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 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 410111213141516 LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 157
  1. #131  
    Senior Member Nick Morrison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    8,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Timur Civan View Post
    its as simple as time savings. my 90mm vivitar is far sharper and has better boken than any PL lens ive used, but its a nightmare to work with.

    the few seconds of time saved with each lens change with physically matched PL lenses adds up. over the course of a day, can mean a few minutes, and thats the difference between getting one more take or not. all high end gear is designed to save those few seconds. collectively it means more shooting time perday. when you are spending 50-300K per day, those minutes are very valuable. its really just about time.
    The mechanics of cine lenses do save time, that is true. However if you plan ahead, it's possible to make stills lenses as cine-friendly as possible, and limit some of the time wasting you're talking about.

    For example, I'm having my main personal Contax set MODDED at RPLENS, as we speak. Not only is Peter adding 80mm fronts and declicking every lens, he is also MAKING SURE (at my request) that all the FOCUS GEARS are in the same place (so they work as a true SET). This way my AC's are saving time, and can swap lenses faster.

    Just sayin'.

    That being said, they don't have accurate focus marks (etc), so I'm not suggesting they are true replacement for cine lenses, they ain't.


    SPEAKING OF FOCUS MARKS
    : I have a question for you all.

    Have you guys noticed that your marks for S35 lenses are "off" when you shoot 5K on Epic? Because the FOV gets wider than standard S35? Just occurred to me this may be an interesting quirk that comes w/ shooting on sensors that extend beyond S35. Will the marks still work?
    Nick Morrison
    Founder, Director & Lead Creative
    // SMALL GIANT //
    smallgiant.tv
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #132  
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Morrison View Post
    The mechanics of cine lenses do save time, that is true. However if you plan ahead, it's possible to make stills lenses as cine-friendly as possible, and limit some of the time wasting you're talking about.

    For example, I'm having my main personal Contax set MODDED at RPLENS, as we speak. Not only is Peter adding 80mm fronts and declicking every lens, he is also MAKING SURE (at my request) that all the FOCUS GEARS are in the same place (so they work as a true SET). This way my AC's are saving time, and can swap lenses faster.

    Just sayin'.

    That being said, they don't have accurate focus marks (etc), so I'm not suggesting they are true replacement for cine lenses, they ain't.


    SPEAKING OF FOCUS MARKS
    : I have a question for you all.

    Have you guys noticed that your marks for S35 lenses are "off" when you shoot 5K on Epic? Because the FOV gets wider than standard S35? Just occurred to me this may be an interesting quirk that comes w/ shooting on sensors that extend beyond S35. Will the marks still work?
    What in the what? Nothing changes at all.
    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  
     

  3. #133  
    Senior Member Nick Morrison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    8,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan Patrick O'Hara View Post
    What in the what? Nothing changes at all.
    Haha. OK. I figured I was probably wrong. Thanks!
    Nick Morrison
    Founder, Director & Lead Creative
    // SMALL GIANT //
    smallgiant.tv
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #134  
    Senior Member Will Keir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,320
    Les,

    The projector test we used center and s35 edge. That means every test used the center then outside on the edges out to the s35 boundaries. Hope that helps.

    Quote Originally Posted by Les Dittert View Post
    The projector test results in the center seemed to only find two results from all the lens tests: 140 and 200 lp/mm . How is that possible ?
    Will Keir
    Creative Director ~ Jumping Rock Pictures
    Epic X & Dragon #2482 / R1 #3033
    Zeiss MKII Super Speeds Lenses

    "Why I choose film?
    The friendships, the adventure, the art."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #135 Effect of Horizontal Angle of View 
    Senior Member Charles Pickel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Seattle, USA
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Morrison View Post
    Haha. OK. I figured I was probably wrong. Thanks!
    You do bring up a sometimes overlooked point. Although sensor size will not have an effect on the accuracy of focus scales, it will have an effect on the relative nature of focal length. That is, the rule of thumb for a "normal" focal length is that it is approximately equivalent to the diagonal of the format. Hence the "normal" lens for ff35 (24 x 36) is a considered to be 50mm (ff35 diagonal is actually 43.266mm). As you increase sensor size and/or horizontal angle of view, the "normal" focal length will increase proportionally. So that classic human-eye POV 40mm lens you used in S35/4k starts to look a bit wide-ish in 5K 15x30. As sensor sizes continue to bounce around (exactly HOW big is that Black Magic sensor again ?), the cinematographer has to make adjustments.

    The new standard is there are no standards.
    Charles Pickel
    www.seriousgear.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #136  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,593
    Quote Originally Posted by Timur Civan View Post
    its as simple as time savings. my 90mm vivitar is far sharper and has better boken than any PL lens ive used, but its a nightmare to work with.

    the few seconds of time saved with each lens change with physically matched PL lenses adds up. over the course of a day, can mean a few minutes, and thats the difference between getting one more take or not. all high end gear is designed to save those few seconds. collectively it means more shooting time perday. when you are spending 50-300K per day, those minutes are very valuable. its really just about time.
    This argument absolutely drives me crazy.

    First, let me clarify that I'm not talking about real handmade cine lenses like Summliux-C's. Now:

    If you're willing to pay 10-15 times more for some convenience (convenience which even you make sound minor), that's your business.

    But that doesn't mean it's ethical for them to charge that. The expense of providing those conveniences is not that large. Larger, matched-diameter housings? A longer focus throw? Actually measuring where the distance marks are supposed to go, which they ought to be doing anyway? I'll eat my hat if a CP.2 costs more than 5-10% more to build than ZF/ZE (and I bet 90% of that is the different diaphram). Letting Zeiss pass that expense on to you at an absolutely outrageous mark-up just because you can afford it screws over everyone who isn't so lucky.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #137  
    You should learn how a cinema lens is made and how an average assembly line photography lens is made. Of course this varies depending on what you compare. It's not about mechanics , as it is about precision, tolerances, materials and quality. It also has a little to do with supply, demand and overhead.


    If you don't like it, don't buy it. But you should educate yourself before ranting. It's one thing to understand and still disagree, it's another to be ignorant. I don't know about cp.2's, but an assembly line generic photo lens and a Cooke cinema lens go through a very different birth canal, and the materials, time, and service costs reflect that.

    Costs are exponential in a way, and that leads to frustrating costs for many. As you increase up the chain, so very often many people find the increase in quality is not worth the increase in price... However some productions do and for very good reasons. Just because it's not you, doesn't make them ludicrous. For reasons you may not know about or dismiss as trivial, these lenses provide the appropriate productions with a service they are very willing to pay for and have paid for throughout the history of cinema.

    I like to remind everyone that cinema lenses are not always the best choice for every video production. In fact, depending on the circumstances, they can be quite wrong. And we should acknowledge that fact and how many types of videography can benefit from other types of lenses. It's a per production basis.

    It's not a reason to hate nor is it an OPEC style price gauge. People pay premium for anything hand built with utmost precision by a specialist, especially when these specialist workers are typically from Germany, France, Japan, England, etc.... Where labour rates are higher, than say a low-wage non specialist Chinese assembly line worker turning out masses of photography lenses everyday. Now this is not to say those lenses are crap, it's more about extreme QC, tolerances and precision, along with the premi quality in design, features, coatings and more.

    So again, the price to performance ratio does get very aggressive toward the top, and this certainly does not lend itself to be affordable to many and certainly not all, however just because you are not one of those productions who value paying for such lenses does not negate their validation as a worth while tool.

    This is why there are options, and I guess it is too bad that the most worthwhile cinema lenses are the ones with complicated sophisticated designs, built out of the highest quality materials, hand built/tested/rebuilt/tested by specialist lens makers and in low numbers. Supply and demand is sometimes a cruel mistress. But that is a capitalist market.

    If you'd like to know more about the production of cinema lenses, you may go to Jon fauer's Film and Digital Times magazine and look upa Cooke book factory tour, Zeiss factory tour or Leica factory tour. They discuss the process and you can see the difference. If that difference is not worth the price to you, than by all means there are options from a 25,000 prime, to a $30 prime. Find what suits you.
    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  
     

  8. #138  
    Moderator Evin Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    4,396
    Sorry for the tardy post guys, have a newborn in the house and time is not in great supply.
    Here is my take on the test...

    http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthr...=1#post1147835
    "All art is deception."

    My DP reel...
    http://www.evingrantdp.com
    360 Cinematography and camera rigs...
    http://www.360dop.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #139  
    Senior Member PatrickFaith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,557
    Have been spending hours upon hours, trying to correct some lens distortions on a heavy vfx shoot (using the LensDistortion node in nukex), will probably need to actually get the lenses and do test shots with the lens on a checkboard grid(I'm lucky that I can actually get the lens back to do the lens distortion charts).

    What I noticed from the SALT III test, is that in all cases the higher cost lenses had less lens distortion problems. I could easily see someone spending $100k in vfx hours on a movie trying to undistort lenses for match merges that need camera solves(I'm finding this very important for 3d mesh generation and deep pixel operations ... the meshes turn out curvey on flat surfaces without running the lens distortion nodes). Just another thing to think about if your doing a lens test for a film and there will be a decent amount of vfx.
    Last edited by PatrickFaith; 02-14-2013 at 11:35 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #140  
    Moderator Phil Holland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    10,933
    Quote Originally Posted by PatrickFaith View Post
    Have been spending hours upon hours, trying to correct some lens distortions on a heavy vfx shoot (using the LensDistortion node in nukex), will probably need to actually get the lenses and do test shots with the lens on a checkboard grid(I'm lucky that I can actually get the lens back to do the lens distortion charts).
    Interesting. I rarely do that at the tail of a production. Usually either before production starts or during the first couple weeks of filming we shoot checker boards and create our distortion geometry for either correction or addition. It's a big time saver getting this done at the beginning of a project as CG elements are created during the production these days. As approved elements come in and surveying/tracking data is culled or created we can get right to work often before the production even wraps.

    I've certainly seen variation across primes from different sets, usually slight though. The worst if the set data collector labels a lens as "zoom" instead of marking the actual focal length used on that zoom. iPads and tablets have greatly enhanced that on set workflow because they now have a "checklist" for each shot to go through.
    Phil Holland - Cinematographer - Los Angeles
    ________________________________
    phfx.com IMDB
    PHFX | tools

    2X RED Weapon 8K VV Monstro Bodies and a lot of things to use with them.

    Data Sheets and Notes:
    Red Weapon/DSMC2
    Red Dragon
    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