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 :)

Leica Summilux-C Primes

K

Ken Wilson

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Messages
157
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Boca Raton, Florida.
Website
www.3dmovies.com
Can anyone please who has access to a Dragon AND Leica Summilux-C Primes AND/OR Master Primes upload soe pic r3d's of any scenery with lots of detail exposed nicely? 6k will be ideal.

I meed to compare them with my lenses.

Thank you!
 
Summilux Tree Foliage Test: done . . . when you zoom into the leaves you can clearly see they are, in fact, $100 bills
 
@ Josh: I have not experience that's why I want to see with my own eyes. Everyone is so different even here!

Mainly I want the pic to look fantastic in an IMAX screen. I estimated it's a 1500% blowout in RCX and there you see very clearly an average lens and a great lens.
 
Last edited:
Ken, where are you located and or do you have a .R3D you can send me to look at?

I have seen several sets of the Summilux-Cs and I'm pretty familiar with their performance. Even the 16mm now :)
 
@ Sert: I have mainly Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Hasselblad photo "lenses" not actual cine lenses, you can get an idea if you go at red.3dmovies.com all the footage there was shot with these lenses and I like them but I tried few times to talk to managers of some movie theaters here in Boca Raton, Florida with no luck, I guess I need to persist more?

It appears that my lenses will not look good on a hopefully very soon_ Dragon for an IMAX doc I'm working on. So before I invest more time traveling to Turkey, Greece, Italy etc again I need to find a "lens solution" that will stand the big screen and not look blurry and cheap.
 
Last edited:
@Phil: I am in Boca Raton, Florida Phil. I do not have a PL mount yet as I have no PL lenses.

In addition I want the Motion mount and as I shoot mainly 3D I don't want to spend 8k for 2 now that I'll use only to test.

I think it'll be obvious to me to see how good the Summis or the Masters are if I blow them 1500% im RCX side by side with mine. Not as good as seeing them in a big screen but faster.
 
Ken Wilson said:
I have mainly Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Hasselblad photo "lenses" not actual cine lenses, you can get an idea if you go at red.3dmovies.com all the footage there was shot with these lenses and I like them but I tried few times to talk to managers of some movie theaters here in Boca Raton, Florida with no luck, I guess I need to persist more?

It appears that my lenses will not look good on a hopefully very soon_ Dragon for an IMAX doc I'm working on. So before I invest more time traveling to Turkey, Greece, Italy etc again I need to find a "lens solution" that will stand the big screen and not look blurry and cheap.
Click to expand...

Ah. I see what you're getting at.

Take a look at that SALT III tests:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?94289-SALT-III-High-Speed-Lens-Shootout-quot-WFO-quot-Results

There are some nice examples from several different lenses to show you their wide open and T2.8 performance in there.

The biggest gains you get from the Summilux-C Primes is resolving power, extremely wrangled chromatic aberration performance (the best out there in this category), minimal breathing, and a fully matched set of glass.

If you are shooting for IMAX I would recommend avoiding any lens that produces image shift while focusing (most still lenses). On big screens like that it's extremely visible even when fixed in post as the motion blur is sometimes tricky to hide when corrected/stabilized.

If you aren't pulling or racking a lot though, you can get away with a lot.

Oddly, if speed isn't a concern and you can get away with T2 primes, the Summicron-Cs are very sharp and cover Dragon 6K FF. They also perform very nicely wide open. It sounds like you are traveling a lot and those are a bit smaller. They do breath a bit more than the Summilux-Cs however, but not by much.
 
@Phil:

I looked at these fantastic tests so many times before but is not the same as a well exposed r3d. I also want sunshine and details maybe a shot like this:

http://red.3dmovies.com/scarlet-x-4k-tokina-11-16mm-f28-greece-video_1902e3f7f.html


One of the sharpest I took at f11 and 1000 shutter..

Yes, I never pull in 3D, I'll need to get the proper lenses first to spend another 20-30k for that.

I m zeroing for the Summicrons-C for now...


 
@Tommaso: I use all lenses I have from 6mm to 1200mm in 5k for documentaries but for movies I use the Canon 50mm 1.0 (rare lens and very good for the dark - looks identical to 85mm 1.2), Nikon Noct 58mm (sharper than the Canon but not so good as the Canon 1.0 in the dark), Canon 24mm 1.4, Canon 85mm 1.2, Canon 70-200 2.8 and the Hasselblad 50mm FLE and 120mm. If I have to pick 2 then for docs is the 11-16mm Tokina and for movies the Noct 1.2.
 
The CA or lack of CA on the Summiluxes is pretty amazing. I'm curious as to which set is sharper, MPs or Summiluxes.
 
Logan Smith said:
The CA or lack of CA on the Summiluxes is pretty amazing. I'm curious as to which set is sharper, MPs or Summiluxes.
Click to expand...

It's an alarmingly close call, but the Summilux-Cs are higher resolving lenses overall. It's especially noticeable on certain focal lengths, like the 50mm.

On that front we are essentially arguing about which super car is more super though.

If the budget is there and I was looking into super speeds, 9 times out of 10 I would choose the Summilux Primes.

T1.9 through T2.1, now that's a trickier conversation.
 
Phil Holland said:
It's an alarmingly close call, but the Summilux-Cs are higher resolving lenses overall. It's especially noticeable on certain focal lengths, like the 50mm.
Click to expand...

That was the impression I got as well. But is that to say that the MPs have certain focal lengths that are sharper than others in the MP lineup, in your experience?
 
Logan Smith said:
That was the impression I got as well. But is that to say that the MPs have certain focal lengths that are sharper than others in the MP lineup, in your experience?
Click to expand...

They are mostly fairly matched in resolving power, but the 50mm has always stood out as the odd duck to me among several sets.
 
I read the Leica also has a unique color look that is desirable to many. The colors appear warmer but in an ideal way unlike the MP's that are faithful to reality.

Anyway, for me the bottom line is a well exposed 5-6k r3d and since I do docs and movies I want some really sharp, well exposed and balanced r3d's with faces in natural light and some scenery.

Then I can see the whole truth and nothing but the truth hehehehe....

If I was Leica or Zeiss I'll put a ton there but there is nothing!

I hope someone hopefully soon will upload these here or send a link.
 
I'm sure somebody will post an .R3D eventually, but honestly look at any of the films shot with these. That should tell you everything you need to know. As well as the SALT III tests, there's snaps of a women to be found there.

I can't share material from studio shoots. That's bad juju.
 
Ken Wilson said:
@ Josh: I have not experience that's why I want to see with my own eyes. Everyone is so different even here!

Mainly I want the pic to look fantastic in an IMAX screen. I estimated it's a 1500% blowout in RCX and there you see very clearly an average lens and a great lens.
Click to expand...

Ken, there are no lenses that will look good blown up 1500%
 
Greg M said:
Ken, there are no lenses that will look good blown up 1500%
Click to expand...

Basicaly I want to see if some footage I took with the still lenses will look good in IMAX. I thought that if it looks good in IMAX then it'll be ok also for a theater.

However...

I do not have access to an IMAX screen or a theater at the moment to project some of my clips and make sure I'm on track.

I blew up in RCX a part of the pic on a 55" 1080p tv 1500% after some minor calculations of how much a 55" tv covers an IMAX screen. I know is the wrong way to evaluate sharpness, color etc but have no other ideas.

Avatar looked fantastic to me and 99.999% of everyone in the IMAX and was shot in 1080p right? So in theory even Scarlet foootage is ok for the IMAX but in reality is it?



What will you do in my case? I'm expecting the Dragons day by day but that's half the story. Or is it more to your opinion and anyone elses of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top