Wich zoom for RED

[samuel33]

I don't have the money to buy 35 prime lens and I want to buy a zoom at first.
Any advice? (still camera lens and 35 zoom lens)

[Akcelik]

Nikkor AFS 17-35mm constant aperture F2.8

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=66640

[samuel33]

thanx dude

[Sanjin Jukic]

Nikkor AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8 D IF-ED Review
Quick Test Report by by Klaus Schroiff,
he is a German and have look at the precision of his test at
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_1735_28/index.htm

[Stephen Williams]

I don't have the money to buy 35 prime lens and I want to buy a zoom at first.
Any advice? (still camera lens and 35 zoom lens)

Hi Samuel,

I would look closely at a Cooke 20-100 T3.1 or a Cooke 20-60 T3.1, they both cost in the region of $30,000 when new, today available for less than $3000 on Ebay.

Stephen

[Jeff Kilgroe]

posted in error...

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Hi Samuel,

I would look closely at a Cooke 20-100 T3.1 or a Cooke 20-60 T3.1, they both cost in the region of $30,000 when new, today available for less than $3000 on Ebay.

Stephen

Well there's a Cooke 18-100 F3 zoom lens on there right now. Looks like a really nice lens. Not sure if the $9500 starting bid is that attractive, but nice lens. I think I'll wait and see what the lenses from RED can do before I cough up that much on a pre-owned Cooke. OTOH, I would probably consider it if I already had RED in hand, but with my RED still a long ways off (don't even have my reservation yet), I'll keep waiting. :)

[Stephen Williams]

Well there's a Cooke 18-100 F3 zoom lens on there right now. Looks like a really nice lens. Not sure if the $9500 starting bid is that attractive, but nice lens. I think I'll wait and see what the lenses from RED can do before I cough up that much on a pre-owned Cooke. OTOH, I would probably consider it if I already had RED in hand, but with my RED still a long ways off (don't even have my reservation yet), I'll keep waiting. :)


Hi,

The 18-100 T3 is the current version of the original 20-100 T3.1. They usually sell for big money. FWIW you can part exchange a 20-100 to Cooke, as some of the internal lenses are reused in the latest version today. (The lens was launched in 1971). At that time it was sharper, and breathed less than any prime lens. Stanley K owned one, he used it on all his films from 'The Shining' to 'Eyes Wide Shut'.

Stephen

Edit The one on Ebay is not the latest version mechanically & looks identical to the Cooke 20-100. Cooke did make various versions including a 14-70mm (with a huge front element)

[beatniq]

Well there's a Cooke 18-100 F3 zoom lens on there right now. Looks like a really nice lens. Not sure if the $9500 starting bid is that attractive, but nice lens. I think I'll wait and see what the lenses from RED can do before I cough up that much on a pre-owned Cooke. OTOH, I would probably consider it if I already had RED in hand, but with my RED still a long ways off (don't even have my reservation yet), I'll keep waiting. :)

Which lens do you think will be suitable for ENG/EFP use?

[Matt Uhry]

No 35mm format Cooke is at all suitable for ENG work. IF you just have to shoot in that style look at the optar 25-80 t3 or converted 28-70's t3. Seems like you'll be better off with a super 16mm lens using the cropped sensor format.

The cooke 18-100 and 20-100 are nice lenses. These were my favorite non Panavision zoom lenses in that range until the Optimo 17-80 T2.2 ( which costs $57K ) I have yet to use the Zeiss 16-110 monster in real life ( Cinegear does not count! ). One has to wonder if Cooke is working on a new version that has a much faster aperature to go with the rocking 15-40 T2 Cxx ?

Back to the Cooke 5:1's
It's quite a big lens, probably best to forget about doing much handheld...
In good tune it approaches prime lens sharpness, and lack of optical defects.
they focus very close, very minimal breathing...
Low Distortion. Decent contrast ( better on the 18-100 )

The 20-60 is a bit smaller, but still a large lens. I think I would miss the long end...

With any used zoom it would be a good idea to have a lens tech check it out for you before you buy... If you have to rebuild the lens it won't seem like that good a deal any more.

And of course we are all eager to find out what the Red 18-85 Zoom is going to be all about...

If you have projects to shoot right when you get your camera and buying is going to be in some way better than renting go for it !

Matt Uhry
www.fuzby.com

[Stephen Williams]

Which lens do you think will be suitable for ENG/EFP use?

Hi,

I think the RED zoom, as I understand it's quite small & light.
Cookes are large, one advantage of big glass is the T stop does not change as you zoom in, unlike smaller video zooms.

I have no knowledge of the Red zoom, this is not to be taken as a negative comment!

Stephen

[beatniq]

Hi,

I think the RED zoom, as I understand it's quite small & light.
Cookes are large, one advantage of big glass is the T stop does not change as you zoom in, unlike smaller video zooms.

I have no knowledge of the Red zoom, this is not to be taken as a negative comment!

Stephen

Thanks, Stephen.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I might do some very rare ENG type work with my RED. For that I would definitely consider the RED zoom, but it might be a while until we see what it's all about. A B4 mount adapter could be a good choice too and you can then use all sorts of common broadcast lenses (which will limit your sensor area - 1080p or 2K probably). Also consider a Nikon mount and some of the Nikkor zooms and primes, which ar relatively inexpensive and look to give great results. The 50mm lens Evin tested looks great - I'm thinking of picking up a 50-300mm Nikkor zoom to test. That could make a real nice general use zoom lens. If I need something better with a sharper image and a lot less breathing, I can rent a Cooke or Zeiss.

[beatniq]

I might do some very rare ENG type work with my RED. For that I would definitely consider the RED zoom, but it might be a while until we see what it's all about. A B4 mount adapter could be a good choice too and you can then use all sorts of common broadcast lenses (which will limit your sensor area - 1080p or 2K probably). Also consider a Nikon mount and some of the Nikkor zooms and primes, which ar relatively inexpensive and look to give great results. The 50mm lens Evin tested looks great - I'm thinking of picking up a 50-300mm Nikkor zoom to test. That could make a real nice general use zoom lens. If I need something better with a sharper image and a lot less breathing, I can rent a Cooke or Zeiss.

The Nikon prime lenses like the 50mm seem like a great solution for low budget indy projects, but I just can't see myself using prime lenses for ENG/EFP.

Regarding the 50-300mm, how is that a general use lens? Won't the already high focal length increase exponentially?

I gave the B4 idea some thought as well. I suppose if RED zoom doesn't work out I'll have to look into that. Thanks for your input!

[Finner]

Does anyone know how much the Cooke 20-100 weighs?

I have used it before and guess 15-25 lbs but would like to know the accurate weight. I searched a little but could not find the stats on the weight.

[Mike Devlin]

The current production 18-100mm T3.0 lens (replacing the 20-100) is listed on the Cooke site as 5.5kg (12lbs)

[Scott Webster]

Zgc Cooke Price list:
http://tinyurl.com/tdogu

Arri Price List 2006 pdf (lenses are pg 54 onwards)
http://tinyurl.com/yk37h4

[Steve Gibby]

Spielberg shot the Emmy-winning mini-series Brothers in Arms with a Cooke 20-100 T3.1.

For true run 'n gun EFP work I'd suggest a B4 mount and a 2/3" HD ENG Zoom lens. You can find them used for around $6k. (18x). RED One is supposed to have two 12 volt auxiliary taps, so powering the servo of an HD ENG zoom will not be a problem.

As mentioned, another possibility is a used S16 zoom. A 35mm still photo zoom would be tricky to do EFP run 'n gun with.

I've ordered the RED 18-85mm zoom, which I know I'll use a lot for cine-style production, but being small and light (as RED has projected), it could be a candidate for some good EFP work when stopped down to f5.6 to f8 for the generally deeper DOF requirements of EFP.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

The Nikon prime lenses like the 50mm seem like a great solution for low budget indy projects, but I just can't see myself using prime lenses for ENG/EFP.

Probably not I'd guess, you'd be swapping out lenses all the time.


Regarding the 50-300mm, how is that a general use lens? Won't the already high focal length increase exponentially?

Perhaps. I'm not sure how it would stack up, but I think it could make a nice workhorse zoom lens. I guess general use doesn't really apply, but it should fit the bill for the times when you need a decent telephoto. I'll have to play with it and see -- I just grabbed one off ebay and will have to do some tests when I get it. It's an older lens model and it seems Nikon doesn't make it anymore as they've replaced it with a couple different 70-300 models ranging in price from about $600 MSRP to upwards of $3K for the same focal length depending on number of elements and whatnot. It's an older model I picked up and looks to be in good condition.

Anyway without drifting too far off topic, you'll probably want a couple lenses to choose from. I wouldn't shy away from something like the 70-300 Nikkor, and a 20-100 with maybe a couple primes. Most decent cameras have interchangeable lenses for a reason, even broadcast/ENG cameras. May as well exploit that if you can.


I gave the B4 idea some thought as well. I suppose if RED zoom doesn't work out I'll have to look into that. Thanks for your input!

The B4 mount may not be a bad way to go. Are you doing ENG work now? What lens(es) do you currently use (if any)? You would probably do well with a 2/3" HD zoom like Gibby said.

[Akcelik]

for the price of Cooke prime you can buy another Red!!! factor that into your budget/workflow.. of course then you need to buy another lens ehh.

[Steve Gibby]

for the price of Cooke prime you can buy another Red!!! factor that into your budget/workflow.. of course then you need to buy another lens ehh.

Or just rent the lenses you need for the 2nd RED on a per project needs basis, until you generate enough capital to buy the lens or lenses you want for that RED. In fact, depending on your business model, you could approach your lens situation the same for both REDs.

I have a feeling that the RED lenses will have a very good price to performance ratio, thus I've reserved a RED 300mm prime and a RED 18-85mm zoom. I also suspect that RED will announce some more lenses soon (primes?). If they do announce primes, I think they'll be good quality and affordable. I'll also use some Nikkor lenses, and simply rent the other cine primes I need on a per project basis. My kits (I'll have 2 REDs) will only include equipment (including lenses) that I'll use regularly. All else will be rented on a per project basis.

[Akcelik]

hello Gibby!

yes. having an extra Red sounds more viable cause its cheaper to hire lens and think of the extra shots one can attain in the least amount of time.

for a wide lens one can make do with picture lens but for tele and normal primes where focus becomes more crucial i would hope to see Red give the aforementioned first priority.

[beatniq]

Perhaps. I'm not sure how it would stack up, but I think it could make a nice workhorse zoom lens. I guess general use doesn't really apply, but it should fit the bill for the times when you need a decent telephoto. I'll have to play with it and see -- I just grabbed one off ebay and will have to do some tests when I get it. It's an older lens model and it seems Nikon doesn't make it anymore as they've replaced it with a couple different 70-300 models ranging in price from about $600 MSRP to upwards of $3K for the same focal length depending on number of elements and whatnot. It's an older model I picked up and looks to be in good condition.

I look forward to the day when I can purchase lenses on a whim just to experiment with them and say, "....what the heck, let's see what happens when I plop this f*cker into RED..." :)


The B4 mount may not be a bad way to go. Are you doing ENG work now? What lens(es) do you currently use (if any)? You would probably do well with a 2/3" HD zoom like Gibby said.

It's probably more appropriately described as EFP work, but yes I am and anticipating more in the future. Perhaps my post was misleading, I have not had the priviledge of budgets which afford me the use a variety of lenses and the cameras that allow them, so I don't have much to offer in that department (unless you want me to discuss their specs and how good their pics look on my monitor). Generally, I work with cameras like the DVX. RED will be my first significant investment into my career and because of that, I'll need to put it to work right away to start paying it off. ENG/EFP work is the easiest and most immediate means I have at doing so, hence, that brings us full circle to my questions regarding lenses, etc.

[Stephen Williams]

for the price of Cooke prime you can buy another Red!!! factor that into your budget/workflow.. of course then you need to buy another lens ehh.

Hi,

It's normal in the film world for the cost of lenses to exceed the cost of the camera body in rental or purchase costs. A film camera is just a box that advances the film one frame at a time!

Stephen

[Steve Gibby]

It's normal in the film world for the cost of lenses to exceed the cost of the camera body in rental or purchase costs.

Very true...I think you raise a good point.

But in the RED world of digital cinema none of the RED lenses announced even approaches the cost of the RED One camera body kit:

Body kit = $17,500
RED 300mm prime = $4995
RED 17-85mm zoom = $9500
Other RED lenses (if announced) = probably priced well below the price of the RED One camera kit.

That's not to say that you can't put lenses on RED One that cost many times the cost of the RED One camera body. You obviously can, but you won't have to in order to get good results with RED One. Only occasionally will you find a professional digital cinema or pro EFP camera where the camera body is priced less than lenses it uses, and then it is usually a high-priced specialty lens, rather than a stock or normal lens for the camera. DC and pro EFP cameras are packed with electronics, which changes the ratio of the body value to the value of normal lenses used.

The digital world simply has different economies of scale and cost ratios than the film world.

[Roberto B]

yep.. but not when this box is a highly technologically evolved like RED (a digital camera not a simple light box) is..

[Steve Gibby]

That was the point of my post

[Roberto B]

yeah, gibby.. you beat me!

different people, same view, same idea.. same truth.

[Steve Gibby]

Some times I get 'em out fairly fast! Wish my typing worked as fast as my thoughts. I'm a "hunt and peck" typist - a severe handicap in a fast-paced online world of forums.

[Roberto B]

:) ..

[Stephen Williams]

yep.. but not when this box is a highly technologically evolved like RED (a digital camera not a simple light box) is..

Hi,

Only problem with a highly technologically box V a low tech box, the low tech box will remain state of the art for longer!

I know Red is upgradable however I think it unlikely (not impossible) that they will still be in use 80 years from today!

Stephen

[beatniq]

Hi,

Only problem with a highly technologically box V a low tech box, the low tech box will remain state of the art for longer!

I know Red is upgradable however I think it unlikely (not impossible) that they will still be in use 80 years from today!

Stephen

Come on. 80 years from now? Don't you watch the news?? That'll never happen. ;)

[Roberto B]

but when the options are to offer an elitist tool for an elitist gang, i'd prefer a decent tool (= realistic = digital offer) instead a dream became a real industrial nightmare.. a real reason to avoid to shoot film..

[Akcelik]

i will tie the Red to the cord on a flag pole and raise it to the top, if a tsunami comes my way.

[Stephen Williams]

i will tie the Red to the cord on a flag pole and raise it to the top, if a tsunami comes my way.

Hi,

& I thought I was getting off topic!

Stephen

[Akcelik]

way out there dude..

[Scott Webster]

Some of you may find this chart useful for FOV comparison:

http://homepage.mac.com/kevinrita/.Public/Lens_angle.pdf

Kevin Riley is a respected NZ DOP who also runs www.cinestuff.co.nz

[samuel33]

've just seen a picture of the cook....it's hudge!
You think i can take the Red on my shoulder with this lens?
The nikkor seemes more easy to handle....but 17-35 isn't to short?
is there any other nikor with spec 17-55 or 70 with good quality?

[Sanjin Jukic]

A very good zoom lens for the future handheld shootings with the RED ONE.
Nikkor AF-S 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

http://nikonimaging.com/global/products/lens/af/zoom/af-s_vr_zoom24-120mmf_35-56g_if/img/pic_001.jpg

"VR - Vibration Reduction
This innovative VR system minimizes image blur caused by camera shake. It allows handheld shooting at dusk, at night, and even in poorly lit interiors. The lens’ VR system also detects automatically when the photographer(cinematographer) pans — no special mode is required."
Test review at
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_24120_3556vr/index.htm

[Martin Drew]

Hi Sanjin

Might not be ideal on the RedOne. There won't be any power going to the lens so there will be no VR and I can't see an iris ring so I presume iris on this lens is not manual (please correct me if I am wrong).

I don't know this lens but another problem you sometimes find with lens designs where the front element telescopes in and out with the zoom is that the weight of the telescoping part can be enough to alter the zoom slightly when you point the camera down or up, not something you want to happen when you are shooting motion. Of course that may not affect this lens but it is something I would watch out for

[Chris Kenny]

Martin, you're right. The VR feature wouldn't really be useful on Red even in principle. It allows low light shooting by compensating for camera shake so you can take long handheld exposures, but you can't take particularly long exposures if you have to shoot at least 24 of them a second! Plus, as you say, it will be incompatible with Red's Nikon mount anyway.

And, yes, it's G-series lens. None of these have manual aperture rings.

[samuel33]

So we have to find a great D-series zoom lens

[Sanjin Jukic]

Guys you are right, no manual aperture. It will work somehow but not good with the RED or any similar cam or even 35mm DOF adapter. SORRY!!!

"The AF-S 24-120mm VR is a full format lens and as such usable on all Nikon SLRs that are compatible to G class lenses without aperture ring."
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_24120_3556vr/index.htm

[Akcelik]

the following will pick up from where the 17-35 left off. they all have aperture control and should work with Red.. prices from B&H new.

Nikkor 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D IF $240
Nikon 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5 AIS $350
Nikkor 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 AIS $400
Nikkor 35-70mm f/2.8D $480 (constant aperture)
Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF $500
Nikon 35-200mm f/3.5-4.5 AIS $900
Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D ED-IF $ 1335 (recommended. same quality as the 17-35 constant aperture)

and keeping in mind a greater zoom range = less quality, one could also just opt for a couple of easily attainable second hand telephoto primes i.e. a 50 & 85mm.

also a link here..
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-12-09.shtml
which i find somewhat relevant to the original poster, (me included). because i am not a pro and will use the Red only for personal projects.

[chuck colburn]

The Nikon 24-120 has been around a long time and is/was? availble as an all manual lens.

[Chris Kenny]

Keep in mind that you probably don't want a lens that varies its widest f-number over its zoom range. When such a lens is on a Nikon, at least the camera will tell you what stop you're actually at if e.g. the aperture ring is set at 2.8, but the lens only opens up to 3.5 at that focal length.

On Red, you'll have to guess, or use the lens on a Nikon a lot and memorize how much it can open up at different focal lengths.