10 replies to this topic

[Hardev Singh]

https://vimeo.com/151565159

 

Some unused dance footage shot with Angénieux 5.9mm F1.8

(Look in 1080P for best quality)

 

 

What do you think of this lens?

[Bill DiPietra]

I've never cared for Angénieux lenses as they've always appeared much too soft for my tastes.  You should be getting a much sharper picture at 1080p on the BMPCC.

[Hardev Singh]

To me it's sharp enough for an Ultra Wide Lens, really can't see a sharpness issue here 

[Tyler Purcell]

Yea I didn't see any sharpness issues either. On my computer it was crisp and looked good. Though the later shots had a lot of noise in them and the focus seemed soft when zooming in.

I've used Angénieux lenses for years and they are absolutely a "softer" lens then other zooms like the Zeiss 10 - 120 that I currently use. It has a good look though, especially for film. For digital, the coatings look a bit weird. I've seen many tests and they all have an unusual bloom of red in them. When I used Angénieux full-time on film, my biggest complaints were the vignetting issues and how the speed changed when you zoomed. One of the Angénieux lenses I used all the time, wouldn't let you run all the way open unless you were zoomed in I believe. I like shallow depth of field, so I'd always want to run the zoom's all the way open and it was tricky.

By contrast, I've found the Zeiss 10 - 120 MKII to be a MUCH better lens. It doesn't have any problems really.

[Kenny N Suleimanagich]

Depending on which of those Zeiss zooms you have (the 10-100, Optex 12-120, or the Arri/Zeiss 11-110) you will get some dark corners at the wide end of the zoom. They also breathe substantially. Optically they're excellent, but the wider end does tend to be problematic at times for that small vignette. 

[Tyler Purcell]

Mine doesn't have any vignetting in final filmed shot, though you can see it on the edges of the viewfinder. It was modified by Optex and they did a great job. Close focus is only 5 feet when wide, but if you stick to that, it's all good. I think that's why the Arri version is 11 - 110, they may have wanted to try and create closer focus when fully wide. The Angénieux had vignetting all the way wide all the time! Plus, it was HARD, just a black circle, where the Zeiss is soft, you can barely see it.

[Hardev Singh]

Yea I didn't see any sharpness issues either. On my computer it was crisp and looked good. Though the later shots had a lot of noise in them and the focus seemed soft when zooming in.

I've used Angénieux lenses for years and they are absolutely a "softer" lens then other zooms like the Zeiss 10 - 120 that I currently use. It has a good look though, especially for film. For digital, the coatings look a bit weird. I've seen many tests and they all have an unusual bloom of red in them. When I used Angénieux full-time on film, my biggest complaints were the vignetting issues and how the speed changed when you zoomed. One of the Angénieux lenses I used all the time, wouldn't let you run all the way open unless you were zoomed in I believe. I like shallow depth of field, so I'd always want to run the zoom's all the way open and it was tricky.

By contrast, I've found the Zeiss 10 - 120 MKII to be a MUCH better lens. It doesn't have any problems really

 

 

Yes, the S16 converted lenses and true S16 lenses are better for sure (i still dream of the Cooke 10.4-52 and Angie 7-81 haha) but damn the price is really out of my budget ! I get this 12-120 for a low price and if it's not the best zoom, he bring a nice organic look to my footage and i really prefer that over a generic oversharp still lens. 

 

I've seen mixed quality videos with them too but recently i've read a lot on these old angies and it seems that the overal quality is really depending of the release year and the condition (saw that there were created on more than 25 years from the 60's to 80's). Mine is from 1980 and in great condition, so i guess it's a relatively good one. But yes constant aperture is missing sadly.

[Tyler Purcell]

I got my 10 - 120 for a grand and I saw a similar modified one go on ebay for $850 recently. I was like holy crap! The Arri/Zeiss ones are $3k - 5k easily and they are no better.

[Hardev Singh]

Wow really good price yes! But still way too high for me 

[Tyler Purcell]

Wow really good price yes! But still way too high for me 

I hear ya! Thats partially why I don't have a zoom for my digital camera.

[Hardev Singh]

Can understand that !