Lens comparison frames, Cooke, Master Prime, Red Prime

[geoffboyle]

The images posted at:-

http://www.cinematography.net/lens-comparisons.html

Were shot at s Santa Fe workshop in Amsterdam.

I didn't set it up, it was something that the students wanted to do.

It doesn't tell you a lot, it's not a lens test as such but it does show that in that instance there really wasn't a lot of difference!

The full res 36Mb files are there as well.

 

[Pawel Achtel]

Thanks Geoff.

Bit noisy.

However, the MP does have noticeably higher contrast than the RPP. It would be good to have a scene containing a higher contrast subject and higher frequencies (detail) in the frame.

 

[geoffboyle]

Thanks Geoff.

Bit noisy.

.

Yeah, as I said on the web-page, I boosted the gain up to make it easier to see.

If I'd left it as shot then I'd get complaints that it was too dark!

 

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

Looking at the out of focus areas It seems like Cooke has the nicest bokeh.

And RPPs look better resolution-wise than Cooke.

Master Primes are unbelievably sharp! Damn. RPPs are second (from what I could judge) and Cookes are a tad soft.

Master Primes also gives her skin a nice natural specular, it seems a little desaturated on the other lenses.

MP king of the hill no doubt, however, I'd only choose Cookes over RPPs if it was a stylistic choice based on softness and bokeh.

 

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

Bump, weird no one commented much on this thread.

Perhaps there were extensive discussion that I missed probably?

 

[geoffboyle]

I must admit that I expected a lot more in the way of comments.

Nobody has beaten me up this time!

 

[peter roehsler]

I think Pietro is right, MP beats them both. The face in the MP shot `jumps´ at you, while the other two just `represent´ or `depict´ (I have no better terms for my impression). I am sure this is only partly due to resolution, it´s about how Zeiss lenses `treat´ the skin. (I have some beat-up pre-war Zeiss glass for Leica and they are far from sharp, but they work magic with faces, esp B&W - this is not about lens blur or flare, it´s pure glass alchemy and lens design).
I was so hoping that RPPs would stand out, but I am sorry to say that they look like your average - albeit top-notch - Schneider lenses.
Thanks for making the test images available, Geoff!

 

[Vinit Borrison]

Hey Geoff,
It would be great to hear your opinion on the red pro primes...

 

[John Fairstein]

Thanks Geoff, nice test. To my eyes, the differences in cost between the lenses is much greater than the differences in image detail.

 

[geoffboyle]

Hey Geoff,
It would be great to hear your opinion on the red pro primes...

Well you know the pictures tell the story, there's not a lot in it and it's a question of what you like!

Initially there were some reservations about build quality but these were really with pre-prod run lenses and I've not heard any negative comments since.

It really does come down to personal choice but projected at 2K I must say that I'd be happy to shoot with any of them!

What a wonderful place to be

 

[Richard Foster]

Thanks for the test, Geoff. The lenses perform as expected, with Cooke's characteristics showing, as does Zeiss, and Red's neutralness, which is fine.

 

[Sean Rawls]

Thanks for the test Geoff.

I think it's interesting how fixated people become on resolution.

Optically the Red Pro Primes are very crisp but I find the look a little too "clinical" for some situations. As a DIT I'm surprised how often DPs prefer older glass to dirty up the digital image. I once did two days of lens tests with a DP between S4s and Super Speeds. Much to my chagrin as a technician, the DP preferred the super speeds because he liked their "painterly fall off". However, I really respect his decision because he chose the lenses because they fit the aesthetic of the story. A younger person (such as myself) might have picked the more expensive glass simply based on reputation. So often I think we get caught up in numbers and shootouts we forget that the cameraman's job is to visually express the narrative. In short, pick the lens that fits the project, there is no "right answer".

That being said, I think lens mechanics and design might be my primary decision maker given the shot to shot matching available in today's color grading (and RAW). Having numerous and accurate marks, good focus throw, and smooth mechanics deeply impact the the efficiency of a camera department and a set as a whole. I honestly prefer the look of my old Nikkor primes to the RPPs, but I'll use the cinema glass every time to give the 1st AC a fighting chance (and so we can make our day). In this vein I was disappointed with the frequency of marks on the RPPs, the size of the marks, and the fact that on the sets I've used the marks didn't exactly match between smart side and dumb side of the lens. While I understand we are comparing a 25,000 set to the most expensive prime set out there, these design concerns are the reason I choose RPPs over still glass. However, I must say I was visually very happy with the last spot I shot on RPPs.

Also of note, people make beautiful pictures with all of these lenses everyday, so if yours look bad, maybe it's time to reevaluate your technique. This idea is figuring prominently in my mind as I'm sitting working a 5D shoot. . . . Just repeat the mantra "they are only tools" hahaha

Anyways, thanks again for the test Geoff, good food for thought