ENG SD Pro B4 mount lens for HD?

[Teague Kennedy]

Does anyone know what SD B4 mount ENG/EFP lenses resolve enought res to be used to shoot 1080? Or at least 720p for DVCPRO HD work?

 

[Stephen Williams]

Does anyone know what SD B4 mount ENG/EFP lenses resolve enought res to be used to shoot 1080? Or at least 720p for DVCPRO HD work?

Hi,

With all due respect, none.

Stephen

 

[chuck colburn]

And for those needing a slightly longer focal length range for their zoom we have this!

http://www.specialoptics.com/SBIR.htm

Albeit a tad heavy for stedicam use.

 

[Cail Young]

Hi,

With all due respect, none.

Stephen

Indeed. There's a reason they make HD B4 lenses.

You can use the SD lenses, though - they'll just be quite soft and may aberrate toward the edges.

 

[AIO Films]

Hi,

With all due respect, none.

Stephen

Actually, how did we come to this conclusion?

I have never read a test report/review on B4 optics (any professional film/video lens for that matter) from a neutral trade magazine with MTF comparison or other kinds of resolution charts. If I missed something and am being ignorant, please shed some light.

Do we make this statement just base on manufacturers' claims?

 

[Walter R]

Having tested a high end 20K SD lens vs. a HD lens, even on a good quality SD camera you can see the difference. Color rendition, contrast and even in the detail. We then tried the SD lens (just for kicks) on a Sony F900, did the comparison with the HD lens and then captured footage to make a quick split screen. The SD lens was definitely not up to the challenge.

There is always some variation even within a given model, so you might find a good lens if you were to test a large batch of lenses, but I can't imagine why you would go that route instead of just looking for a good used HD lens.

 

[Teague Kennedy]

"I can't imagine why you would go that route instead of just looking for a good used HD lens."

correct me if I'm wrong, but the difference seems to be about $10,000, even in used glass. Or are there affordable used HD B4 lenses?

 

[Martin Drew]

I remember seeing some frame grabs up on the web. A comparison of an SD lens and an HD lens (just tried to look for it but can't find the link). There was a difference in resolution, but not as huge as you might expect. The biggest issue was that the SD lens seemed to suffer from a lot more Chromatic abberation. So I wonder if this is down to the glass or the assembly tolerances. If it is the latter then you might get lucky with a particular lens.

Martin

 

[Illya Friedman]

Re: b4 SD vs. HD.

It totally depends on the two pieces of glass you are comparing. Some early HD lenses were essentially rebranded SD (at least from one manufacturer). There's a huge difference between the "industrial/professional" and "broadcast" grade SD optics. Also, witness marks are not in the same place on all makes & models of HD glass, so you'll want to be careful.

The nice thing is that modern Fuji HD optics start at a very reasonable price, pass blue light, and are not really more expensive than comparable SD ENG lenses (new).

Even on many SD cameras you can EASILY see a difference between HD and SD optics, sometimes the difference is startling.

Every DP I know shooting SD (SDX900/DVW790 etc) wants HD optics. It's my policy to include HD lenses at no extra charge on SD cameras. There's a lot of rental houses that are heavily invested in SD lenses and won't/can't do that.

Some of the best B4 HD lenses, and my personal favorites:

http://www.digiprimes.com/2005/home/
http://www.fujinonbroadcast.com/cgi-bin/products.cgi?p=351
http://www.fujinonbroadcast.com/cgi-bin/products.cgi?p=283

I.

Dalsa Digital Cinema
www.dalsa.com/dc

 

[J. Bernard Vallon]

I think if your trying to save money on your RED package, SD B4 lenses aren't the way to go. You can get a mean set of nikon primes and zooms for pretty cheap, <$3000 total, that give a high enough quality image for a 4k sensor. You might not be able to use one lens for every shot like you could with some B4s, but its an easy decision for me.

 

[Teague Kennedy]

primes are absolutely not an option for me. I do reality tv. super 16 zoom maybe good option? I will for all of my pay work be finishing no higher than 1080. I think I will need greater depth of field, so 35mm may not be best option.

 

[J. Bernard Vallon]

In that case Id say go with the S16 zooms, or the nikon zooms. Remember, regardless of format size, depth of field on a 50mm lens will be the same, roughly, for ALL 50mm lenses. If you get a B4 10-75, the depth will be the same as a s16 10-75, or a nikon 10-75. The lenses id look at are the nikon 17-35 or the 28-70, and use the super 16 format on the RED. That will give you the sharper depth you need for reality shoots. I'd maybe find something wider though, because of the smaller footprint.

Some people are talking about the Voigtlander 12mm f5.6. Trouble is its so close to the sensor the, the light rays out of the rear element aren't very parallel, resulting in vignetting on a digital sensor. If your shooting s16 cropped, it might help that problem, and fill your need for a mega-wide lens. f5.6 would give you near infinite focal depth, but it would be no good in low light.

 

[Axel]

We did a comparison of resolution of HD and SD lenses at a Rental house with state of the art equipment on a HDX 900.
We compared SD Fuji 10x4,7 with Canon HD wideangel
and SD Fuji 15 x 7 with Canon HD regular lense.
The processing of the camera was shut down and just the pure image from the lense measured. With the wideangel the Canon HD had an 8% resolution advantage.But on the regular lenses resolution was identical.
We only did the measurement test - no actual shots were taken to compare other parameters.
regards Axel

 

[Martin Drew]

In that case Id say go with the S16 zooms, or the nikon zooms. Remember, regardless of format size, depth of field on a 50mm lens will be the same, roughly, for ALL 50mm lenses.

While it is true that a given focal length lens will display the same DOF whatever the format, remember that a 50mm lens used in 35mm cine format is going to give half the magnification of a 50mm lens used in S16mm cine format. So for a given magnification 35mm cine gives less DOF, that is why so many film makers want to use 35mm cine format.

I would have thought the Canon 8-64 T2.4 S16mm lens would probably fit the bill, very light at 3.9lbs, no noticeable breathing. They have a great reputation and you can find them around secondhand at a reasonable price.

 

[tj williams]

B4 type lenses for 3 chip cameras will have problems on the RED single chip system. These lense are set up to serve the light to chips which are slightly diferent lengths back fm the lens due to differences in colored light. several mfg build optical correctors in the range of 3K to 5K THese also correct the mount to PL. Why when the Sd lens itself isnt that much less than a decent S16 lens? for adapters see Les Zelig in NY on the web.

 

[Steve Gibby]

B4 type lenses for 3 chip cameras will have problems on the RED single chip system. These lense are set up to serve the light to chips which are slightly diferent lengths back fm the lens due to differences in colored light. several mfg build optical correctors in the range of 3K to 5K THese also correct the mount to PL.

There's an active thread on RED User addressing B4 mount lens use on RED One, and optical correction via the Abakus 132 adapter here: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=392

 

[Brian Broz]

I work at a sales/rental house and can't tell you how many times I've heard "DPs" say that they prefer the more "filmlike" image and "smoothness" that an SD lens provides on an HD camera!!
Also, in my experience, most (but not all) HD broadcast lenses are noticeably sharper than their SD equivalent...when mounted on an SD camera such an SDX-900 or BVW-600/700.

FWIW,

Brian Broz

 

[donatello b]

"the Canon 8-64 T2.4 S16mm lens would probably fit the bill, very light at 3.9lbs, no noticeable breathing. They have a great reputation and you can find them around secondhand at a reasonable price."

i've seen them used in the 9000-9500 range - is that a reasonable $$ ??