The FF35 system

[Jase]

I've heard some people talk about how they "aren't sure" about the FF35 system. Why is that? It seems like it has a few more capabilities than the s35. Is there something about the technology I don't understand? Is it that s35mm lenses don't cover the sensor?

Thanks.

 

[Stephen Williams]

Is it that s35mm lenses don't cover the sensor?

Thanks.

Yes, lenses are probably the most important decision a DOP makes.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Yet you will get additional bit depth and can shoot S35 windowed. Especially useful if you have still glass and or if you ever plan to shoot stills with the brain. The price difference is quite small when considering complete packages. All mounts will be available.

Certainly some things to consider.

 

[Clayton Harper]

A lot of people used to think 4K was overkill, now they are screaming for more. The thing about 4K that has blown my mind is the ability to reframe shots especially when going down to a smaller resolution like 1080p or 2K. To me, even a bump to 5K is very valuable for this reason.

I'm sure in a couple years time folks will find lenses and a use for FF35 on the Epic and Scarlet. They just have to see it in action. Not everyone has future vision like JJ.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

Wanna bet?

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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