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 :)

Best cinematic lenses for Scarlet X

Chris Hagan said:
For those interested, this video was shot with the Zeiss ZE 50mm f/2 Macro. I also own the 21mm and 85mm.

Click to expand...

Nice color correction Chris.
 
Nice Chris. Almost bought the 50 macro, but ended up putting together a Contax set instead. Love to see the 21 and 85 also.

Best

Lliam
 
Thanks Alexandros and Lliam. Not that I need an excuse to shoot but it certainly doesn't hurt. I'll see if I can get out this weekend and shoot with the 21 and 85mm lenses. A few others have politely asked as well.
 
a nine page thread about "cinematic" lenses and not a single word about breathing or crosshairs staying in the center while zooming?
come on guys!
what really makes a lens "cinematic" is the lack of breathe compared to still lenses!
so every major focus pull will not look like a zoom...
it`s also important that a zoom stays exactly on target and will not "float around" while zooming!
these things may not be important in the stills world but can ruin your shot on a motion picture quite badly...

michael, you own a ton of lenses, tell us a little about their behavior, that would be very interesting!
do the baltars breathe a lot or are the canon still lenses worse?

also, on a tough shoot it`s very handy to have focus and aperture rings in the same place, the same front diameter etc..
if you change lenses 100 times a day you get to like master primes a lot!

although i enjoy the luxury of being able to have production rent the lenses i wish for the job, i`m constantly looking for nice odd glass that is worth buying. super baltare for example :-)
master primes may be the technical state of the art but their look is way to crisp and technical for my taste, and what`s the use of using a 17500€ piece of glass when you have to use heavy diffusion on it and add flares in post...

that leads us to the question wether "cinematic" lenses have to do with taste, and if a nice look is worth taking a little bad with the good, like nice flares but breathing etc..
 
I wouldn't do that to aluminum…
 
Wondocam: You may need to change "wondocam" to your full name, as per REDuser policy.

You make a really good point. The OP did not say whether cinema lenses refered to the "look", the mechanics, or the intended format of the lens. Looks are 100% subjective, so I was concentrating on the other issues.

The super baltars are built like a tank and exhibit good characterstics for breathing. Good is not equal to perfect. Still lenses really do breathe: a lot. However, different brands and different models within a brand show a wide variety of behavior. If you think there is a tracking issue on "cinema" zoom lenes, you should see how far off the tracking is on still zoom lenses. The interesting thing on zooms is that, in theory, it is possible to build a breathing profile for a zoom lens and, zoom in or out to compensate for the breathing. Of course, that would require a lens with accurate tracking, and a hella program and FZ motors. I believe that Birger was attempting to do that with the Viewfactor FF kit, but I never heard whether they had achieved it.

In spite of mass manufacturing techniques, two identical lenses can have different behaviors in terms of tracking, breathing and other abberations. Most of those differences can be resolved through proper maintenance: all lenses need a tune-up once in a while.
 
Michael Panfeld said:
Actually that is not correct. DoF is contigent on four things: focal length of the lens, aperture, distance from camera to subject, and the circle of confusion.
Click to expand...


To be more precise: It is the image ratio and aperture.
Focal length, distance from camera to subject and sensor/image size define the image ratio. Focal length or distance from camera to subject alone has nothing to do with it. Circle of confusion or amount of pixels has no influence on DOF.

Cheers, Ulf
 
Ulf Krentz said:
To be more precise: It is the image ratio and aperture.
Focal length, distance from camera to subject and sensor/image size define the image ratio. Focal length or distance from camera to subject alone has nothing to do with it. Circle of confusion or amount of pixels has no influence on DOF.

Cheers, Ulf
Click to expand...

Ulf, circle of confusion has everything to do with DoF. CoC drops out when comparing two shots with the same image size. But when comparing two different imgae sizes, as the question was posed several posts above, the CoC is very much part of the equation.
 
Michael Panfeld said:
Ulf, circle of confusion has everything to do with DoF. CoC drops out when comparing two shots with the same image size. But when comparing two different imgae sizes, as the question was posed several posts above, the CoC is very much part of the equation.
Click to expand...

Michael, CoC vs image size will define the resolution but has nothing to do with DOF. (It is the image ratio / aperture. That´s why a FullFrame DSLR can produce a shallower DOF than a 5K Epic.)
Edit: Not talking about resolution or image quality.

Cheers, Ulf
 
:emote_popcorn: ^


Pascal Payant said:
What is the best cinematic lenses for the Scarlet X around the 2k mark per lenses?

Canon L series?
Zeiss ZE?

more options?

give me your thoughts. thanks
Click to expand...

I'd go for the Zeiss. Honestly the cinema 'look' is a combination of good framing, good lighting, proper lensing, color correction, and general "feel" of the image. One can shoot on the best glass available, and still produce video-looking images without those other aspects.
 
Dof is calculated as follows:

hyperfocal distance = focal length squared/(aperture * Circle of Confusion)

The min hyperfocal distances is then calculated as: hyperfocal distance * distance from camera to subject/(hyperfocal distance + distance from camera to subject)
The max hyperfocal distances is then calculated as: hyperfocal distance * distance from camera to subject/(hyperfocal distance - distance from camera to subject)

If you keep the focal length, aperture, and distance the same, but change the CoC (as happens when you are comparing two different film/sensor formats), you will arrive at different Dofs.
 
Michael Panfeld said:
Dof is calculated as follows:

If you keep the focal length, aperture, and distance the same, but change the CoC (as happens when you are comparing two different film/sensor formats), you will arrive at different Dofs.
Click to expand...

Michael, of course as you have a different image ratio. But I´ll give up here, it is drifting too far from the OPs question. I agree with Tony, the cinematic look is the result of many things that have to come together and I don´t think the hyperfocal distance is one of the major aspects ;-)

Cheers, Ulf
 
Super 16 mm lens, it works for Red one?

Super 16 mm lens, it works for Red one?

Roberto Lequeux said:
That is the right answer.

As to the lenses, check them out yourself and don't forget to look for breathing (slight zooming and/or shifting of the image when focusing) and of course look for the best focus feel (mechanics) and focus throw (how much the focus ring rotates from closest focus to infinity). You could go into a large pro store with your camera and try them on if you are in LA, NYC, and other large markets. Consider the ability to focus wirelessly, which is a huge deal. Canons, Nikons and other AF lenses will let you do that very well in the future using a Redmote Pro. Read about the Birger mount on Red One's to learn more about wirelessly focusing still lenses.
Click to expand...


Super 16 mm lens, it works for Red one? I think it will crop the frames, am I right?
 
if you had 5k$ to buy 2 lenses for scarlet canon mount. which one would you guys recommend?

thanks for your input

Alain Maiki
Music Producer/Director/Editor
 
Alain M said:
if you had 5k$ to buy 2 lenses for scarlet canon mount. which one would you guys recommend?

thanks for your input

Alain Maiki
Music Producer/Director/Editor
Click to expand...

For $5K, no need to limit yourself to only 2 lenses. you could cover a lot of territory with some nice glass for that amount.

Wide: Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 ...... (about 17-25mm on Scarlet 4K with crop factor)

Wide-Mid range: Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 USM IS ...... (27-88mm on Scarlet)

Telephoto: Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 USM L IS II ...... (112-320mm on Scarlet)

throw in a fast prime for low-ight: Canon 50mm f/1.4 USM ...... (80mm on Scarlet)

and macro: Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM L IS Macro ...... (160mm on Scarlet)
(The macro would push the total over $5,000.)

That's my shopping list.

These are extremely popular, well-liked lenses (many of them are talked about a lot on this forum)
and can yield great results. A couple of them (the Tokina and Canon 50mm f/1.4 USM, are also great bargains for high quality glass)

These lenses are among the top rated and highly recommended ones at Photozone, a respected review site from Germany.
 
akash adhikari said:
Super 16 mm lens, it works for Red one? I think it will crop the frames, am I right?
Click to expand...

Not if you shoot 2k. I believe (and some one correct me please, if I'm wrong)....you can even shoot some S16 lenses at 3K if you don't go too wide...I remember someone saying that by 20mm on S16mm... 3K stopped vignetteing....but again...I'm relying on ancient hearsay, so please, please don't quote me.

But 2K easily covers S16.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top