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 :)

Image Circle Database

Evin Grant said:
Well then it'll be much less useful. There may very well be some difference in the unused area (+/- 2-3%) but without at least a 10% lookaround it's not going to do you any good because you won't be able to see mics or other elements entering your frame. After all that's the whole point of it.
Click to expand...

I agree to some degree, but unfortunately the figures that RED has already disclosed suggest the S35's lookaround will be around 8% (depending very much on the chosen aspect ratio, of course). Any lookaround is better than none at all.

Anyway, to get back to the original topic, my calculations show that most 5K modes will require around 30-31mm coverage.
 
Even assuming 8% look around and 2% unused sensor edge you would still only need the 30mm image circle coverage for the 2:1 aspect ratio which is non standard. The 16:9 (1.77) Aspect ratio will only require a 27.5mm image circle and the 2:40 aspect ratio will require 29.25mm of coverage. I think most lenses will work just fine in the standard ratios we're used to shooting. this is actually one of the key benefits of a 2:1 aspect sensor. I also think that with Epic's custom frame sizes most DP's (including myself) will choose to lose a few lines of res. rather than their favorite cinema optics.
 
Evin Grant said:
The 16:9 (1.77) Aspect ratio will only require a 27.5mm image circle
Click to expand...

A 16:9 crop from the 5120x2700 usable area will be 4800x2700, which at 5.4 microns per pixel, equates to an image circle of 29.74mm.

Evin Grant said:
I also think that with Epic's custom frame sizes most DP's (including myself) will choose to lose a few lines of res. rather than their favorite cinema optics.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree; people are free to use whatever glass and aspect ratio they choose, I'm just keen to make all the data readily available, and as accurate as possible with the information we have right now, hence the chart.
 
First off the S35 Mysterium-X chip is 30x15mm, native 2:1 aspect ratio. Therefore the maximum record area would be 5120x2560. I believe the 2700 number was published earlier by Red but this would not be "active" as far as I can tell. That would give a max 16:9 resolution of 4531x2560 x 4.5 microns = 24.5x13.8mm and an image circle of 27.5mm.

If you use 2700 as your record height then I see where your numbers are coming from.
However, the pragmatic approach (especially for post) would suggest if you can't achieve 5K in 16x9 to window down to the standard format of 4096x2305. 5k will be especially useful for 2.40 and 2:1 projects but my gut feeling is the majority of 16:9 and 1.85 projects (the ratio 75% of professional media is shot in these days) will still be acquired at the 4K standard.
 
“If I design a new lens with a 30.10mm image circle, can I market it as an 'X35'-compatible lens? Sure, it wouldn't cover the full 5K active sensor area (which is a non-standard aspect ratio of 1.896:1), but it'll comfortably cover 5K at 2.40:1 and 16:9 aspect ratios.”

My understanding of: The Chart, that Steven is referring to list the full sensor with the look around area as 5556 X 2780, with 15.4 megapixels, the active pixel array as 5120 X 2700, with 13.8 megapixels, that’s were he gets the strange aspect ratio of 1.896:1, and the 2:1 aspect ratio of 5120 X 2560 with 13.1 megapixels.

It’s that correct?

Humberto Rivera
 
One more thought, Matthew gets his Image Circle Diameter of 33.54 mm from the outside of the 5556 X 2780 image area. For the full Active Pixel Array it would be a diameter of 31.26.

Humberto Rivera
 
Evin Grant said:
First off the S35 Mysterium-X chip is 30x15mm, native 2:1 aspect ratio. Therefore the maximum record area would be 5120x2560. I believe the 2700 number was published earlier by Red but this would not be "active" as far as I can tell. That would give a max 16:9 resolution of 4531x2560 x 4.5 microns = 24.5x13.8mm and an image circle of 27.5mm.
Click to expand...

The maximum record area of the chip doesn't need to follow the same aspect ratio as the chip's exterior dimensions; I can't think of any requirement for a direct relationship between the two. Also remember that both horizontal and vertical pixel dimensions will generally be divisible by 4 to account for tiling in the wavelet codec.

True, the 5120x2700 area described as "Max Resolution" in the original DSMC announcement hasn't been mentioned in a while, but I'm going to assume it's still applicable until we hear otherwise. Remember the full height of the chip will be over 2700 pixels anyway - I wouldn't mind betting you'll be able to squeeze a larger 16:9 frame (ie. closer to "5K") into that area.
 
Humberto Rivera said:
“If I design a new lens with a 30.10mm image circle, can I market it as an 'X35'-compatible lens? Sure, it wouldn't cover the full 5K active sensor area (which is a non-standard aspect ratio of 1.896:1), but it'll comfortably cover 5K at 2.40:1 and 16:9 aspect ratios.”

My understanding of: The Chart, that Steven is referring to list the full sensor with the look around area as 5556 X 2780, with 15.4 megapixels, the active pixel array as 5120 X 2700, with 13.8 megapixels, that’s were he gets the strange aspect ratio of 1.896:1, and the 2:1 aspect ratio of 5120 X 2560 with 13.1 megapixels.

It’s that correct?

Humberto Rivera
Click to expand...

Humberto, yes, that's exactly what I'm predicting. The 5.4µm dot pitch is the spec that's least likely to change (as it's pretty fundamental to the pixel design), and Jim has referred to the 30x15mm S35 sensor several times this year, so I reckon they've finalised the physical dimensions (and therefore the full sensor's resolution), too. The only figure that might still be subject to change is the maximum recordable resolution, which was originally defined as 5120x2700 pixels. The rest is just arithmetic.
 
Matthew, I don’t know if I getting too obnoxious with my suggestions, but they are just that, suggestions. Anyhow I was thinking that the following format might be a bit more useful, again is just a suggestion. Your web site looks great, and it will be better from week to week, thanks.

Make/Model - Focal Length
Zeiss Master Prime Dia/mm T Stop AOV

14mm T1.3 81°
16mm 34mm T1.3 70°
18mm T1.3 67°
21mm T1.3 60°
25mm 35mm T1.3 51°
27mm T1.3 48°
32mm 36mm T1.3 42°
35mm T1.3 38°
40mm T1.3 34°
50mm 40mm T1.3 27°
65mm T1.3 21°
75mm 42+mm T1.3 18°
100mm 42+mm T1.3 14°
150mm T1.3 9°
100mm Macro T2/T4.3/T32 14.02°/13.52°/12.42°

RED Pro Prime

18mm T1.8
25mm 34mm T1.8
35mm 36mm T1.8
50mm 41mm T1.8
85mm 43+mm T1.8
100mm 43+mm T1.8

Humberto Rivera
 
Well the page I had did not translate from to what came out on the Red screen, sorry.

Humberto Rivera
 
I was thinking that the S35 could actually work utilizing the cine lenses that already exist. The FULL AREA OF THE SENSOR of the S35 is 5556 mm X 2780 mm 15.4 megapixels with a 33.55mm image diagonal, the ACTIVE PIXEL ARRAY is 5120 mm X 2700 mm 13.8 megapixels with a 31.26 image diagonal, the 2:1 RECORDING MODE is 5120 mm X 2560 mm 13.1 megapixels with a 30.91 image diagonal, and the 16:9 RECORDING MODE is 4800 mm X 2700 mm 13.0 megapixels with a 29.74 image diagonal. The 1.85:1 RECORDING MODE would be 4996 mm X 2700 mm 13.5 megapixels with a 30.67 image diagonal. All well within the range of the Master Primes and the Red Pro Primes. That would mean that current glass can continue to be used according to Matthew Image Circle measurements. All the lenses would be slightly wider than previously in the Red One due to the fact that they go out further into the frame. Just a thought!

Humberto Rivera
 
Good Morning to you all. I’m glad that it took Matthew Duclos Image Circle Database, which is a fine work in progress. Steven Hilder cart which outlines the basic mathematical concept behind the measurements of the S35 sensor, until we hear different from Jim. And Evin Grant persistent in the understanding of the S35 as being an alternative camera that can use most of the current glass. The better of two worlds, the high resolution of cine lenses that took some time to evolve to their present configuration, and the slightly bigger S35 sensor with its new technology, and accessories. So I would say the S35 is just as good as the FF35 for both of them to succeed. I can see a world were both cameras would serve their purpose.

Humberto Rivera
 
Matthew, I have a question. What is the Image Circle Diameter of the Duclos Lens PL Mount 11-16 mm f2.8? Thank you.

Humberto Rivera
 
Humberto Rivera said:
Matthew, I have a question. What is the Image Circle Diameter of the Duclos Lens PL Mount 11-16 mm f2.8? Thank you.

Humberto Rivera
Click to expand...

The image circle is beautiful... kidding.
That will be included in my next batch update.
Without the numbers, it covers 5k from 12mm to tele.
It just barely crops on a "5k" at 11mm. Works perfect with the RED One.
 
david farland said:
Matt,
Do you know if the Zeiss compact primes use aspherics on their wides to get the 43+ coverage or can they get away with spherical design because of the relatively smaller aperatures (T2.9/3.6)?
Click to expand...

The compact primes are based on the ZF lenses (which in turn were based on the Contax/Yashica lenses)

The zeiss site doesn't have datasheets on the compact primes that show the optical configuration but if you go to the photo section and look up the z series lenses you can get individual datasheets for each lens that show the actual lenses and optical contruction.


http://www.zeiss.com/photo

This link is the .pdf file for the 21mm/2.8

http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/Distagon28-21ZFen/$File/E_2.8_21ZF.pdf
 
Matthew Duclos said:
The image circle is beautiful... kidding.
That will be included in my next batch update.
Without the numbers, it covers 5k from 12mm to tele.
It just barely crops on a "5k" at 11mm. Works perfect with the RED One.
Click to expand...

Matt:

Do you have a way to check SLR lenses like the Canon EF-S 10-22?

Along the same lines can you project those lenses? would like to compare that Canon 10-22 to the 11-16 Tokina. I have them both but with the projector it is a little easier to be objective.
 
Michael Hastings said:
Matt:

Do you have a way to check SLR lenses like the Canon EF-S 10-22?

Along the same lines can you project those lenses? would like to compare that Canon 10-22 to the 11-16 Tokina. I have them both but with the projector it is a little easier to be objective.
Click to expand...

Of course.
I can check:
PL
B
C (threaded)
Pana
Canon EOS
Nikon
OCT-19
BNCR
Aaton
B4 (proper)
And a few others I'm sure I'm forgetting...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top