Panavision AWZ2 (Anamorphic Wide Zoom 2) vs Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1

Panavision AWZ2 (Anamorphic Wide Zoom 2) vs Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1

When comparing Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1 and Panavision AWZ2 (Anamorphic Wide Zoom 2), which one is better?

1. Compare weight

The lens that weighs the least of the two is Panavision AWZ2 (Anamorphic Wide Zoom 2) which weighs 4700 g, compared to the loser Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1 which weighs 10300 g.

Winner: Panavision AWZ2 (Anamorphic Wide Zoom 2)

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, Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1 is the winner with a minimum focusing distance of 72 cm. This can be compared with the minimum focusing distance of 99.1 cm for Panavision AWZ2 (Anamorphic Wide Zoom 2).

Winner: Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1

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 Panavision AWZ2 (Anamorphic Wide Zoom 2) and Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1:

	Panavision AWZ2 (Anamorphic Wide Zoom 2)	Cooke 35-140mm Anamorphic/i T3.1
	Price ➔	Price ➔
Brand	Panavision	Cooke
Weight	4700 g	10300 g
Mount	Missing
Focal Length	40 - 80 mm	35 - 140 mm
Largest Aperture	2.8	3.1
Anamorphic Lens	Yes	Yes
Minimum Focusing Distance	99.1 cm	72 cm
Type	Zoom	Zoom