Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

17-50 RPZ or other options?

Brandon H

Brandon H

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
145
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Los Angeles
I'm looking to buy a small compact PL zoom lens that will work on the epic. Something at a decent price, the RPZ looks good, but I'm just wondering if there's any other options out there that I'm missing. All of the other zoom's I've seen are huge and not what I need. I want a general purpose zoom I can throw in my backpack with my epic and grab wide / medium shots.

Thanks
 
Is there any reason you're so firmly wedded to the PL mount, Brandon? If you want compact decent quality zooms you can throw in a backpack and use in the field, why not put a Nikon or Canon mount on and choose from a vast range of 35mm still glass? I expect to be using Nikon glass almost exclusively with my EPIC when I get it.

If you do want PL, it's hard to beat the RPZ for quality vs. price. If they had them in the BT store I would have bought one myself by now!

Mike
 
You might also keep an eye on what Matt Duclos is up to. He's already got a killer wide zoom (PL), and is pretty far along on a long zoom (Nikon 70-200 PL conversion). Or wait a bit for the Red Canon Mount adapter, or apparently Optitech is planning to release something along these lines as well soon.

Hiking with Canon glass would be my first choice. NOT with huge PL primes and zooms.
 
Mike 'Fireman' Ross said:
Is there any reason you're so firmly wedded to the PL mount, Brandon? If you want compact decent quality zooms you can throw in a backpack and use in the field, why not put a Nikon or Canon mount on and choose from a vast range of 35mm still glass? I expect to be using Nikon glass almost exclusively with my EPIC when I get it.

If you do want PL, it's hard to beat the RPZ for quality vs. price. If they had them in the BT store I would have bought one myself by now!

Mike
Click to expand...

Well, I guess I just don't like having to change mounts, I'd like, when I'm shooting with my RPP set to be able to quickly switch to zoom if I want to.

Paul Nordin said:
You might also keep an eye on what Matt Duclos is up to. He's already got a killer wide zoom (PL), and is pretty far along on a long zoom (Nikon 70-200 PL conversion). Or wait a bit for the Red Canon Mount adapter, or apparently Optitech is planning to release something along these lines as well soon.

Hiking with Canon glass would be my first choice. NOT with huge PL primes and zooms.
Click to expand...

I think I might wait to see what's going on with Duclos, that wide zoom looks nice for the weight and price. Is there any word if Leica will be making a sweet zoom lens that is compact?
 
Mike 'Fireman' Ross said:
Is there any reason you're so firmly wedded to the PL mount, Brandon? If you want compact decent quality zooms you can throw in a backpack and use in the field, why not put a Nikon or Canon mount on and choose from a vast range of 35mm still glass? I expect to be using Nikon glass almost exclusively with my EPIC when I get it.

If you do want PL, it's hard to beat the RPZ for quality vs. price. If they had them in the BT store I would have bought one myself by now!

Mike
Click to expand...

Perhaps he wants to use zoom as a "zoom"...Nikons and Canons are not Parfocal.
Other zoom option is Optimos 16-42 and 30-80 worth about $20,000 each :-)...i am not sure if Optimos are 5K.
 
We have 3 RED ZOOMs... Love them all. . F2.8, great glass and cheap!
We shoot them side by side with Arri Master primes all the time and cannot see any difference between the two in the grading suite at all.
The greatest thing is, is if we loose one due to being smash in a crash stunt or doing something silly.. you just by another one...

This to me is more a Math & Logic question. 6k for a lens or 20k for another PL mounted equivalent.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...PTIMO_ROUGE_Optimo_DP_Digital_Production.html

buy 3 RED lenses or 1 ?

http://www.red.com/store/lenses/product/red-pro-zoom-17-50mm-t29-i
http://www.red.com/store/lenses/product/red-zoom-50-150mm-t3-i
http://www.red.com/store/lenses/product/red-pro-prime-300mm-t29-i-bt
http://www.red.com/store/lenses/product/red-pro-mattebox

Simple math.. :)

The cheapest way is to use stills lenses when RED bring out canon mounts, but you wont have a nice manual lens feel... Just an akward touchy magnetic focus. . But Canon glass is good.

Always options out there.

Have fun.
 
Mark Toia said:
We have 3 RED ZOOMs... Love them all. . F2.8, great glass and cheap!
We shoot them side by side with Arri Master primes all the time and cannot see any difference between the two in the grading suite at all.
Click to expand...

Mark, I checked out the RPZ 17-50 and thought it quite sharp, but breathing on focus pulls seemed pretty heavy. What's been your experience?

Tim Eaton
 
Depends how you want to work. I've been happily using DSLR lenses since day one (whether RED or HDSLR) and only ever handled PL lenses during trade shows (ie. NAB) or during downtime on shoots I've been on. The breathing factor is the only reason I'd go with PL lenses and that's only because it gives the option for smooth and consistent rack focusing. Other than that, DSLR lenses can handle the job 90% of the time.

When it comes to zooms, it's hard not to recommend DSLR route because you can get so much more bang for your buck, especially with things like the Tokina 11-16, the Nikon 18-200, Nikon 17-55, and the nice assortment of 70-200/80-200 zooms from just about anybody. Plus, if you go Canon with your Epic, you open up a lot of options for general purpose autofocus zooms which could come in real handy.
 
Timothy Eaton said:
Mark, I checked out the RPZ 17-50 and thought it quite sharp, but breathing on focus pulls seemed pretty heavy. What's been your experience?

Tim Eaton
Click to expand...

Never worried me... actually never noticed it..
But some people do have hang ups over it.
but me... I'm easily pleased. :)
 
The 17-50 is an awesome lens and a great value. Its optics are sharp with great contrast and color rendition. The two potential shortcomings of the lens for some buyers is that it starts to vignette at 5KFF on EPIC when at 17mm and there is some noticeable breathing.

Personally, I think breathing is an entirely overrated issue. Considering there is no such thing, as much as any manufacturer tries to claim it, as a lens that doesn't breathe. Some do a very good job of mitigating the breathing effect, almost eliminating it, but it's always still there in some form. The 17-50 doesn't breathe anywhere near as heavily as its 18-50 predecessor. But noticeably more so than the Angenieux zooms, for example.

Anyway, the 17-50 is a great lens. If you want a lens that is truly better, but also 3X the price, there's the Optimo DP 16-42.
 
I just saw Super 8, it had HEAVY breathing all over the place, didn't bother me very much. In fact, I think it ADDED to the style, the old anamorphic look. Am I the only one that doesn't go insane over breathing issues?
 
Brandon H said:
I just saw Super 8, it had HEAVY breathing all over the place, didn't bother me very much. In fact, I think it ADDED to the style, the old anamorphic look. Am I the only one that doesn't go insane over breathing issues?
Click to expand...

Not sure anyone is going insane over it Brandon. For some though, it can call attention to process rather than content. Most theatrical releases don't feature a lot a breathing focus shifts unless they are hand held docu style movies or contain a film within a film gag like Super 8? For the same reason that many, myself included, don't like zooms during a shot because it calls attention to itself in an unnatural way, we don't like the way breathing lenses change the size of the image. It's not necessarily a big deal, just a preference for an image that stays roughly the same size during a rack focus.

Thanks to Mark Toia for the update on his 17-50.

Tim Eaton
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top