早两年多买两套房子，现在气不短。
要几个没有。也就没吃油条那回事儿了。heihei~

原来这样啊，谢谢赐教。等俺有钱了，整一无敌兔，拆了改PL口
要是再有钱了……整一RED ONE来玩

人家可是说过统统不能转5D2的，相圈不够大的，哪个够哪个不够，可参见http://web.me.com/ducloslenses/DataRef/ImgCir.html
但不保超S35范围画质够高。

宁可改机身也不能改口呀，一个头买俩到4个大马三。还是转接evil比较上算。有一小部分屁股比较短的可以靠转接环转佳能1D4，但具体情况不明朗，没人做过试验告诉我。所以还是转evil比较安全，转接环相对也稍微容易买，但也不是遍地都有卖的，还是挺罕见的。

那改口行吗？（我是说改镜头，不是像某牛人那样改机身，那个实在受不了）

安琴有两只变焦和Zeiss CP.2、LWZ.2可以直接买EF口了。其他的绝大多数转接会打板。

能转佳能EF吗？会不会打板？

http://www.arri.de/news_and_events/arri_news_magazine.html

今天能看了，很奇怪。

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=39451&page=3
真他麻烦，为啥总看不了测试！！！！！
第25楼有一个Zip的连接，几大主流镜头的PK。

http://shop34451290.※※※※※※.com/?pageNum=8&catId=null&categoryName=null&encodeCategoriesName=y&price1=null&price2=null&searchWord=null&order=ascent&queryType=all&browseType=null
大家看过这家么？挺猛呀，啥都有，价格倒是比较中庸，不便宜。

大陆的二手电影头事业实在是不发达，也不知道电影厂周边有没有倒腾老旧二手电影器材的。

3千美金也是钱呀，如今有意2年内买房，不敢随便腐败了，这要是几年前，早买回来了。

如今中古只要三千美金
不過是七片光圈有浮動

Super speed 50T1.3当年也卖6200欧元呢，真烦。

我喜欢Super speed 50T1.3，颜色也好，感觉也靓，转在APS上正合我意。

我还是喜欢Zeiss，哪怕是老款的super speed T1.3。等哪天买玩房再说吧。

这个我的arriflex-cine-xenon 100/2就可以啦.既非华丽菜丝,也不是高贵库克.

电影头是个好东西！！

※※※※页面有时候会有不少技术参数，比如 The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor：

Camera
Arricam LT, Cooke and Angenieux Lenses
Arriflex 235, Cooke and Angenieux Lenses
Arriflex 435, Cooke and Angenieux Lenses

Laboratory
Kodak Cinelabs Beijing, China (dailies)
Technicolor, USA

Film length (metres)
3057 m (Sweden)

Film negative format (mm/video inches)
35 mm (Kodak Vision2 250D 5205, Vision2 500T 5218)

Cinematographic process
Digital Intermediate (master format)
Super 35 (source format)

Printed film format
35 mm (anamorphic)

Aspect ratio
2.35 : 1

http://www.※※※※.com/title/tt0859163/technical

老兄没上错图？怎么看一样呢。

这一组我看了一套小图，是通过google的缓存看的

40mm ultra prime

ZF35

[emolu 编辑于 2010-05-29 16:00]

ZeissTest-WFO-RW

ZeissTest-WFO

ZeissTest-Vign

ZeissTest-T4

帮你YY一下

RED Lens Test: Zeiss SLR VS Zeiss Cinema
20/05/08 08:00

Testing and comparing Zeiss SLR lenses and Zeiss Cinema Lenses on the Red.
On May 12, 2008 I met up with fellow cinematographer, and RED owner Hunter Richards (www.hunterhampton.com) and we headed over to Lyon Films (www.lyonfilms.com) where we met with directors Devon Lyon and Kevin Curry. Later, we were joined by Owen Stephens, SOC & inventor of the Pampalite (www.pampalite.com) who got in on the action, and showed us his great line up of florescent lights. The purpose of this get together was two fold, first Hunter updated everyone on the developments that had been made on the RED camera as well as demonstrated the workflow and post process of using the RED in a production environment. Secondly, Devon & I used this opportunity to test out two sets of lenses. Both of us wanted to see how big of a difference there actually is in-between a lens designed for cinema use and for SLR use. The RED can mount both PL lenses and Nikon SLR lenses with a simple change of the lens mount. My cinematography has taken me around the world, and being able to use small, lightweight lenses on a camera capable of shooting raw 4K intrigues me. If the SLR lenses are able to perform at the levels needed for the RED, this would enable me to have a smaller profile and a lighter load to carry when traveling. Scheduled to begin production in the first quarter of 2009, the documentary Walking Through Worlds (www.walkingthroughworlds.com) will take director Joel McEwen and I to remote locations in Asia, and being able to use the SLR lenses on the RED may enable us to get the images we need for the production while keeping down the form factor and weight. But can SLR glass hold up when compared to cinema glass?

For the last two years I have been using a set of Zeiss ZF SLR lenses and various 35mm adapters on projects that have smaller budgets, but still want the cinematic look of film. For the projects that can afford it, I have been renting the cinema lenses. Having used both styles of lenses I have seen the mechanical differences between the two, and now with this opportunity with the RED I had a chance to see how big of a difference, if any, there is in the image quality of each set of lenses.

To highlight the potential differences between the lens sets I settled on the following tests: sharpness, color, breathing, vignetting, and the mechanics. To keep the results consistent I decided to shoot both charts as well as a real world test. Charts are helpful for consistency and measurements, where as the real world test will show you what you actually get. The cinema glass used for this test was a set of Zeiss Superspeed Lenses (MKIII) with a T-stop of 1.3 and the SLR lenses were the Zeiss ZF lenses with a T-stop of 1.4. To keep as many of the variables out of the equation as possible, the footage was all processed through RED Alert using the same settings. See the picture below for the settings used. The only change made to the real world footage was a change to 709 Gamma in the Output LUT.

All of the still frames have been left unprocessed and have not been graded, while the sample footage has been graded using the same settings in each set of clips in Color. You can download the Color project files, as well as the full res sample images and footage at my web site, by going to the resource page. In the download you will find this review in PDF form as well as the setup notes for the tests which details out the various settings used, and lighting setups. So lets take a look at what the tests yielded.

(What follows below is excerpted from my full review notes. If you would like to read the full text, you can download the PDF’s here:
REW-ZeissLensTest-Results.pdf
REW-ZeissLensTest-Setup.pdf
REW-Zeiss-Breathing-H264.mov)

CHARTS:
Resolution / Sharpness @ Wide Open.

Resolution / Sharpness @ T4.

Vignetting @ T4.

Color Fidelity @ T4.

REAL WORLD:
Resolution / Sharpness @ Wide Open.

Resolution / Sharpness @ T4.

(The breathing and mechanics tests are detailed more in the PDFs, and the breathing test video can be downloaded at the link at the beginning of this article.)

After processing the footage, and reviewing the results, I was surprised to find that the SLR lenses were holding their own against the cinema lenses. I would even say that they were out performing the cinema lenses, as the SLR’s felt a little more sharp then the cinema lenses. Not only do the SLR’s feel more sharp, but they are completely color matched with each other and the cinema lenses, and there is no vignetting either.

The results of this series of tests was very surprising to me, and it was very welcome news as well. It was great to find out that the set of SLR lenses that I have will be able to get the job done. My only hunch as to why the lenses perform as well as they do on the RED, is that the film plane on the SLR is larger then the film plane on the RED. So the SLR lenses have to be able to resolve a larger image, and due to the increased image, the breathing in the lenses is probably falling outside of most of the RED’s sensor.

So what does a good set of Zeiss Super Speed lenses costing well over $20,000 get you that a good set of Zeiss ZF SLR lenses costing just under $6,000 can’t get you? Cinema style mechanics. The last series of testing that I did related specifically to the mechanics of the lenses, and this is where the rubber meets the road and the differences really stand out. And it is these differences that will be the deal breaker for many- especially those who have been around for a while.

The first major difference in is the size and weight of each set. The cinema lenses weight almost a full pound more then their SLR counterpart, and they are about twice the size as well. The second difference is the most important difference in my opinion- the SLR lenses rotate backwards. On the cinema lenses, to focus close to the lens you turn the lens counter clockwise, and for the SLR lens you turn it clockwise. The reason this is such a big issue is that an AC (Assistant Camera) has learned their trade very carefully and precisely in order to do there job well.  A good AC is worth their weight in gold. Having learned their craft on cinema lenses, if they were to use an SLR lens, all of their natural reflexes will now be backwards, making their job much more complex. To further complicate the issue the third major difference between the two sets of lenses has to do with the degrees of rotation to get from one end of the lens to the other. On the cinema lenses the shortest throw was on about 300 degrees on the 35mm lens, where as on the SLR lens it was about 115 degrees. That means that there is less movement between distances on the SLR, making the AC’s job that much more challenging. The last mechanical difference is in the aperture. On the cinema lenses the aperture rolls smoothly all the way through the range, allowing for smooth transitions. On the SLR lens, there are hard stops at each half and full stop, with no smooth adjustments possible.

In the end, having a set of SLR lenses may save you a chunk of change on buying lenses, but it may end up costing you more in the long run depending on the application you are using them in. For myself, I’ll be hanging on to my SLR’s to use in applications where small form factor, and lightweight portability are needed. And then I’ll continue to rent the cinema lenses for the projects that require them. Either way I can see a need and application for both sets of lenses.

这个有人能进么？我也看不了。
http://www.vimeo.com/10958292