Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: SALT III- High Speed Lens Shootout "WFO" Results

Reply to Thread
Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 61213141516
Results 151 to 157 of 157
  1. #151  
    Senior Member Nick Morrison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by PatrickFaith View Post
    I like Nick's suggestion of staying with 35-80 mm primes for low budget vfx heavy movies.
    Another thing to consider is using MEDIUM FORMAT glass, which even on Dragon would render almost distortion free imagery.

    Because the image circle is so vast, and most distortion lives on the edges, shooting through the heart of the glass presumably gives you impeccably flat imagery.

    This is probably why people usually notice an imperceptible "magic" to shooting Medium Format on S35.
    Nick Morrison
    Founder, Director & Lead Creative
    // SMALL GIANT //
    smallgiant.tv
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #152  
    Senior Member PatrickFaith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,549
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Ryan View Post
    Anamorphic will be coming. We have zooms, T2 Primes, and Anamorphics to do. Waiting till the newer anamorphic lenses come to market so we have all the available anamorphics to test (which is a lot!)
    Awesome, I reference these posts atleast once a month and appreciate the work you guys are doing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Morrison View Post
    Another thing to consider is using MEDIUM FORMAT glass, which even on Dragon would render almost distortion free imagery.

    Because the image circle is so vast, and most distortion lives on the edges, shooting through the heart of the glass presumably gives you impeccably flat imagery.

    This is probably why people usually notice an imperceptible "magic" to shooting Medium Format on S35.
    Awesome idea, also the 3D camera solves would be real nice. These anamorphics are super cool, yet I'm not sure they "tell" the story that I need ... while I think medium format's could (especially with the 6k). Do you have any thoughts on even how to hook up a medium format to a Epic/Dragon?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #153  
    Senior Member Nick Morrison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by PatrickFaith View Post
    Awesome idea, also the 3D camera solves would be real nice. These anamorphics are super cool, yet I'm not sure they "tell" the story that I need ... while I think medium format's could (especially with the 6k). Do you have any thoughts on even how to hook up a medium format to a Epic/Dragon?
    Patrick, I personally use Hasselblad lenses (I have a complete set from 50 to 250), which are relatively easy to get onto an EOS mount. You just need a simple adapter.

    The large image circle of these lenses makes them ideal for tilt shifting also, and (after trying numerous adapters) I have decided that the MIREX adapter is by far the best. Impecable all metal German engineering.

    PS, if you are interested in Hasselblads, look for the "F" series...they are shutterless and are often a stop faster than ordinary Hassy lenses.
    Nick Morrison
    Founder, Director & Lead Creative
    // SMALL GIANT //
    smallgiant.tv
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #154  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    829
    Quote Originally Posted by Clayton Burkhart View Post
    One other thing which I find disconcerting about the CP.2's is that even though they have an EF mount alternative, there is actually an enormous amount of play when mounted on a Canon camera. This is really problematic as it defeats the whole purpose of a Cinema lens and creates image shift which resembles breathing. So even Zeiss needs to tighten up their tolerances with regards to this aspect.
    Clayton, did u notice less breathing and image shift with the CP.2's on a PL mount system ?

    Thanks.

    - M
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #155  
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Morrison View Post
    Another thing to consider is using MEDIUM FORMAT glass, which even on Dragon would render almost distortion free imagery.

    Because the image circle is so vast, and most distortion lives on the edges, shooting through the heart of the glass presumably gives you impeccably flat imagery.

    This is probably why people usually notice an imperceptible "magic" to shooting Medium Format on S35.
    This is one of the many issues I have with larger image circle lenses... and it's not with the lenses, it's with the people make general assumptions as if all lenses are created equal.

    This is not aimed at Nick, and as medium format lenses are usually made with great care while being of really good image quality, this argument I make is more or less for those who have little experience with optics and make this (or very similar) argument but with general run FF photography lenses, which Nick did not do.

    I hear a few people make the argument that because a FF lens has a very large image circle, just using the center is the 'sweet spot' and thus is better. Although this is true in theory and certainly true when just discussing a particular lens.... it does not always factor in that the image standards of some lenses throughout the circle are less than, say other lenses from edge to edge. So although this statement can be true at times, it's a bad idea to assume it all the time, which I find many FF kiddos doing. Distortion and other optical issues do not simply appear on some arbitrary image circle edge to center ratio. Just because the image circle is wider, doesn't mean the center is sweeter. A poor FF lens can have issues well inside 5k or APS-C territory, despite there being lots of bleed-off room in the FF image circle. Distortion, as in barrel or pincushion is hardly dependent on image circle size, in the manner that a FF lens center will have less distortion than an equivalent focal length lens but one that only covers 30-31mm diagonally. Most higher end cinema, especially the wider lenses, don't have much bleed-off room in the image circle from center to intended usable edge, however, despite the center being better than the edges, the amount of degradation is usually much less than other lenses with much larger image circles. It's just how they are made.

    So while it can sometimes be true that a really well made FF lens will have a very nice center, perhaps better in some or many ways to other high quality cine lenses, it is not a general statement that FF centers are always sweet and healthy from optical issues. I find many shortcuts are made with photography lenses, which little effect the photographer but make cinematography difficult, and these issues do tend to live just as much, if not more, in the optics than they do with the now varying range of quality we find in marketed 'cine-lenses'; a word who's descriptive nature of lens class is widening at great speed.

    So yes, the center of FF lenses is better than the edge, especially with photography lenses lacking some of the consistency criteria some higher end cinema manufacturers aim for, however the misinformation I am fighting is that we assume the center of a FF is always better than a lens with an image circle that only covers the intended format. What I am saying is that assumption is not an always true or false statement and testing is always encouraged. Sometimes it is true, but sometimes it's not.

    My morning rant. :)
    Thank you Red Team for unlocking/correcting the i/data technology. Cooke lenses are reading correctly and all his happy in Cooke/Epic land. Thanks!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #156  
    Senior Member PatrickFaith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,549
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Morrison View Post
    Patrick, I personally use Hasselblad lenses (I have a complete set from 50 to 250), which are relatively easy to get onto an EOS mount. You just need a simple adapter.

    The large image circle of these lenses makes them ideal for tilt shifting also, and (after trying numerous adapters) I have decided that the MIREX adapter is by far the best. Impecable all metal German engineering.

    PS, if you are interested in Hasselblads, look for the "F" series...they are shutterless and are often a stop faster than ordinary Hassy lenses.
    This sounds great for the silky shallow depth of field black and white photography i like to do with medium format, I have been searching for a similar lens system that can do that with RED. I really like your idea, only thing is that I do a lot of vfx on the frames (specially 3d solves), and if I did that I am pretty sure everything in nuke would have to go through a lens corrector before i did any camera solves or vfx merging (and I am late on almost everything as it is right now). I also don't have a collimator handy, which I would want to use before every major shoot(i really need to get some lens testing gear, it's just so hard to justify, 27 years back i had all that stuff ... but not now ). I do follow the medium format groups and clubs on the camera side, but haven't found a good source for medium format cinematography.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #157  
    Senior Member Jacek Zakowicz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,270
    I'm not sure what you mean-50mm lens will have exactly the same depth of field at the same stop and distance in 16mm, APSC, S35, FF or medium format. Same goes for every FL lens be it 20mm or 150mm
    Jacek Zakowicz, Optitek-dot-org, jacek2@optitek.org
    Professional Broadcast and Digital Cinema Equipment
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #158  
    Senior Member PatrickFaith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,549
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacek Zakowicz View Post
    I'm not sure what you mean-50mm lens will have exactly the same depth of field at the same stop and distance in 16mm, APSC, S35, FF or medium format. Same goes for every FL lens be it 20mm or 150mm
    Well your right at some level, and I didn't mean for this to get into a medium format DOF thing (since there are more then three variables that change on medium format lenses). In general though, the closer the object is to the lens that your focusing on, the shallower is the DOF(i.e. things focused on far away have a very large depth of field of many feet at the same T stop, as things focused on a foot away may have only a few inches of dof at the same t stop). So with a larger sensor, you need to get closer to a object your focusing on to have it framed the same. i.e. if your doing a head shot on a s35 50mm lens you stand farther away from the subject then you would with a medium format. So your completely right, if the 35mm lense has a COF that can cover the larger format(i.e. sensor size), there is no change. But as a super nice "feature" of the dragon, since it will have a slightly larger sensor, then a picture framed exactly the same with a 35mm at 6k will have a shallower dof then if it was shot at 5k with the same framing(since at 6k you needed to get closer to the object to get the same framing). This is why with the dragon sensor, I will always be shooting at 6k on the dragon, since I like shallower dof. Hopefully long term, the sensor size will even get bigger, which then makes sense to invest in lenses with large COF diameter limits.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #159  
    Senior Member Jacek Zakowicz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,270
    With all due respect Patrick- the Dragon sensor is onlty 1.5mm wider than the MX. That's 5% gain in the angle of view. Do you really think that anyone will notice the "medium format effect" with so little change?
    Jacek Zakowicz, Optitek-dot-org, jacek2@optitek.org
    Professional Broadcast and Digital Cinema Equipment
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #160  
    Senior Member PatrickFaith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,549
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacek Zakowicz View Post
    With all due respect Patrick- the Dragon sensor is onlty 1.5mm wider than the MX. That's 5% gain in the angle of view. Do you really think that anyone will notice the "medium format effect" with so little change?
    I hadn't done the math but that sounds right for the dof change between epic 5k to dragon 6k(this stuff get's non-linear on closeups ... it hurts my brain). On the dragon though, difference between shooting at 5k and 6k will have a bigger change in feel (dof) if framing identically, and I am on the hunt for my middle 2014 to 2016 lens set - which will use the dragon plus what will come after it. Trying to get a total medium format feel on the 6k will be tricky(it is possible using some old school bellows optics with intermediary focal plane - but vfx would be a nightmare and it looses stops). I wish there was something like the Leica 50mm f/0.95 Noctilux-M but at 35mm and at a price about half of the noctulix (also since i don't need the fanatical resolution of the noctulix ... i could deal with something a bit softer and cheaper as long as the optics didn't have any aberrations). I also have moved to computer controlled focus (integrated to a 3 axis motion control system), so I worry about breathing more then i did in the old days.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Tags for this Thread

View Tag Cloud

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