Believe this is the best review for the arles out there, havent seen any other channels properly getting quality sample footage like this. Thanks for this!
The Arles is the best DZO has to offer. I have the 25mm, 40 and 75mm but I wish I picked up the 135 instead. This is not a hit on the 75mm. It is EXCELLENT. I am amazed at what DZO is doing and how they are futureproofing their lenses to fit on my GFX100II with full coverage using PL versions of the lenses. They also work perfectly on my C70, R5MK2 and Red Epic Dragon with the motion mount. I DZO.
That's a nice selection. I think I'd do something similar, get a mix of the A and B set, otherwise there's not sufficient difference between the lenses. They really are outstanding lenses. Not perfect, but they don't make your wallet hurt! Hmmm, I think the 75 is a good choice given the selection you have. I feel you might miss the 75 if you got the 135.
Amazing video! And not just because it's fueling some very aggressive confirmation bias about the 4-lens set I bought for Cyber Week this year.. Watching on my 2021 16" MBP and the HDR mastering looks incredible with that gorgeous demo footage.
@@team2films You're welcome! Do you let UA-cam apply its own HDR-SDR downconversion? How do you do the SDR downconversion? Both HDR and SDR versions look great. I'm using my MacBook Pro M1 Pro HDR screen for HDR playback.
@@asafblasbergvideographer We're still figuring things out. In this instance we uploaded without any additional HDR10+ metadata. I think next time we will add HDR10+ metadata.
Those Arles Primes look incredible for their price... BUT I must confess that the recently released Thypoch Simera-C are more appealing TO ME. (only downside I can see right now being that they're not available in PL Mount) Great video, as always guys (and happy New Year)
Thanks so much. Yes, the Simera look interesting. We're getting a set to test later this month. I'm sure they will be good, but for us PL is a better choice.
@@team2films Yep, PL should be mandatory for all cine lenses. BUT now that most manufacturer are coming with locking lense mounts (even Kinefinity offers locking E-Mount) these types of lenses are looking like good options for low-ish budget productions.
Happy New Year guys! Impressive you hiked with them they are not the lightest of lenses, but they do capture some beautiful images! I borrowed A set and shot a music video on V-Raptor them. Loved them. We purchased 21, 35, & 50!
That's awesome. Yeah, I will admit I definitely noticed the weight while hiking 🤣 That's a nice selection you purchased. And that's pretty much what we'd pick out too if we just got three. If I added another lens, I'd throw in a 100mm. Thanks for watching and thanks for commenting.
The best part was the fact I loved both portrait images. A & B. I could see they were different but I like both of them for different and similar reasons. That to me said 'I don't need to know which one was which' which is a strong testimony to what DZO has achieved. I have used the 25mm before and loved it.
Great video, wish there was some more Vista Prime Content!! There are no great lenses reviews for the Tokinas on the internet right now, I know myself and a lot of others would love to see a review of them from you guys!! Cheers!
They really are great lenses. We've got the ZF.2 model converted to EF. The only complaint we have about them is that they are not PL! Just means we can't use them across all our cameras.
Thank you for putting together such a thorough video on the Arles primes. You guys provided some wonderful footage to showcase the image quality from these lenses! I still can’t clearly tell which footage is from which lens..the difference in lighting also makes it tricky. I personally prefer footage B over A, but I think that has more to do with the lighting than the lens quality. Either way, I’d like to believe footage B is Arles
Yeah, you are spot on. B is the Arles. If you look closely, it's slightly softer and has harsher bokeh. It's prone to some nisen-bokeh which gives the 'balls' hard edges. You'll see it on the bush in the background and on her hair. But we're glad you have troubling seeing. That's one of the points that we're trying to make. We're nit-picking. Great to have you here. Thanks for watching and commenting.
Hi. Just one thing about the pronounciation or ARLES (I am french). Arles is a city in the south of France well known for its photography festival, its art exhibition and for being the place where Vincent Van gogh made some of his most famous paintings. The name of this city is pronouncedc ARL
Thanks so much. Yeah, the Arles are incredible value, were genuinely impressive, and when viewed in isolation there was very little to complain about. When compared directly, it's clear that the Vista Primes are a superior lens. Their wide open sharpness was top tier, but for us we'd say that the smoother bokeh makes a bigger difference in the look of the image. I don't want to take anything away from the Arles by saying that though! For those without the budget or justification, the Arles are an incredible option. We could genuinely recommend both lenses. Appreciate you watching. Thanks so much.
For the grading, not going to lie, the ungraded looked way better. I did not like the colors at all. I shoot photo and video in the outdoors, so it was nice to see hiking content similar to what I shoot
Thanks for the honest comment. Can you be more specific about what you didn’t like? Were you watching in HDR or SDR? We’re glad you liked the content though.
Vistas are sooooo good and are now down to $4700 each. Way smoother bokeh which effects the entire frame for a smoother overall feel. Razor sharp and holds contrast better even wide open especially on the wider primes (more difficult to make). They're still the better lenses. It’s cool the Arles seem come close-ish for cheap though.
Yeah, we are glad that came across. The Arles are fantastic lenses and offer insane value. They are still conservatively a third the cost of the Vistas. Because they discounted when you buy a set… We were very impressed with the Arles look when wide open. They never felt soft. Never for a moment felt I was comprising by having them wide open. They are great lenses, are they as good as a 6000 dollar lens, no. Do they cost as much, no. But we completely agree that the vistas are better, but we definitely couldn’t hike with the them, and you need to decide whether you can justify the additional cost. Yes we think the smoothness of the bokeh is probably the biggest factor.
@@team2films Yeah as much as I love the vistas I probably will never buy them due to the size and weight. If I'm on sticks though and the job has budget they're the first lenses I rent for a clean but not sterile look.
Great video, and I think all UA-cam videos should be available in HDR, so great work! I don't think that you should be outputting to P3 though, UA-cam will still interpret it as Rec2020, and UA-cam specifically says "If you're grading your video, grade in Rec. 2020 with PQ or HLG. Using a different configuration, including DCI P3, will produce incorrect results" in their guidelines on HDR. Rec2100 IS the standard that defines what HDR is, and that standard defines Rec2020 as the gamut, with the two options for transfer function being HLG or PQ. Most of the time, people limit their own colors to be within the P3 gamut (to ensure that they will be displayed as intended), but they still encode those colors as Rec2020...as a simple example, imagine all the pixels are (0,0,0)...that is a black screen. If you encode it for Rec2020, it is still a black screen (and every TV or monitor should be able to display it). So, choosing what to place inside of the HDR container is not the same thing as defining the container. So, it is a viable option to limit which colors you use to the P3 space, but I think it's incorrect to output and encode the video as P3. In some cases, encoding the image as P3 can change how it is interpreted by something that is expecting Rec2020. I like to use Resolve's CIE Chromaticity Scope where I can overlay P3 on top of Rec2020, to see where my colors are in relation to P3, while still encoding to Rec2020. That being said, your video looks very good as usual. One of my favorite parts of using HDR on UA-cam is that it forces the videos to use 10 bit color, which gets rid of banding...I have seen so many great youtube presenters who have horrible backgrounds with banding because of UA-cam compression, and HDR provides a way to ensure that you are delivering higher quality. Part of the issue is that HDR comes with many preconceived notions, and people think it means "bright saturated colors", but that is not really what it means at all. You should be able to display an identical image as Rec709 in HDR if you want to, just because you have more colors and brightness available doesn't mean you have to use them...although you definitely can...as they say, with great power comes great responsibility. One other thing, I believe that PQ is best when used in a controlled viewing environment, it is an absolute standard which defines the nits, HLG is more flexible, and is dynamic, which means HLG shines when we do not have a controlled viewing environment. This is why typically long form narrative would use PQ (displayed in a theater), and broadcast would use HLG (displayed on a TV). That being said, for PQ 1000 Nits, it should look identical to HLG on the same monitor configured for either standard at 1000 nits. Either can work, but I have found for me that HLG is easier to work with and I get better results. I also have been working a lot on Screen Recording in HDR and how to incorporate those images into an HDR video. In OBS, I think I can get the output of the screen recordings into HLG, which should allow me to integrate the footage very naturally into the color managed workflow. One other topic that interests me a lot is whether you provided a conversion LUT to UA-cam for the SDR trim? I haven't found this to be necessary for me, as their SDR trip automatically looks pretty good. So, I am curious as to your thoughts on that. Anyways, I could talk about HDR all day, but thanks again for your great videos, keep up the great work!
If you right click on the video, and select "Stats for Nerds", you can see that it says "smpte2084 (PQ) / unknown" on your video... If you upload using the correct standard of Rec2020, it would say "smpte2084 (PQ) / bt2020" or in my case "arib-std-b67 (HLG) / bt2020" because I use HLG. That could also potentially affect your SDR version, as they will be trying to do the 3x3 matrix transformation from Rec2020 to Rec709, I believe, which could exacerbate any issues with the automatic SDR trim. It's just important to keep the color you are choosing to display separate from the encoding scheme used to define the colors. Technical, not creative as you rightly mentioned in your video.
One last thought that I had was that I tend to approach HDR differently than how you did during that section of the video. If we look outside using our eyes, we have a vast dynamic range. Due to technical limitations, SDR forced us to cut off parts of the image, either we could lose the shadows, or we had to clip the highlights. Rec709 as specified only has 6-7 stops of dynamic range. We know our cameras are capturing way more than that, even an iPhone can capture around 12 stops. So, because of SDR's limitations, we have to distort our images, we can use techniques like rolling off the highlights to try and lessen the impact, but it doesn't change what we are actually doing, throwing away or distorting the information. This is typically done in the tone and gamut mapping steps of display prep. Some people actually like this distortion, and humans have been doing this for a long a time, so it makes sense that it has become familiar. HDR changes that, so from my perspective, we are not going to accentuate the bright parts, we are simply going to allow them to exist. You were spot on when you said that most of the image will still live in SDR territory, because that is where it actually lives. A face is not as bright as a street lamp just because I have changed my canvas. In SDR, a cloud has to be as bright as a piece of paper, because there are only 100 nits...we can't show any difference between things or that one is brighter than the other. My perspective is, and its ok if others feel differently, that we are simply allowing more of the image that was captured to be displayed. I would let the scene itself dictate the brightest or darkest parts of the image. In other words, I would not try to maximize the dynamic range, I would simply keep more information already in my image. Of course, when it comes down to stylistic choices, then you can make things more dramatic, and push and pull things, but that is really more like "look development", because the image doesn't need to be corrected in my opinion, if it is shot well, well exposed, with proper white balance, then HDR just lets me display more of that image, with less fiddling and manipulating. To sum up, I don't think you need to push and pull shadows and highlights so much, you have enough dynamic range in HDR to let the image live as it was shot, the shadowy parts will be shadowy and the bright parts will be bright. That is my personal theory at least, I am striving for capturing images where I don't need to "work them" so much (an artifact of SDR's requirements) and I definitely don't want them to look "worked on", where what I captured is the star of the show, and my grade, and HDR serve to allow it to be expressed accurately.
Heya Max Always love seeing you in the comments. Thanks as always for watching, and thanks for the meaningful and productive conversation! HDR seems to have had a bit of a ‘Marmite’ effect with some in the comments 🤣 Interestingly, the lenses have split opinion too. People seem to either love or hate them. I will admit that our first HDR upload it’s not precisely where we wanted it to be… but as is the case with most videos, this one was released rather than finished. There’s always more we want to do, and it gets to the point where we’ve just got to get it out there and move on to other pressing jobs. HDR Strategy: Yes we completely agree with your perspective about allowing more of the image to be displayed. I think it’s inline with the ‘just because you can doesn’t mean you should’ mantra. Perhaps the example we picked wasn’t the best, perhaps it was pushed a little hard too (in the name of pop), but there are plenty of shots in the sequence where the HDR sits at much more conservative nit values. We’ve used the same Spiderman quote when talking about this kind of stuff too 🤣 Another factor to consider when incorporating high nit values into a graded image is the fact that most current HDR monitors are not capable of properly displaying excessive brightness. For two reasons: 1. ABL that engages when APL or peak luminance windows size reaches a particular threshold. This is common on OLED panels. 2. Local dimming panels don’t typically have ABL…. But depending on the algorithm used to determine the brightness of each dimming zone, it can clamp the brightness levels. For example imagine a scene with bright stars against a black backdrop. The dimming algorithm will bias towards the black background, thus limiting the brightness of the stars. Output Colour Space: Oooo, yeah, that’s interesting, hadn’t spotted that in the UA-cam documentation. It should be noted that the HDR10 and HDR10+ standard DOES allow for the use of both Rec2020 and P3-D65 colour primaries. Interestingly, I see no difference with the colours when viewed on UA-cam compared with Resolve/Quicktime. As a test, I’m running the same video out to Rec2100, will upload and compare the difference. This could explain some of the more rude reactions that some have had to the grade. It might be that different devices react differently to the incorrect colour space (perhaps legacy devices), where as other more recent devices are capable of displaying it correctly, or simply display it correctly because they are natively in the P3 colour space. Hmmm. I need old hardware to test this on. Screen Recording: We use an external device for our screen recording (A Blackmagic Video Assist HDR 12G SDI). I think we need to do some tinkering in MacOS to get it to send the correct signal. As it’s not simply daisy chained off of the primary monitor, it’s a mirrored display so subject to a different pipeline through Color Sync. Upload: No, no LUT attached. Also, we didn’t add the sidecar HDR10+ json information either. That might have been another issue. Like we said, released, not finished 😞 More HDR ------ Later in the year we’ll be producing more content around grading HDR. That will including monitoring hardware and resolve workflows. Send us an email please Max. Would love to continue some of this via email. Then we can talk about this all day long 🤣 Once again, thank-you so much for always being so positive about the videos we make. You are a great encouragement and we appreciate you.
@@team2films No worries! It's always great to chat with you guys. I'll shoot you an email. I figured we shared a lot of the same philosophy on HDR, so I am glad that it didn't come across as critical, it definitely wasn't meant to be, but I tend to nerd out when it comes to HDR lol. In fact, I should really learn from you guys, your video was excellent, but even more importantly, it was released! I have been wanting to start a channel forever, but I fear I am letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. I have like 3 or 4 videos that are all in some state of readiness, but I think I just need to start, and improve as I go...but luckily, I was able to refer back to Resolve for Editors which was an awesome resource! The chapter on audio syncing and multicam has been a lifesaver. So, thanks for the motivation and guidance!
@@MaximoJoshua It didn't come across as critical. You are so nice, don't worry about that. And if you ever have genuine critique, please always feel comfortable to post it. We're definitely not perfect! Yeah, I look forward to talking via email. Thanks Max, you are THE best :)
A lovely, well put together review. Just one inconsequential question, though: are we sure it's pronounced "Ar-lez"? This seems to be how everyone is saying it, but are the lenses named after the French city? Really doesn't matter either way! 🤣
Hahaha, yeah, we're probably pronouncing it wrong. I think 'Arlz' is the correct way but we have gotten so used to saying arles, that it felt wrong saying anything else. Thanks for watching and commenting. Appreciate having you here.
You could put both of those lenses next to a Canon 50mm F1.8 (nifty 50) and most people on this planets wouldn't bat an eyelid. I've also seen a video on youtube where a bunch of cinematographers where cold tested super cheap lenses vs ultra expensive lenses and they all failed the test badly. However put ANY camera/lens combination in the hands of a talented filmmaker vs clueless newbie filmmaker and you will see a huge disparity in what is produced. Either of these lenses in the hands of a newbie along with a great camera vs an OK camera and a nifty 50mm in the hands of Roger Deakins who's footage will look the best do you think? We have to stop thinking about the gear and start thinking about what we produce. ideas and stories are king. Not pieces of equipment.
Thanks so much for watching. We agree with you that talent and creative ability is more important than equipment. For sure! Here's some thoughts that might be helpful: There's a very big difference between these lenses and nifty fifty :) It might surprise you to see how much difference there is. A great many people would be able to tell the difference. It can be reductive sometimes to say that equipment doesn't matter. It does matter, but it's only effective in combination with talent. There's also nothing wrong with enjoying the tools you use. We're excited that lenses like the Arles are closing the gap and making such high quality more affordable. Thanks so much for watching our video and taking the time to leave a comment.
That is interesting. It's worth considering the cost of the Arles as a set. They are even cheaper per lens when purchased that way. Although we got to say, both lenses are great and deserve praise.
@@team2films Most shots have a 'matte' feeling to them, because of the trim. In general it's a strange look because the low exposure trim clashes with certain objects that are very bright and saturated. Like 08:53 11:13 In high dynamic range situations the highlights are often blown out. Resulting in a Rec709 look. Like on 12:10 12:58 The blue sky is noticeably purple. Also, all the screen recordings should have their brightness values translated to SDR. It's not, so web pages like 08:00 are super dim.
@@MarkusFinholt Thanks Markus. That's helpful feedback. We're going to experiment with our trim process to see what we can do to improve the UA-cam experience the next time we post. Please always feel free to drop constructive feedback in the comments. Compliments are always welcomed too to keep us encouraged :)
Thanks for letting us know. I think there might be some inconsistencies with the way the video is displaying across different devices because of an encoding error our side. Thanks for watching though.
Arles lenses are indeed great... I have been using the 35mm and 180mm and intend to get more. Thanks for your comparison with Tokina, and try a comparison with Cook. As to your video it looks pretty good in SDR, however your HDR is horrendously awful and does no service to promoting these lenses. The skin tones are terrible and should be an embarrassment to have put out... again only making these lenses look bad with bad color grading. Firstly and most important, I would suggest using a color managed workflow. Such would put your images in a good starting point. Again, the SDR of these images looks pretty good and also shows comparisons well. However, your HDR attempt is only a distraction. Secondly and as important, your HDR skin tones are horribly non realistic. As well, all the tones are a distraction to the great scenes shot. What a disappointment to go to the effort of those landscapes and then grade them in such a manner. I would recommend anyone interested in color grading to look up Cullen Kelly's UA-cam site. My recommendation for your review here is to watch it in SDR only (which looks nice and is effective.)
Heya Jeffrey. Thanks for your input. This grade WAS produced using a colour managed workflow, it's shown in the video at 3:20. Sorry you had a bad experience with the HDR version of this grade. There is of course, always room for improvement and there's a great deal we can do to better master content for viewing on UA-cam. We find that HDR can evoke a 'marmite' reaction sometimes, with people either loving or hating the grade, especially when it's stylised. Perhaps also, there might be something amiss with the UA-cam HDR experience on your computer. Different browsers, operating systems and monitors must co-operate to display the image correctly. Can you give us any more information about the setup you are using? Cullen Kelly is great. We really appreciate his work.
@@team2films This was viewed on an LG OLED smart TV direct to internet. Same TV I use as monitor off a Decklink to do grading which although not "calibrated" is adjusted and matches very well an iPad Pro M2 in both SDR and HDR. It also displays other HDR content from other channels fine. Considering that stylized imagery may not be the best approach when comparing lenses, whether one loves or hates beer (also a fermented product) may matter little when the beer just looks and smells downright unappealing.
@@JeffreyDMathias Hmmm, thanks for sharing that info. I think there might be an issue with your device misinterpreting the colour space of the video as using Rec2020 Primaries rather than P3-D65. If that's what's happening it would most likely be due to the fact that we uploaded the video in the P3 colour space when UA-cam like's it's HDR using Rec2020 primaries. If you feel inclined, you could send us an image that shows how the video is displaying. That might help us diagnose any issues in our workflow. And fix future HDR uploads.
I appreciate how much works goes into these kinds of videos but I just have no idea why this video is shot the way it is. Who is this aimed at?? If it’s for professionals using raptors and tokinas then it’s unbelievably patronising and the “I’m talking to a 10 year old” tone would presumably be unwelcome by anyone. Presumably it’s aimed at owner shooter cinematographer who may be thinking of buying a set of budget lenses rather than rent a lens like the tokinas. Despite showing endless well exposed landscapes which say or test nothing if the lens like breathing and near focus CR the fact that the talking head is so badly lit just calls into question the authority and skill set of the presenter. His tone and script is beyond robotic and perfunctory. Why do people make these kind of videos. As someone who uses and owns cine primes and shoots with cine cameras like red and Sony I would have thought that this would have been of interest but the presentation is like being back at school in a gcse chemistry lesson. This is so dead that it is literally unwatchable. Clearly the people that make this content think it’s good and useful but frankly I just can’t get passed that droning patronising tone. Dude we are adults and professionals. Who talks like this??
Hello, thanks so much for watching. It's us that makes these videos, and we appreciate all feedback. Here's some info that you might find helpful: 1. Focus breathing is demonstrated at 14:01 It's incredibly well corrected. 2. Sorry we didn't demonstrate close focus. But you can find information about that on DZO's website. Showing stuff really close on each lens might also be construed as patronising? Or sharing endless stats might be boring? 3. These videos reach a wide audience, especially as the price of these lenses make them a realistic prospect for users who might not be used to high-end cinema lenses. So we try to tackle advanced topics in a way that doesn't alienate people who are still learning. 4. Sorry you didn't like the presenter lighting. What would you have done differently? 5. The sample footage was provided to allow people to form their own opinion about the lenses. We avoided frantic editing or sudden camera movement that would hinder your ability to analyse the lenses. Is there anything in the video that you did like? We're very happy to hear critique about how we can improve our content moving forward, but in order to be helpful, specific suggestions are best.
@ I appreciate your response. Starting with the presenter lighting use the lens you are testing. Light it professionally as you would any IV so no shadows in eye sockets and not top down. If it’s a lens test people want to see the optics. CA and fringing is usually what makes the difference but also distortion and a human face is usually a good test using a 50mm. Generic shots of landscapes tell us nothing. Likewise basic sharpness loss at low f stop. To be honest this is all so obvious but more importantly script these things so it seems like you are talking to a normal person. Anyone who has thousands to spend on a set of Arles or knows why the tokinas are so popular is going to want you to cut to the chase. Taking 14 mins to get to breathing is ridiculous. Look at other channels like Blaine Westropp or Lewis Potts. These are accessible but don’t talk to people like they are idiots with a patronising tone. Even a complete novice would want the assumption of intelligence. There are basic differentials that make more expensive lenses high spec, breathing, distortion especially at the edges, CA close focus, rectilinear on the sides. Build quality is rarely an issue these days. Seriously this isn’t rocket science. Thx.
@ dude I didn’t watch it all and I’m not working. It’s New Year’s Day. These aren’t aimed at professionals obviously but I still get tonnes of these ridiculous videos thanks to the algorithm. I shoot and teach and I have students constantly watching nonsense like this which unfortunately I have to then be aware of where they are getting their information. I am not interested in looking at lenses for my work but am often asked my opinion by rental houses so I try to keep up with new releases. I don’t spend much time looking at these videos but I do find videos like this depressingly irritating because they just add the the noise on UA-cam.
@@KenFlanagan We're sorry you didn't enjoy the video. But are glad you've found the content by Blaine and Lewis helpful. We're aware this video doesn't exist in a vacuum, hence we don't always feel compelled to go over material that other's have covered. @ProAVTV and @CVPTV also have excellent videos to watch. It does sound like some of your observations are addressed later in the video, where more controlled tests and comparisons are featured, but we respect the fact that you don't want to watch any more. As regards some of the stylistic choices made in the video... again we're sorry you don't like them. But perhaps there is a difference between poorly executed, and poorly chosen taste-wise. Please feel free to watch our other videos, it might give you a more rounded perspective on the kind of educational content we create. We hope you enjoy the rest of your week.
Believe this is the best review for the arles out there, havent seen any other channels properly getting quality sample footage like this. Thanks for this!
Thanks so much. That’s kind of you to say! That’s partly why it took so long coming! Appreciate you watching and commenting.
The Arles is the best DZO has to offer. I have the 25mm, 40 and 75mm but I wish I picked up the 135 instead. This is not a hit on the 75mm. It is EXCELLENT. I am amazed at what DZO is doing and how they are futureproofing their lenses to fit on my GFX100II with full coverage using PL versions of the lenses. They also work perfectly on my C70, R5MK2 and Red Epic Dragon with the motion mount. I DZO.
That's a nice selection. I think I'd do something similar, get a mix of the A and B set, otherwise there's not sufficient difference between the lenses. They really are outstanding lenses. Not perfect, but they don't make your wallet hurt! Hmmm, I think the 75 is a good choice given the selection you have. I feel you might miss the 75 if you got the 135.
Amazing video! And not just because it's fueling some very aggressive confirmation bias about the 4-lens set I bought for Cyber Week this year.. Watching on my 2021 16" MBP and the HDR mastering looks incredible with that gorgeous demo footage.
Thanks so much. We appreciate you taking the time to leave a comment. We’ve loved using them. Congrats on your set! You should be very happy :)
The extra Resolve tips are absolute bangers
Thanks! So glad you enjoyed them.
The quality of your videos are amazing!
Appreciate you saying that, thank-you. It's nice to have you here.
@@team2films You're welcome! Do you let UA-cam apply its own HDR-SDR downconversion? How do you do the SDR downconversion? Both HDR and SDR versions look great. I'm using my MacBook Pro M1 Pro HDR screen for HDR playback.
@@asafblasbergvideographer We're still figuring things out. In this instance we uploaded without any additional HDR10+ metadata. I think next time we will add HDR10+ metadata.
Nice one T2, HDR! Lovely jubbly! 👍
Those Arles Primes look incredible for their price... BUT I must confess that the recently released Thypoch Simera-C are more appealing TO ME. (only downside I can see right now being that they're not available in PL Mount)
Great video, as always guys (and happy New Year)
Thanks so much. Yes, the Simera look interesting. We're getting a set to test later this month. I'm sure they will be good, but for us PL is a better choice.
@@team2films Yep, PL should be mandatory for all cine lenses. BUT now that most manufacturer are coming with locking lense mounts (even Kinefinity offers locking E-Mount) these types of lenses are looking like good options for low-ish budget productions.
I like HDR videos. They look much more natural than SDR.❤
Thanks, we appreciate your support.
Oh yeah finally The Arles review but Ursa Cine 12k vs Burano was bugging in my head😂
The Cine12k video is being edited. But to answer that question.... Cine 12k over the Burano. Easy answer!
Love the HDR!
Thanks, appreciate you saying that.
Happy New Year guys!
Impressive you hiked with them they are not the lightest of lenses, but they do capture some beautiful images!
I borrowed A set and shot a music video on V-Raptor them. Loved them.
We purchased 21, 35, & 50!
That's awesome. Yeah, I will admit I definitely noticed the weight while hiking 🤣
That's a nice selection you purchased. And that's pretty much what we'd pick out too if we just got three. If I added another lens, I'd throw in a 100mm.
Thanks for watching and thanks for commenting.
Yes, watching on HDR.
You like it?
The best part was the fact I loved both portrait images. A & B. I could see they were different but I like both of them for different and similar reasons. That to me said 'I don't need to know which one was which' which is a strong testimony to what DZO has achieved. I have used the 25mm before and loved it.
Yeah, that's an awesome conclusion to come away with. That makes us happy. We love both images too. Thanks for watching.
Great video, wish there was some more Vista Prime Content!! There are no great lenses reviews for the Tokinas on the internet right now, I know myself and a lot of others would love to see a review of them from you guys!! Cheers!
Thanks! We'll see what we can do. The Vista Primes will definitely be featuring in an upcoming video about the URSA Cine 12k.
@@team2films Great!! I'm excited!!
Great to add Zeiss milvus to the mix
They really are great lenses. We've got the ZF.2 model converted to EF. The only complaint we have about them is that they are not PL! Just means we can't use them across all our cameras.
High level UA-cam chanell. Beautifull footage
Thanks, we appreciate that.
Thank you for putting together such a thorough video on the Arles primes. You guys provided some wonderful footage to showcase the image quality from these lenses!
I still can’t clearly tell which footage is from which lens..the difference in lighting also makes it tricky. I personally prefer footage B over A, but I think that has more to do with the lighting than the lens quality. Either way, I’d like to believe footage B is Arles
Yeah, you are spot on. B is the Arles. If you look closely, it's slightly softer and has harsher bokeh. It's prone to some nisen-bokeh which gives the 'balls' hard edges. You'll see it on the bush in the background and on her hair.
But we're glad you have troubling seeing. That's one of the points that we're trying to make. We're nit-picking.
Great to have you here. Thanks for watching and commenting.
Hi. Just one thing about the pronounciation or ARLES (I am french). Arles is a city in the south of France well known for its photography festival, its art exhibition and for being the place where Vincent Van gogh made some of his most famous paintings. The name of this city is pronouncedc ARL
I'm so sorry! Thanks for letting us know.
We need fusion tutorial please ❤
Have you checked out our existing fusion masterclasses?
How to export HDR and how to trim pass in sdr
Happy New Year guys thank you for this , I love my Tokina vv this areas are great for the price!
Thanks so much. Yeah, the Arles are incredible value, were genuinely impressive, and when viewed in isolation there was very little to complain about. When compared directly, it's clear that the Vista Primes are a superior lens. Their wide open sharpness was top tier, but for us we'd say that the smoother bokeh makes a bigger difference in the look of the image. I don't want to take anything away from the Arles by saying that though! For those without the budget or justification, the Arles are an incredible option. We could genuinely recommend both lenses.
Appreciate you watching. Thanks so much.
@ it’s incredible this days technology has helped tons with lenses manufacturing
For the grading, not going to lie, the ungraded looked way better. I did not like the colors at all.
I shoot photo and video in the outdoors, so it was nice to see hiking content similar to what I shoot
Thanks for the honest comment. Can you be more specific about what you didn’t like? Were you watching in HDR or SDR?
We’re glad you liked the content though.
Grading is most definitely a subjective journey of taste for sure either way.
Please keep sharing....
Thank You!
We will, thank you.
Very nice test. Thank you for sharing.
Appreciate you! Thanks for watching.
Vistas are sooooo good and are now down to $4700 each. Way smoother bokeh which effects the entire frame for a smoother overall feel. Razor sharp and holds contrast better even wide open especially on the wider primes (more difficult to make). They're still the better lenses.
It’s cool the Arles seem come close-ish for cheap though.
Yeah, we are glad that came across. The Arles are fantastic lenses and offer insane value. They are still conservatively a third the cost of the Vistas. Because they discounted when you buy a set…
We were very impressed with the Arles look when wide open. They never felt soft. Never for a moment felt I was comprising by having them wide open. They are great lenses, are they as good as a 6000 dollar lens, no. Do they cost as much, no.
But we completely agree that the vistas are better, but we definitely couldn’t hike with the them, and you need to decide whether you can justify the additional cost. Yes we think the smoothness of the bokeh is probably the biggest factor.
@@team2films Yeah as much as I love the vistas I probably will never buy them due to the size and weight. If I'm on sticks though and the job has budget they're the first lenses I rent for a clean but not sterile look.
Hi,
and where can I download yours DCTL?
Our masterclass about subtractive saturation talks about the DCTL: ua-cam.com/video/r5MZN0MdlY8/v-deo.html
Nice HDR!
Great video, and I think all UA-cam videos should be available in HDR, so great work! I don't think that you should be outputting to P3 though, UA-cam will still interpret it as Rec2020, and UA-cam specifically says "If you're grading your video, grade in Rec. 2020 with PQ or HLG. Using a different configuration, including DCI P3, will produce incorrect results" in their guidelines on HDR. Rec2100 IS the standard that defines what HDR is, and that standard defines Rec2020 as the gamut, with the two options for transfer function being HLG or PQ.
Most of the time, people limit their own colors to be within the P3 gamut (to ensure that they will be displayed as intended), but they still encode those colors as Rec2020...as a simple example, imagine all the pixels are (0,0,0)...that is a black screen. If you encode it for Rec2020, it is still a black screen (and every TV or monitor should be able to display it). So, choosing what to place inside of the HDR container is not the same thing as defining the container. So, it is a viable option to limit which colors you use to the P3 space, but I think it's incorrect to output and encode the video as P3. In some cases, encoding the image as P3 can change how it is interpreted by something that is expecting Rec2020. I like to use Resolve's CIE Chromaticity Scope where I can overlay P3 on top of Rec2020, to see where my colors are in relation to P3, while still encoding to Rec2020.
That being said, your video looks very good as usual. One of my favorite parts of using HDR on UA-cam is that it forces the videos to use 10 bit color, which gets rid of banding...I have seen so many great youtube presenters who have horrible backgrounds with banding because of UA-cam compression, and HDR provides a way to ensure that you are delivering higher quality. Part of the issue is that HDR comes with many preconceived notions, and people think it means "bright saturated colors", but that is not really what it means at all. You should be able to display an identical image as Rec709 in HDR if you want to, just because you have more colors and brightness available doesn't mean you have to use them...although you definitely can...as they say, with great power comes great responsibility.
One other thing, I believe that PQ is best when used in a controlled viewing environment, it is an absolute standard which defines the nits, HLG is more flexible, and is dynamic, which means HLG shines when we do not have a controlled viewing environment. This is why typically long form narrative would use PQ (displayed in a theater), and broadcast would use HLG (displayed on a TV). That being said, for PQ 1000 Nits, it should look identical to HLG on the same monitor configured for either standard at 1000 nits. Either can work, but I have found for me that HLG is easier to work with and I get better results.
I also have been working a lot on Screen Recording in HDR and how to incorporate those images into an HDR video. In OBS, I think I can get the output of the screen recordings into HLG, which should allow me to integrate the footage very naturally into the color managed workflow.
One other topic that interests me a lot is whether you provided a conversion LUT to UA-cam for the SDR trim? I haven't found this to be necessary for me, as their SDR trip automatically looks pretty good. So, I am curious as to your thoughts on that.
Anyways, I could talk about HDR all day, but thanks again for your great videos, keep up the great work!
If you right click on the video, and select "Stats for Nerds", you can see that it says "smpte2084 (PQ) / unknown" on your video...
If you upload using the correct standard of Rec2020, it would say "smpte2084 (PQ) / bt2020" or in my case "arib-std-b67 (HLG) / bt2020" because I use HLG.
That could also potentially affect your SDR version, as they will be trying to do the 3x3 matrix transformation from Rec2020 to Rec709, I believe, which could exacerbate any issues with the automatic SDR trim. It's just important to keep the color you are choosing to display separate from the encoding scheme used to define the colors. Technical, not creative as you rightly mentioned in your video.
One last thought that I had was that I tend to approach HDR differently than how you did during that section of the video. If we look outside using our eyes, we have a vast dynamic range. Due to technical limitations, SDR forced us to cut off parts of the image, either we could lose the shadows, or we had to clip the highlights. Rec709 as specified only has 6-7 stops of dynamic range. We know our cameras are capturing way more than that, even an iPhone can capture around 12 stops.
So, because of SDR's limitations, we have to distort our images, we can use techniques like rolling off the highlights to try and lessen the impact, but it doesn't change what we are actually doing, throwing away or distorting the information. This is typically done in the tone and gamut mapping steps of display prep. Some people actually like this distortion, and humans have been doing this for a long a time, so it makes sense that it has become familiar.
HDR changes that, so from my perspective, we are not going to accentuate the bright parts, we are simply going to allow them to exist. You were spot on when you said that most of the image will still live in SDR territory, because that is where it actually lives. A face is not as bright as a street lamp just because I have changed my canvas. In SDR, a cloud has to be as bright as a piece of paper, because there are only 100 nits...we can't show any difference between things or that one is brighter than the other.
My perspective is, and its ok if others feel differently, that we are simply allowing more of the image that was captured to be displayed. I would let the scene itself dictate the brightest or darkest parts of the image. In other words, I would not try to maximize the dynamic range, I would simply keep more information already in my image.
Of course, when it comes down to stylistic choices, then you can make things more dramatic, and push and pull things, but that is really more like "look development", because the image doesn't need to be corrected in my opinion, if it is shot well, well exposed, with proper white balance, then HDR just lets me display more of that image, with less fiddling and manipulating.
To sum up, I don't think you need to push and pull shadows and highlights so much, you have enough dynamic range in HDR to let the image live as it was shot, the shadowy parts will be shadowy and the bright parts will be bright.
That is my personal theory at least, I am striving for capturing images where I don't need to "work them" so much (an artifact of SDR's requirements) and I definitely don't want them to look "worked on", where what I captured is the star of the show, and my grade, and HDR serve to allow it to be expressed accurately.
Heya Max
Always love seeing you in the comments. Thanks as always for watching, and thanks for the meaningful and productive conversation! HDR seems to have had a bit of a ‘Marmite’ effect with some in the comments 🤣 Interestingly, the lenses have split opinion too. People seem to either love or hate them.
I will admit that our first HDR upload it’s not precisely where we wanted it to be… but as is the case with most videos, this one was released rather than finished. There’s always more we want to do, and it gets to the point where we’ve just got to get it out there and move on to other pressing jobs.
HDR Strategy:
Yes we completely agree with your perspective about allowing more of the image to be displayed. I think it’s inline with the ‘just because you can doesn’t mean you should’ mantra. Perhaps the example we picked wasn’t the best, perhaps it was pushed a little hard too (in the name of pop), but there are plenty of shots in the sequence where the HDR sits at much more conservative nit values.
We’ve used the same Spiderman quote when talking about this kind of stuff too 🤣
Another factor to consider when incorporating high nit values into a graded image is the fact that most current HDR monitors are not capable of properly displaying excessive brightness. For two reasons:
1. ABL that engages when APL or peak luminance windows size reaches a particular threshold. This is common on OLED panels.
2. Local dimming panels don’t typically have ABL…. But depending on the algorithm used to determine the brightness of each dimming zone, it can clamp the brightness levels. For example imagine a scene with bright stars against a black backdrop. The dimming algorithm will bias towards the black background, thus limiting the brightness of the stars.
Output Colour Space:
Oooo, yeah, that’s interesting, hadn’t spotted that in the UA-cam documentation. It should be noted that the HDR10 and HDR10+ standard DOES allow for the use of both Rec2020 and P3-D65 colour primaries. Interestingly, I see no difference with the colours when viewed on UA-cam compared with Resolve/Quicktime. As a test, I’m running the same video out to Rec2100, will upload and compare the difference.
This could explain some of the more rude reactions that some have had to the grade. It might be that different devices react differently to the incorrect colour space (perhaps legacy devices), where as other more recent devices are capable of displaying it correctly, or simply display it correctly because they are natively in the P3 colour space. Hmmm. I need old hardware to test this on.
Screen Recording:
We use an external device for our screen recording (A Blackmagic Video Assist HDR 12G SDI). I think we need to do some tinkering in MacOS to get it to send the correct signal. As it’s not simply daisy chained off of the primary monitor, it’s a mirrored display so subject to a different pipeline through Color Sync.
Upload:
No, no LUT attached. Also, we didn’t add the sidecar HDR10+ json information either. That might have been another issue. Like we said, released, not finished 😞
More HDR
------
Later in the year we’ll be producing more content around grading HDR. That will including monitoring hardware and resolve workflows.
Send us an email please Max. Would love to continue some of this via email. Then we can talk about this all day long 🤣
Once again, thank-you so much for always being so positive about the videos we make. You are a great encouragement and we appreciate you.
@@team2films No worries! It's always great to chat with you guys. I'll shoot you an email. I figured we shared a lot of the same philosophy on HDR, so I am glad that it didn't come across as critical, it definitely wasn't meant to be, but I tend to nerd out when it comes to HDR lol.
In fact, I should really learn from you guys, your video was excellent, but even more importantly, it was released!
I have been wanting to start a channel forever, but I fear I am letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. I have like 3 or 4 videos that are all in some state of readiness, but I think I just need to start, and improve as I go...but luckily, I was able to refer back to Resolve for Editors which was an awesome resource! The chapter on audio syncing and multicam has been a lifesaver.
So, thanks for the motivation and guidance!
@@MaximoJoshua It didn't come across as critical. You are so nice, don't worry about that. And if you ever have genuine critique, please always feel comfortable to post it. We're definitely not perfect! Yeah, I look forward to talking via email. Thanks Max, you are THE best :)
Prefer A. Which one is it???
Those are the Vista Primes
A lovely, well put together review. Just one inconsequential question, though: are we sure it's pronounced "Ar-lez"? This seems to be how everyone is saying it, but are the lenses named after the French city? Really doesn't matter either way! 🤣
Hahaha, yeah, we're probably pronouncing it wrong. I think 'Arlz' is the correct way but we have gotten so used to saying arles, that it felt wrong saying anything else.
Thanks for watching and commenting. Appreciate having you here.
Yes, is as in city in France... one syllable... sort-a, it's french... spoken by Chinese?
You could put both of those lenses next to a Canon 50mm F1.8 (nifty 50) and most people on this planets wouldn't bat an eyelid. I've also seen a video on youtube where a bunch of cinematographers where cold tested super cheap lenses vs ultra expensive lenses and they all failed the test badly. However put ANY camera/lens combination in the hands of a talented filmmaker vs clueless newbie filmmaker and you will see a huge disparity in what is produced. Either of these lenses in the hands of a newbie along with a great camera vs an OK camera and a nifty 50mm in the hands of Roger Deakins who's footage will look the best do you think? We have to stop thinking about the gear and start thinking about what we produce. ideas and stories are king. Not pieces of equipment.
Thanks so much for watching. We agree with you that talent and creative ability is more important than equipment. For sure!
Here's some thoughts that might be helpful: There's a very big difference between these lenses and nifty fifty :) It might surprise you to see how much difference there is. A great many people would be able to tell the difference. It can be reductive sometimes to say that equipment doesn't matter. It does matter, but it's only effective in combination with talent. There's also nothing wrong with enjoying the tools you use.
We're excited that lenses like the Arles are closing the gap and making such high quality more affordable. Thanks so much for watching our video and taking the time to leave a comment.
In my country the Arles are more like 3,000-3,500 USD and Tokina Vista 6,000 USD. Weird.
That is interesting. It's worth considering the cost of the Arles as a set. They are even cheaper per lens when purchased that way. Although we got to say, both lenses are great and deserve praise.
The SDR trim does not look very good.
Sorry! That’s something we will endeavour to work on with future HDR releases. Any specific observations?
@@team2films Most shots have a 'matte' feeling to them, because of the trim. In general it's a strange look because the low exposure trim clashes with certain objects that are very bright and saturated. Like 08:53 11:13
In high dynamic range situations the highlights are often blown out. Resulting in a Rec709 look. Like on 12:10 12:58
The blue sky is noticeably purple.
Also, all the screen recordings should have their brightness values translated to SDR. It's not, so web pages like 08:00 are super dim.
@@MarkusFinholt Thanks Markus. That's helpful feedback. We're going to experiment with our trim process to see what we can do to improve the UA-cam experience the next time we post.
Please always feel free to drop constructive feedback in the comments. Compliments are always welcomed too to keep us encouraged :)
Do you guys know there is a lens at 95mm or have 95 number in it?
dzofilm.com/en/products/arles-prime
If it’s not even in focus and soft, who cares?? It’s unusable. The Vista Primes win all day long..
Thanks for watching! Heheh, are you talking about the shot that we mis-focused?
looks very (over } saturated to me .
Thanks for letting us know. I think there might be some inconsistencies with the way the video is displaying across different devices because of an encoding error our side. Thanks for watching though.
Arles lenses are indeed great... I have been using the 35mm and 180mm and intend to get more. Thanks for your comparison with Tokina, and try a comparison with Cook. As to your video it looks pretty good in SDR, however your HDR is horrendously awful and does no service to promoting these lenses. The skin tones are terrible and should be an embarrassment to have put out... again only making these lenses look bad with bad color grading. Firstly and most important, I would suggest using a color managed workflow. Such would put your images in a good starting point. Again, the SDR of these images looks pretty good and also shows comparisons well. However, your HDR attempt is only a distraction. Secondly and as important, your HDR skin tones are horribly non realistic. As well, all the tones are a distraction to the great scenes shot. What a disappointment to go to the effort of those landscapes and then grade them in such a manner. I would recommend anyone interested in color grading to look up Cullen Kelly's UA-cam site. My recommendation for your review here is to watch it in SDR only (which looks nice and is effective.)
Heya Jeffrey. Thanks for your input. This grade WAS produced using a colour managed workflow, it's shown in the video at 3:20. Sorry you had a bad experience with the HDR version of this grade. There is of course, always room for improvement and there's a great deal we can do to better master content for viewing on UA-cam.
We find that HDR can evoke a 'marmite' reaction sometimes, with people either loving or hating the grade, especially when it's stylised. Perhaps also, there might be something amiss with the UA-cam HDR experience on your computer. Different browsers, operating systems and monitors must co-operate to display the image correctly. Can you give us any more information about the setup you are using?
Cullen Kelly is great. We really appreciate his work.
@@team2films This was viewed on an LG OLED smart TV direct to internet. Same TV I use as monitor off a Decklink to do grading which although not "calibrated" is adjusted and matches very well an iPad Pro M2 in both SDR and HDR. It also displays other HDR content from other channels fine. Considering that stylized imagery may not be the best approach when comparing lenses, whether one loves or hates beer (also a fermented product) may matter little when the beer just looks and smells downright unappealing.
@@JeffreyDMathias Hmmm, thanks for sharing that info. I think there might be an issue with your device misinterpreting the colour space of the video as using Rec2020 Primaries rather than P3-D65. If that's what's happening it would most likely be due to the fact that we uploaded the video in the P3 colour space when UA-cam like's it's HDR using Rec2020 primaries.
If you feel inclined, you could send us an image that shows how the video is displaying. That might help us diagnose any issues in our workflow. And fix future HDR uploads.
I appreciate how much works goes into these kinds of videos but I just have no idea why this video is shot the way it is. Who is this aimed at?? If it’s for professionals using raptors and tokinas then it’s unbelievably patronising and the “I’m talking to a 10 year old” tone would presumably be unwelcome by anyone. Presumably it’s aimed at owner shooter cinematographer who may be thinking of buying a set of budget lenses rather than rent a lens like the tokinas. Despite showing endless well exposed landscapes which say or test nothing if the lens like breathing and near focus CR the fact that the talking head is so badly lit just calls into question the authority and skill set of the presenter. His tone and script is beyond robotic and perfunctory. Why do people make these kind of videos. As someone who uses and owns cine primes and shoots with cine cameras like red and Sony I would have thought that this would have been of interest but the presentation is like being back at school in a gcse chemistry lesson. This is so dead that it is literally unwatchable. Clearly the people that make this content think it’s good and useful but frankly I just can’t get passed that droning patronising tone. Dude we are adults and professionals. Who talks like this??
Who talks like you, Ken? Not a professional, since a real one would just move on to another video if they didn't like this one.
Hello, thanks so much for watching. It's us that makes these videos, and we appreciate all feedback. Here's some info that you might find helpful:
1. Focus breathing is demonstrated at 14:01 It's incredibly well corrected.
2. Sorry we didn't demonstrate close focus. But you can find information about that on DZO's website. Showing stuff really close on each lens might also be construed as patronising? Or sharing endless stats might be boring?
3. These videos reach a wide audience, especially as the price of these lenses make them a realistic prospect for users who might not be used to high-end cinema lenses. So we try to tackle advanced topics in a way that doesn't alienate people who are still learning.
4. Sorry you didn't like the presenter lighting. What would you have done differently?
5. The sample footage was provided to allow people to form their own opinion about the lenses. We avoided frantic editing or sudden camera movement that would hinder your ability to analyse the lenses.
Is there anything in the video that you did like? We're very happy to hear critique about how we can improve our content moving forward, but in order to be helpful, specific suggestions are best.
@ I appreciate your response. Starting with the presenter lighting use the lens you are testing. Light it professionally as you would any IV so no shadows in eye sockets and not top down. If it’s a lens test people want to see the optics. CA and fringing is usually what makes the difference but also distortion and a human face is usually a good test using a 50mm. Generic shots of landscapes tell us nothing. Likewise basic sharpness loss at low f stop. To be honest this is all so obvious but more importantly script these things so it seems like you are talking to a normal person. Anyone who has thousands to spend on a set of Arles or knows why the tokinas are so popular is going to want you to cut to the chase. Taking 14 mins to get to breathing is ridiculous. Look at other channels like Blaine Westropp or Lewis Potts. These are accessible but don’t talk to people like they are idiots with a patronising tone. Even a complete novice would want the assumption of intelligence. There are basic differentials that make more expensive lenses high spec, breathing, distortion especially at the edges, CA close focus, rectilinear on the sides. Build quality is rarely an issue these days. Seriously this isn’t rocket science. Thx.
@ dude I didn’t watch it all and I’m not working. It’s New Year’s Day. These aren’t aimed at professionals obviously but I still get tonnes of these ridiculous videos thanks to the algorithm. I shoot and teach and I have students constantly watching nonsense like this which unfortunately I have to then be aware of where they are getting their information. I am not interested in looking at lenses for my work but am often asked my opinion by rental houses so I try to keep up with new releases. I don’t spend much time looking at these videos but I do find videos like this depressingly irritating because they just add the the noise on UA-cam.
@@KenFlanagan We're sorry you didn't enjoy the video. But are glad you've found the content by Blaine and Lewis helpful. We're aware this video doesn't exist in a vacuum, hence we don't always feel compelled to go over material that other's have covered. @ProAVTV and @CVPTV also have excellent videos to watch. It does sound like some of your observations are addressed later in the video, where more controlled tests and comparisons are featured, but we respect the fact that you don't want to watch any more. As regards some of the stylistic choices made in the video... again we're sorry you don't like them. But perhaps there is a difference between poorly executed, and poorly chosen taste-wise. Please feel free to watch our other videos, it might give you a more rounded perspective on the kind of educational content we create. We hope you enjoy the rest of your week.