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 Zoom Lens

yeah.. you inquire.. and that 100 quote was a good one.. but not an inquiry.. ehehehe you're a smart guy but nice one too.. very polite, a gentleman.. it's cool to have you over here.. not the same w/ those john does.. i wish you all the best on the red side also.. i hate asskissing and your view is always very critical.. believe it.. sometimes, you're the only one giving information where i can put my confidence.. non biased information.. the key
 
filmmaker's gang said:
. believe it.. sometimes, you're the only one giving information where i can put my confidence.. non biased information.. the key
Click to expand...

Hi Filmaker's gang,

I try to be non biased, but my opinion can also change after using equipment many times. The first impression is very important, however it may not be completely accurate.

Stephen
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi Filmaker's gang,

I try to be non biased, but my opinion can also change after using equipment many times. The first impression is very important, however it may not be completely accurate.

Stephen
Click to expand...
fully agreed.. btw, you already have credits and this "your" detractor :) can just give you an exemption now.. thus, what's your opinion about the images seen so far?.. (non official pj's sure..)

edit
meeting the expectations or below the line?
 
Red Guy said:
On another forum Andy Romanoff of Panavision said:
"No truth to those rumors"
Click to expand...

Hi Red Guy,

I quoted Andy's mail on another board, that is what filmaker's gang referred to.

No truth to 200 cameras had been ordered, he did not say that no cameras had been ordered, not quite the same thing IMHO!

Stephen
 
GETTING BACK TO THE ZOOM LENS

This shot Jim posted gives me positive thoughts to the 28-50mm Zoom lens in low light situations.

9_1188758268.jpg
 
Gavin, I see similar things in other, "brand name" lenses used wide open, on a variety of digital acquisition devices.....

Graeme
 
Gavin, the answer is in the physics of light.

Remember the image hitting the senor is a cone piercing a plane. The tip of the cone is the in focus image, the rest of the cone goes progressively out of focus. As the cone passes through the plane, the out of focus parts of the cone 'rub' up against more green pixels than any other (thanks bayre) hens the color shift. Also keep in mind light doesn't come out of lenses at a perfectly 90degree to the chip. unlike film sensors photosites are buried in little buckets, so some shift happens as light skips over sites.

_mike
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi Red Guy,

I quoted Andy's mail on another board, that is what filmaker's gang referred to.

No truth to 200 cameras had been ordered, he did not say that no cameras had been ordered, not quite the same thing IMHO!

Stephen
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, if someone like Andy gets on the boards then something is up.
And only RED knows who else has ordered cameras. I am going to shoot
a little web feature with my HVX next month. Then another in Jan. with
RED. Should be an interesting contrast.
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Gavin, I see similar things in other, "brand name" lenses used wide open, on a variety of digital acquisition devices.....

Graeme
Click to expand...
Same opinion here.

Digital acquisition is just a different story, not better nor worst. Just different.

If it goes better to my needs...

First, 'cause of the price and after succeeding the flexibility.

For example, the milkgirls. Graeme did a great job there, IMHO. This could be film stock. With the right tweaks.
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Gavin, I see similar things in other, "brand name" lenses used wide open, on a variety of digital acquisition devices.....

Graeme
Click to expand...

Graeme,

Those "Brand name" lenses were probably designed for film use not digital. Hopefully Red Primes designed specifically for the Red one won't have such issues.

Stephen
 
Some of them were designed for digital and some for film. I'm not getting into naming names, but it's a nasty lens chromatic aberation that's so annoying, and it's in practically everything I've tried that's wide open. So I tried some digital stills gear and found that they could be even worse, even on "digital" lenses, again, on fast lenses wide open.

Graeme
 
All of B4 HD-ENG lenses I've been working with show these chromatic aberations, some more (wide angle zooms), some less - greenish and magenta, even stopped down.

Pretty annoying if you pay 20k or more for a lens. One big reason to avoid the B4 route on RED.

Hans

Edit: Never saw these things on 35mm. Was blind in these days probably. Does anyone know wether this is a "digital" problem? Zeiss DigiPrimes were fine, even shot wide open (2/3 needs to be shot wide open).
 
I found that stopping down really killed the issue. Some lenses needed more stopping down than others though.

The same sort of thing happened in the stills world, where they found that the precision and low noise of digital showed up things which they'd not seen before in the lenses.

I don't buy that it's the bayer pattern that causes the green / purple though, as that, you'd expect if it were bayer, would produce problems the size of 1 pixel, and the problems are much greater than that. It's also in the raw data before demosaic, so it's not the demosaic algorithm (we tried lots, just to be sure). The green stuff is the opossite of the purple stuff, and that's been well known in digital for a long while. There are many theories to the cause, but no definitive answers as far as I can see.

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/eos1dsm3/eos1dsm3_sample-e.html shows the exact same issue quite clearly.....

Graeme
 
My experience with colour aberations were only on 3CCD cameras like Sony F900R. If it is a CMOS issue it is also a 3CCD issue. It would be really interesting to test the lenses that create the colour aberations on RED on 35mm as well.

Hans

Edit: Any idea why the colour aberation is on the border where dark areas meet overexposed white areas?

If you stopped down the lenses did you change the exposure? If this is the case a test with NDs to keep exposure would be interesting.
 
Graeme Nattress said:
I'm not getting into naming names, but it's a nasty lens chromatic aberation that's so annoying, and it's in practically everything I've tried that's wide open.

Graeme
Click to expand...

Hi Graeme,

If those lenses are still manufactured I think you should name names, if they are 30 years old designs that are mo longer sold then that's another matter IMO.

Even better show the same shot with different lenses.

Stephen
 
Can anyone tell me what the Red 18-50 lens physical dimensions are? Specifically the outside diameter at the front (not the front element, but the outer metal ring, which has a red stripe around it in this photo: http://www.red.com/skin/img/lenses/l2.jpg?1186471054 ).
Basically, if I had a tube that I had to fit the front of this lens completely into, what would the inner diameter of that tube be?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top