SALT test...

[Michael Lindsay]

sorry i am not a tech geek, but sure that i upgrade to epic 5k its interesting for me to know that rpps do cover the sensor without issues....and more interesting which of the other lens sets do not.

hs t1.3
zeiss t2.1
up t1.8
mp t1.3
cooke s4

i guess if some of the high brands can get problems at 5k, its a good selling point to clients to go with RPP and it is an advantage to have the rpp`s along with epic.

(thinking of the ultra oldschool die hard film dops who just shot with red, but only with their favorite lens set.)
would be cool to have an unbeatable argument

I'm unsure why no-one has answered this question..

I've always assumed, with epicx, that I'd love to shoot out to about 25mm (give or take a .1mm) which my UP can do and have the option of getting up to 125fps by coming down to 4k..

I'd confidant Red are not going to make it difficult for guys with established and trusted lenses.

Michael L

 

[Evin Grant]

Evin... windowing down is the solution for sure. How far depends on the lens. Some will need to go no higher than 4K.

I agree with the image part (bokeh, breathing, contrast) except for the focus falloff... which tends to be one of the major issues going from 4K to 5K. But as long as everyone has ALL the pieces to make their own informed decision, it is all good.

Jim

Sorry Jim, as far as focus fall off, I was referring to the transition between in focus and out, not the edge falloff (which of course depends on lens coverage). I don't know the exact term for this, maybe "out of focus transition"? Either way this seems to be one of the reasons so many DPs prefer S4s.

 

[Douglas Underdahl]

Well, I put a PL mount on a Canon for Pawel a while ago. He said that (as I feared) the mirror interfered with some of his Master Primes, but that he might be able to do a mirror lock up and use live view. Pawel?

I'm sure a PL mount could also be fitted to a 5D (forget what Pawel's cam was but know that it wasn't a 5D) and also there would be a shutter issue . . .

Could also do a custom offset PL mount for RED that would show the edges of all the lenses in question.

Just sayin' . . .

 

[Evin Grant]

Could also do a custom offset PL mount for RED that would show the edges of all the lenses in question.

Just sayin' . . .

This might very well be the solution, we'll talk Doug.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I think the point of the test is not to show off the maximum theoretical capability of a lens, which is probably best left to engineers and charts, etc., but to provide a comparative context between lenses with the RED ONE in 4K mode being the common baseline.

Sure, there are certain comparative issues that would change once you start talking about using a larger area to cover 5K... in that some of these lenses might not even cover that area and thus be out of the running in that scenario, but it is still illustrative to see different lenses creating an image on the same sensor / camera.

For the more technically minded, they probably would be happier to know MTF, lens coverage, etc. but I think many shooters just want to know how these lenses behave in comparison to each other, what is the difference in "feeling" between these lenses, plus how do they perform in low-light, etc.

Trouble with using a Canon still camera as the baseline is that they don't have PL-mounts.

 

[Pawel Achtel]

Well, I put a PL mount on a Canon for Pawel a while ago. He said that (as I feared) the mirror interfered with some of his Master Primes, but that he might be able to do a mirror lock up and use live view. Pawel?

I'm sure a PL mount could also be fitted to a 5D (forget what Pawel's cam was but know that it wasn't a 5D) and also there would be a shutter issue . . . . . .

The MP 75mm works like a charm on the 50D. The 35mm and 14mm are too deep and I would need machine the whole mirror box out of the camera, I think :smash:

It does not need much more clearance, about 2mm, so it should be possible. I expect 5D will be very similar.

There should not be any shutter issues because 5D and 50D can operate in Live View mode, so the shutter and mirror box can be butchered :rofl:

 

[Pawel Achtel]

For the more technically minded, they probably would be happier to know MTF, lens coverage, etc.

Indeed, MTF at 50 lp/mm, white light, WFO and at max MTF, please.

If you guys can't do it , just pack the glass in the same box as my camera coming back from audio upgrade in Lake Forest and we will have the numbers published here next week.

Warning: they will be measured next to brand new MPs that just have been calibrated in Munich and double checked by a lens technician at Arri in Sydney and by me!

The numbers to compare/match/beat are:

MP 75mm - MTF 37% at T 1.3, MTF 66% at f/4.5
MP 35mm - MTF 42% at T 1.3, MTF 72% at f/4.5
MP 14mm - MTF 43% at T 1.3, MTF 74% at F/4.5

I can re-test the MPs at T 1.9 to directly compare with RPPs.

Jim, do you take this challange? :sifone:

 

[Jannard]

Jim, do you take this challange? :sifone:

The sooner the better...

Jim

 

[Pawel Achtel]

The sooner the better...

Jim

Locked in, Sir. :beer:

 

[david farland]

Jim,
I wouldn't stop at 5K.
For me, Red's future is above 5K, particularily with the +14 stop 6K Monstros coming next year.

So what is the real useful life scan of these tests?
4K, 4.5K, 5K, 6K.....??

it's useful to know how long these lenses will last on the expanding frame-size timeline but this will keep on as long as companies like Red push the boundaries.

D

 

[Pawel Achtel]

Jim,
I wouldn't stop at 5K.
For me, Red's future is above 5K, particularily with the +14 stop 6K Monstros coming next year.

So what is the real useful life scan of these tests?
4K, 4.5K, 5K, 6K.....??

it's useful to know how long these lenses will last on the expanding frame-size timeline but this will keep on as long as companies like Red push the boundaries.

D

Dave, this can be derived directly from the MTF measurment. Essentially, you need to know at what resolution the MTF is > 10%. I can get you approximate max resolutions as soon as I take the RRPs off the MTF box. Also, you can get the answer from the projection of the lens. You just eyeball which resolution is still visible (~10% MTF) and work out what pixel density you need to transfer the frequency.

The answer will be also dependent on number of other factors, such as the aperture. Lenses will resolve more at f/4.5 than at f/1.8, more in the centre, less on the edges, even less in the corners.

Either way, 4k is sharp, very sharp, if you have a good lens! The limitation is more likely to be behind the camera...

 

[Peter Majtan]

Well, I put a PL mount on a Canon for Pawel a while ago. He said that (as I feared) the mirror interfered with some of his Master Primes, but that he might be able to do a mirror lock up and use live view. Pawel?

I'm sure a PL mount could also be fitted to a 5D (forget what Pawel's cam was but know that it wasn't a 5D) and also there would be a shutter issue . . .

Could also do a custom offset PL mount for RED that would show the edges of all the lenses in question.

Just sayin' . . .

Hey Doug! I am more then interested and ready to accept any risk associated with this. Could You please PM or E-Mail me a quote for such a modification for the 5DmkII?

peter (at) derylgroup (dot) com

Thank You!

Peter

 

[Peter Majtan]

Indeed, MTF at 50 lp/mm, white light, WFO and at max MTF, please.

If you guys can't do it , just pack the glass in the same box as my camera coming back from audio upgrade in Lake Forest and we will have the numbers published here next week.

Warning: they will be measured next to brand new MPs that just have been calibrated in Munich and double checked by a lens technician at Arri in Sydney and by me!

The numbers to compare/match/beat are:

MP 75mm - MTF 37% at T 1.3, MTF 66% at f/4.5
MP 35mm - MTF 42% at T 1.3, MTF 72% at f/4.5
MP 14mm - MTF 43% at T 1.3, MTF 74% at F/4.5

I can re-test the MPs at T 1.9 to directly compare with RPPs.

Jim, do you take this challange? :sifone:

Pawel, could You please re-test the MP's at T1.8 and T2.8?
1.8 being the actual T-stop for the shipping primes and the 2.8 for my own pleasure :aureola: to compare with my most commonly used aperture...

Good on Ya mate!

Peter

 

[Pawel Achtel]

Pawel, could You please re-test the MP's at T1.8 and T2.8?
1.8 being the actual T-stop for the shipping primes and the 2.8 for my own pleasure :aureola: to compare with my most commonly used aperture...

Good on Ya mate!

Peter

Will do, Peter. But from my last test I observed that the MTF of MPs at f/2.8 is almost the same as max MTF (peaking at around f/4.5). Those lenses are optimised for shooting opened.

 

[Alexander Christ]

Rapid focus and illumination falloff could be checked on a Phantom 65, 4K resolution and 51.2mm x 28.0mm active pixel array.

 

[Douglas Underdahl]

Hey Peter -

I'm not doing any custom work for a while (getting ready for a shoot in NYC) but I can tell you how to do it:

Get a PL receiver from Cinevate. I think theirs are the most available and affordable. You buy the PL adapter for their Brevis units and remove the PL receiver part.

Next, take the EF/EOS mount off the 5D. On Pawel's 50D it came off by removing the four phillips head screws. They can be hard to turn so get a good screwdriver and push down hard. Take your time.

Now, have a machinist make you a collar or stand off to go between the receiver and cam. You'll need to get four longer screws for this; I suggest McMaster Carr.

How thick should the collar be? Well, the EOS is 42mm and the PL is 52. So you do the math and make a drawing for your machinist, measuring the thickness of the Cinevate PL flange and the thickness of the EOS mount you just removed and accounting for them. A digital Mitutoyo caliper is nice to have here.

Now, the big question is how to remove the mirror and any other obstruction from inside the 5D so you can use all your PL mount lenses. For that I think the thing to do is find an experienced Canon tech who can pull that stuff out without harming the rest of the camera's functions. I don't know how to do this but I would think the best bet is to find that Canon tech, wherever s/he is.

For the SALT test, though, maybe RED can free up an EPIC???

 

[DKI]

RPP with 7 blades will have the bokeh like old zeiss hi speed. The bokeh will not be as circle as Panavision or Master Prime or uniqued Cooke. But if you love Optimo 6 Blades bokeh, You may love RPP. I myself buy RPP.

 

[Peter Majtan]

Hey Peter -

I'm not doing any custom work for a while (getting ready for a shoot in NYC) but I can tell you how to do it:

Get a PL receiver from Cinevate. I think theirs are the most available and affordable. You buy the PL adapter for their Brevis units and remove the PL receiver part.

Next, take the EF/EOS mount off the 5D. On Pawel's 50D it came off by removing the four phillips head screws. They can be hard to turn so get a good screwdriver and push down hard. Take your time.

Now, have a machinist make you a collar or stand off to go between the receiver and cam. You'll need to get four longer screws for this; I suggest McMaster Carr.

How thick should the collar be? Well, the EOS is 42mm and the PL is 52. So you do the math and make a drawing for your machinist, measuring the thickness of the Cinevate PL flange and the thickness of the EOS mount you just removed and accounting for them. A digital Mitutoyo caliper is nice to have here.

Now, the big question is how to remove the mirror and any other obstruction from inside the 5D so you can use all your PL mount lenses. For that I think the thing to do is find an experienced Canon tech who can pull that stuff out without harming the rest of the camera's functions. I don't know how to do this but I would think the best bet is to find that Canon tech, wherever s/he is.

For the SALT test, though, maybe RED can free up an EPIC???

Doug, thank You so much. I am on this...

Peter

 

[Michael Hastings]

Wouldn't 5d Mark one work just as well for test purposes?

Wouldn't 5d Mark one work just as well for test purposes?

Wouldn't 5d Mark one work just as well for test purposes? Seems like it would have more similar pixel size/resolution yet full frame and more people that would want to experiment with the PL conversion on this older camera?

 

[Daniel Browning]

Seems like it would have more similar pixel size/resolution

Actually, the A900/D3X are closer to the Mysterium-X pixel size. Here's a 30x15 crop of several FF35 still cameras:

• 5D1: 3.7K (8.2 micron pixels).
• 5D2: 4.7K (6.4 µm).
• A900 and D3X: 5.0K (6.0 µm).