OLD or NEW DRAGON OLPF ?... What's best.

[Mark Toia]

I've been shooting the old and NEW OLPF on a hell of alot of work this year. And have just finished a project were we had 4 cameras (old and new) going side by side. 3 on the ground, one in the air.

Shooting charts is one thing, you can do that all day everyday and beat yourself up, pixel pepping and blogging results of shots from the kitchen bench. But the fact is that real world shooting (& testing) on set is where you really see the differences. Especially when your shooting side by for days on end multiple different lighting scenarios, as well as grading hours upon hours of data. You really get to understand what settings shine in what conditions.
You really get to see the good the bad and the ugly... Especially when you don't expose properly. The same as film.

I'm going to say that I was worried about leaving the older OLPF for the newer version.. I was one of the lucky ones having a Dragon for almost a year now. Giving it a real work out, I started falling in love with it each day as I learnt how to get more and more out of it over that time. But once digging down into the new OLPF, You quite quickly decide that you will never go back to the older OLPF.

I too have seen the slight noise in the darker underexposed areas, but quickly learnt how to combat and shoot around the noise, now I barely see noise at all, even shooting at night. Only by learning how to use the NEW OLPF to it's fullest. The same way I had to learn how to shoot with the REDONE, REDONE MX, DRAGON MX, DRAGON V1. Not to mention the beta cameras we have tested.

Learning how to get the best from certain film stocks is exactly the same as learning how to get the best from DRAGON. You find that sweet spot for varied conditions and next thing your image quality really starts to lift to another level.
What I've come down to after shooting several months with both OLPF's... I'm going to say that newer OLPF is better over all. A lot better... I personally think RED should drop the idea of retaining the older OLPF as an option. it's just going backwards.

Everyone and I mean everyone has different opinions about what's best for them. Everyone has different expectations as well. I for one won't shoot Dragon past 2000 ISO... But I'm lucky enought to have super bright glass to fall back on. I can live @ 2000 ISO for ever more if thats the case. I'll pull in another camera with super hi ISO capabilities for those super black dark nights with no lights. But for the other 98% of my work. DRAGON V2 OLPF is my new girl.

 

[Phil Holland]

Yep. I'm on V2 and haven't looked back. I do like certain things about the V1. I dig the "glow" you can get around some sources. However, the light source orbs, red dots, and busy lens flares were sometimes too distracting.

I really dig what the V2 gives you on the highlight side of things. Color and IR cutting is a bit better as well. I'm looking forward to the day when the Modular OLPF option arrives though. I miss aspects of the V1 and oddly it's not so much about that 1.3 stop difference in tonal placement, but also about character to a degree.

I think though for like 90% of what I'm shooting the V2 is my copilot. Curious to see what other options come down the line, but V2 is giving really good results in areas I define as "overall image quality".

 

[Bohdan Klos]

I personally think RED should drop the idea of retaining the older OLPF as an option. it's just going backwards.

I agree - OLPF1 is not viable. Jarred has pretty much said as much - OLPF2 is the "smart mans choice" he said - I guess you could say the V1 is the stupid mans choice?

As others have said V1 is not what Red would want in peoples cameras - its not how Red want Dragons to be judged. Judge the camera on V2, sure. But I think the camera will do better with the V3 - I`m not talking about speciality OLPFs = just give the bulk of the customers an OLPF that takses the best of both - my guess is if the beta program had been longer the V3 is what Red would want to release as V1.

Red will get this right with time. The magenta smears and flare crop is a bigger concern.

 

[James_Mills]

I absolutely LOVE the new olpf and wouldn't trade it for anything. The stop less in low light means little in comparison to how amazing the actual image is (I've gotten many useable images at 1600 iso as well).

 

[Bob Gundu]

Thanks Mark. I'm glad I'm going with the new OLPF.

 

[Roger Viloria]

Mark, thanks for clearing my mind

 

[Lakis Amarantithis]

but quickly learnt how to combat and shoot around the noise.

Any tips?

Thanks!

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

I'm pretty happy with the new OLPF. I'm working on a new indie sci fi feature film with it, stars Casper Van Dien.

I just spent two weeks, 12 hour days, shooting in the woods with it and with the Motion Mount (PL) in an ultralight configuration, and the latitude on this camera is insane for high contrast natural lighting situations. High altitude shooting in Colorado presents some of the most high contrasty situations you can find, and this camera blew my mind with how it handled every situation.

Last week was our first week in the dark studio shooting set pieces, and I was a little worried about this new set of challenges, especially because all of the lenses we are using are T2.8. But we are having the gaffer overlight the whole scene by about 1/2 - 3/4 stop, to get a good fat negative. The image straight out of the camera looks very video-ish but we have been able to drag it into RedCine and, with the flexibility of FLUT, we have been able to make everything perfect and clean by stopping down the image very subtly in post.

It is not a great pathway for monitoring to do it this way and it would be a lot harder to achieve if the producer didn't trust me when I told him we should intentionally overlight and stop down in post - but the proof is in the pudding - in the flexibility of the image in a real-world shooting environment, as Mark says, and I am overjoyed with the crazy good images we are getting. So is everyone else, once I bust out the Redcine and show them what the power of RAW can do.... DRAGON OLPF 2, given enough light, seems considerably more flexible in post-processing to me than MX. Given enough light, I can push these images all over the place - up, down, and sideways!

I've just been extra cautious in terms of protecting the histogram, rather than relying strictly on conventional metering (though we are doing that, too, to find the proper baseline), and all is well on our shoot.

Thank you, RED!

I'd still like that extra stop of lowlight goodness, if you can squeeze it out. I'd love to be able to shoot clean in low light at 800-1000, if that's possible without making huge sacrifices - that "middle area" camera....

BUT 3 solid weeks in the field and I am overjoyed with the image quality of the Dragon.

While I was testing it, I had some doubts but doing the real work, finally, has obliterated them. Testing, schmesting. We are shooting gorgeous stuff. Once you find that sweet spot, all is right with the world.

 

[Patrick Tresch]

I m a low light, night shoot, protect that highlight guy and miss V1 as the noise is really without comparaison at 2000iso.

V2 resolved some Olpf related flair issues, but there is still some disturbing flair as the frame guard Isn't working properly. My biggest problem shooting docu style without a big matte box and masks.

I hope the modular Olpf will resolve this flair issue.

Pat

 

[David Battistella]

Mark,

Great post. I'm with you, but you have the unique perspective of having tested both extensively. Having looked at a ton of old OLPF Dragon footage, I am liking what the HIGHLIGHT OLPF offers.

I like your approach as well, which I have kinda been preaching and that is to find and exposure strategy for the tool you are using. Even people who go with the LOWLIGHT OLPF will have to have a strategy for certain situations.

The over riding message of "know your tools inside out" is an important one.

I don't care what OLPF people go with and for what reasons as much as I do care that people test their stuff and get the very best out of it for what they are trying to do.

Peace,
Battistella

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

What I've come down to after shooting several months with both OLPF's... I'm going to say that newer OLPF is better over all. A lot better... I personally think RED should drop the idea of retaining the older OLPF as an option. it's just going backwards.

Everyone and I mean everyone has different opinions about what's best for them. Everyone has different expectations as well. I for one won't shoot Dragon past 2000 ISO... But I'm lucky enought to have super bright glass to fall back on. I can live @ 2000 ISO for ever more if thats the case. I'll pull in another camera with super hi ISO capabilities for those super black dark nights with no lights. But for the other 98% of my work. DRAGON V2 OLPF is my new girl.

100% agree. The Marks think alike.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

New OLPF is cool.

 

[Florian Stadler]

I think OLPF 2 is good as well, I just think the ISO loss should be labeled correctly in the metadata...

 

[Martin Stevens]

For me, the NEW OLPF is the FILM LIKE option, as I have always seen film's highlight handling
as the major reason film looked so different and better than video or early digital cinema imagery.

 

[Michael Lindsay]

Mark Toia

Glad to get your input ( I have been following your posts ever since a producer of mine worked with you in London a few years back)

..?... if your happy to reach for a another camera brand for low light I am not understanding why you wouldn't pop in a low light OLPF instead? Maybe I didn't understand correctly?

Basically from my side by side tests of MX vs Dragon V2 I was very impressed with V2's colour accuracy and overall snap. If V1 does not have it I don't want V1 unless I am really stuck for light.... I am happy with balancing my needs shoot to shoot. I always rated MX epic in daylight at 640asa and never had any problems . From my tests I was leaning to a 500 ei rating for dragon but I would prefer 640-800 if possible. So if V3 comes around in 10months with 'everything' I like about v2 but let's through another 1/2 stop I would be delighted!

That said me real (but very minor grumble) is that we need a 4% bump in dragon frame rates for parity with MX epic....

Kind regards

Michael

 

[Michael Lindsay]

I miss aspects of the V1 and oddly it's not so much about that 1.3 stop difference in tonal placement, but also about character to a degree.

I have not been able to quantify as I don't have v1... Does the new OLPF really let through 1.3 stops less?

Thanks

M

 

[Paul Russell]

Even shooting midnight urban under mixed streetights, OLPF2 all the way. Fast glass compulsory, but even then a 1600 ISO grade is not out of the question.

We make art out of the available light. Most times in the camera, sometimes in post.

 

[Timur Civan]

It's just like 35. Over expose stop and pull in post. You will have no problems. The highlights are insanse. They just won't burn.

 

[Greg McDonald]

I agree - OLPF1 is not viable.

After seeing Soderbergh's The Knick last night which was shot with v1 OLPF, I think one could make a strong argument that it is indeed viable.

 

[Bohdan Klos]

After seeing Soderbergh's The Kick last night which was shot with v1 OLPF, I think one could make a strong argument that it is indeed viable.

I guess we don't know what went on in post or what trouble was caused on set by the flaring orbs etc. I`ve completed projects where equipment has given nothing but hassle. No-one would know.

They got amazing pictures, no doubt.