F5: F5 /F55 amd Cabrio Lens

B

Backfocus92

Active member
For those that have bought or used the newer cameras has anyone used it with the Fujinon Cabrio Lens yet. I hear different things from different people as to if this lens will shoot 4K without vignetting. However I have seen it on a Red cameras, but they could be shooting 2K as well. I have used this lens on my F3 and am considering buying one, but as I look to upgrade to the F55 later in the year I don't want to be looking at a new lens that won't handle the resolution. I have read and heard a few places that it is fine for HD and 2K, but will vignette on higher resolutions. Just looking for actual conformation.
 
Thanks for confirming. I am not sure why they said it did not in a few articles I read. Since it is new, one would think it would be made for it. This is why I like real life experience over articles.
 
I spoke to a Fujinon sales rep who assured me of its coverage of 4k, even 5k, but said with 5k it could be a bit soft around the edges but generally not an issue. I have some sample clips I shot on the F55 with this lens and it looks absolutely beautiful. Unfortunately I am not permitted to post them.,, but man I wish I could.
 
I read a review of the Cabrio in the February issue of HD Video Pro magazine. In the review they state that "The T2.9 lens can cover a 31.5mm sensor size, but note that the PL 19-90mm will resolve above 2K, but it's not a 4K lens. ( Fujinon's Premier PL 4K+ lenses can achieve 4K and above.)"

At $38,000 I would really want to be sure this lens can do what I need it to do!
 
davegoulding said:
I read a review of the Cabrio in the February issue of HD Video Pro magazine. In the review they state that "The T2.9 lens can cover a 31.5mm sensor size, but note that the PL 19-90mm will resolve above 2K, but it's not a 4K lens. ( Fujinon's Premier PL 4K+ lenses can achieve 4K and above.)"

At $38,000 I would really want to be sure this lens can do what I need it to do!
Click to expand...

That is absurd... what does that even mean? Not a 4k lens? HD Video Pro is a magazine I stopped reading a decade ago. They are obviously full of s*%t throwing around statements like that. I will admit, the Fuji Primier lenses are likely the best zooms today, and they will certainly out perform the Cabrio, but they are also twice the length, three times the weight and 1.5x the price.

The cabrio is an amazing lens when you consider it's under 5lbs and has the greatest focal range of any light weight zoom ever made. Obviously if you're going to make a lens that small and light with such a fast aperture and at 19-90mm, it won't be as superior as a $60,000 studio sized zoom.

But that aside, labeling the cabrio as being a 2k lens versus 4k lens is careless retardedness. If they want to be grown ups about it they can relay some MTF chart findings or something. It's infuriating to me to hear a magazine with some sort of influence act like they know what they are talking about. Even well maintained cinema lenses from the 1960's and 1970's can outresolve that. If that is a direct quote they are horribly misinformed.
 
Last edited:
davegoulding said:
It is in fact a direct quote from the magazine.
Click to expand...

All I can say is that the only logic they stated which is correct is the fact the Primier studio zooms will likely out-perform the Cabrio, but don't expect night and day. However, to say the other Primier studio zooms are a 4k lens and the Cabrio is a 2k lens, is using an undefinable scale. 2k and 4k are resolutions, not necessarily a unit of measurement for a lens's performance. Lenses can be generally measured by line-pair/mm and MTF.

As far as I know, using resolution rhetoric to define a lens is marketing 100%.

This lens is 4k ready! This lens is 2k!, what does that mean?! When you see that in a lens description, it's marketing all the way. They need to grow up and use actual facts to make their claims. Like an actual number that actually reflects a lens's performance.
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
This lens is 4k ready! This lens is 2k!, what does that mean?! When you see that in a lens description, it's marketing all the way.
Click to expand...

Well, I understand some marketing points get under people's skin, but it's a simplification I can live with. I agree though more info is better.

I assume it just means somebody did the math on lp/mm measurements vs individual pixel sizes on a S35 sized sensor and found the lens(es) lacking.

Somebody else has been proclaiming the Aluras are "not 4K lenses" as well. I suspect a LOT of PL lenses out there are not resolving to whatever lp/mm benchmark is "correct" for a S35 sensor with ~8MP.
 
Nate Weaver said:
I assume it just means somebody did the math on lp/mm measurements vs individual pixel sizes on a S35 sized sensor and found the lens(es) lacking.
Click to expand...

Well, if that is so, that somebody sure went through a lot of exacting math, testing and effort to simply reduce his findings to immeasurable units of blah.

Seem's if the math was truly done, they'd have used the math and not a generalized irrelevant system. My .02.

I don't even think there are standards to which MTF numbers or lp/mm results would ever be deemed 4k or 2k ready. I mean, say they DID have a lp/mm number for us, what then? I don't think even then there is a standard that uses resolution the way marketing does. We can take MTF and lp/mm and we can compare which lens is sharper and what is not as sharp, but I'm not sure this ever truly translates to the resolution ranking system I'm arguing against. Seems to me it's just a really bad way of thinking about it because it never makes sense.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top