Optimator vs. Null Lens and Target

[Peter Matthes]

To begin with, Jacek and Mitch, let me start by saying that I am sure I will never know half of what you guys know about lens theory and adjustment, but let me act as the consumer devil's advocate for a second. :devil:

I have watched all of the youtube Optimator videos ... twice.

My understanding is this:

Price of Optimator Pro vs. Null Lens and Target = Little difference in cost.

Jacek ... I am completely with you that the Optimator Pro does seem to have a serious advantage over the Null lens + Target since it allows you to see into the very corners of the frame. This lets you establish if the sensor is tilted ever so slightly, thereby minutely throwing off the plane of proper focus. As you clearly demonstrated, by spinning the Optimator, you can then establish if the sensor is in fact untrue ... or the very tool meant to measure it is. Hopefully for OptiTek ... the latter is rarely, if ever, the case.

To me, the interchangeable lens mounts of the Optimator seem as problematic as they would be useful. As you change mounts, there would seem to be a serious possibility of inconsistency. When the mount is swapable, any number of issues could throw off the accuracy of the measurement tool it is attached to.

For this potential problem, I understand that you sell a separate Scope Kit that establishes each mount's trueness, but that scope can more than double the price of the Pro model. If you bought the Optimator Deluxe ... with added mounts ... and the Scope Kit ... the price balloons to over $7,000 or more.

As you point out, the Deluxe model includes a micrometer. With all due respect, I don't think this is covered very thoroughly in the videos. If I understand this feature correctly, the micrometer allows you to move the target in and out in relation to the camera's sensor. This would allow one to establish how far off-kilter the camera's sensor is in relation to the target. In the case where one corner is proving to be soft, you could establish how far off (tilted) it actually is. This ability to measure that inconsistency may be very nice indeed ... but it adds another $2,300.00! hmy:

Frankly, and with all respect, if my sensor seemed tilted I would not necessarily need to know by how much. I would just send it in for repair.

I know I am rambling here ... but I am left with these two questions.

Unless the PL mount of the Pro model is permanently fixed ... like the Null Lens is ... wouldn't it be necessary to have the Scope Kit simply to establish is the included PL mount is true at all times? (Regardless of if you will ever change it to another mount ... like a Canon or Nikon)

When you spin the Optimator to judge corner trueness... since the mount is not permanently fixed ... couldn't a user accidently throw off the accuracy of the whole unit? :confused1:

I hope this all makes sense, and I would love to hear any and all opinions on these issues.

If it all seems fruitless, we could just have Jacek and Mitch battle each other. :boxing_smiley:.

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

Optimator Analysis

Optimator Analysis

Let me go first:
I'd like to command you for your throughout analysis- these days the attention span of a ferret seems to be prevailing in our society. This actually is very close to my line of thinking when I was considering features for the Optimator- I'm flattered:blush5:

but let me act as the consumer devil's advocate for a second. :devil:

Should I consider it a battle of Good and Evil? I love those.....

have watched all of the youtube Optimator videos ... twice.

My understanding is this:

Price of Optimator Pro vs. Null Lens and Target = Little difference in cost.

Jacek ... I am completely with you that the Optimator Pro does seem to have a serious advantage over the Null lens + Target since it allows you to see into the very corners of the frame. This lets you establish if the sensor is tilted ever so slightly, thereby minutely throwing off the plane of proper focus. As you clearly demonstrated, by spinning the Optimator, you can then establish if the sensor is in fact untrue ... or the very tool meant to measure it is. Hopefully for OptiTek ... the latter is rarely, if ever, the case.

I agree 100%- FYI We make sure the target is very close to center and flat-we have two independent procedures to set and verify- optical and mechanical.

To me, the interchangeable lens mounts of the Optimator seem as problematic as they would be useful. As you change mounts, there would seem to be a serious possibility of inconsistency. When the mount is swapable, any number of issues could throw off the accuracy of the measurement tool it is attached to.

As I had learned in process this is mainly a procedural issue- from mechanical engineering standpoint tolerance stack could be kept easily under control as long as measurement procedures are followed.
Look at it this way- lenses from various manufacturers(Angie, Cooke, Optex, Century of the top of my head) have used neutral mounting system for years with great success. And lenses are much heavier, used in more hostile conditions ( rentals, hostile locations, stressful setups, etc.) I can't imagine Optimator ever being subjected to such abuse... Optimator is also much smaller and lighter and the lens barrel and mounts machined out of stainless steel-incredibly strong and stable material. StainlessSteel all the way, baby!!!!

For this potential problem, I understand that you sell a separate Scope Kit that establishes each mount's trueness, but that scope can more than double the price of the Pro model. If you bought the Optimator Deluxe ... with added mounts ... and the Scope Kit ... the price balloons to over $7,000 or more.

It's all about having choices Peter:
Every instrument needs to be verified periodically-I mean every one. I simply thought about it when I designed the system so it is complete. I thought it was an advantage- silly me... It has nothing to do with the design, every collimator, projector, etc has to be calibrated from time to time-why should any of these test tools be different...

As you point out, the Deluxe model includes a micrometer. With all due respect, I don't think this is covered very thoroughly in the videos. If I understand this feature correctly, the micrometer allows you to move the target in and out in relation to the camera's sensor. This would allow one to establish how far off-kilter the camera's sensor is in relation to the target. In the case where one corner is proving to be soft, you could establish how far off (tilted) it actually is. This ability to measure that inconsistency may be very nice indeed ... but it adds another $2,300.00! hmy:

Will work on it-thanks!!! As far as the price bump again- it's all about You- the customer, having choices-as spartan or as loaded as you need/can afford

Frankly, and with all respect, if my sensor seemed tilted I would not necessarily need to know by how much. I would just send it in for repair.

I agree it's not for everyone. From experience (working for a major lens distributor) I can tell you that manufacturers prefer numbers in communicating with customers- otherwise they can always use the "it's in specs" excuse.
If you ask them what the specs are and compare you have a better case. you can also determine if the lenses are drifting away if you know your sensor is square but still getting sharpness difference...

Unless the PL mount of the Pro model is permanently fixed ... like the Null Lens is ... wouldn't it be necessary to have the Scope Kit simply to establish is the included PL mount is true at all times? (Regardless of if you will ever change it to another mount ... like a Canon or Nikon)

If you are obsessive/compulsive you may- how often do you check your zooms?

When you spin the Optimator to judge corner trueness... since the mount is not permanently fixed ... couldn't a user accidently throw off the accuracy of the whole unit? :confused1:

I hope this all makes sense, and I would love to hear any and all opinions on these issues.

If it all seems fruitless, we could just have Jacek and Mitch battle each other. :boxing_smiley:.

1- It's procedural, again. Buy the Optimator and I'll personally walk you through it- promise
You wouldn't want to see that battle....:reddevil:

 

[Peter Matthes]

Jacek,

Thank you so much for taking the time and addressing my concerns. :thumbup1:

The ability to change mounts still seems slightly risky to me, considering the room for error, but I definitely see your point when it comes to mount neutral lenses and their past success.

I agree 100%- FYI We make sure the target is very close to center and flat-we have two independent procedures to set and verify- optical and mechanical.

That statement by you (above) leads me to believe that on the Optimator Pro model the target is meticulously measured and then set permanently in place. On the Deluxe model, this target would be adjustable with the micrometer with trueness existing at zero. Are both of those statements true?

If the Optimator Pro model's target is indeed set in stone (so to speak), that certainly would explain why the cost to upgrade from the Pro model to the Deluxe model is significantly higher than just buying the Deluxe from the start.

The main advantage to the Optimator, that I can see, if its ability to see into the corners of the frame. This might not be such a major deal on the Red One, but when the Epic comes out this could be paramount. If the Epic will have a sensor that moves in six different directions (three axis), rather than a ring that adjusts the lens mount to the fixed sensor, the ability to judge the sensor's trueness would become exceedingly important.

I know how busy the gang at Red must be, so I don't expect an answer. However, if you guys know already for certain, could you confirm how proper backfocus will be set on the Epic/Scarlet line?

 

[ericyoung]

The user will only have back and forth adjustment. Sensor tilt will be a factory/service adjustment from an answer Jim Jannard gave at some point to a similar question by me.

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

Optimator concerns

Optimator concerns

Jacek,

Thank you so much for taking the time and addressing my concerns. :thumbup1:

The ability to change mounts still seems slightly risky to me, considering the room for error, but I definitely see your point when it comes to mount neutral lenses and their past success.

You're welcome, Peter. I feel there is a lack of info here about the Optimator and its advantages. You can do so much with it to tune your camera-just take advantage of the features...
FYI I never had issues with focus drifting due to the neutral mounting . It's stainless all the way- as good as solid, only interchangable to other mounting systems

That statement by you (above) leads me to believe that on the Optimator Pro model the target is meticulously measured and then set permanently in place. On the Deluxe model, this target would be adjustable with the micrometer with trueness existing at zero. Are both of those statements true?

If the Optimator Pro model's target is indeed set in stone (so to speak), that certainly would explain why the cost to upgrade from the Pro model to the Deluxe model is significantly higher than just buying the Deluxe from the start.

That's correct, Peter. It's not so much the cost of the parts, but how labor intensive the upgrade is...

The main advantage to the Optimator, that I can see, if its ability to see into the corners of the frame. This might not be such a major deal on the Red One, but when the Epic comes out this could be paramount. If the Epic will have a sensor that moves in six different directions (three axis), rather than a ring that adjusts the lens mount to the fixed sensor, the ability to judge the sensor's trueness would become exceedingly important.

I know how busy the gang at Red must be, so I don't expect an answer. However, if you guys know already for certain, could you confirm how proper backfocus will be set on the Epic/Scarlet line?

I think that in the real world you will deal more with sensor centering when the zooms are not tracking center properly and you are trying to determine what's at fault-camera(sensor centering) or the zoom lens center tracking adjustment. Also I think that having a number next to the resolution target would be important in keeping the consistancy and communicating issues remotely(for example you could trouble shoot the focus issues over the phone just by asking how much the camera resolves of the Optimator target)Corners are important- don't get me wrong but I think that the two above features are more useful in everyday work enviroment.:001_cool:

 

[Mitch Gross]

Peter, great questions. I think Jacek states his case clearly. Let me state that we have a belief in a non-drift tool. Simply stated, the NULL system remains accurate because there are no end user adjustment points that can create any slip. Any adjustment point or interconnect will have a tolerance, and while these may be minimal, the point of our tool is to eliminate as much tolerance range as possible. The NULL is simple, it is accurate, it is effective and easy to use in the field and it will remain so throughout its life. We have tested its use on camera sensors far larger than the RED One and it maintains perfect accuracy.

Just as he has been fair to us, I won't refute Jacek's design concepts here or the Optimator's feature set. That would be improper -- I'm here to tell you what we do. The NULL Lens and Target are just the first two items in the NULL Family of products. We plan to do all of the Optimator's functions and others as well, and one need only purchase the modules for the functions one desires. And at the heart of the NULL design concept is no moving parts.

 

[John "Woody" Glaser]

This is my response from a previous thread...Optimator/Lumacheck/Denz/Null

This is my response from a previous thread...Optimator/Lumacheck/Denz/Null

I am also interested in getting a collimator. I would also like to see some sort of review, or any feedback, from a customer who has actually used them on a red/phantom etc.
There are several collimators in the market right now. I would love to see them compared side by side by a neutral party. (Perhaps a lens/camera tech from a major equiptment house with no affiliations to any manufacturer.)
I would definately use the review to help make a decision on the purchase.
Best Regards,
Woody

 

[Nils J. Nesse]

Jacek, it seems too complicated to find out the price of your Optimator!

The competing products - Null, UniQ, Denz FDC, Lumacheck - all have their prices out in the open.

I figure the Optimator will be more expensive than the Null, but when i dont know How Much, it's difficult to consider it compared to the others.

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

Optimator pricing

Optimator pricing

Jacek, it seems too complicated to find out the price of your Optimator!

The competing products - Null, UniQ, Denz FDC, Lumacheck - all have their prices out in the open.

I figure the Optimator will be more expensive than the Null, but when i dont know How Much, it's difficult to consider it compared to the others.

Actually the Optimator is priced very close to other products
The Pro is about $2600 and the Deluxe is $4800 or so last time I heard.
That's same or less than the competition and all the extra features discussed above are included!!!!!
We are working on more transparent and direct pricing access, just some logistics to work out..

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Jacek, it seems too complicated to find out the price of your Optimator!

The competing products - Null, UniQ, Denz FDC, Lumacheck - all have their prices out in the open.

I figure the Optimator will be more expensive than the Null, but when i dont know How Much, it's difficult to consider it compared to the others.

As I have got a quote from Ban Pro Munchen:

- Optimator Deluxe (Basic) would cost you about Euro 3.500

- Optimator Pro (upgrade fom deluxe) about Euro 1.800

So those are all net prices exclusive VAT.

For the latest price quote email to BandPro with request for Optimator prices.

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

pricing mistake

pricing mistake

As I have got a quote from Ban Pro Munchen:

- Optimator Deluxe (Basic) would cost you about Euro 3.500

- Optimator Pro (upgrade fom deluxe) about Euro 1.800

So those are all net prices exclusive VAT.

For the latest price quote email to BandPro with request for Optimator prices.

Hello Sanjin,
Thanks for posting. I think that there is a mistake in pricing. Deluxe model is the full featured unit and Pro is the basic one.
I'll clarify that with Band Pro
Videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tF022NkUeOw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVlDVCgBydI

 

[Nils J. Nesse]

Thanks Jacek & Sanjin!

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Hello Sanjin,
Thanks for posting. I think that there is a mistake in pricing. Deluxe model is the full featured unit and Pro is the basic one.
I'll clarify that with Band Pro
Videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tF022NkUeOw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVlDVCgBydI

Thanks Jacek,

sorry but I mixed up, simultaneously "sniffing" in three computers on my desktop and messing up is somehow a must in that case.

 

[Nils J. Nesse]

I have to say, the Optimator Pro is less expensive than I suspected...
And BandPro tell me they have a "pre NAB" campaign going on right now, with prices about 15% lower than Jacek listed...

 

[Jorge Díaz-Amador]

I'm going to read through this thread completely when I get a chance. I was always very much against the idea that the end user could set his own FFD using just a test chart. I'm sure that has contributed to a multitude of lens focus issue that were really a miscalibrated RED PL mount. I'm glad there is a choice of tools now to do the job properly.

Here at Abel LA we have a Chrosziel Mk. III 45s collimator and a Null Lens. The Null has the sharpest image for a shallow depth of focus test lens that I have ever seen. Using it with the Chrosziel collimator, it is possible to set back focus within 5µm (0.005 mm).

 

[Peter Matthes]

Hey Jorge,

Abel Cine Tech is very lucky to have you on their team. :grouphug:

Please correct me if I make any misstatements. God knows that I have only a small fraction of the lens experience that you do.

I was always very much against the idea that the end user could set his own FFD using just a test chart. I'm sure that has contributed to a multitude of lens focus issue that were really a miscalibrated RED PL mount.

That always seemed the case to me as well. When testing with a single lens and a chart ... the result could very well be telling you more about the lens than the camera's own back focus. I think most ACs will still do chart tests for each lens (especially zooms), but it would be nice to know if the camera's back focus is calibrated properly to begin with.

Here at Abel LA we have a Chrosziel Mk. III 45s collimator and a Null Lens. The Null has the sharpest image for a shallow depth of focus test lens that I have ever seen.

I agree that the Null Lens and Null Target look really good. Mitch makes a very good argument that there are no moving parts in the Null to drift over time (or upon minor impact). The Null Lens looks like an excellent choice for someone often shooting run and gun, and constantly outside in the field. The target also looks robust and it certainly is cool that it screws on like a silencer. Leave it to the Germans to design it this way (I'm German ... I'm hope I am allowed to make this dig) :001_smile:

Using it (The Null) with the Chrosziel collimator, it is possible to set back focus within 5µm (0.005 mm).

The Null's 0.005mm margin of error certainly is great. However, it is identical to the claims made by OptiTek (Optimator) and (Luma Tech, Inc) Lumacheck.

I would not be surprised if all three devices work equally well in this respect. All three parties (IB/E Optics, OptiTek and Luma Tech, Inc) are lens manufacturers, so it follows that they know what they are doing.

They are even similar in price.

Null + Target = $2,695.00 (Abel Cine Tech)
Optimator Pro = $2,195.00* (Band Pro *PRE-NAB PRICING ONLY)
Optimator Deluxe (includes a micrometer) = $3,995.00* (Band Pro *PRE-NAB PRICING ONLY)
Lumacheck = $2,495.00 (Website quote)

It seems to me, that it really comes down to what strengths and weaknesses each product has ... or does not have.

*It might come down to Null's ruggedness and true accuracy.
*It might be the Optimator's unique ability to see into, and focus to, the corners of the frame ... additionally allowing sensor alignment to be determined.
*It might be Lumacheck's resemblance to a rape whistle. (In all seriousness I cannot find any reviews or video demonstrations of this product)

It would be really nice to have all three products evaluated by a neutral party with a great deal of lens experience. Far be it for me to suggest who that should be, but it would be great to see it happen.

If there were some reasonable suggestions for a neutral and unbiased judge, would all three parties be willing to send a sample of their product to them?

After all, it seems like this will be the year of challenges. [Arri :violent5: Red]
Anyway, it was just a thought. :idea:

Any other opinions out there?

 

[Vico Martin]

Thanks for the quotes, Peter!

 

[Oliver Schietinger]

You may already know but there are two other devices on the market. The Denz FDC or Flange Depth Controller.
I can only link to the downloads page
http://www.denz-deniz.com/down.htm

The Unique Optics Diascope (3 versions)
http://www.uniqoptics.net/instruments.htm

I think they've been mentioned before on reduser but just more food for thought

I find the challenge for any of these devices is consistency, accuracy and ease of use. After that, its all dollars and cents.

Its great to see the different attempts to tackle the back focus issue.

I am not endorsing any device at this time.

 

[Jorge Díaz-Amador]

Peter,

Thanks for the props! I'm happy to be here.

I know both Jacek and Gregory and I'm sure they've produced quality instruments, although I haven't had the chance to try out either one. I'm sure each will have it's own advantages and disadvantages.

When I set FFD focus on a RED ONE with the Chrosziel collimator and the Null Lens, I can see the individual Bayer mask "pixels". I believe those are about 4µm across. There is NO WAY you could ever get that kind of accuracy using a test chart and a monitor, no matter how big the monitor.

You could capture clips and look at them in 4k, but you can't do that in real time. Adjusting for ideal focus needs to be done in real time.

Keep in mind that the Chrosziel Mk. III 45s is a $45,000 instrument, so it's not exactly a fair comparison, nor is the Crosziel something you could take into the field.

 

[Peter Matthes]

When I set FFD focus on a RED ONE with the Chrosziel collimator and the Null Lens, I can see the individual Bayer mask "pixels". I believe those are about 4µm across.

What is 1µm between friends?

Don't get me wrong, Jorge. I think the Null Lens is a great product and extremely sturdy. :yesnod:

The two things that make me hesitate about the Null Lens is its inability to see the corners of the frame, and its green on black Siemens star as a target.

As I can see from their video ... Thank you Oliver for this link! ... Uniqoptics uses a white on black Siemens star for their focus target.

http://www.uniqoptics.net/apps/videos/videos/show/4250782-diascope-demo

It may just be me, but I have always found Siemens stars difficult to focus to, compared to a FiddleHead pattern or even a lined DSC chart.

I guess, for me, it comes down to all these factors:
*** KEEP IN MIND. I have not held any of these FFD tools in my hand, nor had a chance to use any of them. ***

Null Lens

http://vimeo.com/6814014

Strengths:
1) It is robust and sturdy with no moving parts.
2) Reasonably affordable at $2,695.00 for the Null Lens and Target kit.
3) If you always work outside, you can just buy the Null Lens and save $1000.00
4) Accurate to 0.005mm.

Weaknesses:
1) Being a super wide lens, it cannot see the four corners of the frame.
2) Perhaps, for me, a slightly difficult target to focus to.
3) If you use Nikon or Canon lenses, you will have to wait for the Nikon and/or Cannon Null Lenses to come out. Will they also cost $1,695.00?

Optimator Pro

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVlDVCgBydI

Strengths:
1) It can see the corners of the frame.
2) Chart-like target seems fairly easy to focus to.
3) Accurate to 0.005mm.
4) Interchangeable lens mounts - neutral mount. (Nikon, Canon, PL, etc.)
5) All stainless steel used for lens mounts.
6) Least expensive of the lot at $2,195.00* (*At least for the next six weeks)

Weaknesses:
1) Might not be as robust as the Null Lens and Target, but looks solid.
2) Might suffer from some inconsistency since the mounts can be swapped out.

Optimator Deluxe

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tF022NkUeOw

Stength:
Same as above, but ...
1) Micrometer allows the user to establish exactly how far off your sensor is. This I could see as an advantage if you were using a camera that needed to be shimmed, or you wanted to communicate to a camera manufacturer a measured finding in an off kilter sensor.

*Additonal scope available to check accuracy of the Optimator Deluxe. I believe it costs $1,500.00 (forgive my memory) and I am unsure if it can act as a Collimator/Checker for lenses as well as the unit itself.

Weakness:
Same as above, but ...
1) Because the reticle can be adjusted back and forth ... it can move ... and therefore could be more prone to getting knocked out of whack. (technical phrase ... I know)
2) Addition of micrometer adds $1,800.00

Uniqoptics Non-Focusable Diascope:

http://www.uniqoptics.net/instruments.htm

Strengths:
1) Looks fairly solid.
2) Seems to see the corners of the frame slightly better than the Null Target.
3) Accurate to 0.005mm.
4) Optional Nikon mount available for $450.00
5) The kit comes with a fitted case, but it's not cheap. (See below)
6) Kit includes a Collimator/Checker with PL Adapter for individual lenses and the unit itself.

Weaknesses:
1) Still utilizes a Siemens star, which for me is not my favorite.
2) It is expensive, clocking in at $4,790.00 without Nikon mount, but with case and multiple power source choices. (Cigarette, Red Powered, AC)
3) Unclear if the Nikon mount is stainless steel or how it is changed out. Looks like bolts.

Uniqoptics Focusable Diascope:

http://www.uniqoptics.net/52mmffdfocusablediascope.htm

Strengths:
Same as above, but ...
1) Reticle can be moved and focused to ascertain if the camera's FFD is off +/-.

Weaknesses:
Same as above, but ...
1) Because the reticle can be adjusted back and forth ... it can move ... and therefore could be more prone to getting knocked out of whack.
2) Unlike the Optimator, it only has +/- on its adjustment ring. There appear to be no measurement numbers like the Optimator's micrometer. This seems limiting for shimming and communication with camera manufacturer.
3) The complete kit clocks in at $6,240.00 and does not include the Nikon mount. (Additional $450.00)

Lumacheck:

http://www.lumacheck.com/

I really know very little about it except that they also claim it to be accurate to 0.005mm and it costs $2,495.00.

Denz Flange Depth Controller:

http://www.denz-deniz.com/down.htm

-It seems interesting.
-Perhaps, somewhat simplistic.
-It reminds me of a colored version of the pong game from my Atari 2600. :thumbup: