red 18-50 zoom lens?

[omar robles]

Forgive me for posting this. I ve searched all over the past postings on this topic but couldn't get the answer i was looking for.

Is the RED 18-50 zoom lens good enough for a film project? I ask because i dp i spoke with bashed all zoom lenses pretty good. I realize its not as fast as primes. And that it would require a lot of light to operate. But that point aside, is the image quality acceptable?

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

optical quality is fine.. mechanics vary from lens to lens, but in either case they are not the best mechanics.. the RED 17-50 is in a different category, it is much much better and very worthy to be on set.

the deeper stop of a zoom is not so much an issue now with MX..

I personally love zoom lenses.. I like moving fast and having a variety of focal length choices at my finger tips.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

I have always been a PRIMES only shooter, till recently, were the quality of image presented by newer zooms have come incredibly close to that of Primes, that unless Projected are indistinguishable to the eye of the viewer.

Off course size weight and Speed, are other considerations all together.

As far as the RZ 18-50 in question, there is no doubt that image quality and sharpness are top notch, but the mechanics are not, still a great little zoom, especially if considering the price point, and that now you can buy a used one in perfect conditions for $2,500 average.

First thing I would do is when buying one, will be to send it to Re-Mark the focus marks as they are a bit off, also a cleaning and lubrications is part of a service I will do on a used lens.

As Zakaree pointed out the RPZ 17-50 is on a road of its own in comparison, and it is a fantastic little zoom both by Image Quality and mechanics, a far cry form the RZ 18-50.

 

[michael zaletel]

Hi Ketch:

Has anyone definitively confirmed that the RPZ 17-50 is a different manufacturer, different glass, front element, rear element and etc. than the original RPZ 18-50? I am certain the mechanics are at another level but I've read conflicting comments regarding whether the RPZ 17-50 is a completely different lens with unique optical characteristics compared to the 18-50.

If you know, please advise. I'm holding off on accepting delivery of my 17-50 until I know for sure it isn't optically identical to the 18-50. (Or if not identical, very similar optically) Has anyone shot tests with both lenses to see how they both breathe and to compare resolution and distortion at say 20mm and 40mm?

-michael zaletel

 

[Ryan Hamblin]

I can say this michael, we shot with it and Cooke Panchro's for Amy Grants last video. the lens was just a hair sharper than the cooke's, but matched very closely in dimension color, and feel. It really is in a class of its own. Worth the money, I'm very happy with the purchase

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Hi Ketch:

Has anyone definitively confirmed that the RPZ 17-50 is a different manufacturer, different glass, front element, rear element and etc. than the original RPZ 18-50? I am certain the mechanics are at another level but I've read conflicting comments regarding whether the RPZ 17-50 is a completely different lens with unique optical characteristics compared to the 18-50.

If you know, please advise. I'm holding off on accepting delivery of my 17-50 until I know for sure it isn't optically identical to the 18-50. (Or if not identical, very similar optically) Has anyone shot tests with both lenses to see how they both breathe and to compare resolution and distortion at say 20mm and 40mm?

-michael zaletel

Michael,

I believe that many comment by speculations, however I can not either confirm or deny that the 17-50 is in deed of different Glass elements of the 18-50, as I have not and will not take a part either of this lenses, have not put them on a projector side by side either, and it is most of the times difficult to test a lens against the other just by shooting something with it, even side by side.

What I can say is that I was always happy with the Image Quality and sharpness of the 18-50 but not with the Mechanics and Focus Markings, but I'm still not entirely happy with any of the Focus marking on any of Red's lenses, as I have come to get used to the Arri MP's and will have Duclos re-Mark all my Red lenses, other then that, the 17-50 is literally on a world of its own, and in my opinion, it does not compare to the 18-50 in all aspects, and image quality to the naked eye seems much improved.

Also remember that it is very important the installation and actual placement of the Elements, and if they were to be the exact same ones, but their installation is different, then that would also make a difference.

My advise.. take delivery, you will not regret it, and if you do, I'll buy it off you, no questions asked, since I will be taking five cameras to the new Studio in Italy, I will make good use of it

 

[Dave Blackham]

See below, Jim tells us the optics are not the same, much better.....

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=39669&page=2

Originally Posted by Mitch Gross
It sure looks like they started with the same lens and had the mechanics made better, much as they did with the 300mm v. the Pro 300. Just a guess, but that likely would be why the profile is fairly similar and the size and weight are still in the same territory. Too bad the /i data goes away.

Not the same optics... much better.

Jim
__________________

 

[Ryan Hamblin]

does anyone happen to know the difference in length of the pl mount on the 18-50 and the 17-50?