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 :)

RED DRAGON SENSOR, your expectations???

I'm actually really curious to see what the difference is between Monstro and Dragon.
 
My confusion with the Full Frame Dragon sensor is that you are cropping the 4:3 aspect ration to a more manageable theatrical or broadcast ratio and wasting a huge percentage of the sensor's ability. Using such a large sensor also robs a lot of performance that could be more wisely used elsewhere. Would it not make more sense to design a sensor that takes advantage of the full-frame sensor's horizontal resolution and couple that with more efficient vertical real estate?

Unless you are shooting anamorphic, I do not see the benefits of the full frame aspect ratio. It seems wasteful in terms of disk usage, battery power, camera performance and even wasting a lot of time in post.
 
Michael Olsen said:
I'm actually really curious to see what the difference is between Monstro and Dragon.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I thought the Dragon was the new name for the Monstro. Except that today's post by Jannard noted both sensors in the same sentence. Does the Monstro now refer to the 645 sensor only? Confused?
 
RED told us that the Dragon sensor is the first one from the Monstro family.
 
Philip Orlandic said:
RED told us that the Dragon sensor is the first one from the Monstro family.
Click to expand...

Ah, quite right.

2. We announced the RED Dragon. It is of the Monstro family and is scheduled to be released in 2012. The significance of this sensor is that it is an upgrade to the current EPIC-X and EPIC-M and not a new brain. Obsolescence obsolete is alive.
Click to expand...

So they aren't mutually exclusive.

Joe Taylor said:
My confusion with the Full Frame Dragon sensor
Click to expand...

Do we know Dragon will be FF35?
 
Michael Olsen said:
Do we know Dragon will be FF35?
Click to expand...
There are many reasons to make a FF35.

One of them could be a quite wider Dynamic Range because of a bigger pixels and true anamorphic mode without cropping the image.

Maybe this theory is only my wish...
 
Philip Orlandic said:
There are many reasons to make a FF35.

One of them could be a quite wider Dynamic Range because of a bigger pixels and true anamorphic mode without cropping the image.

Maybe this theory is only my wish...
Click to expand...

Oh, I know there are many reasons and benefits for FF35, and honestly I think many people have been waiting for RED to provide an FF35 sensor sense they first announced the Monstro program years ago.

I'm just wondering if Jim announced that DRAGON would be FF35 and I missed it, or if that particular statement was conjecture.
 
In order to compete with the Canons and the Nikons in still picture department, the Dragon sensor would need to:

1. Offfer at least 30s long exposures, with acceptable noise level up to at least 6,400 ISO. In fact, in order to compete with Nikon D3S, ISO 12,800 should be noise free.
2. Be 36mm wide Full Frame
3. Resolution should be at lease 6k
 
I agree 24x36 for cinematographers is wasted real estate. I would be happy with just an 18mm vertical height increase on the Red Dragon sensor as this would allow anamorphic glass and would allow a 16x9 image to use most of the sensoe. It would not be full frame but would go along way to capturing that wonderful DOF of a 5D but it would still require full frame glass for coverage. As long as the camera had a setting for standard S35 coverage you could shoot on normal PL glass as required and only use the full sensor size when the job required.
 
Any aspect ratio that's different than the one you plan to shoot your film is wasted real estate. I personally like a 16:9 sensor as it is perfect for HD down conversions and allows for slight headroom adjustment for 2:1 films. It's also not too much wasted vertical space for 2.4 framing, either. If RED believes that 2:1 is the future, however, that's what the sensor should be. I agree that a 24x36 ratio is a pretty significant waste of space; obviously a 4:3 sensor would be the worst option yet for anything besides anamorphic shooting.
 
so its only for EPIC??? can someone explain why some are saying that the DRAGON will may or may not be 35mm sensor??? am kind of confused? well not kind , am totally confused!!!
 
Jean Guerra said:
so its only for EPIC??? can someone explain why some are saying that the DRAGON will may or may not be 35mm sensor??? am kind of confused? well not kind , am totally confused!!!
Click to expand...

Well, this is a thread about speculation. And speculation is usually a portion of reality, mixed with equal portions of wants and dreams.

I haven't seen anything posted by Jim or Jarred that mentioned that Dragon would be FF35. Or any sensor size, actually. I was just curious as to why Joe Taylor stated it as though it was known that it would be FF35.

Regarding screen real-estate...not everyone here is shooting for the silver screen, you know! But, in general, agreed. 2:1 is actually pretty wonderful in its flexibility. Very smart choice.
 
Jean Guerra said:
is the EPIC M sensor FF35????if not what is it??
Click to expand...

It's labelled as "S35". Lens coverage of the sensor is 27.7mm (h) x 14.6mm (v) Equivalent to S35mm (Motion) / APS-H (Still) lenses.

From: http://www.red.com/products/epic

See the top of the Epics:

1314917912.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top