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 :)

2/3 and S35 lenses

S

scott william

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
747
Reaction score
0
Points
0
This is my first post so here goes.

Now I know it’s only speculation at this stage but do you think a working S35 DSMC Scarlet will be cheaper then a working Red One kit? Not talking lenses here but i/O module, recording module, base plate…

I plan to go with red lenses which are all PL mount correct? I’ve noticed there are 2/3 format lenses and S35 format lenses. What is the difference between the two and will a S35 format lens work on a 2/3 brain? And will a 2/3 mini prime work on a S35 brain at 4/5K resolution or will it only use part of the sensor up to 3k.

I realize things will probably change, except for the mini primes that is but I’m trying to figure out the most future proof and commercially viable way of going red.

Any thoughts?
 
Hey Scott welcome to Reduser! Yeah the S35mm lens should go on the 2/3 with an adapter or other lens mount but the other way(2/3 lens to S35) around and you crop the FOV. Hope this helps a little? Take care. :beer:

P.S. I think the Scarlet S35 with all that you need should be cheaper than RedOne.
 
Image circle should fit the sensor

Image circle should fit the sensor

You will get best results if the image circle fits the sensor.

If you want to use S35 lenses use a S35 sensor, if you want to use 2/3" sensor use so called 2/3" lenses.

2/3" is not the size of the active sensor area, the height of the frame is about as big as a super8 frame is wide, the 2/3" sensor is much smaller than S35 or FF35 size, not that it cannot give good results with a lens that is desigined for the small 11mm image circle.

If you use S35 lenses, you are doing about a 3x "optical" zoom on the image so figure that much loss in sharpness. Better to use lenses optimised for the smaller sensor area and smaller pixels. Stopped down to f/4.5 you might get usable results but at T/1.3 you should notice something less than 3K resolution on a 2/3" sensor using S35 lenses...
 
Dan Hudgins said:
You will get best results if the image circle fits the sensor.

If you want to use S35 lenses use a S35 sensor, if you want to use 2/3" sensor use so called 2/3" lenses.

2/3" is not the size of the active sensor area, the height of the frame is about as big as a super8 frame is wide, the 2/3" sensor is much smaller than S35 or FF35 size, not that it cannot give good results with a lens that is desigined for the small 11mm image circle.

If you use S35 lenses, you are doing about a 3x "optical" zoom on the image so figure that much loss in sharpness. Better to use lenses optimised for the smaller sensor area and smaller pixels. Stopped down to f/4.5 you might get usable results but at T/1.3 you should notice something less than 3K resolution on a 2/3" sensor using S35 lenses...
Click to expand...

I agree. Just use the proper lens for the right camera, it will probably save you time and hassle, than having to do proper conversions and setups. Unless you are more thinking of saving on some dough?
 
So are you saying that the 2/3 scarlet sensor may give as good a picture as the S35 sensor despite the difference in resolution. Don’t want to get into the argument that resolution isn’t everything but is that what you are saying? Or did you simply mean that the 2/3 sensor at 3k will give good results?

Thanks for the warm welcome.
 
Depends on you. I am going for two 2/3(stereoscopic 3D) record 3K then scale down to 2K and 1080P after. I also want the FF35 and then everything after. lol. You may want to go for S35 and record full 5K then scale down to 4K or less since you are thinking of PL lenses. DOF or FOV maybe another factor, DI, your favorite lenses, money, etc. Do you like the look of S16 or S35? Sorry if I didn't help more?

Star Wars 2 The Attack of the Clones was shot in digital 2/3 and filmed out to 2K S35. 2/3 is great!:thumbsup:
 
Thanks. My hesitation in going 2/3 scarlet is that it might not work as a 2nd/ 2nd unit camera for Red One work as they will be shooting 4k. However the price is a lot nicer.
 
Don't forget the newer generation chip that will be better DR. Definitely get the Scarlet S35 if you have RedOne but make the RedOne the 2/2nd units unless for faster frame rates 2K,3K,Anamorphic, etc. Or wait and upgrade the RedOne sensor when that comes out. What ever you choose you should have great quality imaging for less than all the other competitors for its price. Happy shooting.
 
Star Wars

Star Wars

Joseph Ward said:
Depends on you. I am going for two 2/3(stereoscopic 3D) record 3K then scale down to 2K and 1080P after. I also want the FF35 and then everything after. lol. You may want to go for S35 and record full 5K then scale down to 4K or less since you are thinking of PL lenses. DOF or FOV maybe another factor, DI, your favorite lenses, money, etc. Do you like the look of S16 or S35? Sorry if I didn't help more?

Star Wars 2 The Attack of the Clones was shot in digital 2/3 and filmed out to 2K S35. 2/3 is great!:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

What were the camera/lens/sensor set ups for "The Attack of the Clones" ?
 
scott william said:
And will a 2/3 mini prime work on a S35 brain at 4/5K resolution or will it only use part of the sensor up to 3k.
Click to expand...

The mini primes are designed to cover a 10.1x5.35mm '2/3' sensor so yes it would only use part of the 30x15mm 'S35' sensor. And what it did cover would be considerably less than 3k because the S35 sensor has much lower pixel density than the 2/3 sensor.
 
3 chip 1920x1080p

3 chip 1920x1080p

ROCKMORE said:
What were the camera/lens/sensor set ups for "The Attack of the Clones" ?
Click to expand...

I think it was a 3 chip 1920x1080p sensor from Sony,

http://cool-palimpsest.stanford.edu/byform/mailing-lists/amia-l/2001/03/msg00097.html

the results from a 3K Bayer sensor should be close when the best lenses are used, depending on the OLPF and software filters, compression artifacts, and other issues.

Getting true resolution of 1280x720 for filmout is the goal, and it should be able to be meet by 2/3" Scarlet, we shall see...
 
2/3rd should have roughly the same cinematic dof of a 16mm film camera.
 
Brandon Ripley said:
will a 2/3 sensor still have a film look... will you be able to get a good depth of field with a 2/3 scarlet and a mini prime lens?
Click to expand...

Cinematic look does not only depends on DOF.

Image composition, camera movement, great lighting, solid editing and good color grading... All that makes up for a great cinematic experience (visually).

On the narrative side... Well, haha, everything counts.

:beer:

And to answer your question: Mini-primes @ T1.5 will give you a very nice shallow DOF.
 
Mini primes should work on S35 at 2k resolution, but won't cover anything higher without vignietting.
2/3" Scarlet was originally intended as B cam to Red One.
 
Brandon Ripley said:
will a 2/3 sensor still have a film look... will you be able to get a good depth of field with a 2/3 scarlet and a mini prime lens?
Click to expand...

Of course you'll be able to get a good depth of field. :thumbsup:



But getting a shallow depth of field is another story.
 
Brandon Ripley said:
will a 2/3 sensor still have a film look... will you be able to get a good depth of field with a 2/3 scarlet and a mini prime lens?
Click to expand...

I've played with a SI-2k Mini which also uses a 2/3" sensor, and with fast glass it was no problem producing shallow depth of field. Not f1.4 on a FF35 sensor shallow, but definitely enough for beautiful images.
 
thank you everyone. all of your replies have helped answer my question so i appreciate it. i understand that dof is not the only thing is important to the film look haha but thanks. my next question would have to be what would the differences be of shooting on a s35 lens compared to a 2/3 lens. is there a distinct look difference or is it just the resolution of the image that changes?
 
What do you mean by a 35mm lens versus a 2/3" lens? A lens made to cover the 2/3" area wouldn't necessarily fill a 35mm area, while a 35mm lens may fill a 2/3" area. So what exactly are you asking? How a PL-mount 35mm lens will look on the 2/3" Scarlet versus a Mini-Red lens that only covers the 2/3" area? Just depends on the particular lens; there isn't anything intrinsic to a 2/3" lens that makes it behave differently than a larger 35mm lens.

Unless you are talking about lenses made specifically for 2/3" 3-CCD prism block cameras versus lenses made for 2/3" single-sensor cameras. The issue there is that the lens made for a 3-CCD camera is designed to focus red, green, and blue wavelengths on three different sensors, so some sort of adaptor is usually needed to use them on a single-sensor 2/3" camera (like the SI-2K, which until the 2/3" Scarlet comes out, is the significant 2/3" single-sensor camera.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top