Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1 vs Panavision Primo SL10
Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1 vs Panavision Primo SL10
When comparing Panavision Primo SL10 and Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1, which one is better?
1. Compare weight
The lens that weighs the least of the two is Panavision Primo SL10 which weighs 3000 g, compared to the loser Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1 which weighs 10300 g.
Winner: Panavision Primo SL10
Regarding weight: When it comes to the lens's weight, it's actually more important than many people think that the lens weighs as little as possible — it's simply a pain to lug around a lens that's too heavy when you're photographing or filming for several hours, and a few hundred grams can make a real difference.
2. Compare minimum focusing distance
When it comes to minimum focusing distance, that is how close to the subject the lens can focus, Panavision Primo SL10 is the winner with a minimum focusing distance of 61 cm. This can be compared with the minimum focusing distance of 72 cm for Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1.
Winner: Panavision Primo SL10
Regarding minimum focusing distance: The lens's minimum focusing distance determines how close you can photograph your subject, such as a face or an animal. If the minimum focusing distance is 50 cm then you cannot get closer to your subject than 50 cm. Macro lenses often have a very low minimum focusing distance so that you can take close-up shots (macro photography).
Specifications
Full specifications table of Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1 and Panavision Primo SL10:
| Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1 | Panavision Primo SL10 | |
 |  | |
| Brand | Cooke | Panavision |
| Weight | 10300 g | 3000 g |
| Mount | Missing | |
| Focal Length | 35 - 140 mm | 10 mm |
| Largest Aperture | 3.1 | 1.9 |
| Anamorphic Lens | Yes | Missing |
| Minimum Focusing Distance | 72 cm | 61 cm |
| Type | Zoom | Prime |
| Lens Front Diameter (Not Filter Thread) | Missing | 116.3 mm |