Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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

I checked them out at NAB and was very interested. Didn't have the chance to shoot with them but considering an evaluation. They've been re-certified at T1.2 and are all roughly the same size from 18-85mm.

curious if anyone has actually shot with them, especially on Epic.

Jason
 
Jason Diamond said:
I checked them out at NAB and was very interested. Didn't have the chance to shoot with them but considering an evaluation. They've been re-certified at T1.2 and are all roughly the same size from 18-85mm.

curious if anyone has actually shot with them, especially on Epic.

Jason
Click to expand...

Wait ... re-certified? Do you mean by the manufacturer? Certification seems so ... formal. I imagine that they just measure actual light output at the rear of the lens so the T stops give accurate exposure.

In any case ... I to am eager to see some tests of these lenses.
 
+3, it was a while since these lenses starting going around but seems no one has any impressions to share yet?
 
Alexander Ibrahim said:
Wait ... re-certified? Do you mean by the manufacturer? Certification seems so ... formal. I imagine that they just measure actual light output at the rear of the lens so the T stops give accurate exposure.

In any case ... I to am eager to see some tests of these lenses.
Click to expand...

Apparently they were tested on a high end Zeiss testing device and were within the normal tolerances that Zeiss and others use to call them 1.2 (e.g. They read something like T1.21 or 1.22)

As a more practical test, when Ketch was here in Feb we put both his master prime and an Illumina on the epic, same scene and the illumina was clearly brighter - both on the LCD and the histogram.
 
not this thread again. :( optically fine lesnes... BUT I have heard from several rental houses that they are "Mechanically inferior to most every other lens out there" and Im being kind.

I personally didnt like the cheap feeling plastic housings (there is a reason why nobody is buying them after 2 years) - they should sell for about $3K a lens and they would sell lots of sets but instead raised the price and the RED PRO PRIMES are a much better value imho.

IF you want rental glass. Stick with ZEISS and Cooke Primes and Angie Zooms. Nothing else rents really. at least not regularly.
 
Tim Whitcomb said:
not this thread again. :( optically fine lesnes... BUT I have heard from several rental houses that they are "Mechanically inferior to most every other lens out there" and Im being kind.

I personally didnt like the cheap feeling plastic housings (there is a reason why nobody is buying them after 2 years) - they should sell for about $3K a lens and they would sell lots of sets but instead raised the price and the RED PRO PRIMES are a much better value imho.

IF you want rental glass. Stick with ZEISS and Cooke Primes and Angie Zooms. Nothing else rents really. at least not regularly.
Click to expand...

Tim:

Are you talking about the reworked ball bearing version that has only been available for a couple months? And are you solely relying on hearsay? - seems to me a harsh backhand like that deserves to be based on actual experience. Gregory is a neighbor of mine here in Weston, and I have a little familiarity with the situation. As far as sales, he was aware of the initial mechanical issues on the early lenses so really didn't push them much - sold off the initial production batch at bargain prices, waiting for the updated version and I believe with the new version, they sold out several months worth of production at NAB - where people were able to actually put their hands on them.

I'm not a cine lens expert, since I've been a video guy most of my life, but they seem to be very competitive to me. The RPPs are very nice but much heavier and a stop slower. As you say, Cooke and Zeiss have a pretty solid lock on the rental and major production markets and none of the second tier lenses are likely to make much inroads, and it seems to me that the speed can't be overstated for the owner/operator and low budget indie market. Realizing that all of the budget lenses are just that - budget lenses that have some limitations versus the majors - the speed would probably be the deciding factor for me and many others.
 
Spend some time with them at the NAB, and I was really nicely surprised.
Lenses are great for what I could tell. Brighter (faster) then superspeeds.
When wide open they performed very good: good contrast, nice flairs, tight dreamy at1.3, but sharper then supers.
Mechanically I haven't noticed any problems (haven't checked all of them).
If I did not ordered the ultras, that would be a set for me to get.
My opinion is based on the poor light and ref. equipment, so please take it light.
 
Surprised by Tim Whitcomb's negative comments. He must be referring to earlier samples.

Here's my experience from http://reduser.net/forum/showthread...ns-roundup...&p=755478&highlight=#post755478:

"I recently participated in a brief demo by Luma Tech of the Illuminas. They are smaller than the RED Primes and of comparable build quality. The iris is at the nodal point (not the front) as you would expect. We played with the 18mm and 25mm on my RED. No formal testing, but we looked at faces at 1.2 and 4, and shone a flashlight into the lens from about 25 ft. away. Flattering look to the faces, and very little flare. It was an LED flashlight so we couldn't fairly evaluate chromatic aberrations. The rep, Glenn Leibold informed us that the optical elements are first aligned, then the barrels are built around them. Not sure how that works, but it would certainly reduce breathing. We did not see any breathing.

Glenn also mentioned that the Illuminas are designed for ease of service, and I notice they've conducted several clinics around the country for lens techs.

I've also used the RED 18mm and 25mm lenses. Comparing the RED and the Illuminas, my impression is that the Illuminas give a warmer more Cooke like look. Plus you need a stop less light. For techies, Lomo did an optical comparison with Zeiss, Cooke, etc. Glenn mentioned they have a CD of the test results, but I have not looked at them. Their website is http://www.lumatechinc.com/2.html

I am in no way affiliated with Luma Tech, Illumina, or LOMO, and my comments are just personal impressions."
 
Thanks for the feedback people --

Do they have plastic housings?

Regards,
Paul
 
I looked at them at NAB and the housings were not plastic. I couldn't say what exact material they are made of but they were metal of some sort and felt quite solid. I had pretty much dismissed these lenses in favor of Cooke Panchros, due to negative quality reviews prior to seeing them there. Now I am rethinking that and plan to rent a set for a few days and put them through thier paces before deciding. The size is great, and the speed is great. I'm not expecting MP performance, but if the housing quality has significantly improved, and the image is competetively sharp, they may be a viable owner operator set for someone like me. Ultras are just beyond my price range. RPP are great but too big. Panchros are a stop slower than I want in a prime or I would have already bought them.
 
Paul Nordin said:
... Ultras are just beyond my price range. RPP are great but too big. Panchros are a stop slower than I want in a prime...
Click to expand...

You're reading my mind with the above...be sure to report on what you decide on the illuminas..thanks.
 
Will do Steve. I'm just waiting for David Mullen to wrap Big Sur as that production has sucked all the Epic-Ms up in the SF Bay Area. I want to check these lenses out at 5k as that is what I'll be shooting them on (Epic).
 
thanks Paul,

I agree with you on the Red primes vs. Ultra primes vs. Pancros vs. these.

Would love these to work out.
 
The ones I saw at NAB barreled forward a total of approx 1/4" when going from full close focus to infinity, which is not usually a move you'd use on a shot in my opinion.

Was def not a deterrent to me when I was examining them.

Jason
 
Hmmmm, these are seeming like an interesting lower-budget option. Eager to hear comments on how they look/cover the Epic sensor. Definitely will check this thread once someone has tested. Thanks guys :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top