Letus35/Redrock shootout

Dan Diaconu · December 14th, 2005, 05:41 PM

Ted,
Could you do
1. A rez chart (even lights) static and moving on both? and
2. A clear sky (wall, or any other even lit surface)?
3. A color chart.
That is pretty much the "standard" for this type of tests (imo).
In any other circumstances (like the above test) the results could be subjective; to lights used, light distribution in the frame, framing, focusing aso.

Wayne Kinney · December 14th, 2005, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Diaconu

2. A clear sky (wall, or any other even lit surface)?

Shooting solid sky is much better then a plain wall, IMO, much brighter and a real test for vignetting issues.

Ted West · December 14th, 2005, 06:30 PM

I'll shoot some outside stuff next, including sky. Probably won't shoot a rez chart as I don't normally shoot charts for a living. Yes it's all subjective with different lighting and such. We shoot a lot of corporate talking head stuff, with one camera on a tripod, and the other handheld. My main interest is if we can edit between the 2 cameras using the 2 different adapters with out a bunch of monkeying around in post.

Quyen Le · December 14th, 2005, 07:25 PM

Ted,

Look at the 2 exact setting, I assume you shoot on the M2 first then use the same setting for the Letus? since light loss on the Letus is less than the light loss on the M2, the frame captured by the Letus becomes over exposed? I think you should do auto setting on your camera then write down different numbers, that would help us to compare, thanks.

Quyen

Maheel Perera · December 14th, 2005, 08:07 PM

Seems that the LETUS covers more area from the 35 lens image than the M2. And the light loss is less.

Mark Veilleux · December 14th, 2005, 08:56 PM

I cant wait to see the full test results!!!

Eniola Akintoye · December 14th, 2005, 10:31 PM

Me either. I feel the pictures Ted posted are awesome, but Ted, could you please try to make the camcorder's position the same. I feel the M2 had more close up than the Letus, and please mooooooooorrrrrre pictures + footageeeeees.

Maheel Perera · December 15th, 2005, 03:42 AM

Eniola,

The camcorder position is same in both. While the LETUS covers the full 35mm picture area, The M2 covers a bit less. That is the difference you see in the test shots.

Brett A. Noe · December 15th, 2005, 04:16 PM

What needs to be the same is the distance from the film plane to the subject. In this case that distance should be the same in both adapters. So, using the same 35mm lens, measure the distance from the end of the lens to the subject.

On the m2, you can also adjust the motor position up or down. This might allow a greater FOV.

The reason to shoot a res chart is to achieve a sort of baseline for comparison.

I also recommend shooting with an SLR to establish what the correct FOV is for the 35mm lens. I used this method to match the FOV of my adapter to that of the SLR. This avoided light falloff and other of the usual complaint issues.

Luke Brown · December 15th, 2005, 04:46 PM

Ya a res chart would be great as well as a variety of shots. That is really the only "fair" way to compare these.

I think on the forum somewhere you can find a link to a res chart...i think.

Daniel Rudd · December 30th, 2005, 03:24 PM

yah, and some donuts...
and coffee!!

no seriously thanks for your work, can't wait to see.
Daniel

Ted West · February 4th, 2006, 04:13 PM

Sorry for the delay in getting more images posted, I've been in Mexico scouting locations for our upcoming feature "Bikini Vampire Babes Gone Wild!" Should be lots of fun...
Anyway here's a link for some rez chart images. I'm not really happy with any of the adapter images, and will try to improve upon them as time allows. In the mean time any one else have rez chart images we could look at??

http://www.digital-west.com/adapter

Dennis Wood · February 4th, 2006, 06:54 PM

http://www.fortvir.net/gallery/album05/gs400?full=1
http://www.fortvir.net/gallery/album05/guskers35?full=1

These are two of my own. Actually after looking at those, I'm feeling better about my results. The D100 setup I'm assuming is just a digital still right?

The letus is not looking very good there....distortion and a pretty "dirty" frame.

Now if we could convince Ben or Steve to do the same with the Beatties.....

Francois Poitras · February 4th, 2006, 08:14 PM

Interesting. Thanks for posting that.

Yes, some barrel distortion with the Letus, but pincushion distortion with the M3...

Michael Maier · February 5th, 2006, 03:22 AM

That should be very interesting.

December 14th, 2005, 07:25 PM	#19
Quyen Le Major Player Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 356	Ted, Look at the 2 exact setting, I assume you shoot on the M2 first then use the same setting for the Letus? since light loss on the Letus is less than the light loss on the M2, the frame captured by the Letus becomes over exposed? I think you should do auto setting on your camera then write down different numbers, that would help us to compare, thanks. Quyen __________________ Affordable Adapter http://www.adapterplace.com

December 14th, 2005, 08:56 PM	#21
Mark Veilleux Tourist Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: methuen, ma, Posts: 2	tests.. I cant wait to see the full test results!!!

December 15th, 2005, 04:16 PM	#24
Brett A. Noe New Boot Join Date: May 2004 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 20	What needs to be the same is the distance from the film plane to the subject. In this case that distance should be the same in both adapters. So, using the same 35mm lens, measure the distance from the end of the lens to the subject. On the m2, you can also adjust the motor position up or down. This might allow a greater FOV. The reason to shoot a res chart is to achieve a sort of baseline for comparison. I also recommend shooting with an SLR to establish what the correct FOV is for the 35mm lens. I used this method to match the FOV of my adapter to that of the SLR. This avoided light falloff and other of the usual complaint issues. __________________ Brett Noe \| Filmmaker Brett Noe Productions \| http://brettnoe.com

December 30th, 2005, 03:24 PM	#26
Daniel Rudd Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: North Muskegon, MI Posts: 213	yah, and some donuts... and coffee!! no seriously thanks for your work, can't wait to see. Daniel __________________ Daniel Rudd Digital Storyteller (Sony HDV, Aspect HD) Soundtrack Creation & Royalty Free Music Production www.stock20.com

February 4th, 2006, 08:14 PM	#29
Francois Poitras Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Québec (Canada) Posts: 133	Interesting. Thanks for posting that. Yes, some barrel distortion with the Letus, but pincushion distortion with the M3... __________________ François

December 14th, 2005, 05:41 PM	#16
Dan Diaconu Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 804	Ted, Could you do 1. A rez chart (even lights) static and moving on both? and 2. A clear sky (wall, or any other even lit surface)? 3. A color chart. That is pretty much the "standard" for this type of tests (imo). In any other circumstances (like the above test) the results could be subjective; to lights used, light distribution in the frame, framing, focusing aso.

December 14th, 2005, 06:30 PM	#18
Ted West New Boot Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 8	I'll shoot some outside stuff next, including sky. Probably won't shoot a rez chart as I don't normally shoot charts for a living. Yes it's all subjective with different lighting and such. We shoot a lot of corporate talking head stuff, with one camera on a tripod, and the other handheld. My main interest is if we can edit between the 2 cameras using the 2 different adapters with out a bunch of monkeying around in post.

December 14th, 2005, 08:07 PM	#20
Maheel Perera Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Sri Lanka Posts: 128	Seems that the LETUS covers more area from the 35 lens image than the M2. And the light loss is less.

December 14th, 2005, 10:31 PM	#22
Eniola Akintoye Major Player Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Duluth GA Posts: 238	Me either. I feel the pictures Ted posted are awesome, but Ted, could you please try to make the camcorder's position the same. I feel the M2 had more close up than the Letus, and please mooooooooorrrrrre pictures + footageeeeees.

December 15th, 2005, 03:42 AM	#23
Maheel Perera Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Sri Lanka Posts: 128	Eniola, The camcorder position is same in both. While the LETUS covers the full 35mm picture area, The M2 covers a bit less. That is the difference you see in the test shots.

December 15th, 2005, 04:46 PM	#25
Luke Brown Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 31	Ya a res chart would be great as well as a variety of shots. That is really the only "fair" way to compare these. I think on the forum somewhere you can find a link to a res chart...i think.

February 4th, 2006, 04:13 PM	#27
Ted West New Boot Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 8	Sorry for the delay in getting more images posted, I've been in Mexico scouting locations for our upcoming feature "Bikini Vampire Babes Gone Wild!" Should be lots of fun... Anyway here's a link for some rez chart images. I'm not really happy with any of the adapter images, and will try to improve upon them as time allows. In the mean time any one else have rez chart images we could look at?? http://www.digital-west.com/adapter

February 4th, 2006, 06:54 PM	#28
Dennis Wood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 916	http://www.fortvir.net/gallery/album05/gs400?full=1 http://www.fortvir.net/gallery/album05/guskers35?full=1 These are two of my own. Actually after looking at those, I'm feeling better about my results. The D100 setup I'm assuming is just a digital still right? The letus is not looking very good there....distortion and a pretty "dirty" frame. Now if we could convince Ben or Steve to do the same with the Beatties.....

February 5th, 2006, 03:22 AM	#30
Michael Maier Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,269	That should be very interesting.