Fixed 2/3 versus Interchangable....

[Rick Burnett]

Like everyone else, with the knowledge we've been given, we are all trying to decide the path we want to take when the Scarlets become available. I've read through MANY of the threads here and have found a lot of information and thoughts from professionals and beginners to be amazingly helpful, so thank you for that. I am a beginner when it comes to video.

I am currently in a debate with myself over which Scarlet I am going to purchase. At the moment the S35 is out of my price range, so that leaves the 2/3 cinema and the fixed.

Initially I was pretty hyped up about the 2/3 cinema, but then I started reading a lot of information on the sensor size and how that relates to how other lens are going to work with the 2/3 cinema sensor. Which in other words means that say if you are like me and have a D90 with a bunch of lens, they aren't basically going to work like I am used to with the D90 (in terms of results in the video).

This would seem to me to drive me towards needing the miniPrimes or maybe some other not announced mini lens or third party adapter (which it seems like I'd need even to use my Nikon lens, but not 100% sure on that).

I must be missing something, but what would be the BIG draw other than being able to change out lens on the 2/3 with the miniPrimes?

The reason I bring any of this up is that one thought I have really put forth which I think is the essence of the Red camera is that for my first brain I am going to go with the fixed, and then as time goes on, go to either the S35 or what have you. To me, this IS the most amazing part of this camera setup.

Looking at the sample video produced by the fixed lens that has been released, I am AMAZED at the thinness of the DOF. That coupled with the additional lens add ons that will be out, to me, this seems like the better option if you aren't going to go with really good lens on the S35.

Of course, I think a lot of people are worried more about how the fixed lens is going to work which there is not a lot of detail just yet, but the more and more I dig, I am really excited about the fixed package.

I know there is a lot of debate on the single ring, and unfortunately, we don't know a lot of detail about it yet, but so far, given my limited experience with a feature we shot on a HVX200, we'd really only need focus control available on the ring (when exploiting DOF effects), with obviously the option to get to all the other settings with maybe the dials on the handle.

From using the camera as a still generator, I'd use it for zoom like I do now with my D90. granted, I do use manual focus sometimes, but it would be cool if a simple button could be pressed down to modify what the ring does (like a shift).

So, for other people considering the 2/3 Scarlet, where has your thinking gone on these topics/issues? This is not meant to be a 'Just get the S35 or greater' discussion. It's about the 2/3 only.

I figure, while I wait for these cameras to come out, at least I can learn and brain storm (pun intended) with others as to the best option.

Rick
Asylum Studio Productions

 

[Stephen Gibson]

Rick, to me it seems the fixed is a boon to EFP, sports, doc, and industrial video shooters. While the Cinema seems to be more aimed at the crown who want a 2/3 inch sensor, but a more cinema style rig. I know I personally can not wait to see how some fast older C mount glass looks on it. In my mind (which could be way way way off) I think the fixed is aimed at the aforementioned video groups, while the Interchangeable model is aimed at cinema style shooters, which is why I think they have given it the 2/3 inch Cinema name.

Again I could be waaaaaay off... and I am sure there will be plenty of people shooting features on the fixed.

 

[Erik Bien]

Looking at the sample video produced by the fixed lens that has been released, I am AMAZED at the thinness of the DOF.

Perhaps I missed it, but as of yet I don't think we've been shown any grabs or footage from fixed-lens Scarlet — the 2/3" images I remember were shot with a 100mm RED Pro Prime (a pretty long lens for that format).

 

[Jason Madeja]

I would love the interchangeable 2/3rds. It would be great to shoot a feature on. However, I don't make money shooting features, I make money on industrials. The speed of the fixed will be necessary for most of the work I get paid for. Plus, I don't own any lenses so starting a lens collection is going to drive the interchangeable up around 10k, I'd guess. the fixed should be significantly less expensive and still be a nice upgrade over HDV for personal projects. I just hope the fixed lens is as great as it's sounded so far.

I think the fixed will be a great gateway between today's prosumer stuff and tomorrows 4k+ cameras.

I wonder if it will be possible to get the interchangeable 2/3rds brain + the extras needed + a decent 2/3rds zoom lens that could compete with the fixed lens and be relatively close in price. I highly doubt it and that's where the fixed value will need to be, in the lens.

 

[Andrew Gentle]

This would seem to me to drive me towards needing the miniPrimes or maybe some other not announced mini lens or third party adapter (which it seems like I'd need even to use my Nikon lens, but not 100% sure on that).

To shoot with Nikon lenses on any new RED brain you'd need to buy the Electronic Nikon Mount from RED for $500.

 

[David Rasberry]

I am opting for the 2/3" cinema with a selection of vintage 16mm glass to start with. So far I am up to about $3k investment in used lenses. With support accessories, mount conversions, and maintenance service for some of them, I expect that to more than double.

No doubt that the fixed version will be the best bang for the buck, and I expect the lens will out perform most of the older glass.

 

[alex lemon]

Perhaps I missed it, but as of yet I don't think we've been shown any grabs or footage from fixed-lens Scarlet — the 2/3" images I remember were shot with a 100mm RED Pro Prime (a pretty long lens for that format).

I think you are correct. We have yet to see any stills or video shot with the 2/3" fixed (that we know of). I'm really hoping RED will roll out some samples with the announcement later this month. It's always great to see shots of gear, circuit boards, and such, but the proof - as they say - is in the pudding. :smile5:

 

[Rick Presas]

Rick,

you work for the Asylum (of Mockbuster fame)? If so, thats pretty awesome i just watched Mega Shark haha.

 

[Rick Burnett]

Ahhh, the thread that pointed me to 'Izzy' had said it was from the fixed lens, but now I see that this doesn't appear to be the case. Well that certainly makes a big difference as one thing is for sure, whatever setup I go with, we want to have the possibility to have a good shallow DoF, that's one of the things we've not had the opportunity to have with our HVX200 and my experience with a 35mm adapter for it is just very cumbersome. I even built a 35mm adapter for my Canon HV30 to play with and it was just enough fun to drive my future decisions.

This means I'm must going to have to research more and understand the 1.4 to 1.6 zoom factor of using standard lens and also understand what the difference is between what people call a still lens and a cinematic lens (as I see this all over the place but don't exactly understand what those differences really mean). If I go with the 2/3 Cinematic I wouldn't want to purchase lens that wouldn't be useful if I upgrade up the brain line.

Then again, as they begin shipping, I am SURE someone will use the combinations of lens that I have to demonstrate with sample footage to others what they are getting.

The thing that always scares me is that when I bought my D90, I looked at A LOT of sample footage before I bought it. People just worked around the rolling shutter but at the time, didn't really demonstrate the weakness with it. When I tested it, the difference between the D90 and HV30 was absolutely eye opening. The D90 rolling shutter is REALLY REALLY bad. Worse than any other camera I have used. I only say this in regards to lens performance and understanding how the focal length is affected by the sensor size (for instance, I have a 50mm 1.8f lens I use with my D90, how I would even relate to what that is going to be in terms of the sensor size).

D90: 15.8mm x 23.6mm
2/3: 10.1mm x 5.35mm

Significant difference!

Maybe I need to start researching cinematic lens so I can really understand the difference. I also guess, if prices are announced end of month, I can compare the fixed to 2/3 with everything the same except a lens on the 2/3. All my experience has been with stills lens.

 

[Rick Burnett]

Haha, no, I am not with 'The Asylum', they are a different company altogether. Mine is 'Asylum Studio Productions' which is essentially just me.

I work mostly with another company called Media Tribe which did the feature I alluded to earlier (Dogs of Chinatown) and with students from SCAD.

In the past, I did a lot of scoring, mixing, foley, etc, that is my initial skill set. While I am still doing this, recently, I wrote a short sci-fi screenplay and decided to go through the WHOLE process with it (it's a short film). I have really enjoyed the other aspects of film production as well.

I am one of those 'like to do everything' type of persons. Not that in the end I will want to, because scoring is a bigger passion for me (and I've already invested everything I need there), but because then, I understand the process from the inside and can delegate much easier what I want from personal experience!

 

[Rick Presas]

that's one of the things (shallow DoF) we've not had the opportunity to have with our HVX200

really? I've used the HVX with no lens adapter on 3 different projects, and we got a pretty good looking DoF out of it. All you have to do is know how to shoot it (frame your shot in full zoom, and have your subject be well-seperated from the background or the other person if you're doing rack focus between two faces.)

I've seen my HVX's images on a big screen, and it looks great. It becuase of that that i'm really excited about the 2/3" scarlet, as i'd wager it'll be as afar ahead of the HVX as the HVX was to the DVX.

 

[Ethan Cooper]

something else to consider for us low budget guys in this Fixed vs Interchangeable conversation:

If you're use to using small steadicams like the Merlin, the fixed lens will be far easier to deal with in terms of focus. I know it's the cardinal sin of all professional work, but you can pop it in autofocus while flying. You have no chance of focusing while flying the interchangeable version without a remote follow focus which is out of most of our budgets, unless Red has some type of auto focus lenses that will go along with it or unless they've figured out a way to enable auto focus while using Canon & Nikon lenses.

 

[Luca Perin]

Hey guys,,, I'm in the same problem... just a question... i'm wondering if a super 16mm lens.. like the Zeiss Ultra 16 lenses... for example the 25mm(Horizontal angle of view for a super 16 camera:28°), has the same perspective distortion of a normal 50mm...(Horizontal angle of view for a Super 35:27°)... Thank you!!!

 

[Michael Hastings]

Ahhh, the thread that pointed me to 'Izzy' had said it was from the fixed lens, but now I see that this doesn't appear to be the case. Well that certainly makes a big difference as one thing is for sure, whatever setup I go with, we want to have the possibility to have a good shallow DoF, that's one of the things we've not had the opportunity to have with our HVX200 and my experience with a 35mm adapter for it is just very cumbersome. I even built a 35mm adapter for my Canon HV30 to play with and it was just enough fun to drive my future decisions.

This means I'm must going to have to research more and understand the 1.4 to 1.6 zoom factor of using standard lens and also understand what the difference is between what people call a still lens and a cinematic lens (as I see this all over the place but don't exactly understand what those differences really mean). If I go with the 2/3 Cinematic I wouldn't want to purchase lens that wouldn't be useful if I upgrade up the brain line.

Then again, as they begin shipping, I am SURE someone will use the combinations of lens that I have to demonstrate with sample footage to others what they are getting.

The thing that always scares me is that when I bought my D90, I looked at A LOT of sample footage before I bought it. People just worked around the rolling shutter but at the time, didn't really demonstrate the weakness with it. When I tested it, the difference between the D90 and HV30 was absolutely eye opening. The D90 rolling shutter is REALLY REALLY bad. Worse than any other camera I have used. I only say this in regards to lens performance and understanding how the focal length is affected by the sensor size (for instance, I have a 50mm 1.8f lens I use with my D90, how I would even relate to what that is going to be in terms of the sensor size).

D90: 15.8mm x 23.6mm
2/3: 10.1mm x 5.35mm

Significant difference!

It is not the lens that is the difference it is the sensor size. Smaller sensors have much greater dof for the same angle of view. 2/3" scarlet You will be a little better than the HVX 1/3" but nowhere near the effect of the S35 (or D90) sensor.

Take the diagonal of each sensor size and then divide and that

28.4 D90 vs. 11.4 for scarlet 2/3 = approx 2.5 "crop" factor.
28.4 D90 vs. 5.8 for HVX200 = approx 5x "crop" factor.

Hey guys,,, I'm in the same problem... just a question... i'm wondering if a super 16mm lens.. like the Zeiss Ultra 16 lenses... for example the 25mm(Horizontal angle of view for a super 16 camera:28°), has the same perspective distortion of a normal 50mm...(Horizontal angle of view for a Super 35:27°)... Thank you!!!

As far as "normal" perspective I think the rule of thumb is the "normal" focal length would be the diagonal of the format size. FF35 calculates to approx 44mm so sort of close to the 50mm "normal". It should track more closely to the angle of view for the different sensor/film formats.

 

[Rick Burnett]

You are correct Rick P, you can in fact get shots like that but like the lens that came with my D90, I felt like the lens was really restrictive of the shots I could take with it. In other words, I wanted a little more flexibility especially in locations that were tight and I didn't have the option of spreading things out more.

Don't get me wrong, I too have seen our production on a big screen and I'll be honest, it looks absolutely great. We did work within the bounds of what the camera did well, and with many cameras, if you work within it's usable range, you get good results. HV30 is a poster child for results like that.

With the red, not only am I looking at all the upgrades, if you will, to picture quality, cmos ability compared to current cmos sensors, expandability, but in terms of shooting, even more freedom in subject matter and conditions.

We used an SGPro adapter with a prime kit on an HVX300 for a music video and the results looked great. I mean really great. But, there were issues with getting everything setup right with the adapter, and the whole rail system for this setup was not sturdy in my opinion. Still, I was amazed with the results, but the more things you have to deal with compatibility wise, the less time you have to troubleshoot on set when part A stops working with part B!

This is why originally I was designing my DIY35mm HV30 for a B camera, but issue after issue with design and me having to fabricate parts for it, not to mention I don't have a flip unit so I'd need either an external LCD or design some mirror or something. Does it take great video, YES! Is it too hard to expect someone to have to use in a face paced shoot, YES! But I'll still build and play with it because its fun.

Good point on the steadicam issue, especially when changing lens.

I'd like to in the future if I do go with fixed to use it just for that reason when I do eventually upgrade more.

 

[Rick Burnett]

Michael, I think I understand what you are saying, and that makes sense. Mathematically speaking, since the 2/3 sensor is smaller, it's only going to register a smaller portion of the image coming through, so an image with at 50mm lens on say the D90 is going to show more of what is in front of it than the 2/3 because it is going to crop it, and doing the math the other way, based on the diagonal, you'd get 40% of the image you'd get with the D90 sensor for the SAME lens.

Now would it be true to say that at the same settings on both, while the image is cropped on the smaller sensor, the DoF would be the same on both sensors at that point. And that, if you then changed the lens to get the same visual space as the larger sensor, here is where your DoF would get larger.

It's clear that there is a lot more research I need to do to understand what I want And not just trial and error.

 

[Luca Perin]

Thank you Michael...!!! Sorry for the "normal" term...