Epic with Super16mm ZOOM 2K.

[Nick Morrison]

AND...on the Dragon ...current 2K coverage will be recorded at 3k...which when downscaled to 1080p I'm sure will look much better.

I think 16mm lenses are going to be "interesting" on Dragon.

[Matt Uhry]

I think it sort of depends on your expectations. I think 2k epic blows the doors off of 720 Varicam which I was quite happy to shot for several years. 720 Varicam also blows the doors off of super 16mm film. So yes 2k isn't as good as 3k or 4k, but it is still very good.

Nick

Yeah - but our expectations in this case are a moving target, what looked good 4 or 10 years ago not so good anymore. Future proof is not really possible, but you should just try to be future ready as possible. Just saying that 2k is a bit Lo-Fi and I've generally been disappointed when I've used it. **Depends on what you are going for creatively of course**

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

[Nick Gardner]

Agreed. Some times 2k is the right choice however. I had job last week that really should have been shot on ex3s or some such thing, but I didn't feel like renting them and the hassle that that involves. So I took 2 epics and shot 2k so my ssds lasted forever, and I used 16mm glass (i had to dig through my garage, but I found some). Cameras worked great, client happy, and I didn't have to shoot on an ex whatever ;-)

I don't think of 2k as a replacement for shooting what I consider real red footage, it's a nice alternative to have for stuff that would have been shot on another format.

Nick

[Joshua Reis]

I have used 2k mode with the Canon 11-165 and Canon 7-63 zooms on many projects. 2k is perfect for low budget run and gun music videos that will be finishing in 1080 or less. The Super 16 glass gives you that great range and versatility in a compact package when matched with a Scarlet or Epic. The 2k data rate is manageable when you don't have a DIT to deal with 4k file sizes. Transcoding is much faster. There are obvious drawbacks in shooting 2k like a decrease in sharpness and if you want a clean image, I usually rate the Scarlet/Epic 320-500 asa as opposed to being comfortable with anything that it 800 and plus at 3k, 4k, and 5k resolutions. Using an 80A or 80C filter becomes more important if you want a clean and balanced image as a final result. I would be extremely hesitant about using 2k for green screen unless the final deliverables is only SD. I recommend shooting with 3:1 and 4:1 compression to minimize artifacting. 2k is just like shooting Super 16 film in that you can have amazing results, but be aware you are working within tighter tolerances than if one was shooting 35mm or 4k mode. Proper exposure is extremely important and any compression or optical irregularities are magnified. Its an aesthetic choice that has a style of its own. I'm definitely looking forward to the higher pixel density of the Dragon sensor to give us a true and sharp 1080 deliverable.

[Nick Morrison]

I have used 2k mode with the Canon 11-165 and Canon 7-63 zooms on many projects. 2k is perfect for low budget run and gun music videos that will be finishing in 1080 or less. The Super 16 glass gives you that great range and versatility in a compact package when matched with a Scarlet or Epic. The 2k data rate is manageable when you don't have a DIT to deal with 4k file sizes. Transcoding is much faster. There are obvious drawbacks in shooting 2k like a decrease in sharpness and if you want a clean image, I usually rate the Scarlet/Epic 320-500 asa as opposed to being comfortable with anything that it 800 and plus at 3k, 4k, and 5k resolutions. Using an 80A or 80C filter becomes more important if you want a clean and balanced image as a final result. I would be extremely hesitant about using 2k for green screen unless the final deliverables is only SD. I recommend shooting with 3:1 and 4:1 compression to minimize artifacting. 2k is just like shooting Super 16 film in that you can have amazing results, but be aware you are working within tighter tolerances than if one was shooting 35mm or 4k mode. Proper exposure is extremely important and any compression or optical irregularities are magnified. Its an aesthetic choice that has a style of its own. I'm definitely looking forward to the higher pixel density of the Dragon sensor to give us a true and sharp 1080 deliverable.

Josh I'd always heard that 16mm and S16 glass was "sharper" than S35mm, because it had to be to imprint on such a small negative...have you found any noticeable improvement in sharpness when shooting on 16mm primes vs S35mm primes at 2k? Just curious...

[Joshua Reis]

Hi Nick, there are many variables to consider to properly answer this question, but generally speaking I would say "no". A modern and well maintained set of 35mm primes will always look sharper than an identical set of Super 16 lenses. However, we are using a windowed part of the sensor at 2k, so maybe the sensor is a bigger part of the equation here than the glass? I'm not a lens or camera technician, so I'm purely speaking from my experiences as a DP. As I mentioned in my original response, any irregularities in the Super 16 glass will be magnified so if you want a "sharp image" the glass has to be much more properly maintained and perfect than 35 glass, where there is a little more margin for error in tolerances. When shooting in "windowed 2k" mode on a red camera, its essentially the same as shooting at 4k and center cropping 50 percent of the image right? Every lens is different. If possible, I think the best way to really know is to shoot some tests. Compression, shutter angle, T stop, frame-rate, and filters also affect the perception of resolution.