Deepak Bajracharya Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Namaste, In terms of the optical quality, breathing, flares, sharpness, color and contrast reproduction regardless of their zoom range and maximum opening. Which one is nearly perfect for the feature project that will be optically blown up to the scope print from Super 16 format. I have almost settled down with Canon 8-64, though the expert users of this lens mentioned a lot about the flaring problem. Seeking your advice and thanks in advance. With best regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan Schneider Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 I find that the 8-64 is a much better range for narrative filmmaker, although it would be nice to supplement with a longer prime or two. Also, the 8-64 has a close focus of two feet, which during production has been invaluable to me. I think that the Ziess is a sharper lens, and it feels more contrasty, which could be good for your project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deepak Bajracharya Posted November 6, 2007 Author Share Posted November 6, 2007 Thank you very much for your input. I liked canon 8-64 very much because of the minimum focus distance, wide angle range upto to 8mm, benificial specially for the small area. But from the experiences of the professionals, what I observed that the lens flares much. So what is your opinion about this. with best regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan Schneider Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 With a mattebox, french flag and a good grip, the flaring shouldn't be a problem. The Ziess also flares if it gets hit, so either way that will be an issue. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deepak Bajracharya Posted November 6, 2007 Author Share Posted November 6, 2007 What precautions should be taken with the lens originally having ARRi Bayo mount with the PL adapter to the PL mount camera body? Regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Chris Keth Posted November 6, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted November 6, 2007 What precautions should be taken with the lens originally having ARRi Bayo mount with the PL adapter to the PL mount camera body? Regards, That shouldn't be a big deal. Arri b->PL adapters I have seen have all been solid, well made devices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck colburn Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 What precautions should be taken with the lens originally having ARRi Bayo mount with the PL adapter to the PL mount camera body? Regards, There have been some really crappy S/B to PL adapters made over the years. The least you should do is have it checked on an autocollimator bench and preferably on the camera with running film. That way you can see if the film is breathing (not holding focus) in the gate. Don't count on any lens adapter as being right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deepak Bajracharya Posted November 6, 2007 Author Share Posted November 6, 2007 Namaste, I am purchasing the camera body and lens separately from two different parts of the world, the Canon 8-64 ARRi Bayo with PL ada0pter from very reputed dealer in New york so i be able to test only when i got both things at my disposal. If there are other more things to be considered using the PL adapter, please suggest accordingly. With best regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Burns Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 My experience has been that image quality with the Canon zoom deteriorates markedly when shooting at aperatures wider than f/4. I won't use the lens for this reason. Best, Thomas Burns Novice DP Los Angeles -- www.thomasburns.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Brawley Posted November 7, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted November 7, 2007 My experience has been that image quality with the Canon zoom deteriorates markedly when shooting at aperatures wider than f/4. I won't use the lens for this reason. Best, Thomas Burns Novice DP Los Angeles -- www.thomasburns.net Thomas, I think you'll find most lenses, especially zooms, don't perform at their best wide open. The canon is a T2.8. lens. The general rule is two stops closed from maxium aperture gives the best results for most lenses. They are different beasties in my opinion. The canon is substantially wider, and that shouldn't be underestimated. I think it's a more useful range to work with if I had to choose between them. The 11-110 is a retro-fit (of a 10-100) that sees an addtional optical element placed to ensure it covers Super 16. The canon does tend to get rather milky in the blacks at the long end, and this may be the flare problems are attributed to. Almost all the canon's have this..err...attribute, even the newer ones... jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan Schneider Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 I shot a short film last year where much of the film took place in a car. I had the SR halfway out the window trying to get to minimum focus with the Zeiss. Makes the 8-64 look much nicer.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 The Canon 8-64 is a T2.4. Stopping down the little bit to a T2.8 makes a remarkable improvement. I generally consider it a far better performing lens than the old Zeiss 11-110 zoom. That lens actually replaced the rear element, not added another. Ever pull focus with the Zeiss? The image breathes like crazy while the Canon barely moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Worster Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 This does not really concern the shooter I guess but although the the Zeiss does breath a lot the Canon's barrel scribing is not very good. I find it easier to know where I'm at in terms of on the Zeiss. This said I do like the "look" of the Canon over the Zeiss, hard to describe why. Hopefully one of these days Canon will get a little more cine friendly and expand the marks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deepak Bajracharya Posted November 7, 2007 Author Share Posted November 7, 2007 Namaste and thanks for the pros and cons of these lenses. Still would like to know more about using the lens with PL adapter and the things to be considered or the precautions to be taken. Regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck colburn Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Here are a couple of good ones. Steer clear of those ones that just attach by a couple of set screws under the S/B ears. http://www.cinematechnic.com/products/PL_M...pt_ARRIBay.html http://www.denz-deniz.com/lensadapt.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan Schneider Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 have someone check the lens out with the adaptor on a collimator. I recently had a real PL mount put on my 8-64 because the spring in the adaptor was weak. However, if, like you say, the lens is coming from a reputable dealer, it should be in good shape and the adaptor should be fine. I've had one on my Ziess for years without a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deepak Bajracharya Posted November 8, 2007 Author Share Posted November 8, 2007 Thank you all very much for the inputs. I will consider buying the lens with PL mount firstly and keep the lens with the adapter in second priority. Thanking you once again. With best regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now