Announcing the S.A.L.T. (Southland Alternative Lens Test)

[Evin Grant]

I'm pleased to announce the S.A.L.T. to be held at Keslow camera sometime around NAB. Details are still being worked out but here's the basic details...

Location:
Keslow Camera, Culver City

Contributers: (Alphabetical)
Brook Willard
David Mullen ASC
Evin Grant
Matthew Duclos
Matt Urhy
More TBA.

Purpose: testing new glass :matrix:
I'm beginning the process of contacting all of the various new lens manufactures about providing samples for the test. It will be held as close to NAB as schedules allow so that manufacturers from foreign countries can participate without making two trips. If you have access to any of these new lenses please drop me a PM or e-mail (evin@4kninjas.net). All equipment will be insured and can be shipped if necessary. Keslow Camera will provide reference lenses from Cooke, Zeiss and Angenieux, as well as a lens projector and a 1080P theater for subjective evaluations.

The purpose of this test is to produce a fair, concise but detailed impression of both the technical and aesthetic qualities of the image as well as the mechanics of the individual barrels. If the lenses provided are prototypes this will be taken into consideration and evaluated as such.

To the lens makers...
Keslow Camera is an unbiased location for such a test (they do not sell anything) and will provide both a controlled and outdoor environment to test in. All lens representatives are welcome to accompany their optics, and if you feel the test does not due justice to your product it will not be published. I want this to be "no risk" so as to encourage as many players as possible, however published test will be honest and unedited. All parties will sign NDA's as necessary for the test to proceed. The end result will be much more exposure of your product to your key market, Red owners :weight_lift:


This will not be an "open" test, in my experience it's just too hard to get real work done with too many cooks in the kitchen. I have invited a few more people I think will be instrumental in producing a definitive test, some names you may know, others you don't but they will all be top industry professionals. If you are not able to bring new glass to the test or are not contacted by me directly please do not ask to be involved.

I will update this thread with info as it becomes available or otherwise out of NDA.

[Fredrik Callinggard]

If it's possible I would love if you had a lens technician that actually could disassemble the lenses? I know this might not be feasible but that's, of course, the only way of seeing how they're internally.

I've found myself buying new lenses that seemed GREAT in the beginning (on the charts and in the projector) and then by time they failed on me. As you open them up, you notice the flaws in their design and although mine are corrected now, they still cost me a lot of money in service. This should preferably be considered as well (in times like this), with so many new lenses being announced.

Edit: I am aware of that the lenses you're testing will have more TLC to them then the manufactured real life ones.

[Hans von Sonntag]

I've found myself buying new lenses that seemed GREAT in the beginning (on the charts and in the projector) and then by time they failed on me. As you open them up, you notice the flaws in their design and although mine are corrected now, they still cost me a lot of money in service.

Hi Fredrik,

Do you mind to elaborate?

Hans

[Matthew Duclos]

If it's possible I would love if you had a lens technician that actually could disassemble the lenses? I know this might not be feasible but that's, of course, the only way of seeing how they're internally.

I've found myself buying new lenses that seemed GREAT in the beginning (on the charts and in the projector) and then by time they failed on me. As you open them up, you notice the flaws in their design and although mine are corrected now, they still cost me a lot of money in service. This should preferably be considered as well (in times like this), with so many new lenses being announced.

Edit: I am aware of that the lenses you're testing will have more TLC to them then the manufactured real life ones.

I don't think that would be a very likely course. Taking apart a lens that someone has never seen before takes many hours. And even more hours to put back together (properly).

I can understand your concern. Opening a lens would reveal its build quality, grade of materials used, complexity in regards to reliability, and many other important factors. But it would take far too much time.

That sort of in depth analysis will come in time.

[Fredrik Callinggard]

Hi Fredrik,

Do you mind to elaborate?

Hans

I will PM you but I don't think it's fair to speak about these matters in an open forum.

[Andrea Scaglione]

I will PM you but I don't think it's fair to speak about these matters in an open forum.
Why not? It's fair, honest, and a "must". If you know something, please share it.

Andrea

[Fredrik Callinggard]

As you open them up, you notice the flaws in their design and although mine are corrected now, they still cost me a lot of money in service.


I can understand your concern. Opening a lens would reveal its build quality, grade of materials used, complexity in regards to reliability, and many other important factors. But it would take far too much time.

That sort of in depth analysis will come in time.

Both quotes speak for themselves.

[Olex Kalynychenko]

I don't think that would be a very likely course. Taking apart a lens that someone has never seen before takes many hours. And even more hours to put back together (properly).

I can understand your concern. Opening a lens would reveal its build quality, grade of materials used, complexity in regards to reliability, and many other important factors. But it would take far too much time.

That sort of in depth analysis will come in time.

I think, weirdcrew mean about detailed inspection of lens without take to pieces of optical block.
Yes, to Take to pieces of optical block on optical components can be complex procedure and ask of detailed adjusting of position of every component at assembling and ask of special optical devices for this.

But, weirdcrew have good questions, because, the many manufacturers of lens to save money on parts of body of lens and on parts of focusing mechanism.
That's why, the lens can a lost of optical characteristics after a some time use because, the parts of body and focusing mechanism can have surface deterioration and additional gaps.

The many prime lenses have single body of optical block and optical block move inside of main body of lens at focusing.
The idea of inspect of parts of body and parts of focusing and aperture control mechanism can be good.

The many information about real optical quality of lens can give of MTF.
But, to need have special, expensive, equipments for measuring of MTF.

[Ryan E. Walters]

Thanks for putting this test together- I'm eagerly looking forward to reading about the results, and seeing the images. :)

[Fredrik Callinggard]

I think, weirdcrew mean about detailed inspection of lens without take to pieces of optical block.

Actually I didn't discover my problems until I did so. So yes it's a pain in the.... but it would be valuable considering all these new lenses are indeed manufactured differently then the old school way.

[Matthew Rogers]

That sort of in depth analysis will come in time.

You mean when someone drops a lens and breaks it?;)

Matthew

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I am very much looking forward to these tests.

At this moment, my next intended lens purchases are the Optimo DP 16-42 and the RED primes. Any more reasons for or against these planned purchases of mine will be welcomed! :)

I'd like to see the RED lenses make it for this test, if possible.

[Fredrik Callinggard]

Optimo DP 16-42

Excellent choice. As for the RED primes I don't know but they seem nice.

[Evin Grant]

That's really the point in all of this. To get some real data on the options at hand.

[Matthew Duclos]

You mean when someone drops a lens and breaks it?;)

Exactly!

[SirGear]

Carrying out valid tests on lenses is a complicated and controversial matter.
Most of the testing methods used in the rental world and in most service facilities have varying degrees of inherent subjectivity. The people best qualified to interpret the images produced by test equipment such as autocollimators, linear collimators and lens projectors are people who examine and service a lot of lenses. They know from experience what "works".

Yet even the judgment of experienced craftspeople can vary. And the technicians themselves sometimes find it difficult to put into words how they interpret a test image, and to what degree they are mentally compensating for the influences and defects of the test itself. All test equipment introduces artifacts of its own. Lens projectors are especially prone to problems. Many systems are "one off" custom jobs of unkown characterstics. Even some professionally built units by famous makers have really bad defects. Example: Richter Cine Equipment, makers of the old industry war-horse autocollimator made a projector that places the test reticle way out of the plane of focus of its condenser optics, resulting in massive format coverage problems. Nearly all lenses seem to "vignette" on a Richter projector, but it's the projector, not the lens. They also suffer from centering problems due to an imprecise back-focus adjustment mechanism, making them useless in testing zoom tracking. Did I mention the hot spot in the center of the field ?

Panavision and Zeiss attempted to introduce the world to the routine use of MTF (modulation transfer function) machines in lens evaluation and service.
Prior to that time, MTF was used strictly as a scientific and design tool. It is a system that creates an objective, numerical evaluation of a lens' ability to reproduce contrast at a given spatial frequency (resolution standard) and light bandwidth (color). But MTF is a multi-parameter system that must be applied properly. Most technicians and cinematographers do not have the training to appropriately set up and interpret MTF testing. Nor access to the $ 150K + instrumentation and computer software required. Zeiss did however produce a simplified machine intended for service use.

My point is this: Any such public test should be set up with a well thought-out protocol created by a knowledgeable and disinterested third party. It should use the best equipment available, strive for fairness, and thoroughly document both the testing methods and results. It should take place at the most neutral facility possible. I'm not certain a rental house (any rental house) is the best choice. Rental houses do sell something: equipment rental ! But I understand there are issues of practicality.

I'd like to see participation or oversight by someone from SMPTE, the ASC and or SPIE (international optical engineeing society).

I'm hardly a disinterested third party (due to involvement with the Luma Tech Inc. "Illumina S35 primes"), but may I suggest some things I'd like to see included in the test:

-Use of Century/Clairmont lens projector. It's the best commercially available unit. Large interchangeable condenser optics, not a converted slide projector.

-Accurate T-Stop testing via newly calibrated T-stop machine/photometer

-Testng on Zeiss MTF machine if available, at uniform stops and spacial frequency (40-50 cycles).

-Live test on strongly back-lit subject (flair test), Lit by professional DP, shot on RED and rendered by skilled work flow specialist. Lock down shot.

Respectfully,
Charles

[Matt Uhry]

Hi Charles,

Evin and I had a brief conversation yesterday about some of these points. I think you'll be satisfied with the quality and impartiality of our test. We're especially interested in seeing the new crop of lenses in direct comparison to S4's and Zeiss UP / MP.

I'll look into what kind of lens projector they have at Keslow.

Will we see the Luma Tech lenses there ?

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Matthew Duclos]

The people best qualified to interpret the images produced by test equipment such as autocollimators, linear collimators and lens projectors are people who examine and service a lot of lenses. They know from experience what "works".

I wonder where we could find someone who spends every day examining and servicing motion picture lenses... I'm sure if we look hard enough... ;)

[Evin Grant]

I may be able to convince someone on the ASC technical committee to participate. I did them a favor a few months ago.

[Fredrik Callinggard]

I wonder where we could find someone who spends every day examining and servicing motion picture lenses... I'm sure if we look hard enough... ;)

LOL hahaha

[SirGear]

I wonder where we could find someone who spends every day examining and servicing motion picture lenses... I'm sure if we look hard enough... ;)

Oh Looky, found one !

Hello Matthew, I was trying to make a general point about how difficult it is to make objective judgments and convey the information to non-specialists on optical performance, especially when it comes to new products.

You and your dad are probably four of the most experienced eyes in the country, if not the world on this subject. The task at hand is to form as objective a test protocol as possible and convey comparative information in a useful and accurate way. If you've ever witnessed an argument between highly qualified people, you know this can be tricky. Especially if they've been drinking.

-CP

[Matthew Duclos]

Charlie,

I know exactly what you mean. For example, different technicians have different words for different characteristics and processes. But we should be able to give people a good idea of what kind of quality they can expect from different manufacturers.

[OptiTek]

The task at hand is to form as objective a test protocol as possible and convey comparative information in a useful and accurate way. If you've ever witnessed an argument between highly qualified people, you know this can be tricky. Especially if they've been drinking.

I agree,
Shooting bunch of test charts in uncontrolled enviroment, checking collimation and turning lens barrels to see how smooth they are does not constitute a lens test. Putting on my armored jacket now....:matrix:
Jacek Zakowicz, OptiTek

[Evin Grant]

Personally, I understand the value of test charts and lens projectors in the evaluation process but nothing beats a well lit, well focused human face for determining how an optic will render aesthetically. Expediency will require some of the more extreme/involved technical tests be forgone but there will certainly be a methodology and both objective and subjective evaluation of stills and footage. The whole purpose behind bringing a diverse, talented and sophisticated group of industry professionals together is to attempt to form a consensus as to the character and individuality of each of these optics. Frankly I highly doubt any will be dogs.

Each of us will have our own opinions but specifically I'm looking to generate data about these specific areas:

Imaging: (*=@ multiple T stop settings)
Sharpness and Contrast*
Focus falloff and Bokeh*
Skin tone and Color rendering
Tonal scale rendering
CA and flare character*

Mechanical:
Barrel markings
º of Rotation
Fit and finish
Interface with existing cinema AKS

These are the qualities I believe are of most interest to the Redusers that will be shooting these lenses.

[Matthew Duclos]

Agreed, Evin.

[Zakaree Sandberg]

Yes Evin,
charts are great when i want to pretend like im a lens genious and im evaluating the lines...

but in real life, that bores me.

well lit face, body, clothing-colors...
thats what I really judge by:)

[Matthew Duclos]

You and your dad are probably four of the most experienced eyes in the country, if not the world on this subject.
-CP

Thank you for the compliment.
I hope to see the Illumina lenses there.

[OptiTek]

Imaging: (*=@ multiple T stop settings)
Sharpness and Contrast*
Focus falloff and Bokeh*
Skin tone and Color rendering
Tonal scale rendering
CA and flare character*

Mechanical:
Barrel markings
º of Rotation
Fit and finish
Interface with existing cinema AKS

These are the qualities I believe are of most interest to the Redusers that will be shooting these lenses.

There are tools available that will generate numbers describing most of the above mentioned properties.
Without them it's just another marketing push for the highest bidder disguised as a lens test- nothing more..
Jacek zakowicz. Optitek.org:devil:

[Mitch Gross]

Might I add that the timing of this event e pushed back to sometime AFTER the NAB convention? Some of these manufacturers are racing to get sample units assembled for Las Vegas. And some are also participating in large promotional events or connected to the booths of other companies with lots of other needs and events scheduled months ago. I for one can tell you that everything involved in the Abel Cine Tech booth has to be crated up and shipping by April 7th. So the optics on display in our booth would not be available for the S.A.L.T. event until at least a week or so after NAB. The beginning of May is a far more sensible timing of this event in my mind.

[Matthew Duclos]

Mitch,

I think early-mid May will be a good time for everyone.
I'm glad you are participating. Another set of lenses that I am greatly anticipating ;)
Will you be at NAB?

[Evin Grant]

Around NAB is a very loose time frame, I'm expecting a week or so after or longer if necessary, but I do want to do it within a reasonable time frame so Redusers can use this info to make informed purchasing decisions.

[Mitch Gross]

I will most certainly be at NAB, manning the Abel booth when I'm not in meetings or roaming the floor. Or just coddling the lenses and optical devices of interest to REDusers in our booth.

I'm not the one to speak for our entire company as to participating in the SALT event, so I think we'll have to take this up offline. We're certainly interested but will have to work out some details in private. Nothing nefarious, just administrative minutae.

[Clint Johnson]

I'll be curious to find out which of the wide lenses from the other sets will match up best to the Red primes. With no 18mm available out of the gate from Red, I suspect that whichever lens maker matches the optical aesthetics of the Red primes most closely will sell several times as many 18mm lenses as any other focal length- just to round out all those Red Prime Sets that get to market.

They might want to keep that in mind while scheduling how much assembly line time to apportion to particular lenses.

[Evin Grant]

I would think most would hold out and get a matched set, or otherwise just buy the first complete set available. The Red 18mm is supposedly only 4 months or so behind the others.

[Matt Uhry]

Hey Evin,

Any word on who's in ?

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Evin Grant]

Yes, I'll contact you off list while it's all still pending.

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Matt's in? MATT??? He doesn't even like Bear... :wink: hehe

[Steve Gibby]

No...but he likes B E E R!

[Matthew Duclos]

Matt's in? MATT??? He doesn't even like Bear... :wink: hehe

Which one are you referring to?

[Finner]

Mmmmmmmmmm BEER and Lenses. Good combination.

[Clint Johnson]

Mmmmmmmmmm BEER and Lenses. Good combination.

Should we be concerned that this runs the same risk as "beer goggles" where the viewer loses perspective on the actual attractiveness of what they are looking at?

[Fredrik Callinggard]

The Red 18mm is supposedly only 4 months or so behind the others.

Only? So that completes that set in the 1st quarter of next year, if you're lucky.

[Shawn Nelson]

Will the results be posted promptly and thoroughly unlike LART? LART *was* going to be awesome, until the results never came (or they were posted after they weren't that relevant anymore). No offense to Gibby, I'm sure his hands were tied or he was busy or something, but that was going to be awesome...and the only thing to come out of it was pics of Ketch with babes :-D

EDIT: I guess LART actually did have a results page...that was only 1 page long and was only clips.
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6424

Not to make anyone feel bad, it seems everyone in attendance really enjoyed themselves.

I'm just hoping that the results from SALT are a bunch of well written articles that quantify and qualify things (with pics, footage, etc).

EDIT 2: Now I remember, LART was originally going to be out of the gate, then it got pushed, then the results weren't for a month or so after the event, then the "results" were just footage. Maybe it was my misunderstanding. I thought LART was going to be doing research for the larger community and it appears to have mostly been just for the people there to get more experience. Which one is SALT?

[Evin Grant]

I'm keeping SALT small, professional and invite only specifically so we can reach some tangible conclusions about all this glass. Matt Urhy has made up some really nice forms for us all to use when evaluating the results. These will serve as our subjective notes. Objective tests will be published here but some consideration must be taken for time expenditure and paid work. I expect to be the sole compiler of the data, but hopefully I can rope Brook, Matt U and Matt D into doing some of the processing. I'm sure there will be a little bit of geeking out but this is not a party.

[Stephen Williams]

but that was going to be awesome...and the only thing to come out of it was pics of Ketch with babes :-D



Hi Shawn,

Remember the camera was not perfect when released and LART was done under NDA's, quite why I will never understand,

Stephen

[Fredrik Callinggard]

...and the only thing to come out of it was pics of Ketch with babes :-D

NOW THAT WAS AWESOME :rofl:

[Matt Uhry]

...and the only thing to come out of it was pics of Ketch with babes :-D



David Mullen, Finner and I were hidden in a back room and actually did a few meaningful tests at LART, just by the time it was out from under embargo there was no point.

SALT's results should be quite a bit quicker than that. The idea is to be comprehensive, definitive and timely. We'll see if it works but that's what were going for.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Shawn Nelson]

Hi Shawn,

Remember the camera was not perfect when released and LART was done under NDA's, quite why I will never understand,

Stephen


David Mullen, Finner and I were hidden in a back room and actually did a few meaningful tests at LART, just by the time it was out from under embargo there was no point.


Thats right! It was the NDAs that really killed the usefullness of it and made it much more about who was there than who was waiting for reports.



SALT's results should be quite a bit quicker than that. The idea is to be comprehensive, definitive and timely. We'll see if it works but that's what were going for.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

Excellent Matt! I'm glad to hear that.

[david farland]

Excellent to see this about to happen. Hats off to all involved.

One thing, how do you intend to publish the results?
For comparing results will I be able to, say import pics into Photoshop and create my own comparisons....or what?

D

[Evin Grant]

That haven't been defined but some untouched frames will be available I hope.
With the lens projector tests you're gonna have to take our word for it.

Mostly I hope to generate consensus opinions about the "feel" of each of these lenses, I fully expect them all to be sharp.

[david farland]

I trust you guys better than I trust myself, no problem there.
But seeing you guys are going to so much trouble a stills camera/slate setup on projector would preserve all that effort forever. Like your IR works. It's great, people loved it.
I'd pour over those images forever....either via download, $Disk.
Seeing stills for colour matching would also be great. Think about it.
D

[Evin Grant]

But seeing you guys are going to so much trouble a stills camera/slate setup on projector would preserve all that effort forever. D

The problem is that with a lens projector is every focal length has different coverage and even if you took a photo it would never resolve enough to really tell anything. I'll give it a shot with my D3, but I doubt it'll be very useful.

[David Mullen ASC]

What I find more useful are comparisons, because it's all relative to each other -- for example how different lenses at the same f-stop look pointed at the same chart. Some sort of "objective truth" about a lens (other than its basic specs like lens coverage) is less practical to me than simply knowing how it stacks up against its competition in different shooting scenarios, like wide-open, etc.

[Matt Uhry]

I agree with David - but maybe regarding the projection of lenses we can figure out a impartial way to express distortion, resolution fall off, and illumination fall off. Maybe Matt Duclos knows a good way to do that.

I don't think a re-shot image of the lens projector wall is going to be much use, except maybe as a guide for distortion ?

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Matthew Duclos]

Maybe Matt Duclos knows a good way to do that.

Yup.. A well aligned projector and my eye.
And I know Keslow has a nice Richter collimator as well.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

...and the only thing to come out of it was pics of Ketch with babes :-D

...And I helped take some of those pictures, too. :thumbsup:

But yeah, like Matt said, the little bit of meaningful stuff that came out of LART was pretty much old news by the time we could post about it. For many of us who attended, it was our real first hands-on with the early cameras. I learned a bunch by attending about various issues of the time. OLPF issues, compression artifacts, black flares and black streaking with over-exposure, lots of things you probably saw yourself with your early RED. But RED was just about to start shipping the "X" cameras when LART happened and we even had an "X" camera at LART -- I believe it was Manny's camera, since it had just been repaired / rebuilt by RED a few days prior and had the new OLPF...

LART was in many ways more of an invite-only RED users group meet than a concise bunch of testing. But in the end it did provide some useful information and I like to think that RED did get some good feedback from the event.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

BTW.. When is SALT? Is there any confirmed list of new primes that will be included in the testing?

[Roberto Lequeux]

BTW.. When is SALT? Is there any confirmed list of new primes that will be included in the testing?

Someone please answer these questions.

[Greg M]

BTW.. When is SALT? Is there any confirmed list of new primes that will be included in the testing?

This week would be great

[david farland]

Yup.. A well aligned projector and my eye..

So now we have a good impartial way to measure the result, which I believe was never an issue, be good to have an accurate/impatial way to express the detail of those results.
Why I thought stills would be good was not to maintain openness or have a level of public scrutiny on how you ran or graded the test. You guys will nail both.
It's because histortically on this forum when someone reports the fringing is below par or the gears are crunchy or breathing is a problem, we immediately become very critical. Or when we say this was the best or worse we don't often have an idea of 'degree'.
Lots of abberrations get reported, but they may not be a problem to a lot of other people. It's a matter of degree & personal acceptance
It's what you read and not see that make it heard to appraise for yourself.
So I figured having some results which showed the different level of fringing/rolloff may let people decide that they're quite happy with the second last lens in a particular criteria.

..feel very confident that 'you' are the guys actually doing this tests. Just want to get as much public gain out of them as possible..

D

[Pawel Achtel]

So now we have a good impartial way to measure the result, which I believe was never an issue, be good to have an accurate/impatial way to express those results.....
D

I have a solution to this, Dave. You organise the lenses and I will organise a lens projector, MTF machine and a set of MPs and UPs to compare with.

It is just that some RPPs may not come back from the test and stay with the organiser, I expect. :sifone:

[Brook Willard]

We're getting close, don't worry. Everybody's either at NAB or working this week... news to come.

I've volunteered to keep any extra lenses we end up with at the end of the tests.

[Shane Betts]

I've volunteered to keep any extra lenses we end up with at the end of the tests.

How very nice of you Brook. Always thinking of others :)

[Roberto Lequeux]

I really can't wait for SALT, it is going to be a big deal if you guys can get every set of interest.

Will that be possible or are there sets that you may not have access to?

[Evin Grant]

We're doing our best to get them all there. Everyone has said yes, it's more a matter of timing with the test and available prototypes.

[Roberto Lequeux]

That sounds great.

So are we looking at ~a month from now? 2 months? More?

[lensmaster]

What MTF machine will you use?

[Pawel Achtel]

What MTF machine will you use?

I use one at ARRI Australia. I'm not sure what brand it is, but I know it is a very expensive box. It just gives you numbers at different apertures, so it is easy to do a comparison.

Still, the best test is on the projector and eye ball, even though subjective to certain extent.

I'm not sure what Brook is going to use, but I heard that all the lenses will be shipped to Sydney to double check their results. Is that correct, Brook? :sifone:

Edit: This is why they called it SALT, which stands for the Second Australian Lens Test.

[Matthew Verkler]

I haven't read this full thread, so excuse me if this has been covered, but I hope the SALT tests will post physical dimensions and weights for all the lenses tested. The RRP's, for example, seem like they will be really great from what I saw on the projector, but they are big and heavy, esp. the 25. Having a smaller and lighter lens can make a difference for a lot of purposes, so buyers should take that into account.

I'm really looking forward to the SALT tests, and I appreciate the efforts of everyone involved.

Matthew Verkler

[Evin Grant]

Physical characteristics will be taken into account. No MTF machine, lens projection and shot footage only. Manufacturers all have their own MTF data and I don't want to get into that battle. Again this test is about defining the character of theses lenses, both objective and subjective. It's not about generating a numbers war.

[Chris M.]

Physical characteristics will be taken into account. No MTF machine, lens projection and shot footage only. Manufacturers all have their own MTF data and I don't want to get into that battle. Again this test is about defining the character of theses lenses, both objective and subjective. It's not about generating a numbers war.

Not really a number guy myself. I think it always comes down to personal opinion. I shot a 2k project yesterday with a set of Zeiss super 16 glass, and both myself and the director agreed that the 30 year old set of Lomos I had looked a lot better.

We returned the Zeiss to the rental house and went with my set of Lomos. The Producer had insisted on the "name."

Usually, the Zeiss glass is really good and crisp, but the set of Lomos just seemed a little richer in texture than the opposing set.

So, I reiterate that I agree with Evan. It all comes down to personal taste. And, numbers just don't give you that elusive emotive sensation.

C.

[Shawn Nelson]

Did this happen? I thought it was going to be the week after NAB.

[Mitch Gross]

Many of the interested parties are still in prototype stage. Give it a little time or the test will not be as meaningful or useful for end users.

[david farland]

How's it coming along guys....any ETA?
Have you locked in Red's. did I hear Red was going to assist?
Understand you're not going to wait for ALL prototypes to be ready.
D

[Roberto Lequeux]

Update at your earliest convenience please.

[Evin Grant]

Soon. The RPPs being pushed has had an effect.

[Jarred Land]

Soon. The RPPs being pushed has had an effect.

huh... ?

[Evin Grant]

Sorry, typing on autopilot, it's the Illumina protos that weren't available this weekend.

[Evin Grant]

SALT is happening this week! I don't want it to turn into a party so I'm not going to say exactly when but after it's done we'll post photos and preliminary comments.

[Shawn Nelson]

Evin, will you be including the Duclos 11-16mm?

[Roberto Lequeux]

Evin, will you be including the Duclos 11-16mm?

Please... :thumbsup:

I think they were getting one sent. And Duclos was in the team of testers.

[Matthew Duclos]

So it looks like the lineup will be as follows: (no particular order)

Zeiss Super Speeds
Zeiss Standard Speeds
Zeiss Ultra Primes
Zeiss Master Primes
Zeiss Compact Primes
Cooke S4s
RED Pro Primes
UniqOptics Primes
IB/E RED Null
Angenieux 15-40mm Optimo
Angenieux 17-80mm Optimo
Angenieux 24-290mm Optimo
Angenieux 16-42mm DP
Angenieux 30-80mm DP
Ruby 14-24mm
Duclos 11-16mm
RED 18-85mm

And a few others are still pending.
Some of these may not be included depending on time restraints.

Gents, please correct me if I'm missing anything here.

[Brook Willard]

I imagine we'll have a 28-76mm around to complete the Optimo line.

[Nils Ruinet]

While you're at it, and if you have some time left, would be interesting to add the Red 18-50 and 50-150 lenses, just to see how they compare to all these lenses too... Even if you don't do extensive testing on these of course, as they've been around for some time now.

Anyway, looking forward to the results, thanks for doing this.

[Miltos Pilalitos]

i am interested to see how the 18-50 and 50-150 compare too..

[Stacey Spears]

Any chance you can use the IR LED, like the filter tests? There was some hint of the new RPPs rejecting IR in Peter's thread.

[Matthew Duclos]

I think everyone has a good idea of the RED light zooms. RED did a great job with providing an affordable zoom that is easily accessible. These can be picked up at almost any rental house for very little cost and there are many, many reviews of them on the web/REDUser already. I don't think it would be in our best interest to test these as well. If we go through everything else and we still have time, maybe we can squeeze them in.

[Bob Rudis]

Agreed, Please stay with the "Professional" Lenses.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I agree w/ Mr. Duclos about the RED zooms. So many reviews out there already and sample imagery.

Anyway, it looks to be a very nice line-up for for this round of testing. Too bad the new Illumina prototypes won't be there, but I guess we can't have everything. :) I'm anxious to see the results.


Agreed, Please stay with the "Professional" Lenses.

Ouch.

[Matthew Duclos]

I agree Jeff, I would have liked to include the Illumina lenses in my projector test.
Unfortunately, some lenses are still in prototype stages. Including the Uniq Primes.
The Uniq lenses are at a point where they are almost ready to go, but will have minor flaws that are yet to be addressed for final production models.
I do not know the state of the Illumina lenses, but I cannot (nor should anyone else) discount their quality as they are just not ready to be shown.

[Joel Kaye]

C'mon, toss a couple Nikons or Canon L lenses in for fun. :-)

[Paul Hazlett]

What about the IBE primes?

Mitch?

[Mitch Gross]

What about the IBE primes?

Mitch?

Unfortunately these prototypes were not available in time for the tests either. Please don't hold it against them. Just like the Luma Tech lenses, they were just not ready for this. When they are they will be available to all and I think people will be pleasantly surprised by them. For now we were able to send over the RED Null as we felt this was a good opportunity for the device to be checked out by the esteemed group conducting the SALT.

[Shawn Nelson]

Can there be at least one test result such that I could see the same image (or closely the same) on all those lenses, so as to try and get a sense of the differences?

[David Mullen ASC]

Yes, there will a couple of set-ups where every lens will be tested, but as you can imagine, it's hard to get the same composition with an 11mm or 12mm compared to a 100mm. But within the same focal length, the set-up will be the same for comparative purposes.

The big problem is that there are so many lenses to test.

[Shawn Nelson]

Based on this post by Jarred http://reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=423293&postcount=146

Would you please do a test where a 1.2ND (or higher) is placed in front of the glass (without any IR filters) to determine how much IR the RPPs filter? From Jarred's post and the look of the screencaps from that thread (which Jarred asserts were using a 1.2ND without any IR) he seems to be claiming that RPPs don't need an external IR blocker of any sort

[Jarred Land]

he seems to be claiming that RPPs don't need an external IR blocker of any sort

O lord.

I did not make those claims and I did NOT say you do not need an external IR blocker of any sort. Sorry if I led you to that assumption.

The RPP's do have an IR coating on them to help reduce IR hitting the sensor... but I am in no way am telling or suggesting people that they do not need an external IR of any sort... in very high IR situations of course you are going to need an IR filter, All i told you guys was that we did not use one for the test, and in that situation the footage happened to turn out great.

[Shawn Nelson]

that's why I was careful to say "seems", to indicate my own guess factor.

Hmm, if 1.2ND looks great, this could make IRs only a special case situation (instead of they usual for outdoors like it is now).

This is pretty freakin cool that you guys have done this!

[Matthew Duclos]

Jarred,

Ever considered politics? ;)

[Jarred Land]

Jarred,

Ever considered politics? ;)

"I didn't inhale and never tried it again"

[David Mullen ASC]

I think we've decided that there are too many lenses to test in one day to add an IR test. I think there are around 80 or more lenses and doing three different types of tests on all of them is pretty much the day right there.

[Karl Gustav H.]

"I didn't inhale and never tried it again"

But did you in sunshine, snow or rain?

A very,k very bad joke I've been waiting to use. Sorry

[Miltos Pilalitos]

I think everyone has a good idea of the RED light zooms. RED did a great job with providing an affordable zoom that is easily accessible. These can be picked up at almost any rental house for very little cost and there are many, many reviews of them on the web/REDUser already. I don't think it would be in our best interest to test these as well. If we go through everything else and we still have time, maybe we can squeeze them in.

I have both RED ZOOMS and know very well how they perform. What i don't know and was hoping to find out from this test is how they compare to their "pro" cousins.

Maybe this test will be the only chance for many of us to see clearly if the difference in image quality is enough to make an additional investment in the RPP set worthy.

[david farland]

So it looks like the lineup will be as follows: (no particular order)

Zeiss Super Speeds
Zeiss Standard Speeds
Zeiss Ultra Primes
Zeiss Master Primes
Zeiss Compact Primes
Cooke S4s
RED Pro Primes
UniqOptics Primes
IB/E RED Null
Angenieux 15-40mm Optimo
Angenieux 17-80mm Optimo
Angenieux 24-290mm Optimo
Angenieux 16-42mm DP
Angenieux 30-80mm DP
Ruby 14-24mm
Duclos 11-16mm
RED 18-85mm

And a few others are still pending.
Some of these may not be included depending on time restraints.

Gents, please correct me if I'm missing anything here.

Thanks Matt et al....much appreciated.

I'd just add, that as there might be 100x more Red 18-50's used on Reds than say some of the Angenieux or Zeiss's, there should be a atleast one spot for them, even at the expense of another lens.

D

[Evin Grant]

I'll ask if they can be brought, we can't guarantee they'll be tested but we'll try.

[david farland]

Thanks Evin.....as Miltos states it'll give a lot of people a frame of reference.

Also, I'm sure you've all thought about the possibilities of publishing these lens comparisons on website.....
D

[Brook Willard]

Don't worry, the results will be posted and widely available. Everybody will be free to talk about everything that happens during the test as well... and I'm sure there will be pictures galore.

It will take us a little bit of time to compile the data and have something ready to present. There'll be a lot of footage to sort through, organize and analyze. We'll also have a screening of sorts for those involved in the test a week or so after the test. I'm guessing all of the goodies will be posted at some point in that 1-2 week window afterwards.

[Mitch Gross]

Guys, calm down on the IR question. IR is heat. It could be a really sunny day but a cool breeze may be all that's needed to eliminate any IR pollution. It's not an automatic thing. When we do our IR testing it is indoors using huge tungsten lights in very repeatable conditions.

[Matt Uhry]

All the lenses pass IR pollution including the RPP's, some a little more some a little less. You will want a filter like a hot mirror at times. If you've not purchased one because you think you won't need it with the new lenses think again.

Further suggestions for aspects and lenses to test is most welcome, but we do have a pretty comprehensive list of tests, and lenses to test and already have edited out many things we simply won't have time to do. The primary objective will be direct comparisons under controlled conditions.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Antoine Fabi]

Is it possible to test the Illumina ? :)

Thanks

Antoine

[Evin Grant]

Is it possible to test the Illumina ? :)

Thanks

Antoine

We tried very hard to test the Illuminas but they just don't have prototypes ready since the NAB ones went back to the factory. There may be a chance to test them in a few months but the rest couldn't wait that long.

[Antoine Fabi]

Hey thanks Evin,

Very much appreciated!

Antoine

[Adrian T.]

I second the plea to include the RED 18-50 mm in the test. Not because nobody knows it, but because everybody knows it! It's all about comparison.

Your efforts are much appreciated.

:hippie:

[Mitch Gross]

Well they're in the throws of the test now, so any further suggestions are too late. We'll hear results soon enough.

[Chris Parker]

these results will be GREAT for everyone, and everyone's time and dedication to pull this off is much appreciated. where and when should we look for results?

[Matthew Duclos]

Done. Now to compile all the data.

[Evin Grant]

http://www.evingrant.com/pics/Lenslust.jpg

[Jarred Land]

heh heh heh thats awesome...

[Brook Willard]

You guys will have to give us some time to make sense of everything we got today. We shot 170GB of footage... and most clips were about 10 seconds long. We've got our work cut out for us.

But don't worry, it'll be coming soon.

[Frank Weeks]

Take your time guys. All those,who have chosen to take part, deserve a fair appraisal.

That's an amazing photo Evin.

A cinematographers wet dream.

[Matt Uhry]

Only good surprises at the test, no lemons in this bunch.

http://mattuhry.com/reduserimages/SALT-still.jpg

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Frank Weeks]

Stop with the porn guys. We're only human.

[Matthew Duclos]

I'll preface all the results, and I think the guys will agree with me, by saying NONE of the lenses we tested were bad. This crop of new glass is all awesome.
Details to come soon.

[david farland]

We shot 170GB of footage..

whose hosting?
wow...lovely shots on the lenses guys.
looking forward to results......

Well done and thanks to all...........

[Pawel Achtel]

Done. Now to compile all the data.

Don't forget to send the glass to Sydney now. Remember? S.A.L.T. = Second Australian Lens Test. Just that the lenses perform well in US does not mean they will Downunder. :hand:

[Shawn Nelson]

Don't forget to send the glass to Sydney now. Remember? S.A.L.T. = Second Australian Lens Test. Just that the lenses perform well in US does not mean they will Downunder. :hand:

We all know the glass swirls in reverse Downunder!

[Thomas Patrick C.]

So it looks like the lineup will be as follows: (no particular order)

Zeiss Super Speeds
Zeiss Standard Speeds
Zeiss Ultra Primes
Zeiss Master Primes
Zeiss Compact Primes
Cooke S4s
RED Pro Primes
UniqOptics Primes
IB/E RED Null
Angenieux 15-40mm Optimo
Angenieux 17-80mm Optimo
Angenieux 24-290mm Optimo
Angenieux 16-42mm DP
Angenieux 30-80mm DP
Ruby 14-24mm
Duclos 11-16mm
RED 18-85mm

And a few others are still pending.
Some of these may not be included depending on time restraints.

Gents, please correct me if I'm missing anything here.

I think some of the older Russian lomo, ekrans would be a nice addition. Seems there is still some mystery about these cheap to buy lenses. They do come in T1.4, T1.5, so they can compete speed wise, but more importantly
the overall "look" itself would be nice to compare to the much more expensive lenses.

[OptiTek]

:cool:
Only good surprises at the test, no lemons in this bunch.

http://mattuhry.com/reduserimages/SALT-still.jpg

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

Hi Matt, Evin,
Don't you think that an important item may be missing on this picture?
hint, hint....:thumbsup:
Jacek Zakowicz, optitek dot org

[Lenny Manfred]

are the results ready now?.... how about now?.... how about now?.....

[Brook Willard]

Think 2 weeks, guys. We've got to sort through the footage, organize it, process it, have a screening and then put opinions and experiences down on paper. Soon!

[Evin Grant]

Here are some pics from the SALT...

http://www.evingrant.com/pics/EvinDavidFuji.jpg
David and I checking out the tasty new Fujinon 18-85 T2

http://www.evingrant.com/pics/TedMatt.jpg
"Really the lens was THIS big!" Ted and Matt U. sharing fish stories.

http://www.evingrant.com/pics/MattProj.jpg
Matt Duclos scrutinizing a lens on the projector.

http://www.evingrant.com/pics/BrookGawk.jpg
The gang hanging around Brook and his Uber DIT cart looking at some files in Redcine.

[Evin Grant]

Just to keep it all on the level with you guys you should know that there were some absentees in the test. Most notably Master Primes did not show up. I had them arranged but some last minuet rentals screwed us. Same thing with some focal length S4s, again most notably the 50mm and 75mm. We did have a 40mm and 100mm though. The two short Optimos for film 28-76 and 15-40 were omitted for time, they seemed to perform pretty much identical to the Rouge's so you can infer data from those.
The Fujinon only showed up at the latter part of the day so it is only included in a few tests.

[David Mullen ASC]

Here are some pics from the SALT...

http://www.evingrant.com/pics/EvinDavidFuji.jpg


Just to explain why my nose is in the air...
I think you're seeing how two different guys with eyeglasses look at something close. I have progressive lenses so I have to look through the bottom of my glasses... I think Evin is looking over the top of his.

[Chris Parker]

awesome work to all involved. thanks in advance for the effort.....

[Miltos Pilalitos]

Just to keep it all on the level with you guys you should know that there were some absentees in the test.

I hope that you replaced them with the two RED zooms.

[Brook Willard]

No RED zooms came in either. The requests for the RED zooms came too late and RED wasn't able to get them for us.

We did have a few other S4s Evin didn't list [at least one, I remember using a 16mm].

That said, we still had about 50 lenses. Nobody get too sad.

[Pawel Achtel]

Just to keep it all on the level with you guys you should know that there were some absentees in the test. Most notably Master Primes did not show up..

Testing without Master Primes is like having a honemoon without a bride. Send the glass promptly down to Sydney; we will put them on an MTF machine and projector next to brand new Master Primes, and we will report and send them back...or not, depending on the results :rofl:

[david farland]

No RED zooms came in either. The requests for the RED zooms came too late and RED wasn't able to get them for us..

Red didn't have an 18-50mm!!??:blink:

[Jarred Land]

Red didn't have an 18-50mm!!??:blink:

request to us for the short zooms didnt come till after Sean left already with the rest of the lenses on his way to the test... im actually more surprised that there wasnt any up there already.. there are probably more 18-50's out there than any other cinema zoom on the planet :)

[Andrew Walker]

request to us for the short zooms didnt come till after Sean left already with the rest of the lenses on his way to the test... im actually more surprised that there wasnt any up there already.. there are probably more 18-50's out there than any other cinema zoom on the planet :)

No kidding. The 18-50mm Red Zoom was kind of like the kit lens for most of us early camera owners.

[Evin Grant]

We also felt this lens has had plenty of scrutiny in the past, and we only barely made our day at it was. Adding another zoom may have broken the proverbial camels back.

[Sanjin Jukic]

Amazing!

Looking forward to see the test results...

[david farland]

Evin, I guess i'm missing something about the structure of your tests.
So having the Red 18-50mm wouldn't provide any interesting comparisions with the other lenses?
D

[Evin Grant]

All of them are interesting, but you can't make an omelette...

We would have tried to test it if one had shown up, but the request wasn't posted till late Thursday. I would have also loved to have Master primes, but the priority was the new glass. The inclusion of Supers, Standards, UPs and S4s was as a reference and because they were on hand at Keslow.

[david farland]

cheers.......and job well done
Dave

[Miltos Pilalitos]

All of them are interesting, but you can't make an omelette...

We would have tried to test it if one had shown up, but the request wasn't posted till late Thursday. I would have also loved to have Master primes, but the priority was the new glass. The inclusion of Supers, Standards, UPs and S4s was as a reference and because they were on hand at Keslow.

What's done is done and the test results are really something to look forward into but i still don't understand how the testers could overlook the fact that the two RED ZOOMS are the reference for the majority of the RED users and the best way to see RED's advancement in lens' technology.

I only hope that there will be a second test with RED lenses only.

[Rick Darge]

My favorite lenses, hands down, were the Rouge DP 16-42 & 30-80.

Amazzzzzzing glass, mechanics, optics, weight, size!!! Only major drawback is that it can't be used on film cameras but who cares when you have glass this cool!

All the other lenses were just as good, but these really stuck out to me that day..

[Mitch Gross]

What's done is done and the test results are really something to look forward into but i still don't understand how the testers could overlook the fact that the two RED ZOOMS are the reference for the majority of the RED users and the best way to see RED's advancement in lens' technology.

I only hope that there will be a second test with RED lenses only.

Yes, but that wasn't the purpose of this test, now was it?

[Mitch Gross]

Only good surprises at the test, no lemons in this bunch.

http://mattuhry.com/reduserimages/SALT-still.jpg

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

I love seeing the itty-bitty RED Null down at the lower left corner. You could have probably stuck it in the zoom motor bracket of the big Optimo!

[Shawn Nelson]

My favorite lenses, hands down, were the Rouge DP 16-42 & 30-80.

Amazzzzzzing glass, mechanics, optics, weight, size!!! Only major drawback is that it can't be used on film cameras but who cares when you have glass this cool!

All the other lenses were just as good, but these really stuck out to me that day..

You preferred the look of them to the RPPs?

[Brook Willard]

I haven't had a chance to look through the footage and make a really educated decision, but the Rogues very much stood out for me as well. They distort a little more than the Optimo... they're advertised as slower [though there isn't a real-world difference that I could see]... but for $20 grand a pop, they're awesome. If you can always make it to a T2.8, they're smart money.

[Stephen Williams]

Unfortunately these prototypes were not available in time for the tests either. Please don't hold it against them. Just like the Luma Tech lenses, they were just not ready for this. .

Hi Mitch,

I thought Jan told us all they were in the Ultra Prime Class, and that was a couple of months ago, perhaps he meant 1960's Arg 25-250 class.

Stephen

[NateWeaver]

Testing is a thankless job. I learned this a couple years ago.

[Shawn Nelson]

Brook, Evin, David, Richard, et all...thanks a bunch for doing this. As someone who doesn't get a chance to play with MPs, UPs, S4s, etc. very often, I am very much looking forward to getting an education from your results

[Chris Parker]

I haven't had a chance to look through the footage and make a really educated decision, but the Rogues very much stood out for me as well. They distort a little more than the Optimo... they're advertised as slower [though there isn't a real-world difference that I could see]... but for $20 grand a pop, they're awesome. If you can always make it to a T2.8, they're smart money.

VERY interesting, the reports on these lenses. I wish they had one that was more like 17 - 80 in the 'rouge' price range, but i guess it would be bigger too, and these two are real nice and lightweight.

What I am REALLY hoping for is for a 'rouge' line in the 24 - 290 (or 25 - 250) range. That would be absolutely HUGE.

Does anyone know if this 'rouge' line will be expanded upon??

[Evin Grant]

If they do their not talking.

[Mitch Gross]

Hi Mitch,

I thought Jan told us all they were in the Ultra Prime Class, and that was a couple of months ago, perhaps he meant 1960's Arg 25-250 class.

Stephen

The glass is excellent but we had a number of thoughts on the physical housings and mechanics. You will be hearing more from these lenses soon enough.

[Jannard]

Will there be some reference to which lenses cover 32mm image circle (and how well) for EPIC or is that going to be a different test when EPIC is released? Curious.

Jim

[David Mullen ASC]

I believe Matt Duclos measured the coverage of all the lenses in the projection room. Not sure how he labeled the usable coverage though when there was a grey area regarding that.

[Matthew Duclos]

Will there be some reference to which lenses cover 32mm image circle (and how well) for EPIC or is that going to be a different test when EPIC is released? Curious.

Jim

I began noting the coverage of lenses that I knew already but I stopped because the projector reticle at Keslow was not sufficient to determine image circle. I've been compiling a list back at the Duclos Lenses shop and I would be glad to project the RPPs there to determine a more precise image circle.
I have the UQ Primes at the shop right now.

Once Evin posts some more photos from the projection test, I'll elaborate why the projector there was not good for determining coverage.

[Roberto Lequeux]

To everyone that showed up to work hard, and to those that are still working: Thank you! I can't wait for a systematic comparison. Hopefully we can also get a subjective paragraph or two from each of the testers, perhaps pointing out their personal winners, and why.

Will there be a follow up for Master Prime testing? I am wondering what weird planet alignment was to blame for their absence, and feel the test is far from complete without them.

[David Mullen ASC]

Basically the problem was that we needed to test at a rental house that had a lot of these lenses, and guess what? The Master Primes all got rented out that day. We all agreed that we needed to test them but they simply weren't there. We depend on the kindness of strangers, as they say. And it took us all day until closing to test the lenses we did have there. Really, it would have been a two-day event to be completely thorough, so think of this as a sampler until you get around to doing your own tests.

Maybe Evin can arrange a return engagement sometime to finish the other lenses, though in some ways, Matt Duclos' work in the projection room was probably the most informative in a technical way, followed by Matt Uhry's tests of focus racks of different textures of lights, metal, a face, charts, etc. in the frame, and the least important was mine, which was a simple portrait shot against black plus some waving of a bare light bulb and a diffused Kino in the frame to look at soft and hard flare behavior.

[Matthew Duclos]

Thank you David.
I've been compiling notes over the weekend and will have numbers ready soon enough.
Although my data may be the most important, it also the most subjective as the readers will not be able to see what I saw and will just have to trust my conclusions.
The footage shot by David, Evin, Matt, Brook etc. should be available and people will be able to see for themselves and take it as they will.

We did test a LOT of lenses that day and any more probably would have required a second day. I had to ditch a passenger just to fit the lenses back into my car as several manufacturers decided to leave their gear in my possession :reddevil:

[Evin Grant]

Just an update...
I've completed conversions of all the footage to 2K Prores for projection and critique.
I've also organized all the files into sequences for evaluation as sets (S4,RPP,Optimo Etc.) as well as peer comparison where each lens is represented by focal length and presented along side it's closest corresponding lens from the other sets. This approach will allow us to gauge both how the sets match and render a unified "look" as well as how they differ from each other in areas like breathing, CA, flare resistance, ghosting, Bokeh, contrast and snap.

The visual part of the test is not meant to determine resolution, sharpness or distortion. For that we will be referring to Matt D.'s projection numbers and the stills pulled from the lens grid.

Here is a taste of Matt Urhy's stress test...
http://www.evingrant.com/flicks/Breathing.mov

Don't be alarmed if you see some CA on that crinkled foil. The whole point of these tests it to go beyond the design parameters of the lenses to see where their limits are.
Every lens we tested displayed some CA on that foil!

And David's hard/soft flare & ghost test...
http://www.evingrant.com/flicks/Flare.mov
Please excuse the compression in the blacks

Once we've had a chance to get the gang back together and view this material critically we'll compile our thoughts and create an article with both consensus opinions and individual impressions. We'll also have the hard data from the projection and lens grid along with uncompressed frame grabs, and 720P .H264 QTs (like the ones above) for download so you can check all this out for yourself. Please be patient, a few of us are out of town working so it will be at least 10 days before we have anything more solid to report.

I will say this, every lens we tested would be totally capable of feature film level production. There were no dogs in this pack.

I'd also like to give a shout out and thanks to a few people that really helped make this happen...
Robert Keslow, Brad Wilson and the whole Keslow camera staff, thanks for being a gracious host and for the rockin Za.
Richard Darge, Chris Burket and Morgan Shmidt for coming through with cameras and being there to make it all happen.
Alex Cason and Derek Edwards for ACing.
Ali, Emiliy and Aubrey for being patient models.
All the manufacturers who participated and reps who showed up to play.

[Jamon Lewis]

Evan thanks alot already.

[Michael Lindsay]

My favorite lenses, hands down, were the Rouge DP 16-42 & 30-80.

Amazzzzzzing glass, mechanics, optics, weight, size!!! Only major drawback is that it can't be used on film cameras but who cares when you have glass this cool!

All the other lenses were just as good, but these really stuck out to me that day..

Have you used the DP 16-42 outside of the test? I didn't think it was out? Is it a pre-production sample?

I have the 30-80, and it is great, and hope the 16-42 is even better... How do they compare to each other?

Michael L

[Matt Uhry]

Have you used the DP 16-42 outside of the test? I didn't think it was out? Is it a pre-production sample?

I have the 30-80, and it is great, and hope the 16-42 is even better... How do they compare to each other?

Michael L

It's good - allow us 1-2 weeks to present the data in a coordinated fashion ?

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Patrick Scheller]

What camera was used for those tests? Red One or something else? :beer:

[Matthew Duclos]

Several RED Ones were used. Brook took the liberty of calibrating them all to make sure there were no variables. Same cameras. Different scenes.

[Jaime Vallés]

Thanks all for the hard work! We're all very interested in the final results, as well as your subjective comments.

[Nils Ruinet]

Any chance you'll get your hands on the Illuminas, now that they're supposed to officially be in production ?
I'm sure a lot of people would like to hear about these...


It is now official. The production of the ILLUMINA Super 35 T1.3 Lens sets has begun. We are on target for our delivery dates.:thumbsup:

Visit us on the web at www.LumaTechInc.com (http://www.lumatechinc.com/) since it has undergone a bit of a facelift...

Cheerfully,

Glenn Leibold
Luma Tech Inc
www.LumaTechInc.com (http://www.lumatechinc.com/)
glenn@lumatechinc.com


"I Feel the NEED, the NEED for Speed!" Tom Cruise in TopGun...

[Evin Grant]

We tried very hard to have the Illuminas at SALT but they said the earliest they would have a full set was mid summer.

[Nils Ruinet]

Ok, no worries.
Thanks.
:)

[jamesedwelland]

Being mentioned as 'Crucial Ordinance' I thought there may be some news on here! Any progress on the write up of the results?

Cheers

james

[Brook Willard]

We're all meeting next week to screen the footage and discuss our impressions.

[jamesedwelland]

Oddly it might be much better if you did not meet up and discuss. Individual interpretation of the results without peer influence might be much more useful...

james

[Roberto Lequeux]

Any word on when MP testing may happen?

[Evin Grant]

Probably not for this test.

We are meeting tonight to project and evaluate, so results soon.


Oddly it might be much better if you did not meet up and discuss. Individual interpretation of the results without peer influence might be much more useful...
james

We'll even though we are watching together, I have structured the review so that everyone involved can form and record their opinion before we discuss it. That way we preserve the most fidelity in the reviews.

[david farland]

Good luck with it all.
Thanks again everybody for all the work you put it.....

D

[kevin N]

this is great guys. i have been quietly anticipating your results. i am especially interested in how RPP, Uniqoptics, compare to the standard Ang, Zeiss and Cooke.

[Antoine Fabi]

almost 20 days...

Trying to obtain unanimity is very difficult ? :)

Antoine

[Mitch Gross]

No one is paying these guys to do this. They have to make a living too.

[Jarred Land]

well said Mitch.. that's easy to forget.

[Pawel Achtel]

No one is paying these guys to do this. They have to make a living too.

Make a living? That's a novel concept in film making, no?

[Antoine Fabi]

Sure!

Just saying that it will be difficult to have unanimity with so many GREAT lenses :)

If a particular lense had killed every other lense, i think we'd already know. :)

But man i'm curious to see the grab frames.

Antoine.

[Evin Grant]

None of the lenses we chose/were able to test were slouches. That said there were some surprises. We did our evaluation last night and now we are collecting and correlating our thoughts. We will post out opinions/finding first and then frames and footy depending on processing and bandwidth.

[Chris Parker]

thanks for all the hard work gang....

[Jannard]

We have a new lens evaluation surprise to share pretty soon. It is a complement to the SALT tests. It is an app for everyone that evaluates lens performance scientifically for a RED ONE. Put any lens on a RED ONE, capture an image and evaluate the lens via software. It gives a resolution number for every part of the image. Mac & PC. Like horsepower to the wheels.

Jim

[Rick Darge]

Now THAT is f*****g amazing Jim..

Thanks

[Pawel Achtel]

We have a new lens evaluation surprise to share pretty soon. It is a complement to the SALT tests. It is an app for everyone that evaluates lens performance scientifically for a RED ONE. Put any lens on a RED ONE, capture an image and evaluate the lens via software. It gives a resolution number for every part of the image. Mac & PC. Like horsepower to the wheels.

Jim

How is this possible if the Nyquist frequency limit for a 6 micron pixel size is about 80lp/mm and modern lenses often resolve above 100lp/mm?

Of course, you can measure the combined MTF of sensor+lens at a lower frequency, like 50lp/mm, but the sensor component of the MTF will be still below the lens component of the combined MTF. Of course, we are talking about good cine lenses, here.

Relevant article on Schneider Optics website:

http://www.schneideroptics.com/industrial/singer/MatchingLenses.htm

[albert rudnicki]

I am only curious how The RPs stands against MPs, or am I?
My only regret is that I did not have the money to put on Red lenses when they were available for the "new comers"

All this buzz about the new lenses...

[jbeale]

How is this possible if the Nyquist frequency limit for a 6 micron pixel size is about 80lp/mm and modern lenses often resolve above 100lp/mm?

Of course, you can measure the combined MTF of sensor+lens at a lower frequenncy, like 50lp/mm, but the sensor component of the MTF will be still below the lens component of the combined MTF. (...)

There are a number of programs out there now that generate resolution numbers based on digital images, for example Imatest (http://www.imatest.com/home)- of course this is system measurement (lens + OLPF + sensor + processing). I would have to assume the program Jim is talking about works the same way.

In any case, if you have already decided to use a red camera, I think the total system resolution is the only resolution number you care about, since you can't shoot a movie with just a lens in isolation.

Even if you aren't shooting on Red, you can still make a fair comparison to see (for example) if Lens A is sharper than Lens B, other things being equal.

[Jarred Land]

I think the total system resolution is the only resolution number you care about, since you can't shoot a movie with just a lens in isolation.

correct-o :)

Remember.. Apart from just the sensor as John mentioned you have the OLPF in the mix as well :)

[Pawel Achtel]

I am only curious how The RPs stands against MPs, or am I?

I am still waiting for sample RPs that Jim offered to send down here for a test on MTF machine and lens projector at Arri facility in Sydney. And the MPs are waiting impatiently to be compared with too :)


In any case, if you have already decided to use a red camera, I think the total system resolution is the only resolution number you care about, since you can't shoot a movie with just a lens in isolation.
Fair enough.

[Jannard]

We'll do one better... we are developing a way to test lenses "at the rear wheels". We'll invite you up to supervise the test!

Jim

[Tom Lowe]

Lucky Pawel!

When you come up here, bring the 60D and MP 14mm, Pawel. ;) We'll go do some shooting. :)

[Pawel Achtel]

We'll do one better... we are developing a way to test lenses "at the rear wheels". We'll invite you up to supervise the test!

Jim

I'd be honoured.


Lucky Pawel!

When you come up here, bring the 60D and MP 14mm, Pawel. ;) We'll go do some shooting. :)

Absolutely.

[Matthew Duclos]

We'll do one better... we are developing a way to test lenses "at the rear wheels". We'll invite you up to supervise the test!

Jim

You're kidnapping me to test lenses?

[Vincent S]

Any update guys? Really appreciate & looking forward to your test results.

[Michael Lindsay]

As somebody who has tested lenses with the thought that I might post the results here (and subsequently never got around to it) I appreciate how massively difficulty it is to present you findings in a way that doesn't confuse or encourage inferences that are unwise to make.

good luck to them... I'm sure they would love to post there results asap..

Michael L

[Evin Grant]

The results are in, but now we are letting the manufacturers have a first look. It was part of the deal to get everyone to participate.

[R. Gonzales]

Great,

How long before we get a peek?

R Gonzales

[Neil W. Smith]

We had the pleasure of hosting Evin and some of the manufacturers at our place on Friday and seeing the results of the SALT test.

There was two and half hours of footage covering virtually every professional lens manufacturer and lens type. The tests were really well devised to show up the characteristics of each lens and how they respond to differing lighting conditions and focus points. The CA test was particularly illuminating (excuse the pun).

Don't want to pre-empt the results and insights gained (Evin will publish those when he's ready) but would like to make a couple of preliminary observations:

1) Evin and the SALT team in combination with the lens manufacturers did a truly excellent job and have provided a very valuable service to the RED community ... its a joy to be part of a filmmaking community that takes its work so professionally and tries its hardest to share its expertise and knowledge.

2) Without going into any details, I think everyone is going to be pleasantly surprised at how well ALL the lenses did and how good the lower costs ones held up against their more expensive brothers.

Evin and I discussed the possibility of having a SALT open house day here at The Lot in West Hollywood .... seeing the images in a tightly calibrated 2k DLP screening environment really allowed us to see the detail in all the tests.

If people are interested, drop Evin an email and we'll try and organize something on a Saturday in the near future.

In the meantime, big round of applause to Evin and the SALT team ... great work guys!

Neil

[MJ KERBER]

Neil and Evin,

I'm sure there are many of us that would be interested in viewing the footage at your facility--thanks for putting that possibility out there.

[Michael Grugal]

Thank you Evin and Neil for all your hard work.

[jamesedwelland]

The results are in, but now we are letting the manufacturers have a first look. It was part of the deal to get everyone to participate.

Great! Well they must have taken a peep by now so is it time to publish?

Or is there some other issue?

[Evin Grant]

The issue is I gotta try and make a living too. I haven't forgot about SALT but it's gotta be done right and in my spare time.

[Antoine Fabi]

Hi Evin,

Just a suggestion:

Publish only the footage links, for the moment.
In the end, anyway, what is "better" is a matter of personnal taste.

Antoine

[Evin Grant]

I really don't have the bandwidth for that, and besides I really haven't decided what the best way to present all of this footage is. There's almost 2 Hours of it!

[Antoine Fabi]

Holy @#@...that's a lot... :)

The only practical solution could be frame grabs ?

Antoine

[Brook Willard]

All of our thoughts have been written and assembled in a super secret forum on REDuser. Once it's formatted and everybody's satisfied... it'll be posted.

[Antoine Fabi]

Hi Brook,

Not to put pressure, but it's been quite a long time.
Is there a problem ?

Just to know if i should wait for this comparo.

Thanks

Antoine

[Mark Pedersen]

Hi Brook,

Not to put pressure, but it's been quite a long time.
Is there a problem ?

Just to know if i should wait for this comparo.

Thanks

Antoine

Yup! We are all waiting to see the results. Orders are pending. Patience is running out... why the mysterious delays?

What's the embargo all about? Politics? Spill the beans my man!

M

[Evin Grant]

I know it's taken a while guys but there is a political component to this.
It's almost there we're just waiting on one more piece to fall into place.
The first and most important/enlightening section is already written and formatted on the forum it's just in a secret place waiting to be revealed.

[Jarred Land]

politics-schmolitics... :)

[jamesedwelland]

I think thats what we all guessed with the delays -a few poor results and a manufacturer will be crying foul: was the lens a bad example, poorly set up and not direct from the manufacturer?

Some might feel the goal posts have been moved with a new emphasis on image circle...

It would be great to have Red primes available at red centres around the world for testing; at the moment they seem not to be available. More 'politics - schmolitics'?

[Lee Saxon]

Hi Brook,

Not to put pressure, but it's been quite a long time.
Is there a problem ?

Just to know if i should wait for this comparo.

Thanks

Antoine

Not to put pressure, but I'm gonna put pressure.

Calm down guys. Wait patiently for their results and when[ever] they deliver them, thank them graciously for their hard work.

[Ken Willinger]

Not to put pressure, but I'm gonna put pressure.

Calm down guys. Wait patiently for their results and when[ever] they deliver them, thank them graciously for their hard work.

There is a precedent with L.A.R.T. regarding waiting patiently. In the end the results were good for those who participated and no one else. Those who waited paitiently got nothing useable out of it because the info took so long to be made available. S.A.L.T. appears to be heading in the same direction. I'm not holding my breath, although at this point it is mute for me. I've already taken delivery of the RPPs. One bright point is that I saw that Evan posted he'll be getting his RPPs possibly by weeks end. So I guess they performed well enough for him to get them.

[Evin Grant]

I am taking possession of a set of RPPs but they are not mine.
I have yet to decide where my money is going.

[Phil Jordan]

I am interested in David Mullen's opinion of the lenses. Will that be included?

[Roberto Lequeux]

Politics should not be allowed. This should be 33% scientific, 33% images and 33% persona opinion. If someone thinks X set isn't worth a dime or heaven sent, then that should be allowed and completely up to them.

Is any company putting pressure on anyone involved? I am confused... what politics? Was there a disagreement regarding the structure of the publication? If anyone wants to retract anything they said they should be allowed.

That said I am still very disappointed about the lack of MP testing AND extremely grateful for all the work and time put into the testing, opinions and post work.

Looking forward to checking it all out. Can't wait.

[Matt Uhry]

I am taking possession of a set of RPPs but they are not mine.
I have yet to decide where my money is going.

After testing the RPP's @ SALT I am phone stalking Brian Byrne and have already wired the money. I hope to pick up the set @ Red the end of next week.

You'll see in my written opinions that while not every aspect of the RPP's was perfect, they do tend to run towards the front of a pack of lenses that were much more expensive.

The big downside with the RPP's is probably the size and weight. We now live in a world where you'll put on the Optimo Rouge to do handheld or steadicam and use the RPP's on the dolly. Strange. At least it looks like the cameras will get lighter and better balanced.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Roberto Lequeux]

Yea, imagine your lens gaining ~3lbs while your camera can drop over 10lbs when using external sound... :)

[Shawn Nelson]

After testing the RPP's @ SALT I am phone stalking Brian Byrne and have already wired the money. I hope to pick up the set @ Red the end of next week.

You'll see in my written opinions that while not every aspect of the RPP's was perfect, they do tend to run towards the front of a pack of lenses that were much more expensive.

The big downside with the RPP's is probably the size and weight. We now live in a world where you'll put on the Optimo Rouge to do handheld or steadicam and use the RPP's on the dolly. Strange. At least it looks like the cameras will get lighter and better balanced.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

Did you reserve a set back in 2007?

[Matt Uhry]

Did you reserve a set back in 2007?

Yes kind of - actually Feb. 2008. I had a wait and see attitude about it.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Brook Willard]

Everybody with grand theories about the delays... trust me, there's nothing big going on. We've all had our responses written and formatted for weeks now, it's just a matter of them getting posted.

The reason they haven't been posted yet is that we promised the manufacturers that they'd see the results first. As for why that took so long to happen... I'll be honest, that's a good question. Evin has been handling all communication with the manufacturers.

The collective writeup on the day is about 10,000 words in length. Add on all of the stills [Say 50 lenses, several stills per lens] and any footage that gets posted and you've got a pretty significant undertaking.

It's ready - has been for a while. The 15-page email went out to all of the manufacturers today.


Is any company putting pressure on anyone involved? I am confused... what politics? Was there a disagreement regarding the structure of the publication? If anyone wants to retract anything they said they should be allowed.

No pressure from any company.


That said I am still very disappointed about the lack of MP testing AND extremely grateful for all the work and time put into the testing, opinions and post work.

Sort of a mixed message there. Interestingly enough, the only politics involved in the entire test had to do with Master Primes.


There is a precedent with L.A.R.T. regarding waiting patiently. In the end the results were good for those who participated and no one else. Those who waited paitiently got nothing useable out of it because the info took so long to be made available. S.A.L.T. appears to be heading in the same direction. I'm not holding my breath.

While similar in name, the execution and organization of the tests was completely different.

The results are in and posted in the moderator section of these forums. When Evin gets the information sent to all of the manufacturers, we'll move the thread into this forum.


I am interested in David Mullen's opinion of the lenses. Will that be included?

Yes, David [along with the rest of us involved in the test] have written our thoughts on the test. They are standing by.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Sort of a mixed message there.

Not mixed at all Brook. I thought someone might say something about this again. Why can't I be grateful for all the work everyone did, and disappointed at the same time that a set of lenses was missing? Those feelings are in no way shape or form exclusive of each other.

In fact if I were exited about the line up of people that participated (and I am, you included) I would then in fact be even more disappointed that they didn't get to test out MPs!

I would l-o-v-e to hear how in the hell MPs are holding the publication back. I assume and HOPE it is because many of you recognize the test will never be complete without them. I will now go cross my fingers and hope you are planning to somehow include them before publication.
:emote_popcorn:

[Phil Jordan]

I am concerned about if the test shows how the lenses did with a larger image circle for the future Epic 5K. It is nice to know how they do with a current R1 but I am buying lenses for now and the future. I have a set of RPPs on order because I know they will work with current and future cameras and I am curious which others also hold resolution and illumination to a 32mm image circle, not just cover it or not.

[Matt Uhry]

I am concerned about if the test shows how the lenses did with a larger image circle for the future Epic 5K. It is nice to know how they do with a current R1 but I am buying lenses for now and the future. I have a set of RPPs on order because I know they will work with current and future cameras and I am curious which others also hold resolution and illumination to a 32mm image circle, not just cover it or not.

Hi Phil, I think you are concerned about the wrong things.

1) Most of the newer glass did surprisingly well at 32mm and larger image circle, even the zooms - Matt Duclos has the exact figures.

2) If being future proof means covering a big sensor, don't buy the RPP's. Get the Ruby 14-24 and the Zeiss Compact Primes which will fully cover you on the 43mm image circle FF Epics. That would be the most "future proof" move you can make if coverage is your main concern.

3) I believe that most of my future work will be done in formats that are more related to Motion Picture Super 35mm frame sizes rather than FF35mm still "Vistavision" frame sizes. If you are a professional background plate / VFX element shooter ( I'm actually friends with one ) don't listen to me and go as big as you can.

4) If there is a legit. need for large data / large format and money to pay for it I'll rock MF lenses on a 9k Epic 645. That should be a pretty cool camera.

I'm fully down to buy the Red Primes, but that decision is not based on their coverage which is more, less, and equal to the competition depending on who you pick.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[OptiTek]

I am concerned about if the test shows how the lenses did with a larger image circle for the future Epic 5K. It is nice to know how they do with a current R1 but I am buying lenses for now and the future. I have a set of RPPs on order because I know they will work with current and future cameras and I am curious which others also hold resolution and illumination to a 32mm image circle, not just cover it or not.

Let me explain something here about lens design:
There are always compromises involved and one of them is center sharpness vs corner sharpness- you basically get either one or the other,
Generally mp(motion picture) lenses emphasize more on center sharpness at the corner's cost because in motion most action goes on in center of the frame.
Still lens design calls for corner sharpness because after taking a picture one looks at the whole frame carefully so a falloff would be easily seen on a photograph as opposed to motion footage where there simply is no time to analize whole frame.
These compromises are much improved with aspherical design that allows for field curvature correction. Or you could stay with spherical design but the lens would become huge. I think this is the case with Master Primes(if they have aspherics they must be mild )
Anyway that new fad with corner sharpness is a bit moot and one should not forget that first and foremost image sharpness in center and up to 70%field is imperative for motion picture work. Corner sharpness is secondary and nowhere near as important.
Jacek Zakowicz, optitek-dot-org

[Jarred Land]

Anyway that new fad with corner sharpness is a bit moot and one should not forget that first and foremost image sharpness in center and up to 70%field is imperative for motion picture work. Corner sharpness is secondary and nowhere near as important.
Jacek Zakowicz, optitek-dot-org

I think your missing the whole DSMC point there Jacek... If you havn't noticed, there is a shift in the fashion world right now starting to move towards pulling frames from motion to use as not only covers, but full blown printed editorials, in which case edge sharpness certainly is not moot.. but your point is.

[Phil Jordan]

Jacek, sorry to disagree with you. Corner sharpness is important when you are asking a 4K lens (28mm coverage) to go to 5K (larger image ciurcle). If the sharpness is down at the edges of a 28mm image circle it is completely lost and not useable at 32mm.

I agree with Matt sort of but I don't like the Zeiss CF lenses being non uniform T-stops especially slow at the wide end.

For me the only choices are Master Primes and RPPs and I can't afford MPs.

[Evin Grant]

This is an excertp from my SALT article:

My opinion on corner performance…
A lot has been made of lens corner performance recently in light of the newer Red sensor being larger and requiring a larger image circle. Although I think this is an important consideration to be taken into account, I would also state that only very infrequently do objects appear at the very corners of the cinema frame in a fashion that requires high detail representation. In fact many times the “shape” a particular lens adds to the image is desirable to subtly focus the viewers attention in the frame. This is of course a personal preference but it’s important to note that all the lenses tested here out performed the Red sensor in the center easily.

I would also add that as far as the published Epic specs can tell us the only 5K aspect ratio that will be outside the S35 image circle is 2:1. 1.85 and 2:40 should be comfortably within normal S35 imaging circles.

[Roberto Lequeux]

This is of course a personal preference but it’s important to note that all the lenses tested here out performed the Red sensor in the center easily.

WHOA! :shocked: All?

Was that in the very center or a "large" center area? And was it a small difference or slight?

Please do spill as much beans as possible while we patiently/impatiently wait for the full thing.

[OptiTek]

I think your missing the whole DSMC point there Jacek... If you havn't noticed, there is a shift in the fashion world right now starting to move towards pulling frames from motion to use as not only covers, but full blown printed editorials, in which case edge sharpness certainly is not moot.. but your point is.
You are correct, Jarred, however you surely are fully aware of still cameras/ still lens combinations used for video today. Technogies are converging from both ends. As for stills I don't think that full frame cameras with clean 2000 ISO 21Mpixel sensors and light weight, ultra wide, fast and inexpensive(think $1500 14-24 Nikkor) full frame lenses can be ignored.
Shift in the fashion world? I would call it more of a curiosity....
And I'm not sure that still photographers are ready to switch to big manual primes either.
But I know that you are way ahead of all this and can't wait to see what is cooking in Red's kitchen now......:thumbup1:
Jacek Zakowicz, optitek-dot-org

[Jannard]

Jarred's point shouldn't be overlooked here IMHO. Not only is corner resolution a factor when considering a 32mm image circle (not just the fact that there is some light out there) but these cameras will also be used for still capture and stills from motion capture. At that point it is not arguable whether or not corner resolution is important. Not necessarily more important than other factors, but one that can't be ignored.

To Jacek's point, we have several magazine shooters giving us feedback as they have switched to shooting both motion and still in their shoots. Greg Williams (Esquire) is just one of them. Motion in online magazines seems to be a pretty solid bet for the future.

I guess the question is... why not have a full frame of high resolution? Getting it is harder than giving it away.

Jim

[Evin Grant]

I really don't thing these things should be discussed as absolutes. You may very well want sharp corners for a still shoot or shape for a commercial or something totally dreamy like Baltars for a dream sequence. There are no right answers, only tools.

[Jannard]

I really don't thing these things should be discussed as absolutes. You may very well want sharp corners for a still shoot or shape for a commercial or something totally dreamy like Baltars for a dream sequence. There are no right answers, only tools.

I agree completely... but you need information to know what each tool is capable of.

Jim

[Jarred Land]

Shift in the fashion world? I would call it more of a curiosity....

I agree that the curiosity has stemmed from the photographer.. but that curiosity has been quickly noted by the agencies, directors, and producers, which in the end have alot more pull then they probably should :)

[OptiTek]

Jacek, sorry to disagree with you. Corner sharpness is important when you are asking a 4K lens (28mm coverage) to go to 5K (larger image ciurcle). If the sharpness is down at the edges of a 28mm image circle it is completely lost and not useable at 32mm.

I agree with Matt sort of but I don't like the Zeiss CF lenses being non uniform T-stops especially slow at the wide end.

For me the only choices are Master Primes and RPPs and I can't afford MPs.

FYI there is no such a thing as a "4K lens"
There are Academy lenses that cover, well, Academy format(27.16mm circle) and those will clip(100% vignetting) 32mm so they are not usable and 35mm full aperture(motion picture) lenses that cover 31.1mm diagonal-in reality 32mm and these would not have a problem since the coverage is so close.
If you are trying to use academy lenses for full (5k) you'll get poor results- it's pretty obvious...
All the newer lenses cover full aperture because Academy format is pretty much dead since they started using tape recorders for sound- and it's been a while...:001_tongue:
Jacek Zakowicz, optitek-dot-org

[Phil Jordan]

FYI there is no such a thing as a "4K lens"
There are Academy lenses that cover, well, Academy format(27.16mm circle) and those will clip(100% vignetting) 32mm so they are not usable and 35mm full aperture(motion picture) lenses that cover 31.1mm diagonal-in reality 32mm and these would not have a problem since the coverage is so close.
If you are trying to use academy lenses for full (5k) you'll get poor results- it's pretty obvious...
All the newer lenses cover full aperture because Academy format is pretty much dead since they started using tape recorders for sound- and it's been a while...:001_tongue:
Jacek Zakowicz, optitek-dot-org

Of course there is no 4K lens except in the context of 4K coverage on a R1 which is what I was referring to and some of the newer lenses do cover 31-32mm but are completely soft out at the edges which is why we want to know what these lenses will do on a larger image circle. Just the fact that they cover isn't enough information.

[Tim Whitcomb]

Lets not forget there are more lenses coming from RED in the next 8 Quarters or so.

Mini Primes, Electronic FF lenses, the RPP's are just the beginning of their continued commitment to providing the best DIGITAL CINEMA gear on the market.

Easier said than done, but the best part is RED really cares about getting it right.

But you seem knowledgeable, and as such, don't you agree that Lens choice is as much about "aesthetic" as much as its about lens projectors, collimators, edge sharpeness, etc? Perhaps that's why so many on here are growing impatient regarding the SALT tests... but for me, Mark P shot a great little short and the lenses looked killer to me. I liked the Bokeh, tones, color rendition and yes, the sharpness. But wtf do I know.

That said, what IS your point?

[Brook Willard]

With all this 32mm talk, I really hope that the Epic and Scarlet have a "4K" mode where we can shoot standard super 35 instead of RED super 35. The 30mm x 15mm sensor seems so arbitrary. It'll make focal lengths result in abnormal/unexpected field of view, it'll potentially increase the burden on post [though this is less of an issue with the Rocket on the horizon], etc. It's an awesome marketing point - 5K is a great number, bigger sensor is more badass, etc... but the sensor itself isn't even big enough to do proper 4-perf work for standard 2:1 anamorphic lenses.

Don't misinterpret this, I'm very excited and I don't want it to come across as an attack... a larger image circle and larger [but not quite large enough to make the difference I was hoping for] sensor wasn't near the top of my list when I dreamt of the "RED TWO". And if there was a dimension that we wanted bigger, it would be the vertical dimension... to make it big enough to cover 4-perf. And that size, unfortunately, won't be achieved by the S35 sensor.

So it's cool that the RPPs cover the new sensor, but I personally don't think people should concern themselves with it that much.

As Matt said, the difference will come when the 8-perf cameras ship. Until then... stick with [standard] super 35... particularly since the S35 model cameras are the only cameras where the 30mm x 15mm sensor size will ever be important [the future may prove me wrong, but as of today... that's it]. The sensor will be big enough to cover two of RED's cameras, sure... but RED has 9 cameras on the drawing board.

[Kyle Presley]

With all this 32mm talk, I really hope that the Epic and Scarlet have a "4K" mode where we can shoot standard super 35 instead of RED super 35. The 30mm x 15mm sensor seems so arbitrary. It'll make focal lengths result in abnormal/unexpected field of view, it'll potentially increase the burden on post [though this is less of an issue with the Rocket on the horizon], etc. It's an awesome marketing point - 5K is a great number, bigger sensor is more badass, etc... but the sensor itself isn't even big enough to do proper 4-perf work for standard 2:1 anamorphic lenses.

Don't misinterpret this, I'm very excited and I don't want it to come across as an attack... a larger image circle and larger [but not quite large enough to make the difference I was hoping for] sensor wasn't near the top of my list when I dreamt of the "RED TWO". And if there was a dimension that we wanted bigger, it would be the vertical dimension... to make it big enough to cover 4-perf. And that size, unfortunately, won't be achieved by the S35 sensor.

So it's cool that the RPPs cover the new sensor, but I personally don't think people should concern themselves with it that much.

As Matt said, the difference will come when the 8-perf cameras ship. Until then... stick with [standard] super 35... particularly since the S35 model cameras are the only cameras where the 30mm x 15mm sensor size will ever be important [the future may prove me wrong, but as of today... that's it]. The sensor will be big enough to cover two of RED's cameras, sure... but RED has 9 cameras on the drawing board.


Custom aspect ratios come as a listed spec for several of the models. It should be very easy to get 4 perf on the FF models.

[Steve Sherrick]

All I can say is that after shooting with the RPPs today, I am sold on them in a big way. Just spent the past few weeks with S4s, also very nice and capable of producing beautiful images, but the RPPs just seem like the perfect match for Red One. I'm in the process of posting a shot to Vimeo, should be up soon.

Nice work on these lenses RED!

Link to Video: http://vimeo.com/5434694

More can be found here: www.redfilmmaker.com

[Mark Pedersen]

This is an excertp from my SALT article:

My opinion on corner performance…
A lot has been made of lens corner performance recently in light of the newer Red sensor being larger and requiring a larger image circle. Although I think this is an important consideration to be taken into account, I would also state that only very infrequently do objects appear at the very corners of the cinema frame in a fashion that requires high detail representation. In fact many times the “shape” a particular lens adds to the image is desirable to subtly focus the viewers attention in the frame. This is of course a personal preference but it’s important to note that all the lenses tested here out performed the Red sensor in the center easily.

If you consider how our eyes work, they contain WAY more cones in the center and WAY fewer on the periphery. The Fovea is where we focus and direct our eyes to read detail. Much denser cones (higher resolution) in that tinyl area of our retinas. Try keeping your eyes fixed on a word on this page, and then pay attention to how much detail you see in the corners of your web browser without looking directly at it. You can barely resolve it.

Our brains are hard-wired to focus on only part of the scene in front of us. Our brain directs our lenses to what it WANTS to see and focus on. Too much detail would confuse the shit out of you because you wouldn't be able to discern what is important and what is not!

While you can't draw a direct parallel from this to cinematic images, the principles are the same. A good DP and Director direct your eye to the area of the fame they WANT you to focus on and pay attention too. That's what DOF is all about, composition, selective lighting, etc.... Then of course there is motion blurring of the image.

While lens corner resolution and consistent illumination are important if you are doing FX plates and lockoffs on deep DOF high contrast scenes, or to Jarred's point, you are doing DSMC work, for the most part it isn't critical (IMHO). In fact, for most narrative feature work, it can even be considered desirable for the reasons Evin & I mentioned.

How many of you have done "power windows" when grading. Hello??

What I find interesting is that there seems to be little discussion on the other lens properties that really matter: consistency of color matching, contrast, flaring, build quality, serviceability, weight, consistent barrel lengths for quick lens changes with a swing away MB, etc.. I hope the SALT covers that.

A set of lenses should be considered in a holistic way... a system that provides consistent performance across the full range of focal lengths, works well in all production environments (sticks, handheld, dolly, Steadicam, etc..) and holds up to the rigors of production over years of use.

There's a lot to be considered. And of course price/performance is a big one.

That's why we're all anxious to see the results.

Oh, and I have to agree. If MPs aren't part of the test—the one benchmark we all look to—it is missing its foundation.

M

[Rick Darge]

Great post Mark.


If you consider how our eyes work, they contain WAY more cones in the center and WAY fewer on the periphery. The Fovea is where we focus and direct our eyes to read detail. Much denser cones (higher resolution) in that tinyl area of our retinas. Try keeping your eyes fixed on a word on this page, and then pay attention to how much detail you see in the corners of your web browser without looking directly at it. You can barely resolve it.

Our brains are hard-wired to focus on only part of the scene in front of us. Our brain directs our lenses to what it WANTS to see and focus on. Too much detail would confuse the shit out of you because you wouldn't be able to discern what is important and what is not!

While you can't draw a direct parallel from this to cinematic images, the principles are the same. A good DP and Director direct your eye to the area of the fame they WANT you to focus on and pay attention too. That's what DOF is all about, composition, selective lighting, etc.... Then of course there is motion blurring of the image.

While lens corner resolution and consistent illumination are important if you are doing FX plates and lockoffs on deep DOF high contrast scenes, or to Jarred's point, you are doing DSMC work, for the most part it isn't critical (IMHO). In fact, for most narrative feature work, it can even be considered desirable for the reasons Evin & I mentioned.

How many of you have done "power windows" when grading. Hello??

What I find interesting is that there seems to be little discussion on the other lens properties that really matter: consistency of color matching, contrast, flaring, build quality, serviceability, weight, consistent barrel lengths for quick lens changes with a swing away MB, etc.. I hope the SALT covers that.

A set of lenses should be considered in a holistic way... a system that provides consistent performance across the full range of focal lengths, works well in all production environments (sticks, handheld, dolly, Steadicam, etc..) and holds up to the rigors of production over years of use.

There's a lot to be considered. And of course price/performance is a big one.

That's why we're all anxious to see the results.

Oh, and I have to agree. If MPs aren't part of the test—the one benchmark we all look to—it is missing its foundation.

M

[Pawel Achtel]

All good points, Mark.

One thing I wanted to add that I am more critical of corner performance in wide lenses than normal and longer lenses. Wide lenses are often used for establishing shots and other scenery shots where corner sharpness is often desirable.

[Rodney James]

I am new here so I do not mean disrespect but I am so perplexed by how people continue to argue about bad things being good. People arguing that lower resolution on edges is actually better than higher resolution? Come on guys, really?

Mark's post about the eye only focusing on the center of the screen is a great biology lesson, but there is one thing you forgot. Your screen is not blurry on the edges, so if your eyes move up into the corner you damn well expect it to be just as sharp as it is when you were looking at the center. Everyone reading this would return their screens to apple if it wasn't. I expect the same from my images. I want to CHOOSE to have the edges blurry if I want to, just like I want to choose to have the edges vignette if I want to.

We are dealing with high resolution imaging here folks. Resolution and Sharpness matters on the entire image. There is always a subjective factor to everything, but let us not start calling compromises artistic expression.

[Matthew Duclos]

Wow this thread went off on a tangent.. I make a living trying to optimize lenses to gain the absolute best image quality throughout the frame, including the edges. Maybe Im reading all of these posts wrong, but in my line of work, sharpness is everything. Sharpness is a blank canvas. If everyone is looking for crappy image quality in the edge of their frame so that it's more "natural" I may very well be out of a job.