Hello guys,

i've just made a very quick bokeh test with this combo:

HVX200E
SGpro r.2
Nikon 50mm f1.2 (@f1.4)

H264, 24.5mb

It's just one shot with cristmass lights as subject.

http://www.sgpro.co.uk/lights.mov

Any comments would be great!

thanks a lot,
theodoros

Bokeh looks great. Focusing on the lights might've helped to see the relative light loss. What was the lighter area to the left of the tree/lights? What ambient light was there?

Very nice, Theodoros. Could you please make a test ? Could you put the camera on tripod and close down the prime lens, to see how the adapter behave with grain and high-speed shutter ?

Thanks,

Kristin

All this was shot @ f1.4?
Incredible to say a least.

BTW after all my involvement with CINEDOF I`m really considering buying SGpro for commercial HD work in Europe.

Got to know the (FOV) crop factor and light loss first.
Sharpness from edge to edge?

Any toughts?

Thanks in advance,
T

Toenis,

The SGpro uses full 36x24mm frame for SLR lenses. Lightloss is approx. 1 stop. The image was much brighter then with the m2 when it was tested with an HD100

Edge to edge sharpness is even across the frame with the new r2 achromat. Please see early res chart:

http://www.sgpro.co.uk/FX1e_SGpro_r2_res%20chart.tif

Wonderful.

One thing that bothers me is why grabs from "public house" clip (http://www.sgpro.co.uk/fosters.jpg) from www.sgpro.co.uk site doesn`t exhibit that nice bokeh. Why is that?

Thanks in advance,
T

Although I personally think the bokeh of that grab is good, it was taken with the prototype r2 GG disk. The production GG disks have slightly more diffusion then the prototype, resulting in 'harder' bokeh rendition.

really nice clip!

That chart looks amazing! Nice job Wayne.

Bokeh looks great. Focusing on the lights might've helped to see the relative light loss. What was the lighter area to the left of the tree/lights? What ambient light was there?

Thanks a lot Sam.

The lights was on a table and the only other light source was a 60w bulb, 2 meters above the christmass lights.

Very nice, Theodoros. Could you please make a test ? Could you put the camera on tripod and close down the prime lens, to see how the adapter behave with grain and high-speed shutter ?

Thanks,

Kristin

Thank you Kristin. I'll let you know when i will make this test.

All this was shot @ f1.4?
Incredible to say a least.

BTW after all my involvement with CINEDOF I`m really considering buying SGpro for commercial HD work in Europe.

Got to know the (FOV) crop factor and light loss first.
Sharpness from edge to edge?

Any toughts?

Thanks in advance,
T

Thanks a lot Toenis.

really nice clip!

Thank you Phil.

Okay, so I am knew to the Bokeh discussion. So what makes good or bad bokeh. For instance here is a grab from my Micro 35 DIY with my FX1. does this demonstrate good or bad bokeh....

Note, I forgot camera had autogain on so it was probably pushed to 12.

Chris (and everyone),
There is lots of discussion in the photography realm as to what makes good bokeh, but there is definately disagreement between what is pleasing or displeasing. Ultimately it is a matter of preference. I prefer harder bokeh while others prefer what has gaussian dropoff or something like that. It is whatever is pleasing to you that I think is important to achieve.

Very true, it is a subjective opinion, but mostly the photography realm are talking about the bokeh produced by the lens. In the 35mm adapter realm, we are mostly talking about the adapters (or more its ground glass) ability to capture/render that bokeh so that it looks identical to how it would be if shot directly to film. I think its important to seperate these two in our minds as they are not the same thing. In fact, its probably the wrong term refering the GG's ability to render it as 'bokeh'.

Chris, I found this article on bokeh (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/bokeh.htm). I prefer what the article calls "neutral bokeh".