Nikon to buy 100% of RED

Yeah, I said that already, but still would have to see the 50mm f/1.2 EF on something else than the dual OLPF cancellation with the 5DS R when critically comparing.

Regardless, this lens is known to be unusually soft wide open so it's a lazy example. And why these two? I'm assuming it's because 50 vs 50 flagship, but the RF one is $700 more (launch vs. launch). There are other EF lenses from the same time that can be compared wide open and the difference is less dramatic.
 
Actually went back to see how the other cameras on the list looked and I - on a side note - wonder why the CA varies noticeably between the models (including the cropped sensors).

This is interesting because I never bothered much between cycling between the different available cameras to see how a lens looked.
 
Alap.

I made my choice to go to ef in a very pragmatic way.

as i noted 24-105 2.8 is too heavy (and 28-70/2)

again 1.2 lenses dont in my experience deliver anything useful vs a 1.8 or 2

the pragmatic 30 year career maker of images jist doesnt care about these outllyer specs

a 1.2 lens is bright on ground glass and gaining focus wide open (before shooting at 2) was good. But mirrorless dont do wide open and stop down to shoot.
and todays cameras are 6400 happy. 1.2 is a historical quirk

my 70-200 f4 - i care that it is super sharp ultra light and cost less than a good meal

but i do care about af being sticky. And that could trump everything

right now given $10k and a blank sheet id probably go sony

canon are in a hole until the c500iiii is rf mount.

Im really not 100% on my canon c200 choice. Fx6 might have been better even though sony menus/ergonomics generally make me feel ill.
 
I feel like there's been such a calm before the storm and any month/year there is going to be a big cinema camera resurgence, maybe late 2024 into early 2025.

The Japanese are going to spread out their greatest accomplishments...

R5 II - RF Cinema Body (or two)

a7S IV and FX6 II

New Nikon/RED

New Panasonic Cinema Body (okay, maybe not - but we're rooting for you!)
 
NorBro said:
Yeah, I said that already, but still would have to see the 50mm f/1.2 EF on something else than the dual OLPF cancellation with the 5DS R when critically comparing.

Regardless, this lens is known to be unusually soft wide open so it's a lazy example. And why these two? I'm assuming it's because 50 vs 50 flagship, but the RF one is $700 more (launch vs. launch). There are other EF lenses from the same time that can be compared wide open and the difference is less dramatic.
Click to expand...

Yes, flagship vs flagship. Still relevant regardless of relative age of lens because that's the EF 50 1.2 you can get and people might still have. I also compared the EF 24-105 f/4 iI against the RF 24-105 f/2.8 and the latter showed improved contrast and detail even though it's one stop faster.
 
I think that's a stretch; lens is from 2006 and it's well-known for dreamy photography portraits, not video.

Regardless of the mount, lenses are expected to be better now than they were 10-20-30+ years ago, this isn't even a conversation that should be had and I don't know how we exactly got here.

RF highend glass should be better than EF highend glass, even if just a little for some pieces.
 
ahalpert said:
there's no point in buying a fast lens if you have to stop it down anyway
Click to expand...

i should clarify this again. There is a point. But only for stills

a fast but soft open lens is a useful tool for mirror cameras (dslr)

Shooting stills with a mirror and ground glass one would view wide open even when shooting at 2.8 4 or whatever.

the iris would close only at the moment of exposure - when the mirror was up and the operators view black

the view when composing would be bright through a 1.2 lens and the dof thin which would help mf and af

the dof preview button could be used to check the dof (strange that!)

so for dslr stills a fast lens soft wide open had value.

for mirrorless and video such lenses have no technical value.

i think they only sell to folk who dont understand why they were made

yes some may find art in soft but id suggest better to use vaseline a scratched uv filter or a “professional” softening filter
 
NorBro said:
I think that's a stretch; lens is from 2006 and it's well-known for dreamy photography portraits, not video.

Regardless of the mount, lenses are expected to be better now than they were 10-20-30+ years ago, this isn't even a conversation that should be had and I don't know how we exactly got here.

RF highend glass should be better than EF highend glass, even if just a little for some pieces.
Click to expand...
Au contraire. Have you not seen the vintage lens thread? They are quite popular. :D
 
I think that vintage honeymoon phase is over...very 2018-ish. Everything is so modern now, so "clear" as they say.
 
I went through all of them in my day, every fad.

Filters were some of my least favorite...tried to convince myself I liked them but really saw no big difference until you got to the heavier ones which then just made everything too soft.

The weaker ones are supposed to be subtle but what's the point I thought to myself.
 
On my last Ikegami Betacam I had a Tiffin SoftF/X 2 filter pretty much permanently mounted on my main Fujinon lens for about 8 years. Never took it off. It really made a difference back then and clients loved the less-harsh look of the picture while still keeping eyes and other details sharp. But that was before we had a ton of power in post. Now I prefer to shoot everything clean, except for the occassional polarizer or half-grad ND. In my opinion, anyone talking about using lenses to get a vintage look (whatever that even means) is wasting their time. Shoot clean and do it in post where you have more control.

On a different topic, I don't know what camera or lenses they are using to shoot the new season of Curb, but I love the whole look of it. The show itself mostly sucks, but the look is beautiful. Anyone have any details?
 
They've recently (last two-three years) been using the Varicam LT but maybe upgraded again, IDK.

I think you once said you really liked the look of your S1 or S1H and that's like a little Varicam. :happy:
 
NorBro said:
New Nikon/RED

New Panasonic Cinema Body (okay, maybe not - but we're rooting for you!)
Click to expand...

Panasonic are done with cinema cameras. They have let many of their staff go.

What makes you think Nikon would do a cinema camera?

Nikon collaboration with the Bros at RED? I do not see it.

Best case they let RED keep making their cameras and fund some R&D but much more likely is Nikon do their own branded video centric versions of what they have now like what Canon and Panasonic do now. All they need is the IP for internal RAW. Which they now have.
 
NorBro said:
They've recently (last two-three years) been using the Varicam LT but maybe upgraded again, IDK.

I think you once said you really liked the look of your S1 or S1H and that's like a little Varicam. :happy:
Click to expand...

I'm sure they are not using a Varicam, but you are correct that I think the S1H is probably the best-looking camera I owned or have used myself. Too bad it falls short in other ways. That reminds me, I gotta sell that camera.
 
Doug Bee said:
Panasonic are done with cinema cameras. They have let many of their staff go.

What makes you think Nikon would do a cinema camera?

Nikon collaboration with the Bros at RED? I do not see it.

Best case they let RED keep making their cameras and fund some R&D but much more likely is Nikon do their own branded video centric versions of what they have now like what Canon and Panasonic do now. All they need is the IP for internal RAW. Which they now have.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I said on this forum that I thought they were done after the EVA1...just had that same vibe as the LS300 and JVC's disappointment.

As far as Nikon, a cinema camera can mean different things to people...for me it's basically something a little more dedicated than a stills hybrid which you went on to elaborate in the next sentence.
 
NorBro said:
huh? lots of articles about it when it first came out

https://www.panasonicvisualsystems.c...yourenthusiasm
Click to expand...

That was 5 years ago. I'm sure they aren't using Varicam anymore. I don't know what they are using this season but it ain't no Varicam. I will eat my hat if you can prove me wrong. BTW, 10 years ago they were using the F800 and then the FS7 for a few seasons, so what they used in the past is no indicator of what they are using currently.
 
If you see a difference I'd trust your judgement and go with you on it.

You'd think it would be easier to know from somewhere, anywhere, if they switched cameras to one of the usual - ARRI or Venice 1/2 - but I'm not getting anything back on Google.
 
morgan_moore said:
Alap.
Click to expand...

Alas? Ahalp? Or is Alap some unfamiliar slang?

I made my choice to go to ef in a very pragmatic way.

as i noted 24-105 2.8 is too heavy (and 28-70/2)

again 1.2 lenses dont in my experience deliver anything useful vs a 1.8 or 2
Click to expand...

You're living in the past. Just kidding. Not really.

I love my GM 50 1.2. I almost always use it wide open, except when shooting near-macro. But at high magnification I usually stop everything down to somewhere between 2.8 and 5.6.

I'd love to have a 35 1.2. Heck why not a 35 f/1. Not sure i need an 85 1.2, but it'd be nice to have. The longer telephoto you go, the less i need a wide aperture. F/2.8 is often too shallow for me at 150mm+. I find that my ideal DOF for a situation doesn't change much from lens to lens.

my 70-200 f4 - i care that it is super sharp ultra light and cost less than a good meal
Click to expand...

Since moving to Sony, I've tried to adopt buy once, cry once for lenses. I'm always using lenses. They affect the entire picture. There's a big payoff to having the right lens. I don't need all the lenses in the world, just a good set of prines and zooms. And that's why I'm not keen to change systems again. I'd like to stay put.

but i do care about af being sticky. And that could trump everything
Click to expand...

Probably a latest and greatest thing. But it depends. Supposedly the sony 1.8 has faster/better autofocus than the GM 85 1.4, mostly because the 1.8 is lighter. Im hoping the gen 2 GM 85 is better. Lately, on heavy lenses they install 2 or 3 lens motors to push and pull in concert. Maybe there's also a computer/programming advantage to newer lenses.

right now given $10k and a blank sheet id probably go sony
Click to expand...

I think Canon is doing more interesting and serious things but your money would go farther with Sony.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top