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 :)

6K Super 35mm Sized Frame

Daniel Soderberg

Daniel Soderberg

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
1,889
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
San Francisco
Anyone else feeling bummed that the Red sensor is getting closer and closer to full frame? I want to be able to shoot the high resolution (6K) but have a Super 35 sized frame. Getting really bummed that all that amazing vintage glass out there is becoming near useless if I want to take full advantage of the Red sensor...
 
Yes, the sensor is growing. However, the photosites (pixels) became smaller with Dragon. We can now shoot 5K within the S35 window, something not possible with the MX sensor.
 
Exactly. We had this same issue on Epic. A lot of vintage glass couldn't cover Epic 5k. So many people shot S35 on 4K. Now...we get S35 coverage at 5K, which is superb. And a lot of vintage glass can still cover 5.5K and even 6K. Super Speeds for example can cover Dragon 6K from 25mm and up.

RED has given us a lot with Dragon. There is also an advantage of having a larger than S35 sensor. Wider FOV than S35, more shallow depth of field. I appreciate RED giving us options. Shoot 5K with vintage glass. Shoot 6k and get a new, different "feel" with even higher resolution. As always with RED, they provide options...which I appreciate.
 
Well yes, you can crop a sensor on any camera to get a smaller field of view, but obviously you lose out on everything you eliminate by cutting one sixth of the sensor... Everything that Red has been fighting so hard to prove (that more resolution is always better).


I guess I'm just wondering if there's others out there like me that also wish it was a 6K Super 35 sized frame.


And also hoping that Red won't continue to get closer (and potentially go bigger) to/than full frame in the new sensors.
 
Yes, Daniel. I also get bummed by the limited glass options. Shooting 5k is an option, but tests are showing that the Dragon has essentially the same noise characteristics as MX when viewed at 1:1 comparisons, so we have to choose between the perfect lenses, or improved low light performance.

Anyways, I just received my Dragon two days ago and I'm really happy with the improvement, but I do hope that the photo sites continue to get shrink and the sensors stop growing.

Julio

Daniel Soderberg said:
Well yes, you can crop a sensor on any camera to get a smaller field of view, but obviously you lose out on everything you eliminate by cutting one sixth of the sensor... Everything that Red has been fighting so hard to prove (that more resolution is always better).


I guess I'm just wondering if there's others out there like me that also wish it was a 6K Super 35 sized frame.


And also hoping that Red won't continue to get closer (and potentially go bigger) to/than full frame in the new sensors.
Click to expand...
 
Note: I have not shot Dragon yet.

I personally prefer the larger sizes of MX and i expect I will prefer Dragon.

I tend to shoot Ana or on Super-Speeds for the last couple of years so the larger area suits me. Having said that I have used standards as in-between lenses on a few jobs and I think on Dragon that might be a bit annoying.
 
I'm actually looking forward to more film relevant resolutions and format sizes from Red. What they have done with Dragon makes a ton of sense actually. A ton.
 
Phil Holland said:
I'm actually looking forward to more film relevant resolutions and format sizes from Red. What they have done with Dragon makes a ton of sense actually. A ton.
Click to expand...

Phil, you always seems to know things the rest of us don't so I'll take your word for it, but I just finished shooting a feature on Cooke S4's where the 18mm and 25mm barely covered the MX sensor. We had at least two scenes where we would have killed for the lower noise floor of 6K, but our Cookes wouldn't have covered the Dragon anyways, so the low light advantages of 6k are basically irrelevant at wider focal lengths where I typically prefer to shoot (14-25mm).

I do get that the Dragon gives us options like never before, but it is frustrating to have to choose lenses for something as uncreative as image circle rather than more aesthetic characteristics like contrast, flares, color rendition, etc. But of course this is a technical art form and every decision has trade offs in one form or another, so I guess I'll just quit whining and go shoot my movies.

Julio
 
Julio Quintana said:
Phil, you always seems to know things the rest of us don't so I'll take your word for it, but I just finished shooting a feature on Cooke S4's where the 18mm and 25mm barely covered the MX sensor. We had at least two scenes where we would have killed for the lower noise floor of 6K, but our Cookes wouldn't have covered the Dragon anyways, so the low light advantages of 6k are basically irrelevant at wider focal lengths where I typically prefer to shoot (14-25mm).

I do get that the Dragon gives us options like never before, but it is frustrating to have to choose lenses for something as uncreative as image circle rather than more aesthetic characteristics like contrast, flares, color rendition, etc. But of course this is a technical art form and every decision has trade offs in one form or another, so I guess I'll just quit whining and go shoot my movies.
Click to expand...


While I'm certainly one of those shooters that shoots and works at 6K, remember it is indeed a multi-format camera.

For instance, David Fincher's Gone Girl was shot at 6K and they utilized a 5K extraction/frame guide "most" of the time.

I went through a rather tremendous effort to get as much lens coverage information as possible for shooting Dragon at it's various resolutions, but for those who want to shoot in the "pure" optimal image area of those S35 lenses they will and have been shooting for 5K on Dragon for a 4K finish. There's resolution to spare. Some just like taking advantage of the larger sensor size and resolution though.

Where you say "uncreative as image circle" I say more along the lines of standard imaging planes, relevant formats, easily visualization of focal lengths, etc....

Two ways to look at it:
- Use the S35 lenses how they are intended to be used and shoot 5K on Dragon (or extract 5K).
- Or use the S35 lenses how you intend to use them and shoot 6K, 5.5K, 5K, 4.5K, or 4K or whatever you want as long as they cover safely.

The Cooke's cover their intended format just fine. I wouldn't change up that visual aesthetic or focal length selection for any reason.

There's nothing about a multi-format camera that makes me feel less creative. It's actually the polar opposite.
 
Phil Holland said:
For instance, David Fincher's Gone Girl was shot at 6K and they utilized a 5K extraction/frame guide "most" of the time.
Click to expand...

That's good to know. I guess it helps keep things in perspective since this is how most of my discussions have gone with other professionals:

Me: It has at least two more stops of dynamic range, better color rendition, and it's 6K instead of 5K.

Them: 6K? They made the sensor even bigger? So we can use even less lenses now?

Me: No, but it's ok because the photosites are smaller so 5K on Dragon is actually smaller than 5K on MX.

Them: Awesome! So I can just shoot 5K and use all my favorite lenses again. That's great news. I'll never need more than 5K anyways.

Me: That's probably true.

Them: And I heard that Dragon at 2000 ISO is as clean as MX at 800?

Me: Yes, but only if you shoot at 6K.

Them: (awkward silence)

This is the classic paradox of choice in which having more options can actually diminish how satisfied we are with what we choose if we are forced to compromise. In this case, it actually pains me to know that the best possible image quality (6K) is just a drop-down menu away, but I can't choose that option because the only wide lens I have on set is an 18mm S4, or 18mm Master Prime, or 17.5mm Primo Prime, or 18mm Summilux_C Prime, or 18mm Super Speed, or 16mm Standard Speed. And like I mentioned, I just finished a feature where we did 50% of our shots on an 18mm S4. With my new Dragon, if I want to shoot on an 18mm S35mm lens, I have to go into the menu and take a 1/6th resolution hit. I know it's insignificant in most cases, but when we're shooting an interior church scene lit entirely with candles (which we did), that extra resolution just might save me an unnecessary round trip through neat video.

Anyways, I only jumped into this conversation to echo what Daniel Soderberg expressed in his original post. This is not to bash or discredit the incredible sensor I just purchased. But these are real technical concerns and I just hope that either the sensors stop growing (which they won't), or lens manufacturers step up and make lenses to accommodate.

BTW, Phil, thanks for all the Dragon coverage you've been doing these last few months. You're killing it lately and we're all benefiting from your generosity.

Julio
 
Julio Quintana said:
That's good to know. I guess it helps keep things in perspective since this is how most of my discussions have gone with other professionals:

Me: It has at least two more stops of dynamic range, better color rendition, and it's 6K instead of 5K.

Them: 6K? They made the sensor even bigger? So we can use even less lenses now?

Me: No, but it's ok because the photosites are smaller so 5K on Dragon is actually smaller than 5K on MX.

Them: Awesome! So I can just shoot 5K and use all my favorite lenses again. That's great news. I'll never need more than 5K anyways.

Me: That's probably true.

Them: And I heard that Dragon at 2000 ISO is as clean as MX at 800?

Me: Yes, but only if you shoot at 6K.

Them: (awkward silence)

This is the classic paradox of choice in which having more options can actually diminish how satisfied we are with what we choose if we are forced to compromise. In this case, it actually pains me to know that the best possible image quality (6K) is just a drop-down menu away, but I can't choose that option because the only wide lens I have on set is an 18mm S4, or 18mm Master Prime, or 17.5mm Primo Prime, or 18mm Summilux_C Prime, or 18mm Super Speed, or 16mm Standard Speed. And like I mentioned, I just finished a feature where we did 50% of our shots on an 18mm S4. With my new Dragon, if I want to shoot on an 18mm S35mm lens, I have to go into the menu and take a 1/6th resolution hit. I know it's insignificant in most cases, but when we're shooting an interior church scene lit entirely with candles (which we did), that extra resolution just might save me an unnecessary round trip through neat video.

Anyways, I only jumped into this conversation to echo what Daniel Soderberg expressed in his original post. This is not to bash or discredit the incredible sensor I just purchased. But these are real technical concerns and I just hope that either the sensors stop growing (which they won't), or lens manufacturers step up and make lenses to accommodate.

BTW, Phil, thanks for all the Dragon coverage you've been doing these last few months. You're killing it lately and we're all benefiting from your generosity.

Julio
Click to expand...

This may be true Julio, but dont forget the FOV on Dragon 6K is noticeably wider than 5K S35. An 18mm will feel more like a 14/15mm. Whereas a 24/25mm feels more like a 20mm. A number of S35 25mm primes are able to cover 5.5k, and others full Dragon 6k (Ultraprimes, Masterpimes, Super Speeds for example... not sure about Cookes). To me this increase in FOV reduces some of the "lens penalty" inherent in the larger 6k sensor, as in truth we no longer need to shoot as wide a focal length as before, which increases the chance lenses will cover 6k.

Clearly, for extremely WIDE fovs, 6K will prove a challenge for anything but the widest image circle, but for more common FOVs, most primes 25mm and up seem to cover at least 5.5k and beyond, which gives me hope!
 
Last edited:
Daniel Soderberg said:
Well yes, you can crop a sensor on any camera to get a smaller field of view, but obviously you lose out on everything you eliminate by cutting one sixth of the sensor... Everything that Red has been fighting so hard to prove (that more resolution is always better).
Click to expand...

Not true...you don't lose out on everything. In other threads active last week, there was general consensus that sometimes it was better to shoot HFR at a lower resolution and less-compressed REDCODE than to shoot higher resolution with higher compression. Everything has a context, and sometimes you need a full 6K, sometimes it's better to go with 5K, and not only because of the limitations of the glass.

DRAGON puts powerful tools in our hands and it is up to us to make sensible choices. Sometimes, the sensible choice is to stop down a T1.3 master prime to T4.0. People don't wring their hands about losing out on everything because we stop the lens down. Sometimes the sensible choice is to rack an Optimo to the middle of its range to get the right framing and perspective. People don't wring their hands about losing out on everything because we are not using the widest angle that we paid good money for, nor because we are not using the most telephoto end of the lens that we also paid good money for.

Angenieux have taken the bull by the horns and offered modded lenses that are adapted to the world of larger sensors. If you are happy with 5K, there's a lovely 24-290 that shoots T2.5. If you need 6K, there's an equally lovely 28-340 that shoots at T2.9. "BUT WAIT!" I hear you say...I don't want 28mm at the wide end, I want 24mm! I don't want T2.9, I want T2.5! And perhaps some day they will build that, with the concomitant increase in weight, cost, and M.O.D. But when all is said and done, isn't it great that we have the choice to work with a faster T-stop at 5K or a longer lens that covers 6K? I like it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top