I'm wondering what I'll see on my ground glass if I start playing around with removing front or rear elements from my various lenses that are presumptively not "convertible."
It seems like a nice lens, but whenever I've considered it, I'm always reminded that it's about the same price as a set of 300, 450, and 600mm Fujinon-C's. I've asked people who have owned both, and my impression is that they've found the Fujinons to be sharper than the single cells of the Cooke, and then there's the tradeoff of the compactness of a convertible vs the convenience of separate lenses that don't require conversion, the consistent speeds of a single shutter vs. the security of three independent shutters.
Just what I was thinking.If you think that's a lot, check out the prices of Cooke cine lenses: don't even think about zooms...
Cheers, Bob.
In a copal shutter? Not as nice as it could be in a shutter with a decent amount of aperture leaves. For that amount of money I would much rather have an old one, even if it cost more.What about bokeh? Does the Cooke not have a nice bokeh?
I just found my ultimate lens, I just need to sell something to pay for it, like my truck or something.
http://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=161
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?