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 :)

617 lenses and "equivalent FOV"

Nils J. Nesse

Nils J. Nesse

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
813
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
www.filmatisk.no
Just toying with the different formats in my head here.

Am I right in thinking that the 617 format has an "inverse crop factor" of about 4? (Pardon my populistic terminology)

The basis for my math is that 617 film diagonal is 180mm, so:

180mm is a normal lens. (Equivalent field of view to 45mm on FF35)
90mm is a wide angle. (Equivalent FOV to 22.5mm on FF35)
300mm is a short tele. (Equivalent FOV to 75mm on FF35)

Or maybe it doesn't work this way, because the aspect ratio is so different from "normal" film formats? Or something.
 
I owned the Fuji-GX617 and I had three lenses: 90mm, 105mm and 180mm. The total package was about $50K back in the day. There was also a 300mm lens as You can see in this picture:

fuji-617-1.jpg


The main advantage the EPIC is going to have (besides the obvious digital one) is the ability to precisely frame the shot with either the LCD, or the EVF... :w00t:

I can't wait for the 617 Epic!!!
 
Okay, I've been really curious about this - what kind of storage medium can handle this volume of data?

Even the 16GB cards could only store 80 frames at 200mb/frame!

And wouldn't a hard drive be too slow? If I'm calculating correctly it would take several GB/second. Wow.

D
 
David Dennis said:
Okay, I've been really curious about this - what kind of storage medium can handle this volume of data?

Even the 16GB cards could only store 80 frames at 200mb/frame!

And wouldn't a hard drive be too slow? If I'm calculating correctly it would take several GB/second. Wow.

D
Click to expand...

That's where REDCODE comes into play. The 617 will output REDCODE 500. That is "only" 500 MB pr sec, so each frame is approx 20 MB. But you are right, no external media as of today supports these amounts of data.

And still, definitely wow. ;)
 
Depth of field

Depth of field

I worked out some depth of field numbers:

The following have the same perspective, 40 degree angle of view (AOV), 16.4-foot focus distance, and 6.7 feet DOF:

Scarlet 2/3": 14mm f/0.9
4/3" DSLR: * *24mm f/1.6
Super35: * * *34mm f/2.2
Still FF35: * 49mm f/3.2
645: * * * * *76mm f/5.0
617: * * * * 220mm f/14
 
I can't wait for the 617 Epic!!!
Click to expand...

Peter,
I'm with you on this one,I used to use the Linhof and the format is beautiful.
Curious to know if I'll be able to bolt it onto my 10x8 Sinar for studio work.
Although I haven't used the Sinar recently,I could never bring myself to sell it or the lenses.
It might just see a new lease of life.
It's certainly pretty close to the top of my purchase list after the 645 Epic.
Btw,beautiful shots you posted on the other thread.
Tom.
 
Fredrik Harreschou said:
That's where REDCODE comes into play. The 617 will output REDCODE 500. That is "only" 500 MB pr sec, so each frame is approx 20 MB. But you are right, no external media as of today supports these amounts of data.

And still, definitely wow. ;)
Click to expand...

I couldn't resist calculating it out - that would mean a 16gb card could store 800 frames or 33.33 seconds worth of footage.

Can a CF card handle that data rate, even if it was big enough?

I looked up specifications for CF cards and it looks like they normally top out at 800 megaBITS per second which is about 80 megabytes per second. With 500 megabytes per second in REDCODE 500, we appear to have a huge problem on our hands.

I wonder how Jim and team are going to figure this one out. It's particularly interesting since from what I understand there are still no halfway economical options for projecting 4K or even Scarlet's 3K images.

I know that at one point RED was going to introduce a line of monitors and projectors, but they seem to have stuck with image acquisition, to the extent that we are now victims of SONY and their $78k+ units. Darn. If I am ever going to shoot in 4K I sure would love to see what my images are actually like!

I am somewhat amused by the fact that however impractical these units appear from a superficial viewpoint, there is a pretty sizable audience for them already!

D
 
I think it would surprise you just how many of these units will be sold.
As a stills photographer,I have clients who would bite my hand off if I could offer this to them tomorrow.I'm not sure if I would like to shoot a commercial on it,but I have a least a couple of clients who I could convince to do it.
I often use my Phase One P45+ on a 5x4 with a flex adapter which stitches up to three exposures together to give you roughly 6x9,and I'd like bigger please.
These boys at Red are pretty sharp,they know the market.
Tom.
 
David Dennis said:
With 500 megabytes per second in REDCODE 500, we appear to have a huge problem on our hands.

D
Click to expand...

Redcode 500 doesn't refer to 500 megabytes per second. The use of 500 refers to a combination of factors, according to an interview with Ted Schilowitz.

Quote by Ted on fxguide.com "Well this is a little tricky this number is no longer a direct indicator of the data rate, it is a combination of the frame resolution and low compression with the frame rate, so the 225 number is saying both better compression and it allows high frame rate - it is not just the same 'scale' or number as before. It is not just a simple one step compression ratio as it was before."

Read the article on their website or listen to their podcast - that's what I did.

Cheers

Karuna
 
the 645 is of interest to me yes, use my old medium format film glass. But I would not give up the Sinar 8x10, I still use my field camera a lot, cannot beat a 8x10 negative for the depth and detail in still work, but when Red offers the 8x10" Giganto-steriumX Super Format Sensor I will be all over it ;)
Ron
 
Ronald Reddick said:
the 645 is of interest to me yes, use my old medium format film glass. But I would not give up the Sinar 8x10, I still use my field camera a lot, cannot beat a 8x10 negative for the depth and detail in still work, but when Red offers the 8x10" Giganto-steriumX Super Format Sensor I will be all over it ;)
Ron
Click to expand...

Ron,
me too,better get in line,don't think Jim will make one just for a couple of people,not unless he fancies one.
Tom.
 
Peter Majtan said:
I owned the Fuji-GX617 and I had three lenses: 90mm, 105mm and 180mm. The total package was about $50K back in the day. There was also a 300mm lens as You can see in this picture:

fuji-617-1.jpg


The main advantage the EPIC is going to have (besides the obvious digital one) is the ability to precisely frame the shot with either the LCD, or the EVF... :w00t:

I can't wait for the 617 Epic!!!
Click to expand...

I'm with you Peter. I remember taking quite a while to train my eye to the Fuji viewfinder. Red's space age version of 617 is going to be amazing !
Aloha
-A
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top