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 :)

What is the practical point of having a Helium 8K??

paul engstrom said:
8k Helium LOVES lenses. Old ones. New ones. Cool ones. Weird ones. Shoot 8k with Summicron-C. Shoot 6k with old wide dodgy but pretty Cooke Panchros. No other camera does as good a job with as large an array of 35mm and S35mm lenses as the RED Weapon Helium.

Its easy to match cameras in post. Much harder to match any Optimo except the EZ line (nice glass!) with any modern prime on RED 6k for the old sensors or 8k on the new (or Arri 3.2k) due too the illumination falloff inherent in the Optimos. But on Helium - shoot 7k and have a great time.

Plus reframing, etc.

Lenses. Don't underestimate them.

Regarding low-light. Do you have a lighting budget? If you do, the Helium sensor is plenty bright. It is certainly not a dark sensor.

If you don't have a lighting budget then there are a host of other considerations that come into play here.

Gemini looks to be an excellent wildlife camera and also documentary camera and specialty situation camera for budgeted projects.

That 8k Helium is killer nice if you want to exploit a range of glass
Click to expand...

To quote a phrase: What he said....
 
I just went Monstro because I’ve always loved the Vista look, but the Helium sensor is just absolutely gorgeous. Didnt regret at all going from Dragon to Helium, shot amazing footage and lots of high speed without any issues because of “crop” or “noise”. With ipp2 its a winner for everything.
 
I have just been viewing some of our material on a 4k TV and I can say that the image from Helium is a LOT sharper than what I'm used to coming from our 5.1k Epic MX. This is of course because the image has been downsampled. There are several sharpness problems with a 5k image downscaled to 4k such as:
- Debayer filter will loose sharpness always when you are close to 100%
- The low pass filter will significantly reduce sharpness. The lowpass filter will be much less aggresive if the resolution is higher.
- Also remember that not all lenses will cover well on Gemini so you may be shooting at 4.5k which is a bigger problem than going from 8k to 7.5k

Cheers
/Andreas
 
I have pulled print quality frames from my Helium... and I've had Helium frames printed.

IMO the main tradeoffs are thus:
Helium can double as a high resolution stills camera -- its images look better than what I can get with my A7r until diffraction gets in the way.

Gemini has less noise and hence can make a cleaner image at higher ISO, plus it requires far less cropping for high frame rates.

4K 120 FPS footage looks phenomenal, but that 25% crop is a bit of a drag.

IMO unless you plan on pulling frames for printing or using your camera as a hybrid with the intention of printing large (24x36 inches large), you wouldn't really be gaining that much with a Helium over a Gemini. For practical purposes in filmmaking, 5K is more than enough for most productions.

And you still get the rest of the Red benefits, like 16 bit linear recording and Red's vastly improved color science.

It's tough to go wrong either way, IMO.
 
Björn Benckert said:
But if you got enough light and if the quality of the pixels are the same... one gives you a 8k image and the other a 5k image.
Click to expand...

And if the quality isn't the same then the quantity isn't just a bonus on top.
 
Kyle Simukka said:
Why do you think that?
Click to expand...

I think "futureproof" is not a good term to describe that the specs of a camera can stand up longer against new releases.
All companys have the next big thing in development or even ready for sale in the closet when you buy something brand new.
We all know that.

It just feels better to be a head of new technology if your product does something unique and sets it apart from the rest.

The good thing with a 8k RED is that the industry is not ready yet and so companys are not going to bring out more cameras with this feature now.
Especially as the prosumer market rises Helium and Monstro will not be in the competition as 8k is not interresting but so versitile if you once worked with it.

Dual ISO sensetivity for example is the big thing right now and as the BMD Pocket 4k, GH5s, EVA1, A7siii, come out we will see more and more low light one man army stuff that
is impressive indeed and for documentary and run&gun work i'd love to have a Gemini as second camera.

For me a good image needs light at the right spot to support the story and drag the focus of the audience to were you want it.

I love the detail and crop fredom of todays stills cameras which are also 6k to 8k most of the time.
Nobody complains about resolution there.
Cropping in is a common thing in photography in my experience.

I always wanted the same in Motion Picture but got stuck with resolution especially for 4k delivery.
Which my clients really ask for today.

Scaling up is what you can do and it works.
but the results were just never so pleasing than cropping into 8k.
The only thing what I don´t liked was 30fps limit on the Epic-W. Now with the 60 and 75fps 8k upgrade,
you can use the whole sensor for decent slowmotion without cropping in.


Another aspect I like about the 8k RAW is if you do stuff like stock or plates for compositing.
8k serves you well.
You have it in 2k-4k today.
Tomorrow in 5-6k and even in 5 Years there will be enough quality to use It again.
I shot a lot of smoke, dust, ink and lightflares stuff some years ago. That was in 1080p.
No problem to use these on a 2k project but for 4k the upscaling wont look that good.
Would have been great to have these in 8k.

Oh and I also remember shooting Standart Definition on MiniDV, DiscCam and also VHS when I came across the 4.5K RED ONE.
4.5k is crazy and Filesizes are so BIG is what they said. "Who needs that?" Look where we are now and the Red one still holds up to todays
resolutions.

I think that are some points what makes people say 8k is a little more "Futureproof"

Practical points for me on Helium
- Footage can be used for other projects even years later.
- don´t get lazy with lighting and even digg deeper into that topic (For me personal)
- cropping is king
- 4k native delivery with all the luxury of reframing
- 35mp RAW stills on 8k with 1/150 shutter while shooting video
- The amount of detail I always wanted in a camera
- greater ISO performence than other cameras I use to shoot on
 
Last edited:
All great points. This topic for me personally is interesting to follow. I'm in the process of deciding between the Helium or Gemini brain for my next RED purchase. Currently, I have the GH5s and the Red ONE MX.

The GH5s has impressive low-light sensitivity and excels at run-and-gun situations. However, the level of dynamic range in the highs isn't that great, and it seems like the knee is relatively sharp in the top end of the dynamic range. I still haven't found the sweet spot for well-light situations, but in low-light, I'm reasonably happy with the color and low noise.

So, with the GH5s in my arsenal, I have the opinion that the Helium would be complementary to the GH5s and gives me an 8k resolution to work with, which has several advantages. All of my work is mostly in 4K and 4k HDR.

In addition to being an independent filmmaker, I also work in the industry as a software engineer. I specialize in encoding, transcoding, packaging, and delivery. What I think is interesting is with how 4k adoption has had healthy growth with OTT (over-the-top). But the adoption with other distribution methods has been slow or stagnant. I think this is because of the cost and bandwidth required to distribute 4k is an expensive technicial problem.

I almost think HDR is a higher priority than 4k. HDR is impressive, but the cost of the TVs are still reasonably high, so it's hard to predict how adoption will trend. Although, it will be interesting to see how the iPhone-X changes that now that it supports both DolbyVision and HDR10 (https://support.apple.com/en-us/ht207949)
 
I am in this dilemma also to know which one i take, GEMINI or HELIUM. I noticed that GEMINI seems to have more dynamics in the shadows than HELIUM, as much as monstro see more. If the only argument of HELIUM is 8K I think to take GEMINI. I mainly do movies and ads so I think I do not need 8K but the definition attracts me ahah.
 
In my personal opinion, one of the greatest tricks RED has done is to give filmmakers choices, choices from on manufacturer even.

Sometimes things aren't so clear when it comes to making a decision about a camera to buy or use. But when you get to the nitty gritty things like do you need 5K?, 8K?, higher frame rates?, larger format size?, larger format size for anamorphic filming?, better low light performance?, Etc. This is often why so many productions have shot with more than one camera type over the years. Form factor playing a role there too.

You can start discovering exactly what's the most important to you. We're seeing a lot of the things being filmed with Helium right now pop up and so many of those narrative productions are using the extra resolution for reframing, cropping, stabilization, and just better visual fidelity due to the higher pixel count. That said, Gemini is the newest kid on the block and just getting out there. I personally think it's a killer camera for doc work in particular based on the couple times it's been in my hands. I'm a Monstro man myself because I need large format and 8K for what I do. Cost aside, these are are all useful cameras in the face of modern delivery of 4K and beyond and HDR.
 
Phil Holland said:
In my personal opinion, one of the greatest tricks RED has done is to give filmmakers choices, choices from on manufacturer even.

Sometimes things aren't so clear when it comes to making a decision about a camera to buy or use. But when you get to the nitty gritty things like do you need 5K?, 8K?, higher frame rates?, larger format size?, larger format size for anamorphic filming?, better low light performance?, Etc. This is often why so many productions have shot with more than one camera type over the years. Form factor playing a role there too.

You can start discovering exactly what's the most important to you. We're seeing a lot of the things being filmed with Helium right now pop up and so many of those narrative productions are using the extra resolution for reframing, cropping, stabilization, and just better visual fidelity due to the higher pixel count. That said, Gemini is the newest kid on the block and just getting out there. I personally think it's a killer camera for doc work in particular based on the couple times it's been in my hands. I'm a Monstro man myself because I need large format and 8K for what I do. Cost aside, these are are all useful cameras in the face of modern delivery of 4K and beyond and HDR.
Click to expand...

And........what he said
 
Yes Phil is totally right.
The thing is if you do different jobs it would be the best to have different weapons in your arsenal.
I think the biggest problem everyone has that there is money.

There is no more room for 2 DSMC2 bodys for the most of the Filmmakers.
So everyone is searching for the swiss arny knife for they´re production.

Difficult to decide.

If it was my first Red and I come from a DSLR Mirrorless type of camera I´d probably go Gemini.
Nothing changes and it even will be an improvemnt because higher ISOs like 1600 or 3200 and higher work great.

So with mony for only one
If you already own the Epic-W and you like it go DSMC2 Helium and love it. Also if you mostly shoot in daylight or with lighting and cropping or detail (8k to 4k) is important for you Helium is an option.
If you are not happy with DR on Helium and don´t need the 8k + want great lowlight go to DSMC2 Gemini.

If money is not an issue,
Go Monstro or Helium for s35 and Gemini small Projects doc work with no control over lighting.
 
The small image circle in combo with the high 8k resolution of helium gives you the possiblity to use faster lenses that provides the same FOV as slower lenses with larger image circles. Makes Helium a very good option for large cinema zooms for example.

few understand the correlation with stop loss and larger snesors. Simply helium can match the thick focus falloff of monstro if the right s35 lens is used on helium. The smaller image circle compensate. So simply put and strange as it sounds, if using the right lenses helium gives higher exposure possibilites at the same FOV as monstro. Thats the reason MP´s are faster than Supreme primes. It´s the correlation between image circle and speed.
 
Björn Benckert said:
The small image circle in combo with the high 8k resolution of helium gives you the possiblity to use faster lenses that provides the same FOV as slower lenses with larger image circles. Makes Helium a very good option for large cinema zooms for example.

few understand the correlation with stop loss and larger snesors. Simply helium can match the thick focus falloff of monstro if the right s35 lens is used on helium. The smaller image circle compensate. So simply put and strange as it sounds, if using the right lenses helium gives higher exposure possibilites at the same FOV as monstro. Thats the reason MP´s are faster than Supreme primes. It´s the correlation between image circle and speed.
Click to expand...

Oh thats interesting to hear. That goes way deeper than things I know about the Helium. Which lenses would you recommend to play with and understand this better if I may ask?
 
Alexander_Klose said:
Oh thats interesting to hear. That goes way deeper than things I know about the Helium. Which lenses would you recommend to play with and understand this better if I may ask?
Click to expand...

MP = (ARRI/Zeiss) Master Prime

Simply stated, any sufficiently fast glass will do. And to Björn's point: if that speed costs you image circle, then you see the value of the trade that Helium gives you: 7K or 8K pixels vs. 5K or 6K pixels for the same-sized circle. Also to Björn's point: Fujinon Premier Pro 18-85 T2 is great on Helium (covering 7K-8K) whereas it's more paltry on Monstro (covering 5K to 6K). If you really dig the quality of down-sampled images and you have a fantastic lens with a smaller-than-VV image circle, Helium is where it's at.
 
Björn Benckert said:
The small image circle in combo with the high 8k resolution of helium gives you the possiblity to use faster lenses that provides the same FOV as slower lenses with larger image circles. Makes Helium a very good option for large cinema zooms for example.

few understand the correlation with stop loss and larger snesors. Simply helium can match the thick focus falloff of monstro if the right s35 lens is used on helium. The smaller image circle compensate. So simply put and strange as it sounds, if using the right lenses helium gives higher exposure possibilites at the same FOV as monstro. Thats the reason MP´s are faster than Supreme primes. It´s the correlation between image circle and speed.
Click to expand...

I have re-read three times and still don't understand your point for any practical purpose.
 
Hrvoje Simic said:
I have re-read three times and still don't understand your point for any practical purpose.
Click to expand...

Helium. Small image circle compared to dragon and Monstro, still 8k resolution.

There is correlations between speed, FOV and DOF. Heliums smaller circle simply gives you more light per pixel than for example monstro or Dragon when the same DOF and FOV is achieved if the lens in question is fitted for the sensor.

Its the same correlation that makes the Supreme Primes slower than the Master primes.

So for practical purposes, you can for example get a full 8k image out of your big optimo zooms with helium. Making a zoom with the same FOV range and speed for Monstro is seriously difficult, not to say impossible. You simply loose one of the 3 above. Like, if you enlarge the image circle and you loose speed.
 
Björn Benckert said:
Helium. Small image circle compared to dragon and Monstro, still 8k resolution.

There is correlations between speed, FOV and DOF. Heliums smaller circle simply gives you more light per pixel than for example monstro or Dragon when the same DOF and FOV is achieved if the lens in question is fitted for the sensor.

Its the same correlation that makes the Supreme Primes slower than the Master primes.

So for practical purposes, you can for example get a full 8k image out of your big optimo zooms with helium. Making a zoom with the same FOV range and speed for Monstro is seriously difficult, not to say impossible. You simply loose one of the 3 above. Like, if you enlarge the image circle and you loose speed.
Click to expand...

The main reason the Supreme Primes are slower than Master Primes is design. If Zeiss wanted to create T1.3 glass with a larger image circle you would be looking at likely 3-6lbs heavier per lens depending on focal length, which Zeiss doesn't want to do for 1/3rd stop difference. Their goal from the get go was to go super compact and very likely to achieve a higher speed than the Signature Primes.
 
Hrvoje Simic said:
I have re-read three times and still don't understand your point for any practical purpose.
Click to expand...

He's saying if absolute exposure level is important, the T1.3 Master Primes are brighter than T1.5 of Supreme Primes by about a 1/3 stop.

That said, it ignores that Monstro is cleaner than Helium. That ~1/3 stop discrepancy can be compensated with ISO on Monstro and you'll probably still have a cleaner image than Helium. So now you're back to the same exposure level, same pixel count, a cleaner image, and still shallower DoF with the Monstro.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top