Red Pro Primes on AF100

Joe Walker

Joe Walker

Well-known member
Been thinking about these and and the only major question I have about this setup is whether or not the 18, 25, and 35 would be too heavy for the mount (without support). Any thoughts?
 
If the cams structural build is based on the HPX, I'd definitely use support. RED glass is pretty heavy.
 
+1 there is NO way I would hang a lens off of the AF-100 that weighs as much as the camera does w/o a beefy support system.
 
I use support with my CPs, and I think they're much lighter than the Red lenses, so yeah -- +1 for definitely needing a proper support.
 
I think I may have mis-worded my post a tad, I think what I'm trying to ask is how/what/what kind of support is to be used for cinema prime lenses? In all the videos and pics posted that I've seen, it appears that the only thing that is truly supporting the lenses are mattebox/mattebox interface which are connected to the 15mm rods. I haven't seen anything else really "holding" the lenses. I guess that's what I'm trying to get at.
 
Red Pro primes are heavy and have really crappy barrel marks. They are the worst modern cine lenses I know of. I hate ACing on them and I'd never buy them. The only people I know who like RedProPrimes are the people who bought into them from the price rebate.

Worst primes ever, imo.

ps: most cine primes do not need support. They are not supported by matteboxes or etc... Most are not super heavy and can mount to a PL mount without any assistance. Even RPP's... they just are unnecessarily heavy and etc.
 
If you are using the red lenses on the af100 then you are using a PL ADAPTER.
I know the Hot Rod Camera adapter for 4/3 has the support built into the mount. There should be no pressure on the camera's mount itself.

And I agree with Ryan.

ps. sorry about that last shoot and making you use rpp's :(
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
ps: most cine primes do not need support. They are not supported by matteboxes or etc... Most are not super heavy and can mount to a PL mount without any assistance. Even RPP's... they just are unnecessarily heavy and etc.
Click to expand...
Yes, but you're talking about using them in conjunction with an adapter hanging off the m43 mount. That's not exactly the same as a hard-fronted PL mount on the camera.

Which is why I use a mount that provides for its own support, and have a support shoe mounted on the rails to support the mount. I agree that there's no need to put a support under most prime lenses, but I definitely prefer having support under the mount itself.
 
Barry_Green said:
Yes, but you're talking about using them in conjunction with an adapter hanging off the m43 mount. That's not exactly the same as a hard-fronted PL mount on the camera.

Which is why I use a mount that provides for its own support, and have a support shoe mounted on the rails to support the mount. I agree that there's no need to put a support under most prime lenses, but I definitely prefer having support under the mount itself.
Click to expand...

That's a good point. I've never used those adapters before, so I didn't know they were in need or benefited from a support. It was my mistake assuming the torque from the lens could be taken by the mount the same way native PL mounts do.

Matty_g said:
ps. sorry about that last shoot and making you use rpp's :(
Click to expand...

To Matty: I like to remember you by the Clairmont anamorphics we used on 'Frogs'. :) Those were beautiful lenses.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top