The Shires - SLR Magic CINE 50mm T0.95 first look - the Leica Noctilux for cinematographers?

[Andrew Reid]

[html]

The Leica M Noctilux which costs $11,000 is a full frame F0.95 photographic lens. The SLR Magic HyperPrime CINE T0.95 is a full frame F0.92 lens designed for cinematographers with Leica M mount which retails for $3,000 – a third of the Noctilux.

It is quite a different lens to the Voigltander Nokton 25mm F0.95 for Micro Four Thirds. It covers a full frame sensor and APS-C mirrorless cameras like the Sony FS100 and NEX 7 whilst the Nokton vignettes on anything larger than Micro Four Thirds. I shot the above film on the Panasonic GH2 with Iscorama 36 anamorphic attached to the SLR Magic CINE but I am also using it on my NEX 7 and Fuji X Pro 1.

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/content/7439/the-shires-slr-magic-cine-50mm-t0-95-first-look-the-leica-noctilux-for-cinematographers/"]Read full article[/url]

[/html]

[Fulgencio Martinez]

T 0.95???  i think this is imposible!!
T 1    would mean there is absolutetly no loose of light.. and it is an utopic value

[Andrew Reid]

Clearly it is possible because this lens exists!

T-stop takes into account both transmission of glass and aperture size.

T1 does indeed mean zero light loss. No lens has that kind of transmission as far as I know. But the SLR Magic is pretty close. The aperture is F0.92.

For it to be F0.95 and T0.95 would mean zero light loss. That it is F0.92 allows for some light loss, so I am definitely sure about it being T0.95. This isn't some trick.

Although Kubrick didn't think of his NASA F0.7 as a T0.8 or something, you should still measure cinema glass brighter than F1 in t-stops for matching.

[riccardocovino]

back to the topic..
I always wondered how primes below F1 can be mathematically explained.
You say that from nominal F0.92 to real T0.95 there's a slight loss, ok, but it remains a loss on an "extra" light that shouldn't exist.
There must be an explanation, but nobody here seems to be a lens engineer who can solve this mistery.

Anyway, I don't get the point of this lens, especially for Emount users: SLR already sells a 50mm F0.95 with continuos aperture at 1000$, who should buy at 3000 almost the same lens?!

I don't think focus ring size can justify a triple price..

[wondo]

simple answer...

the 1000$ lens is vignetting on e-mount because it`s strictly designed for micro four thirds!

[wondo]

talking about fast lenses....

just google -> Carl Zeiss Super-Q-Gigantar 0.33/40mm

[riccardocovino]

really?
in this review there's no vignetting at all!

[url=http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/08/19/testing-the-noktor-50-f0-95-for-sony-e-mount-with-the-new-nex-c3/]http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/08/19/testing-the-noktor-50-f0-95-for-sony-e-mount-with-the-new-nex-c3/[/url]

[wondo]

you`re right!....

now i don`t get it as well....??

also there`s plenty of canon 0.95/50 glass on ebay around 1500$

so why 3000?
well, as andy pointed it out it`s made for cinematography so no breathing etc..
and if you consider that even a used zeiss hs 50/t1.3 prime is around 3000 and up, not mentioning that a new 50mm master prime is around 17500€, then it`s still a bargain :-)

they should make a set 18/25/50/65/85 all 0.95, that would be a stunner at NAB!

[jbgeach]

To answer two questions in one:

first you must understand what the f-number really means.
F number is the ratio of the focal length to the diameter of the entrance pupil of the lens. f/D. To have a f number below 1 you must have a larger entrance pupil than focal length.

Note that f - number says nothing about how much light actually goes through the lens. The compensate for this, T stop was developed. T stop is equal to f stop if there is 100% transmittance of light. so if a lens has an f number of 1 and 90% transmittance its T-number is 1.1.

This is a big secret / one of the reason primes look better, the T stop on a prime is much lower than the T-stop of a complicated multi element zoom.

Anyway, this looks like a GREAT lens, really a bang for the buck considering what you get.

Steve huff has been testing it with the m9 and it really looks like a great stills lens as well.

[Andrew Reid]

[quote author=wondo link=topic=392.msg2479#msg2479 date=1331582749]
talking about fast lenses....

just google -> Carl Zeiss Super-Q-Gigantar 0.33/40mm
[/quote]

I want one of these. However I am afraid that it may start to absorb nearby objects whilst sitting on my desk

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/corner-of-a-life/5781539879/#]http://www.flickr.com/photos/corner-of-a-life/5781539879/#[/url]

[Germy1979]

[quote author=TJB link=topic=392.msg2474#msg2474 date=1331579896]
Here's how someone else does it.
[url=http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/how-to-afford-anything.htm]http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/how-to-afford-anything.htm[/url]
[/quote]

I just spent the last twenty minutes reading this, lol...  Brilliant article actually!

[Per Lichtman]

@Andrew Reid - EOSHD

Thanks for the great article, Andrew, and for all the recent full-frame coverage I`ve been reading over the last week.

I`m also looking forward to seeing you integrate my Pasadena Pulse Audio v2 Beta 2 settings as they seem to be really helping the other patch authors for the GH2 so far with essentially100% postive feedback as yet. Any plans in that respect?

Also, I noticed a large typo in passing. Your recording time # seemed quite accurate for your Unified Hack but was off by almost 6 times for Orion. You said it "filled up" your 16GB card in 2 minutes, but it is electronically impossible to even fill up a 4GB file in that amount of time. Pushing it at max bitrate constantly, you would get over 12 minutes easily on that card and without spanning you would still get about 4 minutes per clip. I can easily confirm this based on the hundreds of files I created with it recently (and the nearly 1 hour record times on a 64GB card).

I look forward to comparing your Unified patch in my tests in the coming weeks and best of luck with the continuing coverage!