Jump to content


Photo

Super Speeds: Mk2 v Mk3


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 ML Scott

ML Scott
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • 2nd Assistant Camera
  • Melbourne

Posted 27 February 2008 - 09:46 AM

Hi all,

I'm shooting a short with p+s adapter and hvx202 early next month. Very little cash and very little time to test lenses... Trying to get a feel of the difference between the Mk2s and the Mk3s... price is the same. Any experiences or advice on these sets of lenses greatly appreciated.

Also, as an aside, given that the image is being put through an adapter, and a degree of sharpness & contrast is lost, would there be any point using lenses like the UltraPrimes or S4s? My inkling is that it would be a bit of a waste of the extra money. Again, advice would be great.

Thanks, Michael.
  • 0

#2 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 27 February 2008 - 09:03 PM

Hi all,

I'm shooting a short with p+s adapter and hvx202 early next month. Very little cash and very little time to test lenses... Trying to get a feel of the difference between the Mk2s and the Mk3s... price is the same. Any experiences or advice on these sets of lenses greatly appreciated.

Also, as an aside, given that the image is being put through an adapter, and a degree of sharpness & contrast is lost, would there be any point using lenses like the UltraPrimes or S4s? My inkling is that it would be a bit of a waste of the extra money. Again, advice would be great.

Thanks, Michael.


Personally, I would try for lenses that are sharper wide open. The superspeeds are fast but they get a little mushy wide open.

The biggest difference I know of with between MKIIs and MKIIIs is that the MKIIs have the triangular irises and the MKIIIs are more round.
  • 0

#3 Mike Williamson

Mike Williamson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 534 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 27 February 2008 - 10:37 PM

Personally, I would try for lenses that are sharper wide open. The superspeeds are fast but they get a little mushy wide open.

The biggest difference I know of with between MKIIs and MKIIIs is that the MKIIs have the triangular irises and the MKIIIs are more round.


Actually it's the MkI series that have 3 blade irises. The MkII's I believe have 7 blade irises (?) but they definitely do not give you the repulsive triangular bokeh of the MkI's.
  • 0

#4 Mike Williamson

Mike Williamson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 534 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 27 February 2008 - 10:47 PM

As far as what to put on the front of P+S adapter, I personally wouldn't put extra money into Ultra Primes or S4's. I've found that the Pro 35 softens the image considerably, so I'm not sure that your going to get a lot more out of using more expensive lenses. Any of those lenses will out resolve the camera/pro35 combination you're capturing with. My guess is that the main difference would be in how the lenses flare, with Ultra Primes and S4's being more controlled and the Superspeeds showing more veiling.

As a side note, you will be better off using Superspeeds than still lenses (Nikons, etc.), so don't go too cheap. In my experience using still lenses with adapters, they often have lots of chromatic aberration that just looks bad, ugly green and magenta edges popping up on things.
  • 0

#5 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 28 February 2008 - 01:25 AM

Actually it's the MkI series that have 3 blade irises. The MkII's I believe have 7 blade irises (?) but they definitely do not give you the repulsive triangular bokeh of the MkI's.


Are you sure? I could've sworn it was the MKIIs... :huh:
  • 0

#6 A. Whitehouse

A. Whitehouse
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 267 posts
  • Director
  • Melbourne

Posted 28 February 2008 - 02:45 AM

As far as what to put on the front of P+S adapter, I personally wouldn't put extra money into Ultra Primes or S4's. I've found that the Pro 35 softens the image considerably, so I'm not sure that your going to get a lot more out of using more expensive lenses. Any of those lenses will out resolve the camera/pro35 combination you're capturing with. My guess is that the main difference would be in how the lenses flare, with Ultra Primes and S4's being more controlled and the Superspeeds showing more veiling.

As a side note, you will be better off using Superspeeds than still lenses (Nikons, etc.), so don't go too cheap. In my experience using still lenses with adapters, they often have lots of chromatic aberration that just looks bad, ugly green and magenta edges popping up on things.


From experience, I agree with everything Mike says. Put your money somewhere else, stick with superspeeds. And the Mk IIs do not have a triangular bokeh. Good luck.
  • 0

#7 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 28 February 2008 - 03:20 AM

And the Mk IIs do not have a triangular bokeh.


Filed away in my headspace... :ph34r:
  • 0

#8 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 February 2008 - 07:50 AM

Here is an article by Jorge Diaz-Amador on the different generations of Superspeeds:

http://www.cinematec...1,2_lenses.html
  • 0

#9 A. Whitehouse

A. Whitehouse
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 267 posts
  • Director
  • Melbourne

Posted 28 February 2008 - 10:15 AM

Here is an article by Jorge Diaz-Amador on the different generations of Superspeeds:

http://www.cinematec...1,2_lenses.html


It would seem that they have triangular irises right through the range. Its funny because its not what Ive experienced with Mk IIs. Perhaps Ive been mistaken about which generation of Superspeeds Ive been using. Am I reading this article incorrectly?
  • 0

#10 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 February 2008 - 12:17 PM

I think you might be confusing the 16mm lenses wth the 35mm ones. 16mm Superpseeds have triangular bokeh through all generations, while in 35mm it's only the 1st generation.
  • 0

#11 Fran Kuhn

Fran Kuhn
  • Sustaining Members
  • 352 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 February 2008 - 12:33 PM

[quote name='Max Jacoby' date='Feb 28 2008, 09:17 AM' post='220079']
I think you might be confusing the 16mm lenses wth the 35mm ones.

Max,

You're right: I have a set of 16mm Mk IIIs and they have the triangular iris. I also have a 50mm Mk III (35mm format lens) that has the round iris.

Michael,

Paul Duclos of Duclos lenses in Los Angeles checked the 16mm lenses for me. When I asked him how the Mk III series differs from earlier Super Speeds he told me there is no difference optically. IMO they are very good lenses.

-Fran
  • 0

#12 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 28 February 2008 - 01:10 PM

I believe at that point it was just about being marked in imperial & metric instead of one or the other.
  • 0

#13 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 28 February 2008 - 03:05 PM

I think you might be confusing the 16mm lenses wth the 35mm ones. 16mm Superpseeds have triangular bokeh through all generations, while in 35mm it's only the 1st generation.


I think that is exactly it. My only experience with superspeeds is on S16. Thanks for the article!
  • 0

#14 Todd Anderson

Todd Anderson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 February 2008 - 03:26 PM

I think you might be confusing the 16mm lenses wth the 35mm ones. 16mm Superpseeds have triangular bokeh through all generations, while in 35mm it's only the 1st generation.




Actually, I have a set of MK1 16mm Superspeeds, the 9.5mm, 12mm, 16mm and 25mm, that DO NOT have the triangular bokeh (three blades). Though, oddly enough, I also have two MKII 16mm Superspeeds, a 16mm and 25mm, and they do have the three blade iris. So I've been confused as to why Zeiss went 'back' to the three blade iris on the second generation?

Todd
  • 0

#15 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 28 February 2008 - 04:43 PM

Actually, I have a set of MK1 16mm Superspeeds, the 9.5mm, 12mm, 16mm and 25mm, that DO NOT have the triangular bokeh (three blades). Though, oddly enough, I also have two MKII 16mm Superspeeds, a 16mm and 25mm, and they do have the three blade iris. So I've been confused as to why Zeiss went 'back' to the three blade iris on the second generation?

Todd


Are any rehoused? One could probably buy 3-blade iris models for cheaper than round iris models, and it wouldn't matter much if the intention was to rehouse them anyway. New iris blades could be made for relatively little money extra in the grand scheme of something like rehousing.
  • 0

#16 Kyle Waszkelewicz

Kyle Waszkelewicz
  • Guests

Posted 28 February 2008 - 10:35 PM

I recently rented a set of 16mm Mark II's. I checked all the (16mm) sets at the rental house out of curiosity, and the Mark II's and III's had triangular irises while the Mark I's didn't. Weird.
  • 0

#17 rob spence

rob spence
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 409 posts
  • Other
  • Beaconsfield

Posted 20 March 2008 - 07:49 AM

My Mk1 superspeeds have 6 bladed irises.

A tech at ICE film in London told me that mk 1, 2 and 3 16mm superspeeds all had the same glass but different bodies...the later ones with better markings
cheers
rob spence
  • 0


Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

Aerial Filmworks

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

CineLab

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

Opal

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

The Slider

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Opal

Technodolly