2X Anamorphic resolution on Dragon

[Andrew Rieger]

Does anyone know the final image resolution of the Dragon when using a 2X anamorphic lens?

The MX Epic 2X anamorphic resolution is 3296x2700 but I can't seem to find out what the resolution would be using the new Dragon sensor. I remember reading that with a 2X anamorphic, the Epic is shooting around 3.2-3.5K so I wanted to find out if 2X anamorphics on the new Dragon were exceeding 4K resolution.

Has RED published this spec?

 

[Evin Grant]

MAx picture hight is 3160 on Dragon so if it's a true 4:3 aspect ratio at full height is should be around 4200 wide, so yes I think it would quality as 4K, at least spatially.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

But for a 2.40 image, a 2X anamorphic lens only uses a 1.20 : 1 area, not a 4x3 area (1.33 : 1), so if the max height is 3160 then the max width ultimately used for a 2.40 image would be 3792 even if 4200 across was recorded.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

In all honesty I absolutely don't see the pint of using Ana's with Dragon, not for resolution any way.

Unless a particular project specifically called for that Ana's particular look and DOF I plan to stay away form them all together.

 

[Andrew Rieger]

In all honesty I absolutely don't see the pint of using Ana's with Dragon, not for resolution any way.

Unless a particular project specifically called for that Ana's particular look and DOF I plan to stay away form them all together.

I understand that using spherical will yield higher resolutions but I just wanted to find out if a 2x Anamorphic would get you to 4K on the Dragon.

 

[Timur Civan]

There is no real anamorphic mode on the dragon. It just has a visual desqueeze. You do your cropping in post. It depends on what you want you final frame size to be.

 

[Nick Morrison]

How about the new Letus Anamorphic adapter? Can we still shoot spherically 6K, but throw this on the front?

This may be a half-decent compromise on smaller jobs...

 

[Mike P.]

I think the Letus has trouble with wide lenses and/or bigger sensors. That is to say, it'll tap-out sooner on larger sensors. I think Sascha (he owns one) said that he can't go wider than 20mm on 4k/Scarlet without vignetting/seeing the side of the adapter. Also Letus themselves have said that the current AnamorphX is their 2k version and they're working on a 4k-resolving version… That said, I wonder what real anamorphic lenses would actually cover 6k/Dragon.

 

[John Marchant]

Last I checked the most applicable anamorphic for 2:1 glass is 4K 5:4 with 2xANA desqueeze. Check the custom formats if you don't see it

That's very close to a final 2.4:1 ; very few wasted pixels and optimum compression. Resolution is 3840x3072 - for 2.4:1 you'd crop a little off the edges, so you'd be desqueezing from a 3686x3072 frame

On that basis, for 2.4:1 2x ana you get an 11.3 MP source on Dragon, versus 8.75 MP on Epic MX.

Spherical 2.4:1 on Dragon is 15.95 MP if your lens covers it, or 11MP with ordinary S35 coverage.

 

[Peter Lyons Collister ASC]

Remember some of us use anamorphic for a certain look, not new easily just to get a 2.40 aspect ratio. Also some of us love Dragon for more than resolution. Bay has shot some of Transformers 4 on epic MX and Dragon with Panavision anamorphic glass. It creates an amazing look.
Please don't think just in pixels and resolution. That is really a dead end.

 

[John Marchant]

Indeed, the technicality of anamorphic really isn't the point. But at least Dragon has all the bases covered regardless

 

[Andy White]

What's the max size the Dragon offers for 2X ana?

I presume it's based on height, so we can get closer to maximising Ana's.

It seems odd that there isn't (at least) a default Ana option (as with the RED One ana and the Epic 5K ana)... but maybe that'll come in firmware updates.

 

[John Marchant]

Andy, you can desqueeze any resolution by 1.3x or 2x

The most relevant, and largest size for 2x desqueeze, if you target a 2.4:1 delivery, is 4k 5:4 - ie. 3840x3072

 

[Andy White]

Thanks John. Looking forward to getting my Lomo Anas on the Dragon and experimenting.

Of course, I need to upgrade my Epic to a Dragon first!

 

[Nick Morrison]

Remember some of us use anamorphic for a certain look, not new easily just to get a 2.40 aspect ratio. Also some of us love Dragon for more than resolution. Bay has shot some of Transformers 4 on epic MX and Dragon with Panavision anamorphic glass. It creates an amazing look.
Please don't think just in pixels and resolution. That is really a dead end.

Love being reminded of this, thanks Peter.

Just saw Elysium last night (finally) and thought the combo of anamorphic and Epic looked AMAZING.

 

[Alexander Chinnici]

How much Field of View do you lose while compared to a 4:3 sensor? Now that you've covered the M.P. and Resolution I wonder what the percentage is? If an Alexa's 4:3 sensor is 100% of the 2x squeeze lens then how much does the Dragon's sensor crop it? I doubt that it's much but I'm still curious. Thank you.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

It's just math... The Alexa sensor height is 17.82mm, so the width used for 1.20 : 1 (with a 2X optical squeeze) would be 21.38mm (even though in 4:3 mode you record 23.76mm across). The Dragon sensor height is 15.8mm, so the width used for 1.20 : 1 would be 18.96mm. So the difference in horizontal field of view between 21.38mm (Alexa) and 18.96mm (Dragon) for anamorphic photography would be 1.13X. So if you used a 40mm anamorphic on an Alexa in 4:3 mode, you'd have to use a 35mm anamorphic on a Dragon to get a similar field of view.