43 RumorsLog in

For the majority of m43 users af indeed is very important

I must see my boss and ask for a pay rise or maybe play to lotto…

These bad boys will be expensive. I would imagine, pretty DAMN expensive, and far more than any other m43 lens available.

I’ve used Schneider lenses before on 16mm and super 16mm and I have to say I’m fond of them. A lot of DP’s consider them second class under Arri, Zeiss, and Cooke- but I still feel they are better than Angenieux or any of the Red, Pro Optics stuff. Just an opinion.
I can’t see these being too heavy since four thirds needs smaller glass to produce a smaller image circle- but they will probably still weigh a bit because of complex element designs, solid metal builds, and it is standard to make cinema lenses with 80mm front threads and focus gears to fit 105mm matte boxes, rails, and remote focus controls. But there are many 16mm lenses without these dimensions that work with more flexible matte box systems. But now a days I do not see many small matte box systems that are popular and those old lenses were not built for remote follow focus systems. But if they include AF with continuous functionality, maybe it is for a sub top line professional market???
Some have asked what is the big difference between cinema lenses and photo lenses, and not all of it has been said yet. The most important difference is the standard sizes, the well marked and accurate focus gears that aren’t off weather it is 10 below or 100+ degrees outside, when focused cine lenses are not supposed to breath which is a slight zooming that occurs when the elements move (this effect kills Canon and the popular Samyangs because it is awfully noticeable and makes me grimace when i see it). Another important aspect of cinema lenses, and probably the most important, is that a whole set of them has to match perfectly. They are sold as sets for a reason and many true cine lenses cannot be bought new individually or without special contract because DP’s want the all the lenses to have the same light transmission, sharpness, bokeh and color rendition so that every shot matches. Some will say it is not noticeable enough when you use different lenses, but a really pro DP will point it out. Because all the lenses have to match look, the selection process for glass is stringent and the manufacturing techniques are more hands on with secret ways to coat, polish, and build. Just check out old Lomo designs compared to Zeiss and you see big differences in the way they are produced and distinct differences in looks.
Anywho, if Schneider is doing this, we would be looking at something quit professional for the m4/3 system and of course quit pricy. But this is speculation and it smells of fallacy because you can already adapt lenses of this sort to M4/3 without any issue besides loss of electronic compelling. Not a big deal if you have a slate, but for the contemporary indie filmmaker meta data (and we see this in the new Black Magic Design camera) is more and more important and when integrated into the NLE speeds up the post-production which hence saves money. So what we might get is not super sets of cine lenses, but a mid priced work horse set of lenses with electronics for real day use. Much like the 16mm lenses made for news programs back in the day when that is what tv was shot in.
To point out another difference, usually cine lenses are not very sharp compared to photo lenses. There are plenty of test charts out there proving this and the reason is because at 50th a second shutter speed critical sharpness gets lost, film was never meant to be soo sharp, and it doesn’t look that great all the time (too revealing). In the cine world Schneider was especially known for not being sharp like the Zeiss sets, but it has a lovely soft quality that seemed even and pleasant throughout the frame. The colors where also particularity warm- it had a look. In this computer designing lens world I do not know where the company will go, but I hope what they come out with has some of that old school quality to it that I love.