Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

NAB PL Mount Lens Explosion

There are two new standards going forward. 5K and FF35. Lenses that are designed specifically for these formats will command a premium. IMHO.

Jim
 
David Mullen ASC said:
I believe the Fujinon zooms cover almost every existing Super-35 digital cinema camera out there -- F35, Arri D21, RED ONE, Phantom HD, not to mention 35mm film cameras.
Click to expand...

I agree. What I was trying to say was that Chuck Lee, the Fuji rep we all know over the years in this business, told me that the 18-85mm would not cover FULL FRAME Super-35. I don't know if people still shoot full frame Super-35 for standard def TV commercial finishing. If they do, these lenses won't be able cover the entire frame.

I wasn't trying to fault Fuji. However, by excluding the Epic 5K format, Fuji is going to sell a lot fewer lenses. And that's a pity.

Pardon me if I am not too clear on what I wanted to say due to my less than perfect English. It's a second language to me after all.
 
Jannard said:
There are two new standards going forward. 5K and FF35. Lenses that are designed specifically for these formats will command a premium. IMHO.

Jim
Click to expand...

As Alan Kay once said, "The best way to predict the future is to invent it."

:)
 
AIO Films said:
I agree. What I was trying to say was that Chuck Lee, the Fuji rep we all know over the years in this business, told me that the 18-85mm would not cover FULL FRAME Super-35. I don't know if people still shoot full frame Super-35 for standard def TV commercial finishing. If they do, these lenses won't be able cover the entire frame.

I wasn't trying to fault Fuji. However, by excluding the Epic 5K format, Fuji is going to sell a lot fewer lenses. And that's a pity.

Pardon me if I am not too clear on what I wanted to say due to my less than perfect English. It's a second language to me after all.
Click to expand...

I think he was talking bout Full Frame (24x36) not full aperture S35, which they will certainly cover.
 
AIO Films said:
I agree. What I was trying to say was that Chuck Lee, the Fuji rep we all know over the years in this business, told me that the 18-85mm would not cover FULL FRAME Super-35.
Click to expand...

He's just confusing two terms, Super-35 (which is 35mm cine Full Aperture) and Full Frame 35mm. There is no such format as Full Frame Super-35. He meant that the lenses would not cover Full Frame 35mm.
 
Maybe it's the English Lit major in me... but we need a better label than "5K" as the format between Super-35 (cine) and Full-Frame 35mm (still) -- as everyone here knows, "5K" does not suggest any particular sensor dimensions, you could have a FF35 sensor that is 5K if you wanted.

The term in grammar would be a lack of parallelism...

Unless RED wants to start from scratch and relabel all of the formats in something that makes sense, from 2/3" up through FF35 and beyond. The boring way would be to label the formats by the diagonal measurement of the sensor, but if RED wants to stick to labelling by pixel dimensions, maybe the Mini-Reds should be labelled "3K RED's", the 18-50mm zoom is a "4K RED" and the new lenses are "5K RED's" and whatever comes out for FF35 will be "6K RED's" -- though this strikes me as problematic since, as I said, it assumes some sort of universal micron size for photosites.
 
Jannard said:
There are two new standards going forward. 5K and FF35. Lenses that are designed specifically for these formats will command a premium. IMHO.

Jim
Click to expand...

Well, this is indeed, an interesting point. When RED first came onto the cinematography landscape, it did so with a mix of something old and something new: the proven S35 format with 4K resolution. As such, it was easy to use existing lenses on the RED, or for companies like Cooke and Angenieux to modify existing lines of their products and re-badge them as RED oriented. With the FF35 format, something similar will happen yet again. True, the movie world has not used the format as a standard for a long time, but there are existing technologies that can be modified, reworked, adapted and shoehorned into fitting the format. I see an explosion of still glass being rehoused for the FF35 RED cameras for example. And contrarily to what many believe, the FF format WILL become immensely popular since it negates the need for super wide, super expensive and somewhat slow lenses to attain the same field of view that many cheaper, better and faster lenses can achieve on the wide end of the spectrum. These faster lenses will also bring with them the benefit of less lighting requirements and will be a bonafide success with steadycam, underwater, aerial, action, landscape and many other genre shooters.

However, this 5K, in-between-S35-and-FF35 format that RED is betting so much on, will probably remain the exclusive domain of RED. I mean, if you're going to design new lenses that need to cover bigger than S35 area, then what makes sense is going all the way up to FF35, which can use existing glass and technology AND be used on all other formats smaller than it, including this new 5K flavor. I don't envision anybody else, save for RED, coming up with lenses that are aimed squarely at one particular type of RED format, even if they can provide improved imaging capabilities on S35 format cameras. Then again, this probably doesn't much matter, since most people will still be shooting S35 for a long, long, long, long time to come...
 
David Mullen ASC said:
He's just confusing two terms, Super-35 (which is 35mm cine Full Aperture) and Full Frame 35mm. There is not such format as Full Frame Super-35. He meant that the lenses would not cover Full Frame 35mm.
Click to expand...

Sorry, both Chuck and I meant Super-35 Full Aperture which I used to shoot TV spots for standard def deliverable with.

I apologize for all the confusion caused by my wrong lingo.
 
AIO Films said:
In my not-so-humble opinion, ignoring the RED Epic 5K is a mistake. Next generation RED cameras are going to replace film even more. Big productions are going to embrace it so that rental houses will be willing to mate the Epic cameras with expensive lenses.
Click to expand...

S35 is the current "standard". It's going to take some time for anything larger to really catch on as most optics out there do not cover. RED 5K works with the Master Primes and the RPP's and a few select oddball lenses here and there.

These new Fujinon lenses have been in development for some time, they didn't just appear out of thin air. I'm sure the specs on these new lenses have been solidified for some time, and quite a while before anyone knew of RED 5K. So they're not really ignoring anything, it just is what it is.
 
Just means they won't cover the full 4x3 area on 4-perf 35mm Full Aperture (Super-35) but they'd cover a 16x9 area, or 3-perf (which is naturally 16x9), or the 16x9 Super-35 digital cameras. 4x3 on 4-perf Super-35 is a 30mm diagonal more or less. 16x9 on 4-perf Super-35 is a 27.5mm diagonal.

But it sounds like you couldn't use the new Fujinons if you were shooting for 4x3 on a 4-perf Super-35 camera.
 
Plus the fact that it won't cover the 30 X 15mm Epic 5K sensor. So we have fewer choices and they will sell fewer lenses.

That's my whole point, not trying to fault Fuji or anything.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Maybe it's the English Lit major in me... but we need a better label than "5K" as the format between Super-35 (cine) and Full-Frame 35mm (still) -- as everyone here knows, "5K" does not suggest any particular sensor dimensions, you could have a FF35 sensor that is 5K if you wanted.

The term in grammar would be a lack of parallelism...

Unless RED wants to start from scratch and relabel all of the formats in something that makes sense, from 2/3" up through FF35 and beyond. The boring way would be to label the formats by the diagonal measurement of the sensor, but if RED wants to stick to labelling by pixel dimensions, maybe the Mini-Reds should be labelled "3K RED's", the 18-50mm zoom is a "4K RED" and the new lenses are "5K RED's" and whatever comes out for FF35 will be "6K RED's" -- though this strikes me as problematic since, as I said, it assumes some sort of universal micron size for photosites.
Click to expand...

Agreed! Because one day they (or someone else) may release a 6k, 7k or 8k sensor that is the same size as this "5k" size.
 
R35 already means regular 35 or Academy aperture. But then again RED insisted on coming up with FF35 when there was already the perfectly good VistaVision name.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Maybe it's the English Lit major in me... but we need a better label than "5K" as the format between Super-35 (cine) and Full-Frame 35mm (still)
Click to expand...

Agreed. It should clearly delineate between size (30x15) and resolution (5K). And it should be simple, direct, and intuitive.

I propose a simple system using "K" for everything. The first K is the number of pixels (5K). K-2 is the sensor width (3K = 3 * 10mm = 30mm), K-3 is the actual measured luma resolution after AA filter and de-Bayer (3K), and K-4 describes the type of sensor, where Mysterium-X is 1K and Monstro is 2K.

Instead of saying "EPIC Mysterium-X 30x15 5K", we just say:

"5K-1 3K-2 4K-3 1K-4". Just rolls off the tongue.

EPIC Monstro 36x24 6K becomes AKA 6K-1 3.6K-2 4.5K-3 2K-4".

On second thought, perhaps we should only use K for one thing instead of two or four. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top