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 :)

Top 3 Recommended Lenses

Jeremy Wiles

Jeremy Wiles

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2008
Messages
601
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
West Palm Beach, FL
Website
www.kingdomworks.com
What 3 or 4 lenses would you recommend for the Red camera? I'm at the starting line looking at all the options (Nikon, Red, Zeiss, etc.) and would really appreciate hearing from people who've already made the purchase or have made the mistake and are kind enough to help someone else from not making the same mistakes.

Thanks for your help.

Jeremy
 
Superspeeds - Zeiss, Nikon, etc. Put some fast glass in front of the camera and you'll be loving life. :-)

I had a Cooke 18-90 zoom that I sold, but I really liked that lens and how people looked when filmed with the Red.

My Nikkor 50mm 1.4 has given me some nice looking shots too.

I agree with Jason, what's your budget?
 
Don't get stills glass if you can help it.

A. People will laugh on set.
B. AC's won't be able to pull focus (nor anyone else).

18-50 and 50-150 would cover most situations. You could also pick up a 35mm Superspeed (for grabbing those wide night exteriors), and use it as a base for an expanding SS lens kit (something like 18,35,50,85).
 
Charles Angus said:
Don't get stills glass if you can help it.

A. People will laugh on set.
B. AC's won't be able to pull focus (nor anyone else).
Click to expand...

IMO your analysis is extremely cine-centric and narrative centric. The guy who started the thread (Jeremy) didn’t say he was doing just cine-style or narrative production. RED One has been, is now, and will continue to be used in a vast array of non-cine styles and non-narrative genres – in hybrid cine/EFP style and non-hardlined EFP style – where most often the production isn’t on a set, there isn’t an AC on the crew (operators rack their own focus), and operators are regularly and routinely sight focusing RED One using 1:1 image magnification (and 2:1 previously) and edge color.

If Jeremy is new enough to the motion media industry to ask the question he did, then in all fairness he should be given a balanced overview of the various styles of production, and the equipment options for each style of production with RED. As an owner of multiple RED One cameras, some of them for as long as 15 months now, who has produced/directed/shot professional productions worldwide with RED One in all three styles (cine, hybrid, EFP), my philosophy of selecting accessories for RED One, including lenses, is very simple:

Keep and open mind, analyze the needs for each production and/or portion thereof, then select and use the right equipment (and lenses), and proceed.

The production budget, crew composition, genre, aesthetic needs, and delivery medium should determine what equipment is used.

Respect is a 2-way street on this forum – everyone should give respect for others equipment needs and production styles.

Jeremy: As you start your career and your use of RED One, keep an open mind, assess what genres and styles you’re attracted to, and plan your kits accordingly. I’ve given a more balanced breakdown on the pluses and minuses of cine and 35mm stills lenses on this thread: http://205.234.135.241/forum/showthread.php?t=22263&page=2
 
You tell'em Gibby. :)

Seriously, though. Gibby has a great point. I would like cine glass, but the expense is high. So as long as it's a quality image, I'm willing to deal with work around. I was trying to go the birger mount/canon l glass route but I cancelled my birger mount order after I read Gibby's posts that it's doable to manually focus Nikon glass. This will reduce the costs for a FF in the beginning while I get used to my Red One, etc. I can get the FF later if I decide I really need it.

That's one thing to consider too. If you're at 10k and get the two Red One lenses, you'll still have to buy a FF which will still cost you a pretty penny. Don't forget to factor that cost in.
 
if jarred would need a vice for reduser you'd have my support steve.. besides you make success among gals.. all of them :w00t:
 
Thanks for the advice, Steve. I've been working on a project for the past 4 years now and have been using the hvx200. I'm mainly shooting for the cine-style look. Hopefully, you can kind of see that look in my demo reel:

www.thecreativelaboratory.com/demo

Definitely time to make an upgrade! Anyways, I don't have much experience and you guys know a heck of alot more than myself when it comes to the technical stuff.

With the cine-style look in mind, I'm leaning towards a Red 18-50mm and a Red 50-150. Any last advice?
 
Jeremy Wiles said:
Thanks for the advice, Steve. I've been working on a project for the past 4 years now and have been using the hvx200. I'm mainly shooting for the cine-style look. Hopefully, you can kind of see that look in my demo reel:

www.thecreativelaboratory.com/demo

Definitely time to make an upgrade! Anyways, I don't have much experience and you guys know a heck of alot more than myself when it comes to the technical stuff.

With the cine-style look in mind, I'm leaning towards a Red 18-50mm and a Red 50-150. Any last advice?
Click to expand...

I wrote the first published magazine article review on the HVX200 back in February 2006 (Studio Monthly). Its a good camera for what it was intended for.

With the additional info you've provided on shooting style intended, and the budget you have, and the fact that your indie production won't entail large crews who demand their familiar brands of lenses, IMO the RED 18-50 and 50-150 may very well be your best choice to cover abroad range of focal lengths. As you can see from that other linked post of mine, the 18-50 is very good optically, with some utility nuances. We used the prototype 50-150 at the L.A. RED Test I co-produced last December, and optically it was a good lens.

As Jason Ing mentioned, if you go the cine lens route, you'll need a follow focus, and most likely a matte box. If you're budget challenged, you may want to opt for used lightweight versions of those until you can upgrade to more permanent equipment.

Hope this helps...
 
I totally agree with "Gibby" -

But the two small red zooms are 6500 and 8500 =15000usd. alot of still lenses can be bought for that.

If I were you i would take a look at the Zeiss ZF still lenses. Talk to Mitch from Abel. They sell cinelenses and the ZF´s.

Remember FF. Mattebox, filters... it all runs up. (i know ive just been there)

Im mostly cinestyle (tv commercials) people don´t laugh - especially if you hire them and people are aware of a thing called a budget. plus clients cant see the difference is you you nice still lenses that says "Zeiss" or if you use cine lenses that says "Zeiss". you AC will ofcourse know the diff.

if you go still - be sure to buy FF that can reverse the direction (nikon stills focus the opposite way of Cine)
 
Steve Gibby said:
Keep and open mind, analyze the needs for each production and/or portion thereof, then select and use the right equipment (and lenses), and proceed.
Click to expand...

It's such a relief to hear this kind of advice. I've shot hours and hours of footage with Nikon lenses - sometimes handheld without an AC - and guess what? My footage is in focus. And it wasn't hard. And it was cheap and lightweight.

I've encountered people who just say "I'll stick with cine glass" when I offer shooting with my Nikons, which is fine - but if I ever run into anyone who "laughs" at the idea... I'll be oh so glad not to be working with them.

I keep taking it back to Bourne Ultimatum... shot mostly with Nikon glass. The only difference was that they rehoused it for Cine style. The money that cost them was insignificant... for them. For many of us, though, using the same glass that movie used for thousands of dollars less than cine glass and the mild inconvenience of the iris stops, the lack of throw, etc... it's a given for anybody without ego and pride getting in their way.
 
Thanks Sidney and Alexis...

Many are the ways to approach using RED One. If you view lenses as arrows for a bow, then the right arrow is the one best suited for the day's hunt. That said, tomorrow's hunt may call for a different arrow...

I've spent 15 months heavily shooting my three RED cameras - and at times breaking most of the "rules" of how you're supposed to use a cinema camera - but I have a long list of satisfied clients and networks from that work, so the end has justified the means.

In truth, people do me a favor when they criticize my methods and/or equipment choices - it motivates me to prove them wrong. Someone may laugh until they see your good work, then they walk away scratching their head, thinking "Hmmmm...maybe I should try that!"

The proof is in the field testing...

Only progressive minds are on the crews I hire for my projects - or that I hire out my services to.
 
Whew, I got taken pretty seriously there. I was mostly joking/hyperbolizing with what I said, but I can see that wasn't clear. Sorry about that - consider me put in my place.

I've used cine lenses and stills lenses (and eng lenses) myself, and have gotten great results with all of them. My preference would be for cine, whenever available. It's a comfy style of working for me.

Cool demo, btw.
 
I've asked the same question and got a lot of great answers from the likes of Gibby and Grant. What I went with was the Red Nikon/Underdahl mount, the new Arri MMB-1 and the MFF-1 both coming from Abel, (great customer service). Along with that I am going to use:
1. Tokina AT-X 11-16mm f/2.8 PRO DX for Nikon $585.00 cad
2. Nikon AF-S 17-55mm DX Zoom-Nikkor F/2.8G IF-ED $1375.00 cad
3. Nikon AF-S 70-200mm VR Zoom-Nikkor F/2.8G IF-ED $1655.00 cad

and getting my focus rings from Cinevate Inc. (some of the largest I've seen=increased accuracy for short throw focus)
Plus the Arri FF is reversible=Nikon focuses same direction as cine glass.
 
Looks like a good kit. I'd throw in at least one fast prime in there if you do any low light work. Maybe the 50mm 1.4 or the 85mm 1.4 . The 35mm F2.0 is nice too.
 
And I still rent my camera out with the PL mount...
 
Thanks Steve...

Yeah that is what I want to do, the 1.4 primes are next.
Probably will start with the classic 50mm.
 
Cinewalt said:
It's such a relief to hear this kind of advice. I've shot hours and hours of footage with Nikon lenses - sometimes handheld without an AC - and guess what? My footage is in focus. And it wasn't hard. And it was cheap and lightweight.

I've encountered people who just say "I'll stick with cine glass" when I offer shooting with my Nikons, which is fine - but if I ever run into anyone who "laughs" at the idea... I'll be oh so glad not to be working with them.

I keep taking it back to Bourne Ultimatum... shot mostly with Nikon glass. The only difference was that they rehoused it for Cine style. The money that cost them was insignificant... for them. For many of us, though, using the same glass that movie used for thousands of dollars less than cine glass and the mild inconvenience of the iris stops, the lack of throw, etc... it's a given for anybody without ego and pride getting in their way.
Click to expand...

Nikon glass or Ziess Nikon glass?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top