Kinoptik 25mm/2.0 on the G1

[Vivek]

Lovely! Not to play down the other images in this thread, isn't this lens made for mainly people cinematography?

 

[Photomorgana]

Lovely! Not to play down the other images in this thread, isn't this lens made for mainly people cinematography?

LOL, yes all erotic film directors have lots of them
Every lens has its sweet spot. It took me a little longer to start liking this lens on m4/3 than my other Kinoptik lenses (such as 50, 75, 100, 150)
And thats obvious, I guess its easy to like 50-150 since they are so straight forward in terms of FOV.
25mm a bit tricky since it has that little swirl. I would not mind shooting landscapes with this lens, stopped down to f5.6, but it excels at close portraits 1-2 meters and macro work under 0.5 meters. I started feeling comfortable using it after about 1.5 hour of continues use. (oh what a drag dude

 

[petermcwerner]

It took me a little longer to start liking this lens on m4/3 than my other Kinoptik lenses (such as 50, 75, 100, 150)
And thats obvious, I guess its easy to like 50-150 since they are so straight forward in terms of FOV.

I have a 150 in Alpa Reflex mount but did not dare to use it on the G1. It seems to weigh a ton and does not have a tripod mount. Could you use it normally without damaging the G1 lens mount? Same problem BTW with the 9.8mm/1.8: great lens but weighs about 1400 grams.

 

[Photomorgana]

I have a 150 in Alpa Reflex mount but did not dare to use it on the G1. It seems to weigh a ton and does not have a tripod mount. Could you use it normally without damaging the G1 lens mount? Same problem BTW with the 9.8mm/1.8: great lens but weighs about 1400 grams.

Absolutely, 9.8mm its way too large and heavy, tripod is mandatory.
Im not sure about K150 in Alpa mount, as I dont know how much it weigh, but my version is in Arri Std and it weigh appr 600-700 grams at most and I have no problem on G1. But I would still suggest you grip the lens and not the body, although its doable, its not comfortable since the lens is a bit nose heavy.
But honestly I think this particular lens is more suitable for FF bodies (like 5D, D700 etc) I am not saying K150 looks bad on G1, all I am saying is this lens will be much better as long portrait lens on FF body, than 300mm landscape lens on G1 body. (dont forget the cost factor ) Unless some people into 300mm portraits, not that there is anything wrong with that.

 

[loa]

Man, I am having a devil of a time getting this adapter made. I have contacted every potential vendor mentioned in this thread and more, and although I've had a couple "sometime..." responses, I have nothing firm. Sigh! The lens mocks me on top of my desk.

I'm not quite sure how to proceeed. toilet paper roll?

 

[kds315]

I have the c-mount version of that lens (found it in a store at an acceptable price), very tiny indeed, but renders nicely and no vignetting.

 

[Vivek]

The c-mount 25/2 Kinoptik lens- I covet.

Klaus, Could you post a shot of the rear of the lens with/without the adapter?

 

[kds315]

Sure, here some "product shots" of a well used lens...I take it as a good sign.
(will give it some TLC, cleaning etc. soon...)

Just noticed that it is actually a T2 lens, so its speed must be even faster
than f2 like f1.8 or f1.9 - anyone knows that exactly?

 

[kds315]

A bit technical, vignetting (a bit) (@ f2, f2.8, f4, f5.6) and LCA (none I could see).
I may have to re-shoot the vignetting test, since the sunshade is a bit too long
actually and causes vignetting.

 

[Vivek]

Thanks for the photos. Attachment #5 (rear) shows some brassing.

This metal part if painted mat black would help with color fringing seen in image #3 (difficult light) of your earlier post.

 

[Vivek]

Oh, the shade has to go or shortened.

 

[kds315]

Re-shoot of vignetting test w/o shade (f2, f2.8, f4, f5.6), a bit less obviously --> shorten shade!

 

[kds315]

Thanks for the photos. Attachment #5 (rear) shows some brassing.

This metal part if painted mat black would help with color fringing seen in image #3 (difficult light) of your earlier post.

Good idea, I will work anyway on the lens, clean it up, so I will blacken out the shiny parts in the optical path. Thanks!

 

[kds315]

A bokeh shot, vignetting comparison and a table close-up FYI.

 

[Jonas]

(...)
Just noticed that it is actually a T2 lens, so its speed must be even faster
than f2 like f1.8 or f1.9 - anyone knows that exactly?

An old thread, I know. But I saw some Kinoptik images the other day and went back here for a second look. I like what I see, again.

Klaus, I think the lens is an f/2 lens (nominal, theoretical speed) with the T values showing the true speed as used with "external" light meters - all in the film (movie) making tradition.

regards,

/Jonas

 

[kds315]

Thanks Jonas, I should have edited that, but forgot as I have already found that out. T-values stand for true lens transmission value, so it reflects the internal light absorbance and not just a geometric ratio what an f-stop is.

 

[Jonas]

Klaus, it gave me an opportunity to express my admiration for the lens as demonstrated by your and Peter's images here. There is something with these images I find very pleasing to my eyes. probably it is the lack of CA.

If anyone see a good and clean C-mount version of this lens for sale, please let me know!

/Jonas

 

[kds315]

Jonas, they show up on *bay but fetch insane prices now (> $1200); just few days ago one was sold (320491450085) for $900 (which looked rather shabby to me).

 

[Jonas]

Thank you,

I have to rephrase myself then... If anyone see a good and clean C-mount version of this lens for sale for a decent price, please let me know!

But really, USD 900 is about EUR 660. If the lens is very nice and clean and with proper aperture and focusing rings I would consider it.
The lens in the auction... well, "rather shabby" is my impression as well. Somebody really wanted it. I guess patience can pay off.

regards,

/Jonas

 

[kds315]

I found mine sitting around at a camera shop at an acceptable but not cheap price, so maybe you scan through those?