Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

what lens covers the sensor

G

Gregory Sheffer

Well-known member
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
232
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Just went and talked with the lens guys at the shop and they said that I can use a standard 16 lens with the RED in 2k. I do not need to get a super16 lens. Is this true? I had my eye on the Zeiss Vario Sonnar T2.4 12-120mm and I can save a $1000 bucks by using the Zeiss Vario Sonnar 10-100 if the 16 mm lens covers the sensor.
 
gsheff said:
Just went and talked with the lens guys at the shop and they said that I can use a standard 16 lens with the RED in 2k. I do not need to get a super16 lens. Is this true? I had my eye on the Zeiss Vario Sonnar T2.4 12-120mm and I can save a $1000 bucks by using the Zeiss Vario Sonnar 10-100 if the 16 mm lens covers the sensor.
Click to expand...

How weird is that... I've literally just posted a thread with linked article on my site about this:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=114824#post114824

Paul
 
Jens Jakob Thorsen said:
How wierd is wanting to use aprox 1/4 of the sensor?
The full monty is why I reserved the thing!
There are 100.000+ of 16mm sized sensors out there...

Best
JJ
DP
EU
Click to expand...

I don't know if wierd is necessarily the right word. A preference is a preference right, plus there's the additional option to use the full sensor if required at some point. Why not simply ask gsheff the reasons for his choice rather than call it wierd?
 
Crikey Gavin, you're 10-to-1-ing me on posts. What the hell am I doing with my time?
 
Jens Jakob Thorsen said:
How wierd is wanting to use aprox 1/4 of the sensor?
The full monty is why I reserved the thing!
There are 100.000+ of 16mm sized sensors out there...

Best
JJ
DP
EU
Click to expand...
Hi Jens,

Couple of reasons for shooting 2K are that the current crop of slower 16GB CF cards, and soon to be released 32GB cards will work at shooting 2K. A 32GB card will give you about an hours shooting without swapping out, making it ideal for doc work or low budget shoots where you want to run and gun. Also viewing the full 2K as captured is possible for editing and grading whereas even monitoring 4K is not.

Of course 4K is the ideal format, and I'll be shooting most 4K stuff on Zeiss primes, but the camera is all about options so why limit yourself to only shooting one way?

Paul
 
not all 16mm necessarily cover the full(S-)16mm surface.

But what am I making words:

David Mullen ASC said:
Most normal and longer 16mm lenses cover Super-16 just as most normal and longer 35mm lenses cover Super-35 -- it's the wider-angle ones and the wide-end of the zooms that you have to watch out for.
Click to expand...

I would amend: test the lens first.
 
augenmensch aka therock said:
not all 16mm necessarily cover the full(S-)16mm surface.

But what am I making words:

I would amend: test the lens first.
Click to expand...

Hi Augenmensch, I presume the edit you did was perhaps after reading the article I wrote? Yes I agree once tested we'll have some more definitive answers. All I have to go on is theory, but the theory is pretty good.

David's point is a good one, that for a large part 16mm lenses cover S16mm, which means the likelihood of all 16mm lenses working according to the theory put forward is increased. Since the circle of coverage as mentioned in the article is infact only a minimum and in many cases is greatly exceeded. But his point was somewhat against what I was attempting to suggest, which is that 16mm could be used even at the wide end and therefore be an even more suitable format than S16mm. Any lens format that only works from a certain length up is next to useless in my opinion, you might as well go Super 16 entirely if that was the case.

Paul
 
hi Paul,

to be honest, no, I didn't read it yet. Open since then in my browser as part of my work during the train ride home. But theres usually more todo than I can accomplish - in short: nothing pro or con your theory, it still needs to be gathered.

Most of what I know, I got from my father. I wouldn't even call me a good photographer. But as an experienced technician, I have to see that older designs did not necessarily cover the whole area in full quality. That of course is caused by the fact that at that time the lenses were built, the format was not existing and thus could not fullfill the requirements we'd like them to conform to today.
Many lenses of course do fullfill them, as they might even cover a far bigger area than S16. But this is not conditioned by the format, but the lens design.
You might find absolutely a complete 16mm set that fully covers the entire S16 area without any restrictions.
With those many lens designs out there for 16mm I only suppose one should try them first. Thats all.
Cheers mate.
 
Yeah I was simply banging on about the fact that the S16mm is smaller on the Red and the difference in aspect ratio means in theory 16mm should fit fine. It'll be fun to test out and all being well I hope the Cooke will be a great lens for 2K shooting. I'll be sure to give feedback and I'm sure others will try.

Paul
 
Hi Paul,

I finally got it and made to read it.
Complements, good page design and features (the rings switching on and off)!

And of course I got the point you're saying now (at least :innocent: ).
Still, but I think we are not disagreeing at all here, only a test will and can show.
Nonetheless, if your calculations are correct (and it looks pretty good :biggrin: ) in theory they should fit easily...
 
Hi Aug' (:))

Yeah, here's hoping and thanks for the complements! Hopefully I will be able to shed some light before the end of the month.

Paul
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top