I used to love the Master Primes for its sharpness. But after watching this, I now have a newfound respect for Cooke lenses. I guess there is such thing as "too sharp". The Cooke lenses have a softer and more film cinematic feel.
I have felt his too with many lenses in photography. Lenses just become insanly sharb to perform edge to edge. Also the high MP count requires more sharpness and pin-point focussing accuracy. I often need to soften portraits.
I like the Cooke Anamorphics, the breathing tells a story in itself, i like it. In the 50mm shot it helps to get through the story of being surprisingly interrupted while looking at the picture. It´s like your brain zooms out of the activity you had concentrated on just a second before. I know that breathing is a technical side effect of how the lens works, which needs extra elements if you want to compensate that.. Anamorphics have that "dream look" IMHO, as the borders tend to get unsharp / deformed.. Wonder when we will see cameras that can capture a depth field as well via IR-Laser LIDAR or something like that. Then you would use extremly sharp lenses with the smallest aperature you can get away with and just add focus pulling, depth of field and bokeh in post :) you can do that, if you know the Z-Value of each pixel in the frame.
Thanks for doing this test! I can certainly see a difference but, as is often the case, I'm actually how surprised how similar all the spherical ones are (obviously the anamorphics have a very different character). In an ideal world where one has a big budget, I can understand why some DPs would be partial to a certain set (the Master Primes are my personal fav). That said, it surprises me how often I hear DPs insisting that they absolutely NEED Master Primes (or Cooke S4s) on lower-budget shoots when the results are so similar yet the prices can be so far apart.
As far as image quality go the cooke stands out, it looks like a movie in the theaters . Very just a beautiful looking image . Arri master's second and Zeiss 3rd because it can handle backlighting better .
The Master Primes had the smoothest outlines. The characters didn't pop out like they do on phone videos. The colours were better resolved, not artificially dry or warm. The faces looked best too
Is it just me or does the Cooke anamorphic look the best as far as framing and cinematic layout due to the depth of field and aspect ratio. I personally think as far as quality is concerned, I think they’re all close enough in quality to safety say that neither of these lenses is significantly better than it’s competitor. I think the real separation happens based on the aspect radio of the anamorphic.
You should use spherical optics with two (to be correct Fspherical = Fanamorphic x (1/anamorphic coefficient)) times smaller focal leight to compare the same FOV and framing on both.
That was very interesting. I am a long time R user. Pro commercial stills. The Leica R's vary a lot with age and place of manufacture. A lot. You do not address this. My old Canadian 90 mm Cron is so beautifil. Different to more modern designs. But all way above just good enough foe shooting sheet metal..
Leica or Leitz lenses do have a beautiful detail render but have by far the ugliest lens flare and bokeh. Coke anamorphics have perfect flares and almost no light spill but are hideous up close and as someone said breathe like a whale. Hahahahahahah that one got me. :D Arri Master primes have by fa the nicest colours and very beautiful bokeh, but are really sharp. Zeiss are all around really nice but have a lot of light spill. It's not about which are the best but what are you using them for. Cant imagine selecting anything else than Arri Master Primes for commercial use. But on the other hand can't imagine selecting Master Primes for a romantic feature.
I really don't like star shaped light, which is predominent in Leica. Worst of the comparison. Also most suffer from distracting halo flares. Master Primes and other Zeiss' lesser. Cooke Anamorphics the least. I'd love a sharpness test but for what I saw I prefer Cooke Anamorphics.
Focus breathing on the Zeiss is so minimal and non distracted, your audience will always noticed and most of the time will stick to the story, Cooke's in the other hand suffer from the worst of it, the color rendition is showing some chromatic shifting in those Coke too, Again Zeiss and Leica are kings there, but the bokeh stars on the Leica are horrible. Arri seems to be the best happy medium among all of those. Not to sharp not to modern. Depending of the project...Commercial I would pic Zeiss, cinematographic feature Arri or Cooke
Wow, came here looking for Cooke mini video comparisons and cant help to notice that the actress looks so much like an ex-girlfriend of mine, especially the side portrait @4:07. This whole video reminds me of us! LOL!! Emotional , lots of drama, and lots of making up. Aww, the good ole days. NOT!
I really liked the S4 for most of the shots but loved the way that the Zeiss bloomed with the backlight. Super helpful video!
I used to love the Master Primes for its sharpness. But after watching this, I now have a newfound respect for Cooke lenses. I guess there is such thing as "too sharp". The Cooke lenses have a softer and more film cinematic feel.
Agree
I have felt his too with many lenses in photography. Lenses just become insanly sharb to perform edge to edge. Also the high MP count requires more sharpness and pin-point focussing accuracy. I often need to soften portraits.
That is why there are diffusion filters.
Anamorphic still does it for me, would be my pick
I like the Cooke Anamorphics, the breathing tells a story in itself, i like it. In the 50mm shot it helps to get through the story of being surprisingly interrupted while looking at the picture. It´s like your brain zooms out of the activity you had concentrated on just a second before.
I know that breathing is a technical side effect of how the lens works, which needs extra elements if you want to compensate that..
Anamorphics have that "dream look" IMHO, as the borders tend to get unsharp / deformed..
Wonder when we will see cameras that can capture a depth field as well via IR-Laser LIDAR or something like that. Then you would use extremly sharp lenses with the smallest aperature you can get away with and just add focus pulling, depth of field and bokeh in post :) you can do that, if you know the Z-Value of each pixel in the frame.
The cooke and arri lens flare is awesome.
Thanks for doing this test! I can certainly see a difference but, as is often the case, I'm actually how surprised how similar all the spherical ones are (obviously the anamorphics have a very different character). In an ideal world where one has a big budget, I can understand why some DPs would be partial to a certain set (the Master Primes are my personal fav). That said, it surprises me how often I hear DPs insisting that they absolutely NEED Master Primes (or Cooke S4s) on lower-budget shoots when the results are so similar yet the prices can be so far apart.
Anamorphic Cooke 25mm , 50mm and 100mm would be my next choice for film production
What an amazing test video!👏👏👏
As far as image quality go the cooke stands out, it looks like a movie in the theaters . Very just a beautiful looking image . Arri master's second and Zeiss 3rd because it can handle backlighting better .
Preferred different lenses in each shot. Backlit, I enjoyed the Zeiss 50 a lot.
What were the settings for each? Were they all in the same t stops, was it all raw?
Beautiful footage! I was curious to see if you used a speed booster to mount the Zeiss prime with the mini? Or is it already compatible?
Cooke Anamorphics is by far the best if you ask me.
Cooke Anamorphics and Leica Summilux-C.
love the ARRI master primes the best!
AND COKE s4 toooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cooke does it for me
The Master Primes had the smoothest outlines. The characters didn't pop out like they do on phone videos. The colours were better resolved, not artificially dry or warm. The faces looked best too
Is it just me or does the Cooke anamorphic look the best as far as framing and cinematic layout due to the depth of field and aspect ratio. I personally think as far as quality is concerned, I think they’re all close enough in quality to safety say that neither of these lenses is significantly better than it’s competitor. I think the real separation happens based on the aspect radio of the anamorphic.
Are the Zeiss high speeds older ? Better than cp3?
The cook lenses were the most pleasing
You should use spherical optics with two (to be correct Fspherical = Fanamorphic x (1/anamorphic coefficient)) times smaller focal leight to compare the same FOV and framing on both.
The Cooke anamorphic is Xtal?
Leica Summilux 100mm du grand art
Leica Summilux-C, and Arri Master Primes are best
That was very interesting. I am a long time R user. Pro commercial stills. The Leica R's vary a lot with age and place of manufacture. A lot. You do not address this. My old Canadian 90 mm Cron is so beautifil. Different to more modern designs. But all way above just good enough foe shooting sheet metal..
Leica or Leitz lenses do have a beautiful detail render but have by far the ugliest lens flare and bokeh.
Coke anamorphics have perfect flares and almost no light spill but are hideous up close and as someone said breathe like a whale. Hahahahahahah that one got me. :D
Arri Master primes have by fa the nicest colours and very beautiful bokeh, but are really sharp.
Zeiss are all around really nice but have a lot of light spill.
It's not about which are the best but what are you using them for.
Cant imagine selecting anything else than Arri Master Primes for commercial use.
But on the other hand can't imagine selecting Master Primes for a romantic feature.
With Zeiss where do you see light spill thanks ?
Where do you see the cooke breathing like a whale ?
@@creativegreats6924 Damn! I'm going to have to look this up in the evening. :)
cooke anamorphic 50mm
Leica😍
Arri Master for me.
I really don't like star shaped light, which is predominent in Leica. Worst of the comparison. Also most suffer from distracting halo flares. Master Primes and other Zeiss' lesser. Cooke Anamorphics the least. I'd love a sharpness test but for what I saw I prefer Cooke Anamorphics.
Focus breathing on the Zeiss is so minimal and non distracted, your audience will always noticed and most of the time will stick to the story, Cooke's in the other hand suffer from the worst of it, the color rendition is showing some chromatic shifting in those Coke too, Again Zeiss and Leica are kings there, but the bokeh stars on the Leica are horrible. Arri seems to be the best happy medium among all of those. Not to sharp not to modern.
Depending of the project...Commercial I would pic Zeiss, cinematographic feature Arri or Cooke
My Choices 25mm ARRI MASTER PRIME Unbeatable... 50mm Zeiss High Speed or ARRI MASTER PRIME , 100 mm LEICA SUMMILUX, Flare at 50mm ARRI MASTER PRIME
Why is a 100mm anamorphic compared with a 100mm spherical? Makes no sense to me....
Wow, came here looking for Cooke mini video comparisons and cant help to notice that the actress looks so much like an ex-girlfriend of mine, especially the side portrait @4:07. This whole video reminds me of us! LOL!! Emotional , lots of drama, and lots of making up. Aww, the good ole days. NOT!
Arri prime prime 50mm was good
I would still prefer cookie anamorphic 50mm
The Cooke lenses hold up rather well to the Arri Master Primes.
que la chingada... Leica baby!
Master prime and leica
So, Leica is the only one to achieve flare star
I liked blablabla but LOVED the blablabla (the yadayada was the worst)...
Just the same, every lens. if must choose one, the Red Dot 50mm is the best.
Zeiss really fell behind it seems
WHAAAAT¿¿¿¿
Cooke Anamorphics breathe like whale!
At where do you see this focus breathing on the cooke ?
Che musichetta
those master primes have zero focus breathing wizardry tho