Sharpest lenses in 16mm

Jarin Blaschke · May 11, 2004

I'm trying to get the sharpest, cleanest, high contrast image I can in Super16. It's for a high gloss music video that can't quite do 35mm. Tests are unlikely. Prime lenses built for 16mm seem to exist only as old Zeiss superspeeds, and the focal lengths are very limited. I'm wondering if I would get the best performance from Ultra Primes or Variable Primes, even though, in theory anyway, lenses designed for 16 should give the highest resolution within their smaller circle of coverage. Any opinions? UPs? VPs? 16mm Primes? 16mm Aatons can't take a panavision mount, can they?

I will probably shoot at a T2 to 2 1/2 virtually all the time.

My greatest concern is fine detail in the wide shots.

Lens size really isn't an issue, as I don't think the camera will leave the dolly.

Thanks.

-Jarin

Wendell_Greene · May 11, 2004

I just shot a MV using an Angieneaux 7-81mm on an Arri SR-3. Great lense.

John Pytlak RIP · May 11, 2004

If you have the light, the sharpest color negative film Kodak makes is KODAK VISION2 100T Color Negative Film 7212:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...0.1.4.4.4&lc=en

7245 still has the lowest grain.

You can always boost the contrast or saturation during transfer.

Jarin Blaschke · May 11, 2004

I probably will use '12, although I much prefer '48 for print and in 35mm, will continue to prefer it until you guys at Kodak sadly take my baby away.

But as far as lenses, is it true that the latest lenses, when used in 16mm, will actually outperform lenses made for the format with glass closer to the gate?

How about Ultra Primes versus Variable Primes? I wish I could use Primos on a 16mm camera....

Mitch Gross · May 12, 2004

I would totally recommend Ultra Primes or Cooke S4 lenses. They will be very sharp and contrasty. There are also the spherical Elite lenses available for rental from Slow-Motion, Inc. in LA, which are excellent glass. The Variable primes are good, but not as good as those primes.

Michael Nash · May 12, 2004

What's wrong with the Zeiss Superspeeds? I've never noticed any shortcomings in sharpness or contrast for telecine. If there's something better I'd like to know, but not because the Superspeeds have ever let me down. It's true that the focal lengths are limited (why is there no 35mm? it goes straight from 25mm up to 50mm); so I usually supplement the set with a 35 and a 100 from a 35mm set (rental houses don't always want to do this), and a wide like a Century 6mm.

I'll second the recommendation for the Elites. The 7mm is incredible; nice and wide with no barrel distortion. I prefer it to the Century 6, but fewer rental houses have it. They also make a 4.5mm -- nothing BUT barrel distortion! ;)

There are decent zooms like the Canon 8-64, The Zeiss 11-110 seems OK (never tested it though), and the Ang. 7-81 sounds interesting. I think all these are t2.4, but the Canon at least stays sharp wide open. Otherwise, I like the Superspeed primes for the aperture; you can shoot a t2 or below for that 35mm shallow depth-of-field look.

If you use 35mm format lenses you'll be missing the wider focal lengths, which you'd probably pick from a 16mm set anyway. Otherwise I keep 16mm sharp by using no diffusion filters, fine-grained stock and a good telecine. Sometimes a little detail enhancement in telecine can help "snap up" the look of 16mm, if used judiciously and you don't overdo it.

Jarin Blaschke · May 12, 2004

Talking with with CSC, the order for the music video thus far contains the Ultra Primes.

I also ask about these lenses since I may be shooting a S16 film for blow up in a few months. I am looking for the sharpest possible optics. Last time I did a blow-up, I shot with superspeeds, almost always between T2 and wide open. Super16 has a bit more depth of field than I usually prefer. Plus every scene, interior/exterior, night/day, was shot on 7274 rated at ei125. Once we did the blow-up, though, everything was slightly and consistently soft. Maybe the lenses weren't properly seated, maybe SS lenses don't do so well wide open, maybe the lenses have seen better days. I was never able to discern why. Either way, I'm going with a different rental house (CSC) and a different set of lenses.

Mitch - aren't the Ultra Primes a touch sharper and harder than the Series 4s? I have also heard from a few people that the Variable Primes perform just as well as a great set of primes, even surpassing them in a few areas.

Thanks.

Jarin

Michael Nash · May 12, 2004

Talking with with CSC, the order for the music video thus far contains the Ultra Primes.

aren't the Ultra Primes a touch sharper and harder than the Series 4s?

Let us know which lenses you end up with, and tell us your results!

Mitch Gross · May 13, 2004

I'd say that it's a toss up between the UltraPrimes and the S4s, and frankly it would come down to an individual lens-to-lens comparison to really top it all out. Variable primes are sharp, but they breathe like crazy and I'm not the biggest fan. The problem is working wide open with just about ANY lens. Zeiss SuperSpeeds noticeably drop off below a T2.4 or so. They lose resolution, contrast and color depth. I find the drop off more noticeable on these lenses in general than on the Optars or the Elites. And yes, the same is generally true for een the newest 35mm lenses--UltraPrimes and S4s will not perform as well wide open as they will stopped down a bit. So perhaps it is more of an issue of how you are using your lenses than the glass itself.

Zeiss SuperSpeeds tend to flare more than more modern glass, and I don't like the way focus drops off in them compared to Ultras or Cookes. For the zooms I find that they perform better when stopped down a bit as well. I have an 8-64 that gets much better when stopped down from T2.4 to T2.8. And remember that even in today's modern computer-aided design era, evaluating lenses should be done on an individual basis. My Optar Illumina 12mm is much sharper and contrastier than any Zeiss 12mm I've ever seen, but that's just that one particular lens. There is nothing more illuminating than spending some time in the lens projector room with a set of optics and comparing performance.