So the thing I learned over the years when testing lenses, test the lens to its strength. 1. Bokeh, flare, breathing. 2. Test with dimension in mind. 3. Get weird with test to find something that jumps out at you. When you just have basic setups, the comparison is really pointless. Love your work!
I was thinking the same watching this. The flares are definitively something to test, because it can really throw off when the sun peaks out in a shot. That alone can make or break a shot.
Totally. Same with microphones, put them all in the same basic setup and eq them to sound similar and they the differences can be small. Play them to their strengths and put them in difficult or uncontrolled scenarios and the differences become way bigger. Same with most things in life tbh.
I think your conclusion that the Athenas are a bit more clinically doesn't correlate to the actual guesses from both of you. I say this because for 2 of the 3 setups, you guessed the Athenas were the Cookes. And since you said you believe the Cookes to have 'character', you saw character in the Athena's and thought they were Cookes. Hank guessed twice the Athena's were DZO. So you both saw the Athenas as having character when you didn't know what they were. Also, on 2 of the 3 you both guessed the DZO's were the Athena's. Athena's you believed to be more clinical yet you guessed that when looking at DZOs. So you saw the DZO's as being clinical. You did both guess the Athena correct once, but that means you got it wrong the majority of the time. I think the assessment/conclusion is backwards.
I think the thing you're missing out on the most is lens to lens and set to set matching which is incredibly important especially if you're running four different sets of lenses.
Luc Forsyth -- I can't believe you didn't try Zeiss. Zeiss is sharp but not overly and in deference to character and dimensionality. Zeiss also has the best color and contrast.
I guessed wrong on every single lens test lol. It's crazy how good some of these more budget friendly lenses are. Also - the Burano footage looks great!
I feel like this test could have been done better. 1. You should always go in looking for specific things. Be that bokeh, aberration, contrast. Whatever. Make a list and list what exactly do you want. Not just "I want some character" 2. Push the lenses to their limits. High contrast scenes, flares, massive focus racks. See what jumps out to you as not good. And then see if you want to live with it or not depending on the project. 3. Don't be chart averse. They have a role. It's to provide you information. For example: how much warmer is middle grey on this lens vs the other. You can ignore it if you want, but a chart can give you immense amounts of information, if you know how to interpret the data for your own shooting style
all of the sigma cine primes are simply rehousings of the stills versions, except the 65mm, which is an original design for cinema, and there's no stills version available.
This was a great and actually practical way to test lenses, would love to see more! I get that for the upcoming series you'll be shooting mostly wide and medium but I'd love to see you test line ups close to the telephoto or macro-telephoto range when possible! Would be fun to see you test and Schneider cine Xenar III, I got a set to replace an S4 set that wasn't complete and was surprised by how the images came out... Size and weight were terrible on an ursa 12k. Love that you didn't zoom in and pixel peep
The Cooke is always easy to spot. If you look at the out of focus area on the first two tests (out the window and the background lamp), the Cooke has noticeably deeper depth of field than the others, in keeping with it narrower aperture. So that's a bit of a cheat. I figured that Option C was the Cooke in the third test since that one missed focus and the others didn't necessarily have notable differences in depth of field. To me, the Sigma and the Cooke look a bit warmer than the Athena and DZO. The Cooke and Sigma also, to me, seem to be noticeably sharper. That's a double edged sword, since although they are indeed technically superior, I do like the aesthetic and "character" of the DZO and Athena. So I think that's project dependent. Finally, the Cooke, to me, looks like it has the best contrast out of all of them. Overall, what this says to me is that, even though I like the color of the Sigma the least, I'm certainly not ditching my Sigma any time soon when it comes to lower budget projects. The four lenses are far too similar to my eye to justify the massive price difference. That's what I'd recommend for anyone in the lower levels of filmmaking. Spend that money lighting, grip, and camera movement instead, since that'll make a much bigger difference. For higher end shoots, I guess it really depends on the ergonomics. If I needed autofocus, I'd go with the Sigma. If not -- and I usually prefer cine style too -- I'd pick the DZO. I felt the image quality was super similar to the Athena, so I'd just make that decision for the ease of operation, since the Athenas do definitely look a bit short for grabbing focus. If money were no object, and if I had all the equipment to make weight less of a factor, and if I knew I'd not need a shallow DOF or be shooting in low light, I'd go for the Cooke. Otherwise, DZO all the way for higher budget stuff and Sigma all the way for lower budget and passion projects. Another awesome video, Luke! I don't know how you did it....but you somehow got me to watch all 40 minutes, haha. You've always got great info and present it in a super engaging way.
Brilliant. A lot of gear reviews miss the mark about what actually matters. It's great to actually shoot the things you are going to be shooting to test the lenses, but I would have also thrown in a scene that pushes the lenses a bit more. I'd want to know how they handle situations that might produce busy bokeh, loss of contrast etc. Everything looks good indoors with soft lighting. I'd also have colour and exposure matched them in post, as so often I see lens videos biased towards one particular lens just because it had a 'warm look' or it just happened to have the most neutral white balance in a particular scene so the colours looked more separated. In some of your examples, my favourite images were just the ones with the white balance or exposure I prefered.
Nice test! I've been using a Sigma 24 and a 50 Sony-Zeiss with 1/4 black pro mist filters for about 4 years now. I keep thinking about getting cine lenses, but truth is I just don't need them for what I shoot. The lenses I use look excellent. I may try the DZOs. Or just get the Nisis and use filters to soften them up.
Very happy to find your channel - only found last week or so. Now in the stage I am in Filmmaking, it is probably the one with the information I need, in the most when I am about to shoot my Capstone project.
The Sigma lenses are my favorite, they have a softer contrast and a different color rendering. That being said, I am a photographer who is getting into video :)
Hey Luc, Great video and very timely. I too am about to invest in a new camera set up for the upcoming docs and I going to picking up a C400 and C80 (my version of the Fx6 and FX3). I have been thinking about primes for the new Rig and the NISI lenses have been on my mind a lot. The DZO look nice but the NISI have a native RF mount and you need an adapter for the DZO. I definitely liked the look of the NISI lenses so thanks for doing this test, I am sold!!! Happy Holidays brother!!!
same boat, but for commerical work not doc. That said, you'd still be better off getting the nisi in PL and going with an adapter so you can bring the same look across multiple systems. I have a 400 and 70 combo, native is nice for ease of use, but flexibility and consistency is key when you're working on a look :)
@@MrMoviePhoneEx I only shoot Canon so that isn't going to be an issue. Also I don't do commercial work. Just my own Documentaries, I never shoot for other people.
I think you would've seen far more differences between the lenses if you were to film outdoors, with trees in the background - especially if the canopy were a significant part of the background.
This is a very interesting comparison. In this test, the DZOs and Nisis are for sure punching way above their price bracket. Two comments: the speed of the Sigmas shouldn’t be ignored. Having an extra stop of light and more background separation are both very valuable in some doc situations, and this series of Cookes may not be the best representative of “The Cooke Look.”
I think a lot of the differences are gonna come out in less controlled b-roll situations. There was a shot near the end where you shoot a backlit sunset with the Sigma. Different lenses will flare differently and hold onto contrast in situations like that. In high contrast scenes (trees against a sky is my usual test), you’re gonna see more aberrations on some than others, and they show up differently in different formats. I hope this doesn’t sound critical, because I really love your channel and the practical approach you take to the info that you share.
The sigma not only look sharp, they also have a nice separation, color and rendering ... and they are dirt cheap. Maybe this is also the reason why they now are always so underestimated, but in the end you grab an sigma art and be happy.
Love the video! I wonder how the Cooke SP3’s would perform here, given their E-mount small form factor that seem made for self-focusing with larger focus rings. Thanks!
They’re beautiful lenses. I’ve shot a few shorts with them. I paid nothing to use them, so my opinion is based purely on results and I can confidently say they render beautiful images. I’ve used Fujinon, Zeiss supremes (also incredible), Zeiss CP2, NIKKOR (these are great too), milvus, g master, etc. and the SP3 and Supreme primes are the standouts. To say there aren’t substantial differences between lenses is incorrect. It’s best to get closer to a subject and analyze skin, falloff, field distortion, highlights falloff, and bokeh. That’s where you really start to see differences.
To me, I could always tell which was the Cooke because of the focus roll-off. It always looked smoother to me in the transition than the other 3. Sigma was always the sharpest and I thought that the DZO vs. Athena was very interesting because they performed inconsistently. I went 4/4, 2/4, then 4/4. I think it proved to me that the Cooke is worth it when you have the budget for them, but the Athena and DZO are both faithful attempts at a budget recreation. Ultimately, I've learned that I need a lens with AF capabilities for the work I do. I prefer to buy the G master glass for the best AF performance with my FX3 rig. They definitely come out a bit too sharp for my taste so I just use a pro mist filter.
Luc, I see you left a filter on the Cooke lenses. (Maybe the others) This really affects and detracts from the character of the coatings. I know we have to use filters sometimes, but this is something to be aware of.
That ending as I look at lenses to buy on credit... I did buy some vintage nikon lenses nikkor af 28mm, 50mm, and 85mm that I've been using without issues. Maybe I should stick to them.
Other options looking at cine lenses with FF coverage below 7000$ that might me interesting to look at: Sigma Cine Classic. Sigma Cine with altered/removed coatings resulting in a stop of T2.5 while still being a 1.4. Still sharp, similar colors, strong flares and veiling glare. Schneider Xenon FF Primes. Still clean but as far as I remember less cool than CP2s, with a nice fall of and rather pleasing Bokeh. The slightly longer barrel might actually be to your liking. They should be slightly longer than even the DZOs. There were even some E-Mount Shift versions available. I don’t thing they are available new anymore, but can be found used quite affordably. Imagewise I think the Tokina Vista Primes are worth looking at as well. Though they are big and heavy. Off point, we they are not FF and more expensive: If you can, have a look at the Ultra Primes. Rental prices might not that bad and I personally always preferred them over Cooke. The longer focal length can actually cover larger sensor areas than S35.
You managed to get me to watch a video about gear that I'll never use or even afford. That says a lot about your videos :) Also, loved the Hamilton Khaki Field 😊
It’s difficult to tell the difference if the lenses are not all the same length. Also, the colors don’t match so you may be swayed by higher saturation of A lens as apposed to the lower saturation of the others.
I would go Zeiss Super Speeds or Zeiss Standard Speeds personally. Super small and lightweight, tons of cinematic character wide open and clean when closed down, and they're some of the most affordable and readily available lenses to rent.
Seeing how he disliked the Athena’s form factor, I can‘t imagine him being happy with either. Also both are S35 lenses and coverage on the standards is all over the place as are size and weight.
Is this the same shoot where production demanded Arri s35 , but now could be fx6 :) .. Mega6 Intellytech lite clothe V3 for the interviews , MK2 Sigma primes ,all have aperture ring now , you can use AF for those 1.4 interviews on long days , throw in 24-70 or 28-105 ,cheap as chips . Shoot Burano , AF / Vari ND and IBIS , super fast down loading cards ..Sorted !
Hello great video! thank to your content i started documentary a year ago, now i have the chance to film a docu about the local music scene in my city, so im going to shoot diferent spaces, bands and several interviews. So what microphones can u recomend for this docu, considering i have to record some of the instruments? Thanks a lot
The only things I really care about are color and the intangible “vibe.” The sigma consistently had my favorite skin tone and the Cooke apparently has the vibe. I’m new to this, so correct me if I’m wrong, but can’t you just get a nice filter and give any lens some character? (I’m thinking Black Pro Mist type stuff).
What is the point of a lens comparison if you try to make everything look the same in post? Also would it not at least be noteworthy what exactly you had to do to achieve this? Isn‘t the point of choosing one lens over another to save time while shooting and in post while achieving the look you are aiming for as efficiently as possible? Doing it this way seems kind of backwards.
I actually bought a set of the Athenas specifically because I liked their character. For me the Vespids were my first thought, but I found them to have too much fringing. They reminded me a little of Rokinon's non-XEEN cine set, actually. The Athenas have a really nice milky feel to them that I LOVE, and it's the same characteristic that I see in Cookes from time to time. The Athenas are measured and balanced *really* well, and at least in my short career they are the first lenses I've owned that make me feel good about using them.
That's really funny game. I didn't try to win, just answered which look I liked more. And every time 1st place was different lens. Differencies are so tiny i bet client never notice them. Miss flare test, usually lenses work very different in such circuimstances. Could you please in future add fullscreen versions for all lenses bc too difficult to judge from 1/4 screen after youtube compression, especially focus fall-off and sharpness.
Very cool. I guess Arri didn't make the cut and you're going with Sony? I was going by what I liked the best to least. Don't know particulars of each enough. I like the Athena's consistently.
Surprised how nice the athenas look in the bind test... I love DZO, but I've been looking at the nisi's for a while now because of how clean they are with great contrast. Would be interesting to see them with some other cameras though - I'm a canon cine shooter and I primarily see these paired with sony cams.
Rather than guessing the lenses, shouldn't you have just ranked in order which you preferred, and then use those reults to go towards your decision making process? It seems like all you was trying to do was guess the lens based on the look rather than pick which you preferred...... I'm currently at 35:30, so not seen if you've made your decision, but I'd go with Athena or DZO... Very close, but for me test 1 and 2 the Athena won it, in the 3rd test (B Cam), they're very close. Athena looks slightly brighter but the DZO looks sharper.
If you struggle at times to tell a sigma and cooke lens apart for example, then why spend more budget on a potentially imperceptible difference on screen. Could that money go towards more time spent in the grade? It also allows you to pick a lens that handles better in production. Hugs and kisses xoxo
I am out here shooting on an apsc mirrorless cameras and photo lenses (with like one of those ultra budget kinda but not really cinema lenses, like the ones from 7artisans) and I am out her watching this video like I am going to buy any of these.
Shows that we should stop chasing gear on youtube and go shoot with what we have! And to the 100 people saying he should have used 100 different sets of lenses, there is only so much time.
Surprised that you chose the Cooke mini S4 and not the Cooke SP3. The SP3 would have been more appropriate for your budget and also are full frame lenses.
Curse of knowledge is insane. I guarantee that 95% of the audience wouldn't know the difference and it's made we cater to the small amount of specialists who do.
Sigma all day long. I much prefer a sharper image. I would personally prefer to start sharp and soften in post if desired. I think the image quality was comparable hence how difficult it was to tell the difference aside from sharpness. Definitely for someone starting out, or needing to prioritise their budget, adding value in other areas would make more sense.
I called the Sigma in every shot - didn't have a clue for the other 3. So, if it was me...... image qual is close enough to not care, so.... what feels better to use?
Fun comparison video, but it sounds like you based your conclusions on your original pre-conceived notions rather than your own tests. Aside from the Sigma lenses (which you're already very familiar with), you guys weren't very consistent guessing the others.
Used all of the best lenses, some 30k each. Totally not worth it! Reminds me of stereo gear snake oil like expensive speaker cables and power cords. Would never pay over a couple thousand per prime lens.
Budget options sure have come a long way and you can get a lot of bang for your buck. High End gear usually has other advantages though. For Lenses things like consistency, reliability, build quality or serviceability can be major factors a pure image comparison tells you nothing about.
@@kunstspielklavier185 Of course, but it's the image that people generally harp on and on about, when in reality while there are some lenses that are super unique, most lenses, even high budget ones, provide a similar image quality to the eye of 99% of audiences. Honestly, only cinematographers care, let alone tell the difference, when given a blind lens test between a super high end lens and a cheap one. It's all about lighting & composition when it comes to producing a "cinematic" image.
I appreciate the efforts BUT in old time (oldies goldies) you would have used each different sets on different projects BEFORE forming an opinion !! Truthfully you put yourself in a situation where you have to come up with an opinion when it is quite hard.. in my country the association of cinematographers made a screening with different lenses a most people were far off.. Unless you are a senior cinematographer with years of using different set it will be difficult to see significant differences..
So the thing I learned over the years when testing lenses, test the lens to its strength. 1. Bokeh, flare, breathing. 2. Test with dimension in mind. 3. Get weird with test to find something that jumps out at you. When you just have basic setups, the comparison is really pointless.
Love your work!
Yea I def agree. Of course a test like this would be hard to tell what's what without seeing all those qualities. Love YOUR work my man!
@ man thank you! 🙇🏽🫡
I was thinking the same watching this. The flares are definitively something to test, because it can really throw off when the sun peaks out in a shot. That alone can make or break a shot.
@@LaurenceTFraser exactly!
Totally. Same with microphones, put them all in the same basic setup and eq them to sound similar and they the differences can be small. Play them to their strengths and put them in difficult or uncontrolled scenarios and the differences become way bigger. Same with most things in life tbh.
Everyone is buying DZO, I'm just hoping they flood the market so I can grab a second hand kit.
I grabbed the dzo pictor set, 20-55mm and 50-125mm , used off BH for a good price. great lenses.
you can get them right now new for 500-600$ off Black Friday , im buying a 35mm vespid
Yeah.. And id love to get the Arles.
@@michaelfrymus oh yeah , are those not on sale ? I guess just the vespids are , that 35mm arles is out of my price range sadly
@@Tonellacam I know :( Same. Id get a set of 4 to start, but its just too much. But ill wait till next year when I save enough and its worth it
"I'm not gonna zoom in cuz who cares?" ... THANK YOU!!! Finally some sense!
I think your conclusion that the Athenas are a bit more clinically doesn't correlate to the actual guesses from both of you. I say this because for 2 of the 3 setups, you guessed the Athenas were the Cookes. And since you said you believe the Cookes to have 'character', you saw character in the Athena's and thought they were Cookes. Hank guessed twice the Athena's were DZO. So you both saw the Athenas as having character when you didn't know what they were. Also, on 2 of the 3 you both guessed the DZO's were the Athena's. Athena's you believed to be more clinical yet you guessed that when looking at DZOs. So you saw the DZO's as being clinical. You did both guess the Athena correct once, but that means you got it wrong the majority of the time. I think the assessment/conclusion is backwards.
Great observation.
I think the thing you're missing out on the most is lens to lens and set to set matching which is incredibly important especially if you're running four different sets of lenses.
0:52 Never knew Ed Sheeran was into lens tests but alright!
Why didn't you include the DZOfilm Arles set? What's your take on that set in between these lenses?
The DZO Arles have my attention. Not super cheap but not super expensive, and they have a full range of focal lengths.
Luc Forsyth -- I can't believe you didn't try Zeiss. Zeiss is sharp but not overly and in deference to character and dimensionality. Zeiss also has the best color and contrast.
Aren't we also talking approx 5x the price if we compare Zeiss to DZO and ignore T stop and double if we go for nearest equivalents?
@@ZagatoZee --no, look at the Zeiss Nano Primes and the Zeiss CP.3's.
I guessed wrong on every single lens test lol. It's crazy how good some of these more budget friendly lenses are. Also - the Burano footage looks great!
Being a very amateur filmmaker I liked Athenas the best. These kind of video comparisons are super fun! Even with youtube compression. :)
I feel like this test could have been done better.
1. You should always go in looking for specific things. Be that bokeh, aberration, contrast. Whatever. Make a list and list what exactly do you want. Not just "I want some character"
2. Push the lenses to their limits. High contrast scenes, flares, massive focus racks. See what jumps out to you as not good. And then see if you want to live with it or not depending on the project.
3. Don't be chart averse. They have a role. It's to provide you information. For example: how much warmer is middle grey on this lens vs the other. You can ignore it if you want, but a chart can give you immense amounts of information, if you know how to interpret the data for your own shooting style
So refreshing to see the lens cork-sniffing put to bed. This made my day.
all of the sigma cine primes are simply rehousings of the stills versions, except the 65mm, which is an original design for cinema, and there's no stills version available.
they have different coatings and are tuned better for breathing. But yes same glass.
I’m building my set of Nisis and love them! Such a beautiful image and a nice clean base but you can build a more characterized look on top of it.
So rad to see my boy Jose in your video! I had no idea he'd worked with you! Small world! Love your work, Luc!
This was a great and actually practical way to test lenses, would love to see more! I get that for the upcoming series you'll be shooting mostly wide and medium but I'd love to see you test line ups close to the telephoto or macro-telephoto range when possible!
Would be fun to see you test and Schneider cine Xenar III, I got a set to replace an S4 set that wasn't complete and was surprised by how the images came out... Size and weight were terrible on an ursa 12k.
Love that you didn't zoom in and pixel peep
The Cooke is always easy to spot. If you look at the out of focus area on the first two tests (out the window and the background lamp), the Cooke has noticeably deeper depth of field than the others, in keeping with it narrower aperture. So that's a bit of a cheat. I figured that Option C was the Cooke in the third test since that one missed focus and the others didn't necessarily have notable differences in depth of field.
To me, the Sigma and the Cooke look a bit warmer than the Athena and DZO. The Cooke and Sigma also, to me, seem to be noticeably sharper. That's a double edged sword, since although they are indeed technically superior, I do like the aesthetic and "character" of the DZO and Athena. So I think that's project dependent. Finally, the Cooke, to me, looks like it has the best contrast out of all of them.
Overall, what this says to me is that, even though I like the color of the Sigma the least, I'm certainly not ditching my Sigma any time soon when it comes to lower budget projects. The four lenses are far too similar to my eye to justify the massive price difference. That's what I'd recommend for anyone in the lower levels of filmmaking. Spend that money lighting, grip, and camera movement instead, since that'll make a much bigger difference.
For higher end shoots, I guess it really depends on the ergonomics. If I needed autofocus, I'd go with the Sigma. If not -- and I usually prefer cine style too -- I'd pick the DZO. I felt the image quality was super similar to the Athena, so I'd just make that decision for the ease of operation, since the Athenas do definitely look a bit short for grabbing focus.
If money were no object, and if I had all the equipment to make weight less of a factor, and if I knew I'd not need a shallow DOF or be shooting in low light, I'd go for the Cooke. Otherwise, DZO all the way for higher budget stuff and Sigma all the way for lower budget and passion projects.
Another awesome video, Luke! I don't know how you did it....but you somehow got me to watch all 40 minutes, haha. You've always got great info and present it in a super engaging way.
Brilliant. A lot of gear reviews miss the mark about what actually matters.
It's great to actually shoot the things you are going to be shooting to test the lenses, but I would have also thrown in a scene that pushes the lenses a bit more. I'd want to know how they handle situations that might produce busy bokeh, loss of contrast etc. Everything looks good indoors with soft lighting.
I'd also have colour and exposure matched them in post, as so often I see lens videos biased towards one particular lens just because it had a 'warm look' or it just happened to have the most neutral white balance in a particular scene so the colours looked more separated. In some of your examples, my favourite images were just the ones with the white balance or exposure I prefered.
Nice test! I've been using a Sigma 24 and a 50 Sony-Zeiss with 1/4 black pro mist filters for about 4 years now. I keep thinking about getting cine lenses, but truth is I just don't need them for what I shoot. The lenses I use look excellent. I may try the DZOs. Or just get the Nisis and use filters to soften them up.
I am so happy I found your channel. Such down to earth valuable content. Thanks man!
Very happy to find your channel - only found last week or so. Now in the stage I am in Filmmaking, it is probably the one with the information I need, in the most when I am about to shoot my Capstone project.
DZO for the WIN! This video made me feel less scared about using manual focus lenses. Thanks LF!
DZO are nice. Wouldve been cool to have the Dulens APO Minis in this too.
The Sigma lenses are my favorite, they have a softer contrast and a different color rendering. That being said, I am a photographer who is getting into video :)
1st test - DZO looks colder, the Athena looks the right amount of warm, and details in the shadows
Hey Luc, Great video and very timely. I too am about to invest in a new camera set up for the upcoming docs and I going to picking up a C400 and C80 (my version of the Fx6 and FX3). I have been thinking about primes for the new Rig and the NISI lenses have been on my mind a lot. The DZO look nice but the NISI have a native RF mount and you need an adapter for the DZO. I definitely liked the look of the NISI lenses so thanks for doing this test, I am sold!!! Happy Holidays brother!!!
same boat, but for commerical work not doc. That said, you'd still be better off getting the nisi in PL and going with an adapter so you can bring the same look across multiple systems. I have a 400 and 70 combo, native is nice for ease of use, but flexibility and consistency is key when you're working on a look :)
@@MrMoviePhoneEx I only shoot Canon so that isn't going to be an issue. Also I don't do commercial work. Just my own Documentaries, I never shoot for other people.
I think you would've seen far more differences between the lenses if you were to film outdoors, with trees in the background - especially if the canopy were a significant part of the background.
Would've loved to see something inbetween included like Meike's or Sirui.
This is a very interesting comparison. In this test, the DZOs and Nisis are for sure punching way above their price bracket. Two comments: the speed of the Sigmas shouldn’t be ignored. Having an extra stop of light and more background separation are both very valuable in some doc situations, and this series of Cookes may not be the best representative of “The Cooke Look.”
I think a lot of the differences are gonna come out in less controlled b-roll situations.
There was a shot near the end where you shoot a backlit sunset with the Sigma. Different lenses will flare differently and hold onto contrast in situations like that. In high contrast scenes (trees against a sky is my usual test), you’re gonna see more aberrations on some than others, and they show up differently in different formats.
I hope this doesn’t sound critical, because I really love your channel and the practical approach you take to the info that you share.
The sigma not only look sharp, they also have a nice separation, color and rendering ... and they are dirt cheap. Maybe this is also the reason why they now are always so underestimated, but in the end you grab an sigma art and be happy.
Love the video! I wonder how the Cooke SP3’s would perform here, given their E-mount small form factor that seem made for self-focusing with larger focus rings. Thanks!
They’re beautiful lenses. I’ve shot a few shorts with them. I paid nothing to use them, so my opinion is based purely on results and I can confidently say they render beautiful images. I’ve used Fujinon, Zeiss supremes (also incredible), Zeiss CP2, NIKKOR (these are great too), milvus, g master, etc. and the SP3 and Supreme primes are the standouts. To say there aren’t substantial differences between lenses is incorrect. It’s best to get closer to a subject and analyze skin, falloff, field distortion, highlights falloff, and bokeh. That’s where you really start to see differences.
@@CinnovationsI own the SP3s and love the lenses.
To me, I could always tell which was the Cooke because of the focus roll-off. It always looked smoother to me in the transition than the other 3. Sigma was always the sharpest and I thought that the DZO vs. Athena was very interesting because they performed inconsistently. I went 4/4, 2/4, then 4/4. I think it proved to me that the Cooke is worth it when you have the budget for them, but the Athena and DZO are both faithful attempts at a budget recreation. Ultimately, I've learned that I need a lens with AF capabilities for the work I do. I prefer to buy the G master glass for the best AF performance with my FX3 rig. They definitely come out a bit too sharp for my taste so I just use a pro mist filter.
Sigma definitely flattens out the image. Less curvature. Feels more like green screen.
Did you look into the cooke sp3? i havent used them before but have seen some beautiful footage shot on them. they are bit cheaper then the s4s
They are also full frame and native to sony
Yeah, seem like a no-brainer to test out at least.
Luc, I see you left a filter on the Cooke lenses. (Maybe the others) This really affects and detracts from the character of the coatings. I know we have to use filters sometimes, but this is something to be aware of.
That ending as I look at lenses to buy on credit... I did buy some vintage nikon lenses nikkor af 28mm, 50mm, and 85mm that I've been using without issues. Maybe I should stick to them.
Other options looking at cine lenses with FF coverage below 7000$ that might me interesting to look at:
Sigma Cine Classic. Sigma Cine with altered/removed coatings resulting in a stop of T2.5 while still being a 1.4. Still sharp, similar colors, strong flares and veiling glare.
Schneider Xenon FF Primes. Still clean but as far as I remember less cool than CP2s, with a nice fall of and rather pleasing Bokeh. The slightly longer barrel might actually be to your liking. They should be slightly longer than even the DZOs. There were even some E-Mount Shift versions available. I don’t thing they are available new anymore, but can be found used quite affordably.
Imagewise I think the Tokina Vista Primes are worth looking at as well. Though they are big and heavy.
Off point, we they are not FF and more expensive:
If you can, have a look at the Ultra Primes. Rental prices might not that bad and I personally always preferred them over Cooke. The longer focal length can actually cover larger sensor areas than S35.
You managed to get me to watch a video about gear that I'll never use or even afford. That says a lot about your videos :) Also, loved the Hamilton Khaki Field 😊
Great video keep it up 🎉
Gotta try the Dulens set. They’re fantastic.
It’s difficult to tell the difference if the lenses are not all the same length. Also, the colors don’t match so you may be swayed by higher saturation of A lens as apposed to the lower saturation of the others.
I would go Zeiss Super Speeds or Zeiss Standard Speeds personally. Super small and lightweight, tons of cinematic character wide open and clean when closed down, and they're some of the most affordable and readily available lenses to rent.
Seeing how he disliked the Athena’s form factor, I can‘t imagine him being happy with either. Also both are S35 lenses and coverage on the standards is all over the place as are size and weight.
Is this the same shoot where production demanded Arri s35 , but now could be fx6 :) .. Mega6 Intellytech lite clothe V3 for the interviews , MK2 Sigma primes ,all have aperture ring now , you can use AF for those 1.4 interviews on long days , throw in 24-70 or 28-105 ,cheap as chips . Shoot Burano , AF / Vari ND and IBIS , super fast down loading cards ..Sorted !
Nisi for the win! Have a 6-set of the Athena's and they punch waaay above their price point. The look is interesting on full frame abd wide open
Hello great video!
thank to your content i started documentary a year ago, now i have the chance to film a docu about the local music scene in my city, so im going to shoot diferent spaces, bands and several interviews. So what microphones can u recomend for this docu, considering i have to record some of the instruments? Thanks a lot
I think you should have taken the dzo Arles into consoderation, since they are a step up from the vespids and look very much like the cooks
Great video as always 😊
Owned dzo vespid. Vespid retros..bought athenas.. dumped The vespids.. athenas are by far the best budget glass..
The only things I really care about are color and the intangible “vibe.” The sigma consistently had my favorite skin tone and the Cooke apparently has the vibe.
I’m new to this, so correct me if I’m wrong, but can’t you just get a nice filter and give any lens some character? (I’m thinking Black Pro Mist type stuff).
lovin this new longer vids
Why didn't you try the SP3 instead of the S4 mini
Being S35 and the slower than the SP3s makes them a weird pick. Also I don’t quite get why he would not at least test the Sigma Cine versions.
@kunstspielklavier185 the SP3 are also physicaly Smaller
What is the point of a lens comparison if you try to make everything look the same in post? Also would it not at least be noteworthy what exactly you had to do to achieve this? Isn‘t the point of choosing one lens over another to save time while shooting and in post while achieving the look you are aiming for as efficiently as possible?
Doing it this way seems kind of backwards.
I actually bought a set of the Athenas specifically because I liked their character. For me the Vespids were my first thought, but I found them to have too much fringing. They reminded me a little of Rokinon's non-XEEN cine set, actually. The Athenas have a really nice milky feel to them that I LOVE, and it's the same characteristic that I see in Cookes from time to time. The Athenas are measured and balanced *really* well, and at least in my short career they are the first lenses I've owned that make me feel good about using them.
Have you tried the Zeiss Otus lenses? Still photo, but the look is spectacular
That's really funny game. I didn't try to win, just answered which look I liked more. And every time 1st place was different lens. Differencies are so tiny i bet client never notice them. Miss flare test, usually lenses work very different in such circuimstances.
Could you please in future add fullscreen versions for all lenses bc too difficult to judge from 1/4 screen after youtube compression, especially focus fall-off and sharpness.
The DZO and Sigma were my least favorite look in all three blind tests. I often mixed up the Athena and Cooke. 2 out of 3, I chose the Cookes.
Very cool. I guess Arri didn't make the cut and you're going with Sony? I was going by what I liked the best to least. Don't know particulars of each enough. I like the Athena's consistently.
Why not using the DJI auto focusing system for manual focus lenses?
Try the arles man what a beautiful set! Or if you want to test irix lenses are beautiful and they have great character
Surprised how nice the athenas look in the bind test... I love DZO, but I've been looking at the nisi's for a while now because of how clean they are with great contrast. Would be interesting to see them with some other cameras though - I'm a canon cine shooter and I primarily see these paired with sony cams.
Rather than guessing the lenses, shouldn't you have just ranked in order which you preferred, and then use those reults to go towards your decision making process? It seems like all you was trying to do was guess the lens based on the look rather than pick which you preferred......
I'm currently at 35:30, so not seen if you've made your decision, but I'd go with Athena or DZO... Very close, but for me test 1 and 2 the Athena won it, in the 3rd test (B Cam), they're very close. Athena looks slightly brighter but the DZO looks sharper.
If you struggle at times to tell a sigma and cooke lens apart for example, then why spend more budget on a potentially imperceptible difference on screen. Could that money go towards more time spent in the grade? It also allows you to pick a lens that handles better in production. Hugs and kisses xoxo
I know you can’t test everything, but I’m curious how the Meike full frame primes would’ve compared.
I got 2 of 3 pointing out the Cooke. 😊.
I am out here shooting on an apsc mirrorless cameras and photo lenses (with like one of those ultra budget kinda but not really cinema lenses, like the ones from 7artisans) and I am out her watching this video like I am going to buy any of these.
Your videos are 4K but shot on very low bitrate leading to blockings and banding in many places. Please use at least 75 Mbps for 4K bts shots too :)
TH-cam - “lol sure”
I hate the compression that TH-cam throws on a video. Even with iPhone videos I notice banding when put on TH-cam
Definitely over on the velcro straps! Aputure easily sells over 500k units globally and most of their products come with 2+ velcro straps
Shows that we should stop chasing gear on youtube and go shoot with what we have!
And to the 100 people saying he should have used 100 different sets of lenses, there is only so much time.
Cool a video about lens comparisons... *Sees that it is 40 minutes long* Ayyyeeet Ima Head out*
DZO Arles!! Have you tested them? shame you didn't add them into this test.
Surprised that you chose the Cooke mini S4 and not the Cooke SP3. The SP3 would have been more appropriate for your budget and also are full frame lenses.
Curse of knowledge is insane. I guarantee that 95% of the audience wouldn't know the difference and it's made we cater to the small amount of specialists who do.
Sigma all day long. I much prefer a sharper image. I would personally prefer to start sharp and soften in post if desired. I think the image quality was comparable hence how difficult it was to tell the difference aside from sharpness. Definitely for someone starting out, or needing to prioritise their budget, adding value in other areas would make more sense.
Should have given the Dulenses a go for character! Athena’s are good lenses on the neutral side of things
It’s wild hipsters have convinced the world optical defects are “character.”
I called the Sigma in every shot - didn't have a clue for the other 3. So, if it was me...... image qual is close enough to not care, so.... what feels better to use?
I own the sigma cines, they are sharp and compact
There is the Best tool for the job, AND then there is the rest (and choice there doesnt matter). Good luck with all that.
Lol i liked the Athena's the most every time
DZO Arles would have been a great fifth option
S4 cookes are not their least clinical lenses. You’re thinking of panchros. S4s are modern looking designs.
Fun comparison video, but it sounds like you based your conclusions on your original pre-conceived notions rather than your own tests. Aside from the Sigma lenses (which you're already very familiar with), you guys weren't very consistent guessing the others.
What's a "prime look"? 😲
I love them anyway, got a set of Sony Cinealta primes for 5k, and it was the best decision.
"No Sponsorship or Cash".. So you don't get the Glass to keep or (more likely!) sell?..
Try the DZO Arles
Used all of the best lenses, some 30k each. Totally not worth it! Reminds me of stereo gear snake oil like expensive speaker cables and power cords. Would never pay over a couple thousand per prime lens.
Love these blind comparisons! Especially because they tend to prove that the highest end gear is often overrated in its importance
Budget options sure have come a long way and you can get a lot of bang for your buck. High End gear usually has other advantages though. For Lenses things like consistency, reliability, build quality or serviceability can be major factors a pure image comparison tells you nothing about.
@@kunstspielklavier185 Of course, but it's the image that people generally harp on and on about, when in reality while there are some lenses that are super unique, most lenses, even high budget ones, provide a similar image quality to the eye of 99% of audiences. Honestly, only cinematographers care, let alone tell the difference, when given a blind lens test between a super high end lens and a cheap one. It's all about lighting & composition when it comes to producing a "cinematic" image.
Sigma art lenses have no business being as good as they are at that price.
25:14 Those Vespers looking awful sus
" The Director likes the prime look..." What's the Prime look?
Yeah on a doc .. alarm bells if I was up for that shoot ,have to say.
try dulens apo mini primes
I appreciate the efforts BUT in old time (oldies goldies) you would have used each different sets on different projects BEFORE forming an opinion !!
Truthfully you put yourself in a situation where you have to come up with an opinion when it is quite hard..
in my country the association of cinematographers made a screening with different lenses a most people were far off.. Unless you are a senior cinematographer with years of using different set it will be difficult to see significant differences..
DZO Arles are so nice
Anybody got a set of Cookes and willing to trade for a kidney? I got two…
I was wrong except sigma 😮😅
DZO Arles…. Vespids big bro
Whats up with all these dislikes?
I liked the sigma best, that’s interesting