Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/07/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Getting to this late. I'm not familiar with this model, but Arri cine cameras are basically SLRs. On the classic models there is a rotating mirror that reflects light into the viewfinder when the shutter is closed. The lenses have a fairly long focal distance so I suspect that the angle of the light rays to the film or sensor is fairly straight. Mike D Lawrence Zeitlin wrote: > While browsing through the web, I came across the Arri (motion picture > camera) newsletter describing the D20 demonstration back allowing Arri > cine cameras to be retrofitted for video capture. > > http://www.arri.de/news/newsletter/articles/09211103/d20.htm > > One of the features of the D20 is that the frame size is the same as > that of normal 35 mm motion picture film, 18 x 24 mm. This allows normal > cine lenses to be used with the same field of view and focal range as > with film. This gives rise to several questions relevant to the Leica M8 > and 4/3 lens concepts. > > Motion picture frame size is about the same sensor size as that being > used in current digital DSLRs and the M8 and fractionally larger than > that used in the 4/3 system. The 4:3 cine aspect ratio is exactly that > of the 4/3 system. How does Arri use normal cine lenses with normal back > focus on a sensor this size without suffering all the image deleterious > effects so carefully described in the Leica literature. Similarly the > 4/3 literature describes the system as providing almost vertical impact > of light rays on the sensor. Obviously that cannot be the case with the > Arri approach. How does Arri sidestep the issue of light ray angularity > on the edges of the field? The web site didn't give the information but > surely someone on the LUG knows. > > My Olympus Pen F SLR camera uses the exact same film size (1/2 frame) as > the Arri camera. The lenses are normal and compact. The camera, with > lens, is Leica LTM sized. The pictures are excellent. Wouldn't it be > nice to have a DSLR of similar dimensions? > > Incidentally, for those concerned about the multiplication ratio between > frame or sensor sizes, a full frame 35 mm camera produces images only > 1.33 times larger than a 1/2 frame camera despite the fact of having > twice the film area. Further about 90% of the 1/2 frame area is used to > produce an 8" x 10" print while only 83% of the full frame negative is > used to product the same print. > > While I don't dispute that bigger frame sizes in both film and digital > produce better image quality, the difference in quality is not always > proportional to the difference in area between frame sizes. If that was > the case, 35 mm would never have been adopted since a Zeiss Ikonta, with > a 36 sq. cm. image, folds into a package the same size as a Leica M with > an 8.64 sq. cm. image. So let's admit it, the desire for a full frame M > or DSLR digital sensor is based on convenience for existing lens > utilization rather than image quality. I suspect that the same is true > for DSLR cameras using the 4/3 format or the APS-C format. > > Larry Z > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >