Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Scarlet X Data Sheet

I've searched through these pages to try to answer this, but couldn't find the info - how does the crop factor effect DOF? Does it?
 
Kamal Kyrala said:
I've searched through these pages to try to answer this, but couldn't find the info - how does the crop factor effect DOF? Does it?
Click to expand...


Cropping does not affect dof, but when you compensate with a different lens to match FOV your dof deepens
(because you're now at a shorter focal length)

eg ... you have a shot at 50mm 4k and you need a 2k over crank so you switch to the 25mm to match fov, you've now got 25mm dof
so with the windowed high speed stuff we need fast wides on the EF mount. Thats why I said earlier that I think the canon mount sigma 30mm f1.4 is going to be a very popular lens
 
Kamal Kyrala said:
I've searched through these pages to try to answer this, but couldn't find the info - how does the crop factor effect DOF? Does it?
Click to expand...

A 50mm is still a 50mm - the glass or it's characteristics are not changing - but, when the sensor is cropping, you're looking at a smaller 'window' on the recorded image, but the DOF is the same, as it's just a portion of the recorded image.

Oops - saw J.Davis beat me to it ;)
 
Sebastian Winkels said:
That's right, but:
My initial question was weather Scarlet X is recording 2k - or not (according to 2 different versions of Scarlet specs published by Red).

I have no doubt that Red's 1080 raw footage looks better after debayering than other CMOS sensor signals do.

Actually I based my order on that belief.

I would just very much like to know which one of the 2 spec sheets is the right one...
Click to expand...

I think I am not understanding the essence of your question...

RED's 2K acquisition is, I believe, 2048 pixels across by 1080 down, which, as you can see, is (sort of) 1080P. So when they refer to 2K on the chart that was in the announcement page and 1080P on the red.com spec sheet, they are probably referring to, essentially, the same thing. Are you concerned about the "extra" 128 pixels on the horizontal?
 
Thanks a lot for asking!
No, it's not about 128 pixels more.

I try to rephrase my concern more clearly:

I started to wonder about Scarlet X's HD and 2k recording options when I saw Jarred approving Phil Holland's Data-X sheet posts,
which clearly show a huge difference of image size (used sensor window) between the 1080 HD and 2k (both Scarlet X) recording mode.

According to the chart the 1080 HD image size would be equivalent to a 2/3 sensor (thus slightly smaller than a Standard 16mm image),
whereas the 2k recording mode would almost have the S-16mm image size.

At the same time the published specs of Scarlet X are obviously (and unfortunately) still stating different acquisition formats (red.com versus Scarlet Announcement thread on reduser).

If it would be - like you say, that HD and 2k are using almost the same image size, Phil's chart would be wrong. (Why did Jarred approve it then?)
In case Phil's chart is right (about the image sizes), I would definitely like to know if Scarlet X can record 2k or not.

As on red.com it is stated that Scarlet X is doing "only" HD, I guess that's a NO for 2k (at least without recording in 3k and cropping to 2k/S-16mm in post).

I hope that's less exotic and more plausible.


To sum it up:
1) Yes, I am always happy about more resolution than 1080 (after debayering), meaning I'd rather record in 2k than in 1080, if Scarlet X lets me.
2) I am much more concerned about the size of the image, in order be able to use S-16mm zoom lenses, which have always been great to work with and which are still cheap and easy to find (rent/buy).

I'm sorry, I don't mean to play the fuzzy guy or confuse anybody.
I just stopped reading threads only, but rather started to post my questions, as I'd really like to know (preferrably from Red),
if Scarlet X has the recording facility of 2k raw and if the 2k recording window of the sensor is close to the size of a S-16mm image.

Any input much appreciated!!

I would also like to know, weather you can change any of Scarlet X aspect ratios in camera.
I am reading as much as I can on this great forum every day, but so far I could not find an answer.

And Jim&Co have been rather quiet on Scarlet X matters in the last days...
 
Last edited:
Sebastian Winkels said:
Thanks a lot for asking!
No, it's not about 128 pixels more.

I try to rephrase my concern more clearly:

I started to wonder about Scarlet X's HD and 2k recording options when I saw Jarred approving Phil Holland's Data-X sheet posts,
which clearly show a huge difference of image size (used sensor window) between the 1080 HD and 2k (both Scarlet X) recording mode.

According to the chart the 1080 HD image size would be equivalent to a 2/3 sensor (thus slightly smaller than a Standard 16mm image),
whereas the 2k recording mode would almost have the S-16mm image size.

At the same time the published specs of Scarlet X are obviously (and unfortunately) still stating different acquisition formats (red.com versus Scarlet Announcement thread on reduser).

If it would be - like you say, that HD and 2k are using almost the same image size, Phil's chart would be wrong. (Why did Jarred approve it then?)
In case Phil's chart is right (about the image sizes), I would definitely like to know if Scarlet X can record 2k or not.

As on red.com it is stated that Scarlet X is doing "only" HD, I guess that's a NO for 2k (at least without recording in 3k and cropping to 2k/S-16mm in post).

I hope that's less exotic and more plausible.


To sum it up:
1) Yes, I am always happy about more resolution than 1080 (after debayering), meaning I'd rather record in 2k than in 1080, if Scarlet X lets me.
2) I am much more concerned about the size of the image, in order be able to use S-16mm zoom lenses, which have always been great to work with and which are still cheap and easy to find (rent/buy).

I'm sorry, I don't mean to play the fuzzy guy or confuse anybody.
I just stopped reading threads only, but rather started to post my questions, as I'd really like to know (preferrably from Red),
if Scarlet X has the recording facility of 2k raw and if the 2k recording window of the sensor is close to the size of a S-16mm image.

Any input much appreciated!!

I would also like to know, weather you can change any of Scarlet X aspect ratios in camera.
I am reading as much as I can on this great forum every day, but so far I could not find an answer.

And Jim&Co have been rather quiet on Scarlet X matters in the last days...
Click to expand...

Either I am still confused by your question or perhaps, you are reading Phil's chart incorrectly. In fact. Phil's chart puts the 1080P dimension in parentheses right below the 2K frame and indicates they are both about the same size, except for the fact, as I pointed out, that the 2K image is only slightly wider. Under no circumstances are 1080P and 2K very different as far as pixels go. And, on the RED, which windows rather than down samples, to achieve the lower resolutions, the sensor crop will also be almost identical.
 
Jason Wingrove said:
Phil.. im impressed.
Click to expand...

Me too!

Thank you very much for taking the time to put this together.... A couple more posts like this and you wil be the "Brook Willard Hall of Fame" for sure! :)

Again Phil... Greatly appreciated!
 
J Davis said:
Cropping does not affect dof, but when you compensate with a different lens to match FOV your dof deepens
(because you're now at a shorter focal length)

eg ... you have a shot at 50mm 4k and you need a 2k over crank so you switch to the 25mm to match fov, you've now got 25mm dof
so with the windowed high speed stuff we need fast wides on the EF mount. Thats why I said earlier that I think the canon mount sigma 30mm f1.4 is going to be a very popular lens
Click to expand...

Ah, I see. So if I wanted to go with a 35mm look at 4k, i'd need like a 21mm lens, which is a larger dof than you'd normally have at 35mm. So you need a lower f-stop to be able to get a shallower DOF.
 
Terry VerHaar said:
Either I am still confused by your question or perhaps, you are reading Phil's chart incorrectly. In fact. Phil's chart puts the 1080P dimension in parentheses right below the 2K frame and indicates they are both about the same size, except for the fact, as I pointed out, that the 2K image is only slightly wider. Under no circumstances are 1080P and 2K very different as far as pixels go. And, on the RED, which windows rather than down samples, to achieve the lower resolutions, the sensor crop will also be almost identical.
Click to expand...

I hope you are right.
Image size difference between S-16mm and Standard 16mm is 15%.
Red HD and Red 2k, as shown on the X Data chart, might only differ as much as 10% or so.

So maybe I am wrong to call that huge.
But as you navigate closely on the border of acceptable image quality both in HD and 2K,
I'm afraid that 10% can make a significant difference.

I guess I need to test both Red 2k and Red HD recording with my favorite S-16mm zoom lens on an Epic,
comparing also different Redcodes to make up my mind (before buying any S-16mm glass).

Thank's for your input anyway!
 
Sebastian Winkels said:
I guess I need to test both Red 2k and Red HD recording with my favorite S-16mm zoom lens on an Epic,
comparing also different Redcodes to make up my mind (before buying any S-16mm glass).
Click to expand...

This is likely the safest way to go. The chart's pixel dimensions are dead on, so that data is accurate. Since 2k and 1080p have the same vertical resolution I don't think you're going to see a significant difference in the resolution between the two.

As for the coverage, I was told 2k "is a bit larger than S16". With that information I imagine some lenses will work and some will not depending on how tight their projected image circle is. That advantage you have is that you're shooting at 1:9:1 and often that edge vignetting you'll see what you push lens coverage too far will be outside of the captured frame. But again, tests are the way to go.
 
Red have stated that 5120px x 2700px sensor is 27.7mm x 14.6mm so 2k should be 11.1mm x 5.8mm, this makes it smaller than s16, there should be no vignetting. Please correct me if I'm wrong though.
 
J Davis said:
Red have stated that 5120px x 2700px sensor is 27.7mm x 14.6mm so 2k should be 11.1mm x 5.8mm, this makes it smaller than s16, there should be no vignetting. Please correct me if I'm wrong though.
Click to expand...

If there's any new news on that front from what I've been told, I'll upgrade the graphic. Currently, I was told otherwise. We'll know for sure very soon.

**Update, I've added the REDCODE Compression/Max FPS graphic to the first post that Jim shared during the Scarlet X release at the head of this thread. At this point I'm trying to consolidate information so there is less confusion about camera specifications and capabilities.

Again, I'll update and add information as it comes or changes as long as I'm breathing and a Scarlet X shooter :)
 
From another thread, "Sensor Coverage on Scarlet" David Fuller has tested some s-16 lenses on Epic. Some work. Some won't even mount.
So as soon as possible we need to post a database of what s-16 lenses will cover 2K and 3K and mount without interference.
"I can tell you for sure that a Zeiss 11-110 S16 lens works great on an Epic. It covers more than 2k, but not quite 3k except maybe at the long end. At the narrowest point of its image circle, it covers a 16x9 frame that's 2400 pixels wide. That gives you resolution in the Alexa ballpark when down sampled to 1920x1080.

The 25mm and 16 mm Zeiss MK I superspeeds cover more. Very close to 3K, but not quite. The Bad news is that the 12mm and 9.5mm don't clear the OLPF. The Angineux 5.9mm also won't clear the OLPF on an Epic. "


​
 
Thank you!

Thank you!

Phil, you’re indeed a “Rock Star”! I just discovered your charts. What you’ve done is truly amazing, especially now that it has gone through a process of suggestions. I’ve got a “group of visuals” that are useable for the Scarlet for sure, but also for the Epic. Thank you!

Humberto Rivera
 
I would suggest even including all advertised available compression ratios. It may be of interest to some doing run and gun and/or budget/data conscious that they could set up their Scarlet to get several hours or RAW recording out of their 64GB SSD in 18:1 compression at 3k or 2k.
 
Noah Yuan-Vogel said:
I would suggest even including all advertised available compression ratios. It may be of interest to some doing run and gun and/or budget/data conscious that they could set up their Scarlet to get several hours or RAW recording out of their 64GB SSD in 18:1 compression at 3k or 2k.
Click to expand...

I thought RED was artificially limiting the available compression ratios to prevent higher FPS at certain resolutions?
 
Kamal Kyrala said:
I thought RED was artificially limiting the available compression ratios to prevent higher FPS at certain resolutions?
Click to expand...


I have not heard anything about that, but that would not make sense if you consider the information they have given. Clearly compression ratio is not the limiting factor for higher framerates: The spec sheet for scarlet says 3:1 to 18:1 compression options are available but their table showing the lowest compression available in all resolution/fps modes does not list anything close to 18:1 for any of them. This seems to tell us that compression ratio is only a limiting factor for frame rates if you are choosing between 3-7:1 options in certain modes, beyond that, the limitation on the framerate must be one that is due to pre-compression pixel processing speeds or software limitations set by RED. I certainly hope all compression modes are available in all frame sizes and frame rates, but it seems from that table that you will never unlock higher framerates by shooting >7:1 compression.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top