Jump to content


Photo

16mm with 35mm RED Primes.


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 ryan knight

ryan knight
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 115 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 03 March 2011 - 05:30 PM

Anybody shot with that combo?

I have access to a RED with all PL and Arri accessories, with the RED Pro Primes, and I may be setting up a 16mm body with them.

Anybody done something similar?
  • 0

#2 Rob Vogt

Rob Vogt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 437 posts
  • Other
  • New York

Posted 03 March 2011 - 08:12 PM

You can do it if you want but you wont have any wide angle lenses. 9.5 and 12mm are common wide lenses for 16mm and if the widest you can get is 18 or 25mm then you're going to find yourself at a shortage of options.
  • 0

#3 ryan knight

ryan knight
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 115 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 03 March 2011 - 11:08 PM

You can do it if you want but you wont have any wide angle lenses. 9.5 and 12mm are common wide lenses for 16mm and if the widest you can get is 18 or 25mm then you're going to find yourself at a shortage of options.


I'm not worried about that actually. I more interested in how they might perform; if they'll be as sharp or sharper then the 80's 16mm Zeiss lenses I'd likely be able to afford.
  • 0

#4 Chris Burke

Chris Burke
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1675 posts
  • Boston, MA

Posted 08 March 2011 - 01:19 PM

they should work fine. I often wonder how zeiss digiprimes would look with super 16, anyone ever try that combo?
  • 0

#5 ryan knight

ryan knight
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 115 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 12 March 2011 - 12:46 AM

I doubt it'd be a popular combo. That digi glass is so expensive!

Probably pretty sharp though.
  • 0

#6 ck filmworks

ck filmworks
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Director

Posted 21 April 2011 - 03:26 AM

Anybody shot with that combo?

I have access to a RED with all PL and Arri accessories, with the RED Pro Primes, and I may be setting up a 16mm body with them.

Anybody done something similar?


The lenses will obviously will make the 16mm look better, but what's wrong with Zeiss? Do the lenses even fit? PL is half your problem. You still have to check the distance from the lens to the film plane. When all is said and done, why not just use Zeiss MKs?

You digi guys are crazy over toys to play with, I swear.
  • 0

#7 Markus Rave

Markus Rave
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 103 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Frankfurt, Germany

Posted 21 April 2011 - 03:48 AM

The lenses will obviously will make the 16mm look better, but what's wrong with Zeiss? Do the lenses even fit? PL is half your problem. You still have to check the distance from the lens to the film plane. When all is said and done, why not just use Zeiss MKs?

You digi guys are crazy over toys to play with, I swear.


What´s the issue with the distance to the film plane? I thought PL is 54mm diameter and ffd is 52mm except for the highspeed ARRIs.
  • 0

#8 Dom Jaeger

Dom Jaeger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1604 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 21 April 2011 - 07:59 AM

Any PL mount lens will have its back focus set to 52.00 mm.

The ffd (flange focal depth or distance) refers to the distance from lens mount to film plane on a camera. This is usually set fractionally under 52.00 mm on most film cameras that I'm familiar with, except high speed SRs, which have a different pressure plate, and are set at exactly 52.00 mm. PL mounted digital cameras like REDs or Alexa also have their sensors set at 52.00 mm behind the mount.

So any PL mount lens designed for digital use should work fine on a PL mount film camera. The one thing to watch out for is how far the rear element protrudes. As far as I know, RED primes are OK (I haven't tested them), but Angenieux's digital Optimo zooms for example protrude far enough back to foul on the mirror/shutter of a film camera.

Apart from the lack of wide angle options as Rob mentioned, the other issue with using 35mm lenses on 16mm cameras is the possibility of stray light from the oversized image circle bouncing around the mirror cavity and hitting the film.

As far as image quality goes, I know a very successful wildlife documentary cinematographer who only ever rents the old 16mm Standard Speed Zeiss lenses for his work. According to him nothing beats them. Matter of taste, I guess. If your only criterion is perceived sharpness, more modern lenses will probably suit you better.
  • 0

#9 Austin Michaels

Austin Michaels
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 53 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Arizona

Posted 23 May 2011 - 02:06 AM

Here was a test shoot I did with Red Primes on a Arriflex SR3

password is DNA

It was purely a rough cut i did and I finally found a editor to put a trailer together for it after 4 months. Also this is a HD transfer I spent a total of $1400 on everything, never produce and DP at the same time!

The Jib shot was with a 16mm zoom but everything else was a prime. And a 25mm is a 50mm and a 50mm is a 100mm. And with the Red Primes the widest they have is a 18mm which gives you 26mm as your widest. It was a pain in the ass with the eye piece because the RED prime is a bit large for the camera.
  • 0


Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Opal

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Opal

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

Metropolis Post

CineLab

Visual Products

Tai Audio

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

Technodolly

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Willys Widgets

Glidecam