RED Weapon - How Long Before MF Glass goes nuts...

[Filip Orlandic]

Or they keep current dimensons of Dragon, and make it 4:3

Not gonna happen.

 

[Rob Franklin]

An idle thought occurred to me today as I was sitting watching the rain tip down whilst enjoying the warmth of the log burner. A lot of us have dragons, now I have never taken mine apart in the way you used to as a kid with old radios and tape decks so I only have Reds data on the size of the sensor. What if behind all that metalwork was a full frame sensor waiting to get out, truly the laugh would be that the upgrade is a new bit of bodywork and we already are 8k and FF compatible. Jarred would truly be able to chuckle at that one.

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

Same sensor does not mean same size

Red one MX was 4 K
Epic MX was 5K

EPIC dragon is 6K
Weapon Dragon could be 8K

Use your old moint and crop to 6K... Use new mount and use full 8K

Red One MX and Epic MX use the exact same sensor size and exact same sensor, only Red One MX cannot record all pixels and uses extra only for look-around.

 

[Jason Diamond]

An idle thought occurred to me today as I was sitting watching the rain tip down whilst enjoying the warmth of the log burner. A lot of us have dragons, now I have never taken mine apart in the way you used to as a kid with old radios and tape decks so I only have Reds data on the size of the sensor. What if behind all that metalwork was a full frame sensor waiting to get out, truly the laugh would be that the upgrade is a new bit of bodywork and we already are 8k and FF compatible. Jarred would truly be able to chuckle at that one.

doubtful, because then we would be currently windowing at 6K and that doesn't seem logical. By all accounts its a new size sensor but not "new sensor" in the way Dragon was a new sensor to MX. After Weapon the next camera will have an actual New Sensor as Jarred stated recently.

Personally I'm hoping it's a true 65mm MF sensor size.

 

[Scott C]

I think there are several reasons for the confusion. In favor of the "Same sensor, new body" argument:

1) This has been called a body upgrade. Jarred stated the progression was Sensor (M-MX), Body (One to DSMC), Sensor (MX-Dragon), Body (DSMC to Weapon). Same idea as Intel's Tick-Tock philosophy, as many have noted.

2) Knowing that, and how upgrades have gone in the past, you'd think, OK, I'm sending in my camera, they'll pull the sensor and put it in a new body. Because otherwise, why do you need a Dragon (any Dragon) to qualify? If they're tossing your sensor aside, why just call it a body upgrade? I guess they can pull some of the ASICs but it definitely sounds like this is largely an upgrade in processing power.

For the "New or Larger Sensor" camp you have

1) Jarred's comment about current lens mounts which very strongly implied that you would be getting more sensor real estate

2) The potential Alexa 65 style sensor stacking which presumably could incorporate the sensor you've already got

3) The stills photography side of the equation

4) The fact that yes, it's entirely possible to just cut out a bigger version of the current Dragon sensor and keep the same pixel pitch/color science/olpf science etc. and maybe they just donate your sensor to 'BT' Dragons that they'll continue to sell or something like it.

On the "could go either way" side, I'm thinking--

1) It's been stated in the past that the current DSMC form factor wouldn't accommodate a MF size sensor down the road, so this body could just be stage 1 of the planned upgrade cycle-- in other words, it really is just a body upgrade, you keep your sensor for now, with the knowledge that the next iteration of sensors WILL be larger and HAVE already been planned for in the design of the new body. In this scenario, Jarred's comment makes sense-- your lens mounts will work normally now, and will continue to work for their image circle with the next sensor

2) The speedbooster thing has been brought up countless times and dismissed with DSMC due to flange distance-- maybe Weapon eliminates the flange distance issue, would add an adapter for current lens mounts to continue working by default, but would also allow you to now use a RED version of a speedbooster lens mount for MF glass etc.

Just scattershooting here.


P.S. Patrick, love your podcast. It's a staple of mine, I binge-listened through it faster than I did with Serial. Keep up the great work! I have a few folks in mind that might make good guests for the show, so I'll probably shoot you an e-mail sometime soon.

=)
Scott

 

[Jason Diamond]

yes please.
I went with an 8 lens set 35-200 with the apertures to match the lenses of the kit that comes with the Alexa 65.

Off to Duclos until GLoptics start re housing them.

Which lenses/speeds did you go with? Mamiya 645?

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

Same sensor does not mean same size

What he said.

 

[Patrick Grossien]

Can anybody here tell me if there's anything special to watch out for on Mamiya lenses?
Like with the leica lenses, where not all lenses are created equal

 

[Matt Ryan]

Can anybody here tell me if there's anything special to watch out for on Mamiya lenses?
Like with the leica lenses, where not all lenses are created equal

Yeah, stay away from them all until I buy them

 

[Mathias Erichsen]

Can anybody here tell me if there's anything special to watch out for on Mamiya lenses?
Like with the leica lenses, where not all lenses are created equal

I scrambled together some quick net-info on the Mamiyas when I bought mine. Here is some of it:

Most of them have three versions, C, S and N. C came first. S came second and the latest ones with a N on the side is made of more plastic than the first C and the second S, witch has most metal in them. All generations can have a C on them but Second and third have a S or N too.
Most of them is said to have mostly the same optics and similar coating on C, S and N versions.. I think 45mm got a bit better after the first upgrade. Maybe others too.
200mm f2.8 APO is supposed to be a great performer, as is 150mm f2.8 (This one is mentioned as "near APO."..) most seem to prefere 80mm f1.9 over f2.8, I bought a 110mm f2.8, a 55mm f2.8 and a 35mm f3.5 too cause I've read good things about them.
Others can surely give better info than me. I'll probably be better informed too in a while

 

[Patrick Grossien]

Yeah, stay away from them all until I buy them

hehehe. You're not the only one thinking that

 

[Patrick Grossien]

I scrambled together some quick net-info on the Mamiyas when I bought mine. Here is some of it:

Most of them have three versions, C, S and N. C came first. S came second and the latest ones with a N on the side is made of more plastic than the first C and the second S, witch has most metal in them. All generations can have a C on them but Second and third have a S or N too.
Most of them is said to have mostly the same optics and similar coating on C, S and N versions.. I think 45mm got a bit better after the first upgrade. Maybe others too.
200mm f2.8 APO is supposed to be a great performer, as is 150mm f2.8 (This one is mentioned as "near APO."..) most seem to prefere 80mm f1.9 over f2.8, I bought a 110mm f2.8, a 55mm f2.8 and a 35mm f3.5 too cause I've read good things about them.
Others can surely give better info than me. I'll probably be better informed too in a while

Thank you Mathias for sharing!

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

I don't use medium format lenses regularly. And I have no idea what RED is doing regarding a bigger sensor. But there are a couple of things I think are important:

- I recommend you go for quality, not speed.

- The Hasselblad Zeiss 80/2.8 is very sharp. It is superior at every aperture to the Contax 645 Zeiss 80/2. But it has significant distortion (odd, considering it's a standard prime).

- Many Hasselblad lenses wider than 80mm have significant (>0.5%) distortion. Check the MTF documents here:

http://www.zeissimages.com/mtf.php

- The Hasselblad Zeiss 38/4.5 has no significant distortion (maximum of about 0.3%, which is way better than a lot of standard primes out there) but is dedicated to a non-reflex body, the SWC. Perhaps getting this rehoused will not be a huge problem, but it will be worth the effort.

- Like a lot of folks, I thought that Contax Zeiss SLR lenses would go up in price over the past few years. But it appears that they haven't. So if history is a guideline, I don't see medium format lenses going through the stratosphere. Then again, Contax G and Leica R lenses did go up in price ever since mirrorless cameras became popular. It's not always easy to tell. I have a few medium format lenses, but nothing special.

- Perhaps shift lenses made for 35mm SLRs (and their digital equivalents) might be a better idea. They have less distortion than medium format lenses, but may not have an image circle large enough for a 65mm sized sensor. Schneider, Canon and Nikon make them, but I'm not totally sure about which brand would give the best quality.

- Apart from image circle issues, the best lenses I know of for formats larger than VistaVision are the Leica S primes. Still, do your research.

- Really good 35mm SLR primes with matched teleconverters might be a budget-conscious option. But you're looking at effective apertures of f/5.6 and you might not get a lens wide enough.

 

[Christopher Barrett]

Leica-S primes are supposed to be some of the best lenses Leica ever produced. Good call on T/S lenses too. There are Stills shooters who use the Canon 17 & 24 TS-Es on medium format digital backs, so they could def cover a 65mm sensor. I love using those Canon TS-Es on my Epic to maintain perspective.

This frame was shot with the 24mm TS-E II while I was dollying in. I used the Tilt/Shifts for all the wide masters on this short.

 

[Nick Fury]

Leica-S primes are supposed to be some of the best lenses Leica ever produced. Good call on T/S lenses too. There are Stills shooters who use the Canon 17 & 24 TS-Es on medium format digital backs, so they could def cover a 65mm sensor. I love using those Canon TS-Es on my Epic to maintain perspective.

This frame was shot with the 24mm TS-E II while I was dollying in. I used the Tilt/Shifts for all the wide masters on this short.

Copy,

It seems amazing how many times we see Buildings falling over in Prime Time Productions, that do not use the TSE options.

Thank you very much

Fury

 

[Mathias Erichsen]

Yeah! If money was no object I'd get the Leica-S primes.. They look amazing!
To me price is important, and I got all my 6 Mamiya lenses for a total of ~$1000 while ONE single 35mm Leica S is ~$8000

 

[Nick Morrison]

Yeah! If money was no object I'd get the Leica-S primes.. They look amazing!
To me price is important, and I got all my 6 Mamiya lenses for a total of ~$1000 while ONE single 35mm Leica S is ~$8000

Hasselblad CF/FEs are about $500-$1000 each, so while not Leica S, certainly appear to be much more than Mamiyas...

 

[Antony Newman]

Does anyone know if Red are cropping the Dragon sensor?

Would that be something easily verifiable by those changing their OLPF - by shining a torch at the sesnsor behind?

My (complete) guess would have been that the MX sensor was cropped on the RedOne because the LargerActive area of the MX came out After the RedOne mount.

If they hiding away a MF sized sensor ... what would Red have done with engineering defects outside the 6k Central area ... reject or include them?

Exciting times either way.

AJ

Same sensor does not mean same size

Red one MX was 4 K
Epic MX was 5K

EPIC dragon is 6K
Weapon Dragon could be 8K

Use your old moint and crop to 6K... Use new mount and use full 8K

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Yeah! If money was no object I'd get the Leica-S primes.. They look amazing!
To me price is important, and I got all my 6 Mamiya lenses for a total of ~$1000 while ONE single 35mm Leica S is ~$8000

As i look over my PL glass collection, that $8K per lens Leica set starts to look like a bargain! hahahaha...

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Does anyone know if Red are cropping the Dragon sensor?

Would that be something easily verifiable by those changing their OLPF - by shining a torch at the sesnsor behind?

My (complete) guess would have been that the MX sensor was cropped on the RedOne because the LargerActive area of the MX came out After the RedOne mount.

If they hiding away a MF sized sensor ... what would Red have done with engineering defects outside the 6k Central area ... reject or include them?

Exciting times either way.

AJ

MX was indeed under-utilized on the RED One due to internal bandwidth restrictions. It was used in full on the EPIC. Dragon is not being cropped on the EPIC, we use the full sensors. There is nothing stopping RED from offering larger cuts of the Dragon sensor in the new body. So I guess we'll see what they announce.