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 :)

Dragon Lens Coverage Information

Phil any chance you could put a set of Cooke Mini S4i on the dragon?
 
The results for Leica Summilux C Primes during the SALT III projector phase at Duclos were similar to Master primes, perhaps slightly better. Similar high numbers for line pairs per millimeter(200, except for the longs), very little breathing, minor light fall off and good contrast but in my notes the Leica Primes had more coverage for the Dragon specs which were not official at the time but we had a rough idea from Phil's chart.

There could be variation in the lenses themselves.

It's interested that Jim fell in love with the 75mm Lecia Summilux C because that lens for our SALT III tests scored the lowest of the four tested, including spherical aberrations. My old 85mm Zeiss Super Speed MKII put up better lp/mm numbers for Super 35mm coverage area. The leica 75mm scored 100 compared to 140 by the Super Speed.

All the videos are still online from SALT III. Worth another look thanks to Matt Ryan.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...igh-Speed-Lens-Shootout-quot-WFO-quot-Results





Medavoym said:
you get what happened here - on a lens projector, it looked like Leicas had more coverage, on the actual camera, it's the opposite.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
What about the Summicron Cs?

KETCH ROSSi said:
All good on my side... Just prematurely panicked at the word Vignetting... ;)

That the Leica Summilux C. Primes are the best there is, I had no doubts form the moment I shot with it on M8 IN Munich in 2011 thanks to a loaner from Band Pro, and immediately Ordered them.


And can't wait to shoot my first piece on DRAGON with them... And also get some nice 6' print to sport... ;)
Click to expand...
 
But the Leica's are smaller, significantly.

Humberto Rivera said:
Phil, and Mark have done a wonderful service to the whole RedUser community, I personally want to thank you both! The information on the Leica Summilux-C Primes was most welcome, it kind of confirm something that I suspected, I’m sure they have the resolution! However the "Master Primes” do have the breath (12 mm to 150 mm), the T Stop (every little helps), they have been battled tested for a decade (any problems would have surfaced by now), they have (LDS) (and if lucky Red might adopt-it), and they seem wider at a Wider Focal length (25 mm). They’re both good lenses, but I would give the edge to the Mater Primes. If you have any additional notes, like you did with the Leica Summilux-C Primes, but on the Master Primes, IT WOULD BE NICE TO COMPARE THEM! Just saying!

Humberto Rivera
Click to expand...
 
Robert Horwell said:
Phil any chance you could put a set of Cooke Mini S4i on the dragon?
Click to expand...

Yep. Don't know when, but they are high up on the list to test. I think you'll like what they do coverage-wise though.


Will Keir said:
It's interested that Jim fell in love with the 75mm Lecia Summilux C because that lens for our SALT III tests scored the lowest of the four tested, including spherical aberrations. My old 85mm Zeiss Super Speed MKII put up better lp/mm numbers for Super 35mm coverage area. The leica 75mm scored 100 compared to 140 by the Super Speed.
Click to expand...

Yeah. That was an oddity wasn't it? I'm guessing it was that particular lens. I've tested two others that were significantly better than that. Pretty sure the ones we used a month ago were also on the crispier side of things. Testing lenses is tough. Sometimes sets are in various states of needing service. I wonder if Matthew has had any sets come through Duclos in the last few months.
 
any info on how and if the leica m mount will work with dragon? same limitations?
 
I'm certainly no optical engineer, but as I understand it, (and it makes sense intuitively) is that with multiple aspheric surfaces being employed in the Leicas, which by their very nature are harder to repeatedly create within an extremely tight tolerance window, you are bound to see variation from lens to lens. With those aspheric surfaces basically being tuned-in by hand, it's highly probable that you will also see variation between each time you service and alter the relationship between all of those unique elements.

Think why it takes so long for them to produce sets of these... It's months of laborious tweaking to get the lenses to hit their spec. This is why I've stated a number of times that these lenses will be very hard to maintain over their lifespan. You need an extremely talented optical tech who is patient enough to take the time to dial each lens in.

This complicated optical design was a deliberate choice to utilize aspherics to correct aberrations enherent in any lens and optical path... Straight lines, aberration correction and the highest level of performance was selected over ease of maintenance.
 
Christopher Probst said:
I'm certainly no optical engineer, but as I understand it, (and it makes sense intuitively) is that with multiple aspheric surfaces being employed in the Leicas, which by their very nature are harder to repeatedly create within an extremely tight tolerance window, you are bound to see variation from lens to lens. With those aspheric surfaces basically being tuned-in by hand, it's highly probable that you will also see variation between each time you service and alter the relationship between all of those unique elements.

Think why it takes so long for them to produce sets of these... It's months of laborious tweaking to get the lenses to hit their spec. This is why I've stated a number of times that these lenses will be very hard to maintain over their lifespan. You need an extremely talented optical tech who is patient enough to take the time to dial each lens in.

This complicated optical design was a deliberate choice to utilize aspherics to correct aberrations enherent in any lens and optical path... Straight lines, aberration correction and the highest level of performance was selected over ease of maintenance.
Click to expand...

Nice insight to what goes in to making a lens. Thanks.
 
Phil Holland said:
Yep. We're making a big list that will be accessible for everybody everywhere. We just knocked out the most used and common stuff first. More primes certainly to come as well as zooms.

The Zeiss CZ 70-200 T2.9 covers Dragon at 6K without breaking a sweat. The 28-80 CZ T2.9 does as well. The upcoming ultra wide CZ zoom will cover too.

The Leica M Noctilux 50mm will also cover Dragon at 6K. I don't know if it still rings true for Dragon, but there is a certain issue about the rear element of certain wide M mount lenses protruding too far back into the camera too far that may damage the lens or camera itself. This may or may not be resolved. I'll ask. It'd still refrain from going too wide with M mounts due to their optical design.

Optimos are high up on the list to test out. I have rough numbers, but it is much better to put the lenses on Dragon to find out format coverage.
Click to expand...


Actually in my humble opinion, I feel that this might be the next game changer. Lens design for 'EVIL' cameras. RED Epic by definitional falls into that class. However, I am puzzled by RED's sensor housing which limits close flange distance, to a conventional distance. What is the reason for this?

I have set of leica m . 35mm summarit 2.4 lecia 50mm summilux 1.4 asph 100mm summicron 2 apo. Wished I could stick the whole Lecia M summilux to the RED.
 
Do the Cooke S4 Minis cover the 6k dragon?

I have a set and was told by Cooke that they are all good up to 33,5mm diagonal coverage.

holding thumbs that they all cover.
 
Same question about the Mini Cooke S4, and of course more interesting concerning the Cooke 5i. In the beginning there was his rumor that not every focal length covered the 5K MX. Any experiences here?
 
Leica should sponsor you with a test set.

KETCH ROSSi said:
Have not tested them yet Will, but that might change in my next trip to Leica Germany, if there is a prototype to use, either way I would have more detail info in their regards upon my return from that trip no doubt.
Click to expand...
 
Nicolas Brockt said:
Same question about the Mini Cooke S4, and of course more interesting concerning the Cooke 5i. In the beginning there was his rumor that not every focal length covered the 5K MX. Any experiences here?
Click to expand...

Next time I have a Dragon around I'll get the coverage info for the Cooke Mini S4s for sure. The new Sony's too and I've had a request for spherical Kowas. I can do these tests anywhere just need my tiny glowing box with me and a Dragon. K35s will be in there as well.
 
Any feedback on canon L series and cinema lenses?
ff on l series should cover fine but are they sharp enough to resolve 6K
Thx
 
Phil Holland said:
Okay. I'm going to add some additional thoughts here. Some things that we've known for some time regarding lenses really.

Most cinema lenses have been designed with the S35 specification in mind. This is important to acknowledge as there is performance fall off often beyond that spec. However, it's not exactly that simple.
Click to expand...

AMEN. Thank you for saying that. I have to make this point very often when I am assisting on a show that is using older lenses at 5k. They cover, but there is some nasty nasty in the corners.... However, on the same subject, the Cooke Mini-s4/i's have an image circle that was spec'd by the manufacturer as 33.54mm versus the typical S4's and 5/i's which are listed as 30mm. They do have greater image circle coverage and I think are deserving of inclusion on your list, which is a wonderful venture on your part and I'd like to thank you for it!

That said, I would love it if you added these to your list because if shooting 6k, the Mini-S4/i's are truly your best bet for Cooke lenses on a 6k Dragon.
Point is, they are wonderful little lenses and I think,. not yet tested though, that every single one will cover 6k. I mean, the unintended image circle of the Mini's that would be seen should be less than 1mm.

I own a 7 set (18-135) and would be happy to donate them to you for as long as you'd like to do a proper and careful examination and test. They will cover better than S4's and I think it should be well documented. If I could get my hands on a dragon, I'd have done it by now!

Thanks Phil!

I could also give you a fuji 19-90 cabrio, but it's image circle is much smaller than the Cooke Mini's, despite being larger than most cinema lenses, since it covers Epic 5k very well. Chances are it performs only at 5.5k on most of the widest lengths. Testing will come in due time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top