Leitz Hugo Lenses

I

Izod Foldger

Member

https://www.newsshooter.com/2022/09/06/leitz-hugo-prime-lenses/


Thoughts on the new Leitz Hugo lenses? Grug, what do you think?

I've been considering getting Supreme Primes but these look like a good alternative.

Supreme Prime Pros:
Been around longer and perhaps more in demand
Have a 15mm as widest lens (Leitz is 18mm at widest) (using primarily on Alexa 35, so not a full frame camera)
PL mount has compatibility with more cameras

Leitz pros:
60% the size and weight of Supremes
Leitz is perhaps considered better optically and with more character than Zeiss
Perhaps less chromatic aberration
21mm to 50mm are same size and weight
50mm can do T/1.0
Cheaper at $15k per lens vs $20k for Supremes


I gather they're based on m.08 glass, but I'm not clear if these are exactly the same but rehoused aside from the new focal lengths, or if there are differences from m.08.
 
Depending on how similar they are to the M’s, the only down side could be the way they work on some sensors with light falloff towards the edges.
 
Izod Foldger said:

https://www.newsshooter.com/2022/09/...-prime-lenses/

Thoughts on the new Leitz Hugo lenses? Grug, what do you think?

I've been considering getting Supreme Primes but these look like a good alternative.
Click to expand...

Just saw the news on these yesterday. Very excited for them! The M0.8s are gorgeous rendering lenses, but although I've tried them out in rental prep bays a few times, I've never ultimately been willing to subject my ACs to them.

There are very few spherical lenses that I find all that interesting, but these are one of them - they just seem to ride that line of image-quality vs. character really beautifully. DON'T expect them to be CA-free though!

The Supremes are really nice lenses, and I particularly love the cats-eye bokeh they make wide-open. But given a choice between the two, I'd probably lean towards the stronger mojo of Leitzes.

On S35mm, you'll lose the lovely edge falloff on both the Leitz and the Zeisses. And the Supremes seem to carry most of their mojo around the edges, so be aware they'll render a bit more clinically on S35mm than they do on full-frame.

I know that we're going to see some Speedboosted PL-lens mounts for the Alexa35 fairly soon. I'm not sure whether it's possible to fit a Speedbooster element into a shallower LPL-mount though (to get the full image-circle of these, on to an Alexa35 sensor).

Nonetheless I'm really looking forward to getting the Hugos on set.
 
At times i love the fall off, but when the camera is moving a lot on some low contrast scenes it can be distracting occasionally. Do speedboosters do anything for making the lenses more telecentric? not that you might want that.
 
Do you think it's better to use S35 lenses on the Alexa 35? It seems there's a conundrum now where the newer and "improved" lenses are all full frame, and then suddenly Arri gives S35 a renaissance leaving older S35 lenses available, and then the choice of which is better to use, the older S35 lenses or the newer full frame lenses. CVP did a video on it and suggested we'll likely see manufacturers come out with updated S35 lenses, particularly with LPL mount as the shorter flange can result in faster, smaller, and lighter lenses, though that could be a fair amount of time before they're available.

I already own Ultra primes, so I've been looking to add a faster set of lenses with around $100k-$120k for budget. For S35, that leaves Cooke S5i (kind of large and heavy), Master Primes, Zeiss superspeeds, or Leica Summilux-C (pricey), of which I'd lean towards Master Primes for S35, which would also match with my Ultras (which is good or bad, as could use them on the same shoot when wanting smaller and slower or larger and faster lenses, but then have less versatility in owning lens types). I'd also consider three Master Anamorphics, though I could get three Atlas Orions and a set of high end spherical for around the same price. I'd also consider perhaps three Cooke Panchro S35 lenses to go with say Master Primes (clinical) since it'd only be $35k to add them, though that doesn't help me with having a faster lens option, but they do look like good lenses with character at a lower price point than the other lenses mentioned.

Regarding the Leitz Hugos, the size, weight, Leitz look, and T/1.5 (as well as 1.0) make them compelling, so I suppose the question would be, are there better S35 choices and are full frame lenses on an S35 camera (fall off and other factors) enough of a concern to stick with S35 lenses? Would Summilux-C's give a better image on an S35 camera?

Are speedboosters appropriate for high end production or do they degrade image quality too much?
 
If you are looking for character, you could still add a set of Lomo Standard speeds. Currently highly under rated. Then you could still get the MP’s and not be wanting for much.
 
Izod Foldger said:
Do you think it's better to use S35 lenses on the Alexa 35? It seems there's a conundrum now where the newer and "improved" lenses are all full frame, and then suddenly Arri gives S35 a renaissance leaving older S35 lenses available, and then the choice of which is better to use, the older S35 lenses or the newer full frame lenses.
Click to expand...
Such a tough question.

i actually used to like the way s35 worked with some 30-40 year old stills lenses. And with how much more character CSPii/iii and Lomo Standard Speeds have than most FF35 glass, i stopped caring about fast or larger format lenses, or at least stopped worrying about the l@@k. I like having a workable dof personally, and with cameras doing iso3200 usable on the regular now, i am seeing less need for f1.0-f1.4 lenses, other than some creative choice. It’s a good time!
 
Last edited:
In the Newsshooter article:

”Existing M 0.8 lenses will be eligible for a conversion to HUGO lenses in the future.”
 
It warms my heart to see a discussion of lens character after the recent debate on dvxuser where mitch gross and Charles papert came out blasting in favor of one-lens-fits-all. I always thought that lens selection was one of the most fundamental decisions of filmmaking aesthetics
 
Izod Foldger said:
Do you think it's better to use S35 lenses on the Alexa 35? It seems there's a conundrum now where the newer and "improved" lenses are all full frame, and then suddenly Arri gives S35 a renaissance leaving older S35 lenses available, and then the choice of which is better to use, the older S35 lenses or the newer full frame lenses. CVP did a video on it and suggested we'll likely see manufacturers come out with updated S35 lenses, particularly with LPL mount as the shorter flange can result in faster, smaller, and lighter lenses, though that could be a fair amount of time before they're available.

I already own Ultra primes, so I've been looking to add a faster set of lenses with around $100k-$120k for budget. For S35, that leaves Cooke S5i (kind of large and heavy), Master Primes, Zeiss superspeeds, or Leica Summilux-C (pricey), of which I'd lean towards Master Primes for S35, which would also match with my Ultras (which is good or bad, as could use them on the same shoot when wanting smaller and slower or larger and faster lenses, but then have less versatility in owning lens types). I'd also consider three Master Anamorphics, though I could get three Atlas Orions and a set of high end spherical for around the same price. I'd also consider perhaps three Cooke Panchro S35 lenses to go with say Master Primes (clinical) since it'd only be $35k to add them, though that doesn't help me with having a faster lens option, but they do look like good lenses with character at a lower price point than the other lenses mentioned.

Regarding the Leitz Hugos, the size, weight, Leitz look, and T/1.5 (as well as 1.0) make them compelling, so I suppose the question would be, are there better S35 choices and are full frame lenses on an S35 camera (fall off and other factors) enough of a concern to stick with S35 lenses? Would Summilux-C's give a better image on an S35 camera?
Click to expand...

Since you already have Ultra Primes, which have a very clean, optical vibe. I'm not sure it makes a tonne of sense to add a similarly "clean" set (like the Summilux-Cs) if you're going to hold on to the UPs. Adding something with more obvious character (either anamorphic or funky sphericals) probably makes more sense.

Izod Foldger said:
Are speedboosters appropriate for high end production or do they degrade image quality too much?
Click to expand...

They're being used a lot at the moment to get 645 glass projected on to full-frame sensors, with the MILF and Venice. No reason to see there being an issue of doing the same on S35mm. Speedboosters generally IMPROVE optical performance, since you projecting the larger image circle, the MTF is going to be under less stress than just using the centre of the glass.

That said, using lenses with larger image circles on smaller formats, also cuts off the weaker optical performance of the corners - which could also be argued as a means to improving image quality.
 
Do those speedboosters increase flare susceptibility? That's the main difference I've observed when using speedboosters. But obviously they're not all created equally
 
ahalpert said:
Do those speedboosters increase flare susceptibility? That's the main difference I've observed when using speedboosters. But obviously they're not all created equally
Click to expand...

Any additional glass in front of or behind the lens is going to increase flare susceptibility. The quality of the flocking around the elements is the main thing that's going to control that (and good mattebox/flagging technique obviously).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top