Red Camera.. first test with Still Lens ( Nikon )

Status
Not open for further replies.
should i dare say it ..
maybe it's the NIKOR lens ???
Click to expand...

You know, it might very well be. Nikon lenses are designed to be tack sharp and they don't have to adhere to the same rigid properties with regard to breathing etc that cinema lenses do.
 
This looks great and really opens up possibilities for glass you can pretty much get a fry's. May I ask why you guys scaled it to 2k? The filesize can't really be an issue if you're going to compress it to 8-bit jpeg anyway.
 
Jarred Land said:
That lens motor isnt controlled by the camera, thats controlled via Remote, so Jim stands correct... But Curt for sure makes things alot easier.
Click to expand...
For sure Jarred!

Here is the allegation of my innocence :):
Emanuel said:
PS -- Don't worry this apparent misunderstanding is only a pretext in order to push for the tool coming from Curt -- a 3rd party dvxuser.com fellow! ($3,500 up to $5,500 is a real indie offer as well your camera!)
Click to expand...
 
A Nikon vs. Zeiss ZF comparision:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50-comparison/sharpness.htm

Unfortunately, it seems the Nikon results are better according his opinion though this reviewer is Nikon/Nikkor based. And they're not manufactured by Zeiss in Germany.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50-comparison/index.htm

EDIT -- OK guys! You're faster people!! The link is already fixed. :dankk2: for your care!

That link (now fixed) served only as link and clue for the whole review. Still, as I'm saying he's Nikon/Nikkor based. So, we should take away the discount from his own conclusions. Crossing his website you can find a sort of other tests (into the same comparision) between the Nikkor and Cosina (Zeiss-branded) glass -- fairly acceptable considering an equal setting basis. But that page (from the link now updated) was the VR part related where he reviews over what he got with his own findings (and concludes his review).
 
Last edited:
Emanuel said:
A Nikon vs. Zeiss ZF comparision:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50-comparison/vr.htm

Unfortunately, it seems the Nikon results are better though this reviewer is a Nikon/Nikkor based. And they're not manufactured by Zeiss in Germany:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50-...ison/index.htm
Click to expand...

Heh. That's not exactly a fair test. The Zeiss is shot at f/1.4, the Nikon at f/4.8. The reason this makes sense in the test is because the reviewer is testing a Nikon image stabilization feature which allows one to shoot longer exposures without introducing unwanted blur as a result of camera shake. Even if RED supported this lens feature (highly unlikely), you couldn't shoot 24 frames per second with a 1/5 second exposure time!
 
I don't really think it is ment to be a fair test for Red cine style use but gives you an idea of the quality of todays slr lenses.
Aloha
-A
 
Chris Kenny said:
Heh. That's not exactly a fair test. The Zeiss is shot at f/1.4, the Nikon at f/4.8. The reason this makes sense in the test is because the reviewer is testing a Nikon image stabilization feature which allows one to shoot longer exposures without introducing unwanted blur as a result of camera shake. Even if RED supported this lens feature (highly unlikely), you couldn't shoot 24 frames per second with a 1/5 second exposure time!
Click to expand...
Yes I know Chris!

EDIT -- It's already fixed. Link it again. The index is the second one.
 
Last edited:
Poi Boy said:
I don't really think it is ment to be a fair test for Red cine style use but gives you an idea of the quality of todays slr lenses.
Aloha
-A
Click to expand...
Of course! I'm just driven by curiosity. :)
 
The only valid tests will come when we cement down a sensor absolutely perpendicular to the light path (Frankie is a bit too crude for this). Then when the back focus is set properly, everything coming from Red will crispen up a bit and lens comparison tests will be more valid.

Jim
 
Jannard said:
The only valid tests will come when we cement down a sensor absolutely perpendicular to the light path (Frankie is a bit too crude for this). Then when the back focus is set properly, everything coming from Red will crispen up a bit and lens comparison tests will be more valid.

Jim
Click to expand...

wait....so frankie's sensor isn't even secured down correctly? lol.
 
As I understand it, the sensor and electronics live inside of a metal box with the lens mount. Because it's not sealed, dust can get in [and because the box isn't locked down, the focal plane can shift off of the sensor].

Someday we'll see a picture... I hope.
 
The Zeiss ZFs are not going to be appreciably better than their Nikkor equivelants especially at the premium price they are asking for them. They offer a smoother focusing helicoid though. I still feel you will get more bang for your buck with the Nikkors or Canon FDs.
 
Must say that frame looks a lot better than the footage I was getting with an F900R that had a Fuji 22x lens with Diopter attached focusing a foot-and-a-half away on the spinning groundglass of an M2 adaptor fitted with a nikon prime.

Nice depth of field, but remarkably soft :D
 
So all my lovely old Nikkor lenses will last for at least 15+ more years ! (or probably more as Red is MODULAR :thumbup: )

I'm dying to see some pics of Nikkor lens mounted Red camera ..
 
> ...everything coming from Red will crispen up a bit...

One posting about the recent 4k viewing had a comment that the image was already too sharp and you should have used an older Cooke lens that had been knocked around a little (!) So maybe Red should have a sensor tilt/shift/catywumpus knob to tweak in that vintage "Frankie" look.

note, just in case... this is a joke. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top