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 :)

18-50mm Zoom?

thinkbug said:
I played around with the focus and zoom in the booth, just looking through the viewfinder, and saw no noticeable issues. Maybe not the best testing method or environment, but it looked pretty good to me.
Click to expand...
Well, regarding breathing the testing method (not the environment) is fair enough or am I wrong?

Any other NAB 18-50mm testers?
 
I guess the accusation of breathing problems on the prototype 18-50mm can be easily checked.

Significant comments like this travel like wild fire as they easily trump any amount of marketing talk (I mean this in the nicest way) and need to be shafted or confirmed as quick as possible, preferably by independants.

Hopefully people can check these out tomorrow.
Prime lens observations would be great too, if permissable.

Cheers,
 
david farland said:
I guess the accusation of breathing problems on the prototype 18-50mm can be easily checked.

Cheers,
Click to expand...

Hi,

A small lightweight close focus lens is more likely to breathe than a large heavy one with a minimium focus of 24 inches. I understand it's something to do with physics.

Stephen
 
To be fair to Stu I think I should repeat his CML post here:

>Hi Evin,

>The 18-50s that are at the NAB booth have quite a breathing problem
>when racking focus -- is this something that will be addressed before the
>lens is put into production? I know these are hand-built prototypes.

>-Stu

I couldn't read into that post whether he thought it was a big issue or not, he was just commenting on something he noticed. I thought it was worthwhile putting the question out there to get the answer nailed while the lens was still available for checking out at NAB. The fact that nobody else looking through the lens at NAB has commented on this and it wasn't something that Gibby had noticed is very encouraging.

M
 
Please excuse my ignorance but will the new zoom Macro facility give a 1-1 life size magnification. I require close up of insects for my project and wondered if this would be best served by a lens made for that type of work?

It would also have a bearing on whether i go for this zoom or wait!

Mike the beginner
 
Mike the beginner said:
Please excuse my ignorance but will the new zoom Macro facility give a 1-1 life size magnification. I require close up of insects for my project and wondered if this would be best served by a lens made for that type of work?

It would also have a bearing on whether i go for this zoom or wait!

Mike the beginner
Click to expand...

Hi,

Most unlikely, The Minimium focus distance is 8" (from the lens or sensor?) With only a 50mm lens you would need to be about 2" from the front nodal point of the lens, where ever that may be when zoomed to 50mm!

Stephen

EDIT A prime lens back to front will be your cheapest soloution!
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi,

Most unlikely, The Minimium focus distance is 8" (from the lens or sensor?) With only a 50mm lens you would need to be about 2" from the front nodal point of the lens, where ever that may be when zoomed to 50mm!

Stephen

EDIT A prime lens back to front will be your cheapest soloution!
Click to expand...



Thank you Stephen that is most helpful


Mike the beginner
 
From CML:
Evin Grant said:
I wouldn't characterize it as a problem, but the lens does breathe a little bit. Personally I'm happy with it given it's price point and optical prowess. I do not have the information about weather the optics will be adressed before final production.
Click to expand...
 
I really hope we get some sort of tests on this and info. on the lens itself (weight, dimensions) etc... I'm undecided whether to go for the Prime set or stick with the 18-50 and supplement it with a fast wide Russian Prime which will be needed for exterior night shots...

I assume the optical elements would be more suceptible to breathing in a compact zoom, but how will it compare with the Cooke or Arri versions?

Very basic it looks like :

[size=+2]Zoom 18-50 [/size]
Pros : light weight
available shipping with camera in the Summer (?)
price is affordable
new production and elements (no useage)
great for certain kinds of productions and directors
made by a guy we trust

Negs:
range is good but lacks full range
speed is fairly slow for low light shots
zooms generally are not as a pristine image as primes
possible breathing could make this lens less than useful for specific shot choices
delivery not confirmed, so you might be better waiting
no independent testing yet (unlike David Stump test)

The couple of pros i've talked to tell me to sacrifice other budget items to get the Prime set, but I don't know, especially if the Primes won't be available until late December 2007, for example. Also, i'd really like it confirmed by the RED team if the Prime set will be available if I have the camera and would like a set - in other words there won't be a line up, or months delay in shipping. I know that's asking a lot for an order several moinths off, but the Prime set is the price of a car up here so i don't think it's an unreasonable request.

We're holding these guys to an incredibly high standard and getting revolutionary (personal film making) products for an affordable price, but some people are putting a lot of money and trust on the line - i hope we can get a better pic after NAB closes.
I love 'em for what they're doing


:-)



Just my 3 pence. :beer:
 
Breathing

Breathing

I did see the 18-50 personally at NAB. I only saw it rack focus at 50mm (on a 42 inch screen I think), but it definitely breathes noticeably at that focal length.

By the way, I just say this as a fact I personally observed. I am a RED One (508) and Red Zoom 18-85 (354) reservation holder, and DEFINITELY one of the Red faithful. I'm reserving judgement until the actual shipping units can be tested, but even if it breathes at the level I saw at NAB, it is still a DEAL at $6500, and is really compact too.

Let's see how this shakes out when the final is released and can be tested and compared. How much breathing is reasonable at this price point and size? I'm used to a lot of breathing with my Angenieux 20-120 on my Arri BL, so the workarounds are no big deal to me. And a zoom as compact as the RED 18-50 is a major plus too.

(EDIT) Let me also say that the lens was maybe 1-2 feet from the subject (going from memory here), so the breathing I saw should be much more noticeable than if the subject was further away.
 
Verko said:
(EDIT) Let me also say that the lens was maybe 1-2 feet from the subject (going from memory here), so the breathing I saw should be much more noticeable than if the subject was further away.
Click to expand...

Hi,

FWIW Close focusing without breathing is very difficult to achieve on a zoom.

Stephen
 
Again, as I noted in my Post #39 of this thread, I didn't see a significant breathing problem during the brief time I observed the 18-50 in use at the RED booth. They were demo lenses, not the finalized shipping version. Me and a team of other highly experienced shooters will test my RED #8 in Los Angeles sometime soon. We'll test a broad range of cine lenses (prime and zoom), 35mm still lenses (prime and zoom), and B4 2/3" lenses. If a finalized RED 15-50mm zoom is available at that time, we'll test it out, and publish our impressions. Until then, I think brief observations on the performance of the RED 18-50 zoom, made in a busy RED booth at NAB, have very limited value.
 
Yes, I second Gibby's remarks. I was just reporting what I saw, acknowledging that it wasn't the final shipping lens. Let's wait for the real deal to be tested properly.
 
Hi,

Are the lenses marked in imperial units (feet) only, or is there a metric option.

Stephen
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi,

Are the lenses marked in imperial units (feet) only, or is there a metric option.

Stephen
Click to expand...

That's a good point. I don't know if there will be a metric version or not. It would seem silly not to though seeing how much of the world works in metric.
I doubt they will put both on the lens though, too hard to read in fast moving situations.
 
I did hear that Cooke might be making these lenses for Red. Anyone care to confirm? :whistling:

I too, held the 18-50 i my hand and (much lighter than I thought) and also tried a super-quick rack focus, but the results were inconclusive.
 
Gibby, Steve, Evin and all,
thanks for all your words of experience and to all the ones who went out and tested it even more thanks.
I think the 18-50mm may be a Swiss Army knife to a lot of us and will be relied upon heavily.
I was mis-reading one of Gibby's posts in the other thread,18-50mm - Does it breath?, when I thought he said, he would test a couple of different manufacture's 18-50mm lenses. In his minds experience I assume this is what he is doing.

My heart gave a sigh of relief and the voice in my head said 'Yes', we need that comparative test.

I think it's fair to say that a few of us haven't had a lot of experience in seeing breathing problems on these types of zoom lenses.
I guess that is what this forum is about....teaching all who read it, from the voices of experience and viewing online results of practical test. This is why Evin's lens test are so applauded.

I noticed that Evin found very little breathing on the Nikon 17-35mm but I wouldn't have a clue if this is any type of comparison.

So, onto the test regime....

In my experience I found that the professional approach is without doubt the simplest approach....don't think easiest here!...it makes the most sense, doesn't cut corners or make assumptions.

The less professional approach is normally easier, has people thinking it the most practical, hoping it will work, is usually faster and cuts corners.
Often this approach is shoved through with conjecture, opinion and usually succeeds by more luck. Finally if it doesn't work, people are sadly comforted in the thought that they did their best and accept their approach or methods.

Sadly the most professional approach is simply passed over for brevity, inexperience or costs saving.
Sorry to preach but as others have said this lens will turn out to be a workhorse and needs to be professionally & throughly looked at. After all, it's that why we're here.


My suggestion here is to:
1. Use a comparative approach on the lens if possible
2. Follow Evin's great approach on testing lenses and then add whatever additional criteria is deemed required by professionals for this type of cine lens.

Last note: I do a lot of technical evaluation, tenders etc. The hardest step by far is having the right people define the evaluation criterion and to weight the score of each criteria.

End of rant!

David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top