Red 18-85 vs. Cooke 18-100 with images/clips

[Roberto B]

cooke


red


different.. not bad though..

[Matt Uhry]

I agree with Ketch that bokeh is more than just how a lens renders out of focus highlights. It's also how the focus falls off and how it renders shapes out of focus. That's a hallmark of Cooke lenses and I think the Red lens holds up on its own judging from what I could tell at the Red store.

I think Matt did a great and valid test addressing most of the technical aspects of the lenses. Nothing can replace using a lens in real life to be able to judge its character.

I would say it's character is like that of the Zeiss Ultraprimes, neutral, sharp, even, cool toned, and maybe a bit clinical. That's just where you start - the rest of the distance is up to the DP. Obviously you can light and filter your way in many different directions.

I agree my Bokeh test is lacking... Maybe a lucky someone who's taken delivery of their lens could pick up the ball and do some urban night exteriors ? It would be much more relevant than what I've posted.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Jacek Zakowicz]

It looks like at 32mm Red lens is softer in center. Do you think it's the zoom curve(doesn't hold focus well while zooming) or just the performance @32mm ?
Jacek Zakowicz, OptiTek

[Matt Uhry]

It looks like at 32mm Red lens is softer in center. Do you think it's the zoom curve(doesn't hold focus well while zooming) or just the performance @32mm ?
Jacek Zakowicz, OptiTek

Hard to say what's going on with a camera test, it would be easy to spot using a lens projector. That's the best we could get with that particular Red lens at 32mm, it does seem a bit off to me too. There's many variables that could explain it and I'm not at all worried about it unless they all are like that !

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

Just looking at this from the viewpoint of a spectator (I'm not a professional D.O.P.), I like the image of the RED lens a lot more in most shots. Exept the Lens Flare is a lot nicer in the Cooke lens.

Only my opinion though.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Exept the Lens Flare is a lot nicer in the Cooke lens.

...If you want the flare, that is. The RED lens seems to be more resistant to flaring, but this is one of those things that can be subjective. I'd like to test it myself and see how it holds up with more than just an LED flashlight -- with sunlight, etc..

Overall, I like the cooler color rendition of the RED lens better, sometimes I find my Cooke to be a bit too "yellow". Not to mention the better field illumination on the RED, it's a bit sharper / cleaner, etc.. But it's a new design, the 18-100 design is around 20 years old. I really want to get my hands on the 18-85 and give it a workout myself.

[Sanjin Jukic]

Matt, thanks for the nice lens test.

But I always compare lenses with women.

Not always the most beautiful and expensive women models are the best girls (especially in sex, for example).

I have a huge experience with that (issue) and always have got the best and most exciting results just with an ordinary women.

That is the reason I like an ordinary lenses that still lenses at value can provide in a wide range.

RED, Cooke, Angenieux, Ultra Primes, Master Primes, Panavision Primo's,...

all of them can give you a beautiful pictures but also

an ordinary Nikkor's, Leica's, Canon's, Olympus's, Sigma's,...

can give you extraordinary picture in a way that you

are enough "professional" to get it out of them

(all that tricks are at DP's/Cinematographer's hands).

Red 18-85 vs. Cooke 18-100 nice two "girls' but I get enough with my

"dirty" and ordinary still zoom lens Canon EF-S 17-85mm 1:4-5.6 IS USM

Of course you get all of them on (your) RED if you want risk a bit and have enough :) courage .

Have a look once more, nothing scientific, just an average Joe's RED user life and its dirty test:

Canon EF-S 17-85mm 1:4-5.6 IS USM real life lens test

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19543

[bradvr]

Thanks to Matt and MJ for bringing the Cooke and putting our new 18 to 85 Red lens to the test. We will be shooting with the new lens this weekend and will update this thread with the results.

The lens fits our Vocas and the Chroziel Matte box just fine and we will do vignette tests with 4x5.6 filters on Monday. The follow focus is another story through... neither the older style Chrozeil or their newer Follow Focus are compatible with the lens. We are looking at what factory mods are available and will update you when we learn more. We will also check with other models and manufactures to see what is optimal. Bummer that nothing we have in house works as is.

As Matt said, we have two of these puppies and they are available for rent with or without the RED camera. Send a private message or contact us through http://www.videoresources.com

Brad

[Roberto B]

Matt, thanks for the nice lens test.

But I always compare lenses with women.

Not always the most beautiful and expensive women models are the best girls (especially in sex, for example).

I have a huge experience with that (issue) and always have got the best and most exciting results just with an ordinary women.

That is the reason I like an ordinary lenses that still lenses at value can provide in a wide range.

RED, Cooke, Angenieux, Ultra Primes, Master Primes, Panavision Primo's,...

all of them can give you a beautiful pictures but also

an ordinary Nikkor's, Leica's, Canon's, Olympus's, Sigma's,...

can give you extraordinary picture in a way that you

are enough "professional" to get it out of them

(all that tricks are at DP's/Cinematographer's hands).

Red 18-85 vs. Cooke 18-100 nice two "girls' but I get enough with my

"dirty" and ordinary still zoom lens Canon EF-S 17-85mm 1:4-5.6 IS USM

Of course you get all of them on (your) RED if you want risk a bit and have enough :) courage .

Have a look once more, nothing scientific, just an average Joe's RED user life and its dirty test:

Canon EF-S 17-85mm 1:4-5.6 IS USM real life lens test

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19543

agreed.. saving money for your filmmaking is the key.. tools are just tools.. no more than this.

[Sanjin Jukic]

agreed.. saving money for your filmmaking is the key.. tools are just tools.. no more than this.

Finally you are right man or you are one of the filmmaker's gang (mostly a straight men) :)

but also the other sort of man can be accepted without prejudices

but not more than for a filmmaking :),

also without any insults to the "other side" of men .