RED 18-50 vs Nikon

[Jason Ing]

If your going to think about using Nikons on your RED, look into converting them 1st. I have a set of Nikon Zeiss ZFs that were modded by Peter Sensor of RPlens.com and this set is so professional both mechanically and optically in my opinion that I am able to rent them with my RED package. Over the last year I have worked on a variety of shoots from Pepsi cola, Avon to PBS pilots and indie features and for me, optics is a huge part when determining the look you want achieve so I would recommend testing out the glass 1st. I owned the RED 18-50 but sold it cause it simply was not a look or feel I was into, but others like it so to each his own right. I am strongly considering the RED 18-85 at the moment and will be renting soon this time around. Test them 1st. Cheers.

What do you test for? How do you go about testing them?

I need help with getting good Nikon glass. I was going the birger/canon route because I've been a canon guy all my life and have some L glass. But I cancelled and now I gotta learn about Nikon glass. So is Zeiss that much superior? I've been reading that Nikon ED or D glass is equivalent to L? Someone said zeiss is equivalent to L.

Anyway, if you could share some info or point in the right direction, I'd appreciate it.

I was thinking of picking up the 85 1.8 as my first lens. Then maybe the 35 or 50. and then a 14? I should be okay after that. I don't think I want to go the zoom route.

What FF are you using?

Thanks!

 

[Sidney L. Plaut]

Thanks for in depth advice.

still confused because i know the importance of good glass but i simply cant afford UP (i normally rent Ultra primes). The RED 18-85 is too big for me.

I have already contacted duclos lenses in regards to having a set of Zeiss ZF modified - dont know what it will cost, but it sounds like it is worth it

how is the focus throw on the ZF and how sharp are they compared to UP?

and tell me more why you liked them better than the RED?

 

[Steve Gibby]

I've been reading that Nikon ED or D glass is equivalent to L?

In general, Nikon ED or D are equivalent to Canon L. I have Nikon lenses for use on RED, but I also have a Canon DSLR and several L series lenses. Don't overlook Nikon AIS lenses. Though they were built in the late '80's and '90's, many of them are excellent and very good on RED. Note all the AIS glass on my Nikon lens list earlier in this thread. All of them were hand picked for being very good lenses to round out my kits, but also specifically because they were AIS, which was a solid improvement over the previous AI lenses - better lens coatings.

None of my Nikon lenses have been converted to PL or re-housed. When I want a 35mm stills lens for a project it is almost invariably a mobile project with a small crew who will be sight focusing. I also rarely use a matte box or follow focus with my 35mm stills lenses. With practice racking focus with the lens barrel when sight focusing becomes almost 2nd nature.

I do have one 35mm stills lens that was mount-only converted to PL for use on RED One - my Canon FD 150-600 f/5.6L zoom, which was converted to Century PL, with no other modifications to the lens. Its images are stellar - I use it for shooting wildlife and sports.

I was thinking of picking up the 85 1.8 as my first lens. Then maybe the 35 or 50. and then a 14? I should be okay after that. I don't think I want to go the zoom route.

Since it is primes you are looking for, in wide to mid-length Nikon primes, here are some good ones that may suit your needs on a relatively small budget:

14mm f/2.8 D AF, 20mm f/2.8 AIS, 24mm f/2 AIS, 28mm f/2.8 AIS, 35mm f/2 AF D, 50mm f/1.2 AIS, 50mm f/1.4 AF D, 85mm f/1.4 AF D, 85mm f/1.4 AIS, 85mm f/1.8 AF D, 85mm f/2 AIS, 105mm f/1.8 AIS, 180mm f/2.8 ED AIS

Remember, even with a certain lens MM and model, there can be slight to moderate variation in 35mm stills lenses. Test each one out, see if it fits liking and needs, then have fun with it!

 

[aviddv1]

Anyone have any other Nikon vs Red lens samples? I'm curious about seeing the same subject shot with each lens.

Thanks,
Howie

 

[Brandon Fraley]

Anyone have any other Nikon vs Red lens samples? I'm curious about seeing the same subject shot with each lens.

Thanks,
Howie

looking at footage IMHO isn't great for comparing lenses. Any footage you see has been processed, making comparisons of contrast and sharpness etc not terribly valid, plus, generally all these lenses look great, the big difference you'll normally find is in how you use them (build quality, how they feel etc).

besides that I just don't know of any nikon vs RED lens clip

 

[Kwan Khan]

If money was no object, i would love to go out with RED.
But So far so good, I’m actually happy with Nikon17-35mm 2.8, a 24-70mm 2.8, and an 80-200mm 2.8 zoom lens

 

[C.H.Haskell]

What do you test for? How do you go about testing them?

I need help with getting good Nikon glass. I was going the birger/canon route because I've been a canon guy all my life and have some L glass. But I cancelled and now I gotta learn about Nikon glass. So is Zeiss that much superior? I've been reading that Nikon ED or D glass is equivalent to L? Someone said zeiss is equivalent to L.

Anyway, if you could share some info or point in the right direction, I'd appreciate it.

I was thinking of picking up the 85 1.8 as my first lens. Then maybe the 35 or 50. and then a 14? I should be okay after that. I don't think I want to go the zoom route.

What FF are you using?

Thanks!

You can Test lenses in a lab or out in the field, I do both but prefer field test with real subjects...nothing beats a field test for me. I generally cover the basic when testing glass, overall looking for the details and unique characteristics each family of optics tend to yield...how they breath, hold focus, chromatic aberrations, distortion. Some glass is just too sharp for my likings, I lean towards older cinema lenses myself. (Keep in mind I do narrative work)

Obviously its harder to test still lenses cause I dont think you can rent them, so ask your photo friends to barrow some glass and if you dont have those then the good thing about nikon glass is that its cheap so take a plunge at a low risk.

I will say this, old nikon glass is pretty unique and I have always been a fan. The coating on the glass was different 20 and 30 years ago and the images come out softer and more "cine" like imo then new glass which is way sharper. Find a local shop and look at some of the old vivitars, they are much heavier and feel better built then your average plastic modern lens. I found a 70-200 Nikon that was in meant condition from the 70s for less then 300 bucks and it takes incredible pictures...it did 30 years and it still does today.

When buying older glass always visually check the optics for any funk or fungi growth, if the mechanics check out then give it a go. Some stores even give you a week to make sure they check out proper. (there is a way to test glass I got some good deals at Adorama in NYC.