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 :)

Just give me 35mm DOF

35mm (super35) DOF is all I want. I'd settle for any other specs. I shot a feature with one of the DOF adapters. It's a huge pain in the ass. My next feature is coming up and I'll sacrifice DOF if I have to. I won't use another DOF adapter, period. 16mm DOF would be a dissapointment. Why any camera/camcorder manufacturer produces a camera with anything less than 35mm(super35) sensors these days is just stupid. Thank goodness for visionariers like Jim and the RED team. Cheers.
 
Phillip Hudson said:
35mm (super35) DOF is all I want. I'd settle for any other specs. I shot a feature with one of the DOF adapters. It's a huge pain in the ass. My next feature is coming up and I'll sacrifice DOF if I have to. I won't use another DOF adapter, period. 16mm DOF would be a dissapointment. Why any camera/camcorder manufacturer produces a camera with anything less than 35mm(super35) sensors these days is just stupid. Thank goodness for visionariers like Jim and the RED team. Cheers.
Click to expand...


Exactly!!
 
Ooze3d said:
What would you think if Jim offers this?:

- A very simple cam about the size of a HV20
- Fixed 16x zoom
- 35mm sized sensor
- $2000 - $4000
Click to expand...
I'd think Jim was a miracle worker. If by 35-mm–sized sensor you mean a sensor the size of a 35-mm motion picture frame (roughly the size of a typical APS-C DSLR sensor), then it would be hard to add a fixed 16x zoom and call the resulting camera "pocket sized" -- even if you simply mean a smallish camera (e.g., a "palmcorder"), not necessarily one that could actually fit in a pocket. The lens alone would probably be at least 5 inches long (and for a 16x maybe more than 10 inches) and 3.5-4 inches in diameter at the front element, and weigh quite a few pounds. If you want it to have a fairly reasonable maximum f-stop (say, f4 or so) that is fixed throughout the zoom range, then you can expect it to be larger and heavier still. And you can expect to pay far more than $4,000 just for the lens. Remember, Red One's Mysterium sensor is the size you desire (24.4 x 13.7 mm), and look at the lenses it takes.
 
Well you know I might wan't it to need a 35mm adaptor.:glare: So I can trick it out with all the accesorries and make it big like the like a real camera. :sorcerer:

I have to say that an HVX 200 with all the good stuff(firestore, 35mm, LCD monitor, some batteries, sound stuff, mattebox, rail, follow focus, some more Batteries) looks like the real deal.

Then agian who realy want's to mess with a 35mm adaptor. I suggest the Red Box, *patent pending* A red one like shaped box that you put your scarlet in whenever you wana wear big boy pants.

No, but realy the I bet the scarlet will look just fine with a follow focus and matttebox. Anyway I don't think It's is such a big deal, Down here all the producers and directors are getting used to the Idea of using Little :devil: HDV:ranting2: cameras. I allways encourage them to rent something bigger though.
 
Buuuuut, 35mm sensor limits it's use in other areas like eng. What if it had a red 35mm adaptor option? Cuz I would love to make a movie with one, but I would also Like to get 6 of em and shoot a concert.

I guess a 16mm sensor would fall right in the middle.
 
35mm sensor limits it's use in other areas like eng.
Click to expand...

Why is Super35 too big for newsgathering? It's not too big for news still photography. In fact, it's smaller than the 35mm still format (36 x 24mm) or the larger digital SLRs that professional news photographers use across the globe, every day.

Let's not limit ourselves by tradition, especially if that tradition is from a technical limitation that is now gone.
 
killfilm said:
hmmm fair enough, sounds like a cam i would buy too. Just wondering though, when dealing with the clients who think bigger is better, what do you tell them about the small "handycam" looking thing. I think that size also matters most of the time when dealing with a professional crew.
Click to expand...

Remember we're always talking about a pocket size cam. It's ok to think it won't actually fit in a pocket (or at least a standard sized pocket), but you cannot ask for something the size of a HVX or bigger just because it looks more pro. The times they are a'changin man! Now we can have amazing image quality in the palm of our hands. Why make it bigger or heavier just to make it look more pro? If you want a bigger cam, buy the Red One. If it's your client who wants something bigger, just show him a few takes shot with the Scarlet and leave him speechless. I'm just trying to think globally here. Because if we all say exactly what we need, we'll end up having hundreds of different cams and we'll probably be disapointed in the end.

To those asking for 35mm lens mounts. I'd also love to have them, but I don't think it will happen.

Let me post again what Jim said in this thread:

"The inmates are running the asylum...

Jim"

He said it here in this post. And we're just asking for 35mm DOF. A few of us who are following what this thread originally said are just saying we'd sacrifice the rest (resolution, lens mounts, size...) all for a big sensor, and Jim's basically saying we're nuts. So I can't really say what he will think of the ones asking for a full featured mini-Red One.
 
The reson 35mm is not good for eng is the difficulty in focusing and there is no autofocus for 35 lenses (yet)
 
red i wanabe said:
The reson 35mm is not good for eng is the difficulty in focusing and there is no autofocus for 35 lenses (yet)
Click to expand...

Okay, now I'm going to get on your nerves:

Why is Super35 too hard to focus for newsgathering? It's not too hard to focus for news still photography. In fact, it's easier to focus than the 35mm still format (36 x 24mm) or the larger digital SLRs that professional news photographers use across the globe, every day.

And don't tell me it's because they have autofocus. For a long time they did not.
 
combatentropy said:
And don't tell me it's because they have autofocus. For a long time they did not.
Click to expand...

It's not the autofocus, it's the fact that in still 35mm photography you only need to hold focus for a fraction of a second. (Catching a fraction of a second in focus IS way easier these days with autofocus - which is why literally every sports guy shoots that way and they threw away their AE-1's a long time ago.)

There is no autofocus fast enough and smooth enough to track for a 35mm movie camera so it has to be done by hand. It's not as easy as keeping focus with a deeper DOF camera. I think it could be done, but I'm not sure many people would choose to.
 
There are lots of options out there for news gathering cameras and the DOF they need to help them stay in focus. There are few options for filmmakers to achieve the short DOF we need. Let's hope Scarlet doesn't join the ranks of the non-35mm DOF cameras. There are plenty of them out there already.
 
"It's not the autofocus, it's the fact that in still 35mm photography you only need to hold focus for a fraction of a second." Exactly.

Also I wouldn't want to have an explosion:nuke: be out of focus due to deep dof.
 
Call me crazy, but I think Jim just called me crazy.

I mean, I am .. but .. to be called crazy by Jim is an honor!

Okay, how about this?

Just give me 35mm DOF 1080P.

Or, just give me S16 DOF 2K

I'm *trying* to be reasonable here!

:D



Dillon
 
Ooze3d said:
Remember we're always talking about a pocket size cam. It's ok to think it won't actually fit in a pocket (or at least a standard sized pocket), but you cannot ask for something the size of a HVX or bigger just because it looks more pro. . . .

To those asking for 35mm lens mounts. I'd also love to have them, but I don't think it will happen.
Click to expand...
Regardless of whether the lens is removable, if you have a zoom lens that covers the area of a 35-mm–sized sensor (the sensor size you requested), it will be fairly big and heavy, particularly a 16x one. The Angenieux Optimo 24-290 mm weights 11 kg, or more than 24 pounds, and it's only a 12x!
 
Ok, ok... Too much to ask for on the zoom. Maybe 8x?

But anyway, I think we've got a problem here. There're many of us who would like the Scarlet to be a pocket sized cam for film purposes, you know, the first cam to offer raw or lossless 10bit image quality with 35mm DOF and cinematic motion feel which also fits in the palm of your hand! Wow! I know it sounds a bit too much... but hey, it's even possible!

There're others who would want an "all purpose handycam" or even something to shoot news with, but my point here is... Don't we have enough prosumer and pro cams for less than $15,000 all of them just perfect for shooting all kinds of events? They're all big, they all have those tiny 1/3" sensors with the largest DOF ever and you can choose every possible resolution from standard DV to 1080p (or 720p with the HVX). Do we really need another cam offering the same features?

Anyway, I can't imagine Red Team releasing a cam with a sensor smaller than 2/3".

What about a Super16mm sized 2K sensor to keep most of us happy??
 
combatentropy said:
Okay, now I'm going to get on your nerves:

Why is Super35 too hard to focus for newsgathering? It's not too hard to focus for news still photography. In fact, it's easier to focus than the 35mm still format (36 x 24mm) or the larger digital SLRs that professional news photographers use across the globe, every day.

And don't tell me it's because they have autofocus. For a long time they did not.
Click to expand...

Right but more and more shooters are reporters who need something that is not super hard to operate because most of their training went to being infront of the camera not behind it. Now if you have one shooter and a reporter consider yourself lucky.
 
"Huh? Wouldn't deep DOF kind of guarantee that the explosion was in focus? Or did you mean shallow DOF?"

I meant that the other way around. I still get the more is less thing confused sometimes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top