AF-101 'on the set': some pics

Samyang 85mm is a good lens for video and it is a 'must have', in my opinion: it is cheap, fast, sharp and the mechanic is not bad and it is usable with follow focus. Furthermore it is very good for photo. A 35mm f1.4 has been announced at photokina last week and a 14mm f2.8 is already available. If you add the Panasonic 20 mm f1.7 pancake, an 50mm f1.4 lens like the Canon FD and a 135mm f2 lens you will have a set of fast prime lenses at an affordable price.

But what I am really waiting for is a cine style zoom at an affordable price: I hope that someone will make one
 
Dan_Kanes said:
How do you like the Samyang 85mm? Both Optically and mechnically?

I think if Samyang decided to make a set of Cinema/Video Optimized Lenses in a full range of lengths from 16 to 100 they would really be able to sell A TON. Imagine the dampening of a cinema lens, geared Focus and Iris, with a univeral back the like the CP2's, universal 80mm OD fronts with 77mm ID filter threads and under $1500/lens - boom - you have Red Pro Prime / CP2 killers.

How did chromatic aberation manifest itself among the different lenses on the sensor?

Thanks!
Click to expand...

Gary Senda said:
Samyang 85mm is a good lens for video and it is a 'must have', in my opinion: it is cheap, fast, sharp and the mechanic is not bad and it is usable with follow focus. Furthermore it is very good for photo. A 35mm f1.4 has been announced at photokina last week and a 14mm f2.8 is already available. If you add the Panasonic 20 mm f1.7 pancake, an 50mm f1.4 lens like the Canon FD and a 135mm f2 lens you will have a set of fast prime lenses at an affordable price.

But what I am really waiting for is a cine style zoom at an affordable price: I hope that someone will make one
Click to expand...

Go Samyang .....really !:thumbsup:
 
Gary Senda said:
But what I am really waiting for is a cine style zoom at an affordable price: I hope that someone will make one
Click to expand...

The only one who has the experience to pull this off would be Canon I guess.
But they seem to just like what´s going on right now: videoguys buying into pro-photo cameras and L-glass.
If the AF101 comes out this year, Canon will show a prototype new XL camera at NAB, and will deliver around August 2011- maybe along with a cinestyle manual lens we all could use...
 
bwhitz said:
Eyes lie, tests lie... That test said 7 stops Zacuto said 11... Who knows what to believe.

Do people honestly believe the 7D is only hitting 7 stops because of this test? That's absurd. If the 7D only had 7-8 stops it would look like a flip video camera. No offense to anyone, but I'll believe my eyes over all these stupid tests.
Click to expand...


Dude the 7d nor any other DSLR hits anywhere close to 10 or even 11 stops. quit dreaming the Red One barely does 11 stops you think 7d has the same dynamic range as the Red? you'll believe your eyes? come on man get real 7d shoots in STILLS mode at 9 to 10 stops, how do you figure it can have greater dynamic range in compressed video mode than in raw stills? LOL!
 
Samyang Video-DSLR 8 mm F3.5 adjusted to Follow Focus

Samyang Video-DSLR 8 mm F3.5 adjusted to Follow Focus

Gary Senda said:
Samyang 85mm is a good lens for video and it is a 'must have', in my opinion: it is cheap, fast, sharp and the mechanic is not bad and it is usable with follow focus. Furthermore it is very good for photo. A 35mm f1.4 has been announced at photokina last week and a 14mm f2.8 is already available. If you add the Panasonic 20 mm f1.7 pancake, an 50mm f1.4 lens like the Canon FD and a 135mm f2 lens you will have a set of fast prime lenses at an affordable price.

But what I am really waiting for is a cine style zoom at an affordable price: I hope that someone will make one
Click to expand...

http://www.samyang.pl/article,8,news?PHPSESSID=8d64bf08981f15f571dcf87d0aa2790a
 
I have the Bower 85mm F1.4 which people believe is the same as the Samyang. I've been pretty happy with it. One thing is for sure, I felt the focus throw was MUCH better than any Canon or Sigma I have. It was on par with some of my Nikon lenses.

Wish the 85mm Sigma would come out already. I want to compare it to the 30mm.
 
Homunculus said:
Dude the 7d nor any other DSLR hits anywhere close to 10 or even 11 stops. quit dreaming the Red One barely does 11 stops you think 7d has the same dynamic range as the Red? you'll believe your eyes? come on man get real 7d shoots in STILLS mode at 9 to 10 stops, how do you figure it can have greater dynamic range in compressed video mode than in raw stills? LOL!
Click to expand...

Are you serious? The reason DSLRs look so much like film isn't just the shallow DOF... it's something called contrast ratio. I don't know why people have such a hard time beliveing something like the 7D can hit 11 stops. The sensors that go into these cams are designed from the ground up (by engineers that are better than Red's) to look like film and have similar contrast, color, exposure range... ect. Exposing for a shot in stills mode is exactly the same in video mode. This is easily observable by setting up a shot in stills mode and then switching to video... The image is the same. The camera doesn't automatically lose the ability to see light just because of the mode it's in. The sensors "sees" X to Y amount of light regardless. Of couse, however, the Advantage of Raw is that you can brig out hidden areas of the image and fix exposure mistake... This is 'latitude' and yes compression does ruin most of that. Compression also destroys allot of the mid-tones of the image... but it doesn't effect the overall contrast of the image. I guess maybe, I should rephrase my statement to something like "the 7D has 11 stops of 'contrast range'" Since 'Dynamic' implies a full spectrum of mid-tones in between the stops, which obviously is crippled by compression.

http://www.vimeo.com/13762496

I haven't already, take a look at this video. This defiantly shows off how good the DSLRs can look in the right hands with proper exposure. If the 7D really only had 7 stops of dynamic range, the image would not look anything like it does in that video. If you can't see how similar the contrast range is to film and Red in that piece, then you're eyes just aren't suited for cinematography... or any visual art for that matter.

Red does a good job of fooling people into believing their cameras are made with some sort of magic. Really, they are just DSLR sensors strapped to a bigger processor and a really clever compression scheme. Their cameras are great for sure... but if anything, their overall sensor technology is probably behind Canon and Nikon still. They're ahead in digital cinema right now, but it's only because they hit a target that nobody else saw... Now that everyone else knows "what's up" the next few years are going to be pretty interesting...
 
bwhitz said:
Are you serious? The reason DSLRs look so much like film isn't just the shallow DOF... it's something called contrast ratio. I don't know why people have such a hard time beliveing something like the 7D can hit 11 stops. The sensors that go into these cams are designed from the ground up (by engineers that are better than Red's) to look like film and have similar contrast, color, exposure range... ect. Exposing for a shot in stills mode is exactly the same in video mode. This is easily observable by setting up a shot in stills mode and then switching to video... The image is the same. The camera doesn't automatically lose the ability to see light just because of the mode it's in. The sensors "sees" X to Y amount of light regardless. Of couse, however, the Advantage of Raw is that you can brig out hidden areas of the image and fix exposure mistake... This is 'latitude' and yes compression does ruin most of that. Compression also destroys allot of the mid-tones of the image... but it doesn't effect the overall contrast of the image. I guess maybe, I should rephrase my statement to something like "the 7D has 11 stops of 'contrast range'" Since 'Dynamic' implies a full spectrum of mid-tones in between the stops, which obviously is crippled by compression.

http://www.vimeo.com/13762496

I haven't already, take a look at this video. This defiantly shows off how good the DSLRs can look in the right hands with proper exposure. If the 7D really only had 7 stops of dynamic range, the image would not look anything like it does in that video. If you can't see how similar the contrast range is to film and Red in that piece, then you're eyes just aren't suited for cinematography... or any visual art for that matter.

Red does a good job of fooling people into believing their cameras are made with some sort of magic. Really, they are just DSLR sensors strapped to a bigger processor and a really clever compression scheme. Their cameras are great for sure... but if anything, their overall sensor technology is probably behind Canon and Nikon still. They're ahead in digital cinema right now, but it's only because they hit a target that nobody else saw... Now that everyone else knows "what's up" the next few years are going to be pretty interesting...
Click to expand...

It's not a DSLR sensor, it's a CMOS sensor that uses a Bayer pattern. DSLRS use other types of sensors as well. They've never claimed it to be anything other than what it was. And I VERY MUCH disagree that their sensor technology is behind Canons. Canon has worse rolling shutter, horrible aliasing/moire worse than ANY other CMOS sensor that is current, overheating problems, and I am sure there are more being left out.

In fact, their Epic cameras that are being used in real productions right now during their testing phase are absolutely amazing. 5K up to what was it 120fps? Canon can't even do 1080p at 60fps at the moment. In addition, without their new HDR stuff they were getting 13.5 stops of DR just like the Alexa?

Clearly they've shown that their technology is beyond Canon's at the moment.

Please, show me some tests from a Canon CMOS sensor that show 13 stops at 5k resolution at say even 24fps?
 
bwhitz said:
I don't know why people have such a hard time beliveing something like the 7D can hit 11 stops.
Click to expand...
Well, because it doesn't. It does 8.3 stops. That's what DPReview tested it at, that's what I tested it at, and that's what Art Adams tested the 5D at.
 
Barry_Green said:
Well, because it doesn't. It does 8.3 stops. That's what DPReview tested it at, that's what I tested it at, and that's what Art Adams tested the 5D at.
Click to expand...

And I'm not saying you or any of those other guys are wrong... I do believe on your tests it hit only 8.3 stops. However, other tests have shown 11 stops. Now the only logical explanation is that the tests that measured higher DR were staged vindictively to fuel a conspiracy bent on selling overpriced aluminum camera accessories... Or that dynamic range measures different results on different tests. I think I'm going to go with that latter.

All I know is that the cameras I've shot with... XH-A1, HPX 3000, ex-1, ect... are all supposed to be around 7-10 stops and they don't look anything like a film image... even the HPX with it's 2/3" sensor. So either your tests are correct and the 7D only has 8 stops... meaning that the tests for the other cams were BS and they're really only around 4-6 stops. Or that the tests used that register 8 stops, for some reason, measure the DR dynamic range differently and give a lower result.

Since Zacuto's "Shoot out" was the only test to actually show the back-light tests for an image from a film camera (13 stops) with an image from a DSLR (9-11 stops) in the same time and place (control variable), then logically and scientifically, I'm going to believe those results over other tests where only one camera was used at one point and time and then compared on a scale to the results from other tests performed in different and varied conditions.
 
bwhitz said:
However, other tests have shown 11 stops.
Click to expand...

Can you pass on a link please?

Now the only logical explanation is that the tests that measured higher DR were staged vindictively to fuel a conspiracy bent on selling overpriced aluminum camera accessories... Or that dynamic range measures different results on different tests. I think I'm going to go with that latter.
Click to expand...

...or that these other tests may have errors?
 
grimepoch said:
It's not a DSLR sensor, it's a CMOS sensor that uses a Bayer pattern. DSLRS use other types of sensors as well. They've never claimed it to be anything other than what it was. And I VERY MUCH disagree that their sensor technology is behind Canons.
Please, show me some tests from a Canon CMOS sensor that show 13 stops at 5k resolution at say even 24fps?
Click to expand...

Umm... DSLR sensors ARE cmos sensors that use bayer patterns. Red just has a lower pixle count and therefor better DR (at the moment). And just because a company doesn't have a product that measures up to Red's doesn't mean that their technology is behind. I'm sure if Canon dropped everything and built a dedicated cinema cameras, it would blow away Alexa and Epic. Why? Canon is bigger. They are an R&D powerhouse with revenue in more areas than just cameras. But Canon is in the business of staying in business and dropping everything to build a 120fps 5K cinema camera isn't exactly profitable for them simply because it would not be a consumer product. That's like saying Microsoft couldn't have made the ipod because they were behind in technology. Nope... In fact Apple was behind in the tech curve, but saw a product/market that others didn't and took it... just like Red. Unfortunately the pro-camera industry doesn't work the same. People arn't exactly running out and buying Red cameras for Christmas gifts.... which is why, surprise, the Scarlet isn't out yet! Red's business model is highly flawed... for many reasons, but mostly because, you can't make just one super camera that will never be obsolete and expect to generate consistent review for R&D. Eventually the market will be saturated and no one will need a Red camera anymore. Let's face it, consumers are not in the market for shooting 5k 96fps cinema grade images and for every "Pro" there are probably about 1 million consumers...

William_Robinette said:
Can you pass on a link please?



...or that these other tests may have errors?
Click to expand...

http://www.zacuto.com/shootout - episode one

Even if there are errors in the Zacuto test, it still showed film stock measuring at 13 stops and a DSLR measuring at 11 stops at the same time and place (something with other tests have not done, and are therefor are invalid), which means that just by the laws of f-ing logic... DSLRs are just generally 2-3 stops below film And since film is acceptably rated at 13-14 stops... that puts the 7D in the ball park of 10-11.
 
Last edited:
bwhitz said:
Umm... DSLR sensors ARE cmos sensors that use bayer patterns. Red just has a lower pixle count and therefor better DR (at the moment). And just because a company doesn't have a product that measures up to Red's doesn't mean that their technology is behind. I'm sure if Canon dropped everything and built a dedicated cinema cameras, it would blow away Alexa and Epic. Why? Canon is bigger. They are an R&D powerhouse with revenue in more areas than just cameras. But Canon is in the business of staying in business and dropping everything to build a 120fps 5K cinema camera isn't exactly profitable for them simply because it would not be a consumer product. That's like saying Microsoft couldn't have made the ipod because they were behind in technology. Nope... In fact Apple was behind in the tech curve, but saw a product/market that others didn't and took it... just like Red. Unfortunately the pro-camera industry doesn't work the same. People arn't exactly running out and buying Red cameras for Christmas gifts.... which is why, surprise, the Scarlet isn't out yet! Red's business model is highly flawed... for many reasons, but mostly because, you can't make just one super camera that will never be obsolete and expect to generate consistent review for R&D. Eventually the market will be saturated and no one will need a Red camera anymore. Let's face it, consumers are not in the market for shooting 5k 96fps cinema grade images and for every "Pro" there are probably about 1 million consumers...
Click to expand...

No, actually you are wrong, not all DSLR sensors are CMOS sensors with a Bayer pattern. The Leica S2 uses a Kodak CCD sensor. The Sigma SD15 uses a Fovean sensor which is VERY different than standard CMOS/Bayer pattern sensors.

There is SO MUCH MORE to DR than the size of the pixel. Why doesn't the 5D have a larger DR than the epic when it's pixel sizes are 8.2um and the Epic has a pixel size of 5.4um? Clearly, there is more to DR than just the size of the pixel. In fact, most of it comes down to the elimination of noise in the system as that is what takes away from the lower end.

Do you personally have inside information to Canon that you understand their R&D structure? Have you worked for companies that large and with their R&D departments and understand the principles of how they work? I have, with MANY huge companies equal to and larger than Canon, like Samsung for instance. These companies are NOT unified powerhouses, they are generally fragmented smaller businesses inside a larger umbrella business where the left hand constantly doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Didn't you hear that Canon recently merged groups together in their company? There is a reason for that because it is hard to align separate business entities.

Do you have personal insight into RED? You claim that their business model is flawed, yet I don't see them folding OR complaining about their business not working. Sure, they realigned themselves to not cater to the prosumer market, but that was an addition to their original plan which was the professional cinema market. How can you possibly make a judgement of their business model without an insight to their books? You can't.

I've been in the CMOS design world for 15 years. I've worked on chips in almost every imaginable type of equipment. I have the experience and position to tell you that from my standpoint, RED is ahead of the game in terms of technology with CMOS design compared to Canon on the market. If Canon has something better, and they could, because we just don't know, they've done NOTHING to prove to me that their technology is getting ANY better. Each camera they release, including now the 60D, continues to have the same problems as the 5D, 7D and T2I. While companies like Panasonic and Nikon are actually releasing improved cameras.

And I hate to break it to you but there were plenty of MP3 players before the iPod came out. Diamond Rio? It doesn't matter how much money you have, it's about understanding what it is that people want. The iPod gave the user a pleasant experience. Even the Wii is VASTLY inferior technology wise to the Playstation 3 and the Xbox 360 (which I worked on as well), and yet it was an absolute hot item because of how it interacted with people.

Canon doesn't have to have better technology to beat others in the market, they just have to anticipate what it is people want in a camera. Would you buy a camera for 1/4 the price if it only did 60fps instead of 120fps? It's what is important. Canon doesn't seem to listen much to what people want, whereas both Panasonic and RED seem to bend over backwards to listen. That's why I think the AF100 exists.

RED is not trying to sell to consumers, so your point has no relevance. They've already stated they are making cameras for professionals. You don't know what their revenue targets are or what their bottom line is. Just because they might not bring in the same profit amount as Canon doesn't mean they don't have the same profit margin. But really, NONE of that matters to me. Therefore Canon is targeting the consumer. They don't have to make anything more expensive since that is not their target audience. RED does, because they've got a higher standard to hit. They have the motivation.
 
bwhitz said:
And I'm not saying you or any of those other guys are wrong... I do believe on your tests it hit only 8.3 stops. However, other tests have shown 11 stops.
Click to expand...

Then those tests are flawed.

Period.

I have the 5d, 7d, and HPX-500 and have shot on RED as well as 16mm and 35mm film.

There is no way in hell that the 7d has 11 useable stops.

The 5d only has 10:

http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/aadams/story/canon_5d_how_much_dynamic_range_does_it_have_really/

So there is no way that the 7d, having a SMALLER sensor, has MORE.

8.5 is more realistic.
 
mcgeedigital said:
Then those tests are flawed.

Period.
Click to expand...

You're not in any position to make that call... Nobody really is as long as there are different tests showing different results.

We can all agree that film easily hits 13-14 stops right? So if the Zacuto test was accurate in that area... how can you say that when they measure the 7D at 11 stops that there all the sudden wrong? There has to be some truth to the findings if the control variable (film stock) measured correctly. If they found that film stock had 18 stops or something like that and then said the 7D had 11 stops... that would probably mean the test was crap.

You can't just say "Oh the one that is the lowest is correct... " That just makes you sound like you're pissed off and jealous.

BTW, the reason that the 7D might be showing better DR that the 5D is because of the gapless micro-lensing. Supposedly, they waste less light by focusing it into the photodiods...
 
Because the Zacuto test was about photo mode, which uses the entire sensor and doesn't throw out any pixel information.

It's not the same image between shooting full resolution and shooting in video. In video, a much smaller subset is used that includes pixel binning and some suspect line skipping. Whatever they are doing to reduce the data, it is reducing the DR between both modes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top