*** RPP''s & RPZ's FOCUS Re-Markings Professional Service ***

[KETCH ROSSi]

EDIT:



NEW thread w/few pics & chart Posted here: http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=693107#post693107



:closed2ur0:

Hi guys,

firstly I like to point out that I absolutely LOVE the RED RPP's and the RED RPZ's especially at their price point,
they just slashes to threads anything that comes close to them of how sharp they are,
and even so having a Pre-Order of the new Cine Leicas, I will still have great use for the RPP's,
as their build quality is second to NONE... but...

last NAB Mark from HoffHolywood and I we were discussing together with one of his guys and Matt Duclos,
about some of the issues that have been coming up on sets as the lenses not having in off Focus Markings,
and why some were complaining about not renting their RPP's as much as they wanted to,
and loosing some of the business to Arri/Zeiss and or Cookes, even when the Budget was tight and they would have much preferred go with the RPP's,
especially since there was no need to shoot under T*1.8, but still the DP's didn't want t go with the RPP's and or RPZ's do to the Focus Markings,
not been up to their very high standards of Cinema Grade Perfection.

My take on this is that at this price point no one really should complain, and having this serviced and the additional Mapped out Markings added is a easy thing to do,
fast and not at all that expensive, and then you will have a Set of RPP's equally precise to the highest pint as the Arri/Zeiss MP's but still at a fraction their cost.

AGAIN, pay attention here, as this is not intended to Criticize Red for the design on their new Pro series of Optics,
but simply to address the issue of the Markings.

So the reason for this is to try and figure out how many would be wiling to do this to their RPP sets,
and have the Focus Markings added as to have as many and as accurate as those any Other set such as the Arri/Zeiss MP's.

*REMOVING THE HOOD FROM THE 17-50 WILL VOID THE WARRANTY!!

[Gunleik Groven]

From some of the responses I've had, I think you're pretty much spot on.

I don't own them, but I really like them BTW.

[Evin Grant]

Are we taking re-marking, adding marks or both?

[KETCH ROSSi]

Are we taking re-marking, adding marks or both?

Adding Markings Evin.

[Cüneyt Kaya]

AC's here doesnt want to shoot without markings on feature films, at t2-t2,6
they say they need the markings to work.
so ketch, how much in dollares?
and what about the red warranty.

for the 17-50
a red certified marking and removing of the hood by duclos woupd be great

i dont own red lenses yet, so would be cool to know ketch how much you paid ( especially for the rpz)
thanks

[C.H.Haskell]

I am listening.

[OptiTek]

Unfortunately remarking these lenses won't solve the issue IMO.
The RPP scales are this way because of the design choice that was made. The focusing mount range is optimized towards close focus and this is done at the expense of mid to far focus mark spacing. Helix design being linear in nature limits the flexibility of the spacing. Cam design such as Cooke or, now Leica allows for non linear travel and there fore, optimal use of focus range and mark spacing. This is why Cookes have nicely spaced mid range marks and Leicas took it a little further with actually optimizing the cams to the optical design and making the spacing identical in far to mid range that makes the AC job much more straight forward.
The remarking might help a little but will not make a whole lot of difference IMO.

[C.H.Haskell]

Does the RPZ 17-50 suffer a lot of the same issues? Also does Duclos provide a hood removal?

[Dan Kanes]

Shims anyone?

[OptiTek]

Shims anyone?
Shims are the least of the problem:wink5:

[KETCH ROSSi]

Unfortunately remarking these lenses won't solve the issue IMO.
The RPP scales are this way because of the design choice that was made. The focusing mount range is optimized towards close focus and this is done at the expense of mid to far focus mark spacing. Helix design being linear in nature limits the flexibility of the spacing. Cam design such as Cooke or, now Leica allows for non linear travel and there fore, optimal use of focus range and mark spacing. This is why Cookes have nicely spaced mid range marks and Leicas took it a little further with actually optimizing the cams to the optical design and making the spacing identical in far to mid range that makes the AC job much more straight forward.
The remarking might help a little but will not make a whole lot of difference IMO.

I agree with you in most points Jacek, but I still believe that adding Focus Marking, via insuring an accurate
measuring system in such way will be ideal and put the lenses in a better position against the Big boys.

[KETCH ROSSi]

AC's here doesnt want to shoot without markings on feature films, at t2-t2,6
they say they need the markings to work.
so ketch, how much in dollares?
and what about the red warranty.

for the 17-50
a red certified marking and removing of the hood by duclos woupd be great

i dont own red lenses yet, so would be cool to know ketch how much you paid ( especially for the rpz)
thanks

Still on the works but this is why I posted this, as many some have told me of this issue, and I like to see it resolve or at list have a solution that makes the issue less noticeable,
agin, for the price pint this lenses are just simply incredible, what we are trying to do here, is spending a little money to customize them,
in order to make them closer to the big boys which cost 5 times more.

I'm sure He could do the customization of the Hod off the 17-50 and remark the upper part of the naked front Element, but not sure I would this permanently,
as I really like the design of the Hood on the 17-50, but agree that in some occasions, especially in S3D mounting, will be better off removed,
Jared is our Fire Chief and He can sure do what ever He wishes, but we better be very careful what we do to our gear as not to void their warranty.


Does the RPZ 17-50 suffer a lot of the same issues? Also does Duclos provide a hood removal?

Remember Clay that, beside the answer given above, removing the Front top element, as that is what it is, not just a Hood,
as it is made in such a way that serves much more then the purpose of a simple Hood,
you would also have to place a new Focus Mark, as that it is placed on the Hood element right now.

[joshua csehak]

Please pardon my ignorance, but would somebody care to explain the issue here? Are the focus marks off? I have to admit, I'm not sure I've ever pulled focus by measuring; it's always been by doing a focus check and marking it with a dry erase, or on-the-fly.

[Sam Winzar]

I'm interested but would love to know more about price and turn around time (which I guess depend on how many people are interested).

[KETCH ROSSi]

Please pardon my ignorance, but would somebody care to explain the issue here? Are the focus marks off? I have to admit, I'm not sure I've ever pulled focus by measuring; it's always been by doing a focus check and marking it with a dry erase, or on-the-fly.

Current Markings are SPOT ON, its just that more are needed in order to please some tuff crowds, but I agree that are needed, and will make the set better.

[C.H.Haskell]

@Ketch
I see, well I am sure Duclos could whip up some unique alternative. I actually dont have a big problem with I would consider a smaller profile as that is the reason I am buying this compact zoom to begin with. Without that hood, would the element of the lens telescope out, thus bumping into filter tray for example?

[KETCH ROSSi]

@Ketch
I see, well I am sure Duclos could whip up some unique alternative. I actually dont have a big problem with I would consider a smaller profile as that is the reason I am buying this compact zoom to begin with. Without that hood, would the element of the lens telescope out, thus bumping into filter tray for example?

I understand Clay,

however from the design stand point, I'm sure Jared had his own reasons to remove the hood, however, it is not something I would recommend doing, the lens was originally design like that for a reason, if your intention is to remove it for a specific shoot and then remount it, then yes, have it done, but to leave the lens permanently with out the hood, no I would not do it, as Yes the Element will be zooming out of protection range when at 50mm, not a good thing.

[joshua csehak]

Current Markings are SPOT ON, its just that more are needed in order to please some tuff crowds, but I agree that are needed, and will make the set better.

Ah, thanks. Out of my league then. I'd solve the problem with some gaff tape and a sharpie, and spend the money instead on German board games ;)

[Adrian Correia]

Actually on my set, the markings are sometimes off in terms of the stop and focus distance....like T2.8 on one side is T2.8 1/3 on the otter side - and 8 feet on one side of the lens is 8 feet 4 inches on the other side...can be problematic when dealing with shallow stop/ longer focal lengths / moving subjects.

[fREDeric ChAMbERlAnd]

There is also a technical issue with RPP's marking and programming of Preston HU3 lens mapping. The HU3 lens mapping needs some specific marks to be programmed and every RPP has one or two marks missing (you need 6 total).
I have sent my concerns to Preston and they replied they would look into it to add some marking points into a future software upgrade but no word yet about it.

Would love to be kept in the loop on this one (remarking).
AC'S need more marks at T2 . . .

Any experienced AC who looks at the 50mm will tell you the lack of marks between 5 and 10' makes it a black sheep in an instant.

My 2 cents.

[Matthew Duclos]

I've looked into the re-marking (adding marks to existing or fabrication of new focus scales) and the cost wouldn't be too bad. However, I am (as always) concerned about stepping on toes over at RED. I am still trying to gain support for lens repair from RED, such as parts and glass, so I really don't want to break any warranties by swapping out focus scales and removing front housings. Any feedback from RED on this issue would be helpful to me and the users. BTW, why do people want to remove the front housing?

[KETCH ROSSi]

I've looked into the re-marking (adding marks to existing or fabrication of new focus scales) and the cost wouldn't be too bad. However, I am (as always) concerned about stepping on toes over at RED. I am still trying to gain support for lens repair from RED, such as parts and glass, so I really don't want to break any warranties by swapping out focus scales and removing front housings. Any feedback from RED on this issue would be helpful to me and the users. BTW, why do people want to remove the front housing?

Hey Matt,

RED is okay with you adding Focus Marking to the the lenses but you would have to take over mechanical warranty if there is disassembly involved.

As far as the Hood removal form the 17-50, this "WILL VOID THE WARRANTY" so owner should have do so in the knowledge of this.

[Jarred Land]

Correct... we have no problem with Matthew remarking the lenses. If Matt breaks something in the process he buys it :) heh heh heh.

As for the hood the lens doesn't work right if you take the hood off..

[KETCH ROSSi]

Correct... we have no problem with Matthew remarking the lenses. If Matt breaks something in the process he buys it :) heh heh heh.

As for the hood the lens doesn't work right if you take the hood off..

Thanks for confirming this Jarred, much appreciated.

[Matthew Duclos]

Correct... we have no problem with Matthew remarking the lenses. If Matt breaks something in the process he buys it :) heh heh heh.

As for the hood the lens doesn't work right if you take the hood off..

Haha. I don't break things... I fix the things other people break. ;)
That's what I figured with the front housing. If it's similar to the other RED zooms, the front housing retains the entire focus scale and cam. The only way to get rid of the large front would be to replace it with another part. Not something I would recommend. Thanks for the reply Jarred. BTW... Any update on parts/glass availability?

[Tony Lorentzen]

While I agree that the markings on the lenses are somewhat of a problem, there are other and more significant problems causing my set from not being rented as much as I had originally hoped for. Here's what I'm hearing from people:

1) RED got a bad reputation (here at least) with their first two zoom lenses because they were poorly made (mechanically). They need a good service (lube) to work.

2) The RPPs are too big and heavy compared to something like Ultra Primes.

3) They have a weird flare-issue.

4) The markings are off.

5) The markings are oddly spaced.

Most of the people who have rented them have been very happy with them, however. I mostly bought them to shoot with them myself and for that they're absolutely perfect, but I'm not a professional focus puller or DP (as much as I'd love to be one day). I am - however - considering selling them again and buy something else partly because I'm finding it very troublesome that I can't get the lenses serviced locally.

[Alvise Tedesco]

Helix design being linear in nature limits the flexibility of the spacing. Cam design such as Cooke or, now Leica allows for non linear travel and there fore, optimal use of focus range and mark spacing. This is why Cookes have nicely spaced mid range marks and Leicas took it a little further with actually optimizing the cams to the optical design and making the spacing identical in far to mid range that makes the AC job much more straight forward.

Very interesting, thanks for explanation.

[Matthew Duclos]

RED got a bad reputation (here at least) with their first two zoom lenses because they were poorly made (mechanically). They need a good service (lube) to work.


This really is a pity. RED jumped in head first and made a pair of affordable zooms for newcomers to get their hands on. Sure it wasn't the greatest lens ever, but in true RED fashion, they learned really quickly and did a great job with their second go at lens production. The RPP really are a great value in regards to cine primes. Of course they have their drawbacks, but most lenses do. Tony, for your sake, I hope your customers can overlook RED's previous oversights. Looking forward to the next crop of RED lenses.

[Stacey Spears]

As for the hood the lens doesn't work right if you take the hood off..

Thank you for following up and letting us know.

[Steven-Marc C.]

Rome wasn't built in a day, as they say. I find that all the people who use RPP are very satisfied with them. Red's bad reputation regarding lenses is slowly evolving for the better with the RPP. I'd keep them if I were you Tony, I don't think there's anything that comes close to them, not in the same price range.

Matthew, are you going to post something publicly about your remarking services (pricing)?

[Shawn Nelson]

Awesome thread. Matt, now that Jarred has said they have no problem with it, maybe progress can be had on a custom Duclos solution to this?

[KETCH ROSSi]

We wil definitely be moving forward with my first set of RPP's and all 3 RPZ's going n to Matt to get this Party started. ;)

[Matthew Duclos]

Don't thank me yet, Shawn. Thank Ketch and Mark Pederson for approaching me about it. I'll get the ball rolling again and determine cost and time frame. FYI, it won't be cheap. Keep in mind that RED made many sets of lenses that consisted of a dozen parts each and kept the cost to a minimum. We would be making less than 100 of a part that requires precise calibration. And we keep all of our manufacturing in the US.

[Matthew Duclos]

Before this thread gets out of control, I also have to look into the details of making new scales with more marks and witnesses for each mark which means that the marks must be repeatable and they must be evenly calibrated throughout the production. If the engravings require individual marking and calibration for each lens, we're looking at a cost that is much higher than manufacturing a simple scale with more numbers and lines and simply replacing the existing scale.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Before this thread gets out of control, I also have to look into the details of making new scales with more marks and witnesses for each mark which means that the marks must be repeatable and they must be evenly calibrated throughout the production. If the engravings require individual marking and calibration for each lens, we're looking at a cost that is much higher than manufacturing a simple scale with more numbers and lines and simply replacing the existing scale.

Yes first I will be sending in my Lenses to Matt, and give him and his crew in off time to do all the proper work, also to help figure out time frames and work involved to determine Price.

Nonetheless any one serious should Post their interest here, and keep track of this thread.

[Bob Rudis]

I'm in...

[KETCH ROSSi]

I'm in...

Cool Bob,

again at this time we are testing the waters, and Matt will first work on my Set, but this could take some time, as we want to insure the best work possible.

[Joel Jameson]

Add me to the list as well, full RPP set and a 17-50.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Add me to the list as well, full RPP set and a 17-50.

Joel, the RPZ are not really much of a discussed issue, but will test them nonetheless, but only after we have first done a set of RPP's, mine ;)

Next will be to match two sets for S3D work ;)

[Tony Lorentzen]

If only it wasn't so damn expensive to ship stuff securely over the "pond" ...

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Don't thank me yet, Shawn. Thank Ketch and Mark Pederson for approaching me about it. I'll get the ball rolling again and determine cost and time frame. FYI, it won't be cheap. Keep in mind that RED made many sets of lenses that consisted of a dozen parts each and kept the cost to a minimum. We would be making less than 100 of a part that requires precise calibration. And we keep all of our manufacturing in the US.

Hey Matt, I'm still interested -- I was standing at that same table with you, Ketch and Mark at NAB. :) I've owned my RPPs since the beginning, so warranty has long past, hard to believe it's been that long.

Keep us all posted.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Hey Matt, I'm still interested -- I was standing at that same table with you, Ketch and Mark at NAB. :) I've owned my RPPs since the beginning, so warranty has long past, hard to believe it's been that long.

Keep us all posted.

Hey Jeff,

yeah I remember.. hehe

[Adrian Correia]

I'm in Matt....can't praise you guys highly enough for the work on my Super Baltars....you have my utmost confidence.

[Harry Clark]

Nice!
If this modification can be done it would certainly overcome a practical annoyance these lenses have.
As Frederic points out, not having ANY marks between 5' and 10' is bad... and as Jacek points out, there is a limit to how many marks Matt & co. will be able to squeeze in on the "distant" part of the lens due to the linearity of the helix design.
And I would not be surprised to hear that each lens needs to be done individually for accuracy.
But Duclos is certainly the place to go for this. My Mark 3 Superspeeds (overhauled last year) came back like brand new. Really. Like. Brand. New.
You guys do wonderful work, Matt!
Cheers,
Harry

[KETCH ROSSi]

Nice to hears your good experiences with Matt, and this is why I fill comfortable doing this with him, we do respect his work, and hope to be able to make our RPP's sets that much better, and even so well in knowledge of design limitations, I do believe that they can be made better at a reasonable price, which will still make the RPP's a great set of lenses at a great price point just a little more usable in the Focus Markings range then originally ;)

[Blair S. Paulsen]

My original 18-50 RED zoom came back from a rental in lousy shape, after Duclos serviced it the lens had smoother mechanics than it did brand new. Kudos.

IMHO remarking only makes sense if the number of marks in critical ranges and the accuracy of them is up to "cine" standards - the cost of which may prove substantial. If the cost is not too high, I'm in.

Cheers - #19

[KETCH ROSSi]

IMHO remarking only makes sense if the number of marks in critical ranges and the accuracy of them is up to "cine" standards - the cost of which may prove substantial. If the cost is not too high, I'm in.

Cheers - #19

That is the intention Blair, will be of no use other wise ;)

[OptiTek]

That is the intention Blair, will be of no use other wise ;)

Is Good Luck Matt!!!!!!
I've remarked dozens of lenses over the years. Definitely not my cup of tea....
Matt hit me up if you need advise.:emote_hippie:

[KETCH ROSSi]

Is Good Luck Matt!!!!!!
I've remarked dozens of lenses over the years. Definitely not my cup of tea....
Matt hit me up if you need advise.:emote_hippie:

Hehe, well its not my cup of tea either even so I also have re-marked several lenses.. just that they wash off with use.. dam markers don't last long :001_tt2:

[OptiTek]

Did you calibrate blank scales and had them engraved Ketch?:ihih:

[KETCH ROSSi]

Did you calibrate blank scales and had them engraved Ketch?:ihih:

Off course.. haha

[KETCH ROSSi]

Mapping of the Markings added ;)

[Tim Naylor]

While I agree that the markings on the lenses are somewhat of a problem, there are other and more significant problems causing my set from not being rented as much as I had originally hoped for. Here's what I'm hearing from people:

1) RED got a bad reputation (here at least) with their first two zoom lenses because they were poorly made (mechanically). They need a good service (lube) to work.

2) The RPPs are too big and heavy compared to something like Ultra Primes.

3) They have a weird flare-issue.

4) The markings are off.

5) The markings are oddly spaced.

Most of the people who have rented them have been very happy with them, however. I mostly bought them to shoot with them myself and for that they're absolutely perfect, but I'm not a professional focus puller or DP (as much as I'd love to be one day). I am - however - considering selling them again and buy something else partly because I'm finding it very troublesome that I can't get the lenses serviced locally.

For certain type of shoots, I think they're great, but weird inconsistent flaring at certain lengths and stops, kept me from buying a set. I'm fine with the weight and size. It's an extra two-three pounds on the nose compared to UP's. Not a big deal when a full rig weighs 25-30lbs. I have had a few AC's complain about the markings and that distances jump too fast past the midranges. And some quite good AC's have blown some focus cues because of not being accustomed to this. But I still find myself having to use RPP's when production wants to shoot 4.5k (soon to be 5k) when production can't afford MP's. So who knows, they may just start renting more in the days to come. I've a feeling Xenars lens barreling forward trait may keep alot of DP's from dealing with them.

For rental, RPP's are in a odd place. For short form, it's not hard to talk production into spending an extra 200-400 and have Ultra's or Cookes. Which leaves low budget indies - which for owners are not always ideal in terms of rental price / wear index. I'd love to see a new iteration come out that solves the issues you cite. I'd easily pay 10-15 grand more. Because if the issues you site are solved, they'd earn their room and board quite quickly.