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 :)

Leica-M mount lenses on EPIC

Christopher Barrett said:
There was talk of a possible S2 mount coming from Red at some point, was there not? I think that glass would be amazing... nothing on the wide end, tho.
Click to expand...

We did talk to Jarred about it at Red Studios some time ago, we'll see what happens, but RED it is super busy now with so much... ;)
 
Well yes it should be great if S2 glass could be used. Would it be significantly better than M or R glass. I've sorry to say I've yet to check it out ? Will there ever be a R rom interface for Epic ?
 
As I said, tests are individually made to see what one likes better, but capacity of resolution of the glass, Build, and use with a certain mount is an other thing all together,
that is not an Opinion that is a fact,. and if a glass can also be used Electronically with flu control, as well as manual, then I much prefer it to any other Manual only option,
and so every pro photographer I have talked to, (well, as aide the few that wish not to embrace technology) but indeed EPIC has marked a new era of Digital Acquisition... ;)
 
Guys,

don't forget that stiil or cine lenses are just optics and main difference between them are mechanics.

Zeiss recently showed that in a comparison titled ZEISS Slice between cutaway of 3 ZEISS lenses shown at Cine Gear

DSC_1421-FDTimes_CineGear2011_ZEISSx1920.jpg

Zeiss slice: Makro-Planar T* 2/100 and Planar T* 1.4/85 and cine lens Compact Prime 2.9/25; Photo credit by FDTimes

two SLR still lenses: Makro-Planar T* 2/100 and Planar T* 1.4/85 and cine lens Compact Prime 2.9/25.

Generally it means for all lenses, still or cine that main difference between those type of glass is that cine lenses are bigger, heavier, larger, have more mechanical elements,

mostly handmade and because all of that in the most cases more expensive than still glass.

Go back to Leicas there are several Leica M lenses (also all handmade) even more expensive than some of PL glass (for example Noctilux-M 50mm ASPH f/0.95, etc,...).
 
AnthonyFlores said:
Exactly. Leica M lenses are not cheap for sure, and they have some limitations in terms of marks and focus rotation ...

However, some of us already have some of them for our M9's -- also, let us not forget that M lenses are among the most
portable, optically extraordinary lenses and fully cover FF35 ... outperforming basically anything from Canon, Nikon and
pretty much any other lens not costing $10,000 ... $15,000 ... or even $20,000 or more per lens (like Cooke, MP, Leica C's).

In that sense, if I could get a mount that allowed Leica M lenses on an Epic and was Red-approved, I'd jump at it.

Tell me Jiri - setting aside the limitations of focus marks and rotation - can you tell me better optically performing PL lenses that
are f1.4 and cost $5-6,000 or less??? If so, I'd LOVE to hear about them!
Click to expand...

For Cinema Work:
http://www.lumatechinc.com/S35.html

For Still work:
New Zeiss ZF 50mm Macro, Zeiss ZF 100mm Macro, new Zeiss 35 mm ZF f1.4 ansd good old 21mm ZF.
NIkon G series 24mm,35mm,85mm all f1.4.
Coming Back to Leica-great lenses..not enough grunt on LONG END....
$6,000 for Leica 24mm f1.4 which is NOT as good as Nikon's $2,000 G series 24mm....
Sanjin-NOBODY is derailing your thread...You yourself make sure you do some research about OTHER brands before raving about Leica only... there are some great lenses from others too.
Finally Sanjin your Leica Still glass is TOOI SLOW on extreme Wide end too.

regards jiri
 
Jiri Vrozina said:
For Cinema Work:
http://www.lumatechinc.com/S35.html

For Still work:
New Zeiss ZF 50mm Macro, Zeiss ZF 100mm Macro, new Zeiss 35 mm ZF f1.4 ansd good old 21mm ZF.
NIkon G series 24mm,35mm,85mm all f1.4.
Coming Back to Leica-great lenses..not enough grunt on LONG END....
$6,000 for Leica 24mm f1.4 which is NOT as good as Nikon's $2,000 G series 24mm....
Sanjin-NOBODY is derailing your thread...You yourself make sure you do some research about OTHER brands before raving about Leica only... there are some great lenses from others too.
Finally Sanjin your Leica Still glass is TOOI SLOW on extreme Wide end too.

regards jiri
Click to expand...

Jiri,

don't fool yourself with all that crap and false statements about the lenses in general, need education promptly, take any summer school where you can get it...
 
Jiri Vrozina said:
For Cinema Work:
http://www.lumatechinc.com/S35.html

For Still work:
New Zeiss ZF 50mm Macro, Zeiss ZF 100mm Macro, new Zeiss 35 mm ZF f1.4 ansd good old 21mm ZF.
NIkon G series 24mm,35mm,85mm all f1.4.
Coming Back to Leica-great lenses..not enough grunt on LONG END....
$6,000 for Leica 24mm f1.4 which is NOT as good as Nikon's $2,000 G series 24mm....
Sanjin-NOBODY is derailing your thread...You yourself make sure you do some research about OTHER brands before raving about Leica only... there are some great lenses from others too.
Finally Sanjin your Leica Still glass is TOOI SLOW on extreme Wide end too.

regards jiri
Click to expand...

Thanks Yiri, though I've NEVER heard any expert say that Zeiss still glass exceeds Leica M or R at any focal length. Check Ken Rockwell, or others who test those
extensively. Yes, I know that Evin Grant and some others I respect a LOT are high on Nikon Glass .... but I'm still skeptical that it beats out Leica on the main performance indicators.
The big edge Nikon seems to have is amazing performance, including wide open, for the price. That's what's so exciting about it IMHO. Zeiss is also a great value as well, but there are
optical compromises compared to Leica.

Leica is not JUST a premium brand - performance tests nearly always show some (albeit possibly subtle) advantage.

And you mentioned the 24mm ... but Leica has a 21mm Summilux M (f1.4) -- their widest fast lens. I highly doubt anything 21mm/1.4 from Nikon, Canon or pretty much anything short of
a 21mm Master Prime, 5i or Leica C competes with it's performance.

Anything wider than that, you're right -- Leica is very slow. But like I said before, being able to use a Summilux M set of 21-35-50-70 and then 90 at f2 would be impressive. I already have
several of those, just need to round out the set :)
 
Finally,
unless you are shooting STILL VIDEO, most of Still Lenses are hard to control on moving objects. Only ZEISS ZF/ZE still lenses have Long Throw Focusing which is very handy....
 
P.S. to Ketch -- I agree with you about the S lenses ... all indicators are this is one of the best lenses in history. Even the most experienced photographers that I've heard from have been blown away. And they are also auto-focus as you mentioned, but amazing to use manually with buttery smooth mechanics. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ... so sexy :)

As you mentioned, though, there are several big challenges right now ...

Creating smart mounts is a TON of work -- look how much longer it's taking to complete the Canon and Nikon mounts.

Also, compared to Canon and Nikon, the number of customers with Leica S glass is probably not even 1% ....

And last but not least - Leica is behind on production, and even more behind on rolling out the needed focal lengths to
make the S lenses a more complete set. Last I heard, there were only 4 focal lengths -- 35mm, 70mm, 120mm, 180mm
which is not nearly complete enough for serious Epic users IMHO.

Of course, I know you know all this already Ketch, just stating for the benefit of others curious about the S lenses.

If I were Red, I would maybe roll out the Leica S mount when the FF Epic comes out, since that gives Red time to complete
the more important other smart mounts and Leica S will be more attractive on the Monstro or Dragon sensored Epics anyway.
 
AnthonyFlores said:
Thanks Yiri, though I've NEVER heard any expert say that Zeiss still glass exceeds Leica M or R at any focal length. Check Ken Rockwell, or others who test those
extensively. Yes, I know that Evin Grant and some others I respect a LOT are high on Nikon Glass .... but I'm still skeptical that it beats out Leica on the main performance indicators.
The big edge Nikon seems to have is amazing performance, including wide open, for the price. That's what's so exciting about it IMHO. Zeiss is also a great value as well, but there are
optical compromises compared to Leica.

Leica is not JUST a premium brand - performance tests nearly always show some (albeit possibly subtle) advantage.

And you mentioned the 24mm ... but Leica has a 21mm Summilux M (f1.4) -- their widest fast lens. I highly doubt anything 21mm/1.4 from Nikon, Canon or pretty much anything short of
a 21mm Master Prime, 5i or Leica C competes with it's performance.

Anything wider than that, you're right -- Leica is very slow. But like I said before, being able to use a Summilux M set of 21-35-50-70 and then 90 at f2 would be impressive. I already have
several of those, just need to round out the set :)
Click to expand...


Never Said Zeiss ZF exeeds anything.....NIKON 24mm does
 
KETCH ROSSi said:
Okay, I come out and say this, form only 28 years of experience, yet my opinion, refers to just that, my opinion in Still glass used in almost 3 decades...

The M and R Leica glass, was and will remain some of the bets glass in the world... however...


It simply can not stand next to the absurd image quality of the new MF S2 Leica Glass!!!

This new glass is made form dream land it self, and I'll be sure to prove it soon, in more then one way... ;)
Click to expand...


After shooting Leica M and R for some 30 years - moving from MF film to Hasselblad H3D II 39 for stills ( the one you almost bought Ketch!) I now have an S2-P with the 70 S lens.

The lenses are very good...especially for the format.

Here is a capture that I recently posted in the Off Track listings:

picture.php


An Epic S Leica mount would be fabulous. It is one of the few cameras that would make use of the S lens quality. Count me in if it occurs.

Bob
 
Sorry to rain on this parade but if you read(and understand) the reviews the flagship 21mm and 24mm M fast lenses are pretty average wide open. I see a lot of vignetting, weird and quite severe distortion, excessive field curvature, pretty awful color fringing in high contrast situations...
Admittedly, the color rendition is fantastic but that's probably due to the camera as much as the lens since they are all used on late M bodies.
Besides there is no way they will fit on the Epic.
 
Here is another S2-P 70 S capture....the out of focus falloff is very gentle with these lenses but overall they retain great sharpness in the plane of focus.

This capture was handheld in lower light...hence it is not a perfect example. I will look for another tonight although I realize this is a bit off track from the
original post. For travel I use a GH2 with M mount lenses and love their build and imaging...not in spite of their defects but probably because of them.

picture.php


Bob
 
Last two S2-P 70S examples then back to thread.



picture.php



picture.php



Aperture control without AF would be great if that allowed an interim solution for the EPIC.


Bob
 
Bob Moore said:
Here is another S2-P 70 S capture....the out of focus falloff is very gentle with these lenses but overall they retain great sharpness in the plane of focus.
Click to expand...

I thought focuss falloff was a function of focal length and aperture and not dependent on the lens make, no?

I'm a big enthusiast of Leica glass and often those lenses have unmatched optical properties (for example, Leica Aplo-Telyt R modular lenses, which I own), but often Leica enthusiasts seem to take lense's shortcomings as the "look" that they find attractive. Of course, there is nothing wrong with it, but it should be clearly distinguished from measurable optical performance.
 
OptiTek said:
Sorry to rain on this parade but if you read(and understand) the reviews the flagship 21mm and 24mm M fast lenses are pretty average wide open. I see a lot of vignetting, weird and quite severe distortion, excessive field curvature, pretty awful color fringing in high contrast situations...
Admittedly, the color rendition is fantastic but that's probably due to the camera as much as the lens since they are all used on late M bodies.
Besides there is no way they will fit on the Epic.
Click to expand...

Jacek, you always like to rain on the Leica parade. Next you'll be telling us it's stupid to fantasize about S lenses on Epic, because they are not designed or suited for that format/sensor ;)

In terms of the 21mm, you work with lenses on a professional level, so I'd tend to believe your analysis. I think I was going off some DP Review and Diglloyd reviews I read last year.

But now that I'm looking at the charts, I see what you mean. However, seems that some level of distortion at 21mm/f1.4 is inevitable ... you're saying that it's worse than other
fast lenses at this focal length?

I believe you, and stand corrected if that's the case, just curious .... :)
 
AnthonyFlores said:
...However, seems that some level of distortion at 21mm/f1.4 is inevitable ... you're saying that it's worse than other
fast lenses at this focal length?
Click to expand...

Not really. I use Nikon 24mm at f/1.4 for landscapes and it is pretty good wide open. In most cases I do not bother doing any corrections. Then there are Master Primes, which do not have any distortions even at 14mm - just perfectly flat image at f/1.2. So, it can be done :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top