Sigma Classic Cine Primes

Sigma announced along with the FP camera, a new line of lenses that barely have coatings. If you look at the sample footage they show in the presentation, the lenses look exactly like the results I get when I shoot with my old Nikkor lenses with haze and fungus in the internal elements. Has everybody lost their mind and just don't know what else to spend their money on?

https://nofilmschool.com/sigma-classic-prime-lenses

Agree. Even a lens with good coatings can be made to look ‘bad’ with any light shining on it at the right angle. No need to buy new glass to look like old glass.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There's probably a market for these, though: e.g., people who want an instant retro look without any additional effort in post, without having to buy adapters, and without having to take their chances with old used lenses.

A little bit like buying new but prewashed/distressed jeans.

Agree. Even a lens with good coatings can be made to look ‘bad’ with any light shining on it at the right angle. No need to buy new glass to look like old glass.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree. Filters are also an amazing thing.

It’s like a new washed old look Jeans, it look like 20 years old used jeans but are new...
Matter of taste


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

[CaptainHook]

Is there an official video somewhere showing footage from these lenses?
The video in the link appears to be a camera filming a projector playing the video which makes it near useless for evaluating image characteristics from and I'm very interested to see what these look like.

That makes two of use Captain Hook!
Cheers

See https://www.ducloslenses.com/pages/sigma-classic-primes

Nice, I like the softer look for the subjects shown. I think they would work well for many scenarios, especially those featuring a female, as shown in the examples from Duclos.
Cheers

[CaptainHook]

I read earlier as well these lenses were used as the 'A' set on the Venice camera by Claudio Miranda for Top Gun 2.

I read earlier as well these lenses were used as the 'A' set on the Venice camera by Claudio Miranda for Top Gun 2.

I think that was referring to the regular Sigma cine primes, which have been out for a while. If he used these new “classic” ones he must have had super early prototypes as they won’t be commercially available until September or so.

I read earlier as well these lenses were used as the 'A' set on the Venice camera by Claudio Miranda for Top Gun 2.

I think that was referring to the regular Sigma cine primes, which have been out for a while. If he used these new “classic” ones he must have had super early prototypes as they won’t be commercially available until September or so.

Just guessing but given the size and the budget of the film it wouldn’t surprise me if Miranda worked with Sigma to have them make a unique new coating for the lenses to be used in the film to get the aesthetic he was after and then Sigma decided to put it into production...

That does sound credible that these grew out of a special request, but it seems odd that Sigma would be approached with a request for custom lenses as opposed to many other firms who are known for their Cinema lenses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What happened to filters in front of the lens as have been done for decades?
Tiffen Satin or Black Pro Mist for example?
As per examples in the Sigma's website, well... you know...

What happened to filters in front of the lens as have been done for decades?
Tiffen Satin or Black Pro Mist for example?
As per examples in the Sigma's website, well... you know...

As good as a filter can be they are not substitutes for a different lens coating, especially when money are not part of the equation...

Just guessing but given the size and the budget of the film it wouldn’t surprise me if Miranda worked with Sigma to have them make a unique new coating for the lenses to be used in the film to get the aesthetic he was after and then Sigma decided to put it into production...

That makes sense. But on their Facebook page Sigma only says the film was shot with Sigma Cine lenses ("mostly except the POV on and inside the planes. We’ve been told"), and when you look at the trailer the footage looks to my eyes more like something from regular Sigma Cine lenses (which reportedly use the same glass and coatings as their DSLR/mirrorless lenses but with cine housing and gears).

First: Whoa! These new Sigma Classic Cine Primes look nice! I'll sell my left Kidney for a set as long as they have /i Technology in them to feed lens metadata to the camera.

Second: Top Gun: Maverick was shot on Sigma Cinema Lenses! What?! Where is that information available? I need to watch that trailer again. And, when will /i Technology be added to those original Cinema Primes?

I'm a little annoyed that demo video also can only be seen on Duclos' website. I'd like to set the Vimeo video to Watch Later so I can watch it on a TV without the annoying Duclos pop up at the bottom of the screen.

Second: Top Gun: Maverick was shot on Sigma Cinema Lenses! What?! Where is that information available? I need to watch that trailer again. And, when will /i Technology be added to those original Cinema Primes?

There was some speculation last year on dvxuser.com here: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.ph ... io-Miranda)-(a-few-questions) and Sigma confirmed it recently on their Facebook page.

My understanding is that Sigma will release more sample footage from these new lenses in the next few months and the lenses are supposed to be commercially available in September.

[CaptainHook]

Timur's video is available now:



His blog post:

http://timurcivan.com/2019/07/an-examin ... ic-primes/

Cool, thanks for posting that!

The flares in this demo are a bit much for me...they draw too much attention to the lens itself, but I can see how they can be used to support an artistic vision (and of course demo footage like this really is about the lens and not what the lens is shooting). Carefully controlled with a matte box and used judiciously they could have great effect. Interesting to read his commentary about the history as well.

He also has a post about the original Cine lenses from Sigma: http://timurcivan.com/2018/01/an-examin ... me-lenses/

Cool, thanks for posting that!

The flares in this demo are a bit much for me...they draw too much attention to the lens itself, but I can see how they can be used to support an artistic vision (and of course demo footage like this really is about the lens and not what the lens is shooting). Carefully controlled with a matte box and used judiciously they could have great effect. Interesting to read his commentary about the history as well.

He also has a post about the original Cine lenses from Sigma: http://timurcivan.com/2018/01/an-examin ... me-lenses/

I agree. I think I would be good with about 1/8 of the flaring. This looks like, unless you are featuring the effect, a bit of a distraction. Even in this demo I felt like I wanted to see her but couldn't, the flares were in the way and took over the shots.

I do LOVE the shots without or with minimal flare effects and the grading in this is wonderful. Nice work all around on the piece, just a bit too much flaring for my taste.

Interesting! Very interesting.

Ulysses Paiva wrote ...What happened to filters in front of the lens as have been done for decades?
Tiffen Satin or Black Pro Mist for example?

Anything that you put between the subject and the sensor has the ability to degrade the image. I tried a filter that would do what you are saying and it took the 12 bit dng image from a BMPCC 4K with lots of dynamic range for processing and turned it into highly compressed looking garbage that took away my ability to correct it in Adobe Lightroom. It baked in too much lack of focus that could not be corrected.

A Pro photographer gave me a Hoya Diffusion filter at a camera show so I shot some images a half hour after sunset with a Voigtländer 17.5mm F/0.95 pretty wide open at ISO 2000 to see if I could get more of that vintage look. Here is a shot of a former Burning Man statue in San Leandro, California, Truth is Beauty by Marco Cochrane with a Hoya Diffusion filter, and without:

Quality filters are made to work properly. And they do not work the same in every situation. For instance, my Tiffen Satin1 is too much where there is a certain amount of blown highlights, but gives a gorgeous image when not in this situation. Thats why there is a bunch of different effects and intensities.

Timor’s Video is pretty for the most part with soft flares. But 1:12 and 2:12 are surely not flares, they’re internal reflections and the principal reason most people want not to see those so prominently. If I want Timor’s look, I can point my Tokina toward a strong source of light or shine a light off-axis. With all the pressing need for gear, that’s never going to be on my wishlist. Real vintage, charming. Mock vintage, meh!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To be fair, the Truth is Beauty statue's skin texture comes mostly from pushing the highlights to the maximum and accentuating the flare that the Voigtländer produces at wide apertures. If you were to look at the led lights behind the dirty stainless steel mesh with your naked eyes then the brightness would be closer to the diffused image, and without a skin texture.

The BMPCC 4K's low-light ability is taking us to images that were not possible before and are more sensitive to filtering.

Hoya is a respected brand and I may find a situation where their diffusion filter adds something to the image, but I would not look to it as a substitute for a quality vintage looking lens.

In my opinion, the Sigma classics are too sharp and modern, except for the halation. The effect is too strong and does not go with the hard contrast and sharpness when we see no flaring. I much prefer the look of an old single coated Nikkor lens or even better an old Russian lens. These older lenses have lower contrast and a more organic look to them. A lot of the old Russian lenses are M42 and can be easily be adapted to PL-mount.

Timor’s Video is pretty for the most part with soft flares. But 1:12 and 2:12 are surely not flares, they’re internal reflections and the principal reason most people want not to see those so prominently. If I want Timor’s look, I can point my Tokina toward a strong source of light or shine a light off-axis. With all the pressing need for gear, that’s never going to be on my wishlist. Real vintage, charming. Mock vintage, meh!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ahahahah. True! My Tokina flares like crazy!

But when it doesn’t, it’s a fine lens. It’s all about control of very bright light getting anywhere near the optical path or that front element. On set with control of the lights, not a hint of flare from the Tokina Cinema ATX 11-20mm T2.9 PL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m definitely a fan of the lower contrast these lenses exhibit, but. It so much the flaring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk