Nikkor VR & G lenses

G

Greg Cokes

Member
Hello all!

Is it possible to make (Third party) lense mount electronics that would allow Nikkor's VR (Vibration Reduction) and G (IE Camera Apiture control) on the RED?

I have read "Work arounds" like setting apiture on the DSLR, then unmounting / mounting on the RED. I am not sure if contol over these features is copy protected or not.

There are a few more Nikkor lenses I wish to get for my DSLR and I would really like some of these advanced features to be availible on RED too, even if it is third party.

Any thoughs?

Happy Thanksgiving!
Greg

BTW: RED#? / Zoom#?, But I was charged, so I know I am in.
 
I've got the feeling that's going to be awfully tricky / expensive / time consuming. And I'm doubtful of the benefit of VR for a moving camera unless that image stabilization was specifically designed for such a purpose.

Graeme
 
Graeme_Nattress said:
I've got the feeling that's going to be awfully tricky / expensive / time consuming. And I'm doubtful of the benefit of VR for a moving camera unless that image stabilization was specifically designed for such a purpose.

Graeme
Click to expand...
Even if you were able to activate the VR through the camera there would still be problems. Nikon VR only works when it is not attached to a tripod or other stabilizing device, and it would probably require extra power to get those gyros going for an extended period of time. However, in the 'active' mode the lens CPU compensates for lateral movement (i.e. panning out a moving car window) to isolate hand shake. (I have used the active mode on my 70-200 2.8 in low light situations and achieved some pretty cool effects, but mainly because the algorithm is trying to interpret the information as patterns that are supposed to be moving).
J*
 
Greg Cokes said:
I have read "Work arounds" like setting apiture on the DSLR, then unmounting / mounting on the RED. I am not sure if contol over these features is copy protected or not.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure when you unmount the aperture goes to it's smallest size (highest number).
 
...which makes me wonder, are there going to be any lens controls in the camera, or will all exposure adjustments be manual? It looks like the RED lenses are designed for manual adjusment only with no internal CPU.

J*
 
The Nikon VR system requires info from the Nikon body AF sensors so there is no chance thats gonna work on Red. The iris indeed does close down all the way when the lens is not mounted but there should be a mechanical work-around for that.
 
adaml said:
All manual.
Click to expand...
that really limits this camera's applications to a more controlled environment, too bad. I was recording wildlife very close up while in full camo with an XL2, no chance to adjust lenses and meter the lighting as I was in full stealth mode and had to use some sort of built in exposure control.
The RED looked like an awesome field camera, but maybe the design fooled me into thinking it was more versatile.

J*
 
It will be plenty versitile, if you can reach the focus ring you can control exposure, and the onboard histogram/waveform will give you all the exposure data necessary.
 
Unfortunately for the situation I am in, any movement at all will be noticed and the animal will be long gone. The only workaround would be a blimp or a camera cover to hide movement. Even the sound of the motor engaging has spooked the animals.
Sorry I am not doing major motion pictures or commercials, just trying to do HD in the field of wildlife, closeup, and the RED probably is not the right choice.
 
You need to adapt your techniques to your objective. I guarantee that the 4K Red footage you would produce would make up for any accommodations that might have to be made in your shooting technique. If you are already using a blind then there is no reason your iris adjustments could not be hidden from the animals view. And they would be barely audible even right next to the camera.
 
evinsky said:
You need to adapt your techniques to your objective. I guarantee that the 4K Red footage you would produce would make up for any accommodations that might have to be made in your shooting technique. If you are already using a blind then there is no reason your iris adjustments could not be hidden from the animals view. And they would be barely audible even right next to the camera.
Click to expand...
I agree Evin that the picture quality would rival anything else, however there are other considerations as a shooter that I have to look at. I am not usually in a blind (or else all my movements would generally be concealed and there wouldn't be a problem), usually I am on foot silently following an animal either pre-dawn or twilight, in full camouflage with scent control, hauling a 12+ pound camera along with the rest of my gear usually at a pretty good clip until we can get into position for the shot. I might be traversing a swamp or a river, In Africa I might be in a blind but even then all movement must be absolutely minimal. In Canada I might be packed in to a very remote location, in South America I may have to deal with extreme heat and moisture. I need to simplify the tools as much as possible, and the RED although it looked like a heavy duty field camera (with the redrails and the cage and the arm holster) is probably better suited to the urban environment.

But let's get back to the original topic of the post which is from someone who wants to use a Nikon lens with electronics in it to a give him more tools to work with, but can't with the RED because the camera does not communicate with the lens. Why not? Red is manufacturing the lenses, why not expand the applicability by including focus and exposure options?
Nikon was the undisputable leader in professional still photography for decades until Canon introduced lenses with electronic controls that were far superior and overnight the market changed and every action photographer dumped their Nikon gear, and Nikon has been playing catch up ever since. I have been using Nikon for 25 years, and now use both Nikon and Canon, and they are both just a means to an end, tools to achieve a purpose. If I can adapt the RED to my needs then I will use it, as adaptability seems to be a unique factor of this camera. With Nikon lenses, I can adapt an old non CPU Nikon lens to work on, say a D2X by adding a chip that will communicate with the newer camera bodies and allow matrix metering, color metering, programmed operation modes (P, S) and the ability to set apertures by the command wheels on the camera, thus allowing the older manual lenses to operate with fully functional metering on F80/N80, D100, or similar models which Nikon has crippled. Check link: http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html, and I can also disable the IR filter in the sensors to perceive the 14 stops of IR light in addition to the 10 stops of visible light (as Stephen Johnson does with his large format digital cameras), and obtain the images that I want, not some manufacturer who decides that limiting features is a way to sell more models, the very thing that prompted Jim Jannard to create his own camera.
Jim and all at RED will have to eventually consider their decision not to offer communication of the lenses and the camera, maybe they will on the RED TWO, but until then, my tool chest will include other cameras, and yes, I am still looking forward to delivery of the RED.

J*


 
I can also disable the IR filter in the sensors to perceive the 14 stops of IR light in addition to the 10 stops of visible light (as Stephen Johnson does with his large format digital cameras), and obtain the images that I want, not some manufacturer who decides that limiting features is a way to sell more models, the very thing that prompted Jim Jannard to create his own camera.
Jim and all at RED will have to eventually consider their decision not to offer communication of the lenses and the camera, maybe they will on the RED TWO, but until then, my tool chest will include other cameras, and yes, I am still looking forward to delivery of the RED.
Click to expand...

We don't know yet if red one will be capable of disabling the IR filter. I have asked for that to be included and i know a few others would also like something in the way of IR facility. However it may well be that with motion (video) it is far more complex, maybe colour rendition is effected or whatever, by the removal of the green filter?

Red have had a lot of good ideas thrown in by many here on the forum and their primary aim is to produce a cracking cine camera (that can also be used for many other situations) with their first camera and perhaps later down the line make changes etc.

i suspect IF the resolution and dynamics do indeed come out as good as we all expect they will have paved the way for red two or three with a proper ENG style of camera fully suited to that type of work. Red intention remember is to be the best camera company in the world. You don't achieve that by just having one camera, others will follow in time.

As it is it will be a massive learning curve for me anyway. Think of the pleasure you would derive from getting a great shot with the red one in its full glory, wow for me that feeling will be even more so because i will have achieved so much. I love a challange it means the end result is so much more satisfying:)

Michael
 
I look forward to the revolution as a charter member of redcore, and hope that the future lens designs will be as encompassing as the RED ONE camera, integrated as a cohesive system and superior to the choices we are limited to now.
And I hope that there will be a modular adaptation available that will eventually allow the camera to communicate and control the lens.

J*
 
Aperture control is my main concern. I have not purchased any Nikkor G lenses yet but I would like to. VR is of little use on motion picture.


How tough would it be to get control of exposure on these lenses?

Thanks,
Greg
 
If RED decides eventually to engineer a bridge between the Nikkor lenses and the camera (in which metering and programmed exposure are controlled through the camera and not manually through the lens) or better yet design a lens which is fully controlled through the camera itself, and implement it as a modular adaptation, then the RED revolution will not only address the needs of the elite bourgeois Hollywood level filmmakers (of which cost of equipment is a small blip on the radar) which it has currently focused, but also responded to the cries of the lumpenproleteriat who are sick of the limitations of the current offerings from the megacorporations that decide what technology to offer (Sony, Canon, Nikon, etc.), at some outrageous price that most can not afford, then RED and Jim Jannard can call this a real revolution. (and the guy who patents the add on to the RED that works with the Nikon lenses become a millionaire!).

RED is a camera, a tool that will bring high quality HD to the world and challenge the gatekeepers out there today to respond, and they will. They have to to survive. Attack the Cinealta now to establish the front lines in the war, but to win you must challenge the midrange cameras, and address the needs of the regular people who will choose RED over all of those other brands from the corporations that have decided what THEY are ready to offer us when THEY decide.
"Infinitely modular and upgradeable", that is what attracts me to RED, that and the price. The specs will continue to improve (the still photographer Stephen Johnson has used a 50 megapixel prototype sensor achieving a dynamic range that is absolutely unbelievable and far greater than 35mm film for many years now), and RED will have to offer modular adaptations to adapt and evolve.

-as always, a humble comrade in arms,

J*
 
Last edited:
> ...the elite bourgeois Hollywood level filmmakers [...] which it has currently focused...

My impression is the diametric opposite. If Red is focused on the elite, then it seems to have missed- the enthusiasm for Red on this board appears to be from outside Hollywood. A fair number of the Hollywood elite still declare that film is good enough, and are not interested in RED or any other digital acquisition tools.
 
jeffry alan said:
the still photographer Stephen Johnson has used a 50 megapixel prototype sensor achieving a dynamic range that is absolutely unbelievable and far greater than 35mm film for many years now), J*
Click to expand...

Hi,

Do you have any links of direct comparison tests between film and this 50 megapixel sensor?

FWIW the Viper has 27,600,000 pixels, and thats a 4 year old product with a 2/3 inch sensor!

Stephen
 
no lens control..period.

As great as it sounds to have Red be able to autofocus and auto iris and maintain VR.. Still lenses were not designed to move.. alot of them breath pretty badly on focus, and most movements where designed to adjust momentarly, and not constantly. Let alone all the R&D and development cost it would take for them all to talk together.

So I dont think its viable, sorry Jeffry.
 
My goodness Jeff... I hear you man, but politics was over two weeks ago. Ha.

I have the Sony Z1U and keep all the auto fonctions off. I don't want them on RED either. Besides the huge R&D costs Jim mentioned above, which btw would raise RED's cost much higher, I am not sure how much I would trust it with my shots.

I like certain Nikkor G lenses and simply wanted to know if there were any "Third party" folks who were working on getting apeture control, M not A, on these lenses. If so, that would make them very attractive on this camera.

Greg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top