Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

It was a long road...

Nick Wolf said:
I think it takes courage to come back and face the crowd after set backs. He is a major contributor for a very long time to this community and deserves a chance to speak again.

There is no need to form a lynch mob on account of disappointment. Its one thing to be critical and quite something else to use the insident as a license to be mean spirited.


DogDay.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. Let's be mature about this.
 
From www.ibe-optics.com:

27_RED_Star_2.jpg


--> http://www.ibe-optics.com/media/raw/Red_Star.pdf
 
Wow! Looks promising.

When and how much? And, can I play with one?
 
Well they certainly look much better, than the Rebel lenses shown at NAB. The Schneider-Kreuznach logo is comforting.

Looks like a detachable(?) hood, I guess the front element still expands through focus, inside the hood?

The Rebel lenses were a T1.9, this set varies from T2.2 to 2.0, not so exciting.
 
Looks like a trademark violation to me. I wonder if RED gave them permission to call them RED*STAR.
 
You need to be pretty dumb to name your lens REDSTAR. That is a pretty clear Violation.

Just got off the phone with my friend in Germany. Said realistic volume shipping mid 2010.
 
These are not the UniQoptics lenses. They are an evolution from the Rebel lenses shown at Abel's booth at NAB. Red*Star is a worldwide trademark from Schneider for decades. They won a technical Oscar for their projection lenses.

Do not judge the lenses from a bad experience with the way you heard about them. Please judge them on their merits. Come to IBC to find out more.
 
I must say I am underwhelmed so far.
 
Mitch Gross said:
Do not judge the lenses from a bad experience with the way you heard about them. Please judge them on their merits. Come to IBC to find out more.
Click to expand...
I agree we shouldn't judge the lenses because of the embarrassing way they have been brought to market. A little info on pricing and a schedule of release of the wides would have helped restore some customer faith, sadly unless I'm a complete dolt I can find any info on either topic. And why should I have to go to Amsterdam to find out? Been there, done that...
 
Mitch Gross said:
These are not the UniQoptics lenses. They are an evolution from the Rebel lenses shown at Abel's booth at NAB. Red*Star is a worldwide trademark from Schneider for decades. They won a technical Oscar for their projection lenses.

Do not judge the lenses from a bad experience with the way you heard about them. Please judge them on their merits. Come to IBC to find out more.
Click to expand...

Phil Jordan said:
Trademarks are considered abandoned if not used for 7 years.
Click to expand...

It gets a little tiring hearing all of the "expert" assessments of trademark infringement. The U.S. copyright and patent offices do little or nothing to vet the merits of a copyright or patent application so as a practical matter trademark and patent "rights" are determined by court fights (or the threat of litigation).

As a general rule, the more generic a word is (and it doesn't get much more generic than the word RED - one of the three primary colors) the harder it would be to establish trademark rights AND the narrower the field for which it would be applicable. But given that it ultimately has to be decided in court it more often comes down to the depth of the pockets involved, rather than an honest legal evaluation. On the other hand RED can't just look the other way when it comes to the grey areas because one of the legal requirements of establishing and maintaining a trademark is that you have to vigorously defend it.

The "Sue me, Sue you blues" aspect isn't that harmful when it comes to trademarks since it is just about the money to be made through branding, but it is a big problem in the patent area because it really does stifle innovation and distorts the process of product development in a lot of areas.

END OF RANT
 
Prices, delivery schedule and other aspects of these lenses has not yet been established. They are very much brand new, and an ever-evolving product. As soon as there is something solid to report from Abel's perspective, then I will gladly do so.

When the first generation of RED primes were shown at NAB as prototypes I do not recall this sort of negative reaction. The lenses shown at NAB were prototypes. A lot of valuable feedback came from the convention and much development has occurred. These are not selling products yet so it is again by definition prototypes that will be shown at IBC. We hope that they are closer to the finished product, but we shall see.

The new Luma Tech lenses shown at NAB were prototypes as well, and they went back to be redesigned after getting response at the show.

This is a process, a way that manufacturers have developed product for years. It could all be kept secret until the finished product was debuted, or you could get a glimpse along the way and put in your two cents for what you would like to see them become. Or you can choose not to look until the product is completed and the final version is released.
 
Mitch Gross said:
Prices, delivery schedule and other aspects of these lenses has not yet been established...
(EDIT)
...This is a process, a way that manufacturers have developed product for years.
Click to expand...

I understand all of that. Sadly, the OP doesn't;

... however this Friday, there will be, finally, the excellent news for anyone shopping for prime lenses.
Click to expand...

If he said this Friday we'll be showcasing our latest PROTOTYPE there would have been a more positive reaction, don't you think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top