RED lenses - why not T stop

[roryhinds]

There has been a thread in the lens section about the use of F stops over T stops on the RED lenses and I thought RED might not have seen it - thus me posting here.

What's the deal with the F stop on the RED lenses?
Surely it would be better to mark the lenses in T stops like all other Cinema lenses.

The other point being they would then work well in a mixed lens situation so you can easily mix and match your Zeiss with your RED's and Cookes.

What's the reason behind RED marking their lenses in F stops?

[Brook Willard]

This thread (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2374) in the lens section is a good place to start. :)

[roryhinds]

that was the thread that I was refering to...

and I wanted to see if posting in another section would get any feedback from the RED team

[el_cheapo]

perhaps both the f/stops and t/stops will be marked on the lenses? maybe the massive exposure latitude of mystrium renders light transmission an irrelevant piece of information.... supposedly they were going for 11 1/3 stops, which to me seemed like crazy talk. Then again, a year ago the whole idea of an affordable 4k camera was crazy talk.

Given the size of the sensor, it seems to me that one could shoot their footage the same way they would shoot 35mm stills, disregarrding t/stops altogether

[roryhinds]

and what happens when your on a professional shoot and you have a set of Zeiss lenses they you're using with your RED and you want to change lense but one is in T and the other is in F.

Cinema lenses have T stops, why not RED lenses too?

This has been discussed before - my point was to get feedback from RED.
I don't think RED visit this part of the forum much hense me posting in another section.

[Kevin Halverson]

perhaps both the f/stops and t/stops will be marked on the lenses?

This would be an interesting approach. I for one would be happy with just the t-stop markings, but having both would be fine.


... maybe the massive exposure latitude of mystrium renders light transmission an irrelevant piece of information....

The concept of a t-stop rating normalizes the lens and is always valid information for any situation where more than one lens is used in the same production. No lens has zero transmissive losses, so knowing the quantity of attenuation is a valid piece of information regardless of the speed and latitude of the sensor(s).

[Finner]

I don't think RED visit this part of the forum much hense me posting in another section.

From what I have noticed the RED team goes through most every thread and I would be shocked if they had not checked out the T vs F stop discussion. It has become very clear to me that Jim is not about a trickle technology approach with his products. He is however real big on the trickle down approach with information on his products. Jim knows how to keep the hype up and to do that he kicks out bits of very exciting info every once and a while. Having f-stops on the prototype lenses at NAB would make a lot of sense if you did not want to raise too big of concern with other lense manufacturers at that time. Also when the lenses do start to ship it would be a big announcement to say the lenses have been calibrated in T-stops and then if they tested very high in comparison with high end cine lenses some real big press would come about. I also feel a bunch of other exciting camera tech advances and upgraded features will be announced upon shipping. Jim seems to have been playing his cards by just showing enough of them to keep interest and excitement high, but I suspect there are some big cards he has been keeping close to his chest that will pump up hype huge as the camera begins to ship. This of course is all just speculation but if you take a close look at how things have worked so far it makes a lot of sense.

[Stephen Webb]

I have no doubt that the thread has been read by Red (sorry, can't help it) and they've made a choice not to respond. I'm sure they were asked plenty of times at NAB as well, but no-one got an answer on that.

If I were the cynical type (moi?) I'd suggest that f-stops are being used 'cause that way they appear to compare more favourably with other cine lenses.

But as I'm not, I'd suggest that maybe they just haven't been completed and fully tested yet so t-stops are unknown.

:)

[Brook Willard]

Just to bring Jarred's word in here:


way to take things way off topic Rory.

Our lenses have really accurate F stops, and all of our lenses are calibrated to the sensor and the loss from the front through to the back plane is minimized as much as possible. Your not loosing a full stop between F and T stops like some older lenses.

[Stephen Williams]

Hi,

Can't think of any lenses that are 1 stop between F & T stop. My 30 year old Cooke 20-100 is F2.8 T3.1, thats under 1/3 stop!

Stephen

[Steve Gibby]

I have no knowledge that it will be the case, but it wouldn't surprise me if RED lenses were available for order with a choice of F stops, T stops, or maybe both.

It's true that T stops are the tradition in film workflows, with 35mm and S16mm lenses, but RED One will also be used in a diverse array of EFP applications with B4 lenses and 35mm still lenses that are traditionally marked in F stops.

In technology pedigree RED One camera body itself is most closely related to DSLRs, followed by video cameras, and only distantly related to film cameras - and DSLRs and video cameras traditionally use lenses that are rated in F stops.

Media convergence is a tricky business. People from different backgrounds want the new technology, but they are most comfortable with nomenclatures that they are used to. Like I said, a good compromise would be for purchasers to be able to order their RED lenses in a choice of T or F stops, or more economically for RED, for both to be somehow marked on the lens.

[Adrian T.]

I have no knowledge that it will be the case, but it wouldn't surprise me if RED lenses were available for order with a choice of F stops, T stops, or maybe both.

This is the way to go!

It's exactly the same as with the feet and meter scales. RED also needs to offer both of them, either as two separate rings, a single reversible ring, or a double scale ring.

[Poi Boy]

It really doesn't matter if they are marked with F or T. What you get at the sensor is what you get at the sensor regardless of F, T or Banana. Even if you are changing lenses constantly the sensor will give tell you exactly how much light it is getting. T stops are important when shooting film and more or less irrelevant with digital capture.
Aloha
-A

[roryhinds]

as mentioned before.. what happens on a pro shoot when you have just used a set of Zeiss or Cooke and you want to switch to your RED's which has F Stop.

Eyeballing it on the LCD isn't going to cut it. Leave the banana's for the monkeys.

I don't see any reason why RED would not mark the lenses to industry standard for Cinema lenses which RED lenses are - they are not photographic or B4 lenses.

Sorry to go on about this - but a measuring marker does matter a lot.

[David Mullen ASC]

I think we mentioned already the situations where T-stops might be more useful -- for example, multiple camera shooting. You've got three RED camera pointed at an expensive stunt, the clouds are rolling in and out, and at the last minute, an exposure is called out over a walkie-talkie for all the cameras -- "T/4 and a half", let's say, and some cameras have zooms and some have primes, etc. Now while each camera could have a little cheat-sheet that says "on this lens, open up 1/4 of a stop to compensate" etc. but it makes things more complicated.

Plus let's say you are shooting with a set of primes under the same lighting set-up and the director suddenly says, "switch from the 50mm to the 40mm" or "put the zoom on instead" -- well, if you were ready to roll at T/2.8, let's say, it would be nice to just quickly put on the new lens and set it to T/2.8 like the last lens on the camera, not figure out how different it is in transmission.

No, it's not the end of the world if the lenses had f-stop marks on them instead (movie shoots managed for decades that way), you can work around that, but the question is when do people need an f-stop mark instead of a T-stop mark? It seems to only matter in depth of field calculations, and considering it's somewhat of a nebulous concept anyway (depending on Circle of Confusion figure you wish to use), a T-stop number is close enough for most practical situations. If the f-stop marking is only there to make a zoom seem faster than it really is, well, that's not a very good reason.

Yes, it seems the solution is to able to order the lens with the types of marks you prefer (it's just a painted mark, after all) just like whether you want it marked in feet or meters, or both. And to design the exposure ramping out of the zoom...

[Poi Boy]

On a "pro shoot" where you have no bananas you don't eyeball the monitor, you eyeball the waveform and the markings on the lens become irrelevant.
Aloha
-A

[David Mullen ASC]

There are practical reasons for lenses to have T-stop marks, as have already been enumerated -- that's why the whole concept was invented. It's not an issue merely of comfort level for film shooters; they actually serve some purpose, especially when switching between multiple lenses, and even more so if they come from different manufacturers and are of different designs. And those reasons aren't dependent on the lens going on a digital camera or a film camera. Let's stop dismissing their value here because it's getting silly.

Sure, there are many working situations where it will not be much of an issue (single-camera shooting, mostly with the same zoom lens on the camera all day, exposing by means of a waveform, etc.), but that's not the same thing as saying that it would never be an issue.

I mean, why mark the lens at all with either f-stops or T-stops if they are truly irrelevant?

[Poi Boy]

off course there are practical reasons for marks on lenses, however, my point is that is silly to argue why F stops instead of T stops. I'm taking it to the extreme and saying that for digital shooting they are irrelevant because you have the huge advantage of knowing exactly how much light is falling on the sensor. This is regardless of what type of lens you are using or from what manufacrurer and is far more accurate than marks on a lens.
-A

[David Mullen ASC]

A T-stop should be an accurate way of knowing how much light is falling on the sensor since it is a measurement of how much light is leaving the back of the lens. In other words, if you set a lens to T/2.8 and then switch to another lens set to T/2.8, the amount of light hitting the sensor should be the same IF the lens is marked accurately. This would actually save you time from having to double-check the waveform to see how much of an exposure change happened when you switched the lenses, and then adjust accordingly.

Like I said, if you are shooting with the same lens on all day, like a zoom, it's going to be less of an issue, but some people may be thinking of using the RED camera with prime lenses.

It's just another way of working that is not necessarily negated by the fact that you are using a digital camera. Also, though so many people here don't want to hear about how things are done on a traditional feature shoot, often the DP is at the monitor with the director, not operating the camera, and the exposure is set by the camera assistant based on the info that the DP tells him or her, plus not every digital shoot works extensively with waveform monitors -- I've shot eight HD features by just using the viewfinder zebras as a guide to exposing. But on those, I mostly used a single zoom and didn't shoot it with multiple prime lenses.

Like I said, people have different ways of working and some might need T-stop marks on the lens, though they certainly can work around that. Yes, one method would be to do what you describe, definitely.

But there may be a type of shooting situation where a set is lit to a certain level and then different cameras are run with different prime lenses, switching between different lenses all day but not changing the lighting set-up and not wanting to check exposures with every new lens put on the cameras.

[donatello b]

" for digital shooting they are irrelevant because you have the huge advantage of knowing exactly how much light is falling on the sensor."

IMO it is very relevent
it's the DP that will decide of T/F stop ..
you & I can BOTH look at the same scopes , same monitor and you might decide to shoot F/T 8 and i might decide F/T 5.6 = same amount of light on subject , same scopes, same monitor = 2 different calls of F/T stop ..

so if you have 3 camera's shooting same subject - there is a chance all 3 operators could decide on slightly different F/T stop ...
bottom line it's the DP that call's the F/T stop = makes it a whole lot easier if all the lenses have the same amount of light coming out the back end of lens hitting sensor when all are set to same STOP...

[Poi Boy]

If more than one person is looking at the scopes and making decisions the DoP needs to have set a standard for them to follow. As I said before I understand the practical reasons for marks on lenses. I tend to shoot two cameras 25% and single camera 75% of the time, almost always with primes. If I'm shooting digitally I forget about the marks and use the scopes because I know I don't have to worry about different lenses or manufacturers.
Aloha
-A

[David Mullen ASC]

OK, then you don't need T-stop marks -- your system makes sense for you and probably many other people, but that doesn't mean it's the way everyone will want to work. Besides, if it doesn't matter to you... then why do you care if other people want T-stop marks? Your system requires that every time a lens is changed, even if the light levels aren't changed, the exposure has to be checked on the scopes. Some people might not want to do that if the light levels have remained the same and just want to switch lenses and use the same T-stop as before.

Let's just agree that everyone has different working methods...

[Poi Boy]

I never said it was for everyone; just think it is silly to whine about T versus F or vice versa. One thing that does concern me is the price of the Red primes staying low and if you start having to worry about putting double markings for everything it puts upward pressure on pricing.
Aloha
-A

[David Mullen ASC]

I kinda doubt painting maybe eight tiny T-stop marks/numbers on a barrel is going to send the price of a lens up, especially if it's more of an option to buy the lens marked one way or the other, versus all lenses marked with both.

The question I have is who really needs the f-stop marks if, as you say, they aren't important for people just setting exposures based on scopes and ignoring the marks anyway? Seems therefore one could just put T-stop marks on all the lenses, but maybe someone here has a reason why you need the f-stop mark on the lens.

Depth of field calculations were the only reason I can think of, and people manage to do those with T-stops.

[Poi Boy]

It is a bit more involved than just painting marks, there is adiitional engineering and testing needed. Then if you produce them with three different options it does increase cost. I think one set of markings F or T is great, someone will be unhappy but such is life.
Aloha
-A

[Gbabymogul]

I agree about keeping pricing low, but come on, how much would it cost to put new markings on a lens that isn't even made yet?

There's a reason Cooke, Arri, and heck even the Russian makers use those markings (as explained by Mr.Mullen). I was disappointed to see marketing trump industry practice with this decision, IMO.

RED wants to sell these lenses to use on both digital and film cameras. Someone mentioned it being a profit center for them a ways back. Frankly, i'm surprised by some people's reactions to the decision.

In reality, it's in our interests to get the lenses to be extremely profitable and used by small and large productions alike. It's people like Mr.Mullen who'll decide on a lens package for a film (in conjunction with the producer/director).

Don't get me wrong, i'm incredibly grateful that there's going to be a viable alternative to comparable lense packages from the majors, priced around what the Russian lenses are going for, but IMO, it's a mistake to go with the current set up. BTW, the two DP's i talked to about buying a set or two of RED lenses mentioned the issue, so it's relevant,

:beer:

[Poi Boy]

I don't understand how marketing is trumping ind. practice ? I also don't see two DPs being concerned as being all that significant...remember the reaction to Red by many DPs a year ago? "the times they are a changin"
David doesn't buy lenses but he certainly influences the decision, if the lenses prove themselves to be great they will be accepted no matter how they are marked. Fortunately for me I'll be happy either way.
Aloha
-A

[David Mullen ASC]

As far as I understand it, the main reason why f-stop marks have been used on ENG video zooms is that they are not consistent through the zoom range in exposure, and thus rely on the fact that exposure determinations are not made using external meters, but with waveforms, zebras, internal TTL metering, etc.

The reason they are used on still camera lenses are the same, more or less, even though external meters can be used -- since exposure variations from different still photos made with different lenses are less critical compared to moving images that are intercut and have to match perfectly within sequence.

I pulled up this site in looking up whether any HD lenses made use T-stops instead of f-stops:

---
http://www.benallanacs.com/T-Stops.html
...A lens calibrated in accurate T-Stops is essential for shooting Film Style on HD and for accurately testing a camera setup for dynamic range.

Cine-Style HD Lenses, marked in T-Stops, that I’ve used include:

Panavision Digital Primos
Carl Zeiss Digi Primes
Canon HD-EC
Fujinon Cine Series
Angenieux Optimo Zoom
___

Also, there is a small chance, I suppose, of someone buying a set of RED lenses wanting to also use them on a PL-mount movie camera for some reason, where using scopes and whatnot isn't going to help.

[Gbabymogul]

I thought that the RED lenses were meant to compete with Cooke, Arri and the Russian alternatives. Am i missing something here ?

Edit : I figured it out. I guess most people are assuming that with mid >>> large budgeted pics they won't be using RED lenses anyway (either on RED or another camera) due to the speed etc... if that's the case then oh well. I still think it's marketing over industry practice because i can't see any reason why the wouldn't mark them like Arri's (for all the reasons mentioned). IMO, why give professionals even a small reason (debatable) not to choose your lenses ?

Anyway, it won't effect my immediate productions, and i think if they perform, they'll be a f#ing great deal, but for future multi cam multi location shoots with larger budgets ? Naomi Watts filmed with RED prime lenses...what a dream heh

[Poi Boy]

I'm not really getting your point here David, I haven't used many ENG lenses. I have used a lot of still lenses and you are right , not nearly as critical since they are usually not linked together.I don't really see a lot of people using Red primes on other cameras, I'm sure they will but I think it will be 75% Red on Red. So I guess T stops would have the greatest benefit for Red primes overall in terms of serving the most users; Again as far as I'm concerned I would be happy with T or F since I like to make my determinations off the image plane.
Aloha
-A

[David Mullen ASC]

Well, I suppose you're right in that if the RED zoom (not the primes so much) cannot have the exposure ramping designed out of it in order to use T-stop marks, then it might be better to leave it with f-stop marks and sell it cheaper... than spend more money trying to design out the ramping and sell something more expensive. But I think the primes could probably be marked in T-stops.

[Poi Boy]

David, loved your spelling movie, since my spelling sucks...what is your next feature ? are you at liberty to disclose ?
Aloha
-A

[donatello b]

i have deposit on both zooms and until i hear different i EXPECT neither will have exposure ramping ... if i set F/Tstop at 4 then i expect it to hold that expsoure throughout the whole normal zoom range ( however i could see it losing some expsoure when close focusing ( 2ft to 8 inches) ...

if there is ramping then i would have to use it more as a variable zoom ( use it as a prime= no zooming during shot) which would work ( for me ) on the 18-50 but not the 18-85 ....

[Poi Boy]

I expect the same, a variable prime would not be acceptable to me.
Aloha
-A

[David Mullen ASC]

I'm not saying there is any ramping, don't know one way or the other. If there isn't, then the door is open to using T-stop marks as an option. If there is some ramping, then they may want to leave it with f-stop marks only. It may only be as bad as getting a little darker at the most telephoto end, as a lot of ENG zooms do.

--

After "Akeelah and the Bee" was released in theaters last spring, a year ago, another movie that I shot, "The Astronaut Farmer", was released a few months ago. After I shot that film, I did a little supernatural thriller called "Solstice" in New Orleans (there's an article about the shooting in the new Student Filmmakers magazine) but it's still looking for a distributor. Then I spent the last seven months shooting Season Two of "Big Love" for HBO. Now I'm looking for my next job.

[Poi Boy]

as an example: an F 2.8 zoom should only be allowed to be called that if it holds at f 2.8 thoughout its range. Anything else should be called a variable prime. No exceptions.
Aloha
-A

[Poi Boy]

Aren't we all ....looking for our next job ? How do you feel about working on a feature versus a season of HBO ?
Aloha
-A

[David Mullen ASC]

I get asked that a lot, being my first TV series after shooting 30 features. Don't know how to answer that -- I mean, I loved the experience, the crew, the cast, the production people, the writers and producers, and I loved getting seven months of paid work... it's a bit seductive, I guess. Visually, the show is lighter and brighter, and more subtle, than my typical dramatic feature stuff -- it's really a show about the writing and the acting than it is about my cinematography. Part of me likes that, another part of me wants to show off more.

[Dan Blanchett]

David, you can show off on my next film and shoot with the RED ONE to boot! :)

Actually, I doubt I can afford you, but I had to chime in...

Did I say "film" ? I meant, "movie."

[Chris Kenny]

As far as I understand it, the main reason why f-stop marks have been used on ENG video zooms is that they are not consistent through the zoom range in exposure, and thus rely on the fact that exposure determinations are not made using external meters, but with waveforms, zebras, internal TTL metering, etc.


Yes, there are zooms which can't maintain a consistent exposure throughout their zoom range. However, this is always (in my experience) explicitly noted somewhere. For instance, the cheap zoom Canon includes with its prosumer dSLRs is, IIRC, a 17-55mm, marked as "f/3.5-5.6".

A lens marked with a single F-stop, like a lens marked with a single T-stop, is expected to maintain the same exposure throughout its range, as far as I know.

[Matt Uhry]

I'm for T stops - not dual marks or anything. If you meter or are swapping lenses and using multiple cameras T's will be better. If you expose with the WFM or some other way you won't really care whats on the barrel. There is no case for f's on the lens. Sorry if it's going to hurt a little more now that you are spending $6500 for a 18-50 T3.1

More importantly you will rob the industry of a classic hazing technique for over eager camera PA's.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Stephen Webb]

Just occured to me there may be another reason why they're marked in "f" and not "t" - if their manufacturing process doesn't allow consistant results in light transmisssion, they'd be unable to accurately give "t"s without measuring each and every lens as it's produced.

BTW, if you're shooting a scene from 3 cameras and they're each framed differently (which of course they would be) a waveform may not be that much use in determining the setting you use.

[Stephen Williams]

Just occured to me there may be another reason why they're marked in "f" and not "t" - if their manufacturing process doesn't allow consistant results in light transmisssion, they'd be unable to accurately give "t"s without measuring each and every lens as it's produced.

BTW, if you're shooting a scene from 3 cameras and they're each framed differently (which of course they would be) a waveform may not be that much use in determining the setting you use.

Hi Stephen,

I would hope that the T stops were measured on each & every lens. That is the whole point IMHO.

Stephen

[Stephen Williams]

I expect the same, a variable prime would not be acceptable to me.
Aloha
-A

Hi,

IMHO a variable prime should be better than a 'zoom', not worse.

Stephen

[Hans von Sonntag]

Hi Stephen

Variable primes are zooms. Aren't they?
Since Arri Vari Primes there is the term "variable primes": A distinction, marketingwise, not mechanically. Did I a miss something?

Hans

PS: I found Vari Primes just short zooms, too short for a zoom and not fast enough for a prime, IMHO.

[Stephen Webb]

I would hope that the T stops were measured on each & every lens. That is the whole point IMHO.

So how is it possible to give a "t" rating to a lens if you don't know that each and every one you produce will be the same?

Cooke must know that each 18mm s4i they manufacture will be a t2 for example, no?

[ericyoung]

So how is it possible to give a "t" rating to a lens if you don't know that each and every one you produce will be the same?

Cooke must know that each 18mm s4i they manufacture will be a t2 for example, no?

I think it means each lens is individually measured for light transmission, and then the T-marks are only then marked on the lens barrel so they correspond accurately at each iris setting to the theoretical ideal.

But the wide open iris T rating should will be virtually identical for every lens in a model range. So all the 18mm s4i would be T2 wide open within pretty tight tolerances.

[roryhinds]

I wonder what returns policy RED will have as I'd rather spend more money on precision lenses than have ones that don't meet the bar and I'm having to upgrade at a later stage.

I'm all for cheaper prices but if the product is compromised then its not black and white.

Are RED lenses rehoused still lenses which compare to Canon and Nikon or are they Cinema lenses which compare to Zeiss and Cooke?

It makes a difference as to what we are buying into.

It is strange how RED are doing everything to get the camera above standard and I can't believe they will let their lenses fall short.

[Stephen Webb]

They may be measured for transmission to ensure they've been accurately manufactured, but wide open on every lens would have to be identical otherwise they wouldn't be T2. What I was suggesting about the Red Lenses is maybe they aren't critically manufactured in the way Zeiss or Cooke lenses are, so they can't acurately state "this lens is T2.4" or whatever as they may actually range from say T2.3-T2.5. I'm not saying this is the case btw, just pointing out it's possible.

I seem to remember Jim stating quite strongly at one point that the Red lenses are not re-housed stills.

[Matt Uhry]

Lots of cine zooms that are marked in T stops ramp a bit, typically at the long end. An Angenieux 25-250HR T3.5 loses almost a whole stop at the long end. This does not make it a bad lens, just a little untruthfully advertised. The T stop is correct through most of the range.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[David Mullen ASC]

Thanks Matt for that info -- shows you how much I avoid 25-250mm 10:1 zooms in general... Do you know if the Panavision 11:1 Primo does that?

[chuck colburn]

Hi Stephen

Variable primes are zooms. Aren't they?
Since Arri Vari Primes there is the term "variable primes": A distinction, marketingwise, not mechanically. Did I a miss something?

Hans

PS: I found Vari Primes just short zooms, too short for a zoom and not fast enough for a prime, IMHO.

The Arri vari primes are in fact short zooms. There have been and are lenses that were/are variable focal length types. ( see Leica tri Elmars etc.)

http://www.cinematography.net/Pages%20GB/ARRIVP.HTM

[Finner]

as an example: an F 2.8 zoom should only be allowed to be called that if it holds at f 2.8 thoughout its range. Anything else should be called a variable prime. No exceptions.
Aloha
-A

This is not anything close to the definition of a variable prime. A variable prime holds the T stop throughout its range better then a zoom and tend to give a better image then zooms. To break it down you will usually always get your best image from a Prime then next in line is a variable prime and then a zoom.

Also T stop markings our far superior to F stop and will save time and money on most shoots.

[Finner]

More importantly you will rob the industry of a classic hazing technique for over eager camera PA's.

www.mattuhry.com

What technique?

[Stephen Williams]

I think it means each lens is individually measured for light transmission, and then the T-marks are only then marked on the lens barrel so they correspond accurately at each iris setting to the theoretical ideal.

But the wide open iris T rating should will be virtually identical for every lens in a model range. So all the 18mm s4i would be T2 wide open within pretty tight tolerances.

Hi Eric,

Only glass that meets the grade will end up in a Cooke S4 lens! The marks will be individually calibrated.

If you go to your rental house & test some older Zeiss lenses, you may be in for a surprise.

A variable prime is a zoom that is optically as good as a prime. A short zoom has a better chance of achieving that.

Stephen

[David Mullen ASC]

What technique?

To tell a PA to run out and get some T-stops, ASAP.

[PaulClements]

The film industry being what it is I'm sure someone will produce a plastic strip that wraps around the lens and gives you accurate T-Stops, the only problem is we'll pay $1000 for it :)

[Adrian T.]

To tell a PA to run out and get some T-stops, ASAP.

ROFL! :)
"Get the small ones!" :biggrin:

[Matt Uhry]

Thanks Matt for that info -- shows you how much I avoid 25-250mm 10:1 zooms in general... Do you know if the Panavision 11:1 Primo does that?

Hi David, here's my brief 10-1 and 11-1 roundup... You've been very Pana-Loyal recently I guess. ( nothing wrong with that )

Cooke 25-250 - no opinion, it's been a while since I used it, and that was an Panavised anamorphic version...

Angenieux HR 25-250. t3.5 doesn't cover super 35 4 perf (but will be fine on Red) , great contrast, breathes horribly. You loose a 2/3 stop beginning after 180mm until 250mm, in practice this does not bite you much, but may cause additional work in timing or on a chroma key. This lens is very reasonably sized. It would be a good choice if you needed to have a light camera, for crane work maybe if the remote head is a bit on the small side.

Panavision SLZ 11 24-275 t2.8 They claim no ramping and I have not seen any. The ones I've shot with were a little weak resolution wise a the longer end seems to have less contrast than either of the Angenieux's. Very well corrected for breathing and distortion. It's quite a large and heavy lens. I think you can still use 4x5.6 filters on it.

Optimo 25-290 T2.8 GREAT contrast, resolution, Very well corrected for breathing and distortion. quite large bigger than the SLZ-11. It looses a bit of stop at the last 40mm but it's only like 1/2 a stop. I like this lens very much, only negatives are the size and expense.

Anybody else like to weigh in on their fav's in this range?

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Poi Boy]

hey fin I think a lot of people would disagree on your defenition but yes thank you SO much for letting me know primes are best.
-A

[jamesedwelland]

I'm for T stops - not dual marks or anything. If you meter or are swapping lenses and using multiple cameras T's will be better. www.mattuhry.com

Absolutely. Should be no question.

james w

[Adrian T.]

These are the possible solutions in my personal order of preference:

#1 T stops
#2 Choice of T stops or F stops
#3 Reversible or replaceable ring
#4 F stops with a T stops sticker
#5 F stops with a separate mapping table
#6 Dual markings (these are a pain because of possible mix-up)
#7 F stops

#4 and higher are merely a makeshift solution.

How will they handle the feet vs. meter scale? Any ideas?

[Rob Lohman]

Yep, asking someone to get T-stops. Or put the bounce board in the sun to recharge it ;)

[Hans von Sonntag]

Hi Matt,

shot a few commercials with the Angenieux Optimo 24-290. Best long range zoom I ever used. Never shot with Panavision lenses so no comment on these. This zoom is really large, does even have a handle. Ultra sharp, can be mixed with Zeiss primes and you can use it for pack-shots, hardly any distortion. But the sizes and weight... The Angenieux Optimo zooms are all brilliant lenses IMHO.

For my Red camera I bought a Cooke 20-100 in pristine condition. It is a totally different lens, soft and blessed with some distortion. For me its the nicest lens for shooting people, especially open wide (T(sic!)3.2). It is kind of forgiving and not so "scientific" like the Zeiss primes, and I am not really into diffusion...

Hans

[Matt Uhry]

I like 20-100's and 18-100's too. This spot was shot with a 20-100 except for the last shot... I was trying to have an Optimo flown in but it missed it's flight! I think it worked out for the best...

http://fuzby.com/cetelem_mitch.mov

A 20-100 if you can live with the size and weight is one of the best lens values out there.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[roryhinds]

Hi Rob

Can you comment on RED marking their lenses as T Stops?

Feeback from the RED crew would be cool.

Regards
Rory

[Rob Lohman]

I know nothing about such things Rory. Not my area.... sorry

[J. Bernard Vallon]

Unless I'm mistaken, the reason we use T stops is because of light loss through the glass. Meaning that for calculating depth of field, you would use an f-stop, but for metering you use a T stop. Wouldn't it make sense then that we wouldnt know the T stop of a lens until it was produced and the manufacturer could meter through it?

Just a thought.

[Stephen Williams]

Wouldn't it make sense then that we wouldnt know the T stop of a lens until it was produced and the manufacturer could meter through it?

Just a thought.

Hi,

That's true, SLR's with built in metering would always use a T stop!

Stephen

[roryhinds]

Hey Rob

Any chance of you asking someone from RED to give us some feeback as to T stop?

Would be good to hear whats the score on this.

Regards
Rory

[Stephen Williams]

Hi Rory,

QUOTE(Jim Jannard @ May 27 2007, 11:26 AM)
"How about cost? If you want T-stops, buy some Cooke or Zeiss glass."

Stephen

[Rob Lohman]

Would be good to include the full quote with a source

How about cost? If you want T-stops, buy some Cooke or Zeiss glass. Our 5 lens prime set costs less than one Zeiss Master Prime. Our zoom costs 1/6th the price of an Optimo. We are building a very sharp set of digitally corrected lenses with the idea of getting glass into the hands of many.
Source: http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/index.php?showtopic=23269

[Stephen Williams]

Hi Rob,

Possible copyright issues with a full quote.

T stops costing more than F stops is the important point IMHO.

My best

Stephen

[Rob Lohman]

Replied in the other thread

[David Mullen ASC]

I have a hard time believing that marking a lens with T-stops instead of f-stops will turn the price of a RED lens into the price of a Zeiss Master Prime...

Who is the lens designer on the RED team? Maybe he can give us an explanation as to why t-stop marks would dramatically increase the cost of the lens?

If even a cheap 16mm zoom from the 1960's can have T-stop marks on them, I don't see what's the big engineering problem with putting them on a modern lens.

I don't think this controversy is going to go away until the lens designer for the RED team gives us a technical explanation as to why the RED lenses can't be marked with T-stops. And once that happens, his reply can be in the FAQ or something and re-quoted everytime it comes up.

Because it will keep coming up over and over and over again, and simply saying that it will make the lenses dramatically more expensive isn't going to be enough of an explanation without more details -- like by how much it would raise the cost of each lens and why, and if there is a dollar-amount involved, maybe some people would be willing to pay more for a special set with T-stop marks. That way everyone is happy: those who only want the cheapest lenses possible can get the ones with f-stops and those who are willing to pay a little more can get them marked with T-stops.

[Stephen Williams]

Hi David,

Thank you for that, I think it carries more weight comming from you.

There will clearly be an after market in adding T stops to Red Lenses.

Stephen

[David Mullen ASC]

Maybe the solution will just be to calculate what the costs would be to mark the lenses with T-stops and offer a slightly more expensive set of primes for sale with those markings. Unless there are real design issues that prevent this.

I can't believe there is no happy ground between the cost of a RED prime lens and the cost of a Zeiss Master Prime or Cooke S4...

[roryhinds]

Seems crazy to have an after market for something the can be implemented into the new lens.

If there is clearly a after market why not sort it out at production as this seems like a patch to fix the problem.

Surely the hard work and where the money is spent is designing the best optics and having no breathing. I can't understand why the outer markings will add significant cost to manufacturing the lenses.

Its like saying a tape measure in centimeters costs more than one in inches - is it not?

I understand that the T number will be higher and this isn't as good to market as a F stop, but surely what measurement the lenses have doesn't actually effect their performance.

My point being these are Cinema Lenses for RED's Digital Cinema camera, surely using the industry standard measuring system would be a good thing.

It does seem we're all going in circles here and like David says, please can someone from RED shed light on the subject.

[David Mullen ASC]

I see that $20,000 gets you a set of five RED primes, so that's roughly $4000 per lens. So what would it cost to make a set marked in T-stops? Even if it added $500 to the cost of each lens, that would be a set of five for $22,500, which still would be a bargain to some. Or would it add $1000 to the cost of each lens, making a set of five cost $25,000?

At least it's something to consider, making it an purchasing option with a higher per-lens cost and see if there's a market.

[Stephen Williams]

I see that $20,000 gets you a set of five RED primes, so that's roughly $4000 per lens. So what would it cost to make a set marked in T-stops? Even if it added $500 to the cost of each lens, that would be a set of five for $22,500, which still would be a bargain to some. Or would it add $1000 to the cost of each lens, making a set of five cost $25,000?

At least it's something to consider, making it an purchasing option with a higher per-lens cost and see if there's a market.

Hi David,

A Cooke 20-60 I own was previously used with a x2 on a showscan camera, the T stops & focal length markes reflected this. I asked Cooke optics how much it would cost to change the lens back. They referred me to a small company who would replace & recalibrate both scales for approx $600.

Would a set of lenses that had matching F stops have matching T stops?

Stephen

[roryhinds]

Thats crazy.. I can understand that sending a lens to a 3rd party that they would charge $600 (which isn't bad) for the modification.

But I do think that if you mark the lenses at manufacturing it would cost less - surely ?

[Chris Kenny]

Would a set of lenses that had matching F stops have matching T stops?


Not necessarily, since light would be passing through different amounts of glass in different lenses, and that's what causes the discrepancy between F and T stops in the first place. I'd guess Red would try to maintain image brightness across the prime set, though.

[Stephen Williams]

I'd guess Red would try to maintain image brightness across the prime set, though.

Hi Chris,

It would be a shame if lens selection came down to which one transmitted the most light!

Stephen

[Stephen Williams]

Thats crazy.. I can understand that sending a lens to a 3rd party that they would charge $600 (which isn't bad) for the modification.



Hi Rory,

That was for 2 scales so $300 per scale, (£150 from a company in Leicestershire)

Stephen

[Jannard]

We are looking into it...

Jim

[Stephen Williams]

We are looking into it...

Jim

Thanks,

Stephen

[chuck colburn]

I have a hard time believing that marking a lens with T-stops instead of f-stops will turn the price of a RED lens into the price of a Zeiss Master Prime...

Who is the lens designer on the RED team? Maybe he can give us an explanation as to why t-stop marks would dramatically increase the cost of the lens?

If even a cheap 16mm zoom from the 1960's can have T-stop marks on them, I don't see what's the big engineering problem with putting them on a modern lens.

I don't think this controversy is going to go away until the lens designer for the RED team gives us a technical explanation as to why the RED lenses can't be marked with T-stops. And once that happens, his reply can be in the FAQ or something and re-quoted everytime it comes up.

Because it will keep coming up over and over and over again, and simply saying that it will make the lenses dramatically more expensive isn't going to be enough of an explanation without more details -- like by how much it would raise the cost of each lens and why, and if there is a dollar-amount involved, maybe some people would be willing to pay more for a special set with T-stop marks. That way everyone is happy: those who only want the cheapest lenses possible can get the ones with f-stops and those who are willing to pay a little more can get them marked with T-stops.

Mr. Mullen,

Good morning,

First off I would like to thank you for your contribution to the art and craft of cinematography.
I agree with you that lenses can be manufactured with T stops that do not have to be individually calibrated for each lens. Modern lens design using computer aided design applications take into account the despersion and refractive indices of particular glass types to a minute degree. Lens multi layer coatings are also computer controlled to a percentage that is so small as to not be a consideration.
We once took medium format lenses (albeit not inexspensive ones) and rehoused them for expanded focus barrel rotation and proper rotational direction.
I then took the lenses over to Century Optics to use their intergrating sphere light source to calibrate T stop rings for each lens. I found that for a given focal length lens from a given manufacture that they were within a tenth of a stop of each other.
So I think that all things being equal, T stop rings can be made in batch units.

Chuck

[chuck colburn]

Hi David,

A Cooke 20-60 I own was previously used with a x2 on a showscan camera, the T stops & focal length markes reflected this. I asked Cooke optics how much it would cost to change the lens back. They referred me to a small company who would replace & recalibrate both scales for approx $600.

Would a set of lenses that had matching F stops have matching T stops?

Stephen

Stephen,

As you know I did that lens. There was no modification done to the actuall iris itself. All you have to do is buy a stock aperature scale and replace the "Showscan" one on there. A very simple swap out that you or your lens tech could do in a few minutes.

Chuck

Opps forgot about the footage scale. That might take a bit longer as I cannot remember if the shell which has he footage markings on it slips off with out having to take other parts off first. But if it does, then all you would have to do is replace it and check for proper collimation.

[Adrian T.]

We are looking into it...

Jim

Thank you, Jim! :)

[Stephen Williams]

Stephen,

A very simple swap out that you or your lens tech could do in a few minutes.

Chuck

Opps forgot about the footage scale. That might take a bit longer as I cannot remember if the shell which has he footage markings on it slips off with out having to take other parts off first. But if it does, then all you would have to do is replace it and check for proper collimation.

Hi Chuck,

The parts are no longer available, so it's manual labor!:)

Stephen

[chuck colburn]

Hi Chuck,

The parts are no longer available, so it's manual labor!:)

Stephen

Damn, that sucks the big whazoo.
I take it you heard this from Cooke themselves? As I find it surprising that they can't accomadate you. But then again they aren't Zeiss who claims they will fix anything they ever built.
Well if you go the new scale route at least you could have the scale engraved with the footage markings of your choice.

[Roberto B]

why not f stop?

the cheapest the better

less cheaper, less affordable, less sales.. everything less.. who knows if less sales success wouldn't mean less red or if not even red.. no less..

[Stephen Williams]

why not f stop?

the cheapest the better

less cheaper, less affordable, less sales.. everything less.. who knows if less sales success wouldn't mean less red or if not even red.. no less..

Hi,

In reality probably won't cost a dime! More value for money is good IMHO.

Stephen

[David Mullen ASC]

Not referring to these RED lenses per se... but if it slows you down on the shoot in any way, or if you have a problem with focus and exposure, then spending less money on a lens is going to stop seeming like a good bargain... so cheapest is NOT always better, it's not even always the cheapest ultimately! Ever heard the phrase "penny wise, pound foolish"?

I think the solution here may be as simple as having a sentence on the web page under the set of RED lenses that says: "The lenses may be special-ordered with T-stop markings for an extra charge. Please call for a quote." If no one bites, or if they call and don't like the extra charge, then it's no big deal. And if they want to spend the money on getting a set made with T-stops, then they have the option and all the people who want to buy the f-stop marked lenses at the cheapest price are able to.

In theory, it should be cheaper to mark the lenses for T-stops at the time of manufacturing rather than doing it as an after-market conversion.

Remember that these RED lenses are dirt-cheap compared to most cine lenses, so surely there is some sort of middle ground possible for people who are willing to pay a little extra for T-stop marks and yet will still save a lot of money over a Zeiss or Cooke prime.

Now for those who think this a big deal over nothing, I sort of agree -- one can certainly work with f-stop marks on lenses on a shoot. It's merely an annoyance more than anything. But if there's a simple solution to avoid that annoyance, I think it should be explored, considered. After all, this is a company that managed to make an affordable 4K digital cine camera in only one year of development, so it doesn't seem out of their capabilities to solve the problem of putting T-stop marks on their RED lenses for those few customers that might want that.

[roryhinds]

I don't understand why you would have to buy Zeiss or Cooke to get T Stops.

Its like saying the thing that makes BMW cars so great is the speedometer is in Kilometers.

[Dan Blanchett]

Well, Jim said they're "looking in it." Ideally they'll come to conclusion that adding T stops makes sense, and they'll do it for no extra charge. Or at the very least, go with David's idea. We'll see.

[istvanttt]

Not referring to these RED lenses per se... but if it slows you down on the shoot in any way, or if you have a problem with focus and exposure, then spending less money on a lens is going to stop seeming like a good bargain... so cheapest is NOT always better, it's not even always the cheapest ultimately! Ever heard the phrase "penny wise, pound foolish"?

I think the solution here may be as simple as having a sentence on the web page under the set of RED lenses that says: "The lenses may be special-ordered with T-stop markings for an extra charge. Please call for a quote." If no one bites, or if they call and don't like the extra charge, then it's no big deal. And if they want to spend the money on getting a set made with T-stops, then they have the option and all the people who want to buy the f-stop marked lenses at the cheapest price are able to.

In theory, it should be cheaper to mark the lenses for T-stops at the time of manufacturing rather than doing it as an after-market conversion.

Remember that these RED lenses are dirt-cheap compared to most cine lenses, so surely there is some sort of middle ground possible for people who are willing to pay a little extra for T-stop marks and yet will still save a lot of money over a Zeiss or Cooke prime.

Now for those who think this a big deal over nothing, I sort of agree -- one can certainly work with f-stop marks on lenses on a shoot. It's merely an annoyance more than anything. But if there's a simple solution to avoid that annoyance, I think it should be explored, considered. After all, this is a company that managed to make an affordable 4K digital cine camera in only one year of development, so it doesn't seem out of their capabilities to solve the problem of putting T-stop marks on their RED lenses for those few customers that might want that.

Couldn't it be that the RED lenses are made in a kind of OEM agreement by somebody else which may exclude the T-stop marks? OEM marketing decisions very often accept annoyances to justify the lower price.

[Gordon Prince]

There are different markets here. If it'll the most expensive option, I think it'll be a bad move. If not, who's against the more choices out there? But I believe these people are preferring to have it because it's affordable instead no money to buy it. My 2 cents.

[Finner]

Couldn't it be that the RED lenses are made in a kind of OEM agreement by somebody else which may exclude the T-stop marks? OEM marketing decisions very often accept annoyances to justify the lower price.

This is exactly what I have been thinking for quite a while. It makes it easier for cooke to justify the high price of there branded lenses when the ones they are making for red are so much cheaper. But oh ya the lenses are not being made by cooke :whistling:

[Don King]

Couldn't it be that the RED lenses are made in a kind of OEM agreement by somebody else which may exclude the T-stop marks? OEM marketing decisions very often accept annoyances to justify the lower price.

Reason enough. I'm not sure if the price wouldn't be higher... OEM is better than a trade mark with a different value of market.

[Jannard]

We have been digging into the history of making all RED lenses t-stops instead of f-stops. I have discovered that the quote we got for t-stop calibration initially was just too much for us to sell our lenses at the prices we had targeted. We have done some more work on this and think we can accomplish the calibration for a better price. I'm not sure exactly what that means in terms of selling price at this moment, but we are committed to giving it our best effort.

Jim

[Brook Willard]

Fantastic! If T-stops did make it onto the lenses, I could see a much broader market segment opening up.

[Don King]

I wouldn't say the same. I dislike the route.

[Brook Willard]

You'd prefer uncalibrated lenses?

[Don King]

Less expensive ones.

[Don King]

And at the same price that has been announced. Without changes at all. Stable prices is a sign of maturity.

Edit
Besides, we have our own financial commitments that we cannot change whenever a new thread is open.

[Stephen Webb]

I'd love calibrated lenses, and would be happy to pay more for them.

If I may speculate on the price issue, I'm guessing that the extra cost would be in manufacturing to ensure that each lens had exactly the same transmission characteristics. Currently the lenses are extremely cheap - to manufacture them at that price point, I'm thinking it's possible that one set of lenses wouldn't exactly match another set, hence no "T" stops without having to spend more.

Could be talking through my hat there though.

[Jannard]

We'll see what we can do...

Jim

[istvanttt]

We'll see what we can do...

Jim

Thank you. I'm glad that my speculation concerning an OEM limitation where wrong!!!

Personally I agree with those who said: if for T-stops the price has to be somehow higher, I will be happy to change my order to the higher-priced T-stops version.

[Roberto B]

me not.. since i have no more money to spend..

[Andreas Höhn]

I also will be happy to change my order to the T-stops version.It makes Life for film dp´s so much easier.

[Mr. Paul White]

The point is that a part of us is not dp, cinematographer, etc.

[Finner]

Great news. T-stops will not only add value but will help keep the re-sale value way up on the lenses. For those complaining about the price being too high look at it as a wise investment. There is a reason people can get close to the same amount or even higher then what they paid for lenses they purchased 25 or more years ago and proffesional glass and calibrated T-stops have a bunch to do with it. Some here tend to always be looking for the cheap option which in my opinion ends up with products that don't work as well, tend to need repair sooner and more often, don't give you the ability to rent for more $ and are worth much less when you decide to sell them.

Simply T-stops will make digital and film shooting easier and keep the value of your lenses higher throughout there life.

[Matt Uhry]

Jim,
Thanks for taking this step to keep Red's lens efforts credible and professional.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'm all for it... Even if it costs more, understandable due to the testing and calibration. If the lenses can still be calibrated and marked with T-stops, keeping in line with "RED pricing", I'm sure we'll all still be happy. Because, I'm still excited over a set of 5 primes for $20-30K vs. a single Cooke or Zeiss prime for $20-30K.

[Gordon Prince]

I'm afraid it won't be good news for everybody...

[KMayry]

I see that Dalsa is planning to launch their own set of anamorphic lenses for their 4k camera lines. I'd like to see Red do the same. I love the look of the films shot in scope.

K Mayry

[David Cubbage]

I have only just caught up with this thread and felt that I would like to add to the debate.

I don't have a background in cinematography; I make self funded movies using the best cameras and equipment I can afford to buy because I love the art of film making. I don't like to hire anything unless I have to because of the high costs. I ordered a red camera because of the increased quality it will give me and because of it's low price. Jim is giving us a movie making system that is unparalleled in quality for the money. He has carried out his pricing/quality philosophy right through the range of accessories and the lenses. I for one was amazed at a set of 5 cine prime lenses for under $20,000and as soon as I had aquired the camera intend to buy this set. But after reading this thread and the heated discussion on the pros and cons of Fstops versus Tstops I became a bit dispondent that pressure is being applied to Jim to go against a decision he had made on the price point of going with the Fstops.

Now I have read all the posts of this thread and accept that professional cine lenses have Tstops and through David Mullens excellent explanation of the reasons why the difference and a preference for the Tstops in the professional world of movie making are so important. As I see it, without getting emotional, there are two camps here; the cinematographers who are used to working with with budgets that permit hiring cameras and lenses; and cinematographers who shoot with their own cameras and lenses.

When you have large budgets that allow you to hire the best equipment going it's easy to say I want this and that and get it. However, when you are shooting on your own equipment and you have a very limited budget sometimes coming out of your own pocket a few hundred dollars here and there can make hell of a difference to what you can afford. It's all right for people to say I don't mind paying upto $30,000 for a set of Red primes but to a lot of hopeful Red owners that extra $10,000 is going to make the lenses too expensive an option for them and I include myself in that.

I don't know how much of an increase the prime set would have to be raised to accomodate the wishes of those who want the Tstops but I am sure if it had only been only a few hundred dollars on the price of the package I am sure that we wouldn't be debating this issue now.
It would be so sad to see a lot of Red owners have to go to 35mm still primes because this issue puts the price of the Red primes out of their price range. I am not saying that still lenses are inferior in any way but the chance of owning a set of Red primes especially matched to the Red camera is a dream come true.

Jim has given us indies, with limited budgets, a chance to produce our projects with top quality equipment never dreamt of before, and I thank him for that; but it would be such a shame to see him have to change tack mid-stream.

[Dan Blanchett]

It's probably premature to assume Jim is "changing tack." He's responding to a valid concern of his customers, which is a testament to Red's desire to offer the best products possible at the best price. Since he is still vetting this out, it's safe to say he won't make any rash decision. Maybe he'll offer both options, an F Stop set at 20K and a T Stop set at a slightly higher, TBD price. Or maybe he'll figure out a way to offer a set marked with both at an acceptable point in between, or all of the above. I'm just happy he is taking it seriously and listening to his customers, a privilege we have come to expect with RED (and probably take for granted). I don't think he will let us down.

[Finner]

It's all right for people to say I don't mind paying upto $30,000 for a set of Red primes but to a lot of hopeful Red owners that extra $10,000 is going to make the lenses too expensive an option for them and I include myself in that.

Not sure where you figure of $10,000 extra for T-stops as I would see that as a crazy amount. Someone mentioned in this thread that they know of a company that you can send your lenses to and have them calibrate them into T-stops for $600 a lense and that would by far be the most expensive way to have it done. IMHO I would be highly suprised if it raised the cost of the lenses by $150 a lense to have them factory T-stop calibrated and for the value they would go up in re-sale and the ease of being able to use multi cameras or do effects shots and re-shoots it would be foolish not to have them.

You mentioned David that you were suprised by the debate and did not think that if T-stops would only have been a few hundred a lense that RED would have planned on T-stops from the begining. The thing is because a lot of industry profesionals know that it would be a nominal increase in price to have T-stops implemented in the factory is the very reason why so many spoke up about it.

Trust me when I say that if you spend the little extra for T-stops you will be very happy. Not only because of T-stop advantages but because your lenses will be a lot more valuable upon re-sale.





Jim has given us indies, with limited budgets, a chance to produce our projects with top quality equipment never dreamt of before, and I thank him for that; but it would be such a shame to see him have to change tack mid-stream.

This whole project has been about changing tack mid-stream. It is a big part of the reason so many are excited about this company. IMHO this camera would not be half of what it is without Jims openess to input and change from so many of the people here and others Jim is in contact with.

[David Mullen ASC]

First of all, anyone shooting with the RED camera is a defacto cinematographer and is going to have to learn how to shoot, and the T-stop issue is mainly one about efficiency on the set, which I assume is valuable to low-budget people as much as anyone, if not more so. So to say "I'm not a cinematographer" is sort of meaningless because these are issues of photography that everyone will have to deal with, whether it's you shooting by yourself or you hiring a cinematographer to use your equipment. The technical problems of optics and exposure don't just disappear when the camera is not being used by professional cinematographers.

We're talking meat-and-potatoes of filmmaking here: exposing, pulling focus, switching between lenses, etc. This is not some esoteric arty discussion. It's about work efficiency.

Second, I don't want anyone who wanted to buy the lenses for the price advertised to be unable to -- I just wanted the option of T-stops for people who wanted them on their lenses, just as many people here have been asking for options to make their work easier, whether it is timelapse features, long exposures, high frame rates, recording the flash memory cards, whatever -- many of which requests are far more complicated to implement than a T-stop mark on a lens!

Hopefully you'll all get your lenses for the price you had hoped to pay for them.

[Roberto B]

First of all, anyone shooting with the RED camera is a defacto cinematographer and is going to have to learn how to shoot, and the T-stop issue is mainly one about efficiency on the set, which I assume is valuable to low-budget people as much as anyone, if not more so. So to say "I'm not a cinematographer" is sort of meaningless because these are issues of photography that everyone will have to deal with, whether it's you shooting by yourself or you hiring a cinematographer to use your equipment. The technical problems of optics and exposure don't just disappear when the camera is not being used by professional cinematographers.say this to Mr. Lynch or Mr. Von Trier and you'll see what they'll answer you..


I just wanted the option of T-stops for people who wanted them on their lensesi wonder why.. don't you have your beloved and expensive glass?.. :sarcasm:

[David Mullen ASC]

David Lynch and Lars Von Triers have either used consumer DV equipment with many automatic features and shot the movies themselves... or they used professional film or HD gear and hired professional cinematographers.

The RED camera is not a PD150 with a fixed servo-controlled zoom with auto-focus and auto-exposure; it requires a little more advanced knowledge of cinematography to operate and take advantage of its features.

As for whether someone like Lynch or Von Triers would buy a RED camera and learn to use it themselves... or stick to simpler prosumer gear for their own self-photographed projects and hire a cinematographer when they wanted to use the RED camera (as they have for F900 HD projects, for example), I don't know, you'd have to ask them.

If you're saying that cinematographers know more about cinematography and care more about learning and mastering the subject than most film directors might, that's sort of a no-brainer. That's partly what directors pay them to do, care about those details so they don't want to have to waste their time dealing with them, so they can concentrate on directing the movie. A director shouldn't care about T-stops versus f-stops -- it has nothing to do with directing! Just like they shouldn't care about what type of battery the camera is running on, or what brand of audio tape the sound recordist is using. There are lots and lots of details that professionals are paid to care about so that the director doesn't have to even think about it. And if a director choses to shoot a movie himself, either he simplifies the process to reduce the level of details he has to deal with, or he delegates some of that to others, or he decides to accept some loss of quality and control in order to allow himself to shoot and direct simultaneously. Or he masters cinematography himself, as someone like Kubrick did (and even he chose to work with cinematographers even though he could shoot the movie himself.)

[Roberto B]

David Lynch and Lars Von Triers have either used consumer DV equipment with many automatic features and shot the movies themselves... or they used professional film or HD gear and hired professional cinematographers.

The RED camera is not a PD150 with a fixed servo-controlled zoom with auto-focus and auto-exposure; it requires a little more advanced knowledge of cinematography to operate and take advantage of its features.

As for whether someone like Lynch or Von Triers would buy a RED camera and learn to use it themselves... or stick to simpler prosumer gear for their own self-photographed projects and hire a cinematographer when they wanted to use the RED camera (as they have for F900 HD projects, for example)


sure.. lol

are you certain about that?.. loooooooool

i was expecting this your post.. but not so much there.. better?.. it would be impossible.. LMAO i might hire you for my scriptwriter.. not screenwriter.. but don't be worried.. you're already dp and i'm used to write my own stuff.. :weight_lift: at least, you know their first names.. eheheh.. but Trier doesn't take any letter "s" at the end.. only "von" before.. eheheh.. "von" in danish is something like asc.. eheheh


http://www.sanjinjukic.com/extras/LarsVT.jpg

courtesy by another dp/filmmaker and reduser gold member.. sanjin..

but on this one, perhaps his first name is not familiar.. at least, by now.. before his red purchase.. eheheh

ah! red buyer.. we should not forget..

btw, i thought jackson would also be there.. eheheh..

[Gordon Prince]

Ah Ah Ah

"and hire a cinematographer when they wanted to use the RED camera (as they have for F900 HD projects, for example)"

Brilliant, Filmmaker, brilliant.

[Damien Molineaux]

This is silly, not brilliant, what's the point. Wow, you've got a picture of Lars Von Trier operating a camera. Von Trier, and even more so David Lynch, have both worked with professonial DPs on numerous project. The fact that he's operating doesn't mean he doesn't have a DP lighting and setting the exposure ! Ridley Scott, for example, is a director who likes to operate his camera, he still works with a DP. As a matter of fact many DPs don't operate, that's what camera operators are for.

Are you afraid of a professional cinematographer, like David Mullen, using the same equipement you'll be using. Why attack a well respected professional like him ? Anyhow, to each his own way of working, Red One and Red lenses are but tools. Let's see what anyone makes of them.

Cheers,
Damien

[David Mullen ASC]

Usually Lars Von Trier hires a DP like Anthony Dod Mantle on his HD features (like "Dogville"). Lynch acted as his own cinematographer on "Inland Empire" using a prosumer DV camera.

Lars Von Triers has operated the camera himself (as the photo shows), but I'm not aware of any of his features where he acted as the cinematographer, other than his DV-shot ones where is his simply listed as a co-cameraman. Maybe someone has some real info on that.

There are of course director/DP's out there, especially in the commercial world. Steven Soderberg, Robert Rodriquez, and Peter Hyams come to mind.

[Matt Uhry]

sure.. lol

are you certain about that?.. loooooooool

i was expecting this your post.. but not so much there.. better?.. it would be impossible.. LMAO i might hire you for my scriptwriter.. not screenwriter.. but don't be worried.. you're already dp and i'm used to write my own stuff..



Hey Filmmakers Gang. What's your real name? Can I see your films anywhere?

Your anti-craft sentiments don't contribute much to this discussion. A few filmmakers are into that for various reasons, but there's not much to talk about on a camera board if you aren't concerned about how your images look.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[David Mullen ASC]

The thing is that if the whole T-stop issue is completely irrelevant to your own filmmaking work, that's fine -- but that doesn't therefore mean that it is meaningless for someone else. Everyone chooses how deeply they wish to go in learning the technical aspects of filmmaking.

This is sort of a tempest in a tea cup though. The f-stop thing is merely a minor annoyance to be dealt with on a set when swapping lenses a lot or using multiple cameras, nothing that can't be dealt with. But it's one of those little things where if there is a solution, then some people are going to want it, just like some people are going to care more about the mattebox and rod/cage configuration than others and have strong opinions about that topic. I doubt that Lars Von Trier cares much about mattebox design differences, and probably he doesn't need to. But that's not the same thing as saying it therefore doesn't matter because it doesn't matter to him in particular.

[Finner]

Hi Matt and David

I learned a while back that this filmakers gang is just a bunch of kids that goat people and try and upset them. Their posts are consistantly incoherent and I have not seen one intelligent or useful post from them that adds anything of value ever. Your time will be better spent just ignoring them.

[Roberto B]

dear dps,

first of all, i'm not falling in love for 50% of all dps that i know or read.. lol

after that, i didn't attack anyone.. i just was 100% correct.. so, leave your corporate defense away from these forums..

about if i'm afraid of professional cinematographers like david? yes, i am.. so what?

david, i know there's a lot of people here who is thinking you're a king.. maybe you are.. the king of the cinematographers.. BUT not my king.. at least, to me.. and for a lot of people here.. there's a lot written coming from the mailing exchange beyond these boards.. a lot hidden under our thoughts..

you're the same who once said..

"My biggest bit of skepticism regarding the RED camera is still the price point of $17,500 per camera -- I just don't see how they will make a profit"

only two months ago, there was an open thread here..

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1133

in these same boards, now "highjacked" by the same people who didn't believe in Red at all.. when we were giving our own money in the jim jannard's hands.. just for our dream.. a world without dps..

looooooooooooool

about my nick, this is a forum, right?.. the administrator gives me the right to have my account under an anonymous identity.. i have no need to show off.. my marketing stuff is done outside on the real world.. perhaps it's there where you matt may already had heard something about my work.. or you shall hear talk about.. period




david, you forgot Robby (Müller).. he's known as the Wenders DoP but he has worked with Benigni, Jarmush.. and of course, Breaking the Waves is his work too.. but don't try find my name on credits.. eheheh.. this nickname is not there..

[Don King]

I have no knowledge that it will be the case, but it wouldn't surprise me if RED lenses were available for order with a choice of F stops, T stops, or maybe both.

It's true that T stops are the tradition in film workflows, with 35mm and S16mm lenses, but RED One will also be used in a diverse array of EFP applications with B4 lenses and 35mm still lenses that are traditionally marked in F stops.

In technology pedigree RED One camera body itself is most closely related to DSLRs, followed by video cameras, and only distantly related to film cameras - and DSLRs and video cameras traditionally use lenses that are rated in F stops.

Media convergence is a tricky business. People from different backgrounds want the new technology, but they are most comfortable with nomenclatures that they are used to. Like I said, a good compromise would be for purchasers to be able to order their RED lenses in a choice of T or F stops, or more economically for RED, for both to be somehow marked on the lens.


I never said it was for everyone; just think it is silly to whine about T versus F or vice versa. One thing that does concern me is the price of the Red primes staying low and if you start having to worry about putting double markings for everything it puts upward pressure on pricing.
Aloha
-A


The film industry being what it is I'm sure someone will produce a plastic strip that wraps around the lens and gives you accurate T-Stops, the only problem is we'll pay $1000 for it :)


why not f stop?

the cheapest the better

less cheaper, less affordable, less sales.. everything less.. who knows if less sales success wouldn't mean less red or if not even red.. no less..


There are different markets here. If it'll the most expensive option, I think it'll be a bad move. If not, who's against the more choices out there? But I believe these people are preferring to have it because it's affordable instead no money to buy it. My 2 cents.


Less expensive ones.


The point is that a part of us is not dp, cinematographer, etc.


I'm afraid it won't be good news for everybody...


I have only just caught up with this thread and felt that I would like to add to the debate.

I don't have a background in cinematography; I make self funded movies using the best cameras and equipment I can afford to buy because I love the art of film making. I don't like to hire anything unless I have to because of the high costs. I ordered a red camera because of the increased quality it will give me and because of it's low price. Jim is giving us a movie making system that is unparalleled in quality for the money. He has carried out his pricing/quality philosophy right through the range of accessories and the lenses. I for one was amazed at a set of 5 cine prime lenses for under $20,000and as soon as I had aquired the camera intend to buy this set. But after reading this thread and the heated discussion on the pros and cons of Fstops versus Tstops I became a bit dispondent that pressure is being applied to Jim to go against a decision he had made on the price point of going with the Fstops.

Now I have read all the posts of this thread and accept that professional cine lenses have Tstops and through David Mullens excellent explanation of the reasons why the difference and a preference for the Tstops in the professional world of movie making are so important. As I see it, without getting emotional, there are two camps here; the cinematographers who are used to working with with budgets that permit hiring cameras and lenses; and cinematographers who shoot with their own cameras and lenses.

When you have large budgets that allow you to hire the best equipment going it's easy to say I want this and that and get it. However, when you are shooting on your own equipment and you have a very limited budget sometimes coming out of your own pocket a few hundred dollars here and there can make hell of a difference to what you can afford. It's all right for people to say I don't mind paying upto $30,000 for a set of Red primes but to a lot of hopeful Red owners that extra $10,000 is going to make the lenses too expensive an option for them and I include myself in that.

I don't know how much of an increase the prime set would have to be raised to accomodate the wishes of those who want the Tstops but I am sure if it had only been only a few hundred dollars on the price of the package I am sure that we wouldn't be debating this issue now.
It would be so sad to see a lot of Red owners have to go to 35mm still primes because this issue puts the price of the Red primes out of their price range. I am not saying that still lenses are inferior in any way but the chance of owning a set of Red primes especially matched to the Red camera is a dream come true.

Jim has given us indies, with limited budgets, a chance to produce our projects with top quality equipment never dreamt of before, and I thank him for that; but it would be such a shame to see him have to change tack mid-stream.

Although just following a few pages here, there's truly grown-up people posting their own thoughts... And needs. Enough said, fair enough.

[Brook Willard]

What are you guys doing in here? This is a good thread...

[Mr. Paul White]

On Lars von Trier's pic, there's actually a lot of directors who prefer to operate the camera themselves. And a strong feeling of "corporate defense" on it as natural reaction. We the producers are used to deal with these battles each day of our business. But if a director wants to go alone, this can mean a better balance between above and below the line. Thus, to each his own.

I believe this camera is an add value for any producer since, if possible, it can mean a better low budget management. To own instead to rent, targeting and spreading still further for more productions, smaller crews, more artistic freedom, etc. That's where the f stop instead the T method, it can do all "the" difference. Like this other poster said:
It is a bit more involved than just painting marks, there is aditional engineering and testing needed. Then if you produce them with three different options it does increase cost. I think one set of markings F or T is great, someone will be unhappy but such is life.
Aloha
-A

[chuck colburn]

As a point of intrest, what amount of transmission stop error could you live with? 1/10th stop? 1/8, 1/4?

[Stephen Williams]

As a point of intrest, what amount of transmission stop error could you live with? 1/10th stop? 1/8, 1/4?

Hi Chuck,

+/- 1/16th which equals 1/8.

Stephen

[Gordon Prince]

david, you forgot Robby (Müller).. he's known as the Wenders DoP but he has worked with Benigni, Jarmush.. and of course, Breaking the Waves is his work too.. but don't try find my name on credits.. eheheh.. this nickname is not there..Are you forgetting Dancer in the Dark where several custom anamorphic lenses were used on a simple prosumer PD-150?

[PaulClements]

What are you guys doing in here? This was a good thread...

lol, I second this notion, stick to the thread gents

[Policar]

If you're exposing with a vectorscope you don't need t-stops.

Of course, adding t-stops would make the lenses more appropriate for film, which opens up a new market.

[Don King]

And it closes the doors for many...

Edit: The most part which has become this project... (as a possible project).

[Stephen Williams]

Hi Don,

Why not use still camera lenses, they have f stops and are cheap.

Stephen

[Steve Gibby]

In my post #11 I was the first one on this thread to suggest that RED consider giving RED lens buyers an option to order their lenses in a choice of T stops or F stops. I think its is wisdom by Jim Jannard to consider a T stop option for the RED lenses, as he has verified RED is considering. If T stops aren't a high priority to a purchaser and they can save some funds on the lenses by ordering F stops - fine. If T stops are a high priority for a purchaser and they don't mind paying an increased amount for that - fine. What none of us on this thread, except Jim Jannard, understand is exactly how each lens marking/calibration option affects the manufacturing time/expense and economies of scale for the lenses. RED has consistently offered a lot of features in their products for very reasonable prices. I don't see them changing that reasonable price philosophy now for the lenses unless there are factors we don't understand.

Directing and camera work? A certain portion of the overall motion media business is union or operates like union sets, with rigidly segmented jobs and job descriptions. Then there's the vast majority of the yearly total of motion media productions worldwide that are non-union and have smaller crews where each member may wear several work hats. RED is equally capable of being used in either type of those productions, and further capable of being used in a long list of cine style and EFP style genres and sub-genres. The narrative cinema/union/large crew scenario is but one of many profiles for potential RED One projects. There are significant numbers of professionals in the motion media industry who have decades of experience in international and national production across multiple genres - and have never done a union production, and have spread their skill sets horizontally and vertically to include producing, directing, editing, and camera work - and will be adopting RED One for their working scenarios. Those types are comfortable doing all the jobs on a tiny production one week, being the director on a production with a crew of 80 the next, being the DP or cinematographer on a large crew the following week, and the next week being strictly a producer pulling the strings to make a large crew production dance. Does that mean that they are lacking in knowledge or skills in any of those categories? Not necessarily. IMO some of the very best directors on the planet are ones who have also worked extensively as DPs, cinematographers, and editors - and vice versa. When you understand intimately all the jobs on location or on the set, IMO you can more effectively dance with the others on the crew - and if you're directing and the rest of the crew knows you're highly experienced in each of their jobs, then they tend to respect your leadership more deeply. All that said, beyond the obvious demands of directing, the trick is to surround yourself with a crew of highly-experienced professionals and let them do their thing. You simply steer them the direction you need to accomplish the needs of the story or program: you macro-manage, rather than micro-manage.

[Don King]

Good post this last one. That's the difference between to be an indy instead to work with a 'rigidly segmented union set'. IMHO, Red has always been the 1st option's choice. And working with F stops doesn't necessarily mean to go with short range or breathing handicap. An ENG operator uses F stop, not T stop. And he/she doesn't shoot with SLR glass. He/she just don't want to pay for something that he/she won't use at all.

I don't know not even any one cine-style operator over here. But I know a lot of ENG/EFP PROs among the Red reservation holders. This cine-style misconception can be not healthy or can even be harmful for the viability of this project. You cine-style guys don't represent in any way other than as yourselves and your own interests.

[David Mullen ASC]

Well, Don, obviously a cine-style shooter will see things from their perspective, just as an ENG/EFP-style shooter will see things from theirs. I don't think that's surprising -- we don't exactly share the same needs and priorities.

If you're trying to imply that the RED camera was "meant" mainly for the (clearly) larger ENG/EFP market, then why did Jim Jannard give the cameras to Peter Jackson to shoot a narrative "cine-style" demo with (shot by a DP using a light meter...)? This camera does not belong to one type of shooter or one type of production.

And this site is called Reduser, not Redowner. I plan on being a user, and who knows, if I have a financial windfall someday, maybe an owner... though ownership isn't really necessary for my work.

I'd also point out that "indies" shoot both film and digital. Matt Uhry, who has also brought up the notion of T-stops, is an indie DP. I mainly shoot non-studio-financed indie features. And we all shoot both film and digital, which is one reason why the RED camera is so exciting as a new high-quality imagemaking device.

I don't see why it's so controversial to suggest that there be an option to sell a separate set of RED lenses with T-stop marks. And if that doesn't happen, it's not a big deal. But I think we should be looking for more solutions that work for the widest variety of potential users -- not accusing people who make suggestions from a certain production perspective as being "harmful".

And if I sometimes give the impression that my particular shooting perspective is the only valid one, I apologize.

[Evin Grant]

David and friends, my instincts (and Jims comment's) tell me that we will not be getting T stops on Red's lenses. I agree that a T option would be nice but maybe there's another way we can get there. How hard would it be to measure the difference between the F and the T mark? If that diffrence could be determined accurately* then it would be a simple matter of creating a chart & sticker that could be downloaded and printed by those that needed it. For those that feel their lenses will be handled too roughly for a sticker then maybe a thin aluminum or plastic band could be epoxyed on instead. My point is that a little creativity will probably go alot further than whining will (I'm not talking about anyone specifically).

*The test could be as easy as setting up a Red one shooting a grey card with a set of rented T marked primes, match the focal lengths to the Red lens in question and measure the exposure using the in built waveform or histogram. The difference will give you your adjustment.

[David Mullen ASC]

Yes, there are workarounds.

[Poi Boy]

a big ten four Evin; kind of back where we started though. some prefer T for good reason, some like me don't care because of scopes....we'll just have to wait and see what the big guy decides.
Aloha
-A

[Steve Gibby]

Evin,

I suggested the same thing as a solution to the issue in my Post #11, on Page 2 of this thread, starting with "or more economically...":

"...a good compromise would be for purchasers to be able to order their RED lenses in a choice of T or F stops, or more economically for RED, for both to be somehow marked on the lens."

Whether it is by the ability to order lenses with either T or F stop marking, or via post-manufacture re-marking, I think purchasers and users would like an alternative on lens marking. If it needs to be an effective workaround via post re-marking to hold the cost and time of delivery down on the lenses, then that will be a decision RED will make.

Being both a cine-style and EFP style shooter, I can definitely understand both sides of this issue. There are actually a surprising number of "both styles" shooters on RED User - including Dave Mullen and many, many others here. I think that being a "both styles" shooter dovetails perfectly with the "both styles" flexible design of RED One - and unlocks the full revenue generating potential of RED One.

The core philosophy of RED from day one has been for their products to have maximum flexibility, utility, and scalability across a broad range of cine-style and EFP style genres of production. Original T or F marking options, or an effective post-manufacture workaround procedure or kit to achieve that, fits in nicely with RED's philosophy.

Evin, I know you, David, and most others here already understand what I mentioned above, but I simply posted it more as a general observation on the nature of RED and RED One for newcomers who are trying to get up to speed on the capabilities and use of the camera system.

As cimematographers/photographers/videographers we're all "lensaholics" and "glassaholics", so each detail of our lenses is naturally important to us. If it isn't, we're in the wrong profession! The cool thing is that Jim Jannard is a longtime admitted lensaholic/glassaholic so he speaks our language and is definitely listening.

[Leo Ticheli]

A bit ironic that I just finished a two-camera shoot and I've got another next week, but I shoot almost exclusively single camera and I don't set my stop with a light meter. I rely on the semi-toy waveform monitor in my displays and, primarily, my eyes, so I don't need T-stops in my HD work.

Even with multiple HD cameras, I don't set the stop from single reading. I'm sure that the work David Mullen does makes this method very important, but it's not a part of the jobs I do.

I think the real value of T-stops would be for those who own and shoot both HD and film.

I'm certain I don't understand the complexities of lens manufacture, but it seems that it would be easy to engrave the rings with F-stops on one side and T-stops on the other so one could use whichever is appropriate for either stop or depth of field calculation.

By the way, with the shallower depth of field we'll be enjoying, I'll have to get used to pulling out the DOF calculator again! Even so, if it doesn't look right, it's not right, no matter what the chart says!

Alternatively, I would think an optical house could calibrate and engrave the other side of the ring with T-stops. As inexpensive as the Red lenses are, this seems like a small price to pay for the added value of the lenses for those who need it.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

[David Mullen ASC]

A bit ironic that I just finished a two-camera shoot and I've got another next week, but I shoot almost exclusively single camera and I don't set my stop with a light meter. I rely on the semi-toy waveform monitor in my displays and, primarily, my eyes, so I don't need T-stops in my HD work.


To be more accurate, you don't actually use either f-stops or T-stop marks -- in other words, it would have no affect for you if the lens had T-stop marks on it, as many of the cine-style HD lenses already do (Zeiss DigiPrimes, for example.) So a T-stop mark would serve both types of shooters -- the only real argument presented here against them has been the higher cost. No one here has said that they specifically use or need f-stop marks instead of T-stop marks; what they have been saying that neither type of mark is critical for the way they work and in that case, they would prefer whatever kept the RED lenses at the original price.

[Steve Gibby]

Virtually all of my current and future work is and will be digital. When using RED One, I plan to shoot almost everything in REDCODE RAW for the flexibility it gives me at acquisition and the processing options with REDCINE before it goes to post. Also, stock footage is an important part of my business, and shooting REDCODE RAW and delivering it to my stock houses gives them great flexibility in how licensees can order footage.

Assuming that the RED EVF and LCD dance well with RED One's histogram, waveform, and zebra, something I'm comfortable so far in assuming, then I'll usually be setting exposure via the use of the histogram and/or zebra, with added use of the waveform when I have time.

Assuming RED One's Magic Focus works very effectively with the EVF and LCD, something I'm also comfortable in assuming so far, I'll rack/pull focus using Magic Focus with the EVF and LCD.

If I can get away with it, I love working in a WYSIWYG mode. Hopefully RED One's features will fully enable that mode of working.

We'll know RED One's capabilities shortly when a diverse team of pros tests out my RED #8 in Los Angeles. The full team list will be posted here on RED User this month. I can say now that Evin Grant has accepted my invitation to direct the testing. Several professionals from a very diverse array of motion media backgrounds are on the testing team. Their names will be familiar to everyone here on RED User. More invitations will be forthcoming this month.

[Leo Ticheli]

[QUOTE=David Mullen ASC;48465]To be more accurate, you don't actually use either f-stops or T-stop marks -- in other words, it would have no affect for you if the lens had T-stop marks on it, as many of the cine-style HD lenses already do (Zeiss DigiPrimes, for example.) QUOTE]

Absolutely true. Since I almost never consult the DOF calculator and don't set by meter, the barrel could be smooth!

For that matter, I almost never stop down past f2.8 unless I'm shooting a table top and even then I'm usually wide open.

Of course that's all with my 2/3" imager. I haven't shot a foot of film in five years, so I'll be back in 35MM mode with the Red and getting to know f5.6 again! :-) After all, when the crazy talent is moving all over the place you've got to give the focus puller a break!

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

[Matt Uhry]

This cine-style misconception can be not healthy or can even be harmful for the viability of this project. You cine-style guys don't represent in any way other than as yourselves and your own interests.

I'm not sure what you mean... There are many of people who usually work in "Cine Style" who are reservation holders. We are also the likely the majority of customers for Red's lenses, we'll be using the larger 4k area of the sensor and generally work in a style that will benefit the most from more expensive cine style lenses as opposed to a set of Nikons or converted B4 zooms.

The Industry or Hollywood way of working is being unfairly portrayed here by people who may not have experienced it. It's not an appropriate way to work for all shoots, but much of what you actually see on a TV or movie screen was made in this way.

Job descriptions are there so that I can show up on a commercial in Burbank, Birmingham, Buenos Aires, or Bangkok and get the first shot off in an hour, knowing who I need to have the producer hire and what everybody should be able to do. If we mixed up what everybody does and what we call it the system breaks. If you make personal films in your basement ( I do this too ) don't let it any of this bother you, go downstairs and get to work.

How does this relate to T stops ? It's an industry standard. Can I live with f-stops ? Sure, but it's not what we use, and there are sound reasons for that have already been explained on this thread.

Hurl your barbs...

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[ZzzZZz...]

I say let´ em have the t-stops... "Put the sunglasses on... so you can feel cool"
The red lenses are clearly intended for cinestyle use, otherwise they would have a zoom rocker etc...

[Finner]

www.mattuhry.com[/url]

Some basement little productions huh. Are you sure these are skeletons from your closet you want mentioned here. Some taboo little projects.:blink:

Heck I'll take 3 copies of each Blue ray please.:tongue:

[Don King]

Ok. I think the problem is more around the philosophy of this particular device (camera project) than everything else. Different priorities, different needs, right? Since the beginning, this project has been what we're working for. I just adhere to this reservation because it was noticed for a friend of mine that now there would be a digital 35mm ENG/EFP camera. Better than 2/3", better than any prosumer one. That's why I am here. That's why I have my money on a reservation.

A few others (other interests) can be harmful to our investment in any way other than as a different outcome for our priorities and needs.




Well, Don, obviously a cine-style shooter will see things from their perspective, just as an ENG/EFP-style shooter will see things from theirs. I don't think that's surprising -- we don't exactly share the same needs and priorities.

If you're trying to imply that the RED camera was "meant" mainly for the (clearly) larger ENG/EFP market, then why did Jim Jannard give the cameras to Peter Jackson to shoot a narrative "cine-style" demo with (shot by a DP using a light meter...)? This camera does not belong to one type of shooter or one type of production.

And this site is called Reduser, not Redowner. I plan on being a user, and who knows, if I have a financial windfall someday, maybe an owner... though ownership isn't really necessary for my work.

I'd also point out that "indies" shoot both film and digital. Matt Uhry, who has also brought up the notion of T-stops, is an indie DP. I mainly shoot non-studio-financed indie features. And we all shoot both film and digital, which is one reason why the RED camera is so exciting as a new high-quality imagemaking device.

I don't see why it's so controversial to suggest that there be an option to sell a separate set of RED lenses with T-stop marks. And if that doesn't happen, it's not a big deal. But I think we should be looking for more solutions that work for the widest variety of potential users -- not accusing people who make suggestions from a certain production perspective as being "harmful".

And if I sometimes give the impression that my particular shooting perspective is the only valid one, I apologize.

[Don King]

I don't know not even...



Hurl your barbs...??...

[Matt Uhry]

I just adhere to this reservation because it was noticed for a friend of mine that now there would be a digital 35mm ENG/EFP camera. Better than 2/3", better than any prosumer one. That's why I am here. That's why I have my money on a reservation.

A few others (other interests) can be harmful to our investment in any way other than as a different outcome for our priorities and needs.

Hey Don, we all share your quest for quality and we all secretly want a custom camera exactly designed for out needs, mine would dispense perfect espressos from a tube near the EVF and have a cold IPA ready at wrap each day.

I've shot my fair share of ENG and EFP style shoots, from 2 seasons of "Real Stories of the Highway Patrol" a few doc's even more recently the "7 days in a Sentra" ad campaign for Nissan.

I don't think that the Red will be any better suited for this kind of work than ENG cameras are for making features. Yes, of course it's possible, and lots of people will do it, but it's not going to be optimal. What 35mm format zoom is going to equal the range and ease of use of a 22x7.6 with a rocker zoom and a nifty 2x extender built in?

Personally, if I was doing lots of broadcast or industrial work, and not film style shooting I would consider other cameras, a HPX 500 if I was into data and the F900R if I was a tapehead.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Don King]

The F900H/F/R is in my humble opinion the best camera ever made. Quality and convenience, ENG/EFP-style or Cine-style in just one capture device. I hope Red shall still be better.

[I Bloom]

My feeling is that T-stops are imperative. I still plan to shoot film after I start shooting RED (for many reasons, overcranking is one) my goal is to make it possible to do this with my package by only adding a film body and magazines, maybe batteries. For that reason, I need RED lenses to compete with Zeiss Mark II's, they can be a bit slower than Superspeeds or Ultraprimes, but they need to be film ready, not video ready.

That's my two cents.

IBloom

[Joe Walker]

Job descriptions are there so that I can show up on a commercial in Burbank...Birmingham, Buenos Aires, or Bangkok...www.mattuhry.com

Hey Matt, stop on by anytime, and yes us southerners are used to T-stops as well....:) Even down here, it's the industry standard.

[Gordon Prince]

Maybe an industry standard but only over the film world. It's not the case of the ENG or EFP shooter or for who is coming from the 1/3" camcorders where this camera has its root. Nor for those still photographers used to handle with the F stop. Not even for those who have no more money to pay above the $19,990 Red Primes deal.

[Finner]

For ENG and EFP shooters not ready to step up a level to understand T-stops probably will do just fine sticking with a 1/3" camcorder.

[Zed Malone]

i like paying a bit extra for T stops. but to be honest, I really wouldn't know the difference between Fstops and Tstops when it came down to actual use, keeping to a Red prime set.

[Gordon Prince]

For ENG and EFP shooters not ready to step up a level to understand T-stops probably will do just fine sticking with a 1/3" camcorder.


You're completely wrong. It looks as though you are the only one from your gang who doesn't understand the others needs. Who do you think you are to judge the others for their own viewpoint or interest on F stops? Take your lessons to your own. Be cool or stay away. The choice is yours. Your unfriendly tone is not welcome in a friendly forum.

Just for the record. You've earned my own advice, filmmer... and I'm not telling you to get where you came from.

[Finner]

Cool down guy.

Don't know what forum your on but I am no part of any gang.

I understand peoples needs to save money perfectly. Its just I would think most would understand that the few extra hundred spent on getting T-stops would become a very smart investment because the lenses would hold thier value at a much higher level. By the way my choice is to stay but I would perfer if you would stop the threats.

I don't understand your last statement but it seems like english is not your first language as it really does not make sense.

[Jarred Land]

Cool down guy.

Don't know what forum your on but I am no part of any gang..

come on finner.... we all know your the head of the Night Rider Speedo Gang.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/customavatars/avatar285_4.gif

[Finner]

Jarred you promised at our last speedo sleep over that we would keep our gang a secret. Because you told you are out as assistant leader and Brook gets the promotion.

[donatello b]

RED states 18-50 will be marked in T stops - starting at T3 .. same price !!
(under RED one )

[Gordon Prince]

Thank you for your care Don.


Cool down guy.

Don't know what forum your on but I am no part of any gang.

You say so. But as you could check, not all think the same :)


I understand peoples needs to save money perfectly. Its just I would think most would understand that the few extra hundred spent on getting T-stops would become a very smart investment because the lenses would hold thier value at a much higher level. By the way my choice is to stay but I would perfer if you would stop the threats.

I won't comment it at all.


I don't understand your last statement but it seems like english is not your first language as it really does not make sense.

Again. Wrong move. As you wish. I sent you a PM. Check it first where it belongs. Otherwise, the only one that came from my mind, it's the same that I won't comment either. But you can easily translate to your own tongue from my own native, given the fact I believe it's not hard to you to become a fluent polyglot (such as I'd probably take from your own overwhelmed statements):

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/chauvinistic

And if, as far as the first meaning is concerned, you have my credits that you're out from there, it just remains the second one.

[Jarred Land]

play nice kids....

[Gordon Prince]

:) I said I did not comment and I didn't :)

[Finner]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/chauvinistic

And if, as far as the first meaning is concerned, you have my credits that you're out from there, it just remains the second one.

My wife usually adds "Pig" on to that.

[Gordon Prince]

Yeah, your in your own :) :)

[dalemccready]

Am I missing every third word or something? I need to check this browser. Maybe Firefox will be better... ;)

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Besides changing the markings wouldn't you also need to regear the iris?

Otherwise you would be falling on really uneven t-stops wouldn't you? i.e. 3.3 which wouldn't do you any good if nobody else could expose for t3.3 on their lenses. Or do cine irises not pop from stop to stop like a still lens?

[Stephen Williams]

Besides changing the markings wouldn't you also need to regear the iris?

Otherwise you would be falling on really uneven t-stops wouldn't you? i.e. 3.3 which wouldn't do you any good if nobody else could expose for t3.3 on their lenses. Or do cine irises not pop from stop to stop like a still lens?

Hi Gavin,

Cine lenses don't pop stop to stop.

Stephen

[Clayton Harper]

come on finner.... we all know your the head of the Night Rider Speedo Gang.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/customavatars/avatar285_4.gif

I am the actual president of the Night Rider Speedo Image Licensing Consortium.

Darren is under license with my business to use the Hoff with the speedo.

Our company will be releasing a set of lenses marked with David's measurements on the length of the lens. All specs subject to change.

[jaadgy akanni]

I am the actual president of the Night Rider Speedo Image Licensing Consortium.

Darren is under license with my business to use the Hoff with the speedo.

Our company will be releasing a set of lenses marked with David's measurements on the length of the lens. All specs subject to change.


Everything back to normal yet? Is it possible to mark the lens both with F-stops and T-stops-and if yes, in light of Jim's announcement that the 18-50mm will have T-stops, should we presume that it means it will have T-stops in addition to F-stops? Maybe it's been discussed and I missed it.

[I Bloom]

I understand peoples needs to save money perfectly. Its just I would think most would understand that the few extra hundred spent on getting T-stops would become a very smart investment because the lenses would hold thier value at a much higher level.

Am I right in thinking that there is no other PL-mount camera that could use lenses with only F-Stop markings. (Not including Dalsa, D20, Genesis, things most people can't own). Will there be an extremely limited resale market for these lenses?

[Finner]

ibloom

Any PL mount camera can use a lense with either f or t stops. The advantages of T-stops are mentioned a lot in this thread but one of them being worth more has to do with the high price of other T-stop lenses and them being desirable to a larger market.

[Evin Grant]

Now that Jim has anounced the Red lenses will be marked in T stops I'm going to close this thread. I think we all need some breathing room.