Lucian Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Hi all, I've taken an interest in these lenses after numerous mentions from the knowledgeable Andy lee and and Sean, and the fact that p.t anderson used them to shoot part of the insanely gorgeous "the master". I've done a lot of research but still can't quite answer all my questions. So far I have gathered: the massive, zebra striped, 'medium format' p6 mount lenses are the ones to go for. Confusingly medium format lenses are larger than 35mm lenses. Due to their size they let in a lot more light, so an f4 is more like an f2. So my remaining questions are: 1) would these work well with speed boosters on smaller s16 sensor cameras? 2) additionally would they be usable with the iscorama 36? my thinking is not really as they have enormous front threads(80mm +), and the isco rear thread is 49m. Catastrophic increase in vignette seems probable. 3) Even if they were usable with the isco, wouldn't the additional light let in from the large front element be negated because you are stepping down massively to attach to the anamorphic? Thank you in advance for any wisdoms! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Due to their size they let in a lot more light, so an f4 is more like an f2. That's not true. A fullframe lens doesn't let more light into a micro four thirds camera either. Can't beat physics. F4 = F4, no matter what sensor size. Just the field of view changes. Also, The Master was shot on 65mm film with a Panavision 65 HR. Shooting with medium format lenses on a smaller sensor (fullframe or smaller) is not going to give the same effect. Although according to imdb they also used 35mm (Panavision Millenium XL2) with the Zeiss Jena lenses you mention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucian Posted April 21, 2014 Author Share Posted April 21, 2014 Re the amount of light, i'm sure you are right that the fstop doesn't magically change, but here is a great write up on theses lenses by a dp, he shows a side by side comparison of a 50mm nikon f41.4 wide open and a Jenna f4 wide open and the amount of light is similar. So there must be something to his statement "When you look at the numbers, they don´t seem to be real fast, but don´t be fooled. Because of the huge diameter of those beasts they are almost twice as fast as the numbers suggest. Yes, it was the 35mm portions of the master these lenses were used for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy lee Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I have a bunch od these lenses they are Pentacon 6 mount (P6) so to use a speedbooster you will need an adaptor from P6 to what ever mount your speedbooster is Yes I have used my Schneider anamorphics on the Carl Zeiss 80mm f2.8 Biometar it has a 67mm front so works will with the Schneider that has a 70.6mm rear Lucian and nahua 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Re the amount of light, i'm sure you are right that the fstop doesn't magically change, but here is a great write up on theses lenses by a dp, he shows a side by side comparison of a 50mm nikon f41.4 wide open and a Jenna f4 wide open and the amount of light is similar. So there must be something to his statement "When you look at the numbers, they don´t seem to be real fast, but don´t be fooled. Because of the huge diameter of those beasts they are almost twice as fast as the numbers suggest. Sadly the comparison images seem to be gone. Anyway, it is simply impossible. That DP can't beat physics either. Yes, they gather more light, but they distribute it to a bigger image circle because they have to cover medium format film. So you will loose that light. If there would be some kind of speed booster for medium format, you could bundle that light onto a full frame sensor and actually win an F-stop. On the other hand, a 50mm 1.4 on a full frame camera has a lot of light fall of in the covers (vignetting). A medium format lens on a fullframe sensor wont have much light fall off wide open because you are only using the middle of the image circle (which is the brightest). So maybe that's the difference he's seeing. Claiming f/4 is like f/2, that is a two stop difference. A f/1.4 lens might have close to 2 stops light fall of in the corners, so there you'll probably see a difference, but that's gonna be it. Lucian 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucian Posted April 21, 2014 Author Share Posted April 21, 2014 You are likely right about the technical aspect, but seeing the pictures comparing the amount of light was very similar on the 50m f1.4 vs the 50mm medium format lens at f/4 to my eye. So unless the images are fake, there is something to his statement... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucian Posted April 21, 2014 Author Share Posted April 21, 2014 Julian, try this link, if you scroll down most of the pics are broken, but the light comparison is working for me now! http://frankglencairn.wordpress.com/vintage-zeiss-glass-on-modern-cameras/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richg101 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 wide open, an 80mm f2.8 medium format lens will transmit more light onto a full frame sensor than a full frame lens of the same aperture/focal length. almost all full frame lenses show vignette wide open on full frame, but the vignette on the medium format image circle is cropped away when used on full frame so the illumination is more uniform. in the centre of the frame you will see exactly the same exposure, but the edges will be different by a stop or more. Edge image quality will also be worlds apart - the medium format lenses delivering better quality due to being used within their sweet spot. I use Hasselblad and Schneider medium format lenses on the sony A7R because I often like to position the subject at the edge of the frame, while keeping the lens wide open. Only with the medium format lenses do you get really good results at 36mpx at the edges when the lens is wide open. regarding iscorama use on medium format, you'll only see light loss and related issues from step rings if you use them on medium format sensors. the crop factor negates any adverse effects. finally, As i have said a few times, medium format lenses only tend to deliver 'creative' looking images when on big sensors/film surfaces. when on smaller sensors you loose the aesthetic benefits such as that awesome wide fov and shallow dof obtained by a longer lens delivering wider fov due to the bigger imaging area (80mm on medium format = 50mm on full frame). The main argument against using medium format lenses is that some will say they are not as capable at delivering a fine enough resolution in 'line pairs/mm'. - due to not being designed to compress all the information into such a small area. I know for a fact that my schneiders out perform my hasselblads drastically in terms of resolution when used on full frame, 36mpx. Once on medium format imaging areas this difference is less noticable. It is worth reading up on lens talk in the view camera / bellows type technical camera user forums since this subject is easier to discuss in the domain of 8x10" frames! Schneider make a range of 'digitar' view camera lenses which aim to address this issue by delivering way more line pairs per millimeter than typicakl view camera lenses - which would suggest there milage in this discussion. Lucian, nahua and Aussie Ash 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 You are likely right about the technical aspect, but seeing the pictures comparing the amount of light was very similar on the 50m f1.4 vs the 50mm medium format lens at f/4 to my eye. So unless the images are fake, there is something to his statement... Saw the images. The Nikon is definitely brighter. Make crop of the middle and you'll see a big difference. It doesn't look like 3 stops brighter (it should be: f/4 > 2.8 > 2 > 1.4). It's hard to say from one test image, without the necessary parameters. Was the shutter speed / iso exactly the same? was the light from outside constant? I agree with Rich, a MF lens will transmit more light onto the sensor, but that only changes the corner brightness. Anyway, would love to be proven wrong with a proper test :) Btw, MF lenses don't come with fast apertures. So yes, if you get the 50mm f/4 Flektogon and use it wide open on a fullframe dslr, it won't vignette. But a 'normal' 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 won't vignette either at f/4. Same goes for 80mm's... A 85mm 1.4/1.8 doesn't vignette much when stopped down to 2.8. Anyway, not saying you should not go for these lenses, but you shouldn't be doing it for the brightness... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucian Posted April 21, 2014 Author Share Posted April 21, 2014 Brilliant, thank you for the detailed explanation Rich! with x.0.74 speedbooster a s16 sensor would effectively be about aps-c, but it sounds like the magic is lost on anything smaller than full frame. I may have to give a 80mm biometar a go at some point anyway out of curiosity :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tupp Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Can't beat physics. F4 = F4, no matter what sensor size. Just the field of view changes. A couple of points: - the same f-stop on every lens of the same focal length won't necessarily transmit the same amount light to the focal plane, which is why we have T-stops -- they account for the light "Transmission" factor; - the field of view doesn't change from one lens to the next if the (effective) focal length remains the same (barring any condensing optics behind the aperture, such as a speed booster). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Cunningham Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 with x.0.74 speedbooster a s16 sensor would effectively be about aps-c, If you're boosted up to being effectively APS-C then you're in the range of the 35mm portions of The Master. As these were chosen specifically for their ability to cut well with the 65mm portions of the film that's "interesting" enough for my money. That's plenty "magic". That film is tangible enough proof that not all is lost when going smaller than full frame. PT Anderson and his DP tested literally dozens upon dozens of lenses, access to anything and everything, and this was the selection made for cutting between formats without jarring moments. There was no portion of the film that didn't look amazing and without having previously read specific references to what scene might have been shot with what format nobody here can either say what is what or that the proof isn't in the pudding. Lucian 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucian Posted April 21, 2014 Author Share Posted April 21, 2014 hmm well it sounds like i'm definitely going to have to try for myself. Agreed the entire film looked spectacular, as did his "there will be blood", which I believe was shot on panavision anamorphics for the most part. No harm in trying to rig up a combined poor mans version with an isco and biometar... :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy lee Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Biometar is a very nice lens , superb for head shots , very very sharp even wide open , the fall off bokeh is very nice indeed! creates great separation mine is a 1963 version with the plastic focus ring pre zebra, 50 year old glass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucian Posted April 21, 2014 Author Share Posted April 21, 2014 Nice, that is the best version allegedly. My current 80mm solution is the jupiter 9 and I don't like it much at all. Bloomy and cheesy wide open, maybe okay for wedding glamour stuff though I guess, not great for me though :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy lee Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I got rid of my Jupiter 9 for the same reasons also try the medium format Mir 45mm and 65m Kiev lenses ....also very nice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 How do the pentacon 6 lenses compare to other medium format lenses? For example with pentax 67 lenses. I compared some pentax 67 lenses to some nikon lenses on a D3 and they had less resolution less contrast (I only have the latest versions) and had some strange colored cromatic aberrations. I haven't bought any pentacon stuff because the cameras are a mess and I don't like the idea of thorium (call me stupid). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy lee Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 the Zeiss P6 medium format lenses are some of the best you can get , I like these lenses alot , great contrast , Zeiss warm colours and very sharp !! and they have character , all hand made - no computers used in making these or designing them ticks all the boxes for me!! Lucian and nahua 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Shure andy, but how do they compare to other medium format lenses? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertPupkin Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 I have the 50mm and 80mm and love them both. I would really like to get the 120mm and 180mm as I am getting more into the aesthetic of longer focal lengths for ordinary shots. I currently use them with adapters on a t3i but I've been looking into switching over to a m43 camera, most likely the gh4 or a blackmagic. However, with the crop of a m43 camera, these lenses would be VERY long. I'm not opposed to the idea but having a speed booster for them would be pretty neat. I was under the impression that you could only use the mount-specific lenses with the speedboosters, only being able to use c/y glass with the c/y booster, so no putting a c/y adapter on a nikon lens and then onto the c/y speedbooster for example. Is this actually possible? For instance if I had a p6 to nikon mount adapter, could I then use them on the nikon speedbooster? Thanks for the help Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.