15mm Prime, 85mm Prime

[Eric MacIver]

Just two requests to add to your list:

1) I'm not sure how others feel, but I certainly would prefer an 18mm prime in the set rather than the 15mm IF you can match the T/F stops. I've had to shoot on unmatched sets before and it's constantly frustrating when you have to light to the wide even when you have more room on your other primes.

2) Though I know you don't plan on doing so, it'd be great if you could ramp your initial production run of the 85mm primes and sell them independently. I'd assume that there will be a good number of people wanting to buy the 18-50mm zoom, but who need to add a longer lens (other than the 300mm) to their package, and I think the 85mm would do it.

Thanks and good luck with your current hurdles.

[Poi Boy]

15 for me.
-A

[Emanuel A.]

I second Poi -- and 2nd serial number too: 0002 ;-) OK, I stand corrected: (...)00002 :)

[Michael Hastings]

10mm por favor


Just two requests to add to your list:

1) I'm not sure how others feel, but I certainly would prefer an 18mm prime in the set rather than the 15mm IF you can match the T/F stops. I've had to shoot on unmatched sets before and it's constantly frustrating when you have to light to the wide even when you have more room on your other primes.

2) Though I know you don't plan on doing so, it'd be great if you could ramp your initial production run of the 85mm primes and sell them independently. I'd assume that there will be a good number of people wanting to buy the 18-50mm zoom, but who need to add a longer lens (other than the 300mm) to their package, and I think the 85mm would do it.

Thanks and good luck with your current hurdles.

[Emanuel A.]

Again: 2nd serial number one :)

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

5mm.

haha, j/k.

[Alexander Nikishin]

I'll go with the 15mm as well. I love a wide landscape lens or one to get me out of a hole when in a cramped space.

[Manuel Wenger]

I´m also fine with the 15mm but I´d love to see a 85 and also a 135mm prime


Manuel Wenger

[Michael Lindsay]

Indie rentals

I can understand a couple of reasons why the set jumps to 15mm but I guess there would be a number of people happy to see an 18mm f1.9 (yourself included) People used to super speeds will wonder where the 18mm is...?

I would be very happy to pay extra for an 18mm f.1.9 (?T2?) that could be added... I think anything less than $5-6k would be attractive...

Michael

[Leo Ticheli]

I prefer the 15mm.

Love to have a Red 10mm added to the list; even used, those lenses are terribly expensive.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

[David Mullen ASC]

I think it also depends on how often people will be using the 2K windowed mode, in which case they will be more likely to want something wider than 18mm.

Truth is, that for me, I almost never shoot in 35mm with anything wider than in the 24mm-ish range, occasionally an 18mm. I've rented wider lenses like a 14mm but never used them, but then, I haven't worked with a Terry Gilliam... A lot of "Touch of Evil" was shot with the new (then) 18mm, which gives you a sense of how wide-angle it looks. Also, a lot of John Frankenheimer movies. It's pretty wide-angle.

Of course, Kubrick occasionally used the super wide-angle 9.8mm Kinoptic, which was cool for tracking shots. But fairly distorted.

But if you're going to shoot in 2K windowed-mode, then a 10mm, 14mm, etc. can be very useful.

[Stephen Williams]

Hi David,

I was beginning to think I was the only one not using ultra wide lenses. I find lighting becomes a compromise wider than 24mm although I often go as wide as 18mm. I have used an 8mm & 12mm a couple of times but the shot always screams 'effect' IMHO.

Stephen

[David Mullen ASC]

Of course one style is not better than another, just one might be more motivated or appropriate than another, but generally I don't want the viewer to be noticing what focal length I used -- in other words, I'd rather they notice the content rather than how I was shooting the content, and super wide-angle lenses tend to call attention to the fact that they are being shot with super wide-angle lenses. I especially don't like it when really wide-angle lenses are used to make a shot "funny" -- it can be too aggressive, in your face.

But like I said, there are times when people have made it work for the themes of the story, and many of my favorite directors favor the wide end of the lens spectrum (Polanski, Welles, Kubrick, Spielberg, Gilliam, Jeneut, Frankenheimer).

I tend to favor the middle focal lengths for most productions -- for example, on "Big Love" we tend to use a 35mm lens for Steadicam shots, rather than the more typical 24 to 29mm. This is partly because it is more flattering to the actors when shooting semi-close at some point in the move. But one of the directors on the show that I worked with favored wider-angle lenses in general so we did a little more of that type of shooting on his episode.

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Point of information: to my knowledge there is roughly a 1.6 conversion factor with the Mysterium chip @4K. Evin or one of the other lens mavens posted a chart about 3 months ago if you want some details.

I have been assuming that a 15mm lens on the RedOne will feel like a 23mm and that the 18-50 CF zoom will convert to a 29-80 which is a very useful range IMHO.

If I have this wrong someone jump in and correct me, but if this magnification factor is approximately correct it might influence this discussion rather profoundly.

[Michael Lindsay]

I think it also depends on how often people will be using the 2K windowed mode, in which case they will be more likely to want something wider than 18mm.



It is interesting that you mention 2k windowed as a reason for the 15mm... It is partly because of my expectation that I will end up often shooting 2k windowed that I feel an 18mm that matches the other primes in aperture would be a major benefit.. If I'm shooting s16 I will probably need 3 lens wider than 25mm and would rather not have a 2.8 lens in there (unless it was at the super wide end). Especially when the only easily available lens that you could augment the set with are f1.2 (Super Speeds or maybe the Optar lens??)..

Also 25 to 15 is a big jump .. I accept it is a jump many are going to want especially if they are used to sub 5mm focal lengths on 2/3 of an inch cameras and want to go 'wide' with a 35m imager

I'm hoping that the red primes both turn out to be amazing and grow into slightly fuller sets... a couple of macros and a 100/135/180mm with great minum focus and 3 wider super16 lens would be great additions for 2008/09..

In some ways I'm more desperate to test red lens than the actual camera.. I suppose I've accepted that they can deliver a 4k motion imager at a spectacular price that will be able to work for me.. I'd initially assumed I'd have to stump up in a really painful for lens. Red's lens announcements has left me confused and optimistic. I've spent more time than is healthy talking with people about the 'made in England' red lens rumours...

regards

Michael

PS does anyone have concrete experiences they'd like to share about Optar Ilumina lens??

[David Mullen ASC]

Point of information: to my knowledge there is roughly a 1.6 conversion factor with the Mysterium chip @4K. Evin or one of the other lens mavens posted a chart about 3 months ago if you want some details.

I have been assuming that a 15mm lens on the RedOne will feel like a 23mm

The conversion factor is only if your frame of reference is 8-perf 35mm still camera photography. If you are used to shooting in 35mm cine, like Super-35, then you are already familiar with the field of views of an 18mm, etc. because the RED sensor is about the same size as the Super-35 cine frame.

[Alexander Nikishin]

I've spent more time than is healthy talking with people about the 'made in England' red lens rumours...

That's no rumor, I without a doubt read "Made in the UK" stamped on the bottom end of the 18-50 shown at NAB.

[Matthew Rogers]

The conversion factor is only if your frame of reference is 8-perf 35mm still camera photography. If you are used to shooting in 35mm cine, like Super-35, then you are already familiar with the field of views of an 18mm, etc. because the RED sensor is about the same size as the Super-35 cine frame.

The whole mm with field of view issue has really confused me with the Red. My understanding, was that because it was a 35mm sized chip, that the mm you see on the lens really should be the same mm "field of view" that you are use to with a 35mm camera. (of course, I have no experience because I am coming from the video world.) I guess my question is, how wide is 18mm really on the Red with a "red lens"? I will be shooting allot of corporate stuff, which means I need a wide lens for b-roll footage, so I want to be sure I am getting what I need.

Matthew

[chuck colburn]

Your just confusing a 35mm still camera with a S35mm cine camera. They are not the same diagonal of frame.

[Alexander Nikishin]

http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/2897/formatssmallvl2.png (http://imageshack.us)

[Alexander Nikishin]

I guess my question is, how wide is 18mm really on the Red with a "red lens"?

The same as a Zeiss 18mm on a S35 film camera would be.

Go to your nearest film supply shop and check out a Mark V Director's Viewfinder if you need an example.

[David Mullen ASC]

The whole mm with field of view issue has really confused me with the Red. My understanding, was that because it was a 35mm sized chip, that the mm you see on the lens really should be the same mm "field of view" that you are use to with a 35mm camera. (of course, I have no experience because I am coming from the video world.)

A 35mm cine camera, not a 35mm still camera...

If you're used to shooting 2/3" CCD video with B4 mount lenses, the conversion factor is 2.5X, so a 7.5mm lens in 2/3" CCD would give you the same FOV of an 18mm on the RED/Super-35.

If you're used to shooting 1/3" CCD video, then it would be a 5X conversion, so 3.75mm would be the equivalent on a 1/3" CCD video camera as the 18mm on a RED camera.

In other words, 18mm is fairly wide-angle.

However, if you shoot in 2K windowed mode, then an 18mm is not so wide-angle.

[Eric MacIver]

I agree with the 15mm wider angle perhaps helping in windowed mode, and I'd love to see the 15mm stay as an available lens, but I'm just talking about having a matched set of lenses...

I also generally stay with longer lenses, and usually am using super speeds where the 18 is a bit softer than the 24mm. However, there are times (in tight spaces where I still need some degree of a master shot) where I need that wider lens, and I'd like to get the widest I can while matching the rest of my set.

If I'm also having to shoot wide open I'd hate to have to light to a 2.8 just because I am having to use the wide. Whereas I'd otherwise only have to do a 2.0.

[Nick Shaw]

That's no rumor, I without a doubt read "Made in the UK" stamped on the bottom end of the 18-50 shown at NAB.

I wonder if that means that there is any possibility of those of us who live in the UK receiving our lenses without them making a return trip to the US – thus saving on import duty (if applicable) and maybe delivery costs?

[Costelloe Michael]

Nick,

Do you have a notion of which manufacturer could cooke up such a lense? Sorry for the typo! It does however beg the question of how any company could make these high quality lenses so cheaply... economies of scale?

[Stephen Williams]

Nick,

Do you have a notion of which manufacturer could cooke up such a lense? Sorry for the typo! It does however beg the question of how any company could make these high quality lenses so cheaply... economies of scale?

Hi,

AFAIK there is only 1 lens manufacture in the UK. Economics of scale would be the answer IMHO.

Stephen

[Finner]

Stephen which one is this? Cooke & ziess are german made, right? I don't know of any UK lense manufacture plant?

[Sanjin Jukic]

QUOTE:
"In 2002, the first Cooke lens made for large format photography in 50 years is designed and made in Leicester.
The new Cooke Portrait PS945 lens for 4x5 format photography is a modern reproduction of the vintage
Pinkham & Smith Company's Visual Quality Series IV lens. The first lens of its type is a 229mm,
f/4.5. serial no. 0001 is auctioned at Christie's in South Kensington, London on July 16, 2002 to the highest bidder for 3500 GBP."

http://www.cookeoptics.com/cooke.nsf/history_cooke_s4i.jpg

Cooke S4/i Lens with "Intelligence"

Cooke Optics Ltd.
Cooke Close
Thurmaston
Leicester, LE4 8PT
United Kingdom


LINK>>
http://www.cookeoptics.com/cooke.nsf/history/2000

[Finner]

That makes a lot of sense then as the red lenses I held at NAB reminded me a lot of cookes.