Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

  • 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 :)

Which Prime set is the best for RED?

Rafffaello

Active member
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hi!
So,
What you think guys which Prime set is the best?
I thinking between Cooke ,Zeiss Super speed,Nikor
What you thinking?
 
I'd say Johnson. They're made in Micronesia out of the finest of Western Saharan sand, crafted by Libyan midgets with delicate and supple fingers and tested by a small band of Bolivian mountain guerrillas. Trust me dude...these things are awesome!
 
Red-Cam was making a joke there.

All kidding aside, this becomes a question of art versus budget. There is no single answer. One could argue the Cooke S4's are far superior for their detail while another might feel they are a bit too "sterile." One might argue for an old set of Zeiss standard speeds for their "character" while another might feel they are too soft.

I own a set of Nikon primes and zooms which I use regularly on low-budget features, shorts, industrials, and commercials. I regularly mount my client's choice of old Angeniux zooms, Zeiss superspeeds, and Cooke S4's. I may be shooting a feature with a set of Lomo anamorphics soon.

There are quite a few threads featuring comparison images of various lenses. Take a look around and enjoy the opportunity to learn.

Best,

Michael
 
I'd say Johnson. They're made in Micronesia out of the finest of Western Saharan sand, crafted by Libyan midgets with delicate and supple fingers and tested by a small band of Bolivian mountain guerrillas. Trust me dude...these things are awesome!

I prefer Wonka, those umpalumpas are hands down, the finest craftsmen in the world, bar none. Even though the lenses are made of chocolate, and susceptable to heat, they're still some of the tastiest lenses around...

ps, I know nothing about cine glass, you nearly had me googling..
 
I would say that is a very personal thing. I have enjoyed Ultraprimes on my Red very much which looked sharp as hell. I also have shot a lot with superspeeds mk.II's and wish I could afford a set.
 
I'd say Johnson. They're made in Micronesia out of the finest of Western Saharan sand, crafted by Libyan midgets with delicate and supple fingers and tested by a small band of Bolivian mountain guerrillas. Trust me dude...these things are awesome!

And those monster high speed zooms they make... nothing beats walking onto a set and whipping out a big Johnson.
 
It's not which is best for red, it's which is best for you. Test them, see what you like. Different cine glass has different optical quality (not necessarily better, just different). It comes down to what you like visually.
 
Back focus check???

Back focus check???

Red-Cam was making a joke there.

All kidding aside, this becomes a question of art versus budget. There is no single answer. One could argue the Cooke S4's are far superior for their detail while another might feel they are a bit too "sterile." One might argue for an old set of Zeiss standard speeds for their "character" while another might feel they are too soft.

I own a set of Nikon primes and zooms which I use regularly on low-budget features, shorts, industrials, and commercials. I regularly mount my client's choice of old Angeniux zooms, Zeiss superspeeds, and Cooke S4's. I may be shooting a feature with a set of Lomo anamorphics soon.

There are quite a few threads featuring comparison images of various lenses. Take a look around and enjoy the opportunity to learn.

Best,

Michael

Hi Michael,

If you use Nikon then switch to PL lenses, do you back focus cailbration each time you switch back and forth? I've tried to get answers on this but no response. Not from you another thread.

I'm thinking the same. Nikon on commericals and so then bigger budgets use PL Zeiss lenses. I may even pick up a set of primes Zeiss ZK lenses since I saw and read they are pretty amazing results from not shooting with "Cine" Zeiss PL lenses - SS, Master Primes, or Ultra. I'm not saying there are better...but give you good results.

Thanks.
 
What's the budget,
What's the project,
whats the final output. Youtube, film, SD ect.

That can dictate options at times.
 
Hi Michael,

If you use Nikon then switch to PL lenses, do you back focus cailbration each time you switch back and forth?

Considering you're changing mounts = YES.

You should check back focus periodically. I've worked with some who had me check after lunch every day.

Use a focus chart. Seriously.

The original ? - well, it depends...
 
Hi Michael,

If you use Nikon then switch to PL lenses, do you back focus cailbration each time you switch back and forth? I've tried to get answers on this but no response. Not from you another thread.

Thanks.

My RED One came with the back focus bang on (admittedly as measured using zooms, not a collimator) and switching between PL/Nikon mounts results in the exact same back focus. I have yet to loosen my BF ring. I've not noticed any temperature changes affecting my lenses thus requiring a BF adjustment.

Michael
 
You can do your own back focus adjustment, as seen in my videos on youtube. Do a search there for RED CAMERA LENS MOUNT. Also, you can mark your camera and collar for each mount. I show this here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4Y9uufZB7Y

This makes it quicker to swap mounts in the field.
 
Thanks.

Thanks.

You can do your own back focus adjustment, as seen in my videos on youtube. Do a search there for RED CAMERA LENS MOUNT. Also, you can mark your camera and collar for each mount. I show this here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4Y9uufZB7Y

This makes it quicker to swap mounts in the field.

Thanks...I'll check out your videos. One member from our forum, swears you need to go to get a professional cailbrated back focus adjustment. I can't see going back and forth to do this every time. Is this guy correct or is he on crack?

Thanks for any info on this matter.

cheers.
 
Back
Top