Jump to content

RED production schedule


Carl Brighton

Recommended Posts

I must say that I don't understand the point of this entirely academic argument of the economy of scale for lens production. Let's say that every single owner of a RED camera opted to buy a complete set of lenses from a given manufacturer if they would be at a certain price. Now let's double that number. Yippe--you have 3000 orders for lenses -- just enough to save perhaps 5% in economies of scale. Try to get a factory in the Far East to mass-produce anything for you. They won't discuss orders under 10,000 units. And NO oNE WILL EVER SELL 10,000 UNITS OF A SET OF 35mm PRIMES, EVEN IF THEY WERE $100 EACH. It simply isn't going to happen.

 

Do you know why the Zeiss DigiPrimes even exist? It's because BAndPro promised to buy the first 1000 lenses no matter what. Otherwise, Zeiss wouldn't take the risk. And that's for lenses costing upwards of $15,000 each.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 495
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The argument is entirely academic if taken as a complaint about the high cost of cine lenses, but that's not what it is.

 

My actual point has been explicit since the first post where I mentioned cine lens pricing. The quality difference between photo lenses and cine lenses is not as large as the price difference would imply, because there are other factors (sales volume being a significant one) which seriously impact price.

Edited by Chris Kenny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yawn...

 

I don't care about this price difference and where it comes from, I just want the best lens possible. Whatever happened to renting?????

Nothing wrong with renting, in many cases it is preferred - if something goes wrong it´s the rental houses problem... then again there is nothing like owning stuff ;-)

 

Although the initial price of the lens is reflected by it´s rental price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care about this price difference and where it comes from, I just want the best lens possible.

 

The realm of possibility is sometimes constrained by finances, unfortunately.

 

Whatever happened to renting?????

 

You can buy a set of Nikon primes for the daily rental price of a set of Master Primes. If there's only money for one or the other, it's pretty clear which is going to do the indie filmmaker more good.

 

I'd expect RED owners to follow the same pattern as most owner/operators, buying a basic package and renting additional stuff when necessary for particular shooting days/jobs/etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The realm of possibility is sometimes constrained by finances, unfortunately.

You can buy a set of Nikon primes for the daily rental price of a set of Master Primes. If there's only money for one or the other, it's pretty clear which is going to do the indie filmmaker more good.

 

I'd expect RED owners to follow the same pattern as most owner/operators, buying a basic package and renting additional stuff when necessary for particular shooting days/jobs/etc.

 

I'm not saying these are the cheapest prices, but the high end Nikkor lenses that have similar speeds to the Master Primes cost £850 to £1000 each in the UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

The reason 35mm motion picture lenses are so much better than stills lenses is simply because there are less design constraints. If you design a stills lens it needs to be light, and therefore small, so that the photographer can keep the lens steady when shooting. A motion picure lens can be much bigger (the Master Primes are over 2 kilos, anamorphic lenses 4 kilos and more), because size is much less of an issue here.

 

Since one of the main design rules is that if you want better performance (i.e. more speed, less distortion, etc...) that is easier to achieve when the lens is bigger. This is especially true on the wide end, where the design gets more complicated. Here motion picture lenses still have pretty much the same speed as the normal lenses, while with stills lenses the speed drops dramatically.

 

I think this whole issue of stills lenses only comes up because people expect something for nothing, and real life just doesn't offer that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

You also have to factor that one of the advantages of RED is 35mm-style depth of field, and traditional focus-pulling using still camera lenses is a nightmare unless you have time to get eye-focus marks on everything and hope the actors don't move between them... because it's hard to get a few tape measurements and then find 6' 8" on some of those lenses, and then find 6' 6" when the actor leans two inches closer. Even some older cine lenses aren't so great for that.

 

And try to set the f-stops in 1/3-stop increments on some of those still camera lenses...

 

It's all the problems of ENG video lenses being used for cine work compounded, partially because of the small barrels and markings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this whole issue of stills lenses only comes up because people expect something for nothing, and real life just doesn't offer that.

 

People aren't expecting something for nothing. What they are expecting is to save a large amount of money while still getting acceptable results, by using what are essentially commodity products instead of very expensive specialty gear. This is not a crazy idea; there's a pattern like this in most markets. As you leave the realm of mass-market commodity products, you often pass the point of diminishing returns, and prices skyrocket while quality increases only marginally. This is true both because of the impact of economies of scale, and also because at some at some point e.g. tightening tolerances another 50% is going to cost three times as much and only make the image look 5% sharper, or whatever.

 

Put the sort of images you can achieve with a prosumer 1/3" camera at one end of a scale, and the images you can achieve with a RED and modern motion picture glass at the other. What you can achieve with a RED + Nikon prims is far closer to the latter than to the former -- it gets you maybe 80-90% of the way there; shallow DOF, better resolution, many more lens options, etc. For many indies, spending tens of thousands of dollars more to get that extra 10-20% simply isn't a notion that's going to survive a cost/benefit analysis, assuming they have have the capital in the first place.

 

You also have to factor that one of the advantages of RED is 35mm-style depth of field, and traditional focus-pulling using still camera lenses is a nightmare unless you have time to get eye-focus marks on everything and hope the actors don't move between them... because it's hard to get a few tape measurements and then find 6' 8" on some of those lenses, and then find 6' 6" when the actor leans two inches closer. Even some older cine lenses aren't so great for that.

 

These are going to be pressing issues. Exactly how many problems they'll cause for people using photo glass with RED will depend on how good RED's focus assist is, and what third parties offer in terms of follow focus equipment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see how the stills lenses and the follow focus units from 35mm adapters for prosumer cameras do hold up. Seemingly first ACs have been commenting on a lack of a "fudge factor" on 35mm sized single sensor HD cameras compared to the 3 layers on film, so everything has to be even more on the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Quality-wise, I don't see a huge problem with using Nikon lenses. We routinely use mild diffusion on a lens, etc. to soften a lens up anyway. A lot of the island sequence in "Black Stallion" was shot with Nikons on an Eclair Cameflex. Efx people at ILM have used Nikons on VistaVision cameras. I'm using the older Cooke zooms right now for a slightly softer look. We use the telephoto Nikons all the time in cine work.

 

I see it more as a problem from a production standpoint in terms of reliability and robustness combined with the problems of focus-pulling, using remote focus devices like a Preston, etc. Can you even hook up a standard follow-focus device to a Nikon still camera lens? And I'm sure there is a very short rotation of the barrel from minimum focus to infinity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see it more as a problem from a production standpoint in terms of reliability and robustness combined with the problems of focus-pulling, using remote focus devices like a Preston, etc. Can you even hook up a standard follow-focus device to a Nikon still camera lens? And I'm sure there is a very short rotation of the barrel from minimum focus to infinity.

 

There is typically a very short rotation, yes. This is often desirable with photo lenses, because it allows for faster autofocus (which actually gets used even by pros in the still photography world). This could potentially be dealt with by follow focus units which were geared appropriately, say at 3:1 or whatever seemed to work best. You'd probably have to mark on the follow focus rather than the lens barrel, which some people don't like because of play in follow focus units.

 

As far as hooking regular follow focus devices up to Nikon lenses, you need to add lens gears. This can, of course, be as complex as rebuilding the whole lens housing, or as simple as clamping something like one of these around the lens. (Though I'm not sure if that product specifically works with follow focus equipment from other vendors; it's designed for use with their system.)

Edited by Chris Kenny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

As I've found with ENG lenses, when you pull focus on a lens with a short rotation from near to far, it feels different, less graceful -- you sort of "pop" or jump from one point of focus to another. It's harder to roll gently (when desired) over to the next point of focus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a gear fitted to the Zeiss/Contex 35mm lens, which I had as part of my Aaton kit. However, the problem (as with my Mk1 Super Speed Distagons) was the poor scale and you had to eye focus almost everything to get the marks.

 

It's the same with ENG style lenses, the focus puller is at a disadvantage when anything happens between the preset marks and they have to make judgement calls. They're having to make a guesstimate as to where the distance is on the scale. ENG zoom lenses are quite large so it possible to make your own focus distance marking on the lens (at least at the closer distances) using tape, but 35mm stills lens are usually too small to do this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
As I've found with ENG lenses, when you pull focus on a lens with a short rotation from near to far, it feels different, less graceful -- you sort of "pop" or jump from one point of focus to another. It's harder to roll gently (when desired) over to the next point of focus.

 

agreed, ENG lenses also tend to breath far too much. ENG sucks, lol - I need a new job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you even hook up a standard follow-focus device to a Nikon still camera lens? And I'm sure there is a very short rotation of the barrel from minimum focus to infinity.

An engineer on another forum expressed an interest in building, and possibly marketing such a product. Certainly, this will be one of the biggest challenges for those of us who choose to use inexpensive Nikkors on our RED bodies. Microscopic distance scales, and the super-short, focus-barrel rotation of SLR lenses will be the biggest handicap of doing RED on the cheap. Hopefully, companies like RedRock, and others will follow with support products, once RED starts shipping. I really hope that with proper gearing, pulling focus on SLR lenses (at least non-AF lenses) will be a workable solution.

 

Haven't been around much at cinematography.com for a couple years (just re-registered), but, as always, I really enjoy your well-informed and entertaining posts, here, David!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
For many indies, spending tens of thousands of dollars more to get that extra 10-20% simply isn't a notion that's going to survive a cost/benefit analysis, assuming they have have the capital in the first place.

I look forward to this RED camera like everyone else. But, I'm also being honest with myself that dropping $25k on any kind of camera is completely out of reach for me. I'd like to know where all of these "indie filmmakers" are coming up with that kind of dough?

 

Most likely if I ever use a RED it will be a rental and the old Zeiss T1.3's rent for $60/day around here. I don't see the point in using anything less. Why bother with a 4K camera if you're stuck with a lens that can't be follow focused and an iris that can't be ridden?

 

I can understand using cheaper still lenses on something like the K3. That's what I do and it works for me. But, on a $25k camera? I don't think so!!!

 

Hopefully, companies like RedRock, and others will follow with support products...

Have read many poor reviews on the Redrock FF (sloppy gear, etc.). If it's built anything like their adapter, I believe them all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to know where all of these "indie filmmakers" are coming up with that kind of dough?

Not picking on your post in particular, Brian, but I've noticed many here posting are wondering where all of us "DV wannabes" are getting the money to finance our cameras. Funny that so many here just automatically assume that all 1400 RED reservation-holders are all 25-year-old film school drop-outs with no experience and no money! Two of my friends are also RED reservation-holders, both of whom have six-figure incomes, have been working in the industry for over twenty-five years each, and are older than dirt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have read many poor reviews on the Redrock FF (sloppy gear, etc.). If it's built anything like their adapter, I believe them all.

 

I checked out the Redrock FF system at my local movie rental house http://www.redmanmovies.com/. It definitely had very sloppy gears, that could not be adjusted, and cheap plastic parts at a relatively high price. The rental manager there told me that they purchased two entire systems - both with sloppy gears - and they were told that they could not return them. They also weren't able to contact a rep on the phone and had to discuss the problem via Email.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Not picking on your post in particular, Brian, but I've noticed many here posting are wondering where all of us "DV wannabes" are getting the money to finance our cameras. Funny that so many here just automatically assume that all 1400 RED reservation-holders are all 25-year-old film school drop-outs with no experience and no money! Two of my friends are also RED reservation-holders, both of whom have six-figure incomes, have been working in the industry for over twenty-five years each, and are older than dirt.

It's ok. You're an old pro, much older than me, in fact. My post, however, was addressed to someone who made several references to private ownership of the camera by independent filmmakers with tight budgets, not professional cameramen with six figure incomes. I made no assumptions about the RED reservation holders. I only addressed one particular post. I'm not bothered by your response, in any case. Sincerely,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's ok. You're an old pro, much older than me, in fact.

Good one!

 

 

Funny that so many here just automatically assume that all 1400 RED reservation-holders are all 25-year-old film school drop-outs with no experience and no money!
Not that there's anything wrong with a "25-year-old film school drop-out with no experience and no money" who does have a reservation!

 

 

I checked out the Redrock FF system at my local movie rental house http://www.redmanmovies.com/. It definitely had very sloppy gears, that could not be adjusted, and cheap plastic parts at a relatively high price. The rental manager there told me that they purchased two entire systems - both with sloppy gears - and they were told that they could not return them. They also weren't able to contact a rep on the phone and had to discuss the problem via Email.

Yes, they do seem to be a challange to communicate with--a handicap of being a small shop, I guess. They did give me a cool hat at NAB last year, though. How "bad" was it? I mean, if there are no current alternatives, was it "workable?" Or was it just plain, "this is never gonna work, we're better off hand-focusing" kinda bad?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Redrock claims to have an updated version of the follow focus which doesn't have the play issues. The new gearing is also available as a $65 upgrade for old units. See here. I haven't used either version of the product, so I can't say from first hand experience whether the problem is really fixed, but there are some positive comments at that link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Redrock claims to have an updated version of the follow focus which doesn't have the play issues. The new gearing is also available as a $65 upgrade for old units. See here. I haven't used either version of the product, so I can't say from first hand experience whether the problem is really fixed, but there are some positive comments at that link.

Thanks for posting that, Chris! That's encouraging news! Can't wait to get my new hat at NAB again this year, too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ralph I feel I have to enlighten you on some things because I noticed you have become a champion of something that does not yet exist.

If you look at the recent Forbes richest people list you will see Jannard at around the high 500 number and if you look at his bio they have there it states that he is a "savvy marketer".

 

Thats the reason I think you have some naysayers. Its not because we are dinosaurs holding on to film or that we don't believe the camera will never be released. Thats what the fanbots would have you believe.

Its simply we just don't like being sold to in this way. Your comment, about some shill Jannard hired that in your opinion is a great guy because he has a hot girlfriend might be the way you buy equipment but not me. I've got a hot girlfriend and could care less about his. I've read his posts and he's offered nothing but salemanship. I have read his posts in the past on other gear and find him lacking in any true technical knowledge. Hes just a saleman. His opinions rely on simple basic user observations, osmosis, and wikipedia. Big deal.

 

Know that in the US, marketing has become such a gross occupation that it automatically causes some of us to react in opposition because we know we're being played with, i.e., Our nitwit president has sold us a bogus war, has told us to go shopping when things got bad and daylight savings time is being manipulated by corporations with our nitwit prezs help so that people will shop more. Shills are placed in bars with pretty people to push alcohol products, blog writers arer payed by corporations to say things about products, mainstream newspaper writers we trusted are paid to shill for divisive government programs and it goes on and on. The naive never notice, the aware only want the straight scoop not evasion. We have yet to have a full clear explanation on many tech questions that would not hurt any nondisclosure agreements.

 

I have always fully expected the RED to come out. Oakley is a public company and if Jannard was leading us on it would be harmful to the share holders. I fully expect it to shoot great pictures. I could care less if its film or video. Personally i don't like blind obedience to a product we know very little about, even though they keep stating it has been an open process. (Please note here agagin savvy marketer). And if that causes Jannard to get upset. Too bad. Thats what forums are for. Dissemination not fanboydom. I doubt he's losing sleep over it. And in the end he will have the last laugh I'm sure. The day is coming soon and we will find out.

 

Another issue which I find relevant and was put perfectly in a recent post by someone very clear headed is the fustration in getting across the fact that there are very few talented focus pullers around that can keep critical focus for a cam like this if everyone is shooting with 4k pl 35mm lenses and want their actors to actually move. I have this gut feeling that that one observation is going to kick the fanbots in the gut when they get their cams because its so true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another issue which I find relevant and was put perfectly in a recent post by someone very clear headed is the fustration in getting across the fact that there are very few talented focus pullers around that can keep critical focus for a cam like this if everyone is shooting with 4k pl 35mm lenses and want their actors to actually move. I have this gut feeling that that one observation is going to kick the fanbots in the gut when they get their cams because its so true.

 

Maybe. But keep in mind, Red owners will have:

 

1) Full-time access to the camera, to practice whenever they want.

2) Real-time direct feedback at 1080p and though Red's focus assist software.

3) The ability to shoot lots of footage (to check focus on a big screen) without burning through film stock.

 

To the best of my knowledge, there's nobody in the history of focus pulling who has had all of these advantages while learning how to pull 35mm-format focus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Forum Sponsors

Metropolis Post

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Film Gears

CINELEASE

BOKEH RENTALS

CineLab

Cinematography Books and Gear



×
×
  • Create New...