Thread: NEO Super Baltars

Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 30 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 298
  1. #11  
    Senior Member Tommaso Alvisi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    ITALY
    Posts
    2,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    Here are some B&L blueprints.
    Björn, these are not blueprints...at all...just fyi

    BTW Personally I think the market can regulate itself...as previously shown there isn't really a substitute for the real thing...

    if someone can/need/want to settle for the reproduction it's fine as long as well known before buying... (good or bad it's not important, because IT'S STILL DIFFERENT FROM THE REAL THING ANYWAY...)

    Speed Panchros, Kowa anas, Super Baltars, you name it...simply can't be made anymore as once made...IT'S a FACT and in many lens tests has been shown that you can get close, but NOT identical to the originals...

    My 2c.
    TOMMASO ALVISI | tommasoalvisi.com
    Weapon 6K Carbon Fiber #1605 aka qp
    instagram | twitter
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by paulcurtis View Post
    I think that's a bit strong and uncalled for. He has contributed *a lot* to lens design across multiple facets and AFAIK this is a passion project for him. No one is claiming these are identical to the originals.

    If we're going to be pedantic about it, ALL lenses are derivative in some way shape or form and have been for decades. Most descend from the basic designs set out years ago. No one is up in arms about Lomo vs Cooke, which are blatant copies (Had both at one point). Or G35 vs K35 from Gekko. Or the myriad of rehouses going on all the time. Cooke themselves reinvent the same lenses with modern glass replacing old glass. (okay, it's still cooke...)

    I don't often disagree with what you write...

    cheers
    Paul
    As I see it, Cooke can make lenses and call them the "Neo Pancro´s" as much as they want. But that does not mean I can. There is a difference.

    And yes, possibly Cooke is copies of Lomo designs bu there is a difference: Cooke dont call them New Lomo´s.

    I find it the same with rehousing, when people do rehousings and make false claims to what's in side or do not specify, well that is not right. If its a rehouse then fair is to call it just that. Celere lenses got called out on such point by Duclos. And I think thats fair.

    Its actually not right to make rehousings and sell without permission from original manufacturer at all. But personally I actually think taking one product, refine it and when selling its clearly state: product X refined by Y is not all that bad Even though, if those that done the original get down on it I can fully understand them doing so.

    Or is it ok to make NEO MasterPrimes just because every one would understand, no its not new master primes as Arri or Zeiss did not make em? Sorry but I think better practice would be to come up with some other name then. And your gecko example I assume thats rehoused canons and again, they claim they have the K35 look etc. But they dont say its the new K35.... I think thats different.

    Making a lens from a drawing... with different kind of elements with other light index etc and say this is the "new" what ever lens you where trying to copy... No, its not right.

    So possibly these lenses are super great and the guy that makes them super cool. But I find the naming convention simply flat out wrong.

    Another example I saw here, someone doing rehoused Baltars, not Super Baltars. I think together with Van Damien and marketed them with a name think it was "Cinemascopes". Well as you might have seen I collected the real Baltar Cinemasopes and I paid a fortune to get those and another fortune to have them serviced etc and I don´t see why some dude selling spherical rehoused baltars should do so under a name that very much already taken.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se
    Flame / VFX / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    Another example I saw here, someone doing rehoused Baltars, not Super Baltars. I think together with Van Damien and marketed them with a name think it was "Cinemascopes". Well as you might have seen I collected the real Baltar Cinemasopes and I paid a fortune to get those and another fortune to have them serviced etc and I don´t see why some dude selling spherical rehoused baltars should do so under a name that very much already taken.
    I followed your progress on that and 100% back the passion behind it all.

    The Story behind these recreations:

    https://cml.news/g/cml-glass/topic/n...0,2,0,14264710

    From Brian himself if you hadn't read it. Like you he's passionate about Lenses and the notebooks were rescued as he describes.

    No one can copy the originals 100%, the materials are different and so on. But i personally don't have an issue with part using the Baltar name (names like voigtlander have been bought and sold and are just a brand these days yet they are one of the earliest). If the whole optical formula is an attempt to do a version with modern materials and give props where they are due. I think if he'd designed a bunch of lenses and kept quiet about the formula then actually that would be a worse thing to do, no?

    cheers
    Paul
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by paulcurtis View Post
    I followed your progress on that and 100% back the passion behind it all.

    The Story behind these recreations:

    https://cml.news/g/cml-glass/topic/n...0,2,0,14264710

    From Brian himself if you hadn't read it. Like you he's passionate about Lenses and the notebooks were rescued as he describes.

    No one can copy the originals 100%, the materials are different and so on. But i personally don't have an issue with part using the Baltar name (names like voigtlander have been bought and sold and are just a brand these days yet they are one of the earliest). If the whole optical formula is an attempt to do a version with modern materials and give props where they are due. I think if he'd designed a bunch of lenses and kept quiet about the formula then actually that would be a worse thing to do, no?

    cheers
    Paul
    If Brian bought the name from B&L then yes of course thats all fine, but I doubt thats the case, even if B&L does not make Baltars anymore I would recon the name alone is worth quite a lot... Something thats worth something, you usually can not just go take.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se
    Flame / VFX / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Senior Member Jacek Zakowicz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,275
    What a hogwash. Baltars were designed with specific cinematographic goals in mind. These goals were meant to improve the art. And they did. As good tool should. All the "NEO" cr#p is about breaking the image and giving it a name. Cheap pathetic marketing tricks. And most here are falling for it. Lord save us from ourselves....
    Jacek Zakowicz, Optitek-dot-org, jacek2@optitek.org
    Professional Broadcast and Digital Cinema Equipment
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    5,010
    I would suggest everyone read the article if you’re up in arms or in some way upset by these.

    This is a form of historic preservation, and I personally think it’s fantastic.

    It’s a reproduction of a vintage design at the best possible execution- look at what is done with classic cars all the time - it would be worse if he called them something other than a Baltar.

    My favorite thing is that they will really let the original designs sing because I’ve seen some rough around the edges Baltar rehousins with bad centration and degraded performance.

    Baltars represent the peak of cinema prime lens design at their time and that’s really damn good - even today.

    I would say everyone should calm down and give these things a try, they’re really good - better than a lot of faux-vintage concept stuff that is out there.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Member rand thompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,426
    Didn't know so many had such strong feelings about this subject. Maybe Brian and others associated with this project will atleast reconsider due to viewing these and other comments and or direct contact to them. Surely these lenses could be rebranded so that they reflect the inspiration behind this project yet show the proper respect for the Bausch & Lomb Super Baltars Legacy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Senior Member rand thompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,426
    Here's One more interview from Nab 2019.



    NAB 2019: Caldwell Neo Baltar and Neo Super Baltar Lenses




    By PVC Live










    Brian Caldwell is also doing the Chameleon 1.79X Anamorphic Lenses.



    Caldwell Chameleon 1.79x Anamorphics





    By Newsshooter





    We take a look at the new Caldwell Chameleon 1.79x anamorphics at NAB 2019.

    Read all our reports and revies on newsshooter.com




    Caldwell Chameleon





    By Focus24tv





    The new lenses from Caldwell anamorphic full frame lenses
    www.focus24.tv
    Last edited by rand thompson; 04-11-2019 at 11:15 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    I dont agree I say fuck that guy and dont buy his lenses.
    With that logic, have you ever used any Tilta, DJI, Wooden Camera or SmallRig products?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Senior Member Karim D. Ghantous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Melbourne AU
    Posts
    1,619
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    I dont agree I say fuck that guy and dont buy his lenses.
    The patent has expired. What's the problem? Morally I see everything right with this project.

    A similar project could be the recreation of Super Speeds. I think a lot of people would like that. The originals would always have a special value, regardless of new versions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Kanes View Post
    it would be worse if he called them something other than a Baltar.
    That is a very good way of looking at it.
    Good production values may not be noticed. Bad production values will be.
    Pinterest
    | Flickr | Instagram
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts