Underwater Bubble Blowin' Users Group

[Mark Thorpe]

Hey David,
Good to hear from you. If you can get a trip to Palau I have the Gates and everything here if you need to play around with stuff. Plus get some kick ass diving in at the same time.

Are the people at BBC NHU also using the Gates? I knew that Doug Allen had one in Tonga with the SWP44 for the Humpback Whales but didn't know if it was his or from the gear room. He's away 'up North' most of the time eh?

All the best,
Mark.

[Michael Hastings]

Can we use the Nikon 12-24mm f/4 on the red? The DX size 16x24mm sensor is almost exactly the same as red: 24.4mm x 13.7mm (Super35mm). Does anyone know if the mount is the same so if RED makes us a Nikon mount soon the DX size lenses will work?

[Mark Thorpe]

Can we use the Nikon 12-24mm f/4 on the red? The DX size 16x24mm sensor is almost exactly the same as red: 24.4mm x 13.7mm (Super35mm). Does anyone know if the mount is the same so if RED makes us a Nikon mount soon the DX size lenses will work?

Hi AquaVideoRed206,
Evin is doing a great job of appraising the Nikon glass on the Lens threads. I'd suggest you submit your lens query to him or even request that this glass be placed in line for due course evaluation.

Regards,
Mark.

[Ken Corben]

Nikon 12-24mm:


Don't use it (12-24mm) on a film camera or a 24 x 36mm CCD digital camera like the old Kodak 14n. This lens cannot fill the entire frame of a S35mm camera and will give a semicircular image in the middle of the frame of film or big CCD.

[Michael Hastings]

Can you revisit that answer? - The whole point is the mysterium is the same size - it is not the 24x36 of a film 35 SLR or the full frame CCD of a EOS-1Ds.

I will try to get over to the lens forums, but I put it here since my interest is underwater and settling for a 17mm or more is unacceptable even a 15mm on the mysterium is borderline.

I thought maybe someone here had already seen the DX lenses discussed.

Nikon 12-24mm:


Don't use it (12-24mm) on a film camera or a 24 x 36mm CCD digital camera like the old Kodak 14n. This lens cannot fill the entire frame of a S35mm camera and will give a semicircular image in the middle of the frame of film or big CCD.

[Mark Thorpe]

Hi,
Sorry but I am not aware of a thread which deals with this lens. Then again I am not looking through all threads at this point.

Cheers,
Mark.

[Ken Corben]

Wouldn't it be awesome if a +/- $1K Nikon lens was the underwater answer?

DIN S35mm is 24.05mm wide, ANSI S35mm is 24.9mm wide. Always go with the horizontal only. The vertical changes with aspect ratio.

Hence the Mysterium sensor (24.4 x 13.7mm) fits neatly between the two. Now I am guessing that if one calculates DIN S35mm of 24.05mm for the red sensor, unused portion sensor dedicated to "auto black?". then the questions of DSLR lens coverage comes into play.

Caveat: I am not the "expert" just indulging in development ideas with other avid underwater shooters using google and this forum as my knowledge base. That said:

The premise I have been researching under for my ideas is S35mm coverage for the mysterium sensor at 4K Red RAW. If this is the caveat, then technically the 12-24mm Nikon is a 18-36mm, no? Not bad for less than a grand, HOWEVER, there is a caution for S35 coverage from this lens expert.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1224.htm

Tech savvy link:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/dx.htm

KEEP THE IDEAS COMING....

Visual Depiction of coverage areas:

[Michael Hastings]

Just remembered that the 12-24 has no iris ring - a bit of a problem with the RED. Anybody know if you can dig into these lenses to hot wire the iris motor? - we've done it many times with video lenses and it sure would make external control easier than with gears.

Can you revisit that answer? - The whole point is the mysterium is the same size - it is not the 24x36 of a film 35 SLR or the full frame CCD of a EOS-1Ds.

I will try to get over to the lens forums, but I put it here since my interest is underwater and settling for a 17mm or more is unacceptable even a 15mm on the mysterium is borderline.

I thought maybe someone here had already seen the DX lenses discussed.

[Ken Corben]

The Tokina 12-24mm is suitable if the mysterium coverage is there..

"*Will not give full coverage on 35mm SLR cameras.?"

I'd say that for >$1000 if the optics are sharp edge to edge then in 4K Red RAW it might be simple to have a "pan and scan" preset for the output files in post???

http://www.thkphoto.com/products/tokina/afl-00b.html

TOKINA 12-24mm

Mount availability: Canon and Nikon Digital Only*

Recommended Sensor size: APS-C Sized (23.7 X15.6mm)
CCD or CMOS sensor
(w/1.5-1.6x magnification factor)

Zoom Range: 12-24mm

Maximum Aperture: F/4

Minimum Aperture: F/22

Optical Construction: 13 Elements / 11Groups

Coatings: Multi-layer Coatings

Zooming System: Rotary-type

Minimum Focus Distance: 11.8 in. (30cm)

Macro Ratio: 1:8

Number of Diaphragm Blades:
9

Filter Size: 77mm

Dimensions: 3.3 in. (84mm) X 3.5 in. (89.5mm)

Weight: 20.1 oz. (570g)

Included Accessories: BH-777 Dedicated Lens Hood

Optional Accessories: Fitted Case

Suggested List Price: $899.00

[Michael Hastings]

The 12mm is 12mm - that is if you compare it to the red zoom at 18-85 it is a whole lot wider. That conversion factor you are using - 12-24 equaling 18-36 is only when you are trying to compare the angle view to what you would get with a full frame (24x36) 35mm SLR.

Rockwell explains it this way: "A more complex way to imagine this change in field of view is to play a game and imagine that your lens changed focal length. Typically this factor is 1.5, meaning a 50mm lens used on a typical digital SLR will give the same angle of view as a 75mm lens on a film camera. This is all pretend; the focal length doesn't really change. It's just a way for people familiar with lenses on 35mm cameras to imagine the fields of view on DSLRs", or in our case the RED camera.

Rockwell further talks about the 12-24 working fine on full frame SLRs down to about 16mm - in other words there is no optical problem - it just has to cover the sensor and the circle gets smaller as you go wider. Since the mysterium is so close I doubt if there is any loss (one would think that they designed in a little overshoot), but if there is it would probably only require limiting the zoom to 13mm or so as at this focal lenght 1mm is almost 10%. (My other random speculation is that the Mysterium is so close to the DX size that many of these cameras use, that it may have been initially developed with that in mind before the RED team got onto it - or was the Mysterium really developed specifically for RED?)

Unfortunately, we are still back to the iris question to make it the underwater answer. (Anybody have one of the cheaper DX lenses we could tear apart - guess I could look on ebay.)

Wouldn't it be awesome if a +/- $1K Nikon lens was the underwater answer?

The premise I have been researching under for my ideas is S35mm coverage for the mysterium sensor at 4K Red RAW. If this is the caveat, then technically the 12-24mm Nikon is a 18-36mm, no? Not bad for less than a grand, HOWEVER, there is a caution for S35 coverage from this lens expert.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1224.htm

Tech savvy link:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/dx.htm

KEEP THE IDEAS COMING....

Visual Depiction of coverage areas: