STM vs Cinema lenses.

[Ozarker]

I'm just curious. Are the STM lenses to Cinema lenses like the standard EF lenses are to the L lenses? As far as I know the Cinema lenses do not have STM motors. So I guess the real question, or ponder, is: "I wonder if Canon will ever design and release a STM lens with an "L" designation."

Would there even be a need or desire for such a lens?

 

[msowsun]

You really can't make that comparison because Cinema lenses don't have auto focus.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

A STM lens is cheap to make, but has smooth focusing for consumer video. At some point, Cinema lenses may autofocus, but for now, they tend to be manual focus.

Cinema lenses from Canon and Zeiss are a step above "L" lenses. They use hand selected elements to assure the best opts, and the higher end ones are parfocal, and do not change focus as they are zoomed in or out. They really don't compare, since different characteristics are wanted by cinematographers.

 

[Ozarker]

A STM lens is cheap to make, but has smooth focusing for consumer video. At some point, Cinema lenses may autofocus, but for now, they tend to be manual focus.

Cinema lenses from Canon and Zeiss are a step above "L" lenses. They use hand selected elements to assure the best opts, and the higher end ones are parfocal, and do not change focus as they are zoomed in or out. They really don't compare, since different characteristics are wanted by cinematographers.

Have you shot any stills with a Cinema lens? Sounds like it may be interesting. Thanks for the explanation.

 

[Policar]

A STM lens is cheap to make, but has smooth focusing for consumer video. At some point, Cinema lenses may autofocus, but for now, they tend to be manual focus.

Cinema lenses from Canon and Zeiss are a step above "L" lenses. They use hand selected elements to assure the best opts, and the higher end ones are parfocal, and do not change focus as they are zoomed in or out. They really don't compare, since different characteristics are wanted by cinematographers.

Have you shot any stills with a Cinema lens? Sounds like it may be interesting. Thanks for the explanation.

They're basically just re-housed "Ls." The Zeiss Compact Primes are pretty boring, just rehoused ZEs.

The Canon cinema lenses certainly have better mechanics, but they don't have substantially better optics (same designs, just better coatings) than the much cheaper L lenses. There's no magic. What you're paying for is the mechanics because your AC wants something like this to pull focus.

The STM is the opposite end–terrible mechanics, but great autofocus.

It's a matter of where you want to spend your money. If you have tons to burn, the cinema lenses and a crack AC will be better than STM and autofocus. By far. (Less in terms of image quality than in terms of having someone pull focus properly and well.)

But if you don't have tons of money, wouldn't you rather spend it on talent/art/locations/sound/etc. than on renting a lens with good mechanics? Optically the difference is small.

That said, there are cinema-specific lenses that do have major optical advantages, but many of those advantages (a lack of focus breathing and better color matching lens-to-lens, for instance, as well as better mechanics for pulling focus and such) are cinema-specific. And those that are just optically awesome on top of that.... well...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/840523-REG/Fujinon_hk4_7x18_f_18_85mm_T2_0_Premier_PL.html

You pay for it.

 

[Ozarker]

A STM lens is cheap to make, but has smooth focusing for consumer video. At some point, Cinema lenses may autofocus, but for now, they tend to be manual focus.

Cinema lenses from Canon and Zeiss are a step above "L" lenses. They use hand selected elements to assure the best opts, and the higher end ones are parfocal, and do not change focus as they are zoomed in or out. They really don't compare, since different characteristics are wanted by cinematographers.

Have you shot any stills with a Cinema lens? Sounds like it may be interesting. Thanks for the explanation.

They're basically just re-housed "Ls." The Zeiss Compact Primes are pretty boring, just rehoused ZEs.

The Canon cinema lenses certainly have better mechanics, but they don't have substantially better optics (same designs, just better coatings) than the much cheaper L lenses. There's no magic. What you're paying for is the mechanics because your AC wants something like this to pull focus.

The STM is the opposite end–terrible mechanics, but great autofocus.

It's a matter of where you want to spend your money. If you have tons to burn, the cinema lenses and a crack AC will be better than STM and autofocus. By far. (Less in terms of image quality than in terms of having someone pull focus properly and well.)

But if you don't have tons of money, wouldn't you rather spend it on talent/art/locations/sound/etc. than on renting a lens with good mechanics? Optically the difference is small.

That said, there are cinema-specific lenses that do have major optical advantages, but many of those advantages (a lack of focus breathing and better color matching lens-to-lens, for instance, as well as better mechanics for pulling focus and such) are cinema-specific. And those that are just optically awesome on top of that.... well...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/840523-REG/Fujinon_hk4_7x18_f_18_85mm_T2_0_Premier_PL.html

You pay for it.

OUCH!

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

A STM lens is cheap to make, but has smooth focusing for consumer video. At some point, Cinema lenses may autofocus, but for now, they tend to be manual focus.

Cinema lenses from Canon and Zeiss are a step above "L" lenses. They use hand selected elements to assure the best opts, and the higher end ones are parfocal, and do not change focus as they are zoomed in or out. They really don't compare, since different characteristics are wanted by cinematographers.

Have you shot any stills with a Cinema lens? Sounds like it may be interesting. Thanks for the explanation.

They're basically just re-housed "Ls." The Zeiss Compact Primes are pretty boring, just rehoused ZEs.

The Canon cinema lenses certainly have better mechanics, but they don't have substantially better optics (same designs, just better coatings) than the much cheaper L lenses. There's no magic. What you're paying for is the mechanics because your AC wants something like this to pull focus.

The STM is the opposite end–terrible mechanics, but great autofocus.

It's a matter of where you want to spend your money. If you have tons to burn, the cinema lenses and a crack AC will be better than STM and autofocus. By far. (Less in terms of image quality than in terms of having someone pull focus properly and well.)

But if you don't have tons of money, wouldn't you rather spend it on talent/art/locations/sound/etc. than on renting a lens with good mechanics? Optically the difference is small.

That said, there are cinema-specific lenses that do have major optical advantages, but many of those advantages (a lack of focus breathing and better color matching lens-to-lens, for instance, as well as better mechanics for pulling focus and such) are cinema-specific. And those that are just optically awesome on top of that.... well...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/840523-REG/Fujinon_hk4_7x18_f_18_85mm_T2_0_Premier_PL.html

You pay for it.

The lens you link to is not full frame. While its true that super 35 is pretty much the standard for cinema, you can't replace a FF lens with a super 35.

I think the term Cinema is pretty widely tossed around, and is losing its meaning. It used to be that we had still camera lenses, broadcast lenses, and Cinema lenses. Now that DSLR's can take cinema quality video (or close), and Cinema has concentrated on super 35, its a scrambled mess with a lot of crossover between the three usages.

Its no wonder that a person is confused by a cheap stm lens and the difference to a Cinema lens.

Anymore, all that is needed to call your lens a Cinema lens is to add gearing on the focus ring so that it can be operated by a focus puller, and hard gear the focus rather than using a slip clutch as used in autofocus systems.

Canon does make a couple of interesting Broadcast/Cinema Super 35 lenses, but the cost is North of $70,000. I'd like to have one to review on a 7D MNK II, the come in EF or PL mounts. Being able to cover 50mm to 1500mm in one lens sounds interesting, and its not based on any existing "L" lens.


http://usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/lenses/cinema_lenses/cine_servo_lenses/cine_servo_50_1000mm_t5_0_8_9_pl