Lenses?

[Patrizio De Sica]

Unfortunately, I find... I found... and I wouldn't like to believe but I do that I will find.

 

Thanks Stephen , i think she proves my point !! . John Holland.

At least, I edit my own content. And you?

[Brian Drysdale]

There seems to be an impression by some that RED is the only HD camera in this price range. SI have a HD camera which is probably makes more sense for someone on a limited budget - the SI Mini ($12.5k) feeding into a laptop.

 

Regardless of what happens to the RED, there will be cameras for the lower budget HD production. You mightn't have 35mm DOF (without a P + S), but usually there are usually so many other compromises on these productions that this just becomes one more.

 

These cameras are just tools.

[Patrizio De Sica]

These cameras are just tools.

Agreed on this one whatever is the name of this subforum...

[Jay A. Kelley]

What's with all of this constant cheerleading for the RED camera, Patrizio? Do you realize that you come off as a paid shill for the company?

 

 

Unless you have an incredibly soft definition of "revolutionary" that includes inventions like Pop Tarts...

 

The RED camera doesn't exist as a finished product yet so everyone should give the complaining and the cheerleading a rest until it does.

 

Careful David.. I happen to LOVE Pop Tarts. As for those of you that are exciting about the camera. Good for you! Don't listen to these narrow minded folks that seem unhappy that you would all have some fun with a potential new toy.

 

Last I checked we were typing in the "RED" sub forum on this site. You have something to say about RED? Thsi is this place to say it. A prototype will be out in 11 weeks, but I assure you, those people speaking negatively now, will find a whole new batch of bad things to say when they actually see it.

 

If there's one thing I have learned about film makers, it's that they are never wrong. (Yes I know I am sterotyping and not everyone fits that... So if it doesn't apply to you, then feel free to ignore it)

 

Jay

[Jay A. Kelley]

I have to say, being somewhat of a marketing guy, that I think Jim Jannard is a genius.. Someone on here accused another member of possibly sounding like a "shill" for the company because they praised it.

 

Anyone that knows marketing will tell you the best advertisement for an unknown product are those who get all angry and short tempered with it. This reaction actually causes more curioustity for something that is an unknown.

 

I would wager that more interest is created for RED on this forum than the DVX would get on it's best day. The DVX tends to be one-sided and very pro RED.. However, conflict generates more interest.

 

Which leads me to wonder... How many of your nay-sayers are on Jannard's payroll?!!?

 

Every time you guys say "it's NOT revolutionary" you make a first time reader think "Why would they say that?" and then it's off to red.com they go.

 

The very existence of the fighting and debating continues to lift the camera in the public eye.

 

If you are smart enough to stay above the fight and watch from a distance (which I do.... Sometimes :)

Then this is a very interesting thing happening here.

 

Jay

[Brian Drysdale]

I agree on the marketing, although with another 6 months to go will everyone still be standing?

[Gary McClurg]

I agree on the marketing, although with another 6 months to go will everyone still be standing?

 

I think that all this is... is marketing... all the good or bad is creating a buzz... I think that someone thought the best way to get the camera out there in terms of word of mouth was to create a us against them idea...

 

Myself I'm on the fence... I see the Red zealots and the film zealots on these threads... of course I'll get into trouble for this... but it won't be the first time... :D but at least the film zealots have working cameras...

 

The Red is just a lab tested camera untill it hits the market and proves itself... that's all it is... I'd say the same thing about any new camera coming... untill it gets in the hands of people who can test it... shoot with it and work out the bugs.

 

Again here's my biggest problem I see with Red... and that is not that they won't bring a working camera to market... I believe they will...

 

Here's my .02 on the matter... a lot of people still promote this camera and say wow did you know you can buy this camera called the Red for $17,500 and shoot 4k...

 

Even if I go with the low price figures that people come up with and say you can shoot and edit all for $30,000... the funny thing is a quarter of those people where complaining about a year ago about paying $2,000 for a P2 card... and its post workflow...

 

Again if those of you want to take this as a slam against the Red... there's nothing I can do about it... all I'm saying is just open your eyes a bit and look at the truth... that this camera is being made for the middle ground not the guys who want to make a movie on the weekend... and I have nothing wrong against making a movie on the weekend... who knows because I'm tired of chasing funds and people offering you 10% of the budget and they want a 100% control of the project... I might just do that myself in the next few months...

Edited October 9, 2006 by Gary McClurg

[Rik Andino]

Then this is a very interesting thing happening here.

 

No it's not that interesting...

Ir's just another stupid video camera being made

And marketed to the indie (read low budget) film community

Which may or maynot be worth its asking price...

Which may or maynot be embrace by targeted market...

Which may or maynot be revelant several years from now.

 

The whole circus surrounding this camera is ridiculous

almost to the extent of entertainment---but still ridiculous.

And the crap coming out from these so-call red fanatics is even more ridiculous!

 

This whole lunatic debate is polluting this forum

And many of the average folks are getting tired of it.

 

It's come to the point where you can't go into the HD forum...

because all they talk about is RED.

There are more threads about RED than any other camera

Including existing HD cameras like the F900, the Varicam, or the Genesis

Which are used by serious pros in serious productions.

 

So interesting you call it--but ludicrous says I.

[Chris Kenny]

Even if I go with the low price figures that people come up with and say you can shoot and edit all for $30,000... the funny thing is a quarter of those people where complaining about a year ago about paying $2,000 for a P2 card... and its post workflow...

 

There's nothing inconsistent here. It's a matter of value for money. $17.5K is a good price for a 4K camera body. $2K isn't a good price for 20 minutes worth of barely-HD recording.

[Stephen Williams]

There's nothing inconsistent here. It's a matter of value for money. $17.5K is a good price for a 4K camera body. $2K isn't a good price for 20 minutes worth of barely-HD recording.

 

Hi,

 

It's difficult to know what other manufactures will charge when Red hit's the street. Looking at DSLR's like a Nikon D80, I can't help that think the list price of Red may fall quicker than others believe.

 

Stephen

[Gary McClurg]

There's nothing inconsistent here. It's a matter of value for money. $17.5K is a good price for a 4K camera body. $2K isn't a good price for 20 minutes worth of barely-HD recording.

 

Chris, never said the price wasn't bad for a 4k body... myself I believe that to get the package I want... would cost me $70,000... that's 5 grand less than a Varicam body... so to me that sounds like a good deal...

 

Its that people keep saying that for $17.5k you can shoot 4k when that price is just for a body...

Edited October 9, 2006 by Gary McClurg

[Jay A. Kelley]

No it's not that interesting...

Ir's just another stupid video camera being made

And marketed to the indie (read low budget) film community

Which may or maynot be worth its asking price...

Which may or maynot be embrace by targeted market...

Which may or maynot be revelant several years from now.

 

The whole circus surrounding this camera is ridiculous

almost to the extent of entertainment---but still ridiculous.

And the crap coming out from these so-call red fanatics is even more ridiculous!

 

This whole lunatic debate is polluting this forum

And many of the average folks are getting tired of it.

 

It's come to the point where you can't go into the HD forum...

because all they talk about is RED.

There are more threads about RED than any other camera

Including existing HD cameras like the F900, the Varicam, or the Genesis

Which are used by serious pros in serious productions.

 

So interesting you call it--but ludicrous says I.

 

Congrads Rik you just sent another 200 people off to find out exactly why this camera is so worth bitching about. I hope this thread does not upset you as much as you say because to actually GET upset over people writing on their computers would worry me a little.. I would say get up and talk a walk.. Remember, it's just a computer my friend.. As for the camera, think what you will.. In the end it really won't matter much... Will it?

 

Jay

[Mitch Gross]

I liken the internet traffic about RED to hat of the movie "Snake on a Plane." Lots of threads from a relative few made the appearance of a vast interest in what was really a niche product. When the product (the movie) finally became available it played to little more than what the original niche market was.

 

I have nothing against RED and I truly hope the camera is a revelation, but with the buzz of a few I winder if the second coming would be satisfying.

[Dan Goulder]

I have nothing against RED and I truly hope the camera is a revelation, but with the buzz of a few I winder if the second coming would be satisfying.

Jesus would probably shoot on film, since he has lots of Vision, 2.

[Mark Allen]

Jesus would probably shoot on film...

 

See? Another first time filmmaker gets to shoot on whatever he wants. This is what I hate about nepatism!

 

 

 

And for the record, one of the main reason I put in an early reservation on the RED was that everyone was saying "There is no way that camera could be made right now." If it was too good to be true, then I wanted one.

[Chris Kenny]

I liken the internet traffic about RED to hat of the movie "Snake on a Plane." Lots of threads from a relative few made the appearance of a vast interest in what was really a niche product. When the product (the movie) finally became available it played to little more than what the original niche market was.

 

Well, there is a slight difference here. A major theatrical release needs millions of people to turn out, if it's going to be successful. RED is going after a market that operates in rather smaller volumes. Even if the people talking the camera up online actually represent a majority of its eventual buyers (and I suspect in reality there will be many more), RED will probably still move far, far more units than its competitors.

[Michael Maier]

Hi Emanuel,

 

Adaptors are quite easy to come by but I am not sure they are really the lenses you need for a 4K camera. I got some with a camera package I bought. After playing with them for 1 hour I decided to throw them away!

 

Stephen

 

That's quite strange Stephen.

I have used OCT-19 Lomos and they are pretty sharp.

There is a movie shot in 35mm with Lomo and Zeiss glass (forgot the name) and even if you are a professional, you can't easily tell what shot is what. The audience would never tell.

What lenses did you throw away?

[Patrizio De Sica]

I think Mr Williams was thinking in those lenses (or something similar, camera bundled) which Mr Guedes asked before:

 

LOMO PO61-5 f=2.5 / 28mm

LOMO OKC1-35-1 f=2.0 / 35mm

PO3-3M f=2.0 / 50mm

PO2-2M f=2.0 / 75mm

Jupiter-11 f=4.0 / 135mm

Edited October 13, 2006 by Patrizio De Sica

[Nick Bennett]

I've been thinking, who are these 600 or so people. Nothing against them. But its one think to own a camera worth 17k. the same price as a low end HD or high end SD digital camera, but the lenses are not in the same price range.

 

Yeah I can understand this thinking but this assumes that all the people reserving Red cameras are at the lower end of the camera market, I'm sure that like myself there are plenty of very experienced lighting cameramen who already own expensive high end HD kit and lenses that believe that at the suggested body price of $17,500.00 + Import duties and VAT in UK that this has got to be worth a punt.

[colm o'rourke]

This is a Cinematography forum. Quality cinematography uses quality optics. Perhaps you'd feel better at an indie production forum or a writer's forum. I use all sorts of optics in vast ranges of quality for what is appropriate for a given production. But why bother talking about cinematography and then negate the value of good glass?

Hi There

I was looking in to buying some lenses to use on a red camera. I totally agree with you in respect to using as good a quailty glass as you can afford. Personally I can afford either 3 zeiss superspeeds mkII or a cooke 18-100 t3 zoom, which in your opinion would be the better buy?, and out of the zeiss, would the 25, 35 and 85 be the best choice. I will mainly be using them for short films, music video, maybe a low budget feature. Any adviced would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

Edited October 20, 2006 by colm o'rourke

[Stephen Williams]

Hi There

I was looking in to buying some lenses to use on a red camera. I totally agree with you in respect to using as good a quailty glass as you can afford. Personally I can afford either 3 zeiss superspeeds mkII or a cooke 18-100 t3 zoom, which in your opinion would be the better buy?, and out of the zeiss, would the 25, 35 and 85 be the best choice. I will mainly be using them for short films, music video, maybe a low budget feature. Any adviced would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

 

Hi,

 

I think the best advice I can give you is rent the lenses first. After a few productions you will get an idear what you want. The 18-100 T3 is not much use for night shots, or hand holding, but a very useful lens the rest of the time.

 

Stephen

[Michael Maier]

Hey Stephen, do you mind commenting on my post? Because this last week we watched some 35mm footage we shot a couple of weeks back on a Kinor using Lomo primes and they were as sharp as one may want, unless filming some micro surgical subject.

[Stephen Williams]

Hey Stephen, do you mind commenting on my post? Because this last week we watched some 35mm footage we shot a couple of weeks back on a Kinor using Lomo primes and they were as sharp as one may want, unless filming some micro surgical subject.

 

Michael,

 

I made no negative comment on optical performance. I said:-

 

"After playing with them for 1 hour I decided to throw them away!"

 

With motion picture lenses the mechanics of a lens are very important and expensive to fix. For example a Cooke series II lens can be bought on E-bay for $300. To rehouse the glass will cost $6000-9000, depending on who does the work.

 

FWIW FFD accuracy is important at infinity, not an issue in close up work. I don't see what your problem would be if you want to use the lenses for 'micro surgical' work, using extension tubes.

 

Stephen

[Emanuel A Guedes]

Stephen,

 

Concerning your post there, here is an useful thread where I added my humble contribution on the topic.

 

Emanuel

Edited October 25, 2006 by Mr. Emanuel A. Guedes

[Olex Kalynychenko]

I made no negative comment on optical performance. I said:-

 

"After playing with them for 1 hour I decided to throw them away!"

 

I wish insert a some explanation.

If i understand correct, Stephen mean prime lenses of Konvas-1 camera with OST-18 lens mount:

 

LOMO PO61-5 f=2.5 / 28mm

LOMO OKC1-35-1 f=2.0 / 35mm

PO3-3M f=2.0 / 50mm

PO2-2M f=2.0 / 75mm

Jupiter-11 f=4.0 / 135mm

 

The russian lenses RO ( PO) include of set of Konvas-1 camera only. Konvas-1M camera had OKS lenses only (except of Jupiter-11) .

Konvas-1 cameras manufactured near 1960 and lenses must have similar date of manufacturing

too.

This is very old design of lens and old date manufacturing.

The lenses have very long time of storage ( near 40 years ) and we know not condition of this storage.

We wait of high quality of image from this lens ?

Sorry, but, this not possible.

The every lens - The combination of high precision mechanical and optical parts.

We know not, this lenses had service and adjusting of last time or not.

Possible, the surface of glass of thi lenses have mustiness or dust.

 

Other side - quality of camera.

The camera can have not standard flange focal distance and the lens will work bad with this camera and more, more other factor will influence on final quality of image.

 

Michael told about OST-19 LOMO lenses. This is lenses have more modern design of optical block, more modern multi coating and better design of lens mount ( Similar of Arri PL.

RO lenses of Konvas-1 and OKS lenses of Konvas-1M cameras have Arri standard style of lens mount.)

That's why, high opinon of Michael about high quality of image defensible.

Not need mix of quality of russian lenses of 60 and 90. At the fifties, the sixties ,after II World War, USSR was need any cine lenses.

At 90, we had many type of lenses and was need real good quality lenses.

 

The many filmmaker be delighted with quality of Elite Optics lenses.

Elite Optics - this is modern generation of russian professional cine lenses made in St-Petersburg.

The design of Elite Optics lenses include of all best ideas of " Russian optical design school", the continuers

of ideas, realized on OKS, OPF russian lenses.

 

I think, the good idea of test of Elite Optics lenses with modern HD cameras.

If you think about LOMO lenses, need to test a last editions of lenses with OST-19 lens mount and lenses of Ekran fast speed, normal speed and high resolution series.