Red mount red pro anamorphic lenses

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I've got an idea fellas! How about we stop attempting to put ideas for new lenses in Red's heads before the PL-Mount primes have arrived! :biggrin:

I'm hoping that the delay on the PL mount primes is that they've taken extra care to make sure they cover FF35. ...I can dream, right?

 

[JonathanF]

I'm hoping that the delay on the PL mount primes is that they've taken extra care to make sure they cover FF35. ...I can dream, right?

I'm not sure making primes that cover S35 and FF35 in one piece of glass really makes sense. You will generally get a more cost effective design if the Image Circle is smaller. If you are shooting S35 then why would you want to pay for FF35 coverage?

As an example, if I have a T1.3 MP that has a 31mm image circle it's going to cost Euro 15,150. To get that lens with an image circle that will cover FF35 with the same optical performance you're looking at a significantly more expensive chunk of glass. Most of the Arri zooms for S35 are in the 40k range (euro) and I shudder to think what FF35 zooms of that quality will cost.

If someone is delivering it for the same price, you can pretty much assume that somethings going to give, like you'll be using Sygma glass instead of Zeiss.

Frankly I'd rather get the best possible optical quality for the format I'm shooting without the need to engineer performance I won't see on smaller format sensor. If you have both FF35 and S35 cameras it would be a different story altogether, but I think people are going to get a bit of a shock when they start seeing the prices on top tier glass with this kind of image circle dimensions.

J

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'm not sure making primes that cover S35 and FF35 in one piece of glass really makes sense. You will generally get a more cost effective design if the Image Circle is smaller. If you are shooting S35 then why would you want to pay for FF35 coverage?

Thanks for responding to a really old thread.

We now know that RED's PRO primes will not cover FF and that will be something left for their FF35 electronic lenses.

I only shoot S35 because that is what's available. EPIC FF35 and 645 can't get here fast enough. Once that happens, my only reasons to shoot S35 will be to use specific lenses that only cover S35 or if a client wants it, or if it just proves easier or more manageable within the confines of a given project.

 

[JonathanF]

Jeff,

LOL I'm in from the sticks for a week before going back out again for another few days of pickups so I'm getting my internet fix in while I can.

All this big sensor stuff is really fine and dandy till you actually have to get the optics for a film. I don't see the world's cine lens manufacturers, cook, arri, pv, ang, etc. all whipping out FF35 glass any time soon.

If people want to use DSLR lenses then that's up to them, but I'm partial to all the mechanical advantages of Cine glass and I'm not going to give that up for a little extra sensor when It's not going to make it to the screen anyway till 4k projection goes mainstream.

But the added cost in post for grading, VFX, etc are always going to be a consideration.

I can go shoot 65 all day long if I can get a producer to pay for it, but as I've mentioned before, I've been in those meetings and the discussion is always real short.

:J

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

All this big sensor stuff is really fine and dandy till you actually have to get the optics for a film. I don't see the world's cine lens manufacturers, cook, arri, pv, ang, etc. all whipping out FF35 glass any time soon.

Yes, so very true...

If people want to use DSLR lenses then that's up to them, but I'm partial to all the mechanical advantages of Cine glass and I'm not going to give that up for a little extra sensor when It's not going to make it to the screen anyway till 4k projection goes mainstream.

Digital projection is taking off rather quickly. Digital 3D being one of the driving forces and the promise of cheaper distribution. I think larger digital formats will catch on relatively quick compared to past formats. There is going to be increased demand for 65mm and larger. I see the 6x4.5 format becoming quite desirable as it's only about 12% smaller than 15/70mm IMAX. The industry is pushing forward with 3D and I personally don't see 3D becoming the mainstream choice for all genres. But there will be plenty of demand for other formats that can increase the visual appeal.

Post considerations are just that, considerations. Hardware gets faster and cheaper all the time and so do post solutions. I think the biggest roadblock to these larger formats being accepted in the near future will be the lack of cinema-type optics for these larger sensors. The major lens manufacturers will step up with products as soon as they see the demand. New lens designs and product offerings take time. The industry will be a drastically different place in another 5 to 7 years.

 

[JonathanF]

Digital projection is taking off rather quickly. Digital 3D being one of the driving forces and the promise of cheaper distribution. I think larger digital formats will catch on relatively quick compared to past formats. There is going to be increased demand for 65mm and larger. I see the 6x4.5 format becoming quite desirable as it's only about 12% smaller than 15/70mm IMAX. The industry is pushing forward with 3D and I personally don't see 3D becoming the mainstream choice for all genres. But there will be plenty of demand for other formats that can increase the visual appeal.

I'm sorry but I've been involved in the posting on 16 features in the past decade and I have to categorically disagree with you.

I really hope I'm wrong about all this because I'd love it if suddenly everything I shot was getting posted at 4k, but...

We have been able to do 4k in post for a decade and it's simply not being done, and the principle reason is the guy buying the ticket is not demanding it and in most cases they could care less. Further argument against this is the fact that the average screen size has actually gotten smaller over the past decade.

Mind you I'm just talking about the foreseeable future here, maybe 2 or 3 years. But then we'll be talking about S35 sensors at 20k and this whole discussion will be moot.

And there is kinda my point, while the sensors are gaining in resolution, lens manufacturers are unlikely to go out and redesign their cine glass range (which serves a micro tiny market) until we get to the point where the sensors stabilize somewhat. Right now the gains are happening fast and furious and if I was Arri I wouldn't be out having Zeiss grinding any new glass till things shake out a bit more.

I think if you go to any of the big distributors and say you're shooting s35 at 4k and it's really only 3.1k, and for just half the camera and post budget more, we can go to larger sensors, get bigger optics, heavier support equipment and a put just 20-30% more into the post budget to accommodate the additional time, effort and detail required, you'll be told 3.1k is just fine with them. And mind you, having posted both 2k and 4k shots in VFX, those numbers are pretty darn conservative. It's likely more like double, at least.

Post considerations are just that, considerations. Hardware gets faster and cheaper all the time and so do post solutions.

Having worked post on a film that saw an almost $30M increase for post expenses this past year I can tell you these things are a little more than just 'considerations.' These are major factors effecting the success or failure of a film and the money has to come from somewhere. I am pretty sure P&A took a hit on that one. We'll have to see how the numbers rack up when they release.

yet another $0.02

J

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I really hope I'm wrong about all this because I'd love it if suddenly everything I shot was getting posted at 4k, but...

On this I'm not disagreeing with you... I wasn't talking about posting at 4K or higher, I was speaking of acquisition formats. There is a lot more to shooting on larger sensors or with larger formats than potential for higher post and delivery resolution. For me, the reasoning behind shooting 65mm or shooting 6x4.5, etc.. is not to get to 4K or higher. It's about the other aesthetics these formats bring to the image. There is already a push happening with some larger studios to explore other formats in addition to 3D. The IMAX sequences for The Dark Knight are viewed as a great success and we will begin to see more and more of this sort of thing over the next few years. If the tools exist, there will be creative professionals who find a way to use them. I'm excited for these larger formats and I don't shoot or work on features. I'm excited about them for what I do. There are many types of production out there... Most all that I shoot is combined with lots of CG, heavy compositing, etc.. I spend more time in XSI, Lightwave, Modo, Nuke, Shake and AE than I do behind a RED One or any other camera. The possibilities of the larger formats for FX plates has me licking my chops. The EPIC 617 is going to be the camera for large venue and digital signage work. I have some cool things I'd love to try with it, most of which I'm not willing to mention publicly, in hopes that I may get to try them before someone else does.... We'll see. But I'm sure others are thinking of similar things too... RED obviously has lots of plans too. After all, they see enough of a market to announce such a camera.

We have been able to do 4k in post for a decade and it's simply not being done, and the principle reason is the guy buying the ticket is not demanding it and in most cases they could care less. Further argument against this is the fact that the average screen size has actually gotten smaller over the past decade.

Yep. Not much out there for 4K DI and post. Actually that's not entirely true, a lot of the big budget end is shifting to 4K DI. Even though current workstations can grind through 4K much easier than systems could handle 2K only a few years ago, there are some practical issues holding back a mass migration to 4K. Factors such as the end deliverable as you say. It's hard to justify more than a 2K transfer when projected film barely registers 800 lines in most theatrical venues. Also a lack of practical display options for viewing 4K on conventional workstations.

However, with RED and other new workflows that are rapidly gaining acceptance, the lines between acquisition, post workflow and delivery resolutions are blurring. With native REDCODE or other wavelet or dynamic compression schemes, it's possible to work in multiple resolutions and/or quality levels right from the camera original footage. In 2 to 3 years, dealing with 4K or even larger camera original files is going to be no-sweat for most any contemporary workstation. A significant amount of productions will still be shot on film, but look to film scanners and other DI workflows to adopt this level dynamic quality as well. I expect much of this sort of thing to be announced or even demonstrated at NAB this year.

And there is kinda my point, while the sensors are gaining in resolution, lens manufacturers are unlikely to go out and redesign their cine glass range (which serves a micro tiny market) until we get to the point where the sensors stabilize somewhat. Right now the gains are happening fast and furious and if I was Arri I wouldn't be out having Zeiss grinding any new glass till things shake out a bit more.

Yes, I agree. Production will have to lead the way. Upcoming sensor formats from RED are all standard sizes that have lenses available -- still lenses anyway. As more of these formats find their way into creative cinema production, small markets will open up for various lenses. It's entirely possible that manufacturers like Arri / Zeiss, Cooke, etc.. may not be the ones who field products for these cameras. It may be left for the camera manufacturers at first. Or other enterprising companies. With the shift in DSLR technology that we're starting to see, I'm looking to companies like Nikon and Canon to begin making lines of Full Frame 35mm lenses that are more cinema friendly. Time will tell...

But for the foreseeable future -- the next 2 to 3 years, I think you are right. The camera bodies will arrive first, everything else to follow. I still encounter many people every week that don't understand digital cinema or are shocked to learn that RED doesn't natively record at 1080p, etc.. A recent project I shot, very small, but a decent budget, I fought to get the extra $1500 needed to rent anamorphic lenses. The director agreed with me, but the producers didn't understand the reasoning behind it vs. just cropping to 2:35:1. The entire production was just under $10K, so we were effectively asking for a 15% budget increase right out of the gate... It didn't fly. But we posted it in 4K and delivered on both Blu-Ray and DVD. Heh. Color grading via Color Finesse in AE was a bit tricky though and we couldn't work or view at anywhere near full res. Of course this just speaks to your point about 4K post. I would not want to do that same workflow for anything longer than this piece, which was just under 5 minutes finished.

 

[Fredrik Callinggard]

I'm hoping that the delay on the PL mount primes is that they've taken extra care to make sure they cover FF35. ...I can dream, right?

Jim Jannard has already, very recently, in another thread said they're not.

I also think that we'll find that FF stuff will be so "tricky" with focus or we'll have to be on such high T stop for the focus puller, that it won't be feasible for anything but high end production (just like 65mm today).

I've just shot a few things with ana's wide open on RED and it's so hard with focus - especially if it's to go on the big screen and therefor have to be 100% accurate.

With the flat screens growing both in size and resolution I think we're all better of if we stay most of the time in S35 lala land :bleh:

 

[Jens Jakob Thorsen]

I completely agree with Fredrik. Just finished a feature that I shot wide open most of the time, poor focus puller.
I also watched "Hancock" on bluray and was astounded to see that about 50% of all close ups of the actors where more or less out of focus.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Jim Jannard has already, very recently, in another thread said they're not.

Jeeeez... I should've locked this thread. Everyone keeps responding responding to my post from like 3 months ago. Hahaha.. :tongue:

 

[Fredrik Callinggard]

Jeeeez... I should've locked this thread. Everyone keeps responding responding to my post from like 3 months ago. Hahaha.. :tongue:

Sorry :blush: didn't look at the dates of the posts hahaha

 

[Jannard]

Hi,

I am amazed that people are talking about wanting anamorphic glass, for the last year people were telling me that cropping the Red One sensor had more resolution then 35mm anamorphic photography and was better.

Stephen

Cinematographers are fickle...

Jim

 

[Fredrik Callinggard]

Cinematographers are fickle...

Jim

Well it comes with the business since a story shouldn't be the same as the other, but that's the fun :biggrin:

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I have some cool things I'd love to try with it, most of which I'm not willing to mention publicly, in hopes that I may get to try them before someone else does.... We'll see.

Might as well spill the beans Jeff. I've already bugged your house. I know all your secrets.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Might as well spill the beans Jeff. I've already bugged your house. I know all your secrets.

:blink: Uh, oh... Does this mean you know about me converting my basement into a 3000 sq. ft. studio for producing 3D interactive porn? :biggrin: