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 :)

mini RED 2/3 anamorphics anyone? is there enough interest?

J Davis

J Davis

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 22, 2008
Messages
1,267
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
NYC
mini RED 2/3 anamorphics anyone? is there enough interest?
 
I think people are probably more interested in just getting the camera and the lenses already announced. :beer:

That being said...what would the drawbacks be of anamorphics for the 2/3" platform?
 
Its hard for anamorphic these days when you feel like you're throwing away so much 16-9 sensor area away, and doing a funky pixel conversion in post. That said... no other way to get that flare and bokeh...
 
that looks great. I think the 2/3rds with anamorphics would create a very distinct look. Can you rent the Hawk V-lites? I can't find much rental information on them. I assume they are crazy expensive.
 
The 2/3" Scarlet sensor has a maximum recordable area of 3072x1620, which is 1.89:1. If you use a 1.3X anamorphic, you would get a 2.46:1 aspect image squeezed into that recordable area. So the 1.33X anamorphic are more appropriate in terms of the squeeze or factor. In fact, that looks to me like a rather attractive solution for those who want to deliver 2.40:1, without having to crop so much of the frame away.

The two real drawbacks I see to the 1.33X anamorphics to fit the 2/3" Scarlet format are:

1> That 1.3X anamorphic squeeze doesn't produce the same level of optical properties that a 2X anamorphic does. They're an interesting mix I guess soy could say. You don't have the same level of intense flares as you would get with a 2X. But elliptical or squished bokeh elements are very similar to the 2X. However, you have less bokeh or out of focus regions to deal with much of the time, as with the smaller format and appropriately shorter focal lengths, you typically have deeper focus. Sure, you can open up the aperture another 2~2.5 stops compared to shooting S35 and get similar shallow focus, but that is not always practical.

2> Other than the 16mm Hawks, there is no other game in town right now. What is the real demand for such lenses? Would RED do themselves well to produce an anamorphic set of their mini-primes? I would definitely be interested, but how many customers truly would be? I think they would need to make a set that can cover Super16 and not just the 2/3" Scarlet sensor to increase their viability in the market. And at what cost? It could be a good lens product for RED.
 
Hi Jeff, you are echoing my thoughts exactly with x1.33 squeeze for minimum wasted area. With the 2/3 scarlet system set to explode I'm sure the demand for 16mm anamorphics can only increase. the current 35mm anamorphics planned for epic - are they x1.33 or x2 squeeze?
 
you're right about the 1.3x being less pronounced than 2x anamorphic. In the vimeo link from J Davis, if you scroll through the users other videos you can see some lens tests with the Hawks.

http://vimeo.com/9150124

at the beginning and the very end are some interesting shots with some flare. The effect is more subtle than say, Star Trek, but very pleasing, especially the shot at the very end.
 
I too enjoy the look of 16mm Anamorphic. It has that "look" and it's just something that you can't produce without anamorphics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top