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 :)

18-85 T2.9 RED zoom...

Jeff Kilgroe said:
All of RED's lenses will "work" with FF35. If you are saying that it will cover the entire FF35 frame, then I'm not so sure. Have you tested to verify this? Or are you simply operating on the assumption that this lens is a re-housed FF still lens and that RED has made no modifications that would affect its coverage?
Click to expand...

The reasonable speculation has always been that the red 18-50 is based on the sigma 18-50 which is NOT a full frame lens - it is designed to cover aps-c which also happens to be very close to S35.

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3320&navigator=6

From sigma website: "Vignetting will occur if the lens is used with digital cameras with image sensors larger than APS-C size or 35mm SLR cameras."

It seems like RED will offer an S35 crop on the FF sensors so that you can also work in the familiar S35 frame size, DOF and use the normal S35 PL mount lenses from RED, Cooke, Arri, etc.
 
Hi,

It seems like RED will offer an S35 crop on the FF sensors so that you can also work in the familiar S35 frame size, DOF and use the normal S35 PL mount lenses from RED, Cooke, Arri, etc.[/QUOTE]


This is crucial in my opinion. The option to crop the FF sensor to S35. This way you have best of both worlds, you can use nikon or canon leica format lenses, and if the situation calls for a pl mount S35 you just make a switch and everyone is happy. Can someone verify if this is true because this is the only thing that I have to make sure before pushing the purchase button for the scarlett FF35. Thanks for the feedback...and by the way today announcements are just REDOLUTIONARY.
 
cckid said:
Hi,

It seems like RED will offer an S35 crop on the FF sensors so that you can also work in the familiar S35 frame size, DOF and use the normal S35 PL mount lenses from RED, Cooke, Arri, etc.
Click to expand...

absolutely, no question about it.
 
One should also note that on the ANGENIEUX OPTIMO 24 - 290 - they have a 1.4x extender that will cover FF35 sensor - according to my calculations. I think they designed that 1.4x for use on the Dalsa actually - not 100% sure.
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
One should also note that on the ANGENIEUX OPTIMO 24 - 290 - they have a 1.4x extender that will cover FF35 sensor - according to my calculations. I think they designed that 1.4x for use on the Dalsa actually - not 100% sure.
Click to expand...

This is not necessarily true. An extender is designed to magnify the image but only for the format it is engineered for use with. For instance, we have lens doublers for both Super-16 and 35mm. I tried just what you are thinking in testing for the Phantom 65 and discovered some lenses and doublers will work and others will not. Don't know what would work on FF35.
 
Mitch Gross said:
This is not necessarily true. An extender is designed to magnify the image but only for the format it is engineered for use with. For instance, we have lens doublers for both Super-16 and 35mm. I tried just what you are thinking in testing for the Phantom 65 and discovered some lenses and doublers will work and others will not. Don't know what would work on FF35.
Click to expand...


What he said.

But you can use a multiplier to cover a larger format but at the risk of multiplying what ever abberations that are inherent in the original lens.
 
chuck colburn said:
What he said.

But you can use a multiplier to cover a larger format but at the risk of multiplying what ever abberations that are inherent in the original lens.
Click to expand...

ANGENIEUX is telling me it will 100% cover FF35 at the specs Jim posted - (only work with 24-290) and this was done for use with Dalsa.
 
The use of extenders to cover larger formats goes way back. We did it in the sixties using an Angenieux 12-240mm lens designed for 16mm format to cover 35mm cine format. In the late eighties I had a custom optical group designed for the Cooke 20-100 and the 20-60mm lenses to cover the 65mm format for the "Showscan" cameras. It's nothing new.
 
chuck colburn said:
The use of extenders to cover larger formats goes way back. We did it in the sixties using an Angenieux 12-240mm lens designed for 16mm format to cover 35mm cine format. In the late eighties I had a custom optical group designed for the Cooke 20-100 and the 20-60mm lenses to cover the 65mm format for the "Showscan" cameras. It's nothing new.
Click to expand...
understood Chuck - just mentioning the option.
 
AquaVideoRed206 said:
The reasonable speculation has always been that the red 18-50 is based on the sigma 18-50 which is NOT a full frame lens - it is designed to cover aps-c which also happens to be very close to S35.
Click to expand...

I know that's some of the more popular speculation. However, I was just questioning Stephen since he stated so matter-of-factly that the lens would indeed cover FF35. Whether the 18-50 is based on the Sigma design or not, I don't think that it will cover much more than S35.
 
Brent@RED said:
Oh, and one other quick thing so everyone is clear, the reservation number you had for your lens is your place in line. For example, if you are 18Z-000222, you are 222nd in line for the lens. It does NOT mean that you will get lens serial number 18Z-000222. In fact, the serial number scheme for the RED PRO 18-85 is a totally different format so it is not even a remote option to get that serial number :)

Thanks, BC
Click to expand...

I just have my Order No. 396951767 for the 18-85.

I'm #767 in the line?

Or were are my reservation number



Thanks David Torres
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
I was just questioning Stephen since he stated so matter-of-factly that the lens would indeed cover FF35. .
Click to expand...

Hi Jeff,

I made a mistake, it had been a long day!

Stephen
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi Jeff,

I made a mistake, it had been a long day!
Click to expand...

No worries. That's why I was asking if you had actually tried it. Would've been great news if it were to actually cover the larger area.

I know people dog on the 18-50 and dwell on its shortcomings. But having owned one for a couple months now, I can say that it has been a great little lens and I really like it. Know its weaknesses (really just the breathing and tracking) and work within those boundaries. It's a great lens for steadicam use as it's so compact.
 
I have only seen some test footage, I am still looking for some field footy... anyone posted clips from a narrative or music vid shot with this lens? I am strongly considering placing an order.
 
seems good but when i think abt the price......... oh oh oh never
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top