[John Sharaf]

Seth,

Matrix is a was to adjust the color in every hue and saturation. In order to make these adjustments, presumably to create an accurate color rendition of your subjects, you need a DSC CdM chart, a proper evenly lit environment, waveform/vectorscope and ideally a Remote Camera Control Unit (CCU).

If you don’t have the4se things, you’re better off not fiddling with the variable Matrix settings.

Fortunately with most modern “professional” cameras the manufacturers have included various “Preset Matrixs” and I’d encourage you to play with these in a controlled environment (meaning not on a job) to see the various effects they create and determine if and when each might be appropriate for your use.

Adjust your monitor with the pluge and blue only to a nominal setting and light a typical scene that you’d encounter, perhaps an interview and have at it. Try all the different presets and carefully observe. Take notes if you wish. Record the different presets and play them back. Note what it looks like with Matrix on and off. If there is a separate color saturation control try that too, but be careful in using it without a vectorscope as you can mistakenly create too much color which is “illegal” and could cause your footage to be rejected for broadcast.

As I said, the grey chip chart is only useful for adjusting the white balance (red and blue gains), gamma and perhaps detail (although a waveform monitor is best for detail so you can see the noise and artificial contour; otherwise it becomes very subjective and dependent on the size and quality of the monitor you are observing it on).

Good luck!

JS

[John Sharaf]

Mark,

Good thinking! Now the diffusion is softening the shadow of the ribs instead of making a shadow from the ribs. Good luck rigging it though!

JS

[John Sharaf]

I second Todd’s recommendation of Paul Duclos. He is a real gentleman and probably the best Cine Lens tech in the business (although for Canon or Fujinon video lenses I’d probably use factory service).

Paul was for many years the tech at the Angenieux factory service center in Los Angeles and when they closed up that operation, when video became more ubiquitous and Angenieux had not yet entered that market, he opened his own shop, which has just moved into a new facility in the SF valley area of LA.

In addition to fixing lenses, he remanufactures Nikons, Tokina and Zeiss still photo lenses into Cine versions.

His website is very good and features a terrific lens blog “circle of Confusion” hosted by Mathew Duclos.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Seth,

I’d refer to legacy lenses as those designed for film (in this case Super 35mm). Just as the difference in SD vs HD Video lenses is attributable to a smaller “circle of confusion” required for the smaller pixels (more pixels packed into the same area), the same phenomenon controls the softness in the edges issue with larger high density sensors like those in the Epic and F65.

In the F65 for example there are 20 Million (Mega) Pixels.

With digital cinema cameras the first fault revealed by older PL mount lenses is that the light is not parallel as it exits the rear of the lens. As a result the pixels at the edges of the sensor do not receive the same amount of light as those in the center. The result is vignetting. More “modern” lenses designed for single large sensors make the light that emerges from the rear of the lens more parallel and are called “telecentric”. UniQptics, Leica Summicron and Fujinon Aluras (I believe) and Premiers are definitely more telecentric, and also somewhat more contrasty than film lenses to increase “apparent” sharpness.

The issue with the high density large CMOS imagers is that unless the lens’ “image circle” is large enough to essentially “overscan” the sensor then the edges of the sensor are perilously close to the edge of the circle and is not the same resolution as the center or nearer the center. If the lens has a large enough image circle to overscan the sensor, then the edge of the picture falls into more of a sweet spot of the lens for resolution.

For example the 12X Optimo has an image circle of 28mm, whereas the UniQoptics primes have 34mm image circle. I cite these two because the specs are available on them. The actual “image circle” is not often advertised other than to say that such-and-such a lens will cover a Super 35mm area, but will become increasingly more important to know as these larger and more populated sensors become commonplace.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Seth,

the only charts worth buying for camera setup that includes Matrix are the DCS Chroma du Mondes. If all you’re doing is white balance, gamma and detail, then any old chip chart will do, but the calibrated colors on the CdM charts allow precise Matrix adjustment for the most accurate reproduction of color. I know of no other such tool.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Hi Seth,

I hope you’re enjoying that Canon Cine style zoom, there are many times I wish I had it back!

Anyway, there is no literature explaining this developing trend in lenses, as 4/5K cameras are only now coming available; notably the Epic which is in limited release right now and in January the F65, and relatively few people are privy to the situation (can you keep a secret?).

As I said, as long as these cameras are used for HD (1920×1080) or 2K there is no issue with legacy lenses, and yes I have a 12X Optimo which despite its bulk and size is the epitome of legacy lenses to this point in time, but remember that is an almost 10 year old design conceived in an era before single CMOS imagers.

However there is no doubt that the conversion of Cinemas from film projectors to 4K digital projection is now an unstoppable phenomenon and future “big films” will undoubtedly be finished in the 4K domain to take best advantage of this.

Maybe not all films, just as in the past there was always the 16mm blowup to 35mm releases, there will be many lower budget films shot in HD or 2K that are “up-rezed” to 4K, or up-rezzing might even occur optionally in the projector itself. This will allow distribution of smaller files to smaller theaters of smaller films!

Big budget films however will record their master in 3.5K RAW (Alexa), 5K RAW (Epic) or 8K RAW (F65); it is in these cases where legacy lenses will become an issue, essentially because the pixels are so small that the imager is actually sharper than the lens. This effect will only be seen/noticeable on large screens like in a cinema, or in proper editing/color correction environments with 4K projection.

This is just the beginning of the tale. Stay tuned for the next act.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Hi Todd,

The 24-180 is actually shorter and lighter than the 12X Optimo which is the same T2.6. With the nominal speed of the Alexa, F3 and F65’s being 800ISO (and easily gained up to 1260) the speed is more than adequate in my experience.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Todd,

The point is that the current glass is perfectly fine for HD(TV), 2K and Super 35mm film, but when 4K projection in the Cinemas of 4K material shot in 8K becomes the standard, these new lenses will be de rigour.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Bill,

OPERATION> AUDIO-3> AU SG (1KHz) ON/OFF/AUTO

JS

[John Sharaf]

Bob,

The Leica Cine lenses are Summicron-C and cost $178000 for a set of seven! The Fujinon Premier zooms in 14.5-45, 18-85, 24-180 and 75-400 are more than $80K each. These are probably the only lenses out there that have been purpose-built for 4K/5K sensors and are future proof.

JS