Sony Kit lenses vs still or Red lenses?

[Leonard Levy]

Has anybody had a chance to try out the new Sony lenses that come in the kit with the camera?
I don't expect them to be Zeiss quality but how do they compare say to the other inexpensive choices out there, especially something like the Nikon lenses.
Obviously they have the advantage of being geared and having longer focus throws. I imagine they might also have a CAC correction connection to the camera which might hide a great many flaws.

Also I've heard the mechanics are not too good, but again how bad when compared to using still glass or say Red glass?

Lenny

[Paul Richards]

Will test tomorrow and post.

[Andy Shipsides]

They are optically very similar to the Red Pro Primes. They have very little if any breathing, little CA, and hold focus well. Mechanically they are a bit heavy, the rings are plastic, and do not have any exact markings. However they are much better than still glass in terms of pulling focus, and smooth iris changes. I say for the money they are fantastic lenses. $6k for 3 PL lenses cannot be beat.

[Leonard Levy]

Thanks Andy,
Not being very familiar with the Red Pro primes - what does that mean about the optical quality say compared to Zeiss compacts

[Timur Civan]

Originally Posted by Andy Shipsides

They are optically very similar to the Red Pro Primes. They have very little if any breathing, little CA, and hold focus well. Mechanically they are a bit heavy, the rings are plastic, and do not have any exact markings. However they are much better than still glass in terms of pulling focus, and smooth iris changes. I say for the money they are fantastic lenses. $6k for 3 PL lenses cannot be beat.

I've not used them, but andy is right. 6k for pl glass that's aT2 is a damn good deal.

[Steve Strickle]

Glad I ordered mine with the glass..even if you move to something else, I think those lenses will be hot in the market. (very easy to sell!)

[Timur Civan]

I think they would trickle down very nicely to the entering AF100/F3 market of owner operators.

[Jim Tittle]

My dealer loaned me an F3 last weekend, since mine isn't in yet, and the Sony primes were in the box. I decided to leave them there, since I had an MTF adapter and a set of Zeiss ZF2s.

The ZF2s look great to me, and they cost half as much. They're also made of metal. When you turn the focus ring on the Sony lenses, you hear plastic on plastic. Grrrrrr. The Zeiss lenses are silky smooth.

Another issue for me: the Sony primes are really, really big. Ginormous. I know that has advantages for pulling focus. And big stuff really impresses clients, sometimes. But, I think I'll get by just fine without 'em.

[Nate Weaver]

Originally Posted by Jim Tittle

Another issue for me: the Sony primes are really, really big. Ginormous. I know that has advantages for pulling focus. And big stuff really impresses clients, sometimes. But, I think I'll get by just fine without 'em.

big primes are usually that way so they can all be the same size...just an FYI. So the fronts stay the same size (no bellows changes on matteboxes), and the gears all stay in the same place so you can switch lenses quickly...especially for setups with motors.

Not applicable to you, of course :-)

[Leonard Levy]

What do you guys think of the Duclos ZF.2 adaptations as an alternative to the Sony primes for an affordable set.
You could get a set of 28mm- 100mm for $9K (28 & 100 are f2 and the 35, 50 and 85 are f1.4)

Price is comparable to Sony's and you do have that magic word Zeiss on your gear list,

If I read the literature right maybe an Arri follow focus can gear down to slow the shorter focus barrel and can reverse the gear direction for AC's used to standard direction.

Image quality compared to Sony's or Red primes?

Lenny

[Jim Tittle]

Nate: Yeah, I know. Size does matter. In some ways. Some times.

The Sony lenses, despite their substantial girth, don't inspire confidence. Mechanically, they remind me of cheap DSLR kit lenses. I know that it's possible to make a great lens with plastic components, but I'm not convinced that it'll still be a great lens in a year or two. And, even though $2,000 each qualifies these as cheap PL lenses, $2000 is still $2000. In my world, that ain't chump change.

[Timur Civan]

Originally Posted by Leonard Levy

What do you guys think of the Duclos ZF.2 adaptations as an alternative to the Sony primes for an affordable set.
You could get a set of 28mm- 100mm for $9K (28 & 100 are f2 and the 35, 50 and 85 are f1.4)

Price is comparable to Sony's and you do have that magic word Zeiss on your gear list,

If I read the literature right maybe an Arri follow focus can gear down to slow the shorter focus barrel and can reverse the gear direction for AC's used to standard direction.

Image quality compared to Sony's or Red primes?

Lenny

Ive usedthe Duclos adapter ZF2's. They are VERY nice and essentialy CP2's, with less convenience.

[Sam Painter]

I have been wondering how the Sony lenses would compare for weeks.
The CP2's are still not readily available, but I got a hold of a Zeiss 35mm CP2 and a Sony 35 mm that comes with the F3, both PL mount.
I went to Band Pro in Burbank,Ca. (who owned the lenses) and projected them both on a Chrosziel Lens Testing Projector MK5 in their lens testing room.
To my and the sales persons surprise the Sony 35mm looked sharper. Not only in the center, but the edges as well.
That said, the construction of the Sony lenses are not of the best quality and the Focus Witness marks are pretty much useless.
They cost $1866.00 a piece an are a T2....pretty hard to beat for the money.
The CP2's aren't available and cost $3900 each and up.
I bought the camera with the 3 lenses.

[Ryan Koo]

Maybe I'm getting confused, but the CP2s are full frame, so there's a crop factor, right? Are the Sonys any different?

[Peter Moretti]

IMHO, buy it with the lenses b/c you can't get the Sony glass any other way. If you don't like 'em, sell 'em. There should be a good secondary market. JMHO.