The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

A superfast normal on the G1

V

Vivek

Guest
I just received my Angenieux 25/0.95 (type M2) with the proper adapter and all. Initial snaps showed the characteristics I was prepared for (slight but noticeable pincushion distortion, exposing at 0.95, and the like) but I wasn't prepared for the superb clarity this lens delivers! The CA/flare is quite low for this fast a lens. Contrast is quite good and the details it can provide are fabulous.

It does not cover the whole of the 4/3rds frame. I can live that because of its character and class.

Some shots from the first day out (all at f/0.95 and the whole frame).








It is below freezing, overcast and generally miserable weather. I could not hold out for longer than an hour on the street with exposed fingers.
 
R

Ranger 9

Guest
Thanks for the interesting look. I'd expect C-mount cine lenses to be high-end designs since they were intended for professional users and the film image always had to be hugely enlarged.

Did you have any problems with the back focus distance of the lens? I know the mechanical dimensions of the C mount were supposed to be standardized, but had heard that different manufacturers might use different back focus spacing. I know that with C-mount lenses intended for use on older TV cameras, the user was expected to match the individual lens to an individual camera, and the lenses incorporated an adjustment for this; a TV technician would have no trouble making the required adjustments using his test instruments to measure the image.
 

m3photo

New member
Mouthwatering ...

I just received my Angenieux 25/0.95 (type M2) with the proper adapter and all.
... and green with envy.

Can we see it on and off the camera, please?

Questions, questions:

Where from and how much?
 
I'm wondering if the faster f stop makes a difference other then DOF? With my Canon 10d when I have a f1.2 lens on there is no shutter speed difference between f1.2 and f1.4, f1.4 seems to be the limit. I think it's the size of the mirror box throat that is the limiting factor.

tm
 

cam

Active member
luscious, Vivek!

i keep on hoping to find one of the faster M-Mount Angenieuxs for my lowly Epson here in Paris. the draw is something else, very sybaritic (but i guess that should be expected from a Cine lens).
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Thanks for the interesting look. I'd expect C-mount cine lenses to be high-end designs since they were intended for professional users and the film image always had to be hugely enlarged.

Did you have any problems with the back focus distance of the lens? I know the mechanical dimensions of the C mount were supposed to be standardized, but had heard that different manufacturers might use different back focus spacing. I know that with C-mount lenses intended for use on older TV cameras, the user was expected to match the individual lens to an individual camera, and the lenses incorporated an adjustment for this; a TV technician would have no trouble making the required adjustments using his test instruments to measure the image.
Ranger, Yes, generally the cine lenses are good. This one is not one of the general ones but a great one.

It was for super-16 and nowadays sought after by Red2k users. It is not a c-mount lens. The M4/3rds to Arri adapter was made by the previous owner (I told ya that I only wish to make pics and not adapters!;)). It was collimated alright. Shoots past infinity a tad.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Re: Mouthwatering ...

... and green with envy.

Can we see it on and off the camera, please?

Questions, questions:

Where from and how much?

Will post a shot later. It is longer than the kitzoom when the zoom is set to 45mm but is compact (and heavy).

I traded a more expensive lens in for this one!:eek:
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I'm wondering if the faster f stop makes a difference other then DOF? With my Canon 10d when I have a f1.2 lens on there is no shutter speed difference between f1.2 and f1.4, f1.4 seems to be the limit. I think it's the size of the mirror box throat that is the limiting factor.

tm
The default f number of G1, interestingly, is f/1!:) So, yes the camera is already set to meter fast lenses.

However, I find the f/0.95 lenses (this one and the Canon /0.95) do overexpose a tad. So, I set the meter to -0.3eV.

And, yes, when I stop down to f/1.4 or so there is change in the meter measurement.

Cam, Yes, I am quite pleased. Fabulous, fabulous rendition. :)
 

scho

Well-known member
Re: Mouthwatering ...

Will post a shot later. It is longer than the kitzoom when the zoom is set to 45mm but is compact (and heavy).

I traded a more expensive lens in for this one!:eek:
Great shots Vivek with a very special lens. Look forward to seeing this beauty on the camera.

Regards,
Carl
 
R

Ranger 9

Guest
I'm wondering if the faster f stop makes a difference other then DOF? With my Canon 10d when I have a f1.2 lens on there is no shutter speed difference between f1.2 and f1.4, f1.4 seems to be the limit. I think it's the size of the mirror box throat that is the limiting factor.
A constricted mirror-box throat could induce vignetting, but shouldn't be able to alter the effective f/number since it's behind the rear principal plane of the lens. (That's why the diaphragm has to be located inside the lens elements instead of just hanging out the back, which certainly would be much more convenient to engineer!)

Possibly the vignetting of your f/1.2 lens lowers the overall exposure enough that you don't see any difference on the exposure, but I think it's more likely that it's just rounding in the shutter-speed display. There's only a 1/3-stop difference between f/1.2 and f/1.4, and most cameras won't display shutter speeds to anything closer than 1/3-stop increments (or possibly 1/2-stop increments depending on how you have your custom functions set.)
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Here are some pics of the lens. My apologies for the couple of the shakies. Too late to go back now and do it all over again.







the mount side



As you can see from the pics, I have pimped up my G1 and the M4/3 to Arri adapter (aluminum tube covered with a bicycle tube). The 25mm lens weighs less than the 50/0.95 (~445gms). So it is about ~350-400gms. Oh, can't use any hood on the lens! Besides the odd filter size it would require (50.something??mm), anything more than a filter would vignette.

Carl and Andrew- Thanks.:)
 
P

psurfer

Guest
Looking Good, Vivek! Nice- I'm sure you're happy w/such a slight loss of coverage at the corners, considering it will most often be looking into darkened corners anyway...

Have you tried the earliest version of the Ang 1"/0.95? I'm curious if it would have much less coverage, compared to your excellent M2 version.

I have one of those old ones in c-mount: chrome barrel, ~38mm fltr threads. I don't know that the rear element is much/any smaller than yours, at least judging from your pics. That sure would be fun to use it, although it shouldn't be nearly as good wide open as that one!

Didn't Rayqual early on mention a planned c-mt to m4/3 adptr, too?

ps. f/1 default setting? That sure gets one to thinking about what could eventually come down the Panasonic lens pike. If only...

pps. I also have to say that the Lumix 20/1.7 should help solve So many G1 shortcomings for me at the moment. It's intro can't come soon enough. (But man, another 1.5+ stops extra?!!)
 
Last edited:
G

guidomo

Guest
Great stuff Vivek.

Before and after cropping the corners, what would be the effective Focal Length of this lens on the G1?
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Have you tried the earliest version of the Ang 1"/0.95? I'm curious if it would have much less coverage, compared to your excellent M2 version.
Peter, The Early version (or Type M1) is shorter in length than this type M2 version. I did consiedr but I got such an overwhelming negative feedback from some Bolex users (aka classic heads) and that lens being "fuzzy". The coverage is the same and the distortion (barrel btw, I said the opposite mistakenly) is pretty much the same but the contrast and clarity are much better in the second version it seems (I have not made direct comparisons. my impression of type M1 is from reliable hearsay). Colors are accurate. Reds don't show as unpleasant shades (like the kit zoom).

I do have a SOM-Berthiot 25/0.95 that needs a total rebuild (new iris plus a focus mechanism). It covers the whole frame without dark corners. Very sharp as well.

Yes, the 20/1.7 would be very nice.

BTW, did you notice the DOF at 0.95 as projected by this lens? :)


ISO100, f/0.95, 1/80s
 
G

guidomo

Guest
Vivek, apparently if one wanted to crop the image to get rid of the dark corners one would loose around 20% of the image in either direction, which effectively makes the lens somewhat "longer".

More importantly, is my understanding correct that the cine lens image circle is approximately that of the u4/3 sensor, i.e. a 25mm lens gives roughly the Field of View of a 25mm lens on Full Frame, as opposed to the effective 2x Focal Length extension of standard Full Frame lenses when mounted on the G1?
 

Brian Mosley

New member
Vivek, love that last portrait... the dark corners work great for me - all part of the lens character imho. Love the colour!

Kind Regards

Brian
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Vivek, apparently if one wanted to crop the image to get rid of the dark corners one would loose around 20% of the image in either direction, which effectively makes the lens somewhat "longer".

More importantly, is my understanding correct that the cine lens image circle is approximately that of the u4/3 sensor, i.e. a 25mm lens gives roughly the Field of View of a 25mm lens on Full Frame, as opposed to the effective 2x Focal Length extension of standard Full Frame lenses when mounted on the G1?
Guidomo, The first part, I am unsure how much I would lose (I have not calculated yet) but it is certainly not 20% for this lens, much less.

The second part is complicated.

Cine lenses and their coverage depend on the format they were intended for 8mm, super 8, 16, super 16, 35, super 35, and even larger.

On the focal length and FOV, what Monza said. Don't let the crop factor confuse you. It will not change the focal length of a lens.

Brian, Thanks. The lens certainly has character alright.
 
Top