# Canon Cine vs. L lens video. Hilarious



## drjlo (Feb 24, 2013)

Some of the funniest yet informative comparisons ;D

http://vimeo.com/jonyi/canoncineprimes


----------



## Radiating (Feb 24, 2013)

drjlo said:


> Some of the funniest yet informative comparisons ;D
> 
> http://vimeo.com/jonyi/canoncineprimes



Ah yes, badge engineering. Canon is by far the most ridiculously greedy company in photography.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Feb 27, 2013)

This video contains a HAWT blonde.....that'll get the views count up.


----------



## AndreeOnline (Feb 27, 2013)

Radiating said:


> Ah yes, badge engineering. Canon is by far the most ridiculously greedy company in photography.



While I understand your frustration:


if you've held one of the cine primes in your hand, you'll realize that a strict re-housing would be least twice the L price. Build is that much better
They are not the same glass optically. While the differences are minor, even small differences get exponentially more expensive at the top levels...
The cine series are much smaller and that takes its toll as well

It adds up.

I AM surprised though, that a company such as Samyang/Rokinon isn't all over the 'cine glass' trend. They immediately need to re-house their already re-housed cine lenses into similar fat steel beauties.

There seems to be plenty of market space between normal glass and the $5000 mark for Canon/Zeiss.


----------



## TexPhoto (Feb 27, 2013)

Also I think many DSLR shooters are unaware Canon makes a line of Broadcast Lenses, some of which cost $222K http://www.canon.com/premium-lib/movie/t002/index.html
B&H price: Price:$222,109.95
And there a plenty of other manufacturers of $$$! "cinema lenses"

The Cine Lenses are a compromise between DSLR Lenses, and Pro Video. And priced for it. 

And last, if it's too much, don't buy it. Shoot something awesome with a 50mm f1.8 and show the world your skills.


----------



## preppyak (Feb 28, 2013)

AndreeOnline said:


> I AM surprised though, that a company such as Samyang/Rokinon isn't all over the 'cine glass' trend. They immediately need to re-house their already re-housed cine lenses into similar fat steel beauties.


They don't seem to be interested in making lens that are >$1000 in cost (note that even their T/S is $999), so, I think they are pretty happy to make cine versions with a 25% markup over their non-cine versions, even though they are the same optically.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Feb 28, 2013)

The focus breathing examples in the video are dramatic. The cine lenses render much nicer against the L lenses.


----------



## PhotographAdventure (Mar 1, 2013)

This is pretty much common industry knowlege. L lenses are terrible. I'm glad cannon finally has some quality glass available. ;D


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 1, 2013)

Give me my 4 minutes back! >:|


----------



## leGreve (Dec 27, 2013)

PhotographAdventure said:


> This is pretty much common industry knowlege. L lenses are terrible. I'm glad cannon finally has some quality glass available. ;D



Unfortuately Canon dropped the ball on the cn-e line. It wants to be cinematic but it isnt.

Optically the image doesnt look that much different from the best primes, and if you seen the 24mm in action youd realise that the amount of breathing in completely unacceptable for a cine lense, thus making the lens too expensive.


----------



## Northstar (Dec 27, 2013)

Funny bit...."the stops are harder" and the girl smiles with eyes widening.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Dec 27, 2013)

After watching this video, I would never use photographic lens L to video. ??? Now I can only use cine lens, and beautiful model (woman) will materialize in front of me. ;D I can not run the risk of wearing lenses for photography and pop up a naked guy.   Maketing very persuasive.


----------

