SGblade

Ah ha, I've corrected mine too so that anyone who reads this part of the thread will be confused.
 
I for one have no negative attitude about Letus Pricing. I have met and spoke with Le Brothers and they are awesome guys. They are very genuine and love what they do. They have really earned their success. I am just saying if there was a mid level product between Extreme and Ultimate I would buy it in a hart beat.
 
The ultimate is actually worth the price. They put all the pudding they spent in to the optical path... its AWESOME.
 
It's been pointed out that loosening 8 points on the Blade (all requiring tools) to back focus keeps it from being 4500 as opposed to loosing two thumb screws (no tools). Now put yourself in this scenario. You have an array of lenses and as much as you'd like you'd think one back focus fits them all, reality has other plans. You change from a prime 200 to a 17-35 zoom to a 50mm 1.4 to Fish eye in the space of an hour and collimation just doesn't seem consistent. Client is looking over your shoulder. You have a choice:

"uh, this will take about five minutes, I need to loosen 8 points, collimate and we'll be fine"

or

you say nothing, loosen two thumb screws, focus to infinity point it at the nearest skyscraper or tree and in less the 10 seconds you're back focus is dialed in.

That's what I did on my first Ultimate job where client was just around my shoulder. 10 lenses, and many back focuses later, I'd say that 2 G extra for a quick and precise back focus paid its way on just one job.

I'll never buy an adaptor that doesn't have this or until still lenses are consistently collimated across the board (never).

Tim Naylor - DP
www.timnaylor.com
 
Tim, I'm surprised to hear that still lenses have that many collimation problems. What a drag. You would think since they are designed to just slap on any camera without ever checking backfocus, that they would be consistent. I have 9 mostly old lenses and when I checked them on the collimator they were all spot on.

Incidently, does the 17-35 track focus correctly? My 80-200 does and that what I use to check backfocus - More accurate than infinity because its a very precise point - whereas there can be some slop in whether a still lens may go a touch past the infinity mark. When the zoom is tracking everything else works .

Were they Nikons?

- Lenny Levy
 
Hi Guys,

Sorry for the late reply, I have been away.

We are hiring an EX1 this weekend to get some shots with the new glass GG.

Yes, the SGblade will come with a rods bracket.

The unit is nicely sealed, I can't remember the last time we have has a dust issue with the SGpro.

Once we get the pre production Blade enclosures in, we will checkout the weight of both and post here.
 
Why not just purchase the $600 collimation upgrade for the Letus Extreme and be on your way. Zacuto's selling them. Meaning you can get a Letus Elite for $1800 or the upgrade backfocus ring for $600!

Just a thought to save you from spending an extra $2700
 
Lenilenapi said:
Tim, I'm surprised to hear that still lenses have that many collimation problems. What a drag. You would think since they are designed to just slap on any camera without ever checking backfocus, that they would be consistent. I have 9 mostly old lenses and when I checked them on the collimator they were all spot on.

Incidently, does the 17-35 track focus correctly? My 80-200 does and that what I use to check backfocus - More accurate than infinity because its a very precise point - whereas there can be some slop in whether a still lens may go a touch past the infinity mark. When the zoom is tracking everything else works .

Were they Nikons?

- Lenny Levy
Click to expand...

I think the reason some still lenses have more backfocus problems is because most still photographers can deal with slight back focus problems without a problem. They focus by eye rather than doing measurements and focusing by the numbers on the lens barrel. When you're focusing by eye it doesn't matter if rotating the focus ring to 3ft actually focuses the lens to 3ft and 2 inches. That way lens manufactures can get away with not making their still lenses cheaper and not to the same standards as cinema lenses when it comes to collimation.

davide
 
Just so long as it reaches infinity....

though luckily, amost all of my FD lenses hit infinity at infinity on the lens barrel. Only my 24mm is off. but i have yet to find a GREAT 24mm in FD mount. the SSC i have is still kinda crap...
 
Hey Timur, what 24 do you have? I almost got the f2 but then heard it had problems likes the LEX.
 
IMO there is NO good SLR lens in the 24/25mm area other than the high priced Leica and its still an F2. They're either too slow, too soft, poor build quality, short focus throw, or too expensive. LOMO has a great alternative but they are hard to find and the OCT mount won't work well given the amount of Zeiss glass already in the inventory. I would pay $1k for a good 25mm F1.4 in a heart beat. Heck I'll pay $1500 (preferably from Zeiss).
 
Hey, anyone thinking about using a Blade with a Scarlet?
If so, are you going to hope that the new grainless GG holds up and doesn't lose too much detail? That's what I am hoping for since Scarlet will look like film without the need for the SGpro's original GG.
 
Scarlet's image is uncertain. "Look like film" doesn't really work here yet because first, the camera is a 2/3" chip and second, it has a fixed lens. We don't know the resolving power of the naked lens and we also KNOW that 2/3" will not deliver 35mm DOF. The camera's 24fps and color timing in post might render a "film-like" look after post, but out of the box the camera will likely look like a higher resolution EX3 rather than a beautiful 35 Negative.
 
Won't need a relay lens with Scarlet as it has a fixed zoom.
 
Last edited:
Avenger007 said:
Scarlet's image is uncertain. "Look like film" doesn't really work here yet because first, the camera is a 2/3" chip and second, it has a fixed lens. We don't know the resolving power of the naked lens and we also KNOW that 2/3" will not deliver 35mm DOF. The camera's 24fps and color timing in post might render a "film-like" look after post, but out of the box the camera will likely look like a higher resolution EX3 rather than a beautiful 35 Negative.
Click to expand...

Yea, but the color rendition dynamic range and grain will look like Red One's or better, so all you are missing is the additional DOF. And post is post, so I also assumed that you would do curves and whatever else you think your footage needed for that extra push.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top