Suggested New Nikkors for Red...?

It's important to note that although everyone wants to be able to open their lenses as wide as possible, you don't gain much performance in the faster Nikons and in some cases the results can actually be worse. It's a general rule that lenses are their sharpest a few stops down from wide open anyway, but the scale isn't consistent throughout the entire range of lenses. The 50mm 1.2 for example is can be quite soft and exhibit some distortions when open all the way, and really shouldn't be used any faster than 1.8 in a professional setting. The 50mm 1.4 and 1.8 however are near equally sharp at 1.8, so there's not a lot of point in spending the extra cash for almost imperceptable gain. Just like "more resolution" doesn't always make a better camera, faster apertures don't always make a better lens. Keep this in mind when determining which lenses to purchase.

Here are some good sites that review and reference the range of manual and automatic Nikon stills:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikkor.htm#mf

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikkor.htm#af
 
mike the beginner said:
I read this on the idiots thread:huh: it relates to the SI camera

The lenses part got me thinking! the silicon camera is a 2/3rds sensor right? The lenses must be 2/3rds then? Silicon have moved from 1080p to 2k camera? They mention PL mount.

Question their lenses can be bought seperately at $400-$500. Does anyone know what mount these lenses are bases on and are they 2/3rds lenses. I wondered if these lenses could be a cheap alternative to anyone using the red windowed modes or wanting a deeper DOF. I must have something wrong since most 2/3rds HD lenses are expensive!!

Michael
Click to expand...
'cause this can interest to other readers, I answer here if you don't mind. And with an helpful input from the right source: «BTW, on lenses, beware of the 2/3" video lenses that were designed for 3-chip cameras . . . these lenses need an apochromatic adapter in order to be used properly on a single-chip system without any chromatic shifting or other chromatic aberations. This is due to 2/3" 3-chip lenses being specificatlly constructed to offset for the different focal points that the red, green, and blue sensors have in a 3-chip camera» ~ Jason Rodriguez LINK (even if you can find other similar Jason's posts @dvinfo)

Mike, feel free for PM me whenever you need. Hope this helps.

Haak, good point! I agree with you.

Cheers to both! :beer:
E.
 
'cause this can interest to other readers, I answer here if you don't mind. And with an helpful input from the right source: «BTW, on lenses, beware of the 2/3" video lenses that were designed for 3-chip cameras . . . these lenses need an apochromatic adapter in order to be used properly on a single-chip system without any chromatic shifting or other chromatic aberations. This is due to 2/3" 3-chip lenses being specificatlly constructed to offset for the different focal points that the red, green, and blue sensors have in a 3-chip camera» ~ Jason Rodriguez LINK (even if you can find other similar Jason's posts @dvinfo)

Mike, feel free for PM me whenever you need. Hope this helps.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I know about the 2/3rd lenses and three ccd issues etc but the SI camera is a single chip sensor( least i thought it was?) and i presumed the lenses they will sell will be suitable for their single chip camera hence could they be used with red as a cheap lightweight alternative to more expensive lenses for use in achieving deeper DOF generally.

Michael
 
Last edited:
GabrielR said:
Ditto. Does anyone out there rate breathing on still lenses?
Click to expand...

Hi,

All the Nikon lenses I own breath fairly badly, to design a lens that reduces or eliminates breathing costs money. As it is of zero benefit to still photographers it's hardly surprising that they do!

Stephen
 
macgregor said:
Three things:

- breathe is a problem, but you can fix it with an animated crop later in post, so it is not crucial.

- breathe applies when going from infinite to a very close object (or the other way around), which is something you might do once or twice during a whole film. I would not worry about that.

- Most importat to know: how many degrees does the focus ring take on the Zeiss lenses from infinite to closest point? If we get more than 180º then no doubt i would consider as a cheap alternative to cine lenses.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the quote, Emanuel. Very interesting.

I suppose I just need to mosey down to the local camera dealer and try out a couple of these lenses.
 
lens with internal focus ( IF) should breathe less ...
also you notice the breathing more on wide angles ...

on the zeiss 10 -100 T2 ( 16mm lens) .. 10 - 16mm breathes as much as a 400 yard sprinter .... 16-25mm 50yard sprint ... above that ( telephoto) it just depends on the shot - if you are changing focus from 5ft to 100 ft - you'll notice but if focusing from 10ft to 14 ft may not notice ...
on many shots you find ways to hide it ( on actors movement , camera pan/tilt , dolly , lighting change etc)
 
Last edited:
Which do you prefer, Nikkor's on...or Nikkor's off?

BTW, Red Nikkor's have limited appeal!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top