Red Mount? W.T.F. and NO THANKS

[Matt Uhry]

Hi Jim, Jarred and Stewart

PLEASE don't make a proprietary RED lens mount. Leave the full frame 35mm lens market to Canon, Nikon, Zeiss, Leica etc. There's many great options and the other makers have a 50 year head start and 1000's of products available new and used at attractive prices. I'm sure you could do it well, there just is no need for it.

Concentrate instead on delivering the Red primes asap, more of the 18-85 zooms, a longer 25-250 brother to the 18-85 of similar build and quality. While you are at it how about a PL rehouse of that rocking Tokina 11-16 f2.8 ? or something better in that range.

Modern PL mount cine grade optics are what we need to shoot with on the Epic, don't jump into the consumer 35mm lens format.

Thanks for listening,

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Sven Seynaeve]

I was thinking the same as Matt...

[Mark K.]

I'm going to reserve any judgment on this until we hear a little more. If these Red-Mount lenses have a focus-throw and usability closer to cine lenses, then I'm all for them. We'll need that sort of added control shooting in the larger still 35mm format.

However if they're going to be more-or-less the same as the pro f/2.8 zooms currently available from Nikon and Canon i can't really see the point.

[Jason Ing]

However if they're going to be more-or-less the same as the pro f/2.8 zooms currently available from Nikon and Canon i can't really see the point.

Since when Jim & Red does anything "more-or-less the same" as Nikon, Canon, Sony, Arri...

[Matt Garrett]

isn't the shorter focal throw of the AF still lenses done to make the AF faster?
so if they have a longer throw for cine work they'll pretty much suck for still purposes.

[Alexis Hanawalt]

Well... PL mount lenses won't cover the full sensor of some of RED's new offerings... and while I have never had issues, many have complained that Nikon and Canon mounts are not secure enough nor well suited for film production use... so if RED is assuming that these cameras are to be used professionally, that seems to necessitate a new mounting system.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I understand where Matt is coming from. But I'm welcoming this new format from RED. They have a chance to give us what Nikon, Canon, etc.. are not giving us. A very robust mount, option for more controls, zoom and more, integrated into the lens / camera system, larger '645' format, longer throws, tighter and smoother mechanics with hard stops. I guess what I'm saying is that if RED is bringing their own mount and lens interface to market, I'm all for it if it's done right. And saying that we already have too many formats out there is kinda pointless now. There were too many formats and options out there already back in '87 when Canon introduced the EOS standard to an industry-wide response of "WTF?".

[Alexis Hanawalt]

I will add, though, that RED certainly fumbled with the Nikon mount for a while... at as Matt has pointed out before, they kind of messed up with the filter ring on the 18-85 lens...

RED is great with the software and internal components, but has missed the mark with mechanical aspects of things a few times. It still takes a leap of faith that they'll get this all right.

[david farland]

trouble is it takes an age to work out the marketing strategy of Red or what is available to them as a OEM company. Are they just converting elements available to the still world to cine requirements i.e mount, hard stops, breathing etc.
Or are there other forces at play, i.e need for sharper glass at 9K, Jim's brought out Cooke, blah, blah.
D

[Matt Uhry]

I should frame this differently.... how about don't mess around with any "Red Mount" stuff until you ship me the PL primes ( including the 18mm ) and 18-85mm, both of which I've been waiting 2 years for !

Also give some thought to this... what premium would you pay for a "Red Mount" SLR lens ? Double the cost of Nikon or Canon ?

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com