Which cine lens mounts work on a 4/3 camera?

raid

raid

Dad Photographer
Local time
5:20 AM
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
36,565
In particular, which type of cine lenses work on an Olympus EPL-2?
Is a D mount lens OK?
 
Hi Raid,

D-mounts are too small to work on m4/3.

C-mount lenses smaller than 25mm will vignette. There are a few 25mm lenses that do not vignette: the Schneider Xenoplan f1.9 dims the corners only very slightly.

I would recommend the Fujinon CCTV C-mounts -- very good glass, and not expensive (last time I checked).

My main lens on my Panasonic GH-1 is an Angenieux 25/0.95. Very beautiful lens, perhaps my favorite in any format. I shoot it in 1:1 square format to avoid vignetting. Unfortunately prices for these have gone through the roof.

Best,
Kurt
 
Hello Kurt,
I want one cine lens to try out. The Angenieux sounds good to me. Thanks for the tipto try out the CCTV lens.
 
I have a Angenieux 75/2.5 that works nicely. In general lenses lenses with a FL of 35mm or higher work without hard vignetting. Some lenses as low as 25mm can be found without the issue, but they are the exception rather than the rule. IQ can vary widely, but many of the lenses have distinct character.

With regard to the CCTV lenses, make sure you are buying for the larger format (1" ?) CCTV. There are C mount CCTV lenses that are made for smaler sensors and will vignette badly.

A good site for info is the 4/3 foum at Get DPI:
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=44
 
C-mount lenses on m4/3 stikes me as a weird niche, no good/bad value judgment intended. There are different, sometimes contrary reasons to use c-mount optics, with prices ranging from $20-$2,000+. There's also a wide range of image rendition depending on lens formula, focal length and speed.

Most c-mount lenses are made for smaller image formats, and the wider lenses, especially wide/fast lenses, have a look many love. Sharp center, soft (often vignetted) corners and swirly bokeh.

Longer and slower lenses usually have a more familiar rendition, more like full-frame optics, though few, if any, are going to be as sharp corner-corner as most legacy 35mm-frame optics.

Many of the wide/fast optics are relatively cheap, while a few of the anointed ones are very expensive. It's kind of fun to find a tiny 25/1.5 lens for $60, but you need to really like the look of the 25/0.95 Angenieux to spend $1,000+ for one.

I've played with a few c-mount lenses, and in general I don't find them very useful for my photos. I'm more into sharpness and contrast, less into vignetted corners and swirly bokeh. The wide/fast lenses I can afford are pretty soft and flarey wide-open, and if I had $1,000+ for the 25/.95 Ang. I'd rather spend it on the 25/.95 Cosina/V'lander, or 7-14 Panny. I don't find the longer focal lengths distinctive enough to be really distinctive, so why not just use a legacy 50/1.8, 85/1.8, etc?

But that's just me, I have seen some very nice work done with c-mount lenses. Images I like to look at, not images I'm motivated to make for myself.

For you, Raid, I'd first ask myself why I'm interested in c-mount lenses, what my budget is, and what focal length best matches my needs/wants. There are lots of flickr groups with c-mount output, shouldn't be too hard to see the different looks possible...
 
I use adapted CCTV lenses regularly, and have tried some of the old cine lenses.

There are, actually, some D-mount lenses that work. They're generally "telephotos", in the 35-40mm range. They have a much larger than normal image circle, and if you remove their mount and spend $1.50 on plumbing parts at the hardware store you can mount them in a C-mount to micro-4/3 adapter. It's a bit of a time investment, but can be worth it.

What you get from adapting cine lenses (the common-ish ones, not talking about the expensive stuff here) in that ~30-50mm range is a TINY "portrait" lens with a distinctive classic character that's a lot nicer (imo) to carry around and use than the only similarly-priced alternatives, which are normal lenses from legacy 35mm SLR systems.
 
PCB_RF said:
C-mount lenses on m4/3 stikes me as a weird niche, no good/bad value judgment intended. There are different, sometimes contrary reasons to use c-mount optics, with prices ranging from $20-$2,000+. There's also a wide range of image rendition depending on lens formula, focal length and speed.

Most c-mount lenses are made for smaller image formats, and the wider lenses, especially wide/fast lenses, have a look many love. Sharp center, soft (often vignetted) corners and swirly bokeh.

Longer and slower lenses usually have a more familiar rendition, more like full-frame optics, though few, if any, are going to be as sharp corner-corner as most legacy 35mm-frame optics.

Many of the wide/fast optics are relatively cheap, while a few of the anointed ones are very expensive. It's kind of fun to find a tiny 25/1.5 lens for $60, but you need to really like the look of the 25/0.95 Angenieux to spend $1,000+ for one.

I've played with a few c-mount lenses, and in general I don't find them very useful for my photos. I'm more into sharpness and contrast, less into vignetted corners and swirly bokeh. The wide/fast lenses I can afford are pretty soft and flarey wide-open, and if I had $1,000+ for the 25/.95 Ang. I'd rather spend it on the 25/.95 Cosina/V'lander, or 7-14 Panny. I don't find the longer focal lengths distinctive enough to be really distinctive, so why not just use a legacy 50/1.8, 85/1.8, etc?

But that's just me, I have seen some very nice work done with c-mount lenses. Images I like to look at, not images I'm motivated to make for myself.

For you, Raid, I'd first ask myself why I'm interested in c-mount lenses, what my budget is, and what focal length best matches my needs/wants. There are lots of flickr groups with c-mount output, shouldn't be too hard to see the different looks possible...
Click to expand...

I would maybe get one cine lens to try out for a distinct look in images with it. I have enough lenses as it is. I will start with a 17mm/4 that comes with the EP-2. It also comes with an M mount.

Thanks for your personal view on it all. I value it.
 
zumbido said:
I use adapted CCTV lenses regularly, and have tried some of the old cine lenses.

There are, actually, some D-mount lenses that work. They're generally "telephotos", in the 35-40mm range. They have a much larger than normal image circle, and if you remove their mount and spend $1.50 on plumbing parts at the hardware store you can mount them in a C-mount to micro-4/3 adapter. It's a bit of a time investment, but can be worth it.

What you get from adapting cine lenses (the common-ish ones, not talking about the expensive stuff here) in that ~30-50mm range is a TINY "portrait" lens with a distinctive classic character that's a lot nicer (imo) to carry around and use than the only similarly-priced alternatives, which are normal lenses from legacy 35mm SLR systems.
Click to expand...

Hi Brian,
What you said about getting a tiny portrait lens may be enough for me to get such a lens one day.
 
raid said:
Are there any suggested prices for such Zeiss lenses? No Zeiss lens is cheap.
Click to expand...

Zeiss CP2s are generally around £2500 in the UK, pretty cheap for motion picture lenses, I believe leica summilux-C lenses are around $180,000 a set.
 
Mohan said:
Zeiss CP2s are generally around £2500 in the UK, pretty cheap for motion picture lenses, I believe leica summilux-C lenses are around $180,000 a set.
Click to expand...

The CP2 is a step above the (video) DigiPrime series,and is targeted at Super 16 and DSLR/EVIL HD video, i.e. student and independent level cinematography. The Summilux-C line is in quite another class, PL mount and competes with the Zeiss Master/Ultra line, which are no cheaper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom