Sigma?

[Adrian T.]

I don't think any of us were saying it was "just" a rehoused lens

Have a look:

The 18-50 is without a doubt a Sigma.

RED 18-50mm T3 actually is

SIGMA 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC MACRO

I really don't care if it's a Sigma or not or if it contains Sigma parts or not. The main thing here is that it's a great lens for a good price. :shifty:

It's time now to put this whole Sigma theory at rest.

 

[Michael Hastings]

Have a look:





I really don't care if it's a Sigma or not or if it contains Sigma parts or not. The main thing here is that it's a great lens for a good price. :shifty:

It's time now to put this whole Sigma theory at rest.

Well I would like them to consider my main point - it would be a lot of writing gone to waste. It was an indepth discussion of the importance of still lenses and the unimportance of the origin of the RED 18-50.

 

[RED 648]

I have compared the 18-50 on a projector to several Cooke lenses and they compare very favorably.

As a side note the RED 18-50 is made in the UK. It also shares the same typeface on it's markings as a Cooke lens. Just a coincidence?

 

[Mitch Gross]

As a side note the RED 18-50 is made in the UK. It also shares the same typeface on it's markings as a Cooke lens. Just a coincidence?

No, good marketing.

 

[chuckt]

RED is not a manufacturing outfit.
RED simply put their logo on items manufactured by various OEMs and pack it and send to customers.

Lenses are manufactured by Cooke for RED.

Canon/Sony/Panasonic does not sell its proprietary sensors to anyone.
Mysterium is manufactured by small time outfit in small lots.

All other components are, similarly, manufactured for RED, by Chinese OEMs.

That is my speculation.

Sony Ex1 uses a Fujinon 14x Optical Zoom Lens.
If Sony use a third party lens, why can't RED use a cooke lens?
(But Sony did not get Fujinon lens with a Sony logo.)

 

[Tail Ends]

Who manufactures the lenses is not a big issue, but the final product and how it compares to high end film lenses is my question, and it is probably just too early to know. When the time comes, I hope someone could respond to the following question: On a range of 0 to 100, with 0 being no visibility at all and 100 absolutely 100% perfection in all areas, where does any individual Red lens fit on the scale? Many of you talk about price and being a "good deal." To serious shooters, if an Arri lens (for example only) comes in at 97 on the scale and a similar Red comes in at 92 or 93, then many of us can agree that for the price, it's a great deal. But what if the Red comes in at only 67? I can't think of any serious cinematographer who would jeopardize his results for such monetary savings, especially when all else costs the same.

I am so impressed with some of you guys and the time and thinking you spend on behalf of all us other redites, I would hope that when the time comes, some of you would actually do some serious comparisons, leaving cost out of the equation. Such tests are over my capabilities, but many of you have the skills to do this and I am sure that such results would be welcome by all of us, including the Red Team. I include the Red Team only because I have not seen a single comment from these guys that isn't aimed to make the best product available to all of us.

My thanks to all of you,

Tail Ends

 

[albert rudnicki]

Who cares where how who, use it and justify as a whole.
I had a good wino and I am going for two weeks to some warm place, while my dear red ships...
Cheers camrades

A.

 

[Poi Boy]

Hey Finner, still wanna bet me your Cooke ? ouch
Aloha
-A

 

[jbeale]

> I can't think of any serious cinematographer who would jeopardize his results for such monetary savings...

I did only a very brief test with the Red 18-50mm, but I did not see any optical problems. From others' comments, seems like most people give the lens high marks optically. The complains I've seen are about build quality, mechanical operation and "feel", focus shift while zooming, and zoom shift while focusing (AKA breathing). Many people seem to consider it not perfect, but quite acceptable and usable.

I see no reason why you could not make a visually great movie using the Red zoom as your main lens. I think the drawbacks have to do more with operating style, than anything that an audience would likely notice on the big screen. Also... didn't Jim say one of the upcoming shot-on-Red feature films used this lens as their main lens?

 

[Finner]

Hey Finner, still wanna bet me your Cooke ? ouch
Aloha
-A

Sure, it has the mechanics of a sigma 18-50 the lens is clearly a rehoused 18-50 sigma just like I said it was. Now if the back elements were changed for PL mount system in the rehousing process it still does not change the FACT that it is a Sigma 18-50.

So send me your lens Poi. For those that would like to buy it I will put it up on ebay soon.

 

[Mark Toia]

Unbelievable...:angry02:

I wouldn't care if it was a coke bottle inverted, melted, machined and polished with a snotty hanky.

BANG for buck, show me better.
Just release that bloody 50-150 RED Lens, for crying out loud! and the primes, and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the.......:umm:


What a waste of blog space.:ranting2:

 

[Omnius]

Wow

SIGMA

How cool

 

[Sean R.]

You guys are hilarious with all of this speculation.

All I gotta say is wait until you see the primes...
You think the lens market is turned upside down now, y'all aint seen nothin yet.

 

[Andrew Benz]

You guys are hilarious with all of this speculation.

All I gotta say is wait until you see the primes...
You think the lens market is turned upside down now, y'all aint seen nothin yet.

Sean, if only I had the means to get you to spill the beans on the 18-85 zoom. Will this new zoom be revealed at NAB as well?

Thanks

 

[Mark Toia]

You guys are hilarious with all of this speculation.

All I gotta say is wait until you see the primes...
You think the lens market is turned upside down now, y'all aint seen nothin yet.

if these primes were 1.3's not f2's....you would really impress me....

no seriously!:w00t: