It‘s a great camera, but... some odd quality issues on #112 [Archive]

Sebastian Cramer

01-02-2008, 09:11 AM

On Dec31th the camera got out of customs, so I had two day to play with the new baby. Yes, it‘s a great camera! No doubt, it‘s well worth the money, and yes, I will be very happy to start working with it. First pictures are looking great and the whole concept is awesome.
And, of course it is amazing you guys at Red pulled this off...

but....

... I have encountered some strange issues, which I really wasn‘t expecting on such a high end professional tool. Am I the only one here? Any info from other „new“ camera owners of the December delivery is highly apprechiated.

1) PL-Mount:
The shipped PL mount is not a stainless steel mount as shown in the picture Jarred took. It is still anodized aluminium, with a strong tendency to stick and block. It makes strange sounds when turned and feels very (!) different to what is common on a Arricam, 435, Aaton or whatsoever. I had a chance to check out #44 a few months ago, which had the same issue and therefor I finally was very happy, the new mount wasn‘t using anodized aluminium rubbing against anodized aluminium anymore. But it still is, at least on #112.

There is a long dissusion about the i/ and LDS contacts going on. If Red has decided to discontinue to ship cameras with those contacts a note in the manual about this would have been helpful. To me it looked like the contacts have been simply „forgotten“ in the assembly.

2) Loose Battery mounting plate on Cradle
The battery plate was not fixed on the Cradle (not on the Red Quickplate). You could pull it off about 2mm from the aluminium plate. If anyone encounters something similar: don‘t try to turn in the screws. They are about 2mm too long!!! I punched a hole in the back side of the plate by turning it in and ruined a second screw on which the head broke off. The only thing is: take the screws out and shorten them about 2mm or get shorter ones.

Here is a clip: http://www.ready2roll.de/Player/Studio/Redbattery.html

3) Battery Lock on Quickplate
The lock on the battery plate is not preventing the battery from falling out of the mount. A fairly small pressure is enough to push the red brick out off it‘s locked position in the V-mount.
We‘re talking about professional cine gear here! I don‘t like to see the battery falling off in a middle of a hand held shot... (For some reason it is only happening on the Quickplate and not on the Red Cradle).
In general all batteries feel pretty loose in the V-mounts on every Red Mounting plate (but this has been dissused already in various threads).

4) Side-Handles
I got one top handle and 2 side handles. One side handle shipped with no end ring. It didn‘t came of, it was just not there.

5) Not enough grip of the Side Handles on the Red Handle Mount
No matter how hard the bolts are tighten these is still a slip of the side handles on the 19mm shaft of the Red handle mount. It is definitly not tight enough for handheld operation. I brought this up at IBC in September when I had the camera on the shoulder, and was told that this is known and worked on. Handles for the Arricam allways have latch washers on all (!) angles that can be adjusted. It can be really dangerous if the handle can‘t be fixed in wilder handheld situations.

6) Manual:
I received a manual for the battery and the charger but none for the camera itself. If it wasn‘t finished by the time the shipping went out, a simple note would have helped.
I tripple checked all boxes before I finally downloaded the current version from red.com.

7) LCD luminance banding:
My LCD shows a strong banding in luminance, with clearly visible steps on grades. This is nothing I have encountered on other LCD like Transvideo etc. Unfortunatelly I couldn‘t get a picture of this, because contrast and a moiree made it hard to take a photo here. I might put it later.

One side note concerning the lenses:
I asked Kelly to please keep all lenses on hold until there is are metric versions for the scales available. It is somehow frustrating not beeing informed from Red if and when there will be metric scales avaiable. To have metric available can‘t be such a big problem at all.
I know for sure ACs won‘t accept feet-scales here and I will not go to put a marked tape on a brand new lens. It may not me a big deal for Red if they sell a few lenses to me, but it upsets me, that the high demand in metric scales is simply ignored.

Saying all of this, I still would like to point out one thing:
No, I don‘t want my money back... (I might think of returning the batteries and the handle mount with the handles. But still I want to say it‘s a great camera).

But shipping cameras with such obivious odd things makes me somehow nervous, thinking of the really sophisticated parts inside. My feeling is, if Red wants to push up the amount of cameras shipped every month, a serious improvement in quality control is required.

Maybe this is all just pure conincidence, some sort of a „early monday morning assembly“. I really hope so. Let me know what your experience is.

Thanks,
Sebastian

Adrian T.

01-02-2008, 09:28 AM

Wow. I'm not impressed. :wacko:

I really hope that this is all bad luck.

Regarding the metric scales on lenses:
I absolutely share your opinion about that. I mean, take a look at this poll (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=4400).

chuck colburn

01-02-2008, 09:36 AM

Simon Valderrama

01-02-2008, 09:38 AM

Good you mentioned the metrics scale issue on lenses.
Somehow i thought that both systems were engraved at once, because there was no mention about metrics vs. imperial in the store when i ordered my RED lenses.
Lenses with imperial markings would be quite useless here in Italy :waaa:

As other issues you mentioned, hope it's bad luck, banded LCD and sloppy side handles seems really bad!

Hope they're not rushing accessories because of camera delays ...

J.D. Frey

01-02-2008, 09:44 AM

we'll check ours out tonight for comparison- even if there is an issue I know that RED will make good on it- from what I've seen so far regarding any issues I've been really impressed by their resolve to fix them- and add improvements.

Sebastian Cramer

01-02-2008, 09:51 AM

An aluminum lens seat should not be a problem as there really is no wear factor involved with that surface. The locking ring itself I think should be stainless because of the wear factor (some versions of the PL mount used aluminum for the outer part of the ring but had a layer of stainless under it). So far as running aluminum against aluminum that's ok if the parts are properly fitted (lapped in to each other) and are lubricated with the proper grease.

Well Chuck, aluminium against steel is not a truly good pairing, if it comes to serious things like a PL-fitting you won't find much alternatives than steel against steel. Lubricating is also an issue, because the lubrication could gas out and smeer the low pass filter.
Sebastian

Charles Perkins

01-02-2008, 09:51 AM

thats really poor.

your probably going to be attacked for posting negative stuff about RED, but its good for future customers to know that good as well as the bad.

Jannard

01-02-2008, 09:52 AM

This looks like one of those very embarrassing moments. We had a "holiday crew" to help. I'm checking to get to the bottom of this. We will make it right.

Jim

jbeale

01-02-2008, 09:54 AM

There is a long dissusion about the i/ and LDS contacts going on. If Red has decided to discontinue to ship cameras with those contacts a note in the manual about this would have been helpful. To me it looked like the contacts have been simply „forgotten“ in the assembly.

The Red Ops Guide Build 12, p.6 seems to imply the S4/i interface is an option:
"The PL mount may include an S4/i interface. If installed, this interface permits the camera to communicate with various lenses from RED Digital Cinema, Cooke Optics. Ltd and other lens manufacturers supporting the S4/i protocols."

Kelly

01-02-2008, 09:59 AM

Sebastian, I just sent you an email so we can get this resolved right away. We are sorry for this inconvenience and we appreciate your feedback.

Simon Blackledge

01-02-2008, 09:59 AM

I thought this interface was built into all camera? has this changed?
s

J.D. Frey

01-02-2008, 10:02 AM

This looks like one of those very embarrassing moments. We had a "holiday crew" to help. I'm checking to get to the bottom of this. We will make it right.

Jim

see it only took a few posts before Jim was on it- :)

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 10:04 AM

No excuses... sorry man.

just a side note.. the Mount was never Stainless.. the photos we showed where un-anodized aluminum so some may of thought it was stainless..

we did however increase the grade of Aluminum from the previous version, to a much harder 7 series, which is why some people like Evin reported the mount possibly being stainless.

Rich Schaefer

01-02-2008, 10:07 AM

I have to agree with the lens mount, it dose not tighten really smoothly, I can feel the anodizing sliding on anodizing. Perhaps just a touch of lubricant? (let's keep it from getting on the sensor).

My handles needed a $.50 spacer to tighten. The "L" lever screw hit the handle body before tightening:
http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r224/richcam1/IMG_1014.png

Also the top mounts "L" lever bottoms out on the camera body before tightening. I added a few washers to help:
http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r224/richcam1/IMG_1013.png

I have to say ALL TOGETHER GREAT CAMERA! We are all working out the details on the first bunch. It's normal.

Thanks again to the RED team!

Sebastian Cramer

01-02-2008, 10:12 AM

This looks like one of those very embarrassing moments. We had a "holiday crew" to help. I'm checking to get to the bottom of this. We will make it right.

Jim

Thanks Jim for this fast reply! But you must understand that I find all of this somehow concerning. We are talking about professional equipment here.

I just have received a mail from Kelly about replacing or returning some stuff. This is a real quick response. Whoow! I'm impressed.

But here are some questions:

Is there a PL mount in stainless steel (steel against steel) or do you stay with aluminium?
Is there a more rigged alternative to the battery mounting plate?
Is there an alternative to the handle mount, which incorporates latch washers?
Does the LCD have luminance banding?
Will there be metric scales on your lenses?

Looking foreward to your reply, many thanks,
Sebastian

BASSAM MSSALATIE

01-02-2008, 10:15 AM

first thanks Sebastian for you still have confidence with red Products.
i gave them all excuses .cuase we all know what was happening here .befor
shipping resum again..this is good fast reply form redteam to fix this
and i think it will never happen again..thanks .Jim:sarcasm:

Brook Willard

01-02-2008, 10:19 AM

Rich, pull on the thumbscrews... They ratchet to allow tightening.

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 10:24 AM

Brook is right Rich.. the thumbscrews you can reposition the tab so it doesnt get in the way, by simply pulling on the whole screw head and twisting to a proper position.

Stephen Pruitt

01-02-2008, 10:26 AM

All I can say is that the RED Team is INCREDIBLY responsive. Try to get that from Sony/Panasonic/JVC etc. What a team!

For the record, properly anodized aluminum alloys are actually much harder than stainless steel.

Stephen

Rich Schaefer

01-02-2008, 10:31 AM

Ahh, I can see how that would work. I do like my $.50 spacers.

jbeale

01-02-2008, 10:35 AM

Lubricating is also an issue, because the lubrication could gas out and smeer the low pass filter.

Not every kind of lubrication necessarily has an outgas problem. For example Apiezon Grease T, vapor pressure @ 20C = 4.6x10-9 torr, melting point 125 C. Should cause no outgas problem unless you are shooting in ultrahigh vacuum.

Nnote, I have no idea whether this material is ok for aluminum surfaces, or generally suitable for use on a PL lens mount. If correct focusing really requires micron level precision, as I have read here that it does, I don't know how any grease could be used as it would form a variable thickness spacing layer between the metal surfaces.

Harry Clark

01-02-2008, 10:35 AM

Hey Rich, can you tighten the handgrips safely tight?
Can other recent shippees weigh in on the PL mount?
Cheers,
Harry

Johnny Friday

01-02-2008, 10:40 AM

....definately.
Stainless is a softer metal than high grade aluminum. My vote is the highest grade aluminum possible vs. stainless. Stainless bends quite easily whereas aluminum will not.....at equal tolerances that is

Rich Schaefer

01-02-2008, 10:49 AM

My handles do seem tighten. I have to say I have not shot with it hand held yet, that will be the test!

Radoslav Karapetkov

01-02-2008, 10:49 AM

It's a good thing that the manual is PDF-only.

Saves some trees and the camera is evolving constantly, so there's no point of a "finished" manual.

A new PDF with every new build sounds fine.

Apart from literature I'd be perfectly happy to read everything else in PDF, just because of the trees.

I Bloom

01-02-2008, 10:50 AM

just a side note.. the Mount never was to be Stainless.. the photos we showed where un-anodized aluminum so some may of thought it was stainless..

2. We have developed a new stainless steel PL mount system that is user adjustable, stable and does not use shims. It is as close to a religious experience as a lens mount gets.

:huh:
:sad:

Ian Bloom

Jay A. Kelley

01-02-2008, 10:58 AM

Yeah...

This is dissappointing. Things should be smooth, stable and tight right down to the last screw.

Anywhere else and I would be very very worried right now. But here's the thing: It's Jim and RED. They will make this right. If the mounts turn out to be a bad deal, then they will replace them. Pure and simple. If the handles do not tighten by design, they will be fixed.. Period.

I understand his frustration though, we're buying some pricey gear, and you want to feel that confidence of knowing everything is perfect and you got your money's worth from the second you open the box.

Something like this can shake up your confidence.

Just have faith man.. They'll make it better. One way or the other

Jay

Jannard

01-02-2008, 10:59 AM

My 1st post did reference a stainless mount. That was a wrong assumption on my part. 7075 was a better choice. It was changed the 1st day of development and I never corrected my post. Sorry. The mount is great. Many of us have been testing it, monster-stressing it and it is rock solid.

The other issues are inexcusable and will be handled in RED-like fashion.

Jim

Florian Stadler

01-02-2008, 11:04 AM

That's a drag to hear that things have NOT been fixed as promised. We have heard so many times: "We are aware of the issue and it WILL be fixed". Red should get to it before shipping any more cameras!

1) PL-Mount:
I know Red knew that the mount did not feel smooth like any other PL mount.
They designed a new mount yet the problem is still not fixed? This is most disappointing.

LDS: all that was ever promised was an /i connection so I can't say that's a dissapointment (although it would be hugely useful and will hopefully be enabled in the future). Having the /i connection removed and saying it can be added later as an optional accessory (at what cost?) without informing anybody is very disappointing on the other hand.

2) Loose Battery mounting plate on Cradle

I hope this is the Holiday fluke.

3) Battery Lock on Quickplate
MUST BE FIXED. I haven't been aware of this being a problem. Anybody else have this problem?

4) Side-Handles
I will accept this as the "Holiday Fluke"

5) Not enough grip of the Side Handles
We know the problem and it will get it fixed is what I've been told also...

6) Manual:
Will there ever be a hard manual? Since the camera is in constant flux there might not be and we'll have to get used to print a new one every time there is a firmware update. Maybe it's time to separate the manual into "firmware agnostic" and "Firmware dependent"?

It is great that the company is addressing these issues on an individual basis. I hope they are also addressed on a broader root basis. I know this community is putting a lot of pressure on Red to deliver cameras and we have to stop doing that. I have had a lot of faith so far in the "we'll fix this in the next shipment" excuse to a lot of problems but let's start seing these problems fixed.

Happy New Year!

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 11:07 AM

One side note concerning the lenses:
I asked Kelly to please keep all lenses on hold until there is are metric versions for the scales available. It is somehow frustrating not beeing informed from Red if and when there will be metric scales avaiable. To have metric available can‘t be such a big problem at all.

Thanks,
Sebastian

I can answer this issue right now for you, we will unfortunately not be selling any lenses with metric scales.

SF Geek

01-02-2008, 11:07 AM

Is the camera mount coming with the s4/i contacts, or is that now an add on or not an option?

Sebastian Cramer

01-02-2008, 11:07 AM

It is a fact that aluminium against aluminium is a bad pairing. It has a tendency to stick and to smear this is exactly what is happening on the current mounts.
It is also a fact that steel against aluminium is a bad pairing. Open up a Arri, Aaton, Moviecam, Panavision, you wouldn't find any aluminium in the mount.

Yes, you can grease the mount, but be careful on digital cameras. I know Arri is using a special gease which doesn't gas at all for their D20s.

Sebastian

Sebastian Cramer

01-02-2008, 11:11 AM

I can answer this issue right now for you, we will unfortunately not be selling any lenses with metric scales.

Whoow! This is a real big bummer for more than half of your clients!!!

Martin Ludwig

01-02-2008, 11:13 AM

I can answer this issue right now for you, we will unfortunately not be selling any lenses with metric scales.
more than the half of the world will use metric! you can ask all lens manufacturers....

Rick Darge

01-02-2008, 11:14 AM

What a bummer indeed... The aluminum on aluminum stickiness has got me all worried up, I'm sure they'll fix it..

I Bloom

01-02-2008, 11:16 AM

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 11:19 AM

Is the camera mount coming with the s4/i contacts, or is that now an add on or not an option?

We are not shipping cameras with the contacts in them as they are not feature or design complete , they will be an addon that we can ship to customers that they can install, or we can install them at Red during a normal camera checkup for no additional charge.

Dylan Macleod, CSC

01-02-2008, 11:19 AM

Is the camera mount coming with the s4/i contacts, or is that now an add on or not an option?

My question too? I had been expecting this.

If this is not true you should call Cooke and tell them to modify their "RED SET" description...

"The lenses come fully equipped with Cooke /i Technology that can be read directly by the /i contacts in the RED camera lens mount. No need for additional equipment. Cooke's /i "Intelligent" Technology enables film and digital cameras to automatically record key lens and camera data for every film frame, which can then be provided digitally to post-production teams. The technology streamlines both production and post, saving significant time and costs and eliminating guesswork, while enabling greater creative freedom."

from http://www.zgc.com/zgc.nsf/c7a682995edb4e7585256b4d001ebd57/bc15a5d011cfeb648525738b006a826b?OpenDocument

Dylan Macleod, CSC
Toronto, Canada
www.dylanmacleod.com

Greg M

01-02-2008, 11:20 AM

2) Loose Battery mounting plate on Cradle
The battery plate was not fixed on the Cradle (not on the Red Quickplate). You could pull it off about 2mm from the aluminium plate. If anyone encounters something similar: don‘t try to turn in the screws. They are about 2mm too long!!! I punched a hole in the back side of the plate by turning it in and ruined a second screw on which the head broke off. The only thing is: take the screws out and shorten them about 2mm or get shorter ones.

FYI- Mine is rock solid and the screws are the correct length, this is obviously a QC issue that slipped thru the cracks.

3) Battery Lock on Quickplate
The lock on the battery plate is not preventing the battery from falling out of the mount. A fairly small pressure is enough to push the red brick out off it‘s locked position in the V-mount.

Again, mine is solid here as well- the battery is locked in tight. Could this be related to problem #2 above? Personally I am not a fan of the V-Lock, but thats another story.

5) Not enough grip of the Side Handles on the Red Handle Mount
No matter how hard the bolts are tighten these is still a slip of the side handles on the 19mm shaft of the Red handle mount. It is definitly not tight enough for handheld operation.

I am surprised this hasnt been addressed yet, my handles have the same issue.

6) Manual:
I received a manual for the battery and the charger but none for the camera itself. If it wasn‘t finished by the time the shipping went out, a simple note would have helped.
I tripple checked all boxes before I finally downloaded the current version from red.com.

The manual changes too frequently to print it. But it appears you solved your problem. The download has been available for a while.

7) LCD luminance banding:
My LCD shows a strong banding in luminance, with clearly visible steps on grades. This is nothing I have encountered on other LCD like Transvideo etc. Unfortunatelly I couldn‘t get a picture of this, because contrast and a moiree made it hard to take a photo here. I might put it later.

This is a known issue, hopefully this will be addressed in firmware?? It really hasnt gotten in my way though
...but a fix would be nice.

Erik Greensmith

01-02-2008, 11:21 AM

Maybe we can hope for some kind of third-party sticker or something with metric scales to add on to an imperial Red lens. Aligning it would be tricky and would require a very precise system, but through referencing the existing markings it shouldn't be impossible. If there's profit in it, someone will save the day.

Brook Willard

01-02-2008, 11:21 AM

Is the camera mount coming with the s4/i contacts, or is that now an add on or not an option?

My understanding is that the pins were removed from the new lens mount to prevent them from sending information to the camera. Since the metadata is not enabled yet [and - I believe - won't be for a while], removing the pins that are sending useless data [and could be broken in the mean time] is just temporary. When the /i support is enabled, I suspect the pins/connector will be sent out to customers [or the camera could be sent in to RED to have them installed in house]. So it's still a planned feature, but this is just to prevent issues before the feature is ready.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Simon Valderrama

01-02-2008, 11:22 AM

I can answer this issue right now for you, we will unfortunately not be selling any lenses with metric scales.

??

Feels like selling MPH cars to Germany or NTSC TVs to France.

RU serious?

Jannard

01-02-2008, 11:25 AM

1. We acknowledge problems with the "holiday release". I don't like it anymore than you do. All cameras that go out from today on will not have these issues.

2. We found out why we had these problems and have "remedied the situation".

3. We will make any cameras with issues right. I will make sure of it.

Jim

Adrian T.

01-02-2008, 11:26 AM

I can answer this issue right now for you, we will unfortunately not be selling any lenses with metric scales.

Major bummer! Major disappointment! :ranting2:

And I thought you listened to your customers.

So, what third party will step in to fix this disappointment by producing a replacement scale ring or some kind of adhesive scales?

Adrian T.

01-02-2008, 11:28 AM

Shawn Nelson

01-02-2008, 11:30 AM

No pins? Are you serious? I have been working under the assumption that my R3D files had my lens meta data and merely that RedAlert didnt' yet reveal it. Why would you remove them? From an engineering perspective, it's risky to ship things that aren't at least hardware design finished or there can easily be more, bigger, recalls.

George A.

01-02-2008, 11:31 AM

I am still 100% behind RED.

I do sense a feeling of slight dissapointment creeping up among RED (future) customers.

This mishap needs to be fixed ASAP.

Brook Willard

01-02-2008, 11:36 AM

For those curious/concerned about the contacts, check this (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=5714&page=5) thread.

This thread was made at 9:11 this morning. Jim posted that the situation has been remedied at 11:25. If that's not service...

Laco Zamba

01-02-2008, 11:36 AM

Jarred: "/i support, when we have fully implemented it (its lower on the list), will be an upgradable part... We removed the pins from the cameras shipping as if we left it in, since it sends low voltages, it would short out when you put a lens on."

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=127410&postcount=44

Casey Green

01-02-2008, 11:38 AM

Thanks for the report, ready2roll.

There are obviously still kinks getting worked out - but the more feedback given, the better the Camera will be.

Glad to hear things are being "remedied". :)

Oh, and I hope the i/ technology is implemented soon.

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 11:49 AM

No pins? Are you serious? Why would you remove them?.

because leaving them in shorted out the camera in some circumstances with non-red lenses. We also needed to re-enforce the pins so they didnt shear off like so many of you reported.

I know it sucks.. but the camera is not sending any data anyways yet so the mechanical part has no use at this point.

Nils Ruinet

01-02-2008, 12:12 PM

2. We found out why we had these problems and have "remedied the situation".

Jim
Ouch, I guess that's where the "adult supervisor" kicks in...:gun:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=126904&postcount=1
:)

I'm sure the guy who messed up learned his lesson and won't do it again. :ninja:

Harry Clark

01-02-2008, 12:18 PM

Jarred and I had a spirited discussion about the pins already on this on this thread:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=5714
Seems as though they do intend on adding them later, but I guess they want to get cameras into our hands now. :)
I just hope it's a simple install, or maybe I can have CSC in New York install the pins for me. I'm not eager to take my camera out of action to ship it back for that...
I am surprised that they chose aluminum, no matter how high grade, over stainless. I suppose time will tell if this was a wise choice. I believe that all the ENG and broadcast manufacturers use aluminum for B4 mounts, FWIW.
Cheers,
H.

Simon Valderrama

01-02-2008, 12:21 PM

again, i think you're underestimating the whole metric scale issue.

i've already placed my deposit for my RED lenses, but i can't imagine myself using non-metric scale markings with my clients.
I feel ok because i'm red 2867 and so i assume there's enough time for RED to understand that metric scale is necessary and act accordingly.
I understand doing two versions of every lenses can be tricky, but both scales in one can be a solution? like lenses with both T-stops and f/stops.

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 12:21 PM

Brent@RED

01-02-2008, 12:25 PM

Please directly PM me with any issues or concerns regarding your recent RED delivery. I assure you that any and all issues that you might have will be dealt with promptly.

1. We acknowledge problems with the "holiday release". I don't like it anymore than you do. All cameras that go out from today on will not have these issues.

2. We found out why we had these problems and have "remedied the situation".

3. We will make any cameras with issues right. I will make sure of it.

Jim

Sebastian Cramer

01-02-2008, 12:29 PM

I can answer this issue right now for you, we will unfortunately not be selling any lenses with metric scales.

I just sent a mail out to Kelly to cancel my order of the Red lenses.

I'd really love to use Red lenses especially the zooms, because they are lightweight and seem to have a good quality. But even if I would live with imperial scales I know I can't rent I them out simply because it is not accepted here.
Staying only with imperial markers seem to be a quite imperial attitude, to say it the polite way. This has been discussed in many threads sofar.

In terms of the stickyness of the anodized PL mount I will talk to Arri and see if I can get some of the grease they are using on the D20. This is not a fix, but might be a solution to start with.

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 12:34 PM

Glad to hear Kelly is taking care of you Readytoroll... unfortunately we just cant do everything...

Jay A. Kelley

01-02-2008, 12:36 PM

I am not a pro in this, but I do have common sense. If the RED mount performs in any way shape or form that would single it out as being "less" than other professional mounts, then it needs to be dealt with by RED until it meets the quality/operation standards that are expected in this industry when working with such equipment.

If your situation is unique.. Then they'll fix yours and we'll move on. But if this keeps coming up, then they will have to deal with all of them. RED is not going to come this far, and call their mount a "religious experience" only to have everyone else say "have you worked with RED? They're mounts aren't very good.. They stick and they aren't smooth".

RED will not let this happen.. I have no doubt. We just need to find out if it's YOUR mount, or the mounts in general.

Jay

Martin Ludwig

01-02-2008, 12:36 PM

Glad to hear Kelly is taking care of you Readytoroll... unfortunately we just cant do everything...
come on Jarred - 73% pol for metric scales - this is a good number. even if you have to charge for it - the most will pay for it.
But this is definitely so very important.... and you can do it !

Simon Blackledge

01-02-2008, 12:37 PM

I'm more post than camera person. Can someone summise quickly what the issue is with the markings.

sorry about the stupid Q

s

Evin Grant

01-02-2008, 12:37 PM

FWIW the previous aluminum mount was sticky in the beginning but after a few shooting days became very free moving. I suspect the same will be true of this mount, and possibly better because of the higher grade aluminum.

Charles Perkins

01-02-2008, 12:38 PM

has the 50-150 lens entered production?

if not why cant you put both markings on the lens?

Simon Valderrama

01-02-2008, 12:39 PM

Even if I would live with imperial scales I know I can't rent I them out simply because it is not accepted here.

That IS just the point. Imperial markings would make RED lenses really a poor investment in Europe because they would be good just for personal use but no good for pro use or rental.
I still have time to decide to cancel or not my Red lenses order but for sure i'll start to consider alternatives right now.

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 12:39 PM

come on Jarred - 73% pol for metric scales - this is a good number. even if you have to charge for it - the most will pay for it.
But this is definitely so very important.... and you can do it !

we just can't do it... but im sure there are going to be lots of companies out there that will be happy to rescale the lenses if its that important.

Martin Ludwig

01-02-2008, 12:41 PM

I'm more post than camera person. Can someone summise quickly what the issue is with the markings.

sorry about the stupid Q

s
if you have unsharp pictures - maybe the lens had imperial markings and the assistant didn´t knew it.

Laco Zamba

01-02-2008, 12:47 PM

Assistents will have to learn how to use magic focus assist. It will be safer :-)

Simon Blackledge

01-02-2008, 12:50 PM

So it's because focus pullers etc don't understand Imperial? Tape measure is metric etc?

:-/

Simon Valderrama

01-02-2008, 12:52 PM

we just can't do it...

doesn't make a lot of sense.
if one isn't able to put markings in lenses i do not see how he could even start to think about making one in the first place.
Feels like Sony selling to US camcorders with menus in Japanese saying that they're not able to translate menus in english.
weird.:pinch:

Emmanuel Cambier

01-02-2008, 12:57 PM

we just can't do it... but im sure there are going to be lots of companies out there that will be happy to rescale the lenses if its that important.

I guess you'll have a hard time gettin' away with this.:bye2:

David Wyatt

01-02-2008, 01:00 PM

That IS just the point. Imperial markings would make RED lenses really a poor investment in Europe because they would be good just for personal use but no good for pro use or rental.
I still have time to decide to cancel or not my Red lenses order but for sure i'll start to consider alternatives right now.

I don't think Imperial markings would make Red lenses a poor investment here in the UK...just saying :innocent:

David Wyatt.

Simon Valderrama

01-02-2008, 01:03 PM

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/Metric_system.png

Simon Valderrama

01-02-2008, 01:09 PM

I don't think Imperial markings would make Red lenses a poor investment here in the UK...

ok, that was fun :)

anyway, even spacecrafts have fallen because of imperial markings:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter

ShannonRawls

01-02-2008, 01:09 PM

To see a company who's employees talk, apologize, console their customers on a web forum the way these guys do, it's utterly amazing to me to watch people complain (at) them for silly ish. (repeatedly, even after the facts have been stated) Actually, I'm amazed by it.

If the man said they can't make metric markings on their lenses, then the man said they can't make metric markings on their lenses. It doesn't have to make sense.

It's reminiscent of "Armchair Quarterbacks" who watch Monday night football yelling at their televisions because the running back went left and got tackled instead of right to make a touchdown.

Thanks to the original poster for his professional and tactful opinion/review.

Anthony Gratl

01-02-2008, 01:12 PM

After watching so many of us writing why in regards to the lens markings issue, I'm realizing that it's most likely a contractual obligation with the lens manufacturer. Jim and the rest of the Redfolk didn't just fall off the back of a hay truck and land on their heads....so let's stop the needless pile-on, I'm sure if they could do it they would.

EDIT: also what shannon said

Greg M

01-02-2008, 01:12 PM

doesn't make a lot of sense.
if one isn't able to put markings in lenses i do not see how he could even start to think about making one in the first place.
Feels like Sony selling to US camcorders with menus in Japanese saying that they're not able to translate menus in english.
weird.:pinch:

My guess is these are already manufactured and the cost to make the change would affect the price of the lens. therefor the "we just cant do it".

I'm sure they hear you loud and clear and maybe future manufacturing will be affected.

KETCH ROSSi

01-02-2008, 01:12 PM

I have to say that as I read the thread I, for a moment, concerned my self considering that finally, after 2 years, my first RED should be shipping any day now, shortly to be followed by my other two REDs, which are to go to work immediately here in the US, to then shortly after, permanently be taken to Italy.

But yet again I'm extremely pleased with the immediate response by Jim, Kelly and Jarred, this company truly rocks all the way.

Ciao,

KETCH ROSSI
www.KETCHFRAME.com

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 01:15 PM

BASSAM MSSALATIE

01-02-2008, 01:18 PM

Come in guy's stay cool .i am sure every issue will be fixed.don't blame redteam i think we have to blame ourselves
becuase we had pushed them to the edge everyday every second....etc
(when the schedule will be continue ,, where i am in the line..i hope my camera will be shippid soon befor christmas ...) every one here have to blame his self ....
so give them achance and stop creeping anymore..:wink:

Charles Perkins

01-02-2008, 01:19 PM

Thanks guys.. we just can't do it (ill say it again).. but just for kicks, how much would you guys be willing to pay, if anything, for a RED lens to be remarked in metric?

Just a theoretical question of course... heh heh heh...

shouldn't it be the other way around?

you could find out how much it would cost, and ask us if we would be willing to pay for it?

Jay A. Kelley

01-02-2008, 01:20 PM

heheheh Here we go....

Jay

Simon Blackledge

01-02-2008, 01:20 PM

I take it these are metric?

http://www.cookeoptics.com/cooke.nsf/secondary/cookeredset

Stephen Pruitt

01-02-2008, 01:20 PM

Hey. . . who knows? Someone might be using their RED lenses in Liberia!

:-)

Stephen

Jay A. Kelley

01-02-2008, 01:21 PM

Someone needs to throw a number out to get the ball rolling:

How about $150 per lens?

Jay

BASSAM MSSALATIE

01-02-2008, 01:24 PM

STOP pushing please:ph34r:

Sebastian Cramer

01-02-2008, 01:29 PM

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 01:33 PM

shouldn't it be the other way around?

you could find out how much it would cost, and ask us if we would be willing to pay for it?

tough crowd...

Again, we arn't going to do it, but im sure some of the companies that specialize in this would love to know if they had a market or not..

Patric Ralston

01-02-2008, 01:40 PM

I asked cooke what it would cost to get a 2nd interchangable focus scale for each S4 prime lens in either metric or imperial. They quoted UK pounds 299.00 each

Deanan

01-02-2008, 01:40 PM

3) Battery Lock on Quickplate
The lock on the battery plate is not preventing the battery from falling out of the mount. A fairly small pressure is enough to push the red brick out off it‘s locked position in the V-mount.
We‘re talking about professional cine gear here! I don‘t like to see the battery falling off in a middle of a hand held shot... (For some reason it is only happening on the Quickplate and not on the Red Cradle).
In general all batteries feel pretty loose in the V-mounts on every Red Mounting plate (but this has been dissused already in various threads).

Some plates need a quick break of mounting and unmounting a battery
about twenty times for it to properly lock. Please try this and let us know.

Simon Blackledge

01-02-2008, 01:52 PM

I'd say just ask Cooke.

s

Anthony Gratl

01-02-2008, 01:52 PM

Sorry I don't really get the whole point of "it can't be done". It's a ring that is engraved... What's the whole issue about?
I wouldn't mind some "fair" extra cost, as "fair" is a word which came up often on the threads here. It's simply a must to be able to deliver metric markers. Please name a price and I will rethink my cancellation of the Red-lenses.

Believe me, it must be contractual. There's no other explanation, as Red has demonstrated a willingness to meet the needs of their customers. On a critical issue like this, the only answer that seems logical to me is that it's verboten through terms of contract with their supplier(s).

Brent J. Craig

01-02-2008, 02:00 PM

Believe me, it must be contractual. There's no other explanation, as Red has demonstrated a willingness to meet the needs of their customers. On a critical issue like this, the only answer that seems logical to me is that it's verboten through terms of contract with their supplier(s).

That's my thought as well. I suspect the contract Red has with the mysterious company that mysteriously rehouses their mysteriously-sourced lenses and adds markings that look just like the engravings Cooke puts on their lenses prohibits them from making lenses for the 'rest of the world'.

At least I won't have to worry about ending up with a set of weird metric lenses on a shoot any time soon. (sorry) :-)

Sebastian Cramer

01-02-2008, 02:01 PM

Some plates need a quick break of mounting and unmounting a battery
about twenty times for it to properly lock. Please try this and let us know.

Hi Deanan,
I checked it out and it seems that there are two stages of locking on the battery. On the cradle the second level is easily reached by pushing it in, which means it is safely fixed then.

On the mounting plate of Quickplate it is not as smooth. You really have to push it in hard to get to the seconde level of locking. I assume most people would feel it is locked once they hear the click and not push it in harder. I tried about 40 times now. But once it's locked to the second stage it is fixed.
I will let you know if it get better over the time.

Thanks anyway,
Sebastian

Stephen Williams

01-02-2008, 02:02 PM

I'd say just ask Cooke.

s

Hi,

I asked Cooke about re engraving a Cooke 20-60 Zoom, they recommend another company in Leicestershire.

If it's properly done on each lens individually with witness marks I would expect it to cost about £500. Clearly a stick on scale made in bulk would be far cheaper.

Stephen

Sebastian Cramer

01-02-2008, 02:05 PM

Manuel Wenger

01-02-2008, 02:07 PM

Having metric scales is a must, otherwise the lenses are useless in a normal production / rental enviroment here in Europe (except UK). Focuspullers are used to metric lenses here and they will never adopt to imperal.
I had to bring this up again, cause this is a very important point !
I´ve the 15-50 and 50-150 on order but I´d rather cancel the order of the lenses before I go with imperial scale. I can´t rent them out, it´s as simple as that.
Putting a metric sticker on a lens is a no go, stickers can go off, or put on wrong. There is a need for a metric focus ring or a ring with imperial and metric scale, even if it costs some bucks, otherwise i think a lot of European customers will reconsider bying the RED Lenses.

I´m also a bit confused, cause this issue was adressed many times from different clients at IBC back in September and it was said, RED will look into this. Jarreds statment now is a bit surprising.

I don´t want to sound negative, and I love what Jim and his Team is doing, and respect a lot what they are handling arround with, just wanted to point out again how important this issue is for Europe.

Now you can all beat me up for bringing it up again ;)

Manuel

Patric Ralston

01-02-2008, 02:07 PM

Cooke lenses are handmade. If you want focus scales that are interchangable from them (1 metric and 1 imperial) you pretty much have to order them when you order a set of lenses. Each additional scale is £299.00

Regarding RED lenses a stick on lens scale is not a professional option. Perhaps some 3rd party could come up with a 2nd interchangable focus ring engraved in metric.

Deanan

01-02-2008, 02:13 PM

Hi Deanan,

I will let you know if it get better over the time.

Thanks anyway,
Sebastian

If it doesn't, please let us know so.

Brent Copeland

01-02-2008, 02:15 PM

I´m also a bit confused, cause this issue was adressed many times from different clients at IBC back in September and it was said, RED will look into this. Jarreds statment now is a bit surprising.

I think his statement affirms that they "looked into it" as they said they would, or they wouldn't say they wouldn't do it.

Also, Thanks for taking care of this so fast. Just got the email that our red has landed, and can't wait to get off of work to go look at this monster!

THanks!

Otto

01-02-2008, 02:16 PM

I can answer this issue right now for you, we will unfortunately not be selling any lenses with metric scales.

I read this 3 times now, and still don't believe it: You realy say "goodbye" to 50% of potential customers to buy your lenses?

And I'm shocked about this ARROGANCE - I never felt treated like this by a manufacture, even not by ARRI. And I never ever expect this from RED.

And the suggestions to get metric rings done by 3rd parties I also don't believe. It sounds to me like RED is not able to manufacture those rings. What a poor confession...

This is no good advertising for RED products. And I'm afraid the good attitude to look after customers wishes is gone with this. What a shame.

Today I lost the illusion, that RED is different. I had this dream now for about 1 year, and suddenly this dream is over - the moment when the first units got delivered and the truth appeared.

P.S.: I ordered I set of primes and the 18-85mm zoom lens and I will cancel these orders tomorrow. And of cause I dropped the idea to buy 2 other sets of primes and a pair of the other zoom lenses too.

Simon Valderrama

01-02-2008, 02:16 PM

Believe me, it must be contractual. There's no other explanation, as Red has demonstrated a willingness to meet the needs of their customers. On a critical issue like this, the only answer that seems logical to me is that it's verboten through terms of contract with their supplier(s).

Yep, it can be as you say. This makes everyone looking at Cooke?
It can be, but it's still speculation.
Anyway, this makes me confused about my RED lenses order, have to decide if i have to cancel it or not ... i think that if they have contractual restrictions they should say it.

Greg M

01-02-2008, 02:25 PM

Otto,
I think you are misunderstanding Jarred's words...his statement is not "Arrogant". He has simply stated that it cant be done. If this is important to you, and obviously it is then you should look at other options.

Nils Ruinet

01-02-2008, 02:27 PM

So you "can do" the best camera out there from scratch for 10x less than any other manufacturer in the world, but you "can't do" simple metric markings on a lens ?
Hum, sorry, sounds a bit weird...:umm:

But well, I guess you have a good reason for not doing it, even though I can't possibly imagine what it could be.

If it was a price issue, you could just have put both markings on the same ring, I've worked with lenses that had both markings more than once and it was fine. There, problem solved.

If it's contractual, well... strange contract... and certainly not a good idea.

Anyway, too bad for 90% of the world...

Stephen Williams

01-02-2008, 02:45 PM

Otto,
He has simply stated that it cant be done.

Hi,

Many people said Red could not be done & they were wrong.

Stephen

Jan Reiff

01-02-2008, 02:49 PM

I've worked with lenses that had both markings more than once and it was fine.

that´s right, all my old nikon fotolenses have both and few (old) filmlenses too.
but maybe it is not as dramatic as it looks like NOW, i think all are excited and jim and his team won´t leave this topic without a good solution for the "metric" people. indeed, it is quite important for those who ordered the redlenses, no doubt.

Otto

01-02-2008, 03:01 PM

Otto,
I think you are misunderstanding Jarred's words...his statement is not "Arrogant". He has simply stated that it cant be done.

"it can't be done" can not mean it's impossible. Engeenringwise it's easy. It's a simple aluminum ring which has to be engraved different.

So for me the answer "it can't be done" still is arrogant, because it says: We are not interested to serve the imperial world (which is half of the world). I even wouldn't ask for extra money (as Angenieux/Cooke/Zeiss also don't do).

And I still think that businesswise this is completely stupid (to sell only half of the possible numbers). O.k., stupidness may not be caused by arrogance...

Rick Darge

01-02-2008, 03:02 PM

Today I lost the illusion, that RED is different. I had this dream now for about 1 year, and suddenly this dream is over - the moment when the first units got delivered and the truth appeared.

Relax..

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 03:04 PM

And I'm shocked about this ARROGANCE - I never felt treated like this by a manufacture, even not by ARRI. And I never ever expect this from RED.

I truly am sorry you think I am being arrogant.. The honesty hurts sometimes.
if it makes you feel better, i can retract my " we can't " and replace it with " we will think about " and never get it done like some manufactures do.

And to be clear, this is only with our current lenses on the market. The Prime set, which is not released yet, MAY be able to have that as an option.

Stephen Williams

01-02-2008, 03:05 PM

And to be clear, this is only with our current lenses on the market. The Prime set, which is not released yet, MAY be able to have that as an option.

Hi Jarred,

With T stops as well I hope.

Stephen

Simon Valderrama

01-02-2008, 03:16 PM

Relax..

ok but... try to imagine yourself unpacking your long awaited $8,500.00 RED lens just to discover it's only metrics marked, and that you have no other option.
Ready2roll was nearly going to experience this (in a reverse way)

Otto

01-02-2008, 03:21 PM

if it makes you feel better, i can retract my " we can't " and replace it with " we will think about " and never get it done like some manufactures do.

It realy makes me feel MUCH better!

Rick Darge

01-02-2008, 03:21 PM

I wasn't telling Ready2roll to relax. I was telling Otto because he was being a little over-dramatic. I understand everyones' frustration about the lenses right now and it sucks. But hey, Red is new, cut them a little slack.. I'm sure they have their reasons behind everything.

Greg M

01-02-2008, 03:22 PM

ok but... try to imagine yourself unpacking your long awaited $8,500.00 RED lens just to discover it's only metrics marked, and that you have no other option.
Ready2roll was nearly going to experience this (in a reverse way)

Could he not see in the photos that it is only marked in feet.
http://www.red.com/store/show_by_tags/Lenses

Usually before I order something, I investigate exactly what I am ordering. A quick call to Red would have confirmed this. So this shouldnt have been a total surprise.

Remember this is a $6500 lens...the Cooke equivalent is 9X the price.

red1225

01-02-2008, 03:31 PM

Major bummer! Major disappointment! :ranting2:

And I thought you listened to your customers.

So, what third party will step in to fix this disappointment by producing a replacement scale ring or some kind of adhesive scales?

You guys in Europe and the rest of the world have got to get a grip. Buy a bit of chart tape...take a tape measure and mark the lens yourself...no big deal. A roll is a Euro or two at any art store. We do it all the time on the low end of the scale to get more accurate markings.

Also in regards to the handles....I've posted before on this issue. HOLD ONTO THE MATTE BOX LIKE ALL OTHER PROFESSIONAL OPERATORS!!!!

Patrick Tresch

01-02-2008, 03:37 PM

HOLD ONTO THE MATTE BOX LIKE ALL OTHER PROFESSIONAL OPERATORS!!!!

You are really funny.... good that you don't live in a metric world!!!

Pat

Dustin Cross

01-02-2008, 03:39 PM

try to imagine yourself unpacking your long awaited $8,500.00 RED lens just to discover it's only metrics marked, and that you have no other option.

I own a tape measure that has both metric and imperial, so it is not a problem. It is very cheap to buy a tape measure that has both. You are buying Red lenses because you want to save money, so add a $20 metric/imperial tape measure and start shooting.

Remy Carter

01-02-2008, 03:43 PM

Where I come from and what I've been taught is to overcome and adapt. I don't believe if they were only in Metric we would have such a problem, we would just measure like we have to anyway..... But then again maybe you should just wait for the Primes which will probably have both or just metric to make you all feel better.

Rudi Herbert

01-02-2008, 03:44 PM

This whole thing is not arrogant, inappropriate or direspectful, it is just UNFORTUNATE, simply enough.

there must be reasons why RED can't offer the option of metric or imperial, or better yet, and in keeping with the company's innovative spirit, both. And the fact they are not revealing the reason why must be respected as well. Truth is, measuring scales are a weird and divisive thing, sometimes more so than politics among people around the world :-) I've witnessed this first hand. I was a consultant for some companies in the scuba diving world and it always amazed me how they would inccur massive R&D budgets to design diving computers that were either metric or imperial, but not both, thus negating the feasibility to manufacture the product just once and sell it everywhere. And all that took was a 1 mm x 1 mm (.025 inch x .025 inch) chip that would do the x 3.28 multiplication! But even so, it took those companies years and years to accept that, on both sides of the camp...

I was born in a metric country and upon arriving in the US had to learn the clunky imperial system, and now I don't even really know which one is easier for me to use. But for most people, there's a common sense, a logic, a "of course it has to be this way" mentality when it comes to scales that makes it hard for them to accept, understand or want to learn and cope with the other system. That's just the way it is and for better or worse, I really hate to see that some people who were going to buy the RED lenses will turn away because of the inability to have a scale they have every right to expect as well. I for one would love to see RED selling as many of ALL of their products as possible, and it is a pity that they might be somewhat hindered by something that, though acceptably not solvable at the present time, is truly a minor "feat" of design and engineering when compared to anything else the company has achieved. But at least you know inequivocably what to expect...

Emmanuel Cambier

01-02-2008, 03:46 PM

red1225

01-02-2008, 03:46 PM

if you have unsharp pictures - maybe the lens had imperial markings and the assistant didn´t knew it.

If your focus puller can't tell the difference between Imperial and Metric...you've got a serious fuc*ing problem.

Go get some Angen#@*&%^...French lenses.

Patrick Tresch

01-02-2008, 03:47 PM

I own a tape measure that has both metric and imperial, so it is not a problem. It is very cheap to buy a tape measure that has both. You are buying Red lenses because you want to save money, so add a $20 metric/imperial tape measure and start shooting.

It's not about mesuring but about references. Have you been 1rst assist?

So you should know that you have to have an eye to be able to estimate accuratly distance and immediatly change it on the lens without to take any conversion table... This has to be intuitive and precise based on long experience of meters scaling... You don't improvise this with the help of a 20$ tape mesurement.

See you.

Pat

I Bloom

01-02-2008, 03:49 PM

but walk a mile in our shoes before posting… PLEASE

That's 1.60934km guys. :turned:

At least you have the falling dollar to soften this blow. But, I agree it's extremely odd choice for a lense manufacturer.

IBloom

Emmanuel Cambier

01-02-2008, 03:52 PM

Could he not see in the photos that it is only marked in feet.
http://www.red.com/store/show_by_tags/Lenses

Usually before I order something, I investigate exactly what I am ordering. A quick call to Red would have confirmed this. So this shouldnt have been a total surprise.

Remember this is a $6500 lens...the Cooke equivalent is 9X the price.

Come on Greg

It wouldn't cost 9x the price to have had metric markings in the first place, but what would you do then, buy some Cooke ???

Emmanuel Cambier

01-02-2008, 03:53 PM

If your focus puller can't tell the difference between Imperial and Metric...you've got a serious fuc*ing problem.

Go get some Angen#@*&%^...French lenses.

F****** ARROGANT

Greg M

01-02-2008, 03:53 PM

Sanjin Jukic

01-02-2008, 03:55 PM

Kelly is my darling!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.reduser.net/forum/customavatars/avatar203_6.gif

Emmanuel Cambier

01-02-2008, 03:55 PM

That's 1.60934km guys. :turned:

At least you have the falling dollar to soften this blow. But, I agree it's extremely odd choice for a lense manufacturer.

IBloom

Thank you so much IBloom:love:

Greg M

01-02-2008, 03:57 PM

Come on Greg

It wouldn't cost 9x the price to have had metric markings in the first place, but what would you do then, buy some Cooke ???

Thats not what I was implying. I was simply saying you can buy 9 Red Zooms w/ imperial marks or 1 Cooke Zoom w/ both marks...take your pick. It was really intended to respond to th "I cant rent these" remark. Sure you can...if you offered a zoom for $50/day w/ imperial marks only and a Cooke zoom for $300/day that had both marks I think you might find customers that suddenly accept the imperial marks.

Nils Ruinet

01-02-2008, 04:00 PM

If your focus puller can't tell the difference between Imperial and Metric...you've got a serious fuc*ing problem.

Go get some Angen#@*&%^...French lenses.
Thanks a lot for the advice, that was really helpful.
Really.

Rick Darge

01-02-2008, 04:01 PM

Mushrooms?

red1225

01-02-2008, 04:05 PM

You are really funny.... good that you don't live in a metric world!!!

Pat

AMEN TO THAT BROTHER!

Greg M

01-02-2008, 04:06 PM

Mushrooms?

yes, you didnt get yours?

shrooms, Copelandia bispora, magic mushrooms? Should be receiving them monthly as part of your citizenship in the Imperial Wonderland.

Häakon

01-02-2008, 04:06 PM

3) Battery Lock on Quickplate
MUST BE FIXED. I haven't been aware of this being a problem. Anybody else have this problem?
Yes, I mentioned it several months ago in this post (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=98823#post98823) and basically got blasted for it. Among all of the positives I see with the camera, there are still a few weak points. I will say that mounting the battery several times eventually helps it to be seated more securely and I am having much better results compared to when I first received the camera (on day one, it popped off just as easily as it does in ready2roll's video). But I still can't get my handle grips tight enough and that is a concern.

Let me say that RED's service has been absolutely top-notch; when my camera had an issue, they sent a loaner body to me the very next day along with a tech to figure out the problem and get things right. I have never seen customer care on this level before. So please don't confuse my criticism of the few minor flaws the RED ONE still has with an attack on the company. Sometimes it seems people just focus on the bad even though I have plenty of good things to say right next to it... but there are still problems that need to be addressed and it is important (if not essential) to get the bugs worked out.

Dominic Cochran

01-02-2008, 04:07 PM

To all you guys in imperial wonderland :

Please don't all get arrogant at the same time…
Save some of that arrogance for tomorrow.

There is no logical reason for not providing metric, there maybe some other reasons, but walk a mile in our shoes before posting… PLEASE

If I was in your shoes I would get a different lens. If the lens was ONLY metric, I personally wouldn't mind, but I know my AC would. Easy solution, I would have to get a different lens. Cooke 18-100 comes to mind.

It also seems arrogant to not just accept something they clearly said they can't do. It's obviously an issue of already having the lenses manufactured. It IS an unfortunate mistake I agree, but it's clearly a mistake that can't be rectified (at least with the 18-50).

Dominic Cochran

01-02-2008, 04:11 PM

HOLD ONTO THE MATTE BOX LIKE ALL OTHER PROFESSIONAL OPERATORS!!!!

If I'm handholding a 435/535, I think it would be really strange/irresponsible to not hold onto the handles and hold by the matte box instead. I'm confused by your post. And I'm a professional. Can you explain what you mean?

red1225

01-02-2008, 04:12 PM

F****** ARROGANT

Yea...but sharp as a fucking tack!

Simon Valderrama

01-02-2008, 04:13 PM

Where I come from and what I've been taught is to overcome and adapt.

As said earlier, it's more a problem with clients. I'm sure most RED owners can overcome and adapt, but i can't ask my customers to overcome and adapt.
I just can ask it to myself.
I want my customers to feel as much comfortable as possible, the same way Jim Jannard wants with us. On production, gear with a different measure system can be quite distracting, i do not need to tell you.
On the other hand, i've chosen the RED team because they've demonstrated to be able to listen and understand customer needs also on very complicated and demanding issues.
This one doesn't seem so impossible.
Rudi Herbert is right, measuring scales are a weird and divisive thing, but that's why, i think, we feel this minor "feat" of design could be a big problem among our potential customers.
We all know, filmmaking is a collective process, so i can ask myself to adapt, but not assume everyone i'll work with to be willing to overcome this.
Again, i think RED is underestimating the problem.

Emmanuel Cambier

01-02-2008, 04:13 PM

Thats not what I was implying. I was simply saying you can buy 9 Red Zooms w/ imperial marks or 1 Cooke Zoom w/ both marks...take your pick. It was really intended to respond to th "I cant rent these" remark. Sure you can...if you offered a zoom for $50/day w/ imperial marks only and a Cooke zoom for $300/day that had both marks I think you might find customers that suddenly accept the imperial marks.

Hey Greg… love you man.

But let's all face it one time for all:

This sucks big time for us in metric land, and there is nothing any of you can say,(be it smart or not so), that would make us feel better about this.

If it was the other way around you guys from Brooklin to L.A. would be yelling so loud we couldn't here ourselves playing cards in france.

WE NEED YOUR SYMPATHY AND SOLIDARITY NOT AGAINST RED BUT BECAUSE OUR CAUSE IS A JUST ONE.

Yours

Emmanuel

Dominic Cochran

01-02-2008, 04:15 PM

If it was the other way around you guys from Brooklin to L.A. would be yelling so loud we couldn't here ourselves playing cards in france.

That's where you're wrong. I would just believe what Jarred said and buy a different lens. I'm already not using the Red lenses for other reasons than this.

Hrvoje Simic

01-02-2008, 04:15 PM

I suggest some sports.

red1225

01-02-2008, 04:16 PM

Sorry to all my French brothers if I offended them in regards to their homeland lenses. I actually own a very nice Ang. 12-120 and love it.

Peace

Brent J. Craig

01-02-2008, 04:18 PM

there must be reasons why RED can't offer the option of metric or imperial, or better yet, and in keeping with the company's innovative spirit, both

I really shouldn't be telling you this, but I heard the reason for all the coyness regarding metric/imperial is because Red will be rolling out Red Units of Measurement at NAB. If you're changing the world, why not start with the basics?

The most common linear measurement will be the Red Hand, which is somewhere between a foot and a decimeter. Red Hands will be broken up into smaller units called Scarlets. A Scarlet, conveniently, will be equivalent to a millimeter so you can simply ask for a 50 Scarlet lens and people will know what you mean. Larger units comparable to miles/kilometers are rumoured to be called the Jim. Days will be called 'Soons" months will be called "Eventuallys", and very small units of time are of course Nattresses.

:-)

(Sorry. Cabin fever may be setting in...)

Rick Darge

01-02-2008, 04:20 PM

hahahahahaha - best post ever

Greg M

01-02-2008, 04:22 PM

Hey Greg… love you man.

But let's all face it one time for all:

This sucks big time for us in metric land, and there is nothing any of you can say,(be it smart or not so), that would make us feel better about this.

If it was the other way around you guys from Brooklin to L.A. would be yelling so loud we couldn't here ourselves playing cards in france.

WE NEED YOUR SYMPATHY AND SOLIDARITY NOT AGAINST RED BUT BECAUSE OUR CAUSE IS A JUST ONE.

Yours

Emmanuel

Emmanuel,
You have my sympathy...sorry if I was arrogant. Actually I dont even own the Red lens...which is partially why I said what I did. Sometimes you guys overreact as if Red is your savior and when something like this happens you freak. Bottom line is you have multiple choices for lenses, and if you want metric marks you can buy them today. Why freak out about this particular lens. It is what it is, and life is too short to stress over the little details.

But I do feel your pain.

red1225

01-02-2008, 04:24 PM

If I'm handholding a 435/535, I think it would be really strange/irresponsible to not hold onto the handles and hold by the matte box instead. I'm confused by your post. And I'm a professional. Can you explain what you mean?

Yes...hold onto the matte box. No handles. Still confused? You have much better control. The handles actually increase the weight on the front end and limit your mobility (not much) but enough if you get yourself in tight quarters. Thats why so many operators say..."yea...just rest your elbows against your chest...etc." Just like not using a pan handle on a fluid head and holding right onto the mag (like most) professional operators. Better mobility and more at one with the camera. Don't worry...a dp won't hold it against you. Give it a shot...maybe it's for you...maybe not.

Greg M

01-02-2008, 04:24 PM

I really shouldn't be telling you this, but I heard the reason for all the coyness regarding metric/imperial is because Red will be rolling out Red Units of Measurement at NAB. If you're changing the world, why not start with the basics?

The most common linear measurement will be the Red Hand, which is somewhere between a foot and a decimeter. Red Hands will be broken up into smaller units called Scarlets. A Scarlet, conveniently, will be equivalent to a millimeter so you can simply ask for a 50 Scarlet lens and people will know what you mean. Larger units comparable to miles/kilometers are rumoured to be called the Jim. Days will be called 'Soons" months will be called "Eventuallys", and very small units of time are of course Nattresses.

:-)

(Sorry. Cabin fever may be setting in...)

I sure hope they didnt use Jarred's hand...you know what they say about large hands (or is that feet?)

Nils Ruinet

01-02-2008, 04:27 PM

Sorry to all my French brothers if I offended them in regards to their homeland lenses. I actually own a very nice Ang. 12-120 and love it.

Peace
No problem, thanks :wink:

red1225

01-02-2008, 04:32 PM

Hey...can we all go back to calling a 25mm a one inch, a 50mm a two inch, 75mm a three inch...etc. Just like the old days:innocent:

Simon Valderrama

01-02-2008, 04:33 PM

Why freak out about this particular lens. It is what it is, and life is too short to stress over the little details.

... well in my case because i already ordered 15.000 $ worth of RED lenses :sad:
my bad i did not realize the limitation before.

I Bloom

01-02-2008, 04:37 PM

Yes...hold onto the matte box. No handles. Still confused? You have much better control. The handles actually increase the weight on the front end and limit your mobility (not much) but enough if you get yourself in tight quarters. Thats why so many operators say..."yea...just rest your elbows against your chest...etc." Just like not using a pan handle on a fluid head and holding right onto the mag (like most) professional operators. Better mobility and more at one with the camera. Don't worry...a dp won't hold it against you. Give it a shot...maybe it's for you...maybe not.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/582_1199320582.jpg

Listen to "the jesus".

Gunleik Groven

01-02-2008, 04:41 PM

Thing is. When people make fun of "autofocus" requests (which they should rightfully do), the imperial vs metric lense markings issue is more spot on to the problem.

Gunleik
(Bringing out vague tape marks)

The Polak

01-02-2008, 04:42 PM

Wow, great time to join forum. Good idea CrewPix - new intercontinental scale. In Poland we measure in potatoes. I'll tell my AC "give me 5 potatoes", he will nail that 20 inch in no time. Its a new trend in LA now also. Anybody? (chill out)
Whats done is done. Hopefully in near future it will be fixed. New Owners, i am more concern with IMAGE QUALITY of those new cameras. Any tests so far, please?
Thank you

Simon Valderrama

01-02-2008, 04:44 PM

... still hoping not to have to cancel my order tough.
If it's just an "already manufactured" problem, waiting a little longer or paying an extra would be good.
... can 200$ per lens make it?

Dominic Cochran

01-02-2008, 04:49 PM

Yes...hold onto the matte box. No handles. Still confused? You have much better control. The handles actually increase the weight on the front end and limit your mobility (not much) but enough if you get yourself in tight quarters. Thats why so many operators say..."yea...just rest your elbows against your chest...etc." Just like not using a pan handle on a fluid head and holding right onto the mag (like most) professional operators. Better mobility and more at one with the camera. Don't worry...a dp won't hold it against you. Give it a shot...maybe it's for you...maybe not.

Before I was a DP I worked with a whole bunch of other DP's and never saw this once. But I WILL indeed give it a try, especially since I have done the mag thing when it's on sticks.

I hope I'm not TOO set in my ways, it's only been 13 years after all. :turned:

red1225

01-02-2008, 04:51 PM

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/582_1199320582.jpg

Listen to "the jesus".

Ian...once again to my rescue. Is that Chris Doyle??? When I worked with him, he had those same silly bags for hand held.

How about that pint...or liter of beer?

Dominic Cochran

01-02-2008, 04:51 PM

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/582_1199320582.jpg

Listen to "the jesus".

Heh, yeah I forgot I did see that video before. I don't think we can consider him typical though. Which is a good thing of course!

Dominic Cochran

01-02-2008, 04:52 PM

Ian...once again to my rescue. Is that Chris Doyle??? When I worked with him, he had those same silly bags for hand held.

How about that pint...or liter of beer?

It is indeed Chris "Jesus" Doyle

Häakon

01-02-2008, 04:57 PM

You guys sure know how to hijack a thread... :cold:

red1225

01-02-2008, 05:01 PM

Before I was a DP I worked with a whole bunch of other DP's and never saw this once. But I WILL indeed give it a try, especially since I have done the mag thing when it's on sticks.

I hope I'm not TOO set in my ways, it's only been 13 years after all. :turned:

Well were roughly in the same boat...I've got 15 years in.

As Mikey would say..."Try it, you'll like it":biggrin:

The Polak

01-02-2008, 05:04 PM

Graeme Nattress. I think this one is for you. Will RED understand "Intelligent" Technology (like S4/i lenses) in metric system, or all data will be seen and recorded as a Imperial system?

Mike Prevette

01-02-2008, 05:25 PM

overlandfilms

01-02-2008, 05:32 PM

"Give me five potatos". F-ing best post ever. Holding the mattebox is great, though it does sometimes interfere with your First's ability to see the barrel markings / marking disk. However, the MB20 shade, and like models, are prone to separating from the box, so it is an at-risk operation at best.

I hold the mattebox all the time and I agree that it does indeed improve the operator-camera interface for composition and so forth.

FWIW, if I walked into a 1st AC situation and was faced with all metric lenses, I'd be on the phone with the rental house for a replacement set immediately. The rest-of-world is metric and they should have an appropriate toolset for their market. Every 1st AC in the room should agree on this. Period.

[EDIT] - As the poster stated above... newer matteboxes - especially highly modular ones - aren't really suitable for heavy handheld work. If you're scooting or on a Tootsie Roll, you might be okay. [EDIT]

e

red1225

01-02-2008, 05:53 PM

The hands on a matte box idea is a VERY BAD ONE! I have seen it done, and I have seen matte box fail and the camera go down. This is so not what matte boxes are made for. I don't care what big name DP you saw doing it does, it is just not safe.

Nothing makes your nutsack scrunch up more than watching a mattebox rip away from it's frame and send a 435 crashing to the ground superspeed first.

That being said I don't know any longtime AC (myself included) who looked at the RED handles and thought they were going to work. Any style of clamp on handles just wont cut the mustard. Most good handheld systems are rosette based. Preferably ARRI or my fave the Tango Blue handles.

Hey Mike...I don't mean to brag...but I was an assistant for 15 years on big budget features and tv and this is how it was/is done.

And it's not dp...it's dp's...ASC dp's. In addition...dp's usually don't operate (there are exceptions of course) but it's usually the operator that insists upon not using handles.

I've used this method as dp, operator, and assistant with Panavision, Arri, Arricam, Moviecam, Mitchell and the like without cause ever.

The assistant that allowed that matte box to fall off on your shoot should have been fired. It's his/her responsibility to make sure all the aks are on properly.

Also...don't think rosette based handles don't come loose. THEY DO!

Remember better control makes a better shot...it's all about the shot and holding the matte box gives you better control.

It's just a matter of taste...you are free to do as you like. Just letting you know how it's done in the real world.

John DeBoer

01-02-2008, 06:01 PM

Hey Mike:

They do hold the matte box. But there is a catch. They use an MB18 or MB14, and hold the rod as well as the box. The MB 19/20 would never be recommended as its front light shade does pop off with pressure, and the MB19 is to light weight.

Interesting to note:

It seems east coast uses handles, and the west coast uses the rod/mattebox style of handheld.

To each their own.......because they can, and will.

John

Cam Crowley

01-02-2008, 06:08 PM

Geez - this started as a really important thread and has degenerated into a load of bs personal opinions of how best to measure focus and hold the camera. Horses for courses i say.

This metric marking issue has me gobsmacked that RED doesn't see the need for it - WTF. I'll accept that the currently shipping lenses don't have metric markings. Hopefully some smart entrepreneur like Curt from VFS will make a fix - sounds like there will be a bit of a market there and cash to be made. However, I am planning on purchasing the RED prime set but will reconsider that IF there is no rectification by RED or a reasonably priced 3rd party fix.

BTW - love the wiki map Valde! puts the debate into proper perspective. The US, Liberia and Myanmar vs the rest of the world! I hear the Myanmarian Film Industry has some great tax breaks! Maybe I'll move there just so I don't have to be bothered with this stupid debate.

Bottomline is that the vast majority of the world is metric. Ignoring us wont make us go away but it will more than likely piss us off.

That's my BS opinion anyway.

Cam

PS - T stops would be nice too!

Brent J. Craig

01-02-2008, 06:13 PM

BTW - love the wiki map Valde! puts the debate into proper perspective. The US, Liberia and Myanmar vs the rest of the world!

It's a map showing officially metric countries, not countries where the film business uses metric. You would be extremely hard-pressed to find a metric-only lens anywhere in Canada, for example. The last time it came up for me (1992) the metric lenses were shipped in from Germany.

Mike Prevette

01-02-2008, 06:22 PM

I didn't say it can't be done, I said it shouldn't be done. I've seen it work fine a bunch. I've seen it work the smoothest on Panavision matteboxes. However watching it fail was enough to make me shy away from the habit.

Operating is a very particular thing, and everyone has their own tricks. I can't say that what works for me will be the best for everyone else. In my experience getting your hands as wide as comfortably possible makes for a more stable, accurate operating style.

chuck colburn

01-02-2008, 06:24 PM

Sorry to all my French brothers if I offended them in regards to their homeland lenses. I actually own a very nice Ang. 12-120 and love it.

Peace
They can be good.

chuck colburn

01-02-2008, 06:26 PM

I suggest some sports.

I've always loved a two on one fast brake.

Greg M

01-02-2008, 06:34 PM

I suggest some sports.

I'm going to see the Tigers win the National Championship.:nuke:
ya'll fight amongst yourselves.

Cam Crowley

01-02-2008, 06:34 PM

It's a map showing officially metric countries, not countries where the film business uses metric. You would be extremely hard-pressed to find a metric-only lens anywhere in Canada, for example. The last time it came up for me (1992) the metric lenses were shipped in from Germany.

Sorry - couldnt find the wikimap which clearly marks where the film industry uses metric. Damn - should stop using wikis to try to illustrate a point because there's always some smart arse out there etc etc.

And you would be extremely hard pressed to find an imperial only lens here in Australia and Im guessing Europe and Asia too. Guess what. We have industries here also. You may have seen one or two of these non-Hollywood products over the years - we occasionally manage to sneak our stuff into the megaplexes without the audience realising.

Silverlined

01-02-2008, 07:11 PM

All of you worrying about focus issues best wait until you see what they have built into this system. I've have had a couple of days with one of the latest deliveries and focus is not an issue, you will see what I mean when you get yours. Trust your eyes and the remarkable assists that Red has built in and stop whining about metric or imperial markings. This is by no means the video world nor is it strictly the film world, this is the best of both and it really works. When you actually see what this camera, and it's monitoring systems can do I think you'll be down on your knees thanking Jim and his team.
Brad

red1225

01-02-2008, 07:19 PM

Brook Willard

01-02-2008, 07:22 PM

Don't be an ass, red1225.

Nick Gardner

01-02-2008, 07:32 PM

Hi Red 1255,

You might consider that many of the people on this forum have considerably more experience than you, and that your arrogant, my way or the highway attitude rubs a few people the wrong way. I might also suggest that if you are going to post as rudely as you are, that you should post with an actual name.

Happy New Year,

Nick Gardner
IATSE Local 600
Camera Operator

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 07:35 PM

Don't be an ass, red1225.

well said brook.

red1225.. dont be an ass.

red1225

01-02-2008, 07:36 PM

Don't be an ass, red1225.

Excuse me?! Is this not a FORUM? I'm able to speak my mind and opinion! Can I not speak from experience or express my opinion? Can I not tell a less experienced assistant how it is? If I'm in the former Soviet Union let me know Brook...I'll keep an eye out for KGB

Dominic Cochran

01-02-2008, 07:38 PM

Once again Mike...your opinion and methods are your own.

Build your IMDB credit base and talk to me later.

Uh oh, I was worried this would turn into a pissing contest.

Let's all decide the new operating standard has to be left hand on the left rod, and right hand you can choose between the matte box or handle. Any variance from this and you are clearly not a professional.

JK obviously. You're both right. It's personal preference (and in some rare cases amount of insurance).

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 07:39 PM

red1225.. if you continue to make personal attacks your not welcome here.

Shawn Nelson

01-02-2008, 07:40 PM

think of reduser not as a public forum per se, but a big free gathering in Jarred's back yard

Florian Stadler

01-02-2008, 07:42 PM

red1225 I will jump on the pile and say that you act rude and arrogant in this thread towards the French and Mike Prevette (who I personally don't know). Handheld setups are a very individual thing for every operator and there's no "one way only" to go. It depends as much on the operator as it does on the particular camera and type of lens used - balance.

Chill and inform of us of your real name please so we know who not to hire when we're shooting in Brooklyn. No one likes arrogant know-it-alls.

Have a happy and productive New Year!

Dominic Cochran

01-02-2008, 07:48 PM

Steve Gal

01-02-2008, 07:51 PM

If you are going to hold the matte-box for handheld support, I wouldn't do it with the new generation of matte-boxes coming out. Arri would be a must for this as they are built to last and still I would not recommend it.Being a NY based rental house, I see the equipment coming back from jobs and I now understand how all the screws are loose and the swing away brackets are developing play, etc... and I am constantly repairing them to keep them up to par. But I cannot tell the user what to do. Just comes with the territory. If you want to keep your stuff new, do not rent them. As far as the Metric scales, try Century Optics (Schneider) as they rehouse lenses and probably can be done as a group buy? just my 2 cents.

red1225

01-02-2008, 07:52 PM

OK...I can tell I'm not welcome here.

No surprises with my package ok Jarred.

The Polak

01-02-2008, 08:01 PM

This thread started with "stainless steel versus aluminium7075" pl mount issue. I am not a Chemist so i was concern about that one a bit. I looked on internet for some answers. Thats what i found so far.

www.alcoa.com/mill_products/catalog/pdf/alloy7075techsheet.pdf
"...Alloy 7075 sheet and plate products have application throughout aircraft and aerospace structures where a combination of high strength with moderate toughness and corrosion resistance are required..."

www.wikipedia.org/wiki/7075_aluminum
"...7075 is widely used for construction of aircraft structures, such as wings and fuselages. Its strength and light weight are also desirable in other fields. Rock climbing equipment and bicycle components are commonly made from 7075 aluminum alloy..."

www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/mepages/aluminfo.php
"...7075 This is one of the highest strength aluminum alloys available. Its strength-to weight ratio is excellent and it is ideally used for highly stressed parts(...).Applications: Used where highest strength is needed..."

Maybe Aluminum 7075 its not as bad as thought first. Can anybody (RED?) tell me a little bit more about it, please? As far as i know all high end cameras use stainless steel mounts. Why did u guys pick 7075?

thanks a lot
daniel

Chris Nuzzaco

01-02-2008, 08:05 PM

OK...I can tell I'm not welcome here.

You just need to be more tactful, simple as that.

Jannard

01-02-2008, 08:21 PM

JustMe

01-02-2008, 08:25 PM

Jarred hanging from the end of a 4' steel bar that was attached to the lens mount, which was attached to the camera

Jim

I can see the Ape comments flowing....

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 08:32 PM

the one that sold me was Jarred hanging from the end of a 4' steel bar that was attached to the lens mount, which was attached to the camera... and swinging from it.

Jim

oh boy here we go....

The Polak

01-02-2008, 08:39 PM

Wow. That was fast. Thank you Jim very much. Strong it must be. Aircraft wings use aluminum 7075. Note for dolly grips: try not to cross 770MPH speed. At that point camera will loose its warranty.

JustMe

01-02-2008, 08:40 PM

Jarred you are a shaved Ape, we all know it :D

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 08:50 PM

shaved?

JustMe

01-02-2008, 08:53 PM

OK youre still harry

Jannard

01-02-2008, 08:55 PM

6'7" Tarzan... you should have heard the sounds he was making... scared all of us! He tried to take his shirt off, but Matt threatened to quit...

Jim

Jarred Land

01-02-2008, 08:55 PM

OK youre still harry

damn right.

Brook Willard

01-02-2008, 08:57 PM

This is so weird.

Andrew Benz

01-02-2008, 08:58 PM

shaved?

Video of Jarred at work at his previous QC job...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWGQULc8YMo&feature=related

His work speaks for itself. :-)

I look forward to #557... Thanks Guys.

Adrian T.

01-02-2008, 08:58 PM

I still don't get the reason behind the "we just can't do it" for the metric scales.

RED is supposed to be able to move mountains! :tongue:

Maybe it is because the lenses are already produced?
Then why didn't you listen to your customers in the first place?
It was first mentioned on this forum back in April 2007:

Hi,

Are the lenses marked in imperial units (feet) only, or is there a metric option.

Stephen
That's a good point. I don't know if there will be a metric version or not. It would seem silly not to though seeing how much of the world works in metric.
I doubt they will put both on the lens though, too hard to read in fast moving situations.

And it was requested many times later on this forum and at IBC.

Or is it because of some licensing contract? Are you not allowed to sell the lenses with metric scales?

Please tell us the reason behind all this. We simply don't understand.

Jarred, you jokingly asked what we would be ready to pay for metric scales. I really don't see why we should pay for a feature which would cost you almost nothing if you had thought of it right from the start. Nevertheless, I'd be ready to pay an additional $200.

And please, imperial forum members, don't bash on us! Try to walk in our shoes for a moment. Please!

Alan Skinner

01-02-2008, 09:02 PM

damn right.

Jim,

So not only the mount but the camera body took the wight of Jarred on a 4' bar without permanent deflection? That is outstanding!

Just for the record, if there is anything wrong, and I do not expect it, with my order when I receive it (kneeling, praying), I will contact customer care at RED first before posting on the forum. Then, and only then, would I drop any bombs on the forum.

Just seems like the right thing to do give the level of communication from the RED team.

Steve Sherrick

01-02-2008, 09:02 PM

I had initially assumed the mount would be stainless steel. But I then I changed my mind with some demonstrations....

The decision was based on strength, weight and change over temperature. I saw tests with the 7075 that convinced me it was the right choice. While technical testing was done, the one that sold me was Jarred hanging from the end of a 4' steel bar that was attached to the lens mount, which was attached to the camera... and swinging from it. No change in the mount. None. Then temperature testing showed incredible stability of the mount. I think it is the way that the mount was designed... with 7075 in mind, that allows it to work so well.

The weight savings is tremendous over stainless steel. But the decision was based on the performance of the 7075 in this mount.

Jim
Thank you for getting this back on track Jim.

Shit is going to happen. Red's a small company with a small crew from what we can tell. I think Jim has a lot of character to come on here and admit a problem and remedy it quickly. If that wasn't the case, I probably would have canceled my order if I read of enough reports of bad QC. Does it excuse mistakes? Maybe not, but we have to look at this realistically. This is professional gear, yes. It's also affordable professional gear and there are going to be some compromises. Red has made what appears to be a remarkable camera. They have also made some mistakes along the way that they would love to have back. But have they hid from their customer base and hoped people would accept the mistakes alongside the many positive things? No, they keep improving the camera, replacing parts, losing money (most likely) with the goal of eventually getting this thing to be the most bang for your buck in the movie business.

The original poster has articulated his issues well and Red has jumped in to make sure he is eventually happy. You don't have to be a fanboy of the company to appreciate the customer service that is being displayed.

As for the metrics issue - I think it is fair for those who this affects to raise the issue and ask about future implementation. It is not fair to be harsh to Jarred about this. He gave the best answer he could at this time. They are listening, but they may be in a position where they can't do anything about it for certain Red lenses. That's a decision that was made, and quite honestly no one is holding a gun to anyone's head saying you have to buy Red lenses. You can counter with the argument that you want affordable lenses and Red is all about affordable, but at the same time they have no obligation to implement every feature we want. They can listen and the do what makes sense for them.

Now that production is ramping up again for Red and the holidays are past, let's cut Red some slack and assume QC will get better. If it doesn't, Jim will probably have to face more questions about this, but for now let's be optimistic about the process moving forward.

Happy New Year everyone! Things can get heated in here sometimes, and maybe it's just passion for what we do. Hopefully no one takes things too seriously in these debates and it never gets truly personal. Let's hope for a productive 2008 in this industry, especially with an arsenal of Red cameras hitting the market.

Steve

Tony Lorentzen

01-02-2008, 09:21 PM

Brook Willard

01-02-2008, 10:28 PM

Remember guys, no pins as of today. When the feature is enabled, the pins will be added. No feature was removed or delayed... it's just not enabled [both software and hardware] yet.

I don't understand the new disappointment. A feature that wasn't enabled a week ago still isn't enabled today. What's changed?

Having seen bent or snapped pins on many cameras, I'm happy to keep those suckers out of there until they're in play... better not to break a part four times before it's even enabled, eh?

Jannard

01-02-2008, 10:39 PM

We are re-designing the pins and they will be added when they are done. /i is in the future of RED as we have stated.

All existing cameras have the provision for /i.

Jim

Jeff Kilgroe

01-02-2008, 10:48 PM

While technical testing was done, the one that sold me was Jarred hanging from the end of a 4' steel bar that was attached to the lens mount, which was attached to the camera... and swinging from it.

Now I fully understand your previous comments about "Jarred couldn't break it". Hehe.

John Tissavary

01-02-2008, 10:57 PM

Oh yeah - and I'm sure everyone who were thinking about doing VFX work with the RED are going to be disappointed. fxPhd guys included...

I'm not sure I completely understand this post, but... I can't tell you how many vfx shots I've completed over the last nearly 20 years without any lens metadata.

Filmscans w. accompanying camera dept. notes, and when there were no notes we still managed to match.

But again, I could be misunderstanding the post.

cheers,

john t.

Tony Lorentzen

01-02-2008, 11:16 PM

I'm not sure I completely understand this post, but... I can't tell you how many vfx shots I've completed over the last nearly 20 years without any lens metadata.

Sure - "necessity is the mother of invention", but it makes it a helluva lot easier to track footage for VFX work when you have the exact lens data available so you don't have to guess.

Mark Pedersen

01-02-2008, 11:18 PM

We are re-designing the pins and they will be added when they are done. /i is in the future of RED as we have stated.

All existing cameras have the provision for /i.

Jim

Jim,

We appreciate the commitment to getting this done.

I know it's been stated that the /i system will be the first metadata system supported, but is there interest in and/or any effort being made by Red to potentially implement the ARRI LDS system in the future?

If not, do you know of any possible update/workaround/mod that would allow the Red camera to read the ARRI LDS system data as it exists today?

If not, are there any standards bodies in the film business that can be used as a forum to air this issue and try to influence ARRI to open it's protocols?

Personally, I plan to get in front of the ARRI folks at NAB, but I doubt I'll have much influence ;)

Thanks,
M

Sebastian Cramer

01-03-2008, 12:06 AM

I had initially assumed the mount would be stainless steel. But I then I changed my mind with some demonstrations....

Jim

Ok. If the decision is to go with this pairing it must be respected. But I do feel the PL mount should be a lot smoother, or let's say more Arri-like (sorry for this :-).

I was under the impression the whole production stop was addressing this issue and one goal was to get the mount less sticky.
I was actually quite surprised to find that the solution was an adjustable PL-mount in the end. At this point I have to say that I'm not really convinced I will love this, because it can completly be fucked up by custumers who don't know what they are doing.

The industry had been working with a fixed shimmed distance from the film plane to the PL mount of 52mm for decades. The tolerance is 2/100mm and even with sound cameras the filmgate and the PL mount was always built as one single unit to maintain this distance as good as possible (we are talking here about real tight tolerances).
Ok, from time to time you could have a lens that was off, and in this case you had to use eye focus. But everybody had something pretty solid to rely on.

The flange back of exactly 52mm seemed to be one of the very rare rock solid parameters in the film world. Now, why would you change this and open a can of worms by making it adjustable?

The only reason I see at this point is, that it might not be possible to maintain a precise distance to the mount on a digital camera and therefore it needs to be adjustable.
From what I understand about the connection between the mount and the film plane I can only hope the sensor is directly connected to the mount. Otherwise it looks like there might be a lot of use in the adjustable mount.

Please don't get me wrong. I am still a one of the biggest fans of Red and everything they have achieved sofar. I just would like to get an idea how often I do have to touch this adjustment ring.

Thanks,
Sebastian

Alex Wengert

01-03-2008, 01:07 AM

Ok. If the decision is to go with this pairing it must be respected. But I do feel the PL mount should be a lot smoother, or let's say more Arri-like (sorry for this :-).

I was under the impression the whole production stop was addressing this issue and one goal was to get the mount less sticky.
I was actually quite surprised to find that the solution was an adjustable PL-mount in the end. At this point I have to say that I'm not really convinced I will love this, because it can completly be fucked up by custumers who don't know what they are doing.

The industry had been working with a fixed shimmed distance from the film plane to the PL mount of 52mm for decades. The tolerance is 2/100mm and even with sound cameras the filmgate and the PL mount was always built as one single unit to maintain this distance as good as possible (we are talking here about real tight tolerances).
Ok, from time to time you could have a lens that was off, and in this case you had to use eye focus. But everybody had something pretty solid to rely on.

The flange back of exactly 52mm seemed to be one of the very rare rock solid parameters in the film world. Now, why would you change this and open a can of worms by making it adjustable?

The only reason I see at this point is, that it might not be possible to maintain a precise distance to the mount on a digital camera and therefore it needs to be adjustable.
From what I understand about the connection between the mount and the film plane I can only hope the sensor is directly connected to the mount. Otherwise it looks like there might be a lot of use in the adjustable mount.

Please don't get me wrong. I am still a one of the biggest fans of Red and everything they have achieved sofar. I just would like to get an idea how often I do have to touch this adjustment ring.

Thanks,
Sebastian

I need an answer to this as well. I share Sebastian's concern. Sorry Jim and Jared, but I don't think this new mount is a good compromise.

Laco Zamba

01-03-2008, 01:40 AM

Hi Sebastian, did you get my PM?

Phil D

01-03-2008, 02:01 AM

Hi Jim,

With all this talk of differing hand held operating styles (Handles vs Matte boxs) is there not a opening here for Red to take on some of this information!

If a lot of operators use the matte box as a way to hold the camera in hand held situations, maybe some sort of ergonomic grip could be included into the design of Red's own Matte Box.

Looking at the design you have released on this thread... http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6562&highlight=mattbox

...a very simple idea would be to replace one or both of the rod locking nuts with a light weight handle? In effect the handle would be a glorified locking nut.

Or am I just talking nuts?

Wes Printz

01-03-2008, 02:12 AM

CSC is more than capable. Its pretty simple, you just remove the lockring, unscrew the front threaded piece and plug it in... you dont need to remove the whole mount and your backfocus "should" stay the same, if you put the ring back on with the same tightness as before.

Jarred, is there a torque spec on the mount screws? Your "tightness", will be different from another's idea of tight. Are the screws Stainless? Before someone does remove their mount, do you think there may be tooling and fixtures to check the "Should"?

----------------------------

12-29-2006:
The surface will be painted... and the lens mount a special metal. Jim

12-29-2006:
We are looking at Invar for much of the lens mount. Great properties for expansion (lack thereof) with heat. It is heavy so we are working out how to use it with minimal quantity and maximum efficiency.

I promise that you don't get this level of candor from the other camera companies...

Jim

As Jim has said all along.. Everything changes in life including the camera specs.
--------------------------

Several things here, There may have been problems with "Holiday Help", I.E., possibly bringing in extra staff, to get the cameras out the door as everyone wants theirs NOW, you will have issues with under experienced personnel, as Jim said it has been taken care of.

The current delivery schedule is VERY ambitious, for such a small staff doing final assembly, and the users should applaud the team for attempting to meet that schedule. I've been to assembly plants in Japan and Mexico, they pump the gear out they are making, but these have been refined over many many years. I've also seen the other end of the process, hand built precision Assembly.

On the Lens issue, just putting a sticker with either marking is NOT as simple as that. Every Cine lens ring is individually made!! No two Cine lenses have the exact same characteristics. The ring is installed, measured, marked, removed engraved, anodized, painted then re-installed, and checked again.

The wonderful thing about the world is CHOICE. No one is forcing you to buy what ever lens you are deciding to purchase. Yes some lenses are made with either Metric, or imperial, some even have both markings. This was a decision made, and being stuck to. Cooke is offering a RED set, they may have both markings, I'm not sure.

"The Customer Can Have Any Color He Wants So Long As It's Black". -- Henry Ford.

I've noticed a very diverse group of users on here, from top cinematographers, to the casual hobbyist. People want this feature and that feature, saying so and so camera has this feature, or someone else has that feature, How come RED can't have that... What prices are you paying for those cameras??? 2-5x more.. If you want those features, by all means no one is stopping you from getting those. Are you going to get a 2007 Aston Martin DB9 for the cost of a 2007 Volvo?

This project has gone from nothing to delivery in about 2-3 years, (or longer as the web site is Copyright 1999-2008) with lots of feedback and support from the team and community. I bet you all dream you had this kind of access to SONY and Panasonic, that the RED team offers.

Alexander Nikishin

01-03-2008, 02:38 AM

I personally have ventured into the land of hand-held matte box-gripped operating, but have officially decided that if your matte box is anywhere near the lens and has the chance to create a bit of push on the lens itself, I'd rather not even take the chance! Bad for the lens mount, bad for me!

Not to mention......your AC will love you for dropping that technique, it can interfere with his/her sight and pulling.

Sebastian Cramer

01-03-2008, 02:51 AM

Ok. If the decision is to go with this pairing it must be respected. But I do feel the PL mount should be a lot smoother, or let's say more Arri-like (sorry for this :-).

I was under the impression the whole production stop was addressing this issue and one goal was to get the mount less sticky.
I was actually quite surprised to find that the solution was an adjustable PL-mount in the end. At this point I have to say that I'm not really convinced I will love this, because it can completly be fucked up by custumers who don't know what they are doing.

The industry had been working with a fixed shimmed distance from the film plane to the PL mount of 52mm for decades. The tolerance is 2/100mm and even with sound cameras the filmgate and the PL mount was always built as one single unit to maintain this distance as good as possible (we are talking here about real tight tolerances).
Ok, from time to time you could have a lens that was off, and in this case you had to use eye focus. But everybody had something pretty solid to rely on.

The flange back of exactly 52mm seemed to be one of the very rare rock solid parameters in the film world. Now, why would you change this and open a can of worms by making it adjustable?

The only reason I see at this point is, that it might not be possible to maintain a precise distance to the mount on a digital camera and therefore it needs to be adjustable.
From what I understand about the connection between the mount and the film plane I can only hope the sensor is directly connected to the mount. Otherwise it looks like there might be a lot of use in the adjustable mount.

Please don't get me wrong. I am still a one of the biggest fans of Red and everything they have achieved sofar. I just would like to get an idea how often I do have to touch this adjustment ring.

Thanks,
Sebastian

Thinking of this, it comes as a surprise to me that no other digital camera like D20, Dalsa, Genesis, Weisscam, SI has something like an adjustable lens mount. At the end of the day it seems it's all coming down to this one question:

IS THE SENSOR CONNECTED TO THE MOUNT?

I hope the answer to this is not related to the religious experience of the new adjustable mount...

Alexander Nikishin

01-03-2008, 02:53 AM

Thinking of this, it comes as a surprise to me that no other digital camera like D20, Dalsa, Genesis, Weisscam, SI has something like an adjustable lens mount. At the end of the day it seems it's all coming down to this one question:

IS THE SENSOR CONNECTED TO THE MOUNT?

I hope the answer to this is not related to the religious experience of the new adjustable mount...

I've removed the mount without the sensor moving, so to my knowledge, no.

Deanan

01-03-2008, 03:04 AM

I've removed the mount without the sensor moving, so to my knowledge, no.

Not true. The sensor is connected to the mount.
Because you can remove the mount does not mean
it's not connected. How would you shim a sensor/mount unit if it
was one piece.

Sebastian Cramer

01-03-2008, 03:05 AM

Ok, this doesn't mean a lot, the question is, is the holding device of the sensor and the flange of the mount all mechanically grouped together.

Alexander Nikishin

01-03-2008, 03:05 AM

Not true. The sensor is connected to the mount.
Because you can remove the mount does not mean
it's not connected. How would you shim the mount if
was one piece.

"So to my knowledge" was my statements bumper, thanks for the clarification Deanan.

Deanan

01-03-2008, 03:18 AM

Deanan

01-03-2008, 03:24 AM

Ok, this doesn't mean a lot, the question is, is the holding device of the sensor and the flange of the mount all mechanically grouped together.

Absolutely.

Sebastian Cramer

01-03-2008, 03:24 AM

They all have adjustable mounts (via shims). The new mount makes
it easier and faster to adjust.

Yes, Deanan, but once it is set it's set. No other camera needs this adjustment. As mentioned earlier, I prefer a collimated exact distance of 52mm.

Sebastian

Sebastian Cramer

01-03-2008, 03:26 AM

Absolutely.

Great, this is really good news!! Thanks for this info. I was a bit worried.

Wes Printz

01-03-2008, 03:34 AM

Thinking of this, it comes as a surprise to me that no other digital camera like D20, Dalsa, Genesis, Weisscam, SI has something like an adjustable lens mount.

They all have adjustable mounts (via shims). The new mount makes it easier and faster to adjust.

Except Genesis.. NO shims for adjustment of the FFD there.

How I understood ready2roll's question, was: is the sensor physically connected to the PL Mount, which can be removed. From What I have seen of the camera, NO, the sensor is not connected to the removable portion of the PL mount. You would not want the sensor being removed from the camera, except by highly trained personel. The sensor is or should be in a fixed position behind the OLPF.

Stephen Williams

01-03-2008, 03:44 AM

How would you shim a mount if
was one piece.

Hi Deanan,

Very easy, place the shim between the mount & camera!

Stephen

Simon Valderrama

01-03-2008, 03:54 AM

FWIW, if I walked into a 1st AC situation and was faced with all metric lenses, I'd be on the phone with the rental house for a replacement set immediately. The rest-of-world is metric and they should have an appropriate toolset for their market. Every 1st AC in the room should agree on this. Period.

That IS the point.

As far as now we "the rest of the world" had no better official reply than "We just won't do it".
I expect something better from this forum. I do.
Otherwise i wouldn't spend my time here.
We have to decide to cancel our lens orders or not, wasn't this forum intended for this kind of situations?

Just tell us why and we'll decide what to do with our orders OR we could try to find a solution together (like extra money, waiting more etc.)

Anyway, STILL thinking RED is underestimating a critical customer issue.

Deanan

01-03-2008, 04:00 AM

Hi Deanan,

Very easy, place the shim between the mount & camera!

Stephen

Obviously but...One piece meaning the sensor and mount are physically attached as one piece. That is not obviously the case as the sensor, intermediate pieces, and PL are all connected but not one piece as was implied.

Curran Giddens

01-03-2008, 04:57 AM

After reading this thread all I can say is .... At least we got T-stop marks at no extra charge! :mellow:

Martin Ludwig

01-03-2008, 05:04 AM

Obviously but...One piece meaning the sensor and mount are physically attached as one piece. That is not obviously the case as the sensor, intermediate pieces, and PL are all connected but not one piece as was implied.
Deanan - it is all a bit confusing. The best way would be if you / Red could publish a technical drawing - so we all could imagine how it is and speculating has an end.
It is really a little horror for us - because so many people are reading on this forum and calling us asking stupid and non stupid questions.

Pig

01-03-2008, 05:11 AM

But I do feel the PL mount should be a lot smoother, or let's say more Arri-like <snip> and one goal was to get the mount less sticky....

It is interesting to read this; and I am beginning to wonder whether RED has a qualified metallurgist, or at least someone with sound knowledge in this field?

This all sounds to me like a classic case of stick-slip.

There are numerous ways to surface treat aluminum. It's not just a one-anodize-fits-all. Care needs to be taken as to what the mating material is, and exactly what the requirements are of the part in question.
Strength of the part's material (7075) is only a small portion of what the material has to be capable of. Since this is a mount that experiences another material being run against it NUMEROUS times during lens mounting/removing; I am now beginning to wonder excactly what surface treatment that 7075 underwent, considering the descriptions of #112.

RED, if you're listening, aluminum can be treated in a plethora of ways to suit one's needs. Something like a dry-lubricated hard surface treatment should be looked at and tested. There's ways to bring the friction coefficient down to 0.05!
I wonder if RED just went to some company and said: "Make this ring anodized.....in black please."?

Sounds like a different treatment of the alu ring could solve (or to large degree negate) these "sticky" problems.
:construction:

Clayton Harper

01-03-2008, 06:32 AM

It is interesting to read this; and I am beginning to wonder whether RED has a qualified metallurgist, or at least someone with sound knowledge in this field?

This all sounds to me like a classic case of stick-slip.

There are numerous ways to surface treat aluminum. It's not just a one-anodize-fits-all. Care needs to be taken as to what the mating material is, and exactly what the requirements are of the part in question.
Strength of the part's material (7075) is only a small portion of what the material has to be capable of. Since this is a mount that experiences another material being run against it NUMEROUS times during lens mounting/removing; I am now beginning to wonder excactly what surface treatment that 7075 underwent, considering the descriptions of #112.

RED, if you're listening, aluminum can be treated in a plethora of ways to suit one's needs. Something like a dry-lubricated hard surface treatment should be looked at and tested. There's ways to bring the friction coefficient down to 0.05!
I wonder if RED just went to some company and said: "Make this ring anodized.....in black please."?

Sounds like a different treatment of the alu ring could solve (or to large degree negate) these "sticky" problems.
:construction:

Finally somebody asks the right question.

Stephen Williams

01-03-2008, 06:58 AM

After reading this thread all I can say is .... At least we got T-stop marks at no extra charge! :mellow:

Hi,

On the Zooms they do indeed have a 'T' mark, interesting to know how accurate they are. The primes are marked with 'F' stops.

Stephen

Adrian T.

01-03-2008, 07:42 AM

Hi,

On the Zooms they do indeed have a 'T' mark, interesting to know how accurate they are. The primes are marked with 'F' stops.

Stephen

The 300 mm is marked with F stops. But there's no definite answer about the marks on the other primes yet. I suppose they will have T marks as well.

Stephen Williams

01-03-2008, 07:45 AM

The 300 mm is marked with F stops. But there's no definite answer about the marks on the other primes yet. I suppose they will have T marks as well.

Hi,

When you don't get an answer, then it's fairly obvious (to me).

Stephen

donatello b

01-03-2008, 08:21 AM

They all have adjustable mounts (via shims). The new mount makes
it easier and faster to adjust.

could RED explain/show "HOW to Adjust" the new mount ??

also many are going to be using other mounts - how does one get the new PL mount off ?? and back on ...

Curran Giddens

01-03-2008, 08:38 AM

Jim posted this about the new adjustable PL mount:

Loosen the two bolts you see, twist to establish back focus. Lock down. Done. It is solid as a rock when you are finished. The internal threads are fine so it is easy to find absolute zero (or 52mm). The internal mechanism is pretty ingenious.

The original mount works just like all film cameras... it was shim based. Soderbergh's 1st AC checked the mount every single day while shooting two movies on RED prototypes. He never adjusted the mounts once (he did adjust all of them prior to the beginning of the shoot).

Every RED ONE out there with the old mount can be adjusted to be perfect. But all mounts need to be checked and adjusted for "feature film" perfection. And the shim based systems only allow trained professionals to do it. Add in the need for a complete set of shims for any technician to do it and you have a recipe for delays and disappointment. I just did not like the concept of "it has always been done this way, so let's keep doing it that way. This mount is better. Much better. That speaks to the core philosophy of RED.

Jarred Land

01-03-2008, 08:41 AM

Hi,

When you don't get an answer, then it's fairly obvious (to me).

Stephen

dont assume...

:shiftyph34r:

Stephen Williams

01-03-2008, 08:46 AM

dont assume...

:shiftyph34r:

Hi Jarred,

Then I hope all the markings on the primes have witness marks & are really accurate, like other lenses 'made in England'

Stephen

Phil Bates

01-03-2008, 08:54 AM

Finally somebody asks the right question.

After reading this whole thread, (sometimes painful) I am still waiting for a good answer regarding the mating of steel and aluminum. I love the fact that 7075 is strong, but I am concerned with the reports of weird friction in the mount and stickyness.

Phil
www.artbeats.com

Greg M

01-03-2008, 08:59 AM

but I am concerned with the reports of weird friction in the mount and stickyness.

Phil,
Just to clarify...as best I can determine reading this thread it is only 1 report of "stickyness"...not reports. Before everyone freaks out, lets wait on more information from additional users.

Curran Giddens

01-03-2008, 09:04 AM

Sometimes, when things "stick," allz you need is a lil' bit o' lube....

Jarred Land

01-03-2008, 09:15 AM

Sometimes, when things "stick," allz you need is a lil' bit o' lube....

bingo... and we just switched to a better lube that works better with the thread pitch so you guys shouldn't need to worry about that anymore.

Sebastian Cramer

01-03-2008, 09:18 AM

Phil Bates

01-03-2008, 09:20 AM

Phil,
Just to clarify...as best I can determine reading this thread it is only 1 report of "stickyness"...not reports. Before everyone freaks out, lets wait on more information from additional users.

Good point. :) However, there seemed to be a legitimate question regarding the wisdom of mating of steel and aluminum. I am hoping that thread is picked up by someone on the Red team.

Phil
www.artbeats.com

Greg M

01-03-2008, 09:22 AM

This is good news, you don't have any issue with your mount at all.

Sebastian

no, I didnt say that...I have the old mount an dont have any issues with it.
All I was saying is, so far it appears you are the only one reporting the problem with the new mount. So before mass hysteria ensues...lets get more info and make sure its not an isolated problem.

I Bloom

01-03-2008, 09:26 AM

The camera itself is becoming battle hardened with many intrepid productions, using it and gathering feedback. The new mount however is batting 1000 but hasn't been off the bench yet.

What is lacking in the conversation about this mount is any empiricle information about the performance of the new mount itself.

If it can be set within tolerances and maintain FFD over time. Then it's good.

If must be adjusted constantly and cannot be trusted within the normal limits of wear and tear, then it's a problem.

Just do us all a favor and let us know what you discover, so that we can prepare ourselves or as the case may be....relax.

Ian

Phil Bates

01-03-2008, 09:30 AM

bingo... and we just switched to a better lube that works better with the thread pitch so you guys shouldn't need to worry about that anymore.

Ok, maybe I am giving too much legitimacy to previous posts. But there was concern that lube can "gas out and smeer the low pass filter". So, I assume that this is not an issue with your new lube? Does the lubing happen only once at manufacture, or is it part of maintenance?

Thanks,
Phil
www.artbeats.com

Sebastian Cramer

01-03-2008, 09:34 AM

Good point. :) However, there seemed to be a legitimate question regarding the wisdom of mating of steel and aluminum. I am hoping that thread is picked up by someone on the Red team.

Phil
www.artbeats.com

Phil,
it looks like it is mating aluminium and aluminium here. But I think at this point this decision has to be accepted. Jim had explained that there have been good reasons for this. That is fine with me.

Looking foreward to the get the lube, Jarred.

Sebastian

chuck colburn

01-03-2008, 09:57 AM

bingo... and we just switched to a better lube that works better with the thread pitch so you guys shouldn't need to worry about that anymore.
Jarred,

Lithium based lube?

Blair S. Paulsen

01-03-2008, 10:21 AM

Thanks to the Red Team for sourcing a lubricant that performs well in the new mount. I guess its true what they say about the squeaky wheel...

Simon Valderrama

01-03-2008, 10:54 AM

dont assume...

:shiftyph34r:

yeah, never assume.
i assumed non-americans and non anglo-saxons could have their RED lenses for professional use and i was SO wrong.

Sorry if I'm being a bit harsh but probably i have to cancel my order but i still cannot afford Cooke (or other cine lenses) and i feel a bit left alone in the desert.
The fact that RED lenses where available are part of my decision of ordering a RED camera in the first place, because everything i needed was within my budget.

Now i would like to know WHY RED decided to not support non-american and non anglo-saxon market, and also would like to know if a serious solution can be reached, (like third parties engravings) or if future "RED PRIMES" and/or "Red Zoom f2.8 CF 18 - 85mm" will have metrics option and/or both markings.

Just seeking answers to my questions.

Thanks

PS: if the thread now is just about PL mount i can move in a specific thread, sorry if i insist, but i will continue until i get some answers.