Just for the record, you also need to consider differences in camera (are you using the same camera as his?), lenses (these Zeiss seem to be pretty sharp) and 35mm DOF adapter (You said you are using the M2 and the SGPro seems to produce much sharper images from what I have seen) and in a lesser degree, subject matter (does what you filmed has as much detail to be shown? Is it an extreme macro close up?). Post codec won't be the only thing to impact the sharpness here.

Is sharpness turned up on the monitor? Is it a consumer or pro monitor? Most consumer monitors have built-in sharpness enhancers.
You say very, very sharp, but would you say it's as sharp as his images? Again the other things will play a role.

Is the SGpro MUCH sharper? Be interested to see it. I find the M2 a very impressive piece of kit, coupled with my fast nikon lenses the image sharpness is not far off the clean z1 footage, although seeing theodoras' short has convinced me to order the Zeiss lenses!! Sure there are lots of differences in what we shot, and what we used (z1 actually has better low light performance than the hvx), i was shooting a frisky cat, and Theo was shooting a macrod mic but the main questin I was acutally asking was bascially just what is best codec for the web!!!

Phil,

Have you managed to shoot a res chart with your M2? Would be interested to see.

The Fx1 and SGpro gave me this:

http://www.sgpro.co.uk/FX1e_SGpro_r2_res%20chart.tif

Wayne,

How big is your resolution chart? I can download one and print it onto a4. Is that good enough?

Phil

They should be bigger but this one was A4. If using A4, use high res photo paper at your printers highest setting.

cool. will do it tomorrow. we should definately do that shootout. will be really useful for all the people on here who want to know how they directly compare. i havent got my brevis from dennis yet, hopefully early next week. Nice to see your sgpro getting cheaper, not more expensive!!

Very impressive! Can u share some of ure CCing tips with us? also I'm guessing u did extensive AE work right? can u let something slip about ure Post Production work? Is that wiggler which shakes the mic stick all around the place? (00:01:05:00)

Thanks a lot Daniel for your kind words.
CCing and editing done in FCP. No AE. I have used Magic Bullet filters for this.

As for the mic, it was on a stand. The only shaking part of this film was my hvx (and my hand :))

Theodoros, your shots are very impressive indeed. Congratulations for the job well done and the creative editing.
But I'm failing to believe it's because the Zeiss lenses as some seem to be thinking. Whatever you are filming with a 100lp/mm or 250mmlp/mm in the end of the day what counts is what your HVX lens can capture and what your HVX format can record. Even if more resolution and detail is projected onto the GG, if your lens and format cant record that it doesn't really make much of a difference. Since we all know the HVX lens is not nearly capable of 250lp/mm I would say it really makes no difference whatever it's a 100 lp/mm lens or a 250 lpmm one in front of the GG. I think what we are seeing is mainly color resolution from the 4:2:2 format. It's sure sharp, but I have seen stuff that looked as sharp done with a Z1. But the extra color resolution is what is bumping it up and giving the impression of more sharpness IMO. That plus the fact it’s nicely shot and put together makes up to the whole effect.
It would be nice to see some faces and landscape shots done with the Zeiss to see if they really make a difference. If done with both, your Zeiss and your Nikon, that would the ultimate proof.

I think there is a similar sort of logarythmic thing goes on with groundglass relay imaging as seems to happen with passive IR tube based night-vision into the same cameras. Tube based night-vision is also a non-coherent image relay process.

Let's say a pinpoint of light on a chrome fitting on a car in an image projected by the most perfect lens in the universe has a notional rating of 1 in terms of image area it covers and that direct-to-camera imaging yields a perfect 1 which it actually would not.

Let's say then that a pinpoint of light falling on a groundglass screen becomes diffused across an circular area say three pinpoints of light wide by the time the diffusion has had its way with it.

So along comes a less than perfect lens which wide-open projects an image of this pinpoint of light across an image area of 3 in diameter. Now the diffusion pushes the area out one more radius point and it becomes 5 in diameter.

The operator of this softer lens has sweat in his eye or is using the camcorder LCD screen to focus and gets it slightly wrong. The pinpoint falling on the groundglass becomes 5 wide and the diffused pinpoint is now 7 wide.

The groundglass in effect becomes an initial magnifier of any lens softness not in proportion to the deficiencies of the lens.

Therefore, the sharper the image onto the groundglass, the disproportionately sharper it is going to look. Contrast is also going to be affected in the same manner.

I'm not too sure if I really understand myself what I am talking about. It is something that can be readily observed if not so easily described.

He did list other lenses: Nikon: 35mm f1.4 / 85mm f1.4 .

Great detail and animation of what is essentially a blue tube. I enjoyed the tour. For those of us that don't have the latest Zeiss lenses, which parts used the Nikons ?

Thanks a lot Gints.

Hard to remember...00:00:36 as far as i can remember and similar shots were with the 35mm. I think that the last shot was with the Nikon 85mm. Not 100% sure sorry...

Hi theodor... 8^)))
I don't speack english very welll so i'm trying to explain myself...
i would like to understand if the Zeiss Planar for Nikon Lens's iris diaphragm knob is a "step working" knob...
Could you help me?

Nice job wayne.