Redrock Cinescreen 2 vs. Cinescreen 1 tests

P

polcan99

Active member
I recently bought the upgrade for Redrock Micro Mini 35 adapter. The upgrade is a new and improved ground glass which is supposed to have better light transmission and contrast... I shot this test to see if it was worth spending the $150 bucks... here it is!

This test was shot on the Canon XH A1, and using one 1K Red-Head for lighting... personally I think the new cinescreen is not that much better... it's only improvements are in slightly better light transmission. But decide for yourself, you can download the WMV file and watch it on your HDTV to really compare the difference. Let me know what you guys think, and what kind of a test you think I should do next. I'm already thinking of setting up a low light scene that's only lit by candle lights, hopefully in that scenario the new cinescreen will prove it's worth.
Here's the link:
http://www.vimeo.com/2176593
 
Hi Tom,

Thanks for doing the test. A couple of things to keep in mind:

-If you plan on shooting other tests, I'd recommend static shots without a human subject. Boring, I know, but that provides more accurate results.

-The Cinescreen II actually improves its light transmission as you stop down, giving you many more shooting options when compared to the original screen. If you try some low light tests like you mentioned you'll definitely see a difference in the degree of difference between the screens. If you do another, definitely show a range of F-stops on the lens.

-For any users checking out the video on their normal monitors to compare the look of the two screens, keep in mind that each monitor is going to display the image slightly differently, so for best results, you want to compare the images on a calibrated monitor. Something that looks great on one monitor is going to be too bright or dark on another, or the colors will look off, etc etc.

Cheers!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top