The FF35 system [Archive]

Jeff Kilgroe

01-20-2009, 10:09 AM

I feel like we're beating a dead horse with this one... But the FF35 format has many benefits for those who would still choose S35mm optics. First of all, the FF35 model can be equipped with a PL mount. Most PL mount lenses will not cover the FF35 area, but there are distinct advantages for shooting with anamorphic lenses or other effects lenses that may be of interest. The FF35 platform gains the benefits of the Monstro sensor, higher bit depth, increased dynamic range, presumably faster response and reset times. It however offers lower resolution than the s35mm EPIC. As monstro has a lower photosite density than Mysterium X.

Tom Lowe

01-20-2009, 10:25 AM

Do we know what the resolution of the FF35 Epic will shoot while windowed to S35? Something like 4.7K? I guess it will depend on the image circle of the various PL-mount lenses. Has anyone done a little chart mapping out what we think FF35 Epic will provide, in terms of resolution, while mounted with various existing cine 35 lenses?

That might be a really helpful chart. I would do it myself, but I don't the knowledge for that.

Another thing to keep in mind is this: Even if Epic S35 offers 5K, and windowed FF35 offers only 4.5K at the same pixel dimension, will the increased quality of the Monstro image make the whole issue a non issue? In other words, by the time you finish at 4K, the FF35 image could, in theory, look better, in terms of color and dynamic range, for example, than the S35 acquired at 5K. You might be willing to take the .5K hit in resolution, in trade for image quality gains in other areas offered by Monstro, like lower inherent noise. Higher ISO, for example, might be a benefit of Monstro. I would not be surprised if that was the case.

Jeff Kilgroe

01-20-2009, 11:14 AM

Mysterium X has photsites that are 5µm across, the Monstro is said to be 6µm. If Mysterium X is 5K (5120) across at S35, then that would mean Monstro is about 4266 photosites wide at S35 or about 4.2K. As much as I like all the resolution, I'd be willing to trade 5K for 4.2K @ S35 if I could have increased DR.

As it is now, the RED One is actually a 4.5K sensor at s35. But we can only shoot 4K right now, at a crop from the full s35 area. We should have an almost 4.5K 2:1 mode available soon -- something like 4480x2240.

Tom Lowe

01-20-2009, 12:38 PM

I wonder, though, with Master Primes for example (depending on the focal length) if you could shoot FF35 and simply crop away the dead area from the 6K RAW. That might result in something closer to 4.5K or 4.8K or whatever. I don't know the numbers on that, though.

Of course, if you are finishing at 2K, this is all useless talk, because 4.2K on FF35 windowed to S35 is waaaay more than enough res, obviously. This issue we are discussing now, 4.2K vs 4.8K vs 5K Mysterium X, etc, only concerns those to intend to finish at "True 4K," meaning they want their picture to hold up at 4K, pixel for pixel. Of course, True 4K is an important concern, and will become more and more important in time.

To me, no matter from which angle I think about or ponder FF35, the one question that keeps popping up in the end is: When will high-end FF35 cine glass become available? That's the real question, IMO.

Stephen Williams

01-20-2009, 01:24 PM

When will high-end FF35 cine glass become available? That's the real question, IMO.

Hi Tom,

When there is a market, very people ever bought the Van Diemen Leica conversions.

Stephen

Stephen Pruitt

01-20-2009, 03:26 PM

I don't expect there to be much of a market for FF35 cine lenses. I'll be very, very surprised if the FF35 market really developes as some folks anticipate. It certainly won't develop in the life span of the Epic FF35. Film will still be a significant force during tht time.

I'm still holding out for a S35 Monstro. I'm with the Jeff on the dynamic range. That's a no-brainer. We need that range. But I really hate to see us have to give up the ability to shoot a "true 4K," hence the market's real desire is S35 Monstro. There may be a technical reason why that combination is not possible, however. I just hope not.

I just don't want any narrower DoF than S35. But I do want my 13 stops. And my 16-bits.

:-)

Stephen

Tom Lowe

01-20-2009, 03:30 PM

Jeff Kilgroe

01-20-2009, 07:48 PM

II'm still holding out for a S35 Monstro.

I think you could be holding out for a while... maybe forever. It's been covered a few times. No cost savings or production advantages to be gained by placing an S35 sized Monstro in the EPIC. You want Monstro, you buy the FF35 model for $5K more (yep, that's it) and you gain all the added benefits -- potential to make use of the larger frame size with anamorphics, better DR, higher frame rates, etc..

Tom also brings up a good point about shooting with your lens of choice and then cropping away the uncovered area. EPIC apparently allows us the ability for custom frame sizes. Wouldn't it be cool if we could test shoot an entire set of primes and create a frame size preset to fit them that you could load onto any RED camera? Let's say that on average and hypothetically speaking, that the Master Primes cover an area 10% larger than S35. You could load a preset or configure a frame size to give you an image recorded from that 10% larger area when you're on an FF35 or larger RED camera.

roryhinds

01-20-2009, 08:29 PM

I think what people are asking for is a S35 Monstro 5k sensor.

Having the DR of Monstro and a S35 5k image that gives great 4k is what I want for sure.

Getting S35 at 5k is a big deal as it would give you far better 4k results.

Super35mm is King and will be for a very very long time.

Tom Lowe

01-20-2009, 08:37 PM

Tom also brings up a good point about shooting with your lens of choice and then cropping away the uncovered area. EPIC apparently allows us the ability for custom frame sizes. Wouldn't it be cool if we could test shoot an entire set of primes and create a frame size preset to fit them that you could load onto any RED camera? Let's say that on average and hypothetically speaking, that the Master Primes cover an area 10% larger than S35. You could load a preset or configure a frame size to give you an image recorded from that 10% larger area when you're on an FF35 or larger RED camera.

Wow, this is the first I have heard of this. If it does happen, that would absolutely awesome.

Rory, S35 might be the current "king" but Vista Vision was the former King, and he might be ready to take back his crown sooner than you think. :biggrin:

Jeff Kilgroe

01-20-2009, 09:55 PM

I think what people are asking for is a S35 Monstro 5k sensor.

That may be, but the upcoming Monstro specs don't allow for that. Or at least not based on the specs that have been disclosed thus far. (all things subject to change....) In order for Monstro to deliver 5K at S35, the photosites would have to shrink in size to 5µm. That is a 26.6% reduction in size. Which in turn means smaller surface area and less sensitivity or light capturing ability. To be perfectly blunt about this, how do we know that Monstro isn't in fact using the same photosite technology that is in the Mysterium X, but with with an enlarged photosite size? How much sensitivity is gained by enlarging the photosite receptors by 26%?

Having the DR of Monstro and a S35 5k image that gives great 4k is what I want for sure.

That would be great. But something tells me, that isn't going to happen with the first generation of the Monstro sensors.

Super35mm is King and will be for a very very long time.

I don't know about that. I'm inclined to disagree. Look at the IMAX shots in The Dark Knight. OMG... As digital sensors progress and capable workflow tools continue to approach the price of common dirt, the only thing to stop people from shooting larger formats is the cost and availability of optics. With the low cost of RED's upcoming cameras, it puts serious cinema capabilities in the hands of a lot of people -- even more so than the RED One and there's going to be a lot of indies and pros alike, who choose that FF35 scarlet to fit their FF35 still lenses.

Larger formats like FF35 and 645 (damn close to IMAX size) are going to be as economical to post as shooting RED ONE 4K now, or even cheaper by the time they arrive. S35 will remain king as long as film remains king. Then I'm betting it will be put on life support. Film's days are numbered and so are a lot of the established standards relating to it. The transition is imminent, resistance is futile. I have no intention of restricting my abilities to S35 if there are other options for just a little more money or in some cases less... FF35 with RED's FF electronic lenses? Who knows, could be the next big thing.

Oh, but wait... Larger formats like the 645 mean larger apertures to cover the frame with the proper amount of light; which translates into tighter and harder to control DOF. I expect to see all sorts of tools to come along that will simplify this -- better focus and measuring tools. Digital sensors that will eventually surpass any film stock for sensitivity and range, allowing for smaller apertures to be used for larger formats.

Tom Lowe

01-20-2009, 10:49 PM

Along the lines of Jeff's thoughts, the limitations that chemical film placed on shooting and projecting do not apply in the same way to digital. You don't have to drag a double- or triple-sized physical strip of film lengthwise through a camera at high speed, nor do you have to worry about a total lack of venues for 70mm projection. It's all digital.

The logical progression of movie projection is digital 4K. And it will not be too long before Quad HD or 4K displays begin to invade the living rooms of home theater buffs and the bedrooms of PC gamers.

Yes, ISO/ASA ratings need to come up a tad to allow for clean DOF control, but that is a given. The new DSLRs like the D3x and 5D2 have seen absolutely massive jumps in light sensitivity, so there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that DPs will be able to stop down enough to control DOF to their liking and their focus-puller's ability.

The last hurdle, of course, is glass. Glass will control how fast the move to FF35 takes place.

I remember making these exact same points over at cinematography.com over a year ago regarding digital 65mm, Vista Vision or IMAX, and those guys tried to laugh me out of town. Hahaha. They aren't laughing any more thanks to Jim! :wink:

Stephen Williams

01-21-2009, 12:24 AM

Rory, S35 might be the current "king" but Vista Vision was the former King, and he might be ready to take back his crown sooner than you think. :biggrin:

Hi Tom,

Vista Vision was never King, just a failed format that got picked up by a famous VFX house as all the kit was available for almost nothing.

Stephen

Stephen Williams

01-21-2009, 12:30 AM

Yes, ISO/ASA ratings need to come up a tad to allow for clean DOF control, but that is a given. The new DSLRs like the D3x and 5D2 have seen absolutely massive jumps in light sensitivity, so there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that DPs will be able to stop down enough to control DOF to their liking and their focus-puller's ability.
:

Hi,

Testing a monstro sensor around 1500 iso will give us an answer to your question, it needs to have less noise than a R1 today at 320 iso, then just find some wide lenses T2 or beter that cover the sensor.

Stephen

Tom Lowe

01-21-2009, 06:47 AM

Hi Tom,

Vista Vision was never King, just a failed format that got picked up by a famous VFX house as all the kit was available for almost nothing.

Stephen

Failed? Have you watched The Searchers or Vertigo lately?

Vista Vision might have failed in terms of projection (for the same reason 65mmm failed), but in terms of acquisition, it is still legendary. Again, the factors that held back chemical film Vista Vision do not apply in the same way to digital.

Also, where do you get this ISO 320 to ISO 1500 number? The amount of sensitivity gain need to control DOF on FF35 vs S35 is less than 2 stops, IIRC.

Stephen Williams

01-21-2009, 10:40 AM

Also, where do you get this ISO 320 to ISO 1500 number? The amount of sensitivity gain need to control DOF on FF35 vs S35 is less than 2 stops, IIRC.

Hi,

I was thinking nearly 2.5 stops, really you need to get nearer to 16,000 iso to match the DOF of 500 iso 35mm film, I am very sure Red has 2,5 stops less DOF than 35mm film.

Looking at the Canon 5D, it's clearly possible.

Stephen

Daniel S Williams

01-21-2009, 11:26 AM

and you guys are forgetting...after debayering none of this is true 4k or 5k or anything anymore

Stephen Williams

01-21-2009, 12:22 PM

and you guys are forgetting...after debayering none of this is true 4k or 5k or anything anymore

Look at pictures, resoloution no's are unimportant IMHO.

Joe Walker

01-21-2009, 05:16 PM

I remember making these exact same points over at cinematography.com over a year ago regarding digital 65mm, Vista Vision or IMAX, and those guys tried to laugh me out of town. Hahaha. They aren't laughing any more thanks to Jim! :wink:

Uuuhhhhhhh.......

Daniel Browning

01-22-2009, 09:16 AM

Yes, ISO/ASA ratings need to come up a tad to allow for clean DOF control, but that is a given. The new DSLRs like the D3x and 5D2 have seen absolutely massive jumps in light sensitivity,

There have been big reductions in read noise, but sensitivity improvements have been very modest. The D3X and D3 sensitivity is only 15% greater per area than the Canon 1D3, 1Ds3, and 50D. In fact, compared to the old Canon 10D, the D3/D3X is only 1 and 1/3 stop more sensitive.

The reason improvements have been so modest is that we're already near the theoretical limit of physics. Sensors like the D3 are seeing very close to all of the light falling on them (not counting the color filter). There is no way to see more than 100% of the light; you can't see something that isn't there, so sensor designers have little to improve in that regard.

Almost every camera built in the last 4 years is within 1/3 stop of eachother when it comes to sensitivity. What sets them apart in low light is read noise.

Unlike sensitivity, read noise has improved very rapidly. The D3, 5D2, and most other cameras have made improvements of as much as one stop or more compared to previous cameras. The D3X and D90 have made a huge improvement in low ISO read noise, but their high ISO read noise is not as good as the D3 or 5D2.

Low light photography will be improved by reduction in read noise.

so there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that DPs will be able to stop down enough to control DOF to their liking and their focus-puller's ability.

No need to wait for the future. That has been true for the last five years. Cameras on the market now already prove the fact.

The last hurdle, of course, is glass. Glass will control how fast the move to FF35 takes place.

Agreed.

Looking at the Canon 5D, it's clearly possible.

You don't need to wait for any future possible improvements; it has been a fact in still photography already for at least the last five years. I went ahead and started a new thread about it:

Myth busted: larger sensors have thinner DOF.

Tom Lowe

01-22-2009, 03:50 PM

Look at pictures, resoloution no's are unimportant IMHO.

Well, if your goal is a True 4K finish, then resolution obviously plays a major role. You sure as hell are not going to get a true 4K finish shooting on an F900 or Viper. To get True 4K from a Bayer-pattern camera, you really need a 5K sensor. On the other hand, as you say, you need to look at the image. If a 4.3K Monstro camera can produce a better image with better DR and color and less noise than a 5K Mysterium X can, then resolution becomes a less-important factor in this S35 vs FF35 Epic/Scarlet debate.

Stephen Williams

01-23-2009, 02:33 PM

Well, if your goal is a True 4K finish, then resolution obviously plays a major role. You sure as hell are not going to get a true 4K finish shooting on an F900 or Viper. To get True 4K from a Bayer-pattern camera, you really need a 5K sensor. On the other hand, as you say, you need to look at the image. If a 4.3K Monstro camera can produce a better image with better DR and color and less noise than a 5K Mysterium X can, then resolution becomes a less-important factor in this S35 vs FF35 Epic/Scarlet debate.

Hi Tom,

My goal is beautiful pictures, Benjamin Button shows the Viper is a totally capable camera that has been around for 5 years. 27,6000,000 pixels at the capture head has a lot to do with it, even if only 1920 x 1080 are recorded.

Stephen

Tom Lowe

01-23-2009, 03:19 PM

Hi Tom,

My goal is beautiful pictures, Benjamin Button shows the Viper is a totally capable camera that has been around for 5 years. 27,6000,000 pixels at the capture head has a lot to do with it, even if only 1920 x 1080 are recorded.

Stephen

I didn't say anything about the Viper being anything other than a great tool for filmmaking. I have been very impressed with basically all the big features shot on it, including Button, Zodiac, etc. I simply stated that Viper cannot be used to acquire True 4K, any more than an DVX100 can be used to acquire True 1080p. Red One cannot even acquire True 4K.

Tonaci Tran

01-23-2009, 07:48 PM

Häakon

01-23-2009, 09:49 PM

You want Monstro, you buy the FF35 model for $5K more (yep, that's it) and you gain all the added benefits.
The base price of the FF35 camera is only $5K more, true - but as a great deal of us are RED ONE owners already, it means we get a free CF module, battery module, I/O module, and controller unit with the Epic X. I don't know how much all of that is going to cost, but likely another few thousand dollars. Slap some tax on top of that, etc... you're easily in the near $40K range for a comparably packaged monstro camera. That may or may not be a concern to you, but it should be pointed out.

Also, there's also the fact that Monstro debuts later than the Mysterium-X, and with their "Winter 2009" estimate, it's my guess that you're looking at least a year from now (or more) down the road before the FF35 debuts. If the Epic-X comes out in the summer, that could make another big difference in someone's plans. Of course we all want the best camera possible, but we also want to be shooting now and not waiting around for "the next best thing" to come down the line. Also remember that you can only use your RED ONE trade-in once, so if you choose to get an Epic-X it may be a lot more difficult to come up with $40,000 for the Monstro when that time comes. My guess is the market for a used Epic-X will be eroded when "the next best thing" is available.

Just food for thought. :-)

Häakon

01-23-2009, 10:04 PM

and you guys are forgetting...after debayering none of this is true 4k or 5k or anything anymore
Completely agree. Resolution numbers may not be important to some people anymore, but it still is to me. For instance, the 2K mode on the RED ONE is completely unusable for cutting in with 4K work in a 1080 timeline in my opinion. The difference is very drastic and noticeable.

To me, cropping the FF35 sensor to get a s35 image is a total waste of the chip - but judging by people's comments, my guess is that's how the majority of shooters are going to be using this camera. I'm still boggled as to why they don't just create a slice of the Monstro sensor in a s35 size. Yes, the Mysterium-X variant would indeed have a modest resolution advantage in comparison to a s35 Monstro, but I think most people would trade that for better dynamic range. As Jeff has pointed out, it would leave such a camera at around 4.2K - and while I'm in the minority camp who don't feel that this is "enough" resolution moving forward, I feel that it's probably the best compromise/solution of the offerings that are being made available right now. And sure, one can get effectively get that result by slapping a PL mount on the FF35 camera, but as my previous post pointed out, you're probably going to have to spend an extra $10K and wait around a good deal of time for it - and then you're still wasting half the sensor. Does no one else think this is rather silly?

Jeff Kilgroe

01-23-2009, 10:25 PM

The base price of the FF35 camera is only $5K more, true - but as a great deal of us are RED ONE owners already, it means we get a free CF module, battery module, I/O module, and controller unit with the Epic X. I don't know how much all of that is going to cost, but likely another few thousand dollars. Slap some tax on top of that, etc... you're easily in the near $40K range for a comparably packaged monstro camera. That may or may not be a concern to you, but it should be pointed out.

Good points... It's true we don't know how much the modules will cost. And the EPIC-X including CF, battery mod, I/O, etc.. plus some extra features at no additional cost, is a pretty sweet deal. I guess I was just looking at it from the perspective of outright purchase cost. I'm not sure just how, when and where I'll use my RED One trade-in just yet. My gut feeling is it will probably go toward EPIC-X, because like you say, I'm expecting the Monstro models to arrive at some much later point down the road.

As for FF35 vs. S35... I see your point in that many users will end up using mostly S35 glass and will never utilize the full sensor. But then again, there are advantages even with PL mount such as increased sensor area for shooting anamorphics. I think what we're seeing here and with what has been said by Jim / RED is that while S35 monstro may be desirable, it just doesn't seem to have any practical advantages on their end. In other words, they're going to sell you the FF35 version as a bit of over-kill because if they produced an S35 model, that is one more brain model to support and production costs would be the same as the FF35 version anyway.

All I do know is that there are a lot of people wanting Monstro in the S35 size. I think if there's a way to make it happen, RED will do this. They listen to their customers. But I'm still betting it won't happen, personally I don't see a need for it to happen. When there's only a $5K difference between S35 Mysterium-X EPIC and FF35 Monstro EPIC, you have to wonder just where the bulk of that $5K cost difference really is. What is involved in producing an in-between model other than a different sensor size. What do most people wanting the S35 Monstro hope to achieve by getting RED to offer such a thing? Are they hoping to save some imaginary and arbitrary amount like $2K or are they doing it just because they feel it's "silly" to buy a camera with a bigger sensor than their glass will cover? Or is there something else that escapes me entirely? I've heard and read all kinds of misinformation and FUD about it, like "there's a loss of quality when you crop" and other BS like that. Are myths like that really widespread? ...I guess I'm just trying to understand what drives the thirst for an S35 Monstro EPIC over the FF35 model. Right now, I think 99% of all people requesting it are doing so thinking it should save them a bit of $$$, based on the smaller sensor == smaller price logic.

Häakon

01-23-2009, 10:49 PM

As for FF35 vs. S35... I see your point in that many users will end up using mostly S35 glass and will never utilize the full sensor. But then again, there are advantages even with PL mount such as increased sensor area for shooting anamorphics.
No question about that, and I've stated many times that if your desire is to shoot anamorphically, the FF35 is the obvious choice. I'm approaching this strictly from a spherical-shooting perspective.

In other words, they're going to sell you the FF35 version as a bit of over-kill because if they produced an S35 model, that is one more brain model to support and production costs would be the same as the FF35 version anyway.
Well that shouldn't be the case, because they'd be cutting smaller sensors, which means they can stamp out a higher quantity per wafer as compared to the larger version. Also, a larger sensor area means that if you have any dead pixels/defects, you're throwing away a much bigger chunk of wafer real estate - which means you've just increased costs again.

What do most people wanting the S35 Monstro hope to achieve by getting RED to offer such a thing?
Well if there was a s35 Monstro, it would defeat the purpose for having the s35 Mysterium-X camera; my expectation that it would replace that model. And thus, you'd save $10,000 by getting that camera compared to the FF35 version - which is a huge amount of money if you're just going to crop the FF35 sensor for your shooting anyway. And this way you still get the same great dynamic range capabilities. Again, this is with spherical shooting in mind. But in essence, we're having to pay $10,000 more for a bigger sensor we aren't going to use. That's why I would personally want a s35 Monstro, anyway.

Stephen Williams

01-24-2009, 02:21 AM

Stephen,

Do you think Viper is more capable than the Red One?

Tonaci

Hi,

The last time I tested the Viper had more dynamic range, no rolling shutter motion artifacts, less noise in the blue channel, less fan noise, quicker boot time, lower battery drain & the uncompressed images were better for color correction. As film still seems to have the edge overall, I find the question irrelevant as all are tools that can be used today. Horses for courses.

Stephen

Edit It was Tom that brought Viper into the thread, I would not otherwise have mentioned it, BTW Viper is blown away by F23.

Tom Lowe

01-24-2009, 09:08 AM

Completely agree. Resolution numbers may not be important to some people anymore, but it still is to me. For instance, the 2K mode on the RED ONE is completely unusable for cutting in with 4K work in a 1080 timeline in my opinion. The difference is very drastic and noticeable.

To me, cropping the FF35 sensor to get a s35 image is a total waste of the chip - but judging by people's comments, my guess is that's how the majority of shooters are going to be using this camera. I'm still boggled as to why they don't just create a slice of the Monstro sensor in a s35 size.

Even if they did this, it would not improve the resolution for you. It would simply limit you from having the flexibility of FF35. If you are requesting Epic-X-style free modules on a cropped-sensor Monstro S35, I can understand the desire to save money on those modules, of course. But then you are getting into a situation where you might be waiting for a year and a half or more for the camera to even come out.

In the end, Häakon, my guess is that someone like you who keeps busy working a lot on cinema-style projects is probably going to want the Top Dog camera in the Red lineup, and that will be Epic FF35. It will, in fact, by the time it comes out, probably be the top cinema camera on the planet. Also, don't forget that there could be nice cine glass like Master Primes that could take advantage of a sensor area larger than S35, even if that means doing some trimming from the FF35 record area. Jeff mentioned the possibility that Epic FF35 might even offer a "custom" resolution, like, say, 5099x2560, that would fit EXACTLY to the measured capabilities of a given cine lens, so that you would not be wasting anything.

I think the place where everyone's combined efforts would be most useful right now would be putting early pressure on lens companies, like Cooke for example, to consider looking at FF35 cine glass designs right away. Either that, or to begin researching options for the rehousing of still lenses for cine use.

Stephen Williams

01-24-2009, 09:23 AM

I think the place where everyone's combined efforts would be most useful right now would be putting early pressure on lens companies, like Cooke for example, to consider looking at FF35 cine glass designs right away. Either that, or to begin researching options for the rehousing of still lenses for cine use.

Hi,

A small magnifier would do the trick, some stop loss though.

Häakon

01-24-2009, 09:44 AM

You're right on all accounts, and I guess I'm looking at a couple of different things at the same time. One is a wanting to keep pushing for higher resolution from camera manufacturers (ie, I do not believe 4K to be the be-all, end-all "holy grail") while at the same time stating that as the number of pixels gets larger, it can't happen at the expense of things like like dynamic range (which is just as (if not moreso) important to the quality of the final image). The only way this is realistically going to happen is if we break past the s35-size barrier, and that's exactly what RED is doing with the FF35 camera. Ultimately, I think that will be one hell of a system - I just think the lack of cinema grade glass to cover its entire image area is going to be its achilles' heel. And if that's the case, it's an awfully expensive camera to purchase when you're only going to use half of it. That's really what I was driving at. Believe me, I would love for someone like Cooke to surprise us with a brand new line of high-end, FF35 cine glass (heck, 645 glass for that matter...), but I don't think the rest of the industry moves as fast as RED. RED spoils us, and bless them for it.

Tom Lowe

01-24-2009, 10:01 AM

There are a lot of industry heavy-hitters who participate on this board, many of them lurkers. If they start talking to lens companies now about this forthcoming FF35 camera system, it might result in something. Who knows. Given enough time, the market will jolt itself into action. But it's the transition time, waiting for new or rehoused FF35 lenses, that is the concern.

I think David mentioned that when Vista Vision was in its heyday, DPs used a real hodgepodge of still and medium-format glass on them. I cannot remember what he said about it exactly. Maybe someone who knows something about the history of Vista Vision and the lenses used with Vista Vision could help to give us all some background and perspective on this FF35 issue.

roryhinds

01-24-2009, 10:49 AM

I don't see the S35 being a size barrier.
Its a industry standard that works really well with some amazing glass available now.

I just don't see the solution being reinventing the wheel because the new hubcaps don't fit.

Jeff Kilgroe

01-24-2009, 11:51 AM

roryhinds

01-24-2009, 03:09 PM

yes the issue is a lot of investment has gone into S35 lenses which the industry is very happy with.

If you're thinking about buying new lenses then its tough to be caught in the waiting game while you see what new lenses get released if they ever do.

Red's own Prime lenses will only cover S35.
Working with still lenses in a cinema production is very problematic.

I think the problem is that RED's current sensor design doesn't allow for a S35 size sensor with more DR. They are being forced into making larger sensors even though most cinema productions will not use the full chip and will have to window down.

Having a Motion camera that can take stills is no new feature. I personally don't see how I'd really use this feature in a production. Sure maybe for my own personal use but not a paid professional production.

If I want to take stills I've have a professional stills photographer on set with a still camera, using an optical viewfinder and still lenses.

I can't see the still photographer taking stills using Cooke lenses and having to look at a LCD eyepiece.

There simply are different tools for different styles of shooting. Stills requires light lenses with an auto focus function.

I can see that RED are marketing that their motion camera takes better stills than the top end Canon or Nikon, but I see this as a testament to the quality of the motion pictures, not me wanting to replace my stills camera.

I have a feeling Mysterium X will yield better results for S35 production than Monstro. Its S35 @ 5k

Problem is we will have to purchase Mysterium X and wait for Monstro, then if it does turn out to be better we'd have to offload our old Mysterium X at a reduced rate as it will not be worth much with a better sensor on the market.

If RED would only offer a sensor upgrade on the Brains things would be so much easier for purchasing and future proofing. Having to buy a whole new Brain is not a upgrade, no matter how you market it.

REDONE is upgradable, for $4500 you can have a Mysterium X installed. I don't see why for a similar price you can't have a Monstro installed in your Mysterium X Brain.

Tom Lowe

01-24-2009, 03:50 PM

rory, that will not happen. the brains and sensors are linked. period.

if you are happy with S35 and your S35 glass, then get an S35 DSMC. Jim has very explicitly stated that there will not be an S35 Monstro any time soon. we should stop beating that dead horse.

if you are worried that the FF35 Monstro will clean Mysterium X's clock (which it probably will) even windowed at S35, then hold off on your purchase and wait until FF35 Monstro hits. at that time, you can decide.

if you feel you still want S35 Mysterium X, you can probably pick up a used S35 DSMC brain at a very nice discount in the marketplace here or on ebay, for example.

Stephen Williams

01-25-2009, 12:49 AM

Hi,

For Zeiss to make the DigiPrimes, BandPro had to order 1,000 lenses. Anyone here want to do that?

Stephen

Pawel Achtel

01-25-2009, 02:43 AM

Hi,

For Zeiss to make the DigiPrimes, BandPro had to order 1,000 lenses. Anyone here want to do that?

Stephen

But, for Zeiss to put PL mount on declicked ZFs, the deal would probably make more economic sense. I am sure we could flog 1000 lenses here for a grand each. That's $1m. Anyone interested to break a deal with Zeiss?

Stephen Williams

01-25-2009, 03:03 AM

But, for Zeiss to put PL mount on declicked ZFs, the deal would probably make more economic sense. I am sure we could flog 1000 lenses here for a grand each. That's $1m. Anyone interested to break a deal with Zeiss?

The Zeiss deal for DigiPrimes was nearer $30m!

Michael Lindsay

01-25-2009, 05:37 AM

A couple of pennies worth...

Modern S35 glass can produce an imaging circle larger than we currently use on Red...

the S35 Epic is a larger sensor already

Not only will there be a non-subtle FOV changes from a 25mm+sensor width but there will be additional down sampling advantages (theoretically quantifying this is not my area of expertise)

If the sum of more modern chip design, better read noise, better pre-filtering and extra downsampling gains equals:

over 1 stop basic advantage over Red 1
less noise in the shadows
1/2 stop faster
LESS compression

The S35 will simply be a 'no brianer' to many Red 1 users why? Because the FF35 is very unlikely to be a few months away and the s35 will be cheap and available...

Also creating fast set of S4/UP/MP quality range of lenses for a PL mount with a FF35 imaging circle is not trivial and I doubt anyone would make a serous effort before really knowing there would be significant sales opportunities (How many people ordered the Uncompressed option from Red?)

Michael (looking forwards to getting the most out of his lenses)

Stephen Williams

01-25-2009, 06:39 AM

A couple of pennies worth...

Modern S35 glass can produce an imaging circle larger than we currently use on Red...

Hardly surprising as the diagonal of the recorded area is less than Acedamy 35. Old Cine glass also covers!

Pawel Achtel

01-25-2009, 02:00 PM

Fully agree with you, Michael. I am planning to get Mysterium-X (S35) as soon as it is available. It is actually slightly larger than S35 and all Master Primes cover the entire chip. When FF35 becomes available, I will simply buy Scarlet FF35 brain as a second camera.

And, yes most long cine lenses cover FF35mm. It is only the wider once that may vignette.

Ryan Koo

01-29-2009, 10:36 PM

First post in these hallowed RED halls, so please don't jump all over me if I'm out of the loop. My question is this: will the FF35 RED Electronic Lenses at f2.8 compare somewhat to the DOF you'd get with a S35 sensor with a T1.9 lens?

If so, why is there so much talk about whether or not the FF35 format will catch on and whether there will be lenses available, considering RED has already announced a complete set of FF35 lenses they'll be selling themselves? Seems like a nice shallow DOF at f2.8 in conjunction with the increased dynamic range is a no-brainer.

Are you guys expecting RED's lenses to be prohibitively expensive, oft-delayed, or do you not consider them to be "cinema-grade?" Just wondering why the announced RED lenses are being seemingly discounted in this whole discussion.

Häakon

01-30-2009, 11:23 AM

Are you guys expecting RED's lenses to be prohibitively expensive, oft-delayed, or do you not consider them to be "cinema-grade?" Just wondering why the announced RED lenses are being seemingly discounted in this whole discussion.
Mostly, I'm considering them to be non-existent. :-) And sure, the cameras don't exist yet either - but we're still waiting on the prime set for the original RED ONE to show up and that camera has been out for a year and a half now. I think all of your questions are valid here... we really don't know how they will perform, how much they'll cost, or when they'll be available. When they do finally ship, in what quantity will they be shipping? With very little other option besides using still lenses for motion picture work (not acceptable to many), there is no other choice. And as many productions rent glass, what will you be shooting with if your rental house wasn't early in line for the lenses?

Granted most of these issues will likely be smoothed out by 2011, but I don't think anyone wants to sit around and wait for two years before they can use their new $33,000 camera optimally. That's why I believe the vast majority of users who purchase a FF Epic will be using it with s35 lenses for a good while... and while there is nothing inherently wrong with this, it's important to note that you will be recording in less resolution than you get from the s35 camera.

Michael Ragen

02-08-2009, 04:33 PM

Does anyway think that maybe the reason the Red primes are taking so long is that they are trying to make sure they cover FF35? Just a thought.

Roberto Lequeux

02-08-2009, 10:36 PM

^ if they were the same set that would be S-I-C-K

Jeff Kilgroe

02-09-2009, 06:18 AM

Does anyway think that maybe the reason the Red primes are taking so long is that they are trying to make sure they cover FF35? Just a thought.

I'm really hoping so. I doubt that's really the case, but it would be nice. The prospect of the FF35 and 645 cameras is really making me pause and think about my reservation for the RED primes. At this point, I plan to transition to the FF35, perhaps the 645 if the budget allows and I will be seeking glass to cover at least FF35 as I do and will probably not invest any more funds into more S35 glass.

Alec Morris

02-09-2009, 11:10 AM

i think the x factor here is the big names... which new model is Steven Soderbergh going to shoot on? and what if the new sensors are what other directors are waiting for to switch to digital? or even switch to red? (i'm thinking of finchers nike commercial :biggrin: ) peter jackson and ron howard are already shooting vfx on red. i think we all know what company they will be coming to when they want to switch. if Soderbergh (who shot the argentine anamorphic, which makes me think FF35) and say Jackson decide to shoot on the FF35, i imagine we will see glass that covers the FF35 sensor much sooner than we expect

also, how do you guys think the rental market will respond to this new wide array of possibilities from RED? how much (obviously speculative) will the different models rent for? and what will it take for a production to justify renting an EPIC FF35 over an s35, or even going EPIC over scarlet?

Robert Sanders

02-09-2009, 04:44 PM

Don't forget that lens companies like Panavision and Cooke have made custom lenses for folks like David Fincher, Michael Bay and James Cameron. For instance, Panavision made a custom one-of-kind (at that time) 20mm anamorphic wide-angle for "Pearl Harbor". That lens is now a permanent part of the rental catalog.

So, yes, A-list filmmakers can get lens companies to do a LOT for them.

Jeff Kilgroe

02-09-2009, 11:03 PM

A-List filmmakers can do this I suppose.. But I also think 10,000+ cameras out there with FF35 or larger sensors would be quite a good reason for lens companies to jump at the opportunity. IMO, I'm expecting more from Canon, Nikon, Sigma, etc.. There's going to be a big market for FF35 glass that doesn't breath, has smooth mechanics with free-traveling iris, good tracking, etc.. Unfortunately the big camera companies move slow and with the current economic situation, massive pay-cuts and layoffs, I don't know what to expect. But I think that if anyone could have a set of FF35 cine primes ready for a really good price (like 5 primes for $25K or less) by the time RED ships their first FF35 camera, this lens company could have several thousand sets pre-sold in a blink of an eye.

Alec Morris

02-10-2009, 10:24 AM

good point jeff. i guess we all need to make the effort to make it known that people aren't just dreaming about the ff35, but are actually getting the money together

Alec Morris

02-10-2009, 10:34 AM

mostly with so many new options from red, its hard to know which models people are actually going to buy, and in what quantities. thats why i would imagine lens companies could use some motivation from us

Roberto Lequeux

02-10-2009, 09:05 PM

Aside from not knowing which specific model, FF35 coverage will certainly gain popularity, even if the target prices and delivery dates are missed by a small margin. I couldn't begin to guess a number, but there is no doubt that, just as Jeff put it, thousands of sets would be presold one way or an other unless Red starts charging Sony prices.

Michael Panfeld

02-11-2009, 04:39 PM

IMO, with the rumors circulating over Leica releasing cinema primes (I think it's all but actually confirmed but the specs), I'm hoping that they may provide some FF35 support. There's also the RED primes that are over-due. Perhaps there is an FF35 connection with those? I know it's a lot of speculation, but also there are some real possibilities here. At times I'm half tempted to go ahead and put the Nikon mount on my RED and get that set of modified ZF primes from Duclos. They seem to work really well and produce great images for a good price. And will cover FF35. Quite honestly at this point, if the upcoming RED primes do not cover FF35, I may pass on my reservation for them and continue to rent various primes until I see what FF35 offerings will be available for the upcoming EPIC / Scarlet systems.

I think Dalsa just came out with a series of Primes. Called 4K. They may have a larger image circle, but I can't find any prices or sellers.Not even Dalsa itself.

That said, I'm going to chime in here. My choice is the FF35 chip. I am lucky enough to have several complete sets of lenses, including a complete set of Super Baltars, a complete set of zooms, a complete set of LOMOs, a complete set of LOMO Speeds, and a complete set of pristine Canon FD still lenses. I will match the lenses to the job. The FF sensor gives me the flexibility to choose frame size. But most importantly, I want that DR!!

The upcoming wireless FF from Viewfactor (sigh) will largely solve the issue of critical focus on the Canon still lenses. ( My Canon FD glass has very little breathing.) To me the FF35 Monstro sensor is perfect.

Lenny Manfred

02-14-2009, 09:38 AM

i love it. you guys go nuts trying to predict the future. clearly very few of us are good at that, otherwise we would have bought all the superspeeds that where available before the red one came out.

and you keep trying to prove each other wrong. there is no right or wrong here, just difference of needs. if you want ff35 get it, and wait for lenses. i prefer to go with what is here now, the format that is supported with a great number of fantastic cine style glass.

and it doesn't matter either. i thought the whole point of this "modular" system was to have more options. you don't have to choose one. you can buy all the "brains" you want, and use them for whatever specific project you have. i myself plan to get at least three, the first of course being the S35. but that's because i like to keep me feet on the ground, but maybe that's just me.