Canon CN Primes vs the new Zeiss Superspeeds

[Tom Gleeson]

Going to shoot a lens test on Friday with Canons new Digital Primes and fingers crossed a full set of the new Zeiss Superspeeds. We plan to also include Ultraprimes as a known benchmark. Yes we did consider Masterprimes as they have a matching speed but their much higher cost makes it an apples and oranges test.

We plan to shoot:
A test model to look at colour and skin.
A contrast test
A flare test
Focus breathing
Resolution Charts
Qualitative thoughts on mechanics

Any other parameters for testing that you would believe usefull and valuable? We will publish the results ASAP

 

[Ryan De Franco]

Test the corners: that's where lens design really shows. When you test sharpness, make sure you're looking at the edges too, and see if the focal plane is at all curved... you might be surprised!

Everyone is always curious about out of focus highlights, or bokeh. Put something ugly that will nonetheless photograph as circles of confusion when out of focus--like a silver magliner, or shelves, or thin sticks against a bright background. A big test of a lens is how it makes an "unpretty" environment somehow magical; superspeeds, cookes, Leicas, Nikkors all do this in their own way.

Instead of having the model hold the color chart--she might tilt it--mount it on a c-stand in front of her. That way it doesn't change at all and you can reliably compare the lenses' effect on the Macbeth colors.

 

[Jiri Vrozina]

They are full frame lenses, they should be fine in corners for s35

 

[Matt Ryan]

Definitely test for CA.

The CP.2's have a lot of CA so I'm curious if the new Cp.2 SuperSpeeds are the same. Here's some shots from Cp.2's: (right click, open in a new tab to view full size)

 

[Phil Holland]

@Matt the Canon CN-E lenses experience less than that. Especially around T2/T2.8. Wide open it is visible though, but not as much as the CP.2s.

 

[Matt Ryan]

@Matt the Canon CN-E lenses experience less than that. Especially around T2/T2.8. Wide open it is visible though, but not as much as the CP.2s.

Thats good to hear. Im curious how the new SuperSpeeds handle it as well.

 

[Tom Gleeson]

Thanks for the input gentlemen. Will look at CA and corner sharpness. Struggling to get the "full" set of Superspeeds but fingers crossed.

 

[James_Mills]

Where do you guys see the CA on Matt's pulls?

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

Thanks for the input gentlemen. Will look at CA and corner sharpness. Struggling to get the "full" set of Superspeeds but fingers crossed.

What's a "full" set of SS?
I thought there were only 3 like the original CPs...

 

[Matt Ryan]

blow them up and look at the "hot spots." The lights in the first, the muzzle of the gun and his hand in the second, and the edge of the kinos in the third.. They appear as purple outlines or fringes in this case...

Where do you guys see the CA on Matt's pulls?

 

[James_Mills]

Hmmm, I'm used to seeing more dramatic CA with some of the lenses I've experienced it with, and usually it's in forms of color distortion. What exactly are you looking for in these instances, Matt? Is it from the weird doubling shapes that come about the lights or is it the blue glow they omit?

 

[Matt Ryan]

It's the purple outlines and fringing around highlights or hot spots.

 

[Tom Gleeson]

yes a full set of SS are only three lenses. Our 85mm had an issue with focus lumpiness so has been sent back and hoping we get another by tommorrow.

 

[Matt Ryan]

yes a full set of SS are only three lenses. Our 85mm had an issue with focus lumpiness so has been sent back and hoping we get another by tommorrow.

you mean the focus ring?

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

It's the purple outlines and fringing around highlights or hot spots.

Chromatic aberration or (lateral) dispersion is a completely different phenomenon than purple fringing.
The latter is mainly a sensor property albeit dependent on the ray incident angle.
Not an issue with SLR lenses as they are all retrofocal and thus, by definition, near telecentric.
Very little lens influence on purple fringing
You can see the Leica M series camera sensors and their tilted micro lenses for explanation of a very radical configuration.

 

[Matt Ryan]

Chromatic aberration or (lateral) dispersion is a completely different phenomenon than purple fringing.
The latter is mainly a sensor property albeit dependent on the ray incident angle.
Not an issue with SLR lenses as they are all retrofocal and thus, by definition, near telecentric.
Very little lens influence on purple fringing
You can see the Leica M series camera sensors and their tilted micro lenses for explanation of a very radical configuration.

It's not a sensor issue in this case, shot on the RED. When I used Master Primes, S4's, or Super Speed MK III's, Red Pro Primes and Zooms, I didnt have those issues. Only on the CP.2's did those show up.

 

[Tom Gleeson]

Jacek,

We were planning on running the Imatest test procedure on these lenses. What do you think of this technique?

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

That's definitely a good idea.
Just remember to treat is a a relative test. No absolute number conclusions for sure.
The final image is absolutely influenced by the acquisition sensor so the numbers you get reflect that and they are going to vary greatly between different cameras (sensors)
Maybe if you removed the OLFP the numbers would be closer....

 

[Clayton Burkhart]

I just spent the last days on a bench at a couple of different locations.
The CP.2 Superspeeds most definitely have a lot of CA wide open.
It's mostly gone by f2.8
When the original Superspeeds (Mark III I believe) were put up, they were far sharper and with less CA wide open.
Really a whole other level of image.
I can only imagine how much better the old Standards would be by comparison. Definitely sharper than both other sets.
Of course when an S4 was put on it blew them all away as well.
I can say with some assurance that there is definitely a difference between a $3000 lens and a $15000 one.
By the way, I am sorry to inform the Cooke Panchro folks, but what we saw was that at 2.8, they were not as sharp or had as much resolution as an S4 at the same T-stop. This was a surprise.
I also saw the Schenider Xenar's, (Mark I and II's)which were sharper than the CP.2's, but which also exhibited some strange characteristics.
The Xenar 50mm had some kind of veiling flair wide open, exactly like an old Pentax Super Takumar, that was gone if you closed down one stop. This was the only lens in that series, which had that. It explains why a lot of folks find a kind of soft flatness with this series. It is however, a seeming defect which could be quite convenient for portraits - general softness wide open with good resolution at the same time, if that makes any sense. (Sharpness and resolution not being the same thing). Quite nice actually.
There were also a couple of strange distortions going on, on the sides of the charts with two of these Schneider's. (sorry I forgot which ones) Coma-like distortions. Not so nice that one. It means those lovely 18 blades apertures end up making half moons out of headlights at the edges. This would make sense if you look at the Portland tests from last year.

The CP.2's had one dog. Clearly the 50mm/1.4 is the same crap as it's ZF/ZE counterpart. However, to be fair the CP'2's were still better than the photo versions. Less flair and CA. I think this is due to the baffling however.

In terms of coverage, if RED does end up producing a larger sensor, I can say right now that the only cinema lenses which will provide proper coverage are the CP's and the Canon's. You can forget even the Ultraprimes, many in the series just barely cover S35. So if RED does do this, they are going to need to produce a new set of lenses to cover it. Which would only make sense commercially if they wanted to corner the market for their cameras. Hopefully they would learn the lesson of the RPP's, reduce the size and wieght and change the cosmetics to something much more simple and practical.

 

[Matt Ryan]

I just spent the last days on a bench at a couple of different locations.
The CP.2 Superspeeds most definitely have a lot of CA wide open.
It's mostly gone by f2.8
When the original Superspeeds (Mark III I believe) were put up, they were far sharper and with less CA wide open.
Really a whole other level of image.
I can only imagine how much better the old Standards would be by comparison. Definitely sharper than both other sets.
Of course when an S4 was put on it blew them all away as well.
I can say with some assurance that there is definitely a difference between a $3000 lens and a $15000 one.
By the way, I am sorry to inform the Cooke Panchro folks, but what we saw was that at 2.8, they were not as sharp or had as much resolution as an S4 at the same T-stop. This was a surprise.
I also saw the Schenider Xenar's, (Mark I and II's)which were sharper than the CP.2's, but which also exhibited some strange characteristics.
The Xenar 50mm had some kind of veiling flair wide open, exactly like an old Pentax Super Takumar, that was gone if you closed down one stop. This was the only lens in that series, which had that. It explains why a lot of folks find a kind of soft flatness with this series. It is however, a seeming defect which could be quite convenient for portraits - general softness wide open with good resolution at the same time, if that makes any sense. (Sharpness and resolution not being the same thing). Quite nice actually.
There were also a couple of strange distortions going on, on the sides of the charts with two of these Schneider's. (sorry I forgot which ones) Coma-like distortions. Not so nice that one. It means those lovely 18 blades apertures end up making half moons out of headlights at the edges. This would make sense if you look at the Portland tests from last year.

The CP.2's had one dog. Clearly the 50mm/1.4 is the same crap as it's ZF/ZE counterpart. However, to be fair the CP'2's were still better than the photo versions. Less flair and CA. I think this is due to the baffling however.

In terms of coverage, if RED does end up producing a larger sensor, I can say right now that the only cinema lenses which will provide proper coverage are the CP's and the Canon's. You can forget even the Ultraprimes, many in the series just barely cover S35. So if RED does do this, they are going to need to produce a new set of lenses to cover it. Which would only make sense commercially if they wanted to corner the market for their cameras. Hopefully they would learn the lesson of the RPP's, reduce the size and wieght and change the cosmetics to something much more simple and practical.

Thats too bad about the new Super Speeds. I'm a huge fan of the old SuperSpeeds and was hoping since they gave them the name they would hold up to the standard. Guess not.

According to this some lenses should cover Dragon if it stays at the current spec size of 30.7mm x 15.8mm : https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?hl=en_GB&key=0Ap3M8qZUEzJNdFpMZ0JtX2xCdFBxamFwY2NRM0VIanc&hl=en_GB&gid=0