@@ReadytoChop Well, let's say the optics are identical, the price tag definitely is not. A side by side comparison would help us see that paying thousands more may not be necessary.
I understand why you would say that but Like I said in the video. The difference is not in the image but in how it operates. Nonetheless I shall do a side-by-side as many of you see this as something missing from this video. To give some context: When I got the cine version I was a full time movi operator. The build quality, hard stops, accurate focus and F-stops were essential for me (the option for PL mount is also a big factor for some operators). Due to Covid my work shifted and i focus more on my own projects with my production company. For the run&gun projects i take my photo version more often then the Cine version because of ease of use. These lenses are for different types of productions. I hope this helps a bit. Keep a look out for the side-by-side. I'll try to show the difference as much as I can. When it comes to value for money.. Photo version is unbeatable.
@@305kubrick the video actually answers the question of why anyone would spend thousands more. It obviously cannot be image quality because has been mentioned before the optics are identical.
This was suggested, so I gave it a watch. The Future Proof question is not anymore. Why? DZOFilm introduced their Pictor parfocal zoom lenses and they give the Sigmas a run for their money. Now, the Sigmas are faster at T2.0, but only by 1 stop. The DZOFilm also have a better focal range for the zoom with 20-55 & 50-125. Now, there's also one other important feature for the DZOFilm lenses: interchangeable mount. I can go from PL with them to EF. More mounts will be available in the future as well. I was looking at the Cine Sigma Zooms, but ended up buying the DZOFilm lenses and am much happier. Why? Parfocal is of far more importance to me. The design of the DZOFilm lenses is also very solid. Also, I wanted PL lenses. The Sigma PL versions don't have /i Technology, only the newest primes. Although the DZOFilm lenses don't have /i Technology either, the interchangeable mount makes up for that. So I can shoot with them in PL if I desire to, or switch to the EF mount to use on EF Mount cameras. Best of all it's not hard to shim the back focus in order to achieve parfocal. And, the parfocal is a huge selling point. So I think the Sigma Cinema lenses need to make a huge update to the zooms in the future. One, they need to go Parfocal. Two, they need to add /i Technology. Three, they need to expand the focal range of the telephoto zoom beyond 100mm. Just some thoughts. Good review nonetheless. I'm just sticking to the DZOFilm Pictor Zooms now because I feel they are a better option.
I feel ya, thank you for taking the time to write it all down. Didn't try the DZO zooms as of right now but the price and from what i've seen so far on the internet indeed make them a good competition. especially because the 'budget' cine zoom world had no direct competition. First thought when i saw them: I want this kit. I try to make my kit budget friendly so these are a great option. The /i information is something very nice. It's not a necessity but it's convenient. The interchangeable lens mount sounds indeed great but I shoot EF (RED Raven en now RED Komodo). I feel no need to have that mount switch option. Do you switch between mounts often? I don't feel like they have to go beyond 100mm. But I don't shoot on very long lenses that often (so again my personal needs). But you know.. the fact that DZO's are parfocal make them (like you said) a much more user friendly option. And RUn&gunning is nowadays what i do a lot so they would fit perfect in my kit haha. I do want to try the DZO lenses but I don't feel the need to try for switching straight away. The Sigma Cine zooms are still legit top notch and future proof (and unfortunatly parfocal). Kinda wanna buy them now haha
@@PeterBaerveldt Well, I shot my initial tests in PL Mount. I then switched for a multi-camera shoot with one fixed EF Mount camera and the other an interchangeable mount. So far they've been great. I will be switching back to PL for next week's comparison shoot where we'll pit them up against Angenieux Optimo Zooms. Might even put them up against some Cooke S4 lenses. I definitely prefer the PL Mount since all the great cinema glass is in that mount. I do really feel that /i Technology is pivotal these days because of how valuable that lens metadata can be for post production. Especially when it comes to VFX and camera tracking for adding 3D CGI elements. It's not going to take long before it really is important for every lens to have some kind of lens metadata protocol in them. Lastly, I do often shoot beyond 100mm. I did so with my primes where I shot 135mm a good amount. And, I just shot a last minute video last night for someone where I needed to be at 125mm to get the tight close up in the run and gun shooting where I had to keep my distance. Tomorrow's fashion show will likely also have the need to be at 125mm in a few instances from one camera while the other camera is on the 20-55. I can even see myself having the need to go to 200mm in certain instances. When I have beach shoots and someone wades out in to the water having 200 or 300 would be incredible for getting some amazing shots from the shore. Especially when there are dolphins. As you said, it's different shooting styles. The Parfocal design of these new DZOFilm Pictor lenses is amazing. It's so helpful. Especially if I want add a slow or fast zoom into the shot and the subject will still stay in focus. Thank you for responding!
@@TimButt2 thanks for your comments, I was wondering if I should get sigma cine over dzofilm which is indeed cheaper option. I think I'll go for dzofilm combo. Are you still happy with dzofilm combo your self? I plan to use them with my bmpcc 6k and also with ursa mini pro 12k which I'm getting next week, do you feel dzofilm pictor will be good choice for ursa mini pro 12k which it self supports interchangeable mounts, PL & EF which are of most interest in my case ☺️
@@UnchartedWorlds I just shot a music video this weekend with the DZOFilm Pictor 20-55 T2.8 in EF configuration on my Pocket 6K and the DZOFilm Vespid Primes being used in PL configuration on my URSA Mini Pro G2. The footage looks fantastic! I'm still very happy with having got the DZOFilm Pictor Zoom Set. And, I'm loving using them with the DZOFilm Vespid Prime lenses. I've seen footage shot with the URSA Mini Pro 12K and the DZOFilm Pictor Zooms and it looks great. So they hold up well on the UMP 12K. I'm not convinced it is worth upgrading to the 12K yet for me. The UMPG2 works great for me still and I don't need 8K or 12K resolution. I'm excited by the sensor design conceptually. But I'm willing to wait for the next generation. Especially if it means some body improvements since I really want a lot more wireless lens control integrated into the camera with an actual lemo port to power the wireless lens motors and to send/receive information with the wireless FIZ hand unit, which I would like to be a Blackmagic device. Something akin to the ARRI WCU-4, but all Blackmagic. Then I'd love for them to also build their own wireless video transmission and receiving system with the Video Assists having it built in as well as camera control being built into the Wireless Video Assist. I digress. I've expressed a lot of this on the BMD Forums. I also feel that CFExpress is the needed future of media for the 12K system to support those higher data rates. So I'm fine waiting for that integration and as well for CFExpress to improve. Overall, I just don't need that high resolution yet. But I love the DZOFilm lenses. Both the zooms and the primes. If you check out my Vimeo I have a few DZOFilm Vespid examples on there.
@@TimButt2 I checked your vimeo stuff, managed to even find DZOFilm Vespid video, it was one of the models you did recently Kylee. Are Vespids exactly the same as Pictors when it comes to the look , feel and warm colors? Also wonder about the noise I see in the video, is this stylistic choice to have film noise? Is it added in post or is it there from start and you choose not to clean it in post since you want that film noise effect to make the footage more cinematic or classic so to say? And last question, how does it work when working with model industry? Do they come to you and pay you to shoot footage of them they can use on Instagram and social media or do you go to them ask them to work with you and pay them to shoot videos of them so you can have it in your portfolio? Or do you both agree to work for free so you can build up your models portfolio and the model gets an awesome cinematic looking video they can use to promote them selfs on social media? Greatful for your very detailed response above, I'll be investing in DZOFilm pretty soon :) Also good portfolio on Vimeo, very good work.
i would say the red 17-50 T2.9 pro lens would be a good option. I own the 18-35 Cine and 50-100 Cine and they are great but 17-50 is such a great range for me and im thinking about getting the red lens
Range is better indeed. But I’ve shot with some red lenses and to be honest.. I didn’t like them for a bit. But everyone’s preference and/or needs are different. So if it fits your work then you’ll not be disappointed
@@PeterBaerveldt which red lenses have you shot with, primes or zooms? the only reason i bring them up is because at the used price, a cine zoom red 17-50 is literally the cheapest option hahaha, who woulda thought
If you have the PL version of this lens it should work. As it is a super 16 camera It should cover the full Gate. I've never shot on film unfortunately so I don't now from experience but in theory it should work.
Yes, it will work. You will be looking at a crop however. This S35 18-35mm lens on a Super 16mm camera should be more like a 36-70mm on the Aaton. Be mindful of the back flange distance. Could be the only potential thing to consider, but if it’s a PL mount camera, it will take a PL mount lens.
Optical they are indeed the same. I think the cine version is good for many (very specific) things but still the photo version is still unbeatable when it comes to the price. This video is almost one year old and with all these new lenses popping up I'm considering switching to something else. I'll keep the Photo version tho. Still all time favorite lens I think.
The image is the same yes, but there are many benefits to a cinema rehouse that prove more beneficial to crews working on set. Longer focus throw, parfocal, t-stops, geared rings for FIZ control, matching front diameter, etc. It’s for certain people.
I’ve not shot anything with the Ursa 12k. But the sensor size should be around the same as the Komodo (at least that is what I’ve read online). So yes, if that is true, the lens will cover the sensor nicely :)
Peter Baerveldt i got my red gemini last week together with the those sigma cine zooms but at 18 mm it does not cover the whole sensor in 5 k. Even with the long lens i got really strong vignetting throughout all the range
@@PeterBaerveldt taking a guess that English is maybe not your first language and if so, you explain very well. I live in a country where my native English is not the local one and have to impose my imperfections every day. Kudos for pushing through.
Do you own a cinema lens?
Yes the Gemini and Komodo. I also live in Amsterdam :)
@@gemini1213 Nice! Good to now that there are Dutch people as well haha. I'm from Dordrecht.
Will this work well with the bmpcc4k?
@@allentula2771 i bet if art one with ef mount does, The cine version should as well, i also consider getting cine version, i own art and one its okay
This is one of those videos that really would've benefited from actual side by side visual comparisons.
That would make sense if the optics weren’t identical.
@@ReadytoChop Well, let's say the optics are identical, the price tag definitely is not. A side by side comparison would help us see that paying thousands more may not be necessary.
I understand why you would say that but Like I said in the video. The difference is not in the image but in how it operates. Nonetheless I shall do a side-by-side as many of you see this as something missing from this video.
To give some context: When I got the cine version I was a full time movi operator. The build quality, hard stops, accurate focus and F-stops were essential for me (the option for PL mount is also a big factor for some operators). Due to Covid my work shifted and i focus more on my own projects with my production company. For the run&gun projects i take my photo version more often then the Cine version because of ease of use.
These lenses are for different types of productions. I hope this helps a bit. Keep a look out for the side-by-side. I'll try to show the difference as much as I can.
When it comes to value for money.. Photo version is unbeatable.
@@305kubrick the video actually answers the question of why anyone would spend thousands more. It obviously cannot be image quality because has been mentioned before the optics are identical.
This was suggested, so I gave it a watch. The Future Proof question is not anymore. Why? DZOFilm introduced their Pictor parfocal zoom lenses and they give the Sigmas a run for their money. Now, the Sigmas are faster at T2.0, but only by 1 stop. The DZOFilm also have a better focal range for the zoom with 20-55 & 50-125. Now, there's also one other important feature for the DZOFilm lenses: interchangeable mount. I can go from PL with them to EF. More mounts will be available in the future as well.
I was looking at the Cine Sigma Zooms, but ended up buying the DZOFilm lenses and am much happier. Why? Parfocal is of far more importance to me. The design of the DZOFilm lenses is also very solid. Also, I wanted PL lenses. The Sigma PL versions don't have /i Technology, only the newest primes. Although the DZOFilm lenses don't have /i Technology either, the interchangeable mount makes up for that. So I can shoot with them in PL if I desire to, or switch to the EF mount to use on EF Mount cameras. Best of all it's not hard to shim the back focus in order to achieve parfocal. And, the parfocal is a huge selling point.
So I think the Sigma Cinema lenses need to make a huge update to the zooms in the future. One, they need to go Parfocal. Two, they need to add /i Technology. Three, they need to expand the focal range of the telephoto zoom beyond 100mm.
Just some thoughts. Good review nonetheless. I'm just sticking to the DZOFilm Pictor Zooms now because I feel they are a better option.
I feel ya, thank you for taking the time to write it all down. Didn't try the DZO zooms as of right now but the price and from what i've seen so far on the internet indeed make them a good competition. especially because the 'budget' cine zoom world had no direct competition. First thought when i saw them: I want this kit. I try to make my kit budget friendly so these are a great option.
The /i information is something very nice. It's not a necessity but it's convenient. The interchangeable lens mount sounds indeed great but I shoot EF (RED Raven en now RED Komodo). I feel no need to have that mount switch option. Do you switch between mounts often? I don't feel like they have to go beyond 100mm. But I don't shoot on very long lenses that often (so again my personal needs). But you know.. the fact that DZO's are parfocal make them (like you said) a much more user friendly option. And RUn&gunning is nowadays what i do a lot so they would fit perfect in my kit haha.
I do want to try the DZO lenses but I don't feel the need to try for switching straight away. The Sigma Cine zooms are still legit top notch and future proof (and unfortunatly parfocal).
Kinda wanna buy them now haha
@@PeterBaerveldt Well, I shot my initial tests in PL Mount. I then switched for a multi-camera shoot with one fixed EF Mount camera and the other an interchangeable mount. So far they've been great. I will be switching back to PL for next week's comparison shoot where we'll pit them up against Angenieux Optimo Zooms. Might even put them up against some Cooke S4 lenses. I definitely prefer the PL Mount since all the great cinema glass is in that mount.
I do really feel that /i Technology is pivotal these days because of how valuable that lens metadata can be for post production. Especially when it comes to VFX and camera tracking for adding 3D CGI elements. It's not going to take long before it really is important for every lens to have some kind of lens metadata protocol in them.
Lastly, I do often shoot beyond 100mm. I did so with my primes where I shot 135mm a good amount. And, I just shot a last minute video last night for someone where I needed to be at 125mm to get the tight close up in the run and gun shooting where I had to keep my distance. Tomorrow's fashion show will likely also have the need to be at 125mm in a few instances from one camera while the other camera is on the 20-55. I can even see myself having the need to go to 200mm in certain instances. When I have beach shoots and someone wades out in to the water having 200 or 300 would be incredible for getting some amazing shots from the shore. Especially when there are dolphins.
As you said, it's different shooting styles. The Parfocal design of these new DZOFilm Pictor lenses is amazing. It's so helpful. Especially if I want add a slow or fast zoom into the shot and the subject will still stay in focus.
Thank you for responding!
@@TimButt2 thanks for your comments, I was wondering if I should get sigma cine over dzofilm which is indeed cheaper option. I think I'll go for dzofilm combo. Are you still happy with dzofilm combo your self? I plan to use them with my bmpcc 6k and also with ursa mini pro 12k which I'm getting next week, do you feel dzofilm pictor will be good choice for ursa mini pro 12k which it self supports interchangeable mounts, PL & EF which are of most interest in my case ☺️
@@UnchartedWorlds I just shot a music video this weekend with the DZOFilm Pictor 20-55 T2.8 in EF configuration on my Pocket 6K and the DZOFilm Vespid Primes being used in PL configuration on my URSA Mini Pro G2. The footage looks fantastic! I'm still very happy with having got the DZOFilm Pictor Zoom Set. And, I'm loving using them with the DZOFilm Vespid Prime lenses.
I've seen footage shot with the URSA Mini Pro 12K and the DZOFilm Pictor Zooms and it looks great. So they hold up well on the UMP 12K. I'm not convinced it is worth upgrading to the 12K yet for me. The UMPG2 works great for me still and I don't need 8K or 12K resolution. I'm excited by the sensor design conceptually. But I'm willing to wait for the next generation. Especially if it means some body improvements since I really want a lot more wireless lens control integrated into the camera with an actual lemo port to power the wireless lens motors and to send/receive information with the wireless FIZ hand unit, which I would like to be a Blackmagic device. Something akin to the ARRI WCU-4, but all Blackmagic. Then I'd love for them to also build their own wireless video transmission and receiving system with the Video Assists having it built in as well as camera control being built into the Wireless Video Assist.
I digress. I've expressed a lot of this on the BMD Forums. I also feel that CFExpress is the needed future of media for the 12K system to support those higher data rates. So I'm fine waiting for that integration and as well for CFExpress to improve. Overall, I just don't need that high resolution yet.
But I love the DZOFilm lenses. Both the zooms and the primes. If you check out my Vimeo I have a few DZOFilm Vespid examples on there.
@@TimButt2 I checked your vimeo stuff, managed to even find DZOFilm Vespid video, it was one of the models you did recently Kylee. Are Vespids exactly the same as Pictors when it comes to the look , feel and warm colors? Also wonder about the noise I see in the video, is this stylistic choice to have film noise? Is it added in post or is it there from start and you choose not to clean it in post since you want that film noise effect to make the footage more cinematic or classic so to say?
And last question, how does it work when working with model industry? Do they come to you and pay you to shoot footage of them they can use on Instagram and social media or do you go to them ask them to work with you and pay them to shoot videos of them so you can have it in your portfolio? Or do you both agree to work for free so you can build up your models portfolio and the model gets an awesome cinematic looking video they can use to promote them selfs on social media?
Greatful for your very detailed response above, I'll be investing in DZOFilm pretty soon :)
Also good portfolio on Vimeo, very good work.
i would say the red 17-50 T2.9 pro lens would be a good option. I own the 18-35 Cine and 50-100 Cine and they are great but 17-50 is such a great range for me and im thinking about getting the red lens
Range is better indeed. But I’ve shot with some red lenses and to be honest.. I didn’t like them for a bit. But everyone’s preference and/or needs are different. So if it fits your work then you’ll not be disappointed
@@PeterBaerveldt which red lenses have you shot with, primes or zooms? the only reason i bring them up is because at the used price, a cine zoom red 17-50 is literally the cheapest option hahaha, who woulda thought
I owned the 17-50 version 2 of the lens. It was awful
Great review my man!
thanks man!
Wished there was a visual representation of the breathing vs its Art counterpart.
I guess i can do that if you'd like. There are video's here on youtube i believe that actually cover that.
I think the breathing is the same on both.
Peter you're the man! thank YOU
thank you for the kind words! Much appreciated
Would this lens work on my Aaton XTR Prod pl Mount 16mm camera?
If you have the PL version of this lens it should work. As it is a super 16 camera It should cover the full Gate. I've never shot on film unfortunately so I don't now from experience but in theory it should work.
Yes, it will work. You will be looking at a crop however. This S35 18-35mm lens on a Super 16mm camera should be more like a 36-70mm on the Aaton. Be mindful of the back flange distance. Could be the only potential thing to consider, but if it’s a PL mount camera, it will take a PL mount lens.
Does it remain focused when you change zoom? Or do you have to refocus it like the photo version
It performs the same (unfortunately).
Parfocal it is the word
Does it cover the sensor of black magic pocket cinema camera 6k?
Yes it does! Works perfectly
Peter Baerveldt thank you
"Price point" does NOT mean price, so you can just say "price."
This lens is a rehoused 18-35 art. No difference in image at all. Wen't with the cheaper versions.
Optical they are indeed the same. I think the cine version is good for many (very specific) things but still the photo version is still unbeatable when it comes to the price.
This video is almost one year old and with all these new lenses popping up I'm considering switching to something else. I'll keep the Photo version tho. Still all time favorite lens I think.
The image is the same yes, but there are many benefits to a cinema rehouse that prove more beneficial to crews working on set. Longer focus throw, parfocal, t-stops, geared rings for FIZ control, matching front diameter, etc. It’s for certain people.
Hi, does that lens work for the Blackmagic URSA Mini Pro 12K ?
I’ve not shot anything with the Ursa 12k. But the sensor size should be around the same as the Komodo (at least that is what I’ve read online). So yes, if that is true, the lens will cover the sensor nicely :)
@@PeterBaerveldt thank you :)
amazing job!
thank man!
Does this cover the sensor of RED Gemini?
It does! It works great :)
Peter Baerveldt i got my red gemini last week together with the those sigma cine zooms but at 18 mm it does not cover the whole sensor in 5 k. Even with the long lens i got really strong vignetting throughout all the range
Any footage with the Pocket 6k and the Sigma Cine lenses?
We shot the last bit of our Raven vs. BMPCC6k slomotion tests with the Sigma cine's. So you could check that out if you'd like
Great vid - just subbed - btw it’s build quality, not built
haha my bad, mixing up some things here and there. Thank you for letting me know.
@@PeterBaerveldt taking a guess that English is maybe not your first language and if so, you explain very well. I live in a country where my native English is not the local one and have to impose my imperfections every day. Kudos for pushing through.
garbagge