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 :)

Looking at the sensor and testing PL and EF

S

Sebastian Wöber

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 3, 2011
Messages
60
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
www.cinema5d.com
tree_ef4k1.jpg


ef_crop.jpg

Here's the article: http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?p=9243 (R3D file here)

But some excerpts:
Disclaimer: This is not a scientific test, merely a look at the sensors qualities under the given condition.

This is a quick test to get a feeling for the sharpness of the Scarlets Mysterium-X sensor. And to make sure sharpness is not suffering from lens type I tried some PL lenses with a Scarlet PL mount as well. More on that later.

Setup:
Contax Zeiss 28mm T2.8
Recorded at 4K, ISO 800, 25fps, 1/25th shutter, Aperture 5.6 +1/2

Under the given light conditions the Contax Zeiss produced very good sharpness and could hold up with the PL lenses. The PL lenses used were pre-production models and I cannot publish images taken with them.

A quick note about mounts on Scarlet-X: It's extremely easy to switch back and forth between EF and PL mount. All you have to do is unscrew and screw 4 torx screws back in. Especially if you want to use PL you should calibrate your backfocus afterwards.
 
Last edited:
Very cool Sebastian! I have Zeiss ZF's and this little test as well as Jarred's post on Peter Lik's test with the EPIC, let's me know that my glass will hold up well with the Sacrlet. Thanks for doing this test and posting.
 
I have Zeiss Compact Primes, my scarlet order still hasn't come ... so the question is ... should I convert my compact primes to PL to increase sharpness ... or does it not matter between EF and PL as far as sharpness?

?I'm not a expert at this type of stuff ... so I'd say from this example it doesn't matter, i currently use zeiss cp .2 with a canon 5d, and i think i still have some time to change my order to PL(i order AL mounts)?
 
Dan Kanes said:
Patrick, the mount doesn't add sharpness.

Sebastian is illustrating the quality of certain lenses.

Contax VS CP2 - my money is on contax for image.
Click to expand...

Yes mine too. I did a lens test between CP.2 Contax and EF mount Zeiss glass on a test chart with all stops (which I couldn't publish because again it wasn't scientific enough, what good argument to drop tests on glass) and Cp.2 had heavy vignetting at open stops and EF weren't as sharp as Contax. CP2 were a tad sharper than Contax though.
 
Something that should be mentioned here, especially those new to working with Red material, is what R3D data is and the power behind it

The R3D is the raw image data straight off the camera.

Much like working with Camera Raw images captured on a modern DSLR, Red's R3D raw files have a lot of resolution, color, and dynamic range that can be unlocked through post processing.

Take Sebastian's tree R3D for example:
scarletTest_sebastianC5D_Tree.jpg


Also to note, the REDCODE Compression Ratio plays a role in your captured image quality. Most large features are being captured between 5:1 and 8:1 in my experience and that produces exceptional results. That is in regards to motion capture. There could be certain advantages of shooting at higher quality REDCODE ratios for still images destined for high resolution printing depending on your own preferences.
 
Phil Holland said:
Something that should be mentioned here, especially those new to working with Red material, is what R3D data is and the power behind it

The R3D is the raw image data straight off the camera.

Much like working with Camera Raw images captured on a modern DSLR, Red's R3D raw files have a lot of resolution, color, and dynamic range that can be unlocked through post processing.

Take Sebastian's tree R3D for example:
scarletTest_sebastianC5D_Tree.jpg


Also to note, the REDCODE Compression Ratio plays a role in your captured image quality. Most large features are being captured between 5:1 and 8:1 in my experience and that produces exceptional results. That is in regards to motion capture. There could be certain advantages of shooting at higher quality REDCODE ratios for still images destined for high resolution printing depending on your own preferences.
Click to expand...
Phil,

You truly are a great resource on these boards and I find your posts highly educating and enlightening. Keep it up! :-)
 
Phil Holland said:
Something that should be mentioned here, especially those new to working with Red material, is what R3D data is and the power behind it

The R3D is the raw image data straight off the camera.

Much like working with Camera Raw images captured on a modern DSLR, Red's R3D raw files have a lot of resolution, color, and dynamic range that can be unlocked through post processing.

Take Sebastian's tree R3D for example:
scarletTest_sebastianC5D_Tree.jpg


Also to note, the REDCODE Compression Ratio plays a role in your captured image quality. Most large features are being captured between 5:1 and 8:1 in my experience and that produces exceptional results. That is in regards to motion capture. There could be certain advantages of shooting at higher quality REDCODE ratios for still images destined for high resolution printing depending on your own preferences.
Click to expand...


Hi Phil, how did you achieve the post-processed picture? it looks very sharp, what's the method used?
 
In this case it's just a simple Unsharp Mask. No voodoo here. I would recommend USM as well as the pure sharpening features of Neat Video (it's not just a noise reduction tool). There are many ways to get to this level of detail. There's even the sharpness slider in RedCineX Pro. It's about experimenting and finding what works for your tastes and needs.

With RedCode you can even push it a bit further if you desire more of a hard edge approach. I tend to go about this far for motion work. For stills I'd go a bit sharper.
 
Sebastian Wöber said:
Thanks Phil, this is very helpful.
What are the contrasty beige and black pixel artifacts in the post processed image? Thanks
Click to expand...

I apologize for that. Reload the image. It was jpeg nonsense.
 
Thanks Phil, it's a pleasure reading your posts. And thanks to Sebastian for sharing with all of us. :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top