My Plead to the RED Team for Alternative Lens Mounts

This is the lens kit I will be running

10-100 T2 Zeiss Zoom
8mm Illumina 1.3
25-250 T3.9 Angenieux

I will run this kit only for 2k or lower res projects. Anything that requires 4k will strictly be higher end PL mount 35mm primes or zooms.

I say this because my lens kit does the job very well, but I notice that things start to lose edge to edge focus when the footage is projected. As a cinematographer this pisses me off, but I have to remember what I am shooting, S16 transfered to HD. If I was going to shoot 4k projected, I would want the best piece of glass I could afford. That means proper cine lenses, made in small batches by skilled engineers watching the process along the way. As a cameraman, this gives me way more confidence in my equipment. They are the right tools for the job. These lenses are PL mount, not Nikon, C-mount, or Leica. Cinematographers have always been vocal about their images, which is granted because when an image is projected you see every little flaw in optics, and when it is not right it slaps you in the face! That is one reason why cine lenses are so expensive, there is just so much engineering that goes into them. Good glass is one thing but putting the glass to good use is soo much more.
If you are able to string together a lens set that does a good job at 2k, but will lose edge to edge sharpness at 4k, rent the lenses that will give you the best results. Too expensive? Ask the rental manager to give you a break. Tell them what your situation is, they will always do the best they can for you. It is in their best interest. You do a good job, you get hired again! You rent again!

Just to keep one track with my point. My PL mount S16mm lens package breaks down to this.

10-100 6,500 US
8mm 1,800 US
25-250 2,000 US

Combined it does not even come close to a new B4 mount HD lens.
All in all, if you saved a few more dollars here and there, sold the other non PL mount lenses you could come up with a decent 2k PLmount lens package. When the time is right to shoot 4k projected, you should have done enough good work to have justified the rental of a set of S4's or Super Speeds.

I would love a magic pill lens, but there are limitations of size, weight and cost.

Thanks Alex

Thinking about this brings up so many questions,

Pulling focus at T2 on an adapted still lens?
The COC of the RED
Having an adapter between the RED flange and the lens mount
Plastic elements in still lenses ( I have only heard of this, so I could be wrong)
 
Gordon Prince said:
I guess there are a lot of run and gun shooters here waiting for the Red camera to this use. And if this will never be a DVX, at least what can we expect? The camcorder concept maybe. Small, lightweight, ease of use. Like a pen. Call it video vice, if you wish. More than strictly cine style.

Quick and safe, it doesn't bother.
Click to expand...

The shooters that run and gun with this camera will pick a zoom and stick with it. If its a PL cine zoom or a stills zoom that is more then likely what they will use. From there it is really easy to change the les as long as you stay in the same lens format Nikon or Canon or PL. There is really no reason to jump formats because you are shooting "run and gun" in fact if for a particular shoot you have to go fast I would recomend not even considering different lens formats.

K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid) this is one of the first things I learned when I worked on my first film UNFORGIVEN. Trust me on this when I have made things more complicated then they needed to be I was never happy with the outcome. And jumping around with lens formats is definately more complicated then it needs to be.
 
Alex Fostvedt said:
This is the lens kit I will be running

10-100 T2 Zeiss Zoom
8mm Illumina 1.3
25-250 T3.9 Angenieux


Just to keep one track with my point. My PL mount S16mm lens package breaks down to this.

10-100 6,500 US
8mm 1,800 US
25-250 2,000 US

Thanks Alex

)
Click to expand...

Hi Alex,

IMHO $2000 for a 25-250 T3.9 is way to much money, I bought one on Ebay from Digital Domain for $300. There is no way this lens will give you good images on a Red camera unless you stop down to T8.

The 10-100 T2 is a very good lens.

Stephen
 
I agree, it's a dog! It came with the camera package. SD at T8, it can pass.

I would never shoot that lense for projection! I find myself renting the Canon 300mm all the time. Good glass, rehoused for CINE applications.
 
Finner said:
. I know you would have to be extremely careful but with kim wipes or quality swab's and alcohol we may be able to do it ourselves.
.
Click to expand...

Hi Finner,

I am sure you will be able to change the mount yourself without problems, it's just many of the people reading this thread won't be so skilled.

Stephen
 
Alex Fostvedt said:
If you where to change to mounts. How would you set flange depth without touching the sensor?
Click to expand...

Hi,

I have a pocket autocollimator, cost $175 new on Ebay. Not sure it will work on a CCD.

I did ask this very question on Cinematography.com, the only reply I got suggested an autocollimator.

Stephen
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi ,

An intermediate adapter means 4 surfaces instead of 2, the accuracy of each surface must then be within 1.25 microns! Any dust between the surfaces and you will be out of spec! If you have test equipment at home there is no reason why you should not do it yourself.

Stephen
Click to expand...

What is the fundamentally different mechanical problem that has to be solved if you are constructing an interchangeable mount as opposed to an interchangeable lens. I can appreciate that if you have compound mounts, that is the interchangeable mount + the lens mount, that would add complexity. I would imagine the interchangeable mount would have to be far more rigid than the lens mount.

We all accept interchangeable lenses and they have to conform to the same tolerance and not be thrown out by a spec of dust etc. I presume they mount with acceptable precision. I am sure I am just missing something, because your argument is clearly well informed.

Martin
 
Hmm, sounds dicey. I imagine if you were to put your flange out, it would be a shop fix. Good news is that it is pretty hard to twist, bend, or break a well designed PL mount.
I once slipped and tossed my camera about four feet in front of me. Camera was a little muddy, luckily it did not land on the lens. It landed battery first!
 
Finner said:
The shooters that run and gun with this camera will pick a zoom and stick with it. If its a PL cine zoom or a stills zoom that is more then likely what they will use. From there it is really easy to change the les as long as you stay in the same lens format Nikon or Canon or PL. There is really no reason to jump formats because you are shooting "run and gun" in fact if for a particular shoot you have to go fast I would recomend not even considering different lens formats.

K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid) this is one of the first things I learned when I worked on my first film UNFORGIVEN. Trust me on this when I have made things more complicated then they needed to be I was never happy with the outcome. And jumping around with lens formats is definately more complicated then it needs to be.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But for instance if you will work with the Red zoom and you need longer than that and you can change to a SLR tele, you can't go without the proper tool. Then, you'll be limited to your zoom range. The idea is how to avoid such limitation.
 
They do make some great PL doublers, 1.5x and a 2x. Connects between the lens and mount. Small and very lightweight. I have only found that they can change the color temp of the shot slightly, nothing that cannot be touched up in post. Test before you buy! I think Century and Zeiss make them. I have used them with Canon S16 11-165 zooms. The 2x gave me a focal length of around 330mm. I opened up an eighth of a stop as well to compensate for any light lose from the doubler.
 
Muttondraw said:
What is the fundamentally different mechanical problem that has to be solved if you are constructing an interchangeable mount as opposed to an interchangeable lens. I can appreciate that if you have compound mounts, that is the interchangeable mount + the lens mount, that would add complexity. I would imagine the interchangeable mount would have to be far more rigid than the lens mount.

We all accept interchangeable lenses and they have to conform to the same tolerance and not be thrown out by a spec of dust etc. I presume they mount with acceptable precision. I am sure I am just missing something, because your argument is clearly well informed.

Martin
Click to expand...

Hi,

A Cooke lens with an intermediate mount, the mount would stay on the camera for months or years without ever being changed. It was never something to be swopped over whilst on location.

The engineering limitations as I see them are:-

1)The extra 2 surfaces need a tolerance of ZERO to be completely ignored. That will not happen IMHO, measuring and adjusting to 2 microns is not easy.

2) The maximum thickness of each side of the adapter is half of the FFD. Nikon has a shorter FFD than PL so by default it will be less strong as it is thinner.

16mm Bolex to PL adapters are easy, so nothing is impossible!

Stephen
 
Alex Fostvedt said:
They do make some great PL doublers, 1.5x and a 2x. Connects between the lens and mount. Small and very lightweight. I have only found that they can change the color temp of the shot slightly, nothing that cannot be touched up in post. Test before you buy! I think Century and Zeiss make them. I have used them with Canon S16 11-165 zooms. The 2x gave me a focal length of around 330mm. I opened up an eighth of a stop as well to compensate for any light lose from the doubler.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the hint. Different FOV but same DOF. I stand corrected: longer yes and faster because we'd like to get that shallow look for a particular purpose. Thus, we must change anyway and the quick interchange will be necessary.
 
Shooting with the Red zoom, need a longer lens? Pull the lens, mount the doubler, mount lens to the doubler, change position of follow focus, and lens support. Should not take more than 5 minutes. Quick and dirty solution to adding length to you lens.
 
Alex Fostvedt said:
They do make some great PL doublers, 1.5x and a 2x. Connects between the lens and mount.
Click to expand...

Hi Alex,

I think the doubler is a far better soloution than changing mounts in the field. Remove it when not in use as quality will suffer. (The image is magnified).

FWIW a 16mm zoom with a doubler will cover 35mm 16 x 9, it was a trick used in the past for light hand held zooms on 35mm.

Stephen
 
I wonder how many people will try to cover S35 with S16 lenses? Just like many cine's I know who use unconverted Zeiss 10-1 zooms to cover S16mm. They just stay away from the wide end of the lens. Not the best option, but will work. My zoom is converted. It would drive me crazy to pull out and not cover the whole frame. Pushing in in post is such a waste of film negative.
Like I said before, right tool for the job.
 
Alex Fostvedt said:
Shooting with the Red zoom, need a longer lens? Pull the lens, mount the doubler, mount lens to the doubler, change position of follow focus, and lens support. Should not take more than 5 minutes. Quick and dirty solution to adding length to you lens.
Click to expand...
Like I said, there's the question of the DOF. Still, the bokeh. Close-up not necessarily macro work but why not for this purpose too. Sports. And other setups when you cannot move your camera either.

Right tool for the job. Agreed. That's where the quick interchange of lenses of different mounts will be a solution if possible.
 
Last edited:
I also second the HKSC plead. Interested in Pentax K mount given the number of the lenses owned. Hope to use it on RED if proper mount is available.
 
Gordon

The right tool for the right job would mean not changing mounts to move in closer for a shot and ending up with 2 drastically different looks. The DOF will not be worth the terrible looking difference. It would be like shooting the wider shots with a 35mm camera and then getting your long close ups with a 16mm camera. Your end product would be crap.

I know I would be much happier with the outcome of the Red just shooting all 35mm or 16mm or stills len's for the whole sequence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top