Canon's Upcoming RF cinema camera rumored specs

Indeed but the angie is (2-4-5.6) 2 stops faster (per chip area/size) than the eng lens.. which means its front element needs 4x the surface area making it clearly huge.

Interesteing ly its exactly 4x heavier adding credence to the above!

(I have a 300 5.6 and a 300 2.8 and the size cost difference is huge too)

It is much more realistic to compare 4-5.6 FF zooms to ENG zooms as they will have similar character in terms of DOF and required light level (assuming the larger chip more light sensitive)

Another design restricion is that the word on the internet (by the influencial muppets) is that a lens like the 18-80 T4.4 is too slow.. its not - it is a realistic thing that is affordable and portable and still isolates ones subject.

With the 18-80 and even the new arri zooms luckily the engineers are not letting the white noise entirely ruin thier designs.

The fuji and ziess 'affordable' cine zooms which dont have the requisite throw were probably ruined by maketing departments looking for the wide(er) T number for the press release.
 
Last edited:
morgan_moore said:
Indeed but the angie is (2-4-5.6) 2 stops faster (per chip area/size) than the eng lens.. which means its front element needs 4x the surface area making it clearly huge.
Click to expand...

But the Fuji has nearly 2x the zoom range and a wider wide-angle. Apples to apples, there's no way a larger format zoom will not be proportionally longer and heavier, no? And more expensive, right? This is where I'm confused about the talk of miniaturization increasing costs.

The 18-80 is a bit of a gem in its price tier. And when you look at the size and weight, etc. It's a lens I'd like to have yet was never worth it for the amount I'd use it.

But I'm also considering the sony pz 28-135 now. Not as good but similar. (And my god, you can get it for $1500 used now, although I'm not sure how durable it is.)

But part of the issue is that the telephoto is not long enough for situations I'd want such a lens. I've been livestreaming with a gh5, typically with a 70-200 and .71 speedbooster = 100-284mm. The long end is pretty much long enough, I wouldn't need to go much longer. The wide end is not wide enough for when I want to pull out.

So, neither the 18-80 or 28-135 would foot the bill in those circumstances, not by a long shot, even with a S35 crop. I would need something like a 70-300 or a 28-200. Of course, canon has the 70-200 servo. Still - not worth it for me
 
Last edited:
Im not a total expert but some crappy zooms 18-250 5.6 are tiny.

Yes big format will be bigger but considering a bigger chip is more light sensitive you can have a slower Tstop - so they kind of trade off.

Ultimately the front element catches photons and two front elements of the same size catch the same amount of photons. The further elements focus that to whatever chip size.

Just there is some nuts myth that we need T2 AND F335 coverage - that is indeed great but can literally see in the dark - something that one might not need or want to carry or pay for.

The internuts advocate T2FF just like car internuts probably advocate v12 cars - nice but not needed in daily life.

I think the sony lens is great and great value - its a fine example of what can be done - yes I think build wise id think grit might but it and Id not go on location with some form of backup even if that were two primes.
 
Miniturisation costs because (for examle) glass (of a 2/3 lens) needs to be of higher quality because it needs to resolve more lines per inch than a FF lens. 10.8 camera lenses resolve very low lines per inch.

Big things do use more material but material is not usually a major cost in manufacturing.

THink mobile phones- they used to be a suitcase in the car.. but we managed to shrink them into sub fag packets.. very hard. THe suitcase came first.
 
Sure but these S35 zooms are so much more expensive than smaller formats.

Yeah I have a tamrom 18-270 3.5-6.3 and it's as small as a 35mm prime collapsed. zoom it in and it extends to about a 70-200 size. But it's very lightweight.

However - doesn't the engineering that goes into reducing breathing and making the lens parfocal also factor into increasing the size/weight? (Yes, I'm totally not an expert). Just look at the sigma 18-35 art vs cine

PS I'm still going to try rigging my Ronin-S focus motor to my zoom ring and letting the A7SIII AF adjust focus and see if the results are smooth enough that I can kiss off proper servo zooms for my purposes entirely
 
James0b57 said:
Throw a should mount centered under the lens and you have a nice run n gun ready for anything s35 system similar in theory to the ENG cameras but instead of the camera being the main part, the large heavy s35 zoom becomes the core piece.
Click to expand...

Sort of like this? :) Camera whips of real quick as the rest is built around the lens. Auto or Man or AF/M focus controlled by the push/pull focus ring. The iris I always drive manually. IS is selected manually on the lens. Servo zoom can be from the FS7 grip or the lens itself.

Chris Young

Oh! Forgot.
It also drops straight onto a Sony VCT-14 tripod plate making it cross-compatible with the other cameras using the VCT-14.

https://www.newsshooter.com/2015/06/03/movcam-sony-a7s-lanc-control-cable-released/

IMG_20200925_173106 CC01.jpg
IMG_20200925_173205CC02.jpg
 
Last edited:
ahalpert said:
I think the reason ENG cameras have not simply become S35 might be because the lenses would be ungodly huge and you usually want more DOF anyway.
Click to expand...
This is definitely true, especially for sports or live events where it's common to use big box lenses with 76x to 100x zoom ranges. I don't even want to know how large a lens would have to be to achieve an equivalent zoom range on a Super 35 or full frame sensor.

Interestingly though, with the push to 4K and 8K there have been some incremental steps made toward larger sensor ENG-style cameras. For example, Sony's latest 4K high frame rate broadcast camera, the HDC-4800, shoots 4K at up to 400 fps and has a Super 35 sized sensor: https://pro.sony/en_EH/products/4k-and-hd-camera-systems/hdc-4800

I believe the reason this was done was to be able to achieve reasonable sensitivity when shooting 4K at such high frame rates, which likely would have been difficult on a more traditional 2/3-inch sized sensor.

Ikegami's 8K broadcast camera (SHK-810) is also Super 35, I assume for similar reasons:
https://www.ikegami.com/archives/menu1/shk-810

Ikegami even has an ENG style camera with that uses the ARRI Alexa ALEV III sensor and has a PL mount (model HDK-97ARRI):
https://www.ikegami.com/img/pdf/br/products/hdtv/pdf/HDK-97ARRI.pdf
 
davedv said:
This is definitely true, especially for sports or live events where it's common to use big box lenses with 76x to 100x zoom ranges. I don't even want to know how large a lens would have to be to achieve an equivalent zoom range on a Super 35 or full frame sensor.
Click to expand...

Such a lens would be the same size - right now you can get a 'doubler size' converter (8cm ish) to take an eng lens to S35 - BUT this takes out 2-3 Tstops so you might get a 76x lens.. at 5.6-8

With different geometry one would not need the doubler (1/4er er)

Keeping 76x AND covering S35 AND having a Tstop of 1.8 or 2 would indeed by huuuuuge!

But 5.6 lens is usable on S35.

We see the canon 50-100 with manageable size (yes big but portable - comparabe to an eng sports lens) and that slower Tstop - its 5-8.9or something - slow T but many still use it - Ive seen heaps lined up in a rental house for a nature show. No one was saying '5.6 I cant use it'

S
 
cyvideo said:
Sort of like this? :) Camera whips of real quick as the rest is built around the lens. Auto or Man or AF/M focus controlled by the push/pull focus ring. The iris I always drive manually. IS is selected manually on the lens. Servo zoom can be from the FS7 grip or the lens itself.

Chris Young

Oh! Forgot.
It also drops straight onto a Sony VCT-14 tripod plate making it cross-compatible with the other cameras using the VCT-14.

https://www.newsshooter.com/2015/06/03/movcam-sony-a7s-lanc-control-cable-released/

View attachment 140591
View attachment 140592
Click to expand...

How does the grip interface with the lens?
 
At any rate, today I'm lagstreaming a gallery walk-through with gh5/ronin-s and shelving my beloved Laowa 12mm in favor of my Tokina 11-16 so I can use a screw-on polarizer to cut reflections off the framed prints. Maybe a 16-35 equivalent with servo zoom operated from the ronin handle would be cool. But there's no way in hell I'd need or want a big zoom eng lens or camera for this situation...which is probably why I've never bought one

The idea of one lens fits all is a fallacy

Sure, sometimes my 18-270 is the best tool. Interesting that arri didnt release a true super zoom with their signature zooms
 
morgan_moore said:
But 5.6 lens is usable on S35.

We see the canon 50-100 with manageable size (yes big but portable - comparabe to an eng sports lens) and that slower Tstop - its 5-8.9or something - slow T but many still use it - Ive seen heaps lined up in a rental house for a nature show. No one was saying '5.6 I cant use it'

S
Click to expand...

Lol 8.9 is pretty demanding. That's a daylight exteriors lens. Sure 5.6 is fine but then it's only a 50-100 and what's the point of having that huge range. I only use my 18-270 3.5-6.3 for daylight exteriors. I'm not sure I ever use it indoors except in bright situations.

Which is fine and such lenses have their place. But I don't think anything slower than a 5.6 or ideally a 4 is really a general purpose lens. Maybe you can get away with an 8 on an FX9 or a7siii
 
Last edited:
Are the 2/3 lenses - designed for filming a lion on the other side of the river any less compromised - the one you linked to ramped with telephoto.?

The grown up reality is that 8000ISO (s35) is usable in the context of getting a shot of leopards having se_x

The 50-1000 is 'small' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzzDv4knPSk (and 'cheap')
 
Am pleasantly pleased and surprised (as the C100/C200 never had this) that the new Canon C70 has Timecode I/O.
Although I bet most C70 buyers would wish that BNC connector was for HD-SDI instead of TC!
 
IronFilm said:
And that will only last until the EVA2 gets shipped out!

And that will only last until the BMD UMP G3 gets announced.....
Click to expand...

Neither BMC or Panny have any history of useful AF - so I dont think you are right.

Ive been plaesed with my FS7 for years - just it is too big and lacks AF

FIrsst maker to deliver those things in a sensibly shaped package while matching or exceeding the FS7 codec will be bought and with me for 5+ years.
 
morgan_moore said:
Neither BMC or Panny have any history of useful AF - so I dont think you are right.

Ive been plaesed with my FS7 for years - just it is too big and lacks AF

FIrsst maker to deliver those things in a sensibly shaped package while matching or exceeding the FS7 codec will be bought and with me for 5+ years.
Click to expand...

The FX6 is not going to match FS7 codecs. The FX9 has FS7 codecs. It would totally undercut the FX9
 
ahalpert said:
The FX6 is not going to match FS7 codecs. The FX9 has FS7 codecs. It would totally undercut the FX9
Click to expand...

Well sony sit knowing what canon have - a canon that does match the FS7 (does it not?) - thier competition is the canon not the years old FS7

The FS7 HFR is thin but the rest is OK.

If they cripple 6 to protect the 9 they get no where because people buy the C70 and nothing from sony - the 9 is a dead duck anyway vs the 300ii afaik?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top