Red Zooms - who is producing these lenses

[Martin Ludwig]

heard some rumours from people who has some good connections to the lens manufacturers that the RED zooms seem to be from Sigma - rehoused and redesigned anywhere in the states. any comments on this?

[chuck colburn]

Actually they are being made by Bausch & Lomb in a sub basement of the Luxor Hotel in Vegas. At least that's what I heard.

[Greg Voevodsky]

A small UK company named Cooke. Sigma would be a joke. You can read the press releases about Cooke and Red. The reason why Red's lenses are inexpensive is that they are not as fast and they are being made in volume.

[Evin Grant]

Ludmux, Red has stated, on the lenses themselves that they are made in Engalnd. Where exactly the optics are being sourced from is something only a handfull of people know, and they aren't telling. Quite a few optics houses have the resources to produce OEM optics for Red including Cooke, Cosina (Who is making the ZF series for Zeiss), Sigma, Thales(Angenieux) or Tokina. I don't mention Nikon, Canon, Zeiss or Leica though because IMHO these companies have too much brand recognitiong and/or other affiliations (Sony/Panasonic) to make OEM glass for Red. I looked into this a bit and I think your friends observation may come from the coinsidence that Sigma makes two still camera zooms that match the focal lenths of the two Red zooms. 18-50 2.8 and 50-150 2.8. Although it seems more likely a coinsidence that two very useful zoom ranges are represented in both product lines for a similar format, it also seems from reviews around the net that both Sigma zooms are very good performers and either way Red will make sure we are very happy with the results. In the end all that matters is whats up on the screen in 4K.

[Corrado Silveri]

I've read here on Reduser that someone have seen a "Made in UK" sign on the Red lenses.
Cooke (I think) is UK based.
Btw, I hope the lenses are made and engineered with the same effort of the camera body. Don't mind about the nationality or the "pedigree"...

[Mark Mannschreck]

I'm crossing my fingers for Cooke... The Sigma DC/EX zooms sounded like too much of a coincidence BUT the Sigma "DC" lenses have no aperture collar like the "G" Nikon lenses. Although I suppose you could build one during a complete re-housing?

[chuck colburn]

England has always been a center for optical devices. Companies such as Ealing, Beck etc. have produced some of the most precision optical mechanical devices ever made. Just because it says made in England does not mean that the componets weren't sourced from other countries. In some countries only the actuall assembly (and not necessarly all of it) has to be
done there for it to qualifiy as being "Made in"

[PaulClements]

Well there was a company registered as limited in the UK: Red Ltd - Company No. 06267283

Interestingly it was registered on 04/06/2007 - That's 4th June 07 as it's the british display of dates.

It might just be someone coining in on Red or it might be a division of Red based in the UK, and the only viable reason for that would be to manufacture lenses. Perhaps they are using individuals from Cooke to create the lenses, or maybe Jim's poached a few of the UK's best glass experts and formed a company.

If anyone lives near Harley Street London, pop into No. 29 suite B and ask them if they are Red's Lens division or if they know who's making them!!!

[chuck colburn]

Paul,

That's your job.
If you "popped" in thru my front door with the expression on your face in your avatar I'd probally tell you anything you wanted to know! lol

Chuck

[PaulClements]

Yeah but they'd tell me what I want to know... not necessarily the truth lol

[Erik Widding]

Sigma would be a joke.

Who do you think used to make most of the 35mm lenses in the world? :sarcasm:

Don't know what the numbers are now, but at one point Sigma made a majority of the 35mm camera lenses in the world. Most selling under such brand names as Canon and Nikon. Not just the cheap stuff, either. It is only more recently (last decade, give or take) that Canon started making all of their own glass.

If I needed some custom glass, in quantity, Sigma is the first company I would talk to. But you all know my company's philosophy when it comes to lenses... why do custom, when there is already so much great glass available off the shelf.:innocent:

[donatello b]

there are not that many company's that make lens ...
so how many lens makers are there in UK ?

Les Zellan was in the RED NAB booth for hours with HUGE smile on his face ..
Les Zellen was at RED screening at CineGear sitting with huge smile ?
perhaps Les just likes hanging out at RED all the time ..and he's happy all the time ??
IMO Les knows who makes RED lens ...

[Laco Zamba]

If RED lenses are made in UK (still speculation), do we have to pay import duty in EU?

[Mark Mannschreck]

Les Zellan was in the RED NAB booth for hours with HUGE smile on his face ..
Les Zellen was at RED screening at CineGear sitting with huge smile ?
perhaps Les just likes hanging out at RED all the time ..and he's happy all the time ??
IMO Les knows who makes RED lens ...

Is this true? I never saw him at NAB... But then again I have no idea what he looks like.

[Matt Uhry]

Maybe it's Sigma elements / design rehoused by Cooke, JDC, or someone else in the UK. Sigma glass, at least in the EX line can be quite good quality I think. You can't judge it by the bad $70 plastic barreled Sigma lens of 10 years ago....

I expect the Red lenses to be decent and a good value for the money. If you are in a high performance at any cost state of mind there already are some good options, from Arri/Zeiss, Cooke, and Angenieux. But be ready to spend some serious bucks - and please don't whine about it, it's very expensive to design and make low volume, high precision things.

I'd be happy to meet up with someone from team Red and give the 18-50 lens a once over, either under NDA or do a little reduser write up on it.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Stephen Williams]

If RED lenses are made in UK (still speculation), do we have to pay import duty in EU?

Hi,

Yes, you are buying them from Red, so they will be imported from the USA.

Stephen

[Adrian T.]

Quote from here (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=60529&postcount=174):

Q15. Who makes the lenses?
Ted [Schilowitz]: We have partners. If you know optics and you know lenses, these were made in the England. Grin…….

Nuff said... :biggrin:

[filip kovcin]

Hi,

Yes, you are buying them from Red, so they will be imported from the USA.

Stephen

[this is my first message here, (sorry for my english)]

does this means that red is buying/producing these lenses in UK and of course is paying all tax/custom duties to import it from UK to USA, and then - the final user - if from europe - will pay duties AGAIN because the product is imported from USA, despite it's european origin. maybe open minded people from red can find a way to cross over that double import duties issue.

filip

[PaulClements]

There is one point that I've brought up before about Cooke making the glass:

Since Cooke Optics is a limited company their accounts are available through companies house which means that payment from Red or a Jannard owned company of some sort will likely show up in the near future.

If Cooke foresee a problem with people knowing Red Lenses are made by them then I don't think they'll be directly making them, perhaps a division of Cooke. If Cooke didn't see a problem then they wouldn't be disguising the matter. I've spoken to a couple of people from Cooke and both denied Cooke are making them catagorically, and stated that many people have asked them.

My money is on Jim and Les Zellan setting up a UK based Red Lens company which uses the skills and expertise of Cooke employees for mutual benefit. That way Cooke can say they are not making the lenses and not offend their client base with a cheaper lens set and Jim and Co. can tentatively link Cooke to their lens production. Best of both worlds no one gets stung.

[Stephen Williams]

Hi,

Paying lots of taxes/duties is what international business is all about!

Stephen


[this is my first message here, (sorry for my english)]

does this means that red is buying/producing these lenses in UK and of course is paying all tax/custom duties to import it from UK to USA, and then - the final user - if from europe - will pay duties AGAIN because the product is imported from USA, despite it's european origin. maybe open minded people from red can find a way to cross over that double import duties issue.

filip

[Emanuel A.]

You said all Stephen!

[Harry Lipnick]

Not to mention didn't I read somewhere that Red lenses are going to use "/i" technology. That's the metadata mechanism invented by, who else, Cooke. Of course they could have just liscenced the technology, but I'd say that sure adds some steam to the Cooke argument.
Peace,

-Harry

[laguun]

it will be quite interesting to see how much marketshare red optics will take in the 35mm domain.

if red successfully completes is manufacturing plan, they will be from #0 to #1 in 35mm cameras, probably for units and revenue. however, i doubt that this will become a hattrick and that they won´t repeat the same huge success with lenses, as a) there are many options besides red in lower and higher end, b) while the camera is somewhat revolutionary, the lenses so far mainly have a very good price/performance but don´t outclass the competition.

anyhow, whoever builts the lenses for red will have a nice expansion in units.

[PaulClements]

...the lenses so far mainly have a very good price/performance but don´t outclass the competition.

To be fair that's only speculation, other than the speed. There isn't any evidence either way. What's to say the glass won't outperform it's competition? Ok so spending $50-$60k on a zoom compared to $6-$9k shouts the latter would be poorer, yet here is a company that looks set to have built one of the best digital cinema cameras to date, and low and behold it costs 10x less than it's competitors. Furthermore many of those competitors laughed at the idea of a quality camera in that pricerange just as I'm sure many of the lens manufacturers laugh at the idea of quality lenses in that price range.

I'm not saying they are better, I'm simply not saying they are worse than anything out there because no one has evidence to suggest either way. You never know, if Red do to the lens market what they have done to the camera market there could be a few pissed off lens manufacturers, and if Cooke were wise enough to foresee Jim's intentions and jump on the bandwagon before the shit hit the fan then more credit to them.

[laguun]

To be fair that's only speculation, other than the speed. There isn't any evidence either way. What's to say the glass won't outperform it's competition?

if we assume that the optical quality of red lenses is excellent, and the few shots we have seen indicate this, the speeds, focal lenghts of red zooms and red primes are still below the competition of angenieux, cooke and zeiss.

The reds have 3x zoom, ranging 18-50 and 50-150, angenieux has many options more, 10x and 12x 35mm ranging 24-290, or the elder 25-250.
There are leightweight 26x zooms (7.8-208) at F2 and 40x zooms from them as well.

The red primes start at 1.9/2.8, the zeiss at 1.2/1.3.





Ok so spending $50-$60k on a zoom compared to $6-$9k shouts the latter would be poorer, yet here is a company that looks set to have built one of the best digital cinema cameras to date, and low and behold it costs 10x less than it's competitors. Furthermore many of those competitors laughed at the idea of a quality camera in that pricerange just as I'm sure many of the lens manufacturers laugh at the idea of quality lenses in that price range.

Don´t get me wrong - reds offers are excellent, but while the camera is better in techspecs and price, the lenses are only better in price, but not in techspecs.




I'm not saying they are better, I'm simply not saying they are worse than anything out there because no one has evidence to suggest either way.

The red lenses have an excellent price/performance, however they -are- worse in speed and range than the existing ultra-top-end.



You never know, if Red do to the lens market what they have done to the camera market there could be a few pissed off lens manufacturers, and if Cooke were wise enough to foresee Jim's intentions and jump on the bandwagon before the shit hit the fan then more credit to them.
I sure hope so, and already the announced lenses are great, however red doesn´t offer the maximum performance on the market for lenses, different from their camera.

[Evin Grant]

Speed doesn't always equal performance, and given Reds prodigious light gathering and low noise charachteristics, coupled with the daunting task of focusing 4K accurately you have to wonder if T1.3 is really that important any more? I have a feeling we'll all be shoting in the f4-5.6 range for all but lock offs. And even then f1.9/T2.1 should be plenty. I'll still have some fast Nikkors up my sleve but for bread and butter shooting the Red primes should be plenty fast. And BTW the top end Cooke S4 series are all T2.

[donatello b]

"however they -are- worse in speed and range than the existing ultra-top-end."

i sure wouldn't use the word "worse" - they are slower but that doesn't make them worse & they are shorter zooms then other zooms out there but that doesn't make em worse - only shorter ... if RED can deliver images at ASA 1000 then T3 & T2 ( or 2.1) doesn't seem so slow ... the red primes T stop are very close to the zeiss ultra primes, standard primes & cookes S4's ...

each zoom range has it's own like/dislike ... 18-50 vs. 18-100 ...i see like & dislike in either ...
24-290 great range (like) and then the weight (dislike) - strickly a tripod lens...for me, a must have AC carrying the whole camera w/lens ( you will not see me attempting to pick up camera/lens) ...

like the ang15-40mm and dislike the price ( including rental price) ...

lets not forget the minolta 17-35mm lens ( approx $1400 new) that was rehoused and sold for 23K - it's available at many of the big rental houses ..
does the 23k make it a much better image then when it was $1400 ?

if sony was marketing RED it would be priced alot higher then their F23 and we'd all be posting on the HVX or some other board.

many lens manufacturers buy there glass from the same manufacturers ..

remember Avid didn't lead the way to affordable NLE's .. they followed up out with several products to compete with FCP and other NLE's and drop prices all around ... IMO 35mm lens manufacturers will be dropping their price if they want to sell some lens to REDs ( us) ... ...

[PaulClements]

Evin and Donatello kind of summed up my thinking. The point of the Red lenses are that they are designed with the camera in mind. Perhaps they have forgone making the primes 1.2/1.3 because they can get better optical performance from the lens, less CA, less distortion etc etc, and they feel that the sensor's capabilities will allow for shooting in low light rather than relying on faster T stops.

Having more lens options is a fair point, but I dare say there are a great many films that could be shot with just the two zooms or prime set Red have announced. Furthermore I'd be suprised if Red stops after producing the current lineup.

Focal lengths of the shortest optimo and the Cooke CXX zooms are 15-40mm - Can one define them as better than the shortest Red zoom focal length because they are 3mm wider, even though the Red zoom gives you an extra 10mm?

My point still remains though because I don't personally rate a lens as being better purely because it has a faster T-Stop. Until the Red lenses are tested against others on the market saying they are better or worse is fruitless because no one knows.

My belief is that they would be hard pushed to better what is on the market, my hope is they will, but until I see trustworthy tests or I get to compare them side by side myself I will personally reserve judgement.

[laguun]

i sure wouldn't use the word "worse" - they are slower but that doesn't make them worse & they are shorter zooms then other zooms out there but that doesn't make em worse - only shorter ...

shorter and slower, than the existing options - however at much lower price as well.



if RED can deliver images at ASA 1000 then T3 & T2 ( or 2.1) doesn't seem so slow ... the red primes T stop are very close to the zeiss ultra primes, standard primes & cookes S4's ...

i agree, however, the master primes are between 0.7 and 1.6 f-stops faster, and thats my whole point: red offerings are great, but in lenses they are, specwise, not the best, only very good.

one example: when we talk with our customers about the camera, they are quite interested as the red one offers many unique advances in quality (4K), ergonomics (light, compact, no moving parts) and creativity (digital 120p @ 35mm dof). When we speak about the lenses, then there are no such breakthroughs, only very good, but not surpassing the competition - besides the excellent price.



each zoom range has it's own like/dislike ... 18-50 vs. 18-100 ...i see like & dislike in either ...
24-290 great range (like) and then the weight (dislike) - strickly a tripod lens...

the 25-250 then would be the lens of choice, at ~4kg , while the 24-290 is at ~11kg.



for me, a must have AC carrying the whole camera w/lens ( you will not see me attempting to pick up camera/lens) ...

yeah, the 7.8-203f2.2 (1.86kg) has become our workhorse for these scenarios.



lets not forget the minolta 17-35mm lens ( approx $1400 new) that was rehoused and sold for 23K - it's available at many of the big rental houses ..
does the 23k make it a much better image then when it was $1400 ?

i think we will basicly see four segments in the market:
a) photoglass, rehoused/assisted by peripherals for the best bargain
b) s16 & 2/3 for highspeed 60/120p as well as handheld & eng
c) 35mm regular use, i suppose here will be the sweetspot for red (and used 35mm glass)
d) 35mm top-end/budget doesn´t matter class, i suppose zeiss/angenieux/cooke will be remaining dominant there for quite some time.



if sony was marketing RED it would be priced alot higher then their F23 and we'd all be posting on the HVX or some other board.

Having invested $$$.$$$ in complete hdcam workflows from lens/cameras/nles/vcrs/class 1 monitors, i agree.
However there are many buyers of red i know who don´t upgrade from hvx, but crossgrade from 35mm and/or hdcam - and those are the ones which often already have excellent glass in use and/or possession.



remember Avid didn't lead the way to affordable NLE's .. they followed up out with several products to compete with FCP and other NLE's and drop prices all around ... IMO 35mm lens manufacturers will be dropping their price if they want to sell some lens to REDs ( us) ... ...
I wish you are right, however, i suppose that a large chunk of the commercial market demand will stay with the "best of the best" lens category if the difference is only $.$$$ or $$.$$$. AE/combustion/shake/fusion/nuke/color/speedgrade etc do exist, but so do smoke/flame, ds, scratch/clipster, pablo/iq etc.

for the last 10-15% performance, you usually pay 100-150% more, and these markets do exist, especially in moviemaking.

Furthermore,
- many of the top-lens manufacturers are sold out on their top 35mm product lines (angenieux for sure is) at the current price point and would make less profit -and- revenue when lowering prices
- many rental houses have existing 35mm lenses, which have been paid for and can react with rental prices, if price and not specs decide the deal
- better f/t-stops results often in less necessary light, so a faster lens often is cheaper to rent than the additional light
- DPs can be pretty conservative: shooting digital, electronic viewfinders etc are still a mayor change some of them in their working experience, so expect many DPs who "at least" want to stay with -exactly- the lens they know/want/are used to.

[laguun]

My belief is that they would be hard pushed to better what is on the market, my hope is they will, but until I see trustworthy tests or I get to compare them side by side myself I will personally reserve judgement.
yeah - i am only talking techspecs right now, and judgement day is when serial production red lenses can be evaluated.

[Costelloe Michael]

My money is on Jim and Les Zellan setting up a UK based Red Lens company which uses the skills and expertise of Cooke employees for mutual benefit. That way Cooke can say they are not making the lenses and not offend their client base with a cheaper lens set and Jim and Co. can tentatively link Cooke to their lens production. Best of both worlds no one gets stung.

Paul,

This is a really good point. With the fall of VFG last year and the amalgamation of Sammies and several other companies into PV over the preceeding years there were an awful lot of previously staff lense technicians floating around. It would be easy to put a 'sideline company' together to increase productivity :wink:

Maybe the fact that they are slower than the 'top quality' competition points to the marketing needs of the company that make them. By this I mean that if you wanted cheaper lenses buy Red, but if you want faster lenses buy Cooke! That way you don't replicate your market, if Cooke are involved that is!

BTW As far as Zeiss super speeds are concerned, who make there lenses to T1.3 I love the way they flare, if that's the look I'm after, but give me slower S4's at T2 anyday.

Mike C

[Costelloe Michael]

[QUOTE=donatello;62528IMO 35mm lens manufacturers will be dropping their price if they want to sell some lens to REDs ( us) ... ...[/QUOTE]

Hey Donatello,


Don't underestimate the ability of the market to stick it's head in the sand and work off perceived status. Skoda are owned by VW but I know which one would be more popular and that's not down to price.

Have you ever used the Frazier lense? A very specialised lense that earnt it's maker academy status for it's design. BUT you should see the look on the technician's faces when it comes out on commercials. Hundred's of thousands of £'s of kit, full crane rigs, 35mm cameras, steadicam etc, and this lense is supplied with standard still's lenses on the front of the Frazier attachment! :whistling:

Red seems to be creating a market for people who either want to step up from HDV and are sort of 'prosumers' by definition and a core of HD ready industry professionals who want to be free from the limitations of the larger companies' marketing strategies, DCT etc. I think the rest of the industry will stand by and watch the spectacle unfold, whilst hammering away at alternative strategies in the backrooms to exploit this market!

Mike C

[Stephen Williams]

Hi,

High end motion picture lenses hardly breathe at all, this IMHO is probably by far the more important factor for people who have been working with such lenses.
People coming form an ENG background don't seem too concerned.

Stephen

[martinnoweck]

Paul,

That's your job.
If you "popped" in thru my front door with the expression on your face in your avatar I'd probally tell you anything you wanted to know! lol

Chuck

LOL
martin

[Hans von Sonntag]

Hi,

High end motion picture lenses hardly breathe at all, this IMHO is probably by far the more important factor for people who have been working with such lenses.
People coming form an ENG background don't seem too concerned.

Stephen


Yes. Your right.
Also there was this f-stop, t-stop debate... It all depends where RED wants to position their lenses in the market. Since a Red zoom is very short in range compared to ENG zooms they are not build for ENG. Even for highend documentary I find the ranges to short. A S16/HD option will be more satisfying.

Feature film (cinema / TV), commercials, high end corporate, this is the typical range of application for RED lenses, zooms and primes. Of course, there is the independet filmmaker but this market is small and not "rich" at all. They will find RED lenses expensive and might go the photo lens route.

Thus, RED lenses have to face Zeiss, Cooke and Angenieux in a market which is used to expensive high-end glas and where people usually rent - so the price of the lenses relativise but performance not.

Since choosing a lens is a very personal, creative decision I will wait with any comment on quality, usability, look and feel until I worked with them.

Generally it's great to have a new kid on the block, might become your best friend!


Hans

[Emanuel & Co]

Of course, there is the independet filmmaker but this market is small and not "rich" at all. They will find RED lenses expensive and might go the photo lens route.
Yes, but this will be a natural market for the RED zoom lenses granted its typical purchaser.

Its share will be more than 51%, that is, more than everyone else including high-end (used to rent not to buy).

That's for sure!

[laguun]

Yes, but this will be a natural market for the RED zoom lenses granted its typical purchaser.
Its share will be more than 51%, that is, more than everyone else including high-end (used to rent not to buy).
That's for sure!

Possible, and i wish Red all success in reaching an excellent marketshare with their lenses as well. In the 35mm camera segment they became marketleader overnight.

However, i wouldn´t even bet on 20% 35mm optical yet.

It -might- be different, if red decides to sell all/most of their primes single, not only the 300mm. $20.000 is certainly to much for many of the fellow redusers who are moving up from the hdv/dvcpro hd/p2 segment.

furthermore it will be -highly- interesting to see which quality the 2/3 optical adapter offers. If this solution offers a good or even excellent image, then many buyers (the ones who extend from hdcam/viper/varicams) will have lenses from the getgo.

Another quite deciding point is how panavision will decide to face the challenge. If they decide to embrace Red (if you can´t beat them, join´em) as they already did with hdcam & sony, and "panavise" the Reds mount, there will be a -huge- inventory of panavision glass available for rental.

[laguun]

Hi,
High end motion picture lenses hardly breathe at all, this IMHO is probably by far the more important factor for people who have been working with such lenses.
Stephen
You are right, however some of the actual angenieux cinema lenses do still breathe quite a bit...



People coming form an ENG background don't seem too concerned.

The ENG people, and highly experienced motion picture DP/AC teams who started working in 60/ties/70ties/80ties/90ties seem somewhat more unimpressed by breathing.

[Stephen Williams]

You are right, however some of the actual angenieux cinema lenses do still breathe quite a bit...


The ENG people, and highly experienced motion picture DP/AC teams who started working in 60/ties/70ties/80ties/90ties seem somewhat more unimpressed by breathing.

Hi,

Shorter Motion Picture Zooms 5:1 or less tend to have very little breathing. 10:1 and longer tend to breath rather more.

They may be unimpressed with ENG style lenses, but they buy them because they are short & light.
I had the dubious pleasure of testing a F900R with an ENG zoom for a pitch I was shooting last night. I ended up getting out a film camera, even if I have to pay some money myself for processing I want to win! The other DP pitching is shooting on HDV.

Stephen

[laguun]

Hi,
Shorter Motion Picture Zooms 5:1 or less tend to have very little breathing. 10:1 and longer tend to breath rather more.

yeah.
we mainly have the longer angenieux and they do breathe. not terrible, but they do.



They may be unimpressed with ENG style lenses, but they buy them because they are short & light.
I had the dubious pleasure of testing a F900R with an ENG zoom for a pitch I was shooting last night.

most of the recent movies and work we have done has a high or even mayor share of eng/efp lenses. the imagequality of those efp/eng lenses has become pretty good, and that is the cruicial point for us. here and there digiprimes are used, but meanwhile we mostly use the zooms.

its one of the reasons why we are very interested in red and digital 35mm - finally we can use our 16/35mm PL glass again for the mayority of our work, which has become digital and saw 35mm film fading into minority.



I ended up getting out a film camera, even if I have to pay some money myself for processing I want to win! The other DP pitching is shooting on HDV.
Stephen
fingers crossed, hopefully the client will have a decent monitoring to spot the weaknesses in the hdv footage.

[Stephen Williams]

.

fingers crossed, hopefully the client will have a decent monitoring to spot the weaknesses in the hdv footage.

Hi,

I am going to pay for a small cinema, the HDV footage can be digitally projected on the domestic projector they use for commercials, my footage will be contact printed from the 35mm neg.

Stephen

[laguun]

Hi,
I am going to pay for a small cinema, the HDV footage can be digitally projected on the domestic projector they use for commercials, my footage will be contact printed from the 35mm neg.
Stephen

that should give you a good headstart :)

- if they have a good dci compliant digital beamer, it will expose the weaknesses in the hdv.
- if they have a bad beamer, it will look ugly as well

;)

[Steve Gibby]

red offerings are great, but in lenses they are, specwise, not the best, only very good.

Shouldn’t that judgment be reserved until after RED lenses ship and are tested? If a lower T stop number is the only determination of the quality of a lens, then we are to ignore the other factors in lens quality – MTF, CA, bokeh, falloff, etc, etc., etc.?



one example: when we talk with our customers about the camera, they are quite interested as the red one offers many unique advances in quality (4K), ergonomics (light, compact, no moving parts) and creativity (digital 120p @ 35mm dof). When we speak about the lenses, then there are no such breakthroughs, only very good, but not surpassing the competition - besides the excellent price.

How do your customers know that at this point, before the RED lenses ship and are tested? If their opinions (and yours) on the quality of RED lenses are just based on T stop numbers, and the RED lenses have not been tested, how do your customers (and you) draw an educated opinion on that?


i think we will basicly see four segments in the market:
a) photoglass, rehoused/assisted by peripherals for the best bargain
b) s16 & 2/3 for highspeed 60/120p as well as handheld & eng
c) 35mm regular use, i suppose here will be the sweetspot for red (and used 35mm glass)
d) 35mm top-end/budget doesn´t matter class, i suppose zeiss/angenieux/cooke will be remaining dominant there for quite some time.

I think you have some good points in there, but:

Why use the term “eng” (electronic news gathering)? ENG will be an extremely limited market for RED One (some b-roll, etc.). It is EFP (electronic field production) that is IMO the single largest potential market for RED One, specifically non-hardlined EFP. If you’re not familiar with the difference between EFP and ENG, I’ve summarized and described them in my sticky on the EFP and ENG for RED forum. Link: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1105

Again, shouldn’t the judgment in your categories “c” and “d” be reserved until RED lenses ship and are tested? I’ve seen in 4k resolution, the results of the RED 300mm lens, and I was pleasantly surprised by what I saw. If Mark Nevaldine, Steven Soderbergh, and others are now beta testing the RED 18-50 CF zoom, and stating that they really liked the results, I think those educated opinions signal that the RED lenses are very good quality - and again that T stop numbers don’t tell the whole story when judging a lens.



I wish you are right, however, i suppose that a large chunk of the commercial market demand will stay with the "best of the best" lens category if the difference is only $.$$$ or $$.$$$. AE/combustion/shake/fusion/nuke/color/speedgrade etc do exist, but so do smoke/flame, ds, scratch/clipster, pablo/iq etc.

Yes, but budgets are budgets. A penny saved is a penny earned. Producers set goals for quality, but each project is budget driven. In a convergent motion media industry there are vast numbers of workers who don’t come from a tradition-bound film industry, but rather a more budget-conscious EFP and digital photography industry – and they represent the largest single consumer demographic for RED products.


for the last 10-15% performance, you usually pay 100-150% more, and these markets do exist, especially in moviemaking.

It’s not the end viewer who is demanding that last 10-15% performance – it’s certain perfectionist directors, DPs, and cinematographers. In a vertical distribution model of this century, that ranges form big screen down to iPod, with the majority revenue for most productions being from ancillary streams, the need for that last 10-15% has essentially evaporated. If the end viewer isn’t demanding that last 10-15%, but only a few crew members, than economics will certainly be a key consideration by budget-conscious producers – and again, who’s to say the RED lenses won’t get you that last 10-15% in performance until they’ve been shipped and tested – unless of course you’re measuring lens performance on T stop numbers only.


- many of the top-lens manufacturers are sold out on their top 35mm product lines (angenieux for sure is) at the current price point and would make less profit -and- revenue when lowering prices.

The lens market is dynamic, and subject to the influence of economies of scale, micro-economics, and macro-economics. Just as top camera manufacturers have had to come to the realization that RED One will change the dynamic of the D-cinema and EFP camera market, top lens manufacturers need to realize the RED lenses will change the dynamic of the 35mm lens market. A line of high quality, affordable S35mm lenses has never existed – and in this case they are being designed and optimized for digital imaging. If cinematographers end up getting great images with RED lenses, that satisfy their most demanding imaging needs, then wouldn’t that affect the price point of both used and new top lens manufacturer’s products?


- many rental houses have existing 35mm lenses, which have been paid for and can react with rental prices, if price and not specs decide the deal.

True, and they are always interested in maximizing their investment in legacy equipment. But its still a dynamic industry, and at some point customer demand for certain products will force rental houses to turn over their old equipment and invest in newer equipment when customers are asking for it. If RED lenses test well, and they’re obviously affordable, then I would guess that rental customers will be asking for RED lenses, and the old rate model of exorbitant rental prices for “top level” lenses could begin to crumble.


- better f/t-stops results often in less necessary light, so a faster lens often is cheaper to rent than the additional light.

But how about the results of RED’s recent ISO tests? The Mysterium sensor is obviously very sensitive and can be pushed without significant noise in the images. That should enable shooting in low light situations with no additional light. That also could change the need (and thus rental demand) for faster lenses in many situations. Shooting wide open and hyper-shallow DOF gets a lot of press, but the fact remains that the vast majority of shots across both the cine style and EFP style industries are at medium DOF, with hyper shallow and deep DOF shots being necessary, but in the minority. The RED lenses should be fast enough to achieve all but the shallowest of DOF requirements.


- DPs can be pretty conservative: shooting digital, electronic viewfinders etc are still a mayor change some of them in their working experience, so expect many DPs who "at least" want to stay with -exactly- the lens they know/want/are used to.

RED One is closest in technology to a DSLR, followed by a video camera, and only remotely related in technology to a film camera, with most of that being in lenses. The EFP industry dwarfs the film and D-cinema industries in terms of sheer numbers of productions worldwide each year, and the number of workers employed. Rental houses need to realize that the single largest purchase and rental market for RED one and RED lenses is the worldwide EFP industry. Conservative film industry DPs who are grudgingly adopting digital technology, represent and extreme minority of the potential purchase and rental market for RED One and RED lenses. Yes, they will change slowly for many factors, but they’re just the tip of the RED sales and rental iceberg, with the remainder of that iceberg being the giant numbers of adopters from the EFP industry, DSLR industry, and progressive-thinking film industry people.

[Steve Gibby]

Hi,

High end motion picture lenses hardly breathe at all, this IMHO is probably by far the more important factor for people who have been working with such lenses.
People coming form an ENG background don't seem too concerned.

Stephen

Yes, low breathing is a priority for traditional cine-style shooters. If you’ve tested RED lenses and can give us some details about their breathing or lack thereof, then how about posting that data. I’m assuming you haven’t, so why the foregone conclusion that “high end motion picture” lenses breath less?

High-end motion pictures are but one of many genres of cine style and EFP style productions that RED One and RED lenses will be used in. I think your post reflects an elitist position, the typical traditionalist film industry attitude of “We’re the real professionals because we shoot high end motion pictures and film, and the those ENG guys invading our workspace are a bunch of aesthetically-challenged, non-artistic, automatic feature using oafs who simply point cameras at things without trying to achieve good quality images”. IMO your sarcastic statement belongs on one of the territorialistic cinematography boards – not here on RED User where professionals are converging from cine style, EFP style, and the still photography industries.

Your generalization about “ENG” people is ludicrous. Lumping ENG in with EFP is also ridiculous. Firstly, ENG is “electronic news gathering”. RED One will be used in ENG only for very limited use – for some b-roll, and few other limited uses. RED One will be used for a vast number of EFP (electronic field production) genres and productions, usually non-hardlined, but also some significant numbers of hardlined EFP. In fact, the EFP industry is the largest industry in motion media production, and easily the largest market for RED One cameras and RED lenses. ENG is a tiny niche within the overall EFP industry, and the number of ENG people and entities adopting RED One and RED lenses will be miniscule. If you’re not clear on the EFP and ENG industries, and their genres and sub-genres, you might want to read my “EFP & ENG Definitions & Explanations” sticky at the top of the “EFP/ENG and RED” forum here on RED User.
Link: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1105


Yes Stephen, EFP professionals do care about getting top-quality images and pay attention to such things as lens breathing. We shoot the vast majority of our camera functions manually, and when it comes to lenses, we’re also interested in MTF curves, CA, bokeh, rolloff, and the various qualities of lenses. Many of us use high end motion picture lenses on day, and EFP lenses the next – and we don’t just shut off our professionalism when we switch over to EFP work. I’m a film guy, video guy, and still photo guy, and I give respect to the workers in all those industries. I’ve broadened out in skill sets, industries, and genres enough over the past four decades of making images to realize that there are some tremendously talented shooters coming from all of the converging image-making industries.

[Steve Gibby]

Since a Red zoom is very short in range compared to ENG zooms they are not build for ENG. Even for highend documentary I find the ranges to short. A S16/HD option will be more satisfying.

ENG (electronic news gathering) is limited-use market for RED One and RED lenses. On the other hand EFP (electronic field production) is the largest market for RED One and RED lens use, in terms of sheer numbers of productions worldwide each year. That you would even mention RED zooms for ENG shows me that you don’t know the difference between ENG and EFP, or the divisions of EFP: non-hardlined and hardlined, both of which are key markets for RED One and RED lenses. If you’re not clear on the EFP and ENG industries, and their genres and sub-genres, you might want to read my “EFP & ENG Definitions & Explanations” sticky at the top of the “EFP/ENG and RED” forum here on RED User.
Link: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1105

My most recent Emmy Award was for a documentary. I’ve reserved each of the RED zooms (18-50, 18-85, 50-150), and the prime set, and I can assure you that I will be using them in my next documentary. I’ll fly the shorter lenses on a stabilization unit. I will also use S16 and 2/3” HD ENG zooms for certain documentary sequences.


Feature film (cinema / TV), commercials, high end corporate, this is the typical range of application for RED lenses, zooms and primes. Of course, there is the independet filmmaker but this market is small and not "rich" at all. They will find RED lenses expensive and might go the photo lens route.

For a recent magazine article I wrote, I listed the following as just some of the suggested uses for RED One:

Feature films (2540p, 4K, 2K) Indie films (4K, 2K or 1080p) HDTV programs (4K, 2K, 1080p, 720p) Commercials (4K, 2K, 1080p, 720p) Infomercials (4K, 2K, 1080p, 720p) Stock footage acquisition (4K, 2K, 1080p, 720p) Music videos (4K, 2K, 1080p, 720p) Business videos (2K, 1080p, 720p) HDTV News & promo B-roll (1080p, 720p) POV deck (1080p, 720p, with a cigar cam) POV mount camera (2K, 1080p, 720p) In-water camera with a custom housing (4K, 2K, 1080p, 720p) Aerial handheld and gimbal mounted (2K, 1080p, 720p) Events of various sizes (1080p, 720p) Film festival screenings (4K, 2K, 1080p, 720p) Broadcast teases and promos (2K, 1080p, 720p) Public service announcements (2K, 1080p, 720p) Note: 1080i, if needed, can be extracted from any format RED ONE shoots

A lot of those genres are EFP in the shooting style, even though they may use some cine-style lenses and equipment. Again – the EFP market is the largest market segment for RED one and RED lenses.



Thus, RED lenses have to face Zeiss, Cooke and Angenieux in a market which is used to expensive high-end glas and where people usually rent - so the price of the lenses relativise but performance not.

RED lenses have yet to ship and be tested, so how can you judge their performance relative to Zeiss, Cooke, and Angenieux? Are you basing that on cost and T stop numbers? If so, see my comments to Laguun above. There are many factors to overall lens performance beyond T stop ratings.


Since choosing a lens is a very personal, creative decision I will wait with any comment on quality, usability, look and feel until I worked with them.

LOL…here you say you’ll reserve your judgment on quality, usability, and look and feel until you’ve worked with RED lenses, and yet your earlier statements in your post show exactly the opposite – that you have RED lenses already niched in performance below other top quality lenses, and limited to certain narrow markets.

[PaulClements]

Breathe Gibby :)

[Adrian T.]

Breathe Gibby :)

LOL! :biggrin:

[Steve Gibby]

Inhales...........aaaaaaaah! :wink:

[Stephen Williams]

If you’ve tested RED lenses and can give us some details about their breathing or lack thereof, then how about posting that data. I’m assuming you haven’t, so why the foregone conclusion that “high end motion picture” lenses breath less?


Gibby,

I said:-

"High end motion picture lenses hardly breathe at all, this IMHO is probably by far the more important factor for people who have been working with such lenses."

Did I say Red lenses breathed or could not be classed as high end motion picture lenses?

If your saying the Red Zoom does not breathe.........I will get a chance to see them at IBC then I will know the answer.

Stephen

[Stephen Williams]

Yes Stephen, EFP professionals do care about getting top-quality images and pay attention to such things as lens breathing. We shoot the vast majority of our camera functions manually, and when it comes to lenses, we’re also interested in MTF curves, CA, bokeh, rolloff, and the various qualities of lenses. Many of us use high end motion picture lenses on day, and EFP lenses the next – and we don’t just shut off our professionalism when we switch over to EFP work. I’m a film guy, video guy, and still photo guy, and I give respect to the workers in all those industries. I’ve broadened out in skill sets, industries, and genres enough over the past four decades of making images to realize that there are some tremendously talented shooters coming from all of the converging image-making industries.

Hi Gibby,

I never mentioned EFP!

Stephen

[Steve Gibby]

Gibby,

I said:-

"High end motion picture lenses hardly breathe at all, this IMHO is probably by far the more important factor for people who have been working with such lenses."

Did I say Red lenses breathed or could not be classed as high end motion picture lenses?

If your saying the Red Zoom does not breathe.........I will get a chance to see them at IBC then I will know the answer.

Stephen

This thread is about RED lenses, so I think it can be reasonable deduced by readers of your post, that yes, you were pointing to supposed breathing with RED lenses.

I'm not saying RED lenses don't breathe. I am saying that judgment of how much they breathe should be reserved until production lenses ship and they can be tested.

IBC exhibition runs September 7-11. RED has recently stated that the shipping schedule for RED One cameras is still valid as posted. RED One cameras 1-50 are on that schedule for a date given of August 30. There's a separate forum on RED User about the L.A. REDTest sessions (LART) which will take place immediately after cameras 1-50 ship, and four of those cameras are scheduled to be part of the LART testing. Two of the RED lenses I've reserved are scheduled to ship with my camera: 18-50 CF zoom and the 300mm tele. We'll test the 18-50 extensively in real world shooting scenarios, in artificial and natural light, by the LART team of highly-experienced DPs and cinematographers. If RED's camera delivery schedule holds, and we have the LART testing immediately, those results will be posted here on RED User, and pre-date your attendance at IBC by a week - plus it will be extensive testing, not just the limited impressions you can get by briefly using the 18-50 at an IBC booth.

And yes...me and the rest of the LART team have used "high end motion picture" lenses extensively, so their performance parameters are very familiar to us. I'm saying let's reserve judgment on RED lenses until they ship and can be tested.

[Steve Gibby]

Hi Gibby,

I never mentioned EFP!

Stephen

Ahhh...that's exactly my point Stephen. You mentioned ENG when ENG is only a very distant and limited market for RED. So why bring up ENG then? Many traditional film shooters enjoy lumping television industry and non-cine style shooters under the catch-all misnomer of "ENG" - when the vast majority of television production, and non-broadcast production is various flavors of EFP. Very few dedicated ENG shooters or ENG organizational entities will be adopting RED. EFP is a totally different story though, particularly non-hardlined EFP - its the largest single potential market for the RED camera system.

[Stephen Williams]

This thread is about RED lenses, so I think it can be reasonable deduced by readers of your post, that yes, you were pointing to supposed breathing with RED lenses.

I'm not saying RED lenses don't breathe. I am saying that judgment of how much they breathe should be reserved until production lenses ship and they can be tested.



Hi Gibby,

I own 20 - 30 year old Zeiss & Cooke lenses, I would hope that new Red lenses out perform those old lenses. I don't think that's so elitist or unreasonable expectations on my part. FWIW the Red lenses are rather more expensive than the lenses I own.

Stephen

[Stephen Williams]

So why bring up ENG then?

Hi Gibby,

I said "People coming form an ENG background don't seem too concerned" which I believe to be a true statement with regard to lens breathing.

I brought it up because if it turns out the Red zoom lens does breathe, then I don't think it's a issue for many potential customers, if they dont breathe at all then everybody will be happy.

Stephen

[Steve Gibby]

Hi Gibby,

I own 20 - 30 year old Zeiss & Cooke lenses, I would hope that new Red lenses out perform those old lenses. I don't think that's so elitist or unreasonable expectations on my part. FWIW the Red lenses are rather more expensive than the lenses I own.

Stephen

Since RED has stated that their lenses are optimized for digital imaging, and RED One is a D-cinema camera, IMO there will be a very good chance that RED lenses will out perform your old film lenses on a RED One. I've personally seen 4k footage from an early RED protype shot with a RED 300mm prototype lens, and screened in 4k in Los Angeles, and it looked exceptional. I've used a lot of old Zeiss and Cooke lenses and I can honestly say that I don't think any of them could have given results better than the REDCODE RAW 4k/300mm/L.A. 4k screened footage I saw.

Nobody is saying you can't get good results with your old film lenses on a RED One. What RED is saying though, is that their lenses are optimized for digital imaging, developed for use on RED One, and RED one has a digital sensor. New RED lenses may be more expensive than your old film lenses, but they are positioned vastly less expensive than other cine lenses, and in view of what I just said above, the RED lenses may very well generate the very best images obtainable for a RED One camera system. We'll know a lot more about that shortly when the cameras and lenses ship and we can do some field testing with them.

[Steve Gibby]

Hi Gibby,

I said "People coming form an ENG background don't seem too concerned" which I believe to be a true statement with regard to lens breathing.

I brought it up because if it turns out the Red zoom lens does breathe, then I don't think it's a issue for many potential customers, if they dont breathe at all then everybody will be happy.

Stephen

A miniscule portion of ENG industry people will be adopting RED One, and even then for very limited use (some b-roll), so why bring ENG people up at all? I believe I was right in deducing that you were erroneously using ENG as a collective term for non-cine style shooters - in other words TV, video, business, events, etc. Again electronic news gathering (ENG) is just one tiny little niche within the overall EFP family of production genres - and yet it gets erroneously used repeatedly by film people and others in the motion media industry as the catch-all phrase for non-cine style production. Three people in this thread alone used the term ENG in erroneous contexts - I think you get the point.

I do agree that certain adopters of RED One and RED lenses are less concerned about breathing, as long as it is within acceptable limits for professional production use. There will always be perfectionists in the imaging industry, and all of us (including myself), demand near-perfection when it is needed for a particular project or part thereof, but I think we need to keep in mind the broad range of cine-style and EFP style productions that RED One and the RED lenses will be used for. Very few of them demand near-perfection from a lens.

If RED lenses don't breathe, or breathe little, it will be exciting indeed. If they breathe within standards for professional use, so be it. If someone wants to pay four times as much per lens, or much more in rental fees, to achieve a slight reduction in breathing, I guess that's their choice. Again, this conversation is all moot until the cameras and lenses ship and they are tested - something that will will happen shortly.

[Stephen Williams]

Since RED has stated that their lenses are optimized for digital imaging, and RED One is a D-cinema camera,

Hi Gibby,

Are the Red lenses just 'telecentric' or is there more to that in the optimization?

Stephen

[Steve Gibby]

Hi Gibby,

Are the Red lenses just 'telecentric' or is there more to that in the optimization?

Stephen

That's a question for RED - and once again, a question that will be answered shortly when the cameras and lenses ship. A lot of digital image sensors work well with telecentric lenses because chroma variation and shading problems are minimized. But telecentric lenses usually tend to be larger, heavier, and more expensive than normal lenses with similar T or F ratings, and focal lengths. That doesn't seem to be RED's philosophy in lens construction. Their lenses seem to be smaller, lighter, and less expensive. I've handled the 18-50 CF zoom, and I'd estimate it to be about 5" long and weighs about 3 pounds.

Here's Jim Jannard's position on RED lenses, and I would assume that he knows a lot more about them than you or I do. Sure, he's interested in marketing lenses, but those lenses will need to ultimately deliver on what is stated about them. Jannard has always struck me as a guy who is very interested in delivering what he claims he is going to deliver:

"IMHO all RED users should own the RED 18-50mm CF zoom, the 50-150mm RED zoom, the 300mm f2.8 RED telephoto and all the RED primes. :-)

All are designed for digital imaging..."

Jim Jannard
7/1/07
DVi
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=94153&page=2

[Evin Grant]

In the digital still photography world "designed for digital" lenses generally differ from thier film couterparts in two or three ways, the first is wheather or not they cover the full 35mm (Still 24x36mm) frame. In the Nikon line there are digital lenses optimised for this format (17-35mm f2.8, 70-200 f2.8) as well as "DX" lenses optimised for the 16x24mm APS-C format, either will cover Red's 4K sensor. In the Canon line all of the L series glass is optimised for both formats but the EF-S line is for the 16x24mm format only. This is also about telecentricity as refered to in an earlier post.

Secondly a digital lens will often be much better corrected for chromatic abberation and dispersion. This is becuase an imaging sensor is much thinner than a piece of film, and film also has three layers of color sensitivity so all the wavelengths don't need to be focused as precisely to the same point. This is why ED, UD and Aspherical lens elements have been implemented even in standard digital lenses. This means that most digitally optimised lenses have a higher resolution than thier film couterparts as well, although it depends on vintage and design, some lenses really are timeless (Read my reviews, Shameless plug:))

Lastly digital optimised lenses have the ability to pass on information (Meta data) about thier focal length, aperture and focus distance, to the image file, this has been incorperated in almost all auto focus lenses since the begining of digital imaging but it's just now becoming standard in the cinematography world.

So how might Red's lenses be superior to other cinema lenses on the market?
1: Designed to perfectly cover the Red One's S35mm sensor
2: Optimised for focusing all wavelengths on a digital sensor plane
3: Designed to eliminate or reduce CA and dispersion on the Mysterium sensor
5: Able to resolve to the full 4.5K of the Mysterium sensor
4: Able to pass Meta data to the clip via the Cooke /i system

[Steve Gibby]

Agreed Evin...nice summary.

I would imagine RED would summarize it in similar terms. Jim Jannard is a man of few words, but I believe when he said in his quote "All are designed for digital imaging" that the points you made are similar to what he had in mind.

[laguun]

big grin here in berlin - i have a 5 hours meeting and gibby doubles the lenght of thread.

i agree with most points gibby made, on some i have a slighty different perspective.

as a bottomline, i think we can sum up several points.

a) most important, final judgement on red lenses has to be made after delivery. there are many indications that their quality might be excellent. offering cooke /i tech, a very interesting pricing and having convinced top-directors so far, they might be an excellent choice. gibby and his l.a.r.t. will probably offer the first insights, if everything proceeds fine, results will be public shortly before ibc.

b) the traditional manufacturers products offer better techspecs on their best products, in range and f-stop, at a considerably higher price. These techspecs, however, don´t equal imagequality - and quality seems to be paramount for most posters in this thread.

c) we will see a very broad spectrum of different users, different technology, different standards used by the dps working with red. dare i to say: probably the widest spectrum of all cameras in recent moviemaking history.

d) older cinemalenses can be pretty interesting choices for many of the posters here.
d²) same applies to certain photolenses(d² is also called the evin grant disclaimer)

e) there is no "one-size-fits-its-all" lens

f) different from the camera, which (if red is able to ramp up production as planned) took the 35mm sales marketleadership at once, opinions are somewhat different if the same will happen to lenses (having me in the rather not camp)

g) and finally, and additionally on topic: whoever is that lucky british manufacturer who builts the lenses will probably see a -slight- increase in revenue this year.

p.s.
h) never mix eng and efp in a thread monitored by gibby.

[Steve Gibby]

LOL...nice summary Laguun. I think you expressed yourself very well in your summary post, and yes, I agree with most of your summary. :biggrin:

Yeah, I'm passionate about the variety of potential uses for RED One. For the past 20 months since I attended the very first RED One camera specification meeting at Oakley (12/05), and wrote the first published interview with Jim Jannard about the RED One camera system and its intended uses (3/06), I've had to exchange posts with a never-ending parade of guys on all the RED boards who've tried to insist that RED One was just a cine-style camera system, and guys who made "its not an ENG camera" posts. Time and again I've had to correct guys on the difference between EFP and ENG, and explain how RED One was definitely being developed as an EFP style camera - beyond its obvious cine style uses.

Correct EFP & ENG definitions are definitely one of my concerns when it comes to RED One discussions. :wink:

[chuck colburn]

Good lenses are complicated and cost a lot of money.

[Steve Gibby]

Good lenses are complicated and cost a lot of money.

Kinda like good women, eh! :wink:

[PaulClements]

Kinda like all women more like!

[Sanjin Jukic]

Like the silicon bulbs from Formentera this summer.

880

[Antoine Baumann]

I don't think faster lens are better, in fact you better choose a T4 lens if you intend to shoot at T4 and not a T1.3.

Of course if you shoot at night you might consider a T1.3 lens, but with the low noise level of the RED camera, and the high sensitivity, it might not be a necessity.

Well you should have less DOF at T1.3 than at T4, but is that really so important?


If your saying the Red Zoom does not breathe.........I will get a chance to see them at IBC then I will know the answer.

Stephen

I would also look to that at IBC.


antoine.

[laguun]

I don't think faster lens are better, in fact you better choose a T4 lens if you intend to shoot at T4 and not a T1.3.

rule of thumb: a lens can never be too fast, it can only be to slow.



Of course if you shoot at night you might consider a T1.3 lens, but with the low noise level of the RED camera, and the high sensitivity, it might not be a necessity.

think about:
- highspeed (96/120p)
- night, as in carchase
- underwater. deep underwater. every f/t less is basicly more viewrange, clear waters given.
- light using candles/torches/campfire etc as in western/historic/drama/horror etc
- documentary / hidden camera
- think about a -huge- exterior shot (castle? harbor?) where yoz have to light up details
- wildlife
etc pp

there are to many reasons why a low f/tstop is extremly important in many situations to list. even in the studio. less heat, electricity, weight make the set faster.





Well you should have less DOF at T1.3 than at T4, but is that really so important?

yes, very important. think wideangle interior.

[Matt Uhry]

Of course if you shoot at night you might consider a T1.3 lens, but with the low noise level of the RED camera, and the high sensitivity, it might not be a necessity.

Well you should have less DOF at T1.3 than at T4, but is that really so important?

antoine.

Selective focus is considered by many DP's to be an important part of their craft.


Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Stephen Williams]

rule of thumb: a lens can never be too fast, it can only be to slow.


t

Hi,

Whilst in principle I agree, lens theory would suggest that a lens that opens to f2.8 might perform better at f4 than a f1.2 lens at f4. The reason is that the light has to travel through more glass, which is in theory a bad thing.

So a small light slow lens could 'in theory' perform rather well optically, practice is another matter & thats what tests are for!

Stephen

[Antoine Baumann]

rule of thumb: a lens can never be too fast, it can only be to slow.


lagun no you are wrong the rule of thumb (or whatever, as I don't understand "rule of thumb") is the less glass the light has to go through the less aberration you get.

So why expect a T1.3 lens to give a finner picture at T3.2 than a lens with a max apperture of T2? There is strong arguments to say it won't.

I am not saying there is no need for fast lens, I am saying it is not true that they are always the good choice, and you cannot say it is better just because it is faster.

antoine.

[Chris Burket]

heard some rumours from people who has some good connections to the lens manufacturers that the RED zooms seem to be from Sigma - rehoused and redesigned anywhere in the states. any comments on this?

I would be much more interested in who designed them. It doesn't matter who makes them, every manufacturer could turn out the same lense with the same set of specs and extremely strict manufacturing tolerences.

And after the lenses hit the market, I'm sure someone will project them, take them apart etc... and will then be able to report on their characteristics.

[explosive]

heard some rumours from people who has some good connections to the lens manufacturers that the RED zooms seem to be from Sigma - rehoused and redesigned anywhere in the states. any comments on this?

AS far as i know, they are being made in england. sigma manufactures in japan.

[Stephen Williams]

Hi,

If Cooke were involved in the lenses I think Jim would have told us.

Stephen

[PaulClements]

Maybe not directly Stephen but I do wonder whether Cooke's designers and technicians were employed to work on them under the guise of another company and setup and run the production line. All the evidence points to some involvment but I don't believe Cooke themselves actually make them, if you see what I mean. That way Cooke protect their products and make a load of cash and Red gets decent lenses made by some of the finest glass makers. Perhaps it's the fact that the glass is being mass produced rather than hand made that Cooke didn't want their name put on it.

Who knows, the whole thing could be a giant RedHerring™.

[Stephen Williams]

Maybe not directly Stephen but I do wonder whether Cooke's designers and technicians were employed to work on them under the guise of another company and setup and run the production line. All the evidence points to some involvment but I don't believe Cooke themselves actually make them, if you see what I mean. That way Cooke protect their products and make a load of cash and Red gets decent lenses made by some of the finest glass makers. Perhaps it's the fact that the glass is being mass produced rather than hand made that Cooke didn't want their name put on it.

Who knows, the whole thing could be a giant RedHerring™.

Hi Paul,

I think if they were, Cooke would know about it!

Stephen

[PaulClements]

I don't understand what you mean Stephen?

What I'm meaning is that between Les Zellan and Jim they make a company called Red Lenses or similar based in the UK and employ people that work at Cooke to help set it up and design lenses.

If you ask Cooke if they are making them they catagorically deny it. But it doesn't mean the tech's can't be involved through another company for the mutual benefit of Red and Les Zellan.

[Stephen Williams]

I don't understand what you mean Stephen?

What I'm meaning is that between Les Zellan and Jim they make a company called Red Lenses or similar based in the UK and employ people that work at Cooke to help set it up and design lenses.

If you ask Cooke if they are making them they catagorically deny it. But it doesn't mean the tech's can't be involved through another company for the mutual benefit of Red and Les Zellan.

Hi Paul,

Leicester is a small place & Cooke optics is a small company, I think people would have a good idea what was happening.
In any case how many lens designers work for Cooke?

Stephen

[Emanuel A.]

Hi,

If Cooke were involved in the lenses I think Jim would have told us.

StephenMaybe not Stephen.

Cooke is too much involved with their own business. And the money has no voice nor favorite soccer team.

E.

[PaulClements]

Hi Paul,

Leicester is a small place & Cooke optics is a small company, I think people would have a good idea what was happening.
In any case how many lens designers work for Cooke?

Stephen

Hi Stephen,

Leicester isn't that small, a few hundred thousand people live there so by English standards it's probably one of the top 25 cities. I'm not sure how many lens designers work for Cooke but I know it wouldn't take much to make them sign a non-disclosure.

At the end of the day the only fact that we have about the manufacturing of Red Lenses is that there is secrecy surrounding them. The fact we don't know who makes them or heard on the grape vine who is, should be enough of an argument to suggest that people wouldn't have a good idea what was happening.

We've been introduced to many of the people involved in the production of the camera such as Graeme, Rob etc but oddly we've never had a single person come on the forum to tell us about the production of the lenses... seems a little odd if they were infact working for an independent Red Lens company don't you think? Throughout Red's productions Jim has put together teams of the best people to produce his stuff, why would he choose anything less than the best personnel for his lenses? He invited Eric and Birger to make the mounts but didn't have them hide any information for whatever reason? Curt and his company have been making bits and pieces and again nothing has been disguised. So why do so with the lenses unless there is something to hide?

It's one of two things, either Red wants us to think that Cooke or its employees has had some kind of involvment in the production of Red Lenses or they actually have, because all of their hints point that way.

It's all speculation and I agree that I don't believe the lenses are being produced at the Cooke factory in Leicester by Cooke. The fact is that if you were a billionaire wanting to produce a set of decent quality cine lenses would you come to England to have them made and completely ignore Cooke Optics? - Especially when that billionaire has said that they are his favourite cine lenses and Les Zellan has been at many of the Red functions and curious other bits of information exist that point towards it.

If the lenses are good they could turn out to be an even bigger cash cow than the camera itself. I find it hard to believe Les Zellan wouldn't be rubbing his hands at the thought of turning over a profit of a few million extra because of it - I would lol.

Paul

[Andreas Höhn]

What is with Optex ? I own a 300mm T3.2 which looks very, very similar to the Red 300mm. As far as I know optex was based in the UK as well, in north London.

[Stephen Webb]

What is with Optex ? I own a 300mm T3.2 which looks very, very similar to the Red 300mm. As far as I know optex was based in the UK as well, in north London.

And made some very very bad decisions.

And died a horrible death.

[Andreas Höhn]

tell me more....what decisions ? how was the horrible death ?

[Stephen Webb]

Optex was mainly a Production Accessories rental house. Their biggest draw was that they were the exclusive rental outlet for Steadicam, but they were also the biggest grip hire company in the UK (I believe). Added to this they were extremely good at innovating new toys to meet demand from various productions.

My understanding is that the guy who owned Optex decided the time had come to expand and over-reached himself. Eventually creditors called in the loans and the whole shebang imploded - a sad end to a company that had done fantastic work for 30 years or so.

The Steadicam rental department moved to Tiffen UK and a number of ex-employees set up Production Gear and took on a lot of the ex-Optex contracts. They tend to specialise more in video than film though.

[Martin Drew]

I think there was a lot of bad feeling amongst staff over the way Optex "died", it happened suddenly just before Christmas and none of them got paid, let alone any redundancy. This was despite being assured previously that everything was fine.

Another company that sprung from the ashes is MTF services (http://www.mtfservices.com/products/lens%20adaptors/lensadaptors.html) which specialise in lens adapters and servicing.

[Stephen Williams]

Another company that sprung from the ashes is MTF services (http://www.mtfservices.com/products/lens%20adaptors/lensadaptors.html) which specialise in lens adapters and servicing.

Hi,

Thats Mike Tapa, he built the Excellence periscope amongst other things for Optex.

Stephen