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 :)

ILLUMINA PRIMES or RED PRIMES

J

Jon MIchael Puntervold

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2009
Messages
1,065
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Norway
ILLUMINA PRIMES or RED PRIMES. Thoughts? Pros and cons? I need to acquire a set.

Best,
Jon Michael
 
Last edited:
i/ Cookes with a price around the same level as Lumina, but with more light than the panchros would have been ideal for my use, maybe we'll see it in the future? :)

All the new camera owners need new lenses, and most are not willing to pay by the "old" prices.
 
They are both awesome values.

You should consider the Zeiss Compact Primes as well.

My choice is the Illumina ... In the end I'm a speed fiend with my glass. I'll mostly shoot at 2.8 - 5.6, but when I want fast ... well I want fast.

That narrows it down to older MK3 Superspeeds, Zeiss Master Primes and Illuminas.

If you are planning on renting ... I might strongly recommend the MK3's. There is a lot of "brand buying" that happens. People have perceptions, mostly outdated and ill informed. Still, they buy what they want.

Anyway there is a whole long thread about this.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...luminas-vs.-the-new-Cooke-Panchros...a-review

and Paul Nordin has a review here of the Illuminas.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...Illuminas-performance&highlight=Illumina+test
 
Illuminas all the way! I've been shooting with my set for two months now and they are great lenses. Sharp, really fast, rugged, and compact. To those who never dip below 2.8, maybe the Panchro's are the solution, but I just dont see that being fast enough.

Example1, on a fast moving doco shoot in a Bordeaux wine cave. Lighting in cave was 40-60w bulbs. No time to relight the entire cave. So we opened up the lens to T/1.3, set Key appropriately, and the background lighting balanced nicely. Never could have done that with two stop slower lens. NEVER. Would have to have re-globed the entire cave, and that was not possible.
Example2, on a commercial shoot where director swore everything would be shot 25fps (European delivery). Lit to a T/4.0. Part-way into the shoot Director asks for 96fps overcranked in spite of prior no-overcranked plan. No relighting needed in this case. Just opened up lens to T/1.3. DONE

I'm not saying you can't work around a T2.8 lens, but I am saying that there are times those extra stops on the Illuminas equate to a WIN, as opposed to a long conversation about how long it will take to light/relight. And for those that say, with the light sensativity of the MX sensor 2.8 is all they ever need, I say that alone is not enough unless you don't mind dealing with noise in people's fleshtones, and the "conversations" that result from that.

My two cents.
 
Both are optically good.
The one thing I complain about the RPP, is the lack of focus marks especially between 5m and infinity on the 35 and 50. I mean, when using 50 you are often between 50 and infinity. The 50 should have had the 85 and 100 focus ring.

I would have picked Illumina if I had already an Ekran Set. It's good to have choices.
I can't wait for the Nikon electronic mount.
 
I wish Red would just buy the Illumina designs outright and sell that as Red Super Speeds. T1.2 is just great, plus they'd get a GREAT set of S16mm primes as well.

Have the Lomo machines shipped over from Russia, continue to get the glass blanks from Schott, and sell a few thousand sets. :-)

You don't even need to change the price...

It'd be great to have lenses manufactured here in the states. If Cooke can do it in the UK, then surely they can be done in the US, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top