LEICA R on RED: Pictures

[Lakis Amarantithis]

35-70mm 2.8 @ 2.8 of course natural light 7:30pm today. Huge respect to the designer of this lens and Leica in general as well as the Red Dragon. For me is simply priceless to be able to capture life with 2 legends: Leica and Red.

 

[Mark M]

35-70mm 2.8 @ 2.8 of course natural light 7:30pm today. Huge respect to the designer of this lens and Leica in general as well as the Red Dragon. For me is simply priceless to be able to capture life with 2 legends: Leica and Red.

I may need to borrow your copy if that's ok... (for just a few years

 

[David Battistella]

And this, my friends, is why I love this thread so much!

Thanks Lakis!

 

[Mark Andersen]

I have a couple frames to share from my first couple of shoots with the R's

Edit: forgot to state which lenses I used:

1. 50 Lux, late version
2. 80 Lux
3. 35 Lux, earlier version
4. 50 Lux

 

[Lakis Amarantithis]

I may need to borrow your copy if that's ok... (for just a few years

One more thing Mark about this 35-70mm f2.8 lens. It's not an APO. But somehow I don't see any difference. I blew earlier a pic to 1080% and no red or blue by the sides/corners etc. Also the designer said specifically in the documentation that is no good to have the sun or bright lights in the pic pointing in the lens. Which brings this question to me:

There are some shots like the first shot of Mark Andersen above where the sun flares. Does this tells something about the lens and is that a desirable shot and why? When the sun hits the lens obviously the pic becomes fuzzy. I always avoid it but I've seen great cinematographers using it.

When you come to FL I'll be happy to go film with you Mark and any other Red user of course.

@David
Thank you! David for this beautiful idea you had. I would not get into Leica's if it was not for you and all the other great users here. Now after my girl is my new religion.
I still don't know what coatings they put in those lenses but I can't get that image with anything I tried from other lenses some that the cost the same or more.

 

[Paul Ryzhkoff]

One more thing Mark about this 35-70mm f2.8 lens. It's not an APO or any other fancy name lens. But somehow I don't see any difference. I blew earlier a pic to 1080% and no red or blue by the sides/corners etc.

Lakis, the same thing can be observed with Elmarit-R 28mm E55 (version 2) — it is completely free from chromatic aberration, yet there is no APO in it's name.
Kind of completely amazing to me. Best lenses ever!

 

[Lakis Amarantithis]

Lakis, the same thing can be observed with Elmarit-R 28mm E55 (version 2) — it is completely free from chromatic aberration, yet there is no APO in it's name.
Kind of completely amazing to me. Best lenses ever!

I agree 100% Paul. And I think also with the 19mm V2 and more than few others. Some much better or better than others but all above any other still lens generally speaking.
First pic with the 35-70mm 2.8 and the rest 2 B&W with the 19mm V2 and the awesome Kippertie IR olpf.

 

[Kemalettin Sert]

Do you guys know 21mm F 1.4 covers Dragon sensor?

 

[Mark Andersen]

There's a 21mm out there that is 1.4, Other than a MP? Which lens are you referring to?

 

[Lakis Amarantithis]

Do you guys know 21mm F 1.4 covers Dragon sensor?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...YXqAmBe_HFBoC9oPw_wcB&is=USA&m=Y&A=details&Q=

all m and r lenses cover the Dragon but Phil said before that this particular lens is no so good for the Dragon. The m 24 F1.4 is much better or the 19 v2 r I posted above I would say is the best if you want to go lower f stop.

 

[Mark Andersen]

Ah yes the M lens, Ms don't work on Reds or SLRs, the rear element extends too far into the camera and will hit the OLPF, and would likely have some strange color artifacts due the extreme angle at which the light hits the sensor coming out of the back of the lens. It's too bad there isn't an R version of this, a 21 with a 1.4 would be handy.

edit, I should clarify that the wide angle Ms don't work, the longer lenes, like 50s and up are fine.

 

[Paul Ryzhkoff]

Regarding the information above, 19mm lens is in some ways should be way better than "superspeed" 1.4 M lens.
21 1.4 has really big "moustache" distortion which is uncorrectable even in stills world. Also vignetting @1.4 is pretty severe.

 

[Paul Ryzhkoff]

Gentlemen, i need your advice.

I currently have a set of 28...100mm lengths:
28 v2 E55 elmarit
35 cron
50 lux
80 lux
100 APO elmarit

I can't decide which one to get next, as a most effective purchase —
35mm Summilux R for $2700 in BGN condition, a bit rough externally but glass is perfect. Rare lens, only 1600 have been made. Picture quality - AMAZING !

or

19mm v2, unused basically, smooth as silk, just perfect ! box, etc. For $3200, which, i understand, is a bit expensive, no ?
How many of 19mm v2 lenses were produced ? Is 19mm v2 less rare than a summilux 35 ? Not long ago I almost bought one for $2000, which is a much better price...

For 35mm width i already have 35/2 summicron, which is nice, but 35 lux is an almost perfect lens, better than it's ASPH M siblings...

What are you opinions on each? any suggestions ? which is more rare ? 19 or 35/1.4 ? Thanks !

 

[Mark Andersen]

I'd say you need something wider than a 28, so the 19 V2 better compliments what you already have. I don't know which is more rare, it seems the 19 v2 comes up for sale a lot less than the 35 Lux on eBay if that's any indication.

 

[Mark M]

Hi Paul, I agree with Mark that the 19mm v2 makes more sense here given your line-up.

And according to Puts – about 6,000 of each (19 v2 / 35 Summilux) were produced so both are rather uncommon but not extremely rare.

 

[Oscar Stegland]

CFF-1 is an amazing follow focus, though obviously in a higher tier cost-wise. For an owner-operator, it's a no-compromise option, and can work with just about any camera/lens/build you can imagine. Because it has so many points of adjustability, it lacks the simplicity of an FF4/5, and isn't as immediately adored by camera assistants, but when lens barrels get fat and or extremely narrow, it's nice to have something that can always manage to reach and perform.

This! The CFF-1 is extremely flexible but with all those adjustments available it's rather difficult to get in the right position and frankly a pain in the ass to adjust. In my experience it does neither more nor less than either the Arri FF4/FF5 but it does it while being much more complex and not in a good way. For the price I'd much rather go with an Arri. Have experienced a bit of backlash with Oconnor as well.

I use a Tilta FF-T03 with my Contax lenses and so far it even works well with my tiny 50mm f/1.4, but it can be rather tricky to fit between the camera and matte box as it's not a particularly small unit. My friend has used it with his Leica R set with good results (19mm V1, 24mm, 35mm 1.4, 50mm 1.4, 90mm 2.0) as well. We haven't used it on RED yet though but if you run the 15mm rod riser it shouldn't be a problem. I would definitely prefer something with an adjustable arm though.

On another note, this is a fantastic thread guys. Great images and a wealth of knowledge. I opted for the Contax route (after reading Nick's fantastic survival guide) due to budgetary concerns, but when I can defend it financially I will start collecting these bad boys as well and hopefully get a set of Mamiya's as well. In the meantime, I will more than likely shoot a few projects with my friend's R's and post any results here. We're also looking into doing a shootout between his R's and my Contax (21mm 2.8, 28mm 2.0, 35mm 1.4, 50mm 1.4, 135mm 2.8, getting the 85mm 1.4 and 100mm 2.0 soon) if anyone might be interested in seeing the results.

 

[Raafi Rivero]

When I first bought Leica lenses this spring it was for the superior image quality, bang-for-buck, etc. But the lenses also come with an adoptive family of sorts. The gratitude (and inspiration!) flows from there.

 

[Paul Ryzhkoff]

Mark Magnarella and Mark Andersen, thank you both for your sound advice. )

I already use 18-35 for wide shots, being F/1.8 it is more convenient, although not a Leica and has colors slightly shifted to magenta side. Which i of course correct during grading. Spending on 19mm is tough for me because it's almost twice as expensive as NEW ZE/ZF 21mm Zeiss, but the results are almost identical. What's more, being very wide and only 2.8 it will not offer less DOF than 18-35 or any kind of sound advantage, except for Leica color. Many R experts said it is not as groundbreaking as 28mm E55 R lens, for example.
I am debating is it worth it currently for me, and at this moment it think maybe not...

Raafi, very nice imagery, almost 3D !
Cheers

 

[Dominik Muench]

Another weekend, another Leica R shoot:

 

[Mark M]

Nice lighting there Dom!