Optar Illumina Super-16 Lenses

[Curt Schulz]

I agree with your assessment but I wonder since the pool of s16 glass is limited (and no longer available as new) if companies will continue to invest in the format five years down the road. I think buyers will reinvest if their spending 1k for camera body and s16 lenses are limited supply. Also, folks love the 5D and still shoot with it because of its unique full frame abilities and RED ditched the s16 sensor size with the Scarlet. That said, I think the pocket camera is a very cool and viable product (for all the reasons and more listed above) as is the glass and that is why I want to buy it and some lenses---I'm just wary if people think that the glass is worth much more than it is given the trajectory of the industry.

 

[James Houk]

I guess time will tell.

 

[Robert Hart]

The CP Ultras are a trace warmer than the Zeiss. There is a comparison on a website, cinematography.com or suchlike which is a more professional and much more valid assessment than my comment here. It compares Zeiss, Optar Illumina and CP Ultra T. I have two sets of CPs, one mine, the other owner's which are here presently. There is a little bit of variation between the two sets. Other than that they are comparable with the Illuminas, seem a little sharper but not into the corners with the 9mm which also vignettes unless it is modified.

Something I should draw attention to is that some of the used CP Ultra T lenses may exhibit image shift in a sort of slow spiral walk as focus is moved. According to Ken Hale at Whitehouse AV this can be dealt with. Image shift has also been reported as an issue with older Optar Illumina lenses and that this can also be addressed by a lens technician. Apparently the Illumina lenses vended by Lumatech were of better build quality. The Illuminas in the kit I am trying do not walk the image. The Elite 35mm I have is an older lens. It does kick the image when focus direction is reversed otherwise there is no image shift with focus.

With the welter of web comment on the Blackmagic and Micro 4/3rds cameras, I cannot now locate the original review with a Google search. My recall is that in the comparison, the Zeiss came in first, the Illuminas second and the CP Ultra T* third. There were also 16mm specific lenses by Cooke known as Kinetal. How they compare and whether they are Super16mm compatable I do not know.

 

[Curt Schulz]

Thanks Robert great to know this, thanks for the details. Do you know anything about difficulties with getting Russian glass serviced? I know Dulcos will not longer service them.

Best,
Curt

 

[Skyler Proctor]

Never really thought of s16 4k sensor. Doesn't seem viable but what do I know. Would be interesting that's for sure. Is anyone producing new super 16 glass? In five years (at the rate things are moving) most (not all) film school kids will want to work with s35 sensors with s35 glass since still glass is so abundant and affordable. But there will always be a place for super 16 glass with some people---I'm not writing it off, I just think that if you are going to spend over $5k on glass make sure you can get a good turn on your investment in the next five years as (IMHO) it won't retain it's value like old school 35m glass:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Super-Balta...294?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item417266fcf6

Ever heard of Nikon's "1" camera series? Its darn close to Super 16mm, slightly bigger (within a mm each way I think by the time you figure the video mode crop), and the sensor was original designed to shoot 4K video at 30FPS. In fact the camera can capture 30FPS in RAW at 4K for 1-2 seconds. Obviously not viable for any video work, but the point is, if a Nikon still camera pointed at consumers can shoot 4k video from a super 16mm sized sensor, then why not have a professional version for a cost not much more than the BBPC? One of the biggest advantage I think is the glass, both size and price. For instance, a Canon\Angenieux 11.5-138mm T/2.5 for the Canon, T/2.4 for the Angeniux are well respected Super 16mm lenses that equal the same field of view as the Angenieux 24-290 (well very close, they are approximately 23-276). Now assuming real quick as one person noted that S35 sensor cameras will be cheap in the next 5 years which seem inevitable with the $4000 BM Production Cam, the Optimo 24-290 still isn't going to be a cheap lens 5 years from now, its still going to be $50k+. And what other 12X zooms are there that are fast and quality? The Primo? Those kinds of lenses are super rare and super expensive. So what if 5 years from now you have an Alexa S35 equivalent for $2500, if a 24-290 costs $50k and an Angenieux 11.5-138 is say $5k, which one do you think people on low\no budgets are going to choose? Sure you could rent, but again, the S16 glass is much cheaper and if you have a month feature shoot say, you could buy the 11.5-138 for nearly the price of the 24-290. And say you do have the budget, say you are shooting on a difficult location where its difficult to get to/shoot in are you going to pack a 24LB 24-290? or a 4.5lb 11.5-138mm? I could through a a BM Pocket Cam and a 11.5-138mm in a backpack and hike up a hill, no can do with an Alexa and a 24-290 (at least not by myself and even if I could I'm going to need a nap by the time I get to the top). So invariably I think there will be lots of people on budgets, like music videos and commercials, people's who budgets have been slashed from 5 years ago often by 50-80%. So I think it will start providing cheap ways to get a very similar quality, either on a budget, and\or when weight\size are a factor for the camera package. I mean think about it, why has Super 35mm traditionally been chosen over Super 16mm? Its the quality, Super 16mm was always more noisy, less definition. Of course less depth of field, but I think in the long run, if you have a nice set of super speeds this won't be a big deal. Now look at the Pocket cam vs say the C300, a camera that retails for 15X the price. Sure the C300 has far better ergonomics than the Pocket cam, but think about the sensor, the BMPC is rated at a half stop better dynamic range and its saving files to 12-bit lossless codec vs an 8-bit heavily compressed codec. On paper, the Super 16mm sensor is superior to a Super 35mm sensor. Something to keep in mind....for the first time smaller sensors are outperforming bigger sensors, a revolution we have yet experience in the 100+ years of film stocks\digital sensors.

 

[Curt Schulz]

You make good points, especially about performance of the smaller sensor in the BMPC vs the C300. Do you think commercial work will be acquired at 1080p in 5 years? It seems so far away and I think 4k will be standard for consumer cameras then. I don't see pro cameras going smaller on sensors and the folks that want that awesome $5k s16 zoom are the professionals. I think the pocket camera is an exception to the norm of sensor industry. But there's no denying the quality of the glass available for it and I think the BMPC is going an awesome addition. It would be awesome if Nikon came out with an s16 camera to compete too!

 

[Robert Hart]

There may be a resolution or sharpness/detail wall waiting in ambush relating to Super16 sized sensors if these start to become commonplace in 4K. Technically, the glassware may not be up to the job except at exceptional expense compared to 35mm lenses. Then again the whole 35mm, Super16mm, 6Km, 2K and whatever may be sent packing and screaming for the woods by the Lytro camera - type evolutions down the track. As I predicted way back in regard to HD and Cine-Alta ENG-style videocameras of the times, in times ahead and perhaps not too for ahead, there may also be REDs, SI2Ks being hauled around by their robust Lemo cables on the ground by street urchins as improvised toys. - Feather-dusters and all that.

 

[Curt Schulz]

Lots of Optar Illumina s16 lenses popping up on eBay for those interested.

 

[Fred Salaff]

We have NEW and complete sets of S16mm Illuminas for sale.