Giray Izcan Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 Hello, I have posted on cinematography.com a few times. I have an NPR ultra 16 camera. I shoot with Rokinon lenses. I have a short film project intended for short film festivals. My question is if the image quality difference between super and ultra 16 noticeable under same circumstances I.e. lenses , lights, etc.? If I shoot on photo lenses, can I achieve similar quality to pl s16 lenses since I use the center of the lens? I am trying to figure out if ultra 16 with stills primes scanned at 2k would be noticeably less quality than s16 with 2k scanning? Or should I get a PL zoom lens like Canon 8-64? I've shot a few different test films and seems like Rokinon yields pretty contrasty , sharp and modern look but would like to get professional's opinions. In sum, can I roughly get the same image quality as s16 with u16? Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Will Montgomery Posted November 19, 2012 Premium Member Share Posted November 19, 2012 All things being equal you'd have a hard time telling the difference between Ultra and Super 16, but in an A/B test you'd probably notice a small difference. The biggest factor will be film stock and lenses. If you're shooting 50D or 100T you'd be fine with regular 16mm as long as your lenses are of good quality. If you have a PL mount, I suggest renting a Zeiss 11-110 Super 16 zoom lens. It's just about the best looking glass I've ever seen on a 16mm camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giray Izcan Posted November 19, 2012 Author Share Posted November 19, 2012 Will, Thanks for responding back so promptly. When I look at.the difference in width between 2 formats, there is only 0.6mm difference. What do you think about Rokinon lenses? I read on various reviews and comparisons that Rokinons get indistinguishably sharp as (almost) Zeiss. I should probably get pretty sharp images with photo lenses right? Here is the link for my music video. I edited on compressed codec therefore increased grain , I did corrections again and rendered the footage as uncompressed. There is a noticeable difference. in terms of graininess. http://vimeo.com/m/53480636 I shot this on Rokinon 35mm. Compressed post correction definitely added grain. The actual footage is not this grainy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Will Montgomery Posted November 19, 2012 Premium Member Share Posted November 19, 2012 I love Vimeo but it is rough on film due to the compression. Your link doesn't seem to work. Unfortunately I don't have experience with Rokinons but I'm sure someone here has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giray Izcan Posted November 19, 2012 Author Share Posted November 19, 2012 Will, Thanks for response. I am sorry that the link didn't work, but here it is once more: https://vimeo.com/53480636 Hopefully it works this time. And please let me know what you think about the lens (Rokinon), because I need someone else beside myself to view it to get an objective opinion. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gautam Valluri Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Giray, There are some really nice moments in your video. I like the footage you were able to achieve, and the dusty/ old west look and the ruggedness- Good work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now