New mount...

[Joseph Mastantuono]

Also, Bad Lenses are a huge problem, and there are less than awesome rental houses out there. That's why the AC spends all that time checking every lens, before checking out of the rental house.

 

[Casey Green]

Looks great, Jarred. Out of curiosity, what is the difference between making the mount with a glossy finish as opposed to a flat or textured one? - or was this just for aesthetics?

(BTW, I do like the glossy finish).

Still hoping for an answer on this. Jarred, would you be so kind to chime in?

thanks for any info.

 

[Jarred Land]

The finish is the same as all our other anodized accessories.. and the same as the front lockring everyone is using already.. its not as glossy as it looks.

 

[Casey Green]

oh, ok. that makes sense. the pic threw me off a little.

thanks.

 

[Jarred Land]

Also, Bad Lenses are a huge problem, and there are less than awesome rental houses out there. That's why the AC spends all that time checking every lens, before checking out of the rental house.

bad lenses are a huge problem even at good rental houses, the difference is the good houses check them more often then the bad houses.

 

[redicule]

Mr Ridicule,

What you post are not objective comments but rumors and old news. And yes, it looks like a direct dig at RED as there is nothing constructive in your post. Everyone knows there have been and will be problems as this develops.

A - Do you have a RED camera on order?

B - Do you work for another camera company and only post here to cause trouble?

C - Do you have any grip on reality?

That this camera even exists is amazing. That RED allows us to come on the journey instead of waiting for another year to even see it, amazing. That the cost / value relationship is off the charts. That to compare RED to any other camera company who has been in business for many years is silly. That things are changing too fast for most to understand that this is a new way of doing business. Please stop applying your old school BS to this dynamic process.

If A is no and B is yes -- then would you please go away and leave us alone with our joy at having a REAL affordable camera solution to shoot 4k. From the most amazing camera company EVER.

I think I know the answer to C ... or maybe you are just one of those people who bitch about everything. How about going away for a year and then come back and see how things are then because people like you just imped progress and waste our time. Thank you.

---------------

Answers:

A: No, I do not have a camera on order, and don’t intend to become an owner or supplier in the future.

B: No I do not work for a camera company, or any other kind of company in the industry

C: No, I definitely don’t have a grip on reality (& no am I not a grip!!)

On to the rest of it: Yes speculation & rumors are abundant, not necessarily all in my posts. I don’t think I have been bitching, perhaps asking questions that you feel I shouldn’t would be more accurate? Not sure where the old news comes in. Let me point out that the majority of your quote above is simply opinion, but lets not dwell on that.

I haven’t been following this project for too long, but I am interested in it as this is the first video camera that I think has the potential to provide a quality alternative to film. Believe me, in the field I have had many conversations about the camera where I was the one talking it up, and will continue to do so. However I think it’s important to ask questions, and quantify against known technology.

I presume that by “old school BS”, you refer to comparisons to film cameras? The reality is that most high-end motion pictures and TVCs are still shot on 35mm film cameras. Is this not what Red is trying to compete with or at least work along side? In this case those “BS” cameras are what Red will & should be compared to.

So when there is an issue with the PL mount, of course it is logical to ask why it works on a film camera but not here, especially because the PL mount has originated from film cameras. And if Red can then turn around and provide a logical explanation, great. And if they can deliver an alternative product that works, even better –I hope they have.

I do think there is always going to be a lot of film vs video snobbery just as there is mac vs PC, which is pretty boring & I don’t buy into it. There are a lot of sensible posts here, but it seems that whenever someone questions something or perhaps makes a statement that could be perceived as being against Red, the unofficial red-brigade leaps into action and goes on the attack. Sure you are allowed to do that, but to be honest some of it is comparable on religious extremism, and as an agnostic I just don’t buy that approach. Dang, now I’ve gone and upset all the religious people with that metaphor – please note the extremism part.

Anyway, if I post something and Jim (or anyone else) replies saying “I think your impression is incorrect because of such & such…..” and makes a believable argument against what I have said, I am happy with that. If someone else replies to the same post by saying that my ways are “old school BS”…… well…… at least shoot me down with an intelligent response rather than an aggressive attack that will please the mob.

I guess at least if I object to something & say so, then someone posts back saying I’m an idiot, then there has been some alternate view-points flowing. At least allow yourself ot have a laugh at my expense!!!

Following is a script of a 15sec cartoon;

Sc1
“I like you, you’re nice, and I also like all the things that you like”
“I like you even more, and yes we do like the same things don’t we”
“Then it’s agreed we all like each other and the same things”
“Oh look, there’s a flower!”

Sc2
“See that guy over there, he likes other things”
“He must be bad if he doesn’t like the same things as us!”
“I hate the things he likes, so I hate him too!”
“Maybe he’s dangerous?”
“Maybe he’s a terrorist!!”

There I go again, sorry. I’ll try and restrain myself in the future… but no promises.

 

[Jarred Land]

play nice kids.

 

[David Battistella]

Jarred,

Maybe you need to create a category called BOXING RING, just so people who want to go at it can type away all the fun they want without interrupting decent threads.

When I am in the mood for negative discourse I can just check in to the old BOXING RING and check out how people who want to go at it on line chose to waste their time and energy.


David

 

[Steve Murray]

However I think it’s important to ask questions, and quantify against known technology.

Of course. My point is right after Jim gives out great news to those of us waiting for our cameras -- you jump in and use old news and rumors to say that there was something "wrong". When in fact this camera is still under development and not a finished product. My point is your timing. It makes you sound like you work for a competing company and want to point out every little thing you can dig up.

I presume that by “old school BS”, you refer to comparisons to film cameras?

No. Nooo not that -- Talking about the old days / ways of business when a company would develop a camera and bring it out when it was finished. Then everyone would check it out and say what was wrong, they liked, didn't like and so forth. This is a new way.... a way allowing us to see the development process as never before, to help with it, to maybe help make the camera better. This camera is not yet finished and as Jim has stated maybe will never be "finished". Plenty of the 100 current owners are pointing out what is not working, needs improvement & etc. I do not feel like people who are not actually using the camera need to point out what they read or heard. I think most of the forum members are well aware of everything... that is sort of the point in this new way of doing business which Jim is doing with RED.

-----------------------​

 

[luis bustamante]

I might find myself dodging flaming darts with this one, but I'm going to suggest that, while proper back-focus is important, that in the RED's case, the nature of performing back-focus calibrations is not as "professional" as it might be for a film camera. Why?

Because unlike in a film camera, the imaging plane is the same for the recorded image as for the viewing plane (since no video tap, no ground glass, etc). In other words, with a careful eye, an accurate test chart/lens, and monitoring a 1-to-1 magnified image on an external monitor, you should be able to get the back-focus, visually, as good as any 'professional' could do.

I won't discount the notion that its not important.. that its not critically important even, just the notion that with a little bit of patience, the proper tools, and the new RED mount, anyone slightly more skilled than a camera monkey should be able to do it, perhaps even in the field.

I agree. To elaborate on that Michael Kent form DSC Labs sent me this video on how to adjust backfocus: http://www.paolociccone.com/qtplay.php?file=videos/2U-S03-EP01.mov

BTW, that new mount is DA shit! Can we have some Mattebox news now?

Thanks,

 

[nzben]

If you have an off-spec lens and you "tweek" your camera mount to match it, then you have two wrongs that happen to add up to a "right"... for THAT LENS ONLY. Any other (good) lens will appear to be off when mounted on that "tweeked" camera. If you find that some lenses are good and some are not, when mounted on the same camera, that can ONLY mean that some of your lenses are off-spec. The only way to tell which lenses are out of calibration is to have a service tech check them with properly calibrated tools.

I wonder if people may be noticing collimation issues more now because Red has both very good resolution and also immediate feedback. Maybe if you're on a big feature, your lenses are always in excellent condition. Maybe on an indie production, with rented / borrowed older lenses, some time-consuming procedures aren't done so often, possibly?... I don't mean to blame anyone for anything. Just saying Red makes it quick and easy to find out how bad (or mis-matched) your lenses are.

In the case that I came across a set of PL lenses that didn't work with the camera (camera fine with other lens sets) this would imply that the lenses were not setup properly right? But in this case those same lenses would work fine on another camera, which is why it got confusing. Also it seems that it was something to do with the lenses not physically fitting in the port hole properly.
You could then say that the other camera that the 'faulty' lens set worked with was tuned to that particular set of lenses, however it would also work the the lense that DID work fine on the Red camera!!
There starts to be too many variables and you can go round in circles forever....

I did a TVC not long ago where we shot with a PV mount 435 with about 10 anamorphic primes. The lenses were from all sorts of series, different ages, etc. Some of them where more recent, 1 was recognised by the lens tech as being the 50mm used on one of the original Bond movies. So we had real variety in the lenses but they were all bang on.

 

[Jarred Land]

No. Nooo not that -- Talking about the old days / ways of business when a company would develop a camera and bring it out when it was finished. Then everyone would check it out and say what was wrong, they liked, didn't like and so forth. This is a new way.... a way allowing us to see the development process as never before, to help with it, to maybe help make the camera better.

Enzo you said something in your response that is incredibly important.

Red is a different company, with a very different development and a very different attitude towards the customer.

We are incredibly flexible, and we admit to our errors. We notice a problem and we fix it as soon as we can instead of waiting 18 months for the new model. A new great idea comes from a customer and we try and incorporate it as fast as possible.

At the very start of Red, Jim kept repeating that the product would change. Specs would change. Designs would change. I just dont think anyone really anticipated how much RED ONE would change, especially for the better.

The camera we are shipping today is 100x better then the camera we were advertising when some of you first signed up. And honestly, alot of it is because of your guy's feedback.

You arn't afraid to tell us when something sucks, and we arn't afraid to admit your right.

 

[jbeale]

In the case that I came across a set of PL lenses that didn't work with the camera (camera fine with other lens sets) this would imply that the lenses were not setup properly right? But in this case those same lenses would work fine on another camera, which is why it got confusing. Also it seems that it was something to do with the lenses not physically fitting in the port hole properly.
You could then say that the other camera that the 'faulty' lens set worked with was tuned to that particular set of lenses, however it would also work the the lense that DID work fine on the Red camera!!

In that case, there must be something else going on, and I think you already said it: if the lens does not physically fit precisely flush to the PL mounting surface, that is a problem! If there is anything interfering with the fit, all bets are off when you need micron-level tolerances.

 

[Panos Bournias]

From other company

From other company

When we bought the JVC 101E 2 years ago it was one of the first cameras in Indonesia. We had incredible problems as we immediately put the camera into a project. We could not edit with Avid nor with FCP we had time code problems, we were absolutely f...d** for months until they made the famous A upgrade, that it took them much longer than the red upgrades.
Then they up graded the firmware several times to deal with very important issues, still now after 21/2 years and there is a rumor that they still want to change the ccds on the older models. We kept on following the flow of the development for that product and was never admitted that it was/is in Beta - Alpha-Gamma state.
So, red is really much much better... I can only compare it with Avid a few years ago that was also really responsive to the feed back of its users.
Thanks Red it is a really great practice.

 

[Mitch Gross]

If this mount is as good as the ones in Arri/Aaton/PV cameras I’ll be very happy because I’ve never had a problem with one. They seem to hold their accuracy for ages. I can’t remember ever finding one off enough to have to go into service.

I didn’t get on too well with the port of the Phantom. It took me a whole minute to get the lock to work on an Ultra Prime, though the Cookes seemed to show less resistance. It also wasn’t shimmed quite right which was okay when we were on a 135mm, but was 2 metres out on a 50mm! (subject was 7 metres from gate, estimating from an HD monitor I set the lens to 5 metres). To be fair to the Phantom, the 1000fps stuff looks nice.

You must have used a Phantom with the old mount that was not properly shimmed. Vision Research (manufacturer of the Phantom) issued an announcement last month (I reposted it on CML and Cinematography.com but not here) stating that the PL lens mount had been redesigned and would be replaced free of charge on all Phantom cameras. The new mount fits perfectly with every lens we 've tested, and believe me that we've tried a huge variety. As someone else mentioned, there are many PL lens flanges on various oddball optics and adapters that are not quite at Arri's design standard. They all now fit. So do the Panavision lenses for the PV mount we offer for the Phantom. At Abel we set the mount depth and centering on every Phantom we sell or rent as part of our standard QC program.

Sorry to hear that you had this problem, but let me assure you that we are working with Vision Research to make sure such issues are a thing of the past. Just like RED is doing.

Don't want to shill, just that you mentioned Phantom so I figured I should let you know.

Mitch Gross
Abel Cine Tech

 

[Mitch Gross]

I might find myself dodging flaming darts with this one, but I'm going to suggest that, while proper back-focus is important, that in the RED's case, the nature of performing back-focus calibrations is not as "professional" as it might be for a film camera. Why?

Because unlike in a film camera, the imaging plane is the same for the recorded image as for the viewing plane (since no video tap, no ground glass, etc). In other words, with a careful eye, an accurate test chart/lens, and monitoring a 1-to-1 magnified image on an external monitor, you should be able to get the back-focus, visually, as good as any 'professional' could do.

I won't discount the notion that its not important.. that its not critically important even, just the notion that with a little bit of patience, the proper tools, and the new RED mount, anyone slightly more skilled than a camera monkey should be able to do it, perhaps even in the field.

There are a few problems with this, not the least of which is having a proper 1-to-1 pixel display of enough size and accuracy to be useful and being able to set up to do this in the field. Are you going to reset for every lens? How do you account for depth of field? More importantly, what about depth of focus (that's the focus range at the image plane).

Did you know that you can simply pull on a lens a bit and the focus can shift? And this is with brand new lenses. How about a zoom lens? What if it appears in focus at a telephoto but soft at wide? What happens if there is drift somewhere in the middle? How do you account for these things? Due to refraction around the iris blades, many lenses will have a focus depth 10-15 microns different wide open than they do stopped down a little bit. And what happens if you set a focus depth that makes the lens sharp but all of your witness markings are off? This can easilly happen if the mount is set to the lens instead of the lens to the mount.

There's no such thing as a free lunch (although one could call RED filet minon at hamburger prices). There needs to be some absolute benchmark standard to which a lens and a mount are set. I know of a number of rental facilities that do not do this, and I consider it a bit of a travesty. It's great that the new design makes setting the lens mount's depth much easier and quicker. So have it set right once and don't touch the darn thing. Have your lenses checked on every rental and periodically in general. Have the mount checked periodically as well. But I wouldn't do it yourself unless you had some real answers to the issues I mentioned above. You could be very unhappy otherwise.

BTW, at Abel as a matter of course we check the collimation of every lens and every camera to an absolute benchmark for every rental. In general they never move, but we do it anyway. If someone were to bring their RED or other camera in to our shop to rent lenses and our lenses did not focus properly, we would gladly reset the camera's mount for a small service fee (for our time). I believe that other responsible rental houses would do the same.

Mitch Gross
Technical Director of Rentals
Abel Cine Tech

 

[Mitch Gross]

By the way, one crazy little feature of this mount is that by extending it way out you can turn any lens into a macro. Not recommended but it would work.

Mitch Gross
Abel Cine Tech

 

[Rich Schaefer]

flange-depth focus

flange-depth focus

Regarding lens & mount calibration:

I am a shooter and I own many cameras including an Arri III and a Moviecam Compact 35mm cameras. Back focus is an issue (also called flange-depth focus in the film technicians world). I use a flange-depth gauge almost every time the cameras work! The tolerance is measured in hundreths of a milimiter and is allowed to be +/- 10/100s of a mm off!!!! Consider the Red, @ 4k, on a chip, it better be on!

I have had many days where the cameras have been on car mounts bouncing around, music videos moshing, and using snorkel lens systems and the mounts have been knocked out of wack! I unfortunatly have have some soft shots to prove it! SHIMS are how many film cameras deal with this. It is normal. My Arri III uses shims. My Compact has a screw adjustment that can move the movement back and forth. The Arri III has had more problems (it also gets the rougher assignments).

I use a very good camera house to keep my lenses dead on! They get comlimnated every 6-12 months or when they get bumped, or when they seem a little off.

A good AC checking the lenses is a must! but it is only half the battle in the film world!!! Your flange focus distance needs to be on. On film cameras there is a different adjustment to adjust the ground glass vs. lens mount!!!!!! So it may look in focus in the finder but be out of focus on the film! Very scary.

We are lucky with the Red vs. film in this regard! We will be able to see the actual image in real time, and we will know if it is out of focus!

The 2/3" b4 mount is very loosey-goosey. I have seen many an AC back focus HD lenses by placing a chart at exactly 6 feet, setting the lens to 6 feet and backfocusing. They often fall out of focus at the long end. What they arn't considering is that the whole engraved scale on the lens barrell is adjustable! They need to find a back focus that keeps everything in focus through the whole zoom range, and set the engraved scale to best match. Or just use a good rental tech to do it!

A good lens mount is para-mount (Ha ha ha)

JIM, THANKS FOR DOING THIS RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cheers,
Rich

 

[Michael Stanmore]

Is there going to be a guide for us scumbag indy people who are going to need a little introduction to getting these lenses and back focus sorted? The most complex camera I'm used to using is an HVX200...

Or do I HAVE to take it to some hiring house person?

Also, once I get the camera sorted for the Red lenses I'm ordering, will that need adjusting periodically, or would you only need to adjust the camera mount if you're getting different lenses. I had no idea this was an issue.

I feel like a moron, or a five-year-old who's somehow bought a car but can't find the accelerator, so please be patient with me...

 

[Axel Mertes]

[..]You arn't afraid to tell us when something sucks, and we arn't afraid to admit your right.

OK, Jarred, we are on it:

I found it "sucks" :ranting2: (strongly overdriven) that there are no pelican cases for the RED in the store yet. Jim teased us so well with those early ones and we use them for all other gear we already own. I'd be happy to get some that really fit well to the camera body and some basic stuff. Grip will be more robust anyway...

Another thing that I missed from the store is the engraving option for the choosen camera name. Is that something to be added to the CF card module on request?

:help: Gimme hope, please! :blush:

Cheers,
Axel