Better films every fortnight. Subscribe to Syrp Lab YouTube.

In this week's Film Science, we headed out on an early morning shoot putting six different lenses to the test. Ranging in price from $300 to a whopping $15,000, we try to determine the difference between a classic photo lens vs a cine lens when you're trying to achieve that cinematic look.

Imagine you've got $1000 to spend on a new lens for your latest film or social project.
If you're anything like us, you're probably wondering what lens is worth your hard-earned cash and asking yourself – should I buy a classic photo lens, or do I need a state-of-the-art Cine lens to nail a cinematic look?
To help answer these questions, we headed outside on an early morning shoot to put six different lenses to the test.

Cine lens v photo lens: What's the difference?

The differences between a cine lens and a photo lens range from price to UX capabilities, sharpness, focus, colour and flare.
Photo lenses are conventionally smaller, lighter and cheaper than cine lenses. They are known for capturing high-quality still images while maintaining the integrity of colour and sharpness.
Cine lenses are designed for cinematography and are used in professional filmmaking. Most cine lenses are bigger, clunkier and more costly than your standard photo lens, but they do offer more precise control for the experienced filmmaker.

The key difference between Prime Cine and photo lenses

Focus breathing
Focus breathing is a change in the angle of view that occurs when adjusting the focus of a lens. Cine lenses are designed to minimise focus breathing, ensuring the image remains consistent and stable while adjusting focus.

Colour matching
Cine lenses are designed to match colour from lens to lens. As we found in our testing, the colour and contrast can change from brand to brand and even lens to lens. A set of cine lenses are perfect for producing consistent colour and contrast across all of your footage.

Autofocus and image stabilisation
Cine Lenses give you more control over each element but don't have the essential smart assists that a photo lens offers. This means you might need an AC and some extra support gear like a tripod, slider or stabiliser for wobble-free footage.

Continuous aperture control
On the flip side, cine lenses' have a continuous aperture that lets you ramp a shot without jumps, allowing seamless transitions and precise control over depth of field.
The size of the aperture impacts the depth of field. When comparing photo and cine lenses, we need to remember that F-stop - the size of the lens aperture that controls the amount of light entering the camera - isn't the same as T-stop, which measures the actual transmission of light through the lens after accounting for any losses due to absorption or reflection.

Ridged connection
Cine lenses have a rigid connection to the focus with built-in gears making it perfect for follow-focus systems allowing for precise and consistent adjustments during filming.

Cine lens v photo comparison test 

For our comparison, we selected three photo primes and three cine primes ranging in price from classic cheapies to eye-watering expensive. 

The lenses we tested were

Photo lenses:
1. The classic Canon 50mm EF f1.4 ($379 USD)
2. The Sigma Art f1.4 50mm EF ($949 USD)
3. Canon RF f1.2 ($2099 USD)

Cine lenses:
1. Meike T2.1 50mm ($649 USD)
2. Canon EF T1.3 cine prime ($3,950 USD)
3. ARRI Ultra Prime T1.9 ($15,400 USD)

Cine lens v photo lens: How did they perform?

When testing each of the lenses, we did a locked-off establisher, some up close handheld movement, a silhouetted shot, and general coverage. We switched lenses with each shot to make sure we had consistent lighting and weather.
We compared the lenses to six main elements contributing to a lens's overall quality and finished look.
These were: Sharpness, focus, distortion, colour/contrast, bokeh and flare.

Sharpness
All of the lenses were nice and sharp, with one exception. The Cannon EF 1.4 photo lens lagged behind in our testing (probably because Chase has been thrashing this lens for about 8-years), while the Sigma Art F 1.4 lens did have a clinical crispness.
As for the Cine lenses, the Cannon CN-FT 1.3 and the ARRI Ultra Prime T 1.9 lens captured the soft glow without removing any details in the shot.

Focus
We can't talk about focus without mentioning focus breathing. Focus breathing can happen when you adjust the focus of a lens, causing the size of the thing in focus to change slightly as the lens moves internal elements to refocus.
Obviously, this isn't an issue in photography because you are taking a single frame, but it can be pretty distracting when it comes to video. Cine lenses will often have an additional element that minimises the focus breathing.
We shot really open with all of the lenses. The Cannon RF.F 1.2 photo lens had the most focus breathing. There was also a bit on the cine ARRI Ultra Prime T 1.9 and the Cannon CN-FT 1.3, but the biggest surprise was the Meike Mini Prime T20.2 which had minimal focus breathing.

Distortion
During our testing, this was a hard one to judge. Distortion was minimal on all lenses but most notable on the Meike Mini Prime T20.2. Distortion might be more of an issue if we used wider prime or zoom lenses.

Colour/Contrast
The photo lenses appeared to have more global contrast than the cine primes. The ARRI was the least contrasty, but the shot's details and subject were still super clear. The big note was colour, with the Cannon lenses producing a much cooler, warm, green-tinged shot.
We also noted the aberration of the lens with the colour changing between each lens and even the brand. The Cannons had some pronounced green and pink aberration, while the Sigma and Meike were yellow and green. The stand out for this test was the ARRI. This lens had the nicest aberration that was subtle and blended nicely into the shot.

Bokeh
Bokeh is the out-of-focus area in a shot, where bright lights become distinct circles or a bit more blurred.
In our testing, the Cannon RF.F 1.2 photo lens had a clean, even bokeh and a subtle texture similar to the ARRI Ultra Prime. The Cannon EF 1.4 photo lens and the Sigma both had uneven bokeh, with the Sigma having more of a doughnut look.

Flare
Flares are caused by light bouncing off the internal elements of a lens, like coating and flares. Unfortunately, they are inevitable. We tested the flare at our studio and found that the Meike had a stronger rainbow flare while the Cannons had more of a green.

To see the lenses in action, check out these clips.

Canon RF F1.2

Canon RF F1.2

Canon RF F1.2

Meike T2.2

Canon CN-E T1.3

Arri Ultra Prime T1.9

Photo v Cine: Which lens should you choose?

Honestly, it depends on your shooting style and budget.
The Canon RF 50mm balances quality and price, making it a great pick for shooting YouTube videos and on-the-go content for social media. However, for higher-budget projects, renting a set of cine primes like the Canon EF T1.3 could be a better choice.

Many filmmakers, photographers and content creators select lenses based on the type of project they are shooting, their budget or personal preference. A cine lens and a photo lens are pretty similar when it comes to their core elements. Although cine lenses aren't designed for solo operators, they do offer manual focus and finer aperture control over the elements allowing for smoother adjustments.

The classic advice is to try out different lenses on test or spec projects to see what you like and what works well with your shooting style. Ultimately, the choice comes down to the vibe you're trying to achieve, your budget and the project you're working on.

Want to learn more about the science of filmmaking and the tools behind the craft? Check out more of our Film science episodes

Liked to learn more about filmmaking gear and techniques? Checkout out more of our Film Science episodes.