Focal Length Range

[Eren Ozkural]

Apologies if this has been covered before but I pulled a quick search and noting concrete came up.

My question is: what's the equal 35mm equivilant focal length range of the Scarlet Fixed Zoom?

I know the zoom factor is 8x but is that a 20mm-160mm? 50mm-400mm? 80mm-640mm?

Being a stills and film/video shooter I'm usually spoilt for choice when it comes to lenses and 3K res isnt enough for my photography requirements but the price and frame rates offered by the fixed 2/3 may be too hard to ignore.

Knowing what kind of focal length range i may have to work with will help me choose which model I will purchase (2/3 fixed v S35).

I know that RED can't divulge a lot of details regarding the guts of their new models due to the competition, the wait for asic spins, all things change etc. etc. etc. however I can't imagine why divulging the exact focal length range of the 2/3 fixed would give the game away/is still undecided.

Help a brother out :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Russ Blaise]

I asked that question way back and this was the answer I got:

"There has been some talk that it is something like 7.2-57mm, but no one knows at this point. Final specs haven't been announced. This would be roughly equivalent to a 28-224mm zoom on a 35mm camera."

 

[Eren Ozkural]

I'd be very happy with 28-244mm if that were the case.

Still, that's based on assumptions. RED's made fantastic lenses for a while now and the cameras are quite far along the developement cycle.

Jim/Jarred anyone from RED like to comment in any way please?

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

I'd be very happy with 28-244mm if that were the case.

Still, that's based on assumptions. RED's made fantastic lenses for a while now and the cameras are quite far along the developement cycle.

Jim/Jarred anyone from RED like to comment in any way please?

Jim has already said that the Scarlet zoom will begin at the still full-frame equivalent of 28 mm, and 8 x 28 = 224, so yeah, FF-equivalent range is 28-224 mm. And an archived Scarletuser.com post by Joseph Hutson quoted the 6/5/08 version of the Scarlet FAQ, wherein Jon Sagud said, "Scarlet will offer the 35 mm still camera equivalence of a 28-224 mm zoom lens. (This would be described as an 18-144 mm on an S35 sized sensor, such as the RED One and 7.2-57.6 mm on a 2/3" sensor)." Of course, it's possible these specs will change, but nobody at Red has hinted that the lens has changed.

 

[Eren Ozkural]

Thank you very much Lawrence. I should go on Scarletuser more often...

 

[Russ Blaise]

The fixed zoom lens being a 2.8, How do you guys think that will work out in low light situations?

 

[Eren Ozkural]

Not well. I still feel like I need to shell a few hundred quid more for the Nikon 1.4 50mm when I'm shooting available lighting at night with my 1.8 50mm.

Did a TV shoot with an EX3 last weekend. Even though the aperture goes up to 1.6 (correct me if I'm wrong) I had to push the gain up on quite a few shots (it was a Behind the Scenes type of show so a lot of dimly lit backstage areas) even though worklights were on and the ceiling was glass on a moderately cloudy day. All I can say is thank God for SD down conversion

I wonder in what order of magnitude is shooting 2.8 at ISO 800 on the 2/3 Fixed comparable to a Red One shooting on a 1.4 lens at ISO 250?

 

[Ian B. Johnson]

Not well. I still feel like I need to shell a few hundred quid more for the Nikon 1.4 50mm when I'm shooting available lighting at night with my 1.8 50mm.

Did a TV shoot with an EX3 last weekend. Even though the aperture goes up to 1.6 (correct me if I'm wrong) I had to push the gain up on quite a few shots (it was a Behind the Scenes type of show so a lot of dimly lit backstage areas) even though worklights were on and the ceiling was glass on a moderately cloudy day. All I can say is thank God for SD down conversion

I wonder in what order of magnitude is shooting 2.8 at ISO 800 on the 2/3 Fixed comparable to a Red One shooting on a 1.4 lens at ISO 250?

Keep in mind that using that 50mm on the 2/3" is going to be much less wide than you're used to. Then you run into the issue of wider lenses becoming more and more expensive to be able to open up to anything less than 2.8, and it starts making more sense to go with the fixed.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

The fixed zoom lens being a 2.8, How do you guys think that will work out in low light situations?

If the sensor can perform well at ISO 800, then F2.8~T2.8 will be just fine. We'll have to wait for the final specs to see. And while I would love to see a faster lens, it is a zoom with more elements so that makes fast more of a challenge. Same with size, I don't want to see the physical size of the lens grow in order to allow more light. The fixed lens camera is about being compact.

 

[Eren Ozkural]

Keep in mind that using that 50mm on the 2/3" is going to be much less wide than you're used to. Then you run into the issue of wider lenses becoming more and more expensive to be able to open up to anything less than 2.8, and it starts making more sense to go with the fixed.

I know Ian, I wasn't referring to the crop factor but rather the low light performance that would result between the T/F stop being a few stops wider and the low light performance of the sensor being 3.2 times better than the RED One.

Throw in the diminished resolution and sensor (pixel as well?) size and a bunch of guess work and I'm assuming that the 2/3 Fixed will have at least as good low light performance as a current RED One with a 1.4 lens on it.

Thoughts anyone?