The Case for Micro Four Thirds on Scarlet (and perhaps Epic!)

[G Lap]

Just for the record, Leica also makes 4/3 cameras. As for the ascertion that most of their lens offerings are pure shit, the vast majority of all 35mm lenses fit that description. Look at the tests of any Canon or Nikon APS-C lenses! I'm talking only about the super high grade and a few of their high grade offerings, which are absolutely superb. They cover the range you need to cover. It bears repeating that the thing that makes these lenses soooo sweet is their sharpness wide open, their speed and eveness across the frame.

Leica don't make 4/3 cameras, they do though make superb 35mm lenses! (Similarly, PanaLeica lenses are not made by Leica but by Panasonic). I also think it's fair to say that at the the top end of their ranges both Nikon and Canon have some excellent 35mm glass, albeit with some limitations when used cine style.

 

[Phil Holland]

To be clear on what's going on, much like users noticed sharper images with crop factor bodies is that the sensor falls within the often "sweet spot" for a given lens. With a 4/3 camera and even lenses designed exclusively for that sensor there is simply less surface area to cover, hence the more even illumination. Now as lenses get larger and the sensor size gets larger it's trickier to construct quality glass for an affordable price. We totally can have a flat field FF35 50mm f/0.95 lens, it would just weigh about 15lbs, look like a giant sunflower, and cost about $35k.

It's cheaper and easier to design quality optics for smaller sensor sizes. Also, they will alwaysl be smaller and lighter than their equivalent larger crop factor counterpart.

Now I'm coming from the "I'm too insane about lenses and have to test things for a living" category. I own 42 lenses (only two of which are zooms) from many different brands. Most of which cover FF35. I owned a digital medium format body with 7 lenses at one point. I also have had to test cinema glass with lens grids and charts for a little over a decade now. I'd say I've been "intimate" with about 400 or so different lenses in my time on different sensors sizes and film planes. (I'm not a slut, I loved them all equally at first).

And I'll just give you an example what my "first date" with a lens is like. Here's a rare little gem of a lens from the late 1970's that covers FF35 and has been used on S35 digital cinema cameras for feature use. The Olympus OM 18mm f/3.5 (adapted to EF for personal ease of use).

First I check her out.

Shot with a 1Ds Mark III - bigger

Then I take her out to a nice place.

Shot with a 1Ds Mark III - bigger

Now for me this is a cool little lens that contends nicely with modern 18mm f/3.5 designs. Especially when it comes to barrel distortion, lens size, and image sharpness. However, it does suffer from typical old lateral yellow/blue chromatic aberrations. Slight enough to correct in post. Also, not as contrasty as modern lens coatings, but certainly within a correctable space when color correcting. Micro contrast is decent, but not the same as the Zeiss 18mm designs. Cinema 18mm designs are higher quality, but no where near the compact size of this lens. Which = a special lady that gets to hang out with me more.

I will swing this back into reality a bit though and state that it's not just the lens quality, but how you use the lens that matters. There are many sharp and high quality f/1.4 lenses at different focal lengths out there that cover FF35/S35 and smaller. Much like sensor size is a choice, as are lenses.

 

[Zeb B]

I'd say I've been "intimate" with about 400 or so different lenses in my time on different sensors sizes and film planes. (I'm not a slut, I loved them all equally at first).

And I'll just give you an example what my "first date" with a lens is like.

First I check her out.

Then I take her out to a nice place.

and then . . . . ????

Good post but I think it really brings us, again, to the topic of your relationship commitment issues. When unboxing that new lens how does it make you feel? Why can't you seem to maintain that passion and dedication with just one lens? Do you view your lens as a simple object there for your pleasure and convenience? Oh, we are out of time . . . so again next Friday then?

 

[David Rasberry]

m4/3 to 2/3 crop factor is 2, not 4. It is exactly twice the image circle size.

I like the format size a lot as a motion format. My favorite concept for a 4/3 Scarlet is a 20mm x 10mm sized sensor with .0048 pixel pitch. 4k at 4/3, 3k at S16mm size and 2k at 2/3" size. Not sure I care that much about the m4/3 mount or lenses, though Olympus does make some excellent glass. One of the disappointments with the AF100 is the general unsuitablility of current 4/3 zooms for motion work. I would prefer just standard PL mount for the most part, but you would need S35 lenses to cover it. Or use the Canon electronic mount and Canon EFS still lenses.
Scarlet will have interchangeable lens mounts like Epic, so no real need for mount adapters.

 

[George Petersen]

m4/3 to 2/3 crop factor is 2, not 4. It is exactly twice the image circle size.

I know - I was referencing relative to a FF35 4/3 is 2x, 2/3 is 4x.

 

[George Petersen]

Leica don't make 4/3 cameras, they do though make superb 35mm lenses! (Similarly, PanaLeica lenses are not made by Leica but by Panasonic). I also think it's fair to say that at the the top end of their ranges both Nikon and Canon have some excellent 35mm glass, albeit with some limitations when used cine style.

They did make the Digilux 3, but upon checking, I see they've discontinued it. Strange - their M series designs would be very adaptable to four thirds and since they are designing and/or making lenses for Panasonic, it seems like a natural.

 

[Phil Holland]

and then . . . . ????

Good post but I think it really brings us, again, to the topic of your relationship commitment issues. When unboxing that new lens how does it make you feel? Why can't you seem to maintain that passion and dedication with just one lens? Do you view your lens as a simple object there for your pleasure and convenience? Oh, we are out of time . . . so again next Friday then?

Nah. I'm home and under the weather at the moment sadly or I'd be out enjoying the evening.

The reason I have a bunch of lenses comes down to the notion that they are tools and I'd have to throw away my previous analogy to explain that.

I like different tools for different jobs. I would say if I fall under any category is that I prefer primes over zooms, but I have a couple zooms when I need them. Even thinking about buying one more. I like the precision of primes though and for one reason or another they have assisted in my compositional education and certainly increased my "framing logic". I like the concept of reaching into the bag and knowing you want a specific lens. I like thinking about a shot and choosing the right glass for that shot. Beyond lighting and shutterspeed it's about as close as you can get to a brushstroke when shooting. I don't like the concept of shooting at strange focal lengths like "93.2mm" that will only exist in zooms. Difficult if you ever have to re-shoot a frame. Usually you squeeze more image quality out of a prime. Primes also offer the potential of extremely wide apertures as well. Good for low light. Good for getting creative with depth of field. I certainly find a lot of interest with the subtle nuances in image quality and image "flavors" between different manufacturers. For instance the difference between Zeiss and Leica or Nikon and Canon. I like a few really odd and rare lenses, but I also like a lot of the usual suspects. Each tool has a use. They wouldn't exist if they didn't.

Everybody here knows all that though. I'm merely a glass lover. If I wasn't I would have gone insane a long time ago.

 

[Peter Moretti]

Another freaking sensor size? No way, not for me. I'm hoping M4/3 goes away if I just keep on hitting the snooze button.

 

[G Lap]

They did make the Digilux 3, but upon checking, I see they've discontinued it. Strange - their M series designs would be very adaptable to four thirds and since they are designing and/or making lenses for Panasonic, it seems like a natural.

It was a Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1 badge-engineered clone though. Leica have their arrangement with Panasonic covering compact cameras and some input to PanaLeica lens design but they have publicly stated that they have no interest in 4/3rds. They have a CSC announcement expected at the next photokina (September 2012) but have said that they are looking at APS-C or larger sensors for that.

As for the M line, it's likely to be a cold day in hell before a 4/3rds sensor gets anywhere near that camera.......

As for Scarlet, I don't see RED going down that route either.

 

[David Rasberry]

I wouldn't mind seeing a QHD (What they are calling 4k for next gen TV's) S16mm Scarlet. That would be a really nice step up from 2/3".

 

[Clint Lealos]

I like the idea of 3 standard sensor sizes. I think we could go with these 3 for several years before new standards are introduced:

M4/3 (16mm) - Cable TV, internet, low budget indies, etc.
S35 (35mm) - Network TV, commercials, movies
FF35 (IMAX) - Big budget movies

With that said, there is definitely room for a 2/3" sensor on this list, but it will probably be in direct competition with the M4/3s market. If Scarlet is indeed a 2/3" sensor then I think we are in for a battle between the two sensor sizes. Should be interesting. If anyone can shake things up... its Red Can't wait to see how it all unfolds on Nov. 3rd!

 

[David Rasberry]

I like the idea of 3 standard sensor sizes. I think we could go with these 3 for several years before new standards are introduced:

M4/3 (16mm) - Cable TV, internet, low budget indies, etc.
S35 (35mm) - Network TV, commercials, movies
FF35 (IMAX) - Big budget movies

With that said, there is definitely room for a 2/3" sensor on this list, but it will probably be in direct competition with the M4/3s market. If Scarlet is indeed a 2/3" sensor then I think we are in for a battle between the two sensor sizes. Should be interesting. If anyone can shake things up... its Red Can't wait to see how it all unfolds on Nov. 3rd!

M4/3 should become the S16 of digital cinema. Only lacks decent compact constant speed reasonably fast zooms.

But shooting 4k 4/3 with primes and 3k S16 crop for the zooms would not be a bad compromise to start with.

 

[Paul Watt]

Again, the very short ffd is gonna make m4/3 really hard. And as a sensor size, it's fairly close to S35, so it doesn't make sense to me to have two such close sensor sizes. The seemingly very affordable mini-primes on 2/3 should give a nice shallow dof if you want that, they will match each other, and they're light and small, which is a main feature of the Scarlet, in my opinion. For a sharp zoom, the fixed should be amazing. Or get a 16mm zoom that holds focus, and has a constant aperature. So, the m4/3 idea has a difficult to implement mount, a redundant sensor size, and lower quality lens options (for 2/3 sensor anyway) than what's supposed to be available already.

 

[Max Gibson]

Hi All;

I've been lurking around watching Red's progress and have been getting very excited about the Scarlet as well as the Epic. I must say, that I think that all creative roads should lead to Red. For that reason, I think that as the highest common denominator, the micro four-thirds mount belongs on Scarlet! The reasons are many: ....

.... If not, I'll be thinking about the Panasonic AF101 and GH2.

Great points. You had me sold until that last sentence. The first rule of image making they drilled in my head at the school was to get the best lens available ( beg, borrow, steal .. ) That was the time Film was Film and if the lab was constant the quality of picture depended on two lenses : the one on the camera first and the one inside the head of the viewer second. After getting the best imager ( Red, Epic, Scarlet, pink ... ) if the old glass is not giving your picture a special look that you are looking for and you clap that Canon FD or Nikon Ai on just because you think you are saving some $ for the cast and crew and grip perhaps you have to be honest with all of them and let them know the picture is being shot through some less than best for a reason or two !

i would get RED lenses. Those are designed with the specs of the camera. i could always grade the picture to something else when i have the ultimate best RAW files on the HardDrives .

 

[Steve Sherrick]

m4/3 is working just fine for me as a tool in that price range. If something comes along that is better or more appropriate for those projects, perfect. But right now, I can interchange Nikon lenses between the RED and the GH2 easily and they serve different purposes. I have a wide focal length range, so adapting is not that tough.

But if Scarlet is what I think it is, then it will probably be the best run and gun camera available. Unless you need a new camera right now, I'd hold off purchasing anything until these announcements are complete in November. Something tells me the Indie market is about to heat up, especially if the announcements involve products ready to ship.

 

[Philipe Ratton]

I wouldn't mind seeing a QHD (What they are calling 4k for next gen TV's) S16mm Scarlet. That would be a really nice step up from 2/3".

Would like that too

 

[Zeb B]

i would get RED lenses. Those are designed with the specs of the camera. i could always grade the picture to something else when i have the ultimate best RAW files on the HardDrives.

I am curious on how many Epic DP's use the RED lenses? Any guesses out there?

 

[George Petersen]

Again, the very short ffd is gonna make m4/3 really hard. And as a sensor size, it's fairly close to S35, so it doesn't make sense to me to have two such close sensor sizes. The seemingly very affordable mini-primes on 2/3 should give a nice shallow dof if you want that, they will match each other, and they're light and small, which is a main feature of the Scarlet, in my opinion. For a sharp zoom, the fixed should be amazing. Or get a 16mm zoom that holds focus, and has a constant aperature. So, the m4/3 idea has a difficult to implement mount, a redundant sensor size, and lower quality lens options (for 2/3 sensor anyway) than what's supposed to be available already.

The sensor doesn't have to be 4/3 - it can be s35 or 2/3, so long as there is a mount for MFT or 4/3 lenses and the smarts to recognize the lens and use its features. On the S35 sized sensor, you would just have to crop it to a size covered by the lens.

 

[Max Gibson]

I am curious on how many Epic DP's use the RED lenses? Any guesses out there?

hmm.. that's a good question ! i recall there was a poll on the old Scarlet Forum about PL mounted lenses but back in those dark days there wasn't Epic on this earth or even the thought of MiniPrimes. How about we start a new poll on this after the Scarlet's announcements. i really need to get me some lenses. Renting is becoming quite unpredictable these days.

 

[Ron Goodman]

The ultimate small size lenses for the Epic are the Leica M series. They are the legendary series of lenses widely considered the finest lenses made. They are designed to cover a full 36mm width frame in the stills format so the Epic sensor is blanketed easily and then some. The back flange distance for these lenses just barely allow for a mount to be designed for the standard Epic case. Even then the camera can only accept lens in which the rear lens elements do not protrude aft of the lens mount itself. This limits the number of the shorter focal length lenses up to 35mm but the image quality is outstanding. These Leica M's test equal or superior to the newest Nikons and better than the latest Canons in a package that is generally one fifth the size and weight. (Check out independent tests of all). The Leica M mount for the Epic may be obtained from SpaceCam Systems on its webstore at spacecam.com It is a very rigid precisely engineered mount. One may also utilize any number of adapters to Canon, Nikon, contax or even Hasselblad but the spring tension type springs utilized in most of these mean that a secondary lens support should be used. The m4/3 format lenses simply cannot be mounted on the Epic without major reengineering of the camera case...
Ron.
SpaceCam