Sony E mount for RED

[Alberto Guglielmi]

There are a lot of products that are coming out for the E-mount. Including some interesting lenses by SLR magic and other small companies.
it is also one of the lens mounts with the most adapters. You can pretty much use any lens from past present and future.

I was wondering why there is no E-Mount for a RED.
Using an M-E adapter it would also probably solve the physical M-mount issue with wider lenses and the protruding element.

Is it a physical/sensor compatibility issue or simply no-one created one yet?

 

[Filipe Abreu]

I back u up on this one. That would be really great especially if the electronics ou work too. Controlling the FZ-28-135 with foolcontrol would be great

 

[Phil Holland]

It's a physical issue due to where the mount would need to exist in the camera.

RED makes a Leica-M Mount that has a flange depth of 27.80mm and you can see there's not much more space than that.

The Sony E-Mount is 18mm, which is very shallow. RED DSMC and DSMC2 bodies just can't do that physically.

 

[Filipe Abreu]

All Right then

 

[Alberto Guglielmi]

Phil, thanks for the clarification. I have the M mount, and I thought that the problem with the M mount and wider lenses is that the lens has protruding elements. They are physically going past the 27+mm of the mount. And even when fitting before the OLPF, they create vignetting and aberration due to the protruding elements interfering with optical projection.

The E lenses don't have protruding elements (I think). Is it then a matter of light/image projection on the sensor that would make such a shallow mount not operable?
What if the E mount for a RED become a deeper mount, allowing for some space behind the end of the lens to optimize image projection on the sensor?
I am not sure what I say makes sense, but I am just trying to understand what can/could be done.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

It could be made to work with additional optics, which would incur light loss and probably a noticeable degree of image degradation. Ultimately not a practical solution. Perhaps with future sensor/ OLPF and camera body designs this may become directly possible. Going back to making it worth with additional optics, it would translate into a larger mount, probably closer in size to the PL mount or even a bit bigger as the light from the lens would need to be refocused onto the sensor plane and to account for the shift in distance not only for focus, but to regain proper sizing of the image circle. The mount flange is already too far from the RED sensor to work with E-Mount or similar lenses in this instance. And to fix that we would have to move the mount flange even further away to make room for the necessary optics to make it work. The mount would essentially become an intermediate lens with 4+ elements to itself.

 

[Mike P.]

Red should've redesigned the swappable mount system in dmsc2 to allow for shallower lens mounts (like e-mount or full support Leica-M)... Then just used a "smart" shim/pass-through to make it backwards compatible with old mounts... There's no need for the sensor to be seated so far back in the body, is there?

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

yes there is. the sensor position adjustment mechanism...

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

There is also the OLPF system which is spaced out from the sensor surface and the interchangeable frames and everything around it. The system is predominantly designed for use with cinema/ PL and SLR lenses which have flange to focal depths much greater than the new mirrorless systems. If RED were to design a system that places the sensor very close to the mount attachment surface, it would make for much larger mounts to accommodate PL, EF, F, etc.. mounts. They would need a radically different design for the sensor positioning mechanism and OLPF system. Systems like Sony's E-Mount are relatively new and are pretty small potatoes in the grand scheme of what's going on here.