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 :)

Evin Grant's NAB 2011 lens roundup...

AnthonyFlores said:
I think these were initially conceived as a competitor to Zeiss CP2's and also perhaps as an alternative for RPP's and others in the $4000-5000 range.

However, like you I believe the drawbacks are too much relative to the positives. Perhaps if they fix some of the flaws in later edition, reduce the
size a bit ... they will be worth another look.

Anthony
Click to expand...

The size didn't bother me. They were no bigger than RPP's. As far as performance and build I'd take CP2's in a heartbeat. I'm not sure what Schneider is thinking with this design at that price. Love their polarizers though. Best in the biz.
 
AnthonyFlores said:
Yes!!! You rock Roberto. Here's to hoping that -- if Red doesn't buy/merge with Panavision ;) -- at least maybe they partner with them to produce sets of 645 lenses for
sale ... available exclusively to owners of that Epic 645 camera.

I mean did you see how many of those lenses in the set are T2 or T1.9??? It's unreal! (Yes, I know impractical 65mm/T2 lenses are, given how hard it is to pull focus on FF35 wide open ... but still!)

Doing this would make the release of that camera even more special :)

Anthony
Click to expand...

I would not bet a cent on Panavision changing their business model. But I would be happy if they made sure to have lots of 65mm sets in perfect working order and utilizing the latest technology.

PV mounts can suck it. But it is what it is. More power to them... really. It is up to the competition to pull us away from them by creating their own sets.

How 'bout a "Red-Leica 645 set"? :thumbsup:
 
Roberto Lequeux said:
I would not bet a cent on Panavision changing their business model. But I would be happy if they made sure to have lots of 65mm sets in perfect working order and utilizing the latest technology.

PV mounts can suck it. But it is what it is. More power to them... really. It is up to the competition to pull us away from them by creating their own sets.

How 'bout a "Red-Leica 645 set"? :thubmsup:
Click to expand...

Well, if they can keep those same amazing specs as the Panasivion 65mm set with many lenses at t2 or 1.9 (why not, if their new designer was involved in the original Panny designs) ... and they can keep each lens at $30k or less, I definitely think they'll have some buyers. Whether it will be worth the cost of development and production for them, no one really knows. What's interesting is that -- while I would guess that 65mm digital filmmaking would be mostly limited to things being shot for the big screen ...... the biggest market for the 645 Monstro might be fashion photographers.

Think about it -- MF is king in their world, but they are increasingly in need of great motion footage as well. Hence the booming popularity of the Epic these guys. So if that sector picks up enough, and considering some the current shortcomings of MF glass -- Leica designing a special set to meet these 645 still/motion use might not be all that far-fetched.

I'm sure our good friend Ketch would be among the first in line, even at $250k for a set of eight :-P

Anthony
 
I agree, but for stills they will already have access to all MF still glass, Red will make sure of that via whatever mounts are necessary. The only way fashion photography would help the cause would be if they start getting really into the "new" motion side of fashion, and they started wanting to do a lot of big focus pulls that demanded no breathing. Then, some would ask for motion glass. But even then, if the IQ doesn't match their stills lenses they might pull out and simplify their motion shots, or just skip it all together and focus on the stills.

I think it will be all about how easy it is for us to pull focus, and how small the files are --in relation to how big storage solutions have gotten to at that point. If extremely shallow focus is the only factor, I think it will be a renaissance for large format (and an unprecedented explosion of it perhaps!).

Being able to shoot ISO2000 (+!) just to close down the lens will help a lot. Big lights helped them back then, and our lights are getting smaller and more efficient. There is always day exteriors.

The cool thing is that Epic's 645 frame will most likely be around 8k. Nobody knows just how big it will be, but I think Jannard is a very talented photographer/manufacturer/boat-captain when it comes to weighing pros and cons for things like this and picking the balance point. It has to be significantly larger than 5k, we all know that at least. And with this much sensor area, even if the 645 was designed with rather large photosites, there certainly will be a lot of resolution we'll be able to crop out and still get Stradivarius level imagery.

Between (higher than M-X!) sensitivity, cropping the sensor a little or a lot, and lights...

...I'd say 645 will go though a renascence once Red breaks down that barrier.
(The Phantom is great, but not high resolution so it doesn't compete for A-Cam)
 
Roberto Lequeux said:
I agree, but for stills they will already have access to all MF still glass, Red will make sure of that via whatever mounts are necessary. The only way fashion photography would help the cause would be if they start getting really into the "new" motion side of fashion, and they started wanting to do a lot of big focus pulls that demanded no breathing. Then, some would ask for motion glass. But even then, if the IQ doesn't match their stills lenses they might pull out and simplify their motion shots, or just skip it all together and focus on the stills.

I think it will be all about how easy it is for us to pull focus, and how small the files are --in relation to how big storage solutions have gotten to at that point. If extremely shallow focus is the only factor, I think it will be a renaissance for large format (and an unprecedented explosion of it perhaps!).

Being able to shoot ISO2000 (+!) just to close down the lens will help a lot. Big lights helped them back then, and our lights are getting smaller and more efficient. There is always day exteriors.

BTW for fun you can pick up the 645 bodies for about $100 and shoot 645 film - probably scans out to 50-60 megapixels worth.

The cool thing is that Epic's 645 frame will most likely be around 8k. Nobody knows just how big it will be, but I think Jannard is a very talented photographer/manufacturer/boat-captain when it comes to weighing pros and cons for things like this and picking the balance point. It has to be significantly larger than 5k, we all know that at least. And with this much sensor area, even if the 645 was designed with rather large photosites, there certainly will be a lot of resolution we'll be able to crop out and still get Stradivarius level imagery.

Between (higher than M-X!) sensitivity, cropping the sensor a little or a lot, and lights...

...I'd say 645 will go though a renascence once Red breaks down that barrier.
(The Phantom is great, but not high resolution so it doesn't compete for A-Cam)
Click to expand...

I've already gathered up a full set of Pentax 645 lenses from 35mm (ultrawide on 645) through 400mm in anticipation of Epic 645 - remember it was supposed to be ready about now. Even these lenses - which are both sharp and pretty cheap on the used market - would be fine for the fashion type shoots. The wide to normal focal lengths have long focus throws and the mechanics are very smooth. If one had them modified with gears and maybe a stiffer lubricant they would work pretty well as cine lenses. Haven't checked breathing though.


Evin Grant said:
The glass in the Primos comes from ELCAN, which used to be a division of Leica (Ernst Leitz Canada) but is now owned by Raytheon..
Click to expand...

Interesting - didn't know that. My brother is a very senior guy at Raytheon in the electro-optical division (formerly Hughes) - but it makes sense - Raytheon with their defense/satellite businesses probably have the most advanced optics in the world.
 
So whats wrong with the ARRI/Zeiss LWZ-2 15,5mm-45mm? I have an Angie 30-80mm and it has served me well for a couple of years, but it is not of the best build quality and it has a pretty clear fall-off in the long end.
I want to buy a wider zoom to complement it, and was amazed the the LWZ-2 is almost the same price as the Angie 16-42.(LWZ 26K and Angie 16-42 20K) BTW my 30-80 flares in an unattractive way with its needlepoint/prick-flare(pun intended)
Why is no-one talking about the LWZ? Any opinions out there?
Thanks

Jens-Jakob
 
Angie_75x.jpg


This little baby is a new .75x wide angle attachement lens for the 15-40 & 16-42 Optimos. It essentially turns your lens into a 12mm prime with some minor barrel distortion and a 6' minimum focus distance. I think this is a very nice solution for those wanting to travel as light as possible and still have an extreme wide angle option. $3500 list price.


Hi Evin,
just one question regarding a new Angie .75x wide angle attachement lens.
Do you loose resolution with this .75x WAA?? Also are 1.4 and 2.0 x Adapters suitable for Optimo 16-42??

regards
jiri
 
Jiri Vrozina said:
Angie_75x.jpg


This little baby is a new .75x wide angle attachement lens for the 15-40 & 16-42 Optimos. It essentially turns your lens into a 12mm prime with some minor barrel distortion and a 6' minimum focus distance. I think this is a very nice solution for those wanting to travel as light as possible and still have an extreme wide angle option. $3500 list price.


Hi Evin,
just one question regarding a new Angie .75x wide angle attachement lens.
Do you loose resolution with this .75x WAA?? Also are 1.4 and 2.0 x Adapters suitable for Optimo 16-42??

regards
jiri
Click to expand...


I'm curious just how visible the distortion with this attachment. Is it only something pixel peepers would notice -- or would it be noticeable by typical members of the audience ...
 
I did not get to view any actual footage but my impression from playing with it was it's sharp. I wouldn't hesitate using it for those instances where it would be needed, however it did show visible barrel distortion, think 35mm anamorphic lens and you're in the ballpark, so still totally useable but it's really tough when a Duclos 11-16 is the same price and extremely well corrected, even at 11mm.
 
Thanks for that.
Just final question: How does RED Pro 17-50mm and Duclos 11-16mm cut? Are the close for Color Match?
Thanks again.
 
Jiri Vrozina said:
Thanks for that.
Just final question: How does RED Pro 17-50mm and Duclos 11-16mm cut? Are the close for Color Match?
Thanks again.
Click to expand...

I was wondering the exact same thing today. Curious to know as well.
Thanks
 
Evin Grant said:
I did not get to view any actual footage but my impression from playing with it was it's sharp. I wouldn't hesitate using it for those instances where it would be needed, however it did show visible barrel distortion, think 35mm anamorphic lens and you're in the ballpark, so still totally useable but it's really tough when a Duclos 11-16 is the same price and extremely well corrected, even at 11mm.
Click to expand...

Thanks Evin, that helps me understand better :)
 
Evin,
I am new to the Red users site and have a brand new Angenieux 24-290 may want to sell, I can't figure out navigation to post anything, can you help???
Dean@usedvideo.net
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top