Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

RED lenses Sigmas?

Finner said:
At least red decided to go with sigma's and not leica's. The leica's are the real crap lenses.
Click to expand...

zeiss-olimpia180mm.jpg


Shot yesterady at Graben, Viennese central platz.

NIKON D50 with Zeiss Sonnar Olympia (1936) 180 mm 1:2.8, Exposure manual: Sensitivity ISO 200, Shutter speed 1/125 sec, Aperure f/4.0, (Nikon F mount).

What a BOKEH Man!

No need for rehousing!

Just take the best old (vintage) and the best brand new still lenses and you are fine!

CINE GLASS YOU COULD RENT!
 
Zeiss olympia 1936... That is some wicked ass nazi-glass sanjin. Did you get it very hush-hush with some waffen SS followfocus?
 
EVERYBODY BUY LEICA'S and SIGMA/RED LENSES, CANON'S, NIKKORS WHATEVER.

...and leave the good stuff for me...

This subforum is getting silly, It seems everyone is asking one of these 3 questions, I'll save everyone the trouble and give you the answers:

Q) Cine lenses are so expensive, is it worth it? A) Yes, if you do that kind of work. You know who you are, you know why you need them. You can afford them because you pass the costs to someone else.

Q) If I use still lenses will I be able to shoot my Low / No budget project? A) Yes, they will work great, and probably be better much better than what you are used to. Nobody is going to dislike your movie because you did not use S4's and the cash would be spent in much better places like a good DP or some lights or more shoot days or better locations or....

Q) Are Red 18-50 Lenses Sigmas rehoused by Cooke? A) They are made by red elves on Mars.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com
 
Matt Uhry said:
EVERYBODY BUY LEICA'S and SIGMA/RED LENSES, CANON'S, NIKKORS WHATEVER.

...and leave the good stuff for me...

This subforum is getting silly, It seems everyone is asking one of these 3 questions, I'll save everyone the trouble and give you the answers:

Q) Cine lenses are so expensive, is it worth it? A) Yes, if you do that kind of work. You know who you are, you know why you need them. You can afford them because you pass the costs to someone else.

Q) If I use still lenses will I be able to shoot my Low / No budget project? A) Yes, they will work great, and probably be better much better than what you are used to. Nobody is going to dislike your movie because you did not use S4's and the cash would be spent in much better places like a good DP or some lights or more shoot days or better locations or....

Q) Are Red 18-50 Lenses Sigmas rehoused by Cooke? A) They are made by red elves on Mars.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com
Click to expand...

Amazing...

I new it had to be true!
 
Matt Uhry said:
EVERYBODY BUY LEICA'S and SIGMA/RED LENSES, CANON'S, NIKKORS WHATEVER.

...and leave the good stuff for me...

This subforum is getting silly, It seems everyone is asking one of these 3 questions, I'll save everyone the trouble and give you the answers:

Q) Cine lenses are so expensive, is it worth it? A) Yes, if you do that kind of work. You know who you are, you know why you need them. You can afford them because you pass the costs to someone else.

Q) If I use still lenses will I be able to shoot my Low / No budget project? A) Yes, they will work great, and probably be better much better than what you are used to. Nobody is going to dislike your movie because you did not use S4's and the cash would be spent in much better places like a good DP or some lights or more shoot days or better locations or....

Q) Are Red 18-50 Lenses Sigmas rehoused by Cooke? A) They are made by red elves on Mars.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com
Click to expand...

And again one more thing.

Nobody made a feature film using still lenses with 4K digital acquisition until today.

So still nobody can talk about that experience, just can guess pros and cons.

For sure THAT is going to happen very soon with a little help from RED/Birger/P+S Technik.

We just have to wait a little bit till next year.

And of course CINE LENSES are always the first option.

And how long would last this praxis also we have to see.

That's about REDvolution.

LEICA-SummicronM90mm.jpg

Shot last week behind Hofburg entrance at Michaelerplatz direction to Kohlmarkt, Vienna.

Canon EOS 30D with LEICA Summicrom M 90 mm f/1:2.0 (ELCAN-Ernst Leitz Canada), Exposure manual: Sensitivity ISO 100, Shutter speed 1/100 sec, Aperture f/2.0, (Viso M to Nikon F to Canon EOS adapters).
 
Billy.Summers said:
what about shooting 100% RAW?

straight to the sensor, bypassing the lens entirely!:ninja:
Click to expand...

Then you would get a DUST only.

As we know well threre are 5 main parts in a digital acquistion*:

1. Lens.

2. Sensor.

3. Inner camera's Bayer pattern filtering, algorithm and recording codec.

4. Recording media (CF, HDD, {tape}).

5. RAW developer software (De-Bayering, etc).

And then with that you could get on a STARDUST.
______________________________________
* RED camera related acquisition.
 
Leica Re-housed Lenses

Leica Re-housed Lenses

The Third Man
Actually as well as Dalsa Vantage in Germany claim that they have a set of Leica Lenses that they developed with Leica with the same maximum T-Stop. If however you review the Leica catalogue your see mixing the R & M series lenses as re-housed lenses you can cover all the focal lenghts they have produced with the same 2.8 stop. Of all the stills lenses I have tested for consistancy the Leica lenses are by far the best certainly better than Sigma, Nikon or Canon, thats not saying those companies dont produce good lenses its just saying that there quality control is not as rigorous as Leica.

4K cameras (I wont get into why currently Red is not 4K) in order to maximise the potential of the sensor need the best optics or all your doing is highlighting the abberations of that lens or any number of other issues. This is why SD video lenses clearly needed to by replaced by HD lenses on the
2/3" cameras where its even more critical. Olympus for instance acually made different lenses for their E system not simply because the sensor was a different format but because they wanted to optimize the lenses for digital as oppsed to film where price sensitivity really counts.
Think of image capture this way, early photographers had very basic cameras and the most important piece was the lens, spin forwards to digital and its no different the lens is still important anyone who thinks differently really doesnt understand photography be it still or moving.
 
Optically speaking.

Optically speaking.

Dalsa have a guy called Dan Sasaki working for them that used to work at Panavision, Dan was the head optics service guy at PV and he put together various one off lenses which Im sure he will be doing at Dalsa as well as putting together sets from various made up stills lenses. The key to people like Dan is understanding how optics work, what you can and cannot get away with and engineering into re-works improvements to the mechanical flaws so you maximize the optical performance of the glass. What you cannot do however is improve on the optics themselves that is why cinematography lenses are so expensive because they are optimized utilizing the best glass & coatings available whilst being configured to work best at maximum apertures down to about 5.6 whereas most stills lenses are normally configured to give optimum performance at 4 - 5.6 depending on design.
Zooms are realy where cinematography has no equal in stills these lenses are extremely complex both mechanically and optically and for good reason as stills do not require zooming in shot or splits etc etc. So whilst the Red One is aimed at all manner of cinematographer if the likes of Peter Jackson want to get the most out of it then they need to take optics seriously.
 
Nova Invicta said:
The Third Man
Actually as well as Dalsa Vantage in Germany claim that they have a set of Leica Lenses that they developed with Leica with the same maximum T-Stop. If however you review the Leica catalogue your see mixing the R & M series lenses as re-housed lenses you can cover all the focal lenghts they have produced with the same 2.8 stop. Of all the stills lenses I have tested for consistancy the Leica lenses are by far the best certainly better than Sigma, Nikon or Canon, thats not saying those companies dont produce good lenses its just saying that there quality control is not as rigorous as Leica.

4K cameras (I wont get into why currently Red is not 4K) in order to maximise the potential of the sensor need the best optics or all your doing is highlighting the abberations of that lens or any number of other issues. This is why SD video lenses clearly needed to by replaced by HD lenses on the
2/3" cameras where its even more critical. Olympus for instance acually made different lenses for their E system not simply because the sensor was a different format but because they wanted to optimize the lenses for digital as oppsed to film where price sensitivity really counts.
Think of image capture this way, early photographers had very basic cameras and the most important piece was the lens, spin forwards to digital and its no different the lens is still important anyone who thinks differently really doesnt understand photography be it still or moving.
Click to expand...

Great reply Nova Invicta.

Optics.

Just think how your eyes are working.

Nova Invicta said:
Dalsa have a guy called Dan Sasaki working for them that used to work at Panavision, Dan was the head optics service guy at PV and he put together various one off lenses which Im sure he will be doing at Dalsa as well as putting together sets from various made up stills lenses. The key to people like Dan is understanding how optics work, what you can and cannot get away with and engineering into re-works improvements to the mechanical flaws so you maximize the optical performance of the glass. What you cannot do however is improve on the optics themselves that is why cinematography lenses are so expensive because they are optimized utilizing the best glass & coatings available whilst being configured to work best at maximum apertures down to about 5.6 whereas most stills lenses are normally configured to give optimum performance at 4 - 5.6 depending on design.
Zooms are realy where cinematography has no equal in stills these lenses are extremely complex both mechanically and optically and for good reason as stills do not require zooming in shot or splits etc etc. So whilst the Red One is aimed at all manner of cinematographer if the likes of Peter Jackson want to get the most out of it then they need to take optics seriously.
Click to expand...


No doubts that Leica's are the best factory controlled still lenses.

I cannot afford 500.000-400.000 €/$* to buy the full sets of Cooke S4 and Arri/Zeiss Master Primes now.

(* This approximate price is for both sets together).

Future is always unwritten.

Who knows?

But me as an experimentalist and a little movie maker, producer and renter can afford to

get a set of best still glass (vintage and new models) that could fits to RED.

And of course it would be a mix of different brands and lenses.

Also it would produce almost a similar result as cine lenses especially for a film drama like a style directing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top