Zeiss Super Speeds vs. Canon CN-E vs. Rokinon Cinema Primes (Cinema Lens Shootout & Comparison 2020)

[@ChristianCashmir]

Let us know which Lens is which in the Blind Test! Will post the answer in a few days.

[@elginger5215]

Lens a 15000, lens b 300

[@FilmJams]

It’s actually the other way around :) Lens A is the Rokinon ($300)

[@JoeTheViewer]

@@FilmJams That's what I thought.

[@thenetfilmmaker]

Having used 2 of the 3 of these lenses (particularly the 50s) the ZEISS hands down. There is a 3 dimensional character the right that the others don’t have. The canon which it pains me to say looks like video. It’s a beautiful lens and is a solid choice but I can’t love it. The rokinon is one of those rare things that people turn their noses up and scoff at, but it’s a gem in the right hands. Use it between a t4-5.6 and you will be surprised. Even though he panavision primos sweet spot is a t5.6. I grabbed a 50mm ds for under a 100 and it’s getting regular rotation.

[@FilmJams]

Thanks for watching! I agree the 50mm Rokinon js a little gem for the price. But ya hard to beat the Zeiss - just a lot more cash!

[@nepomukism]

Something strange happens to the distant fine hair lines outlined left and right into the light of the bokeh test between the talent and the background.

[@FilmJams]

Could you be more specific- I’m not sure I understand what you mean.

[@RhythmicEye]

I just watched this after picking up 5 Rokies (24, 35, 50, 85, 135mm) for AUD $2'280.00 delivered to my home. I'm a little bit excited tbh, they look fantastic for the $$$

[@FilmJams]

Nice enjoy those lenses! Best bang for the buck 💥🎥 thanks for stopping by the channel!

[@topicruben]

Rock n’ roll with Rockinon 😳😲 Man..., that lens looks awesome for the price!!! THANK you SO MUCH for showing us the magic! Stay well and safe, and keep rocking

[@FilmJams]

Rockin’ Rokinon! Haha for sure! Thanks for checking it out and glad it was helpful. The 50mm especially is my favorite of the Rokinon bunch. We will, and hope you stay safe as well!

[@topicruben]

Film Jams Thanks man. I got a nice gig with an American client here (filming around Italy) and I’m gonna get the new iMac (cause I’m editing with a 13” MacBook Pro mid 2013!!! But I wanted to get the RF 15-35mm 2.8, but it’s out of the budget 😭, so I was looking for some options (maybe the 16-35 EF), or one of those cine lenses which will go super with the matte box 📦!

[@FilmJams]

@@topicruben That's funny! I'm in the same boat. Looking at a used 16" macbook pro VS the new iMac that just came out. Tough decision! I also want the 15-35mm RF, but it's so expensive. Hoping it gets a price drop soon. I have the 16-35mm f4 lens I'm using now, and it's great, but would love to have a little wider, and faster!

[@topicruben]

Film Jams for me it’s more the fact that opens at 2.8 cause the 24-105 opens at 4 😭

[@FilmJams]

True! 2.8 is nice to have 😁🎥

[@moisesrea6135]

thanks for the work you did! I had a little budget when I saw your video I made the decision and I already have the 35mm and 50mm Rokino

[@FilmJams]

Very nice! Congrats on your purchase! The 50mm is my favorite of the Rokinons. Enjoy! Thanks for stopping by the channel 😄🎥💥

[@JamesClark1991]

Wow. I'd take the Rokinons every time out of the bunch. The differences are so small considering the prices. Such a shame the Rokinon 50mm has onion ring bokeh though, that really sucks.

[@FilmJams]

1991ClarkJames yeah it’s pretty amazing how close they are considering the huge price differences. The Rokinon’s are an incredible value. But yes the bokeh does have that characteristic. I sort of like it though sometimes for when I’m shooting grittier content.

[@jaiblak4265]

Out of the Rokinon vs the other lenses, I wonder if the difference is just the final product viewed in cinema vs Tv or online?

[@divisionoflabor3070]

Onion ring bokeh isn't a deal breaker. It's no worse than a triangle bokeh that some covet. In fact, a triangle bokeh takes me out of the experience more than onion skin which I likely wouldn't notice if I was engaged.

[@pharmabuse6135]

Thanks for this test, resold on the CN-E's sharpness and lack of onion skinning. A CA test would have been cool; looking at the maglite, though, seems like the CN-E's have more purple fringing. Would also be interesting to compare the CN-E's to the L series, to confirm whether they are simply rehoused or if they may have additional coatings. Maybe you've done that comparison already?

[@FilmJams]

Thanks for watching! Yeah the CN-E’s I’ve found are really sharp. Some people say they are too sharp for cinema, but I like the look and sometimes I put a little Hollywood Blackmagic filter in front if needed to soften them up a bit. They do have a bit of CA tho compared to the Super Speed Primes but it’s not normally too noticeable to me. I have tested the L Primes to the CN-E a little bit, but I think it would be interesting like you said to do a more thorough comparison video. Adding it to our list!

[@ashley.caldwelldp]

Great comparison mate. Thanks for taking the time to do this 🙂

[@FilmJams]

Caldwell Media thanks! Glad it was helpful 😀

[@henryh.fischer6018]

liked the video, would love some more analysis from a DP who's worked with them all. Possibly even doing a long form like Media Division. Very interesting to see the differences though. Some very unexpected characteristics from the super speeds

[@FilmJams]

Thanks Henry! I agree and was surprised with what we found as well. I shot our last feature film on the Canon CN-E primes and was impressed with them. That’s a good idea of doing a closer analysis... Thanks for the idea! If you want to check out that film the trailer is on our channel here and you can stream on Amazon prime: Elfette Saves Christmas. Take care! And thanks for watching.

[@ashley.caldwelldp]

I recently sold my set of rokinons to build up my set of Zeiss primes. The Rokinons represent incredible value for money and a decent image for a softer type of filming without too much character in the right environments. I found the flaring was really displeasing on the rokinons and that is one area where the Zeiss characteristics really do ‘shine’ (pardon the pun). The Rokinon Cine lenses seem to have a lack of quality control somewhere along the lines as you can have two of the exact same lens and they render different images. I had two 35mm’s at one point and one was really soft wide open with a warm tone and the other was reasonably sharp with a cooler tone. The rokinon cine’s are great for people wanting to have lenses on a budget that offer the declicked aputure, focus gears and iris gears with small filter threads.

[@FilmJams]

Nice. That’s always fun building out w new set of lenses. Some good deals right now on EBay for the Zeiss primes. I didn’t realize the quality control was that bad on the Rokinon, but makes sense. I have a set of them and the 50mm is amazing while the 35mm is much softer and doesn’t have any character. I will say in my experience with cinema lenses there can be variations in lenses even in higher end ones. Especially vintage lenses. One set of Super speeds I shot on was much different that another I used for another project. I heard someone say lenses are like diamonds. You have to search thru the bunch to find the really good ones with just the right aesthetic, and then hold on to those!

[@johnw5427]

wow thanks, the Rokinons killed it for the price

[@FilmJams]

John w thanks John! For the price they are hard to beat! 😀🎥💥

[@jaijacobphoto316]

This vid is awesome. Here I am thinking about getting a 35mm prime, but wanted to do a comparison. It’s like you all hacked my brain and read my mind!

[@FilmJams]

Once you Film Jam, the Jam is inside you. Like the Force. Only slightly tangier.

[@jaiblak4265]

Looks like if you did a slite dehazing on the rokinon then add a lil more contrast you'd get it to look like the $15,000 lens in the A/B/C side by side. If I had the both I would definitely try this in post. But then I guess you'd have to add back the color temp seeing how the colors are already damn near the same. But I wonder..? To me it seems the Canon is in 3rd place while the zeiss take lead (of course) and the Rokinon to my surprise is in 2nd.

[@FilmJams]

Interesting. Thanks for sharing your comments ;) And yes a little color correction and dehaze and you can get them very close. To me the Zeiss has a different almost 3D quality to the other 2 that’s hard to describe. Personally I still liked the Canon’s color better than the Rokinon, but I almost prefer the Rokinon bokeh over the Canon. For the price the Rokinon are hard to beat!

[@dudepersonvids]

I of course have to watch this in 4K to notice all the finer details - but that seems to be what you're paying for with high end lenses. The Rokinons are perfectly serviceable - but wide open, they really lack sharpness and have more chromatic aberration/fringing than the Super Speeds. Also, I never noticed how "dirty" the bokeh are on the Rokinons before, compared to the smoother bokeh of the other two. And the Super Speeds have some kind of magic pixie dust to them that makes the image look brighter, more silvery, and renders highlights a little differently. I can see why someone would want to rent these higher-end lenses. As a filmmaker on a budget, I am of course going to stick to my Rokinons until I can afford to hire something nicer. This is a great comparison for all of us who can't afford to get hands-on with these lenses!

[@FilmJams]

Hi there! Thanks for watching. Yes the details are more noticeable in 4K for sure. I agree the Super Speeds have incredibly clean bokeh. I didn’t notice it so much with the Rokinon either until I saw them side-by-side in this test. But for a lot of work the Rokinon are great. And for indie filmmakers I think they’re a perfect first cine style lens. They were the first cinema lenses I bought, and we still use them today for certain projects. Anyway thanks again for stopping by the channel and commenting!

[@kaushikfilms1922]

I want to shoot a feature film with Red Komodo. Please suggest me the lens for better output. Budget is not a big issue. I want only the best result comparison to CP3 / Ultra prime. Please reply.

[@FilmJams]

Nice. Sure I think the Cooke S4’s are a great option of budget is not an issue. Ultra Primes are good too. If you want to go Anamorphic the Atlas Orion’s are one of my personal faves right now. If you haven’t checked out our video on the Cooke’s VS the Atlas Anamorphics here’s a link: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eHexomeDhKmpoJI

[@kaushikfilms1922]

How much cost ? I want to purchase Red Komodo. So please send me the better option for feature film look

[@FilmJams]

@@kaushikfilms1922 Check out the video and the links below the videos :) All info in there.

[@rowangallagher]

The 35 and 50 Samyang/Rokinon are amazing for the price, but once you slip out of those into other focal lengths they fall apart especially all the lenses wider than 35 unfortunately. Personally better off renting higher end lenses if you're shooting a short or need consistent quality across the focal lengths. I still keep my Rokinon 50mm because it's great.

[@FilmJams]

Yes! I also like the 85mm Rokinon. The 50 is amazing though. 35 is a little soft for me, but could be a bad copy I got. Anything wider is very soft as you said. Thanks for watching!

[@divisionoflabor3070]

85 is the best lens imo. I'm looking to get the 135 too. They're a great value. I like the 24, it's not bad.

[@FilmJams]

Yeah definitely great value. How do you like the 135mm? Haven’t tried it yet!

[@DipaceGiri]

unless I am shooting a movie on mars I will always choose a rokinon.

[@FilmJams]

Ha! Nice!💥🔭

[@sasca854]

Looked to me like the Canon lenses had the most consistent performance. They weren't always the best, but even in tests where they weren't, they were always _very_ close to it. The Rokinon lenses were the worst in just about every test, but _definitely_ not _10 to 50x_ worse. In fact, in a few of the tests, I dare say they even a little better than the others-- or at the very least, comparable.

[@FilmJams]

Yeah I think the Canon are great all-around performers. And definitely agree about the Rokinon- they are noticeably not as good - but not dramatically so. Are they $4,000 per lens worse? That’s the questions we keep asking ourselves haha 😆 thanks for watching!

[@PhilippeOrlando]

Considering that all the people who spend time watching Netflix series, on a laptop, a tablet and sometime a phone, will look for sharpness, highlight roll off, contrast and will not even pay attention to the story, I will always go for the most expensive Cooke lenses I can't afford. Seriously, even though the Rokinon are as good as the other lenses, if the story is decent and original, with amazing acting with great lighting, the Rokinon is all what you need.

[@FilmJams]

Yeah it would be interesting to see a big budget movie shoot on Rokinon just to see if people could actually tell the difference. When you add in the pro lighting and good story I doubt anyone would complain. I could see Steven Soderbergh do something like that. He shot a film a while back w an iPhone. Hey thanks for watching and commenting!

[@nepomukism]

@@FilmJams Well Soderbergh wasn't the first. But apart from that the most common mistake in such comparisions is that people who scream loud how actually good cheap gear holds up against the big ones is, they forget it is not about the smartphone used for this shot evereybody talks about, it is the funny fact that a famous film maker is using it for the shot, which makes it a huge story. If any extraordinary talented young film maker would shot on a smartphone nobody would care. So this type of comparisions are a little bit misleading. As lower your reputation as a film maker, ironically, as more you have to care about how professional your equipment is. Sad but true. That is a rule of thumb a very talented film maker with reputation told me once. And it proofed to be true. And it is a rule which none of the prosumer market seller or manufacturers will tell you, otherwise they wont sell any of their mid price lenses no more. If you are REALLY talented buy the best lens you can get for your parents money or even rent them and do not make funny youtube videos on cheap ones while swearing about that they are almost as good as the commonly used ones. By the way, this would accidently also help the market of the top high end equipment to survive against the cheap mass products rolling everything over.

[@topicruben]

Watching again 😉

[@FilmJams]

Nice! Make sure to have extra popcorn this time haha 😆

[@topicruben]

@@FilmJams 😂🍿🍿🍿

[@FilmJams]

@@topicruben yesss! Haha! Rock-inon and poppin’ kernels!

[@sauce.unlocked]

The arri just makes even low budget lenses look good

[@FilmJams]

It really does!

[@mageefilms]

To me the clear winner is the Zeiss. However, there is a small difference to the Canon primes - and more of a gap between Canon/Zeiss to the Rokinon. If you consider the price relation, the Rokinon is the winner ... especially good enough when filming a breathtaking story.

[@FilmJams]

I’d agree with that! I like the Super Speeds as well, but the cost is very high compared to the others. And true... if you have a great story, I don’t think people will be complaining about the lenses! Anyway thanks for watching 😃👍

[@EugeniaLoli]

I prefer vintage lenses, because they have character. However, since I'm almost always on a tight budget, I'll take the Rokinon any time.

[@FilmJams]

Eugenia Loli I like vintage lenses too! But yes the Rokinons are great for the price! Especially the 50mm. There are some nice newer lenses like the Canon Sumire and Cooke Panchro Classics that are emulating that vintage look but with modern housings. Hoping to shoot with them soon!

[@mrwashur1991]

Vintage is great but a lot of them don’t let in a lot of detail. Sharpness is there but there’s a lot of detail missing (you’ll only see it in a side by side comparison). There’s nothing wrong with a tight budget but you should look into the Zeiss zf2 and convert them. Two of my used Zeiss’ costed less than the Rokinon. The Zeiss’ are a million times better than the Rokinon. I almost bought the Rokinon 35mm and I cancelled my order when I saw that the Zeiss was only $200 more. They’re going to last generations. Where as the Rokinon would have maybe lasted 10 years max (that’s being very generous too). I’d rather save up more money than to buy something just because it looks professional. Trust the build quality is horrendous and will not last as many people have problems with the focus rings getting stiff or stuck in one spot. Or their mount breaking is the number one failure. I just don’t see the logic in these lenses. They sound and look cool but they just flat out suck. Even in this video with the $100 bill you can see more detail in the Zeiss. Zeiss optics are amazing but you won’t notice until you use one.

[@FilmJams]

@@mrwashur1991 Zeiss does have some great glass for not much more money than the Rokinons. The ZE and ZF (nikon conversion) are pretty great bang for the buck. Rokinon has its place though - they are nice entry level lenses. I've filmed some projects on them that I really like. Never thought "Oh I wish I filmed that on a different lens" I actually quite like the look. And haven't had any problems durability-wise with my set of Rokinons (yet) :) Fingers crossed. But if you have the extra money - sure there are always going to be some more options out there for you.

[@sixsoxsex1]

@@mrwashur1991 I think the Zeiss Milvus superspeed f1.4 is the perfect compromise price and quality!

[@florianwoelffel6193]

I love your videos Christian ! Keep up the good work ! You deserve so much more followers. ,-) I have a little question regarding the song between 6min55 and 9min39. Can you tell me please what's the brand/title and where can I buy/find it ? (Shazam doesn't recognize it). Thanks in advance.

[@FilmJams]

Thanks Florian! Really appreciate that! We’re trying to grow, but it’s slow. Any shares are very much welcome ;) we license all of our music through Universal Production Music (formerly Killer Tracks). They have some great music. The song is called: UPM_BER1286_13_Horizons_Instrumental_Sue_1293653 by Tom Sue - Take care and thanks for watching!

[@florianwoelffel6193]

@@FilmJams Thanks a lot ! I will share them in the future, no problem. Cheers from France. Have a good day !

[@FilmJams]

Florian Woelffel you too! Awesome. Thanks Florian! Greetings from Florida, USA 🇺🇸- I was in France a few years ago at Cannes. Very beautiful place.

[@topicruben]

I don’t know why I type Rokinon (on Amazon- I’m in Italy) and they give me Samyang. Are they the same people???

[@FilmJams]

As far as I know they are the same yes. Just rebranded.

[@topicruben]

Film Jams thanks man 🙏

[@FilmJams]

For sure!

[@CertainExposures]

Thank you for posting this test. I came here through your link on the FB thread.

[@FilmJams]

Sure! Thanks for watching and commenting! Appreciate it. And glad it was helpful :)

[@stu9000]

I'm guessing lens A is the Zeiss... only because of the onion skinning in the lens B bokeh. Great tests thank you! Its funny how they looks so similar but they don't feel the same. The Zeiss has the best depth rendering IMO.

[@FilmJams]

Lens A is actually the Rokinon! Thanks for watching. It is pretty crazy how difficult they are to tell them apart!

[@ijohnathonwhite8002]

The one on the left is definitely the $15,000 lens. The lens still appears sharper, you have a better color balance, and less fringe.

[@FilmJams]

Actually Lens A is the Rokinon! $300

[@ijohnathonwhite8002]

@@FilmJams Wow, that's amazing, because I watched the entire video and side by side I always favored that lens the least, turns out the difference isn't too noticeable at all.

[@FilmJams]

I was completely surprised too....really thought the Super Speeds would be more noticeably better.

[@dudepersonvids]

That's odd, because even though I could see the text that told me which lens is which, I noticed a lot more fringing on the left, a little less fringing and more sharpness in the middle, and the least fringing and most sharpness on the right. (I watched the footage in 4K on a 4K laptop screen - I doubt I would have been able to notice such subtle differences otherwise, especially with a KZbin video).

[@dudepersonvids]

@@FilmJams For me, the Super Speeds are pretty noticeable better. But it's definitely diminishing returns - you get 85% of the way there for $500, 95% of the way there for $4,000, and 100% for $10,000+.

[@kemalcaglar34]

In my opinion The lens is better which shoots better content nobody focusing on lenses as long as your content is very good

[@FilmJams]

True! Good story is very important. But lenses are also pretty fun!

[@E39M5SPEED]

CN-E : Sharpest. Super Speed MK2 : best Bokeh (depth of field) Rokinon: best over all because it’s under $500 Tanya looks like she is really enjoying this LOL

[@FilmJams]

E39M5SPEED thanks for watching! I think you have a good point. Sometimes the Zeiss looked sharper to me. What did you go with for the blind test? Haha she was “acting” lol ;)

[@CoolhandLukeSkywalkr]

@@FilmJams I feel like sharpness would be easier to spot if you did the test on an 8k camera. Arri Alexa are the best cinema cameras, but the resolution is always too low. They need some new 8K cameras.

[@FilmJams]

CoolhandLukeSkywalkr nah don’t need 8k. Most film are still mastered in 2k. Plus, 2K on an Alexa is sharper than most 4k cameras. Not all 4k is equal ;)

[@CoolhandLukeSkywalkr]

@@FilmJams So what are you trying to say, Arri will just never make a 8K camera? I like the look of 8k downsampled. Technology will continue move forward, within 5 years, most of Hollywood studios will be using 8K Arri Alexa cameras. Eventually, 16K digital cameras will be the normal. That's technology for you.

[@CoolhandLukeSkywalkr]

@@FilmJams They are mastered in 2k due to visual effects, and because it's cheaper, not because the results are considered just as good as native 4k or native 8k. In five years, 4k visual effects will be common and the price of production cost for 4k will have plummeted. 8k cameras will therefore be common sense. Just getting newer sensor technology is always good. I am really looking forward to seeing the results of the first 8K Alexa LF cameras. 8k Alexa 65 would be great. Whatever they build, I'll be excited for it, it will be mind-blowing. I love the Arri cameras and the quality of the footage they produce. I never said all 4k is equal, I am anticipating the 8k Alexa LF Mini and I said that you would be able to tell a bigger difference on sharpness of lenses an 8K camera.

[@MexicanMovie]

I wonder what kind of difference I'd see with these 3 on my C300, or even my C100 ????? All i have is 2 Rokinon 35 T1.5's and the rest is just all Canon L zooms (70-200 2.8L IS and 24-105 f4L IS) plus the gold ring primes (50 1.4 and 85 1.4)..... ?????????? that is a humongous difference on your Alexa Mini !

[@FilmJams]

KP media I think you’d still see an improvement on the Canon cameras. I have a C300 as well. Even using the Canon CN-E Primes versus my Canon photo zoom lenses and the Rokinon primes is a noticeable difference to me. But you have a nice kit - if it’s working for you I don’t see a need to upgrade....you could always rent the Ultra Primes if you wanted to try them for a project. You will need a PL mount C300 tho as they don’t come in EF (that I know of anyway!)

[@MexicanMovie]

@@FilmJams Well I'm wanting to start shooting more stock video footage, and even though i have the XC15 which does decent 4k, the depth of field is not as good. Maybe I'll rent the CN-E OR ZEISS CP.2 to try out first. Thanks !!

[@FilmJams]

Ahh that’s cool. Stock footage is fun. Trying to get my stock footage website up this year. But Yeah there are some great deals for both Canon CN-E and Zeiss CP2 on eBay right now. A lot of people are offloading gear. Worth checking out! And you could always start with a 35mm or 50mm prime and build your set out as you get more $$

[@avdpost]

Did you upload in 4K?

[@FilmJams]

Aaron Van Domelen yes! Sometimes it takes a little longer to process the 4K version. Give it an hour.

[@avdpost]

@@FilmJams Def can't wait that long! Nice it's up! Just making sure I should watch again! I'm a pretty happy Rokinon owner, curious if you tested any heavy backlit scenes or if you have examples comparing chromatic aberration, stuff like that.

[@FilmJams]

Aaron Van Domelen true! It might be sooner than that. But yes we own the Rokinons as well. I especially like the 50mm. We didn’t test chromatic aberration specifically but you can see some differences in the Chromatic aberration in the bokeh test.

[@Dr.TJ_Eckleburg]

Definitely getting something special out of the Zeiss. Not sure if it makes them worth 500x more, but if money is no object they are absolutely the right choice for cinema work. With that said, in the real world there’s no reason not to go with a Rokinon.

[@FilmJams]

I’d agree with that. If you have the dough to rent the Super Speeds they do add something special. But there are a lot of other great lenses for owner / operators out there and can get 95% of the way there for a fraction of the cost. Hey thanks for watching!

[@wjuice2020]

Lens A is $15k is my guess b/c the roundness of the bokeh.

[@FilmJams]

Lens A is actually the Rokinon! It has surprisingly more round bokeh than both the other lenses. Thanks for watching!

[@wjuice2020]

@@FilmJams wow! Thats amazing.

[@FilmJams]

JimmySmith yeah the Rokinon’s are pretty solid! Especially for the price!

[@divisionoflabor3070]

Just picked up 4 of the Roki Cine DSX, on sale!!! Thanks for showing the incredible value these lenses offer for us poors lol

[@FilmJams]

Haha all good! Thanks for watching! Enjoy those puppies 😆👍🎥

[@OracleFilmsUK]

Great video, deserves a lot more views and I'm sure it will get them. I think only a couple of things I noticed, it seems like your voice audio has some noise on it, perhaps a bit of noise reduction would remove the slight hissing sound. Also, I think you should have shown the price of each lense along with their test, as I forgot what the lens prices were by the end, which is the main thing you were comparing. But very enjoyable and good production value.

[@FilmJams]

Oracle Films thank you! Appreciate the feedback. Yes I always think “we should add more titles” lol...and you’re right that would have been helpful to see. Thanks for watching!

[@johnw5427]

@@FilmJams dont listen to him, if you cant remember the prices of three lenses you got problems

[@Ronholtmusic]

Good info

[@FilmJams]

Thanks Ron! Appreciate you watching.

[@macfawlty]

Thanks for this comparison between the 3 families of lenses. Very illustrative and well presented separately and side-by-side. I own the Rokinon Cine Lenses 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm. I'd have to give the nod to the Canons in these tests. The Zeiss appeared to have more field separation between subject and background. These 1st gen Rokinons look remarkable, stupendous for the money. The bokeh on the Roki's was my favorite actually, uniformly round. I didn't prefer the football shape bokeh on the others. Sharpness on the Roki's is a bit soft wide open, but appears to be quite sharp at 2.8. I've found them to be a little soft throughout, but sharp enough for professional use.

[@FilmJams]

Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for the message. I agree. I actually like the round bokeh on the Rokinons too. For the money, you really can't go wrong with them. They are a little softer like you mentioned, but yes at around 2.8 they start to look really nice. I have the Canon's and I still use the Rokinon lenses on a lot of jobs, just cuz they're smaller, and I particularly love the 50mm Rokinon. Something special about that lens! Have a good one, and thanks for stopping by the channel!

[@loudandclearmedia]

The Zeiss definitely looked sharper than the other two to me. I liked the color of the Canon the best, but even though those two things are true it's hard not to pick the Rokinon as the winner just because of price. They really aren't bad looking lenses, albeit a little soft IMO. Still, for three hundred bucks you could leave them in the car in a bad neighborhood and not worry about it.

[@FilmJams]

Very true! I think the biggest thing this test showed me is that there isn’t a $10,000 difference in the quality. Sure the Zeiss and Canon look a little better but good lighting and a good crew would be how I invest my money on my next film! High end cinema lenses are nice when you can get them tho!

[@naah1682]

The longer I look at the stand in the more tired and creeped out she is looking back at me. Was this ungraded?

[@FilmJams]

Na Ah watch out she’ll suck your soul out! Yes completely ungraded. Just the ARRI rec 709 LUT

[@naah1682]

Film Jams she does seem to do that.

[@FilmJams]

😮

[@mike.thomas]

Wow, what a great shootout. It’s interesting/weird to me that the similar FL lenses still showed different DoF at the same T stop (say with the 50mms when you were at 2.8). The Zeiss example had the models face a bit further back, but the Canon vs the Rokinon was striking. I ended up going with a full set of Meikes for my Sony A6600. Have only shot the 35mm at any length thus far, but I dig it a lot. I see here in the comments that the model is your fiancé. You are a lucky man - she’s beautiful and her smile, combined with the shape of her eyes, is bewitching.

[@FilmJams]

Thanks Mike! Appreciate that! My wife now haha. I am very lucky. She’s the best! 😆👍 thanks for checking out the shootout. I’ve heard good things about those Meike. Hopefully can try them soon! I’m not exactly sure why the DOF was different - but I have noticed the Zeiss Super Speeds have an almost 3D quality to them. Maybe that has something to do with it.

[@mike.thomas]

@@FilmJams Congratulations! Yes, I don’t know how many times over the years I have read about Zeiss “3-D quality”, and I don’t disagree. So Zeiss is my favorite lens manufacturer. I feel that they provide as much optical quality as Leica at a slightly more affordable price. Most camera systems I have owned, film or digital, uses Zeiss formulas or actual lenses in their lineup: Contax, Hasselblad, Sony, etc. Love your vids. Keep up the great work!

[@FilmJams]

Thanks a lot! Yeah I agree Zeiss makes some great stuff. I love Leica too! Getting ready to shoot some videos on a vintage Leica R set we just had rehoused. I’m pretty excited about. I have an older Zeiss 50mm ZE 1.4 that I like a lot too and you don’t hear about much but has this nice bloom effect on the highlights when you shoot it wide open. Have used it on a few music videos for special effects type shots and for the price it’s a really fun lens. Anyway thanks for watching and supporting us 😆👍

[@mike.thomas]

@@FilmJams I have a nice set of Leica R glass. Rehousing is definitely the way to go, because adapting still lenses with gear rings sucks, IMO, at least from my experience. So that landed me in my cine lens set. Didn’t have the budget to rehouse the Leica glass, and I’ll still shoot it for ... stills. Hopefully you’ll do a video on that rehousing project!

[@FilmJams]

@@mike.thomas oh nice! So you had the Leica R modded? Which mount did you go with? I am looking forward to doing a video on them when they’re done! I tried the EF mount which I liked but we ended up going for PL with our set. Probably a month or so out still on those!

[@OfficialMNIB]

- Like no: 1 tappin; in to show support - As always, very informative & well put together - We've dropped our final vid of 2019 - Be great to have you tap in & let us know what you think.

[@FilmJams]

OfficialMNIB thanks so much! Checking it now 😆🎥

[@johnyazimov9514]

питер?

[@FilmJams]

Johny Azimov St Petersburg, Florida!

[@johnyazimov9514]

@@FilmJams i thot its in russia

[@FilmJams]

Ahh sorry, no but I’d like to go one day!

[@billyoung9538]

A=$300 & B=$1500

[@FilmJams]

Thanks for watching! We’ll post the answer Sunday!

[@FilmJams]

You guessed right! Good eye Bill ;)

[@Esperia-ef9xh]

good deal 🏁

[@FilmJams]

😄🎥 Which ones did you like the Rokinons?

[@vitorhugofilms1141]

What bothers me is the soft focus. I haven`t found a good budget friendly sharp lens for my BMCC4k, they all seem soft

[@FilmJams]

Hmm interesting. I find the Pocket 4K to be pretty sharp overall. What lenses have you tried?

[@vitorhugofilms1141]

@@FilmJams i have a Lumix GX 12-35 f/2.8; Laowa 7.5mm f/2; Olympus 75mm f/1.8. They should all be good, but I still can’t like it enough. Perhaps it might be cuz I’m coming from Sony cameras, and they are extra sharp

[@FilmJams]

@@vitorhugofilms1141 yes true Sony cams are very sharp. Personally I like the more organic look and even prefer lenses that some people often refer to as soft like many anamorphics. To me film was never about being super sharp it was the natural look that drew me to it anyway. Different strokes as they say :)

[@nepomukism]

Apart from that the most common mistake in such comparisions is that people who scream loud how actually good cheap gear holds up against the big ones is, they forget it is not about the smartphone used for this shot evereybody talks about, it is the funny fact that a famous film maker is using it for the shot, which makes it a huge story. If any extraordinary talented young film maker would shot on a smartphone nobody would care. So this type of comparisions between common high end lenses and cheap lenses are a little bit misleading. As lower your reputation as a film maker, ironically, as more you have to care about how professional your equipment is. Sad but true. That is a rule of thumb a very talented film maker with reputation told me once. And it proofed to be true. And it is a rule which none of the prosumer market seller or manufacturers will tell you, otherwise they wont sell any of their mid/low price lenses no more. If you are REALLY talented buy the best lens you can get for your parents money or even rent them and do not make funny youtube videos on cheap ones while swearing about that they are almost as good as the commonly used ones. By the way, this would accidently also help the market of the top high end equipment to survive against the cheap mass products rolling everything over.

[@FilmJams]

I think I’ll respectfully disagree with pretty much everything you said. The fact is prosumer and even consumer film gear has gotten so affordable and the quality so good that most of our clients don’t even specify camera or lens requirements anymore like they used to do much more-so 20 years ago or even 10 years ago. Movies like The Creator (shot on a $3500 FX3) are quickly changing people’s perception of cinema and quality. Our rental house owns a variety of lenses and we have seen a continual downward trend of the high end gear being rented. My friends who own other rental houses say the same. The industry has shifted. Of course I myself prefer the Cookes over Rokinon’s if I have the budget and choice, but I’m not going to cry about it when I am tasked to film on Rokinons or other inexpensive lenses. I’m much more concerned about my lighting package and crew these days than the lenses or camera I’m supplied as they’re all so good. I think videos like this are exactly what motivates many younger filmmakers to dip their toes into the industry without worrying they don’t have a set of $100,000 lenses. You don’t need a set of Cookes to make a great film. Or to win an Oscar. You just need talent.

[@nepomukism]

​@@FilmJams No worries :) I am used to this disagreement. And my comment was very polarizing, I admit. Sorry for the mood on this day. Yes, your position (opinion) is very popular in this range these days and this is what makes this market so profitable. I am involved by myself as DP in international cinema production and rental houses etc. a lot and see a complete different development than what mainly gets promoted today (similar to what you say). The simple reason for this analytic misinterpretation or even sometimes wanted re-painting of the picture in my opinion (no offense) is that (like often with statistics) relevant data in relation get ignored. In this case it is simply the fact that the prosumer market including the user base was growing massively on the last decades, with soft borders to other markets. While the cinema top level tech gear market therefore keeps being the same size (static) or even gets down a little bit depending on the focus you take (FX artists growing, camera department static, other crew going down in some countries, etc). This does not automatically translate to "the prosumer cameras and lenses get more use in Hollywood now". Which is simply a wrong statement. Which can be proofen immediately. That is a misinterpretation of numbers and rather a "hope" which makes young filmmakers believe that things got easier today (which is a dangerous and wrong assumption placed far beyond reality). Of course rental houses experience more requests in mid range gear today, which is absolutely logical and includes some TV stations who try to get away with prosumer gear to lower costs on reports etc. This all feels like "a movement" and is great for many scenarios, but it is not a movement changing the requirements to produce an international cinema blockbuster. Again, it does not change the requirements for the top notch cinema production gear. Which hasn't and never had a huge market nor a big change (lowering) in requirements. It only changes the market - or better sad: "has filled the big gap" - below this level. That was the reason for its success. The big gap which existed before. Above nothing will change so quick because most of it has not been build to be replaced but to last for long. Most of the not electronical gear will be updated every 10 or 20 years if any and will be the most reliable and most sturdy available. My Panther dolly lasts since 20 years and will do so for the next 10-20 years. Same goes for our Master primes still holdig up with 8K. In opposite to the prosumer products mostly last no longer than 3-6 years. Depending on mounts and sensors which change or other things changing repeatly. Take a distant and realistic look at the overhyped RED story (now Nikon). And some of the most respected film makers go even back to film today. And our inhouse tests see immense differences in the image quality between different lens price levels (And I am sure many filmmakers too). For me you can't compare lenses development including 20 years sience and a 1000 bugs lens popping up some years ago without realizing that maybe not everybody is able to distinguish the differences between them. It is a little bit like the discussion about Wine or Coffee beans. There are people who can taste and value the difference, and others who can not. It depends what it is for. I mean, for KZbinrs, Vimeo Short film makers and TV stations the borders have been soften, yes. If you would say it this way, I would agree. But if you plan to contribute/subscribe to Cannes you better have no glitch in your artworks.

[@bartoszkaczmarek5739]

Comment for stats

[@FilmJams]

Say what now?

[@bartoszkaczmarek5739]

@@FilmJams just bumping wish one day your channel hit 1kk (100% deserves it) 😄💪

[@FilmJams]

@Bartosz Kaczmarek Ohhh that's awesome!!! thank you so much! Yes more comments haha 😆

[@spotshooter1]

The Rokinon and Canon optics are sorely lacking character. One reason the 1980's Super Speeds continue to hold their value is their character and how them make actors look more interesting. Modern optics are highly corrected and rectilinear which is great for shooting products, but terrible for photographing humans. Check out Shane Hurlbut's comparison between between the Leica Summilux and Cooke S4. Full disclosure I'm a Cinematographer and I own a set of the Zeiss T1.3 primes and I've also shot with the Canon's which I found to be dull and boring.

[@FilmJams]

Christopher Bell good insights. Yes that comparison Shane did is great. I’m a sucker for cinema lens comparison videos - there are too few of them IMO. I agree with you on character, but I do like the Canon’s for certain projects. And my new favorites are the Atlas Anamorphics- just shot a few videos on the A set. Those have a ton of character that I personally like. How do you like the Super Speeds compared to newer Zeiss lenses?

[@jasonpetermuir1]

You really do pay for what you get...

[@FilmJams]

Yep. Very true! Thanks for watching.

[@TheWaguilaS]

The model is very beautiful, is she ur girl? if yes u better marry her cuz beauty :)

[@FilmJams]

Thanks! Yes my fiancé! That’s how we do up in here haha 😆

[@yellowchartreuse]

You keep mentioning price points, but has Rokinon ever released their price points? Wait..do you mean price? If so, I have good news: you can just say price. It's shorter, and it means...well..price. Unlike the term "price point," which does not mean price. Cool?

[@FilmJams]

yellowchartreuse your mother must love you very much :)

[@johnw5427]

dumb point

[@yellowchartreuse]

@@FilmJams Wow...no need to get rude or weird. Not cool. Had I been rude first that might be one thing. Don't go low.

[@JeffreyBoles]

I know this comment is old, but I think he said price points because the different focal length lenses of each set have slightly different prices. So he said "price points" to get the idea across that he is talking about a price range or average price of each lens for their respective sets instead of one specific price.

[@FilmJams]

@@JeffreyBoles Yes exactly that :) Thanks for watching!

[@mrwashur1991]

I mean those Rokinons are built like garbage. Go watch Duclos lens guts of him taking one apart. Also just because it has the markings that doesn’t mean they are accurate and were built right. If you ask me it doesn’t make sense to buy those Rokinons. Their qc is garbage and infinity is always off. It’s just people who would rather look cool than to buy a quality product. I’ll take a zf2 before I would a Rokinon. I bought a fisheye Rokinon some years ago for my Sony to use for skateboarding and while the optics are okay it’s just a terribly built lens. Zeiss is built like a tank. There’s no point in buying a Rokinon just because it gives you markings on the side and has .8 gears built in. Tiltas gears are $2 now and they work super good. Zeiss already has a long focus throw and will be smoother than any Rokinon out there. Plus they aren’t made with plastic and they actually have qc. The Rokinons mount may be metal but it’s screwed into plastic and that ain’t going to last very long if you use it a lot. It just makes more sense to cinemod. The cost isn’t that much more than the Rokinons. Remember to invest in glass, not just buy something that looks cool lol. Basically what I’m saying is yes if your Rokinon breaks you could just buy another and be at about the same cost as that canon but the problem is that you are probably 95% going to have to buy another. Just save your money and invest in something worthwhile, those “cine” lenses are built like they’re priced. Don’t be fooled by it looking professional.

[@FilmJams]

I definitely understand where you are coming from. We personally have owned the Rokinons for over 5 years and they've been solid. Used them on a couple features, multiple short films, and at least 50 or so corporate video projects - and have had zero issues. They certainly aren't at the build quality level of some other lens manufacturers, but I do think they're a great entry level option for many new filmmakers. I actually own the Rokinon fisheye that you mentioned, and I'd agree that lens is one of their worst lenses. It's soft, and doesn't perform well. But their newer Rokinon cinema DS lenses like the 50mm and 85mm are really nice looking lenses and sharp. I don't know if people are buying lenses to "look cool" like you said, but we bought them from a functionality standpoint. I actually don't think they look cool at all. Zeiss, Cooke, and Canon are all great lenses, and we own sets of each, but we still use our Rokinons for certain projects. They're small, lightweight, and I don't fear for my life taking them on a boat or shooting off the back of a car off-roading, like I would if I brought my Cooke's. I think investment in lenses comes in a lot of different shapes and sizes, and not every lens is good for every filmmaker. The Rokinons are another option in the tool chest.

[@mrwashur1991]

Film Jams well that’s a good point, I can see why people on a budget would buy them I’m just saying that you can get other lenses for about the same price that are going to last longer. I’ve just heard a lot of people saying their focus rings get stiff or loose and that the most common is their mount breaks. But that’s also a good point on the crash cam stuff and using them when you don’t want to use something expensive like out in the snow and rain or on a boat etc. I’m just saying I think it makes more sense to invest a few hundred more and get a more worthwhile lens but I can see a place for this and yes it’s kind of a value for the price, some of them are like $700 or $800 when you can get used Zeiss or even new sigmas for that price. Idk just doesn’t seem like a good deal to me. But I’m glad they’re working good for over 5 years!

[@FilmJams]

Yes I see your point. Invest a little more and get something higher quality. I do like zeiss and fancy cinema lenses but these definitely have their place. Hopefully mine stay solid! Now I’m worried about the mounts breaking :) anyway thanks for checking out the video and have a good one!

[@charlesteton]

Just watched your suggested tear down. Not sure what you took from his video but he praises the design of the lens 85% of time and says brand is underrated. The outer casing is plastic, inner is metal alloys. I’m onto my third feature as writer/producer/director/DOP/Editor, other distributed by Mel Gibson’s company Icon/Majestic. First was shot on Canon K35, mostly 18mm, loaned and my own K35 25-120 T2.8 Macro, which I bought for 1K back then because it was the cheapest lens I could find to shoot 35mm SuperScope, one of only two films to be shot WideScreen that year in the UK, the K35 was as soft as sh*t but it worked. Second shot on Canon SD zoom, all be it the sharpest, and loaned by them. Third film will be shot on EF-S ‘plastic’, Canon L and probably a few Samyang lenses, 24mm T1.5 & 50mm 1.5, where I need the extra light. Running test on all lenses, within my zero budget. Just shot a 5 part series, now picking up awards for Best Series and Best Director, completely shot on three lenses. EF-S 17-55mm f2.8, fair bit of plastic, 70-200 f2.8, little plastic, and 24-105mm f4 L MK I, fair bit of plastic. I mean the actual truth of the matter is: A vast majority of the world now watches content either through their phones or tablets and as long as what needs to be in focus is sharp, when who gives a f*ck. Peeps who still watch TV, even 4K TV’s still watch SD shows blown up to 4K. I can’t remember who said it but ‘Content, content, content!’ Zero Joe Public pixel peep. Happy Christmas and peace be with you all! X

[@FilmJams]

Yeah the content game is a-changin’. So many lenses now to choose from and every camera released now practically shoots 8k. Thanks for stopping by the channel and looks like it’s time for Xmas again!

[@topicruben]

I don’t know why I type Rokinon (on Amazon- I’m in Italy) and they give me Samyang. Are they the same people???

[@charlesmawungwa4702]

Yes

[@FilmJams]

Same manufacturer. Just different branding.

[@topicruben]

@@FilmJams Yes! now I know everything about Samyang and Rockinon. I'm sorry I got distracted with other lenses cause I could've have one samyang by now but live and learn. Thanks

[@FilmJams]

Haha all good buddy. Hope all is well!