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 :)

FINALLY!!! Got my Canon mounts and just tested the hell out of it!

Jarred Land said:
The Canon 70-200mm 2.8 is my favorite all around lens... , so it was the first one and longest one we worked on, glad you like it.

the new build coming in the next couple days will have a lot more lenses supported, like the Zeiss MF etc, and a new revision of the AF algorithm that performs a lot better across all lenses.
Click to expand...

Canon 70-200 F2.8 MII for the win. My most used lens as well. Next, the Canon 800.
 
Mark great work!!

However please let me correct you in few points and give you a STRONG ADVISE!!

It comes with LOVE as a fellow REDUSER to an OTHER, so I hope you take them well... ;)

First the Canon glass I have tested them all, and yes they are super sharp some are, but you can't absolutely match them to a Master Prime, I owned them and tested them well,
as soon as you print over 13x19 you will see serious differences, as far s projection, I have not gotten over the 2k on a 40' screen, and you could already see a difference.

I love canon glass, have been using it for as many years as I can remember, and owned them al, besides the 1200mm, ALL OF THEM were in my bak at one time or an other,
so I do love them and still do, very sharp, very great glass, and very affordable, but NO MATCH TO A MASTER PRIME, and I know they will be even less of a match for the LEICA SUMMILUX CINE PRIMES... ;)

It is important to make clear distinctions, as we are professionals, and people might believe what we say, so we need to filter the excitement form the THRUT.

Canon fantastic glass, Master Primes, on a different world all together, and they should be, they are Cine Glass which cost WAYYYYY more, for a good reason too... ;)


Second correction, the 50mm Master Prime o=r any Master Prime, does not start below 22k, so I imagine it was a typo when you say 12k MP... ;)


THIRD!!!


Please don't ever again place over almost 10LB of weight and stress on such long telephotos!!!

The back element on this Super Telephotos is not meant nor build to take more then just few pounds of weight, at most that is a Pro body like the 1D bodies,
and a Pro flash like the 580EXII, but absolutely not that much weight as you left on, no matter how much careful you are that much weight seating on it,
will slowly but surely bend, micron by micron the inner end of that lens, and good by precision!!


Oh and the ADVISE comes from a guy that has been repeatedly using both the RPP 300mm and the RPZ 18-85 on the EPIC M Ti PL mount, without ANY SUPPORT!!


Big difference, PL glass, and Ti PL mount, vs. Canon very good but very delicate and week mount in comparison.

Oh, and I did put the 600mm on the EPIC, no support, but it was the lens on the Epic, no viceversa, and the lens was facing sky up, so the weight was not Horizontal as in your pic, but was Vertically angled.

I just would really hate see you damage such a lens, as they are not cheap, but the extenders are... ;)


Aside form that, again great work, and great to see you out there!!


Okay back I go to the cave I came from and continue on... ;)
 
I have no doubt that the still glass can match the Masterprimes as I have done similar tests but that was when the lenses were stopped down f5.6. Mark did you see similar performances wide open?
 
Agreed, I tested an old and beaten 35mm lens that was about 30 years old and it was just as sharp at f/5.6 as a master prime.
Pretty crappy fully opened and distortions were a bit different too...there is so much more to the lenses than sharpness...

Tom Gleeson said:
I have no doubt that the still glass can match the Masterprimes as I have done similar tests but that was when the lenses were stopped down f5.6. Mark did you see similar performances wide open?
Click to expand...
 
I think what is interesting is that some have the thought that stills glass isn't really sharp enough and that there is some big problem with using it. In my thinking, still photos are scrutinized in detail far more than any motion picture. If Canon really ain't all that great, why aren't all of the high end photographers using cine glass?

Where you run into troubles is not getting quality detail and sharpness out of stills glass. For us who are shooting motion, it is about whether or not you can keep that shot in focus with such a short throw on the focus ring.
 
I love this post!!! Considering I own just about every Contax Zeiss prime between 18mm and 300mm, I love an affirmation that STILL glass CAN get the job done. It's never going to REPLACE Cine Glass, obviously (and Ketch, I love your persistent words of caution, they are inspiring, actually).

But for those of us like me that are on a budget (is $10k a budget???), a great stills collection can provide a wealth of creative possibilities.

ESPECIALLY in today's workflows, where you are frequently shooting on two or THREE cameras. (An AC literally asked me two weeks ago if I owned a THIRD Contax Zeiss 50mm prime. I had to tell him politely that I didn't, but would get on that!)

And speaking of LONG LENSES. Check out this shot I pulled off two nights ago. With a Yashica 500mm F8 on a Mutar II doubler (for a 1000mm F16)


All shot on a 60D, 640 ISO.

Can't wait for our first Scarlet to arrive! Imagine this on 4k!!!


PS - For those of you who've never heard of the Yashica 500 F8 (its ok, few have), in cult circles it's considered one of the best mirror lenses EVER made. Only a click below it's more renowned older brother, the Contax Zeiss 500 F8. Mirror lenses will never match a glass lens if you REALLY blow them up, you can't beat their portability. This Yashica is barely bigger than my 85 1.4!
 
Last edited:
Ketch, I'll never take what you say the wrong way. :)
So all is cool.
We are all big boys, been around for years, shot everything from 10x8 t0 super 8... been there done that. Made our millions... So its ok to share with me some of your thoughts and experiences.

Regarding the Master primes, 50mm Canon back to back we did (and only for a bit of fun) ... nobody was more agasp more than me... I was just bragging to every with me at the time that the Master primes will eat the canon for breakfast... we shot the same thing, put it up on a huge projector and a 2.4 screen, ZOOMed up to 100% 200% 400% 800%... quite literally made a fool of myself because there was not a single bit of difference... on the edges included. That was @ f8.
If I cut the slate of the front, you would think it was from the same lens.

The worst was about to come, both lenses were set to f1.2 for the canon, f1.3 for the master prime... Ouch. The Canon was sharper.
Sorry mate.... Proof is in the pudding....

Mind you! Here me out...

I have had many lenses from nikon, Arri, and Canon over the years, (to many) And quite often I have swapped them out. I went through 3 different 600m F4's before I got a sharp one. 2 - 4002.8's 4 - 16 to 35's before I got a sharp one, 2 - 50mm 1.2's before I get a sharp one..... and I have never been able to send back my soft 18mm Ultra prime.. or soft 18 and 24mm Ziess... We had a soft 29 - 290 soft one day.. so not all lenses are built the same.

Regarding Leica glass... Well. Only the crazy rich will ever know the quality of Leica.

Regarding hanging my EPIC off the 600mm... Seriously does not worry it, but would hate to drop it... thats when it gets messy. But I doupt Ill do it again anyway, becuase it was out of balance. I'm going to make a rig to balance it.

At the end of the day, we all have done our personal testing, some more than others. I went into my canon lens testing only for a laugh... As plastic toy lenses have never floated my boat... but surprise surprise... Reminds me of when I got my first RED 5 years ago. We only bought it to replace a DV CANON XL1... hahahahaha... What we got was another shock.

So life goes on...



KETCH ROSSi said:
Mark great work!!

However please let me correct you in few points and give you a STRONG ADVISE!!

It comes with LOVE as a fellow REDUSER to an OTHER, so I hope you take them well... ;)

First the Canon glass I have tested them all, and yes they are super sharp some are, but you can't absolutely match them to a Master Prime, I owned them and tested them well,
as soon as you print over 13x19 you will see serious differences, as far s projection, I have not gotten over the 2k on a 40' screen, and you could already see a difference.

I love canon glass, have been using it for as many years as I can remember, and owned them al, besides the 1200mm, ALL OF THEM were in my bak at one time or an other,
so I do love them and still do, very sharp, very great glass, and very affordable, but NO MATCH TO A MASTER PRIME, and I know they will be even less of a match for the LEICA SUMMILUX CINE PRIMES... ;)

It is important to make clear distinctions, as we are professionals, and people might believe what we say, so we need to filter the excitement form the THRUT.

Canon fantastic glass, Master Primes, on a different world all together, and they should be, they are Cine Glass which cost WAYYYYY more, for a good reason too... ;)


Second correction, the 50mm Master Prime o=r any Master Prime, does not start below 22k, so I imagine it was a typo when you say 12k MP... ;)


THIRD!!!


Please don't ever again place over almost 10LB of weight and stress on such long telephotos!!!

The back element on this Super Telephotos is not meant nor build to take more then just few pounds of weight, at most that is a Pro body like the 1D bodies,
and a Pro flash like the 580EXII, but absolutely not that much weight as you left on, no matter how much careful you are that much weight seating on it,
will slowly but surely bend, micron by micron the inner end of that lens, and good by precision!!


Oh and the ADVISE comes from a guy that has been repeatedly using both the RPP 300mm and the RPZ 18-85 on the EPIC M Ti PL mount, without ANY SUPPORT!!


Big difference, PL glass, and Ti PL mount, vs. Canon very good but very delicate and week mount in comparison.

Oh, and I did put the 600mm on the EPIC, no support, but it was the lens on the Epic, no viceversa, and the lens was facing sky up, so the weight was not Horizontal as in your pic, but was Vertically angled.

I just would really hate see you damage such a lens, as they are not cheap, but the extenders are... ;)


Aside form that, again great work, and great to see you out there!!


Okay back I go to the cave I came from and continue on... ;)
Click to expand...
 
That's amazing Mark! The Canon was sharper at 1.2...
Speechless...........
 
Glad Mark, and I do enjoy your posts a lot, so keep them coming, and I guess you did have an insanely good copy of the Canon 50mm 1.2... ;)



Joseph Hutson said:
I think what is interesting is that some have the thought that stills glass isn't really sharp enough and that there is some big problem with using it. In my thinking, still photos are scrutinized in detail far more than any motion picture. If Canon really ain't all that great, why aren't all of the high end photographers using cine glass?

Where you run into troubles is not getting quality detail and sharpness out of stills glass. For us who are shooting motion, it is about whether or not you can keep that shot in focus with such a short throw on the focus ring.
Click to expand...


Joseph what most need to understand that when it comes to Lenses it is never as simple as that vs the other, NEVER.

Still glass does indeed need to be good so to resolve imagery from, well, STILLS, yet one can not EVER really compare Still glass to Cinema glass, in depth and saying that Still is better the Cine glass, it will never be!!


There are several reasons for this, one is of course the Build it self, and not talking about Build quality here, but about how the actual lens is build!!

Cine glass has to overcome many more obstacles then what Still glass is originally designed for, and for this you find all kinds of Lens Defects in Still glass, much less prominent or insistent in Cine glass.

Such as Super Color Matched Optics, NO CA, NO NO Barrel distortion, NO Focus Breathing, well, some Cine do, but the best don't, NO Light fall off thru out the entire Focus Range, which in the best Zooms is also maintained, etc.
the list is long, and for this Cine glass is Cine glass and Still glass is Still glass.


Can Still glass be used instead of Cine glass?

Yes of course, but only for those on a Budget or after a particular look given by a particular lens, or for reasons of weight and size, were the image quality is not as important.

Sharpness is only one part of the equation, the capable resolving resolution is the most limiting factor in some lenses, and Jim already pointed that out, more then once, so I don't have to go in to it here.


So is not that Still glass is not sharp in off, is just that, it is only but good in off, and for me good in off will never cut it, not when it comes to my images, I except no compromises... IF I CAN.

Again, its okay to use, of course, but there is a difference and it is not a small one.

I'm surprise that Mark has gotten a FANTASTIC copy of the Canon 50mm 1.2, as I had 4 and tested against other 4 RED PRO PRIME 50mm, and my Master Prime 50mm, and the only one that was sharper was the RPP.

But not all lenses are built equally, so it could be and I trust Mark that it was.


But Joseph, you must be more careful in your assessments, and BTW, lots of Photographers do use Cine glass on EPIC... ;)


What I am curious is to see how Medium Format glass will do, no big expectations, but I know for fact that will do bounds and leaps better then 35mm Still glass, but that too will never match the Cine Glass overall capacity and qualities, again, SHARPNESS been only but one element of the MAT in a GOOD LENS to produce a great image that can stand out in large prints and in a large 4k Screen.
 
I've got a set of Hasselblad medium format glass with PL :)))) ... Sharp yes, better than cine glass... maybe.... better than canon glass.... maybe....

If talking about the glass or the lens as a whole... then master primes are by far a better lens. As pure glass goes, after my test against some of the master primes to canon glass.... I'm not sure.
I'm trying to dig out that side by side, it's got to be on one of these cards....
 
Mark Toia said:
I've got a set of Hasselblad medium format glass with PL :)))) ... Sharp yes, better than cine glass... maybe.... better than canon glass.... maybe....

If talking about the glass or the lens as a whole... then master primes are by far a better lens. As pure glass goes, after my test against some of the master primes to canon glass.... I'm not sure.
I'm trying to dig out that side by side, it's got to be on one of these cards....
Click to expand...


Hassy has had always some insane glass, but that was because of their partnerships with Zeiss on that, now days with that gone, I haven't gotten the chance to test out their new Glass,
but I will soon in off as I test shoot a series of the Big Medium Format cameras in which the Hassy 200MS.

But as far as medium Format glass so far what I have seen is the Leica S series glass to be by far the best of them all, can't wait to test some on the EPIC 645, or even on DRAGON... ;)
 
mmmm..... DRAGON.... I hope its more than just a sensor enlargement....

Found that 50mm comparison...
Was almost in the trash..

Side by side cameras, shot about 20seconds after each other.
Notice the 50mm Canon is really like a 60mm...

Canon_masterprime.jpg
 
Ramesh Jai said:
Visually, and that's just me, I find the MP sharper. BUT the Canon is not bad at all!!!
Click to expand...


Just for the record, Im a Master Prime Fan. :)))

But for a lens 1/20th the price.... (and autofocus) I think it does really well.
The 70 -200 is the prize winner though. ZING!!!!!!
 
I'm also totaly blown away by some of the canon and leica still lenses.
As Mark I almost can't see a difference in certain situations.
You would expect a much much bigger difference in image quality but it's not really there.

Of course it's much easier to work with real cine-glass and so on but at what price difference?
MPs cost around 6 times as much as any still glass. So are the MPs 6 times better? No way. Maybe 30% better.

Now imagine the Redmote Pro shows up soon and does really work like it should. Dial in "focus throw" for still glass, 20 meters wireless remote, smooth motion etc. This could change the lens landscape for good. I'm pounding Jarred in any thread that comes up with this matter, because it would be that huge.

RED would sell even more Scarlets and Epics if the REDmote Pro would solve the "focus throw" problem of the still lenses. The Birger Mount was pretty good in this regard but I think RED could make it perfect and also ship it in volumes. Birger is sleeping right now.

So RED do this and the in brain Prores encoder and nobody and I mean nobody will come close to you again soon.

Best
Tim
 
Hi Mark, Ketch,Joseph.

I have been reading this post and having a huge laugh. I have known the secret of using Still Lenses on Video/Film cameras with astounding results for over 15 years. When I let the cat out of the bag with JVC HD100, having a simple adapter made by Zoerk
which allowed me to mount Nikon Lenses, a huge number of guys quickly caught on with, the best part of it was reading books
on how they came up with this brilliant idea later. After that lesson I just keep my mouth shut and do my work.

Incidentally Dubai is mentioned a number of times in this post where I happen to live and run a company for the last 12 years, so enjoy the place.

And as Mark mentioned we have all made our millions and done most of the stuff within our respective fields.
But learning never stops, LIVE,LEARN,ENJOY.

NEVER believe you have the solution to anything, there will always be a smarter guy who
can do it better,cheaper and faster.

Yusuf Thakur
VFX, Dubai
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top