Jump to content


Photo

Zeiss 10-100 1.8 what are the differences between MKI and MK2 ?


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Gregory PAUL

Gregory PAUL
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 60 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • FRANCE

Posted 13 March 2010 - 03:29 PM

Hello,

I was wondering what were the differences between the MKI and MKII versions of the Zeiss 10-100 1.8 in both mechanical and optical point of view. Also, any difference in picture quality ?

Thanks !
  • 0

#2 Charlie Peich

Charlie Peich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Chicago

Posted 14 March 2010 - 11:11 AM

Hello,

I was wondering what were the differences between the MKI and MKII versions of the Zeiss 10-100 1.8 in both mechanical and optical point of view. Also, any difference in picture quality ?

Thanks !



Gregory,

Both lenses were optimized for Standard 16. Neither lens will cover Super 16 satisfactorily at the wide end.

On the Mk I, the front element of the front lens group (the focusing group) is 80mm. This caused the lens to vignette in the corners from 15mm down when focused at 5 feet and closer (you can focus slightly closer than 5 ft, but there are no marks). This would disappear as you focused to a further distance.

The Mark II corrected this problem with a larger front element. The Mark II's front element is 87mm.

That was the only change, just a larger front element and slightly different focusing ring. The rest of the Mk II is identical to the Mk I. You would have to compare them on a projector to see any difference optically.

"Great value has been given to the neutral colour reproduction so that if the lens is changed the film retains, as far as possible, a uniform colour character." That's quoted verbatim from the Arri Tech. Information sheet.

However....

While not wanting to change the physical size of the lens and, of course, raising the cost of the modified lens; Arri/Zeiss perhaps, cough, cough, didn't address the new weight of the re-deisgned front focusing group, cough, and it was rumored, cough, cough, that the Mk IIs may have needed more servicing than the Mk I. Cough. I have a Mk I, bought it just before the Mk IIs came out, no problems.

I found the Tech sheets for the 2 lenses:

Hope this helps.



Mk I
Posted Image


Mk II
Posted Image
  • 0

#3 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5070 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 March 2010 - 11:19 AM

I had a Mk 1, which later had the Super 16 conversion fitted. I can confirm the vignetting at closer than 5ft, something that was a bit annoying after having the 10-100 T3 before. They also breath quite a bit while focusing.
  • 0

#4 Charlie Peich

Charlie Peich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Chicago

Posted 14 March 2010 - 11:58 AM

something that was a bit annoying after having the 10-100 T3 before. They also breath quite a bit while focusing.


Hey Brian,

I had the T3 also. Didn't you just love the rotation direction of the focal ring, it rotated in the opposite direction from all the other zooms in the world. What the heck was Zeiss thinking? Killed many assistants that weren't used to working with the lens. The T3 also needed rebuilding often as the nylon guides on the focal group wore out quickly.

Did you add a larger gear ring to your Mk I's focal ring? I put one on mine, it gave it a better ratio for the slower zooms. Also, at the time I had a J-4 control and motor, and I don't think the motor's gear would mesh properly. I think CP sold the over size ring.
  • 0

#5 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5070 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 March 2010 - 01:01 PM

Hey Brian,

I had the T3 also. Didn't you just love the rotation direction of the focal ring, it rotated in the opposite direction from all the other zooms in the world. What the heck was Zeiss thinking? Killed many assistants that weren't used to working with the lens. The T3 also needed rebuilding often as the nylon guides on the focal group wore out quickly.


Yes, the zoom operation was weird and counter intrusive and you had to get used to it. I had a fluid zoom drive fitted to mine and later had a gear added on the focus for use with a follow focus. It was pretty compact, which was nice for hand held work, the down side was the max aperture and the triangular flare.
  • 0

#6 Gregory PAUL

Gregory PAUL
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 60 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • FRANCE

Posted 19 March 2010 - 01:58 PM

Hello everyone !

Thanks Charlie for all the details and the tech sheets.

Well, for now I've got a MKII that has a zoom ring trouble. I don't know yet if I'll have it repaired because I contacted Zeiss for the parts and it's quite expensive...

Soon I'll have a MKI that has been converted to S16.

So, what I'm thinking about is to put the MKII front glass on the MKI. Do you think that it could work ? I guess that if it is the same optical design it should work fine...

Thanks !
  • 0

#7 Charlie Peich

Charlie Peich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Chicago

Posted 20 March 2010 - 08:34 AM

Hello everyone !


So, what I'm thinking about is to put the MKII front glass on the MKI. Do you think that it could work ? I guess that if it is the same optical design it should work fine...

Thanks !


Hello Gregory!

The "zoom" ring problem, as I recall, was the most prevalent problem with the series II. I have a friend who has a small rental house, he had a MkII that developed that problem. $7,000 to fix with Zei$$.

As for putting the front "focusing" group from the Mk II on the MkI, I don't know if that can work. You need to talk to Zeiss or a lens tech like Paul Duclos. Paul works on the Mk I and Mk II lenses.

If it was my Mk I, and it was working without any problems, I wouldn't mess with it because of the additional weight on the front of the lens. For instance, with my Mk I, I don't put any clamp-on filter rings with multiple filters, or clamp-on matte boxes on it... no additional weight added to the lens. This is the philosophy I've had with all zoom lenses.

A lens tech told me once years ago, "a 'variable focal length' lens is a barrel of compromises!"

Charlie
  • 0


Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

Aerial Filmworks

Opal

Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Technodolly

CineLab

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

Technodolly

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Glidecam

CineTape