Personal View site logo
Tokina Cinema Lenses
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

  • 32 Replies sorted by
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Our interview on 135mm T1.5

  • MikeLinnMikeLinn

  • MikeLinnMikeLinn

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    image

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1196835-REG/tokina_tc_m100m43_cinema_at_x_100mm_t2_9.html

    img19.jpg
    745 x 497 - 47K
  • IronFilmIronFilm

    They've now got the 100mm as a cine lens:

    http://www.tokinacinema.com/100mmMacro.html http://www.43rumors.com/the-tokina-100mm-t2-9-macro-now-available-for-mft-too/

  • vicharrisvicharris

    Another thing I just realized during Cine Gear is the placement of the focus gear ring. See how far up it is. I'm sure everyone is different but on my rig, that would be completely worthless. I have to position my gear ring all the way on the back of the focus grip. The reason is for the FF to clear the MB. I'm using the TrusMT FF and Cinematics Matte Box so it's not like I'm using any crazy combo here. To get the lens far enough in the MB so it clears the edges for FOV, I don't see how you could use this lens. You would have to have one of the large, wide angle MB, like the Red Rock or it's knock off sold on here. I wonder why they placed it so far forward? I should have asked them when I was playing with the lens.

  • rockroadpixrockroadpix

    If thinking something that costs too much is entitlement, well... I got nothin'.

  • vicharrisvicharris

    @BurnetRhoades Are you speaking of us who are not happy with the price points of these lenses?

  • rockroadpixrockroadpix

    Right now, they're the only game in town that has cine style zooms under $10K AFAIK.

    Oops, forgot about this nice one that I used with the F3- http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/839881-REG/Sony_SCL_P11X15_SCL_P11X15_11_16mm_T3_0_Wide.html

  • BurnetRhoadesBurnetRhoades

    Why would the "budget HDSLR crowd" need, demand, or even consider themselves the target group of properly cine housed lenses is something I still fail to understand...

    Indeed. Smelling a lot of entitlement in here. These are expensive but not obscenely so when compared to quality stills lenses that even amateurs buy because they think they "need" it. They're downright cheap compared to average-ish ENG lenses used for news gathering and community college RTV classes.

  • danyyyeldanyyyel

    It is very different for a small specialize hand made company like duclos and a big company like Tokina. I think they will find that the market they are targeting is very different. Until now thay have been cheap mass market alternative to the Nikon and Canon lens. When they use to sell in the thousand, I think they will see themselves in the awkward situation of selling in the tens.

  • rockroadpixrockroadpix

    I have produced/shot $200k^ commercials (for that we rent Zeiss/Angie/Cooke etc.) If I shot more of them, I wouldn't buy Tokinas for that use. I'd invest with the big boys. I don't think they're on par with those other lenses. Like it has been said, they are $600-800 lenses that have been slightly modified. I think most people's issue is with basically a little re-housing for triple the $. For the record, I love my 2 duclos Zeiss ZF mods, I remember I was wowed by the Tokina they had listed, until I saw the price.

  • vicharrisvicharris

    A quote from One River Media.

    OneRiver Media PRO 2 weeks ago I agree that the pricing of these seems quite odd. I'm really excited to see lens companies join the way of converting their photo still lens line into cine style lenses. But the prices on the Tokina cine line is making me scratch my head. A lot. In order to stay competitive, they need to follow the lead of Rokinon/Samyang in this market. Tokina would sell a BOAT LOAD of the 11-16 cine if it's priced similar to the original still lens variant. But at $2k, there's no way the same market of people will buy it. They will make sales on it, but not in large quantity like the budget HDSRL crowd (where there are vast and many) would offer. Likewise, the populous HDSLR crowd will not buy a $5500 cine zoom lens. Not a chance. What's odd to me too is that he said the focus twist had 120° of rotation like it was a big deal... that's nothing! Our Rokinon 14mm cine lens has around 270° which is much more cine style. And that lens is only a few hundred bucks. Still scratching my head.

    So I'm not one of the only ones saying this. So that added focus throw is useless too. Something tells me we're going to see a huge price drop in these lenses quickly :)

  • vicharrisvicharris

    Yep, I'd pay $1000, maybe $1200 for a cine version but $2000 is way too much. It's not like you're going to pull huge rack focus' with this lens anyways so I'm not sure how much the improved focus throw would really help out. I have the Rokinon 14mm cine version and it's focus throw is about twice as far as the Tokina, maybe further and I've never really seen that pay off as much as one would think. Since it's so wide, unless you have an almost 360 degree focus throw, I'm not sure it's still worth it. I cine version of the 12-24 would be nice as well. For exterior day filming, when there's no time to swap lenses, that lens has become my go to one now!

  • rockroadpixrockroadpix

    They'd still make coin if they sold the 11-16 for around $850-900. Heck, I'd consider buying it if it were in that neighborhood.

  • svartsvart

    Well, they say in that last video that the focus throws are different than their stills versions, so that immediately says that they are different mechanically as the helicals must be different. The glass is still probably the same though.

  • peaceonearthpeaceonearth

    lot of bucks - but Olivia is priceless cute [SCNR]

  • vicharrisvicharris

    Looks like Tokina is swinging for the fences with that 16-28. $5500! Wow. So that's a 700% price increase on that lens and a 280% increase in the 11-16. Hmmm

  • vicharrisvicharris

    @cls105 If you use the nikon version it is already declicked when used with and adapter like Kipon or Novaflex! :) I have a feeling this is targeted at all the poor saps that have to use the Canon mount version and don't have the ability to adjust their iris manually.

  • cls105cls105

    All I need is a declicked manual aperture. No need for a fancy house. Give me the cheap

  • AriaAria

    How many of these Cine Lenses do you think they're actually gonna make? That does have an impact on what a company charges for a product. I can't say that I love the price but then I can understand that with the relatively small number of units they're likely to have made, this will not make it a worthwhile endeavor unless they charge a lot more. Every market has their scale. There simply aren't enough customers for the Cine Version to allow them to keep the costs low. Large production runs will allow a company to find a lower price point than if you make a special short run of a particular model. Also usually on the Cine versions these companies try to pay more attention to build quality on each unit. At least that's how I see it.

  • jfilmmakerjfilmmaker

    Less than $2,000??? Well, now I feel significantly better buying the $575 11-16mm DX I off Adorama... If they only made it for $700 I would have felt like a jack*ss.

  • tmcattmcat

    @jasonp There is no reason in the world that this lens should cost over 1000$. None, anywhere. I'm looking for some but there just aren't any anywhere at all.

  • B3GuyB3Guy

    Well, I've got red anodized RedStan clamps for my Kowa anamorphic, so don't go doing no braggin' about lenses with little red rings around me, no sir ;-)

  • vicharrisvicharris

    Oh my bad, I forgot to mention they put a red ring around the front, so yeah...there's that too :)

Add a Comment