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 :)

Scarlet Fixed attached to Red Rock M2 Encore?

R

rychoi

Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Points
0
What are people's opinions on this rig? I already have access to an Encore with Zeiss and Nikon Nikkor primes, but I do not feel as if I require many of the superior features that come with the S35 other than the fact that it crops less than a 2/3" Cinema with 35mm lenses.

This way I could utilize the 35mm lenses in a way that is much cheaper to me than purchasing the S35? Does anyone forsee any Red Rock + Scarlet predicaments?
 
rychoi said:
What are people's opinions on this rig? I already have access to an Encore with Zeiss and Nikon Nikkor primes, but I do not feel as if I require many of the superior features that come with the S35 other than the fact that it crops less than a 2/3" Cinema with 35mm lenses.

This way I could utilize the 35mm lenses in a way that is much cheaper to me than purchasing the S35? Does anyone forsee any Red Rock + Scarlet predicaments?
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt RED and any 35mm lens adapter companies are going to be aligning themselves... what's the point? If you want 35mm DOP / angle of view then just get the scarlet 35 (that's what it was designed for).
 
Dancsó Péter said:
I was also thinking about buying the 2/3 Scarlet only, and then after a year or two buying a Letus or Redrock for it and some Nikon lenses, so I don't have to cough up that much money at the beginning.
Click to expand...

Some ZF manual lenses with a follow focus with reverse gears would be a fun rig to shoot with. Hopefully the Fixed 2/3 Scarlet or the 2/3 Scarlet will still be rated at a higher ISO... ISO 500 would be "ideal". An other sweet idea would be an SG Leica Mount! :001_wub:
 
I'm sure you'll be able to use the M2 Encore with the 2/3" Fixed Scarlet, but make no mistake... The S35 Scarlet should produce dramatically better results. And it better, given that the S35 brain alone costs twice as much as the 2/3" Fixed.
 
I've never quite understood the impulse to use 35mm adaptors on a 2/3" camera when you've only got a 2.5-stop difference in depth of field to compensate for compared to Super-35. So unless you want super-duper shallow focus, it doesn't seem worth the hassle. Plus with a smaller sensor, ideally you'd be using lenses with an even higher MTF than used for 35mm since you are compensating for a smaller target area.

With a 1/3" camera, the adaptors make a lot more sense just because it's almost a 5-stop difference in depth of field compared to Super-35.
 
^^^great post!


I think a lot of people (myself definitely included) are so used to 1/3" shooting techniques that there really will be a big re-learning with 2/3"

if you plan on spending over $1,000 on a lens adapter, why not just save a bit longer and switch out the brain for a 2/3" scarlet with interchangeable lenses?

and hey! then you'd have 2 cameras! 3D anyone?

Thats my basic plan. Start with a Fixed 2/3" and then when it comes tim to upgrade, buy a nicer brain (havent decided which yet) and make the 2/3" my "trick cam" or 2nd angle cam.

this is the glory of the "future proof system" not having to change the entire camera means that no matter what RED setup you have, upgrading will always be easy and (fairly) cheap :)
 
David Mullen ASC said:
I've never quite understood the impulse to use 35mm adaptors on a 2/3" camera when you've only got a 2.5-stop difference in depth of field to compensate for compared to Super-35. So unless you want super-duper shallow focus, it doesn't seem worth the hassle. Plus with a smaller sensor, ideally you'd be using lenses with an even higher MTF than used for 35mm since you are compensating for a smaller target area.

With a 1/3" camera, the adaptors make a lot more sense just because it's almost a 5-stop difference in depth of field compared to Super-35.
Click to expand...

What if you have a bunch of lenses that fit into a adapter set-up, but that you won't be able to get direct adapters for, for the Scarlet?

Like the SGPro has mounts for Minolta MD, and I have access to an entire set of Minolta MD lenses. If there aren't any plans to make a Minolta adapter for the Scarlet available (which i've been told is the case), if I wanted to use any of the Minolta lenses, i'd need something else that'd let me mount Minoltas on it instead.

In that kind of situation would you think an Adapter would make sense?
 
You can get C mount to MD adapter for 2/3" Scarlet pretty cheap. Made for use with Bolex and other 16mm cameras. You have to deal with the crop factor though if you go this route.
For the price of a high quality DOF adapter you can get some premium quality used 16mm lenses that are faster and sharper than their 35mm counterparts.
 
Not that it's all that important, but, mount adapters are generally listed as the lens mount to the camera mount. Such as a PL mount to "C" mount. It would be impossible to make a "C" mount to MD.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
I've never quite understood the impulse to use 35mm adaptors on a 2/3" camera when you've only got a 2.5-stop difference in depth of field to compensate for compared to Super-35. So unless you want super-duper shallow focus, it doesn't seem worth the hassle. Plus with a smaller sensor, ideally you'd be using lenses with an even higher MTF than used for 35mm since you are compensating for a smaller target area.

With a 1/3" camera, the adaptors make a lot more sense just because it's almost a 5-stop difference in depth of field compared to Super-35.
Click to expand...

Yes, people want to be able to use the super shallow DoF... When you are beginning it is understandable to want to somehow make your project scream "pro". There are a whole lot of people who will feel exactly that way when they see 2" focus.

Of course, it is not going to make your a better DP. Still it is a nice tool, and it can surely look beautiful. Also, it can save you from no set design. I suppose a fast telephoto can do that too with a 2/3 but now you are limiting youreself in terms of operation and camera placement.

An other advantage I see is to be able to "practice" with a "proper" set up. People who don't yet know enough about optics would rapidly gain valuable experience by working with the FOV and DoF that most films use if you properly set your camera on the GG to film a S35 projection. That is invaluable for someone trying to learn how to shoot on a S35 camera.

Of course, hopefully they won't forget about composition, lighting, camera placement, so on and so forth... because if you are good DP it goes beyond being used to a S35 setup.

Also David, you don't need a higher MTF lens in front of the adapter. The whole idea is to film a S35 (or other) sized projection on the GG. Unless I am sorely mistaken or missing something?

About the lenses, if you had a set that you could only use with an adapter then that makes for a heck of an reason. Good point.

Rick Presas said:
if you plan on spending over $1,000 on a lens adapter, why not just save a bit longer and switch out the brain for a 2/3" scarlet with interchangeable lenses?
Click to expand...

I also see the reasoning in this point. However, people seem to forget that Fixed Scarlet is supposed to come with AUDIO, and some sort of screen, battery socket... possibly more. So we won't know the $$$ math until we see what Fixed Scarlet can do. It sounds like there will be a whole lot of room in the middle for many students and others starting up to consider a Fixed Scarlet with something like the Blade or M2E. We'll see.
 
So the depth of field of 35mm shot at a f/4.0-5.6 split does not look professional? Because that's what 2/3" photography looks like at f/2.0. "Citizen Kane" was often shot at an f/11 or f/16 -- it doesn't look professional? Much of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" was shot at deep stops too.
2/3" sensor movies like "Benjamin Button" don't look professional?

If you out an adaptor in front of a 2/3" camera lens or sensor, the MTF of the lens you put on the adaptor hardly matters because your resolution is now limited by the groundglass texture screen.
 
I couldn't tell you if it looked "professional" because it would depend on so many other factors... if you shot it I am sure it would. :) I don't have that good of a gauge as to how shallow DoF gets based on numbers David, but I sure as heck loved the crap out of the looks of "Collateral" and "Zodiac". I am fully aware that 2/3" cameras can serve a heaping plate of bokeh with fast lenses if that is what you are trying to make sure I am aware of. Also that with wider lenses you can get the same FOV angles. I also can't tell you if the f/2.8 lens will deliver enough to satisfy bokeh hungry aspiring filmmakers hoping to lean on shallow DoF in hopes to make their movies look better than their current capabilities. I am not talking about a second year film student. I talking about everyone, including the guy that just bought a consumer camcorder at Best Buy or the guys that chipped in to get an HPX-170 but forgot to buy a single half decent microphone to put on a broom stick. Fixed Scarlet digs deep into that sector with a price tag that approaches the current cost of a used HVX-200. There are a lot of people in that place along their career timeline that want a magic button to make their stuff look "professional", and for some reason 2" DoF is a popular trick.

I guess I misunderstood your post regarding the MTF requirement for 1/3" cameras using adapters. I am not sure what you meant, but I do realize that GG's rob tons of detail, but there are some with grain patters that give very sharp results. Here is a grab using the nicer looking but less sharp Roto Razor 2 GG on an SGblade, shot with a Viper, and using Evangelo's relay: http://www.motionfx.gr/Files/Canon_Cinezoom_F2-8_Viper_235-1_4K.jpg So while you are obviously right there is still a boat load of detail that the GG can deliver on back to the camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top