Jump to content


Photo

Cooke Zoom 9-50 T2.5 (S16) review


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 C. Y. Richmond

C. Y. Richmond

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 31 October 2008 - 12:24 AM

Shooting a S16 short and considering renting the Cooke Zoom 9-50mm T2.5 Lens, but have never worked with it. I have access to a Canon 8-64mm, however, the film's aesthetic lends itself to late 1960s, early 1970s new Hollywood (i.e. "Harold and Maude," "Five Easy Pieces," etc.), so i am considering renting the lens to try to get a more diffused ("aged?") look. Anyone ever work with this lens? Perks? Faults? Thanks.
  • 0

#2 Mitch Gross

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

Posted 31 October 2008 - 09:40 AM

The Cooke 9-50 does not cover Super-16. There are two versions of this lens that do, a Cooke 10.4-52 and a 3rd party conversion that is a 11-60. It is a very clean, sharp lens with nice contrast and a slightly warm look. If you're looking for something a little fuzzy with poorer contrast, try to dig up an old Angenieux zoom, like a 15-150. There are other sizes like 9.5-57, 10-150, 12-120 and 12-240 but these do not cover Super-16 at all focal lengths.
  • 0

#3 Sander Ferdinand

Sander Ferdinand
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 52 posts
  • Other
  • The Netherlands

Posted 08 November 2008 - 11:24 AM

I was told the Canon 8-64 was an old video lens when i saw one, and the guy who gave it to me for filming said he hated it because of the lack in contrast at high apertures. Alltough i'm not a very experienced s16mm shooter i would advise you to stay out of low light conditions with the canon ( everything under ~ F 3.0 = bad ). That is, if you're gonna use it.

Greetings
  • 0

#4 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5193 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 08 November 2008 - 05:20 PM

I was told the Canon 8-64 was an old video lens when i saw one, and the guy who gave it to me for filming said he hated it because of the lack in contrast at high apertures. Alltough i'm not a very experienced s16mm shooter i would advise you to stay out of low light conditions with the canon ( everything under ~ F 3.0 = bad ). That is, if you're gonna use it.

Greetings


The Canon is pretty contrasty at most stops and doesn't really match the look from the 1960 or 1970s. It's not that bad wide open compared to most zooms, although it improves closed down a stop. Quite a few camera people swore by them when they came out.
  • 0

#5 Chris Keth

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

Posted 10 November 2008 - 08:38 PM

The Canon is pretty contrasty at most stops and doesn't really match the look from the 1960 or 1970s. It's not that bad wide open compared to most zooms, although it improves closed down a stop. Quite a few camera people swore by them when they came out.


That's my experience with them. I love them for a good all around zoom when I shoot S16. If I can't get one of the newer gen zeiss T2 11-110s I get one of the canons.
  • 0


Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

Metropolis Post

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

Aerial Filmworks

Tai Audio

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

Paralinx LLC

Wooden Camera

The Slider

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

Metropolis Post

Abel Cine

Tai Audio

Glidecam