18-50mm Zoom?

[Alexander Nikishin]

is it true the 18-85 will now be an 18-100?

I've heard that there may be a 50-150 in the works. With the release of the 18-50, I don't see there being a reason to release a second zoom with basically the same focal lengths.

 

[Stephen Williams]

With the release of the 18-50, I don't see there being a reason to release a second zoom with basically the same focal lengths.

Hi,

Well Cooke had a 20-100 , 25-250 and then a 20-60, I have both 20-60 + 20-100.

Stephen

 

[PaulClements]

Admittedly I'd prefer to see something like a 50-150mm alexander. If the other lens was 18-100mm I can understand it still being made. But effectively only offering another 35mm doesn't seem a great deal of point. Perhaps another compact 50-100 and a third compact 100-200 might be good. Keep the size and weight of the lenses similar and down nearer primes than traditional long zooms.

I don't know why lens manufacturers don't seem to make zoom lens sets, perhaps Red might break this mould and give us everything from 18 upto 300 or beyond in 3 or 4 zooms.

 

[Stephen Williams]

Hi Paul,

In motion picture photography the reason to use a zoom is mainly to save time changing lenses. Having a set of zooms defeats that advantage.

Stephen

 

[Alex Boothby]

Hi Paul,

In motion picture photography the reason to use a zoom is mainly to save time changing lenses. Having a set of zooms defeats that advantage.

Stephen

How about 1/3 as many lens changes then? (25, 35, 50mm)...
There are other advantages to a zoom; more precise framing, quick pre-roll adjustments, in camera zooms, etc. Zooms are not just variable primes. Personally I'm more concerned about f-stop than breathing as Red offers ample resolution to fix this in post.

Perhaps another compact 50-100 and a third compact 100-200 might be good. Keep the size and weight of the lenses similar and down nearer primes than traditional long zooms.

I don't know why lens manufacturers don't seem to make zoom lens sets, perhaps Red might break this mould and give us everything from 18 upto 300 or beyond in 3 or 4 zooms.

I think this is a great suggestion although I think it would be acceptable to skip a little range (by standard prime lengths). Something like a 18-50mm, a 65-125mm, and a 150-250mm. Can you even make a compact zoom at the longer lengths?

 

[Roberto B]

I've heard that there may be a 50-150 in the works. With the release of the 18-50, I don't see there being a reason to release a second zoom with basically the same focal lengths.

rusky, you're there.. same thought here..

 

[Roberto B]

Perhaps another compact 50-100 and a third compact 100-200 might be good. Keep the size and weight of the lenses similar and down nearer primes than traditional long zooms.

still better..

 

[steevo435]

I don't know why lens manufacturers don't seem to make zoom lens sets, perhaps Red might break this mould and give us everything from 18 upto 300 or beyond in 3 or 4 zooms.

The reason, at least up until this point, is that it is impossible (I know that word is taboo around here!!) to make zoom lens that are anywhere nearly the quality of Prime lenses. Up until now, any DP that knows his/her way around a set will select prime lenses if quality is the main objective. Zoom lenses have lots of moving parts.
By the way, there was a set of zoom lenses introduced in the mid 1990's that shocked the world with the quality of prime lenses in a zoom...that set was called the Arri/Zeiss VP's (Variable Primes). Look them up if you like, they were short zooms because physically and optically you can only get so much from a lens with moving elements. The VP series was a 16-30, 29-60, and a 55-105 matched set...beautiful glass if you can get your hands on it. :biggrin:

 

[Alexander Nikishin]

Maybe Brook or Evin can answer this question.....

How many degrees were in a full pull on the 18-50?

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Having just finished a TV series with zoom lenses, I can tell you that a 20-100mm Cooke in 35mm can pretty much satisfy 90% of the typical set-ups for interiors. We thought about getting the 17-75mm Panavision Primo but the problem was that we were always ending up at 100mm on our coverage.

We also carried a 25-250mm Primo zoom but found that the 10:1 zooms tend to breathe when you rack focus, plus there was some barrel-distortion at the 25mm end.

We liked everything about the Cooke 20-100mm except that it was an older lens limited to T/3.1 wide-open, plus it was a little soft at that f-stop. But mechanically, in terms of being low distortion and low breathing problems, it's a great lens and I wish that Cooke would update it.

There was the Zeiss VP (Variable Prime) lenses, which were short zooms that covered a certain range, so that three lenses did almost every focal length, the idea being that you only had to carry three lenses and since they were not long in range, they could be designed to be sharper. Trouble is that when most people change a set-up, they make a big change in focal length, so you were doing lens changes almost as often as with a prime set.

 

[PaulClements]

We liked everything about the Cooke 20-100mm ... it's a great lens and I wish that Cooke would update it.

Is the 18-100mm not considered an update David? It's colour matched to the S4 lenses so it fits with Cookes modern lens set.

 

[PaulClements]

Hi Paul,

In motion picture photography the reason to use a zoom is mainly to save time changing lenses. Having a set of zooms defeats that advantage.

Stephen

I understand that Stephen, the point I guess I'm making is that Cooke, Angeniuex et al make various zooms at the same time that overlap. Such as the 20-100mm and 25-250mm. As such the lenses become larger and heavier. Making two zooms such as 20-75mm and 75-250mm would surely offer better quality optics, make them lighter and smaller and offer the same range for the owners. It would also mean people would be more likely to buy both lenses rather than one over the other. As such fewer people use the 25-250mm compared to the 20-100mm or 18-100mm.

 

[Stephen Williams]

I understand that Stephen, the point I guess I'm making is that Cooke, Angeniuex et al make various zooms at the same time that overlap. Such as the 20-100mm and 25-250mm. As such the lenses become larger and heavier. Making two zooms such as 20-75mm and 75-250mm would surely offer better quality optics, make them lighter and smaller and offer the same range for the owners. It would also mean people would be more likely to buy both lenses rather than one over the other. As such fewer people use the 25-250mm compared to the 20-100mm or 18-100mm.

Hi Paul,

As David points out 20-100 is a very useful range. It's not light but saves time. I would be interested in the RED 18-85, if it does not breathe, is tack sharp wide open @T2.8 and remains @T2.8 throughout its range.

As dust may be an issue I would want to keep lens changes to a minimium. My 18-200 stays on my D70 all the time.

Stephen

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Judging from all the different zoom ranges that Fujinon is making HD zooms in, I'd say that there is no consensus as to the ideal range -- so zoom manufacturers end up making a lot of choices for consumers.

Also depends on how often you want to swap lenses. Certainly 18-85mm is a very practical range, similar to the Panavision Primo 17-75mm but going to 85mm is even better. I'm not much of a user of the 18mm end of zooms though, but that's just personal taste.

 

[Mike Devlin]

We liked everything about the Cooke 20-100mm except that it was an older lens limited to T/3.1 wide-open, plus it was a little soft at that f-stop. But mechanically, in terms of being low distortion and low breathing problems, it's a great lens and I wish that Cooke would update it.

At least according to their website, the new Cooke 18-100 T3.0 is the replacement for the 20-100 (www.cookeoptics.com/cooke.nsf/secondary/s4t3zoom), but it is not much faster.

 

[PaulClements]

Do you think the problem with the 18-85mm is the fact that making such a long range on a compact lens has caused Red problems? Perhaps the eventual lens we'll see will be a bit longer and heavier than originally anticipated?

 

[David Mullen ASC]

The longer the zoom range, the harder it is to design a zoom that is fast but not too large, plus doesn't have breathing problems when rack-focused. If you want it to go to 100mm, let's say, but be T/2.1 at the fastest, it ends up being a pretty big zoom for 35mm target areas. And if you need a 10:1 ratio, it gets hard to not have breathing problems unless you are very clever in the design.

Again, most of the long Fujinon HD zooms that have designed out the breathing problems tend to have huge front elements.

I don't think the 18-100mm Cooke zooms are all that new in design - I recall adds for them back in the late 1980's.

 

[Stephen Williams]

I don't think the 18-100mm Cooke zooms are all that new in design - I recall adds for them back in the late 1980's.

Hi David,

Correct and it's based on the 20-100 from 1971.

Stephen

 

[Alexander Nikishin]

Does anyone here have experience with the Cooke 20-100 in regards to breathing?

It was used in Band of Brothers and that is without a doubt a beautifully shot film.

 

[Stephen Williams]

Does anyone here have experience with the Cooke 20-100 in regards to breathing?

It was used in Band of Brothers and that is without a doubt a beautifully shot film.

Hi,

Very little, less than older primes, that's one reason it was a breakthrough when introduced.

Stephen