All pictures taken in Nyon, Lake of Geneva, Switzerland at full aperture (f/2.0) - developed in RAW Therapee
I like it! Wish lenses like this were easier to find...
How is the corner performance?
Peter, if you could, please mention if the lens is meant for 16mm or 35mm format. I don't know the lenses well enough to tell if either format is coded in the name.
But thanx for sharing. Probably expensive if 35mm?
Let me answer for Peter.
This lens is in 35mm format. Dont buy wide angle 16mm format lenses. And if you want longer I would suggest smaller and lighter C-mount lenses.
The price depends on condition and version. Cooke III would be much more expensive and in mint condition we talking 1K+.
Allow me to disagree. There are very few c-mount lenses that cover the whole G1 sensor and do not vignette and/or smear. I was induced by the c-mount craze on this forum to buy 2 supposedly superior such lenses, a 20mm SOM Berthiot and a 25mm Schneider Cine Xenon. Both did not cover the full sensor, vignetted and/or smeared. Unless you have tested such lenses yourself on the G1 or know from a reliable source (not the seller) that they cover the whole G1 sensor without vignetting and/or smearing, keep your hands away from them, be they 16mm or S16 cine, TV or Surveillance.... if you want longer I would suggest smaller and lighter C-mount lenses.
Longer lenses are not automatically safe: I own a 75mm/1.3 Kilfitt Zoomatar that smears very strongly in the corners at apertures wider than f/5.6
Kilfitt Zoomatar 75mm/1.3 at full aperture on the G1
Where available, consult the makers specifications. E.g. for Kinoptik there is a table on their website specifying the lens coverage.
When in doubt, my advice is to keep away from c-mount lenses. I know this is a controversial issue on this site and other forum members love these lenses in spite of their shortcomings.
I was just out playing with my C-mount lenses, I was doing close ups of flowers, on the screen, they looked pretty good, I will get the photos up soon.
Clearly, these lenses are not for the faint of heart. I went into this with little knowledge of the C mount "scene", and have learned a great deal about lenses. Right now, I have 5 of them, and for the moment, it's the only way that I can get a lens that combines fast aperature and small size on my G1. There is a cost ....
Just as Peter describes, it's a bit of a gamble as to how much of the sensor that you cover, and at what aperature. For me, I was able to afford the "risk" on the lenses, I have two wide angles that turn a lovely 12 mpix camera into a pretty good 6 or so Mpix one, my two normals are pretty good at covering the sensor, and with the subjects that I shoot with them, the issues in the corners are moot. I did not understand all this when I started playing with the wide angles, but relative to my friends who hunt and boat, this experiment is cheap.
The bottom line on the C-mount 'debate' is that some of us don't mind cropping the frame to get amazing speed/performance out of a very compact lens... Others (specifically Peter) can not be bothered with a little post crop to rid an otherwise wonderful (and many times inexpensive) lens of vignette and edge quality falloff.
I simply don't get the '3-5 lenses that don't have full coverage are not worth as much as one that does' argument... Here is an example of my $150 Schneider 10mm/1.8 (@1.8) that I cropped. Does it matter that it was cropped? I guess to some it does...
@F16 (and cropped... so it's worth nothing?)
I should mention I was on a 10mile hike (16km) when I took these photos. Did I appreciate only carrying 2 lbs in photo equipment including tripod?? Yes sir I did.
Last edited by milapse; 30th April 2009 at 06:56.
The pictures are beautiful, milapse, I particularly like the first one.
No point discussing the rationale behind c-mount lenses on the G1. I realize it has become a madness, like a religious war. Let us be tolerant of each others convictions and avoid it to escalate into personal feuds.
I admire your pictures even if I doubt that with a lens covering the full frame you would not have achieved the same or better results.
Milapse, great pics.
Peter, while I understand where you coming from, I have to partially agree with you. C-mount lenses are great and best form factor of any I tried so far.
Now, of course not all of them are made equal. Kern Switars are #1, closely followed by Cooke Ivotals, panchrotals and Angenieux. Yes 25mm and wider you have to crop, but for example Switar 75mm f1.9 is tack sharp, corner to corner.
50mm Macro-Switar is another example, with no black corners but a bit soft in corners, but so is Leica 50mm f1.4
The most overrated lenses are SOM Berthiods, they are not very sharp. One would always get better results from Kodak and Wollensak than from SOMs.
My expertise comes from a family friend who spend 40 years filming features and documentaries using Bolex and Arri etc. Also I spend over $10K buying different lenses, trying them and building my collection.
Not all Arri lenses are great either, Not all Cookes are great, earlier versions do allow some glare, etc. And as mentioned before you need 35mm format to cover sensor, but those will get more expensive and get much larger, so all of a sudden your choices of mounts becomes greater and reason going Arri becomes smaller.
One should always pick and choose the best of different worlds, considering different factors. I probably would be happy image wise if I picked up Leica M primes, but I would be all broke financially and kinda bored
To answer you question, I would need to know the cost of the new 20/1.7, because it is the only option that I can even think about affording, and the only fast lens on the map.
In M mount, a 25/2.8 from Zeiss or Liecia is about 3-8 times more expensive than ALL my C-mount lenses. CV does not make a fast 25, but my 25/4 cost about the same as all my C-mount lenses. Call the adapers a wash, 1C = 1M
In round numbers, I've got about $300 in c-mount lenses, and another $100 in adapters. I have made a decision to skip getting some of the very good C-mount lenses, as I have a feeling that more will be coming via CV ... in native mount, and with firmware updates to deal with the corner softness much the way the kit lens does! Kind of like selecting the focal length and max aperature via the menus the way that I do on my D300. This is only my read of a whole bunch of tidibits that are floating around in internet space, so don't even take it as a rumor!
This is from the wollensak 25mm 1.5
and a zoom
The whole set with samples from the kit lens can be found at:
Beautiful shot, Dave,
What do you mean by "zoom", made with a zoom lens or a detail of a shot with the same Wollensak? I assume that the Wollensak does not cover the whole sensor, or am I wrong?
Interesting what you say about CV, that would be good news, although by now I have practically all I need, except an extreme wide angle (Olympus 9-18?)
We have all learned a lot with regards to c-mount lenses, and are still learning. That's why I put up the database...so people who pioneered (i.e., spent money) could assist others into making good decisions.
I haven't seen nearly as many lenses as others, but I would not necessarily shut the door on cine lenses; only on *some* cine lenses.
The 25/1.9 Xenoplan is great (IMHO) and also the 75/2.5 Angenieux. There are others. Those two I've used personally.
I am also borrowing a 25/2.8 lens (not cine, tho) for testing and will report the results, this may be a good option for a medium speed normal...
50mm Macro Switar is one of my favorite lenses, especially for macro. I have one in Alpa Reflex mount and IMHO it is one of the best lenses ever made. It shines on the G1.
Zoom was a very poor choice of words. Sorry about that, that picture of the yellow part of the flower is about a 100% CROP of the first image. You are right, there is no zoom at all. The focus was on the yellow part. If you follow the link, there is a comparison of the same crop from the kit lens. For all practical purposes, I see very little difference between the two crops, while the lens gives a very different look to the photos.
I would love to get this lens on a smaller body!
The 1.9 version of the raptar may cover the whole frame, but as you stop down, the 1.5 looses corner coverage.