Nikon Lenses on S35 chip?

[Andy Taplin]

Correct, DOF is not altered. DOF is a function of focal length and aperture.

Yes of course, but thanks for the detailed explanation Jeff.

The main reason for asking the slightly dumb question was that I'm thinking to really get the most of of the 2/3" Scarlet one would need a P+S Technik type 35mm adaptor to allow shallow DOF with reasonable coverage, otherwise the 'filmic' quality Red (but perhaps not Scarlet) is known for will be lost. Maybe Red are going to make their own?

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

The main reason for asking the slightly dumb question was that I'm thinking to really get the most of of the 2/3" Scarlet one would need a P+S Technik type 35mm adaptor to allow shallow DOF with reasonable coverage, otherwise the 'filmic' quality Red (but perhaps not Scarlet) is known for will be lost. Maybe Red are going to make their own?

Not really a dumb question though. Lots of people in "the industry" don't really understand how all this lens stuff works.

As for 35mm adapter, there's no doubt that we'll see plenty of them being used on the 2/3" Scarlet both the fixed and interchangeable lens models. Which may be an OK solution for some, but I would think most people would choose the S35 Scarlet instead. A good 35mm adapter system that will properly compliment the resolution of Scarlet, will cost a lot of money and in many cases about the same as the difference to upgrade from the 2/3" to the S35 body. ...Just something to consider there.

 

[Valeriu Campan]

The Nikon lenses are designed to cover a 43.27mm diagonal

Not all Nikon lenses are designed to cover the full frame sensor. What about a lens like this one or this DX lens that will not cover a full frame sensor (24x36mm).

Once they are mounted on the RED ONE, they will have the same angle of view as any other lens set at the same focal distance, with same depth of field.

A 25mm is a 25mm is a 25mm, a 50 is a 50 is a 50, regardless of brand.

There are many photographers out there that have never seen a full frame camera in all their life or even in their professional career. Not to mention a film camera. I know a lot of very good young press photographers who never went to a lab, have no idea where to look through a twin reflex or what a Leica is... And they are doing well, take great photos, win awards...

By the way... what is a full frame camera? 24x36, 24x65 (Hasselblad), 56x56mm (2 1/4), 6x7, 4x5?

 

[Andy Taplin]

Not really a dumb question though. Lots of people in "the industry" don't really understand how all this lens stuff works.

As for 35mm adapter, there's no doubt that we'll see plenty of them being used on the 2/3" Scarlet both the fixed and interchangeable lens models. Which may be an OK solution for some, but I would think most people would choose the S35 Scarlet instead. A good 35mm adapter system that will properly compliment the resolution of Scarlet, will cost a lot of money and in many cases about the same as the difference to upgrade from the 2/3" to the S35 body. ...Just something to consider there.

Yes, I guess an S35 might even work out cheaper, but If you mainly want to shoot 1080p would you still go for the S35? Would 5K files introduce some workflow issues?

 

[Jaime Vallés]

Yes, I guess an S35 might even work out cheaper, but If you mainly want to shoot 1080p would you still go for the S35? Would 5K files introduce some workflow issues?

From what I understand, the S35 Scarlet brain will be able to shoot in 1080p (scaled, not cropped) so you could avoid the massive 5K file sizes while still retaining the 35mm DoF.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, though.

 

[Liam Hall]

DOF is a function of focal length and aperture.

And camera to subject distance, lens sharpness, MTF, film or sensor sensitivity, viewing distance, position of the moon...

 

[Stephen Williams]

Correct, DOF is not altered. DOF is a function of focal length and aperture. .

Hi Jeff,

You can simplify it further, magnification on the sensor at a given aperture. Lens focal length is not a factor.

Stephen

 

[Daniel Browning]

Comparing two images that have entirely different field of view is not very useful, in my opinion. But since the discussion is already in progress I might as well join in.

Correct, DOF is not altered.

That's true if the smaller format is viewed at a smaller display size and smaller resolution (e.g. S35 is viewed on 20" TV with DVD player) and the large format is viewed on a large display size (FF35 is viewed on 42" TV with 1080p).

But I think it's more useful to think about what happens when both images are viewed at the *same* size: the large format is magnified less and the small format is enlarged more. This makes the DOF thinner on the small format. Unless, of course, you digitally crop the FF35 image and blow up the center portion (assuming it has proportionately higher resolution): then DOF would be the same. Reproduction ratio (or magnification) is an important factor when discussing different sensor sizes.

...viewing distance, position of the moon...

Yes, there are a ton of potential factors. For most discussions about depth of field, the other factors are abstracted out, so that it can be assumed that their relative effects will be the same. For example, one might assume that each format size has the same total resolution, and that lenses for each format have the same MTF relative to Nyquist, and the OLPF has the same MTF relative to Nyquist. That would completely abstract out the effect of lens sharpness, sensor resolution, and OLPF. And so it goes.

My favorite way to simplify DOF is this: For a given field of view, focus distance, bellows factor, and display size: DOF goes with aperture, no matter the f-number, focal length, or sensor size.

 

[Liam Hall]

Very well put Daniel.

 

[Andy Taplin]

From what I understand, the S35 Scarlet brain will be able to shoot in 1080p (scaled, not cropped) so you could avoid the massive 5K file sizes while still retaining the 35mm DoF.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, though.

Well if the S35 will shoot scaled 1080p with minimal or no artifacts that would be the clincher for me, can anyone confirm or deny this?

Thanks

 

[Valeriu Campan]

Well if the S35 will shoot scaled 1080p with minimal or no artifacts that would be the clincher for me, can anyone confirm or deny this?

Thanks

Does 1080p mean a 16:9 format?

In that case, the image will be cropped to the chosen aspect ratio and you'll stiil get a 'massive' RAW file, though, a bit smaller that the full frame 5K.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

It has been mentioned that Scarlet and EPIC will shoot, in addition to REDCODE RAW, a REDCODE RGB format that will be scaled to 1920x1080p. This will be good for certain applications, mostly very fast turn-around ENG type work. I really don't see people using this as their primary shooting mode, especially for any filmmaking and documentary work.

As REDCODE support and related tools continue to evolve, it is becoming easier and easier to work with 4K RED files. 5K would not be much different and computers continue to get faster as the RED software tools continue to get more efficient. For those concerned about working with 5K REDCODE, I suggest downloading some 4K REDCODE files and working with them now. This will demonstrate worst-case scenario for what the workflow will be like by the time Scarlet arrives. I can online 4K REDCODE natively in Premiere Pro today, finish in AE and output my final at any resolution I want from 1/16th up to full 4K all on my 2.5 year old Macbook Pro.

And has history has shown us, 1080p recording never happened for the RED One, even though it was one of the original specified features. Most people don't seem to care about it not being there. ...I don't.

 

[Stephen Williams]

Comparing two images that have entirely different field of view is not very useful, in my opinion. But since the discussion is already in progress I might as well join in.
.

Hi,

I am talking about 2 images of identical sizes, shot with different focal length lenses at the same F stop, both will have the same DOF.

Stephen

 

[Daniel Browning]

Stephen,

When I said that comparing different fields of view was not very useful, I was not referring to your post, but the earlier discussion about the same lens on two different formats. Your post accurately describes DOF of the lens in isolation, whether field of view and focus distance are given constants or not.

By the way, "magnification on the sensor" doesn't factor in the impact of reproduction magnification. For example, it predicts that 100mm f/2 has the same DOF on S35 as it does on FF35, which is true of the lens in isolation, but when both projected at the same size, S35 will be magnified more, and have thinner DOF.

I prefer "total magnification and f-number", where "total" magnification includes magnification on the sensor, magnification in post-production (cropping), and magnification for display.

The big advantage of "total magnification and f-number" is that it is the absolute shortest way to describe DOF. It encodes bellows factor intrinsically, and works whether field of view and focus distance are a fixed constant or not. Whereas my favorite DOF simplification ("DOF goes with aperture") only works with a sidecar full of conditions ("for a given field of view, focus distance, bellows factor, and display size").