Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

  • 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 :)

Red Lenses

Status
Not open for further replies.
Physical condition and camera work
Yes, physical conditioning is critical for getting certain types of mobile hybrid cine/EFP style shots. An in-shape shooter can place cameras quickly and easily in and out of situations that an out of shape shooter simply can’t. Physical coordination, an eye for the shot, mastery of available technology, mastery of optics, and experience are the other elements which, when combined with physical conditioning enable getting those types of very challenging, mobile, small crew or single operator shots. When it all works, its like tai chi or martial arts with a camera. One of my skill specialties through my career has been getting those exact shots. I'm a veteran of 35 years in this industry, and I’m 60 years old, but I’m 6’ 2”, 200 lbs, and I still do intense physical fitness work outs at least five days a week. I do those for fitness and lifestyle sake, but also very importantly to continue to be able to get the difficult mobile shots required by the projects I produce and do contract shooting for.

Convergence of shooting styles
With cameras like RED, there is a synthesis of shooting styles possible, and in fact being used in the real world. RED's technology is closely related to DSLR, moderately related to TV/video, and least related to film. Users of RED are now converging from all three of those backgrounds, and some people like me come from all three. With the technology being convergent, and the mix of people using RED being convergent, its no surprise that especially in non-union, mid to small crew productions, shooters with RED are free to push the camera and how they use it to modified paradigms. General categories of shooting style with RED may be traditional cine style, hybrid cine/EFP style, and EFP style. Traditional cine style will generally be using cine lenses, MB, FF, ACs, measuring tapes, hand held meters, etc. Hybrid cine/EFP style may be using various lens types (cine, 35mm still, B4), may or may not be using MB/FF/ACs, and may be using in-camera electronic aids for focus and exposure. EFP style will generally be using EFP lenses (but may also use cine, 35mm still), almost never a MB/FF/ACs. All these approaches to using RED ONE are valid, as are varying flavors and modifications between the general categories I listed. Whatever style most effectively achieves the images, and is also cost-effective (producer in me speaking now), is perfectly valid with RED.

Focusing with RED
Fact: the vast majority of productions worldwide each year are either Hybrid cine/EFP style or EFP style. Almost all of those productions are shot by sight focusers working either alone, or in medium to small non-union crews. I see some confusion on this thread about sight focusing. There are two types of focusing that fit that term: 1) An AC/focus puller, or single shooter visually estimating distance to the subject and focusing according to that estimate 2) A shooter or single operator using their eyesight to use electronic aids (EVF, LCD, or other monitor) and the focus aids (2x magnification, focus assist) in an electronic camera (like RED) to sight focus. Some shooters routine use both methods of sight focusing. I am mostly a sight focuser, who works in medium to small crews, doing high profile international and national work. In six months of heavy use of my RED cameras, I’ve found RED’s in-camera focus tools to be accurate and very quick and easy to use – even for very shallow DOF critical focus. Professional sight focusing with RED ONE is a reality folks. That’s not to cast doubt on others choice to go a more traditional way, with measuring tapes/lens scales/ACs, etc. If it fits their workflow and crew requirements, fine.

Last thoughts
RED ONE is inherently an “open mind” camera. Its scalable, flexible, and adaptable. Those who want to maximize RED ONE’s potential, and in the process unlock their own potential (and bank account) should consider all the potential ways to shoot with RED ONE and then go out and push the performance envelope. At 60 years old, you’d expect me to be set in my ways and limited down to a few ways to shoot. I’m not! I’m open minded, flexible, and adaptable – just like RED ONE.

We’re all part of the overall motion media production family. I respect everyone’s choices, although I may not agree with them. I know what works for what I produce, and me and my crews simply go out and have fun doing it – but we constantly refine our styles and equipment.
 
stevie.. your posts are rock 'n rolling.. as usual.. nice formatting too.. :wink:
 
fantastic discussion, really. i would only add that, among the professional photographers that i know who use canon lenses, most own and use a few of the so-called off-brand lenses, including sigma.

the main difference is that you have to pick and choose the best-of-breed lenses with these "other" manufacturers. but sigma is definitely capable of making optics that stack up very favorably to canon L glass.

i have the 300-800mm sigma bomb, and for super-telephoto, it is best-in-class. it is comparable to, if not exceeding the performance of, canon super-telephotos of the same speed. i have canon L 70-200mm f2.8, a 400mm f5.6, and the legendary 200mm f1.8 (i've never seen any other canon still lens that can touch the 200mm, period, for clarity and beauty), so i have used a lot of big telephoto lenses and made the comparisons. certain sigma lenses are right in there--assuming that you compare lenses of the same speed.

and certainly, some L glass has received its share of mixed reviews, the 17-35mm springs to mind. and the 100-400mm L series, you either love it or you think its soft on the long end, not much opinion in between....

i don't own and have not used the sigma 18-50mm, but i know that sigma is absolutely capable of producing outstanding optics. their target market is great optics at a cheaper price, and that is frequently reflected in the price/quality ratio. if RED approached them with a certain price point, quality expectation, and target market and told sigma what they wanted and for whom, i have no doubt that they could deliver it.

but i would only add that people who doubt the company's ability to make good optics are usually not people coming from a still photo background, where owning the best-of-breed from a range of manufacturers is normal. instead, they are usually talking through the conventional public perception, which sees sigma as less-than canon and then applying this same (somewhat misguided, imo) thinking to the RED lens.

jim is a still photographer, he knows all this--i'm betting he owns a few sigma lenses in his collection, the bigma 50-500mm is a great sports lens, one of the most versatile still lenses made--if sigma is indeed the manufacturer, then he would also understand the wisdom of protecting his lens from public misperceptions about what the brand "sigma" signifies....
 
All you dumb bastards can go screw your dogs as far as I'm concerned!

When did this become a fetish site?

PS I like Redheads in fishnets
 
IThe above story just doesn't ring true or compatible with my experiences shooting for eighteen years across four continents with crews of all kinds. The myth that professional crews are entrenched in a "can't do it any other way" methodology is, in my opinion, nonsense. generally they are willing to adapt to whatever the situation requires.

Jtm,

First, my hat off to you if you're James Mather. I didn't want to offer too much detail on the story as I thought it was unimportant, but I assure you it is very much true. The cinematographer in question is probably one of the top 10 in Europe (he's top 5 in my book) and let's just say one of his films has been nominated for foreign film Oscar within the past ten years). He was as good as I expected him to be and very open minded and innovative. The crew he was working with had an obvious dislike for our project and the company footing the bill and they were not hidding it, but they felt "obliged" to go through with it. I'm certain that a lot of their inability to do this or that came from not wanting to in the first place, but the end result was the same.

I didn't "wing" the steadicam shot right away. It took me six tries to get it done, but for whatever is worth, it wasn't the most difficult thing I've done with a camera in my life. The director wanted the shot I got for him but the operator claimed it was impossible and tried another variant which, after about one hour of failed attempts, got him exhausted and he asked for a rest. During the break the director asked me to try the climb he originally wanted just to see "if it was possible" and when I made it happen the first time, he asked me to keep trying it until we got it. Both him and the crew knew that I had some experience with a camera and that I was very fit, no more, no less, there was nothing capricious about it, except that he wanted to get the shot he wanted and I wanted to get my company the shot that had been promised.

As for the crew not being able to focus by eye, well, they wanted to recreate the conditions on a sound stage and when I denied the budget required, they begrudgingly went up to the mountains, and would not "sign off" on the shot because there was no way to confirm focus by eye on such conditions. Once it became obvious this was the only way, they went at it and I even had my people bring up a 24" monitor for them to feel more comfortable. They hit the right focus several times but were uneasy about giving it a go, until the director stepped in, assumed responsibility and got it done. Whether they were acting out their discontent or not, their efforts at guesstimating focus by eye were far clumsier than mine with just a modest still photography background and than I would have expected. You can read into it as much as you want, but that's what happened. I am in great terms with the director but never again heard from that crew again.

Lastly, I've met many a steadycam operator, and have to say that the 99.9% majority of them have impressed me with their craft, but to me, a great many of them are not in the physical shape that I would expect such a person to have (then again, I've been an athlete for many years and workout 2-3 hours everyday, so my point of reference is no doubt unbalanced and probably wrong) But I do know that a commitment to excellence, seriousness and dedication can help compensate for the lack of years of experience, although of course, many people in this industry have plenty of both.

Ufff, I think this is the end of this thread for me...
 
Rudi,


Are you a steadicam operator? Or are you saying you just jumped in gave it a shot and everything worked out great?


Nick
 
Well fair enough - I stand corrected Rudi - apologies for doubting you - I'm pretty shocked at that situation developing though and it would, no doubt, become one of my "war" stories too. It sounds like you had local resistance (which occurs when the crew don't like foreigners coming in and telling them what to do - a kind of xenophobia) - generally they become apathetic and difficult (yes, I've experienced that a few times - there are a few countries which I wouldn't be in any hurry to return to). Sounds like that's what happened to you.

I was really referring to "home turf" or "level playing field" shooting - where you don't get lumped with a focus puller but rather choose one from a pool of people. Usually I find that crews who work at a features or commercials level are nothing but accommodating.

However resistance from pro film crews generally occurs I find when they are being put in an "impossible" situation ie: Focusing C Series anamorphics with difficult, hyperactive actors, no rehearsals, wide open by candlelight - on the whip. (in other words - the first AC is about to get screwed royally) - then it's measuring tape city all the way - and who could blame them?... but if the director says that he's willing to take the chance on focus then I find 9/10 guys will row in with it.
 
Rudi,


Are you a steadicam operator? Or are you saying you just jumped in gave it a shot and everything worked out great?


Nick

No, not a professional operator in any way, shape or form, though I've owned a Glidecam for years now and have used it extensively on many small projects. I just jumped in and it worked out great in the end, then again, what made that particular shot complex was not so much the "flying" as it was the actual physicality of it. So yes, I got lucky, and I'll take it :-)

Jtm,

No problem at all, I agree with you. Most of the union crews I've met and worked with here in the US are nothing but accomodating as you say, but many of those who sort of monopolize the top spots of the small industry in their countries are used to having their rear ends kissed by the customers instead of the other way around. Go figure. Anyway, let's all go and shoot something :-)
 
Does anybody know what is the front diameter of Red 300mm f/2.8 lens?

Pawel
www.achtel.com
 
Thank you!

That's an odd number for a filter or a matte box. I assume standard 114mm mate box adapter would not fit, right? Does it have drop in filter slot?

Cheers,

Pawel
www.achtel.com

Actually, I believe the front filter thread is 114mm - but I could be wrong on that. It does have a drop in filter slot, which takes 43mm screw-on filters. The lens hood is nice and long, plus the drop in filter slot is very effective, so I have yet to use a matte box on my RED 300 in over six months of heavy use.
 
Actually, I believe the front filter thread is 114mm

Well, the outer diameter is 117 mm. And that's what counts when you attach a matte box.
 
Well, the outer diameter is 117 mm. And that's what counts when you attach a matte box.

LOL...yes...I know how and where to attach a matte box. When Pawel asked what the outer diameter was, I was thinking he was asking for outer thread diameter in case he wanted to screw a filter on there, if he wasn't using a matte box. Even if the NDs are in the filter tray, in certain conditions (dust, etc.) it could be a good idea to screw in a multi-coated clear filter to keep dust and spray off the front of the lens. Then again, the lens hood is so long that I haven't had debris problems on the front element, even in windy conditions on beaches.
 
117mm is actually more standard than 114mm is.
 
Does anyone have a review of the Red 50 - 150 Lens yet ?

thanks,

Dave
UK
 
Holy off-topic random thread revival, batman!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top