DON'T shoot a film with REHOUSED Stills Lenses
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 09. 2021
- Cheap rehoused stills lenses, like from Rokinon or Samyang, can have very close optical quality to much more expensive cinema lenses, but should you use them for professional video work?
════════════════════════
🅾 𝙄𝙉 𝙏𝙃𝙄𝙎 𝙑𝙄𝘿𝙀𝙊
1 month free trial of Skillshare: skl.sh/crimsonengine09211
Rokinon Set: bhpho.to/3zUt6GM
Sigma Cine Set: bhpho.to/3bFhPPN
════════════════════════
🅾 𝙁𝙄𝙇𝙈𝙈𝘼𝙆𝙄𝙉𝙂 𝙏𝙊𝙊𝙇𝙎
Pro Cinema Training: canonmasterclass.com
LUTs & Looks: crimsonengine.com/tools
Sound Tracks: bit.ly/2lD3Sbu
Stock Footage: bit.ly/3jB5Zbv
════════════════════════
🅾 𝙍𝙐𝘽𝙄𝘿𝙄𝙐𝙈'𝙎 𝙎𝙀𝙏𝙐𝙋
Main Camera: geni.us/cHRlEAo
B-Cam: geni.us/fAgbee
A-Cam Lens: geni.us/w59h
Memory Cards: geni.us/K1TEKPz
Wireless Video: geni.us/Sutjt
Wireless Monitor: geni.us/DzHHm
Tripod: geni.us/t8mZ57Y
Key Light: geni.us/c22sBzn
Backlight: geni.us/KqEC7I
Computer: geni.us/ltveUkO
RAM: geni.us/AgyUkGe
RAID Storage: geni.us/hFXK
Adobe Premiere Pro: geni.us/Mde35u
DaVinci Resolve Studio: geni.us/TOKisPw
Everything Else: kit.co/CrimsonEngine
════════════════════════
🅾 𝘾𝙊𝙉𝙉𝙀𝘾𝙏 𝙒𝙄𝙏𝙃 𝙐𝙎
Subscribe: czcams.com/users/crimsonengine...
Insta: / crimson_engine
Book: / crimsonengine
Tweet: / crimsonengine
Web: crimsonengine.com
════════════════════════
🅾 𝘾𝙍𝙄𝙈𝙎𝙊𝙉 𝙀𝙉𝙂𝙄𝙉𝙀
Canon Masterclass - Krátké a kreslené filmy
Great video about the importance of proper housing and gears for cinema lenses, but the video should have been titled "DON'T shoot a film with CHEAP REHOUSED Stills Lenses", because those Sigma's are exactly that: rehoused Sigma Art DSLR lenses. I started watching this video thinking it would cover an entirely different topic.
2 years later and a movie infamous for scenes being shot with a helios 58mm f2, there are NO DON"Ts in art.
I think you should look at focus rotation when looking at a rehoused lens, rokinon have the same focus rotation at there still lenses.
The focus throw on a Helios is actually fairly long which is good for filming. But I think a lot of these older lenses are being used in mainstream movies as expendable "stunt lenses" in action sequences. I'm not aware of any films other than low budget indies that use them for A camera work.
@@HeathcliffBlair The Northman, Everything Everywhere etc., the last Batman movie, Dune, are some of the most recent movies using those lenses. And apart from the Batman movie, most of them were adapted on the Arri cameras for A roll.
@@JamesDKyrts A-roll? Good grief. I have one of those Helios lenses. Frankly, they're a bit overrated, imo. Fine for "character" FX, but the IQ isn't really there for critical shots. Again, just my opinion. I guess it all depends on what you need to tell a particular story. To that end, you cast a lens with the same care as casting an actor. Cheers.
@@HeathcliffBlair I did not. Reeves did, Eggers did, Villeneuve did. They might know what they are doing.
Anyhow, to each their own poison.
Regarding the 'past infinity' focus marker, this is quite standard and allows to focus at infinity after temperature changes that expand certain optical elements, in practice changing the infinity distance for the lens. This is less of a problem in a studio, where the focus is usually closer, but it's something you'll encounter more in nature photography (animals more than landscapes). As a fun fact, Canon started with their white telephoto line precisely to prevent (or at least delay) thermal expansion inside the casing, which they still keep over 4 decades after the first one.
As for the lenses themselves, perhaps you're dismissing their target audience a little too much. I know it's not your intention, but once you mention a focus puller, the comparison becomes unfair. A production that has budget for that role is not the target audience for these lenses. You can make the same argument for any gear: there's always something a lot more expensive that offers you some gains, marginal or not, but that doesn't mean you should not get or use the cheaper gear.
I've watched so many of your videos lately, not sure why I wasn't subscribed, but doing that now. Cheers, keep them coming!
For personal projects, rokinons are amazing to have. The cine DSX line are all metal now, with more iris blades, weather sealed, and have an improved coating. Haven't had problems with focusing. I also have a diopter set for when I need to focus in close quarters. I'm getting my money's worth, it's a perfect go-out-and-shoot-a-film lens set. Just know the limitations. Stopping down to t2 gets rid of any softness, and these lenses aren't even that bad wide open. Lol, go watch tangerine with an iphone and small anamorphic lenses. It's really just splitting hairs for most people.
Most Cine lenses are rehoused still lenses, especially the Sigma shown in this video is still a rehoused photo lens. But even Canon are based off their Photo lenses and Zeiss CP are also rehoused stills lens. If you should show Cine lenses that are not based on Photo lens you need to be talking about Cooke, Angenieux, Atlas and much larger brands that does not sell any photo lenses.
Exactly 👌🏽. That’s similar to the point I made. People are paying 2 or 4 times more for rehoused still lenses that has the exact same image. Honestly, that doesn’t make sense to me. If I’m paying a lot more for a product I need the end product to look much better as well.
That's total crap. The Canon CN-E and Sumire are NOT rehoused photo lenses. This is confirmed by Canon itself. The top shelf Sigma and Tokina cine lenses are also NOT photo lenses.
@@alexiskobalt7450 Sigma cine line are photo lenses rehoused, The Tokina 11-20 is a rehoused photo lens, the 50-135 as well, the 25-75 and all the other cine lenses by them are actually not photo lenses originally.
Conversely: I love run-and-gun single-operator shooting using those Rokinon lenses. Being able to rack focus quickly between foreground and background subjects is much more practical for me than getting razor-precise, repeatable focus pulls. (And the focus throw of the Rokinon, stills lens or not, is SO, SO much better than any of my autofocus “focus by wire” lenses.)
My biggest issue with rehoused lenses is the internals and how everything is being switched from "auto" to "manual" if that makes sense. Case and point, I got the Sigma modified lenses from PC Hood/Cinematics (Epic Light Media has two pretty awesome videos covering them) and the 18-35 has had its bad days. About two years in the focus ring malfunctioned and I had to take it apart and fix it. It was an easy fix and I got to see how the rehousing worked and saw some ways to make it better so I did. Now, almost 3 years in and the aperture ring malfunctioned. I looked up Sigma 18-35 teardown videos and followed the instructions up to the point where you access the aperture's mechanics. And that's when it hit me like a bomb. The biggest issue with rehoused lenses is how the mechanical parts that replace the digital/electronic ones, interact with the new housing to make it function. So many "lazily" crafted pins and holds that I could see how these would suffer the test of time. Needless to say, I'm working hard and smart to invest in the actual cinema zooms from Sigma. It's a hefty price tag, but it's the reliability, life span, and move to PL mount that keeps me confident and happy about the coming purchase. Thanks Crimson Engine for this video!
I agree with the point but not the title. The Xeens, Sigma Cines etc. would constitute rehoused stills, the others would be more in line with a cine mod.
For me I love the fast one finger focus with the Rokinon lenses more than longer throws, for run and gun wedding filming atleast !
This is great info for someone new. Focus pulling takes great skill so make sure you give yourself the best tool to get it right.
This video is spot on. Budget gear comes at a cost. True pro level gear avoids limitations and increases reliability. Ultimately, the question is can the tool do the job in a consistent and repeatable manner.
Actually a very good video, really an eye opener. I am working on a set of Canon FD lenses and already own the 24, 35 and 50 SSC lenses. Now I see that they are great for starters as a cheap set (and optically they truely are beautifull) but when I am graduated and getting into the film world, I will still need to get myself some actual cine glass for the usability.
Hey, he's back from the Canon homer videos! Great video! I been preaching this for years. More of these please!
the wider rokinons are just rough in general. I had the full set and sold them for some better glass a bit ago. The 85 is nice even closer to T2. But the rest of them need to be used at 2.8 for them to actually resolve a high res image. That said, you can still shoot great stuff on them. Just harder to do and probably takes more time because of the minimal focus rotation that you talked about.
This was an eye opener I'm really far behind in knowledge thanks for this vid and do you have any recommendations even price wise, would love some info thanks.
Wow. Thanks. After weeks of debating different lenses, the difference for pulling focus is HUGE. This video narrowed things down considerably. (No pun intended.) Subscribed. ✌
Thank you Robidium. You explained that very well.
I’ll keep saving for the Canon Cine Lens set for my C200. Until then I’ll keep hiring when I need one.
Great Video, whats your thoughts on SLR Magic Microprimes, same as Rokinons ?
Are canon fd or zeiss contax rehoused lenses are any good ?
I think they have a longer focus throw 🤔or Can't it be extended during the rehousing process ?
Just Curious!
thus is incredibly eye-opening, thank you
I got a normal Samyang 24mm 1.4 for a decent price. So the difference between that a Samyang 24mm t1.5 "cine" lens would be minimal?
Thank you VERY much for a very valuable lesson with this.
Well said sir and i concur
Excellent explanation. So important.
Great video brother! You have been really inspiring me lately to break into Cinema Film for my upcoming projects. I would love to buy a C500 mkii. However, I am looking at the Blackmagic 12K with should allow me to buy some Cine lenses as well for Documentary, Corporate narrative, etc. I appreciate it if you could comment.
What do you think about Meike lens?
It should be noted that when using a focus motor, this difference is essentially moot because however small the actual physical movement, it is mapped to the entire range of the focus wheel.
I hoped this would be true. I tried it and while it gives a little extra distance, it's still unusable for precise focus because the lens focus distance is too small out of that first range.
@@Crimsonengine If you don't set hard stops/A-B points that's true, it's still challenging...but you rarely need to be able to pull all the way from closest focus to infinity. By limiting the range to the distance the talent is actually occupying, you then map that limited travel across the entire wheel. Given how cheap something like the Nucleus Nano is, it's a good option if you need to work with a stills lens.
Im with Humcrush Productions on this one. There are workarounds to this problem that are worth the thousands of dollars saved for some people. But obviously, cine lenses are more convenient and efficient.
@@jiwonbaeqdp And sometimes it's not even about money. Sometimes you want a particular look from a particular vintage lens. Remapping makes them behave - at least as far as the focus puller is concerned - like a proper lens.
@@Humcrush yup yup! I own a full set of canon fd ssc’s with simmod gears and they honestly work fine on set with nucleus m ff
What about using electronic gearing in a remote follow focus to change the focus throw?
Exactly, I use a wireless follow focus so I always get the same large throw no matter what lens I use.
What about focus breathing as this is often an issue that affects photography lenses?
The Possessor was shot with rehoused Canon FD lenses and it looks fine.
I'm sure it does. If you don't need to pull focus, you'll be fine.
No, they used old K35s which are related but not the same. Mostly the famous concave 35mm that looks fantastic. They are also expensive to rent so it certainly wasn't for reasons of cost. Drove the focus pullers mad apparently.
At Cannes 2023, a few films were shot with rehoused Canon FD's. "Blackbird Blackbird Blackberry" for example. And "Omen", used Canon FD's rehoused by TLS. TLS rehouse the lenses in such a way that the focus throw becomes much larger. I think it all comes down to HOW you rehouse them. Misleading claiming that rehousing IN GENERAL is unadviced.
just get a big follow focus + lenses with smooth focus ring is a functional work around when $1000 plus lenses are not an option.
You’re making me wish I hadn’t sold my sigma Cines lol. But great point to the value of more expensive, larger body cine lenses.
I think you meant 1 meter = ~3.3 (3.28)' rather than 2.6.
I use Canon FD lenses and this issue is not as big as it's being made out to be, for example the 50mm f1.4 lens has a focus throw of almost 180 degrees between the minimum focus of 1.47ft to 10ft, which is good for most shots, and my Pentax-k 100mm f2.8 has a focus throw of over 200 degrees between 3ft to 15ft. which again is enough for most shots. So maybe this is just a problem with the Rokinon lenses.
Most of the classic manual lenses are good as their focus throw was designed for manual use and is long compared to any modern lens designed to be focused by a computer where an inch is one extreme to the other.
THANK YOU! Just cancelled an order for one of these.
thanks for sharing.
To be fair, the 24mm Rokinon is the worst offender in terms of the "2.5' to infinity" issue. The other lenses in the Rokinon set are easier to pull focus on.
Thank you, I almost made this mistake with the samyang 35mm t1,5 vdslr ii:)
I have that lens and it works swimmingly
I agree this cheap cine lenses is not that great. Try a vintage lenses instead. It will have more breath focus than a this modern rehoused lenses, plus the amount of light reaching the sensor in na Rokinon 35 mm T1.5 is less than a sigma 18-35 mm f/1.8
My follow focus system is the nucleos nano anyway 😂
I ran into this issue with the samyangs too
We use the samyang lenses at college (film school) and they work swimmingly
Very good information. Newbies like myself would likely go for the more affordable option and end up wasting money or getting frustrated when it doesn’t work well in practice. Always worth watching your content!
Go watch some other reviews on these lenses. I think Film Jams and Film Riot both did reviews of these lenses. For the price they are unbeatable and I love my set.
This guy has no idea what he’s talking about. Seriously….
I have worked with these lenses multiple times and their only real flaw is sometimes their measurements are off - which is exactly like the normal Sigma lenses. Meaning they behave like an F Stop rather than a T stop. Not all of them, but I did encounter a 50-100mm that was off about by 6 inches. Kind of lame when it says it’s a Tstop. But. No big deal in reality.
Thank you so much for saving me from wasting money on samyang vdslr t1.5 lenses
Shouldn't we be looking at smarter ways of pulling focus? like take advantage of tracking focus. I mean, the technology is almost there, so why not? Sure, is not about replacing a focus puller, but doing the job easier, smarter.
I picked up a few of the original Rokinon cine EF lenses
So cheap, but you get what you pay for
The 85mm is super solid
But the 24 and 35 is hot garbage
Super soft image, and the focus ring has play in it making it useless for follow focus marks
In hindsight those were a waste of money when I could have put that money towards a more quality lens
I work with a crew that has a full set of the Rokinon Cine DS EF lenses, it seems like they refined the build to remove the focus play issue but the image is still soft on the 24 and 35
50 and 85 are decent
An AC dropped the 50 and the focus ring exploded into a bunch of pieces
Customer support is non-existent, there are no replacement parts either so they had to buy an entire new lens just for a single broken part.......
Again you get what you pay for
In hindsight, especially after realizing repairs are impossible and there is no customer support, they wish you invested into a different lens set
If you can afford the expensive stuff sure you can go full out and get the more expensive ones. But many people are just limited.
The title is in my opinion a little bit on the clickbait side.
Better one would be "advantages of premium cine lenses" or the countpart.
Thank you!! You just saved me from an incredible expense
$2000 for 4 completely usable cine lenses?
Good video.
Thank you. This is a very unpopular opinion, and I started out think against you the same as most people here. But I see your point, in that one may as well buy a stills lens with autofocus than a neutered manual focus lens. Unfortunately at this point true cinema lenses are far out of reach for me, which is of course why the cheap rehoused glass is so tempting.
The funny thing is the sigma cine lens is actually a photo rehoused lens, so this video really doesn't make sense
Maybe you meant don't buy cine mod lenses
Guess who am I believing, Stanley Kubrick, who used to use converted stills (particularly AI-s Nikkors) on a lot of his films, or you?
He also faked the moon landing :) lol
Stan all the way
Yeah but... Just use remote follow focus and you can map any range to any range on the wheel, so...
Aren't Canon Sumire rehoused still lenses?
No.
If every shot was a moving shot that requires focus pulling this kind of extremist position might make some sense to those with extreme budget constraints.
Most shots are actually NOT moving shots. It makes far more sense to save money with the less costly lenses for 90% of the shots and rent a more costly lens with a greater focus throw for moving shots.
….Until some lens manufacturer or rehousing addresses the focus throw for less money to make a name for themselves.
BS, I have been using the Samyang 16mm alot on documentaries along side other various lens and there has been zero issues with focus pulling. Learn to pull focus and you will have zero issues with any lens.
After 3 years of extensive experience shooting on these lenses, I cannot confirm the same experience/issue. It's just a non-factor. Sure the throw on focus is narrower, has it EVER been problematic? No.
Rokinons break :( the are all plastic inside, the lens mount can't be replaced if it breaks off, there are no replacement parts. the sometimes rough handling lenses get the rokinons simply don't hold up. I 'm not saying you should be dropping or hitting your lenses, but sometimes things happen, especially when everyone may be moving fast you don't have the most experienced crew people, etc.
I think they need to be treated as expendable :)
0:27
Rokinon seems more cinematick :D
If the Rokinons are so called cine lenses, then why didnt they come with some decent focus throw?? Now I really dont get why people would buy these insted of vintage Zeiss, Canon, Mamiya Leica glass...
Anybody focusing on researching lenses this hard isn't making films. The lesson here is to shoot films and not watch videos like this.
I believe on the sigma site it states that the first line of cine lenses are recoated and rehoused sigma art lenses.
Confusing Title
*Cries in contax zeiss
WOW!!! NEVER gave it any attention!
Your title is completely misleading - it should be maybe 'cinevised' but 'rehousing' refers to a process of actually rehousing a lens with proper marks the same as a traditional cine lens.
bad title/concept. if a lens' images are good then it's usable. this is more something to know about and less a reason to discount these lenses. Perspective of the video is a elitist , this is something that can easily be worked around. glad u can afford the nicer lens but don't put down the cheap stuff that takes good quality video just to make yourself feel better about buying the pricier lens.
I'm not elitist at all. Buy the autofocus version of the lens for almost the same price, and get a better result. I'm not saying you need to shooting with Cine lenses, I'm saying that the Rokinon's are fake cine lenses and will get you into trouble, because it happened to me.
@@Crimsonengine your answer to the focus degrees is to throw more money at it, with the purchase of a more expensive lens and hiring of a focus puller, that is why I believe it elitist. But for indie filmmakers, the price point this is obviously aimed at, this is something that can easily be worked around with a little effort. This is the way all movies have been made, take after take till the right one is locked. So for the price you get a good image, but obviously you won't get everything such as a longer focus throw (which again is something that can easily be worked with). Also the reason these are real cine lenses is because they give the option to MANUALLY control the aperture, instead of the autofocus version which has aperture digitally, through camera settings. Stop trying to delegitimize a quality lens. Now another reason a cinematographer should not buy the auto focus version is because it will ruin your shot hunting for focus randomly. This is tolerable for youtube but for cinematography. autofocus systems are almost universally not used because of it. Also autfocus can not focus for the story, it may lock a face but a face is not always what I might want to take the audiences attention too, maybe an object of interest in the foreground. Every auto focus mode runs into problems like this when it's the art that comes first instead of bowing to digital restraints.
You don't know what 'elitist' means. Grow up.
@@vinnieRice elitist: relating to or supporting the view that a society or system should be led by an elite. In this context the view that the more expensive, or elite, product is superior would be elitist particularly in the way he tried to discount the lens. Expand the way you think. Nothing I said was immature so the only person who doesn’t know what they’re saying is the one who doesn’t know what “grow up” means.
@@VirisNS Yeah, the Oxford Dictionary that you quote doesn't say anything about higher cost = elite which is the point at which your juvenile argument breaks down. He discounted the Samyangs because they're crap frankly and do not meet the minimum requirements for a professional tool. Is a truck elitist because it is more expensive than a bike? Expand the way think. Money is not at the root of Elitism. Asset inequality is a byproduct of historical social and political problems. Read a book.
Heres one thing id have to say, if your still using those rokinon or samyang lens chances are your still working on super low budget films where you have to pull your own focus vs having an ac. I do own the xeen 24mm n honestly you buy it to look the part as a cinemagrapher.
DON'T shoot a FILM with Rehoused Stills Lenses. WHY SO SERIOUS? Man that looks like a clickbait attempt) Try to convince Kubrick that he could not use photography lenses) Limitations often leed to "thinking out the box" and I'm sure you know that.
“affiliate links below”
inaccurate and misleading , rehoused Nikkor cost more than sigma
Either you don’t know what you’re talking about, or you aren’t making your point correct……
Great video!
I'm a new Sony full-frame photo-videographer, and most of my (starting) lenses are Samyang/Rokinon (MF 12 F2.8, MF 14 F2.8, AF 24 F2.8, MF 85 F1.4).
I can definitely attest that it's seemingly impossible to focus pull with the Samyang MF 85 F1.4 at medium to long distances. The rotational bounds are just way too tight - especially at longer focus distances. I took it to Toronto Kids Fashion week 2021 and could not track the catwalk for the life of me 😂
Thanks for saving me the heartache/disappointment of buying the Cine versions of my stills lenses - thinking that would fix my problem for the future 🙏🏻
I agree with the fact that cine lens have better usability if you have a first AC following you around all the time. But what if you don’t have that luxury? What if you’re on a gimbal or handheld? This is when solid still lenses come into play. I think this video is geared towards bigger productions and not solo run and gun operators. Autofocus is invaluable in so many different ways even though it does have its limitations. Shooting interviews, tracking people, animals, objects, is something that is very difficult to do without a focus puller. I’ve completed many great projects with stills lenses even though I do own cine lenses. I typically go for cine lenses if I’m looking for character in my footage and I’m not under any time constraints so I can plan my shots. I create content to market businesses and most clients are looking for a sharp clinical look. There are plenty of cine lenses that are just rehoused still lenses which is an old practice. So why spend so much more for virtually the same image??? How many average content creators are using ARRI cine primes to shoot on their hybrid or entry level cinema cameras??? The only real benefit to prosumer cine lenses is the better performance and reliability in focus pulling. But as far as image quality the differences are negligible and unnoticeable to most people or clients (depending on the project and budget of course)….and if you do want character in a still lens you can easily just add filters. For most everyday businesses and client work, still lenses are perfectly fine. Especially if you’re working alone.
Thanks for commenting! This could have been it's own video :)
As a Focus Puller and Cinematographer who has worked with various lenses from the big names in cinema to budgeted lenses, this is misleading. Especially considering that more and more productions (on the indie level) are shooting with vintage lenses like the Canon FDs, Leica Rs, etc.
Granted, I agree with you in the sense that using any still or rehoused lens would be more difficult than using true cine lenses, but it is not impossible. Any Focus Puller worth their salt should be able to adapt to any lens because at the end of the day, the best lens is the one that serves the story.
Rokinons are a great kit that will serve many well as they learn and grow in the industry.
A focus puller can adapt to any lens obviously, however, it is NOT ideal on a professional film set and it is a huge waste of time and could cost you time (money) and great performances that are now completely gone because the focusing distance is all over the place especially wide open (the tiniest movements of an actor or improvisations, tracking handheld shots that include actors, ...etc). An actor's performance is more important than a "lens look". As a director, cinematographer, and focus puller who worked on feature indies, I would not wish this on any director wishing to maximize actors' performance and blocking. Going the photo lens route already sets limitations on how you shoot your film before you even start (not that limitations are always a bad thing). You do not adapt to various inconsistencies across different inconsistent lenses. Let's not even get into tweaking your camera rig + focusing configuration for close/infinity every time to "adapt".
All of that is okay if budget is an issue where you have no other option and all key crew members have prepared for this problem (because it is a problem), but I strongly disagree that it is normal and part of any focus puller's responsibilities, where adapting to issues results in the same quality vs. pro cine lenses.
@@VENAXIS Not ideal and impossible are two different things. Obviously there is a better way to do things and can say with confidence that I had to adapt to many situations, figuring out the right amount of speed/focus throw for each lens' inconsistencies throughout many jobs.
Not to mention that there are shoots that have budget and still decide to shoot with funky lenses. Again, not ideal but if you're not the one calling shots, guess what, you still have to do the job.
That said, my whole point behind my comment is simply that lenses like Rokinon and other still lenses have a place and are very capable lenses. Just understand what you're getting yourself into.
@@zanin.lindsay Yes I understand that but you made it sound like a focus puller can get the exact same results as they would on proper pro cine lenses (maybe that wasn't yoyr intention), but that is simply not true for many reasons. Also, Tommy Wiseau is a perfect example of a high budget using funky stuff. That is just a big budget spent badly. You can always use the budget to tweak this funky thing for professional use (cine rehousing) without losing its look or quality.
Thanks. Despite this video being make I've been using the hell out of my rokinons for personal projects. I can focus just fine.