First look at Red Pro Primes in TO

[Gregor Hagey]

I just wanted to post some initial thoughts on the Red Pro Primes. I had a chance to look at them on July 3 and 7 and shoot a few quick tests. Morning Glory kindly provided the full range of RPPs.

The first thing I noticed is that they are big. Really big and heavy. For anyone that uses a 1030HDS or Video 20 these lenses with regular accessories will overload an already maxed out tripod.

I compared the RPPs to a MP, Zeiss Standard MKII and an S4 on two different lens projectors in Toronto and it's surprising how great they look. Both the RPP and MP are very neutral, can resolve up to 200 lpm, have great coverage and very little chromatic aberration. The Zeiss Standards by comparison were definitely softer and had more CA. The S4 looked great overall, but had a warm cast (which is not necessarily a bad thing). The RPP had marginally more pincushioning then the MP, but it was more then acceptable. Stephen Reizes csc helped set up the first test and was was quite happy with what he saw. He did remark that the 300mm RPP is very, very similar to his Tamron 300mm.

Jack Mosor helped set up the second test where 1st AC Joe Chan checked all the focus marks against tape and they were all bang on and didn't need to be shimmed (which was good because they didn't come with shims).

I performed a very simple Bokeh test with 2 mag lights and I thought the RPP was quite nice and compared quite well with the MP and was better then the S4s less then circular iris shape (once again this could be a creative choice to have a more artificial looking Bokeh).

The MP did clearly perform better with flaring. I would shoot more tests with the RPP if my project involved a lot of flaring of the lens with lights to make sure the effect is what I wanted.

The RPPs did not get the best results on either of the Zeiss MTF machines I looked at them on and I'm not too sure if it's because of a real issue with the lenses or because the MTF machine wasn't designed with RPP in mind.

From what I saw I'd be happy to take these out for the right project, either film or digital. I don't see these as a compromise, just another choice.

More pictures to come.

 

[Gregor Hagey]

more pictures

more pictures

Here are some more pictures of Bokeh and a Flare test. The files names indicate the lens specs.

Gregor

 

[Gregor Hagey]

last batch

last batch

Here's the final flare pictures. I also shot a DSC MegaTrumpet 12 chart, but it's kind of pointless to shrink it down and post it. All the primes exceeded the resolution of the sensor which according to the chart was between 1500 to 1750 LPPH.

 

[Paul Leeming]

Thanks Gregor, can't wait to get our set!

Cheers from Tokyo,

Paul

 

[Pawel Achtel]

Great test. What numbers did you get on the Zeiss MTF machine at the same f-stop?

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Also, thanks for a great test!!!

 

[Gregor Hagey]

Great test. What numbers did you get on the Zeiss MTF machine at the same f-stop?

I'd rather not quote numbers as I'm not too sure about their validity. Almost all the numbers were very high but as some of the lenses were rotated the readings could drop quite dramatically in some cases. The 300 had the lowest MTF of the set, but completely on par with other lenses of it's focal length. I'm told that it's best to have the highest MTF for wide angle lenses because they need to resolve more fine detail because of their wider field of view, whereas telephoto lenses don't need to resolve as much fine detail. I will say that MTF machines are a bit outside my expertise. Next time I test with the RPPs I just want to just shoot people's faces - which is the ultimate test for me. S4s can be considered technically inferior to MP, but many consider them more flattering to a person's face.

I should also say that both the MTF machine and the autocollimator at both facilities said the RPPs needed shimming (neither could agree on the amount though). However, after checking them against a tape measure on both a Red body and a 535 body it was clear that the focus marks were in fact bang on and no shimming was necessary.

Pawel feel free to PM me for more.

 

[Taylor Morrison]

Nice test... Very clear comparisons. any shots wfo for comparison?
Thanks

 

[Gregor Hagey]

Nice test... Very clear comparisons. any shots wfo for comparison?
Thanks

Didn't have time to shoot wide open, but I did look at it. For Bokeh the shape of the iris is completely gone and out of focus points of light are just circles (which is what you'd expect). The MP, S4 and RPPs look very, very good wide open. As expected contrast is a bit better as you stop down, but they are such high quality it's not a consideration like shooting on Zeiss High Speeds where stopping down from T1.3 to T4 dramatically improves CA and resolution. From a pure technical stand point the MP probably edges out all the competition, but sometimes it's just splitting hairs. Once a shot has been (de)graded to it's 'look' by adding vignettes/grads, increasing the contrast, warming/cooling the picture, using secondaries to selectively pull out colours, adding/removing grain, etc, etc. the qualities of the lens can become quite subtle.

 

[Taylor Morrison]

Once a shot has been (de)graded to it's 'look' by adding vignettes/grads, increasing the contrast, warming/cooling the picture, using secondaries to selectively pull out colours, adding/removing grain, etc, etc. the qualities of the lens can become quite subtle.

Agreed on this point but it is great to start with a clean slate so to speak. Thanks for the follow up.

 

[Raul Gonzo]

Gregor, thanks for doing these tests. Everyone seems to agree they are big and heavy, but no one has said if they need any sort of support. What are your thoughts on that? Plus, the set up I have right now clocks in at about 30lbs. on my 1030hds, changing lens from my 18-50 to a RPP, shouldn't be more than the 41lb max. (if balanced correctly). Am I missing something with that?

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

I wouldn't worry about supporting them, even the 25mm and 35mm, unless you are planning on going ape-chit with Blair-Witch style HH, but it would be wise to support any big lens for that. Just my humble 0.02.

 

[joakim_hansson]

Thanks for an interesting and hands on comparison, I´m in the process of getting a RED with a lens set.
-It´s interesting to see the small differences that the 5x more expensive MP can produce. I´d say that RED has got a really good value for money lens set if all of them compares this good to MP...
Also as I have understood the RPP handle 5k better than arri high speed lenses too - which for future use is a really good reason (if not just the price) to get a set of RPP...

 

[Sean R.]

Jack!!!!! Nice poses. Good tests guys.
Exciting that you guys have the RPP's up there now.
All the best to you and your crew.

Sean Ruggeri

 

[lensmaster]

The fact these RPP's are being compared to MP's is amazing to me. I heard early on that the goal was to make them almost as good as Cooke.

Now all you see are RPP MP comparisons??? For 100K+ more a set...

 

[Gregor Hagey]

Gregory, thanks for doing these tests. Everyone seems to agree they are big and heavy, but no one has said if they need any sort of support. What are your thoughts on that? Plus, the set up I have right now clocks in at about 30lbs. on my 1030hds, changing lens from my 18-50 to a RPP, shouldn't be more than the 41lb max. (if balanced correctly). Am I missing something with that?

Stephen noted that due to its length he thought the 300mm needed a support (his 300 Tamron does which is similar in length and weight, etc.). The other primes should be okay though, the housing is quite rigid.

The lightest I can get the Red with a clip-on mattebox, light weight follow focus and either the Red light weight zooms or Zeiss High Speeds is 40lbs. I can only get it down to 30lbs in handheld mode by using the battery belt clip and shooting to cards. If your setup is in fact 41lbs with with a RPP then you should be okay with the 1030, but once you get up to 45-50lbs it's time for a new head and legs.

 

[Raul Gonzo]

I will have to double check the weight of my set up, but it seemed I was doing pretty good with the RRmattebox, a drive, a battery, the 18-50 and the LCD screen.
Thanks again for your input Gregor.

 

[Jochen Schmidt-Hambrock]

Thank you very much for your tests.

Just got my bill from RED. Cant wait....

Jochen

 

[Andrae Palmer]

Ok we are about to get our RPP's and I was wondering about support for the 25mm and 35mm. Remembered getting a lot of heat on here for not having a support for the older Angenieux 25-250mm zoom which only weighed 5 pounds. The RPP 25mm and 35mm weigh more but don't need support?

 

[Matthew Duclos]

Ok we are about to get our RPP's and I was wondering about support for the 25mm and 35mm. Remembered getting a lot of heat on here for not having a support for the older Angenieux 25-250mm zoom which only weighed 5 pounds. The RPP 25mm and 35mm weigh more but don't need support?

The Angeneieux HR was a lot longer than the RPPs and created a lot more leverage due to its extended front weight. The RPPs are in fact heavy, but I don't think they require a support. Perhaps if you are concerned with the integrity of your RED camera mount, a support would be in order.
I would be glad to look into fabricating a support for the RPPs if there is enough interest.