I have the same questions!
For Super 16 going to 35mm, are the Kinetals serious contenders against
the Zeiss primes and the new Illuminas?
There was some discussion on the Cinematography Mailing List about Cooke
Series III and IV's being used to good effect on Arri 16SR's, and I also
know that the standards of 16mm Circles of Confusion have changed over
the years:
1/1000" (.001") – old 16mm standard
6/10000" (.0006")- ASC recommends for 16mm
1/2000" (.0005") .0127mm 12.7u - modern 16mm
So you see that the newer lenses will probably be in the order of 1.66
to 2x as sharp as the older 16mm lenses, going by the CoC standards.
However, what is the resolving power of the film stock? Weren't the old
Kinetals too sharp for the stock of the time? They're meant to be
sharper than Switars, so what's the real story behind them? (The Cooke
website isn't very informative on the subject of Kinetals)
So they might be just fine for modern stock?
All these questions and no answers...
Guess that's what this list is for!
ps/ Also, when the pundits mention Series 3 and 4 Cookes, are they
talking about the Speed Panchro series 3 & 4s? Or did Cooke change the
names too? Slightly confusing...
Cheers
Chris
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fulgencio_Mart=EDnez?= wrote:
> sorry for being late answering. i don´t know anyone. maybe Les bosher
> can do the job.
> about kinetal lenses,
> If they are good by are they so cheap?
> Do they really work well blowing up to 35mm?
>