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 :)

The Day of Understatements... (RED primes)

Jannard said:
The characteristics we all like about the Cooke lenses ARE visible on a lens projector (mostly). You can see a very great resolution at the center, then a slow falloff of resolution at the edges. You can see where the light falls off and you can see the contrast difference vs. a MP.
Click to expand...

It's also pretty easy to make a Master Prime look like a Cooke S4 in post - with the exception of the flare - we nailed it to the point a very established DP could not tell the difference.
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
Q1 of 2010?

I'm planning to have two features shot on EpicX in the can before that.
Click to expand...

Damn, then I'll have to hold onto the credit so I can be in that first batch with EpicX27!
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
Q1 of 2010?

I'm planning to have two features shot on EpicX in the can before that.
Click to expand...

I guess it all depends on how Jim does EpicX. Is he going to have you, SS, PJ, etc all use it on real sets first, or is he going to have the first 100 be beta testers again? Not sure, I haven't heard anything at all about that.
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
It's also pretty easy to make a Master Prime look like a Cooke S4 in post - with the exception of the flare - we nailed it to the point a very established DP could not tell the difference.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the nail in the coffin.

Shawn Nelson said:
Damn, then I'll have to hold onto the credit so I can be in that first batch with EpicX27!
Click to expand...

I would do the same.

Shawn Nelson said:
I guess it all depends on how Jim does EpicX. Is he going to have you, SS, PJ, etc all use it on real sets first, or is he going to have the first 100 be beta testers again? Not sure, I haven't heard anything at all about that.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't make sense not to honor the line. I am sure he has plenty of others going out before the official start.
 
Jannard said:
The characteristics we all like about the Cooke lenses ARE visible on a lens projector (mostly). You can see a very great resolution at the center, then a slow falloff of resolution at the edges. You can see where the light falls off and you can see the contrast difference vs. a MP. It is pretty easy to see why one would like an S4. The problem comes when you go from 4K to 5K. The resolution and light falloff continue rapidly outside 30mm. What might work very well for a 4K image now is not the same on 5K.

You get to decide what you want. But I think it is your best interests to know exactly what you have to choose from and why.

A lens projector doesn't tell you everything, but it certainly tells you more than you are giving it credit for. I have spent weeks with this tool and I now know WHY I like what I like and why I don't like what I don't like. Information is never a bad thing. And I'm not suggesting that you ignore the seat of your pants. I hope you are not suggesting that you should ignore a lens projector. The two are connected. One can help explain the other.

Jim
Click to expand...

If I had the funds I would go one step further;

What would be really cool, is to have a rigorous set of MTF diagrams in hand whilst using the lens projector. The MTF diagrams reveal more clearly many of the idiosyncrasies of a lens at various apertures, but it would be very nice to relate these to particular visual thresholds that you could actually see using the lens projector. The two sets of data would complement each other very well as there are particular trends that are hard to pick up on by just staring at a projected test slide. The MTF diagrams can act as a sort of road map for particular things to find or pay attention to whilst using the lens projector. Some critical thresholds you might worry about on a MTF diagram where everything takes a distinct nose dive may not look so bad on a lens projector giving you the ability to judge what is significant or not. Some lenses even have very weird relative illumination curves at different apertures that you wouldn’t predict and would be very difficult to pick out by eye.

Ultimately a set of MTF diagrams for the whole system i.e. RPPs with their respective SENSOR and COMPRESSION SCHEME would also be terrific; a sort of definitive proof of the rationale of the lens design as being conceived as an integral component of the RED high resolution imaging systems. This also demonstrates that the new red primes and others to come are much more suited to high resolution larger sensor designs than just about anything else, centre to edge.

[Unfortunately the equipment for true MTF testing is very pricey and not as much fun as a lens projector].
 
Chris Parker said:
ha. that's you though Mark. The rest of us won't get our hands on them until months later!!!!
Click to expand...

Hmmm...that's an inaccurate assumption

There were several of us who received RED One cameras just as early as Mark (8/30/07), and will likely receive Epic and Scarlet just as early as he does. :-)

There are some of us here, myself included, who have been around RED just as long or longer than Mark, and have been around Jim much, much longer.
 
Roberto Lequeux said:
Ok, ok... we get it guys... you are all incredibly cool. Now stop kissing each others ass and stop boasting.
:cool:
Click to expand...

LOL...no boasting is involved. Those of us who received RED One cameras early almost without exception went out of our way to provide others hands on time with our cameras, and posted as much early field info as we could so that you guys here could share in the excitement. I don't see that changing with the rollout of Epic and Scarlet...if we're fortunate enough to get those early cameras, we owe it to all our RED family here to help you share in the stoke by posting a lot and providing our friends here with first hand info.

Hopefully each of you would do the same if the tables were reversed...
 
I never posted early on, but followed the forum very closely back in the Frankenstein days. I only kid, and consider all of you low reservation holders lucky to have had the cash and experience together with the vision necessary to jump on-board... I only had the vision.
 
Roberto Lequeux said:
I never posted early on, but followed the forum very closely back in the Frankenstein days. I only kid, and consider all of you low reservation holders lucky to have had the cash and experience together with the vision necessary to jump on-board... I only had the vision.
Click to expand...

Correction, the *credit* and *wishful desiring*/*vision* necessary to jump onboard :-)
 
Michael Lindsay said:
Does anyone remember if the Red one had microlenses?

thanks

Michael L
Click to expand...

??? What kind of a question is that?
Didn't Jim just say it does.
Anyway, I remember Graeme Nattress also saying that it does somewhere.
 
Shawn Nelson said:
You are correct in that the 18-50mm looks great! I've shot some fun stuff with it. I guess it's just hard watching it's value fall like a rock. I've never seen glass (to a mount that it still in ever-increasing use no less) fall in value by so much so fast. I was hoping to flip mine for 75% of value (which is usually pretty damned easy with glass) to somehow leverage into your prime set. No dice. But that's not your problem. Anyways, thanks for the clarifications. On my earlier comment, can you have the 18-50, 300 & 18-85 there at NAB as well to compare against the RPPs?
Click to expand...

I would guess that the resale value of your 18-50 has dropped more from the introduction (released and announced) of new product from the competition to the market, than from anything RED has done. If you want a short focal length zoom, it's still your only option from them. Just something to consider.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top