Lenses

[HockeyFan12]

S35 "normal" lens comparison:

 

[kye]

Mark Holtze is pitching a Netflix show using his SMC Takumars and this video shows some footage from an advanced test he shot.  Footage from the Takumars and S1H.

 

[JordanWright]

Just a little update to my Contax Zeiss journey. I created and sold a set. I ended up with a 25mm 2.8 35mm 2.8 50mm 1.4. I was planning on selling the 50mm and picking up an 85mm 2.8. When I found I buyer for the 50mm, he asked if I had anymore and made me a generous offer for the full set. I think I will build a new set up in the future. A few notes for people who might be picking up a few lenses.

1) DON'T sleep on the 25mm 2.8 MM. I returned the 28mm because it had an aperture issue and saw a good price on the 25mm. This lens has reviewed poorly and doesn't test well on the charts, especially in the corners, but wow what an image! It's bitingly sharp in the centre but does suffer in the corners a bit. It has very good subject separation and pop, pleasing flares and very good close focus. It was a bit of magic, by-far my favourite of the set.

2) The flares across the set are quite consistant and have similar characteristics. It's very easy to cut the lenses together.

3) Treat the 50mm 1.4 strictly as a 2.8. Possibly my least favourite lens of the set. The 50mm 1.4 was dreamy wide open and warmer than the rest of the set. Ive read that earlier versions perform slightly better. Although stopped down to 2.8 and it was very sharp but I tended to gravitate to the 35mm 2.8 and just move a bit closer. Maybe it's my bias as I tend to prefer wider lenses though? Many people love the 50 1.4.

4) I wish there was something fast, affordable and wider than the 25mm. The 21mm would have been perfect but prices on that lens are outrageous. I've read that the Zeiss ZE 21mm 2.8 is the same optical formulae and has almost identical performance, however you lose the aperture ring on the EF version and Focus Direction is reversed on the F version. There is an 18 F4 that would probably be the option I would go for if I was to buy the set again. 18 is about as wide as I would need on S35, you could probably get away with the 25mm as your widest on a larger sensor.

5) I wouldn't recommend a speed booster with these lenses (or any lens actually). Contax Zeiss  requires 2 irreversible modifications if you use a regular speed booster or 1 if you use a cine lock version. Ive also noticed just how much speed boosters mess with the image, I very much dislike its effect on lens flares and the distortion it introduces (Tested on 2 different versions of the Metabones XL). They are good at what they are for, but they are not a magic fix-all solution. This process convinced me to sell mine and seek a solution without one. Although I will miss the positive EF mount, that thing is priceless! 

6) Mint doesn't mean mint. There is a significant amount of dishonestly in sellers and people selling on behalf of there older relatives who don't know possible issues. Overall I purchased 6 lenses and 3 had to be returned. (Misting, Aperture actuation issue and lumpy focus ring) 

7) Don't get too curious and start opening up the lenses, you'll drop a ball bearing on your carpet and it'll be gone forever and you'll have to keep ordering different sizes on amazon until one fits! (1.5-1.8mm will work as a replacement in the smaller MMs)

I'm sure i'll pick up some of these lenses again in the future (defo the 25mm again), I do almost regret selling them but I made a bit of profit to put into other areas of my kit. 

[Henchman]

I have Jupiter 8 lens that  won't focus at all.

I'm using it with an M39 to EF adapter.

The only thing it will focus on, is extreme close up. Like a crazy macro lens.

[PannySVHS]

This is one of the coolest threads for photolenses on digital filmcameras on the web. I am always exited to read about your posts. It´s also cool to get answers to ones questions. Here is mine regarding the M. Holtze video above. What is revealing about it besides the advise to go the distance for pitches and to do testing ahead of the pitch? Footage seems tame to me and rather unspecific to the task of setting a 70ies mood. Maybe a large projecition of TV will reveal the use of the presented material to judge character and vintage flavour and consistent color rendition through the various primes? Thanks for putting this video up for discussion @kye

On 7/1/2020 at 1:34 PM, kye said:

Mark Holtze is pitching a Netflix show using his SMC Takumars and this video shows some footage from an advanced test he shot.  Footage from the Takumars and S1H.

 

[heart0less]

7 hours ago, Henchman said:

I have Jupiter 8 lens that  won't focus at all.

I'm using it with an M39 to EF adapter.

The only thing it will focus on, is extreme close up. Like a crazy macro lens.

That's because this Jupiter isn't a normal M39x1 mount.

It's actually a Leica M39×26tpi aka L39

Since it's meant for rangefinder cameras, its flange distance is so short that you won't be able to use it on a DSLR.
If you put it on a mirrorless camera, it'll work just fine.

 

 

[kye]

1 hour ago, PannySVHS said:

This is one of the coolest threads for photolenses on digital filmcameras on the web. I am always exited to read about your posts. It´s also cool to get answers to ones questions. Here is mine regarding the M. Holtze video above. What is revealing about it besides the advise to go the distance for pitches and to do testing ahead of the pitch? Footage seems tame to me and rather unspecific to the task of setting a 70ies mood. Maybe a large projecition of TV will reveal the use of the presented material to judge character and vintage flavour and consistent color rendition through the various primes? Thanks for putting this video up for discussion @kye

 

I guess you'd have to know more about his project to see the links - certainly he can!

I posted it as the Takumars are one of the famous vintage lenses that people like to collect, and the footage from the S1H should be top quality, so assuming that Mark did a good job filming (which I would assume he did) then the video should be a good example of footage from those lenses.

I've got a few Takumars, and although they're not the SMC Takumars, they're still excellent and if I shot FF I think I would have just collected a whole set of them, they are beautifully made things and the images are very nice too.  A great balance of being high resolution but not too sharp.

[Henchman]

17 hours ago, heart0less said:

That's because this Jupiter isn't a normal M39x1 mount.

It's actually a Leica M39×26tpi aka L39

Since it's meant for rangefinder cameras, its flange distance is so short that you won't be able to use it on a DSLR.
If you put it on a mirrorless camera, it'll work just fine.

 

 

I want to use it with my BMPCC 4k. It has an MFT mount. Is there an adapter I can get for it?

[heart0less]

51 minutes ago, Henchman said:

I want to use it with my BMPCC 4k. It has an MFT mount. Is there an adapter I can get for it?

Surely, there is. 

This one, e.g.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1413094-REG/fotodiox_m39_mft_lens_mount_adapter_for.html

It cannot be any thicker / higher than that. 

It's not properly advertised since it's more of a L39 (which isn't the same as M39) to MFT adapter, but what can we do.. 

Bear in mind you won't be able to use Russian M39 lenses with this adapter, even though they would mount perfectly - once again, different flange distance. 

[kye]

5 hours ago, heart0less said:

Surely, there is. 

This one, e.g.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1413094-REG/fotodiox_m39_mft_lens_mount_adapter_for.html

It cannot be any thicker / higher than that. 

It's not properly advertised since it's more of a L39 (which isn't the same as M39) to MFT adapter, but what can we do.. 

Bear in mind you won't be able to use Russian M39 lenses with this adapter, even though they would mount perfectly - once again, different flange distance. 

Your post is why I've avoided m39 mount lenses and stuck with m42 mount!!  What a mess.

Of course, lots of talk about the earlier models of the classic Russian lenses being better in many ways, so yeah.

[Henchman]

22 hours ago, heart0less said:

Surely, there is. 

This one, e.g.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1413094-REG/fotodiox_m39_mft_lens_mount_adapter_for.html

It cannot be any thicker / higher than that. 

It's not properly advertised since it's more of a L39 (which isn't the same as M39) to MFT adapter, but what can we do.. 

Bear in mind you won't be able to use Russian M39 lenses with this adapter, even though they would mount perfectly - once again, different flange distance. 

I only want it for the Jupiter 8.

Thanks for the info.

[kye]

More spectacular footage from the Laowa probe lens..

and here's the BTS:

I watch James Hoffman because I'm interested in coffee, so this is a completely unexpected foray into camera tech and slow-motion loveliness, but if you like coffee then I can also recommend his channel.  He's a Barista World Champion, has a ridiculously nerdy interest in coffee, and is hilarious when he tries coffee products that taste terrible or reviews cheap and bad coffee equipment.

You're welcome!

[noone]

10 hours ago, kye said:

 

You're welcome!

Thanks Kye,

Not a coffee fiend but that was fun.

Had to look up the cameras and the Veo 1310 model is only 1.2 (one point two) mega pixels but can shoot at speeds up to 423,350 fps at tiny sizes, 10,860 at full size.

They have a few 4k models

The Flex 4k is a cinema model that shoots up to 1000 fps in 4k

https://www.phantomhighspeed.com/products/cameras/4kmedia/flex4k

These are all crazy things that in some cases would cost more than a house.

GULP! Just noticed their flagship high speed camera shoots at up to one million FPS though just over a mega pixel sensor.....That is insane!

 

 

Still, that video gives me some ideas for my little RX100 iv (just mucking around 1000 fps is not that great but can be fun but 500fps is ok as is 250fps...all upsized to full HD in camera).

[PaulUsher]

On 5/6/2019 at 2:39 PM, mercer said:

I have a plastic fantastic coming in the mail today... the Canon 24-85mm 3.5-4.5. I paid less than $60 for it. I’m hoping it matches well with my Canon 28mm 1.8 for a two lens set up. 

The flickr samples look pretty good, has anyone ever used it?

Hey man, curious to know how did you get on with this lens? AF performance & noise? How bad is breathing for video? Any quirks or character of note? I like experimenting and I’m looking to try a light and low-profile all-rounder to pair with R and metabones speedbooster... not for work, just for fun. Thanks for sharing 

[noone]

Portrait lenses, Pre and post CoVid!

[leslie]

after noones show and tell, i feel slightly inadequate 🙄 my last acquisition for the takumar collection for quite awhile i hope is a pentax smc 17mm f4 m42.

This should round out the collection nicely and cover all my bases. After this a better tripod and head is on the agenda.

 

[mercer]

On 7/13/2020 at 7:52 PM, PaulUsher said:

Hey man, curious to know how did you get on with this lens? AF performance & noise? How bad is breathing for video? Any quirks or character of note? I like experimenting and I’m looking to try a light and low-profile all-rounder to pair with R and metabones speedbooster... not for work, just for fun. Thanks for sharing 

Hey, it's actually a fun little lens, if you're not chasing speed. I used it at 5.6 for run and gun when I needed to get inconspicuous, quick shots in public to kinda match with my 28mm 1.8.

I shoot on a 5D3 with ML Raw, so I only have one-touch AF, but it seemed pretty fast and relatively quiet. Honestly, I don't remember how the breathing was, but most USM lenses, I've used, tend to breathe a little.

There wasn't any quirks of note. It vignetted a touch on the wide end. I tend to like lenses with character... hence the 28mm 1.8 and it's curvature, but the 24-85mm seemed a little flat and two-dimensional. Ken Rockwell's review of the lens is pretty spot on.

I bought a mint copy that came with the original box and the lens hood, which is supposedly rare? When I noticed I could double my money, I ended up selling it... not because I didn't like the lens, I just got what I needed from it and threw out a Buy it Now price that actually ended up tripling my money.

I posted this frame in another thread...

How do you like the R with the speedbooster?

[leslie]

ok so i know with a fish eye lens, tilting backwards or forwards gives an interesting visual effect. what i'm wondering is how a fish eye performs on a crane when it its raised or lowered. Is it the same effect or less obvious ?

[PaulUsher]

On 7/18/2020 at 11:30 PM, mercer said:

Hey, it's actually a fun little lens, if you're not chasing speed. I used it at 5.6 for run and gun when I needed to get inconspicuous, quick shots in public to kinda match with my 28mm 1.8.

I shoot on a 5D3 with ML Raw, so I only have one-touch AF, but it seemed pretty fast and relatively quiet. Honestly, I don't remember how the breathing was, but most USM lenses, I've used, tend to breathe a little.

There wasn't any quirks of note. It vignetted a touch on the wide end. I tend to like lenses with character... hence the 28mm 1.8 and it's curvature, but the 24-85mm seemed a little flat and two-dimensional. Ken Rockwell's review of the lens is pretty spot on.

I bought a mint copy that came with the original box and the lens hood, which is supposedly rare? When I noticed I could double my money, I ended up selling it... not because I didn't like the lens, I just got what I needed from it and threw out a Buy it Now price that actually ended up tripling my money.

I posted this frame in another thread...

How do you like the R with the speedbooster?

Hey Mercer, thanks for your detailed reply and reposting that image. I think it could be a goer, for the price it’s hardly a risk, but the dirt cheap copy I was looking at has gone. Inconspicuous is exactly what I’m after for personal / street stuff. You know how the bigger full frame standard zooms can draw attention. There’s that little RF 24-105 now but it’s f4-7.1 ... I’m down with the ‘f8 and be there’ philosophy for ENG, but it doesn’t excite me creatively. Speedbooster makes the 24-85 a more interesting 28-105 f2.5-3.2 approx. 

What’s great about the speedbooster though is being able to use it in ways you’re not supposed to. Like modding and mounting EF-S / APSC lenses - the 17-55 2.8 vignettes upto 22mm but you end up around 28-70 f2 equivalent - with IS. Or boosting lenses in FF mode (without engaging the crop) offers some characterful results for Academy/4:3 aspect ratios- I love the pillar boxed look for emulating 16mm or creating that Andrea Arnold vibe 😉 I can see the speedbooster being a nice creative option for the new R5/6 users.

[PannySVHS]

On 7/20/2020 at 2:40 AM, PaulUsher said:

I love the pillar boxed look for emulating 16mm or creating that Andrea Arnold vibe 😉 I can see the speedbooster being a nice creative option for the new R5/6 users.

Wow, I bought Fishtank years ago on DVD. And didnt keep the directors name in my head. Now, you putting it back in there. Thanks. What a cool forum this is. And what an awesome thread. Classic!