Nikon lenses with the Red One

[Mo Kamal]

I've been reading through the forum for a long time looking for a definitive answer to one question, but I found a lot of contradictory answers, so I am hoping that someone who knows what they are talking about can give a clear answer here.

For a newbie it is confusing figuring out all the acronyms of Nikon lenses, and I am sure there are quite a few people out there who are using Nikon lenses for the first time with the Red One. Is there some sort of guide to Nikon lenses, their different acronyms (af-s, af-d,etc..) and their compatibility with the Red ?

Or at least could someone please post and explain to lens newbies moving to the Red One from prosumer type cameras (with no real lens experience), exactly which type of Nikon 35mm still lenses could be used with the Red Nikon mount?

I read an email from Red staff saying "all Nikon lenses will work", but also I have definitely read posts where people where saying that only "manual focus lenses" could be used.

So what is the deal?

[martinnoweck]

every lens that works with my f301 works with my r1. but i think there is a database by evin about nikon lenses?

regards,
martin

[Mo Kamal]

every lens that works with my f301 works with my r1.

Thanks for the info, but like I was saying, I don't know much about lenses, up til now I have been just pointing and shooting, so even when I look up the stuff ur referring to, I sill do not have a clear answer to my question.


Basically this is what I am trying to say:

lets say that you are sending someone to a camera store to find what lenses they have that you could buy for a Red package, and that someone knows nothing about lenses. you would probably say something like " check out all the lenses they have that are labeled (this or that) but not labeled (this or that).

so basically: instructions without assuming any knowledge about different types of lenses or Nikon cameras.

[Jean Déraps]

With the Nikon mount sold by RED you can only use lenses that have the aperture ring, i.e. non "G" series lenses. You can then have that adapter modified by Doug Underdahl to have some control over the aperture in those "G" lenses if you so desire. Do a search on the forums to find the info.

[Mo Kamal]

Actually I did search the forums, many times, but most of the time the results were irrelevant.

So you're saying that every single Nikon lens that has an aperture ring would work with the Red One ?

[martinnoweck]

i did a search regarding the tests made by evin grant in the lens subforum - but the posts are gone ... anyone any idea?

anyway: i have only tested it with nikon 17-35, nikon 50, nikon 135, nikon 300mm and the p&s prime set. but basically yes: any nikon lens which can be manually controlled (iris, focus) should work on the nikon mount sold by red.

regards,
martin

[Mark Phelan]

Yes, that is the beauty of Nikon keeping the same mount for decades. I don't know about EVERY SINGLE lens working, for example the ultra wide angle 6mm from years ago that projected into the body of the camera so far that you had to lock up the mirror to operate it. That puppy might not work, not sure. But yes, as a general rule, every Nikon lens would work, even the G series, but you'll need Doug's newer mount to operate the iris with those series of lenses.

[number6]

i did a search regarding the tests made by evin grant in the lens subforum - but the posts are gone ... anyone any idea?

anyway: i have only tested it with nikon 17-35, nikon 50, nikon 135, nikon 300mm and the p&s prime set. but basically yes: any nikon lens which can be manually controlled (iris, focus) should work on the nikon mount sold by red.

regards,
martin

Same thing here.... I really hate to see that because that was one of the best references for Nikon users anywhere. Maybe he decided to turn it into a book:unsure:

[number6]

even the G series, but you'll need Doug's newer mount to operate the iris with those series of lenses.

Didn't I read somewhere that the G lens would still work without help but only wide open? Anyway, there are way too many other Series of Nikon lenses to be forced into using a G series lens.

On ebay I've even seen Sigma, Tokina, Vivitar... others... lenses with Nikon mounts. Don't know if they hold up very well to the Nikon glass though.

[Mo Kamal]

That's really good to know, for some reason I was under the impression that only a select group of Nikons would work.

I've been looking at footage shot with Red and an old Nikon, and the stuff looks close to pro cinema stuff. Really impressive, and gives me hope :)

[Mo Kamal]

I found a page that may be of use to newbies looking into nikon options:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility-lens.htm

[Stephen Pruitt]

Nikon lenses give spectacular results with the RED camera. Our entire film was shot with the Nikons, and our next one likely will be, as well.

The chief issue with the Nikons isn't image quality, it is the fact that the Nikons focus "the wrong way." That is, the focus turns the opposite direction from a cine lens.

In addition, the focus throw of Nikon lenses is much narrower than cine glass, which makes it much harder to pull focus on moving subjects, but some people (such as the DP for our first film, Seth Iliff) are incredibly good at doing that, as well.

And don't forget that Tokina 11-16mm lens. You'll need Doug Underdahl's new Nikon mount to use it on the RED, but that lens (as well as a few others, such as the Nikon 10.5mm fisheye) make that new mount essential.

In the final analysis, whereas there are clearly mechanical issues with the Nikons (which I don't mind all that much, to be honest with you), there is no way that anyone could ever tell the difference between a great Cooke zoom set to 85mm and the legendary (and MUCH faster) Nikon 85mm f1.4. . . the Nikon lenses (and Canon lenses, I'm sure will, as well, once someone comes out with a workable RED/Canon mount) simply rock.

Stephen

[number6]

That's really good to know, for some reason I was under the impression that only a select group of Nikons would work.

I've been looking at footage shot with Red and an old Nikon, and the stuff looks close to pro cinema stuff. Really impressive, and gives me hope :)

Long before I received my REDs I started laying in glass, based primarily on 1. the affordability and 2. Evin's primer. I bought some newer lenses but also, 4 Nikon 50-300s (one has fungus and one has what appears to be a thin film of glue on one of the inside optics, but the other two are great) before finally getting the two that I will use for feature work. This is very old glass that will likely soften my footage somewhat, but that's alright with this camera. The R1 has so much extra room for a starter like me that I should be able to finish with respectable output.

Don't get me wrong... I am using Nikon for financial reasons only. When my ShipHighInTransit is sold, I will move to Cine glass. I retain my PL mounts!

[Mo Kamal]

Nikon lenses give spectacular results with the RED camera. Our entire film was shot with the Nikons, and our next one likely will be, as well.

The chief issue with the Nikons isn't image quality, it is the fact that the Nikons focus "the wrong way." That is, the focus turns the opposite direction from a cine lens.

In addition, the focus throw of Nikon lenses is much narrower than cine glass, which makes it much harder to pull focus on moving subjects

Were you using a follow focus?

cuz from what I could gather, even the less expensive brands like redrock micro make it possible to increase the range of focus throw on still lenses, and I emailed them about reversing the direction of rotation (to match cine lenses) and they said they were coming out with some sort of reversing gear that should be available this week.

[Mo Kamal]

Don't get me wrong... I am using Nikon for financial reasons only. When my ShipHighInTransit is sold, I will move to Cine glass. I retain my PL mounts!


of course, same here, I don't believe that the only reason pros use cine lenses is to be snobbish. Name brands and industry norms aside, if the top of the line PL lenses were not worth their price, many many more pros would be talking out against them and production houses would have also caught on.

Everyone values money even the filthy rich, so I believe for the most expensive arri lens to have such a market then it must be worth it.

[K. Møller]

M.K,
Did the guys at RR say anything about pricing?

Cheers.

[James T Mather]

The bigger issues with Nikon (or any other stills glass for that matter) is the purely practical matching of f-stops between lenses - if you are shooting exclusively daytime exteriors this will not concern you but a lens set is only as fast as it's slowest lens and, typically, this turns out to be the widest lenses in stills - which is, to quote the dude, a bummer.

So a used 28mm Nikon t1.4 costs around four grand (that is if you can even find one) - the T3.5 version can be picked up for maybe fifty bucks. You are paying for speed and performance wide open.

Beyond that 20mm is generally the widest available at a reasonable stop in any product line which means that to get something for small locations like a 16mm you may be forced to light the room up to T4 - which is four times the amount of light required from a Zeiss superspeed for the widest shot of your location. In short, when you are shooting wide shots, you are leaning hardest on your lighting package -this is when a fast cine lens is useful.

But if you are shooting outside or in roomy bright interiors this may not be a problem for you. Alternatively rent Superspeeds or MP's for those big night shoots.

[Mo Kamal]

M.K,
Did the guys at RR say anything about pricing?

Cheers.

I think when I checked out their site the full FF package (ff,gears,whip,and speed crank) was around 900 bucks, but they hadn't added the reversing gear yet.

[Mo Kamal]

But if you are shooting outside or in roomy bright interiors this may not be a problem for you. Alternatively rent Superspeeds or MP's for those big night shoots.

I'm used to shooting interiors with an HVX and an M2 adapter, so hopefully whatever Red setup I end up with will be a great improvement when it comes to lighting.

[Steve Gibby]

Though we also use a wide range of cine lenses on RED One, we've also had very good results with Nikon on the multiple RED One cameras I own. We use them in hybrid cine/EFP productions, using 1:1 image magnification to sight focus. For mobility and lightness, we almost always use screw-on filters, rarely use a matte box, and never a follow focus. Genres have included adventure travel, alternative sports, nature, documentaries, business media, and many more.

Some of the Nikon lenses we use are recent manufacture, and others are 10+ years old AIS lenses.

The Nikon lenses we use are:

17-35 f/2.8, 80-200 f2.8, 50-300 f4.5 AIS, 400 f3.5 AIS, 85 f1.4 AIS, 180 f2.8 AIS, and a few others (14mm, 20mm, etc.).

[James T Mather]

I'm used to shooting interiors with an HVX and an M2 adapter, so hopefully whatever Red setup I end up with will be a great improvement when it comes to lighting.

Yes I've shot that system and you'll certainly find it an improvement. (you were working somewhere around 160 asa I guess) - the difference is that the lens adapters generally offer a much wider "neg" (more like ff35mm) so the 20mm is much wider than it will be on a motion picture s35mm frame. It just means you have to be cautious before signing off on tight/small locations where the director is demanding to see the whole room in a shot.

[number6]

Though we also use a wide range of cine lenses on RED One, we've also had very good results with Nikon on the multiple RED One cameras I own. We use them in hybrid cine/EFP productions, using 1:1 image magnification to sight focus. For mobility and lightness, we almost always use screw-on filters, rarely use a matte box, and never a follow focus. Genres have included adventure travel, alternative sports, nature, documentaries, business media, and many more.

Some of the Nikon lenses we use are recent manufacture, and others are 10+ years old AIS lenses.

The Nikon lenses we use are:

17-35 f/2.8, 80-200 f2.8, 50-300 f4.5 AIS, 400 f3.5 AIS, 85 f1.4 AIS, 180 f2.8 AIS, and a few others (14mm, 20mm, etc.).

Gibby, just curious... is your 50-300 the ED version? If so, does it warrant the extra cost for use on a RED?

[Steve Gibby]

Gibby, just curious... is your 50-300 the ED version? If so, does it warrant the extra cost for use on a RED?

Yup...it is the ED version. IMO its worth the extra time and expense to get the ED AIS version of the 50-300. Every lens reviewer I've read seems to agree with that. That's not to say that the pre-ED versions aren't good lenses - they are. But the ED lens coating reduces flare and any other minor artifacts. The 50-300 is one of the best lenses Nikon ever made, and certainly one of the very few best zoom lenses they have made. It is crisp! It used to be the staple lens in the kit of sports and nature shooters who used Nikon. It weighs somewhere around 5 pounds. I use it without a matte box or follow focus, with screw-on filters.

The footage from the ED 50-300 f/4.5 AIS on RED is very nice - crisp, clean, artifact free, excellent bokeh, etc.

Its not super fast at f/4.5, but then again is is almost always fast enough for what its is designed for - natural light shooting of wildlife, sports, etc.

I bought mine about five months ago online in the used equipment store at B&H. If you're familiar with their 1 through 10 ratings for used lenses, this one was rated by B&H as a 9. I picked it up for $1,500 - and it was one of the best Nikon lens decisions I've made for use on my REDs.

If you shoot sports, nature, or some other genre with RED where you can use a crisp 6x manual zoom, I highly recommend the Nikon ED 50-300 f/4.5 AIS zoom - if you can find one - they're hard to find because they're such a good lens that photographers tended to hang onto them, even when they switched to newer lenses throughout the rest of their kits.

[Mo Kamal]

The Nikon lenses we use are:

17-35 f/2.8, 80-200 f2.8, 50-300 f4.5 AIS, 400 f3.5 AIS, 85 f1.4 AIS, 180 f2.8 AIS, and a few others (14mm, 20mm, etc.).

Which 80-200 f2.8 do you own?

I'm wondering if the AF-S is worth getting (over the AF-D).

[Steve Gibby]

Which 80-200 f2.8 do you own?

I'm wondering if the AF-S is worth getting (over the AF-D).

I own the ED 80-200 AF, which was made from 1988-92 (mine was made in '92). It is optically excellent, basically a very similar optical design to the later Nikon 80-200 lenses. It is built like a tank. Images from it are very sharp, it is pretty good wide open, but becomes excellent at f/4 and further stopped down. If you look around you can find one in very good condition used for around $600 USD.

The AF-S was made from 1999-2004 and is also a great lens - very sharp. The AF-D is the most current version of 80-200, and though I haven't used it I hear very good things about it from associates who use it on their Nikon DSLR cameras.

All three of these Nikon 80-200 lens versions (AF, AF-S, AF-D) are excellent lenses and should be very good on RED One. I have only used my AF version, and the images from it on RED One have been very crisp, with nice rolloff and bokeh - and the performance to price ratio of the lens on is sky high.

For those who shoot Nikon on RED One, and shoot genres where a zoom is useful, IMO there are two "must have" zooms for your kit: the 17-35 and one of these versions of the 80-200.

Hope this helps...

[Steve Sherrick]

Nikon shooters - purchase Nikon mount from Red. Upgrade that to Doug's newer mount, buy only good glass (there are some lemons out there), and definitely look at lenses like the Tokina 11-16.

As has been mentioned, still lenses are tougher to focus than cine lenses, are not always optically equivalent, i.e. quality control not always as tight as cine lenses, and can have some color shift within a set. But if you get a good set going, you'll find they are a great way to go for certain projects.

[Mo Kamal]

yes the Tokina 11-16 seems to be a great value, I think that any other Nikon mount lens in that focal range would either be slower or way more expensive.

[Denis Buhot]

yes the Tokina 11-16 seems to be a great value, I think that any other Nikon mount lens in that focal range would either be slower or way more expensive.

.. but consider some in the sigma range, nikon mount. Especially long or very long lenses, if you care to use any. Shorter lenses seem to have lost their iris ring recently... Too bad, when you take a look at some footage here, skaters in Paris Trocadero, notably...