Jump to content


Photo

Black Magic Cinema Camera


  • Please log in to reply
85 replies to this topic

#1 Albert Smith

Albert Smith
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 151 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Chicago

Posted 23 May 2012 - 05:36 PM

I'm interested if anyone has any insight if super16mm lenses could possibly cover the black magic sensor (15.81mm x 8.88mm). I know regular 16mm lens's were often converted to cover super 16mm.... maybe it would be possible to stretch them even further?


I also heard there maybe issue's with PL mount lenses on the black magic camera, would it be possible to convert a super16mm lens to a mount that would work?


I'm specifically very curious about the possibility of the full range zooms for documentary work like the Zeiss 11-110 or the cannon 11.5-138mm.
  • 0

#2 J Van Auken

J Van Auken
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 23 May 2012 - 07:18 PM

Posted Image

It may come down to a lens-by-lens consideration.
  • 0

#3 Albert Smith

Albert Smith
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 151 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Chicago

Posted 25 May 2012 - 12:23 PM

yep, I figured as much. Know anywhere to get that type of image circle information for vintage lenses?
I'm going to start sending out some emails and see if I can dig up anything.
  • 0

#4 Albert Smith

Albert Smith
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 151 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Chicago

Posted 31 May 2012 - 04:39 PM

I emailed Mr. Duclos about it. he basically said wide angle super 16mm lenses in general will not cover the sensor, what a shame.


"Jake,

Unfortunately even Super 16mm is still too small to cover the sensor in the BlackMagic camera. Some lenses might work, particularly more telephoto lenses. But the wide angle lenses such as the 11-110mm would not cover at the wide end of the zoom. "
- Matthew Duclos
  • 0

#5 Evan Ferrario

Evan Ferrario
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 138 posts
  • Director

Posted 02 October 2012 - 12:45 PM

http://www.ebay.com/...d=180918391026

Here is someone selling Zeiss Ultra 16mm primes on ebay. In the description, the buyer claims the Blackmagic chip is 23% larger than super 16mm and that these lenses will cover the chip over the entire range of primes. Now I know these are very expensive Super 16mm lenses, but I imagine the sets at rental houses are not getting much use otherwise. It would be great to find out if this information is true, or if the seller has miscalculated, they do say they went to panavision to check out the lenses circle size.
  • 0

#6 Evan Ferrario

Evan Ferrario
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 138 posts
  • Director

Posted 02 October 2012 - 12:51 PM

look at his other items, he claims the 6mm covers the frame also. This might be the widest possible lens for the BMD camera if true.
  • 0

#7 Travis Gray

Travis Gray
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 209 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Boston, MA

Posted 02 October 2012 - 01:08 PM

It's also a PL mount.. sooo.....
  • 0

#8 Evan Ferrario

Evan Ferrario
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 138 posts
  • Director

Posted 02 October 2012 - 01:25 PM

Lots of M43 to PL mounts out there for fair prices, I don't know about Canon to PL.
  • 0

#9 Travis Gray

Travis Gray
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 209 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Boston, MA

Posted 02 October 2012 - 02:02 PM

Lots of M43 to PL mounts out there for fair prices, I don't know about Canon to PL.


Oh I guess that could make sense then. The coverage would be larger when on an adapter I'm assuming? I was thinking it would decrease if farther away from the sensor. But also not sure about flange distances on the two mounts.
  • 0

#10 alexander kirch

alexander kirch
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 09 October 2012 - 12:34 PM

i own the zeiss ultra16 primes (6,8,9.5,12,14mm), but cant get a black magic cinema camera. :-(
but on a scarlet these nearly cover the 3k. there is just a little vignette, but not that much.
if they fit on the blackmagic, these would be the perfect lenses!! (of course, because they are 15k zeiss glasses ;-) )

if you re interested in these lenses, just let me know. maybe i will sell... (way under this ebay-price)

cheers,
alex
  • 0

#11 Matt Kolze

Matt Kolze

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Other

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:24 AM

I'm not sure those Ultra 16 lenses will cover the sensor.

For the sensor size of 15.81mm x 8.88mm the minimal diameter of coverage will be 18.1mm.

The Zeiss glass covers approximately 16mm diameter in projection.

Super 16mm needs at least 14.4mm for coverage. The Ultra 16's cover this well but are not going to cover the new Black Magic Cinema Camera in my opinion.
  • 0

#12 Matt Kolze

Matt Kolze

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Other

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:26 AM

Posted Image

Here's a picture of the projection of the 9.5mm Zeiss Ultra 16 lens.

Note the coverage for super 16 and the radius of D = 7mm which is the measurement from the center of the reticle to the center of the siemens star at point D.

Double this for the diameter and we have 14mm. This lens covers this and some. The next radius would be at E = 9.5mm or 19mm diameter. This lens doesn't even begin to image this siemens star or the letter E at any point. All of the Ultra 16 lenses image a similar circle out.

I also projected this with an Angenieux reticle which has no format markings but does indicate a 8mm radius point. The Ultra 16's just barely covered this point.
  • 0

#13 Noel Sterrett

Noel Sterrett
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 10 October 2012 - 07:46 PM

I also projected this with an Angenieux reticle which has no format markings but does indicate a 8mm radius point. The Ultra 16's just barely covered this point.

While it's clearly not ideal from a resolution standpoint, a 1920 crop of the 2432 sensor is 12.5mm, which is just a tad less than the 12.52mm of Super 16.

You could decide on a crop on a lens by lens or even scene by scene basis depending upon the degree of tolerable falloff.

A bit of a kludge? Perhaps, but the upside of using Ultra 16 Primes could easily outweigh the downside.

Cheers.
  • 0

#14 Dom Jaeger

Dom Jaeger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1599 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:35 PM

This is a partial list of S16 lens image circles that I've measured, using a projected reticle like Matt. I haven't found any focal lengths under 16mm that would cover the Black Magic sensor (~18mm image circle).

Optex 5.5 ~15 mm
Kinoptic 5.7 ~14.5 mm
Angenieux 5.9 ~14 mm
Zeiss Mk3 9.5 ~14.5 mm
Zeiss Mk3 12 ~16.5 mm
Zeiss Mk3 16 ~19 mm
Kowa Ultra T 9 ~14 mm
Kowa Ultra T 12.5 ~15.5 mm
Kowa Ultra T 16 ~16 mm
Switar 10 ~14.5 mm
Switar 25 ~15 mm
Cooke SK4 6 ~16 mm
Cooke SK4 9.5 ~16 mm
Cooke SK4 12 ~16mm

Out of that list, Zeiss Super Speeds are the only option, with the 16 (and 25) covering. From Matt's description it sounds like the Zeiss Ultra 16s all have an image circle of ~16mm, similar to the Cooke SK4s.

With zooms, you can get partial coverage at the long end, and go a bit wider if you don't stop down past T8:

Zeiss 11-110 covers from 50-110
Canon 11-165 covers from 50-165
Canon 8-64 covers from 30-64
Angenieux 7-81 covers from 25-81
Canon 7-63 covers from 20-63

It's possible to increase the image circle of a lens with a focal length extender, which is basically how old Standard 16 lenses were converted to S16. I tested a Zeiss 10-100 with a doubler for example and found that it would cover the Black Magic sensor through the whole range (20-200).
  • 0

#15 Noel Sterrett

Noel Sterrett
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 11 October 2012 - 07:28 AM

While the Blackmagic sensor has an ~18mm imaging circle, the lens need not cover the entire circle, only the area of interest. If you are shooting for 2.40, for example, the image circle needed becomes ~17mm. Subtract from that gradual falloff and the fact that the entire image will likely never actually be seen, and some of the lenses are quite close.

Cheers.
  • 0

#16 alexander kirch

alexander kirch
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:53 AM

this is what i shot with the red epic and arri ultra 16.

Attached Images

  • arri16.jpg

  • 0

#17 Matt Kolze

Matt Kolze

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Other

Posted 11 October 2012 - 11:17 AM

I would agree that most any lens could be used on a particular sensor with the understanding that the image will need a crop. I would also note that this compromise does effect the effective focal length of the taking lens as well as the quality of image due to the loss of useable real estate on the sensor. I/e from 5K to 2K in a Epic scenario.

As long as this is acceptable the Ultra 16's are a really nice and fast set of glass. They have amazing contrast and remarkable resoution across the field as well as in the center.

As for adapting them with a 2X? If you can accept the light loss and degredation of image then it can work. Remember that your focus marks will be off as your effective film or image plane has changed. Additionally the Ultra 16's have a rather deep set, as much as 32mm behind the PL, and may have interference issues with whichever adapter is chosen. In fact I can't think of one that would work. This is why they have the blue ring to clearly identify that they are not to be used on 35mm film cameras as the rear group may hit the mirror shutter.

I haven't actually looked at the interior of the Black Magic camera so I'm not quite sure how much room is available before the low pass filter. This is an additional consideration which should be tested prior to production.

Edited by Matt Kolze, 11 October 2012 - 11:18 AM.

  • 0

#18 Noel Sterrett

Noel Sterrett
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 11 October 2012 - 11:43 AM

this is what i shot with the red epic and arri ultra 16.

Thanks for the shot.

I've done a quick and dirty composite over the 3K (3072) image of the BM 2.5K (2432) sensor.

Looks pretty good to me!

Did you do any other lenses?

Cheers.

Attached Images

  • Ultra16coverage copy.jpg

  • 0

#19 Noel Sterrett

Noel Sterrett
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 12 October 2012 - 06:40 AM

Oops. I failed to consider pixel size in the above.

The RED sensor = 5120 pixels / 27.7mm = 5.41 micrometer pixel size.
The BM sensor = 2432 pixels / 15.81mm = 6.50 micrometer pixel size.

To extrapolate the RED image to the BM sensor, the larger BM pixels must be scaled up by a factor of 6.5 / 5.41 = 120%:

That means 2432 BM pixels take up the same space as 2992 RED pixels.

Cheers.

Attached Images

  • Arri14U16 copy.jpg

  • 0

#20 alexander kirch

alexander kirch
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 12 October 2012 - 01:47 PM

thanks noel,

this helps a lot.
i only have the ultra16s set. no more money for something else ;-)
but i think these are the best for the BM...the 6mm is so wonderful wide... i guess you won't get a wider high quality lens for the BMC.
maybe i ll sell one or two - interested?

so what about the PL-mounts for BM?
  • 0


Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

Glidecam

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

CineLab

CineTape

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

The Slider

Willys Widgets

FJS International, LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Abel Cine

Opal

Willys Widgets

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

CineLab

Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks