Jump to content

CANON Super16 Zoom 6.6/66


 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello everybody!

Do you know the "Canon zoom 6.6/66mm" for Super 16 (Full aperture 2.7) ?

What is its quality and aspect ?

It is very difficult to get informations on it : It's easier to find some informations about the 8/64mm for instance...

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Hello everybody!

Do you know the "Canon zoom 6.6/66mm" for Super 16 (Full aperture 2.7) ?

What is its quality and aspect ?

It is very difficult to get informations on it : It's easier to find some informations about the 8/64mm for instance...

Thanks!

 

 

while I have not personally used it, some friends who have reported it to be an extremely sharp zoom. They went on to say that they felt it was sharper than some primes that are out there. What do you me by aspect? Aspect ratio perhaps? It is a super 16 lens so it will cover that aspect ratio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Sponsor
the 8-64 is a great lens

 

 

The 6.6-66 is a better lens and also much newer. Boston Camera got a 416 with the 6.6-66 (boscam.com) as the camera was rigged at their hands on demo with the 6.6-66 I got to play with it a bit and it is very nice especially the wide end with little distortion and visibly very sharp through the ground glass. I think is is the newest-bestest S-16 zoom available.

 

-Rob-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 6.6-66 is a fantastic lens- my favorite of all the S16 zooms I've used for all the right reasons (contrast, sharpness, flaring, even the barrel itself). I think there is also a matched sister zoom-- 10-135 or something like that.

 

I would agree with Chris's friends in that it's sharper than a lot of primes out there (probably not ultra16's, but certainly superspeeds).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 6.6-66 is a fantastic lens- my favorite of all the S16 zooms I've used for all the right reasons (contrast, sharpness, flaring, even the barrel itself). I think there is also a matched sister zoom-- 10-135 or something like that. I would agree with Chris's friends in that it's sharper than a lot of primes out there (probably not ultra16's, but certainly superspeeds)

 

i used the canon f/2.5 11.5mm - 138mm almost entirely @ f2.8 for about 3500' feet of film recently. i noticed that there's a significant amount of color fringing around highlights. it only occurs when the backlight is more than 4 stops over. it's not so noticeable in closeups, because your eye is elsewhere; it's more a wide shot where you have a character coming in from a brightly backlit door, say, and the eye is looking carefully at the detail. the lens is really solidly built, and feels great, but i have a feeling that optically there's a better choice out there. the rental house, abel cine tech had an angenieux f/2.1 11.5 - 138 that was out: we were just a student film getting a deal on what was there. my nikon full frame primes (@ f2.8 not wide open) on a digital still camera with a 23mm x 13mm size sensor control CA color fringing better. i also intercut the zoom with a zeiss 16mm T 1.3 used @ f/2.8. the prime controls flare better, controls CA slightly better, and is about the same sharpness. overall the director was very happy with the results and actually enjoyed the lens imperfections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Todd-

 

Can't say I've ever used the 7-63 before, so I can't comment. Compared to the 8-64 though, I'd say the 6.6/66 is sharper and has a better coating. I haven't noticed any fringing on 6.6/66. I had to look this up-- the 6.6/66's counterpart is a 10.6/180, also T2.7.

 

Another zoom worth considering is the Angenieux 7-81HR. IMO, a "technical" equal to the new canons with a better range than the 10-1. Between the two, I like the look of the Canon a bit more, but would happily use either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Matt.

 

I've heard a lot of great things about the Angenieux Super16mm Zooms. And I think they even marketed their 10.5 -138mm zoom as, "equal or better than the primes of the day" (there was an ad for a television show that was shot exclusively with that zoom in the early 90's). And in the back of my mind, I am curious if the Angenieux S-16mm zooms have a similar 'look and feel' to the Optimo 35mm zooms (which I love the look of). Granted, they have the older HR coatings,... but curious if they had a similar look.

 

I suppose the only other downside to the Angenieux zooms versus the Canons is the size. The are much larger (at least the 10.5 - 138mm)!

 

Having said that, because I came across such a great deal on both a perfect condition 11.5-138mm and 7-63mm ($4,000 each if you can believe that), I went the route of making a purchase of some Canons without trying out the Angenieux's first. Looking forward to doing some tests.

 

Would you say the wide end of the 6.6-66mm is as sharp (or sharper?) than superspeeds? Reasonably stopped down to f4, or so? (even if it suffers from a passable amount of barreling, etc)

 

Todd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would you say the wide end of the 6.6-66mm is as sharp (or sharper?) than superspeeds? Reasonably stopped down to f4, or so? (even if it suffers from a passable amount of barreling, etc)

 

I'd say equal to or better than... thought it's worth a look with a lens projector. 6.6 is WIDE, and there is some softening in the corners, but nothing objectionable to me. If anything the coating on the canon is much nicer giving you better flare supression and contrast (so *apparent* sharpness at least).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...