Thread: DSMC Grade Lenses

Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1 DSMC Grade Lenses 
    Senior Member A. Bastaki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Abu Dhabi, UAE
    Posts
    817
    Cine Lenses are HUGE.
    DSLR Lenses are TINY.
    DSMC Lenses can be somewhere in the middle..
    OR
    DSMC Can have a super smart PL Mount to fit Super smart PL Lenses.

    A normal PL mount that can take normal PL glass lenses and can take DSMC Certified Smart PL Lenses. I'm thinking Red lenses with internal motors fitted in em.


    Jim was talking about legacy and how red doesn't have that shit going on, as in sticking to a form of legacy mount system or 2 way camera/lens communication as in EF or Nikon G.

    Why not create a whole new set of Almost or full cine grade lenses for the DSMC.

    A set of Primes, and a bunch of zooms. A Tilt Shift lens. & and a good macro lens.

    Mount can be interchangeable. You can use EF lenses on em. or Nikon. (smartly) birger can make those :p

    Sensor cleaning Program.

    Sensor stabilization program. That way you don't need to add that to your lenses.

    Super fast and super quiet lenses that can focus quietly.

    If the focus can be controlled from the camera.. why can't the zoom too (that can help video shooters shoot zooms more smoothly)

    Big Ass Viewfinder. & have it Tiltable please.

    Lens can be controlled away from camera. zoom, aperture and focus.

    Minimal CA, and vingetting. Awesome lens coatings to reduce flare and color tinting.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2 Cash Mo Money 
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    132
    All these things cost money in the case of lenses big money its no coincidence that Leaf, Sinar, Hasselblad etc rely on others for lensing their cameras. Leica properly spent far more on developing the S series lenses than it cost to develop the S2 especially as Kodak & Fujitsu were co-developers for key parts.
    Perhaps Jim new camera wont use lenses instead using a pin hole? If however it does use lenses then they are just as key as a camera and if your a pro has invested heavily on glass you wont want to change to a completely new system unless its vastly superior than anything else and you can justify the outlay. Cameras relative to lenses are cheap particularly in stills.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member J. Bernard Vallon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    878
    My Dream lens solution works like this:

    A 'root mount', like the Red One, which fits deep into the camera body, which is possible without a mirrored shutter (as this isnt a DSLR), and is interchangeable with allen keys or something, and I can fix a Nikon mount, Canon, Leica, etc that intigrates with the 'smart' parts of all those lenses.

    Further, I want the shutter to be corporal (sp) like medium format shutters are, so I can sync at any speed, and be as close to the lens base as possible.

    Word.
    John Bernard Vallon
    JBV Media
    443-834-9023
    john (a) jbvmedia.com
    www.jbvmedia.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,684
    Red's "modular", rendering obsolecence obsolete philosophy would point to a DSMC that could use all possible lens. And Red has already shown they want to throw their hat into the lens arena.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    146
    Quote Originally Posted by Nova Invicta View Post
    Perhaps Jim new camera wont use lenses instead using a pin hole?
    Why not do both?

    Just poke a hole in the center of a spare body cap and you get a pinhole lens...

    :shifty:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member Drew Suppa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Burbank, CA
    Posts
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by Akube View Post
    Big Ass Viewfinder. & have it Tiltable please.
    Jim, I used to do some fashion photography and I agree with Akube on the larger viewfinder.

    Keep it optical. Having a big screen on the back of the camera is great, but an optical viewfinder allows you to (hypothetically) remove the viewfinder and swap it out.

    Rather than making a tiltable viewfinder (which will add a lot of weight) please look at the design of the Nikon F4S; the viewfinder is removable and can be swapped out for a waist-level viewfinder, which is great for studio photography.

    Making them interchangable is also great, because you can have 2 viewfinders geared towards still photography, then you can make a monstrosity of a tiltable one for video acquisition.
    Drew Suppa
    S.O.C. Pending
    Cinematographer, Operator, 1st AC, DIT
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Here's my question: who is this DMSC going to be targeted towards? I can see medium format and still life shooters flocking towards it, but again, the lens issue is a big one. Sure you can put focus mechanisms in the bodies, but Canon - and now Nikon - have discovered that autofocus motors in the lens (vibrating piezo elements, aka Ultrasonic and Silent Wave) are MUCH faster.

    About size: how big will this camera be? If it's much bigger than today's big DSLRs, then it's not going to appeal to journalistic shooters in the field.

    What about ruggedness and sealing against dust and moisture? One of the problems with a totally modular camera is keeping out foreign elements (imagine shooting in a war zone, for example). A Nikon pro DSLR like the D3 uses a magnesium alloy body and is well-sealed against dust and moisture. Those things can really take a pounding.

    I guess my point is: Can the RED DSMC offer enough compactness, durability, lens flexibility...and of course autofocus...to lure in any pro shooters beyond the medium format crowd for whom action, speed, durability and portability are unnecessary?
    www.cinemaspy.ca
    Infiltrating the World of Film & Television
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Having investigated Olympus (and other) 4/3 glass in great detail, I must say that this is something I've long wanted to see for Red. The 4/3 format has a 2x full frame 35mm equivalent focal length. The Olympus "Super High Grade" lenses are second to none for speed and amazing sharpness across the frame and zoom range. Check out their 14 - 35mm F/2.0 (28 - 70 35mm equiv.), 7 - 14mm F/4.0 (14 - 28mm 35mm equiv.), 35-100mm F/2.0 (70-200 35mm equiv.), a 90-250mm F/2.8 (180-500mm 35mm equiv.), 150mm F/2.0 (300mm 35mm equiv.) and a 300mm F/2.8 (600mm 35mm equiv.). There's even a 25mm F/0.95 from another manufacturer that's a bit soft wide open (as most fast lenses are), but super sharp from F/2.8 and up. There are some decent lens tests on slrgear.com and lenstips.com. They make Canon L series glass look, well.... weak! I just wish there were a higher pixel count 4/3 sensor available to complete with Canon on that level - something RED knows how to do!

    Panasonic has just announced a 4/3 1080P camera for $5K at CES, but it's no RED: 8 bit, 1080 at 60i, 50i, 30P, 25P (Native) and 24P (Native). Why not give the buyers of these an upgrade path Jim?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,493
    Quote Originally Posted by CinemaSpy View Post
    Here's my question: who is this DMSC going to be targeted towards? I can see medium format and still life shooters flocking towards it, but again, the lens issue is a big one. Sure you can put focus mechanisms in the bodies, but Canon - and now Nikon - have discovered that autofocus motors in the lens (vibrating piezo elements, aka Ultrasonic and Silent Wave) are MUCH faster.

    About size: how big will this camera be? If it's much bigger than today's big DSLRs, then it's not going to appeal to journalistic shooters in the field.

    What about ruggedness and sealing against dust and moisture? One of the problems with a totally modular camera is keeping out foreign elements (imagine shooting in a war zone, for example). A Nikon pro DSLR like the D3 uses a magnesium alloy body and is well-sealed against dust and moisture. Those things can really take a pounding.

    I guess my point is: Can the RED DSMC offer enough compactness, durability, lens flexibility...and of course autofocus...to lure in any pro shooters beyond the medium format crowd for whom action, speed, durability and portability are unnecessary?
    I shoot only fashion, but we use our Red MX all the time, for many reasons, including, very importantly, more film-like highlight roll-off and precise color than a 5D in stills mode, and more latitude for truly raw grading. An Epic would be a 100% all the time thing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,020
    Quote Originally Posted by CinemaSpy View Post
    I guess my point is: Can the RED DSMC offer enough compactness, durability, lens flexibility...and of course autofocus...to lure in any pro shooters beyond the medium format crowd for whom action, speed, durability and portability are unnecessary?
    I would think that a RED EPIC-X with a Canon 80-200 L would make a real beast of a sports/action photography camera.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts