Why Cinema Lenses Cost So Much

Why Cinema Lenses Cost So Much

Photography offers a moment of interest. Cinema demands sustained attention

I get a lot of emails and calls from customers asking what kind of lens package they should get for their shiny new Sony F3 or their tiny new RED Epic. The simple answer is, there is no simple answer. Let’s face it, for most of us who aren’t shooting the next Iron Man feature film, budget is the primary factor when it comes to choosing a lens package. A lot of folks who would be looking for a new lens kit are coming over from the still photo world. As you all know, the RED/DSLR revolution has changed the industry drastically over the past few years and allowed a lot of people to squeak by with existing gear or pre-owned gear that got the job done. Maybe now it’s time to step-up your game and get a set of true cinema lenses. Or maybe it’s time to snatch up some glass/metal tubes from Russia that Ivan tried to pass of as a cinema lens… Either way, what’s the difference between a 18-55mm Nikon kit lens ($90) and an exotic Angenieux 24-290mm Optimo ($70,000)?

Basically, everything boils down to two categories; usability and image quality. Obviously there are other factors involved such as production quantity, but that is usually tied into image quality.  Again, the question is, why is a cinema lens so much more expensive than a still photo lens? Cinema lens prices increase exponentially as the quality increases. For this demonstration, the top of the price spectrum will be represented by the Angenieux 24-290mm Optimo, and the bottom will be represented by the Nikon 18-55mm kit lens. Some would expect a few test shots with some text overlaid on them similar to that of most online lens reviews (mine included), but this really doesn’t show much beyond very basic image quality. To be honest, with todays manufacturing processes and techniques, the overall image quality in the center portion of each example lens, would probably be fairly similar. That doesn’t mean that the next big feature film is going to go out and shoot on a Nikon 18-55mm, but it also doesn’t mean that an 18-55mm Nikon isn’t going to produce good results. This is where the usability of each lens comes into play. For example, the entire core, focus, zoom, lock rings, and housing of the 24-290mm Optimo are machined from billet aluminum. The only part of the Optimo that isn’t made of high quality aluminum is the mount… Because that is made of stainless steel. Comparatively, the Nikon 18-55mm does in fact have an aluminum core, but everything else is plastic and brass, which can be good. It keeps weight and production cost down to a minimum, but is devastating to mechanical accuracy and precision. It doesn’t mean that the Optimo is the better lens for every situation. I wouldn’t want to lug a 25 lb. lens around Disneyland to snap pics of the family with Mickey Mouse. This leads me to the fine details such as stability and accuracy. Cinema lenses are not auto focus and traditionally require a trained focus puller to nail focus in any given shot. This isn’t done by peering through the viewfinder or pressing a button. It’s accomplished by taping out the distance to the subject and then dialing in the measured distance on the lens’ focus scale, which means those marks better be accurate or someone is losing their job. Focus mark accuracy isn’t really a concern on still photo lenses since 99% of users simply depress the shutter button half way and let the cameras auto focus do the work. The other 1% of users who focus manually for still photography, usually look through the viewfinder, pick a subject and adjust the focus ring until it looks sharp, still no need for focus mark accuracy. Nobody sets up their SLR, tapes out the distance, adjusts the lens to that distance and snaps away. It’s just to realistic.

Speaking of focus, image shift and breathing are two more features that are critical in motion picture lenses, but not so much in still photo lenses. Let’s take our 18-55mm Nikon lens, put it on a camera, look through the monitor and rack focus or zoom. The whole image jumps around and loses focus because the components used inside the lens are very light-duty and left very loose to allow the tiny little drive motors to auto focus the lens for you. Comparatively, our 24-290mm Optimo is built with solid aluminum components that are precisely fitted and adjusted to keep everything as tight as possible. This keeps everything extremely smooth and accurate. If you adjust focus or zoom, the image should stay dead center and solid. This kind of performance requires extremely tight tolerances during machining and a very high level of care during assembly. Focusing with just about any still photo zoom lens will create a “breathing” effect that is simply an optical design characteristic. There is no adjustment for this flaw within the lens. It’s part of the optical-mechanical design and is taken into consideration during the development of a lens. Breathing is a bad thing in cinema because it really pulls the audience out of the scene. It changes the field of view of the lens and appears as though the lens is zooming in and out during even a small focus pull. This is why cinema lenses are designed not to breath and add substantially to the cost in order to do so. Tracking is somewhat related to breathing as it can really ruin ascot if not calibrate. Tracking is the movement of the image relative the the sensor/film, while zooming. Ideally, zoomed all the way in, an object in the very center of the image should stay in the exact same position on the sensor/film throughout the entire zoom range. Most cinema lenses include internal adjustment to calibrate tracking while still photo lenses aren’t concerned since you can simply re-compose before each shot.

Another common characteristic of still photo zooms is their speed, or maximum aperture. Take our 18-55mm Nikon for example, again… The maximum aperture is f/3.5 which isn’t too bad. But as soon as you start to zoom, it looses light and stops all the way down to an f/5.6. Modern SLR cameras can easily compensate for this with automatic adjustments to exposure with the shutter speed or ISO. The 24-290mm is comparatively very fast at T2.8 and maintains its maximum aperture throughout it’s entire zoom range. Mostly because it’s an annoyance to think about adjusting setting from shot to shot and trying to match everything, but also because it would look horrible if the aperture started to close down in the middle of a shot, ruining the lighting, look and feel of a scene. Okay, there are plenty of still photo lenses that maintain a constant aperture. In fact, most of the major pro lenses will do this easily. But these are usually a fairly short zoom range. Do the numbers… Take the 14-24mm Nikkor, a great lens with a constant f/2.8 aperture, the zoom range is only 1.7x. The 24-70mm, a 2.9x. And the 70-200mm, a 2.8x zoom. Those three lenses are Nikons current crop of pro zoom lenses. The Angenieux 24-290mm maintains the same constant T2.8 aperture throughout it’s 12x zoom range. That’s almost unheard of in still photo lenses. These couple of characteristics can be lumped into the optical quality of the lens but also effect the usability. Another usability concern for motion picture lenses is their durability. Granted, if a cinema lens is dropped, it’s almost certain that it’s thrown completely out of whack and would require re-calibration, they are built like tanks. The same can not be said for our little 18-55mm Nikon friend. However, there are a lot of modern still photo lenses that are built to endure relentless usage and can really take a beating. All of these details are very minor on paper. It’s when you really get into the nitty gritty and use the lenses on a daily basis that you realize the differences can be substantial. Kind of like looking at two different cameras on paper. Each camera has a 3″ LCD screen, shutter speed, aperture, and ISO adjustments, an SD card slot, compact and portable, and includes a strap! One is a Leica, the other is a Kodak. Both are great cameras, but they are clearly meant for different purposes and clearly have a cost difference. The same logic applies to still photo lenses and cinema lenses. I like to think of it this way: Still photography offers a moment of interest. Cinema demands sustained attention.

Sony F3 Lens Options

Sony F3 Lens Options

Sony is just starting to roll out their anticipated F3 camera. A Super 35 sized sensor in a mall, lightweight package. I try to stick to knowing a lot about lenses so you can hear more about the camera from Jason Wingrove’s real world take. But I will tell you all about your lens options when shooting with an F3. I’ll start with the most logical…
The camera comes with a PL mount. PL mount is the standard mount used by just about every non-panavision camera in the motion picture industry. This means that you have a slew of premium cinema lenses at your disposal and that’s how it should be. However, if you are on a budget and can’t afford an Angenieux 24-290mm Optimo then there are a few other options available. I know there are quite a few people making the jump to an F3 from a DSLR like a 5D MkII or a 7D and probably have some Nikon lenses or Leica lenses that you adapted to use on your Canon. Those are still great lenses and will perform just fine on an F3. Of course this is all under the assumption that real cine lenses aren’t an option. I want to make sure that is very clear from the beginning. There is no replacement for cine lenses like Zeiss, Angenieux, Cooke, etc. But there are many options out there for alternative lenses. A favorite of the DSLR revolution has been the Zeiss ZF lenses. They use great glass with advanced coatings and fully manual mechanics. If you don’t know why these still lenses are well suited for motion picture, read through Still Vs. Cine. Your set of Zeiss ZF lenses is sitting around gathering dust because you purchased a PL mount camera. No worries. There is a company called MTF Services that is making a kit to change your F3 to Nikon mount. I haven’t dealt with them personally but the mount looks decent. Now you can use your Zeiss ZF lenses as well as any other Nikon mount lens in your arsenal. The other common route the DSLR community has chosen is Leica’s R series lenses. The selection of prime lenses is great and the glass is simply stunning. Unfortunately there isn’t a Leica mount available for the F3 as far as I know. But there is a Leica to Nikon adaptor for Leica lenses that would solve the problem with the same kit from MTF Services. Yes, you’re converting your Leica mount to Nikon and your Sony mount to Nikon but everything is solid and as long as you take care of your equipment and have it checked frequently, you should be able to maintain the proper flange depth. The benefit to using still photo lenses with a camera like the Sony F3 is their size and weight. There are usually two major components on a hand held rig; the camera and the lens… The Sony F3 is already light enough for what it is. Choosing an appropriate lens makes all the difference in portability and ease of use. If you want to ditch the stills lenses and go for the more professional application, take a look at other sets of prime lenses.

Cooke Panchro

Cooke recently released their Cooke Panchros, a throwback to their original Cooke Speed Panchros that were very common back in the 1930’s and are still well known today. Cooke went on to make other great lenses like the S-4s and now the 5is. These were top notch cinema lenses. But they left behind all of the smaller productions that couldn’t afford a set of premium lenses. They filled the gap with their new Panchro lenses. A bit slow in the aperture at T2.8 but acceptable to say the least. The whole set is matched in speed and color reproduction. Small and compact compared to todays standards, the Panchros should do just fine for almost any application other than low-light. If you’re thinking about using Cooke Panchros but think they will be too slow because of low light, then your grip dept. isn’t doing their job.

Sony PL mount primes. 35, 50, 85mm

You might be asking “What about the PL mount primes that Canon is offering with the camera?”… Sony is offering three PL mount prime lenses (35,50,85mm) for an additional $6,500 (I think) that would work just fine on the F3. I haven’t had a chance to formally test these Sony primes but I’ve handled and used the 35mm on an F3 and I believe they will leave a lot to be desired for professionals. Think of it as the kit lens that comes with a DSRL. It gets the job done… But you can do better. I’ll reserve my final judgment for when I can put the Sony PL lenses through their paces and see what they can really do in a proper test environment as well as real work application. Who knows, they may surprise me. I can go on and on about all the cool PL mount primes you can now use with a Sony F3 but that would take several pages of writing that I simply don’t have the will to write. I’ll finish by going over one other option that I think suits the Sony F3 very well.

Angenieux Rouge zoom lens.

 

Angenieux makes an excellent line of lenses they call Optimo. This line includes their amazing 24-290mm, 17-80mm, 28-76mm, and 15-40mm. All of these lenses set the standard for cinema zooms over the past decade and truly are works of art. Angenieux set the bar so high they left the little guys at the bottom and needed to do something to put their glass in the hands of the creative newcomers. Along came their Rouge series. Originally aimed at those using a RED camera since they were digital only lenses. This meant they can’t be used on a reflex mirror camera since the rear element sticks too far into the camera body. The Rouge series consists of two lenses that are direct descendants of their Optimo parents, the 30-80mm and the 16-42mm. Distinguished by their protruding rear element and signature red rubber grips, the Rouge lenses perform just as well as their pricier counterparts, at a fraction of the cost. A good option, maybe one of the best options for a lightweight, professional cinema zoom lens… In the world.

Lens Image Circle Database

I say database… But it’s really just a list trying to sound official.

So basically, RED has given the world a great deal of technology at a great price. But they also induced many a headache with different sensor sizes, resolutions, specs, and names. To make things a little easier, I’m compiling a list of lenses that pass through the shop and recording their image circle, or the diameter that they will cover without vignetting. This list will simply show you what the lenses are capable of. Feel free to comment on this post if you see any discrepancies or want a specific lens added. I want this to be as accurate as possible. Also note that the sensor/format sizes are generalized. There are a ton of different industry standards. There are several dozen formats that fall under 4 perf 35mm film alone.  Continue reading “Lens Image Circle Database”

Lens Mod FAQ

I receive dozens of emails everyday and I want to respond to them all but sometimes it just isn’t possible. I’m not a trade secret kind of guy. I like to spread knowledge and educate as many people as I can. So here is a quick little FAQ in regards to lens modification and a few other common questions I am asked… Frequently.

EDIT: THIS POST IS OUTDATED AND MAY NO LONGER BE ACCURATE. PLEASE CONTACT DUCLOS LENSES FOR CURRENT INFO

1) What lenses work well for motion picture?

2) I have a bunch of still lenses. Can they be converted to work for cinema?

3) What is a Cine-Mod?

4) Can my lens be Cine-Modded?

5) What lenses are well suited for a Cine-Mod?

6) Can the mount on my lens be changed?

7) I have Nikon lenses. Can the focus be reversed?

8] The focus throw of my still lenses is short, can it be expanded?

9) Can lens breathing be corrected?

10) Can my lens be re-housed for cinema use? What is the cost?

11) Can my lens be converted to PL mount?

Continue reading “Lens Mod FAQ”

Diving Into Micro Four Thirds

Olympus introduced their Four Thirds system not too long ago. Then they dropped it and ran with the Micro Four Thirds system and it looks like they are going to run pretty far with it. As far as I know there are only two companies currently using the M4/3 system; Olympus and Panasonic. Olympus is utilizing it in their smaller interchangeable lens cameras which are pretty cool if you ask me. I purchased a Olympus PEN as a M4/3 test mule recently and I love it. And then there is Panasonic with a similar line-up of small cameras. However, Panasonic took it one step further with their new AG AF-100.

Continue reading “Diving Into Micro Four Thirds”

Auto Focus Cinema

RANT WARNING!

No… Just no. Auto focus for DSLR motion picture was a topic raised at a discussion panel I took part in this weekend at the PhotoCine Expo. Auto focus works great for shooting stills with just about any modern camera but it just isn’t appropriate for cinema. To clarify, I think it’s a must for shooting quick and gritty, reference material or home movies. But with the shallow depth of field and artistic styling of images rendered by a RED camera or DSLRs, it just isn’t a good idea. Nikon’s new D7000 does 3D facial focus tracking by recognizing a face and keeping focus on it which is cool, but why would you want to focus on just a persons face. What if the shot calls for a long, slow focus pull between two subjects that are 20 feet apart? Okay fine, you could use software and tell the lens to pull focus from distance ‘X’ to distance ‘Y’ and specify a given focus pull rate. But now you just have a mechanical focus pull done by a computer that has no emotion or feeling. There is no organic allure or life to the scene.

To add to this proposed flaw I present exhibit B: Auto focus lenses are loose and sloppy and don’t work well for motion picture. Due to their inherent mechanical pitfalls such as loose tolerances, low quality internal components, and short focus throw, this makes auto focus lenses a poor choice for motion picture since it introduces image shift, unreliable and unrepeatable focus marks, and other inconveniences. A cinema lens uses manual focus for a good reason. It keeps the image stable when racking focus and allows the shooter to pull focus in a way that expresses the emotion or passion that a scene should be able to convey. Basically, there is no way to instill life or humanity if you assign focus to a computer. When the day comes that a computer can carry out such tasks, I’ll be locking up my vacuum and hiding in my safe room.

(REVISION) Oh and I almost forgot to mention that pulling focus is more than just a tradition. It’s a craft that many have spent a career refining. This is why there is a job on a professional movie set for a “focus puller”. It’s not just a crabby old guy who doesn’t want to change his ways or embrace a new piece of technology, Auto focus in cinema just isn’t… Cinematic.

Zeiss T1,3 “Super Speed” Refurbishing

Zeiss’ T1,3 primes or “Super Speeds” as they’ve been deemed, are getting a little long in the tooth but still hold their own if well cared for. This is one example of such a lens. It is in superb condition optically but the exterior body of the lens has taken quite a beating. Particularly the painted rear housing surface. For some reason Zeiss thought it was a good idea to construct the rear housing out of brass instead of aluminum. This meant that the brass section didn’t receive the same anodizing as the rest of the lens but instead was treated to a nice coat of gloss black paint. Needless to say paint doesn’t hold up to daily use quite as well as anodized aluminum. In the much later models Zeiss switched to an aluminum rear housing with an anodized surface… Anyway. I didn’t think to take a photo of the rear helical housing prior to stripping all the paint, but you can guess the condition of the weak paint based on the anodizing blemishes and scratches. You do the math. So in this post I will show the process or refurbishing the rear housing of a Zeiss T1,3 Super Speed.

The old paint has already been removed and the surface is primed. I cleaned the engravings from any old filling to make sure there is enough depth to refill the engravings after a new layer of paint is applied.

Continue reading “Zeiss T1,3 “Super Speed” Refurbishing”

Still vs Cine Lenses

One might assume that a lens is a lens and you can simply adapt any lens to suit ones needs. This is usually a matter of changing or adapting the mount just so the square peg fits in the square hole. The fact is that still lenses and cine lenses are very different and can’t always be interchangeable. Still lenses are defined (in my opinion) as lenses that were designed and built for use with an SLR still camera whereas a cine lens would be one designed and built for use on a motion picture (movie) camera. I’ll go over why the two aren’t interchangeable and what can be done to reduce the differences between the two. Modern still lenses are designed for two things… Speed and ease of use. Continue reading “Still vs Cine Lenses”

Focus back on back focus

Back focus is a common term used to describe the Flange Focal Distance (FFD). Or the distance between the rear surface of a lens mount and the film plane or sensor. The most common FFD in my line of work is relative to the Positive Lock (PL) Mount system used on many motion picture cameras and lenses. The FFD for a PL camera is 52mm (2.0472441″) This means that when a lens is mounted to a camera correctly, the image produced by the lens should come to focus at exactly 52mm from the rear of the lens mount. Continue reading “Focus back on back focus”