Difficult choise: Old PL zoom or going the Nikkon Stills route...

[Eirik Tyrihjel]

I think Evin´s lens tests are very exciting and definetly a promising direction,
BUT
Once the RED zoom becomes available (and quite likely a set of reasonable well achieving primes) all in PL mount, those Nikkon lenses will have to go.

Also the idea of having to switch back and forth from PL and Nikkon mount, which will (most likely) be a sort of delicate operation, I am having a hard time deciding.

Maybe I should get something like an old Angenieux zoom 25-250 HP, or the Cooke Varotal 25-250 MK1, that way it will fill out the announced RED zoom once it ships, and not rendered useless.

I am thinking it would be wise to pick one up now, before 1500 RED owners with new cameras all simultaneosuly starts buying old PL lenses (I know some of you already started, but you get my point)

I guess what I am asking is for any valid input on older zooms, versus the idea of going with the Nikkon mount. (Stephen?)

[Chris Gearhart]

I have thought the same thing about a complementing zoom to RED's. I've considered the Angenieux and the Cooke, but I can't find the gumption to purchase until after NAB at least.

I also wonder if that many of us will be buying lots of old PL mounts. A wild guess on Red lens purchasers and their probable migration paths:


Rental Houses, five REDs each (100 reservations?)--no lenses needed.
The folks migrating up from 1/3" chips (400 reservations?)--I suspect a majority are going the Nikon/Canon route until and perhaps after the Red Zoom. The rest will get RED primes (:whistling: ).
ENG/EFP guys (with maybe a yearning for drama) (400 reservations?)--I wonder if most of them will go with RED zoom and B4 mounts and rental.
Film or Varicam/Cinealta guys (600 reservations?)--They are the ones who will be buying up stuff, but I bet most will at least be waiting until after NAB or just getting RED branded lenses and renting until they arrive.


I think only the folks who don't have access to rental houses will be snatching up old PLs. I think it gives us something to hunt while we wait for NAB, to be honest. I am thinking the RED solutions will be pleasantly sufficient for most people's needs and budgets.

So, I don't really feel the pressure to buy early.

[Dan Blanchett]

I'm getting the RED Zoom and will be using a couple Nikon lenses in the meantime (17-35 and 50mm), perhaps selling them once the RED lens arrives (or if they fail to deliver on performance) and/or converting them to on-set still photography duty. I don't plan on switching back and forth. I can't afford anything more pricey at this time.

Regarding pricing, I have already noticed a considerable mark up on Nikon 50mm AI lenses on ebay (some going for over $200 versus $75-95 two weeks ago) although on Keh.com they are slightly less. Not sure if this increase is being seen on PL mount lenses as well.

Dan

[PaulClements]

Thinkbug, you probably see AF's going at that price, the AI's are still around the $90 mark. I almost bought one two days ago at $85 but got locked out of ebay.

For the OP, it's questionable that an old pl lense such as the ones you've listed would actually be any better than the Nikon lenses. Both in size and performance. Many of them breath just as badly. However it does raise a question over accessories. If you use PL from the getgo then the release of the Red Zoom won't impact on your follow focus or mattebox, that said there are available and upcoming products that will work well with either anyway so this could be a moot point. At this point we don't know how difficult changing the mounts will be. Early discussions on the setup were based around a few screws, but caution was raised over threading them and making the camera redundant, I wouldn't be suprised if Red has invested alot of time in energy in creating a changeable mount that is little more effort than changing a lens. But until NAB we'll have no idea.

Lets not forget that even after NAB it might still be a long while before many people get their cameras and any kind of surge in PL mount lenses begins, so we'll know more about how easy/hard changing the mount is and can each make a more reasoned judgement. Truth is though I don't think the release of the camera will dent the current lens market anyway. They are expensive pieces of equipment, always have been (Where quality exists) and will be for a long time. A few hundred more individuals won't change too much.

Finally, who are you looking to serve with your camera? If it's your client you can always rent on their behalf. If it's yourself and you don't mind then Nikon's are of course a good option. Owning a PL mount might sound better than SLR lenses but it won't necessarily encourage more people to hire you if it is not a decent PL lens.

cheers

Paul

[Poi Boy]

I would be very hasitant to buy an old pl zoom before nab, we don't know final specs yet regarding the mount. I would also suggest that Nikkor primes are going to look better than old bargain zooms.
-A

[Dan Blanchett]

Paul, unfortunately it was AI and not AF. Those $85 AI lenses shot up in the waning seconds. I should know, I was bidding! This is recent, too. Last week it wasn't so bad.

Two recent Examples:

$380.00 (click) (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=017&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=270100927247&rd=1&rd=1)

$187.00 (click) (http://cgi.ebay.com/NIKON-50mm-NIKKOR-f1-4-AI-4011736_W0QQitemZ180099235422QQcategoryZ73445QQssP ageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem)


However (and I don't wish to get off topic) I think that a determined and vigiliant buyer may still find a good deal.

[Poi Boy]

Regarding old or new Nikkors; if that is the way you are going, I would consider buying them new. If you run into prices like thinkbug is quoting a new 50 is a much better value.
Aloha
-A

[Dan Blanchett]

It might be tough finding a brand new 50 (AI) if you want the rugged all-metal body Evin recommended (those were made in the 70s). But you can find some that are "mint" or near enough. The 17-35 is still available new for $1250-1500.

[Poi Boy]

I've shied away from the af models but apparantly many are just as good and inexpensive.
-A

[Hans von Sonntag]

Some thought on this topic:

1. If you purchased used photo lenses you will be able to sell them without a significant loss once you change the mount to pl. Optically good photo lenses are not inferior to cine lenses. Only rack focus and often heavy breathing are the downsides.

2. Timeless lenses like Cooke 20-100 and the successor, and of course more expensive, 18-100 zoom will keep their production value. As well as most of the PL-primes on the market. They will also keep their price value.

3. Angenieux zooms from the 70ies for 0.5 - 2k are heavy breathing and have a rotating front lens. I wouldn't buy one.

4. The RED-Zoom will be probably a reasonable lens. But it will cost just under 10k. Will it be better than an used Cooke 18-100? Probably no. Lighter? Probably yes. Much lighter? Probably no. For sure not much cheaper. A lot of guessing on the RED-Zoom here.

5. Decent used Pl glass will probably increase in price. No worries for those who purchase before NAB.

- I bought a Cooke 20-100 for 3.5 k in a very well maintained condition and it's sharp through out the whole range. I did this because I shot a lot of stuff with this lens on 35mm and know what I can do with it and what I can't do.
I will not go the photo lens route because of the above mentioned downsides.

Conclusion: If you know the PL -Zoom lens and it's a good bang for the bug (way under 10k) buy it now, it wont get cheaper. If you are not sure about it go the photo lens route.

My two cents on this,

Hans

Edit: I will use the RED for what I am doing now: Commercials, Corporate, Drama. It will substitute 35mm and F 900. I am not doing ENG. I am also doing EFP, documentarian style of shooting. We will see how RED with the Cooke 20-100 will fit in this. Hand held with a 4.5 kilo zoom is a challenge. For sure this zoom is a lens to start with. Other will follow later, many option here.

For the folks which have to use B4 2/3 zooms an adaptor will be necessary but this is an different concept for a different application and optically not the best solution considering the resolution RED will deliver.

[Mike the beginner]

A lot of good advice from Hans thank you!

I wonder if the fact that red can have interchangable mounts just might ocassionally be a negative aspect for some people. Surely no matter how easy or difficult the changover will be, it will pose some risk?


Could this go against the rental market or individuals from getting their cameras rented? The point being would a large organisation want to risk getting a red rental if the mounts have been constantly changed and the calibration or relation of sensor to mount etc is just ever so slightly knocked out or dust. I dont want to have to clean my sensor! frightening!

I really like the idea behind Birger Engineering (specialised mount) working with the canon wide angle photo lens zoom and their longer zooms. To get image stabilsation thrown in here as well as remote focus and zoom has to be compared to say the 300mm prime for the likes of wildlife and nature work.

In that particular intance long primes, would the birger solution not actually be better than the red solution?

I just dont like the idea of changing mounts other than in a controlled environment when you can take your time and do it right. Aslo when renting you are going to get the hirer not giving tuppence as he changes mounts whenever he pleases out in the field. Just a beginner thoughts.......

Mike the beginner

[Moir]

A lot of good advice from Hans thank you!

To get image stabilsation thrown in here as well as remote focus and zoom has to be compared to say the 300mm prime for the likes of wildlife and nature work.

In that particular intance long primes, would the birger solution not actually be better than the red solution?

Mike the beginner

Mike
I wouldn't plan on getting any benefit from image stablisation (IS) on the long Canon teles. The IS on these lenses is designed for still photography, and works extremely well for that format, but is not designed for video use.

[Hans von Sonntag]

I wonder if the fact that red can have interchangable mounts just might ocassionally be a negative aspect for some people. Surely no matter how easy or difficult the changover will be, it will pose some risk?

Could this go against the rental market or individuals from getting their cameras rented? The point being would a large organisation want to risk getting a red rental if the mounts have been constantly changed and the calibration or relation of sensor to mount etc is just ever so slightly knocked out or dust. I dont want to have to clean my sensor! frightening!

I really like the idea behind Birger Engineering (specialised mount) working with the canon wide angle photo lens zoom and their longer zooms. To get image stabilsation thrown in here as well as remote focus and zoom has to be compared to say the 300mm prime for the likes of wildlife and nature work.

In that particular intance long primes, would the birger solution not actually be better than the red solution?

I just dont like the idea of changing mounts other than in a controlled environment when you can take your time and do it right. Aslo when renting you are going to get the hirer not giving tuppence as he changes mounts whenever he pleases out in the field. Just a beginner thoughts.......

Mike the beginner

Hi Mike,

interesting stuff, the image stabilisation. But I suppose (almost dead sure) as Moir pointed out, it won't work on film/video applications. There are some stabilisation systems out there based on gyroscopic systems. Used them once 15 years ago and found it funny and heavy. Not really usable. Then of course there is steadicam and and a bunch of derivatives; not applicable for long lenses.

The renting business. Renting houses will consider RED as a digital 35mm camera. As the RED team states the RED ONE will be thoroughly compatible with the Arri accessories. In most, most cases they will not rent a camera out with a photo lens mount. The reason: They have all sort of 35mm lenses in their portfolio and also the PL mount is far the sturdiest around. I would not change mounts if I don't have to. The socket for attaching the mount will not get better.

Privately rented out RED Ones will be very individually configured. I can imagine there will be a lot of people renting them out with a B4 adaptor and tv-zooms. Note that high performance 2/3" zooms are expensive. Canon and Fujinon wide angle zooms are around 20k. And of course there will be the indie feature folks. A lot of them will use photo lenses. A way you can go for sure but nor really for rental business.

Dust on the sensor: Well this is like with any other camera. Changing lenses can cause dust. Use dust-off or a simple bellow. Done a million times on 35mm gates...

If you change mounts, although it's a better idea not to do this, you have to do this in adequate environment. Not in the field as long it is not a hospital for instance... I don't know yet how it is done but collimating the camera and the used optics would be a good idea, at least if you want to rely on proper backfocus and correct distance readings.

Hans

[Michael Hastings]

Why do you say no benefit on IS? I only have a little experience with the IS lenses but as far as I could tell it worked very well on a continuous basis - in fact I found myself using the 300mm just as a nice optically stabilized telescope through the EOS20D - not even wanting to take a picture.


Mike
I wouldn't plan on getting any benefit from image stablisation (IS) on the long Canon teles. The IS on these lenses is designed for still photography, and works extremely well for that format, but is not designed for video use.

[Hans von Sonntag]

Why do you say no benefit on IS? I only have a little experience with the IS lenses but as far as I could tell it worked very well on a continuous basis - in fact I found myself using the 300mm just as a nice optically stabilized telescope through the EOS20D - not even wanting to take a picture.


This is interesting. Do you know how it works?. Does it need some information (kind of data) the Camera delivers.

Hans

[PaulClements]

If you rent your camera out and have a Nikkor setup. Then you either rent it as your Nikkor setup or as a PL setup with hired lenses. At the end of the day if someone wants to use a decent modern cooke zoom (For example), then why would they want to use a nikon for any particular shot? Something like cookes 18-100mm would cover anything in most Nikkor sets anyway, and they won't want to suddenly swap out to an SLR lens that doesn't share the same characteristics!

This is at least one way of renting. It leaves you the option to change mounts in a controlled environment before the camera even gets to the shoot. It also gives anyone looking to rent your camera that extra option. Many Indie film-makers might like to see the Nikkor glass as an option afterall, so it could actually help you to get business. Just a point of view!

[Moir]

Why do you say no benefit on IS? I only have a little experience with the IS lenses but as far as I could tell it worked very well on a continuous basis - in fact I found myself using the 300mm just as a nice optically stabilized telescope through the EOS20D - not even wanting to take a picture.

Well, we are talking about long heavy telephotos here (ie. 300mm), which will generally require tripod mounted shooting for Red. In my experience, OIS is best switched-off for tripod mounted shots. You get random drift even when locked-down, and pans / tilts don't stop at the end point.

I'm interested to know if your experience is different. When you use your 300mm lens as a telescope, is it hand-held or mounted? If mounted, do you experience the above problems, or do you get a rock-steady image even when you pan?

[Mike the beginner]

Well, we are talking about long heavy telephotos here (ie. 300mm), which will generally require tripod mounted shooting for Red. In my experience, OIS is best switched-off for tripod mounted shots. You get random drift even when locked-down, and pans / tilts don't stop at the end point.

I'm interested to know if your experience is different. When you use your 300mm lens as a telescope, is it hand-held or mounted? If mounted, do you experience the above problems, or do you get a rock-steady image even when you pan?

Thanks Moir, another good bit of learning experience.


Paul, the reason i mention the different mounts is that for my own uses, i am likely to require a suitable lens for underwater work and possibly panoramic views where i fear the 18mm end of the red zoom at about 26mm (fov equivalent)will not be wide enough. At the moment i like the birger engineering solution as even with the extra price of the mount i can put a $700 new canon 10mm-22mm zoom and cover both underwater and establishing shots. Though i hope someone at red team will test the various still re nikon, canon lenses for colour and compare to red prime to see how they compare. Out of my depth, but just a beginners thoughts..............

Mike the beginner

[Eirik Tyrihjel]

My agony is over... I ended up on Nikkon still lenses and (if needed) renting PL lenses untill I get my RED zoom, and hopefully the unannounced - but hopefully coming RED prime series...

[chuck colburn]

This is just my dos centavos on changing out camera lens mounts. There is no optical or mechanical reason that a camera can not have field interchangeable front ends. A properly machined base that is factory trued to the film plane and a set of accuret lens standards, (i.e. steel/brass) that have a decent amount of seating surface area and a secure clamping arangement are going to repeat within one or two ten one thousandths of an inch. It worked for the Eclair ACL and there is no reason that it would not work for any other camera. I've taken apart hundreds of motion picture cameras and unless there was an error in the flange focale depth to start with, they went back togeather the way they came apart. And these were front ends that were not designed to be interchangeable. I'm not saying you should do it in a dust storm, but it could be as easy (almost) as changing a lens. If the seating surfaces are as clean as the ones on a lens and the lens mount on the camera you have nothing to worry about.

[Matt Uhry]

I have to agree with Chuck, while caution and cleanliness while changing mounts is a good idea, the mount/camera connection is way less vulnerable to errors than the lens/mount connection.

I would try to avoid a situation where you had to change mounts on set - not fun while the AD stares at you or the sun goes down or both.

Keeping constant .01 of a milimeter accuracy is most important to people who are using modern, fast, sharp, well maintained and prepped ( and expensive ) wide angle primes and zooms, using Tape focus with a good (expensive) AC. which is probably the opposite of the typical situation for Nikon crowd anyway who are by default going to live in eye focus land.

I guess I'm saying don't worry about it so much. In practice this is not going to be a problem.

Matt Uhry
www.fuzby.com