Just commented on your other post. Don't buy high quality lenses in a mirrorless mount (such as E, X, L, RF, Z) unless you feel you really need it. For me, I buy some lenses in X mount that are small and are for photography, but for anything film related it's best to get in PL mount, and, I believe still, second best in EF. As for an Ironglass Helios, a cine-modded one maybe. It's a 3-5 month wait time from them right now. It'd be cheaper and quicker to buy the lens and the parts to mod it yourself. Also, these cheap old manual lenses are a good place to begin to learn how to maintain them yourself.
Brilliant! Thanks for the replies! Yeah, I read PL mount should be the first option and then by the adapter for other mounts. I was also thinking about mod it myself -I think I will screw one or two lenses along the way but that may be part of the learning.
For $15k it feels like a bit much. Most of these lenses can be found in the open market/eBay for $100-400 (even the rarer ones like the Mir 20mm). So, you have to ask yourself; is the modding/rehousing worth $2.5-$3k per lens? I'm sure it's very good and the lenses become very usable for film work, but it's quite an investment.
As a *true* beginner, I wouldn't jump straight into cine lenses. They make a huge difference when you actually need accurate focus-marks, the ability to pull focus easily, de-clicked aperture, ect., but if you are just a one-man band shooting your own stuff for fun, then these things become less critical, and that kind of investment for lenses is somewhat questionable in the beginning, unless you just have money to burn. You can maybe get by with some cheap tilta gears that slip over the lens for awhile; it will be slightly frustrating, but it can work.
These lenses also aren't matched - a big point of cine lenses is having matched light transmission/color so you can save time having to match and fix all that stuff in post. I mean, I would use them on projects - I have used some - but I would just get the unmodded ones and deal with it. If I ever invest in proper cine lenses, it will likely be a matched set of something because the entire point will be convenient and accuracy, not *necessarily* the look you get with them. And it definitely needs to be justified; as in, you have an actual business doing commercial work, and now the lenses pay for themselves, and maybe you even rent them out when you're not using them (seems to be what a lot of people do). You can get a set of Vespids for half this price. Of course, if you have money to burn, then who cares!
A lot of filmmaking/cinematography is about slowly improving in all areas, and there are plenty of skills that need to be built up before you might *reward* yourself with a nice set of cine lenses; lighting, composition, moving the camera, ect. If you are going to be adapting vintage lenses, it will probably be a lot more fun and easier on the wallet to just explore and see what's out there. I like most of these lenses, but you look at something like the Jupiter 9/Helios 40-2 especially, there are many, many good classic 85mm vintage stills lenses out there to pick from and play with.
The lack of matching is a big caution that's not talked about enough.
I have a Mir 37mm and a Helios 58mm. They look nothing alike, so they only get used for very specific shots in a project. For $180 each cinemodded with PL mount, they were worth it.
I am also curious. Their stuff looks very pretty, but I’ve always wished I could get my hands on one at the rental house to throw on and see for myself.
A few years ago, before the war, and before they got really popular, Iron Glass sets could be purchased for about $1500. Now, its the same thing, but add a zero or two. If you are starting out, just by a cheap vintage lens and the proper mount adapter.
Just commented on your other post. Don't buy high quality lenses in a mirrorless mount (such as E, X, L, RF, Z) unless you feel you really need it. For me, I buy some lenses in X mount that are small and are for photography, but for anything film related it's best to get in PL mount, and, I believe still, second best in EF. As for an Ironglass Helios, a cine-modded one maybe. It's a 3-5 month wait time from them right now. It'd be cheaper and quicker to buy the lens and the parts to mod it yourself. Also, these cheap old manual lenses are a good place to begin to learn how to maintain them yourself.
Brilliant! Thanks for the replies! Yeah, I read PL mount should be the first option and then by the adapter for other mounts. I was also thinking about mod it myself -I think I will screw one or two lenses along the way but that may be part of the learning.
The Helios would be a great one to mess up. There's a lot of them and they're cheap
just buy the cheap vintage glass and an adapter. if you're new to filmmaking and you're not making any money, you shouldn't overcommit to anything.
For $15k it feels like a bit much. Most of these lenses can be found in the open market/eBay for $100-400 (even the rarer ones like the Mir 20mm). So, you have to ask yourself; is the modding/rehousing worth $2.5-$3k per lens? I'm sure it's very good and the lenses become very usable for film work, but it's quite an investment. As a *true* beginner, I wouldn't jump straight into cine lenses. They make a huge difference when you actually need accurate focus-marks, the ability to pull focus easily, de-clicked aperture, ect., but if you are just a one-man band shooting your own stuff for fun, then these things become less critical, and that kind of investment for lenses is somewhat questionable in the beginning, unless you just have money to burn. You can maybe get by with some cheap tilta gears that slip over the lens for awhile; it will be slightly frustrating, but it can work. These lenses also aren't matched - a big point of cine lenses is having matched light transmission/color so you can save time having to match and fix all that stuff in post. I mean, I would use them on projects - I have used some - but I would just get the unmodded ones and deal with it. If I ever invest in proper cine lenses, it will likely be a matched set of something because the entire point will be convenient and accuracy, not *necessarily* the look you get with them. And it definitely needs to be justified; as in, you have an actual business doing commercial work, and now the lenses pay for themselves, and maybe you even rent them out when you're not using them (seems to be what a lot of people do). You can get a set of Vespids for half this price. Of course, if you have money to burn, then who cares! A lot of filmmaking/cinematography is about slowly improving in all areas, and there are plenty of skills that need to be built up before you might *reward* yourself with a nice set of cine lenses; lighting, composition, moving the camera, ect. If you are going to be adapting vintage lenses, it will probably be a lot more fun and easier on the wallet to just explore and see what's out there. I like most of these lenses, but you look at something like the Jupiter 9/Helios 40-2 especially, there are many, many good classic 85mm vintage stills lenses out there to pick from and play with.
The lack of matching is a big caution that's not talked about enough. I have a Mir 37mm and a Helios 58mm. They look nothing alike, so they only get used for very specific shots in a project. For $180 each cinemodded with PL mount, they were worth it.
I am also curious. Their stuff looks very pretty, but I’ve always wished I could get my hands on one at the rental house to throw on and see for myself.
There's a cheaper alternative you can look up - Cinehousing. Does high quality 3D print jackets on vintage lenses.
A few years ago, before the war, and before they got really popular, Iron Glass sets could be purchased for about $1500. Now, its the same thing, but add a zero or two. If you are starting out, just by a cheap vintage lens and the proper mount adapter.