Red Primes Suggestions box

[Evin Grant]

I'm opening this thread to try and give Jim, Jarred and Co. some pre-release feedback before NAB in the hopes that the Red primes will be there in a prototype fashion and we can get some of the FUD out of the way ahead of time.

First off the facts:
Price: $19,975
Fl range: 15 T2.8, 24,35,50 & 85mm T1.9

What I'd like to see...
Fit and finish similar to the Red 300mm
Witness marks (Much more important on high speed cinema primes)
Dual sided distance markings
95mm universal fronts
Internal focusing with no barrel extension
A 15/16/18mm that was also T1.9

Personally, I would rather pay $25,000 for this set and have it meet all these requirements than $20,000 and have it be missing any of these crucial
features.

I'll include a poll that will help gauge the Reduser sentiment.
What do you all think?

[Shawn Booth]

I agree except for FL's.

I'd much rather have: 100mm, 75mm, 55mm, 40mm, 27mm.

But everyone has their own prefs.

[Gabriel Beaudry]

I would also like, at some point, to have the option to buy the lenses one at a time.

[G.A. Kokes]

I am interested too, but will wait until there are some unbiased reviews.

Cheers,
G

[Evin Grant]

I am interested too, but will wait until there are some unbiased reviews.

Cheers,
G

After shooting quite a few different types of glass on a Red I'm less worried about the optics. Not to say I don't care but I suspect that they will be very good optically. The 18-50 and 300mm Red lenses have shown us that Red can make a sharp lens. The 300mm in particular give me a lot of confidence in both ergos and glass, but the last 10% is always the hardest, I'm just trying to see how much we can push.

[Matt Uhry]

There are two big problems for me with the proposed specs of the Red Primes.

It's way too big a gap between 15mm and 25mm. They need to add a 18mm or skew the whole set wider.

The 15mm being a f2.8 is lame. If you think about lighting a large night exterior your wide lenses need to be faster than f2.8.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Chris Gearhart]

I've been very happy with the 18-50 and the 300mm especially.

I'd love for all the primes to be 1.9, however. That'd be worth a few extra g's.

[Evin Grant]

There are two big problems for me with the proposed specs of the Red Primes.

It's way too big a gap between 15mm and 25mm. They need to add a 18mm or skew the whole set wider.

The 15mm being a f2.8 is lame. If you think about lighting a large night exterior your wide lenses need to be faster than f2.8.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

I hope that can be accomplished by this thread, Matt.

[M Olsen]

Either drop the 15 in favor of an 18mm or add a 20mm. Common maximum aperture is an absolute.

[roryhinds]

we fought for T Stop only to not realise that Witness Markers where not on the cards.

Thats the deal breaker for me, like having a ruler with just numbers and no lines, crazy I say... RED have gone mad.

[Evin Grant]

I understand your frustration Rory, but honestly the 18-50 is a different beast. It's the Mid-Pro (my phrase) zoom that does a lot for a little but I don't think anyone really expects a $6,500 lens to have hand calibrated witness marks. More to the point the overall mechanics of the zoom make it nearly impossible to do this because the tolerances involved are not tight enough, but that does not make the lens bad. I've shot with a few and have been fairly impressed at it's optical performance. It possible to focus accurately by eye and by distance when stopped down.
The primes are a different story though, they need to have some bench time. They will often be used WFO and pulled at that stop as well. Paul Duclos is $95 an hour. I'm not sure how long it would take him to add witness marks to a lens but I could do it with chart tape, a tape measure and focus chart at about 1-2 hours per lens. Even adding an hour for engraving that's only $1500 for the set. The 300mm definitely has tight enough tolerances to be marked in this way so i would hope the Red primes would be too, and thus include Witness marks.

[I Bloom]

It's fairly normal for wide and long lenses to have higher minimum apertures. This is really just physics.

I would like to see an 18mm added to the set, in addition to some longer focal lengths. Buy the set of five for 25000, then add on wides and longs. If it's up to the specs Evin has outlined, I'd buy it.

IBloom

[Adrian T.]

95mm universal fronts

I think they already stated that they will be 110 mm.
I don't care as long as they will have witness marks.

[KETCH ROSSi]

I personally just like Prime lenses, so as I know for fact that the RED 300mm Prime is a fantastic lens, even much more so when considering its price, very low for a PL mount lens.


I'm all on to pay the extra money and go to $25k and even $30k for their set of Primes, the higher the quality and the more the features the better, if people are selling very, very old Zeiss sets for the same money I think that people should be willing to pay at list as much for RED brand new technological Primes.


Ciao,

KETCH ROSSI

[Matthew Rogers]

I'm not sure how long it would take him to add witness marks to a lens but I could do it with chart tape, a tape measure and focus chart at about 1-2 hours per lens. Even adding an hour for engraving that's only $1500 for the set. The 300mm definitely has tight enough tolerances to be marked in this way so i would hope the Red primes would be too, and thus include Witness marks.

Do you think if you engraved witness marks on the 18-50 that after a year of use they would still be accurate? Or do you think the lens might slip on it's focusing?

Matthew

[Brent J. Craig]

As mentioned, 15 to 24 is a huge jump. The Cooke 21 is a lens that is used a lot on my jobs!

[laguun]

Do you think if you engraved witness marks on the 18-50 that after a year of use they would still be accurate? Or do you think the lens might slip on it's focusing?

Matthew

zoom lenses should be recalibrated as precaution - we do it every 12 months.
Even the quite expensive and robust angenieux do usually vary ~0.025-0.5mm focal lenght compared to their markings at the end of the scale after 12 months of almost daily use. However, these are 10x or 26x zooms, not 3x as the red.

p.s.
we have one lens we meanwhile nicknamed diamond, its the angenieux 7.8-208F2. every single time it goes back to the factory to have its checkup, and, dont ask me why, its scale remained -exact- even after 5 years checks in a row, not a single time we had to realign it.

[Matthew Rogers]

So basically you would suggest against engraving because in a year the marks might be off and then it would be hard to re-engrave them? I'm starting to think a little white camera tape with marks might be the best idea!:)

Matthew

[Evin Grant]

Mac, I'm not sure witness marks would ever be accurate on the 18-50, pretty much anywhere in the range of the distance number may be accurate depending on the play of the lens. Every one I've seen has been slightly different. Honestly, eye focus from T2.8-T5.6 and scale focus from T5.6 on.
You'll do fine.

[Shawn Nelson]

I would like to see the prime lenses sold individually. I can't afford the whole set at this point, but I would love the chance to at least pick up one at a time as money becomes available.

[Matthew Rogers]

Mac, I'm not sure witness marks would ever be accurate on the 18-50, pretty much anywhere in the range of the distance number may be accurate depending on the play of the lens. Every one I've seen has been slightly different. Honestly, eye focus from T2.8-T5.6 and scale focus from T5.6 on.
You'll do fine.
Are you saying that if you had someone or RED engrave them they wouldn't be accurate? Or are you talking about if I measure the distances and mark it on my 18-50 the next time I focus the lens it would already be off? Also, what do you mean by scale focus at T5.6 on? I'm confused!:)

Also, I forwarded your post onto a friend who has written a bunch of shorts scripts.

Matthew

[Evin Grant]

Thanks Mac,
What I mean is that there is enough play in the focus ring that you may be on or slightly off at any particular time because the tolerance of the focus mechanism is not tight enough to maintain the repeatable mark. This is by design, as I stated earlier to make the tolerances tighter and to add witness marks would raise the cost of the lens by many thousands of dollars. By scale focused I mean focus by distance, at T5.6 there is enough depth of field to overcome any focus inaccuracy inherent in the lens mechanics.

[chuck colburn]

One thing I would suggest is an optical tech at the factory or at least at RED headquarters performing REALLY tight quality control on each and every lens. Rejecting any that are not up to snuff. This is going to be very important if RED wants to impress the movie making community with their primes. These are new lenses and I assume new designs as opposed to rebarrled still camera lenses. And they better be consitently good or the word will spread fast if they aren't.

[Sean Michael Johnston]

I'm with Shawn - I hope that they'll offer them individually.

[Matthew Rogers]

Thanks Mac,
What I mean is that there is enough play in the focus ring that you may be on or slightly off at any particular time because the tolerance of the focus mechanism is not tight enough to maintain the repeatable mark. This is by design, as I stated earlier to make the tolerances tighter and to add witness marks would raise the cost of the lens by many thousands of dollars. By scale focused I mean focus by distance, at T5.6 there is enough depth of field to overcome any focus inaccuracy inherent in the lens mechanics.

So what about pulling focus for a Focus Puller? If a move is non repeatable, then it makes it a pretty worthless lens for a focus puller?! I kinda feel that's pretty sad considering the $1,000 Fujinon lens on my JVC HD110U can repeat a pull each and every time!

Matthew

[Evin Grant]

A focus puller can do fine from T5.6 and above. Below that it's a bit of a guess but if you have the monitor there you'll know if it's good or not. The $1000 Fujinon is no better it's just on a 1/3" camera which has enormous DOF and so the tolerance for error is much greater.

[Sven Seynaeve]

However the Red team decides and takes care of the quality questions about the primes I hope they come up with some high end quality primeset. If the primes are not equal or almost equal to some higher priced primes this won't benefit the the comunity believing in Red.

Maby it's a little based on rumours from around, but this would be one of the biggest dealbreakers in case of credibility for the Red brand, especially if we had to discuss this over with the ones using our gear in the future.

I'd love to see a sollution that would'nt cost us a fortune to get amazing quality, but not being a dealbreaker if a job's depending on it and most of all the decision taken by the dop which gear he'd like to use and be confident in.

Paying more for them could be an option for us , but the build quality should be much better then, causing the rumours to discappear forever.

[Mark K.]

15mm, 24mm, 35mm and 85mm all work for me. Given a choice, I'd ditch the 50mm in favour of a 135mm in an instant. I can't really see myself wanting to shoot a 15mm lens much below f/4-5.6 unless I absolutely have to, so f/2.8 would be okay there.

[Zack Birlew]

1. Sell the lenses individually.

2. Add a few more to round out the range. (ie. 18mm, 28mm, ect. to 100)

3. Add the pro features people are asking for. (ie. marks, ect.)

4. Maybe also offer a smaller set? (ie. 15mm, 50mm, 85mm/100mm) [wide, medium, close]

5. If you can, make all of them 1.9 or less.

6. I don't know, coming from a video world, maybe develop, by comparison to a whole lens, an economic Wide Angle and Telephoto attachment for those on a tight budget? Heck, maybe even a RED-approved rear/front anamorphic adapter?

[nick allsop]

witness marks please

[Matt Uhry]

15mm, 24mm, 35mm and 85mm all work for me. Given a choice, I'd ditch the 50mm in favour of a 135mm in an instant. I can't really see myself wanting to shoot a 15mm lens much below f/4-5.6 unless I absolutely have to, so f/2.8 would be okay there.


Can you explain why ? I find your statements strange.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Matthew Duclos]

Can you explain why ? I find your statements strange.
Agreed. Wouldn't people want a set with a consistent speed? It seems that a lens with a speed of 2,8 in a set of all 1,8 would be unwanted.

Correct me if I'm wrong. I would like to know opinions.

[Hans von Sonntag]

T 2.8 for a prime is not acceptable, unless it's a extreme lens like the Zeiss R8 or a telephoto.

Hans

[Nova Invicta]

Only one post here asked the MOST important question, are they good optically and better than re-badged average stills lenses? You can have any focal lenght you like but optical performance is the most important factor much more so than any sensor (crap in crap out). Arri sell their Zeiss lenses individually so does Cooke and any camera store and so should Red.

We have rejected Arri Zeiss lenses / Cookes if they were not good enough and so should anyone purchasing from Red. Red should also issue the factory spec in terms of MTF etc so you know your lens performs within the specification.
Which ever lens you choose always go for the best you can afford their MORE important than the camera.

[Andrew Madu]

Which ever lens you choose always go for the best you can afford their MORE important than the camera.

Ain't that the truth! Just got my quote from Arri for a set of Master Primes. Someone in my household is going to draw the short straw for bred and water for a few weeks! :)

[Florian Stadler]

The lens with the highest minimum aperture of a set is what you will have to light for every time (you'll probably want to close it down a 1/3 stop at least for performance). Making the wide lens the slowest lens is a big mistake and is the reason I would not even consider a set of Red lenses sight unseen.

That being said, my regular A.C. has a wooden light meter that has 2.8 1/3 written on it with a sharpie that she likes to wave around the set from time to time.

Lenses are the new filmstocks and I would be most interested in characterful lenses.

[Mark Pedersen]

Lenses are the new filmstocks and I would be most interested in characterful lenses.

Love it.

Sound like there are plenty of characterful lenses out there ;0

Just not that many good ones that are also cheap.

Maybe you get what you pay for? Hmmm. Seems I've heard that one before.

M

[Charles Angus]

Primes without witness marks are not worth using. Not cine quality.

If focus pulls are not repeatable, the lenses are not worth using. Useless for cinema.

T2.8 for a prime in a T1.9 set is disappointing, to say the least. However, Canon's offering in this range is f2.8 (for EF mount), and it costs the same (assuming each lens costs 1/5th).

In the end, I would not consider a lens set to be "cine" if it did not meet Evin's "what I'd like to see list".

It's only a bargain if you get what you need.

[Matthew Duclos]

It seems to me that the masses do not want still lenses that have been converted. I assume this is due to build quality and mechanics. If problems such as "lost-motion" in the focus and iris were eliminated and a consistent speed of 1.8 was applied throughout the set. AND the lot had focus scale witness marks on both "smart" and "dumb" side, and the set was all PL mounted, would that be a viable purchase for most people?

[Scott Webster]

It seems to me that the masses do not want still lenses that have been converted. I assume this is due to build quality and mechanics. If problems such as "lost-motion" in the focus and iris were eliminated and a consistent speed of 1.8 was applied throughout the set. AND the lot had focus scale witness marks on both "smart" and "dumb" side, and the set was all PL mounted, would that be a viable purchase for most people?

Matthew,

Urban legend has it that Band Pro went to Zeiss with the proposal for what is the Digi Prime/Zoom range. Zeiss said yes but to get them to build them they needed a minimum order from Band Pro. Not sure what the actual number was, but let's say it was 1000 for Zeiss to be interested in tooling up for manufacture. Band Pro went all in.

Let's look at Red. Conservative sales of 5000 cameras by the end of 2009.

From what I can tell RedUsers are looking for a standard set of 5 primes 16-85
with your specs priced between 25000-35000.

What I think Evin is subtly trying to suggest that if Red or an alternative manufacturer lift the specs of there prime set the market will be there. We are starved for product at this price range.

[Nicholas Vedros]

So if the red prime set shows up at Nab, which from what I can gather is just speculation, not supported fact, then when might we be able to expect a purchasable red prime set after that?

Any thoughts?

[Martin Jäger]

and i'm also with shawn - and if we can't have them individually i'd
like to see a set with only 3 lenses - as an alternative.

martin