Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Announcing the S.A.L.T. (Southland Alternative Lens Test)

Status
Not open for further replies.
So it looks like the lineup will be as follows: (no particular order)

Zeiss Super Speeds
Zeiss Standard Speeds
Zeiss Ultra Primes
Zeiss Master Primes
Zeiss Compact Primes
Cooke S4s
RED Pro Primes
UniqOptics Primes
IB/E RED Null
Angenieux 15-40mm Optimo
Angenieux 17-80mm Optimo
Angenieux 24-290mm Optimo
Angenieux 16-42mm DP
Angenieux 30-80mm DP
Ruby 14-24mm
Duclos 11-16mm
RED 18-85mm

And a few others are still pending.
Some of these may not be included depending on time restraints.

Gents, please correct me if I'm missing anything here.
 
While you're at it, and if you have some time left, would be interesting to add the Red 18-50 and 50-150 lenses, just to see how they compare to all these lenses too... Even if you don't do extensive testing on these of course, as they've been around for some time now.

Anyway, looking forward to the results, thanks for doing this.
 
I think everyone has a good idea of the RED light zooms. RED did a great job with providing an affordable zoom that is easily accessible. These can be picked up at almost any rental house for very little cost and there are many, many reviews of them on the web/REDUser already. I don't think it would be in our best interest to test these as well. If we go through everything else and we still have time, maybe we can squeeze them in.
 
I agree w/ Mr. Duclos about the RED zooms. So many reviews out there already and sample imagery.

Anyway, it looks to be a very nice line-up for for this round of testing. Too bad the new Illumina prototypes won't be there, but I guess we can't have everything. :) I'm anxious to see the results.

tubular said:
Agreed, Please stay with the "Professional" Lenses.
Click to expand...

Ouch.
 
I agree Jeff, I would have liked to include the Illumina lenses in my projector test.
Unfortunately, some lenses are still in prototype stages. Including the Uniq Primes.
The Uniq lenses are at a point where they are almost ready to go, but will have minor flaws that are yet to be addressed for final production models.
I do not know the state of the Illumina lenses, but I cannot (nor should anyone else) discount their quality as they are just not ready to be shown.
 
What about the IBE primes?

Mitch?
 
Paul Hazlett said:
What about the IBE primes?

Mitch?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately these prototypes were not available in time for the tests either. Please don't hold it against them. Just like the Luma Tech lenses, they were just not ready for this. When they are they will be available to all and I think people will be pleasantly surprised by them. For now we were able to send over the RED Null as we felt this was a good opportunity for the device to be checked out by the esteemed group conducting the SALT.
 
Can there be at least one test result such that I could see the same image (or closely the same) on all those lenses, so as to try and get a sense of the differences?
 
Yes, there will a couple of set-ups where every lens will be tested, but as you can imagine, it's hard to get the same composition with an 11mm or 12mm compared to a 100mm. But within the same focal length, the set-up will be the same for comparative purposes.

The big problem is that there are so many lenses to test.
 
Based on this post by Jarred http://reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=423293&postcount=146

Would you please do a test where a 1.2ND (or higher) is placed in front of the glass (without any IR filters) to determine how much IR the RPPs filter? From Jarred's post and the look of the screencaps from that thread (which Jarred asserts were using a 1.2ND without any IR) he seems to be claiming that RPPs don't need an external IR blocker of any sort
 
Shawn Nelson said:
he seems to be claiming that RPPs don't need an external IR blocker of any sort
Click to expand...

O lord.

I did not make those claims and I did NOT say you do not need an external IR blocker of any sort. Sorry if I led you to that assumption.

The RPP's do have an IR coating on them to help reduce IR hitting the sensor... but I am in no way am telling or suggesting people that they do not need an external IR of any sort... in very high IR situations of course you are going to need an IR filter, All i told you guys was that we did not use one for the test, and in that situation the footage happened to turn out great.
 
that's why I was careful to say "seems", to indicate my own guess factor.

Hmm, if 1.2ND looks great, this could make IRs only a special case situation (instead of they usual for outdoors like it is now).

This is pretty freakin cool that you guys have done this!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top