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 :)

Thoughts regarding S35 vs. FF35 sensor size

The question is whether there is a need for several thousand new motion picture cameras in the world...

...but yes, I'm interested, curious, and excited by the possibility of new cine lenses being produced to cover the 8-perf 35mm / FF sensor area. I'm sure someone will step up to produce some, I just doubt that it will be a high volume market.
 
My guess is that a S35 Monstro chip is just not a physical possibility with the current technology. The added DR and bit depth might be directly related to the size of the photosites. It's a compromise that has to exist.

My feeling is that if the Monstro sensor when cropped to S35 is above 4K then there isn't much to worry about. We have enough resolution already for most things that call for cine glass. Monstro will still have the advantage.
 
ibloom said:
My guess is that a S35 Monstro chip is just not a physical possibility with the current technology. The added DR and bit depth might be directly related to the size of the photosites. It's a compromise that has to exist.

My feeling is that if the Monstro sensor when cropped to S35 is above 4K then there isn't much to worry about. We have enough resolution already for most things that call for cine glass. Monstro will still have the advantage.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it is an impossibility -- the Dalsa had a 14-bit A/D processor for their slightly-larger-than S35 sensor. I wouldn't be surprised if the next ARRI digital cine camera had a 16-bit processor with an S35 sensor.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
I'm not sure it is an impossibility -- the Dalsa had a 14-bit A/D processor for their slightly-larger-than S35 sensor. I wouldn't be surprised if the next ARRI digital cine camera had a 16-bit processor with an S35 sensor.
Click to expand...

You are comparing CMOS to CCD technology. Red is likely to stay CMOS.

IBloom
 
David Mullen ASC said:
The question is whether there is a need for several thousand new motion picture cameras in the world...

...but yes, I'm interested, curious, and excited by the possibility of new cine lenses being produced to cover the 8-perf 35mm / FF sensor area. I'm sure someone will step up to produce some, I just doubt that it will be a high volume market.
Click to expand...

Although excited to see how RED could wind up the cine lens industry, my belief is that one of the things that made RED so revolutionary was the ability of a new camera body to be able to use old affordable lenses from many years ago. Along with the usage of old lenses like Mitchell's or PL's, the mounts that have been widened the possibilities like nikon's and canon's also have made the camera a very successful item and have re valued the lenses available in the market today.

I too doubt that the market for this lenses would be a high volume one, and probably not a very profitable one... specially after seeing the images produced by a R1 with any of the lenses mentioned above.
 
Häakon said:
Of course the monkey wrench in the equation is that the sensors are not the same, and the "Monstro" sensor is supposedly one generation better in terms of latitude and noise and all of that fun stuff. So it doesn't make the comparison apples to apples, because we're dealing with more than just a loss of resolution here.
Click to expand...

Hopefully the Monstro will be better at least that's what we are all lead to believe.
 
estebanred said:
Did you notice that the comparison chart between sensors with frame rates and DR is no longer at the Epic_Scarlet revealed link?
Click to expand...

Instead of going by Reds word... I'll actually look at the images and wait for a third reputable party to conduct a test. Playing the DR sliding game is not cool here.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
The question is whether there is a need for several thousand new motion picture cameras in the world...
Click to expand...

A fair number of them will be replacing Red Ones or effectively replacing other cameras. Particularly film cameras, as the transition to digital continues to unfold. (Mind you, I doubt you'll see many rental houses having their 535Bs melted down for scrap any time soon. But they'll probably sit on the shelves a bit more each year from here on out.)

But one also shouldn't underestimate the potential size of the market, if the price is right. Red has already demonstrated there are far more customers for an S35-format motion picture camera than any of its competitors knew existed and/or were interested in trying to serve.

Red has emerged as the leader (by unit sales volume) in the digital cinematography market, and the whole market (to a good first approximation, anyway) will eventually be digital. So assuming Red stays on top as that happens, the technical choices they make are going to significantly shape the future of cinematography.
 
estebanred said:
I too doubt that the market for this lenses would be a high volume one, and probably not a very profitable one... specially after seeing the images produced by a R1 with any of the lenses mentioned above.
Click to expand...

If Jim can sell cine/still hybrid lenses using the Red mount. I believe the volume will be high enough.

IBloom
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Since 56mm x42mm is 1.33 : 1, and the 2X anamorphic format uses a 1.20 : 1 area to create a 2.40 : 1 image when unsqueezed, there would be very little cropping, basically down from 2.66 : 1 to 2.40 : 1...

... but the problem is that modern 2X anamorphic lenses aren't designed to cover an area as large as 56mm x 42mm. The dimensions of the 4-perf 35mm anamorphic camera aperture are 22mm x 18.59mm.
Click to expand...

So, modern anamorphic lenses will cover nicely the FF35, croping on all the sides, I just don't understand why Alexander keep saying the 645 is "the" camera to use with anamorphic lenses.

Emmanuel
 
what is wrong with s35
pro glass is pl mount. s35 is a standard in cinema ff35 is not. ff35 glass is stills glass and is not going to be ideal. yes i want the best sensor but i want it to fit current pro sizes. i'm hoping the epic x select would allow an upgrade to a monstro s35 size sensor when one is designed instead of swapping the whole brain, i'm just guessing what the "SELECT" means.
i'm worried that red might be spending to much time working on unproven formats instead of just being ahead of every body else with current ones.
we are still waiting for the pl mount red primes, red are now going to make 8 more cameras and loads of different lenses with different lens mounts. it will all get very confusing.
 
Emmanuel Cambier said:
So, modern anamorphic lenses will cover nicely the FF35, croping on all the sides, I just don't understand why Alexander keep saying the 645 is "the" camera to use with anamorphic lenses.

Emmanuel
Click to expand...

My understanding of a larger sensor area in combination with the 1.33 ratio of the 645 may be flawed due to the giant size (As David has pointed out) that a 2x anamorphic lens can not cover.

Another question to David then....

Is there no benefit then to the larger 645 sensor in comparison to the FF35 sensor resolution wise for anamorphic shooting?
 
Sorry I'm not David..

If you are trying to produce a 2.35 image (or a vertically extended 16:9 image) with Anamorphic lenses the 645 offers no advantage I can possibly imagine over the FF35.

Even the published frame rates suggest there is no other advantage from the potentially higher bandwidth capacity.

regards

Michael L
 
If someone built 2X anamorphic lenses that would cover the 645 sensor area, then there would be some advantage in getting a 2.40 image since the sensor is 4x3, but it seems a better route would be to design some 1.6X anamorphic lenses to cover the 1.50 : 1 FF35 sensor... IF you are going to build new anamorphic lenses in the first place.

Depth of field will be challenging enough with a spherical lens on a FF35 sensor, even harder with anamorphic, and even harder with 645, and even harder with anamorphic on 645...

The 9K 4x3 645 image seems well-suited for IMAX photography though.
 
Hi Haakon,

I would like to believe the same, really.

I was looking at the FF35 only because it seems it will have 16 bit compared to 12 bit for the S35.

But...the EPIC X S35 have a Mysterium X Select and REDCODE 250 instead of 225...

So i guess i dont understand...

Antoine
 
On the announcements on the 3rd, Jim seemed to become irritated that several of us, myself included, were disappointed that there wasn't a S35 Monstro option. If it were not technologically feasible, that would be one thing, and that's certainly understandable. But he also said that the RED One would be getting a S35 Monstro upgrade, which all but implies that a S35 for Epic REALLY IS possible.

My current thinking, especially given a lot of comments on the 3rd, is that some people (possibly including Jim) aren't as concerned about increasing dynamic range as others. I'm cool with that, but I suspect that anyone shooting indie features knows all too well how hard it is to equalize exposures between indoor and outdoor-though-the-window shots sufficiently to avoid noise and/or blow-outs. As I noted on the 3rd, in response to a comment by Jim, the big boys don't need nearly as much DR as the indie crowd, since they can always custom-build a house with a removable roof to pour in the lighting. Those of us on $100,000 to $1,000,000 feature budgets (which, I'll venture, is just about everyone using a RED One for feature work!) just don't have that choice. We have to make do with the house we can get, whether that means we can get enough light into the house or not (and, usually, we cannot).

So, I'm with everyone else who craves a S35 Monstro. Thirteen stops would have been heaven this past summer as we shot our first feature. Resolution at 5K is almost certainly enough for the new generation 4K digital projectors just coming online, even with the debayered chroma losses. We don't need more K. . . we need more DR.

If anyone can turn this trick, it is Jim Jannard. The question is, since he's stated he'll be offering a S35-sized Monstro for the RED One, why on earth wouldn't he be offering a S35-size Monstro Epic?

Any thoughts?

Stephen
 
I thought it was a Mysterium-X sensor that the RED ONE could be upgraded to, not a Monstro sensor.

I would also prefer a 16-bit S35 Monstro sensor option for the EPIC, preferably 5K, with a 24mm wide area used for picture information, plus a lookaround area, so perhaps a sensor that was 28mm to 30mm wide. I'm sort of assuming that whatever the source is for the Monstro EPIC sensor, it can't accommodate the S35 size limitation for some reason, maybe because it's an adaption of an existing FF35 DSLR sensor. Or somehow make the Mysterium-X system be 16-bit with more dynamic range, like the Monstro, since the size of the sensor is about perfect for S35 photography.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top