Affordable Cine Zoom Lenses for Blackmagic Cameras

You are just starting out with video, and I think that you are getting some very bad advice. Bluntly, my suggestion is that you ignore a lot of the "advice" you're getting in this thread, because some of it is complete rubbish that is going to wind up, if you follow it, costing a lot of money.

In all fairness to the people who have been kind enough to offer advice, I did ask the question "which would you pick". I am sure they based their opinion(s) on the work that they have done. Although subjective, they are answering what I asked. I have seen video's in both focal lengths and see the wisdom of having both of the lenses in question, but again, I can only afford one right now.

In my personal opinion, I do find the Sigma Art lens to be nice, but lacking in overall cinematic qualities (as some others have mentioned), and the overall look of the finished quality.

I am often asked why I select certain guitars for recording or live use, when at the end of the day, "they all sound the same". Well first off, to my ears they are distinctly different. Secondly, it is also about inspiration. The feel of the neck, string action, different pickups, cause me to approach the guitars in different ways thus inspiring me to create in different ways. It's not always about the audience, but what inspires the artist to create to the best of his ability. This is the way I see lenses.

For the record, I do not subscribe to the notion "More expensive = better", but as with guitars, the big difference in price, to a point, is quality, which is also important to me. I have purchased "cheap" guitars which constantly detune, the electronics, wear out, etc., and so they basically become unusable. Then there are times when a "cheap" guitar has put a smile on my face. It has all the characteristics of a much more expensive guitar.

Again, this is an expensive hobby for me, but I don't mind paying a little extra for quality and in this case, the look that I am going for.

In my personal opinion, I do find the Sigma Art lens to be nice, but lacking in overall cinematic qualities (as some others have mentioned), and the overall look of the finished quality.

...

For the record, I do not subscribe to the notion "More expensive = better", but as with guitars, the big difference in price, to a point, is quality, which is also important to me. I have purchased "cheap" guitars which constantly detune, the electronics, wear out, etc., and so they basically become unusable. Then there are times when a "cheap" guitar has put a smile on my face. It has all the characteristics of a much more expensive guitar.

Again, this is an expensive hobby for me, but I don't mind paying a little extra for quality and in this case, the look that I am going for.

I think that you are still failing to distinguish between mechanical and glass issues.

These DZFilm lenses are not the cinema equivalent of high-end guitars. In reviews, they are being described as “cheap”, “affordable” and “budget”. Those are direct quotes. You are paying for certain lens mechanics, and if reviews are to be believed, you are getting decent, but not great, glass.

It isn’t even clear whether you’ve thought through the pros and cons of zooms and primes. Before buying, you really should put a zoom and a prime on your camera and think about what is going to work best for you.

I remain of the view that asking people what focal length range to buy/use for your video work is not something that makes any sense given that you have both a background in still photography and the Sigma 18-35mm in hand.

Anyway, it’s your money.

Quite a few folks at reduser.net are discussing the use of Leica-R and Zeiss Contax C/Y lenses for serious cine use.
Of course, they have their lenses 'cinefied' for better handling, but there are very renowned cinematographers among them.
Optically, these are very fine glass (and not exactly cheap).

As I’m sure you know, not so long ago you couldn’t give Leica R lenses away.

Leica’s M (typ 240) gave them a new lease on life. Unfortunately, I didn’t buy any R lenses when I got my own M 240. I regret that now

In my personal opinion, I do find the Sigma Art lens to be nice, but lacking in overall cinematic qualities (as some others have mentioned), and the overall look of the finished quality.

...

For the record, I do not subscribe to the notion "More expensive = better", but as with guitars, the big difference in price, to a point, is quality, which is also important to me. I have purchased "cheap" guitars which constantly detune, the electronics, wear out, etc., and so they basically become unusable. Then there are times when a "cheap" guitar has put a smile on my face. It has all the characteristics of a much more expensive guitar.

Again, this is an expensive hobby for me, but I don't mind paying a little extra for quality and in this case, the look that I am going for.

I think that you are still failing to distinguish between mechanical and glass issues.

These DZFilm lenses are not the cinema equivalent of high-end guitars. In reviews, they are being described as “cheap”, “affordable” and “budget”. Those are direct quotes. You are paying for certain lens mechanics, and if reviews are to be believed, you are getting decent, but not great, glass.

It isn’t even clear whether you’ve thought through the pros and cons of zooms and primes. Before buying, you really should put a zoom and a prime on your camera and think about what is going to work best for you.

I remain of the view that asking people what focal length range to buy/use for your video work is not something that makes any sense given that you have both a background in still photography and the Sigma 18-35mm in hand.

Anyway, it’s your money.

I am not dismissing your advice, I actually welcome it as a part of this healthy debate.

First off, I think you are misunderstanding the whole focal length thing. I should have simply asked which lens do you find yourself using more and which inspires you more. Of course I have experience with a variety of focal ranges including 18-35mm. That goes without saying. My original leanings are with the DZFilm 20-55mm since that is what I mainly shoot with on the photography side. As an artist, I am also open to suggestions/recommendations. In this case particularly since I am new to the concept of "Cine Lenses".

Sticking with the guitar references, I own for example a Gibson Les Paul Historic 59. Amazing guitar, and for the year it was built in (2003), it is considered to be one of the finest that Gibson has ever produced. They are expensive at up to ~$6000 - ~$10, 000 used. As a side note, and actual 1959 Gibson Les Paul can fetch upwards of a half million dollars (vintage collectable). Amazing guitars. Let's call these "High end professional lenses"

I also happened to come across a a 2014 Fender Telecaster (made in Mexico). Once I picked it up it, had that perfect worn in solid feeling and sounded amazing. It wasn't until after I looked at the back of the headstock that I realized it was made in Mexico. That is blasphemy in many guitar player circles. But guess which guitar I pick up the most when writing new material. Yep, the MIM Telecaster. I own a total of 10 guitars all in varying price ranges. Right now I am looking for my MIM Fender Telecaster lens equivalent.

Based on personal ungraded footage I am seeing from the Sigma 18-35mm Art lens so far (including what I am seeing online). Vs the ungraded footage I am seeing online with these DZFilm Pictor lenses, that is the creamy/dreamy/warm (or whatever you want to call it) look that I am going for. timbutt2's footage was the deciding factor.

As you said, it is my money, and I feel the $1600 price difference is well worth it especially if this lens will inspire me. Sadly, I find the Sigma 18-35mm Art uninspiring. I am really trying to like it. I consider myself to be artistic with a good eye. I am also very technical, so I don't think it is a matter of my not knowing what I am doing. Oh, and as for prime vs Zoom lenses, I have always preferred Zoom lenses They fit my worlflow better. I do own a few primes, but rarely use them anymore.

Tim,
can you post the shims you used for your DZO Pictor set? I need to switch mine to EF Mount.

Tim,
can you post the shims you used for your DZO Pictor set? I need to switch mine to EF Mount.

I can’t guarantee that your shims will be the same as mine. There’s a detailed method for checking the parfocal nature of the lens and how to shim it in the manual for the lens. Mine is as follows:



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As I’m sure you know, not so long ago you couldn’t give Leica R lenses away.

I know what you mean. I was coming late to the party for Leica-R, but in time for Zeiss Contax C/Y.
May need to up my insurance now!

But let's not derail the discussion. Actually, a few vintage photographic zooms are parfocal if you have a good adapter (or, better, precise conversion) and grabbed the right sample. Sample variation is one of the factors discerning still from cine lenses and part of the reason for their prices.
And then, cine lenses in professional use get regular servicing. Most vintage photographic ones have not seen that in ages.

Video is finally out:

DZOFILM PICTOR 20-55MM VS ANGENIEUX OPTIMO DP 16-42MM VS SIGMA 18-35MM

the DZO does look pretty good compared to the others.
however i still want some form of character that these seem to be lacking. The OOOM zoom appears to have a little more of that special look.

Interesting video, I thought the test presentations were solid, not hyper-kinetic and thankfully, the goofiness was reserved for the in-between stuff and not part of the tests themselves. I preferred the Angenieux, but not by much and not in every instance. Definitely not by the differential in price. DZO's performance is impressive. The Sigma was meh all the way down the line for me. It would be cool to see a shoot-out with the DZO and Fuji and Ooom.

Interesting video, I thought the test presentations were solid, not hyper-kinetic and thankfully, the goofiness was reserved for the in-between stuff and not part of the tests themselves. I preferred the Angenieux, but not by much and not in every instance. Definitely not by the differential in price. DZO's performance is impressive. The Sigma was meh all the way down the line for me. It would be cool to see a shoot-out with the DZO and Fuji and Ooom.

We might be able to do a Fuji since I think Litewave has a Fujinon Cabrio 20-120 T3.5 and they did compare that against the Laowa Ooom: https://litewavemedia.com/fujinon-cabri ... ns-rental/

Going in I would have thought the ANGENIEUX would blow the doors off the DZO. Definitely not and for sure not all the time. Very interesting.

Newsshooter has a new promotional demonstration of DZO lenses. I'd like to know more about who's behind this brand and what long-term support looks like:

Newsshooter has a new promotional demonstration of DZO lenses. I'd like to know more about who's behind this brand and what long-term support looks like:

I saw the announcement. Wow, what a great price on these. They look really nice so far too. Will be excited to check out more footage. Considering how much I love the zooms I'll definitely try to get my hands on them to test them out. Best part for us BMD users is that they are Full Frame, so that makes them future proof for whenever Blackmagic does go VistaVision with one of their future sensors.

EDIT: Article released on CineD with some specs: https://www.cined.com/dzofilm-releases- ... 2cHDQAtTZs

Lots to like if you manage the flares.

Lots to like if you manage the flares.

Indeed! Now that I have the updated desktop computer I'll look into getting the Vespid lenses. They're perfect for working with the Pictor Zooms. Then I'll be PL completely. Still have to pay off the new computer first; LOL

That will feel very good. Having good tools that you understand well helps you to focus more of your attention on what is in front of your camera.

After researching for a couple of months, and along with the fact that the DZOFilm Pictor 20-55mm and 50-125mm lens bundle has been on back order, I decided to sell some of my music gear and get the dual lens kit instead of just the 20-55mm.

I have seen enough footage with these lenses mounted on the UMG2 to convince me that these will work for me. They do have a nice look about them. For the price point, I haven't seen anything better. Sure the Cookes, Angenieux, and the other big boys look absolutely lovely, but I cant afford even their lower priced offerings or used models. According to UPS, my lenses should be here tomorrow!

Phil Holland likes 'em!

Posted by ProAv today:

One correction. The Fujinon MK lenses, one of which I have, are also available for Micro Four Thirds, which can be adapted for about £200 to L-mount, and for Fuji X-mount.

Thanks for posting the ProAV review which seems to be very objective. It’s certainly appealing but I’d like to know any comments or conclusions you have made as currently your Fujinon MK zoom is at the top of my wishlist for 2021. It’s nice that the DZO will work on both the BMPCC4K and the URSA Mini 4.6K. However I do suspect the DZO breath more than the Fujinon which is an important consideration for narrative work where virtually no breathing is desired.

Thanks for posting the ProAV review which seems to be very objective. It’s certainly appealing but I’d like to know any comments or conclusions you have made as currently your Fujinon MK zoom is at the top of my wishlist for 2021. It’s nice that the DZO will work on both the BMPCC4K and the URSA Mini 4.6K. However I do suspect the DZO breath more than the Fujinon which is an important consideration for narrative work where virtually no breathing is desired.

Hi Rick,

I'm extremely happy with the Fujinon, although it took some getting used to. For one thing, it's my first and only zoom lens. Also, my primes are almost all Leica, the most recent made in 1992, and the Fujinon has a different look. Almost a year later, I wouldn't be without it.

If you decide to get one, note that Fujinon lowers the price from time to time. Currently US$3800, I paid $3300 at the end of last December. See the screen capture. That promo price ended a couple of days later, but I have seen it since. [I'm trying to figure out Capture One and this was a good excuse to try out the healing brush to delete certain info ]

I had hoped to go to the Island last month to visit a relative, and could have lent the lens to you for a few days to try out, but as you know quarantine is still in effect. Drag.

Duclos 1.jpg (47.65 KiB) Viewed 7218 times

I'm trying to figure out Capture One and this was a good excuse to try out the healing brush to delete certain info

I'm on the fence between the Fujinon and DZO as well. Probably going to rent each and play around over the winter.

How are the folks at Duclos? I've yet to have any dealings with them but from Matt's posts, they seem great as well as smart.

Thanks for the feedback. Good you bought your zoom from Duclos which I’d plan on doing as well unless a Canadian supplier made me an offer I can’t refuse (highly unlikely though).

I'm on the fence between the Fujinon and DZO as well. Probably going to rent each and play around over the winter.

How are the folks at Duclos? I've yet to have any dealings with them but from Matt's posts, they seem great as well as smart.

I’d really appreciate seeing your comparison this winter if you’re able to rent both zooms!

Duclos is very good, first class treatment of their customers. If there’s any promotion offered by a vendor, it tends to go to Duclos first as they are recognized by the manufacturers as very much in tune with the needs of professional shooters. Also most lenses only have a one year warranty but if you buy from Duclos, you’re covered for two years. I bought my Tokina 11-20mm PL zoom from Duclos.

I’d really appreciate seeing your comparison this winter if you’re able to rent both zooms!

Duclos is very good, first class treatment of their customers. If there’s any promotion offered by a vendor, it tends to go to Duclos first as they are recognized by the manufacturers as very much in tune with the needs of professional shooters. Also most lenses only have a one year warranty but if you buy from Duclos, you’re covered for two years. I bought my Tokina 11-20mm PL zoom from Duclos.

Rick, I will definitely share. Waiting to see if the DZO 20-55 and 50-125 pop up on lensrentals.com. Right now they have the 10-24 and 20-70. I haven't dug around to see if anyone else has them though. They do have both the Fujinons.

Appreciate the info on Duclos. Will definitely be making this investment with them.

How are the folks at Duclos? I've yet to have any dealings with them but from Matt's posts, they seem great as well as smart.

This was my first purchase from Duclos. It was a straightforward transaction, but my impression is that they're very professional. Lens was properly packed, shipping was expeditious. I was interested in purchasing certain threaded filters from them at the same time, but what they have in terms of accessories is pretty limited. I would be more than happy to deal with Duclos again.

Lens Rentals could certainly share their impressions of the two brands’ zooms with you once they’ve had the time to do their own testing and comparisons. They seem particularly helpful and thorough.

One other comment about the Fujinon MK lenses. In North America, Fujinon's Broadcast Division in New Jersey supports these lenses.* Actual people answer the phone, and they are both knowledgeable and helpful. On my query, they fired off an e-mail to Japan and had the info that I wanted, together with a diagramme, the next day. A pleasure to deal with.

* The exception is the Fuji X-mount version, which is apparently handled by their photo group. My query was about a lens support that is packaged with that version. Instead of passing me off to another department, the Broadcast Division got me the info that I wanted.

Really used the DZOFilm Pictor 20-55mm in an interesting way for this video. This one had a few zooms in it. As well, Shot it all at T2.8 because it was a lower light situation and was shooting 800 ISO on the UMPG2.

Hello guys, i have a bmpcc4k and id like to use it for fiction narrative with action and vfx. Im searching for the lenses, and i choose to buy the Dzofilm MFT but i have a question:

Is the Dzofilm 20-70 mm for MFT compatible with
speedbooster? Because if it is, i can get from just one lens a good cine range, for making dolly and crash zooms no? Or its better getting the both lenses set? (10-24 mm + 20-70 mm).

Thanks

Edit: nevermind, i found that its impossible, due to being already a MFT lens.

Wondering if anyone has used the DZOfilm zooms with a mount adapter. Thinking about wanting one for both super35 as well as BMPC4K and want to know if it will work with the pocket camera.

Thanks for all the great posts.

Hello guys, i have a bmpcc4k and id like to use it for fiction narrative with action and vfx. Im searching for the lenses, and i choose to buy the Dzofilm MFT but i have a question:

Is the Dzofilm 20-70 mm for MFT compatible with
speedbooster? Because if it is, i can get from just one lens a good cine range, for making dolly and crash zooms no? Or its better getting the both lenses set? (10-24 mm + 20-70 mm).

Thanks

Edit: nevermind, i found that its impossible, due to being already a MFT lens.

Well, if your speedbooster takes EF mount then there is the EF mount version of the lenses which you can use with your speedbooster.

It's not advisable to use the DZOFilm Pictor Zooms (20-55mm & 50-125mm) with a speed booster. This is because the rear element is long enough that it will touch the glass of the speed booster. So you could use a mount adapter if it has no glass element to get the EF/PL lens on to the MFT Pocket 4K, but in that case you may as well just be using the MFT Mount Linglung Series (10-20mm & 20-70) of lenses.

So it's more advisable to use the EF Mount Version of the Pictor Zooms on the Pocket 6K or to use them on the URSA Mini Pro cameras in either EF or PL Mount. I'd advice PL since it's the most secure.

There’s some confusion here I believe. 1) I was asked which of the two DZOFILM Pictor lenses I would suggest buying if you could only buy one. I answered that question with my previous post because the post before I was stating that buying the bundle was better. I was pushed to say which one go buy first and I answered that.

Next, Matteo’s Leica R lenses have been cine moded and they helps improve upon some of the still photography lens issues. However, those are also primes and as a result optically are going to be a lot better for modifying to cinema lenses than still zooms. As I said still zooms are not parfocal by nature and with cinema lenses you expect that.

The main topic for this thread is affordable cinema zoom lenses. That is what I’m trying to address. And, in my comparison of the DZOFilm Pictor against the Sigma Art I pointed out the strengths and reasons for the Pictor lens being better for cinema purposes. Especially for an AC on a wireless focus. And, then I stated what I stated and stand by that the lens comparison shoot proved why the Sigma Art doesn’t hold up. The DZOFilm Pictor held up against an $18K lens from Angēnieux. That’s an impressive feat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for getting back Tim? Knowing how much time you've spent with these I was hoping you'd see this.

I've got several BMPCC4K's with an complete set of MFT primes that I really like. Yet there have been times where a set of zooms would be a good thing to have.

But I see myself adding a Super35 body. With that I don't see the MFT zooms being a good investment for where I'm headed. I do have one of the basic Metabones EF-MFT adapters. Though not ideal it would hold me over without any wides until I buy the new body. For that I can either carry a couple MFT primes or pick up a BMPCC6K until I make the change.

It seems that the camera's are moving so fast that it's not a good idea to get to attached. The glass seems to stay around a bit longer. I guess that may be changing a bit now too.

There’s some confusion here I believe. 1) I was asked which of the two DZOFILM Pictor lenses I would suggest buying if you could only buy one. I answered that question with my previous post because the post before I was stating that buying the bundle was better. I was pushed to say which one go buy first and I answered that.

Next, Matteo’s Leica R lenses have been cine moded and they helps improve upon some of the still photography lens issues. However, those are also primes and as a result optically are going to be a lot better for modifying to cinema lenses than still zooms. As I said still zooms are not parfocal by nature and with cinema lenses you expect that.

The main topic for this thread is affordable cinema zoom lenses. That is what I’m trying to address. And, in my comparison of the DZOFilm Pictor against the Sigma Art I pointed out the strengths and reasons for the Pictor lens being better for cinema purposes. Especially for an AC on a wireless focus. And, then I stated what I stated and stand by that the lens comparison shoot proved why the Sigma Art doesn’t hold up. The DZOFilm Pictor held up against an $18K lens from Angēnieux. That’s an impressive feat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for getting back Tim? Knowing how much time you've spent with these I was hoping you'd see this.

I've got several BMPCC4K's with an complete set of MFT primes that I really like. Yet there have been times where a set of zooms would be a good thing to have.

But I see myself adding a Super35 body. With that I don't see the MFT zooms being a good investment for where I'm headed. I do have one of the basic Metabones EF-MFT adapters. Though not ideal it would hold me over without any wides until I buy the new body. For that I can either carry a couple MFT primes or pick up a BMPCC6K until I make the change.

It seems that the camera's are moving so fast that it's not a good idea to get to attached. The glass seems to stay around a bit longer. I guess that may be changing a bit now too.

Yes, investment in glass is always a good bet. I have no problem with investing in Super 35mm because I don't think it's going anywhere. It's been a standard for a very long time. So the DZOFilm Pictor Zooms are great because they cover that sensor size area.

As for VistaVision/Full-Frame the DZOFilm Vespid Primes are covering that spectrum. They are not zooms, but what a lot of people forget is that cinema zooms that cover VistaVision/Full-Frame are more rare and generally cost a lot more to make and sell. That market has been pretty limited. So Primes have been the major player in that arena. Again, I'm not talking about still photography zooms, but cinema zooms.

I also expect S-35 to stay with us, it's the best compromise between resolution and DoF for moving images.
Photographic FF or VistaVision has such a paper-thin DoF that is very difficult to handle and smaller formats than S-35 don't catch enough light, especially with the race to more and more photocells.

I'll share my shim configurations for my lenses in the future.

[/quote]

Hi Tim, can you remember the shim amount you applied for your DZOfilm Pictor Zoom 50-125 PL mount on your Ursa mini Pro? (I own a 12k unit but I guess the flange distance is the same to G2).
My total shim amount is +0.46.

Also, as I'm planning to buy a 6kPro as a Bcam and convert it to PL mount with Woodencamera kit, I wonder if the parfocal is preserved when switching the Pictor Zoom from the Ursa to the Pocket 6k PRO?

Thanks

Hi Tim, can you remember the shim amount you applied for your DZOfilm Pictor Zoom 50-125 PL mount on your Ursa mini Pro? (I own a 12k unit but I guess the flange distance is the same to G2).
My total shim amount is +0.46.

Also, as I'm planning to buy a 6kPro as a Bcam and convert it to PL mount with Woodencamera kit, I wonder if the parfocal is preserved when switching the Pictor Zoom from the Ursa to the Pocket 6k PRO?

Thanks

I truly believe that it will vary per lens. So my Shim amount will be different from yours. The key is to use test focus charts and to measure the shim amount that works for your lens. It will be different for your lens than someone else's.

I have noticed that the Pocket 6K Pro once PL modified needed to have the Wooden Camera PL Mount Shimmed just right in order to match my UMP with its PL Mount. Generally however I noticed no issues with the parfocal nature of the zooms. I mainly fly the Vespid Primes on the Pocket 6K however since they're smaller and lighter. Use a lens support with the Pictor Zooms to be safe.