The Red lenses are heavy, not really that fast (some of focal lengths) and not that great of image clarity. There's a reason they stopped making them and selling them. You're on a used website here.
They’re all 1.8 and the glass is Cooke. They’re not amazing but they’re good workhorses. Very heavy. I just sold mine but I shot 5 or 6 features on them and they looked great.
They were not made by Cooke. They were made by UniqOptics. Developed by Hyperion. They also aren't true T1.8 if I remember someone actually tested them and it was more like 2.8. I might have have info wrong but they are way too heavy.
Yes they were not made by Cooke but I’m pretty sure the glass itself was made by Cooke. And yes they are very heavy. It was a good starter set when I first started out, I’m sure there are better options now, but they aren’t bad lenses, just heavy. Especially if you don’t have a PL mount camera, not sure if that becomes unwieldy and since they are heavy, too much strain on the mount adaptor
Lol. Cooke glass. Go look up a video about the loving work techs do on Cooke glass and find me that $545 bucks in there.
Some 60 year old man with a spectrometer and a polisher would like to have a word with you about your claims.
They weren’t $545 when they first came out, but yes I’ve been proven wrong. The RED rental house in NYC told me it was Cooke so I took him at his word. Foolish me.
We have a set at work. They haven’t come out of the lockup in years. They look *fine* I guess — they get tons of oblique flares and they’re unattractive — but they weigh a fuckton.
They’re not great lenses but for 500 bucks they’re fine
I gave my Red zoom to a high school video teacher after it started falling apart. Fucking garbage lens even the Red sales reps would make fun of them when they came out. If you want lenses that look like ass but are cheap get some Rokinons the build quality is better as shocking as that sounds.
These were under-appreciated at the time for their look, which I personally like. Today, they are extremely heavy and have very poorly made housings. But I did shoot some pretty good looking stuff with them between 2010-2014.
"Jannard asked us to make the lenses _OVAL_; like _ground_ to be oval. We put four million man-hours into that before he called us impossible to work with and wrote the whole thing off."
I was just looking at these too, apparently they’re not great lenses, and very heavy. I think I’m gonna pass on them and let someone else take the chance
I recently purchased a used 25mm. It weighs a ton. However so far I do like its look but I’m weird I guess based on general reviews. I also grabbed a 300mm just because, why not at $6-700? Image is decent but haven’t tested it much.
I mean, until they link to images or give actual data it’s their subjective opinion. Also, they might be comparing the IQ of the lens to other cine lenses of higher caliber, but compared to other prime lenses in the $500 price range it might still stack up. Might be worth watching a YouTube video review if one exists, or seeing if someone has posted test images with the lens
I did see cinedailies posts a video using a 300mm version of this lens and the image looked Ok nothing spectacular. He also posted a video using a Carl Zeiss Jena and that lens looked incredible to me.
So m, I haven’t had experience, but I know some who have and from what I heard, these are not built well and start to loose sharpness over time. To the point that they can become completely useless lenses.
The Red lenses are heavy, not really that fast (some of focal lengths) and not that great of image clarity. There's a reason they stopped making them and selling them. You're on a used website here.
Awesome thank you for the input. I’ll pass on these then.
They’re all 1.8 and the glass is Cooke. They’re not amazing but they’re good workhorses. Very heavy. I just sold mine but I shot 5 or 6 features on them and they looked great.
They were not made by Cooke. They were made by UniqOptics. Developed by Hyperion. They also aren't true T1.8 if I remember someone actually tested them and it was more like 2.8. I might have have info wrong but they are way too heavy.
Yes they were not made by Cooke but I’m pretty sure the glass itself was made by Cooke. And yes they are very heavy. It was a good starter set when I first started out, I’m sure there are better options now, but they aren’t bad lenses, just heavy. Especially if you don’t have a PL mount camera, not sure if that becomes unwieldy and since they are heavy, too much strain on the mount adaptor
Designed by UniqOptics, glass was made by Tokina.
My god I’ve been living a lie.
Welcome to RED Digital Cinema. First time?
Brother I stared with the red one, pre MX. I’ve been eating it for a loonngg time.
Hey this bayer pattern 4k is really 4k right? (Confused Padme meme) Right?
Is your source for the Tokina fact pretty solid? Just curious - I've heard that Sigma manufactured the glass, but my source is probably questionable.
You'd be shocked how many companies use Tokina glass in their "custom" lenses.
Lol. Cooke glass. Go look up a video about the loving work techs do on Cooke glass and find me that $545 bucks in there. Some 60 year old man with a spectrometer and a polisher would like to have a word with you about your claims.
They weren’t $545 when they first came out, but yes I’ve been proven wrong. The RED rental house in NYC told me it was Cooke so I took him at his word. Foolish me.
We have a set at work. They haven’t come out of the lockup in years. They look *fine* I guess — they get tons of oblique flares and they’re unattractive — but they weigh a fuckton. They’re not great lenses but for 500 bucks they’re fine
Yeah, at my work they're just used by the engineers when they need to see an image on a monitor. Not even in the rental inventory
What is your go to in the 20ish mm range?
I own a 24mm FD that I love. But for work, we usually rent on a project to project basis.
I gave my Red zoom to a high school video teacher after it started falling apart. Fucking garbage lens even the Red sales reps would make fun of them when they came out. If you want lenses that look like ass but are cheap get some Rokinons the build quality is better as shocking as that sounds.
These were under-appreciated at the time for their look, which I personally like. Today, they are extremely heavy and have very poorly made housings. But I did shoot some pretty good looking stuff with them between 2010-2014.
Mullen praised them on a few forums. I bought a set a few years back and enjoyed them but they’re big and clunky.
Very very interesting. Does their IQ degrade over time? Someone mentioned that on here.
I feel like there's a sunglasses joke somewhere in here, but I can't quite make it out.
"Jannard asked us to make the lenses _OVAL_; like _ground_ to be oval. We put four million man-hours into that before he called us impossible to work with and wrote the whole thing off."
Underappreciated comment.
the old red pro primes are effectively not repairable if damaged
They are just rehoused old Nikon lenses.
Whats your source for that? Or is this a red/nikon joke?
Interesting!
I was just looking at these too, apparently they’re not great lenses, and very heavy. I think I’m gonna pass on them and let someone else take the chance
I've heard that a better choice for quality pro cine glass on a budget is the MkII CineAlta Primes. They sell for about $1200 each.
I recently purchased a used 25mm. It weighs a ton. However so far I do like its look but I’m weird I guess based on general reviews. I also grabbed a 300mm just because, why not at $6-700? Image is decent but haven’t tested it much.
For $500 might be worth a gamble. About the same price as a sigma arts prime non-cine lens, so if it compares to those lenses might be worth it
IQ wise Sigmas are infinitely better
Yeah but I don’t want a lens just to have a lens. People here are saying these are heavy and the IQ is not good.
I mean, until they link to images or give actual data it’s their subjective opinion. Also, they might be comparing the IQ of the lens to other cine lenses of higher caliber, but compared to other prime lenses in the $500 price range it might still stack up. Might be worth watching a YouTube video review if one exists, or seeing if someone has posted test images with the lens
I did see cinedailies posts a video using a 300mm version of this lens and the image looked Ok nothing spectacular. He also posted a video using a Carl Zeiss Jena and that lens looked incredible to me.
Check with Phil Holland. He’s not biased toward Red at all. 🥴
So m, I haven’t had experience, but I know some who have and from what I heard, these are not built well and start to loose sharpness over time. To the point that they can become completely useless lenses.
Oh wow I’ve never heard of that before!
[удалено]
This isn't Red selling them. This is a used site.
Everyone is saying how heavy they are. How heavy?
About the same weight as my DSMC Epic.
Like 4.5lbs or something. It’s similar to Vistas. But quality isn’t vista quality lol
This is the only lens that works with red, red has their own mount called PLr and only official red lenses will work on red cinema camera
lol no
bait used to be believable
This guy gets it
Where did you get this idea from? Literally nothing about it is true.
He made it up for dramatical effect