Free Canon EOS + Letus Elite or M2 & Live Lens or SGBlade and buy lenses?

G

groveChuck

U-matic Member
Ok, not free Canon lenses, they're my wife's.
I married her for her fine glass.
She's a still photog and has:
f1.4 50mm
f2.8 17-35mm
f2.8 24-70mm
f2.8 70-200mm
f2.8 300mm

All L series pro glass.
Sharp as a tack, edge to edge.
Have her blessing to use.

Free. Did I say that?

1st question: are 2.8s fast enough?

I have a DVX100B, looking to upgrade, possibly to the 170 soon.

I started looking at adaptors- reading, watching, reading, watching...

Was heading towards Letus Extreme, then Letus Elite:
Good edge to edge sharpness! Backfocus! Built in flip!
Sounds good!

Then I found out about the PITA dealing with EOS lenses:
Put it on the Canon body, preview DOF, remove, do a little dance (the EOS Shuffle), put it on the adaptor, put the SLR body away, repeat, repeat, repeat...
See if you can find a perfect aperture to leave the lens at.
Or use the limited usable range of iris +NDs.

Yikes! What a workflow!

I see Redrock M2 has a device called Live Lens that controls the EOS lens.
Anybody use it?
Plus I'd have to get a flip- more light loss, right?
And a bigger rig?
And do the EOS Shuffle.

Now a friend suggests I check out the SGBlade.
Less likely to see the spinning glass, more shutter/aperture flexibility, right?
But i'd have to get a flip.
And deal with the EOS Shuffle.

SO:
*Is the "free" glass worth it?
*Is 2.8 fast enough?
*Has anybody done the EOS Shuffle without going crazy?
*Especially shooting outside where the light may not be constant ,using NDs and iris?
*Anybody use the Redrock M2 Live Lens?
*Is the SGBlade better than the Letus Elite?
*Do the M2 or SGBlade have any backfocus problems?
*Is the M2 in the same league as the Elite and Blade?
*Buy used FD lenses? (if you can't tell, I'd rather not)
*Did I say free glass?
*Will this post ever end?

Yes... now

Next- hopefully info, answers, suggestions... and steps to the EOS Shuffle.

thanks,
Chuck
 
Last edited:
Letus bokeh isnt very filmic from vids ive seen,it has good light/sharpness probably cause ground glass is too transparent for light ,more light comes through and theres not enough diffusion to get nice bokeh like lets say SGPro or Blade.
You might say "its just blur ,it doesnt matter" ,but it matters ,its because of this blur we want adapters.
 
The idea of "good" or "filmic" bokeh has never made any sense to me since they're such objective terms. I've never had anybody point at the out of focus area of my image and say "Hey! That doesn't look like film!" I think a lot of people are getting hazy bokeh because they're always shooting wide open so DOF is just ridiculously shallow and then the background looks like crap. I shoot at f4 on the Extreme most of the time and I get very (IMO) nice bokeh rendition.

486806921_spobv-M.jpg

499818814_gZrru-M.jpg

499818625_yxPvA-M.jpg


groveChuck, you are one lucky man! Those are VERY nice glass and I would not hesitate to use them on an adapter. Realistically speaking, you're not gonna want to shoot wide open (for sharpness and bokeh rendition) so you're always gonna want to be stopped down at all times. I usually just set the iris at f4 on the SLR lens and just leave it. So the whole having to take the lens off isn't a big deal because you'll only have to do it once for each lens. With those lenses you're covered from wide to telephoto (and then some) so I don't see the point in spending money on other glass. Only thing I would say those is some of those lens (like the 70-200) is HEAVY and you're probably gonna need additional lens support, which will increase the size of your rig. If you're looking to go fast and light, zoom isn't the way to go, but those lenses are all performers and would be a very good choice for adapter use.
 
Sweet. You can use those same lenses on the 5D Mark II and probably the future Scarlet/Epic with an EOS mount. So the gift will keep on giving.

Now if only I could find a girl with a set of Red pro primes... Please PM me if you're out there, dinner's on me at Olive Gardens!
 
Huy, you use EOS lenses with the Extreme?

In those BEAUTIFUL grabs, you used a Canon body to set f4, then used what, NDs or iris to control your light?
What's your max iris/shutter? 5.6 & 1/125th?

Any isuess with the Extreme?
Backfocus?
If I go with Letus, I still may go for the Elite.

Thanks for the quick reply!
Chuck
 
Last edited:
groveChuck said:
Huy, you use EOS lenses with the Extreme?

In those BEAUTIFUL grabs, you used a Canon body to set f4, then used what, NDs or iris to control your light?
What's your max iris/shutter? 5.6 & 1/125th?

Any isuess with the Extreme?
Backfocus?
If I go with Letus, I still may go for the Elite.
Click to expand...

I use FD lenses, but I started out using cheap EF glass for a while, then decided that I could never afford the high-end glass and switched to FD.

In general, I find that I'm always shooting at the highest f-stop that I can, which is about f4-5.6. I would love to shoot at f8 but then the grain pattern becomes very obvious. I would just set the lens to f4 by default and use the stock lens and ND to control exposure.

No issue with the Extreme. I just got the optimized achromat with it and I'm very pleased with the edge to edge, even on my 24mm. If you get the Elite it already comes with an easy backfocus adjustment.
 
man, I'm going to need that MB some day.
looks really nice!

btw, you are shooting with the A1. I thought you don't need the optimazed achromate for the A1?
 
ryvac said:
btw, you are shooting with the A1. I thought you don't need the optimazed achromate for the A1?
Click to expand...

I chipped my old achromat so I decided to just go ahead and get the optimized achromat as a replacement. Hien at Letus gave me a great deal on one.
 
Alright guys, enough talk about the A1 and MB!
ryvac, I'm going to have to ask you to go to the A1/MB forum ;^)
I'm tryin' to stay, er... FOCUSED here.
In a shallow sort of way, of course! (ba-dump)

The topic here is a free, fine piece of glass, or 5 pieces of glass, and... coupling them with the adaptor that best fits.
Huy, you seem happy with your Extreme/FD setup- any backfocus issues ever?
And you sound like you'd be comfortable setting an EOS at f4 and staying there?

Where'd you get your FDs?

I'm still wondering if the M2E is as sharp as the Extreme/Elite, and if the SGBlade is better than the Letus? (Sorry Timur, not "better", but uh... higher quality?)

And anybody use M2 Live Lens???

thanks guys,
Chuck
 
I'd sell one of those L lenses and buy a full set of FD's. EF lenses are a pain to focus on because of that tiny focus mark window and the fact that the focus barrel can pass the focus range completely screwing up your focus marks.. FD's are so much more easier to use. Mechanically, amongst the usual choices, FD's function closest to cinema lenses in that it focuses the correct direction and has manual aperture control.
 
The Extreme doesn't have a backfocus adjustment feature so I can't be sure if my backfocus is set correctly; it's probably not. It doesn't really affect anything as I focus by eye and not by a tape measurer. The Elite has a focus ring so you can set backfocus to your heart's content.

I'm very happy with using FD lenses. I've put together quite a nice set of primes for just under $700; with EF glass I would have had to spend 4-5 times that which I why I envy you :). I get all my FD glass at keh.com.

After a lot of research on lenses, I'm pretty much convinced that faster doesn't always mean better. A lot of faster lens actually performs worse than their slower counterpart (i.e the EF 70-200 f2.8 is actually not as sharp as the f4 version). The faster lenses tend to not perform that well wide open, they'll just get you that extra bit of light when you need it. With photography, sometimes you just need that bit of light to take the shot; but with film, most DP worth his salt would stop down the lens and bring in more lights to compensate for best results. My FD 85mm goes as low as f1.2, but I've never shot anything at that iris except for testing purposes. All my lenses remains at f4 pretty much all the time (I would leave them at f8 for even deeper DOF except the Letus limits me to f4). If I was using all EF glass, I would stop them down just the same so I don't see a lot of problems as far as doing the SLR body trick.

Just to show how stopping down affects bokeh rendition, here are some side by side comparisons on my 85mm between f1.2 and f4. All the ones at f1.2 has horrible, hazy bokeh, lack of sharpness and contrast go to hell. The ones at f4 show a very nice bokeh IMO.

f1.2
478008039_3ycev-L.jpg


f4
478007957_Hgqrr-L.jpg


f1.2
499825102_XbA3G-L.jpg


f4
499824059_Xpj6S-L.jpg
 
Crap, what am I talkin about, Canon EF L lenses images are beautiful and may be worth the hassel, especially if you get yourself a solid follow focus(i'd go cinevate) and the RREncore is supposed to come out with an EF controller..
 
Huy Vu said:
The idea of "good" or "filmic" bokeh has never made any sense to me since they're such objective terms. I've never had anybody point at the out of focus area of my image and say "Hey! That doesn't look like film!" I think a lot of people are getting hazy bokeh because they're always shooting wide open so DOF is just ridiculously shallow and then the background looks like crap. I shoot at f4 on the Extreme most of the time and I get very (IMO) nice bokeh rendition.
Click to expand...

Interesting... My experience is very different - the hazy bokeh is especially apparent on the areas that are only slightly out of focus. When shooting wide open (and long focal length) the background is usually blurred so much that the haziness becomes much less visible.
I have Letus Economy (which is said to be optically equivalent to LEX) and SGBLADE (both on HMC151) but have been using only the latter since I got it. Initially I had to use RR1 to finish the feature I started with Letus (to 'emulate' Letus image rendering) but it proved to be so much better at all areas that I found it difficult to match the footage. Now I use RR2 only. All I can say is that I can definitely tell the difference in the bokeh rendition. To me the difference is enormous, but I'm kinda crazy about smooth bokeh - I realize some people are more sensitive to other image properties.
With non-flip tube I experience extremely little (if any) chromatic aberration and excellent e2e sharpness regardless of the camera lens aperture (so I can open it all the way up to let more light through). This was not possible with my Letus. What's also great about non-flip tube is that I don't have to zoom in too far to focus on the gg, so my camera lens stays at f1.7, I guess. As a result, even though RR2 loses 1.5 stops, it is still faster than my Letus, which required zooming in further and stopping the camera lens to ~f4.0 to improve e2e.
I learnt to live with flipped footage. I can deal with it in post. Working in ProRes I can even afford to 'unflip' and reencode (export) the clips without visible quality loss.

groveChuck, you are one lucky man! Those are VERY nice glass and I would not hesitate to use them on an adapter. Realistically speaking, you're not gonna want to shoot wide open (for sharpness and bokeh rendition) so you're always gonna want to be stopped down at all times.
Click to expand...

Yeah, great lenses! Speaking about DOF and overall look, at f2.8 you should be fine with day interior shots (not to mention day exteriors which are ok at f4.0-f5.6). Of course, the rules are there to be broken and you might like the very shallow DOF f1.4 offers for some psycho shots etc. Night shots (when there's usually not much to be seen in the background) could benefit from fast primes, too.
However, the problem with the adapters is their light loss. Overall light loss is usually higher than the number printed in the adapter specification. So, unless you can afford serious lighting setup, you might be FORCED to stop down further or add gain to get proper exposure... Some people say they can add 6dB gain without excessive noise, but it's either not true or my 151 is a lemon - it's quite noisy at all gamma settings (and detail coring doesn't help much)...
 
Last edited:
My take on it is that all too often 35mm adapter users like to shoot wide open for that ridiculously background out of focus look. When you look at movies at are shot on film, only rarely is the background that blurred. It's actually very distracting when that happens because then your eyes can't tell what it is that it's looking at. In my last film I worked with the Letus Ultimate and I noticed that the bokeh rendition were so much more pleasing, more "smooth" for some reason even though I'm using the same lens as on my Extreme. Then I realized that a huge part of it is that I was able to shoot at f8 for most of the film, which resulted in a nicely defocused background without any of the blooming effect I see at lower f-stop. If I were to buy a Blade it would be for its ability to stop down further and not so much for the subjective "bokeh" rendition. The only way I'll be convinced that actually makes a difference is if there's a blind selection test between all of the adapters; until then it's just some undefined quality that 99% of the people watching won't give a crap about.
 
Huy Vu said:
My take on it is that all too often 35mm adapter users like to shoot wide open for that ridiculously background out of focus look. When you look at movies at are shot on film, only rarely is the background that blurred. It's actually very distracting when that happens because then your eyes can't tell what it is that it's looking at. In my last film I worked with the Letus Ultimate and I noticed that the bokeh rendition were so much more pleasing, more "smooth" for some reason even though I'm using the same lens as on my Extreme. Then I realized that a huge part of it is that I was able to shoot at f8 for most of the film, which resulted in a nicely defocused background without any of the blooming effect I see at lower f-stop. If I were to buy a Blade it would be for its ability to stop down further and not so much for the subjective "bokeh" rendition. The only way I'll be convinced that actually makes a difference is if there's a blind selection test between all of the adapters; until then it's just some undefined quality that 99% of the people watching won't give a crap about.
Click to expand...

I totally agree about the extremely shallow DOF. If I could I would shoot f4-f5,6 on the taking lens and also the HVX. Lenses are usually sharper 2 to 3 f stops from fully open.

A lens like the 50mm f1.4 is perfect at 2.8 or f4.0 A lens that has a maximum f2.8 is usually best at 5,6 to f8.0.

That doesn't mean that there are great lenses out there like my old Nikon 80-200 f2.8

Enjoy /Volumes/HITASHI 1TB 4 NEW 042009/CACC Fashion Show/Pics/Fashion 1.tif

I had to use it fully open last night for a fashion show because that was all the light that they had and it look beautiful, but it was hard to follow focus.

Enjoy
 

Attachments

  • Fashion-1.jpg
    Fashion-1.jpg
    59.4 KB · Views: 0
  • Fashion-2.jpg
    Fashion-2.jpg
    51.9 KB · Views: 0
  • Fashion-3.jpg
    Fashion-3.jpg
    105.1 KB · Views: 0
  • Fashion-4.jpg
    Fashion-4.jpg
    37.5 KB · Views: 0
  • Fashion-5.jpg
    Fashion-5.jpg
    51.4 KB · Views: 0
  • Fashion-6.jpg
    Fashion-6.jpg
    68.6 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
astigmatic- Thanks! First you say sell an EF and buy FDs, then you say keep the EFs!
Adding FURTHER confusion to an already confused shooter! lol!
Yeah, RR's supposed to have the Live Lens for controlling EF lenses, but I can't find anyone who's used it.

That's one of my problems, I can see the benefits to both: easier to work with the FD, nice quality of the EF (plus they're mine to use!)

I think the EF L series is sharp enough I could shoot at f2.8 with no problem, or stop down to f4 for more DoF. I guess it just makes me feel weird that I wouldn't be able to easily (key word perhaps?) tweak the aperture a half stop if needed, but I guess I could do that on the camera's iris if necessary, as long as it wasn't at, what's the max- 5.6?

trez- you're used to not having flip, I don't think I want to go that route, in the field or in post.
But do you think the bigest advantage of the blade over Letus is the bokeh?
Anything else, like wider range of camera shutter speeds or iris?
Does your Letus have the old ground glass or the new which is supposed to have better e2e?
What's RR2? Red Rock?

Huy- again, thanks for the gorgeous grabs!
$700 for a set of prime FDs?
Maybe I should stop worrying about working with EFs and get the FDs.

And Douglas, I'm not shallow DoF obsessed, just shallower than video, and with that ""organic" look.
Nice stills!
80-200 f2.8 wide open?
What monitor do you use?
It must have been really tricky follow focusing down the runway!

I guess I should have said I'm not doing narrative; more corporate, concert production.
I'm thinking, especially in a live situation like a concert, it could be tricky not only on EF aperture, but focus could be more difficult?
Can you use follow focus on EF?

But I guess what I'm looking for in an adaptor is:
low light loss
e2e sharpness
nice bokeh (but I can't say I'm bokeh obsessed... at least not yet!)
that organic look
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top