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 :)

High Speed Lens Shootout

Matt Ryan said:
Well we were able to get every set minus the Cooke 5i's. We even shot the Canon Cine Primes and Canon L lenses alongside Illuminas, Elites, Masters, Leicas, K35's, Super Speeds, and CP.2 Super Speeds. As a bonus we happened to have a 50mm Leica Noctilux with Spacecam mount so we shot that one as well. Tomorrow will be the technical test at Duclos and will fill in all the info for these sets as a baseline comparison. Todays test was fun to see how the numbers pan out in a real world situation outside the lab.

Not giving anything away yet but day 1 was definitely interesting. Let's just say our test put a lot of stress on the lenses, more than anything you would probably ever capture in a frame.

Shot in 5KFF 3:1 compression 320ISO @ 3200K.

19221_10200307149858463_1156460288_n.jpg

72821_10200307149138445_1066799643_n.jpg

528828_10200307148938440_1808775473_n.jpg

480262_10200307148738435_1418956930_n.jpg

14822_10200307147938415_298093732_n.jpg

423995_10200307147418402_1043255572_n.jpg

252745_10200311345123342_1611439639_n.jpg

67424_10200311345443350_1730156921_n.jpg

23327_10200311345643355_1776809957_n.jpg
Click to expand...

WOW. Totally stoked!!!
 
CP.2 Super Speeds

CP.2 Super Speeds

Just ordered my CP.2 Super Speeds and really interested in how they hold up against the Canon Cine lenses. Only problem is that I have PL Mount and not the EF. Sigh. May change my mind after I read these results. Post! Post! Post! I can't wait.
 
There's a ton of data and images to go through, but the guys are working on it and we'll be showing images soon.

I really wanted to thank everybody involved. It was a good fun "flairing" for y'all. Also wanted to especially thank Jarred and Matt Duclos for allowing us access to their spaces, tools, and minds. Also all the sponsors who provided the lenses tested, we'll give them due credit when the write up is ready to go.

The last two days were a ton of work, but it was also a great deal of fun. Many critical observations were made. A few surprises as well.
 
If you're interested I have a nice set of all-Duclos converted Contax that could be added to the party. They would represent about a 10K investment give or take and I think many would find the comparison interesting... though I would would guess they'd probably be similar to the Zeiss.

21 2.8
28 2
35 1.4
50 1.4
85 1.4

No worries either way.
 
Paul Schneider said:
oops. guess its a bit late for the Contax's ;-)
Click to expand...

haha yeah. Just finished the last day of testing.

Todays test included a beauty lens comparison and some projector fun. We will have a full video plus R3D's and write up posted by next Friday at the latest with all of the results. Hope you guys enjoy as much as we did testing them.

Our beauty comparison was for the 75mm/85mm lenses and we shot at 5K FF 3:1 @320ISO, 5600K. Crappy Iphone pic:
32160_10200316071001486_811749064_n.jpg
 
Can't thank you guys enough for doing this, including RSH, Duclos and the sponsors. So excited and curious about the results
 
That's actually a good thing. THe PL mount is made for durability and strength, the EF mount can cause problems such as image shift in the optics because of it's thin construction. We observed that in the real world tests but they held up a lot better on the projector.

Patrick Elliott said:
Only problem is that I have PL Mount and not the EF.
Click to expand...
 
Can't wait to see these tests. I hope the Super Speeds did ok! I'm kinda expecting their going to pull a Leica R (at the Salt tests) and flunk the math (wide open Supers are kinda soft, but by 2.8 find their way), but aesthetically hit a home run.

That's what I WANT to see, anyway. The Met fan in me is expecting it may be worse, though. Haha.
 
Last edited:
Timothy Jones said:
Hi Nick

Could you link me up with the SALT Test ?
I can't seem to find it. And, what was the downlow on the Leica's?
Thanks,
Tim
www.tjphoto.net
Click to expand...

Tim, here's the SALT TEST.

I think the conclusion about Leica R's is that they weren't as sharp as they expected (which isn't to say they aren't sharp). And that wasn't a bad thing. Mr. Duclos I think goes into a long explanation that basically says that Leica designed the lenses to maximize for beauty and for a certain specific rendering...ie they are designed with clear aesthetic considerations as well...and so "sharpness" in the clinical sense was only one if Leica's many priorities.

In short, they look awesome. They are awesome. Even if they only get an A- in math instead of an A. And it looks like the trade off in math only ADDS to their charm, doesn't detract.
 
Last edited:
Was there any still glass there to 'ground' the results, as it were ?
Or you didn't want to 'go there' ?
 
Will Keir said:
That's actually a good thing. THe PL mount is made for durability and strength, the EF mount can cause problems such as image shift in the optics because of it's thin construction. We observed that in the real world tests but they held up a lot better on the projector.
Click to expand...
It's definitely not the lens mount. Either the (lens) internal mechanics are a bit sloppy or the mount fit to the camera is sloppy. If properly mounted the Canon EF, Nikon F etc. any proper bayonet mount is as solid as can be... guarantied:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top