Is the 1D Mark IV better....

[Sanjin Jukic]

As I said in my post Sanjin, I meant a wide lens like a 16mm.

Beyond this, I don't wish to talk to you again.

Please feel free to not answer my posts or converse with me. Ever again.

Sorry to disturb you but when you talk lenses you sound pretty helpless:furious3:

 

[James T Mather]

Sorry to disturb you but when you talk lenses you sound pretty helpless:furious3:

At least I don't think a 24mm on a 1.3 crop is a wide lens - good luck being a DP

/ ignore

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

/ ignore

Thanks for a good advice.

Yes I should...

 

[Dave Blackham]

yes.

1d apparently has less skew than 5d
aliasing apparently about the same
getting wider "fast" lenses for 1d is tricky as nothing is currently available faster than 2.8
- this might be cured by the increase in usable ISO but test before you buy.

James, thanks for this. I cant find anything faster than f2.8 either, nothing from Leica or Zeiss as I know they have 15mm lenses available at f2.8 and are Full Frame and the Tokina and Nikon APS-C wide short zoom lenses are f2.8 as well, Im not sure if these even cover the 1D mk4, but only f2.8 which ever.

 

[James T Mather]

APS C will not necessarily cover the APS H format. Watch Philip Blooms (very beautiful )prague video - where he reaches the same conclusions about the APS-C/APSH lenses and finding wide enough focal lengths for the 1d.

http://philipbloom.co.uk/2009/12/22/prague-a-canon-1dmkiv-pre-production-test-film/

 

[Ketch Rossi]

I meant a wide lens like a 16mm.

James,

I intend to get in the middle of no ones discussion here, but just like to point out that when talking about Canon Primes Still camera lenses there is just not WIDE, but there is ULTRA WIDE, like the EF 14m f/2.8L II on a FF Imager.

The WIDE range is considered from 20mm to 35mm still on a FF Imager, so even the EF 24mm f/1.4L II does indeed encompass the WIDE terminology even on the 1D IV, since when multiplied to consider the 1.3 cropping factor, the lens will still remain in the WIDE @ 31.2mm.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

James, thanks for this. I cant find anything faster than f2.8 either, nothing from Leica or Zeiss as I know they have 15mm lenses available at f2.8 and are Full Frame and the Tokina and Nikon APS-C wide short zoom lenses are f2.8 as well, Im not sure if these even cover the 1D mk4, but only f2.8 which ever.

But there is still something like a last hope for some of you that looking for a sort of solution to use super-fast wide PL lenses:

PL Mount for Canon EOS

PL Mount for Canon EOS by Pawel Achtel.

Carl Zeiss/Arri Master Prime 14mm T1.3 on Canon 50D by Pawel Achtel.

LINK>>>


or

PL Lenses w MBF Adapter on Canon 1D MkIV>>>

PL-Mount Adapter für Canon EOS 7D and 1DMK4>>>

But range of PL lenses for both solutions are very limited and also with the second option for 1DMK4 you have to crop the picture because of "possible" vignetting...

 

[Ketch Rossi]

But there is still something like a last hope for some of you that looking for a sort of solution to use super-fast wide PL lenses:

PL Mount for Canon EOS

PL Lenses w MBF Adapter on Canon 1D MkIV>>>

PL-Mount Adapter für Canon EOS 7D and 1DMK4>>>

But range of PL lenses for both solutions are very limited and also you have to crop the picture...

Sanjin, I will be very interested to now more about this option, but I don't see anything concerning the mount be compatible with the 1D series bodies as in the 1D IV.

Is this a screw on adapter? No butchering required? As in the Pawel solution, he he.

 

[Dave Blackham]

or

PL Lenses w MBF Adapter on Canon 1D MkIV>>>

PL-Mount Adapter für Canon EOS 7D and 1DMK4>>>

But range of PL lenses for both solutions are very limited and also you have to crop the picture...

Its a very interesting adaptor but seem only to work with some lenses. On wiki it reports the Lens throat diameter is the same for both mounts at 54mm so I guess its less than that so will only work with a few lenses. I don't know why its only advertised for the 7D though. Perhaps the mirror issues that affect use of some lenses like the Leica R 35mm that hit the mirror on a 5D if you wanted to use a Leica PL re housed lens or such.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Will the 14mm MP cover the 27.9mm × 18.6mm sensor on the 1D4?

Of course, if you chop the body up and fail to make it work, you just lost $5,000.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Angenieux Optimo 15-40mm T2.6 zoom on Canon 1DMK4

LINK>>>

Also

Syndicate Syndicate 7D PL Rod Mount Beta 2 could be adopted for 1DMK2

"with a PL-mount that works with all types of PL lenses, even deep ones.
Perfect for both production of full HD film as well as use as a perfect portable viewfinder for regular film production.

The camera house is modified to accept all kinds of PL lenses using a permanent, but completely dust free hollowing process.
However, the optical view-finder and the still photo exposure meter is disabled in the process."

LINK>>>

 

[James T Mather]

Maths suggest "not likely" for a 14mm

At a guess its getting towards 31mm Diag on a MP 14mm - 27.9mm×18.6mm works out at almost 33.53 mm Diag so - might be vignetting. Test first.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Thanks Sanjin, that should answer it, he he.

 

[James T Mather]

ADDENDUM: In response to the (ill mannered) post earlier (and to your polite one Dave) there is also the possibility for a F1.8 sigma 20mm (debates regarding quality notwithstanding*) that might foot the bill for an acceptably wide fast prime on the 1d (and to a lesser extent the 7d) which would give head to toe on an average actor at 8 feet in a 1d (approximately equivalent to a Red @4k at same distance on a 16mm). May be a hint of vignetting at below t4 but would probably look much like Zeiss Standards on R1 - also the vignetting may not be apparent unless you have a 2001 "white wall" type aesthetic. Might even look pretty - its often introduced in TK as a look anyway.

This might also apply on the 31mm coverage on a 33.53mm MP14mm.

So never let it be said I don't try to be even handed in a conversation - I just don't abide rudeness.

(*According to reviews, build quality, ease-of-use and sharpness may vary - Some good, others not so much - a bit like people

 

[Rick Darge]

This begs the question, why doesn't Red call their sensor's 1.5x crop, etc. Epic-X would be a 1.3x crop I'm guessing. 4k, 5k, debayer, crop, apc-h, argh god, my head, it's exploding! :banghead:

 

[Ketch Rossi]

This begs the question, why doesn't Red call their sensor's 1.5x crop, etc. Epic-X would be a 1.3x crop I'm guessing. 4k, 5k, debayer, crop, apc-h, argh god, my head, it's exploding! :banghead:

He he, Richard, I have felt the same at the beginning when moved to Digital, but I soon discovered that it absolutely makes no sense to go nuts, about cropping factors and lenses.

I just choose the body of choice for what it offered as far as image quality, and specs first, and never considered for one second the crop factor, I get it I tested it, and I see what I get out of each individual Focal, and use the 14mm as a 14mm and the 50mm as 50mm and so on despite of sensor crop.

The only true large difference however comes when shooting 2/3 imagers, then you have to do some additional tests as to choose your focal.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Maths suggest "not likely" for a 14mm

At a guess its getting towards 31mm Diag on a MP 14mm - 27.9mm×18.6mm works out at almost 33.53 mm Diag so - might be vignetting. Test first.

What about at 16:9 aspect ratio?

 

[JanneJansson]

He he, Richard, I have felt the same at the beginning when moved to Digital, but I soon discovered that it absolutely makes no sense to go nuts, about cropping factors and lenses.

Amen, I have had big headaches of zig-zaging between crop factors. But a crop factor is not always bad. A way of thinking is you are just using the "sweet spot" on the lens like the mid range T-stop if you really want to go sharp. :cheers2:

 

[James T Mather]

Sure for 16x9 (assuming you are going out to the edges/full neg which is a guess)

28mmx15.75mm - 32.12mm diag which certainly sounds more in the ballpark - might juuuust clip your corners.

 

[Andrew Wilding]

This begs the question, why doesn't Red call their sensor's 1.5x crop, etc. Epic-X would be a 1.3x crop I'm guessing. 4k, 5k, debayer, crop, apc-h, argh god, my head, it's exploding! :banghead:

Because it doesn't have a "crop factor" of 1.6x. It is more or less the same size/fov as s35 film, which is what the red one competes against, not ff35 (still photography.)

If you are coming from a (full frame) still photography world, you might throw on a 25mm and think of it as being cropped, but it looks the same as a 25mm on a "movie camera."

I'm sure you know this, and its really just semantics, but what can I say, im bored.