HVX fixer for LEX available now

[Ryan E. Walters]

Thank you Ryan for the tests!
What detail settings did you use?

Arno

All of the testing that I do uses the Scene file setting that I have set up for tests. You can download my settings from my resource page on my site. In short, I keep everything at zero, and use a B-Press Gamma. (These are not the settings that I shoot with, but rater a clean slate from which to compare stills from.)

 

[KeeganFlynn]

It's been my impression, as well as some others' here, that the Canon XH-A1 and XL-H1 looked just fine edge-to-edge right out of the box with the LEX. I don't think you'll need a fixer for them and I don't think Letus plans to offer one (I could be wrong). Some of us have theorized that the LEX was developed on Canon cameras. Dunno...

The HVX/LEX combos (at least the ones I've seen, including mine) definitely need some fixin', so you might want to have both the stock achromat and the HVX-specific one to be covered. I don't know yet how friendly the achromat swapping procedure is though. Hopefully it's not too inconvenient to do from time to time.

I'm not worried about problems with the stock achromat and an A1 (Steven Dempsey's stuff assured me of that)

I was just wondering if it's possible to go with this HVX-specific achromat when the LEX is hooked up to an A1. I'd prefer not to have to switch between achromats, or have to pay full price for the HVX-specific one.

 

[AwakenedFilms]

Letus HVX optimization

Letus HVX optimization

Does anyone have side-by-side moving footage comparisons of the 'old' achromatte and the 'optimized' one?

Still not convinced, but want to make the right decision on whether to upgrade.

Thanks - Jason

 

[Luis Caffesse]

I'd be interested to see that too.

My Extreme has some edge to edge softness issues - I'm curious if this add on would alleviate that.
Though honestly I can't help but think it should be sharp as is.

 

[Kholi]

I wonder how much the edge sharpness issues in all adapters are prevalent with Cinema Glass? Just a question. I guess I might have to go do some sort of chart testing soon.

Just another reason why the 200A and 170 will rock. Faster you get get the setup, the easier it is to hit the sweet spots with these contraptions.

 

[AwakenedFilms]

I have placed an order for the HVX optimization kit and will post comparison footage of the old achrmatte versus the new one, once it arrives. Does anyone have any request of what types of moving footage you would like to see (rez charts, full sun outdoor, tungsten interview, fast moving objects...etc)?

j

 

[Luis Caffesse]

I'd love to see either a focus or res chart - basically anything flat that will show the edge to edge sharpness.

 

[AwakenedFilms]

HVX old vs. new achromatte comparison Grabs

HVX old vs. new achromatte comparison Grabs

Hey all, Below are a few comparison grabs of the old vs new achromatte for the LetusEx and HVX200. Grabs were exported at TIFFs, Aspect corrected in Photoshop and saved as jpgs (size10). Intentionally no color correction, gamma correction or sharpening was applied outside of camera (yes, they are not pretty).

Lighting: 1.2k diffused tungsten source

Charts: 300dpi laser jet printed on 8.5x11 paper

Zoom: 'Academy' framing 27.7 OLD, 28.1 NEW

Focus: HVX=3.02ft OLD, HVX=2.99ft NEW

Lens: 50mm 1.4 NIKKOR focused with tape measure @ 2', f-stop=5.6

Camera Settings: White Balance 3.2k, 720 24pn, F-stop=4.8, detail=+4, VDetail=+3, Coring=+2, Chroma=+1, Color Temp=+2, MAster Ped=-4, Gamma=B.press, Knee=Mid, Matrix=Cinelike

To be completely honest, I have not seen a huge jump in resolution as far as Edge to Edge sharpness is concerned. I did other framing, aperature settings and lens configuration tests... The obvious variations ended up being the same with both achromattes: softer resolution at f2.8 and below and color temperature shift towards orange/yellow as the lenses were stopped down. I also did some moving footage tests. Nothing jumped out as a big difference. I'll post a link later with a short clip of moving footage of the charts

New achromatte does allow the HVX to zoom a little less, but in my case it allowed for less 'tweaking' as far as centering the image and therefore I ended up having to zoom a little more.

I still have the old achromatte, but am headed to the Carribbean for a wedding shoot. If there is feedback for more tests, I may be persuaded to wait on sending it back...

Jason

 

[puredrifting]

Hey all, Below are a few comparison grabs of the old vs new achromatte for the LetusEx and HVX200. Grabs were exported at TIFFs, Aspect corrected in Photoshop and saved as jpgs (size10). Intentionally no color correction, gamma correction or sharpening was applied outside of camera (yes, they are not pretty).

Lighting: 1.2k diffused tungsten source

Charts: 300dpi laser jet printed on 8.5x11 paper

Zoom: 'Academy' framing 27.7 OLD, 28.1 NEW

Focus: HVX=3.02ft OLD, HVX=2.99ft NEW

Lens: 50mm 1.4 NIKKOR focused with tape measure @ 2', f-stop=5.6

Camera Settings: White Balance 3.2k, 720 24pn, F-stop=4.8, detail=+4, VDetail=+3, Coring=+2, Chroma=+1, Color Temp=+2, MAster Ped=-4, Gamma=B.press, Knee=Mid, Matrix=Cinelike

To be completely honest, I have not seen a huge jump in resolution as far as Edge to Edge sharpness is concerned. I did other framing, aperature settings and lens configuration tests... The obvious variations ended up being the same with both achromattes: softer resolution at f2.8 and below and color temperature shift towards orange/yellow as the lenses were stopped down. I also did some moving footage tests. Nothing jumped out as a big difference. I'll post a link later with a short clip of moving footage of the charts

New achromatte does allow the HVX to zoom a little less, but in my case it allowed for less 'tweaking' as far as centering the image and therefore I ended up having to zoom a little more.

I still have the old achromatte, but am headed to the Carribbean for a wedding shoot. If there is feedback for more tests, I may be persuaded to wait on sending it back...

Jason

Hi Jason:

I just shot all day and am really bushed and perhaps I overlooked it, but which set is which? I am guessing the ones on the left are the original achromat and the ones on the right are the new one? If so, i think I see a difference on your resolution chart, favoring the one on the right with about an extra 100 lines of resolution?

Dan

 

[Kholi]

Actually, you may not see a massive difference if you're shooting with the lens stop at 5.6 and the camera stopped down. A lot of people are referring to the edge softness when wide open or using wider lenses.

Try opening wide open and comparing the two, although that's a really tedious test and not fun at all. I say just shoot.

 

[AwakenedFilms]

Hi Dan and Kholi,
The pics to the left are the OLD ACHROMATTE. I have plenty of grabs on my HDD of Nikkors at f1.4/2.8 and f11, with a 50mm @ 2', 24mm @ 1' and 135mm @ 5'. I didn't see as much difference as I was hoping for on those either. If I have a chance, I'll upload some more later.

J

 

[Ted Spencer]

These results are very different from what I see in mine. The two images you have here are for all intents and purposes identical, and neither shows much edge softness. But as Kholi pointed out, wide open is the best way to test these things (though I know you did say you tried it).

Then there's the fact that the chart is very small (8.5 x 11"). Maybe this is the key, because to fill the frame you'd have to be quite close. At such close proximity the distance from the lens to the middle of the chart is substantially shorter than the distance to the edges (at least as a percentage of total field depth). It seems to me that this could be the problem - it might actually lessen the edge softness problem by effectively creating a "favorably inconsistent" focus plane.

In the (admittedly informal) test I did I shot a piano at a distance of about 5 feet, with the keyboard filling the entire frame. I had both the camera and the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 wide open. I'd say edge softness improved by a factor of 80-90% with the new achromat and spacer ring. Still not perfect, but *much* better.

Even if only informally (like I did) I'd suggest you try something more like that. Wide open apertures and at least several feet from the subject.

One last thought since your shots do all look very good e2e: did you notice much edge softness in your use of the camera/LEX previously? Who knows - maybe you've got a lucky HVX that's just fine with the stock achromat. I've yet to see one of those, but I suppose they might exist : )

 

[AwakenedFilms]

Hi Ted,
I also found the E2E sharpness lacking on the original achromatte. Maybe not as poor as yours was, but its a hard call as some of this is subjective. I'll try an do some more tests before sending the old one back, though I leave the country tonight for a week or so.

That being said I am glad I did the tests and will probably be glad I upgraded the more I shoot with it.


Here are more examples of charts @ wide open (you will notice the 3.2k preset is much better in the wide open than at f5.6 and even worse at f11). Below are a few more comparison grabs of the old vs new achromatte for the LetusEx and HVX200. Grabs were exported at TIFFs, Aspect corrected in Photoshop and saved as jpgs (size10). Intentionally no color correction, gamma correction or sharpening was applied outside of camera (yes, they are not pretty).

Lighting: 1.2k diffused tungsten source

Charts: 300dpi laser jet printed on 8.5x11 paper

Zoom: 'Academy' framing 27.7 OLD, 28.1 NEW

Focus: HVX=3.02ft OLD, HVX=2.99ft NEW

Lens: 50mm 1.4 NIKKOR focused with tape measure @ 2', f-stop=1.4, 24mm Nikkor focused with tape measure @ 1', f-stop=2.8, 135mm Nikkor focused with tape measure @ 5', f-stop=2.8

Camera Settings: White Balance 3.2k, 720 24pn, F-stop=8.0, detail=+4, VDetail=+3, Coring=+2, Chroma=+1, Color Temp=+2, MAster Ped=-4, Gamma=B.press, Knee=Mid, Matrix=Cinelike

(When you open the pic, the title should tell you old.jpeg or new.jpeg)

J

 

[AwakenedFilms]

Even more comparison grabs of the old vs new achromatte for the LetusEx and HVX200. Grabs were exported at TIFFs, Aspect corrected in Photoshop and saved as jpgs (size10). Intentionally no color correction, gamma correction or sharpening was applied outside of camera (yes, they are not pretty).

Lighting: 1.2k diffused tungsten source

Charts: 300dpi laser jet printed on 8.5x11 paper

Zoom: 'Academy' framing 27.7 OLD, 28.1 NEW

Focus: HVX=3.02ft OLD, HVX=2.99ft NEW

Lens: 50mm 1.4 NIKKOR focused with tape measure @ 2', f-stop=1.4, 24mm Nikkor focused with tape measure @ 1', f-stop=2.8, 135mm Nikkor focused with tape measure @ 5', f-stop=2.8

Camera Settings: White Balance 3.2k, 720 24pn, F-stop=8.0, detail=+4, VDetail=+3, Coring=+2, Chroma=+1, Color Temp=+2, MAster Ped=-4, Gamma=B.press, Knee=Mid, Matrix=Cinelike

(When you open the pic, the title should tell you old.jpeg or new.jpeg)

J

 

[Tim Naylor]

Even more comparison grabs of the old vs new achromatte for the LetusEx and HVX200. Grabs were exported at TIFFs, Aspect corrected in Photoshop and saved as jpgs (size10). Intentionally no color correction, gamma correction or sharpening was applied outside of camera (yes, they are not pretty).

Lighting: 1.2k diffused tungsten source

Charts: 300dpi laser jet printed on 8.5x11 paper

Zoom: 'Academy' framing 27.7 OLD, 28.1 NEW

Focus: HVX=3.02ft OLD, HVX=2.99ft NEW

Lens: 50mm 1.4 NIKKOR focused with tape measure @ 2', f-stop=1.4, 24mm Nikkor focused with tape measure @ 1', f-stop=2.8, 135mm Nikkor focused with tape measure @ 5', f-stop=2.8

Camera Settings: White Balance 3.2k, 720 24pn, F-stop=8.0, detail=+4, VDetail=+3, Coring=+2, Chroma=+1, Color Temp=+2, MAster Ped=-4, Gamma=B.press, Knee=Mid, Matrix=Cinelike

(When you open the pic, the title should tell you old.jpeg or new.jpeg)

J

Cool pics. How do I figure out what pic corresponds to what?

 

[AwakenedFilms]

top left is 24mm f2.8 old, top right is 24mm f2.8 new, bottom left is 135mm f2.8 old, bottom right is 132mm f2.8 new...

Should be able to see the title when clicked (title is something like: 135mm f2_8, HVX f8 old.jpeg)