Today we are comparing my trusty 24-70 Sony photo lens to a few high-end cinema lenses. To see if they really make a large enough difference in your image to be worth the hefty price tag.
"Are they worth it? Yes in about 5% of the situations, no in about 95% of the situations" - I needed to hear this today! Another great video man. Keep them coming.
Thanks Callum! I’m so glad it resonated with you man! It was something I always wish I had heard, especially in todays gear obsessed culture. Appreciate you brotha! I’ll try to keep ‘em coming!
Yes they are worth it. One gives you a digital look and the others gives you an organic look. You must be an audio guy that thinks hybrid cameras and low dynamic range don't matter.
@@contentm3893 haha I actually know very little about audio. Prob should learn more honestly. But I get your point. I do think in the scenario of spec projects though, my statement still stands. You’ll get a better looking image investing in all other aspects of production than if you put that into lenses. Appreciate you watching man!
@@carstenschlag I was joking. I think it's good to dive into cine lenses for any production because they do affect the look more than people actually think. If you pair a cine lens with the DJI focus system you have AF that photography lenses offer. Not a bad combo and you don't have to rely on the bigger crew. Cine shooters have a lot to learn about not relying on big crews to pull off high quality productions.
@@carstenschlag Agency and Hollywood is shifting to smaller crews which means more profit or lower production cost. No one is saying don't use lighting and other value added production additions but the big crew that waste money is old Hollywood thinking. You have to invest in glass and many will say that's what you invest in first. So it's not that much more to have a set of cine primes.
As a fellow Sony user I'd recommend the Voitgtlander Nokton classic lenses as they definitely give off a more vintage look than a Sony photo lens and are reasonably priced.
I think you didn’t talked about the biggest pro of cine lenses: Efficency on set If you have big crew and an AC cine lenses improve how fast you can change lenses. They are workhorses and they are standardized. For me that’s the biggest advantage
You are totally right! The reason I didn’t mention it is because the scenario I was thinking of when making this video is “are they worth it for spec projects”. For me anytime I have a real job with good budget, I’m absolutely renting cine lenses and efficiency is a big reason why. But for specs when you have a small crew, maybe not even a AC, they become not as efficient for me. Appreciate you taking the time to watch man!!
I've alaways just used my photography lenses for everything I do. Might potentially rent the cooke sp3's for a spec ad soon. Love the helios though!! One of my all time favorite lenses in my toolkit. Love this video dude!
I’ve heard the sp3s are sick! Def wanna try them out myself soon. Yeah I’ve also used my photo lenses for almost everything and they get the job done for sure. I do love the look of higher end and vintage glass though. Just has something special to it lol. Appreciate you watching my dude!
Yo Luke ! Yeah the lens you use can for sure have a major impact. I def wanna start being more intentional with my lens choices but with how expensive it is will prolly stick to my trusty g master haha. Appreciate you watching man!
My Men Carsten is back with a banger! :) The Bokeh of the Hellios is so amazing. I think thats the reason why so many people use this lens, no? Its crazy to see the diffrence between some lenses. Seeing the difference between the Sony G Master and the Ultra Primes feels a bit like one half of my monitor can't spit out colors anymore haha
Thanks brother! Yeah I love the Helios, about to pick up the matching 37mm to have a wider focal length with the same character. And yeah haha it’s crazy the difference between the Sony and the cinema lenses. You can match em pretty well with some color grading but it’s a ton of work and still doesn’t look as good. Really appreciate you watching my dude!!
Great video!! And beautiful lenses, I was wondering just one thing. I have the G master 24-70 and mine doesn't have that bloom on the highlight and this loss of contrast. It almost look like when you use it with a promist / cinebloom filter
Thanks brother! That’s a solid point, someone else commented about that earlier and after thinking about it, it’s possible I accidentally left my black satin on there which would explain that. also I did buy that lens used so it also could be damage from the previous owner. Honestly not totally sure what caused it haha will have to do further testing. Appreciate you watching man!!
@@carstenschlag also super shortcut that I use to match the contrast is using advanced contrast slider in a "uni.finisher" node from maxon plugin feels like cheating honeslty but does the really trick well
Pretty certain you have filtration on the 24-70 (you can see it too in the B-roll). It doesn't usually look so washed out when it's void of filtration. Would be interested to see how it compares without any filters.
That is a great catch haha! I totally missed that, a couple other people asked if I had it on there and I couldn’t remember if I took it off. Seems like I didn’t lol. I’m def gonna try again with out the filtration. Appreciate you catching that and taking the time to watch!!
Hey Carsten. Great video buddy. In regards to the why the highlight may feel differently, there's a few potential reasons. The first is that the T-Stop of the Arri may differ in terms of light gathering vs the F stop of the Helios and the G Master lenses. F effects focal depth while T is more about measure the light captured and they are not always accurate. The next possibility is that for the G master specifically has some digital compensation going on to have smoother rendering with it having electronic information from the lens being sent to the camera. The last thing is possibly the coating of the lens will render how rolloff of both the highlights and the shadows very differently from lens to lens. hope this helps man!
Really nice overview. I agree and would like to see you comparing even more affordable options since I think you have to expect a good jump in quality from an Ultra Prime, SP or Pancrho series of glass! :)
@@carstenschlag Among the options that come to my mind could be DZO Vespid, Nini Athena, Tokina, Laowa, Sigma (even if probably those are photo lens rehoused), Iris, Meike, Xeen CF, Sirui, 7Artisan Hope and why not the Laowa Nanomorph 1.5x as outsider! :)
Yessir! Happy Wednesday! Anamorphic lenses are sweet, I wish I had more opportunities to use em. Haha I’ve pitched them on my last couple jobs and keep getting veto’d. One day though someone will hopefully say yes lol! Appreciate you watching!!
I normally do run black satin on there . Lol I think I took it off for the test? Honestly not 100% sure though, my memory is horrible haha. Appreciate you watching Stephen!
Great comparison and I‘m actually kinda shocked at just how much better the image looks! I always thought it‘s more about things like bokeh, sharpness, CA, distortion and stuff like that but never guessed that the overall image, colors and contrast could look so different. Would be great to see a comparison to some of the more affordable cinema lens offerings - maybe there are some affordable gems that come at least a bit closer to that look.
Thank you! Yeah man, I was pretty shocked too honestly! It definitely makes choosing a lens seem like a bigger deal haha. I’d definitely be interested in testing more lenses. Any lenses you’d like to see compared? Appreciate you big time!!
@@carstenschlag I actually don‘t have the best overview of those things. Especially after daily youtube recommendations of new “best budget cine lens“ videos, haha. It‘s also hard to tell, because sure I‘ve seen some good looking footage of some of these offerings, still it‘s a lot harder to tell without any comparison. And yeah, you could argue then why bother. But still, if I look at your comparison and I think about getting such a difference just because of the lens, it‘s intriguing. Sorry for the long chatter. So the ones that looked really interesting to me were for example the Nisi Athena or DZO Vespids or maybe the Irix. But maybe just get the ones that are most easily available to you, I don‘t know. Would appreciate pretty much any comparison of that quality. I‘ve seen some done in daylight, where the light had changed while changing lenses, which makes it just so much less useful. And also the versus photo lenses aspect is just really interesting to me personally. And also showing them side by side. Just a great comparison - really appreciate it!
Wow that 24-70 looked super washed out, could that have had something to do with the ND you were using? I wonder if a CPL could have brought some of that contrast back? Side note, from this comparison the Leica and Arri were way more than 5% better in my opinion! That said, I love all your stuff :) How are you finding the FX3 vs the 6K full frame by the way?
Thanks Geoff! Yeah I was surprised by how washed out it seemed in comparison as well. It could be the nd but I’ve never noticed it before so I’ll have to test it out and see! Out of the box the Arri and Leica do look way better but the reason I said only like 5 Percent better is because if this were for a real job and everything was lit, proper set design, fully colored. The difference would be way smaller. But with no additions, like straight out of the box totally agree Leica and Arri are wayy better! And I’m loving the fx3 man, haha auto focus has made my life so much easier doing RU-vid videos. They are both great cameras but for me fx3 is the best! Appreciate you watching brotha!
@@EricMoore790 I love the sigma 18-35. I’ve also heard the sigma 18-50 is good as well. Not sure how good the auto focus is on those lenses but if you can manually focus they are awesome!!
Yeah I’m 95% sure you’re right. A couple other people have commented the same thing. So if multiple people are saying it, I’m gonna guess it’s right lol. Appreciate you pointing it out man and appreciate you watching!!
I adapted grandpas Leica R 50mm on my Sony. I sold every autofocus Sony lens after that and just use the manual Leica Rs. No pressure to upgrade, beautiful image and on top they hold their value.
You actually have more color in the shadows with the Arri Ultra Prime compared to the Sony G Master. That's shocking to be honest. Also looks like color is much more balanced.
Ironic that the Arri Ultra Prime had the most distortion since that's their selling point ;) So, they don't really work on full frame. Unless I'm missing something. Also, zoom lenses have to make many tradeoffs for a variable focal length. When you look at it that way it is INCREDIBLE how good that Sony lens is. Maybe for your next test you compare Sony primes against the Arris. I bet there is no real difference. The real difference in cinema lenses is simply they can't be made in high quantities because who wants gears around their lenses and manual focus. I bet the optical technology inside them isn't as good as current photo primes. Just speculating ;)
You bring up A-LOT of good points! Haha yeah there def is some distortion which is probably due to not being made for full frame. I will say though depending on the project and the look, I’d still consider using them on a full frame sensor. That is also a great point about zoom versus primes. I’m for sure gonna try to put Sony primes up against Arri full frame compatible primes! Very interested to see the results! I really genuinely appreciate you taking the time to watch and comment!
Main difference in IQ… Due to strict strict environmental laws in the EU and in Japan, mass produced consumer lenses made AFTER 2003 no longer are manufactured utilizing leaded glass. Leaded glass is close to what Swarovski jewelry is made of. A higher shine than regular glass. Leaded glass like cinema lenses, or older Leica Zeiss and Nikkor lenses that have lead are capable of producing “3D pop” also known as micro-contrast A lot of lenses specifically made for high end cinema are still produced with lead. Leaded glass (Swarovski type of glass) has a higher refraction index rating compared to modern glass which many manufacturers (Sony Nikon Canon) are now producing lenses utilizing synthetic glass/plastic elements (usually in the groups and elements in between the front and rear elements). To make up for the lack of lead, nano coating technologies were created. However coatings cannot reproduce 3D pop characteristics of leaded glass
I get it, in the end all spherical lenses are the same in theory, they're not anamorphic or anything crazy different, but two of these lenses are just photography lenses rehoused and rebranded for video 😭. I think the comparison is just on the different characteristics of different spherical lens rather than the difference between photography lenses and cinema lens. I think cinema lenses are great for if you use a follow focus, or need a set that you can switch in and out easily, I also think photography lenses are worth it, people always say they don't have character, it just means you need to research and try different photography lenses. A lot even have near anamorphic characteristics.
I get where you’re coming from. That makes sense. I do like the look of a lot of photo lenses and still love my 24-70 g master!( actually just shot a fun new spec with it 😃) my point in making the vid was just to see difference in quality of glass and what each looked like straight out the gate. Even though I think the g master didn’t look as nice, it still is a beautiful lens that has some character to it and is amazing in the situations it’s built for. If you have any recommendations for other lenses you’d like me to compare, send em my way! Really appreciate you taking the time to watch and comment!
The G Master looks like you did not put any effort into making it look how it can and should look. I'm not saying you are trying to make the 10,000 lens look superior on purpose but I'm just wondering why the G Master looks like a bad kit lens in this comparison?
Totally get what you’re saying! Yeah, me and my buddy were shocked looking at the monitor on the day that there was such a large difference. But I promise you there was nothing done to make any lens look better or worse. It’s possible I forgot to take off my black satin filter or my copy of the g master may have issues or something but it looked fine to me. I only noticed the difference once we tried the nicer lenses. I’ll definitely be revisiting this again to check, but I promise nothing was done other then point the lens at the talent! Appreciate you watching man!
Hey man! I haven’t used that camera before but pretty much any camera now a days is good enough. I will say I believe it’s 8bit so you would probably hit the limitations of it pretty fast and probably upgrade sooner. if you bought something a little more expensive now that was 10 bit you would probably get more use out of it for longer ( I did exactly that lol and upgraded less than a year later). But like I said you can make a great image with any camera, it’s all about what you put in front of it! Appreciate you watching dude!
@@carstenschlag thank you man for answering! your lighting tutorials proved out to be very helpful for me! yeah I know 8bit cams are a Lil outdated but you are right! " a great image can be obtained by any camera" - sir Carsten the first 🙏♥️
Realistically the problem isn’t the lenses. Although a good cine lens will always be helpful, the problem is the shitty slog3 overly digital codec out of the Sony. And I say that as someone who primarily shoots in Sony. FX Slog 3 sucks. Shoot with anything else and you’ll be like…..oh.
Yeah I could see that being possible. I feel like with a good grade you can make it look nice. I haven’t compared it apples to apples against another camera to really see the difference but I’ll def give it a shot now! Appreciate you brotha!
All LOG profiles in essentially 8-bit CODEC trade good color for bad. No problem if you like that look, or have to use it because you're in harsh lighting conditions. Main point, LOG profiles won't bring out the best in the lenses.
Genuine question: A lens with more contrast is a better lens? I really want to know what to look for when analyzing a set of lenses. What should I look for in terms of contrast? Great video as always, very usefull!
It's a bit counter intuitiv because in recording you want low contrast with a log format. But what is being recorded on this log has to have a maximum of information and higher contrast is more information! It helps to separate colors close to each others (like the richness of the skin tone). When you use a lens with low contrast (like with haze or fungus) you realy see the difficulty you get when grading it, because there is no information being recorded and you can't make it pop. On the other hand with a very high contrast, you have the choice in grading to make it flat or contrasty. Usually you want a sharp, contrasty and saturated lens to get the choice when you are shooting (diffusion filters to cut sharpness, grading for colors)
A lot of it is personal preference honestly! Personally I like lenses with a bit more contrast but certain projects call for a lower contrast look and I’ll use lower con lenses. The main things you want to look for when evaluating lenses are, mechanically do they work ( is focusing/zooming smooth), are the fast enough ( what t or f stop does it open up to), size wise do they feel comfortable, and then personal preference if you like the look they are giving you and if it fits your project. Sorry if that wasn’t too helpful!! Hopefully it gave at least a little clarity in what I look for. Appreciate you watching brotha!
That Leica R looks amazing. Canon FDs and Takumars also produce a very 3 dimensional image at an amazing price. I tested between the sigma 18-35 and the FDs and the difference was night and day but unfortunately those older lenses can get way too milky depending on where the light source is coming from so definitely a compromise.
@@luker1ng I'm not sure what the proper term is, ghosting or veiling maybe? Basically the older FD's are particularly susceptible to that kind of flaring which takes out all the contrast and looks kind of hazy or milky and not in a good way. Have to use a matte box and work around their limitations, but they sure look beautiful when you can control the light.
Yeah the copy I was testing was phenomenal! Def gonna use it on some projects. Cannon fds are great, haven’t shot on the takumars but have heard great things. Totally get what you are saying about the milky feeling when sun hits em. Pretty much always gotta run em with a Mattebox or sometimes in a pinch I’ll make a makeshift lens hood out of cine foil lol. Appreciate you watching, Oliver!
Very good point! they were all set to the same value and that makes sense for the Sony and the hellios but where I am still a little confused is the Lecia. Because that lens measures in t stop and was set to the same t stop as the ultra prime and the highlights were way different.
Haha fair point… but I think it brings up a good question of what qualifies something as a cinema lens? I’d say the the TLS Leica R counts in my book. At the end of the day, like I said at the beginning of the video, i really mainly focus on the look the lens is giving me and if it fits the project then that’s the right lens. No matter what the lens may be classified as lol. Appreciate you watching brotha!
Haha correct! At the beginning of the vid I said this would not be a technical review. The way I approach doing lens tests for projects is based on feeling. Obviously there are basic technical requirements needed based on the project. Cinematography isn’t a science and a lot is based off feel and taste, which is how I approached this lens test. Appreciate you watching!!
@@carstenschlag yes, but the problem with approaching this type of subjects with feelings instead of logic is that you start ignoring the technical aspects, which can lead you to purchase things you don’t actually need. Same as how some people buy expensive Leica cameras just because they look nice or have some gimmicky features
