What are your future lens buying plans

[david farland]

FF35 6K cameras are due to be released in 9 months.

Question:
For those intending to buy a FF35 6K camera, how much more S35 glass will you be likely to buy?

Most existing PL glass will only cover 4.5K or less. Red's Pro S35 lenses will just cover 5K.
As we move from 4K to 5K to 6K your exisitng PL lenses become less attractive.

Monstro FF35 6K Scarlet/Epic is announced for Q1 -2010.
The Monstros will have 3 extra stops over RedOne and a 6K sensor which will result in a full 4K chroma/ 4.8K luma resolution. Nice.

Existing S35 lens or Red Pro lenses obviously won't cover the 6K (43mm image circle)
You'll need to buy Red's FF35 hybrid cine/still lenses or use existing FF35 still Nikon/Canon/other lens...I hope!

What are you going to do?
Dave

[Steve Gal]

I think many people will keep their cine lenses and use the FF35 camera but in 4K so you gain the extra dynamic range and can keep the depth of field under control. I see the 6K coming in handy for chromakey. May be very hard to pull focus with that little depth of field your 6K images will be a little soft.

[david farland]

So you think 4K with 12-13 stops is enough to theatrical distribution?
Or that some extra pixels won't improve the digital to distribution format transfer process. Personally I don't know.

regarding the tight 6K DOF, I'd expect smaller gears on FF or equipment like View Factors FF where you can (I think in future) adjust focus swing on control knob.

Chroma key will be nice thou....

D

[Jannard]

So you think 4K with 12-13 stops is enough to theatrical distribution?

D

David... A RED ONE is good enough now for theatrical distribution... at least quite a few people think so. :-)

Jim

[david farland]

Thanks for pointing that out Jim...yes it is good enough for distribution.

But do you feel greater than 4K pixels in acquisition will improve the image in theatres?

D

[Frank Weeks]

You bring up some interesting questions David. So many choices about to hit the streets.
Of course Jim is right about Reds quality. I've seen what this camera, my camera, is capable of. I know I want the best lenses for R1. That is what I will concentrate on at NAB.

The question I must honestly ask myself is , Do I really need more quality than this camera delivers? Speaking only for myself, I'm not sure. My ego says yes, but my logic is not so sure. My medium is not the big screen. Do I really need 5 or 6K or do I just need to maximize R1's ability with a great prime set.

Part of me wants the newest and greatest. My business side says take your time.

Just my two cents

[Tim Naylor]

I would like to see 4k on full frame still size imager instead of 5 or 6k. I'd like the benefit of higher asa (500 or more) and the vista vision DOF. After 4k, I don't think resolution is as big a priority as sensitivity. RED's current 250 ASA is a big handicap, especially with night exteriors and mixing with available light.

[david farland]

Jim on another thread just brought up the breathing of still lenses again and I'm thinking how much a god send it'll be if View Factor can calibrate zoom lenses via zoom motor control, thru the focus range to eliminate breathing.
Only have high F stops on still zooms to worry about then.

Of course the next convergance of still & cine industries will be the convergence of lens and capture formats. I'm sure you won't get to many arguments form Canon/Nikon!
But how hard can it be. We have FF35 still lenses (with floating element technolgies) and we have all the exisiting cine lens techniques.

Still, as stated many times it's going to be an interesting couple of years for lens manufacturers and how will they go on FF35 lens price will be a key factor in the universal takeup of cine FF35 capture.
hope it goes well for Red as that means it will go well for civilisation.

Much like Jim discovered some 'soft' points in the cine market (& I hope still market...but that yet to be proved) and plugged them,
manufacturers will plug soft points in the technical side of the industry, i.e better focus assists at FF35.

Back on topic....what lenses will you buy?

D

[Jannard]

Back on topic....what lenses will you buy?

D

I'll buy all RED lenses. Does my opinion count? We are building the lenses I have always wanted. I'm not buying them because they are RED. I'm buying them because they are better.

Jim

[david farland]

I'll buy all RED lenses.
Jim

When I asked what lenses, I was really asking what size - S35 or FF35?

D

[Jannard]

When I asked what lenses, I was really asking what size - S35 or FF35?

D

All of them... :-)

Jim

[david farland]

Okay,

I'll buy all of them too if you come to our next Red open night.

Dave

[Christian Edwards]

this thread is hilarious :)



I'm not buying them because they are RED. I'm buying them because they are better.

Jim
Great slogan ill quote you on that

[Christian Edwards]

Okay,

I'll buy all of them too if you come to our next Red open night.

Dave
when is that by the way?

[Florian Stadler]

Wait and see. Presently I just got the 18-85 red zoom and am stoked.

[Claus Mueller]

While I'm waiting for my 18-85mm (#124), I'm now thinking about the RED primes but the question is, why should I buy the primes when I want to go the Epic FF35 route. Better I skip the primes and buy the new electronic lenses in 12-18 months or so?

[david farland]

Flyer is about to go out for next Red night on 29 April @ UTS. speakers will be Warren Lynch-colourist for Lord of Rings/Nothing Men (RedOne) &
Tom Gleeson-DOP for Happy Feet and a swag of Red shoots.

D

ps: and hopefully Jim....

[david farland]

and I forgot George Evatt whose just designed/built a great underwater housing for Red.

D


ps: back on topic...how many Red s35/FF35 lenses aren't you going to buy.....mines none!!

[jimhare]

Hey Dave,

Yep, I'll be back from the U.S. and can speak about multi-cam and show examples of the shoot last month.

6 Reds, 12 hours of footage, 2 days to have the entire show processed and edited!

Jim

Or did you mean the REAL Jim? :beer:

[Liam Hall]

When I asked what lenses, I was really asking what size - S35 or FF35?

D

Does size matter? My wife wants FF35, I've always been happy with S35...

[jaadgy akanni]

Does size matter? My wife wants FF35, I've always been happy with S35...

Only those who can't afford FF35 say size doesn't matter:rofl:

[Roberto Lequeux]

someone should sig that

[Hans von Sonntag]

There are many points to consider:

1. Pal/NTSC is around since 40 years or more. Most TV stations still broadcast SD. I bet 1080 will be around for the next 3 or 4 decades.

2. Less than 1/100 of higher budget projects will end up on the big screen. Not to mention all the music video, ads, coperate stuff, doccos, etc...

3. According to IBU modern 35mm projection is around 720p, maxing out at 800p. Most find the traditional screen already a challenge when ist comes to focus, VFX, etc....

4. Resolution is subjective. Why does a 35mm shot commercial look on televison so much crisper and prominent than on video shot news? Both have the same measured resolution.

5. Digital projection will be seen soon in many cinemas, no doubt. Is measured full 4K necessary? I doubt this. See point 3. and 4.

5. With S35mm I can control DOF nicely and find it very balanced between deep DOF and shallow DOF. With FF35 this will be more difficult.

6. FF35mm is an even bigger challenge focuswise. I find S35mm challenging enough. Devices such as electronic FF systems won't change the fact that the DOF is more shallow and hence more difficult to nail.

7. Speed. I don't know of any wideangle FF lens with a T Stop of 1.4.

8. Zooms. There are many who would love to see a S35mm zoom that maginfies 10 times but should not weight more than 2 kilogramm. Currently a S35mm 10-1 zoom weights 5+ kilogramm. Seems to be hard to pull off, if not impossible. FF35 will be even harder in this regard. Does anyone want a 10-1 which is even bigger than the Optimo 24-290?

Jim did turned the motion picture camera world up side down. But there are so many points that are not in favour of a FF35mm motion picture system which is not only used for the big digital screen but many other applications that investing in traditional S35mm glas remains meaningful, IMO.

Hans

[Rudi Herbert]

I'll buy all RED lenses. Does my opinion count? We are building the lenses I have always wanted. I'm not buying them because they are RED. I'm buying them because they are better.

Jim

And if you make a 14mm, and hope to God, something even wider at some point, then RED is EVERYTHING I'll ever need to buy.

[Fredrik Callinggard]

Jim did turned the motion picture camera world up side down. But there are so many points that are not in favour of a FF35mm motion picture system which is not only used for the big digital screen but many other applications that investing in traditional S35mm glas remains meaningful, IMO.

Hans

I'm with Hans on this one. I will still invest in the FF35 Epic but will mostly use the cine lenses on it. What I'm after is to be able to use my Anamorphic lenses with it and the specifications and DR that it comes with.

So, yes it's probably wise to invest in S35 cine lenses after all RED are doing them as well, but who knows hahahaha.

[Matt Uhry]

There are many points to consider:

1. Pal/NTSC is around since 40 years or more. Most TV stations still broadcast SD. I bet 1080 will be around for the next 3 or 4 decades.

2. Less than 1/100 of higher budget projects will end up on the big screen. Not to mention all the music video, ads, coperate stuff, doccos, etc...

3. According to IBU modern 35mm projection is around 720p, maxing out at 800p. Most find the traditional screen already a challenge when ist comes to focus, VFX, etc....

4. Resolution is subjective. Why does a 35mm shot commercial look on televison so much crisper and prominent than on video shot news? Both have the same measured resolution.

5. Digital projection will be seen soon in many cinemas, no doubt. Is measured full 4K necessary? I doubt this. See point 3. and 4.

5. With S35mm I can control DOF nicely and find it very balanced between deep DOF and shallow DOF. With FF35 this will be more difficult.

6. FF35mm is an even bigger challenge focuswise. I find S35mm challenging enough. Devices such as electronic FF systems won't change the fact that the DOF is more shallow and hence more difficult to nail.

7. Speed. I don't know of any wideangle FF lens with a T Stop of 1.4.

8. Zooms. There are many who would love to see a S35mm zoom that maginfies 10 times but should not weight more than 2 kilogramm. Currently a S35mm 10-1 zoom weights 5+ kilogramm. Seems to be hard to pull off, if not impossible. FF35 will be even harder in this regard. Does anyone want a 10-1 which is even bigger than the Optimo 24-290?

Jim did turned the motion picture camera world up side down. But there are so many points that are not in favour of a FF35mm motion picture system which is not only used for the big digital screen but many other applications that investing in traditional S35mm glas remains meaningful, IMO.

Hans

I'm thinking the same thoughts as Hans. My bread and butter, paying clients ( TV Spots ) are still having discussions whether to finish in HD or SD !

S35 will be where I sink the majority of my lens money.

All this being said, an Epic 645, with Hassy lenses sounds like it would be fun... I don't see the demand from the client side.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Claus Mueller]

But there are obviously some of us want to buy FF35 for whatever reasons. Everything you can do with S35 you can do with FF35 plus 6k plus DR.
Back to the topic lens buying plans. Why do they need the RED primes plus the upcoming FF35 electronic lenses?

[Jannard]

But there are obviously some of us want to buy FF35 for whatever reasons. Everything you can do with S35 you can do with FF35 plus 6k plus DR.
Back to the topic lens buying plans. Why do they need the RED primes plus the upcoming FF35 electronic lenses?

The FF35 RED lenses will be a "different breed of cat" than the S35 RED Pro Primes... which are full manual "very cine" designs.

The FF35 lenses will have auto-focus, auto-iris and image stabilized capabilities (like current DSLR lenses) with "cine-accommodation" features... hence DSMC.

Jim

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

Why you guys see the FF35 sensor size as problem?

You can just shoot cropped and get more FPS (with Epic) and as said use anamorphics properly, right?

Or does it come from the psychological feeling that you are most of the time wasting most of the sensor? :)

Please educate me.

[Curran Giddens]

Back to the topic lens buying plans. Why do they need the RED primes plus the upcoming FF35 electronic lenses?

The FF35 brains will be 6K resolution and I want buy the FF35 electronic lenses to be able to take advantage of the extra resolution. Because the "Monstro" sensor has larger photosites, with an S35 lens you will be limited to "only" 5K or less (4.5K?).

[jaadgy akanni]

The FF35 RED lenses will be a "different breed of cat" than the S35 RED Pro Primes... which are full manual "very cine" designs.

The FF35 lenses will have auto-focus, auto-iris and image stabilized capabilities (like current DSLR lenses) with "cine-accommodation" features... hence DSMC.

Jim

Autofocus, autoIris, and image stabilization...all proprietary capabilities, exclusively complementary with the camera brains?

[Jannard]

Autofocus, autoIris, and image stabilization...all proprietary capabilities, exclusively complementary with the camera brains?

Yes to proprietary. And yes to compatible with all the "Brains". So you can use the FF35 lenses on all models (except Fixed 8x obviously) and the only limitation is the sensor size. You can use, for example, an FF35 lens on an S35 brain and have full auto capability. There is a compromise doing this when shooting "cine" compared to RED Pro Primes. It will be better than shooting DSLR lenses from other manufacturers but not like using dedicated cine lenses. Again... DSMC.

Jim

[Claus Mueller]

The FF35 RED lenses will be a "different breed of cat" than the S35 RED Pro Primes... which are full manual "very cine" designs.

The FF35 lenses will have auto-focus, auto-iris and image stabilized capabilities (like current DSLR lenses) with "cine-accommodation" features... hence DSMC.

Jim

Thank you Jim for quick response, great service as always.

[Alan Fletcher]

The FF35 lenses will have auto-focus, auto-iris and image stabilized capabilities (like current DSLR lenses) with "cine-accommodation" features... hence DSMC.
Jim

Will they be parfocal?

[Lauri Kettunen]

I'm buying them because they are better.

I would also like to say the same way. However, better or best are not absolute issues but they depend on the needs of who rates lenses. My question is, will there be long RED teles and zooms having wide range available? Moreover, as I work with wildlife documents, also needed lenses which are not that heavy.

This lens issue is bit puzzling for won't be able to exploit the upgrade program to Epic X before there exists whole set of RED lenses or a working mount preferable to EF lenses.

So, could you Jim give us some idea what you think is the best way to go on, if one has this kind of special needs?

[jaadgy akanni]

So you can use the FF35 lenses on all models (except Fixed 8x obviously) and the only limitation is the sensor size. You can use, for example, an FF35 lens on an S35 brain and have full auto capability. There is a compromise doing this when shooting "cine" compared to RED Pro Primes. It will be better than shooting DSLR lenses from other manufacturers but not like using dedicated cine lenses. Again... DSMC.

Jim

Gotta love that. Thanks Jim.

[Jannard]

I would also like to say the same way. However, better or best are not absolute issues but they depend on the needs of who rates lenses. My question is, will there be long RED teles and zooms having wide range available? Moreover, as I work with wildlife documents, also needed lenses which are not that heavy.

This lens issue is bit puzzling for won't be able to exploit the upgrade program to Epic X before there exists whole set of RED lenses or a working mount preferable to EF lenses.

So, could you Jim give us some idea what you think is the best way to go on, if one has this kind of special needs?

Everything "depends". I don't know your specific needs but with Scarlet and EPIC, you have a ton of options... including 3rd parties that are making electronic control mounts for Canon and Nikon lenses, and there are more on the way (as I understand). I obviously prefer the RED system because it will be integrated and unique to the DSMC tasks. But we won't have every tool available for awhile. We just started this program and it will take us a couple more years to catch up on every possible option.

Choices... choices.

Jim

Jim

[Lauri Kettunen]

We just started this program and it will take us a couple more years to catch up on every possible option.

Jim, Thanks a lot.

It would be helpful if RED announced the specifications of the new mount as early as possible. Then the 3rd parties and the camera owners could start to plan how to adapt the existing 3rd party Red One mounts to Epic/Scarlet. I'm just saying that although really like my Red One still would like to go to Epic X as early as possible.

[Jarred Land]

Dont worry Lauri, we will have a pretty extensive matrix on Red.com as soon as it's complete.

[Daniel Browning]

Hans,

I appreciate your down-to-earth perspective.



Jim did turned the motion picture camera world up side down. But there are so many points that are not in favour of a FF35mm motion picture system which is not only used for the big digital screen but many other applications that investing in traditional S35mm glas remains meaningful, IMO.


Although I disagree with some of your points, I still agree with your conclusion. The lack of cine FF35 lenses, by itself, is enough to cast some doubt on Jim's sanity. There's a fine line between visionary genius and crazy dude.



1. Pal/NTSC is around since 40 years or more. Most TV stations still broadcast SD. I bet 1080 will be around for the next 3 or 4 decades.

2. Less than 1/100 of higher budget projects will end up on the big screen. Not to mention all the music video, ads, coperate stuff, doccos, etc...

3. According to IBU modern 35mm projection is around 720p, maxing out at 800p. Most find the traditional screen already a challenge when ist comes to focus, VFX, etc....

5. Digital projection will be seen soon in many cinemas, no doubt. Is measured full 4K necessary? I doubt this. See point 3. and 4.


Agreed. Some projects don't need more than 1080p and don't want the delay of downsizing in post. Hopefully, the 1080p recording mode on the new cameras speed up the workflow for those. For everyone else, there's 4K+.



4. Resolution is subjective. Why does a 35mm shot commercial look on television so much crisper and prominent than on video shot news? Both have the same measured resolution.


My experience is the opposite: that video looks "crisper" most of the time, due to oversharpening, aliasing, and interlace twitter. It is often also more more "prominent" due to the distracting oversaturation, blown highlights, posterization, and compression artifacts. 35mm, on the other hand, often has more contrast, less sharpening, less saturation, more pleasing tone curve, no aliasing, no interlace artifacts, etc. toe-may-toe toe-mah-toe. :)



5. With S35mm I can control DOF nicely and find it very balanced between deep DOF and shallow DOF. With FF35 this will be more difficult.

6. FF35mm is an even bigger challenge focuswise. I find S35mm challenging enough. Devices such as electronic FF systems won't change the fact that the DOF is more shallow and hence more difficult to nail.


I don't think that's the case. Here is how I would put it: FF35 does not offer any improvement in noise or dynamic range over S35 when used in low light at the same depth of field. It's only the same, not better or worse. (Given raw cameras with the same angle of view, perspective, and technology.)

Similarly, S35 does not offer any improvement over 1-chip 2/3" in low light when used at the same depth of field.

In other words: one must shoot thinner DOF in order to get any improvement in noise or dynamic range in low light.

Ample light is a different story; however, as one may get the noise/DR benefit of the larger sensor without changing the depth of field.

I tried to explain it in this thread (http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=25272).



7. Speed. I don't know of any wideangle FF lens with a T Stop of 1.4.


Yep, T/1.5 is as fast as they get. However, I think it should be pointed out that T/2.2 on FF35 has the same light gathering power as T/1.4 on S35, so it results in the same apparent exposure (brightness), noise, and dynamic range. (T/1.4 on FF35 would have less noise instead of just the same).

Similarly, T/1.8 on Scarlet 2/3" has the same light gathering power as T/4.0 on RED ONE. Noise is the same again on those two. When the physical aperture is the same, then the DOF, light gathering power, and even diffraction is also the same.

Everyone thinks in terms of f-stops, and so believe that larger formats must have thinner DOF, more light, less diffraction, etc. This was a necessary fact of life with film because of the nonlinear response. But now that we have linear raw digital, the "crop factor" also applies to f-number as well as angle of view: it's now possible to shoot the same aperture (different f-number) on a large format and get the same results.

[Roberto Lequeux]

So I take it there will be an Impero type of accessory, right? Will the RedMote be "part" of this accessory?

[david farland]

The advantages to me of the FF35 Monstro is 3 stops…that’s simply huge.

But I’ll have that with 4K crop or full 6K image.

So what additional advantage have I got using FF35 lenses with 6K (apart from shutting up everyone saying present R1 sensor ain’t real 4K)

Cropping without softening image for film out.
Green screen with great chroma rez (mentioned above).
Pushing colour in post. (Will check how much benefit will be actually scene).
Another biggie is down rezing from 6K in camera/post. Additional noise reduction.
Others…??
Disadvantage of critical focus/breathing will hopefully be fixed by Red’s auto/cine FF35 range of lenses or Viewfactor’s solution. Double the file sizes will be no more of a problem in 2 years than Red file size is now.

I’m guessing Red will release 6K lenses at the same time they release the FF35 cameras.

So back to the question….what lenses (Red of course) will you buy.

Over the next 9 months they’ll have a range of S35 primes/zooms.
In 9 months Red will also have FF35 lenses.
I expect Red’s 6K lens offering will fulfil most equivalent S35 needs, (eventually).

Question (again)

1. Do you need additional S35 glass now? I do, but I hate the idea their worth will depreciate in 2 years!
2. In 1 or 2 years, if you buy a 6K camera, will you be happy to remain at 4.5K/5K image resolutions?
3. How will Red’s FF35 lenses compare to their S35 lenses?
4. What can you afford?

It’s gonna be a weird old lens world over the next 12 months.

D

Ps: Dan (or others)
Should similarly built lenses, a FF35 f2.8 lens covering a 6K sensor & a S35 f1.9 lens covering a 4K sensor, have the same MTF across their image circles?

[Joel Kaye]

The advantages to me of the FF35 Monstro is 3 stops…that’s simply huge.


I'd sure like to see a R3D side by side with RED at some point. Put me in the I'll believe it when I see it camp.

Same with lenses. I've got Birger/Canon's now and I'm happy... hoping the VF Impero works well when I get it. I'm not a resolution freak. I can already see the peach fuzz and wrinkles on everyone's face NOW. There's a point when good enough is good enough. If RED didn't overheat and was a few pounds lighter I probably wouldn't be looking at an upgrade too seriously. As it stands, the overheating thing is a real problem for me.

[Gordon Prince]

Canon L still lenses.

[Ivan G]

Man shits changing so fast, I don't know if I like this... It's beginning to remind me of computer upgrades! Yes I'm lovin the idea RED is cutting edge but the competition hasn't stepped on their toes or no where near yet and here comes another wave! Processors can barely keep up with 4K now we're talking 6K? I think this next generation of cameras and lenses will separate the boys from the men overall.

[Roberto B]

disagreed.. unless you call men to hollywood filmmakers boys and boys to the best noncommercial filmmakers men and women why not?

[Jannard]

If RED didn't overheat and was a few pounds lighter I probably wouldn't be looking at an upgrade too seriously. As it stands, the overheating thing is a real problem for me.

You need your camera checked out... no reason for this. What build are you on? What fan setting do you have checked?

Jim

[Hans von Sonntag]

Hi Daniel,

thanks for your interesting response!




Agreed. Some projects don't need more than 1080p and don't want the delay of downsizing in post. Hopefully, the 1080p recording mode on the new cameras speed up the workflow for those. For everyone else, there's 4K+.

The upcoming 1080p mode must be RGB. Shooting 4KHD, debayering half to 1080p and coding to 1080p RGB/YUV will lead to a new RedCode. Advertised in the last three years it never saw the light yet. The problem: The result will dramatically depend on the settings of the menue, the infamous metadata will baked in - for ever. This will bring Red in the realm of Sony. People will compare F35 footage with Red's (compressed) 1080p RGB footage. I'm still uncertain wether Red will implement in-camera debayering that can be recorded.



My experience is the opposite: that video looks "crisper" most of the time, due to oversharpening, aliasing, and interlace twitter. It is often also more more "prominent" due to the distracting oversaturation, blown highlights, posterization, and compression artifacts. 35mm, on the other hand, often has more contrast, less sharpening, less saturation, more pleasing tone curve, no aliasing, no interlace artifacts, etc. toe-may-toe toe-mah-toe. :)

The big difference is DOF. Shooting a closeup with a shallow DOF makes the forground much more prominent. The difference between blurred background (hardly any resolution) and in focus forground (full resolution) gives the forground a higher subjective resolution. You cannot do that with video. Wait... you can. Is the RedOne video?



I don't think that's the case. Here is how I would put it: FF35 does not offer any improvement in noise or dynamic range over S35 when used in low light at the same depth of field. It's only the same, not better or worse. (Given raw cameras with the same angle of view, perspective, and technology.)

Similarly, S35 does not offer any improvement over 1-chip 2/3" in low light when used at the same depth of field.

In other words: one must shoot thinner DOF in order to get any improvement in noise or dynamic range in low light.

Ample light is a different story; however, as one may get the noise/DR benefit of the larger sensor without changing the depth of field.

I tried to explain it in this thread (http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=25272).


I fully follow your agument here. But DOF is a variable that many don't want to vary too much. If you want a format that is well balanced between low light capabilities, not hardcore thin DOF and over all usability S35 seems to be a proved compromise, IMO. FF35 will exibit a considerable thinner DOF when we want to benefit from it's anticipated lower noise - and you want that, won't you?

I find for low light docco work a 2/3" system such as a f900R often more convenient and optically acceptable when good lenses are used.

Shooting FF35 must bring visible advantages not only in bright sunlight.



Yep, T/1.5 is as fast as they get. However, I think it should be pointed out that T/2.2 on FF35 has the same light gathering power as T/1.4 on S35, so it results in the same apparent exposure (brightness), noise, and dynamic range. (T/1.4 on FF35 would have less noise instead of just the same).

Fine. Nontheless I want to gain from FF35 and not achieve the same. This thread is about the question "Have S35 cine lenses a valid future, will my investment hold its value?" I say yes.

The golden route would be a S35mm DMSC camera that resolves 5K+ with the DR of the upcoming FF35 cameras. Here we would get the best balanced system for most applications.

I don't think that Jim Jannard is right when he thinks that still photoraphy and motion picture photography will merge to one single device at some point. Only because Nikon and Canon are producing DSLRs with limited film capabilities does not mean that photographers become handicapped filmakers and vice versa.

Hans

[Hans von Sonntag]

The advantages to me of the FF35 Monstro is 3 stops…that’s simply huge.


Hi David,

Jim stated elswhere that MysteriumX will have 1 Stop more DR than the current sensor. If you takes this in account FF35 Monstro will have 2 more stops DR which ist still huge.

Personally I will go the EpicX route first. I do think there will be a big run on Scarlets FF35 and they will be on backorder for a longe time - probably. This won't be the case with Epic FF35. With it's frame rate and sensor crop abilities it is aimed for the advanced film market. There won't be many around. When it's out we will have plenty of time to test it and to make a decision. Until then I will have shot 1-2 years with the EpicX and ROI will be accomplished as it is already with my current RedOne.

Hans

PS: Red's spec's often changed. Rarely to the worse. I bet there will be a 5K+ S35mm lens capable 12-13 stops DR EpicX Mk2 around.

[Sanjin Jukic]

PS: Red's spec's often changed. Rarely to the worse. I bet there will be a 5K+ S35mm lens capable 12-13 stops DR EpicX Mk2 around.

Hi,

I heard here that no any S35 lens would cover 5K+ brand new Mysterium-X RED sensor...

maybe you'll get more 1, 2 or 3 stops DR but you should be able to "accommodate" to work with "slower" FF35 still photo,

FF35 cine rehoused, new RED Pro series lenses, look for Panavision offer or even get Todd-AO, Super Panavision sort of 65mm/70mm lenses...

The most of those lenses aperture staring at f/2.8, 3.5 or 4, 5.6, +,...

[Roberto Lequeux]

Hans, I don't think I can see Red making an RGB 1080 out of the camera. I think they'll stick to giving you a RAW 1080p in their RedCode flavor.

[Hans von Sonntag]

Hans, I don't think I can see Red making an RGB 1080 out of the camera. I think they'll stick to giving you a RAW 1080p in their RedCode flavor.

Roberto, you don't want 1080p RAW. With a debayer factor of roughly 0.80 the measured resolution will be well... approx 860p.

Hans

[Frank Mirbach]

I would like to see 4k on full frame still size imager instead of 5 or 6k. I'd like the benefit of higher asa (500 or more) and the vista vision DOF. After 4k, I don't think resolution is as big a priority as sensitivity. RED's current 250 ASA is a big handicap, especially with night exteriors and mixing with available light.

I fully agree ! Resolution is absolutely sufficient in 4K already, so we´ll be fine with the 5K the EpicX has. Much more important is a faster chip!

Frank

[Roberto Lequeux]

Roberto, you don't want 1080p RAW. With a debayer factor of roughly 0.80 the measured resolution will be well... approx 860p.

Hans

Oh, yes, that's right. Still, I think they will give us whatever would translate to a perfect 1080 in RC.

[Hans von Sonntag]

Oh, yes, that's right. Still, I think they will give us whatever would translate to a perfect 1080 in RC.

They do that already with 4KHD.

Hans

[Roberto Lequeux]

Oh, ok, I see, that makes sense. I really need to find a couple of good debayer related threads and sit down with a big ol' cup of java in the morning.

However, going into making an RedCode comparable RGB is a big endeavor obviously. They have lots of die hard followers thanks to the size and quality of their RAW compression. So I think if anything, it will be done in the form of a module so they can continue to concentrate on their built in clientele for a while. They seem extremely concerned with their second camera coming to market in the opposite fashion that R1 did so so they can take that second step as a company and silence all negative buzz.
Of course they too must see the benefits, but I don't think it will be out for a while longer. Also, they have so much buzz already all they don't need to even announce such a module at NAB'09. So while I bet they will get into that market, I don't see them doing it now.

And then again it might be RedRay... a little pocket sized anything in anything out deck and playback device.

[Frank Mirbach]

There are many points to consider:

1. Pal/NTSC is around since 40 years or more. Most TV stations still broadcast SD. I bet 1080 will be around for the next 3 or 4 decades.

2. Less than 1/100 of higher budget projects will end up on the big screen. Not to mention all the music video, ads, coperate stuff, doccos, etc...

3. According to IBU modern 35mm projection is around 720p, maxing out at 800p. Most find the traditional screen already a challenge when ist comes to focus, VFX, etc....

4. Resolution is subjective. Why does a 35mm shot commercial look on televison so much crisper and prominent than on video shot news? Both have the same measured resolution.

5. Digital projection will be seen soon in many cinemas, no doubt. Is measured full 4K necessary? I doubt this. See point 3. and 4.

5. With S35mm I can control DOF nicely and find it very balanced between deep DOF and shallow DOF. With FF35 this will be more difficult.

6. FF35mm is an even bigger challenge focuswise. I find S35mm challenging enough. Devices such as electronic FF systems won't change the fact that the DOF is more shallow and hence more difficult to nail.

7. Speed. I don't know of any wideangle FF lens with a T Stop of 1.4.

8. Zooms. There are many who would love to see a S35mm zoom that maginfies 10 times but should not weight more than 2 kilogramm. Currently a S35mm 10-1 zoom weights 5+ kilogramm. Seems to be hard to pull off, if not impossible. FF35 will be even harder in this regard. Does anyone want a 10-1 which is even bigger than the Optimo 24-290?

Jim did turned the motion picture camera world up side down. But there are so many points that are not in favour of a FF35mm motion picture system which is not only used for the big digital screen but many other applications that investing in traditional S35mm glas remains meaningful, IMO.

Hans

Good post Hans !

Greetings,

Frank

[Sanjin Jukic]

People should know a little bit more of the following facts:

- RED1 was advertising from the beginning that it will deliver 4K resolution that would (?) equal to S35mm film scans.

- Later they've got many critics that RED1 (because of Debayering...,...blah, blah) is not delivering a full 4K resolution that can equal S35mm 4K film scans

- Even Graeme Nattress said that RED Mysterium sensor can deliver after Debayering process a bit more than 3.2K resolution (at the CML forum lately (http://www.cinematography.net)).

- All that Mysterium sensor resolution sort of "speculation" was enough for Jim Jannard and then he said:

:sifone: Now we'll give them FIVE (5K+ sensor)... :sifone:

- Why 5K+...?

- Just because if you would "debayer" from 5K+ sensor then you will for sure get exactly about 4K resolution that could equal resolution of S35mm 4K film scans.

- But 5K+ sized sensor is a bit lager than S35mm sized sensor and the most of S35mm lenses would not cover that.

- That is way RED must make a totally new line of cine lenses that can fit to the lager sensor size.

- Of course you can use another type of lenses like a FF35 still photo, etc...

- But the most of professional DPs want to have a cine lens mechanics, longer throw follow focus ring, exact markings, etc...

[Jamon Lewis]

I think that most Scarlet's market are people come'n from lens adapters with still glass. As far as the extra (shallow) DOP that comes with FF,we are used to lighting for f5.6- f8 now as it is so I think many are prepared to set up that extra light so the lens can be stopped down to gain that extra DOP that will be needed with FF.

I know personally I'm tired of the crop factor and want FF image, I want the focal length that it says on the lens. I'm in my buying cycle for a new camera and S35 is more or less the price I would pay for any other competitors cam with specs not even in the same world as Scarlet. For me (and I think for alot of people) spending the extra $2,000 for FF instead of S35 and using the glass they already have works out (financially) better than buying S35 and springing for a new set of lenses.

To be clear i will have a set of RPPs or MPs one day :) but I wont wait till I can get them to rock and roll.

[Joel Kaye]

You need your camera checked out... no reason for this. What build are you on? What fan setting do you have checked?

Jim

I was a little unclear - sorry 'bout that.

It's only when I'm in ambient temps over 100 degrees. Anytime ambient temp is under 90 the camera has been fine so I believe it's operating to spec.

I believe the body hot warning comes on at 104 and shutdown is 115. If EPIC can keep operating at ambient temps of 115 (not sure what that would put the body temp at) I think you'd probably have it licked. The guys in Australia and the Middle East might have more thoughts though.

I know you guys want to sell the next round of cameras but I sometimes think everyone forgets how good the image quality of what you've already created is. :sifone:

[Daniel Browning]

Should similarly built lenses, a FF35 f2.8 lens covering a 6K sensor & a S35 f1.9 lens covering a 4K sensor, have the same MTF across their image circles?

The short version is: yes.

Smaller sensors need MTF at higher spatial frequencies in order to match the image of larger sensors. Basically, in order for two formats to have the same image, the "crop factor" needs to apply to MTF. If it doesn't, then the image quality wont be the same.

The crop factor between RED ONE 4K recording area and FF35 is 1.6X (36/22mm). So in order for a S35 f/1.8 lens to have the same resolution and contrast as a FF35 f/2.8 lens, the MTF must be the same at 1.6X higher frequencies. That is, if the f/2.8 FF35 lens has MTF80 at 19 lp/mm and 14mm image height, then a S35 lens must have MTF80 at 30 lp/mm and 9mm image height.

And not just one MTF value, but the entire range of MTF values at all frequencies relative to the viewer's CoC (or Nyquist, if both sensors have the same resolution) and relative to image height.

The question is: does MTF actually tend to scale in this way in real life? The answer to that is above my level of expertise, but what I know leads me to believe that it does scale, but is not directly proportionate; that large sensors are favored.

I think the reason larger sensors tend to have superior MTF is at least threefold:

Faster f-numbers are more difficult.

My understanding is that S35 f/1.8 is more difficult than FF35 f/2.8, even though they have about the same size and open aperture. Similarly, I understand that f/4 on Medium Format is easier than f/2.8 on FF35.


Miniaturization is difficult.

The manufacturing tolerances are tighter for smaller formats. A 1mm centration error is a bigger problem on 2/3" than medium format, so the tolerances must scale with the size, and I would think that it makes smaller sizes more difficult. However, there are certainly counter points to this: f/2.8 lenses for digicams and mobile phones prove that highly miniaturized multi-element plastic lenses can be constructed within amazingly small tolerances, at low cost, and amazingly high MTF (over 400 lp/mm). I don't know how well that translates to the high quality lenses we want for 2/3", S35, and other sizes, if at all, but it's interesting none the less.

Optical viewfinders do not allow back focus distances to vary

Optical viewfinders that were necessary for film forced lens manufacturers to have a certain distance between the exit pupil (real of the lens) and the film itself. This distance is based on whatever the manufacturer chooses, not format size. So a a FF35 lens design cannot always be scaled down for S35 if it would mean the back focus shrinks too much to fit onto the mount without hitting the mirror. So then the designed must be changed for retrofocus with more rear elements, perhaps reducing the quality.

Rangefinder lenses, for example, can have rear elements just 4mm from the surface of the sensor, because there is no mirror to get in the way. That's the opposite of telecentricity, and while it can save cost, improve speed, and reduce aberrations, it increases falloff greatly: at least because of cos^4 falloff, and perhaps also due to sensor angle of response.

So if my understanding is correct, these factors combine to favor large formats such as FF35. Not that it matters for cine purposes, as there is not many cine lenses for FF35.



The golden route


Good points all around, Hans, especially about how DOF affects sharpness.



The golden route would be a S35mm DMSC camera that resolves 5K+ with the DR of the upcoming FF35 cameras.


I think FF35 will always be superior (when used with more light), but at some point S35 will be good enough that the difference will not be important in many circumstances.

[Emanuel A.]

Yes to proprietary. And yes to compatible with all the "Brains". So you can use the FF35 lenses on all models (except Fixed 8x obviously) and the only limitation is the sensor size. You can use, for example, an FF35 lens on an S35 brain and have full auto capability.

(...)

These are good news!




(...)

There is a compromise doing this when shooting "cine" compared to RED Pro Primes. It will be better than shooting DSLR lenses from other manufacturers but not like using dedicated cine lenses. Again... DSMC.

JimWhat exactly will it mean comparing with "cine" then?

[DAVID McNAMARA]

I'll buy all RED lenses. Does my opinion count? We are building the lenses I have always wanted. I'm not buying them because they are RED. I'm buying them because they are better.

Jim

Hey Jim
What glass is used in the Red Primes? I have read the comparisons between S4's and the new RED primes and I am very excited.
David McNamara
RED#5209

[Jannard]

Hey Jim
What glass is used in the Red Primes? I have read the comparisons between S4's and the new RED primes and I am very excited.
David McNamara
RED#5209

Just like the RED 18-85mm zoom, the RED Pro Primes are a fresh sheet of paper design using the best glass and coating technology available anywhere. They are not re-housed anything. We'll have them, along with a lens projector, at the Reduser party in Las Vegas at the Rio Hotel.

Jim

[chuck colburn]

Just like the RED 18-85mm zoom, the RED Pro Primes are a fresh sheet of paper design using the best glass and coating technology available anywhere. They are not re-housed anything. We'll have them, along with a lens projector, at the Reduser party in Las Vegas at the Rio Hotel.

Jim

Damn, wish I could be there for that!

[Emanuel A.]

So, they are not a sheet of paper anymore, I believe. ;-)

[Roberto Lequeux]

SJ said 5k for true 4k debayered, that is what I thought was so exiting about 5k cause I agree that 4k is plenty anyway, but 5k gets you "true" 4k wich means a lot for the big guys. And I agree that many would not mind adding a bit of light for a little more stopping down.

Still, I think this is going to be even cooler when you factor in that with a few years passed since Mysterium, there is NO WAY that we won't be seeing BIG advance in sensitivity. S/N simply HAS to be WAY better.

Of course I haz no clue about the actual state of sensor development. I am no engineer or industry insider, but consider this: In the same span of time we went from CPUs generating 95C of heat at a given voltage to a now 60C, at slightly higher voltages. Smaller architecture simply gets more effective hardware, the more effective it gets, the lower the voltages, the lower the heat, the lower the S/N. Anyway, I am rambling, but this has to mean that they are currently getting more sensitivity with equal SN, or most likely higher sensitivity with lower SN than R1. It has been a long time in electronic-years since Mysterium got released. And Red is going to release 3-month old hardware, not 1-year old stuff cause Jim is a relentless maniac who keeps changing things till the last second. We have to be a long way from Mysterium.

So I think we'll be able to stop down even more than necessary to get S35 DoF out of a sensor with a size somewhere between S35 and FF35.

And the double threat would be, if all this were true, that we'd also get us into the average lens sweet spot, right? Which would only seem calculated... a best of both worlds advantage. Larger photosites would effectively help push us into where Optics wants us to be.

[DAVID McNAMARA]

Just like the RED 18-85mm zoom, the RED Pro Primes are a fresh sheet of paper design using the best glass and coating technology available anywhere. They are not re-housed anything. We'll have them, along with a lens projector, at the Reduser party in Las Vegas at the Rio Hotel.

Jim

Thank You Jim
When is that party?

[jbeale]

Still, I think this is going to be even cooler when you factor in that with a few years passed since Mysterium, there is NO WAY that we won't be seeing BIG advance in sensitivity. S/N simply HAS to be WAY better.

I believe they have announced 1 stop improvement with Mysterium-X. That's good, but may not be WAY better depending on your expectations. Remember that camera sensors do not scale and improve quite the same way as computer chips do.

The most comparable thing to the Red camera progress, in my mind, is the development of DSLR sensors. For example, in the past 9 years Canon has gone through seven generations of mid-range 1.6x crop DSLRs (EOS D30,D60,10D,20D,30D,40D,50D). If you remove the effects of software noise reduction, I think the actual improvement in Canon's sensor SNR has been a few stops over that nine year period (just my impression from using the cameras- I haven't measured it).

[Roberto Lequeux]

I see, but Canon was probably holding back a bit on their R&D. Couldn't sensitivity be up a little more than one stop if S/N goes up by 1 stop?

[Jannard]

I see, but Canon was probably holding back a bit on their R&D. Couldn't sensitivity be up a little more than one stop if S/N goes up by 1 stop?

By your logic, Monstro should be ISO 2000... and it is absolutely not. Too sweeping of a generalization. Too many other factors involved. Just sit back and try to relax. We'll post what it is when we know for sure after all the work is done.

Jim

[Roberto Lequeux]

Wow... I didn't know it would take that much.


Just sit back and try to relax.

My bad. Sorry about the noise.

[Daniel Browning]

Couldn't sensitivity be up a little more than one stop if S/N goes up by 1 stop?

One definition of sensitivity is "light gathering power" (or quantum efficiency). Another definition is "the suggested ISO rating for a camera which is based on light gathering power and read noise".

It's useful to understand that difference as well as the way that read noise and light gathering power affect the ISO rating.

Most people say that the RED ONE's "sensitivity" is ISO 320. This is a shorthand way of saying "a good exposure index to use for rating the camera to get a nice amount of highlight headroom and a certain amount of stops in the shadows". Some don't mind a little less highlight headroom, so they recommend ISO 250 or ISO 200 to get less noise in the shadows (more "footroom"). Others prefer to rate the camera at ISO 500 for even more highlight headroom when the shadows aren't as important.

So what causes a photographer to rate ISO the RED ONE at 320 or ISO 250?

There are two principle factors: quantum efficiency and read noise.

Quantum efficiency (QE) means "what percentage of light that strikes the sensor that is converted." If only 1% of the light striking a sensor is captured, that would be a low QE. 50% is a high QE.

Exposure and QE determines how much "photon shot noise" is in the image for a given sensor size. Most images are photon shot noise limited. The only way to improve photon shot noise is to collect more light. For a given sensor size you can collect more light by changing exposure (wider f-number, more lights, etc.) or improving the QE of the sensor.

The other factor is read noise. This type of noise typically only affects the shadows in most images.

So if RED improved QE in Mysterium-X twofold, they could change their rating from ISO 320 to ISO 640 and the improvement would be exactly as everyone expects. The theoretical maximum is 100% QE, but the practical limit in reality is closer to 40-70% due to pesky things such as trying to get accurate color.

If RED improved read noise twofold, the improvement will be a little bit different. Since it only affects shadows, rating the camera at ISO 640 would cause an increase in photon shot noise, so that noise gets worse in highlights, midtones, and shadows. But the noise in midtones and highlights isn't bothersome at all right now IMHO, so if that was the case I think most of us will be happy to make the trade for improved shadows.


For example, in the past 9 years Canon has gone through seven generations of mid-range 1.6x crop DSLRs (EOS D30,D60,10D,20D,30D,40D,50D). If you remove the effects of software noise reduction, I think the actual improvement in Canon's sensor SNR has been a few stops over that nine year period (just my impression from using the cameras- I haven't measured it).

Canon's QE has improved 5% in the last 1 year. 30% in the last 3 years, and 115% in the last 5 years. I'm not sure about before that. I think this signifies that Canon is hitting the practical limits to QE, though not the theoretically possible ones. [10D: 0.042 photo-electrons per 12-bit ADU per square micron. 50D: 0.100 e-/adu/um^2.]

Canon's biggest improvement in the last 5 years was high-ISO read noise. Combined with the QE improvement it allowed the high ISO shadows to improve S/N by 3.2 stops from 10D to 50D. (using S/N at 8 stops below clipping for 12 micron CoC).

Base ISO read noise and full well capacity improvements over the same time period improved base ISO dynamic range by 0.77 stops.

So... getting back to the question one more time:


Couldn't sensitivity be up a little more than one stop if S/N goes up by 1 stop?

It depends on where the S/N improvement occurs. The only way for it to occur equally in all exposure zones due to improvement in QE, which would be pretty incredible. A 1 stop improvement in read noise (shadow S/N) would allow the photographer to rate the camera at double the ISO and still get the same shadow noise as RED ONE. (Midtones and highlights would be a little noisier, but that will not be a problem for many folks). That, too, would be a tremendous improvement, and is much more likely to reside in the realm of reality.

I'm looking forward to Scarlet.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Sorry Jim, I feel like I am back in school about to get reprimanded by my professor, yet again, for talking way too much. But I feel I have to thank and answer to Daniel's post.

Daniel, thank you yet again for yet an other :a'la Bill and Ted: "most excellent" post. Only now I "found" photon shot noise: "occurs when the finite number of particles that carry energy, such as]...[photons in an optical device, is small enough to give rise to detectable statistical fluctuations in a measurement" - from Wiki, haha... or course!

Till now the only noise I knew was Read Noise, and all the while I wondered WTF is this read noise everyone is talking about?! :blushing:

[Antoine Baumann]

SJ said 5k for true 4k debayered, that is what I thought was so exiting about 5k cause I agree that 4k is plenty anyway, but 5k gets you "true" 4k wich means a lot for the big guys.

Sorry but what is "true 4K"?
"Our" Northlight scanner scan 6k and then downscale to 4K/2K, that is to get the best MTF curve @ 4K/2K, as remember this scanner has a ccd sensor and is also limited by Nyquist, therefore in a way scanning 4K will never result in a "true 4K" image.
I think the debate about 4K or not is coming because of the 3 ccds cameras, where (as film in a way) you get 1 channels for each color, and not with a single "bayer" sensor, thus the "hey man, not true 4K" argument, but come on!

Also what's the "big boys"? Was not slumdog millionaire shot partially @2K "bayer" resolution, and are you sure the post production of the scanned film were really @ 4K?
I mean sure, this is not the 120 mio $ hollywood movie, but still I would put Dany Boyle in the "interesting director" category, not sure if that is also in the "big boys" one, but who cares?

As stated many many times, 2K finished resolution is enough for theatrical release, and 4K acquisition is enough also. Now if you want have the biggest resolution, why not do 3d animation movie @ 100K, sure render times get long, but come on, you will be the first to attempt it ;-)


cheers,
antoine.

[Andrew M.]

Northlight is limited to 200 lppm on its optics anyway so hardly true 4k.
Adding precision of film movement that is equivalent of 150 lppm gives you effective resolution of the whole system to be good 2K as compared to digital cinema.
Digital Cinema does not convert or move the medium. No optics involved in converting or producing masters.
What you acquire is what you display in the digital projection.
At the end RED 4K gives you 50% better result than RGB 4K scan

[Roberto Lequeux]

Come on Antoine, I can only deal with so much ridicule per thread. Give me a break pls... : )

I guess what I meant by "big boys" was anyone who felt they needed "4k" straight to the film out. And I guess that makes me a "small boy" who would be perfectly happy to screen from a PS3 plugged into a 1080 projector in a garage if saves me some valuable cash to put into the film xP

I'll just try to shut up till DSMC is out and take what I get with a massive smile plastered across my face.

[Antoine Baumann]

Sorry Roberto, no intention to be targeting to you ;-)
but I have to admit that I sometimes get annoyed by this "true 4K" stuff, I mean, what is it? 100% MTF @ nyquist limit and then 0%? If it doesn't exist, then why bother about it?

For me with redone 4K resolution, resolution is not a problem anymore, and I will stick with S35 cine lenses (still hoping for a monstro S35 4/3), more DR is more important as well as ergonomy and a few technical stuff (like multi display,...).

cheers,
antoine.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Exactly... for my non-DP eyes I don't need any more resolution than R1 already offers for 2.35 after watching Knowing... well I knew that ages ago. If we don't get a good film out it is on us for not doing things right. And with the lenses it seems we will be covered in every front without having to pay too much, so maybe we won't need to use a PS3 after all. : )

[Cüneyt Kaya]

If we don't get a good film out it is on us for not doing things right.

quote of the year

[ericyoung]

Daniel Browning's posting goes mostly over my head at the moment. The most significant sensor improvement for me would be low light performance being up there with the best from Sony, or Canon and Nikon DSLRs.

Was watching the extras on the DVD of Apocalypto, and the lit by firelight shots on the Genesis looked amazingly clean. OK, I'm sure post-processing probably helped, but on the two limited test shoots I've done so far, unuseable noise rears its head at anything above ISO 500 on the Red. Nowhere near enough to shoot available light by firelight. Still I'd be the first to admit I might be doing something wrong - Red newbie that I am!

[Michael Ragen]

depends on exactly what you need to light with the fire. you can for closeups. at 1:10 this is just firelight. http://www.vimeo.com/2217794

don't get me wrong though. i'm really hoping the new cameras are 500 iso.

[Dan Hudgins]

The most significant improvement for me would be low light performance being up there with the best from Sony, or Canon and Nikon DSLRs.

Its hard to balance using high speed lenses with the reality of actors that move around and don't hit their marks,

Look at the 1K scans from Super16 at these links (you need to sign in to see them), they were shot at f/2 and f/2.5 and there is not much that you can see in sharp focus, the plane of focus is like 1mm deep maybe?

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=402805#post402805

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=28486&page=5

I was shooting some stuff in 35mm at f/1.2 using a 28mm and the depth of field was only a few inches or less at 6 feet, so sensor speed may be more usefull than lens speed?

[ericyoung]

Its hard to balance using high speed lenses with the reality of actors that move around and don't hit their marks...I was shooting some stuff in 35mm at f/1.2 using a 28mm and the depth of field was only a few inches or less at 6 feet, so sensor speed may be more usefull than lens speed?

Sorry Dan, my post was strictly off topic, although this thread has been straying all over the place, but I wasn't referring to faster lenses. I meant the noise floor/sensitivity of the Red [Edited my post above to be clearer].

Fire with its low colour temperature really stresses CMOS and hence Red's weakness in the blue channel. And it's low luminance challenges Red's relatively low native sensitivity compared to other digital sensors. I'd like improvements in both areas, although I realise greater sensitivity will have undesirable consequences when shooting in bright sunlight!

[Shawn Nelson]

Daniel, indeed, a most excellent post. Btw, we need to hang out.

[ericyoung]

Here are a few frame grabs of the Standard Def Apocalypto DVD (I know it's hard to judge from a low res MPEG source, but the dark areas appear to have low noise filmlike grain rather than nasty blue fixed pattern noise like I see in the EVF of my Red when I raise ISO above 500. But I haven't shot enough real world tests with my camera yet to see what it can really do with correct settings etc. And I'm sure crushing blacks and other post can work wonders.

[donatello b]

lens = fixed lens Scarlet - whatever it (lens) is = it is ..if JJ says it's good that's good enough for me ...

lets talk about Primes & other zooms after NAB & S.A.L.T ...

[ericyoung]

depends on exactly what you need to light with the fire. you can for closeups. at 1:10 this is just firelight. http://www.vimeo.com/2217794

don't get me wrong though. i'm really hoping the new cameras are 500 iso.

Hi Michael

So what were your camera settings on those shots? What grading?

Thanks
Eric

[Michael Ragen]

i believe we were shooting 320 with superspeeds wide open or very close to. grading was done in after effects but i don't have the details on that.

[david farland]

Thanks Daniel and all for the information...really nice!!

Just steering the thread a bit...always like a picture.
11918

This one lays out the next 12 months of Red lenses/cameras.
To me end of 2009 always felt like a log jam with too many options, which is kinda weird. That's Jim's problem.
I don't have to buy them all, do I Jim? Well I know his answer....
So he's given us a lot of choices at the end of the year....great.

Someone with a FF35 will have a better camera than someone with a S35.
And someone with the $$'s to buy everything in this economy will have a juicier xmas/new year than me. Good luck to them. They probably deserve it.
Availability of lenses may dampen the FF35 camp a little but I expect where's there's a weak point, someone will fill it and we'll have cine grade FF35 lenses all over FF35 cameras sooner than you can say what's the next big lenses offering for NAB 2010.

Bottom line is cash and if I plan to go FF35 cameras, I'll need to budget for FF35 lenses...as I'll be wasting half the sensor/camera if I don't use them and you're paying $28K for a couple of extra stops.

So my lens budget for the next year will include FF35 lenses.

Question 1: Will exisiting S35 lenses be regarded as B4 lenses in 5 years as resolutions 6K and upwards take hold?....it ain't going to go down or stay constant!

Dave.

[Joel Kaye]

Nowhere near enough to shoot available light by firelight. Still I'd be the first to admit I might be doing something wrong - Red newbie that I am!

Make the fire bigger or get the talent closer. Did you bring some shiny boards? Bounce that fire light right back at 'em.

You have to color correct warm and crush the blacks 'cause that's what you shot. Also, noise reduction software does work.

[Joel Kaye]

Here are a few frame grabs of the Standard Def Apocalypto DVD

That was probably lit with HMIs with CTO. Those guys had all the gear in the world out there - I'd be really, really surprised if all they had was a fire.

[ericyoung]

That was probably lit with HMIs with CTO. Those guys had all the gear in the world out there - I'd be really, really surprised if all they had was a fire.

Well, according to Mel and his producer on the commentary track, it really was just fire light, but he wasn't the DoP and maybe their memory was incorrect...

[Scott Webster]

I had the pleasure of watching a digital projection of Apocalypto off an HDCAM-SR master on a screening hosted by Panavision New Zealand. Dean Semler and John Gault were both in attendance. If you even have the opportunity to hear Dean speak, take it.

This quote is from an info handout given on the evening:

The imagery in Apocalypto involves a certain amount of natural firelight. At the beginning of the picture, the villagers gather around fires to listen to an old story teller and dance . For these scenes, Semler bounced an HMI gelled with White Flame Green and 1/2 CTO into an Ultrabounce 35' above the action to create a "dirty nightlight" 1-2 stops under the overhead ambiance. "I then approached special effects supervisor Jesus Duran and said, 'Tonight, you're going to be my gaffer!" recalls the cinematographer. "He had his crew build six propane fires in the village to provide the main illumination. I was sitting in the tent, and my screen was black. Then the fires came up, and it was absolutely beautiful. My concern was that the fire would be too bright and the faces not quite bright enough, but the range was superb. I had no trouble in the highlights, and it didn't flare out. The blacks stayed black; the faces were really beautiful, and I was able to stay on the zooms and shoot any direction without having to avoid lights hidden in logs and rocks" By Benjamin B