Epic Lens Test - Canon vs PL Elite

[Rick Darge]

The canon mount is great for indies. Opens up a whole world of possibilities.

[Matt Uhry]

We would be very honored to have you attend the testing. I follow your threads closely - always learn something. Would love an updated opinion (from 2009 SALT) on high quality zooms for Epic:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthr...-Lens-for-Epic

Hmmm. Zooms. These are the one's I own, or would seriously considered buying,

Criteria is how much I like the images, how much my AC's like it, chance of paying itself off in a reasonable
amount of time and anticipated resale value, and reliability

Angenieux rouge 16-42 and 30-80 series are the best value / performance
Duclos 11-16
Ruby 14-24
Cooke 18-100 ( not as new, clean used one )
Angenieux 24-290 Optimo
Duclos 70-200 if Paul ever finds the time to make it.
Long Fuji / Arri 45-250

[David W. Jones]

Well having organized the original Salt test I guess I should chime in. Most modern lenses are sharp enough to produce good looking images on an Epic, at least in the center, especially stopped down. Where things start to become complicated (and expensive) is when they need to be good even in the corners and wide open or close to it. However Matt is right, it's really not optical performance that truly sets apart high end cinema lenses (my leica M lenses are sharper than my Optimos) it's mechanical accuracy, repeatability and the lack of optical abberations specific to cinema (breathing, ramping and image shift). These aspects are why cinema lenses command thier premium prices.

Now this next comment is going to start a bit of a religious war but I agree with Jim, that even among still lenses the Canon L wides, zooms and even the 70-200 2.8 are not the creme de la creme (the 70-200 f4 is quite good though). They are totally servicable as is proved by many professional photographers that rely on them, but compared to Leica M/R, some Zeiss ZEs and the new Nikon G series lenses they are at the back of the pack. This is even evidenced by the number of Canon shooters who use the 14-24 Nikkor with an adapter on thier EOS bodies.

I'd be glad to help you with your test but do not put too much hope in L glass trouncing the cinema or even the other still glass that's brought to compare. In the end there will be more similarity than not but at the edges of optical performance every little thing counts.

Evin has pretty much nailed it!

[Lliam Worthington]

Hi Josh,

As a new Scarlet owner I would indeed very much like to see this test.

Just watched Shane Hurlbuts new lens test. Thought it was fantastic. But would love to see this same test on Epic/Scarlet.

http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2...g%3A+Hurlblog)

Best Wishes and a very Merry Christmas

Lliam

[Justin McAleece]

I think the CA is the biggest issue on the L Primes. THere is quite a bit more than their Cinema counterparts.

[Stephen Pruitt]

I want to make myself very clear here: I am talking about using the Canon glass with an electronic mount. I cannot imagine that Canon L-glass will fare very well when using a manual follow-focus, as those lenses simply weren't designed to be used in that way. The throw isn't long enough. But plug in a Birger electronic mount and/or RED's new electronic Canon mount, and those sorts of mechanical issues vanish.

I have not used RED's electronic mount (and it will likely be some time before I can do so), but we are extremely happy with the performance of our Birger/Canon/Impero combination on our RED One MX. Focus is repeatable and smooth as butter, you can change the focus "gearing" electronically at will, and focus can be done remotely without ever touching the camera.

I'm definitely not saying that L-series glass is the equal of the best cinema glass. Not at all. No one would say such a thing. I'm merely saying that anyone can achieve truly impressive, professional-quality results using Canon L-series or Nikon or Leica or (insert great stills glass here) glass on a RED camera.

And as for breathing, if there was ever an overblown lens issue, that's the one. Unless you are racking from the tip of your nose to all the way across the room, no eagle-eyed client would ever notice. Further, even if they did notice, half of those mentions would be good! ("I loved the way you slightly zoomed in there as you pulled focus from his beer to the zit on the end of her nose.")

Stephen

[Brian Pascale]

I too would love to see this test. I have my order in for a Scarlet Canon TI mount and have already received:

TOKINA 11-16mm f/2.8
CANON 16-35mm f/2.8L
CANON 24-70mm f/2.8L EF
CANON 70-200mm f/2.8L IS EF II

With all the chatter about canon L lenses being subpar on the Epic I have been trying to decide if I want to return the 16-35mm and get the Nikon 14-24mm. So I would love to see the Nikon G glass vs. Canon L glass. Canon has the edge for me because I want to be able to us my "Little Bramper" with a Canon body and lenses for controlling exposer for time-lapse, and the Canon mount came out before the Nikon mount. How much will I loose by getting an adopter for the Nikon? I know it won't match as well as having all Canon, but I do mostly documentary work and this new rig will already be a big step up from my Panasonic HPX-500.

[Evin Grant]

FYI the new Nikon D800 and D4 which will be announced at the beginning of 2012 will both have 1080p uncomressed HDMI out. The D4 will have 102,000 ISO, that's a pretty compelling C cam for video.
The D800 will be 36MP too.

Until the redmote-pro starts shipping there is no elecronic follow focusing with any still lenses.
Once it does I'll be very curious to see how the Nikon and Canon lenses respond to it. Exciting times.

[Jeffrey T. Morgan]

re: zooms, the RPZ's would be very interesting to see.... again, only if you add zooms to the range.

[Stephen Pruitt]

Hey there, Evin. . .

. . . I was under the understanding that the standard REDMote could be used to control the focus of Canon lenses? Is this not true?

Stephen