The Letus Ultimate -- Experience Thread

To be honest, stills always look like junk but the footage speaks volumes. This might be off base but since the S4's are in use:
What is the preference here between the Ultra/Master/Cooke Sets? They're hard to lock down a good/new set but I'd like to know as I have not been able to put each line through rigorous shooting.

Ultimate looks like a winner. I have been hitting a lot of short cuts while filming exteriors lately and I don't like compromises. I'd like to place an order.

edit: hold onto that cam package for a week while I write a check.
 
Last edited:
Avenger007 said:
To be honest, stills always look like junk but the footage speaks volumes. This might be off base but since the S4's are in use:
What is the preference here between the Ultra/Master/Cooke Sets? They're hard to lock down a good/new set but I'd like to know as I have not been able to put each line through rigorous shooting.

Ultimate looks like a winner. I have been hitting a lot of short cuts while filming exteriors lately and I don't like compromises. I'd like to place an order.

edit: hold onto that cam package for a week while I write a check.
Click to expand...


Hey Avenger, I know what you mean about stills. It's hard to ever judge ANYTHING on still images. I personally don't even like stills from big movies because they just don't really say anything IMO. Glad the footage (even if just random stuff) Doesn't disappoint.

As far s those lens sets go I couldn't EVEN begin to tell you. The first time I ever saw one of these massive things was a Master Prime set and the first official time using them was S4's with this footage. I really want to get my hands on a Master Prime rental soon to be able to judge, I may even be able to go and do a side by side test with all three sets soon.

What kinds of things would you test for between them if you had the chance to do so?
 
I think the typical sharpness, flare, and falloff tests will always apply but the other things to note are minimum focus, breathing, diopter use/sharpness, build material, weight/size, and other set specific features like lens information, witness marks (and removability), and how easily the lens can be assembled/disassembled by design. i think a lot of the features shine (or dont) during production which also leads to the conclusion that there is likely not one set to outperform the others consistently in all shooting scenarios. each has its advantages but id like to see some opinions on "if you had only one choice". reduser probably has more results though.

i heard the relay is right around the corner from letus. is it still in the $4k range?
 
Relay's definitely right around the corner. Final pricing however I have no idea about. Probably should keep an eye out on the Adapter Place web page if you want to catch one. I have a feeling they're all going to vanish as soon as it's up for sale.

If I can setup a test over at the camera house I will. I think if it came down to choice it will also come down to money and S4's are the cheapest to rent out fo those three.
 
Here's what I dug up as far as settings go:

CineD - CineLike Gamma - All Presets aside from +2 On Details.

There are some shots where the lenses were wide open to achieve the most shallow backgrounds possible. However, most of the time the lens lived between F4 and F8 while the camera itself remained at about 4~5.6 as far as Iris goes.

That's included in the beach sky shots with the family strolling in slow mo. That's a place I would normally see grain because the shutter had to be amped to match the slow motion.

Just as well the Dolly shot was also with the adapter on, same situation with iris' because the wifi video didn't work and I can't even remember if we had a wifi follow focus on set. We probably did, but didn't end up using it due to the wifi video being inoperable at the time. Once more the adapter exhibited zero swirling grain in the sky.

Other than that all camera settings were straight from the CineD scene file and I don't even think I boosted saturation in-camera because it's supposed to get a grade treatment by the post house. It may have already, I haven't gotten the final back for myself yet, though.

Everything was also lit with shiny boards shaken up by Geoff R, Siniarch and Matty_G. on the regular.
 
Kholi

Try the standard -7 on detail, on cine like D (just boost the VF detail to see the focus) and then add sharpness in post, but the very fine, i.e. for After Effect - radius 0,6 - amount 150% - threshold 1. Detail / sharpness on camera is a post process on the DSP stage. The DSP does not have very good performance on the addition of detail, so some times there is a coring effect that if its burned to your image cannot be removed. So by not adding the sharpness in the camera you have more creative control on the result.

For film out, for instance first upscale to 2K with Lanczos and then add sharpness.

If you using CineD use also an S shape curve in the Luma to correct blacks, compress whites and expand midtones.

Thats my two euro cents...
 
you know I actually just discovered that method two weeks ago. The in camera sharpening adds way too many artifacts and even final cut works better and looks better. I'm sure that the After Effects sharpening is even better.

Ok finding that the cleanest image in camera fairs better for post outside of color capturing with the HVX.

Totally agree with your method although I've since been using -2 to -4. The 200a fairs better in all areas over the 200 so its got a tad more leeway.

I'm definitely gonna try your AE settings. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Here's a still from some footage I shot last night with the Canon XHA1 and Letus Ultimate:

ultimate_tara.jpg
 
One thing with the XH-A1: There's no shame in posting a full resolution still.

Nice.

Did you get your Ultimate, Disjecta?
 
Is that uncompressed SDI out? Any further compression from the jpg conversion? One of the far better looking stills I've seen.

Wide open? Bokeh looks better than EX imo.
 
First post updated to include that bad-ass still. Let me know if you want me to remove it, Disjecta.
 
Here's another (keep in mind that stills from the timeline are always a little softer than the moving image):

zac.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top