VaricamLT: Varicam LT, Scarlet-W or something else?

I own the latest canon 24-70 out of necessity and it's quite possibly my least favorite lens.
I've had the 80-200 which is good enough to have been blessed by Dulcos treatment. I've never had any issues with Vignetting on the F5, F55, Alexa or Varicam.

https://thecinelens.com/2010/02/15/nikkor-80-200mm-pl-mounted/

https://thecinelens.com/2011/10/09/duclos-pl-80-200mm-f2-8-rental/

I picked one up after the DP of the bourne Identity sang it's praises in ASC magazine. and it's easily one if not my favorite still Zoom lens for video.
I don't put much faith in photo test sites testing photo lenses for photo uses. They are generaly in love with auto focus which is where the canons generally excel. As a video and cinema shooter I need my hard stops with great optics. I resource I trust for Stills glass for video information is Matthew Dulcos

he also blessed the 70-200
https://thecinelens.com/2010/09/21/duclos-70-200mm-re-housing/

the proof is in the pudding check out APEX (Story of the HYpercar) on NEtflix. It's Lensed exclusively with Nikon Glass
 
sean007davis said:
I don't put much faith in photo test sites testing photo lenses for photo uses. They are generaly in love with auto focus which is where the canons generally excel. As a video and cinema shooter I need my hard stops with great optics. I resource I trust for Stills glass for video information is Matthew Dulcos


the proof is in the pudding check out APEX (Story of the HYpercar) on NEtflix. It's Lensed exclusively with Nikon Glass
Click to expand...

Quite right, the proof of the pudding, agree there, and I do think there is too much pixel-peeping going on. The sites I mention though are very much looking at optical performance - testing mtf at all apertures and focal lengths, and also, importantly, chromatic aberration, distortion and vignetting. It just sounded a bit odd to say that the Nikons were running circles around the Canons - that's certainly not what the tests were reporting. I must confess I've not used those lenses though, but have used 200mm f2, 400 2.8 and 600 f4 of Canon and Nikon, and couldn't really see any difference (except Canon 400 2.8 sharper wide open than the Nikon). Also used several Sigmas which were excellent, notably 50 and 85 1.4 and the 18-35 1.8. Each to their own of course, I was just surprised at the running rings around comment as I would be just as happy to use the Canons as the Nikons, in fact more so as they focus the "right" way! 2 benefits that the Nikons (at least the pre "G" ones) have is that they have aperture rings, and that they can use simple adapters to mount on Canon bodies.

Steve
 
Sean,
Do you have any images with the Nikon glass? I am curious to see some samples. I personally use the Sigma glass because I shoot on the 5D3 for photography so I can kill two birds with one stone. All ART glass - 18-35, 50, 85, 24-105. I am a big fan of the 18-35, covers a nice range that I use for most of my shooting. The 50 and 85 only come out a few times. I am always a big fan of 24-70 but decided against getting the Canon one.

I use to shoot Nikon a few years back and loved their glass. With the new releases of Nikon cameras lately, I should consider renting a few Nikon lenses to compare between Canon and Nikon.
 
sean007davis said:
If you're interested in a budget lens combination for the LT that yields cinematic images and complements the way the Varicam subtly renders colors I'd recommend you try some of the older Nikon glass

Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 DX
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8
Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 (most of the 1st jason bourne film, the bourne identity was shot with this lens)

Just throw a novoflex nikon to Canon adapter and you're good to go on the LT, or if you own the lens do what I did and get the Leitax mounts for Nikon and permanently convert the lenses to EF mount.
I've projected these lenses and done tests with the LT on a 4k projector and the Nikon glass does laps around the EF and sigma.
I find that sigma Glass isn't exactly sharp but rather high contrast (which is often perceived as sharpness) and the amount of focus breathing very distracting, but I'm an admitted Glass snob.
although I'm partial to primes, doing more quick turn around stuff I've been relying on these Nikon zooms a lot more, as well as the tokina 11-16.

I've tried the 18-80 from canon on the LT and it's a decent lens but the fact that the focus ring has no stops is a deal breaker.
the Zeiss 21-100 is an amazing lens.

I think the Varicam LT lets you get away with using almost any glass but if you want the best image you should certainly get the best glass for the camera.
If you're using stills glass I definitely suggest trying some of the Nikon offerings, the 3 I recommended are a good starting point.

when i get a chance I'll post a ridiculous picture of one of my set ups with a LOMO 25-250 zoom on my Varicam LT
Click to expand...

17-55mm is a nice focal range, but what I'm really after is a lens that doesn't breathe much and if it's parfocal it's of course even better. Since this is a lens made for stills I guess it has a fair amount of breathing. I have "loads" of EF-mount lenses and they're good enough for what they do but they are still lenses, so I'll try to get proper cine lenses. Either a zoom or two or a set of primes.

As primes go the following seem to be interesting and within reach:
Sony Cine Alta 20-135 set
Celere HS 18.5-85 set
SLR Magic APO set (if they make something wider than 25 mm)

The zooms that seem interesting are:
Canon cine lightweight zooms 15.5-47 and 30-105
Angenieux EZ zooms 15-40 and 30-90
Fujinon Cabrio 19-90mm T2.9 (although the 4K version is probably too expensive for me but the focal range is great)
 
I've been shooting with a guy recently who has Sony primes and his 2nd(maybe 3rd?) just broke. Same thing on all of them, internal mechanics break and the focus barrel just spins. I don't know if they are v1 or v2. Reports are that the v2's were actually very good.

I don't think you can go wrong with the Canon zooms(or primes). Canon Cine lenses still seem underrated in the industry as a whole, but they make beautiful, sharp glass that is flattering on people/skin and they are well built. I have a five lens set of the CNe primes and the 17-120 zoom.
 
The latest posts on still lenses for the LT is very interesting.
Maybe you guys would consider starting a new thread dedicated to this topic.

But While we are on this subject, has anyone tried the Zeiss Otus with the Varicam? It seems like these lenses are under rated (much like the varicam), but produce amazing images (much like the varicam).
I shot some stills with the 85mm and really liked the look of the images and the separation of foreground, middle ground, and back ground. I was immediately thinking this kind of distinct dimensionality would be great for video. I wasn't able to make the lens flare, it seems they have gone to great lengths to correct for that sort of thing. But they are certainly an interesting set of lenses, with really refined optics, and a nice character.

I found one sample on vimeo of the 55mm and 85mm shot on a GH4. https://vimeo.com/106160276
I think you'll like :)

The Otus or the Angenieux EZ zooms are at the top of my wish list right now.

Tobias Menle, also has very good things to say about the Canon CINE primes.
 
The shots are nice, but 800px compressed jpg doesnt really show off a lens, still lenses only really fall down when they are in motion.. zooms, focus pulls.

Clearly an $80 canon FD could make stills as pretty as these..
 
My lens collection has to cover two cameras, so I have a certain amount of doubling up of focal lengths. I like to have maximum zoom range for studio mode but also be covered for much of the range for handheld especially on the wider end.

Cabrio 19-90
Alura 15-45
Alura 30-80
Alura 45-250
Zeiss CZ.2 70-200

I used to have the Alura 18-80 but when going handheld/Steadi with two cameras, I found myself restricted so I started subbing the Cabrio and eventually it became the all-purpose A camera lens.

They are all quite closer in color and contrast rendition, since they are designed to be in the Arri family (so they cut well with Master Primes, Ultra Primes etc which I bring in when shallow DOF is required). For this reason I don't mix and match with Canons.

I'm eying changing the Zeiss out for the Cabrio 85-300 as it would be nice to get a little extra telephoto oomph and I've been disappointed with the iris ramping that occurs with the 70-200 at the telephoto range.

My philosophy is a workhorse set of lenses that can deliver a neutral and clean image, because you can always muck it up with filtration or grading as required. This is the lens set that shot over 300 different looks for Key & Peele so I know how far I can stretch the results!
 
Charles,

How does the Alura 18-80 stack up against the Fuji 19-90 with regards to CA, distortions etc?
I've never used the Alura, it's bigger and heavier, isn't it?
 
Last edited:
The thread is silent all of a sudden.

Hoping that more Varicam users will comment with their experiences. I am close to getting one too. Considered the RED Scarlet-W but the Varicam seems like an all-round camera that I would enjoy using. I have the Odyssey 7Q+ so combining that for the RAW output would be great.
 
Last edited:
Hi Ashok,

I've had my LT for a little over a month now. I too was considering the Scarlet-W. After a lot of research, I pulled the trigger on the LT. I don't have the O7Q+ yet, but I find the internal codecs are very robust and I don't even know if I need the raw option. I will get an O7Q+ as a monitor and for those rare occasions when raw could be really useful (ex. high contrast scenes, scenes with variable lighting temperatures, heavy heavy grades)

But to be honest, the LT is really well designed, easy to use, and it doesn't take much work in post to produces lovely organic cinematic images. I think inactivity on the forum is the best testimony to the camera. Silence is silent approval.

If I had one desire, it would be awesome if Panasonic could unlocked AVC-Intra 444 (maybe thru a paid license?) for those productions that really want to go head to head or surpass(?) Arri color. I'm not sure if the hardware can write larger files like that internally, but if it was a paid option it would be the cherry on top of a perfect camera.

Best wishes

-Alex

ps - The boot time and mode switching (the primary complaint I see online about the LT) in my opinion is the whining of the spoiled internet echo chamber. If you humbly consider the pace of changing film magazines in the golden age of analog film-making, the LT reboots can become a meditative pause in your creative process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top