Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 One and ND filters

M

Mr. Paul White

Well-known member
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
222
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Are the ND filters even necessary? Or can we use the Red One without any matte box?

I'm thinking to buy the new Nikon 14-24 2.8 AF-S for the use with the Birger mount and I'm wondering...
 
There ist no "video" cam without ND Filter. Unless the RED would work like a DSLR where you can change ASA down to 50 or up to say 3200 ASA. You will defenitly need some NDs to bring down your aperture to let's say f4.

On a sunny day I even put NDs on my photography lenses to keep a nice shalow dof when I use strobes. And that stuff is always shot with 50 ASA.
Now think about REDs 320 ASA.

So there you go. You will need a mattebox with 2-3 filter stages to put your NDs in. Hopefully RED 2 will have a ND wheel built in. That would be killer.
But for now, we will have stick with our matteboxes.

Cheers
Tim
 
OK. But you can always low your aperture even if you'll change your DOF from a shallow setup... to a deeper one.

And you can change your RED ONE's ASA down to 50 if you wish to keep your shallow DOF or am I wrong?
 
Emanuel said:
OK. But you can always low your aperture even if you'll change your DOF from a shallow setup... to a deeper one.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what many doesn't like.

Emanuel said:
And you can change your RED ONE's ASA down to 50 if you wish to keep your shallow DOF or am I wrong?
Click to expand...

IMHO you're wrong here. It was said many times here, the ISO settings are just metadata, doesn't affect Redcine RAW data, nor affect sensitivity of the sensor. It just clips off more of shadows.

Or Am I mistaken?
 
dalife said:
That's exactly what many doesn't like.
Click to expand...
IMHO this shallow DOF hype, more than a mania, is only a... hype. Just a feature like many others. It shouldn't be a mania.

dalife said:
IMHO you're wrong here. It was said many times here, the ISO settings are just metadata, doesn't affect Redcine RAW data, nor affect sensitivity of the sensor. It just clips off more of shadows.

Or Am I mistaken?
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I'd like to know.
 
Mr. White--

No, the 14-24mm Nikkor will not accept filters, but you could always use a matte box with ND filters or, better yet, consider the Nikkor 12-24mm f/4 AF-S DX. It covers the full RED sensor, is decently priced and accepts 77mm filters.

This is the only DX lens I own--or need--since it covers the wide end of the range for my D2X, but it has served me well for my wide end needs.

I'm not planning on upgrading to the full-frame Nikon D3, but might have to reconsider the 14-24mm Nikkor if/when a D3X or equivalent is released.
 
Emanuel said:
IMHO this shallow DOF hype, more than a mania, is only a... hype. Just a feature like many others. It shouldn't be a mania.

That's exactly what I'd like to know.
Click to expand...

The sensor doesn't lose sensitivity when you lower ASA.

Minimum ASA is somewhere around 200 to 250.... below 320 you're probably in danger of blowing too many highlights unless your scene is flat.

If you want 5.6 in sunlight you'll need heavy ND with RED.
 
joelnet said:
The sensor doesn't lose sensitivity when you lower ASA.

Minimum ASA is somewhere around 200 to 250.... below 320 you're probably in danger of blowing too many highlights unless your scene is flat.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I'm confused. Do you mean above 320 we're probably in danger of blowing the highlights or am I missing something here?
 
BillG said:
No, the 14-24mm Nikkor will not accept filters, but you could always use a matte box with ND filters.
Click to expand...
The use of a matte box can produce vignetting or (once again) am I wrong? LOL
 
Does the DX range of Nikkors really cover the whoe sensor, i had the impression the DX range is for the smaller Imagers ?

Considering the vari ND, i think these are two linear pol filters on top of each other, where one is rotatable, this is different to ND filters, if you have the opportunity to test take a look a the sky and on glass reflections, they change significant with a pola and don´t change with ND.

Setting the ASA on the camera does in my opinion alter your working point, but the sensor won´t get more or less sensitive.
If you put the ASA setting to 320 you would have 5 stops to overexpose and 5 stops to underexpose before you loose detail/burn out highlights. if you set ASA to say 100, you have aprox 3 stops to underexpose and 7 stops to overexpose. At least thats what happening in other CMOS cameras arround, and i think red is working the same way, please correct me if I´m wrong.

Manuel
 
joelnet and other posters here are absolutely correct, this camera has a fixed relationship between the quantizer levels and the amount of light the sensor is exposed to. The 'ISO' setting effects only the metadata, not the sensors gain.

While you 'could ' reduce the equivalent shutter angle (shorten the acquisition period) to reduce the total exposure, doing so would also change the motion characteristics and isn't the correct approach. Having access to ND filters (either screw on or mattebox types) is absolutely essential. I would recommend a .3, .6, .9 & 1.2 ND set as a good starting point.
 
depending on your application, you can always use screw-on filters...that's what i plan to use for lightweight outdoors set-ups...basically for hike-in locations...for everything else, yes to a mattebox.
 
ND on a switch

ND on a switch

You know what I'd love to see? A modular filter wheel that mounts between your B4 lens and the camera for those of us who are aiming to shoot more ENG style with the camera. Think of it like a 2x extender switch on your lens, except it would activate 1 or two stages of ND instead. Maybe this is something that could be integrated into the B4 to PL mount.

That way I could really have the advantages of both worlds - 2K, longer record times, 72 fps, all with the flexibility of being able to run and gun without a matte box for stopping down the lens...

Does anyone make such an item? Anybody think something like this would be marketable to someone besides me? Brigger? Gibby? I know I'd dig it.
 
Emanuel said:
The use of a matte box can produce vignetting or (once again) am I wrong? LOL
Click to expand...

It can, if the matte box and lens are mis-matched, ie. if the lens is too wide for the matte box or, alternately, the matte box is too narrow for the lens.

But you can always use the supplied lens hood (comes with the lens) for the wide end of the zoom range and change it out for a matte box for the long end of the range, if necessary.
 
khmuse said:
joelnet and other posters here are absolutely correct, this camera has a fixed relationship between the quantizer levels and the amount of light the sensor is exposed to. The 'ISO' setting effects only the metadata, not the sensors gain.
Click to expand...

Isn't the result the same?
 
Caesar said:
Isn't the result the same?
Click to expand...


No, not at all. Changing the metadata only provides a preset to the post software (which can be overridden) but does not change the actual image captured at all. The "results" couldn't be further from "the same".

This is an essential concept for any RED operator to wrap their mind around. This camera, in terms of its 'ISO' setting is very different from others that do have an analog gain path that is adjustable.

I will state it again for emphasis. The gain of the camera is fixed. If you clip the sensor (or underexpose it) changing the ISO setting will have ZERO effect on the data acquired. The only things that changing the ISO setting has is to push or pull the processing of the .r3d file into a usable format. No matter what you do in post processing, if you clip the sensor, everything at or above that illumination value is lost and without detail.
 
Emanuel said:
IMHO this shallow DOF hype, more than a mania, is only a... hype. Just a feature like many others. It shouldn't be a mania.
Click to expand...
Don't you like a nice shallow DOF Emanuel?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top