Tim Naylor
Veteran
Where did you buy your lomos? RAF is always sold out. Any leads?
Letus Extreme - Lomo test footage
- Thread starter IanD
- Start date
IanD
Well-known member
Hey Tim,
I've been collecting the Lomos for about 5 years and they are getting very scarce these days. I got some from Raf, some from Realrus and Russianmarket on Ebay and others from private sellers. I would contact Raf and tell him what your looking for and he'll keep his eyes open if any lenses pop up. I've always had great interactions with him in the past and trust him implicitly.
You can also post on the Konvas cinema group user list. A fair bit of gear is exchanged between the members there, myself included.
http://konvas.org/mailman/listinfo/cinema_konvas.org
Regarding the falloff in the shot with the 18mm, that's due to the CCD offset in my HVX which the Lex can't seem to compensate for. That's just the very edge of the image circle. If I zoom in a bit more it goes away but I lose too much fov. I'm hoping the Letus folks can come up with an adjustment to perfectly align the adapter with the CCD block. Otherwise I'm very happy with the edge to edge sharpness of the LEX, especially with the longer lenses.
I've been collecting the Lomos for about 5 years and they are getting very scarce these days. I got some from Raf, some from Realrus and Russianmarket on Ebay and others from private sellers. I would contact Raf and tell him what your looking for and he'll keep his eyes open if any lenses pop up. I've always had great interactions with him in the past and trust him implicitly.
You can also post on the Konvas cinema group user list. A fair bit of gear is exchanged between the members there, myself included.
http://konvas.org/mailman/listinfo/cinema_konvas.org
Regarding the falloff in the shot with the 18mm, that's due to the CCD offset in my HVX which the Lex can't seem to compensate for. That's just the very edge of the image circle. If I zoom in a bit more it goes away but I lose too much fov. I'm hoping the Letus folks can come up with an adjustment to perfectly align the adapter with the CCD block. Otherwise I'm very happy with the edge to edge sharpness of the LEX, especially with the longer lenses.
Last edited:
cardmaverick
Well-known member
I was JUST looking at potentially buying a set of LOMO anamorphics and an SGPro for my Andromeda camera today... man, those LOMO's are nice.
In my opinion it looks quite soft. It looks nice but really not that sharp. It has a nice 70's soft look to it. Are your Lomos from the 1970's?
I wonder if this is because of the hi-speed Lomos, which I heard are quite soft, specially in comparison to the normal speed Lomos, or if it's because of the HVX200 low rez chips. I know it's not the Letus Extreme as I have razor sharp images from it and a EX1 with Nikon lenses.
I wonder if this is because of the hi-speed Lomos, which I heard are quite soft, specially in comparison to the normal speed Lomos, or if it's because of the HVX200 low rez chips. I know it's not the Letus Extreme as I have razor sharp images from it and a EX1 with Nikon lenses.
IanD
Well-known member
Soft? Not really sure what you think you're seeing. Of course putting any lenses on a 35mm adapter in front of a HVX isn't a good way to evaluate sharpness and resolution, but these lenses easily outresolve the HVX chips.
These Lomos are the high speed variants from the late 80's and are plenty sharp- especially on film where I've intercut them seamlessly with Mk3 Zeiss superspeeds.
The main difference is the Zeiss primes have a bit more contrast especially wide open. In regards to the standard vs high speed Lomo lenses my experience has been that the standards are only sharper at T8 and above which makes sense since the high speeds are optimized for T5.6 and lower.
What you're noting may be the difference between the EX1 and the HVX or perhaps you're used to the detail cranked up in camera to add sharpness. My HVX detail is 0.
Anyway these lenses work fine for me. In my own less than scientific tests they equaled if not exceeded my Zeiss Contax primes in resolution. For whatever that's worth.....
These Lomos are the high speed variants from the late 80's and are plenty sharp- especially on film where I've intercut them seamlessly with Mk3 Zeiss superspeeds.
The main difference is the Zeiss primes have a bit more contrast especially wide open. In regards to the standard vs high speed Lomo lenses my experience has been that the standards are only sharper at T8 and above which makes sense since the high speeds are optimized for T5.6 and lower.
What you're noting may be the difference between the EX1 and the HVX or perhaps you're used to the detail cranked up in camera to add sharpness. My HVX detail is 0.
Anyway these lenses work fine for me. In my own less than scientific tests they equaled if not exceeded my Zeiss Contax primes in resolution. For whatever that's worth.....
Avenger007
Well-known member
How do you feel the zeiss contax stack up against the Lomos?
Yeah, you're right. I'm probably getting the impression it's soft because I'm comparing it to EX1+Letus Extreme stuff. Not a fair comparison since the EX1 blows any sub 10K camera and even the HPX500 out of the water in the sharpness department. The HVX200 is already "soft" on it's own.
But I do find Lomos have a softer warmer look, very reminiscent from the 70's. The Zeiss stuff is more "contrasty" and maybe slightly sharper ans surely cooler/not so warm. Lomos are quite fuzzy. More like Cookes than Zeiss.
But I have to disagree with standard speed Lomos only being sharper above T8. They are sharper all the way across the board, at least the ones I have used. Their MTF is actually higher too, according to a Russian lens technician I talked to once. If I'm not wrong, it's the same thing with Zeiss. The standard speeds are also sharper than super speeds.
IanD
Well-known member
Sami: That warm kinda golden tone is from the Lomo optics themselves. I used the 5600 preset WB in open shade and that's how they render color. If I wanted a cooler, more Zeiss look I could manually WB and correct it. I rather like the color pallet of the Lomos. Sometimes that alone can leave the impression of less contrast when it's simply just a warmer rendering.
Mediacre: I've owned both standard and super speed Lomos and for the most part they are equally sharp to a T8. I'm sure on a lens projecter the standards would have a modest edge though. I only have two standard speeds left, an 18mm T2.3 and a 50mm T2.3. I used to own a full set of both and ended up selling off most of the slower lenses. I will shoot a side by side test one of these days and compare them to the Super speeds. I doubt it'll be a big difference due to the resolution bottleneck of the HVX ccds.
Avenger: I gotta say that resolution-wise the Zeiss and the Lomos were equal with the Zeiss having slightly more contrast. Again, that could just be the warmer tones of the Lomos appearing less contrasty. As much as I love the Contax lenses I had to go all in with the Lomos. Having fast, wide lenses is very important to me on 35mm adapters and the Zeiss 25/2.8 was just too slow with too much light falloff to be really handy. My Lomo 18mm/1.4 and 22mm/1.4 on the other hand....sweet.
Mediacre: I've owned both standard and super speed Lomos and for the most part they are equally sharp to a T8. I'm sure on a lens projecter the standards would have a modest edge though. I only have two standard speeds left, an 18mm T2.3 and a 50mm T2.3. I used to own a full set of both and ended up selling off most of the slower lenses. I will shoot a side by side test one of these days and compare them to the Super speeds. I doubt it'll be a big difference due to the resolution bottleneck of the HVX ccds.
Avenger: I gotta say that resolution-wise the Zeiss and the Lomos were equal with the Zeiss having slightly more contrast. Again, that could just be the warmer tones of the Lomos appearing less contrasty. As much as I love the Contax lenses I had to go all in with the Lomos. Having fast, wide lenses is very important to me on 35mm adapters and the Zeiss 25/2.8 was just too slow with too much light falloff to be really handy. My Lomo 18mm/1.4 and 22mm/1.4 on the other hand....sweet.
Last edited:
Avenger007
Well-known member
Thats exactly the issue I have. I like the 18mm F4 but inside its tough to light. Great for exteriors though. I do love the pricetag however at under $3500 for 8 lenses. I have a set of Zeiss ZF and the set of Zeiss Contax I just mentioned and I find that they can be used side by side with very little difference. Unfortunately, I started with the ZF set which costs over twice what the used Contax lenses did. I imagine a similar set of Lomos would be over $10k?
Also, sorry if this has been asked but what kind of mount are those lomos?
Also, sorry if this has been asked but what kind of mount are those lomos?
Great footage man. Can't wait till mine arrives. I have a project comming up and after I ordered my lex I had to redo some of the storyboard segments because of the footage I'll be able to get. Your encode is much nicer than mine. What program did you use and what settings?
Bob
www.bobfranklinfilms.com
Bob
www.bobfranklinfilms.com
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Ian:
Can you tell us your zoom and focus settings n your HVX when shooting with the 18mm and 35mm lenses? I have to put my HVX to Z80 when shooting with the 28mm 2.8 Nikon D to get rid of the vignetting whereas I can be at Z73 or 74 when shooting with the 50mm and 85mm focal lengths.
Thanks,
Dan
IanD
Well-known member
Avenger: The Lomos use the OCT-19 mount which is a Russian version of the BNCR, a bit larger than PL.
Bob: I just exported from Final Cut Pro - h264 at medium quality. Pretty standard settings.
Dan: I'm away from my gear now (actually in LA for a bit) but from memory I have to zoom to about 85 for the 18mm and 22mm and 81 for the 35mm. My 50mm, 75mm, and longer I can zoom out all the way to the edge of the LEX image area, but usually find myself at 74 for good measure. Strange as it may sound considering my rig, I don't feel the need to duplicate 35mm FOV. I try to get as much usable FOV from my lenses and minimize my zooming in. The HVX's lens is best at mid ranges in terms of fstop loss, resolution and optical distortions.
Bob: I just exported from Final Cut Pro - h264 at medium quality. Pretty standard settings.
Dan: I'm away from my gear now (actually in LA for a bit) but from memory I have to zoom to about 85 for the 18mm and 22mm and 81 for the 35mm. My 50mm, 75mm, and longer I can zoom out all the way to the edge of the LEX image area, but usually find myself at 74 for good measure. Strange as it may sound considering my rig, I don't feel the need to duplicate 35mm FOV. I try to get as much usable FOV from my lenses and minimize my zooming in. The HVX's lens is best at mid ranges in terms of fstop loss, resolution and optical distortions.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Thanks Ian:
That puts my mind at ease that me having to zoom in more for my wide angle lens is normal and there is nothing wrong with it.
You doing a shoot out here? Wish we had time to meet up. Take care!
Dan
That puts my mind at ease that me having to zoom in more for my wide angle lens is normal and there is nothing wrong with it.
You doing a shoot out here? Wish we had time to meet up. Take care!
Dan