Would OM lenses make a good, consistent set for video?

[strangelove]

After collecting a small assortment of seemingly random lenses to use with video, I've realized I need to stop picking up random lenses and build a set of consistent lenses I can use for video work... on my last shoot, I shot with 4 lenses from 4 different makers/eras, and it was impossible to get a consistent look in post. My first inclination was to try to build a set based on my favorite from the bunch (a Leica Elmarit-R f2.8/90 - love that Leica look), but trying to put together a fast set of Leica-R lenses is likely to cost as much as a set of cine lenses. So I've reconsidered my other lenses, and as I really like using the Olympus f1.4/50, I'm wondering if the rest of the OM lenses (probably of the f2 variety) have a consistent look across the line? Overall, they seem reasonably priced. Any thoughts?

Oh, and the cameras I'm shooting on have EF mounts (but different crop factors), so whatever I end up with needs to be adaptable to EF

[Gardener]

Personally I think that OM is the best legacy option for EF mount since you can switch lenses without pulling out the adapter. The problem is availability and prices - tele Zuikos in f/2.0 cost more then Canon AF analogs, and are fairly rare, wide 2.0 are more common but also run in hundreds of dollars.

[SXR_Mark]

I have quite a lot of Zuikos, and they are always fine lenses. But whether they have the 'consistent' look you want I am not sure because I am not a good enough photographer to know what this really means.

As Gardener has pointed out, the f2 lenses (21mm, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 85mm, 100mm) will cost a lot. I only have f2.8 at best (except for 50mm of course).

I have read the the 35-70mm with constant f3.6 aperture is a good lens for video as it stays in focus when zoomed. This is the top spec 35-70mm (there are, I think, 3 others) and is quite pricey, but probably less than the f2's. It is a good lens, though I haven't used mine much. You will need an adapter with the exact correct thickness to benefit from the constant focus though.

Mark

[Basilisk]

If you want a set, you might consider the Samyang primes - almost certainly the best value f1.4 set (apart from the 14mm at f2.. Though you have a bit of a gap between 35 and 85, so you might have to find a fast 50 from a different manufacturer; there are plenty of options for those.

[Gardener]

[ForenSeil]

[strangelove]

thanks for the replies. I was actually on a shoot yesterday and the director brought along 3 of the Rokinon (aka Samyang) lenses she had just bought. Unfortunately, the aperture blades on the 35 got stuck when I closed them down to f11.0, and the 85 flared horribly when I aimed the camera even remotely in the direction of the sun. I ended up not even trying the 24 and just told her and her editor they'd have to play around with different looks in post (it was for a music video, so she was fine with it). So based on that bad experience, I think I'm going to avoid them (however, I think I also like the idea of using an old set)

[strangelove]

[strangelove]

[visualopsins]

Asahi Takumars have very consistent 'look' -- color, contrast -- and feel...

35/2, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 135/2.5

[strangelove]

[Pontus]

I just measured a few OM lenses:

21/2 has a focus throw of 50mm (of 190mm)
35-80/2.8 has a focus throw of 57mm (of 220mm)
50/2 macro has a focus throw of 160mm (of 197mm)
90/2 macro has a focus throw of 180mm (of 218mm)
100/2 has a focus throw of 155mm (of 187mm)

Measured a bit randomly, there are thinner and thicker parts on the lenses. At least % or degrees can be calculated if needed.

[strangelove]