Meryem Ersoz

RED just announced it: 18-144mm

also announced: plans to make a wide(r) angle add on attachment.

all things subject to change...

talk amongst yourselves.

Jarrod Whaley

Meryem, are these the actual focal lengths, or are they 35mm equivalents? I'm assuming the latter.

BTW, do you have a link?

__________________
-->jarrod whaley.
www.oakstreetfilms.com

Meryem Ersoz

your command is my wish, Jarrod!

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpos...8&postcount=23

Jarrod Whaley

No commands here, just respectful requests. :)

Thanks for the link.

__________________
-->jarrod whaley.
www.oakstreetfilms.com

Tim Le

Jarrod, the 18-144 focal length is in S35 cine terms (not 2/3" terms). So on the wide end, this is about as wide as 28mm in terms of still photo full frame 35mm.

Jarrod Whaley

Thanks, Tim--I followed Meryem's link and got the word from Jim's "lips."

So even with a 2x tele adapter, we're looking at the 35mm equivalent of 288mm. That's pretty short. I know it's physically impossible to get any longer than that in a 2/3" lens this small, but it does still seem pretty limiting with regard to a lot of common shooting styles. It's about what I expected, so I'm not complaining...I'm just sayin'.

__________________
-->jarrod whaley.
www.oakstreetfilms.com

Dylan Couper

Yes! YES! YESSSSS!!!!

Ok, I'm sold. I'll take 2.

__________________
For quick answers try our Search!

Jon Fairhurst

28mm to 224mm (full frame 35mm photo reference) is perfect for the base lens. Sure, it's not tight enough for wildlife, sports or paparazzi, but we knew that already. It should cover a lot of the typical digital cinema range.

I'll be curious to see what attachments they come up with...

__________________
Jon Fairhurst
FRESH FILMS WEEKLY AT COLONELCRUSH.COM.

Tim Le

I hear you Jarrod. I occasionally shoot aircraft so sometimes I need a long lens too. The Scarlet just inherently won't be an ideal "A" camera for long lens work. The only solution for that kind of work is to have interchangeable lens but then that opens up another can of worms which Jim very logically spells out on another thread.

However, 18-144mm (S35) is very useful for narrative and general purpose work. I'm very happy that they went with a 28mm equivalent on the wide end. I just hope there is way to control the zoom with a rear lens controller and with the same finesse as a Fuji or Canon lens/controller.

Jon Fairhurst

Jarrod,

Have you considered a ground glass adapter? Sure, you lose light, but you can then mount just about any 35mm lens you could want. As long as the sensor is reasonably sensitive and noise free, it can work. Some of the EX1/Letus shots I've seen are gorgeous. A budget of $6k should get the camera, a nice adapter and a start on a lens collection. That's still less money than the EX1 alone.

Of course, if you need more light and/or a wide DOF, go with the multiplier approach. Or wait to see what they announce next...

__________________
Jon Fairhurst
FRESH FILMS WEEKLY AT COLONELCRUSH.COM.

Jarrod Whaley

Long focal lengths are pretty key to what I do. I suppose you have enough resolution to crop quite a bit off if in post if you need a bit more reach, but obviously the perspective characteristics of long focal lengths take hit in that scenario. Maybe RED will release some really crazy-long tele adapter or something. Here's hoping. Not a peep at REDUSER so far about getting any extra reach, but plenty of focus on the wide end.

__________________
-->jarrod whaley.
www.oakstreetfilms.com

Jarrod Whaley

Jon, I shoot a lot of verite-style documentary stuff where artificial lighting is more or less impossible, so the light loss of a ground-glass adapter coupled with a T2.8 lens doesn't sound like it would work out very well--not to mention the weight and the fact that the grain of a ground glass is probably going to be the size of grains of rice at 3k. :)

__________________
-->jarrod whaley.
www.oakstreetfilms.com

Meryem Ersoz

i'll let you borrow my 200mm f1.8...it's the dream glass of all time. i haven't found the lens that can touch it for pretty tele images.

can't help so much with the giant grains, however...

undoubtedly people will be sticking adapters on this thing like crazy, the moment it's released, so i'd wait and see how it plays out...

i shoot a lot of verite, too, and isn't that what camera lights are for? i don't leave home without it! have you tried the litepanels mini? it's pretty non-intrusive...

Jarrod Whaley

I might just take you up on that offer if I ever take the ground-glass adapter route. :) That sounds like a pretty sweet hunk of glass.

I've tried the camera light thing and while it obviously helps in low light, it's just not a good fit for my own style. It looks really "11:00 news"-ish and calls attention to the presence of the camera. That works out just fine for some verite shooters, but it goes against what I'm personally after visually. I also find that on-camera lighting is kind of invasive with respect to your subjects, and they begin to adopt an "I'm in a movie" kind of phony personality. I try to have as little impact on my subjects as possible, which is part of why I shoot at long focal lengths--so I can stay out of the way, and in many cases even hide.

Never tried the lite-panels kit though, I must admit. Maybe I'll give it a go.

__________________
-->jarrod whaley.
www.oakstreetfilms.com

Glenn Chan

Be careful what you wish for. Have you seen a ENG zoom? (The kind of lens with a huge zoom range, and a 2X extender on top of that.) You compromise image quality for that kind of zoom range (e.g. lots of chromatic aberration).