Oh you would think I might know this by now but I don't.
Other than geared focus & zoom rings, T values vs. f values, is there an optical difference worth the $$$.
Has anyone shot stills w/ the Cine lens?
Printable View
Oh you would think I might know this by now but I don't.
Other than geared focus & zoom rings, T values vs. f values, is there an optical difference worth the $$$.
Has anyone shot stills w/ the Cine lens?
Optically (as in lens alignment) I'm sure there's *some* kind of difference, seeing as they have to get all the bits of glass into the same sized frame for the gearings. Some lenses (like imagine a niftyfifty) would absolutely swim inside that housing and could just be padded out (I reckon even the 135/2L would be skinnier than that housing and could fit easily). But i'm intrigued myself as to the dimensions of that 14mm as compared to the still 14/2.8L version, especially the width of the front element(s). If they've had to shave off bits to get it into that housing, that's definitely going to affect IQ, especially vignetting and bokeh. Or maybe the cine lenses are bigger than they look on my screen and there's more than enough room for even the 14mm?
A lot of what you're paying for is the video-specific features, like perfectly-repeatable and accurate focus scales, things don't get bigger and smaller as you focus to and fro, and especially with zooms that the focal point doesn't change as you zoom. So unless you need that kind of stuff, the lenses aren't worth the extra money.
If however, you're a stills-only absolute gear nut with a metric shiteload of money, and even if the optics are almost the same, these cine lenses are going to have (i hope/presume) ridiculously good Quality Control, the best bits of the best glass, and be hand-tuned up the wazoo.
Whether you can afford that 10x increase in price for the last 1-2% of possible IQ probably depends on how much you've won on the lottery lately though...
In the competition to be the one with the best equipment on your block, owning all the Cine lenses and the 1D C will put you close to the front of the pack.
It might be a bit excessive, owning this lens to just take stills could be an indication of some type of mental disorder.
I have to wonder though, the CN-E 14mm T3.1 LF has a 11 blade aperture vs the 14mm f/2.8 L II 6 blade aperture might make a noticeable difference. Maybe I need this lens.
I think optically they are designed to be parfocal and to not focus-breathe. Doesn't sound like much, but I think it is not easily achieved in the design