18-50 T3 question.

[Jonathan Burton]

Noticed that the RED 18-50 has gone on sale and I just had a few questions. Firstly does anyone know how much this lens was before the price drop? Also I would love to hear any feedback about it from users regarding its performance, color, contrast breathing etc.

Any advice/help would be much appreciated!

Cheers.

[Ryan S]

The lens was $6500 before the price drop, I believe. Never used one myself, but I've heard mixed reports about its mechanics.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Mechanics seem to vary from one unit to the next. Some are gritty or sloppy and some are almost smooth, but not quite what one would expect from a "pro" cine lens. IMO, it's not as bad as what a lot of people make it out to be and the lens was a good value for the money even though it had compromises. At the new price it's a good deal and it seems there's going to be several of them for sale on the used market too with the new Pro model coming out. I owned one for a while and really liked it, thought I had a good reason to sell it at that time and then regretted it after as it was a versatile lens in a small package.

As for performance; Some hold focus through the zoom range better than others. Although, I don't think any of them do this completely. Optically, the lens performs great. Sharp image, great color, good contrast and very little CA. It breathes like a horny dragon, though...

I can't wait to check out the new 17-50 Pro version. But buying it may have to wait... Too many other toys coming up this year with the M-X upgrade, Epic-X, etc..

[Jamie Havill]

Good enough for PJ:

http://us.imdb.com/media/rm4151217664/nm0001392

[Ryan S]

Good enough for PJ:

http://us.imdb.com/media/rm4151217664/nm0001392

And a Sachtler fluid head, too! Interesting. I like a trend-breaker.

[Stephen Williams]

I would wait for the new Red Zoom lens, or try to buy a second hand 18-50, they sold second hand for less than $4k before the price reduction, what a second hand one would go for today is anybodies guess. $2000-2500 ?

[Jens Jakob Thorsen]

Used one on a feature. Big mistake.Compared to my Elites and my Ang 30-80mm it was horrible, VERY soft and a lot of CA. A lot worse than my elites at 1,3. Did not test it properly ...my stupid mistake. Probably the worst lens I have used in my 20years+ career. I would also recommend waiting for the 17-50.
BTW Sachtler fluid heads are amongst the best, Smoother than Oconner and better build.
If you want quality buy German or japanese. Nobody in their right mind would buy an English or American build car;-)
(Oconner owner)

[Milan Spasic]

Good enough for PJ:

And good enough for Soderbergh.

http://cinemaautopsy.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/che.jpg

[Ryan S]

And good enough for Soderbergh.

I thought Che was anamorphic...or was that just one part of it?

[Milan Spasic]

I thought Che was anamorphic...or was that just one part of it?

Jim's words:


The 18-50 is a sharp lens. Ché was shot with two of them.

[Ryan S]

Interesting...the IMDB Technical entry for Part One says Panavision Cameras and Lenses along with Red Cameras and Lenses. I took the former to mean a Panavised Red with Primos.

Either way, impressive screenshot.

[Andrew Walker]

I had to trade in my first 18-50mm RED Zoom. The second one I got was much better.

[David W. Jones]

Interesting...the IMDB Technical entry for Part One says Panavision Cameras and Lenses along with Red Cameras and Lenses. I took the former to mean a Panavised Red with Primos.

Either way, impressive screenshot.

I would take much of what you read on IMDB with a grain of salt.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Used one on a feature. Big mistake.Compared to my Elites and my Ang 30-80mm it was horrible, VERY soft and a lot of CA. A lot worse than my elites at 1,3. Did not test it properly ...my stupid mistake. Probably the worst lens I have used in my 20years+ career.

You probably got a dud lens. Yes, unfortunately, the 18-50 came in a variety of flavors ranging from good to terrible. To quote Forrest Gump, life is like a box of chocolates...


I would also recommend waiting for the 17-50.

I would also recommend this if the budget allows and you can wait.

[David Mullen ASC]

Part One of "Che" was shot in 2.40 anamorphic with Panavision lenses, Part Two was shot spherical 1.85, probably with a mix of lenses including the Red 18-50mm.