Let's talk sensor...

[Joseph Ward]

Brook can you show 65/70mm, and 8mm sizes also compared to S35. Please. lol:biggrin:

 

[Tom Lowe]

IMAX (15/70)
* camera aperture: 70.41mm (2.772″) by 52.63mm (2.072″)
* aspect ratio: 1.34:1

Why do you want 4:3 for Imax? To use Anamorphic lenses?

It's a lot closer to the IMAX aspect ratio than 16:9.

Canon has already managed to cram 5,616 x 3,744px into the Mark III so I think in 2 years perhaps the EPIC can easily be 6,000+px wide at S35mm, don't you?

A closer comparison would be Canon's brand new XSi, which uses a sensor closer in size to Red One and (presumably) Epic. Right now that camera is packing photosites in like sardines and only has 12.2MP - 4272 x 2848. What is being suggested for Epic is closer to 20MP - on a tiny XSi-sized sensor. Not an easy thing to do. Plus Epic's sensor needs to pump out 24 or 30 or 60 frames per second, compared to the XSi, which is designed for single shots.

 

[Steve Murray]

A closer comparison would be Canon's brand new XSi, which uses a sensor closer in size to Red One and (presumably) Epic. Right now that camera is packing photo sites in like sardines and only has 12.2MP - 4272 x 2848. What is being suggested for Epic is closer to 20MP - on a tiny XSi-sized sensor. Not an easy thing to do. Plus Epic's sensor needs to pump out 24 or 30 or 60 frames per second, compared to the XSi, which is designed for single shots.

My point is that all cameras in the current market were developed at least a year ago and 2 years from now and with Jim's persistence.... well, who knows how amazing a chip we will get. I'm hoping for 120 fps at 5K.

 

[Matt Uhry]

Back to the initial spirit of Brooks post... If they are going to call the camera EPIC, the usable part of the sensor, not including look-around, should be at least as big as super 35 18x24mm, otherwise it's not really Epic and it should be called MOW or Sitcom.

I'm very happy with my Red one, but I'd like to see Red fix some current problems that actually happen every day, on real jobs before announcing great sounding futuristic projects with lots of hype and no real details.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

 

[Brook Willard]

I'd like to see Red fix some current problems that actually happen every day, on real jobs before announcing great sounding futuristic projects with lots of hype and no real details.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

Well said.

 

[Anders Holck]

My only real beef with RED is the marketing:

"RED offers the Mysterium ™ Super 35mm cine sized (24.4×13.7mm) sensor, which provides 4K (up to 30 fps), 3K (up to 60 fps) and 2K (up to 120 fps) capture, and all this with wide dynamic range and color space in 12 bit native RAW"

"And 12,065,000 pixels deliver resolution that can only be called Ultra High Definition."

To be perfectly fair it would need a few disclaimers:
*Actual 4k recordable area is 22.11mm x 12.44m
* 3k and 2k uses a smaller sensor crop.
*Actual recordable area is currently 9,437,184 pixels.

They have a killer product, there is no need to oversell it by confusing anyone.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Anders, keep in mind that with new builds, specs are literally changing. So it might just be an issue up updating the website and simple semantics.

 

[Brook Willard]

The bummer is that if they do enable a 4.5K mode on the RED ONE and you do get to shoot the advertised resolution with the advertised sensor size, you lose the advertised look-around area. I want to prevent this on Epic.

If I'm shooting 5K, it should be 24mm wide and have a look-around area.

 

[Phil Bates]

Brook, I thoroughly enjoyed your post. Thanks for the effort putting it together!

You deserve better than all the weirdness that took over this thread.

Since Epic is a thoroughly professional camera specifically designed for film production [not ENG/EFP, not to replace a video camera, not to be a great upgrade from an HVX, etc]...

This statement is the only thing that gave me pause. I realize that the 5K resolution by itself sets this apart from video cams, but strickly speaking, couldn't the Epic with it's lighter body easily take on some ENG/EFP roles?

I would agree with you that Epic shouldn't compromise on design for great cinematography, but on the other hand I need Epic to work in a wide variety of scenarios including quick limited crew setups. I hope that your speculation doesn't imply a limitation on the convenience side of shooting.

Thanks again for the great post,
Phil

http://www.artbeats.com

 

[Brook Willard]

People can and should use the camera for whatever they'd like to use it for in my opinion... as long as that doesn't detract from its primary functionality in any way, shape or form.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Does the EPK/EFP crowd consider the RED ONE to be too large & heavy for that work? It seems to me to be in the same size/weight category as the F900 / Varicams / Digital Betacams that I see used for EPK's on the shows I shoot.

Or is that work now being down on the prosumer-sized cameras?

Maybe because I come from a 35mm and pro HD world, but the RED ONE already is a step down in size from what I'm used to in 35mm, more the size of a Super-16 camera, and it seems comparable to professional HD equipment in size. So it seems odd to me that so many people here complain about the size of the thing. My only answer is that they must be used to the size range of cameras like the Canon HDV's, the HVX200, the Sony EX1, etc.

Personally, EPIC might as well be the size of the RED ONE, and then design a RED TWO to be smaller than either, because it seems odd that the higher-end camera would be smaller than the cheaper one... If EPIC is going to smaller than RED, then by that logic, the Scarlet should be the largest one of all!

 

[Justin O'Neill]

IMAX (15/70)
* camera aperture: 70.41mm (2.772″) by 52.63mm (2.072″)
* aspect ratio: 1.34:1

Why do you want 4:3 for Imax? To use Anamorphic lenses?

1.34:1 is REALLY close to being the same aspect ratio as 4:3. It would be 4.02:3. My guess is there is some rounding up to get the 1.34 number and it really is the same as 4:3.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Does the EPK/EFP crowd consider the RED ONE to be too large & heavy for that work? It seems to me to be in the same size/weight category as the F900 / Varicams / Digital Betacams that I see used for EPK's on the shows I shoot.

I'm probably insane to some degree, but for EFP I don't find the RED to be too large; provided I take the proper lens and accessory selection with me for the job. I shot two days of hang-gliding and parasailing last week (man, I really need my EVF). I'll be shooting a kayaking event later this month. RED is very comparable in size, a bit longer in many configurations, compared to the F900, Varicam, etc.. My typical RED setup weighs less than some of the HD rigs I've used in the past.

I should be shooting a lot of ski / snowboard action this coming winter. And I have to lug my gear onto the slopes or into the terrain park in a backpack or on a sled, just like everyone else.

Much of this type of production has gone to prosumer cameras like the HVX200 and EX1. The combination of image quality, mobility and price are too hard to resist. But I've been turning up some people who still shoot EFP and documentaries on 35mm for one reason or another. Most have been willing to give RED a try or at least let me give them a demo so they can entertain the possibility. Most are not scared by the workflow as it is now, but I've got a few hold-outs waiting for the camera to no longer be considered "beta".

I have so far found the RED to be a terrible camera for shooting wildlife. The long boot time, lack of a sleep or power-save mode and the cooling fan just make it difficult for the task. All stuff that's been covered here before. I had a perfect opportunity at a large buck just the other day -- huge specimen, his antlers still in velvet, staring right at me as I set up. He went about his business, I went about mine and I thought it was going to work out. As soon as the RED cooling fan kicked on as I powered up the camera, he darted off. Oh well... I'll try and find another I guess and power up the camera earlier when I'm a bit farther away.

 

[Bob Torrance]

By "full frame" sensor, you must be referring to the 8-perf 35mm still camera format (VistaVision).

If someone just made some decent 1.34X anamorphic lenses, I'd live with a 16x9 sensor, which satisfies the majority of shooters.

Look at the new Hawk V-lite lenses. Both 1.34 and 2x anamorphic. Small, lightweight, t2.2.

Could be a reason for a full height Monstro sensor.

bob

 

[Joseph Ward]

By "full frame" sensor, you must be referring to the 8-perf 35mm still camera format (VistaVision).

There is no crop factor if you are comparing 4x3 Super-35 to 16x9 Super-35 cine formats, except vertically.

Anyone used to shooting in 35mm for filmmaking doesn't really have to deal with any crop factors when using the RED at 4K, other than the fact that at 4096 pixels across, you have an Academy-width image, not a Super-35 width image.

I'm not sure what you are referring to in regards to having to "resize" the RED recorded image. It's 4096 pixels across in 4K recording mode, which is a standard file size for D.I. work. And it has to be converted from RAW Bayer to RGB anyway, so the notion of a true "size" is a bit nebulous anyway.

I think the oversized sensor is a useful idea -- I like the lookaround area on the monitor and viewfinder outside the 4096 recorded area.

As for 4x3... I'm all for it because I like shooting anamorphic movies, but I also recognize that anamorphic makes up less than a third of all 2.40 shooting, so it's a niche within a niche. If someone just made some decent 1.34X anamorphic lenses, I'd live with a 16x9 sensor, which satisfies the majority of shooters.

Does VistaVision have to be at 48fps to work?

 

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

So the RED One isn't a truly professional cinema camera?

And what about Scarlet?

 

[Peter Majtan]

No Rado - they are just saying that Red One is still "beta" - not a public release production-certified unit. But this should change soon hopefully...

 

[Brook Willard]

So the RED One isn't a truly professional cinema camera?

RED is a cinema camera, wannabe ENG/EFP camera, HVX upgrade, etc. It wears a lot of hats... and that's fine.

Epic should wear one hat and one hat alone. Anything else it gets to work as is great... but cinema should be the priority - the rest is just a bonus.

 

[Andrew Benz]

"Epic should wear one hat and one hat alone. Anything else it gets to work as is great... but cinema should be the priority - the rest is just a bonus."

One way or the highway... got it.

 

[Brook Willard]

Just my feelings. I welcome people who disagree, but many of the issues that plague the RED are the result of it trying to do too much.