WISH LIST: Built In 2x Teleconverter to Maintain Quality / Reduce Cost

[Alsone]

Built in 2x Teleconverter

Red Team know can you consider offering a built in a 2x teleconvertor in the Scarlett lens as standard?

I note that many professional cameras rather than going for a filter mounted teleconvertor actually have one built in behind the lens as standard that moves into play when requested.

I'm presuming the reason for this is that fact that the lens is better quality glass than the converter so if you mount it on the filter mount, you multiply the errors / aberrations in the converter by 8x whereas if you mount it behind the lens, you multiply the lens errors / aberrations by 2x, a much lesser amount with the lens having many less errors to start with.

As the lens is fixed its not going to be possible to mount a teleconvertor behind the lens unless its factory standard. Also, the cost to Red in doing this would presumably be quite low because already having a contract with the lens manufacturer and being able to purchase in bulk, Red can keep the glass costs low whereas for an after market purchase, the cost would be quite high for quality glass or fluorite.

These convertors usually move electronically but in the interests of keeping costs low, maximising battery life and reducing the number of things to go wrong, a manual twist ring / lever would be a more than adequate solution for a low cost built in solution.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

It's not gonna happen... the lens is what it is and you have to use the teleconverter that they offer. There's so much covered about the lens now and they are going to just make the camera, as many as possible to be able to sell alot of them. To give people a choice of having a physical change to the camera will produce alot of hold-ups.

A request or "wish" should be about something that everyone could agree on... that's also the only way something could be done.

And if you don't like the teleconverter you can always use a mini35 adapter, another teleconverter or zoom in the image (zoom to 1080 and you have 20x in the process)

 

[Steve Phillipps]

With a lot of these Scarlett requests it seems that the feature requested really indicates you get a RED One instead. If you've got a teleconverter you'll need a fairly beefy tripod to hold it steady at the long focal length so you no longer into the lightweight run n gun type camera that Scarlett quite obviously is meant to be. It compliments the One, and when it's not capable of doing something you use the One.
Steve

 

[Alsone]

Steve, most "run and gun" cameras at this price and above have 15-20x zoom. eg Xh-A1, HVX200, EX1, Z1 etc etc. The Scarlett has 8x so it is completely in character to want teleconversion and Red have said there will be teleconvertors. People simply use a tripod at the longer end with big zoom ranges / teleconversion.

Glazarus, I don't think its necessarily true to say it would cause hold-ups. Its almost certain that Red being camera experts and not lens manufacturers will buy the lenses in and and if such a lens doesn't already exist off the shelf (which it probably does given the prevalence of built in teleconvertors in the 2/3" lens segment), I doubt it would take a professional lens manufacturer more than a month to knock up a prototype with a teleconvertor built in.

Also, Red said the camera was subject to change so it can't be assumed that everything is absolutely set in stone yet.

I don't want to see any hold ups any more than you do, but only Red know what can and can't be done in the time scale and as the emphasis with Scarlett is on quality and this is also a quality issue that can only be addressed from the OEM end with a fixed lens, it deserves consideration.

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

Steve, most "run and gun" cameras at this price and above have 15-20x zoom. eg Xh-A1, HVX200, EX1, Z1 etc etc. The Scarlett has 8x so it is completely in character to want teleconversion and Red have said there will be teleconvertors.

None of these have 3K or RAW workflow as standard, so these types of comparisons are useless. A 2x teleconverter alone is a $700 - $1200 add-on for 2/3'' lenses. I don't think you are getting one of these thrown in for free on a $3,000 camera.

RED will make some coin on SCARLET accessories, just as it has done with RED ONE accessories. Nothing wrong there.

Z1 has a 12x zoom, fyi. And still retails new at over $4,000. So if you add a 2x as an add-on to a SCARLET, your reach will be similar for about the same price....plus, you'll get all the embarrassment of riches that RED is offering in SCARLET.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Also, Red said the camera was subject to change so it can't be assumed that everything is absolutely set in stone yet.

They want to reach out to as many as possible and the current focal length is in the range where most can benifit from it. It's not gonna change, don't count on that with the lens.
They are not goin to make a built in adapter because then they have to count in how many that would likely to buy that version so that they make enough to sell them etc.
An external adapter makes most sense. If they are going to sell as many as possible it's better to just keep making them and sell alot of them.

If you want a built in adapter then just saw of a lens or make your own camera. They are making it so that most people can benefit from it... there will not be two types of one camera and with the motto of modular design they will for certain make ONE type of the camera and enable changes with modularity. This might make you say "but it's not modular if you can't change the lens", well, modular in the context of what type of camera it is... and this is NOT a Red One.

Stop speak from your own interest and think about how this camera is going to reach out to as many as possible. Your idea and suggestion isn't realistic and you know it.