Whats the difference between the newer full frame sensors like the sony a99 vs the super 35 sensor on a fs100, what would be better for film/video

well this helped a little,

http://blog.abelcine.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/35mm_Digital_Sensors_2012MAY.jpg

Simply stated, both sizes are based on the size of 35mm film. However, full frame cameras have a much larger sensor because the heigth of the frame is equal to the width of a strip of 35mm film. In a Super 35mm sensore, width of a strip of 35 mm film is the width of the frame--- therefore resulting in a smaller sensor.

There are reason to consider each. Super 35mm will approximate Cinema 35mm imaging closer, because it is close to true size. Therefore, angles of view and depth of field for lenses lengths will be the same as 35mm film shooters are used to.

On the other hand, the larger the sensor, the shallower will be the depth of field at a particular angle of view. In addition, the larger sensors also are udually better at gathering light, and work better in lower light shooting. Also, with all the 35mm still lenses out there, use of legacy lenses from still photography provide a wide variety of lenses out there for use of the full frame shooter.

A picture tells a thousand words..

here (http://www.abelcine.com/fov/)...

I always thought a full frame was 36x24mm (Canon 5D) and Super 35 Sensor was 24.9x14mm (Alexa?)
Full frame refers to a still image camera, Super 35 refers to a motion picture camera? Am I wrong? In a traditional still camera, the images were parallel with the length of film, and in motion picture, the images were perpendicular to the length.

The nearest 35mm motion picture format to full frame stills is Vistavision 37.72 mm by 24.92 mm.

Perhaps the full frame is a consideration if you're wanting cheaper glass with a wide angle,of view with a large max aperture. The cine Super 35 T1.3 18mm type lenses are expensive.

Whats the difference between the newer full frame sensors like the sony a99 vs the super 35 sensor on a fs100, what would be better for film/video

Easy. "Full Frame" is a still camera designation. It refers to 135 format which uses 35mm film pulled horizontally. That is, the short dimension runs from perf-to-perf, while the long dimension runs down the length of the film. Image area is roughly 36 x 24 mm.

Super 35, or S35, is a cinema camera designation. It also uses 35mm film, but pulls it vertically. That is, the long dimension runs from perf-to-perf while the short dimension runs down the length of the film. Image area, for 3-perf Academy Ratio, is roughly 24 x 13 mm.

So, full frame uses a considerably larger image area than does S35. That is, full frame is roughly 2.8 times the area of S35.

What if we use lenses dedicated for Full-Frame on Super35 cameras or vice versa? Is it not recommended? What differences will be observed in video footages ?

A picture tells a thousand words..

here (http://www.abelcine.com/fov/)...

That is cool! Good explanation.

What if we use lenses dedicated for Full-Frame on Super35 cameras or vice versa? Is it not recommended? What differences will be observed in video footages ?

Any reply....

What if we use lenses dedicated for Full-Frame on Super35 cameras or vice versa? Is it not recommended? What differences will be observed in video footages ?

FF lenses will cover any S35 sensor, but most S35 lenses have an imaging circle that's too small to cover a FF sensor - if that's the case they will vignette. The S35 lenses that can cover a FF sensor typically have heavily smeared edges and corners.

FF lenses are find on any of the smaller sensor cameras - as we see with the various adapters floating around.

Super 35mm (basically the same as APS-C) is the industry standard for years for filming features with.

FF seems like a no brainer but the shallow dof can make it difficult to keep subjects in focus. Keep in mind DSLRs are designed to take pictures not shoot video that means there are many drawbacks that people tend ignore until they use them.

My layman's answer is that Super35 is about a 1.5 (sometimes 1.6 or 1.7 depending on specific cam) crop factor compared to full frame. This means that if you put a 50mm lens on a Super35 cam, it acts like a 75mm lens in terms of field of view. . .essentially becoming that much more telephoto. I BELIEVE you also get the benefit of that crop factor's multiplier in extra depth of field, with Super35 (i.e. at a given focal length//f stop, if you back the Super35 cam up enough to equal the field of view/shot size of a full frame cam with the same fstop/focal length, you will have 1.5x-ish more DOF with the Super35 cam).

So, a given lens will be tighter on a Super35 cam than on a full frame cam, but have more depth of field at the same fstop/focal length when their fields of view are equal.

Full frame looks really cool as it is so unreal-ly shallow, for some things, but can be very hard to work with. The show "Wilfred" was all done on a 5D (don't know if M2 or 3), a full frame DSLR, so you can see what it looks like in practice.

Super35 is plenty shallow/wide enough for most folks, as evidenced by the popularity of the FS7, FS700, C100, C300, etc.

Actually, "Wilfred" was filmed on three 7D's. They later moved to Nikon D800's.

So based on the various discussions of sensor size. I’m guessing that the new Canon COMPACT-SERVO 18-80mm T4.4 EF Cinematic zoom which is designed for S35 type lens coverage should almost work perfectly on the new Canon EOS 1DX Mark II when shooting in 4K video mode. Here is the reason:

Canon 4K area size pulled from central portion of Canon’s full frame sensor
26.9 mm x 14.2 mm

Super-35 Sensor size lens coverage area
24.9 mm x 14 mm

See Canon Lens spec from their Brocchure here:

Minimum Object Distance from Image Sensor
0.5m (1.7 ft.)
Object Dimensions at M.O.D.
Aspect Ratio 1.78:1
Dimensions 24.6 × 13.8mm
43.4 × 24.3cm at 18mm
9.5 × 5.3cm at 80mm
Aspect Ratio 1.9:1
Dimensions 26.2 × 13.8mm

Any thoughts?