Cheap cinema glass, something that has shifted from a contradiction in terms to a reality is moving fast and the benefits are many, but choices!

Too many choices.

They are getting better.

The point of cine lenses over stills lenses is a mix of things, some practical, some visual and some are maybe personal or even mental.

They should in a perfect world be matched in colour, draw, handling, mechanical connections and rendered look, but the cheaper ones sometimes do not always hit all these marks.

Colour consistency in particular seems beyond them, but oddly, if you mix brands you often can get it done. My Sirui 24 and a Vision 35mm are close in colour and look, the Sirui 35 and Vision 25 are also close.

They also use T-stops as aperture measurements, which are in theory more accurate and consistent than F-stops and are usually slower (i.e.T2 is often equal to F1.8).

Top end cine lenses should also have minimal chromatic aberration, superior flare control, distortion control, sharpness, have low focus breathing (which is where the lens effectively zooms when long focus throws are employed) and all the above mentioned characteristics. Some may be for anamorphic formats (often with unique and less than pristine visual qualities)

They do not all do everything perfectly, but when not, they provide a special something that is much loved by the knowledgeable user.

Often the mid range cine lens (2k-ish) are close to a highly corrected stills lens from the same brand (Sony, IRIX, Canon) packaged in a cine-friendly form factor. These lenses provide high levels of good qualities, but sometimes these are too clinically perfect for some.

Usually cine lenses at any price are deliberately restrained with smoother Bokeh, slightly softer than “hard” stills lens sharpness, interesting flare control and generally an eye towards video needs over stills. This often means if you have a photo and cine lens option, you can have two looks to choose from.

Some ranges are less reliable than others, the 7Art Vision series for example which has very different looks across the range from super “filmic” soft to relatively hard sharp, while the same brand can make the Spectrum and Hope series that are quite consistently stable lens to lens.

My lens set or sets as I have two formats, defies one of the big tenets of cine lenses which is consistency within a set. It is a bit of a mess, but to be honest, it is workable, excellent value and overall has cost me less than my 300 f4…… in total.

The decision to go into L-mount pre G9.II release, the camera which would have probably stopped me especially with the GH7 following, was rewarded by some bargains last year. I got the S5, a decent kit lens, the Lumix S 50mm, a pair of 7Artisan Spectrum lenses and the IRIX 150 macro for under $4k au.

I then added a Sirui 24 Nightwalker and 7Artisan 12mm Vision for M43 (the 12mm is a good Vision lens, the Nightwalker range offered nothing at all wide). These, along with some legacy glass and plenty of stills lenses have given me plenty of choices, although the M43 set is a work in progress (see below).

Choices.

So many.

So, what do we need?

Handling is important.

A cine lens gives you smooth and click-less apertures, long throw manual focus, consistent (within a set) in ring placement for easy swapping.

Sharpness and contrast.

The general feeling in cinematography circles, the great contradiction it seems, is that as the cameras and lenses get sharper and offer higher resolution, the desire is to reduce it for a more “filmic” look, which seems to be getting stronger at the moment. It is hard to see anything produced at the moment with less than a Black Mist 1/2 strength between the lens and the viewer.

You can add filtering, use old film lenses, making the most of the good-not good qualities of that “legacy” glass or you can go to cinema lenses.

That certain something, the “X-factor” that makes your footage stand out. This is the bit where it gets interesting. It is possible, I know because I have done it, to end up with a dozen 50mm equivalent lenses* that all offer something different and suit their own projects.

Cine lenses sometimes cost a packet to be character filled over perfect or rarely both. There are clinically perfect lenses, but there are many that are easily identifiable to the initiated.

Have a look for example at a scene from the current iteration of Shogun. The frame lines are often bowed, the edges more or less blurred, the outer edges even weird looking. The use of very expensive anamorphic lenses does this and more (including strange oval Bokeh and streak flaring), which adds to the end product in the eyes of the maker.

Your take may be different and even by calling it out I may have forced you to recognise something you may have ignored otherwise, but it is real. I still remember noticing anamorphic effects on the new Star Trek movies, something I had not noticed before, but cannot un-see now.

Anyway, long way round, but back to the point.

There are so many good cine lenses out there at the moment.

At the very budget end ($0-250au), many of the budget brands below also do non-cine manual focus glass with heaps of character (i.e flaws), like the $75 TTArt 35mm f1.4 I have that looks for all the world like an anamorphic when shot full frame and heavily letter-boxed (it is not a full frame lens), or my ancient 1960’s F series Olympus half frame 25mm saved from the junk box at the shop I worked. These are almost all manual focus by design and “interesting” optically.

The next level ($400-800), where this post is aimed, are the true “budget” cine lenses, the indie film makers entry level option, that once was a qualified choice, but now, not so much.

The 7Artisan Spectrum lenses for full frame are a consistently good choice for that cine-sharp semi retro look getting praise from many videographers like Caleb Pike, Matthew Dangyou, Anton & Co, Victor La Forteza, Dustin Abbott, Josh Sattin, Josh Cameron, Caleb Hoover, Pav SZ and more.

They are pretty stable, except for very strong colour shifts between lenses. The 35 and 50mm are noticeably different, the 50 leaning a little magenta, the other very warm. I tend to use one lens and crop to a second focal length rather than muck around in editing.

The Vision range is less consistent or if you like, more “character” filled.

Their new Hope range is closer to the Rodger Deakins “perfect lens” (he will then add effects later), with nearly ideal performance in all areas for the cost of a stills kit lens, except unfortunately they are still not perfectly colour matched. To be fair, my stable of Panasonic camera sensors vary as much as these lenses, so no point is being too picky, just aware.

I have the Hope 25mm T2.1 coming in M43 (and the 50mm as of a few days later). It was a no-brainer as it seems to be the best of its type, something I felt my M43 kit needed. This lens is slightly warmer than the rest of the Hope range, but my G9.II is neutral-cool in rendering like my S5, (my S5II is warmer so it is what it is).

I would have preferred it in L-mount as a 38mm in crop format (40-45mm are my true perfect focal length), but it’s not available yet. I may add the 16 and 50 also, but we will see as the other option is the L-mount 25 if it comes, matching perfectly, with two different focal lengths.

This means I have yet another 50mm equivalent, but they really are all different*.

The 50mm, a lens I tend to avoid in stills work, fits well in video. I am not keen to show the world with a bias, no introduced strangeness, overly obvious perspective effects etc. A 50mm is considered the boring middle of the lens world, a slightly portrait leaning neutral perspective, which in video means what you do with everything else matters, the lens will not save you or fight you.

Sirui has the Nightwalker range which were probably the most respected crop sensor range until the Hope series, but if you want super fast, they are still a strong contender. They even offer relatively stable anamorphic lenses for many formats. They are not “dirty” lenses, maybe too clean for some anamorphic fans, but they are ideal if you want some anamorphic benefits without painting yourself into a corner.

Other budget brands I do not have, but are doing compelling options are Viltrox, Iron Glass, Rokinon/Samyang, Mieke, Vespid, Laowa, Mitakon etc, although the Sirui anamorphic range is tempting.

In the mid range ($1-3kau each), outside of the range of this post are the IRIX, Nisi, DZO, Sony, Canon, Sigma, Panasonic etc, that also often offer the same glass in stills form cheaper, but with less cine-convenience. These are closer to the “real deal” and for many enough, but seem to me to be neither one thing or the other.

To me they seem to be a compromise that is relatively pointless considering the recent boost in cheap options and the reality they still fall far short of top tier cine glass.

Many of the issues the cheaper Hope series deal with are still very real at this price point as reviewers like this have found https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEiStRQxBTk

My concession to this level are the cheaply bought IRIX macro and the Lumix S prime lenses designed to be true hybrid lenses and so far have proven to be. They are perfectly good stills lenses, but have some cine lens characteristics, like similar size, weight and filter size and can be programmed in camera to matching cine lens focus throw.

Sam Holland https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4UAqVYfWLg chose the Spectrum and Lumix S 50mm’s to ask the question “do they make a difference” and found them surprisingly close, but that was by design (ironically, everything he said about colour would have been flipped if he had chosen the respective 35mm’s).

A Sigma Art prime or Sony G Master and Spectrum lens may have shown a stronger contrast in design ideals.

If the Hope are as good as hoped (!), I will look at that range to go forward in both formats (M43 and maybe L-mount APS-c if available).

No matter your real needs, there are now options aplenty. Films like The Creator have shown that cheap cameras can make full Hollywood grade movies and that crew used a few relatively cheap classic 75mm Kowa and Atlas Mercury lenses, as well as some Soviet Iron Glass rehoused antique stills lenses, proving also that budget lenses are also an option.

*my 50mm options, a focal length I seem drawn to.

1. Olympus 25mm which is stable and lush, actually closer to a 45mm in reality.

2. Olympus antique 25mm f2.8 half frame with muted colour, funky Bokeh and flare.

3. Olympus 12-40 f2.8 at 25. A nice organic looking lens and a good match to a Pana sensor.

4. Panasonic 12-60 Leica. A slightly brighter and more modern-cleaner version of above, my best AF/stabe option for video.

5. Lumix 50 S slightly warm and modern stills/video balanced.

6. Lumix 35 S (as crop frame 50), cooler but similar to the 50mm.

7. 7 Artisans Spectrum 50 neutral colour and cinematic smoothness.

8. 7Artisans Spectrum 35 (as crop frame 50) warmer coloured version of above.

9. Pentax 50 f1.4 SMC which although legendary is an odd one for me.

10. Helios 58-42 in L mount. That old pearl. Mine has oil on the blades but works fine. This is one of the stars of the Iron Glass range.

11. TTart 35 f1.4 (for crop frame, but used on full and not a cine lens), a decent anamorphic clone when heavily letter-boxed. This one needs a follow focus as its focus ring is tiny and hard to reach and the 37mm filter size is a pain (looks hilarious with a mat box on).

12. 25mm 7Artisans Hope series, probably my best “clean” cine lens option outside of another IRIX, but unseen as yet.

13. Sirui 24 Nightwalker, a very fast and decently corrected cine lens, probably beaten by the Hope lens above for quality, but faster and different in rendering.

14. Several other zooms, but no standouts in either M43 or full frame.