Leica C 100/1.4 10群13片
非球面x2, Super-EDx2, EDx2
原設計高畫質成像圈只有28mm
但是可以涵蓋Super-35和全幅
1.4是物理口徑,T光圈其實更小

http://www.bandpro.com/products/new-products-and-specials/93-lecia-summilux-c.html
4. Future-Proof Resolution - This one's a bit technical to be explained in one sentence, but MTF ratings and cycles per mm show these lenses to be high performing at least to 8K.
(Iain Neil, who designed the legendary Panavision Primos, is the head designer for the Summilux-C lenses. Jon Fauer's article with Iain is your best source for design information.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
官方也是这么表示的，莱卡从MTF看，分辨率可以支持到8K，当然也是我刚才贴的设计者说的那几句话。也就是说，她的相圈很大很大，大到高质量地覆盖645全幅。我没理解错吧，各位给审阅一下。

RED ONE. Scarlet now starts at 3K resolution (3072x1620) with a 2/3" Mysterium-X sensor that shoots at up to 120FPS video and scales up to 6K (6000x4000) using a 36x24mm Mysterium Monstro sensor with up to 30FPS video. EPIC will scale even larger, starting at 5K (5120x2700) and 100FPS with a 30x15mm Mysterium-X sensor and working up to an unprecedented 9K (9334x7000) and 50FPS on a 56x42mm Monstro sensor.

Read more: http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/11/13/red.epic.and.scarlet.dsmc/#ixzz1AtCTXXtl
——————————————————————————————————
这个是RED的感光元件尺寸，6K是FF35，9K是645全幅，8K保不齐还比宾得645D还大呢。看来买莱卡是最合算的了，能干很多事，能用很多年不用升级，能不能用在S2上呢？另外还有很强的防尘能力。

Film and Digital Times 32-33合订本PDF

“The other very big technical aspect, without getting into MTF,
is that these lenses were designed to perform extremely well
for not only 4K, but also 6K, 8K, and well beyond. Two major
things (besides distortion and a few other things) contribute to
picture quality when you talk about camera resolution like 2K,
4K and so on.One is contrast and the other is resolution. Most
cinematographers do lens tests by looking at a test chart that has
black and white bars. You can put up a Baltar, you know, a really
old lens from the 1950s, and you can say it’s a 4K lens. But there’s
a difference.
———————————————————————————————————————
难道莱卡电影镜能拍中画幅？我印象里RED 6K好像指的是FF35，8K是啥，超FF35——那不就是宾得645D了么？

钱是个好东西，over。

真他妈够莱卡的，一个镜头大约17片镜片和至少两个非球面，也就莱卡能干这事，怪不得不带LSD系统和MP卖一个钱呢。
Film and Digital Times 32-33合订本PDF
The emerging set of 8 primes average 17 elements, with at least
two aspheric element surfaces.

莱卡，莱卡真的是摄影头出身，不光前口给了螺纹滤镜，连后口都是螺纹滤镜，号称省得清理后组镜片了。佩服死了，这精神，绝对是为了穷苦人预备的，谁没事老去保养镜头呀
Film and Digital Times 32-33合订本PDF
Theyall have a 95 mm threaded lens front. A threaded ring at the rear
of the titanium PL mount permits quick and clean mounting of
nets—no more snot tape needed to glue stockings behind the lens.

路过~~~
好东西啊

http://blog.digitalcontentproducer.com/leitner/2010/04/30/21-mondo-nab-10-pl-mount-primes/
这里这里，7D是改过口的。

莱卡21T1.4的后口，怎么这么大？我怎么记得Zeiss和cooke是一丁点儿？这不是吸引我败家莱卡么？！

转接么？

太强大了。。。。。。。

也不知道莱卡流们怎么评价这个比起莱卡M50 1.4和R50 1.4呢？

LeicaSummiluxC_50mm on Sony NEX5：

一不小心发现MP50原来挺有分量呀，一般50头都是系列里边最轻量级的，没想到MP50和MP75同样的前镜片大小，居然还成了重量级的，2.7公斤，除了几个长焦外，就他最沉，看来是没少下功夫呀，比那些广角都要沉300-400克。不会又把50/0.7的那套玩意拿出来了吧。

如果要真是这样子，难道MP的相圈要小于cooke 5/i？

也不知道著名的库克轮架（Cooke Cam）能不能实现Zeiss MP的双浮动镜片组，标准外行的我看着图片，貌似Cooke Cam有点简单了。

看看！

下边说的zeiss虚报光圈的问题，如果Zeiss认为他没虚报的话，是不是能说明Zeiss是按照中心亮度测量的，而四角的暗角要明显大于cooke许多，全开光圈画面的平均亮度会明显低于cooke，才导致的感觉上虚报光圈了？

一枚库克镜头，有10到14片不等的镜片，以及大约60个机械部件组成。镜筒是阳极化处理的铝合金材料。镜片组被固定在著名的库克轮架（Cooke Cam）上。轮架是一个带有凸轮的镜箍，凸轮与外围镜筒的轮槽契合，这样轮架就带着安装在它上面的镜片沿着轮槽路径移动。这种凸轮式的镜筒移动方式，比螺纹式镜筒的摩擦要小得多。库克镜头中的凸轮是用聚合树脂制造的，这种材料非常坚固，它能让镜筒在-25℃到55℃工作环境下柔滑运动，而且完全不需要任何润滑剂。
——————————————————
邓东译版的cooke工厂探访。

不过，这么贵重的东西，我还没想好买哪一个。
cooke Zeiss leica（还是带有潘那维新血统的莱卡）。。。。。。

会的，不过我得办成一件大事才能买，要不就没有理由奖赏自己。你们会看到我的电影镜PK ZF100的那一天的到来的。

快买吧快买吧 电影头贬值慢，买个不会亏多少的

我对cooke的唯一心理障碍就是当年也不知道谁说过一句，在cooke的镜头里永远看不到蓝天白云。到现在也不知道真的假的，有时间只能去买盗版盘验证一下了。

http://philipbloom.net/2010/03/04/shooting-7d-pl-with-cooke-lenses-for-saturdays-la-masterclass/
大家来体会一下cooke黄，如果再有人说sony黄，咱们就用cooke拍他

http://www.filmaker.cn/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=4727&extra=page%3D1
leyanl
新会员

帖子28 注册时间2008-8-11 发短消息 加为好友
12楼 发表于 2011-1-8 00:39  只看该作者

(RPP)颜色比较单薄，不及蔡司，库克的色彩感，参数指标是差不多达到UP的级别，一部戏中我用这几种镜头都拍过相同画面对比过，个人还是比较喜欢库克的色感
__________________________________________________________________]
看来RPP真不行，就是个清楚，没别的太多含量了。

楼下的兄弟回应了，测试还是不要用幻灯机，capss同志曾经也说过。
My advice for testing the lenses, it is good to pre-test the lenses on good quality projector, but nothing will replace the on the camera test, with good chart, evenly lit (use dispersed light) and underexpose one or two stops.

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=13076

Today I had a great evening at Arri Australia projecting and evaluating various lenses that I intend to put on my Red One and later on Epic.

My Evaluation Criteria
The assumption was that, in order to resolve for Mysterium sensor, a clear and contrasty image of ~70lp/mm should be obtained across the image plane. Accordingly, my main criteria for glass selection was to achieve ~70% MTF at 70lp/mm. To aid my estimation, I assumed that the 70% modulation corresponds to roughly 5-10%MTF (barely visible) at ~200lp/mm. Other than that, the testing was very "unscientific" and mainly aimed at giving me a ball-park guidance.

Wide Angle
We projected 16mm MP and 16mm UP. The difference in the 60% centre section was very small, but noticable. Both lenses resolved 70lp/mm nicely in the centre. However, at the edges the 16mm UP is soft - very soft. Essentially, if you shooting 3k widndowed, the UP will be OK, but at full sensor coverage expect significant bluring and CA towards the edges of the frame and corners are even worse strugling with resolving even 30lp/mm. Master Prime had some softness in the very corners too, but the edges were as crisp as it gets.
My opinion is that in wide angle department Master Prime is an absolute minimum glass to have on a 4k (or 5k) chip, no ifs or buts. In the corners, the limitation is still in the glass and not in a 4k sensor, not even in a 3k sensor! But anywhere else, including edges, the 4k sensor would limit the final image resolution.

Medium Angles
We projected 35mm MP and 32mm UP. There was less difference between UP and MP here, however I still decided to put 35mm Master Prime in the shopping basket in favour of an equivalent UP. Not as prominent as at 16mm wide angle but, after careful consideration, I concluded that the MP is worth the extra cost as the difference in corner resolution was still significant. What I mean significant is that it is clearly a limiting factor over the CMOS resolving power. At 3k crop area both lenses out-resolved the sensor and produced 70lp/mm with high contrast and I could not see any significant difference in their performance in this region. For budget concious, going UP in those angles (~35mm focal length) is tempting, specially if shooting 1:1.85 or 1:2.35 aspect ratios. I decided to "future proof" for Epic and selected a MP again.

Long Lenses
We projected 75mm MP and 80mm UP. I was hard pressed to tell them apart except for the very corners and even that was marginal. Both performed superbly resolving far beyond what Mysterium is capable of.
We also put 180mm UP on the projector. Again, beautiful lens: crisp corner-to-corner and out-resolving Mysterium sensor comfortably.

Conclusions
I am taking delivery of 14mm MP (wider than 16mm tested) and this is a must-have lens at those angles. If you think any lesser glass would resolve 4k at super wide angles, you are kidding yourself! Master Prime barely achieves this and it is miles apart from Ultra Prime.

If you are aiming at Red One's or Epic's full raster, medium angles of about 35mm focal length are still in Master Prime territory. The difference is on the edges and corners only, but the difference is clearly visible. Border line, but enough to swing me into selecting Master Prime.

At longer focal lengths of ~75mm, you will save heaps of money by going Ultra Primes. They are razor sharp corner-to-corner, edge-to-edge and, in my opinion, there is absolutely no justification to go Master Prime. Mysterium chip resolving power will be a limiting factor here, certainly not the glass.

It was quick and rough "sanity check", but I hope some of you guys will find the above observations useful.

It was certainly good fun playing with all this glass and I would like to thank Rey and Stefan of Arri Australia for their kind invitation and assistance.

V版。。。。

我现在很想知道UP65和UP50哪个更好呢？我个人更倾向于UP65的画质一点，但是如果只能用APS-C机身的话，UP50的视角更适合我一些。如果选择MP50呢？和UP65和UP50对比一下，画质和相圈大小。我倒不是非要覆盖全福，但我希望画质不降低的情况下，相圈更大，这样在以后全副Evil普及之后，即使切掉画面四边，也不至于损失的范围过大。

MP65有四片如今透光不好的鉛玻璃，太令我吃惊的答案了。看他的样子倒是觉得他有传统风范。另外从Zeiss cooke和莱卡对65的特殊照顾来看，65相当于是Zeiss ZF85的感觉，以人像为主，不知道UP65和UP50对比会怎样，UP65不会肉一些吧。

另外，即使透光不是太好，能有4片铅玻璃，难道MP65有独门秘籍？也不知道拍出来啥样子，迄今为止没见过任何图片，我所搜罗来的录像也只是屈指可数，还多是contax镜头一类的摄影投拍的。