Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Quality alternative to Blue Star lenses?

This is topic Quality alternative to Blue Star lenses? in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=008938

Posted by Peter Amies (Member # 4169) on 10-01-2007, 01:57 AM:

Hi everyone!

I'm in a bit of a bind, and could do with some assistance shopping for a new scope lens. I have the budget to replace an existing scope lens due to a screen size adjustment, and am having trouble finding the perfect lens.

Currently we have an 85mm integrated Isco Ultra-Star HD Plus (red) lens. I need to replace this with a 95mm focal length, and at the same time I'm hoping to improve the corner to corner focus issue we've always had with the current unit.

So I've looked at:

95mm integrated Ultra-Star HD Plus (easy swap for the current lens, but doesn't solve the focus issue)
95mm Ultra-Star HD Plus prime / Ultra-Star HD CS attachment (would the separate component system improve focus at all?)
95mm Ultra-Star HD Plus prime with Blue-Star CS attachment

I love the Blue-Star attachment (as I know a lot of you do) and a side-by-side comparison with the integrated red lens shows a MASSIVE improvement in focus. Problem is, the sheer size and weight of the Blue lens scares me! It's mounted in an FP-30EQ with a 3 lens turret, and with the Blue attachment (we've borrowed a sample for testing) you can hear the motor on the turret really having to work hard to move the lens.
Does anyone know of a lens combo that could give me the image quality of the Red / Blue set, without the massive size and weight? Are the Blue-Star integrated anamorphics any smaller, and has anyone ever used a magnification attachment to alter the focal length (it seems crazy that they're only available in 42, 45 and 48mm lengths)? Is magnifying the integrated Blue lens even a possibility?

Thanks in advance for all your advice.

Peter

Posted by David Graham Rose (Member # 1450) on 10-01-2007, 01:25 PM:

Greetings

Why not look at the Schneider range of Cinelux Premiere lenses? One can purchase a combined anamorph with variable iris. I've always found these to give extremely good focus.

Regards

David

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 10-01-2007, 02:14 PM:

Is the ISCO "red" lens inherently incapable of uniform focus? Or is it just difficult to set up correctly? I'm asking because the new Regal 15 here uses those lenses and I've noticed the same non-uniformity of focus across the entire screen. (Although where it *is* in perfect focus, it's very sharp.)

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-01-2007, 02:56 PM:

I've found that the RED ISCO lenses are among the best available.

Mark

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 10-01-2007, 05:01 PM:

Um unless the lens has been dropped, or is heat damaged ect, you really should be able to get a great image out of it. Perhaps something else is at fault? I have found in the past that xenon/ mirror alignment can be a big factor with scope focus.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-01-2007, 05:51 PM:

Those ISCO red lenses suck. They kill the contrast just to pass more light! Anyone who thinks they are better than the Schneider Premiere lenses should have their eyes checked. (For that matter, regular Schneider lenses are better too.)

Posted by Peter Amies (Member # 4169) on 10-01-2007, 06:20 PM:

I've always loved the Red Isco lenses, but from my experience, they aren't the best performers when it comes to even focus. I've seen the same thing across multiple lenses, on multiple screens, so I'm certain it's an inherent part of the lens design. It's also something a number of people on this forum have mentioned on a number of occasions. Anyone know if there would be a noticeable difference between the Red integrated scope and separate Red prime / attachment combo?

The Blue-star lenses (in comparison) have astounding geometry and focus (which, again, a huge number of you have mentioned). But they're just SO chunky! A little too much in a triple barrel turret.

Brad, how have you found the Schneider Premiere compared to the Isco Blue? And if the variable iris isn't an issue for me, would I ever notice the difference between the Premiere and standard ES series of lenses? Beyond that, can an anamorphic attachment be coupled with the Schneider Variable Primes?

Posted by Ian Freer (Member # 1940) on 10-01-2007, 08:16 PM:

Hi Peter

I may be able to bring a Schneider ES Cinelux integrated anamorphic lens for you to check out. It is unfortunately 82.5mm, so won't make your image smaller as you seem to be wanting to do, but as it's close to the 85mm you're using now it may give a reasonable indicative example of performance.

The lens is not brand new, but wasn't used for more than a couple of years before it was replaced (ironically in this case) by an Isco lens...

I'm not sure of the rules for posting contact information, but I'll check my registered details to ensure they're up to date and hopefully you can contact me via those if you want to.

Cheers,
Ian

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-01-2007, 11:26 PM:

Sorry Brad...I've done the shootout on Schneider Premier vs the ISCO RED lenses...on a target for target basis, the ISCO resolved as much or more line pairs in each target. The Schneider needed to have it iris adjusted to beyond f/2.0 before it had the same resolution but a substantial decrease in overall light level. The ISCO also out performed the Schneider in chromatic abberations too. This was all done with a Schneider representative present using identical focal length lenses on the same projector/same screen...only the lens was changed and a USL light meter checking the light levels as the lenses were adjusted or changed. I do beieve the Schneider had a greater contrast (it wasn't measured...sorry) but at the expense of all other criteria. Both SMPTE and Schnedier targets were run too.

The Schneider lens is also more critical about being dead square to the aperture than ISCO.

I think one of the reasons people think the Schneider lens resolves so much is their high-contrast but in fact they are resolving less detail but instead have a sharp light/dark transition...to which detail gets lost.

I suppose on one of my future tests...it would be good to measure the contrast ratio of the two otherwise identical lenses.

One last thing...when evaluating lenses and resolution... believe it or not, lamphouse alignment is critical. What you are really focusing is light with the lens and if the light is distorted coming out of the lamphouse (bad reflector or alignment) you will never achieve the maximum results with ANY lens.

As to the anamorphics. ISCO integrated anamorphic is nothing more than the same 4-element compact anamorphic they have been using for decades...even if coupled to a red prime lens.

There is no substitute for the Blue-Star anamorphic...It resolves the most, has the least amount of distortion too. I use it almost exclusively.

For those times when only a compact anamorphic will do, I strongly recommend the Schneider ES anamorphic. It too is only a 4-element job but I think it does quiet well with shorter prime lenses. Unlike ISCO, the ES anamorphic is just an attachment that can be used with most any prime lens. I've tested it down to 28mm for use with 16mm film too. It is one of Schneider's better products.

Steve

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-02-2007, 12:22 AM:

Customers don't give a flip about numbers and target patterns. All they care about is what looks the best.

Schneider wins.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-02-2007, 06:18 AM:

And yet, amazingly, I never get any complaints on the ISCO lenses...and in many installations I have a mix of Schneider and ISCO (depending on focal length/format) and never has the Schneider come away as the customer preferred looking image...in fact, they both come away looking excellent.

Steve

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-02-2007, 08:49 AM:

quote: Brad Miller
Customers don't give a flip about numbers and target patterns. All they care about is what looks the best.

Brad,

You're absolutely right on! Thats why they are all heading to the nearest digital installations to watch their movies...

Personally, I've found pretty much what Steve posted. Its easy to mistake extra contrast as perceived image sharpness when it actually isn't. We have quite a few red ISCO lenses on short throw/large screen installs and the images are excellent with very flat focus.

Mark

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-02-2007, 09:55 AM:

I have had more schnieder anamorphs go soft over time than iscos

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 10-02-2007, 09:59 AM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
You're absolutely right on! Thats why they are all heading to the nearest digital installations to watch their movies...

Despite what you think, the average person doesn't know if a place uses DLP or not.

The only way they'd know is if the people advertise it and a lot of the times they wouldn't know the difference without going to read about it.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-02-2007, 01:04 PM:

quote: Chris Slycord
Despite what you think, the average person doesn't know if a place uses DLP or not.

Ha, What planet are you from...? Indeed every patron that is in his/her/its seat when the presentation starts is subjected to the fairly impressive T.I. DLP header... then at the locations that pertain the Dolby Digital Cinema Header after that... So yes... all the folks in their seats in this town very definately know that its DLP.

Also... If you knew how lousy film projection is in this part of the counrty..... [Eek!]

Mark

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-02-2007, 03:43 PM:

[Big Grin]

..."Amen" to that... On of lousy projection over in this part of the country and that Chris has never seen digital presentations to make that statement..

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 10-02-2007, 07:40 PM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Ha, What planet are you from...? Indeed every patron that is in his/her/its seat when the presentation starts is subjected to the fairly impressive T.I. DLP header... then at the locations that pertain the Dolby Digital Cinema Header after that... So yes... all the folks in their seats in this town very definately know that its DLP.

Things must be different in your town then because at my old theater, a bunch of people actually thought we were digital when we clearly had 35mm only. I'm also pretty sure that a lot of places don't use the DLP header by company policy so not everyone who sees a digital showing knows/cares.

quote: Monte L Fullmer
Chris has never seen digital presentations to make that statement..

I could've sworn I saw Meet the Robinsons in 3D. But apparently you know differently. [Razz]

Really boring since I'd already screened it at my theater (just went with some coworkers to check out the fancy new 3D junk). And with that movie, it was really junk.

And at the new theater I transferred to, the couple DLP's they have look pretty good, though I've only seen trailers thus far from the booth as I was merely being trained on how to use some of their equipment I'd never used before and haven't had time to see a feature in those houses.

edit: I think this whole discussion just came from our different POV's based on our area. The average person in your area has seen and knows the difference; and where I've lived they really didn't. Also, if we're gonna continue discussing this (I think it's not needed but whatever), we should do it outside this thread as we're quite a bit off-topic.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-02-2007, 08:58 PM:

True, I'm using the older Schneider anamorphics and right now, they seem to present a decent picture, but got some that needs the elements realigned due to focus issues.

Posted by Peter Amies (Member # 4169) on 10-02-2007, 11:06 PM:

I've had the chance today to get a 95mm Schneider Cinelux Premiere lens in the turret alongside our current Isco Red lens for a direct shoot-out between the two.

Thoughts:

With both lenses set up as best as possible, the Red lens had slightly better focus at the center of the image (looking at test charts and line pairs). No arguments on this point from anyone who looked at the test.
The Schneider has dramatically better focus corner-to-corner, and once again, with our test, there was no way anyone could argue this fact. It was blatantly obvious.
If I was to pick between the central focus of the Isco or the evenness of the Schneider, the Schneider would win. Just a more pleasing image overall.
The Isco Red / Blue combo still walks all over anything else we've looked at! Again, no arguments from anyone in the room on this point. It's just a phenomenal lens!

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-03-2007, 12:24 AM:

I'm a bit curious there...you say the ISCO has a better focus at the center...I have found that both Schneider and ISCO can resolve more than the test targets can provide in the center. I've yet to see the Schneider meet, let alone exceed corner-to-corner focus...unless you stop the Schneider down.

All of that said, I did not test the 95mm of both companies so the results my vary. Also, I would believe the light source would be a factor here. I did my testing using Kinoton Lamphouses (Balzers mirror) and Projectors.

Posted by Bryan M. Montgomery (Member # 4412) on 10-03-2007, 12:58 AM:

Sounds like I wanna Blue Star! Many of my lovely "patrons" in the rare events when the feature starts a little late after the video pre-show has ended, have come out and stated "the film is stuck!" because of the silent and still company logo being projected by the video projector, so I agree, most people do not know the difference between film and digital (big TV)
Hell, they dont even know the difference between film and video!
I have yet to see the throngs of people clammoring to see the several digital screens in my area, just because its digital.
Why are you so evangelical about D-cinema Mark? I know you will still be working, but I will likely be out of work once the change-over happens, all to put a few extra pennies in the pockets of powerfull men....

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-03-2007, 02:30 AM:

Peter,
Were these tests done on a flat or slightly(and properly) curved screen? What lamphouse and what was your eveness of illumination? Did the projector have a flat gate or curved? What size lamp and screen, throw? There are too many other varialbes that you didn't mention that may also have to be taken into account. I also don't see what you say.

quote: Bryan M. Montgomery
Why are you so evangelical about D-cinema Mark? I know you will still be working, but I will likely be out of work once the change-over happens, all to put a few extra pennies in the pockets of powerfull men....

I'm hardly evangelical about it... but if you want to send me a buck for each time I mention it thats also fine! If you go back through my posts you'll find quite a number of posts in which I say I can live with Film or Digital provided that film is done right. Fact is that its easier to do Digital right and its more stable and stays right for a longer period. Film has been my hobby and then my craft since I was seven years old and I love film. On the other hand Digital has cleaned up so many thousands of theaters dreadful presentation standards that I have become just as favorable of it, possibly even a little more biased towards it. Nothing in my lifetime has done so much to raise the presentation standards of so many in such a short time. Digital has some very powerful attributes and it is also the future... film is not.

Who may I ask are the people that are going to get rich from Digital? I don't know of any... There isn't any more profit margin in it than selling film equipment...

quote: Bryan M. Montgomery
I know you will still be working, but I will likely be out of work once the change-over happens

Actually I have not decided that I will continue in digital. Since I have failing kidneys I have considered early retirement and possibly movinng to Wyoming just to grow Alfalfa.

I guess you could be out of work if you want to program your thinking that way or you could be heading another direction so you get to know everything there is about digital and continue working in the field. What disgusts me the most is someone that has convinced themselves they can't do something and especially those that ignore what the future is going to be. These type of people have no future! The truely great aspect of this country is that you can do what ever you want to if you put your brain to work on it. In my lifetime so far I've had the pleasure of working in three fields that I wanted to work in since I was a child. Two were short lived although I suceeded in them quite well and the third one has gone on now for nearly 30 years...The other interesting aspect of my life is that all my past jobs in audio, electronics, mechanics, and optics have given me the knowledge to do my day to day job as a cinema technician... I couldn't have gotten the knowledge I have through being in some union, going to school, or any other way... All I did was take the initiative to get here.

Mark