On the still lens front, you have a variety of options. I am addressing this topic from a 40 foot screen digital projection perspective, not a still photography one.
ZEISS ZE PRIMES
21mm-Zeiss-ZE
Zeiss ZE primes rock. Their resolution is spectacular and they are lightweight. Their focus is alittle more cinematic then a Canon or a Nikon, so it gives your focus puller a chance.
28mm-Zeiss-ZE
The lenses do breathe, which means they zoom in or zoom out when you rack focus. This asthetetic bothers some people so you should see if you like it and or can deal with it.
CANON L SERIES PRIMES
Canon L Series 35mm
Canon L Series 85mm
Canon L series primes deliver very beautiful, sharp images. They do not resolve as well as the Zeiss primes. So you will loose a little detail and color gradation choices in post. If you are fine with that, then the Canon primes are a great choice. Their zooms are not as sharp as the primes and they don’t hold contrast as well.
Canon L Series Lenses
The Canon EF lenses cannot hold up on the big screen. I used them on the first 2 shooting days of the Navy SEAL movie and they were just plain soft. When I went into color correction, I was not able to have the full range of detail of the 8 BIT compressed color space, that I had with the L series or the Nikons. Canon lenses also have one tricky issue: the endless focus wheel. It is amazing for a still photographer but not a trained focus puller. Companies like Zacuto have put lens stops on their zip gears to try and correct the problem but it is still something to contend with.
NIKON AI SERIES PRIMES
Nikon AI Series 28 mm
Nikon AI Series 50 mm
Nikon glass delivers well with the AI series. They were the cream of the crop back in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s and still are in my book. They deliver images just like the Zeiss in contrast but the glass has a warmer tone. However, their focus range is short like the Canon’s.
LEICA R SERIES PRIMES
Leica 35 mm R Series
I tested Leica and found that they delivered beautiful contrast and color throughout. They felt the closest to the Panavision Primo primes and had more of a cinema focus throw, even more than the Zeiss ZE primes. These lenses resolve so well on the big screen.
HASSELBLAD MEDIUM FORMAT ZEISS PRIMES
50 mm Hasselblad Medium Format
150 mm Hasselblad Medium Format
Hasselblad medium format lenses were very interesting on the 5D. It had the same contrast and color of the Zeiss ZE Primes. You need to check it out. They have an amazing cinema focus throw, but breathe like the Zeiss. I like the large focus markings and the weight, they felt really nice on my Red Rock Micro shoulder rig. As long as you feel comfortable shooting above a 4.0 these lenses are a great choice.
With all of the lens options out there, these are still just tools. The story and the characters are KING! These players all have a back story that never makes it to the screen, but it is the thread, the tapestry that binds the film. Find that thread, follow it to dream and create your next work of art!!!!
Tags: lense choice, Lenses
Shane 
This entry was posted
on Saturday, February 6th, 2010 at 6:43 pm and is filed under Lenses.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Color Grading the 5D MKII for Case Combines
Hurlbut Visuals HDSLR Bootcamp: Join the Revolution of Digital Film
Leica R Mount Lenses for the Canon HDSLR’s
A Hybrid Shoot In America’s Heartland for Case Tractor
The Making of The Carnival Sequence from “The Last 3 Minutes”
Turning Still Cameras Into PL Mount Movie Makers
The Making of The Vietnam Sequence From “The Last 3 Minutes”
Altering Lenses For Peak Performance
The Making of The Janitor Sequence From “The Last 3 Minutes”
Boutique Rental House Hosts Hurlbut Visuals Moviemaker
Thanks for posting this info. Since mentioning the Ziess in your last post, I have been checking them out. I am prepping for a round the world trip that I will film on the Mark 2 and need to build out my current lens selection. I am also looking to shoot a lot of stills and want the best of both worlds. The Ziess are a little more affordable than the L glass from Canon but I believe I lose my auto focus for stills? Is this correct?
Any suggestions/recommendations. I will more than likely not be projecting on a 40 foot screen but would like the best overall imagery and would say the focus is more on video than stills.
Thanks Shane.
Jon Carr, The Zeiss ZE will not auto focus, they just talk to the camera regarding exposure. If not projecting on a big screen, then I would go for L Series Canon. That way it will work for your stills also. The best overall image would be Zeiss.
Hey Shane under Leica R Glass you have a photo of Carl Zeiss Jena lenses I am presuming this is a mistake. However have you tested any Carl Zeiss Jena lenses like the 35 2.4 in your photo and what was your opinion of them? I like the idea of Zeiss but I cant afford the ZE series but how did you find the Zeiss Jena in comparison(if you tested these lenses).
Thanks once again for sharing all this info
One other question Shane is how did the Nikon AI glass hold up on the big screen compared to the others?
Hi Shane,
I like to hear your thoughts about the, horrible in my opinion considering the price you pay, vignetting of 28mm Zeiss ZE wider then f4.
Thanks
hi,
i would like to know if there will be another post about “filtration”.
about the filter’s set to use with stills camera for optimizing the performance:
antimoirè filter,
nd filter(wich one is the best in terms of color rendition and full spectrum),
diffusion filter,
anti IR pollution.
Shane, thx for the comment related DP role on post. If you have the oportunity check it out the Canon 135mm f/2.0L this lens is a gem, don’t have zeiss color, but in my opinion, gives the best 3D effect and organic look of all L lenses and btw is a nice focal lenght for film tele work on 5D, much better than any 70-200 zoom at this range.
Jon, as Shane says, the zeiss dont have autofocus, but with the ZE mount, you get focus confirmation (when you pulse the trigger the focus point stand still if the focus is precise) I test on the 50mm and works fine.
alternatively, you can get a Eg-S preciosion matte focus screen that are optimized for manual focusing, or attach a loupe to lcd as a viewfinder.
anyway this solutions are intended for planified shootings, for run&gun situations is always better an AF.
sorry about my english guys.
greets.
ivan marasco, there is a filtration blog coming out mid week. Stay tuned
Sam Phibbs, Much better than the Canon. They seem to have the same contrast as the Zeiss but a little warmer in the color tone. They feel really nice.
Sam Phibbs, yes that was a picture error, sorry about that. I have corrected the picture. I have not tested the Jena glass. Another one on the list, another set of tests. I am glad you are enjoying the blog and thanks for all of your comments.
Andreas, I have not come across the problem because I do not shoot any of these lenses lower than a 4.0. The focus is too extreme with the 5D’s vista-vision sensor. These lenses are 1/2 the cost of a Canon L series, and if cost is an issue I would go with a great set of Nikon AI seires. I was able to get a complete set off of ebay for 500.00, a 24,28,35,50,85,105,180,200mm.
Alvaro, you are welcome, I like the Canon 135mm. I used it on the first week of the Navy SEAL movie, after that not so much. We made the switch to Panavision Primos.
Wauw…nice testing
. Wondering if you have anamorphic shooting experience on 5D? If so, what lenses did you use Panavision, Lomo, iscorama?
Agree with the Leica comments. The 180/3.4 APO-Telyt-R is particularly impressive.
If the Leica R-series are the most similar to Panavision Primos when projected on the big screen doesn’t that make them the best (second best being the Zeiss ZEs)?
Also, are all Rs created equal (I’m seeing different ones available, e.g. summicron, elmarit, etc.)?
Mike, Yes, finding enough of the Leica’s to rent or buy is another story. I am in direct contact with Leica and talking with them about a set of primes for motion picture. All R series are not created equal, I found the Summicron’s to be the best overall. There coating and contrast far surpass the others.
Alan Dang, we did not test those just the Summicrons. So many lenses, so little time. I will take a look at that one in particular.
anders, Thank you so much, I haven’t found a reason to shoot anamorphic on the 5D. Talking with Panavision we found that the anamorphic lens would just use a much smaller portion of the CMOS chip and degrade your image overall, so I never went for it. We are already up against it with our 8 BIT compressed color space.
Hi Shane,
I’d be very interested to know how the canon 50mm EF 1.4 specifically stands up against the leica summicron R 2.0 50mm and zeiss ze 50mm. I’ve read several tests where the canon 1.4 has been found to be very good with great sharpness at 2.8 onwards but i’m considering looking for a summicron instead following your comments. Problem is I’m on a budget and wonder if it would be best to get another size leica lens instead and keep the canon 1.4, because either way i would keep the canon 1.4 for stills because of the AF. Or is the leica 50mm that much better than the canon for video that i should get it (in terms of big screen projection). Is it the contrast that really sets the leica apart? How about the bokeh in comparison?
You previously mentioned in an earlier thread ‘We are converting our mov. files in cineform which unlocks all the detail in the blacks and the highlights, and then putting them into the Avid’. Could you explain a little about what you are doing in cineform that gives you this added detail? I currently convert my files to prores (LT).
Also, are you using twixtor to convert to 24p when you refer to it as helping the image or some other process in twixtor which helps the image?
Sorry for so many questions!
thanks again for the time and work you are putting into this blog. It’s great
I am very curious to know how the new Zeiss match up with their older counterparts: the C/Y Zeiss T*’s. I have a 35/1.4, 50/1.4 and 85/1.4. I like their consistency, coatings and sharpness. I also like that they are faster than the new versions, but how do they really compare?
Clayton, I have not tested those, but the speed is not an issue unless you want a lot of out of focus photography. Everyone is gravitating towards the fast lenses. That is the wrong direction. Shooting the 5D under a 5.6 is a recipe for disaster. Been there done that.
Hey Shane…been away from computer for a while…what is the buzz I hear on FB and blogs about not being able to use Panavision lenses on the 5/7d any more…is Panaviosn recalling their pv to eos mounts???
Heard any news?
Ken Glassing
ken glassing, yes they are taking all the mounts back. Because of this lawsuit they are not renting any mounts or the lenses to go on any Canon camera.
I would love to know how far you push the ISO on the 5D when shooting for the big screen? And also if you go any higher when shooting for TV or Web? Do you ever use any noise reduction in post? I remember you mentioning something about adding film grain to cover up the video noise? Thanks in advance.
Justin Cerato, I take the 5D up to 1600 ISO. I feel that is the edge for the noise level on the big screen. For the TV or the Web 1600. ISO I don’t like the noise reduction tool on the camera. It is much cleaner to do so in the post process than having a $2700.00 still camera do it for your preform you music alldations
Shane, do you disable the camera’s noise reduction in the menus then? I presumed this was for stills only but i take it it also puts the noise reduction onto the video?
thanks
Hi Shane,
great post! thanks for all those infos. Could you please explain a bit more why you said …shooting under 5,6 with a 5D is looking for disaster,
thanks in advance
Andre
Andre, everyone is shooting this camera wide open on their lenses at a 1.4, or a 2.0, 2.8. Because of the sensor size being the size of a vista-vision camera the depth of field is very shallow at those t-stops. At a 1.4 you have 1/32 of an inch of depth of field. That will be impossible for you to focus on anything that moves. At a 2.0 you have about a 1/4″ of depth and then when you get up to a 5.6 you will have an 1″ to 1.5″ of depth. This will keep the eyes and the nose on a face in focus. I am running a focus blog this weekend it will go into more depth.
thanks Shane,
focus blog here? I’ll read it for sure,
thanks
Andre
I agree very much- fast lenses(1.4 or even .95…) might be awesome when shooting in the woods at night, but the prices are upthere and need to be aware that the focus is near impossible and will go in and out, if all out, even for the most experienced and talented focus pullers… even on 7D, 2.8 or below is horrifyingly tough…!
Indeed Leica primes are stellar(and my favorites) but Zeiss ZE, as well as C/Y mount Zeiss(in fact, if pay close attention, even Ultra Primes do breathe but those lenses have photographed so many of the movies, along with Super Speeds or now Master Primes, we enjoy at movie theaters, and those movies shots may very possibly be breathing…!), Canon L(those nice little Canon S16 zooms we’ve all used on Aaton or Arris have similar characteristics… most recently “The Hurt Locker”…), Nikon(many of us have mounted PL mount Nikon super telephotos on big guns, or the same still lenses on Eyemos on super stunt sequences), etc etc… all good lenses!
http://gizmodo.com/5465157/vintage-lomo-lenses-attached-to-canon-5d-mark-ii-create-the-most-beautifully-shot-video?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+gizmodo%2Ffull+%28Gizmodo%29
Hi Shane..it seems this guy claims 2x anamorphic lenses is using the full chip size of the 5d. I dont understand how anamorphic lenses will degrade your image…can you elaborate on that?..
Sho1, I agree, I am very happy with my Zeiss ZE and there will be a big announcement on 2/18 that will change the cinema lens capture on the Canon cameras. It will be very exciting times once this news hits the press on Thursday. Stay tuned!!!!
Hi Shane. Thanks for all your helpful info. Could you please tell me how you mount the Hasselblad H series lenses onto a Canon 5D. Many thanks.
Sorry I see that you weren’t using H series Hasselblad lenses in your tests. Any idea if this can be done though? Thanks.
Richard Brown, I would check novoflex http://www.novoflex.com/en/home/ and or fotodiox https://www.fotodiox.com/catalog/home.php to see if a mount exists. They seem to be the leader with all the adapters.
anders, But, here goes an explanation that will hopefully shed some light for you (I apologize for all the #’s and %’s) …..
Everyone that has rented the Panavision Anamorphics were all extremely pleased with the images they received.
The 5D MKII’s 1.5:1 aspect ratio sensor is 1.417″ x .945″ (36MM x 24MM) 21.1 meg pixels for stills, and 7 meg pixels when shooting video(it only uses 1/3 of it’s pixels when shooting video).
The 35MM Motion Picture Anamorphic 1.2:1 aspect ratio frame is .840″ x .700″ (21.3MM x 17.8MM).
The traditional 35MM Anamorphic Motion Picture frame can easily be extracted from the 5D’s sensor. If you extract the .840″ x .700″ Anamorphic frame from the 5D MKII’s 1.417″ x .945″, you are only utilizing 44% of the sensor. This means you only get 3.1 meg pixels of the 7 meg pixels it has to offer when shooting video.
You can however go as tall as the 5D MKII’s sensor will let you, providing the lenses cover. Up to 50MM seems to work just fine on the C, E and Primo. The G physically would not fit, as it hit the mirror of the camera.
If you take advantage of the taller Vista-Vision format, your traditional Anamorphic frame goes form .846″ x .700″ to .955″ x .796″, which is 12% larger the traditional 35MM frame.
That would then render you 57% usage of the 5D MKII sensor (4 meg pixels) as opposed to the 44% (3 meg pixels) when using the traditional frame.
In short what this means is if you use the full height of the 5D MKII sensor with an Anamorphic 2x compression lens, you effectively get a negative 12% larger. This means your 50MM Anamorphic lens is really a 44MM Anamorphic lens yielding you the field of view of a 22MM Spherical lens.
One more thing, the LOMO Anamorphics have a very nostalgic look to them. We’ve had a few sets pass through here over the years. I wish I had a set here, their “dated” look can be very appealing for certain situations. They are relatively sharp, but are not in the league with the Panavision Anamorphics.
Thanks Shane. Have been in touch with Neither Novoflex and Fotodiox and neither make an adaptor for Hasselblad H lenses to Canon EOS bodies. I suspect it’s all to do with the aperture and shutter being controlled only by the camera body.
Richard Brown, I bet you are right. There is so many variables to putting some of these mounts together. It might have to do with the flange depth also, maybe hitting the mirror, etc. like what is happening with the PL mount disaster with the Canon cameras.
Andre, your focus blog is up.
[...] for manual focus, rather than auto focus with a manual fallback. DP Shane Hurlbut does a thorough comparison with the options, and the Zeiss lenses perform extremely well in their price and size [...]
Hello Shane,
I discover your site/blog in the last episode of redcenter. Thank to make me discovers there is Hasselblad to Eos adapter. I live in Japan and there is a hudge market in 2nd hand lense, there are always in very good condition with small price. I will follow your blog more often it’s a real gold mine of feedback and experience.
Shane, you mentioned an announcement today, Thu Feb 18. Can you point me to the information you hinted at?
Just read the news about the new DSLR Zeiss Cine Lens at http://photocinenews.com/2010/02/18/zeiss-unveils-new-dslr-cine-lens/
Amazing news! Thanks again for leading the charge. Right behind you.
Joseantonio W. Danner, you are welcome. It is great news, testing them out next week in the DR.
Greg Walker, here you go. http://photocinenews.com/2010/02/18/zeiss-unveils-new-dslr-cine-lens/
Vincent Folle’zou, thank you so much for your kind words. I loved the focus range, and image quality on the Hasselblad.
Thanks Shane….it’s a very helpful explanation of how shooting anamorphic works on the 5D…really appreciate it.
Hello Shane,
I’m a newbie to the whole DSLR cinematography thing, but I’ve been reading lots of forums lately and decided to go with a 5DM2 camera.
The only thing is that I don’t know which lens would suit me best for starters. A good all-arounder that is. Wanted to shoot short movies which would be shown on a big (not 40 foot though) screen.
Would be also nice if I could send some of my footage to festivals.
Hi Shane,
I think your calculations are a little off on the image size.
The Canon 5D-II has a 21 meg sensor ( stills ) that gives a 60.2 meg RGB still image,
as well as an effective 2 meg sensor ( video ) that gives a 5.93 RGB video image.
I do wonder about your tests showing the Canon lenses as being relatively poor performers
against the Zeiss, Nikon’s, etc….since in most published tests ( done at higher still sensor resolutions
generally ) they seem to hold their own.
See:
http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=101
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/zeiss_85mm/index.html
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/zf25_canon24/zeiss_zf25a.html
http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/35mm/index.htm
So I guess the question I am asking is……were you testing the lenses at STILL resolution, or
at VIDEO HD resolution, since just about any of the current Canon lenses ( except for possibly the very
cheapest consumer budget grade lens! ) can out resolve a 2 meg video HD 1920×1080 sensor.
I do appreciate all the other lens issues, such as breathing, flare levels, contrast, functionality, etc.
I’m just having a hard time understanding how Canon lenses can produce reasonably sharp images
for stills on a 5D-II, but look soft for HD video, given the much lower resolution requirements….
Thanks, and thanks for putting up this blog…..it’s great!
Pete
Peter Stone, it is your creative choice on what you want to use. If you are a Canon guy you use Canon. I fit the lens to the project. I’ve shot Primos, Zeiss Ultra Primes,Cookes, Zeiss super speeds, and Master Primes. They all work, it comes down to what assists you in telling the story. But they are also all Cinema style lenses, not still lenses. Still lenses have major problems in every way shape and form when it comes to motion. There is a reason for still lenses and a reason that cinema style lenses were designed, they both have two totally different applications. One needs to rack focus quickly and have its focus range short so that the still photographer can capture the moment. Cinema lenses have longer focus throw to help the focus puller and add finesse.