Jump to content

Matt Kolze

Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Matt Kolze

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Occupation
  1. No I can't claim that one for sure. But the ease of swapping out the fan in the Alexa is a nice design. Every camera has it's good and bad. I just don't care for bashing any brand particularly when all of the factors are not taken into consideration.
  2. First time I've heard of such problems. Maybe there's more to this story than just bad sensors? I've never personally seen one go bad and we have over 60 Alexas working pretty much non-stop since the camera released.
  3. As long as the extender is sitting at the same distance, optically speaking, it is calibrated to work at from the Angenieux than there should be no issue. Sometimes they will not fit due to different inside or outside dimensions. More than likely the mechanical fitment issues will prevent the multiple adapters from working. It is a tough call without having the parts in front of you. Make sure they have a good return policy if things don't line up properly. Matt
  4. Alexander, I looked at a 8mm Ultra 16 in projection. It is almost exactly the same image circle as the 9.5mm The total is 16mm diameter and then it is a hard cutoff. I was going to put the picture up but it really looks identical. :)
  5. This is terrible. At least he is at peace.
  6. I would agree that most any lens could be used on a particular sensor with the understanding that the image will need a crop. I would also note that this compromise does effect the effective focal length of the taking lens as well as the quality of image due to the loss of useable real estate on the sensor. I/e from 5K to 2K in a Epic scenario. As long as this is acceptable the Ultra 16's are a really nice and fast set of glass. They have amazing contrast and remarkable resoution across the field as well as in the center. As for adapting them with a 2X? If you can accept the light loss and degredation of image then it can work. Remember that your focus marks will be off as your effective film or image plane has changed. Additionally the Ultra 16's have a rather deep set, as much as 32mm behind the PL, and may have interference issues with whichever adapter is chosen. In fact I can't think of one that would work. This is why they have the blue ring to clearly identify that they are not to be used on 35mm film cameras as the rear group may hit the mirror shutter. I haven't actually looked at the interior of the Black Magic camera so I'm not quite sure how much room is available before the low pass filter. This is an additional consideration which should be tested prior to production.
  7. Here's a picture of the projection of the 9.5mm Zeiss Ultra 16 lens. Note the coverage for super 16 and the radius of D = 7mm which is the measurement from the center of the reticle to the center of the siemens star at point D. Double this for the diameter and we have 14mm. This lens covers this and some. The next radius would be at E = 9.5mm or 19mm diameter. This lens doesn't even begin to image this siemens star or the letter E at any point. All of the Ultra 16 lenses image a similar circle out. I also projected this with an Angenieux reticle which has no format markings but does indicate a 8mm radius point. The Ultra 16's just barely covered this point.
  8. I'm not sure those Ultra 16 lenses will cover the sensor. For the sensor size of 15.81mm x 8.88mm the minimal diameter of coverage will be 18.1mm. The Zeiss glass covers approximately 16mm diameter in projection. Super 16mm needs at least 14.4mm for coverage. The Ultra 16's cover this well but are not going to cover the new Black Magic Cinema Camera in my opinion.
  • Create New...