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 :)

18-85 T2.9 RED zoom...

Jashunter said:
Jim, great work! cant wait to try Mikes out, is this a new regime re lenses? are many of the other lenses designed by your team too?

jason

_
Click to expand...

The primes (which are late in production BTW) and the Scarlet lens are from the RED team. More coming...

Jim
 
Jannard said:
The primes (which are late in production BTW) and the Scarlet lens are from the RED team. More coming...

Jim
Click to expand...

Stupid me, but does this mean the primes are late in the production process (ie, nearing production) or behind schedule? Ehh?

bob
 
Jannard said:
The primes (which are late in production BTW) and the Scarlet lens are from the RED team. More coming...
Click to expand...

Any little tidbits of info you can share on the primes? Still on track for this year?

...I'm dyin' over here.
 
me thinks the primes are behind schedule....anything I can do to help?
but then again, we are talkin 5 brand new lenses....
 
OK, so which matte boxes we know will work with this lens?

I looked at my Arri LMB-5 specs and it seems that, with no adapter ring, the maximum diameter it can go over is 144mm. Maybe some gaffer tape over the lens - hate that because of the goo potentially finding its way to the glass. But, is 4x5.65 enough?

Jannard said:
Coming as soon as Jarred has some time...
Click to expand...

I thought "Jarred has some time" was an oxymoron, LOL
 
I think with something like the LMB-5 you could get away with a duvetine cover or possibly make a neoprene ring to help block the light in that 1mm gap you would have all the way around. I wouldn't do the gaff tape around the lens either. Looks like the MB-20II fits and the RedRock will fit with a few minutes of sanding the rear bellows piece. 5.65" filter width will cover the front element, just barely, but I don't know what that would do on the wide end of the zoom range. I would be concerned about 5.65" width vignetting at wide focal lengths, especially with 2 or more stages in place. Maybe not so much with the RED One 4K sensor area, but more so as we get 4.5K enabled. 5.65" x 5.65" seems to make more sense than 4 x 56 filters...
 
Thanks Jeff, if it fits on MB-20, it will fit on LMB-5, which as has slightly larger ID. LMB-5 is 2 stage and covers the wide end of 17-102mm Angenieux (144mm OD), so I guess, the definitive answer is: "she'll be right, mate" :)

Good idea about the neoprene.
 
fcuk know why (or how) i worked this out the first time. I did it to see if it was worth getting 5.65x5.65 filters for general use , over the 4x5.65's I already have. I decided it wasn't.

The 4"x5.65" (1.4) will only give you 3.1"x5.65" (1.78) before it begins to vignette on top/bottom.
The 6"x6" (1.0) will only give you 3.4"x6" (1.78) before it begins to vignette on the sides.
The 4"x4" (1.0) will only give you 2.2"x4" (1.78) before it begins to vignette on the sides.

Cheers,
Dave
 
Jannard said:
OffHollywood gets the 1st one... I'm sure Mark will post some results.

Jim
Click to expand...
Why him? This guy posted the most awful underexposed footage ever posted at Reduser. Almost canceled my Red reservation.
 
david farland said:
fcuk know why (or how) i worked this out the first time. I did it to see if it was worth getting 5.65x5.65 filters for general use , over the 4x5.65's I already have. I decided it wasn't.

The 4"x5.65" (1.4) will only give you 3.1"x5.65" (1.78) before it begins to vignette on top/bottom.
The 6"x6" (1.0) will only give you 3.4"x6" (1.78) before it begins to vignette on the sides.
The 4"x4" (1.0) will only give you 2.2"x4" (1.78) before it begins to vignette on the sides.

Cheers,
Dave
Click to expand...

Dave,

This is useful math for everyone, but it is important to note that the need for larger filters is also a function of the size of the front element of a given lens. A 12mm c-mount lens might need a 2"x2' filter to cover while a UltraPrime of the same focal length would need a vastly larger sheet of glass. I never think it a good idea not to cover the entire front element of a lens with a filter even if you are not using the full image area that the lens can project. Your filtering effect can be diluted and compromized by less than full coverage.

While I have not tested it yet (soon), I did note that while the front element itself of the 18-85 appears to be quite large, the lens comes with a front masking much like Cooke zooms that is smaller than 4x5.65. So your beloved 4x5.65 filters may be perfect as you suspect.
 
Don King said:
Why him? This guy posted the most awful underexposed footage ever posted at Reduser. Almost canceled my Red reservation.
Click to expand...

Because Mark had the first 18-85 reservation... and the first public RED ONE... and we like him.

NormLi said:
Jarred, I personally liked it :) Make everyone more curious.
Click to expand...

That was the idea... You can all thank Brook for being an ass-hat and lowering this on my priority list.. I think Mark is about to post an arsenal of photos anyways though :)
 
Good news folks!

A few minutes with the Dremel tool and some fine sandpaper and the Red Rock fits over the lens like GLOVE!!

All good all the way to 18mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top