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 :)

DSLR Rig for Scarlet-X

For every post talking about how low quality stills lenses are and how useless they are for cinema applications, I see a post claiming the Nikon 14-24 or new G primes are sharper than Master Primes.

It doesn't even matter if G primes really are sharper than Master Primes. The fact that they're close enough that there's room for debate is the end of the issue for me. If you need a projector and a test chart to tell the difference between a $1500 lens and a $25k lens, the latter is not worth its price.

And not for nothing but lots of those guys posting about how useless stills lenses are use CP.2s...
 
@ Les
I've heard that it is /or soon will be, possible to map every pixel in in every frame the direction & angle of light, color temp , color, contrast, wb etc in every frame of vision within the metadata stream.

If this is true? Then this truly will change the way the world sees images. Opening up the possibility of someone creating a "plug in' which matches every cine lens or still lens know to man against any other lens, matching lens characteristics between disjoint lens systems . After all compared to recording the infinite individual pixel data this surely would be a "push over" recording the finite lens systems man has created.

Is this possible or is it a pipe dream? You tell me.
 
Last edited:
P.S. Gavin

Apologies the price quoted for Tilta gear earlier in this post is an Ebay price by a reseller hence I think about $3000 US for the rig. This price reflects the profit margin a reseller has applied to the Tilta product ie 100% . This is not the case if you deal direct with Tilta via email at .....

huang@tilta.com.cn

Whilst not sure on the MB. costs, the full rig is apparently about $1600 US. However individual per item costs may be higher on a per unit basis. They are apparently releasing a Scarlet/ Epic rig sometime early next year . Please note I have not contact them yet but it is on my to do list , so I'm not sure what results you'll get.

Good Luck!

P.S.S Liam apologies I was going to post this earlier but got drowned in work!
 
Mike, I think you're absolutely right. Lens patterns, eventually images themselves, will all be mapped. Tens of thousands of photochemical wells are, on some level, just a matter of 2 digits.

Our grandkids grandkids' stories will no doubt be told by storytellers with augmented imaginations. Our "rigs" and "lenses" will seem curiously mechanical. The lens becomes the digital brush, the baseplate is an interface that records your dreams. "Did you know we once burned images into plastic with light and washed away the silver? Scanned it with a CMOS that later became the film itself?"

It's exiting to be around at the beginning of RAW, when Red, Ikonoskop and Arri take the processing out of the camera and into the computer, making the camera a more impartial eye.
 
That's a little far out there Mike !
I'm happy to get decent images from technology we have right now.
And as always, the proof is in the pudding, err, image... as it were.


RE: Matte box : I have the Trusmt DSLR Matte box , the guy shipped fast from Asia, and the quality looks fantastic for $350 ... even has carbon fiber french flags at that price!


-Les Dittert

Mike Garrick said:
@ Les
I've heard that it is /or soon will be, possible to map every pixel in in every frame the direction & angle of light, color temp , color, contrast, wb etc in every frame of vision within the metadata stream.

If this is true? Then this truly will change the way the world sees images. Opening up the possibility of someone creating a "plug in' which matches every cine lens or still lens know to man against any other lens, matching lens characteristics between disjoint lens systems . After all compared to recording the infinite individual pixel data this surely would be a "push over" recording the finite lens systems man has created.

Is this possible or is it a pipe dream? You tell me.
Click to expand...
 
@ Les
Arhh.......................... the dangers of coming back from the pub & jumping on the Red forum ;)!
 
Hey Mike, no worries at all :)

Struggling to catch up on some of my own correspondence as well.

I've been in contact with Tilta re Scarlet. They advised that they would be releasing pictures and hopefully pricing for their "F3 rig" prior to xmas. I've emailed back to confirm whether they meant this is the same rig intended for the Scarlet or whether they are doing something separate. Will advise when i hear.

Also been in contact with, DSLR Pros - great customer service so far - and I think their gear looks good. But i'm justa guy Shhhhnneeeeeakin up on it :)))
http://dslrpros.com/Products/tabid/...t.aspx?SortField=DateCreated+DESC,ProductName

They have responded by stating "All of our baseplates and rigs will work with the new and old RED camera systems and they are extremely competitively priced. Our primary baseplate will probably be your most flexible option with our carbon fiber rod system (This comes with all of our rigs). It makes for easy mounting and removal for various rig configurations. This also works great for transitioning between run-and-gun shots directly to mounting on a vest based stabilization platform. "

And when asked regarding their follow focus' lash...

"Our follow focus units use high quality worm gears that reduce back lash to less than .4 % of a degree. They are very comparable to other more expensive brands as they all pretty much use the same worm gears. There are only a few manufactures that build the gear box assemblies and they are very expensive if not purchased in bulk quantities."

Anyone used one of DSLR Pro's rigs?

Best Wishes

Lliam
 
Last edited:
Lee Saxon said:
For every post talking about how low quality stills lenses are and how useless they are for cinema applications, I see a post claiming the Nikon 14-24 or new G primes are sharper than Master Primes.

It doesn't even matter if G primes really are sharper than Master Primes. The fact that they're close enough that there's room for debate is the end of the issue for me. If you need a projector and a test chart to tell the difference between a $1500 lens and a $25k lens, the latter is not worth its price.

And not for nothing but lots of those guys posting about how useless stills lenses are use CP.2s...
Click to expand...

Well, that depends on what your complaints and needs are.

My number one issue is the mechanical operation of the lenses.

For my projects that's the issue that matters most. The CP.2 lenses solve that much. They are the cheapest lenses that solve that problem well.

I reject the CP.2 because I don't like the inconstant stop of the set.

If your issue is optical quality though ... none of these sets are the answer to your problems.

The CP.2 are exactly the same glass with the same performance as the ZF and ZE series SLR lenses. They are slightly better color matched and have a better aperture.

As it happens I like the images from the Zeiss ZE/ZF/CP.2 lenses ... its the inconstant stop that stops me from buying them. Well that and money. ;)
 
Les Dittert said:
Alexander,
The guys at Foundry have been at my office more than once. Nice guys. Ask them if they have heard of me.

So I am a bit stubborn, and will still pursue the application of 'free' glass to what I am doing. I think of it as a neat challenge.
I'm well aware of image distortion/warp matching, as I use it in my work. The free glass does have some same lens repeat-ability issues that do cause some problems, but I'm confident that a substantial improvement can be had with advanced image processing. We often do more advanced processing than those companies you mentioned.
Probably won't make sense for most crews that are in a rushed production environment, where you need to see near perfect footage right away.
That's OK, my personal projects are slow, stock footage type stuff. I can let some cores cook it for a couple of days to improve the quality, especially for 1920 sized results.
Click to expand...

I'll agree that you can improve the results of just about any lens with the techniques you describe.

The idea I got from what you wrote, and maybe I completely misunderstood you, is that you believe that low end "plastic lenses" could be made to look as good as Zeiss Master Primes. Nope, never gonna happen.

I do believe you could get Ultra Primes looking as good as Master Primes for the cost of a little resolution.

I also think that a lot of low end cine people, and soon Scarlet owners, can't tell the difference between Zeiss ZE lenses and Master Primes. If you can give that crowd software to make their L zooms equivalent to a Red Zoom, I think they'd be thrilled.

More likely however they won't notice.

I do look forwards to testing one or two 'cine' class zoom lenses, to see what they are made of, so to speak. The results will be fun to see for all, good or bad.
Click to expand...

Well there is cine glass and there is cine glass.

If you are testing a Canon L zoom against a Red Zoom or an old Varotal that's one thing.

Put it up against a modern Angeniuex .... that's another thing.

Can you point me to any sites that have done some testing on cine glass before ? Something with quantifiable results, or images. Not words like 'creamy skin tones', or 'organic'.
I'm not sure, but I think many 'Scarlet' class people would love to see!

-Les Dittert
Click to expand...

I can't point you at the sort of technical data you want to see ... DP's tend not to post that stuff when they do tests for projects. I don't know why that is. Historically I think top tier DP's were often commissioned by a project to test this or that ... but that test data was part of the project. Now I don't know.

You see a lot more data on camera tests ... but frankly I don't respect the methodology of most of these tests.

In lieu of links to good tests, I'll inflict some discussion on you. Perhaps you'll prefer the word "blather" ;)

Panchros are the cheapest lenses that are truly optically superior. So long as you can accept the t/2.8 stop of the set, they are a perfect match for the Cooke S4 and S5 lenses.

Most of the people you see comparing lenses and using terms like "organic rendering" they are not at all thinking about Canon L lenses or the like.

Those folks are probably comparing Cooke S4/i lenses to Arri/Zeiss Ultra Primes. I haven't seen the argument come up with the current generation of lenses. (i.e. Cooke S5 versus Master Primes)

Both are fantastic lenses. They are both t/2 sets. They both cover a lot of focal lengths, though the UP's have more focal lengths.

When people talk about the "creamy organic bokeh" they are talking about Cooke's unique iris design. They are using aesthetic language because its a purely aesthetic point of consideration. There is no technical advantage to the Cooke aperture, but it looks different and that difference is notable. In fact its sometimes integral to the story.

(Cooke's are quite often used in period pieces where you have low key high contrast scenes.)

"Creamy skin tones" are an indication of the coloration of the lens coatings and the lenses ability to resolve certain types of detail. I don't like this phrase because it conflates purely aesthetic considerations with ones that are technical.

The color of the lens coatings and biases in lens elements are not as indelible as they once were thanks to color correction, but the bottom line is that these lenses are also filters that affect the image before any data can be collected. Obviously this affects the coloration of skin. More importantly it can affect the light available to the sensor, and can be deleterious to skin tones.

The Red One was often knocked for its skin tones, but I remain convinced this is in great part a result of the older manual Nikon AI and AIS lenses many low end users chose for budgetary reasons. These lenses (and, to a much lesser extent, current Nikon lenses) are "bluer" in their coloration. The downside is that they also filter some colors essential for good skin tone rendition.

You can deal with that (and I have) but it requires that you understand the problem in the first place. Proper lens filtration can clean issues like this up flawlessly - at the cost of some light.

The other element is the ability to render skin detail or texture.

I can say that it wasn't until I first used the Cooke lenses that I saw the difference myself. I thought I was looking at the results of different cinematographers, or better makeup ... any of a thousand factors. The bottom line though is that Cooke lenses make skin look better.

Zeiss lenses resolve a bit more detail though ... and they make objects look better.

I think the key to these aesthetic descriptions is to look at the shapes of the MTF curves of these lenses.

Its very hard, to take Master Prime footage and make it look like S5 footage, or vice versa. I don't want to say impossible, but only because impossible is pretty rare. The reason is the differing MTF curves.

Ultimately I believe these tiny differences carried through a film production can make a difference in how the audience perceives the film. If used artistically they can really improve the experience of a film.

Note I said tiny differences though. If I have a project for which I would select Cooke S5 lenses, but I could only use Zeiss CP.2 lenses, then as a cinematographer I have a lot of other tools I can bring to the table to achieve my goals. It won't look like my original conception, but I can make a great piece of art anyway.

Often when discussing these things, we lose sight of that. I can make a movie with a cheap $400 kit lens ... I have. It was a good lens for the task ... and the results are almost exactly what the director and I wanted. (The better lens would have been a 1960's vintage zoom converted to PL mount with somewhat distressed coatings.)

S my final advice would be: learn what your tools can and can't do, and then go make a movie.

Speaking of which ...
 
I just got at Gini rig in the door, and at the same time a red handlebar and red-handles. Seriously the gini rig has quality stamped all over it. And the follow focus has a minimum lag (we will see how it develops over time). This will not be my only support gear, but what a great start at a great price. thx to fellas here at reduser :)
 
Lliam Worthington said:
Hey Mike, no worries at all :)

Struggling to catch up on some of my own correspondence as well.

I've been in contact with Tilta re Scarlet. They advised that they would be releasing pictures and hopefully pricing for their "F3 rig" prior to xmas. I've emailed back to confirm whether they meant this is the same rig intended for the Scarlet or whether they are doing something separate. Will advise when i hear.

Also been in contact with, DSLR Pros - great customer service so far - and I think their gear looks good. But i'm justa guy Shhhhnneeeeeakin up on it :)))
http://dslrpros.com/Products/tabid/116/List/0/CategoryID/2/Level/a/Language/en-US/Default.aspx?SortField=DateCreated+DESC%2cProductName

They have responded by stating "All of our baseplates and rigs will work with the new and old RED camera systems and they are extremely competitively priced. Our primary baseplate will probably be your most flexible option with our carbon fiber rod system (This comes with all of our rigs). It makes for easy mounting and removal for various rig configurations. This also works great for transitioning between run-and-gun shots directly to mounting on a vest based stabilization platform. "

And when asked regarding their follow focus' lash...

"Our follow focus units use high quality worm gears that reduce back lash to less than .4 % of a degree. They are very comparable to other more expensive brands as they all pretty much use the same worm gears. There are only a few manufactures that build the gear box assemblies and they are very expensive if not purchased in bulk quantities."

Anyone used one of DSLR Pro's rigs?

Best Wishes

Lliam
Click to expand...

Isn't DSLR pro's just another reseller of the ProAIM stuff and the cinecity/dv city stuff?
The products all look the same, take a look over here http://www.thecinecity.com
I bought a mattebox with rod support from them and a small steadicam for my HDSLR, the mattebox does the work fine for it's price but i didn't like the rod support which i got from them.
The steadicam is a great product however it's really hard to balance it and keeping it balanced.
Overall there products are not great quality but that's what you pay for.
I tried the ProAIM follow focus a couple of times on a few projects but i didn't like it, too much backslash and not smooth at all.
There was an discussion about these products from DSLR pro's on Cinema5D but i can't find it anymore, if i find it i will post it here :)
 
Hi Luuk,

I don't think I found the same rigging configs on the Proaim site from memory... and cant seem to get on Cinecity now... But your probably right.
Thanks for the feedback mate.

Best Wishes
Lliam
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top