PDA

View Full Version : Sony PL F3 kit lenses test



OptiTek
02-19-2011, 02:47 PM
I thought I share here(first!!!!:dita:)
Yesterday I accidentally had an opportunity to do a fairly throughout test of the 35mm prime.
Since the facility has pretty much all test equipment including MTF setup by Zeiss and a test projector I can call it a comprehensive technical evaluation.
We also had a 25mm Master prime for sanity check.:001_smile:
Let's get to it:
It's big, Master Prime big. But light-about 3+ lbs(1,5 kg)- from what it felt like in my hand- did not put it on a scale. Nice surprise really since my biggest issue with the majority of late lens designs is their weight. After a closer look it turns out the barrels are at least partially plastic- hence the low weight.
Phew- what a relief- I thought they put some levitation electronics in it:wink:
Not surprisingly the size of the lens pretty much is not an issue anymore with such a low weight.
This is not your mother's plastic lens barrel either- it feels tough and it's hard to tell from painted metal- some kind of advanced polycarbonate or hardened ABS I think.
Focus action and iris control felt smooth and fairly light- good for focus motors.
Only about 180 degrees focus rotation- could be better. The interesting thing about it is that it looks like they implemented non linear cam design- what this means in English is that the focus marks are properly spaced and seem focus puller friendly-they are not cramped together towards infinity. Very cool...
We put it on the Zeiss MTF machine and surprise!!!-very high numbers in center (we did not go off axis- not enough time and thought we'll see easily enough in projection) easily comparable to the Master prime. The objective in the Zeiss(MTF machine) only allowed for up to 40lp testing- I would love to see a shootout on the MTF at 100lp for both Sony and MP- that would be interesting....
In plain English it means that the lens resolves very clean image- not much of aberrations present even wide open...
Of course the MP tested at T1.3 and the Sony at T2 but still..
In projection another surprise( actually not so much after the MTF test)
Very clean and flat image easily resolving the 200lp target across the field- around 36mm image circle BTW- good for full sensor Epic coverage.
The performance seems to peak at T2.8 and stay there for a while.
Breathing- I haven't noticed much but I also did not pay much attention to it.
Bokeh- looks like at least a 7or 8 blade iris so that should give you an idea.
Since the lens is so crisp I think that the focus falloff will be pretty dramatic- a good thing IMO(?)
There is is a smallish issue with the PL mount(looks like LDS contacts were installed on this one) we concluded that one of the clearance diameters is too big and that makes lens caps hard to remove and makes the lens either hard or even impossible to mount on non F3 PL cameras- but that is a slight mechanical error easy to fix -CAN YOU HEAR IT SONY? I know you are here and for your sake I hope you are listening.....:wink:
That's all folks- I hope you enjoyed the reading.....

Pawel Achtel
02-19-2011, 07:00 PM
thanks, Jacek. Very interesting.

albert rudnicki
02-19-2011, 08:31 PM
Great test Jacek, thanks.
Do you recognize the glass?

Ryan Patrick O'Hara
02-19-2011, 11:56 PM
I disagree. I tested the 35mm and the mechanics were garbage if trying to pass it off as a cinema quality lens. It was all plastic and the focus ring didn't glide. It felt like plastic on plastic friction. The iris ring had a defected tooth in the gear and it was just aweful. There aren't any witness marks next to the focus distance readings on the barrel.

They were very big and bulky, but were light weight, a positive result of a super negative attribute.

I'll thank you for your review but have to say I completely disagreed. My mom wouldn't have a plastic lens and gears like that. :)

The lens seemed optically sound, however, if you're going to go to cinema lenses, this is not a set for you. I'd rather buy 7000 of top photography glass than 7000 of bottom shelf cinema glass...

I wrote this review soon after my hands on test of the F3 and Sony 35mm PL lens test.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?236052-Thoughts-from-the-BandPro-F3-Open-House

Alexander Ibrahim
02-20-2011, 07:46 AM
I disagree. I tested the 35mm and the mechanics were garbage if trying to pass it off as a cinema quality lens. It was all plastic and the focus ring didn't glide. It felt like plastic on plastic friction. The iris ring had a defected tooth in the gear and it was just aweful. There aren't any witness marks next to the focus distance readings on the barrel.

They were very big and bulky, but were light weight, a positive result of a super negative attribute.

I'll thank you for your review but have to say I completely disagreed. My mom wouldn't have a plastic lens and gears like that. :)

The lens seemed optically sound, however, if you're going to go to cinema lenses, this is not a set for you. I'd rather buy 7000 of top photography glass than 7000 of bottom shelf cinema glass...

I wrote this review soon after my hands on test of the F3 and Sony 35mm PL lens test.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?236052-Thoughts-from-the-BandPro-F3-Open-House

To be fair to Jacek and Sony- these are still pre-production lenses. Having tested several preproduction EX1 cameras, I can say that Sony advances their development units fairly rapidly.

In other words, I believe both of you. I just believe that Jacek has just seen a much later revision of the lens than you did.

OptiTek
02-20-2011, 08:33 AM
I disagree. I tested the 35mm and the mechanics were garbage if trying to pass it off as a cinema quality lens. It was all plastic and the focus ring didn't glide. It felt like plastic on plastic friction. The iris ring had a defected tooth in the gear and it was just aweful. There aren't any witness marks next to the focus distance readings on the barrel.

They were very big and bulky, but were light weight, a positive result of a super negative attribute.

I'll thank you for your review but have to say I completely disagreed. My mom wouldn't have a plastic lens and gears like that. :)

The lens seemed optically sound, however, if you're going to go to cinema lenses, this is not a set for you. I'd rather buy 7000 of top photography glass than 7000 of bottom shelf cinema glass...

I wrote this review soon after my hands on test of the F3 and Sony 35mm PL lens test.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?236052-Thoughts-from-the-BandPro-F3-Open-House
Good feedback Ryan,
I assure you I have no horse in this race just trying to share my impressions.
I've done my fair share of testing early lenses over the years and it's not unusual to have the mechanical(and optical) defects on early preproduction examples. You should see what the early S4s looked like back in '95 or so when we tested them against the primos. a company sale fell through because of it....:angelsad2: And look at them now- some would say the best in the biz.....
Yeah you right gears chipping is a real possibility with plastic gears. Also we are yet to see how these composite mechanical parts hold up over time...
I would say that rental houses should be real careful-maybe this is not for the rental enviroment.
For a private owner/operator however this could be a ticket into PL world.....
I actually welcome these new materials- it's refreshing to see something different than a 6 lbs primes(not that there is anything wrong with that:smile5:)
The scale witness marks are surely a victim of the $2k price tag- no individual marking in the factory for sure. Actually in real world the ACs check and make their own marks anyway so more prep time for them-maybe their prep shift will grow from 2 to 4 hr day:devil:
Actually my biggest issue is that there are only 3 lenses in the set-I don't see anybody serious buying three lenses and trying to match some wides and teles to these three. Let's hope they decide to pursue PL glass and come out with a 16or20, 25, and 135mm.
The more the merrier I say...

Alexander Ibrahim
02-21-2011, 03:01 PM
Actually my biggest issue is that there are only 3 lenses in the set-I don't see anybody serious buying three lenses and trying to match some wides and teles to these three. Let's hope they decide to pursue PL glass and come out with a 16or20, 25, and 135mm.
The more the merrier I say...

I expect them to keep their primes very few and instead pursue zoom lenses.

What I find interesting is that they did not go to their historic partners, Zeiss and Fujinon, for lenses.

I especially think that Fujinon would jump at the chance to deliver job lots of lenses and get lots of people using and thinking about their product in a cinema context. I know they've made a big splash with their lenses for Arri and their other PL zooms... but its early days for them and every bit of exposure helps.

Peter Moretti
02-21-2011, 03:40 PM
I think Sony owns Minolta, which makes lenses.