Dragon and Leica lenses...

[Bob Gundu]

I had my doubts about the zooms originating from the stills world, but they reassured me that these were built from the ground up. But zooms and primes are different animals.

Compact zooms and primes from Zeiss are the same still lenses but in a better housing. Way overpriced IMHO. Schneider is releasing the Cine Xenons, FF T2.1, made for digital cinema cameras like Dragon in mind. They will be cheap. Let's hope they are good too. They look good though.

 

[Santiago Marti]

Didn't know that about the compact zooms. Thought that being in the same compact family they wouldn't be so good but actually never tried them. I'm really interested in the Xenons though. I'd love to see Schneider releasing more than 3 lenses at first.

 

[Brian Merlen]

+1 for the full frame schnieders! very interested in a set of those!

 

[Phil Holland]

One of my highlights from NAB 2013 was speaking to the designer of the Compact Zooms for about 45 minutes. They are indeed fresh designs.

Interestingly enough, the very first thing I did once the doors were open was spend about 45 minutes with the Red Motion Mount and learn all I could.

 

[Carlo Rho]

About Zooms:
Last year @ IBC '12 I was speaking with southern EU sales rep from Angenieux and he said that the new Optimos 28-340 & 19.5-94 were in fact the "old" Optimos 24-290 & 17-80 with a new back. They were not release them because they were expecting the Dragon's spec to be sure to cover the entire new sensor.
I never saw this lenses out from fairs but you can now order them (with a 12-18 months waiting list) so I believe that they cover the Dragon. We've to wait the IBC and hope that RED borrow an Epic Dragon for the Angenieux booth to check it.
Others interesting zooms are the Canon's CN-E30-300mm T2.95-3.7 L SP & CN-E 14.5-60mm T2.6L SP, we've tested them last year (for Canon) and they're quite nice, well constructed and definitely lighter and cheaper (half size/half price) than Angenieux. Their look is similar to UltraPrime, a bit "without a soul", they're technically good but without a specific feeling that a Leica, a Cooke, a MasterPrime or a Standard Speed could give. The T on the longer 30-300 is almost the same as the 28-340 but Canon declare that you'll loose light at 300 while Angenieux doesn't but you need only a waveform to see that the French guy has the same behavior.
Canon sells them in PL or EOS mount (not interchangeable) covering S35 or APS-C sensors with a 1:1.78 FoV so I believe they could cover the 6K HD (1:1.77) but not the 6K full frame (1:1.9), they for sure deserve a test once Dragons will be released in the wild.

 

[Mehran MK Khan]

The features page on the EPIC Dragon page notes that the new sensor window design allows the wider Leica Ms to be used. I really hope this means I get to use my 24mm/35mm Summilux Ms. I'd be crying tears of joy if someone confirmed this.

 

[Les Hillis]

The features page on the EPIC Dragon page notes that the new sensor window design allows the wider Leica Ms to be used. I really hope this means I get to use my 24mm/35mm Summilux Ms. I'd be crying tears of joy if someone confirmed this.

Wow, didn't think that was going to happen, but from the RED website...

"Leica-M, Canon, Nikon, and PL lenses are all compatible with EPIC DRAGON cameras. All mounts are easy to swap out and are engineered to fit precisely, without ever having to adjust back focus. A redesigned sensor window allows for the use of wider Leica-M and Angenieux lenses, while also providing a larger field of view when shooting. Every lens is a new perspective and the EPIC DRAGON lets you pick the one that works for you..."

+1 Can anyone confirm the OLPF port on the Dragon camera's has in fact been changed as described above?

 

[Chad Lancaster]

wow thats great news, Jarred which wider Leica M lenses will work?

 

[Les Hillis]

Chad, with the OLPF port widened to accommodate the wider Dragon sensor window, all M-mount lenses with a protruding rear lens element should fit, unless there are some M-mount lenses whose rear lens elements are too long and sit too deep as well (can't think of any off the top of my head).

People should remember though that getting a lens to mount and getting a decent image from it aren't the same thing. With the rear lens element sitting so close to the sensor, the light coming through the lens hits the edges of the sensor at such an oblique angle that it's difficult for the sensor to 'read' the light correctly. This can result in dimming and colour shifts around the edge of the frame (when going wider than about 35-50mm).

The Leica-M digital still camera's compensated for this to some extent by angling the tiny lenses on the photosites around the edges of the sensor to receive this highly angled light better.

The vignetting and discolouration can also be corrected in post with software, but it's a bit of a multi-step process/hassle and might not always give acceptable results. See here for some 12mm and 21mm M-mount test examples - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYVqug-eEUQ

Hmmmm, just had a thought. Wondering if, with a 4K finish, you could use the wider lenses but crop out the vignetting on the wider 6K (or even 5K) Dragon sensor and still get a wide field of view, or a unique view (ie. 12mm perspective and spatial relationships but with a 35-50mm field of view)...

 

[Nick Morrison]

Chad, with the OLPF port widened to accommodate the wider Dragon sensor window, all M-mount lenses with a protruding rear lens element should fit, unless there are some M-mount lenses whose rear lens elements are too long and sit too deep as well (can't think of any off the top of my head).

People should remember though that getting a lens to mount and getting a decent image from it aren't the same thing. With the rear lens element sitting so close to the sensor, the light coming through the lens hits the edges of the sensor at such an oblique angle that it's difficult for the sensor to 'read' the light correctly. This can result in dimming and colour shifts around the edge of the frame (when going wider than about 35-50mm).

The Leica-M digital still camera's compensated for this to some extent by angling the tiny lenses on the photosites around the edges of the sensor to receive this highly angled light better.

The vignetting and discolouration can also be corrected in post with software, but it's a bit of a multi-step process/hassle and might not always give acceptable results. See here for some 12mm and 21mm M-mount test examples - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYVqug-eEUQ

Hmmmm, just had a thought. Wondering if, with a 4K finish, you could use the wider lenses but crop out the vignetting on the wider 6K (or even 5K) Dragon sensor and still get a wide field of view, or a unique view (ie. 12mm perspective and spatial relationships but with a 35-50mm field of view)...

Very interesting Les. I'm fascinated with how good Rangefinder glass could look on Dragon, but have been hearing about the Leica-M issues on the wide angles. I guess we'll have to see. Your idea of windowing in at 4K is interesting. But it may negate the need to go wider. A 24mm prime cropped at 4K may end up giving you the same FOV as a 35mm prime at 6K (except you get the advantage of 6k). I guess on ultrawides like a 21mm cropping in would still make sense. This whole range-finder development bears looking more into...I for one am officially very interested.

 

[Les Hillis]

Yeah, will have to wait and see if the windowing would work. Not sure if there are enough numbers around to be able to work it out in theory yet. With your liking of Zeiss lenses, it makes sense that you'd find these developments interesting, as some of the better wide angle M-mount lenses that don't fit the Epic/Scarlet's are actually Zeiss made and branded lenses.

I think though it might be the Angenieux lens guys that end up benefiting most from these changes.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Yeah, will have to wait and see if the windowing would work. Not sure if there are enough numbers around to be able to work it out in theory yet. With your liking of Zeiss lenses, it makes sense that you'd find these developments interesting, as some of the better wide angle M-mount lenses that don't fit the Epic/Scarlet's are actually Zeiss made and branded lenses.

I think though it might be the Angenieux lens guys that end up benefiting most from these changes.

Haha. Yeah, I just found out that there's a way to MOD Contax G rangefinder glass to Leica M mount...with MANUAL focus (all be it pretty poor manual focus). Drooling at the thought of how GOOD it could look on DRAGON....

 

[Ketch Rossi]

I have to say they we have tested just about every combination of lenses with the Dragon sensor and the Leicas win.

This really should be no surprise.

All the Leicas cover the full sensor and have the most resolution of all lenses tested.

While some lenses will necessitate dropping down to 5.5K to cover... the Leicas don't. The resolution of these lenses are completely matched with the Dragon sensor.

Just sayin'.

Jim

Jim, I hope Phil is wrong here, I really do... If Phil is right I must admit that I am truly disappointed on the Leica's since the Master Primes and Ultra Primes both cover 6k from 18mm on.

 

[Eric Z]

Ketch,
Master Primes actually cover 6K from 25mm on:

I just LOVE those Master Primes!!

 

[Ketch Rossi]

I stand corrected Eric... Still disappointed on the Leica's coverage, but I guess they were design to resolve up to 8k, not meaning that they would cover a sensor specific size up to that resolution.


I think is really time to get some Engineering hat on and complete a design for a Full frame Cine Glass... FAST!!

 

[Phil Holland]

Correct Ketch. They were designed to resolve 8K within an S35 format. And believe me, those Leicas at 5.5K are going to out resolve certain other lenses at 6K even.

All of which can lead to a clean, high resolving, and vibrant 4K finish.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

And that of I have no doubt, and I guess I have to see the vignetting myself, and I will soon enough, as it might be completely usable for me anyways, just that with my first film been pushed so far along, was mainly also do to the awaiting of the Dragon since I'll be printing a crazy amount of 6'+ Prints off of it.

 

[Daniel Grosseman]

I thought that Epic Dragon had the same sensor size as the Epic MX but with a higher density of pixels(smaller photo sites). Is it bigger? The only reason that the lenses that covered 5K in MX won't cover 6K in Dragon would be, in my opinion, if the sensor size was expanded, in that case lenses with larger image circles would be a necessary.

 

[Phil Holland]

I thought that Epic Dragon had the same sensor size as the Epic MX but with a higher density of pixels(smaller photo sites). Is it bigger? The only reason that the lenses that covered 5K in MX won't cover 6K in Dragon would be, in my opinion, if the sensor size was expanded, in that case lenses with larger image circles would be a necessary.

Daniel, Epic Dragon's 6K sensor is larger than Mysterium-X. However, Mysterium-X at 5K is essentially Dragon at 5.5K due to the new smaller pixel design. So higher resolution in that same "format size". 6K gets you a bit more resolution and larger format as well. There are lots of lens options that cover all of these formats in reality.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

So what T/2 or T/1.3 cine lens cover 6K below 25mm?