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 :)

Arri 65mm digital camera

I'm still ready to buy that EPIC-645...
 
Yeah but what's the lens crop on that? Is my 18mm lens going to turn into a 36mm lens??? Circle of confused minds want to know... :) sorry...
 
Where are the still images? Can you find one and post the full resolution still inline here?

-Michael
 
Glen Powell said:
Yeah but what's the lens crop on that? Is my 18mm lens going to turn into a 36mm lens??? Circle of confused minds want to know... :) sorry...
Click to expand...

"Ordinary" lenses will not cover the entire frame. The lens focal length will stay the same, but using one lens with a projected image circle made for FF or S35 cameras will result in heavy vignetting or even showing your image in a circle inside the frame. If you had a lens which covers 65mm format, using it on a 65mm camera you'll have a wider field of view in respect of the image projected on a FF sensor or a S35 one.
 
If all of this "sensor size queen" competition was motivated by purchases by women, trust me the whole size race and the resulting lens conundrum would be pretty pointless and dead in the water from jump.

How's about a 4:3 sensor? Arri has more than proved that it makes very sound business sense to develop.
 
Glen Powell said:
Yeah but what's the lens crop on that? Is my 18mm lens going to turn into a 36mm lens??? Circle of confused minds want to know... :) sorry...
Click to expand...

Nicolò Rebughini said:
"Ordinary" lenses will not cover the entire frame. The lens focal length will stay the same, but using one lens with a projected image circle made for FF or S35 cameras will result in heavy vignetting or even showing your image in a circle inside the frame. If you had a lens which covers 65mm format, using it on a 65mm camera you'll have a wider field of view in respect of the image projected on a FF sensor or a S35 one.
Click to expand...

Thanks Nicolò Rebughini I guess you missed the smiley face at the end of my post, that suggested that it was made in jest... I was being sarcastic and trying to make fun of all of the confused lens crop posts that litter the forum.
 
Glen Powell said:
Thanks Nicolò Rebughini I guess you missed the smiley face at the end of my post, that suggested that it was made in jest... I was being sarcastic and trying to make fun of all of the confused lens crop posts that litter the forum.
Click to expand...

Whoops :) Next time I should pop out my sarcasm meter!
 
The event is in two days and the timetable info consists of words "concept technology" and "first images", so if there is no official announcement at the time being or during these two days, one can deduce that Arri chose the event route for introduction.
 
Isn't Panavison also working on a 65mm sensor 6K camera? Photosite density would be pretty low... wouldn't that translate into fairly decent low light? (in theory)
 
BRANDON JAMESON said:
If all of this "sensor size queen" competition was motivated by purchases by women, trust me the whole size race and the resulting lens conundrum would be pretty pointless and dead in the water from jump.

How's about a 4:3 sensor? Arri has more than proved that it makes very sound business sense to develop.
Click to expand...

There are visual attributes which come from larger imager sizes and a whole set of nuances we can't easily achieve with 35mm or smaller imagers. But for the most part it is subtle and the casual observer or typical audience won't see or notice. As for aspect ratio, 4:3 makes a lot of sense, there are even arguments for 1:1 sensor sizes, especially for VFX production and moving forward to arbitrary display sizes in a multitude of devices. The EPIC would make for an awesome stills camera if not for the nearly 2:1 wide aspect we're dealing with. On projects where I've used the EPIC for stills, it has performed well, but the aspect ratio leading to low vertical resolution or severe vertical crop, if you want to look at it that way compared to comparable width DSLR sensors, has often been a compromise. 4:3 aspect sensors also make for a better fit with 2:1 anamorphic lenses for those into anamorphic cinematography. Whereas the 1.89:1 sensor we have with EPIC-MX or Dragon is more in tune with 1.3:1 anamorphic lenses.
 
"Isn't Panavison also working on a 65mm sensor 6K camera? Photosite density would be pretty low... wouldn't that translate into fairly decent low light? (in theory) "

You should gain 2 stops on the low end, but this is negated because you lose two stops to maintain the same dof as 35mm. Isos from 100-3200 should be ultra clean
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
There are visual attributes which come from larger imager sizes and a whole set of nuances we can't easily achieve with 35mm or smaller imagers. But for the most part it is subtle and the casual observer or typical audience won't see or notice. As for aspect ratio, 4:3 makes a lot of sense, there are even arguments for 1:1 sensor sizes, especially for VFX production and moving forward to arbitrary display sizes in a multitude of devices. The EPIC would make for an awesome stills camera if not for the nearly 2:1 wide aspect we're dealing with. On projects where I've used the EPIC for stills, it has performed well, but the aspect ratio leading to low vertical resolution or severe vertical crop, if you want to look at it that way compared to comparable width DSLR sensors, has often been a compromise. 4:3 aspect sensors also make for a better fit with 2:1 anamorphic lenses for those into anamorphic cinematography. Whereas the 1.89:1 sensor we have with EPIC-MX or Dragon is more in tune with 1.3:1 anamorphic lenses.
Click to expand...

Hey Jeff!

Yes, I couldn't agree with you more on all your points.

Using a 2xs anamorphic lens on a 16x9 sensor (or something similar) is a pain in the arse and to be frank, although we own a RED and an F65, most DPs we hire who enjoy anamorphic lenses ALWAYS ask for the Alexa. (We even tried to offer to rent HAWK 1.3x lenses from Germany on one project and STILL ended up with the DP choosing a 4:3 Alexa shooting Arriraw.

Dan, a far as Panavision releasing a 65-70mm sensor camera, may I point out that that rumor has been around for YEARS....and Phantom HAD a very cool 65mm sensor that we used a few times before they discontinued the product.

The files were HUGE , the workflow next to impossible and getting a superb set of lenses was not an easy thing to do.... (We ended up using Panavision glass after testing a few other options.

I still don't fully grasp the hunger for larger sensors when there is no elegant workflow for projects that don't have the luxury of $$$$$$$$$$ (or access) to the very few post workflows that can actually play the files at close to the correct playback speed.


Ponderous. :)
 
You're conflating larger sensors with larger file sizes but that's not necessarily true, the ARRI 65mm sensor could end up with the same pixel count as a Sony F65 or Red Dragon, in that 6K range, and the file size issues would be the same even though those cameras have 35mm sensors.

The Phantom 65 camera was only 4K, the files were huge probably because you were dealing with uncompressed raw versus compressed raw.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
You're conflating larger sensors with larger file sizes but that's not necessarily true, the ARRI 65mm sensor could end up with the same pixel count as a Sony F65 or Red Dragon, in that 6K range, and the file size issues would be the same even though those cameras have 35mm sensors.

The Phantom 65 camera was only 4K, the files were huge probably because you were dealing with uncompressed raw versus compressed raw.
Click to expand...

That's kind of what I thought.... 6K is 6K no matter the sensor size. Just larger sensor sites / less pixel density. A compressed RAW like the red wavelet should give reasonable file size. The lack of larger format lenses / cost of those lenses will keep these as rarified bird.
 
To think I was almost about to jump on an Amira...I'm betting the house on this camera... PS great that its 65mm cuz that wouldn't necessarily kill s35 sales for the majority of people... Instead of jumping on Amira or XT maybe I should just go into full savings mode and buy nothing I am thinking until ordering is available...
 
Brian Merlen said:
To think I was almost about to jump on an Amira...I'm betting the house on this camera... PS great that its 65mm cuz that wouldn't necessarily kill s35 sales for the majority of people... Instead of jumping on Amira or XT maybe I should just go into full savings mode and buy nothing I am thinking until ordering is available...
Click to expand...
I don't think the 65mm Arri will be a big-seller due to size and expense. I would wait and see what they have to show at NAB in April -- or possibly SMPTE in October. I tend to doubt they'll have anything to ship for some time. The Amira was a far easier camera to built, and even that didn't start shipping until almost 6 months after it was unveiled.

I also tend to think the file sizes will be fairly intimidating, particularly if they hit ProRes 444 8K. These won't be easy to deal with in post, and it'll be a greater challenge for D.I.T.'s. I think the 65mm format will be appropriate for some large-budget projects, but for the vast majority I think normal 4K/5K will be enough. If you have an Imax release or a $100M+ picture, go for it.
 
im sure it wont sell in mass like alexa, but im sure it will book well as a niche lucrative option... seriously i'm betting the farm if I can swing it on this
 
Brian Merlen said:
im sure it wont sell in mass like alexa, but im sure it will book well as a niche lucrative option... seriously i'm betting the farm if I can swing it on this
Click to expand...
It's possible for certain things it'd be a good rental item. But if the stock Alexa is $60K, I'd bet the 65mm Arri will be about twice as expensive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top