S35 with Mysterium-X vs. S35 with Mysterium Monstro (lenses)

[George A.]

Dear Jim,

Very quick question about using lenses with the two flavors of EPIC/SCARLET cameras.

I understand that S35 on a Mysterium-X sensor is 5K, while S35 on a Mysterium Monstro (cropped from 6K) is approximately 4.2K.

My plan is to upgrade from my RED ONE directly to an EPIC Monstro with a PL mount, mainly for the 3 stops of added dynamic range (compared to the regular Mysterium sensor). I won't shoot FF35, only cropped S35.

The question is: do I still need lenses that cover 5K in my chosen scenario? My current lenses cover 4K just fine, so I guess 4.2K won't be a problem. Unless 4.2K on Monstro is much bigger (in mm) than 4K on regular Mysterium, in which case I would indeed need lenses that cover a diagonal of 32mm (like the RPPs) instead of only 30mm.

What do you think?

Thanks Jim,
George

 

[Lee Saxon]

Dear Jim,

Very quick question about using lenses with the two flavors of EPIC/SCARLET cameras.

I understand that S35 on a Mysterium-X sensor is 5K, while S35 on a Mysterium Monstro (cropped from 6K) is approximately 4.2K.

My plan is to upgrade from my RED ONE directly to an EPIC Monstro with a PL mount, mainly for the 3 stops of added dynamic range (compared to the regular Mysterium sensor). I won't shoot FF35, only cropped S35.

The question is: do I still need lenses that cover 5K in my chosen scenario? My current lenses cover 4K just fine, so I guess 4.2K won't be a problem. Unless 4.2K on Monstro is much bigger (in mm) than 4K on regular Mysterium, in which case I would indeed need lenses that cover a diagonal of 32mm (like the RPPs) instead of only 30mm.

What do you think?

Thanks Jim,
George

This is exactly what I was afraid would happen when I started seeing people (even Jim) saying things like "this lens covers 5K."

An S35 sensor is an S35 sensor (or a FF35 sensor cropped to S35). It is the size it is. It doesn't matter whether they put 14 million pixels ("5K") or 261 million pixels ("28K") or 5 million pixels ("3K") on it, its physical size doesn't change. Its the photosites/pixels that are different sizes.

 

[Tom Lowe]

In order to produce stellar 4K, you are going to need 5K acquisition. 4.2K will not cut it.

This is why the FF35 lens issue is paramount.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I suspect a number of S35 cine lenses will cover the 30mm-wide 5K area of a 6K FF35 Monstro sensor, except for a couple of wide-angle ones and some zooms.

You don't want to get overly obsessed over these number issues, i.e. 5K RAW = 4K RGB. No one in the audience gets up and measures the image to make sure it is delivering 4K lines of resolution at all times throughout a movie. It's an abstract ideal you are aiming for, 4K, not based on practical reality of lenses, focus, atmospheric haze, motion, any number of things that affect visible resolution. It's not like you're going to fall into some real-world situation where 4.5K RAW is visibly superior to 5K RAW or something like that. I think you'd have to be talking about a bigger difference in pixel resolution to be worrying over this, like 6K versus 4K.

Remember that the Monstro sensor has a 14-bit A/D, and the Mysterium-X (as far as I know) is a 12-bit A/D, so you aren't comparing apples to apples... is 5K 12-bit "better" than 4.5K 14-bit?

In theory, what I like about the 6K 14-bit Monstro sensor is that you have tje option of using the full 6K FF35 sensor when you really think you need that extra resolution, like for wide shots, and then you can use a 5K or 4.5K area of it (whatever it works out to be) with most of your S35 cine lenses, for the bulk of your shooting, like for close-ups where 6K isn't really going to necessary, or even desirable.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Yeah, very true. That's why I think the FF35 Monstro models, in the end, will be where most serious shooters go. More flexibility, and a sensor with better image-acquisition properties.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I was just looking at the specs on the Red.Com site... the Mysterium-X sensor is 5K at 30mm wide (the older Mysterium sensor is 4.5K at 24mm wide), and the Montro sensor is 6K at 36mm wide...

So the 5K area is the same size on both sensors, the Mysterium-X and the Monstro. I still don't know if the Mysterium-X sensor is 12-bit and the Monstro is 14-bit.

Now something else to keep in mind is that if you use all 5K of the Mysterium-X sensor for image recording, you won't have any lookaround area on the on-set monitor, whereas you could with the Monstro sensor if you are recording 5K off of the 6K sensor.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Wait, I thought Monstro had larger photosites than Mysterium X?

Keeping up with these specs can be difficult.

 

[Jannard]

If you are cropping an FF35 to something smaller than 24x36, you can crop less with a lens with a larger image circle. There will be LOTS of crop options with Monstro FF35, many to fit whatever lens you are using... but bigger image circle is better (assuming a good quality lens). We anticipated this with the RPPs.

Mysterium-X pixels are 5.4 micron. Mysterium Monstro pixels are 6.0 micron.

Jim

 

[Shawn Nelson]

I've picked the RPPs as my horse for years to come, I'll go EpicX to start, and eventually will want a Monstro brain that maximizes the RPPs without cropping.

 

[Felix K.]

This is exactly what I was afraid would happen when I started seeing people (even Jim) saying things like "this lens covers 5K."

An S35 sensor is an S35 sensor (or a FF35 sensor cropped to S35). It is the size it is. It doesn't matter whether they put 14 million pixels ("5K") or 261 million pixels ("28K") or 5 million pixels ("3K") on it, its physical size doesn't change. Its the photosites/pixels that are different sizes.

And let's not forget "lens resolution". 28k pixies on a S35 plane would be quite crammed.

Theoretically speaking, that is.

 

[Lee Saxon]

And let's not forget "lens resolution". 28k pixies on a S35 plane would be quite crammed.

Theoretically speaking, that is.

Yeah, I doubt it's possible to build a lens with sufficient resolving power.

Plus I doubt it's possible to build a sensor with photosites that small (at least with the current process technology) and I doubt it's possible to get a usable image with the tiny amount of light such photosites would collect!

lol probably not a good idea, my 28k S35 sensor.

 

[Lee Saxon]

Mysterium-X pixels are 5.4 micron. Mysterium Monstro pixels are 6.0 micron.

Jim, when you say Mysterium-X here you're just refering to the S35, right? Unless I'm even worse than I thought at math the photosite density of the 2/3" is like triple that of the S35.

 

[Jannard]

Jim, when you say Mysterium-X here you're just refering to the S35, right? Unless I'm even worse than I thought at math the photosite density of the 2/3" is like triple that of the S35.

Yes to S35 and not the 2/3".

Jim