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 :)

I dream of medium format red ;)

I am unconvinced of the advantage of either Meduim format or even 65mm for motion work. These large formatts in the time of film guaranteed a clean grain free image. 35mm printed via an internegative and then an interpositive struggled to remain grain free especially with the stocks in earlier times. Properly exposed and treated digital acquisition can be virtually noise free and the post path should not add noise and can be used to further minimise any noise.


Secondly the DOF difference could be seen as an advantage but shooting Full Frame video with T1.4 glass or even anamorphic glass can create such shallow shots that not only is focus on dynamic shots difficult but especially within the context of drama shooting it can simply become distracting to have so much of the frame soft. There is an argument for TVC shooting that a super shallow focus is a positive as shots are often 1-2 seconds long.


I am not arguing that there is never a case where these giant sensors would not be appropriate but I suspect a 36mm wide Full frame sensor would be as far as I would need to go. But I am looking forward to see people more talented than myself use these 65mm Digital sensors on actual productions.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Ketch, current digital "65" cameras are based on film format dimensions, they aren't even close to actually having 65mm or 70mm wide sensors. "65" is just a label referring to the film format.

The Alexa 65 has a sensor that is 54.12mm x 25.58mm, the Phantom 65 has a sensor that is 51.2mm x 30.5mm, and 5-perf 65mm film is 52.48mm x 23.01mm. "65mm" and "70mm" are just referring to the outer dimensions of the strip of film.

So it's silly to say that Red should make a 70mm camera instead of a 65mm camera when both are the same size, unless you want them to actually make a sensor that is 70mm wide, in which case lenses made for "65mm" cameras wouldn't work on it.

Even a 70mm Hasselblad doesn't use a 70mm wide area and neither does any 645 cameras, not even the digital ones. "65" and "70" have always been a reference to film formats.
Click to expand...

Correct David...

In all points... :)

A TRUE 70mm Sensor, is what I like to see coming from RED... Preferably with a new set of lenses to go with... But if no lenses come, I am sure some one else will have them come shortly after... Following Panavision's fantastic example... :)
 
Tom Gleeson said:
I am unconvinced of the advantage of either Meduim format or even 65mm for motion work.
Click to expand...

Have you seen Interstellar on the big screen in 70mm film projection? I feel like that'll convince you pretty fast :)

Personally though, I'm all for packing more resolution into a S35-sized sensor vs. making bigger sensors. You've gotta blast the scene with light to get a workable DoF, or give your 1st AC an ulcer trying to keep focus, and what's the point of extra resolution if it's not in focus? Even in Batman, Alfred went out of focus once or twice. I can't imagine how hard it was!
 
Who knows what RED's plans are at the moment, but the EPIC-645 camera that was announced ages ago was supposed to have a 9K sensor at roughly 55mm wide, which translated to a pixel size of .006mm, or .001mm larger in each direction than what we have on Dragon. It would have given a larger imaging area than 65mm film formats and something in the neighborhood of 13% smaller than 15/70 IMAX. I think it would have been (and still would be) a great format option as it is right in line with digital "645" medium format offerings. And there are a good number of lens options out there that will cover this frame size.

I love medium and large format photography because it offers many visual nuances we can not easily achieve with 35mm and smaller formats. There is a lot more to it than just resolution... There's something magical when we have the attributes of shooting with a 75mm or 90mm focal length, but with the same AOV we would have with a 40mm or 50mm on FF35. Along with the longer focal lengths needed to maintain relatively common frame sizing, DOF becomes shallower. I don't see this as a problem with current trends in sensor development and the ability to gather more light with these newer sensors.
 
joshua csehak said:
Personally though, I'm all for packing more resolution into a S35-sized sensor vs. making bigger sensors. You've gotta blast the scene with light to get a workable DoF, or give your 1st AC an ulcer trying to keep focus, and what's the point of extra resolution if it's not in focus?
Click to expand...

If you pack more photosites into the same sized S35 sensor and lose sensitivity and end up just having to open up the stop or add more light to compensate, then what's the difference?
 
Björn Benckert said:
The alexa XL is three flipped amira sensors standing on the side next to each other. For red to do the same they would need to sort out the rolling shutter. But as they managed to make the dragon sensor I'm positive that they had larger sensors in mind as well. So I assume that they would have to make a new sensor all together. And even if dragon has taken a bit longer than what I think RED expected I would guess that they show something bigger quite soon. Even though I think (sadly) that they got a bit burned on showing off their work in progress stuff a bit early, possibly thats why we seen nothing yet.
Click to expand...

It's just a bigger cut of the cmos-die... stitching sensors doesn't work.
 
Dunkan Wolf said:
It's just a bigger cut of the cmos-die... stitching sensors doesn't work.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt, even though I have not tested it, that the alexa XL works very well and stitching sensors can work without difference from single cmos sensor. But the rolling shutter effect offcourse would be different if you stack them standing on the side, then the rolling shutter runs left to right or opposite which is more of an issue than from top to bottom. And I agree the cmos without global shutter is to me a bit on the last straw and the more pixels and th bigger the sensors the issue just gets scaled.
 
Dunkan Wolf said:
It's just a bigger cut of the cmos-die... stitching sensors doesn't work.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt, even though I have not tested it, that the alexa XL works very well and stitching sensors can work without difference from single cmos sensor. But the rolling shutter effect offcourse would be different if you stack them standing on the side, then the rolling shutter runs left to right or opposite which is more of an issue than from top to bottom. And I agree the cmos without global shutter is to me a bit on the last straw and the more pixels and th bigger the sensors the issue just gets scaled.
 
Rolling shutter becomes irrelevant if you have something like the motion mount or other secondary global type shutter or mechanical shutter in the optical path. The Alexa sensor actually has a slower read/reset time than the MX sensor by a good bit. But they use a mechanical shutter so it blanks the image as a film camera would, then the sensor resets and we don't see the same scan line type skew of digital sensors. The Alexa Studio allows us to turn off the mechanical shutter and just use the electronic shutter. Bleh... Way more skew than MX or Dragon. I don't know if the older Alexa models allow for this now via software updates or not. I haven't been shooting much on any camera lately. I need to rename my Dragon to 'Dusty'. :(

As for stitching sensors. That's not what Arri is doing. That said, it can and does work just fine. It's not something we see in cinema cameras, but aerospace and geosat industries, medical imaging, etc.. all use sensor arrays to great effect. In the case of video or cinema cameras, I think it would work best through a prism system where each sensor can overlap the adjacent edge of the other and then the image can be properly stitched to compensate.
 
I for one would be interested in both a FULL FRAME Dragon (ie 5D sized), and a MEDIUM FORMAT Dragon. Simply because they are unusual formats with their own distinct styles. Maybe not for every job, but for some jobs...perhaps ideal. I agree with Jeff that it IS exciting to use longer lenses with wider FOVs. A 50mm that "feels" like a 21mm is a UNIQUE way of looking at the world. It's not just about shallow depth of field.

Moreoever, using a 50mm lens that has a WIDE-ANGLE deign, is also interesting.

We did a job last week for History Channel where we TILT-SHIFTED portraits on a Hasseblad 50 2.8, and let me tell you...it's magic. Not just because of the tilt shift, but also because the 50mm is a "distagon", a wide ange lens (very similar in design in fact to the Contax/ZE 21 2.8...just blown up to MEDIUM FORMAT)...so there is a "bend" or an "attack" of the lens that wouldn't normally see is a PLANAR (telefocus) 50mm design.

So, there are many reasons to explore larger sensors - variations in perspective, depth, scale, optical design, etc.

Everything has it's place, and options are generally good.
 
I think that if RED released a Full-Frame chip camera it would sell like pancakes! I think the main reason the Canon 5D was so wildly successful for video was because it has such shallow DOP. Also, there is a great selection of FF cinema lenses out there. A 65mm or Imax sized sensor would be great too, but a Full-Frame sensor Epic would actually be used a TON! I imagine it would end up being used more than the S35mm sized version. I for one would upgrade in a second!

Wynn Padula
Owner/Director of Photography
www.fastandlightproductions.com
415.446.8050
 
Wynn Padula said:
I think that if RED released a Full-Frame chip camera it would sell like pancakes! I think the main reason the Canon 5D was so wildly successful for video was because it has such shallow DOP. Also, there is a great selection of FF cinema lenses out there. A 65mm or Imax sized sensor would be great too, but a Full-Frame sensor Epic would actually be used a TON! I imagine it would end up being used more than the S35mm sized version. I for one would upgrade in a second!

Wynn Padula
Owner/Director of Photography
www.fastandlightproductions.com
415.446.8050
Click to expand...
5D was successful just because of price.Nobody cares about shallow dof
What are those great FF cine lenses out there?
 
Kemalettin Sert said:
5D was successful just because of price.Nobody cares about shallow dof
What are those great FF cine lenses out there?
Click to expand...
Thats wrong, the 550D and the 7D had the exact same sensor / video tech as the 5D but smaller sensor and even lower price by about 1/2 or 1/3 so with your logic nobody would buy a 5D and instead go for the less pricy smaller options. Well, the 5D's been quite a hit, so I think people like "large" even at a higher price. And it's not only about the shallow dof. As large / large, or to be more exact different format sizes looks different all together. Sensor size relative to the object shot makes huge difference. For example a macro shot with 8mm sensor looks extremely different than with a 35mm format camera even if you stop down to compensate.
 
Björn Benckert said:
Thats wrong, the 550D and the 7D had the exact same sensor / video tech as the 5D but smaller sensor and even lower price by about 1/2 or 1/3 so with your logic nobody would buy a 5D and instead go for the less pricy smaller options. Well, the 5D's been quite a hit, so I think people like "large" even at a higher price. And it's not only about the shallow dof. As large / large, or to be more exact different format sizes looks different all together. Sensor size relative to the object shot makes huge difference. For example a macro shot with 8mm sensor looks extremely different than with a 35mm format camera even if you stop down to compensate.
Click to expand...

The Sony A7 is also becoming quite popular. I think there's a place for all formats.
 
When we bring up medium format it brings up my desire for Red to move into the stills world. Phase One/Leaf backs are outrageous (even compared to the Pentax 645D/Z) because the market is tiny and the sensor isn't being used anywhere else. Red could get around this somewhat by giving us a medium format digital back which shared sensor (and probably some electronics) with a medium format cine camera they were selling to IMAX types. I know it still wouldn't be what you'd call high volume, but it'd be higher than Phase One etc (plus, it wouldn't be Red's primary revenue stream like it is Phase One's so the margins would be tamer).

Craig Lees said:
Wonder how much a Mamiya 6x7 goes on ebay for these days?
Click to expand...

Incredibly affordable. If you're the least bit tempted, and your wife is already unhappy with how much stuff you're stockpiling, DO NOT check eBay.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top