Mini Epic 4/3rds standard D-cine system

[David Rasberry]

I would like to get some feedback from the pros here on the idea for an entry level D-cine camera system based on the open 4/3 or recently announced micro 4/3 standard developed by Panasonic/Leica and Olympus.

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/about/benefit.html

I see this as slotting somewhere between Scarlet and One in price

The case for the format:

1. Sensor size 18 x 13.5mm 4:3 ratio , 18 x 10.1mm 16:9 ratio. Similar DOF flexibility to S35 in a smaller less expensive form factor.
2. Bayonet lens mount standard with full capability for electronic lens controls
3. Optical design optimized specifically for digital sensors
4. Instant access to a full range of aftermarket prime lenses from Leica, Sigma and Olympus. Primo optical quality at significantly lower cost size and weight than 35mm lenses. Example: 25mm F1.4 Leica Summilux for $800.
True cine grade zoom lenses would need to be developed, but these too should be significantly smaller lighter and less expensive than 35mm cine lenses. No 35 adaptors or lenses needed, but could be accommodated.

This seems like a no brainer to me. It could be possible to assemble a full package with a decent fast zoom, selection of primes, Panasonic G1 style LCOS EVF, already existing LCD displays, and a basic selection of accessories for little more than the price of a ONE body. All optimized for the format.

Take a run thru the site link above, check out the available lenses and the gallery. Tell me what you think. Pros and cons. But keep an open mind to the possibilities.

[Emanuel A.]

This would be interesting indeed. Not forgetting the DSLR (full_frame@Canon) competition though.

[David Rasberry]

I don't consider any DSLR format camera, motion or not, to be direct competition for a true cine camera design.
Wrong form factor. No pro audio support. D5 does make nice pictures though, but not a serious film/video production camera. I do like Canon digital cameras. Might buy a D5 and a Scarlet, but the Scarlet would get used a lot more for cine shooting. I am talking about 4/3rds as a potential standard for true D-cine production cameras.

[Alex Carr]

And people said I was crazy,

"To capture images, D-SLR cameras incorporate a device called an image sensor (CCD, MOS, etc.) that captures light in the form of electrical signals. However, since the image sensor’s characteristics differ from those of film, a lens optimized for film photography may perform poorly with an image sensor."

This is one of the reasons behind Digi-Primes.

[Emanuel A.]

The competition is out there now more than ever, aside other details. Not for everyone but for many. RED ONE has had its business secret into the hands of many. If not, it wouldn't cost not even twice the price. Same for Scarlet. But if we're speaking about something below the curtain, why to change the Scarlet specs? And so much buzz around a camera which doesn't exist yet?

[Emanuel & Co]

... why to change the Scarlet specs? And so much buzz around a camera which doesn't exist yet?Still further, to announce the change ...

PS. There are other people thinking the same everywhere.

Or still being pessimistic, as for ex.:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?p=1411529#post1411529

[Emanuel A.]

On the spot. :-)

[David Mullen ASC]

I
The case for the format:

1. Sensor size 18 x 13.5mm 4:3 ratio , 18 x 10.1mm 16:9 ratio. Similar DOF flexibility to S35 in a smaller less expensive form factor.

The 4x3 4-perf Super-35 camera aperture is 24.84mm x 18.67mm, so a sensor that is 18mm x 13.5mm would not give you the same depth of field, though similar enough for some people... I guess the smaller sensor would be like closing down by 1.4 stops in terms of extra depth of field.

I'm not sure why an 18mm wide sensor would help much to reduce costs -- you'd still need to use 35mm optics.

[David Rasberry]

The 4x3 4-perf Super-35 camera aperture is 24.84mm x 18.67mm, so a sensor that is 18mm x 13.5mm would not give you the same depth of field, though similar enough for some people... I guess the smaller sensor would be like closing down by 1.4 stops in terms of extra depth of field.

I'm not sure why an 18mm wide sensor would help much to reduce costs -- you'd still need to use 35mm optics.

The point is that there is a wide selection of specifically designed digital sensor optimized premium quality optics available for this format already at a fraction of the cost of premium 35mm lenses. Everything from 7mm fisheye to 800mm super tele, including some nice zooms with OIS. It only needs a couple of cine specific zooms created to make a fine acquisition system with 4 times the image area of a 2/3" video format camera.

[David Rasberry]

The competition is out there now more than ever, aside other details. Not for everyone but for many. RED ONE has had its business secret into the hands of many. If not, it wouldn't cost not even twice the price. Same for Scarlet. But if we're speaking about something below the curtain, why to change the Scarlet specs? And so much buzz around a camera which doesn't exist yet?

This is not Scarlet. This deserves consideration as a discrete acquisition model on its own merits. That's why I named the thread mini EPIC. I expect that Panasonic may pursue this as an alternative to RED.

[David Mullen ASC]

The point is that there is a wide selection of specifically designed digital sensor optimized premium quality optics available for this format already at a fraction of the cost of premium 35mm lenses. Everything from 7mm fisheye to 800mm super tele, including some nice zooms with OIS. It only needs a couple of cine specific zooms created to make a fine acquisition system with 4 times the image area of a 2/3" video format camera.

You're saying that there are a bunch of cheap optics already on the market that work on an 18mm wide sensor but don't work (vignette) on a 24mm wide sensor, at high enough quality for 4K cinema work? What are they? I'm looking at the specs for some low-end Nikon and Canon DSLR's and most of those sensors are in the 23mm to 24mm wide range, so what line-up of still cameras use 18mm-wide sensors and whose lenses don't work on a standard 24mm-wide DSLR sensor?

Optics for 24mm-wide sensors and film formats are pretty commonplace in the market already, and there are optics for 2/3" video and 16mm cameras, so why invent some new inbetween size for cinema work? And why would that make the camera significantly cheaper than a standard format size? Generally standardization drives down costs -- we don't need a new size format for cinema work, we need more optics for the existing size formats. Who wants to start owning lenses that only work on an 18mm-wide sensor but don't work on a standard 24mm-wide sensor? With standard lenses that cover the common S35 / DSLR / RED ONE area, you have more options in terms of putting them on different cameras when needed.

[Matt Uhry]

You're saying that there are a bunch of cheap optics already on the market that work on an 18mm wide sensor but don't work (vignette) on a 24mm wide sensor, at high enough quality for 4K cinema work? What are they? I'm looking at the specs for some low-end Nikon and Canon DSLR's and most of those sensors are in the 23mm to 24mm wide range, so what line-up of still cameras use 18mm-wide sensors and whose lenses don't work on a standard 24mm-wide DSLR sensor?

Optics for 24mm-wide sensors and film formats are pretty commonplace in the market already, and there are optics for 2/3" video and 16mm cameras, so why invent some new inbetween size for cinema work? And why would that make the camera significantly cheaper than a standard format size? Generally standardization drives down costs -- we don't need a new size format for cinema work, we need more optics for the existing size formats. Who wants to start owning lenses that only work on an 18mm-wide sensor but don't work on a standard 24mm-wide sensor? With standard lenses that cover the common S35 / DSLR / RED ONE area, you have more options in terms of putting them on different cameras when needed.

He's talking about the 4/3 format - It's a consumer photo format with a 18-13.5mm sensor size, positioned presumably below APS-C DSLR's and above fixed lens 2/3 inch snappy cams. There's some interesting lens work going on like the Olympus 14-30 F2.0 and 25mm Leica Summilux 1.4 The lenses are compatible sans adaptors across manufactures, all fly by wire in terms of focus and iris. Lots of choices actually.

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/products/lense.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Thirds_System

I wish that this is what they did for the Scarlet, instead of the fixed lens.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[David Rasberry]

He's talking about the 4/3 format - It's a consumer photo format with a 18-13.5mm sensor size, positioned presumably below APS-C DSLR's and above fixed lens 2/3 inch snappy cams. There's some interesting lens work going on like the Olympus 14-30 F2.0 and 25mm Leica Summilux 1.4 The lenses are compatible sans adaptors across manufactures, all fly by wire in terms of focus and iris. Lots of choices actually.

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/products/lense.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Thirds_System

I wish that this is what they did for the Scarlet, instead of the fixed lens.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

Thanks Matt

Panasonic, Olympus, and Leica are making still cams already for this format. I see Panasonic potentially coming out of left field with a D-cine camera form factor in 4/3 standard to compete with RED. Lot shorter hop than revamping their video line. Could be a real sweet spot for 1080p acquisition at 3960x2225 9 megapixel 16:9 res.

[David Rasberry]

A little more fuel for the fire.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCG1/DMCG1A.HTM

One feature: auto focus with subject tracking. Your own digital focus puller built in.

[Emanuel A.]

This is not Scarlet. This deserves consideration as a discrete acquisition model on its own merits. That's why I named the thread mini EPIC. I expect that Panasonic may pursue this as an alternative to RED.I understand your point but in matter of predicting, I prefer to deal about realistic scenarios. Scarlet "could be" your "camera". Otherwise, I don't see room for any other else. I doubt Panasonic may have some interest to go there. As far as I know, they are not so much interested about digital cinema for now.

[David Mullen ASC]

Thanks Matt for the links, I hadn't heard of that format.

I agree that it may be an interesting choice for a Scarlet-type camera.

I find, though, most still camera lenses problematic for cinema use in traditional follow-focus situations involving actors.

[David Rasberry]

I see this as a great potential format for compact field cameras for documentary work. Cine specific lenses would need to be developed for it for better narrative film ergonomics. Panasonic as already announced an HD series of lenses to be released next year for a combo/still HD video camera also to be announced sometime next year. NAB should be very interesting. The new micro 4/3 standard added two more pins to the lens mount for cine specific lens functions. A 3840 x 2890 4/3 sensor would provide 4x 1080 res in 16:9 crop.
The main advantage besides sensor size is it is an open digital specific optical standard that has been endorsed by 6 manufacturers so far.