Wideangle suggestions

Emanuel

Emanuel

Cross-Examiner
Considering the S35 format of the sensor, I'd bet it won't be easy to find a wider lens than the RED 18-85mm zoom lens. Any suggestions?
 
it won´t be easy to find any lens - around 700 red one owners looking for lenses now.
btw, I have 2nd hand zeiss primes in PL mount, T2.1, for sale, 14,24,28,32,50,85,135mm in excellent condition. Also I have Zeiss Variable Primes ,VP 2 (29-60mm) and VP 3 (55-105mm) T2.2, for sale. VP are not zoom lenses ! please use boardmail to contact, thanks
 
Yes, 18 is ridiculously wide angle and more than enough for 99% of applications. Unless your shooting a rap video :D
 
I have a Canon K35 14mm from this set of K35s I bought. Actually, not sure if it is K35 as it may have EOS glass, but it is a cine lens....so looks like any of you MCs need some video love give me a call.
 
18mm translates to 27mm equivalent on a 35mm still camera, which is nice and wide but not ridiculously wide. I think most shooters will eventually want a 14mm or 15mm to complement the zoom on the wide end.
 
Nikon 15mm 3.5 $850
NK06999019017.jpg

This is a sharp workhorse of a lens.
I'm also working on an Idea of how to use the Nikon/Tokina 12-24 DX on the Red with aperture control.
 
Yes, I have the Nikkor 12-24 DX lens and it is a fine lens. Only problem is no aperture control and the focus ring is not really meant for manual focussing, although at 12mm there is not much focussing to do anyway. The Tokina might be a little better in that respect because I think you can actually shift the focussing ring into a 'manual mode' so that it stops rotating at the end of the scale. And at 500 dollar or so it is quite cheap too.

Wouldn't it be possible to make a Nikon mount with an aperture ring? After all it is only a lever on the back of the lens that controls the diaphragm. In that way you could also avoid the stepping of normal still lenses and vary your aperture smoothly.
 
OK,
Imagine swimming underneath a pack of 30 or so sharks, or almost having the lens coating of my current 120 degree external wide angle lens being removed by the sandpaper qualities of the belly skin of a giant manta ray. What kind of lens would I need to be able to replicate these scenarios with RED? I have to admit that I am not the tech geek when it comes to the potential minefield of equipment requirements for RED but I am (with only a few days left) looking to hedge my bets until the final days of availablity and will the make my decisions.

I am thus far self taught on the cams I have used so far but RED seems such a suhweeeeeeeeet deal that I am already in preparaton stages for a potential project with it. Looking forward to potentially producing something from the Oceans of world, to finally do justice to the solace and beauty I find there with a camera that will really bring that environment to life.

Cheers,
Mark.
 
The Manta Rays I am on about have a wingspan of up to 10 feet and I can get both wing tips in the frame when their belly is about 18" from the lens. Pretty damn impressive. My main lens concern for RED lenses are those which would be compatible whilst offering an extra wide FOV. Underwater filming is mainly about the wider picture then closing in once establishing shots have been made.

Cheers,
Mark.
 
sndrk said:
Wouldn't it be possible to make a Nikon mount with an aperture ring? After all it is only a lever on the back of the lens that controls the diaphragm. In that way you could also avoid the stepping of normal still lenses and vary your aperture smoothly.
Click to expand...
Actually this is a good idea, and not just for Nikons but also Canon lenses. I have an EOS 350D with two zoom lenses which are fine, but have no manual aperture controls. I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to devise a Canon/Nikon mount that takes these EF lenses and has a basic electronic portion to control the aperture as it would be done on camera, via the relevant contacts. If anyone reading this is contemplating making some of these third party mounts, I think it'd be a hot seller!
 
5.6 seems pretty slow epecially under water, What do you think Camdiver ? I have a 15mm 2.8 not the sharpest but it will do in a pinch when the zoom isn't wide enough.
Aloha
-A
 
Poi Boy said:
5.6 seems pretty slow epecially under water, What do you think Camdiver ? I have a 15mm 2.8 not the sharpest but it will do in a pinch when the zoom isn't wide enough.
Aloha
-A
Click to expand...

I'm not a diver, but I know light. It'll depend on how deep you go and the temperature of the water (colder water is denser and darker). You should spring for the 2.8 if you ever plan on going into cold waters. Personally, I'd opt for the 2.8 regardless... because you never know when you'll find yourself needing to shoot after dusk.
 
Ive been shooting some underwater stuff for the past 2 years. Depth would be between 2-15 meters. Using a 200asa stock I never went below 5.6 or above 11(on a sunny or partially cloudy day)
 
Cold water actually at most times can offer the best clarity and light due to a reduction in organisms able to survive colder temps. Like us, a lot of sea creatures actually like temperate conditions. A pro photographer of mine does some stunning imagery in cold mountain lakes etc. Less organisms = less particulate = better viz, but thats another issue.

My planned project is to look at going mainly to non enclosed environments where I would have continuous line of sight to the surface and as such direct ambient light when underwater lighting is not being used. I do carry 400w of floodlighting with me (2 x 200w Lightheads) for use if I should need to illuminate darker recesses etc. However seeing as light is also absorbed by the denser water medium (the human eye cannot discern red, of all colors, after a depth of 15ft or so without artificial lighting) I would of course prefer lenses that would behave correctly with these points in mind. That is only a backup solution for lighting as we are also looking to get a seriously big surface supplied rig for the set sequences etc.

For the super wide shots the plan is for be camera FOV to be pointing perpendicularly toward the surface anyway whilst looking to get silhouette shots of marine life passing from that perspective.

The rest of the stuff is basically portraiture of generic shallow reefs I would imagine on a sunny day a good performer somewhere around f5.6 to f8 and then other options for super tight macro with floodlighting.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,
Mark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top