p.17 #1 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Worth pointing out that the Simera-C M-mount lenses lack a rangefinder coupling.
See 2:30 in this video:
The provision of M-mount by DZO is to use the M's flange focal distance to increase the reach across pretty much all cine cameras via LPL, and for videographers using the mirrorless mounts.
'Short flange distances are the future. Designing lenses based on the M mount's flange distance of 27.8mm not only makes them significantly smaller and lighter compared to mounts with longer flange distances, like the PL mount at 52mm, but also allows for remarkably similar image quality.'
p.17 #2 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
philip_pj wrote:
Worth pointing out that the Simera-C M-mount lenses lack a rangefinder coupling.
See 2:30 in this video:
The provision of M-mount by DZO is to use the M's flange focal distance to increase the reach across pretty much all cine cameras via LPL, and for videographers using the mirrorless mounts.
'Short flange distances are the future. Designing lenses based on the M mount's flange distance of 27.8mm not only makes them significantly smaller and lighter compared to mounts with longer flange distances, like the PL mount at 52mm, but also allows for remarkably similar image quality.'
Personally I am not doing any videography. But I am, the M-mount DZO Cine lens makes sense, easily adapter to EF, Z and RF mounts with very compact sizes.
p.17 #3 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
True. I wouldn't buy them for M only but if you happen to have an M it'd be nice to also use them if you wanted too. Like in my case if you didn't have another 75mm or 21mm say.
p.17 #4 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Sure, but this is the 'Leica & Alternative Gear' forum and we would not want to have any misunderstandings. Showing just how far apart the cine and stills worlds are, B&H's page does not mention RF coupling at all:
There are often sound reasons for using lightweight stills-cum-cine lenses such as the Simeras or the Leica 0.8 series on MILCs - it's not often stated that they are better prepared and cleaned, and QC can be expected to be better. And the cine Simeras have the 16 blade apertures.
Stills users are notoriously behind the curve in their demands for sharpness and separation. It's why the Simeras are not appealing to many people want their lenses to do something 'different'.
'The Signature Primes represent a studied design statement called the “conscious design of softness” by ARRI Cinema Lens Specialist Art Adams. Of course, this doesn’t refer to “softness” as such; the Signature Primes are modern, high MTF optics, but that the quality of the out-of-focus areas (bokeh) were designed with a distinctly rich and creamy character'.
The new age of blending of stills and cine can be called 'Modern Vintage', even if it an oxymoron. I thought readers might like this from the Leitz 0.8 page:
p.17 #5 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Precisely, it is quite sensible and useful for it brings for me the type of shooting I'm trying to emulate.
It will provide in my mind a better casing, more apertures, more cinematic bokeh yet still be high in resolving power. I will shoot this by EVF as I usual do, so no need for rangefinder coupling.
Plus, I can use them (simera-c lenses) on my new sony 7CR as well as Fuji gfx 100ii and an older nikon 7.
Finally, I find the idea of a more "modern vintage" look quite appealing.
Joe D
PS: Since I'm limited in my visual acuity, I have always relied on evf's and shoot the Leica m11 monochrom this way as I've done with its predecessor the m10 mono.
p.17 #6 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
After testing the 50 Simera, I had to test the Thypoch 35/1.4 for e-mount. The e-mount version performs better on a Leica mod than a stock Sony sensor at infinite. Especially in the midzone and the most in the corners. At closer distance, the 35/1.4 does a hair better on the Stock Sony, especially in the corners. So, I think there is some tweaking by Thypoch.
I am more used to the 35/1.4, but I really don't get how Thypoch botched the ergo and build this bad--they can do better. Their cine version felt night and day better than this in terms of ergo and build. And this is a new version without the infinite lock. And some actual photos from the last overcast 2 days.
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.17 #7 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
nehemiahphoto wrote:
After testing the 50 Simera, I had to test the Thypoch 35/1.4 for e-mount. The e-mount version performs better on a Leica mod than a stock Sony sensor at infinite. Especially in the midzone and the most in the corners. At closer distance, the 35/1.4 does a hair better on the Stock Sony, especially in the corners. So, I think there is some tweaking by Thypoch.
I am more used to the 35/1.4, but I really don't get how Thypoch botched the ergo and build this bad--they can do better. Their cine version felt night and day better than this in terms of ergo and build. And this is a new version without the infinite lock. And some actual photos from the last overcast 2 days.
Thanks for this testing. It looks like that 35 f/1.4 isn't adjusted for the Sony sensor or at least performs worse on a Sony sensor than a thin cover glass sensor. Maybe a Leica M 35 f/1.4 would perform even worse on the Sony sensor. To my eye the midfield on the Sony stock camera doesn't catch up to the performance on the thin sensor camera until stopped down to f/2.8 and the corners of the stock camera don't match the corners of the thin sensor camera until stopped down to f/5.6.
I also have to say after reviewing a lot of images that I have to agree with you that I am not impressed with this Simera 35 f/1.4. I like the 50 f/1.4 a lot better, but perhaps that is just my tastes.
p.17 #8 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Always curious about the mysterious world of optical design, and at present the entry of the Simera lenses, I came across a short video where the authors of a very impressive 836-page tome were discussing the vital issue of why modern, virtually aberration-free lenses were failing to evoke emotional responses in audiences. As fate would have it, this realisation came at the time when almost all aberrations had been vanquished in their very expensive cine lens ranges.
The 35mm and 50mm Simeras obviously use Leica counterparts as starting points for their further development, but significant differences stand out, once you know how to observe lens cut diagrams. Some excerpts from the video:
'In around 2016 to 2018 we were starting to catch wind of this trend to older lenses being adopted. Zeiss engineers were scratching their heads – ‘what do you like about this lens?’ - it (the lens) becomes too clinical, if the look is not imbuing something to the scene, if it’s just a 100% pure crystalline of what I’m seeing with my eye, it feels like it’s lacking something – (by) taking the reality out of the situation.'
'When the manufacturers realised, it was a real struggle for a lot of them. It creates this emotional response in us, for some reason it’s there. It’s palpable. I think that’s part of the evolution of this whole book. It melted our brains to see what different characters, what this (older) glass brought. Why do we have a different emotional reaction to them?' The response:
'Taking these (high end) lenses and deoptimizing them, detuning them, reintroducing aberrations. Taking coatings off or recoating with a less robust coating, or *changing air spacings so there not in the proper place where they would correct an aberration, so they’re letting a little bit of SA to be introduced and that does a lot to affect the performance of the lens.* So they are tuning them to match the look of older lenses. So I think there is acknowledgment that there is value in aberrations.'
This would appear to account for at least some of the divergent and very attractive optical performance of the Simeras in question. Panavision are doing this retrofitting to their modern lenses. Zeiss/Arri have gone another (half-hearted and less organic) way, adding filters to their high end lenses to add spherical aberration, for example.
The DZO approach also stands in contrast to Leica's repackaging of their 21-24-28-35-50 Summiluxes as major elements of the M 0.8 (now Hugo) cine range, where (apparently) these lens's designs are virtually identical to the stills versions, certainly regarding their rendering style.
YT video 7:45 title: 'Behind the Cine Lens Manual: The Nature of Lens Character'
p.17 #9 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
philip_pj wrote:
Always curious about the mysterious world of optical design, and at present the entry of the Simera lenses, I came across a short video where the authors of a very impressive 836-page tome were discussing the vital issue of why modern, virtually aberration-free lenses were failing to evoke emotional responses in audiences. As fate would have it, this realisation came at the time when almost all aberrations had been vanquished in their very expensive cine lens ranges.
The 35mm and 50mm Simeras obviously use Leica counterparts as starting points for their further development, but significant differences stand out, once you know how to observe lens cut diagrams. Some excerpts from the video:
'In around 2016 to 2018 we were starting to catch wind of this trend to older lenses being adopted. Zeiss engineers were scratching their heads – ‘what do you like about this lens?’ - it (the lens) becomes too clinical, if the look is not imbuing something to the scene, if it’s just a 100% pure crystalline of what I’m seeing with my eye, it feels like it’s lacking something – (by) taking the reality out of the situation.'
'When the manufacturers realised, it was a real struggle for a lot of them. It creates this emotional response in us, for some reason it’s there. It’s palpable. I think that’s part of the evolution of this whole book. It melted our brains to see what different characters, what this (older) glass brought. Why do we have a different emotional reaction to them?' The response:
'Taking these (high end) lenses and deoptimizing them, detuning them, reintroducing aberrations. Taking coatings off or recoating with a less robust coating, or *changing air spacings so there not in the proper place where they would correct an aberration, so they’re letting a little bit of SA to be introduced and that does a lot to affect the performance of the lens.* So they are tuning them to match the look of older lenses. So I think there is acknowledgment that there is value in aberrations.'
This would appear to account for at least some of the divergent and very attractive optical performance of the Simeras in question. Panavision are doing this retrofitting to their modern lenses. Zeiss/Arri have gone another (half-hearted and less organic) way, adding filters to their high end lenses to add spherical aberration, for example.
The DZO approach also stands in contrast to Leica's repackaging of their 21-24-28-35-50 Summiluxes as major elements of the M 0.8 (now Hugo) cine range, where (apparently) these lens's designs are virtually identical to the stills versions, certainly regarding their rendering style.
YT video 7:45 title: 'Behind the Cine Lens Manual: The Nature of Lens Character'
p.17 #10 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
A short video (2:55) shot open gate (full frame) on the 28-35-50 Simeras in cine form (same optics at our stills lenses), mostly using 28mm and 50mm and mostly at f1.4 and f2.8. Most respondents are cine folks and comment on the camera. And fair enough, but we know where the magic starts. This is test footage, but gives some good ideas for bokeh, focus especially close focus, the 'modern vintage' rendering look and skin tones.
p.17 #11 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
There will be some interest in the Simera 75/1.4 when it sees the light of day in the new year, early hopefully. The shorter focal length Simeras are definitely 'people lenses' of course, with an emphasis on close focus distances. (DZO is a provider to the cine industry; they are simultaneously pushing the range into the stills and cine fields.)
But the 75mm will be more finely tuned for this purpose. It will come with similar design goals and philosophy as the 21-28-35-50. The focal length will see it pitted against quite a bit of competition from low cost lenses as well as Cosina's Nokton 75/1.4. The DZO company has settled on an M-mount as the 'universal' mount for the very good smaller cine cameras that are gaining wide acceptance at present.
The 75mm T1.5 - the recently released cine version with its larger and presumably heavier housing - weighs in at just 435 grams. Hopes are high that we may see a sub-400 gram stills version, about the same as the VM 75/1.4 with an adapter on it.
But the purpose of this post is to link to a lengthy video shot with the new and earlier Simeras, at 21-35-50 and the 75mm. The five minute long 75mm segment starts at 34:37. Many such videos are often composed (more or less) as a series of stills so the lens rendering can be assessed pretty well by pausing the presentation.
You have to 'look through' the effective color grading of this footage to view what we may see in a matter of weeks. It gives a good idea of many aspects: bokeh front and back, focal plane separation and fall-off, corners, performance by focus distance, facial shaping (critical in a 75mm), longitudinal layering, near-far relationships, detail retention in bokeh, 'presence', etc.
Dec 26, 2024 at 05:01 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.17 #12 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
philip_pj wrote:
There will be some interest in the Simera 75/1.4 when it sees the light of day in the new year, early hopefully. The shorter focal length Simeras are definitely 'people lenses' of course, with an emphasis on close focus distances. (DZO is a provider to the cine industry; they are simultaneously pushing the range into the stills and cine fields.)
But the 75mm will be more finely tuned for this purpose. It will come with similar design goals and philosophy as the 21-28-35-50. The focal length will see it pitted against quite a bit of competition from low cost lenses as well as Cosina's Nokton 75/1.4. The DZO company has settled on an M-mount as the 'universal' mount for the very good smaller cine cameras that are gaining wide acceptance at present.
The 75mm T1.5 - the recently released cine version with its larger and presumably heavier housing - weighs in at just 435 grams. Hopes are high that we may see a sub-400 gram stills version, about the same as the VM 75/1.4 with an adapter on it.
But the purpose of this post is to link to a lengthy video shot with the new and earlier Simeras, at 21-35-50 and the 75mm. The five minute long 75mm segment starts at 34:37. Many such videos are often composed (more or less) as a series of stills so the lens rendering can be assessed pretty well by pausing the presentation.
You have to 'look through' the effective color grading of this footage to view what we may see in a matter of weeks. It gives a good idea of many aspects: bokeh front and back, focal plane separation and fall-off, corners, performance by focus distance, facial shaping (critical in a 75mm), longitudinal layering, near-far relationships, detail retention in bokeh, 'presence', etc.
Philip, do you have any sense of whether Thypoch is modifying the design of their lenses in any way for cameras that have different sensor glass thickness. Nehemiah reported that the Sony E-mount version of the Simera-C 50 T 1.5 performed well on both his stock Sony camera and on his thin sensor Sony camera. He also reported, however, that the Sony E-mount version of his Simera 35 f/1.4 (stills lens) performed noticeably better on his thin sensor Sony camera than on his stock sensor Sony camera. Meanwhile Bastian has reported that the Leica M mount versions of the Simera 28, 35, & 50 f/1.4 (still lenses) all perform at least a little better on a Leica M10 than on a stock Sony sensor camera.
Thypoch statements about what they are doing about adjusting for sensor stack thickness have also confused me. You seem to have followed these lenses closely, so I wonder if you have learned something I might have missed. It seems to me Thypoch is marketing the Leica M Simera-C cine lenses as being able to be used on pretty much any mount, but what does that mean for adjustment for sensor glass cover thickness? Did they pick a medium adjustment? Are they adjusted for Leica M? Are the Sony E mount versions adjusted for the cover glass thickness of Sony E mount?
It matters to me, as I would like a 50 f/1.4 that is adjusted for the cover glass thickness of a stock Sony sensor, but I am not sure that will be available and if so in what mount. My actual preference is kind of weird. It would be a Simera 50 f/1.4 for stills in Leica M mount, but adjusted for a Sony stock sensor camera. I doubt that will be possible.
p.17 #13 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Steve Spencer wrote:
Philip, do you have any sense of whether Thypoch is modifying the design of their lenses in any way for cameras that have different sensor glass thickness. Nehemiah reported that the Sony E-mount version of the Simera-C 50 T 1.5 performed well on both his stock Sony camera and on his thin sensor Sony camera. He also reported, however, that the Sony E-mount version of his Simera 35 f/1.4 (stills lens) performed noticeably better on his thin sensor Sony camera than on his stock sensor Sony camera. Meanwhile Bastian has reported that the Leica M mount versions of the Simera 28, 35, & 50 f/1.4 (still lenses) all perform at least a little better on a Leica M10 than on a stock Sony sensor camera.
Thypoch statements about what they are doing about adjusting for sensor stack thickness have also confused me. You seem to have followed these lenses closely, so I wonder if you have learned something I might have missed. It seems to me Thypoch is marketing the Leica M Simera-C cine lenses as being able to be used on pretty much any mount, but what does that mean for adjustment for sensor glass cover thickness? Did they pick a medium adjustment? Are they adjusted for Leica M? Are the Sony E mount versions adjusted for the cover glass thickness of Sony E mount?
It matters to me, as I would like a 50 f/1.4 that is adjusted for the cover glass thickness of a stock Sony sensor, but I am not sure that will be available and if so in what mount. My actual preference is kind of weird. It would be a Simera 50 f/1.4 for stills in Leica M mount, but adjusted for a Sony stock sensor camera. I doubt that will be possible....Show more →
Just one data point that might give a clue in regards to the Simera 50 1.4 M mount...it is very noticeably better on a Leica SL2 as compared to adapting it to my GFX 100S in 35mm crop mode.
p.17 #14 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Steve Spencer wrote:
It matters to me, as I would like a 50 f/1.4 that is adjusted for the cover glass thickness of a stock Sony sensor, but I am not sure that will be available and if so in what mount. My actual preference is kind of weird. It would be a Simera 50 f/1.4 for stills in Leica M mount, but adjusted for a Sony stock sensor camera. I doubt that will be possible.
I've played the adapting (avoiding Leica) game for a while few years back and I gave up, going Leica (M) was a revelation to my way of shooting anyway (and they all have quirks and irks). A nice condition M240 doesn't break the bank and will give you a peace of mind to capture the full potential of the lens.
Dec 27, 2024 at 10:08 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.17 #15 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
jeffersoncasey wrote:
I've played the adapting (avoiding Leica) game for a while few years back and I gave up, going Leica (M) was a revelation to my way of shooting anyway (and they all have quirks and irks). A nice condition M240 doesn't break the bank and will give you a peace of mind to capture the full potential of the lens.
I have had a Leica M10 twice, so I know the benefits of using a Leica M camera, but for awhile at least I am going to be using a Sony A7R V. It has its advantages too and while I am using that camera I would like lenses that have been designed for that sensor stack. I am quite happy with the lenses that are available for Sony E mount and for which the lenses has been modified for the sensor stack, but I would like to add the Simera 50 f/1.4, but probably not if I can't get one for which the design has been modified for the thicker sensor stack on Sony cameras.
Dec 27, 2024 at 10:31 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.17 #16 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Just one data point that might give a clue in regards to the Simera 50 1.4 M mount...it is very noticeably better on a Leica SL2 as compared to adapting it to my GFX 100S in 35mm crop mode.
Hi Tariq,
That is consistent with Bastian's testing of the Leica M mount version of the lens as well. Thanks for the data point. I would love to see Thypoch develop a version that has been modified for thicker sensor stacks and they may have with the Sony E mount cine version, I would just like to see a version in a non-cine lens as well.
p.17 #17 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
What further proof/proof do you all want on the cine e-mount being optimized for Sony?
Dec 27, 2024 at 11:58 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.17 #18 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
nehemiahphoto wrote:
What further proof/proof do you all want on the cine e-mount being optimized for Sony?
Hi Nehemiah,
What I think you found was that the 50 T1.5 Simera-C for Sony E mount is optimized for Sony. I think you also found, however, that the stills 35 f/1.4 in Sony E mount was not optimized for Sony. That raises the question to me about whether the Simera-C 35 T1.5 would be optimized for Sony--perhaps the 35 is harder to optimize and they just didn't do it, and it also poses the question that if Thypoch makes a stills Simera 50 f/1.4 for Sony E mount, will it be optimized for the Sony sensor stack? Personally, I would like the 50 f/1.4 optimized for the Sony sensor stack and I think right now we know the Leica M mount version isn't, but will there be a stills lens that is?
What I would like to see, but I don't think they will do, is two stills editions. One optimized for Leica M cameras and one optimized for mirrorless cameras and that you could get either edition with whatever mount you like. Personally, I would get a lens optimized for mirrorless cameras, but with a Leica M mount so I could adapt it to whatever camera I wanted in the future.
p.17 #19 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Steve Spencer wrote:
Hi Nehemiah,
What I think you found was that the 50 T1.5 Simera-C for Sony E mount is optimized for Sony. I think you also found, however, that the stills 35 f/1.4 in Sony E mount was not optimized for Sony. That raises the question to me about whether the Simera-C 35 T1.5 would be optimized for Sony--perhaps the 35 is harder to optimize and they just didn't do it, and it also poses the question that if Thypoch makes a stills Simera 50 f/1.4 for Sony E mount, will it be optimized for the Sony sensor stack? Personally, I would like the 50 f/1.4 optimized for the Sony sensor stack and I think right now we know the Leica M mount version isn't, but will there be a stills lens that is?
What I would like to see, but I don't think they will do, is two stills editions. One optimized for Leica M cameras and one optimized for mirrorless cameras and that you could get either edition with whatever mount you like. Personally, I would get a lens optimized for mirrorless cameras, but with a Leica M mount so I could adapt it to whatever camera I wanted in the future....Show more →
I follow and agree with all that, just when I read "and they may have with the Sony E mount cine version" I am wondering what other proof people would like. The lens was shot at all distances on both mounts and show a remarkably better performance on a stock Sony then what Bastian showed with his m 50/1.4 Simera.
I do think it's all pretty clear they modded their 35/1.4 for e-mount. As it performs worse on Leica than on Sony, I just think we are butting up against a clearly optically unspectacular lens from a technical standpoint. Looking at Bastian's review, his m-mount version performed way worse on stock Sony, which is not at all the case on the 35/1.4 e-mount.
And by my thinking, I would be very surprised if the modded a the cine 50/1.5 and the still Simera 35/1.4 for their Sony version but no the stills 50/1.4, but that remains to be entirely verified.
p.17 #20 · New M-Mount 28/1.4 and 35/1.4 from Thypoch
Steve Spencer wrote:
Personally, I would get a lens optimized for mirrorless cameras, but with a Leica M mount so I could adapt it to whatever camera I wanted in the future.
The confusion this might cause, especially given thypoch seemingly aren't labelling how a lens is optimised, would be frustrating.
