FORUMS: list search recent posts

December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?

COW Forums : RED Camera

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Noah Kadner
December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 3, 2008 at 4:46:48 pm

Just trying to figure it all out. Got the initial analysis here:

•The fixed-lens Scarlet, clearly aiming at Sony/Panasonic/Canon cameras has shown up with a price- $3,750 for the complete kit.
•RedCodeRGB-1080 scaled from full frame sensor. This was a previous anounced feature of the Red One, and is still supposedly coming in a separate build.
•Epic-X, a nicely priced upgrade path from Red One. Package is $28,000-$17,500 trade-in for Red One=$10,500.
•$4,500 for the Mysterium X sensor upgrade for Red One.
•Lower compression rates for the new cameras.
•Higher maximum fps., now up to 250 (for Epic).
•Delayed delivery of some cameras - as most expected anyway.
•Anyone buying the Red One before the first Epic is delivered can use the upgrade path to Epic-X.

and also at:

http://twenty398.com/2008/12/the-dec-3rd-red-announcements-an-initial-analy...

Am I missing anything major?

-Noah




Check out My FCP Blog and my new RED Blog. Unlock the secrets of the DVX100, HVX200 and Apple Color.
Now featuring the Sony EX1 Guidebook, DVD Studio Pro and Sound for Film and TV.
http://www.callboxlive.com


Return to posts index

Mauricio Santana
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 3, 2008 at 7:45:22 pm

> Am I missing anything major?

I don't think so, but I just wanted to elaborate on your first two points.

I jumped in to high definition just last year. I first started looking for a sub 20k camera fully loaded (with mattebox, filters, tripod, mike, etc) and I started looking at a Canon's XLH-1, since I worked with the original XL-1 and I loved the factor, and the interchangeable lenses. However, when SONY came out with the PMW EX1 I took the plunge and I must say is great. I was willing to sacrifice the interchangeability of the lens for a 1/2 inch sensor.

For this year I was seriously considering buying an EX3 (in addition to or replacing my EX1) as an upgrade, solely for the interchangeability of the lens.

Now I can tell you right away that I can see many people like me will be buying Scarlets. The modularity is just great. Now they just added full 1080p real time recording, so you can do ENG if needed, no need to have a workhorse workstation to downconvert and recompress afterwards, or you can record 3k and do post-production with it if you want a better picture. That kind of flexibility for under 20k (I am assuming even though the body is 2k or 3k dollars you would still spend at least 6k for a lens and another 8k on accesories like mattebox, filters, mike, lights, battery, and interfaces, etc) surely beats Sony's, JVCs, Panasonics or Canons sub 35k dollar offerings.

Or can anyone see if Sony's PDW530 or PDWF335L still provide good value? I haven't personally used them so maybe someone can can point out some things I missed.

I would be worried for those companies' investors. And I am definitely taking the plunge on RED late '09.

Again, all of these comments relate to the 2/3 inch sensor Scarlet, because it seems they have equally good offerings across the board.

Just my 2 cents.

Mauricio



Return to posts index

Russell Lasson
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 4, 2008 at 3:08:54 am

Things just keep getting better and better!

Someone had a shoot on our sound stage today and they were using an XDCAM. My first reaction when I saw this was, "Why in the world would anyone shoot XDCAM any more?" This was proof to myself that I'm becoming a RED snob. Having graded projects shot on both formats, I absolutely love what the RED camera is doing compared to the old school HD cameras. The look and flexibility are fantastic.

What's great about the whole thing is that the REDONE is going to be the worst RED camera that they ever make. If the REDONE is as bad as it's going to get, and it still has revolutionized the way I work, then I'm really excited about the next couple of years.

I'm most excited about the upgrade to EPIC for existing owners. I can't wait to see 4K images at 100+ fps.

-Russ

Russell Lasson
Ridgeline Digital Cinema Mastering
Universal Post
Salt Lake City, UT


Return to posts index


John Sutherland
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 6, 2008 at 1:35:08 am

I'm watching this all with great interest. I've recently moved into the HPX-500 P2 (from a 2/3" SD tape world) on a temporary basis while this camera market shakes out, maybe you all can shed some light here.

Yes, the 2/3" interchangeable lens looks like my kind of camera. I'm coming from a 2/3" ENG configuration world, and my biggest question right now is - what lens? I love the versatility of the zoom, easy to make quick framing changes for interviews, good for follow the action doc-type shooting, etc. And even though I'm not doing "feature" or Indie film work (doc and hi end corporate projects), I crave the image quality these cameras will deliver. What are going to be lens options for Scarlet? Looks like 35mm still lenses could be used, but DOF is an even greater problem there. Does it make sense to assume a good piece of Fuji or Canon 2/3" glass will be an option here? Changing primes during an interview set up seems like a bad option, maybe I've just got video camera on the brain...

thanks,
John


Return to posts index

Shane Betts
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 6, 2008 at 7:41:59 am

The lens you fit won't affect DoF, assuming the focal length is the same. When everyone talks about 35mm depth of field, the shallow DoF is a factor of how big the sensor is as the the frame size changes the field of view for a given focal length.

So, if you fit a 50mm lens and set it to t5.6, the depth of field will be the same regardless of 2/3", super 35 or full frame 35 sensor. What will change is the field of view the lens presents. On a 2/3" sensor that 50mm will be a telephoto, on a super 35 sensor a short portrait lens and on full frame 35 a standard lens. Put the same 50mm lens on the 6x4.5 Epic and it's a wide angle. That's where the DoF comes into it. On one sensor you get the same DoF using a tele as you do on a wide angle on a larger sensor.



Return to posts index

Uli Plank
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 6, 2008 at 9:45:45 am

Plus, the current zoom lenses offered by RED deliver excellent optical quality for the price. I don't expect the zoom on the Scarlet to be inferior.

Regards,

Uli

Director of the Institute of Media Research (IMF) at Braunschweig University of Arts


Return to posts index


Shane Betts
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 6, 2008 at 11:02:46 am

And, using any lens built for a 30x15 frame on a 2/3" sensor will give amazing results as you're only using the very centre of the image. Any fall-off in sharpness, illumination tend to occur near the edges and/or corners and you're never seeing that at all.



Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 6, 2008 at 2:37:29 pm

[Shane Betts] "So, if you fit a 50mm lens and set it to t5.6, the depth of field will be the same regardless of 2/3", super 35 or full frame 35 sensor. What will change is the field of view the lens presents."

Optical theory 101

in practice images at a given DOF and field of view, the required f-number to maintain depth of field is proportional to the format size being captured.

For example, if a 2/3in sensor required f/5.6 , an 35mm size imager would require f/32 to give the same DOF using the same focal length lens due to the magnification factor of the focal length as compared to the imager size.

Even if using lenses of comparable field of view based on the size of the imager lets say 90*- the larger format imager would indeed need a considerably smaller aperture to maintain the same depth of field as seen on the smaller sensors output even though both lenses see approximately the same 90* field of vision.



gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

Inside look at the IoHD
http://library.creativecow.net/articles/adcock_gary/AJAIOHD.php




Return to posts index

Shane Betts
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 6, 2008 at 10:13:54 pm

Gary, you're confusing focal length with field of view.

Whilst focal length certainly does govern field of view at a given frame size, if you move a lens of a given focal length across frame sizes, the field of view is what changes, not depth of field. Think about it. All you do by changing frame size is take a slice out of the centre of the image projected by the lens - effectively zooming in on the image. What you're suggesting would mean the depth of field varies from the centre of the image to the edge.

Here's the calculation for field of view. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_view. You'll notice it's all about the relationship between focal length and frame size.

Here's the calculation for hyperfocal distance. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperfocal_distance You'll notice that frame or target area size is not mentioned in the formula - it's all about focal length, f stop and focus distance.

I stand by my first statement.



Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 7, 2008 at 6:04:17 pm

[Shane Betts] " you're confusing focal length with field of view. "

nah
I have worked with this along time - I have a degree in the field of optical theory (a long time ago)

Please note that this article is unverified on WIKI ". " target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_view."

"Think about it. All you do by changing frame size is take a slice out of the centre of the image projected by the lens - effectively zooming in on the image."

By not taking into account that the reduction in the field of view also reduces the amount that can be viewed- thereby increasing the effective focal length of area being seen- with the resultant loss of DoF.

DoF is determined by not only the the lens its self but the manner in which the lens is to be used and it is not independent of focal length, by the nature of optics it cannot, circle of confusion and chromic aberrations non-withstanding.

With a RED camera - go ahead and try to maintain the same DoF with one lens on all 3 frame sizes that the red can shoot - you will see that in 2K and 3K there is noticeably less than what you get with the full 4K image with the same lens.

the differences will be more noticeable ( ie: dramatic) at a closer focus point-



gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

Inside look at the IoHD
http://library.creativecow.net/articles/adcock_gary/AJAIOHD.php




Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 7, 2008 at 6:31:34 pm

[gary adcock] "you will see that in 2K and 3K there is noticeably less than what you get with the full 4K image with the same lens. "

Oops

I meant to say

there would be MORE DoF with the 2K and 3K frame sizes when using the same lens-

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

Inside look at the IoHD
http://library.creativecow.net/articles/adcock_gary/AJAIOHD.php




Return to posts index

Shane Betts
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 8, 2008 at 12:20:54 am

So, using your theory, If I take a shot at 4k and then crop it in an NLE, the depth of field will change?



Return to posts index

Uli Plank
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 8, 2008 at 8:13:16 am

No, of course not.

I'm afraid that you are completely misinterpreting what Gary is saying.

Please remember: to get the same field of view at different resolutions of the Red One you'll need dfferent lenses.

Regards,

Uli

Director of the Institute of Media Research (IMF) at Braunschweig University of Arts


Return to posts index

Shane Betts
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 8, 2008 at 11:44:04 pm

I'd like to think that I had misunderstood what Gary was saying Uli. I'm getting bored with the conversation and Nathan has probably gone off and shot his movie by now;-)

So, to clarify my position (as per my first post) on this before I drop it and get onto some actual work.

Regardless of what format the lens is designed for, a lens of a given focal length will produce the same depth of field no matter what sensor size it's pointed at. What changes as you fit a lens onto different sensor sizes is the field of view, which is where some people get confused.

The different sensor size will change the field of view of that lens and so, at a given field of view, depth of field will vary across sensor sizes because the focal length of the lens required to produce the desired field of view will change.

And so, a standard lens on a smaller sensor will have a shorter focal length and therefore greater depth of field at a given aperture. A standard lens on a larger sensor will have a longer focal length and therefore less depth of field at a given aperture.

Focal length = depth of field.
Sensor size = field of view.

My apologies to Gary if that's exactly what he has been saying.



Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 9, 2008 at 5:11:28 pm

[Shane Betts] "Regardless of what format the lens is designed for, a lens of a given focal length will produce the same depth of field no matter what sensor size it's pointed at."

Shane

this ignores some basic real world issues.

According to your comment - the lens in question always produces the same DoF regardless of the field of view Correct? How is that determined?

Under your theorem what are the consequential change to DoF when changing focus (how do you explain lens breathing?)

Under your guide a lens that has a 10ft DoF when focused at infinity would still have a 10ft DoF when focused at 1 ft.- and we all know that this is not possible, since even the % of DoF changes with when applied to close focus or macro situations - without regards to the sensor size at all.

a 50mm macro lens on a DSLR (extreme example) has a 1ft DoF @ f4 when focused at 5 ft yet that very same lens on the very same camera has a DoF of 5MM @ f4 when focused at 5in.






gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

Inside look at the IoHD
http://library.creativecow.net/articles/adcock_gary/AJAIOHD.php




Return to posts index

Shane Betts
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 9, 2008 at 10:39:37 pm

[gary adcock] "According to your comment - the lens in question always produces the same DoF regardless of the field of view Correct? How is that determined? "

As I have explained Gary, it is the focal length, in combination with f-stop and focus distance that determine the depth of field. The original question was, if Nathan buys a Scarlet and fits it with a Nikon lens, will it give different DoF. Answer, no it won't. Put a Nikon or a Bolex or a Fujinon of the same focal length on the Scarlet and the depth of field will be the same. And the field of view will be the same too. Take those lenses and try them on an Epic and (aside from the fact the Bolex and Fujinon will vignette) the depth of field will stay the same.

[gary adcock] "
Under your theorem what are the consequential change to DoF when changing focus (how do you explain lens breathing?) "


Sigh. Well, yes, if you swap lenses and then focus on something else, the DoF will change. Or if the sun comes out and you change stops. Duh. But then, one wouldn't do that if one was making comparative tests now, would one...

And breathing?! You're killing me Gary. Breathing is caused by the lens changing focal length ever so slightly (and to a minute degree, even distance from the subject as the front element moves fore and aft) as focus is racked. Stills lenses generally do it more simply because the designers don't bother to address it as it's not an issue in stills. In the stills world it's not a flaw.

And, before you reply, yes a Nikon lens will focus in the 'wrong' direction, and it has click stops on the iris (easily removed by a technician) and it won't readily work with follow focus units, and it'll focus too fast and loose for accurate focus pulls, and it doesn't have a servo zoom, and...yadda, yadda, yadda.

What it will have, however, is the same DoF at the same focal length.







Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 10, 2008 at 5:33:54 pm


Shane
you need to get off your computer and actually use a lens rather than reciting from the internet.

the properties you chided me for are the same for all optical lenses DSLR optics have only minor differences that PL mount Prime lenses- your ideas only hold water if the lens in question only has one element and not possible in the actual world of production optics, since most lenses in use today have 5-9 element groups- many of which are used to modify or correct the optical "properties" of the

Once againI ask you how do you explain this simple issue that breaks all of your thinking-

SO please Explain under your "Unified all lenses of the same focal length have the same Depth of Field Theory" holds up with the example I previously posted - and using only one lens but the extremes of the focus THAT SINGLE lens is capable of.


[gary adcock] "Under your guide a lens that has a 10ft DoF when focused at infinity would still have a 10ft DoF when focused at 1 ft.- and we all know that this is not possible, since even the % of DoF changes with when applied to close focus or macro situations - without regards to the sensor size at all.

IE: a 50mm lens on a DSLR (I removed the Macro comment extreme example) has a 1ft DoF @ f4 when focused at 5 ft yet that very same lens on the very same camera has a DoF of 5MM @ f4 when focused at 5in. "



If this 50mm lens always has the same DoF how do you explain the reduction of the DoF when focus is adjusted on the same lens then?


gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

Inside look at the IoHD
http://library.creativecow.net/articles/adcock_gary/AJAIOHD.php




Return to posts index

Uli Plank
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Dec 11, 2008 at 7:22:13 am

The DoF is a relative effect!
Think percentage or fractional values, not absolute ones. It will (roughly) extend one third to the camera side and two thirds to the distance from the distance mark you have set on the lens.

By the way, to confuse you even further, there doesn't really exist anything like a DoF. In theory, a lens can only be focused perfectly to one single distance. But considering resolution of your optical system, the media you are exposing and the viewing conditions, there will be a certain range where you can't really see the resulting blurriness (the so-called "Circle of Confusion"). This range is called DoF.

It will increase with distance, but that increase will be the same for a lens of, say 50mm, independent of the camera it's on. But if you blow up the size of a smaller sensor, you'll blow up the blurriness, so you'll see it earlier.

Does that help?

Director of the Institute of Media Research (IMF) at Braunschweig University of Arts


Return to posts index

Steve Wargo
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Jan 12, 2009 at 4:52:38 am

[Russell Lasson] ""Why in the world would anyone shoot XDCAM any more?""

Red is a great camera unit for many circumstances. It doesn't, however, fit MOST production environments. If it did, there would be a mass exodus from everything else. When does reality set in instead of rah, rah, rah?

Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It's a dry heat!

Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut (not quite PRO) systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck
2-Sony EX-1 HD .


Return to posts index

Russell Lasson
Re: December 3rd RED Annoucements- What's what?
on Jan 12, 2009 at 5:01:40 pm

[Steve Wargo] " It doesn't, however, fit MOST production environments."

It fits most of our production environments. That's why we don't use other cameras very often any more. Rah, rah, rah! Go RED!

I totally agree that using RED on certain types of productions, like reality tv, certain documentaries, one man crews, would be extremely challenging. But saying that RED doesn't "fit MOST production environments" is your opinion and I politely disagree with it. For us and many other people in our market, the RED fits nicely and we've seen a mass exodus from other cameras to RED here.

It still might be a while before we start seeing RED in the wedding video market here:) Maybe when Scarlet comes out....:)

-Russ

Russell Lasson
Ridgeline Digital Cinema Mastering
Universal Post
Salt Lake City, UT


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]