SALT II results... (Part 1,2,3,4 Bokeh, Breathing & Flare and Part 5: Impressions)

[Phil Holland]

An older well abused Glidecam 4000 Pro!

 

[Erich Roland]

test

test

great test guys. thanks much!

 

[Patrick Grossien]

What do you think I do every day...

So Matt, you agree on the statement that one would have to pick a premium version out of a bunch of the same lens in order to get one that performs perfect?

 

[Evin Grant]

There is no perfet lens, but you can find samples that are better than average performers. Whether that difference is visible on screen is a different discussion and totally dependent on the lens in question.

 

[Patrick Grossien]

Thanks Evin! I guess since I haven't had the possibility to check various versions of the same lens it's just tough to wrap my head around how extreme these differences are. I'll just be checking my new still lenses more in the future.

 

[Patrick Grossien]

And just once more I want to thank all of you guys for the great work you did. Thank you so much for sharing the knowledge and of course for starting this at all. Wish I coud be thanking you in person, but maybe I'll manage to get to the 2013 NAB... Until then be assured of my gratitude. Thanks and thanks again. You guys rock!

 

[Matthew Duclos]

So Matt, you agree on the statement that one would have to pick a premium version out of a bunch of the same lens in order to get one that performs perfect?

Yes. regardless of the manufacturer. There will always be variation in manufacturing and assembly. The difference is how much variation there is.
The worst lens off a Canon L assembly line can be horrible whereas the worst lens off of a Angeneiux Optimo assembly line is just slightly less than perfect.

 

[Matt Uhry]

Hi Guy's, sorry to run in late with my take on the SALT II, i've been shooting solid since the test and now have had a day to come up for air.

My first take away is that I've accepted that choosing AF lenses is making a Faustian deal - you can get some the latest and best optics ever made, which when compared to the cost of Cine lenses are at bargain prices. The issue with them is that they are purpose built for the needs of stills work. For motion work you'll deal with image shift, loss of motion, vague focus scales and limited barrel rotation. On many of my jobs I move the camera and film moving subjects, this is what Cine lenses are designed to be really good at. There may be future technological things that fix some aspects of this, like the Redmote Pro, but devices will lack the instant response and dead simple elegance of the direct control of a hand on a focus knob or a finger on an iris ring.

Canon or Nikon - If you've decided you can live with AF 's

My one surprise was Nikon - from the 14-24 all the G Prime Lenses and the 70-200 that was a sweet, high resolution, contrasty, fast, reasonable distortion bunch of lenses. Skip the 24-70 at the moment and lets see if the v2 is better. If you are not used to the focus rotation of cine lenses and won't know that Nikon is backwards and are ready to sign with Mephistopheles and go AF this would be a set to seriously consider over the Canons. Not saying the Canon's sucked... just that Nikon had them at every focal length to my eyes and Nikons build quality was better.

Zeiss or Leica ? ( or other good quality manual lenses )

I may have a bit of "Red Dot Fever" but I think they both look really good and both are mechanically good. if you go with the R's you'll save a few bucks, but work harder on Ebay. With the ZE's, as long as you avoid the 50 1.4 and maybe the 18mm f3.5 there is no way to make a strong imaging case of one over the other. You can get a fistful of Zeiss shipped to you overnight from B&H. One nasty is that the ZE's have no manual iris and the ZF's do but focus Nikon direction. Matt D's optically and mechanically superb Leica 70-180 got me interested in Leica Zooms... they are not exactly cheap... I'm curious about the Leica 28-90mm f2.8-4.5 anyone using one of those ?

Duclos 11-16 T2.8

Duclos puts a great deal of effort into selecting good samples, tuning and cinevising them. Also It covers a unique range and does it bloody well.

Summary:

I was hoping to find a magic x factor in one brand or another, but the differences turned out to be pretty slight, basically some tradeoffs to make here and there which we've documented and illustrated and also given you the materials to decide for yourselves. Figure out where your tastes, priorities, budget lie and proceed from there.


Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

 

[paul engstrom]

I'm curious about the Leica 28-90mm f2.8-4.5 anyone using one of those ?

www.mattuhry.com

Sanjin posted about that particular lens in the thread you started about your prime set. Apparently a very, very good lens.

 

[Evin Grant]

. I have a full set of R lenses all designed in the 90's and the difference is significant.

Then go ahead and send em on out here for us to test I promise to give them a through exmaination.

 

[Patrick Grossien]

Yes. regardless of the manufacturer. There will always be variation in manufacturing and assembly. The difference is how much variation there is.
The worst lens off a Canon L assembly line can be horrible whereas the worst lens off of a Angeneiux Optimo assembly line is just slightly less than perfect.

Thank you so much. Its just good to know that I have to take that into account when buying a lense.

So that also means that the 50mm could have been a bad apple? Or did you guys get the chance to check a different 50?

 

[Clint Lealos]

This is one of the best lens tests I have ever seen and I think the community has benefited greatly from all your efforts. I have a very tiny tip for Nikon owners that don't want the Nikon focus direction. I recently sold 6 ARRI FF2's on Reduser and almost every one contained a nifty Nikon reversal gear that attached to the FF2 making the focus direction "normal". These little gears were made by Samcine in the 70's and 80's, but I'm sure there are some floating around. Its a very simple device that could easily be replicated by any machine shop. In the attached photo the small piece with the white gear is what I'm talking about. I wish I had a better picture, because I think it is a very clever solution that has been overlooked and needs to be revisited. Hopefully, someone will find this useful

 

[Matt Uhry]

This is one of the best lens tests I have ever seen and I think the community has benefited greatly from all your efforts.

Thanks Clint, we all really appreciate hearing positive feedback.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

 

[Steve Gibby]

we all really appreciate hearing positive feedback.

Then here's some more:

Very nice work Matt, Evin, and whoever else was involved!

Hard to believe its now been well over four years since our L.A. Red Test event (12/07).

 

[Brian Pascale]

+1. Good information. I went with still glass because of price and size. If I start making feature films I will seriously consider cine glass.

This is one of the best lens tests I have ever seen and I think the community has benefited greatly from all your efforts. I have a very tiny tip for Nikon owners that don't want the Nikon focus direction. I recently sold 6 ARRI FF2's on Reduser and almost every one contained a nifty Nikon reversal gear that attached to the FF2 making the focus direction "normal". These little gears were made by Samcine in the 70's and 80's, but I'm sure there are some floating around. Its a very simple device that could easily be replicated by any machine shop. In the attached photo the small piece with the white gear is what I'm talking about. I wish I had a better picture, because I think it is a very clever solution that has been overlooked and needs to be revisited. Hopefully, someone will find this useful

 

[Phil Holland]

Just a note on Leica R lenses. I noticed when I went on my crazed hunt for Leica glass a few years ago the difference between the 90's and 80's (and earlier) lenses. All of my Leica R lenses are from 1996 and I'm very happy with them. I went through several different vintage 90s was able to see a difference in contrast, chroma, and CA.

If I was recommending the first two Leica R lenses for anybody to get:

The Summicron 90mm f/2

(here's a distortion chart for the 90mm)


And the Elmarit 60mm f/2.8 Macro:

(here's a distortion chart for the 60mm)

All of them are fair to good performers with the 180mm and up primes getting into the "scary awesome" zone.

Another lens to look at is the Voigtlander 40mm f/2 SLII. Wide open it's not the best thing on earth. It got a unique feel, built very well, and is extremely compact.

(here's a distortion chart for the 40mm)

While not officially supported by Red's Canon AI mount as of 03.01.2012, I can confirm that the EF version indeed works on the Epic and Scarlet just fine.

 

[Evin Grant]

I'm pretty sure the last generation 28mm Elmarit ROM is a new and very sharp design.

 

[paul engstrom]

Thanks for the test fellas!

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

I always wonder why anybody would use a macro lens designed for, uh, macro photography and optimized for close up work for normal distances. There are lenses designed for normal work....:wink5:
And BTW I know how these lenses look -I've projected lenses for 25 years- it's my business....

 

[Evin Grant]

The reason that the Macro lenses are sometimes preferred is their performance often times exceed that of their normal distance cousins, of course focus scales are usually abbreviated in the far distances though. Also some focal lengths (60mm specifically) are hard to come by in non macro.