Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

T2.8

E

Ethan Cooper

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Messages
705
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Keller, Tx
For all you guys moaning about the T2.8 fixed lens, Angenieux released a lens made for the Red One that is a 30-80mm T2.8 zoom. It cost $20,000. They seem to be ok with T2.8 on their $20,000 lens.
________
Dualnote
 
Ethan Cooper said:
For all you guys moaning about the T2.8 fixed lens, Angenieux released a lens made for the Red One that is a 30-80mm T2.8 zoom. It cost $20,000. They seem to be ok with T2.8 on their $20,000 lens.
Click to expand...
Most people coming from the consumer-video world think an 8x or 10x zoom range is short, whereas in the 35-mm film world, it's considered longish (there certainly are longer). The complaint about the T-stop doesn't so much have to do with how fast the lens is, but the greater depth of field it yields with the same field of view but a smaller imaging area. Compounding that issue is the tendency of most lenses to yield sharper images when stopped down a couple of stops -- in other words, the typical lens is not at its best wide open. But we know next to nothing about the lens beyond T2.8, 8x, and fixed. Because it is fixed, however, I'm certain that Red will deliver a lens that represents the best money can buy at that price point, most likely better than what can be had today. I'm sure that with a little planning and practice, folks will be able to achieve acceptably shallow depth of field.
 
Well I am pretty sure Cooke is doing the optics and Red is outsourcing the optics design to them as well, so not to worry yall.
 
HD Bubaloo said:
Well I am pretty sure Cooke is doing the optics and Red is outsourcing the optics design to them as well, so not to worry yall.
Click to expand...

Really?! I hope so. Whatever they do, I have faith that Red will not settle for a lens that is less than amazing.
 
Then again, I do remember an interview Jim gave were he said Oakley would be making the lenses for the Red One. They certainly have the equipment and resources.

Jim quote:
"liquid laser prototyping, electron beam gun vapor deposition machines for Iridium coatings, 5 axis mills, multi-stage injection molding machines, full testing equipment for every aspect of what we manufacture... the list goes on and on. We invent, design, engineer, prototype and build all our products from data. Nothing hand made."
 
light and scarlet

light and scarlet

Ethan Cooper said:
For all you guys moaning about the T2.8 fixed lens, Angenieux released a lens made for the Red One that is a 30-80mm T2.8 zoom. It cost $20,000. They seem to be ok with T2.8 on their $20,000 lens.
Click to expand...

I worry about the scarlet's t2.8 for light reasons. As someone explained in another thread, the redOne has a 35mm sensor, so it gets more light than a 2/3" sensor does @ t2.8.

jayson
www.oldchildprojects.com
 
HD Bubaloo said:
Then again, I do remember an interview Jim gave were he said Oakley would be making the lenses for the Red One. They certainly have the equipment and resources.

Jim quote:
"liquid laser prototyping, electron beam gun vapor deposition machines for Iridium coatings, 5 axis mills, multi-stage injection molding machines, full testing equipment for every aspect of what we manufacture... the list goes on and on. We invent, design, engineer, prototype and build all our products from data. Nothing hand made."
Click to expand...

Well except for the CNC mills (still need a turning center though) I don't see anything listed there that has anything to do with photographic optical design or manufacturing.
 
Well I did leave out the glass cutters, optical polishing equipment, lens designing cad software and CNC that goes with it, Collimator's, etc ooohhh and did I say LASERS.

Yes, they actually do have everything they need in house to produce lenses, polish them, and collimate them.
 
HD Bubaloo said:
Well I did leave out the glass cutters, optical polishing equipment, lens designing cad software and CNC that goes with it, Collimator's, etc ooohhh and did I say LASERS.

Yes, they actually do have everything they need in house to produce lenses, polish them, and collimate them.
Click to expand...

Cool

Must have been fun to see all that stuff at RED. Do they give tours?

thanks,
 
Red has the equipment required to design and prototype the lenses. Manufacturing will take place most likely in the UK.
 
You seem to have the inside scoop on the RED lenses. When did you see the RED facility or are you part of the optical design group there?
 
2.8 still seems a bit high for Shallow DOF. Having owned a 2/3 CCD Still camera (Panasonic LC1, to be exact) it was its ability to open to 2.0 that contributed for very nice DOF (it had an excelent leica lens built for it, though ).

If still photography law applies for 2/3 lenses, DOF will be relativelly shallow, but nowhere near 35mm in look.

As for low light, I'm confident RED's High ISO and low noise track record on the RED ONE is more than enough to cope with the 2.8 aperture for low light.

It should theoretically, however, give shallower DOF than an HVX- which goes to 2.2 and even 2.0, but is a 3x 1/3 ccd camera.

Maybe someone from the RED team can explain in more detail the DOF defferences between a 2.8 2/3 lens and camera in DOF vs a 2.0 1/3 CCD camera?
 
8x

8x

8x sounds like a good compromise of price size and quality.
I was looking around on B&H.com and saw an 8x HD night vision device. It has an 8x lens on a body about the size of a Scarlet body.
528552.jpg

photo from B&h (obviously)

EDIT, EDIT, EDIT. Sorry, I got that wrong. That device above is 8x digital zoom, not optical.
Scarlet is looking great.
Does anyone have any pics of an 8x lens for a 2/3 chip camera? Just currious about how big they are and how much they cost. I want to know how much of a bargain I am getting.
 
Eugene said:
Does anyone have any pics of an 8x lens for a 2/3 chip camera? Just currious about how big they are and how much they cost. I want to know how much of a bargain I am getting.
Click to expand...
Are you asking for images of an 8x removable zoom lens for a 2/3" chip DV/HD camera, or just any built-in 8x zoom lens on a 2/3" chip camera?
I don't know of any 8x zoom 2/3" removable ENG zoom lenses, then again, I'm not really shopping for any either.
However, I can say I do recall a built in 8x zoom for a 2/3" camera, but it wasn't video, it was an "advanced point & shoot" camera (advanced for the time-circa 2002-2003), which shot crappy video btw.
It was called the Nikon Coolpix 5700, and the successor was the 8700.
I owned the 5700, and it eventually broke on me and I never got it fixed, even though Nikon had issued recalls on them for a faulty CCD, which ironically enough I discovered shortly after trying to shoot video with the thing for the first time. Yeah, sad.
All in all, the camera was my first digital camera, and I loved it. I still have it boxed away.
Here's a close-up view of the 8x lens for the 2/3" sensor...
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
8xzoomlensfor23rdinchcameracopy.jpg

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Detailed images of the Nikon Coolpix 5700 can be seen here: in this DPreview 2002 review
And the 8700 was practically identical except for a slightly higher resolution chip.
 
this might be my stupidest question so far, but...

this might be my stupidest question so far, but...

since I'm a self-proclaimed dumbass, I feel no shame to ask:

What is the fastest Zoom a 2/3" sensor could possibly have? Is there a correlation there somewhere? Would a faster Zoom require the sensor to be bigger? Somebody please try to make sense of what I'm trying to ask here...lol Thank you
 
F2.8 is just one factor in the type of images you can capture, and is quite irrelevant when you don't know the other factors in play.

F2.8 paired with a ISO500 sensor will produce the same exposure as F2.0 paired with a ISO250 sensor. Without know the qualities of the new Mysterium X sensor, it's impossible to judge whether F2.8 is sufficient for a given lighting situation.

Or how about this for a factor: How much light is present on your scene?

Most zoom lenses have a variable maximum aperture that changes as you zoom in. The DVX, for instance goes from F1.6 at full wide zoom to F2.8 at full tele zoom. Actually, this cause confusion for a lot of people, who set their aperture when at wide zoom, and wonder why the image gets darker as they zoom in. This caught me by surprise when I started using video cameras.

If Red is going to produce an 8x zoom lens that has a consistent maximum aperture of F2.8 all the way through the zoom range, it is an interesting design concept and could result in more predictible, repeatable shooting, with fewers gotchas, but until we know more about the sensor, it's impossible to tell if the rig is suitable for low light shooting, for instance.
 
Please don't confuse F-stops and T-stops... huge difference. Also, 8x is meaningless without knowing the focal lengths. Regardless, T2.8 is quite nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top