Configuration

[Ramis]

Hi everyone,

My company is planning to purchase a Red Camera in a short period of time, therefore has asked me to set up a configuration list that suit our needs, and I'm finding it quite difficult , I saw a post right here showing a basic list, that helps but our needs are quite different , these are my questions ;

1 .-We do have a complete set of nikon lenses, red has a mount , but how does it affect in terms of focal leght or light loss? .

2.- I've heard some rumors about the poor quality of the red lenses ,good enough to shoot 2K but insufficient when shooting 4K Any opinions?

3.- Can the Base Production Pack be attached to Arri Bridge plate?


Thanks in advance!!!!

[J.D. Frey]

I'm not sure about this- but I think the arri bridge plate is 15mm and the production pack is 19mm- I'm guessing they will work in tandem, but you will need additional rails. If I'm wrong someone will correct me shortly. :)

also if you are worried about the RED lenses regarding quality- then the Nikon mount won't help much in that regard (just guessing again here) but you will want a Cooke or some other cinema lens.

[Manuel Wenger]

1. I assume there will be no light loss for the nikon mount, since i think it just corrects the Flange Focal Distance, and there is no additionla glass in this mount. However the nikon mount is not as stable as a PL mount (nothing to do with Red, it´s a problem of the Nikon mount system wich is designed for still photography), wich could cause problems when focusing.

2. Where did you hear that the lenses are just good for 2K ? I don´t have a lens in my hands yet, but as far as i heard (read here) the lens is fine for 4K and a very good value for it´s money.

3. The Production Pack won´t fit into the Arri Dovetail, this was discussed somewhere here allready, to go with the Arri Dovetail you´ll need the 19mm Arri Plate which is in the Store for 900 USD.

Hope this helps a bit.
Manuel

[Steve Gibby]

2.- I've heard some rumors about the poor quality of the red lenses ,good enough to shoot 2K but insufficient when shooting 4K Any opinions?

I've owned and heavily used the two shipping RED lenses for over four months now, the 18-50 zoom and the 300mm tele. They're both excellent lenses and both resolve 4k extremely well. We've projected both lenses, and shot multi-burst charts with both, with excellent results. Our 18-50 has been used widely in 4k for shooting commercials, television, and high-end corporate productions, in cine-style and EFP style configurations. We've used the 18-50 for shooting 3D, underwater, from helicopters, on stabilization units, and many other professional productions. We've used the 300 tele extensively in 4k and 2k for shooting sports, nature, and even feature style scenes - all with excellent results. We also used a prototype RED 50-150 zoom extensively at the LART (L.A. RED Test) sessions last month to shoot several 4k scenes - and the results were excellent.

I don't know where you got the impression that RED lenses were sub-standard. IMO for the price I paid for them they were an excellent investment, and I couldn't be happier with he results.

True, there are some cine-style shooters here who somehow expect the RED 18-50 to match the Zeiss and Cooke zooms for mechanical functionality, even though the RED 18-50 costs about one sixth as much as those other lenses. But the RED 18-50 is and will be used in a wide variety of cine-style and EFP style production genres, many of which I've already used it in. The bottom line is the images the RED lenses generate when used on RED One. The images are stellar. If someone wants to pay six times as much to get maybe a slight increase in image quality, and easier mechanical utility, well, its their money. But for me and many others who have bought and used RED lenses, I couldn't be happier with the images they generate, and the very cost effective outlay for them.

[Paolo Tinari]

I don't know where you got the impression that RED lenses were sub-standard.

Someone here wrote that those lenses were good for Little Johnny from the hvx

[Blair S. Paulsen]

IMHO the RED 18-50mm CF Wide Angle zoom lens can resolve more lp/mm than the sensor can read. It is up to the job optically. The mechanicals are not as smooth as the best cine lenses. At T3 it is not a fast lens so if you need to shoot in available light or night exteriors then it can be limiting.

I have had Cooke S4s, Zeiss Master Primes and other state of the art lenses on my RED and they look stunning. The RED 18-50 is not in their class but is an excellent value for the money.

[Johnny St.Ours]

Someone here wrote that those lenses were good for Little Johnny from the hvx

I'm Johnny, I'm from the HVX- and the JVC, but I'm 6"4' dammit, and tired of bein' called little. You guys from the ARRIs and PVs... maybe you're just top-heavy

[Dominic Jones]

You're 6 inches and 4 feet??! I'd say that was fairly little!

Sorry, couldn't resist!...

To the OP:

1. Nikon glass should be fine - if you read up on this and other sites (including 35mm adapter sites, which are usually good for feedback on pros and cons of SLR glass) you'll find tone of info to cross-reference and make your own decisions. Personally I've shot a fair few productions with Nikon glass on HD camera systems and whilst some lenses are better than others, with a bit of experience and playing around you can get an excellent set of lenses that will definitely do the trick. You will of course also have a PL mount, so for bigger budget productions or shoots with specific requirements you can hire in PL lenses as required. There will be no light loss from the Nikon F mount, as it is a proper mount not an optical adapter.

2. Haven't used 'em so don't know, but Gibby knows what he's talking about - I'd probably listen to him, if I were you...

3. Well, the base prod pack includes a bunch of stuff including a 19mm base plate. Buy the 15mm base plate as well and you should be able to mount everything else to this, I would imagine - anyone out there confirm this? Be aware that there are TWO 15mm standards - Arri offset and lightweight. both use 15mm rods but have different spacing and lens positioning, and so are not interchangeable. I believe the 15mm base plate by Red is Arri offset.

Hope that helps...

[Johnny St.Ours]

You're 6 inches and 4 feet??! I'd say that was fairly little!

ha! sound like a real idiot now, don't I? Maybe I'm well grounded- low CoG and a lot of feet!

[Dominic Jones]

Lol! It's a Spinal Tap moment!...

[Irri]

I thought the following was true. Please correct me if I am wrong…

With RED you have the option of either the RED Bottom Plate or the RED Arri Base (15mm or 19mm)

The RED Bottom Plate attaches to the RED Shoulder Dovetail to which you attach the snap plate from your tripod

The RED Arri Base attaches to an Arri Base Plate to which you attach your snap plate.

The RED Bottom plate cannot be attached to an Arri Base Plate, nor can a RED Arri Base be attached to a RED Shoulder Dovetail.

What Red call a Base is what Arri call a Bridge

15mm and 19mm refer to the diameter of the rods which can be attached and which are placed at specific distances from each other.

There is no 15mm RED Bottom Plate.

[Ramis]

I've owned and heavily used the two shipping RED lenses for over four months now, the 18-50 zoom and the 300mm tele. They're both excellent lenses and both resolve 4k extremely well. We've projected both lenses, and shot multi-burst charts with both, with excellent results. Our 18-50 has been used widely in 4k for shooting commercials, television, and high-end corporate productions, in cine-style and EFP style configurations. We've used the 18-50 for shooting 3D, underwater, from helicopters, on stabilization units, and many other professional productions. We've used the 300 tele extensively in 4k and 2k for shooting sports, nature, and even feature style scenes - all with excellent results. We also used a prototype RED 50-150 zoom extensively at the LART (L.A. RED Test) sessions last month to shoot several 4k scenes - and the results were excellent.

I don't know where you got the impression that RED lenses were sub-standard. IMO for the price I paid for them they were an excellent investment, and I couldn't be happier with he results.

True, there are some cine-style shooters here who somehow expect the RED 18-50 to match the Zeiss and Cooke zooms for mechanical functionality, even though the RED 18-50 costs about one sixth as much as those other lenses. But the RED 18-50 is and will be used in a wide variety of cine-style and EFP style production genres, many of which I've already used it in. The bottom line is the images the RED lenses generate when used on RED One. The images are stellar. If someone wants to pay six times as much to get maybe a slight increase in image quality, and easier mechanical utility, well, its their money. But for me and many others who have bought and used RED lenses, I couldn't be happier with the images they generate, and the very cost effective outlay for them.
Well I'm a rookie in red one aspects and so is everyone else here in Europe, and some people give opinions not having a clue of what they are talking about and they mess up.

Thanks Gibby and everyone else for your great help.

[PaulClements]

True, there are some cine-style shooters here who somehow expect the RED 18-50 to match the Zeiss and Cooke zooms for mechanical functionality, even though the RED 18-50 costs about one sixth as much as those other lenses. But the RED 18-50 is and will be used in a wide variety of cine-style and EFP style production genres, many of which I've already used it in. The bottom line is the images the RED lenses generate when used on RED One. The images are stellar. If someone wants to pay six times as much to get maybe a slight increase in image quality, and easier mechanical utility, well, its their money. But for me and many others who have bought and used RED lenses, I couldn't be happier with the images they generate, and the very cost effective outlay for them.

This is true but the camera was made with the intention of not compromising so it's a pity that the early lenses do not compare in all departments with what's on the market. I'd rather pay twice the amount for the 18-50mm for something that was closer to a Cooke 15-40mm in build quality. Mechanical utility is what really seperates cine from still lenses, so I can understand people wanting to buy or rent lenses that have it over the red lens. That being said for the price the lenses do seem pretty good from what I've seen. I'd be interested however to see the equivalent length sigma's used in a side by side comparison once the Birger mount arrives.

I have high hopes, as I'm sure many do, for the 18-85mm. This one's been in the boiling pot for some time and I think could very well be something special.

Paul "A redone rookie from Europe" Clements

[Bill Goehring]

Given the unexpectedly high demand for the Birger solution(s), it seems to me that RED was wise not to aim any higher with the RED lenses than they have. Otherwise, they would probably be dealing with a disproportionately greater amount of static over the price, rather than the quality. I think Jim & Co. hit their niche pretty squarely on the head as it is.

Sounds to me like a used Cooke is your best solution.

[Steve Gibby]

Paul,

Its important to keep in mind that RED One isn't just used for large crew cine-style production, but rather for a vast array of cine-style and EFP style productions. In many of the configurations we've used our RED 18-50 in we don't even use a matte box, follow focus, so the operator manipulation of the lens has basically the same manual workflow that longtime still photographers who used manual still lenses were used to - manually focusing, zooming, and adjusting iris quickly by twisting the appropriate part of the lens barrel, or gears in this case. For very lightweight configurations, working as described above, we haven't found the RED 18-50 ergonomics and short throw gears to be a hindrance at all - in fact the lens is small and very easy to manually adjust on the fly without having a follow focus or anything attached to the gears.

The 18-50 optics are excellent. In my opinion, those who are complaining about the RED 18-50 are almost without exception those who simply aren't comfortable operating a cine lens without having the usual matte box and follow focus attached. I understand that - me and my crews use matte boxes and follow focus units regularly - when we need them to enhance the field workflow. When we've used the 18-50 with a MB and FF it has functioned fine for us, and without either, it also worked fine.

I also think a certain amount of "lens snobbery", egos, brand loyalty, and stubbornness to accept workflow alternatives, comes into play among those who criticize the RED lenses.

The bottom line is image quality - and the RED lenses provide excellent images. If I have to work a bit harder at mechanical utility in some genres I shoot, but actually get easier utility in other genres I shoot, and pay about one sixth the price to get those images, I think that's good business economics.

The above said, I also use top of the line cine lenses from Zeiss and Cooke when it makes the most sense for a particular project. The rest of the time I leave my previous biases and prejudices out of my lens choices. RED lenses rock. I've been using them for over four months on a wide variety of professional projects.

If a slight increase in image quality and a moderate increase in mechanical utility of a Zeiss or Cooke zoom is worth six times as much money than a RED zoom, or maybe fifteen times as much money than a Nikkor or Canon zoom, then its your money, spend it. For my money I've been happy with my kit choices - and a diverse array of clients have been very happy with the images from both of my RED lenses (18-50 & 300). When I can, I'll also buy the RED 50-150, which I shot with last month for a few days. It's impressive. I expect the 18-85 t be good too - I'll probably buy it also. I do a lot of genres that call for zooms - but I use primes when that's the best lens choice and I have the time or safety to walk to framings. When I need a Zeiss or Cooke lens I simply rent it and build it into the project budget.

[PaulClements]

If a slight increase in image quality and a moderate increase in mechanical utility of a Zeiss or Cooke zoom is worth six times as much money than a RED zoom, or maybe fifteen times as much money than a Nikkor or Canon zoom, then its your money, spend it.
This was my point though, optically it's difficult for a new company to compete with the decades of experience of a company such as Cooke or Zeiss, but there is no reason that the build quality of the lens couldn't be on a par in my opinion, and like I mentioned earlier I, and I'm sure many others, would happily have paid more for such build quality.

It would appear that the 18-85mm has had more love and attention than the 18-50mm, due simply to the time it has taken for it to be ready. I tend to feel the 18-50mm was created to have something affordable for shooters straight away, which is of course a good thing, but the delivery schedule of the camera undoubtedly impacted on the usual devlopment time of such a lens.

The fact that there is an affordable option that is capable of capturing great shots is a very good thing though, so don't get me wrong. The only thing I am commenting on is the fact that the camera is a "no compromise - better than what's out there" piece of equipment - That's how it was built - That's the level of quality Jim aspired to in it's initial conception and I applaud this. Personally I hope to see that same concept taken toward the lens market with the 18-85mm and Red prime set by being on a par or perhaps (dare I say) better what is already out there - Is this so impossible? No one considered the manufacture of the camera impossible and Red has succeeded in building something of very high quality, what's to stop Red aspiring to do so with their lens production, or their customers desiring it?

I would've loved to see a line of LeicaRed Cine lenses myself. Red would probably have sold more lenses than cameras! :)

Paul

[Sanjin Jukic]

I would've loved to see a line of LeicaRed Cine lenses myself. Red would probably have sold more lenses than cameras! :)

Paul

With LeicaRed Cine lenses RED would easy take over new coming Digital Hollywood even to compete with Panavision Primo L lenses.

One more thing: It is an experimental but can still draw my attention.

The P+S Technik offers IMS Interchangeable Mount System (http://www.pstechnik.de/en/optics-ims.php) that can be for sure adjusted for RED in a near future.

Also it offers a product number 19906 that is Leica M Mount P+S Technik Interchangeable Mount System.

What does it mean?

You could have Leica Noctilux-M 1,0/50mm that is let's say about T 1.3.

New lens costs about 4.795,00 € (http://www.leica-camera-berlin.com/index.php?id=57&tx_ttproducts_pi1[backPID]=57&tx_ttproducts_pi1[product]=1336) or 5,495.00 US $ (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/89430-USA/Leica_11822_50mm_f_1_0_Noctilux_M.html). As a second hand you could find it about 50% off.

It means that you could have the fastest high quality still lens for about 1/3 or 1/4 of a cine lens like Zeiss Master Prime 50 mm T 1.3 (a price about 14.500,00 €)

LINK>>> (http://www.pbase.com/juergenkook/image/39172412).

And for sure you must learn how you can focus with this lens on the moving images camera like RED.

http://k43.pbase.com/u17/juergenkook/large/39172412.EPSN178112s.jpg
Photo by Jürgen Kook
Leica Noctilux-M 50mm@f1.0
Shot with Epson R-D1
1/388s iso1600 full exif

http://i.pbase.com/u40/juergenkook/large/39290387.EPSN1934112s.jpg
Photo by Jürgen Kook
Leica Noctilux-M 50mm@f1.0
Epson R-D1
1/111s iso200 full exif

http://i.pbase.com/u17/juergenkook/large/39196248.EPSN172312s.jpg
Photo by Jürgen Kook
Leica Noctilux-M 50mm@f1.0
Epson R-D1
1/42s iso200 full exif

LINK>>> (http://www.pbase.com/juergenkook/image/39172412)

Compare it with Brooklyn Grit short movie (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7383) that is also shot in a metro station.

[PaulClements]

They're still STILL lenses though Sanjin. That said it'll be fun to try out some Leica on the Red though. We might see people happy to go with the look and feel of them over the compromises of them being still lenses. Especially ones such as the Noctilux.

Paul

[Sanjin Jukic]

Paul,

yes "they're still STILL lenses" and for sure it is worth a try.

On RED ONE of course.