Canon 7D killed my scarlet dreams!

[Nik Manning]

For so many reasons that you all know if the Canon 7D is similar to the 5D I will not be getting a scarlet.

The main thing I wanted from scarlet was a bigger than 1/3 sensor, better than hdv codec, and 24p no wrapper.

I now have that with the 7D at a price that is absolutely stupid low!

The other reason is now I assume other DSLR makers will come out with competing cameras at competing pricing which will make the under 2K price segment very active.
I really think the Canon 7D if it is similar to the 5D will take a lot of market share from the bottom end scarlet. I would think at least 40%. Great lenses, much cheaper, faster workflow, Red One DOF, Super 35mm size sensor, first to market, now other DSLR's will add those features, and it is a DSLR!

I wanted to wait for a scarlet but I bought a Canon 7D. I can't see myself spending 4K now for an entry level scarlet. For lower end music videos, commercials, movies,photoshoots, even some documentaries this camera will be a workhorse!

I honestly think Red will not release a 2/3 chip scarlet.

[bimdas]

well we all saw what happened once dslr with video capabilities came out. Red killed the original scarlett idea and went back to the drawing board to come out with a billion different scarletts and epics later on at pretty good prices specs wise. Hopefully Red will now come out with a 2k for under 2k scarlet with interchangable lens mounts.

[NoxNoctus]

There will still be a high demand. Think of RAW.

[dadoboy]

The 7D won't kill Scarlet, but I think these DSLRs are in fact putting a damper on 35mm adapter sales. If you look at the number of people who visit the adapter forum in the last 6 months... it's a lot smaller than when I first started visiting this board (for that reason).

[Adam J McKay]

I also don't think the 7D is going to kill the scarlet. I do however, think that the 7D the now rumoured d700x, and the eventual super 35mm sized sensor dedicated video cameras that Canon is bound to release, are definitely going to put a SERIOUS damper on the sales of Scarlet. I also love how some border line school boy slander was posted by Jim on the RED site and was quickly removed when a few users pointed out the flaws in his logic. Don't get me wrong, I think RED is doing great things and Jim is definitely loyal to his customers, but the tables have turned.

And according to Nikon rumours. A photographer in Australia has seen the d700x and says it is going to put Nikon on top. Nikon rumours also claims he is a Canon user. Will the rumours be true? With the cat and mouse game Nikon and Canon play continue? Of course.

Hey did anybody hear anything about Scarlet's release date?
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry.

Im tired.

[ChipG]

Scarlet will cost a lot more than just the cam, you will more than likely have to upgrade your computer & get raid drives to edit the 3k footage. The guys over on the Red forum are saying it won't effect the sales because it's a cinema cam but I personally know 8 people who were going to buy a scarlet but now think the 7D footage will be good enough for them. With the bing / circut city promo rebate the 7D body was $1449.00, how much for a scarlet, new computer, raid drives etc? $7-$9k??? thats a couple 7D's, some nice glass, a nice shotgun mic and misc gear for an indie with $1-$2k left over.

The Scarlet better have one helluva image and price or thier sales won't be over 10k units with all the future vdslr's coming out but they might be ok with 10k units sold. I really think after we cross a point in 1-2 years Red will not have much of a future unless Jim J wants to continue to feed it out of his pocket and probably will for an ego thing because he loves cameras and the industry. I have been wondering what he is going to do with all these Red trade ins? He'll have to sell them for $7k to move them in large quantities. I do think he was very smart hedging the company with a future studio but NM with the 25% rebate might have been a better place (I would never want my actors or crew working in the worlds largest party town). If I were him I would deversify more by producing a couple $100M + feature films a year shot on all Reds, big names etc.

I'm going to get some crap for this post but didn't mean anything disrespectfull to anyone. Just my opinion and I'm on the fence now about getting a Scarlet.

[John Caballero]

There will still be a high demand. Think of RAW.

Don't worry, RAW will be coming from the big guys on future VDSLRs. Its just not time for it yet but watch how they will match and surpass anything Red does with the Scarlet. Well, they already started and Scarlet isn't even out. Boy, it is gonna be bloody out there.

[f64manray]

At this late hour, when I think of Red and Scarlet, I think of "There Will Be Blood". Canon has a very long straw and they're drinking Jim's milk shake. ....They drink his milk shake. They drink it up.

[sblfilms]

At this late hour, when I think of Red and Scarlet, I think of "There Will Be Blood". Canon has a very long straw and they're drinking Jim's milk shake. ....They drink his milk shake. They drink it up.


LOL. I've been a big proponent of RED since NAB 06 and have been "patiently" waiting to join their ranks, but the 7D does everything I NEED in a camera and I can now relax and shoot in a way that is easier than I currently do (HF100 to SGblade), in a quality that is better than I currently get, and just save up for an S35 Scarlet which probably is 12 months from releasing as it is.

[NoxNoctus]

I think I made the right move....I....hope...I made the right move. It just makes sense though. Canon is video, Canon is photo. Canon's done both for years and years. Nikon just doesnt have that video side. As much as I love the layout and picture of Nikon, I had to switch. I just hope this camera proves to be worth breaking that long long long loyalty!

I was about to pull the trigger Aug. 31st around midnight, and get a Handy35 and the new Panasonic SM400, then sure enough the announcement blasts across all forums....maybe a sign? hopefully...we find out in a month!

[Digigenic]

At this late hour, when I think of Red and Scarlet, I think of "There Will Be Blood". Canon has a very long straw and they're drinking Jim's milk shake. ....They drink his milk shake. They drink it up.
Thanks for the laugh.

[Nik Manning]

So are we mostly in agreement that at least of the people here who wanted to get a 2/3 sensor scarlet will be getting a DSLR namely the Canon 7D instead?

Realistically if Scarlet comes out in Early November and has an updated Super 35 brain for 4K instead of 7K. A package will still cost 7K.
Not bad at all for the quality you get but remember that in 6-8 months Canon will release a new 5D and nikon will enter the market, and panasonic, and maybe others. It just doesn't seem like a smart move to drop that kind of cash anymore. If there is uncompressed hdmi out I really will keep this cam forever.

Finally Finally Finally! I thought this cam would be here 2 years from now but double the price and with a worse codec. Happy Days. :)

[dadoboy]

Not myself. I plan on purchasing the 2/3" Scarlet and the s35mm scarlet.
I want the 2/3" because I have 16mm and S16mm lenses I can use with it.
If I can continue working for the next two months (always in danger of not getting enough work) I will also buy the 7D. I may just sell some camera gear to buy the 7D too.

If RED kills any Scarlet, I bet it will be the Fixed 2/3" with the built in lens - they have no experience in developping that kind of system and I bet in the end they'll realize its way more trouble than its worth to the market.


So are we mostly in agreement that at least of the people here who wanted to get a 2/3 sensor scarlet will be getting a DSLR namely the Canon 7D instead?

Finally Finally Finally! I thought this cam would be here 2 years from now but double the price and with a worse codec. Happy Days. :)

[Nik Manning]

DadoBoy don't worry your in LA I might let you play with my 7D. :) sounds like you Are still buying one anyway.

[Zak Forsman]

These DSLRs are cheap enough that i don't mind picking up one or two, or renting them every now and then. But I'm still set on getting one, if not a pair of S35 Scarlets the day they are available. I want a true digital cinema camera that can be configured into a DLSR form factor. I want raw data to push around in post. 3K, 4K, 5K... I can handle it, I welcome it, I demand it!

[Rakesh Jacob]

So if my math is correct that's 3 imaginary cameras sold allready just on this thread! Jannard better get on his hustle!

[dadoboy]

IMAGINARY CAMERAS ARE CHEAP! EXACTLY WHAT I CAN AFFORD AT THE MOMENT :grin:


So if my math is correct that's 3 imaginary cameras sold allready just on this thread! Jannard better get on his hustle!

[TimurCivan]

I would personally prefer the scarlett (on paper) because you get all the functionality of a Dedicated cinema system. Undercranking, over cranking, 60p+ speeds, 5k sensors, Robust RAW codec, MONITORING.....REAL MONITORING......., PL glass/Nikon/Canon/Anyhting you want really, Built like Tank.
7D is a GREAT second unit camera, or 1st unit on small (very small) productions. i would NEVER bring a VDSLR in their current forms on a paid shoot. If i cant show a client an image ...... i would never work again.

*And before anyone says anyhting about the monitoring issue, HDMI is not a connection use able for professional work.

[joe 1008]

Right. If your jobs pay enough, right now the lowest level ist Red 1 or the HPX 2000. Professional production companies won't go beneath these cams. But already in the EX1 and HPX170 segment - depending on the job - I would dare to show up with a 5D/7D. And a vast amount of people on this board works at that level, including me.

[squig]

The thing is cinemas with digital projection are projecting @ 2k. if you can expose correctly with a Canon DSLR the codec holds up pretty well compared to raw so the only advantage I can see with a scarlet is if you want to underexpose. As for color space I'm pretty content with grading MKII footage as is. Am I missing something here?

[dadoboy]

A 7D would only be for personal shorts and music vids I want to direct, not for jobs. I won't have to rent out lenses because I have a great range of Nikons and Tamrons. It will free me up some I think. I feel so calcified shooting with larger cams for other people sometimes.

You're right about that HDMI out though. Perhaps someone can make an HDMI to HD-SDI converter that could be permanently fixed to that output. Perhaps not technically possible.

[Zak Forsman]

The thing is cinemas with digital projection are projecting @ 2k. if you can expose correctly with a Canon DSLR the codec holds up pretty well compared to raw so the only advantage I can see with a scarlet is if you want to underexpose. As for color space I'm pretty content with grading MKII footage as is. Am I missing something here?

I know LA is ahead of the curve, but even our local independent theater is about to add 4K projection. It won't be long before it's common enough that 2K is considered a compromise, in a theatrical setting -- like having to play your 5.1 mix back in stereo. It's very good, but why not future-proof your work as much as possible? If doing so is within your financial means, of course.

[Rakesh Jacob]

The thing is cinemas with digital projection are projecting @ 2k. if you can expose correctly with a Canon DSLR the codec holds up pretty well compared to raw so the only advantage I can see with a scarlet is if you want to underexpose. As for color space I'm pretty content with grading MKII footage as is. Am I missing something here?

Squig, Squig, Squig..... *sigh*
You just don't get it. Scarlet is vaporware I mean magical, so... it's kinda of mythical and imaginary and it can be anything we want. When we wanted a camera to save us from the lame 1/3" prosumer and the expensive 2/3" pro cams here came Scarlet a $3500 to $7000 2/3" camera. And when FF and APS-C DSLRs came and we need to be rescued from the horrible codecs, the ghastly "mud" and "OMG WE NEED A BIGGER SENSOR BUT THAT SENSOR IS TOOOOOO BIG"... wait, the S35 Scarlet has raw, a pristine image (which it actually does from the Izzy clips, no joke) and this sensor size is just right! And just like anything else in the magical Red Forest, it's subject to change and keep our imaginations fresh with awesome new camera... brochures. At least their graphic designers are hard at work :grin:
Seriously I think thier marketing policies are questionable at best and unethical at worst. The RED ONE IS AMAZING, IT IS REVOLUTIONIZING FILMMAKING! BUT the way they treat product development like an imaginary carrot in front of hungry gullible faithful donkeys... not cool.
I SINCERELY HOPE THAT THE SCARLET COMES OUT AND IS A FANTASTIC, EVEN LIFE CHANGING CAMERA AND I LOOK LIKE A TOTAL D-BAG! But it's doesn't make thier trade practices right.

[squig]

Yeah Zak I read about the sony 4k projectors but I'm thinking in terms of a 12 month timeframe for my feature and I need a cam that actually exists well in advance so I know wtf I'm doing with it. if the scarlet comes out spring next year I can only image what canon and maybe even nikon and panny can deliver by then. I started school this week and they have a red but I'm still keen on shooting the film with a MKII/7D because I know it intimately and I can pick it up and shoot something whenever I want and I think my script holds up so nobody is gonna pixel peep, plus I'm too poor for a scarlet.

And Johnny remember I was the one who said "scarlet is a brochure" but I'm down with raw as much as the next guy but I want it in an 800gsm DSLR body for under $3000 so I'll be waiting a while and will live with the pretty shit hot options we now have available.

[TimurCivan]

it just makes me happy that we have the luxury of arguing over which, 35mm lensed, 1080p camera we want to buy for under 2,000$.......

:)

try imagining this 1 year ago... or 5.....

[Rakesh Jacob]

it just makes me happy that we have the luxury of arguing over which, 35mm lensed, 1080p camera we want to buy for under 2,000$.......

:)

try imagining this 1 year ago... or 5.....

THAT is the Gospel F-ing truth!

[Zak Forsman]

Yeah Zak I read about the sony 4k projectors but I'm thinking in terms of a 12 month timeframe for my feature and I need a cam that actually exists well in advance so I know wtf I'm doing with it. if the scarlet comes out spring next year I can only image what canon and maybe even nikon and panny can deliver by then. I started school this week and they have a red but I'm still keen on shooting the film with a MKII/7D because I know it intimately and I can pick it up and shoot something whenever I want and I think my script holds up so nobody is gonna pixel peep, plus I'm too poor for a scarlet.

And Johnny remember I was the one who said "scarlet is a brochure" but I'm down with raw as much as the next guy but I want it in an 800gsm DSLR body for under $3000 so I'll be waiting a while and will live with the pretty shi* hot options we now have available.
I can understand that. I'm doing the same with the D90. :) I recently had two Red One owners offer me use of their camera at no charge just because they like my movies. And I'm still sticking with the D90 for now because i prefer the small, unobtrusive form-factor.


Squig, Squig, Squig..... *sigh*
You just don't get it. Scarlet is vaporware I mean magical, so... it's kinda of mythical and imaginary and it can be anything we want. When we wanted a camera to save us from the lame 1/3" prosumer and the expensive 2/3" pro cams here came Scarlet a $3500 to $7000 2/3" camera. And when FF and APS-C DSLRs came and we need to be rescued from the horrible codecs, the ghastly "mud" and "OMG WE NEED A BIGGER SENSOR BUT THAT SENSOR IS TOOOOOO BIG"... wait, the S35 Scarlet has raw, a pristine image (which it actually does from the Izzy clips, no joke) and this sensor size is just right! And just like anything else in the magical Red Forest, it's subject to change and keep our imaginations fresh with awesome new camera... brochures. At least their graphic designers are hard at work :grin:
Seriously I think thier marketing policies are questionable at best and unethical at worst. The RED ONE IS AMAZING, IT IS REVOLUTIONIZING FILMMAKING! BUT the way they treat product development like an imaginary carrot in front of hungry gullible faithful donkeys... not cool.
I SINCERELY HOPE THAT THE SCARLET COMES OUT AND IS A FANTASTIC, EVEN LIFE CHANGING CAMERA AND I LOOK LIKE A TOTAL D-BAG! But it's doesn't make thier trade practices right.

I try to give the members of this community a lot of credit. I don't fault them for talking about what's on our horizon. you want to throw out words like "imaginary" and "vaporware" and "brochure", that's great. but like I said, I give this community a lot of credit I don't think they're blind. or stupid. And I certainly don't condescend to them saying they are wasting their time by eye-balling a camera that hasn't been built yet, especially if the alternative is to covet cameras that are in pre-order limbo. not much of a difference there in terms of practical use. anyway, I'm personally not one to get caught up in hype. I suppose that is a choice. But I'm also keenly aware of where digital cinema is headed, because its my livelihood to know. And i'm always doing my best to think three, four, five moves ahead in the game. I'm optimistic that Red will or has quietly revised their Scarlet line to compete realistically with the burgeoning technology. so for me its a DSLR today, with an eye toward DSMC on the horizon. Red can do what they want marketing-wise. I don't see anything unethical about building and sustaining a willing community. It's not like they're spamming my inbox on myspace/facebook/etc.

[Adam J McKay]

It really is Amazing. Imagine what things will be like even this time next year... I mean we will still be waiting for Scarlet and Duke nukem forever, but other than that haha.

[squig]

I can understand that. I'm doing the same with the D90. hell, I've had two Red One owners offer me use of their camera at no charge just because they like my movies. And I'm still sticking with the D90 for now because i prefer small, unobtrusive form-factor.

So far the 7D looks like everything we wish the D90 could have been and after spending a couple of months with the MKII I just can't see what could be wrong with it or where it could be lacking for anybody who knows wtf they are doing.

[Carlos_Nieto]

So far the 7D looks like everything we wish the D90 could have been and after spending a couple of months with the MKII I just can't see what could be wrong with it or where it could be lacking for anybody who knows wtf they are doing.

... an articulated LCD??

[Zak Forsman]

So far the 7D looks like everything we wish the D90 could have been and after spending a couple of months with the MKII I just can't see what could be wrong with it or where it could be lacking for anybody who knows wtf they are doing.

that's cool. it's not enough of a difference for me to switch right now. wish I hd more time to devote to following the developments of these cameras a little closer, but i've just been way too busy with the filmmaking. it's funny, we're all talking about where we'll be in six months. how much time elapsed between the GH1 and the 7D? imagine where we'll be next month! haha! :)

[Richard J. Johnson]

I think he sums this up nicely. Even though the thread is about killing one person's Scarlet Dreams. I have never had Scarlet dreams because I did not and do not think It will be released for a couple of years.

ORIGINAL POST BY BARRY GREEN:


Not necessarily; Canon (and Panasonic and Nikon) are doing to the *announced* Scarlet specifications. But since Red's "gone quiet" we don't know what the actual intended Scarlet will be.

I put up a big post here a couple weeks ago saying that IMO the 2/3" scarlet is DBA (dead before arrival), but a full-frame or S35 scarlet, priced competitively (i.e., not $8,000 for a brain alone, but maybe $3,000) might still be very much alive, especially with any wonders that they may have devised or implemented between then and now.

But yeah, a fixed-lens 2/3" scarlet at $3750 has lost pretty much all of its appeal in the face of a $1500 (with lens) GH1 or $1700 body-only 7D, each with a sensor at least 4x as large as 2/3".

Clearly the ball is back in Red's court. They would have to do something phenomenal to recapture the momentum. The landscape is very different now than it was back at NAB 2008. I think they've got it within themselves to deliver something phenomenal; they are, after all, exclusively a digital cinema company, and Canon and Nikon are almost exclusively still-camera companies with video "grafted on", so there's still quite a bit of room for Red to really appeal.

But no doubt the rules have changed. It's no longer a case of "forget anything else, just wait for the Scarlet", it's now a case of "I can't wait to see how the Scarlet's going to be competitive, in light of the new options out there."

Funny thing is, everyone was so jazzed initially about Red because they were a small company that could react quickly, but now it's the behemoths (Nikon/Canon/Panasonic) who are innovating and changing things at a furious pace!

[Spartacus]

I´d disagree here: RED should change their approach on their "low-end" by only offering a READY TO USE fixed zoom lens 2/3" or APS-C Scarlett, with viewfinder, xlr inputs and the option of recording sth like AVCintra to SDHC cards (with their Redcode as an option).
Stick with the 3K pricetag and many filmers would choose this over any VDSLR.
The 5D/7D may offer the image quality we all want, but besides being "unobstrusive" it just ain´t a videocamera.

But hopefully Canons video department will deliver all this soon...
Anyways, the good thing right now is, that no matter what you decide on, you can already achieve amazing results at a ridiculously low price tag...!

[ethan cooper]

I was thinking about this very topic this morning. Originally I was in the 7D might have killed off the 2/3" Scarlet camp but the more thought I put into it the more I began to change my mind.

For video people, the second the 2/3 Scarlets hit the market we'll be slapping ourselves on the forehead and chiding ourselves for even considering some of these early vDSLRs as viable options. Problem is, we haven't seen Scarlet yet, haven't been made fully aware of what it offers in terms of image quality, workflow, inputs, and all the subtitle well thought out details that make using a camera a joy instead of a headache. I do think Red can sell a bundle of 2/3" Scarlets but it will take them hitting the streets before many realize, "oh yeah, that's what a decent camera should be like" and get rid of their vDSLRs.

[mcgeedigital]

These DSLRs are cheap enough that i don't mind picking up one or two, or renting them every now and then. But I'm still set on getting one, if not a pair of S35 Scarlets the day they are available. I want a true digital cinema camera that can be configured into a DLSR form factor. I want raw data to push around in post. 3K, 4K, 5K... I can handle it, I welcome it, I demand it!

Exactly.

[Rakesh Jacob]

I would love an APS-C/S35 Scarlet!!! Why? Because it would be a "real" (no pun intended, this time) video canmera. I love/need the form factor, controls and audio section that prosumer cameras have. I'm highly adaptable and can get used to DSLRs even in thier current state but to have the functionality and physical aesthetics of what works for what I want to do would be great.
Now, I'm not attacking any person on these forums when I call Scarlet vaproware. I sincerely and profusely appologize if my late night rant read as such. BUT IT IS BY DEFINITION (wikipedia atleast) VAPORWARE. Why? Because that's how this product is marketed, it is not illegal but is prickish at the very least.

"Vaporware is a term used to describe a product, usually software, that has been announced by a developer during or before its development and, therefore, may never actually be released. The term is usually applied to products which fail to emerge after having well-exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product. The term implies unwarranted optimism, an as yet unannounced abandonment of a project, or sometimes even deception; that is, it may imply that the announcer knows that product development is in too early a stage to support responsible statements about its completion date, feature set, or even feasibility. However, most vaporware would not be considered a hoax since the makers have a genuine intention to create their product, even if it ultimately never materializes."

[Jack_Felis]

Well, if you think S35 1080p is enough for you then you didn't need a Scarlet in the first place. As far as post goes with h.264, I have no idea, but I would assume it's a little cramped like my MJPEG Nikon D90 footage, which really isn't all that bad in my opinion. You've got to think about what more resolution gets you and what a RAW workflow can bring to your film. Certainly you'll get clearer images all around but whether that gets seen is entirely dependent on the success/purpose of the production. For visual effects you need all the resolution you can get just so you can dirty the footage up a bit to blend in the effects. Although digital projection has changed this somewhat, for theatrical distribution you'll want as much resolution as you can get. Let's also not forget frame rates, the 7D offers 720p 60p and the Scarlet offers 3K 120fps, big difference. You'll also have to factor in lens choices and working with still lenses versus cinema lenses. Now, having worked with my Nikon D90, I'm pretty sure a lot of people can get by just fine with still lenses, although a follow focus makes all of the difference in the world.

I agree that a 2/3" Scarlet is kind of hurting right now. I never really liked the idea of a 2/3" Scarlet, it just complicates things when it comes to lenses. I think RED should focus on S35 as their minimum sensor size and go with it. Yeah sure it might eat into RED One sales for high speed work but if they were going to hold that back then they need to offer more than 120fps. Their top Epic needs to be a 9K+ Phantom-like camera or at least offer the same frame rate capabilities. Separating S35 from FF35 is cool, but don't take away basic frame rates like that, if anything give the more expensive FF35 models more frame rates and/or even more resolution, thus having more incentive to go for the FF35 rather than the S35. They need to take some kind of different approach right now because the competition really is going to start heating up. I don't think the 7D is going to be the camera to actually compete against Scarlet but there's already people popping up and saying their opting for the 7D instead of a Scarlet and that has to be troubling to RED on some standpoint.

[Richard J. Johnson]

by DEFINITION the scarlet could be considered Vaporware. But as I am sure you know just saying that is bound to start a flamewar.:kali:

Truthfully it does not really matter to me. There are no Scarlets but there are 7D's and at their price point, paying for a Scarlet may not be too big of a problem for those that could afford it anyway.

how $3000 5D footage can be cut with the $25,000 RED ONE footage blows my mind. Not saying the 5D is better, which it's not IMO, but I would assume that RED has taken notice. And If the $1800 7D can be cut with the Scarlet that I'm assuming would be double the price at least, I could see the Scarlet taking a hit.

[Ian-T]

I think an S35 1080p cam is good enough for me. But I want one that I could downcovert from a much bigger size....where I have control on how it's downgraded. That's why a Sacrtlet would be perfect. Oversampling is where it's at. I don't want to necessarily leave that up to the camera to do.

[Rakesh Jacob]

BIG HUGS FOR EVERYONE!!!
Let's just play it by ear, we are entering a golden age of vdeography. Exciting and inspiring products are on the horizon and Youtube is about to get a huge bump in quality :)

[joe 1008]

Definitely. There will be rolling out a better camera every six months, now. This is evolution at its best. If I finally get good results from my compressor workflow I might stick some more time to my 5D, skip the 7D and get the next one that is to come.

[filmmaker's gang]

I also love how some border line school boy slander was posted by Jim on the RED site and was quickly removed when a few users pointed out the flaws in his logic. Don't get me wrong, I think RED is doing great things and Jim is definitely loyal to his customers, but the tables have turned.

yeah.. that one came from akube (Bastaki) was tough..

"Dear Jim;

if i were in my lovely old college days.. doing my short flicks.. i'd get a 5dmk ii or a 7d.. I wanted shallow dof... cheap good looking glass... and lots of glasses to choose from...

i would never buy a scarlet or a red1 back then. and I would have continued to buy canon products for the consequent 4 years of college.

reason:

i would spend approx. 6k within those 4 years on lenses and upgrading cameras. in 4 years i'd upgrade twice. and a set of 3 prime lenses and a zoom and a decent tripod.

the red one costs 28k for a working kit.

scarlet s35 would cost 7k (brain only).

When you are an underdog... or a starter.. what keeps you going is the beleif that content is king.

canon is still the best bang for the buck (for the little guy) and not just the little guy...

i love my 5mkii... the whole 25 and 24p.. is overrated. i can do that in post when my entire edit is complete.

and for stills... well.. 21mp still smokes 5k... & 6k... and for timelapse purposes nothing beats the 5d mkii.

So... i am not at all annoyed. I think it is fair to pay 1k to 2k for a new canon (brain) every year or two."

the problem is.. more than the usual BS.. spec dreams but on the paper.. but on 3d renderings etc.. but always on delay.. subject to change is not a red trade mark.. it is a world spec

[xbourque]

I think that if one could pre-order an s35 Scarlet at Adorama today for shipping in early October, a lot of people at the professional end of things would choose Scarlet for less compression, more latitude in post, better anti-aliasing and professional monitoring.

However, if you want to do a fair comparison, then you should compare the imaginary Scarlet with imaginary vDSLRs (or large sensor, photo-lens compatible camcorders) of the future of 2010 from Canon, Panny, Sony and even Nikon.

For instance, you should compare the fictional Scarlet with the fictional 7D mark II, including optional batterypack-like IO module with XLR audio inputs and uncompressed HD-SDI video output, 100 mbits Cineform-like codec, proper live view AF, quad core DIGICs for decent oversampling and all the expected software refinements (zebra, peaking, VU meters, waveform, vectorscope).

That's when it gets a *lot* tougher for Red.

And if any of these contenders can't get it right on the first try... say they forget manual controls... 30p only...or too much jello... or aliasing issue.... they'll just release another, better, cam 9 months later. In the meantime, they can sell Point & Shoots, plasma TVs, photocopiers, printers and blu-ray players to keep the cash flow going.

Red one was a success because these big companies couldn't be bothered with a market of a few hundred units worldwide.

However, the success of these early vDSLRs awoke the giants...

-X

[rhinman]

I think the most important concept to understand in Canon winning the war is that of First to Market. Even if RED is better, Canon will sell a bundle before RED even hits, thus diminishing the ability to buy a superior camera. Coupled with the fact that a Scarlet and any footage (other than Izzy) has yet to appear in even prototype form on any forums, at any conventions or anywhere else for that matter, makes it much less viable as a successful lauch. Think of the Zune. I know many users who absolutely love it. The iPod came first and is an excellent product as well. Plain and simple.

Consider also that the RED forums have evolved into a pat Jim and his crew on the back party and you begin to wonder if the RED will ever appear. At some point they have to assume that it is at a build state that is financially viable and launch worthy.

Please Jim, get these prototypes in the hands of prosumers (actual professionals on budgets) and convince us all that the word Scarlet isn't referring to the color of sparkly shoes on Dorothy's feet.

[hermmermferm]

Canon 7D killed my Ikonoskop dreams. Or maybe Ikonoskop killed my Ikonoskop dreams.

[xbourque]

Think of the Zune.

Oh snap! That's harsh!

[joe 1008]

Dear Jim;

if i were in my lovely old college days.. doing my short flicks.. i'd get a 5dmk ii or a 7d.. I wanted shallow dof... cheap good looking glass... and lots of glasses to choose from...

i would never buy a scarlet or a red1 back then. and I would have continued to buy canon products for the consequent 4 years of college.

reason:

i would spend approx. 6k within those 4 years on lenses and upgrading cameras. in 4 years i'd upgrade twice. and a set of 3 prime lenses and a zoom and a decent tripod.

the red one costs 28k for a working kit.

scarlet s35 would cost 7k (brain only).

When you are an underdog... or a starter.. what keeps you going is the beleif that content is king.

canon is still the best bang for the buck (for the little guy) and not just the little guy...

i love my 5mkii... the whole 25 and 24p.. is overrated. i can do that in post when my entire edit is complete.

and for stills... well.. 21mp still smokes 5k... & 6k... and for timelapse purposes nothing beats the 5d mkii.

So... i am not at all annoyed. I think it is fair to pay 1k to 2k for a new canon (brain) every year or two.

Video now is like audio seven years ago...

[Jason Ramsey]

people forget just how important a thing redcode is. That's one place where there will be a clear distinction. RED has been doing great things with compression. As evidenced by RED Ray more recently. Redcode is one thing that I think sets them apart from the current competition in a big way.

Beyond that, all these VDSLR's are still terribly lacking (for me) in some very basic features and functionality that people used to not live without. Though, I do understand the price attraction.

FEature set, functionality, and codec are 3 big differences.

--

Though, I do find it kind of funny how people sing the death bell of cameras that are not even released yet, and that we know very little about as of now. We have no idea how much things have changed or not. Don't understand why people are always so eager to ring the bell for one camera or another every time a new one comes out.

There is a price to be paid for RAW, professional outputs, inputs, proper control, high speed sensor, etc, etc.

And, there are still vast differences between this camera and the little we do know about the dsmc line. Why does it always have to be one or the other? Still different tools for different people.

If i had a nickel for everytime someone proclaimed that x camera was dead, or x form factor was dead and they were wrong (or wayyyy premature)... I'd have an awful lot of nickels.

Just don't understand the war. And, personally... don't understand much of the comparison. One will have a much more professional feature set and function than the other, and there will be a price to pay for it. Just a matter of which tool will meet your needs.... or not.

Later,
Jaosn

[Rakesh Jacob]

Dude Jannard threw one of the first punches, up to that point I kept my fat ass out of the fray!

[Jimmy Moss]

As far as VDSLR's go I still can't stand the jello. Once they fix that ... sign me up.

Also, we MIGHT see a "3k" scarlet in Nov.

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34264

And this clip pretty much kills anything I've seen except for Red footage. I know.... its only one clip.

http://redgrabs.com/izzy/

Until then I'll be making money with my HVX200a and Redrock.

[entry]

Definitely. There will be rolling out a better camera every six months, now. This is evolution at its best. If I finally get good results from my compressor workflow I might stick some more time to my 5D, skip the 7D and get the next one that is to come.
This is what I thought too. First I thought about selling my 5D and buying 7D, then keeping the 5D and buying the 7D, but now that I've been thinking it a little bit more, I choosed to wait at least for the yearly next year to see all the new cameras that will come. I mean, I have killer FF still camera, thats half what I wanted from 5D, that's something 7D can never give. I have great HD video camera too. It has some flaws, but nothing that I couldn't live with at the moment.

Next generation video updates will likely include auto focus, at least 720p HDMI output while recording, flipable LCD screen, even less or zero jello and everything else better too in the IQ side + more. That is the camera I wan't. 7D made some great updates, and for video the sensor size is better than 5D's, but still, 7D isn't ready, I don't want another video camera that is "half good" and doesn't have those options I listed that will make the camera "perfect 1080p machine".

So, I will keep taking great pictures with my FF camera, shoot great videos and learn the secrets of HD video and different lenses with my 5D. At least when you learn to pull Follow Focus well with FF, it will be walk in the park with crop camera :) I'm going to buy some L quality lenses instead, lenses that can be used for the next 5 years easily, and lenses that I can use with the next generation crop HD DSLR.

just my 212 cents.

[Rakesh Jacob]

As far as VDSLR's go I still can't stand the jello. Once they fix that ... sign me up.

Also, we MIGHT see a "3k" scarlet in Nov.

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34264


Might, BIG MIGHT, see a working PROTOTYPE in Nov. to be a little more realistic, and that WOULD STILL BE F-ING AWESOME!
As Barry said balls in their court. Look forward to their play :beer:

[Alex.Mitchell]

Video now is like audio seven years ago...

What happened to audio seven years ago?

[puredrifting]

"Now, I'm not attacking any person on these forums when I call Scarlet vaproware. BUT IT IS BY DEFINITION (wikipedia atleast) VAPORWARE. Why? Because that's how this product is marketed, it is not illegal but is prickish at the very least."

Amern. I have been saying this for at least a year and have been admonished by many RED fanboys. But I still stand by it.

RED is an exciting company but their foot dragging and hyperbole has lost them millions of dollars of sales and marketing momentum as well as they (as a company, not the RED One) have become known as a bit of punchline by many working DPs.

Dan

[J Davis]

Coming from video with small CCD's it was all about learning lenses and dof.
Balancing ISO, aperture and ND's.

Scarlet was supposed to do that for me but it ended up being the GH1.

Will I still buy a scarlet? Definitely. Redcode is fast becoming an industry standard
and once these little red cams ship producers will expect redcode delivery more and more.

[puredrifting]

Hi J:

"Redcode is fast becoming an industry standard"

In which industry? I am on the LA Producer Group and I see bewildered posts constantly about what is this RED stuff, how does it work and who in the heck can post it? Maybe in the indie film world it is becoming somewhat of a standard, but in the studio system and in LA, VERY few producers have a clue about it and shooting RED code has been an extreme PITA in the two projects I have used it on.

Give me AVCINTRA 100 any day over RED code. The RED workflow is what I least like about RED cameras.

Dan

[J Davis]

Hi J:

"Redcode is fast becoming an industry standard"

In which industry? I am on the LA Producer Group and I see bewildered posts constantly about what is this RED stuff, how does it work and who in the heck can post it? Maybe in the indie film world it is becoming somewhat of a standard, but in the studio system and in LA, VERY few producers have a clue about it and shooting RED code has been an extreme PITA in the two projects I have used it on.

Give me AVCINTRA 100 any day over RED code. The RED workflow is what I least like about RED cameras.

Dan

I work in advertising here in New York.
For the past year nearly every shoot I've seen has been RED. The exceptions were 5DM2's. Thats the industry I'm talking about.

[Ian-T]

OOHH....East Coast vs West Coast!!! And they aint Rappers!!!! Cool :)

[entry]

OOHH....East Coast vs West Coast!!! And they aint Rappers!!!! Cool :)
oh no :grin:

[J Davis]

OOHH....East Coast vs West Coast!!! And they aint Rappers!!!! Cool :)

ROFL. Shame I'm not into cyber bangin'
booyaka !

[keenast]

The 'Red' is perfect for the commercial's world as nobody there is able to make up their mind: we shoot RAW (whatever that is) so we can change everything later. And that's how the 'RED' is pitched, with the 'don't worry' you can change everything later' line. It's funny but sad.

[astigmatic]

I think once the scarlet comes out and peeps see the huge difference in resolution versus the dslrs, the dslr craze will end quicker than it started

[TimurCivan]

ive been working with ALOT of red here in NY. film is unfortunately unheard of... and ENG form factor hd is becoming rarer.

its either, RED or Hvx...

[f64manray]

I think once the scarlet comes out and peeps see the huge difference in resolution versus the dslrs, the dslr fad will end quicker than it started

I guess cameras that don't exist always blow away cameras that do exist in our imagination.

The DSLRs (5DII & 7D) produce superb images now. Just how much better than superb do you think Scarlet will be. Since you made a prediction, permit me to as well. I've seen the Izzy video. Put the same Iguana in front of the 5DII and see if you can tell a difference.

I predict the image quality between the DSLRs (5D & 7D) and the Scarlet which will be well in excess of $6,000 dollars in S35 will be so close that VDSLRs will actually increase in sales as people sitting on the fence waiting for Scarlet after seeing side by side comparisons won't be able to justify the extra expense. There are reasons to go with scarlet but image quality won't be one of them. Look at where the 5DII and 7D are now. Just where do you think this technology will be when Scarlet is released. So, I would say that when Scarlet is released and it is able to actually be compared to the Current VDSLRs and what ever else is on the market in 2015, the Scarlet fad will end quicker than it started.

[astigmatic]

from what i've read, the 5dii doens't even have the resolving power of the ex1, I may be wrong though since I don'thave one, but if so, i'll predict that izzy will look a whole lot better on the big screen shot with whatever Red comes out with.

[13th Judas]

the 3K at $3K 2/3" fixed lens scarlet is still alluring. i would prefer this on event than any vDSLR. as a cinema tool, i would use it in my wide shots and maybe action shots, then, if i require a shallow DOF, instead of using an expensive 35 adaptor, i would use the very affordable 7D.

c'mon guys, scarlet and vDSLR can co- exist :).
(it's a bit weird using the words scalet and exist in the same sentence. sorry guys i can't help it :grin: ).

[Adam J McKay]

I am going to go ahead and say that the vast majority of us don't need a 5k sensor anytime soon. Yes, there are people who do, but HD T.V isn't even a standard yet and very few Cinemas are projecting 4k. The Panavision Genesis puts out 1080p. Is scarlet going to be better because of its 5k bayer pattern sensor? I understand full that right now the VDLSR are lacking the form factor and functionality of a dedicated video system...but it's only a matter of time. So again, comparing make believe with make believe. Scarlet VS Next gen ( or two ) of Canon prosumer cameras.... We just don't know. There have been talks about what each will do and how beautiful the images might be, but won't know until Phillip Bloom tests them haha.

[Amr Rahmy]

a lot of talk about "red raw".
what you can get today from the red one after spending 2-5x more on lighting and severely limiting what you can do in a scene to help out the camera, and after any manipulation possible in post it is not the "raw" image every one thinks it is.

[Adam J McKay]

a lot of talk about "red raw".
what you can get today from the red one after spending 2-5x more on lighting and severely limiting what you can do in a scene to help out the camera, and after any manipulation possible in post, it would not stand a chance against the canon vdslrs.

Im not really sure if that was a negative comment or not haha

[morgan_moore]

The 'Red' is perfect for the commercial's world as nobody there is able to make up their mind: we shoot RAW (whatever that is) so we can change everything later. And that's how the 'RED' is pitched, with the 'don't worry' you can change everything later' line. It's funny but sad.

Shooting RAW is absolutely the dream, its nothing to do with not being able to make up ones mind..

On set you have to make up your mind..

on a bad monitor
in a hurry
before you have shot everything

that even cameras like the SonyF35 you bake in your look onset I find amazingly dumb

not only does raw give you some insurance (latitiude) it also enables you to creat a look in a controlled environment

and potentially (i dont know about this for motion) do HDR where one uses the latitude to the full to recover skies etc

I want RAW

Not having raw is like taking your film to the local 1 hour photo and then burning the negatives

S

[Amr Rahmy]

Im not really sure if that was a negative comment or not haha

sorry, forgot the iQ of most red fans. post edited

[Zak Forsman]

sorry, forgot the iQ of most red fans. post edited

keep it civil, please.

[joe 1008]

What happened to audio seven years ago?

I should have said SEVERAL years ago. Seven is too specific. What happened was that every cheap PC turned into a high end studio with a good A/D card and a good microphone. The A/D card in a way is the equivalent to the camera, the microphone the equivalent to the lens. What most dropped - beside the computers - was the A/D card. It dropped from RED levels to 7D levels, then. From then on things became better, but not much cheaper anymore. There will always be a basic level of investment. (about 10k for a whole video equipment - the same like for a DVX a couple of years ago) IMO this price will stay constant but within two or three years we will be able to record with codecs equivalent to REDcode. So there are two ways to go: High upfront investment: Get a RED now and get the jobs that pay it. Or get a VDSLR and update it every year until you get the same or a similar quality as RED. I've choosen the latter one. Remember: If there is a BIG job you can always rent.

[J Davis]

I think once the scarlet comes out and peeps see the huge difference in resolution versus the dslrs, the dslr craze will end quicker than it started

Going out on a limb here but I have a feeling that the vDSLR's are the industries way forward in competing with RED's scarlet. They will not die out they will grow and grow and once scarlet ships we will see ENG style cams like HVX with CMOS/MOS sensors, mounts for interchangeable lenses, good audio and Iframe codecs (or cineform raw). They may not beat redcode but they will compete on price points.

[astigmatic]

^ in a way.. i think canon vdslr's are just indicators of what's in store for their camcorder division. I can't wait to see what canon has in store for their XH-A1 replacement.

[Kholi]

I love these (h)DSLR cameras just as much as everyone else. Still gonna ride the bleeding edge every time one with some salt comes out (aka Manual Controls and 24p).

I know that it's an awesome thing for budget purposes, I do implore those who have yet to experience RED from pre-to-post production spend some time reading unbiased information. It WILL be awesome as hell when we get a raw image from any of these cameras, sans line skipping etc etc... right now there's little comparison between REDCode and what we're getting out of (h)DSLR equipment.

Sure, it looks great on the web. Once you get these things into production environments that call for results in all areas, you start seeing quickly where Scarlet will still lead unless Canon and Panasonic make something pretty similar.

Also, no, there's no need for 5k in general. But there are vast benefits to being able to acquire an image at its native resolution, one being VFX. Another, asthe almight Barry Green mentioned somewhere else, is anamorphic acquisition so you achieve the highest resolution from the get-go before going to post.

Only scratching the surface with these cameras, I do hope to see some mmassive steps taken in the next year but let's not discount the validity of what RED offers in cameras (when they actually get released).

Until the 7D comes out, I'm back to shooting RED for everything, even though it's huge and all of that stuff it gets the job done without any of the issues present in the current crop and, hey, even the 7D.

Also, S16mm Film is becoming pretty popular around here (LA) with the price of Telecinie having gone down, camera rentals cheaper (thanks to RED) and stock advancements (i'm learning about this myself, lots of studying!), and being ale to go straight to a hard-drive with ProRes. 4:4:4:4 transfer from film? Yes please. No matter what digital camera you're using, it still really cannot touch the endless depth of fillm. S16 is a great in-between for cost and image.

[Kholi]

The thing is cinemas with digital projection are projecting @ 2k. if you can expose correctly with a Canon DSLR the codec holds up pretty well compared to raw so the only advantage I can see with a scarlet is if you want to underexpose. As for color space I'm pretty content with grading MKII footage as is. Am I missing something here?


Have you worked with REDCode Raw personally? Going through proper channels in post? The statement that Canon's H264 holds up pretty well compared to Raw is strange to me. It doesn't hold up nearly as well, especially for keying.

Advantages as far as resolution goes are obvious. An image derived from 3.5kish compressed to a 2k size will look absolutely more resolute on a massive screen (especially in wides) than an image downscaled poorly internally (aliasing, etc) projected on the same screen.

Even if everything's mastered @ 1080/2K, that certainly does not mean that 4K doesn't have its advantages. Its these very things that make RED look that much closer to film over other expensive cameras.

Now, none of that is to say that a 7D Projection will look bad by any means. It is what it is though, and it is not raw.

[joe 1008]

Also, S16mm Film is becoming pretty popular around here (LA) with the price of Telecinie having gone down, camera rentals cheaper (thanks to RED) and stock advancements (i'm learning about this myself, lots of studying!), and being ale to go straight to a hard-drive with ProRes. 4:4:4:4 transfer from film? Yes please. No matter what digital camera you're using, it still really cannot touch the endless depth of fillm. S16 is a great in-between for cost and image.
:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

But a 7D is good for an increased learning curb. You can shoot miles of footage without any costs...

[Kholi]

I would definitely, undoubtedly, suggest that any newcomer that isn't shooting for a living pick up a 7D, kit lens and a 35/1.4 to start learning.

[joe 1008]

I love my 5D (I would love my 7D even more maybe - but I avoid to go through my compressor conversions frame by frame - that keeps my love burning) And I feel like a completely newcomer again. If not even like a child...

[Nicolas Christakis]

I would definitely, undoubtedly, suggest that any newcomer that isn't shooting for a living pick up a 7D, kit lens and a 35/1.4 to start learning.

Any suggestions on that 35/1.4?

[J Davis]

I would definitely, undoubtedly, suggest that any newcomer that isn't shooting for a living pick up a 7D, kit lens and a 35/1.4 to start learning.

No don't do it! Buying primes is addictive!
It starts with a friend suggesting you try a little nikon 35/1.4 and then you get
a 50/1.4 because its no biggie.
Then you move on to a 85/1.4 or a 24/1.4 then a expensive wide zoom ...
its a slippery slope people

Don't listen to Kholi, think of your wallet, your family, your life

Remember. Just Say No.

[Ian-T]

"War on Primes" :)

[Rakesh Jacob]

Hey Kholi, just curious about "resolute" when you say that are using it in it's denotative/ditcionary meaning or psuedo-slang for dealing with pixel resolution? Not nit-picking bro just honestly curious about what you mean, thnx

[f64manray]

I want RAW

Not having raw is like taking your film to the local 1 hour photo and then burning the negatives

S

I would think not having RAW would be more akin to shooting chrome. Expose, shoot, hand it over to the E-6 process, and what you get back is what you get back. You really need to know your craft when you shoot chrome. You're working with very narrow exposure tolerances.

I would dearly love to be able to see 5DII shot by a great DP, processed and projected the best that it can be and compared to Red.

[f64manray]

keep it civil, please.

Hey Zak,

Just curious, you're shooting a feature on the D90, correct? How is that holding up when projected on the big screen?

[J Davis]

I would think not having RAW would be more akin to shooting chrome. Expose, shoot, hand it over to the E-6 process, and what you get back is what you get back. You really need to know your craft when you shoot chrome. You're working with very narrow exposure tolerances.

I would dearly love to be able to see 5DII shot by a great DP, processed and projected the best that it can be and compared to Red.

What you said struck a chord with me. I know this is a poor comparison but I will bring up the GH1 and AVCHD.

Because the codec is weak with the GH1 and color tweaking can only be minimal before image degradation sets in - it forces you to get it right at the time of the shoot!
I kinda liked that.

[f64manray]

What you said struck a chord with me. I know this is a poor comparison but I will bring up the GH1 and AVCHD.

Because the codec is weak with the GH1 and color tweaking can only be minimal before image degradation sets in - it forces you to get it right at the time of the shoot!
I kinda liked that.

I like that as well. Their seems to be a more or less constant debate in the photo world about shooting JPEG vs RAW, and I usually reserve comment because I really don't want to insult anybody's skills, but there can be considerable amount of snobbery on the behalf of those that shoot RAW, and it's kind of amusing because I'm thinking, well if you were reeeeally good you would just shoot JPEG and expose to get the expected results from however you choose to have you're camera convert the RAW data to JPEG. I would just rather conform to the camera on the shooting end. I guess it just comes from years of shooting chrome ...and being whipped like a bitch by it. :-)

[Texanite]

Shooting RAW is absolutely the dream, its nothing to do with not being able to make up ones mind..

On set you have to make up your mind..

on a bad monitor
in a hurry
before you have shot everything

Amazingly enough, some of us have been shooting motion pictures on film for years and having to "make up our minds" on set:

with NO monitor
in a hurry
before we have shot everything.

I've been shooting film professionally for more than 20 years under those circumstances. And so have many many many many others.

Are colors and contrast tweaked in the telecine? Sure, but not to the extremes that some people seem to think. In 99% of the narrative features I've shot on film, the post-production processing of the image was very minimal. The "look" and the exposure were actually determined while shooting. How is that possible? It's called pre-production and experience.

[Adam J McKay]

sorry, forgot the iQ of most red fans. post edited

I bet you smell... hahaha

[Kholi]

No don't do it! Buying primes is addictive!
It starts with a friend suggesting you try a little nikon 35/1.4 and then you get
a 50/1.4 because its no biggie.
Then you move on to a 85/1.4 or a 24/1.4 then a expensive wide zoom ...
its a slippery slope people

Don't listen to Kholi, think of your wallet, your family, your life

Remember. Just Say No.

That indeed it is.

My suggestion? 35/1.4 Zeiss ZF or Contax. But they're 'spensive.

[Kholi]

Hey Kholi, just curious about "resolute" when you say that are using it in it's denotative/ditcionary meaning or psuedo-slang for dealing with pixel resolution? Not nit-picking bro just honestly curious about what you mean, thnx


Pixels, although the literal meaning can be used there as well.

[xmephestox]

i honestly don't see why a 2/3 3k camera wouldn't do well, in the end, it's all about how it "looks" si 2k, is a 2/3 inch 2k camera, and you have pro's like danny boyle (slumdog) and guy richie (new sherlock holmes) shooting on it, and happy with it. danny boyle for slumdog even said he was using less and less 35 mm cause he was so absolutely pleased with the images it was giving him. and honestly in a real full onset production, a lot of producers who don't know the tech, will look at a 7d, or 5d, and go what's this? bring out something like a scarlet or whatever where it has more bells and whistles to the look, and they'll go, ok we have a real camera on board. it's gonna take a good long while to break the existing system and make all this stuff a standard.

it's all gonna change i know, but it's not gonna happen overnight...

[Rakesh Jacob]

Pixels, although the literal meaning can be used there as well.

:) cool that's why I was wondering cause both seemed equaly applicable

[Jason Ramsey]

saying that h.264 compares to RAW is pretty far out there... More specifically comparing it to redcode. In what way? The fact that you can create comparable footage with two different cameras under certain situations does not necessarily make them comparable. This is RED's bread and butter. Compression and Redcode is one of the main things that is setting them apart from everyone else (my opinion). Look at what they are doing with RED Ray for example. Anyone who hears the specs of redray would think it impossible. Until you've seen it with your own eyes that is. There really isn't much to compare something like h.264 with something like redcode raw. That's really stretching.

No, this is not a "fanboy" speaking. But, some of the statements coming here sound like they are coming from "haters" in my opinion. Folks with more of an agenda than a real grounded basis of information.

Codec and quality of compression, speed of sensor, and feature set. Again, there is a reason that the DSMC line costs more than the gh1, 7d, etc. Whether you want to believe it or not. And, that's not downing on this cam at all. Looks like a nice step forward in comparison to the other vdslr cams out right now. They are still going to be widely different tools though. Resolution is a 2nd'ry advantage to the DSMC line in my opinion.

Pick the one that works for you and stop trying to slay a 7,000 dollar brain with a 1700 dollar one. Seriously. Some people want scalability. Some want (and know the advantages of working with) R3D. Some want true xlr inputs and othe professional inputs/outputs. Some don't. Better for you does not mean better for everyone. And, when we start taking to insulting people in our argument, then you lose all float with me in terms of taking your statements seriously.

For me personally, the comparisons largely end at the fact that both shoot stills/motion. Beyond that, I see the current crop of vdslr's and the DSMC line as pretty damn different beasts. One will meet one persons needs, another will meet someone elses.

[Kholi]

Gotta agree with Ramsey. I would definitely suggest doing more research and asking for some raw RED Footage if you can tackle it, experiencing it first hand instead of speculating what you may or may not need.

While, again, it's true that a really good 1080/24p is "enough" for small jobs, there are more than small jobs that need to be done.

Again, I'm one of the largest proponents of the (h)DSLR movement, I will not tell you that you can get the same results from a 5D, 7D or GH-1 at its best as you can a RED ONE at its best. Doesn't even take a veteran Colorist or a Guru VFX artist to know this, it only takes spending a few hours with the RED and then toying with the footage to know why it's quickly becoming (well, already is) a massive hit with large and small studios alike.

Oh and Jason, it would be pretty rad to get a 3K S35mm Scarlet @ 3,500? 7K does sound like a lot these days, although its worth it. Barry punched me in the face with some economic logic and now I'm really hoping Scarlet's price point has dropped.

[Nik Manning]

I don't think this is the tool you would shoot your movie that has a 1 million dollar budget on. I think it is the tool you should buy to make the kind of work that can get you the million dollar movie job.

If I ran a photography school I would buy the Canon 7D.
If I ran a video production school I would buy the Canon 7D.
If I was going to photography school I would buy the Canon 7D.
If I was going to film school I would buy the Canon 7D.
If I wanted to buy a prosumer video camera under 4K right now I would buy the Canon 7D.

[ChipG]

I'm on the fence but I would buy a 3k S35 Scarlet @ $3500 with xlr inputs, lcd screen and battery. No lens of course.

[mcgeedigital]

I have shot with a RED One side by side with a 5DMkii.

The 5dMkii looked good. REALLY good.

The RED One footage was just incredible, and once I started throwing the image around in Red Alert and Red Cine-X, the power of shooting video in a RAW format became VERY evident.

There's no comparison.

[Kholi]

I have shot with a RED One side by side with a 5DMkii.

The 5dMkii looked good. REALLY good.

The RED One footage was just incredible, and once I started throwing the image around in Red Alert and Red Cine-X, the power of shooting video in a RAW format became VERY evident.

There's no comparison.


And this is exactly why there is no substitute for hands-on-experience.

Even if you shot for a final look in-camera, the difference when comparing both is severely obvious. Almost saddening but then you remember that one costs a lot more, so it should be that much better.

Here's to hoping the 7D's quality is as good as the MKii's, though. If not, I don't know if I'll jump on another (h)DSLR that doesn't shoot a raw format. It's becomeing increasingly irritating to have to work around shortcomings versus just shooting RED and having to deal with the weight and storage.

[f64manray]

And this is exactly why there is no substitute for hands-on-experience.

Even if you shot for a final look in-camera, the difference when comparing both is severely obvious. Almost saddening but then you remember that one costs a lot more, so it should be that much better.

Here's to hoping the 7D's quality is as good as the MKii's, though. If not, I don't know if I'll jump on another (h)DSLR that doesn't shoot a raw format. It's becomeing increasingly irritating to have to work around shortcomings versus just shooting RED and having to deal with the weight and storage.

Apparently, this severe difference can only be seen in person on a computer monitor that is actually working with the footage because it is not discernable in any way in the footage I'm looking at on the net. If that's the case, I'll be fine for quite ahwile.

As I said before, I would dearly like to see both formats shot by pros and projected in a movie theatre. Don't know if I'll ever get that chance.

[mcgeedigital]

Apparently, this severe difference can only be seen in person on a computer monitor that is actually working with the footage because it is not discernable in any way in the footage I'm looking at on the net. If that's the case, I'll be fine for quite ahwile.

As I said before, I would dearly like to see both formats shot by pros and projected in a movie theatre. Don't know if I'll ever get that chance.

I can see the difference on my Panasonic Viera 46" 1080p plasma.

It is night and day.

[Kholi]

And that's not even with raw footage. 1080 for 1080 on my 46" Samsung it is absolutely night and day. Although you can intercut them decently, you sure will notice the difference once you get out of vimeo boxes.

Maybe if you only plan to upload to vimeo or even go SD, then sure. Even then I think there would still be visible differences. Especially on wide shots.

[Rakesh Jacob]

Just my 2cents: just the difference between DVCProHD and H.264/AVCHD is staggaring in post production. You can push DVCProHD so much further because it is less compressed. Now I don't have any experience with Red files but I can only imagine it's gotta be brilliant to work with!

My issues have never been with Red products, they are revolutionary to say the least. I've only had issues with the way they treat product development as it pertains to thier customer and poential customer base. Which I wont rehash cause I'm not trying to bash.

And even in the end delivered videos online you can tell that the lattitude and color fidelity can not be touched by any other video system I have seen.
That's just my experience, yours may be different.

[Jason Ramsey]

Apparently, this severe difference can only be seen in person on a computer monitor that is actually working with the footage because it is not discernable in any way in the footage I'm looking at on the net. If that's the case, I'll be fine for quite ahwile.

As I said before, I would dearly like to see both formats shot by pros and projected in a movie theatre. Don't know if I'll ever get that chance.

On the net... exactly the point... stating something as fact when you've only ever watched compressed web videos.

Just trying to bring a bit of balance to things. doesn't have to be a hardcore for or against one or the other or an all or nothing proposition.

Again, I thinlk these cams are different beasts at the end of the day. don't see much point in comparing them in most regards.

[Jason Adams]

No matter what, the consumer wins. I have been a long time Avid editor and I have always said the best thing to happen to Avid was FCP. Competition is great for the industry.

These tech races are great. Everyone is desperately trying to out innovate and under price the other guy. It seems VDSLRs are out foxing Scarlet dreams, but I dare say had Jannard not lit the Scarlet fuse we might not have VDSLRs. Just my opinion.
To be fair RED does have raw and a working CINEMA camera where VDSLRS are still work arounds, rigs, and adaptations. VDSLR is the new 35mm adapter.


Rather than choosing sides let these guys kill each other on features and price and we reap the spoils of war. In 10 years in this business I can not remember the camera market moving this fast.

I don't care who wins. The longer the battle the more the innovation rises and the further the price falls.

[Ted Ramasola]

No matter what, the consumer wins. Competition is great for the industry.

These tech races are great. Everyone is desperately trying to out innovate and under price the other guy. VDSLR is the new 35mm adapter.


Rather than choosing sides let these guys kill each other on features and price and we reap the spoils of war.

I don't care who wins. The longer the battle the more the innovation rises and the further the price falls.


I'll drink to that.:beer:

[Jason Ramsey]

yup. just pick the one that works for you.

[raymondluo]

That indeed it is.

My suggestion? 35/1.4 Zeiss ZF or Contax. But they're 'spensive.

Just got the contax for 555 USD, scratches on the coating but not deteriment to image.

[mattsand]

Amazingly enough, some of us have been shooting motion pictures on film for years and having to "make up our minds" on set
as well as always thinking of what nets, filters, smoke, exposure and processing techniques to use in order to dirty down that overly sharp and clean 35mm image, which makes the current pixel and low noise hunt a but ridiculous. there's nothing wrong with a techincally better image, but you often have to degrade it significanly to make it look pleasing, and even an ntsc res image can look fantastic on the big screen.

[f64manray]

And that's not even with raw footage. 1080 for 1080 on my 46" Samsung it is absolutely night and day. Although you can intercut them decently, you sure will notice the difference once you get out of vimeo boxes.

Maybe if you only plan to upload to vimeo or even go SD, then sure. Even then I think there would still be visible differences. Especially on wide shots.

But the difference must not be that great if Rodney Charter is filming 50% of his series Washington Field with several 5DIIs. I'm guessing this series will be broadcast in HD and the 5DII would not be used if it couldn't intercut with the other main cameras. Is it Red he's using for that?

This is happening outside the Vimeo box is it not? Also several music videos on MTV with the 5DII. It seems like I'm reading of more and more uses of the 5DII in professional applications outside of the Vimeo box.

Also the 5DII was being used on the set of Iron Man II. Not sure in what capacity.

It comes to mind that the award winning film "November" with Courtney Cox was filmed with a DVX100 and surely the 5DII's IQ is superior to that SD camera. No?

There is a point where that just clearing the bar is good enough and it appears that the 5DII is at least clearing the bar and can and is being used in a professional production capacity outside of the Vimeo box. At least industry DPs seem to be making that judgement.

It seems for every post that praises the Reds flexibility with its RAW codec, I read one that says it's a PITA.

[morgan_moore]

I like that as well. Their seems to be a more or less constant debate in the photo world about shooting JPEG vs RAW, and I usually reserve comment because I really don't want to insult anybody's skills, but there can be considerable amount of snobbery on the behalf of those that shoot RAW, and it's kind of amusing because I'm thinking, well if you were reeeeally good you would just shoot JPEG ..

It is simple RAW has more dynamic range and does not bake in the colour temp

Now you can shoot 'jpg properly'

you can also learn to 'lean' on RAW, to shoot jpg style and just be lazy on your exposure

But you can also learn to shoot RAW properly - its called HDR high dynamic range,

Lets take still a hotel room, tungsten lit, with a sea view..

To get both the sea and the room exposed with jpg you are going to need to add fill light to control the dynamic range of the scene or maybe ND/Gell the windows or the lights, maybe both to control colour temp

OK that is 'proper traditional shooting', the sort of shooting that makes shooting the movies, or even hotel stills on chrome, super expensive and time consuming

Shooting RAW and carefully exposing, you can get both the inside and outside correctly exposed using differently processed RAW -> TIFF outputs from the same RAW file

You then mask the images together and get not only a correct exposure, correct colour balance across the daylight and tungsten sources and also a very natural form of light because you have not added any 'artificial' light

So the RAW shooter is saving rigging time (and cost) massively and also recording a scene in a manner pleasing to the eye

Which is surely the goal

Obvioulsly the RAW shooter is also queiing up for a PP nightmare to take such an approach for shooting stills let alon movies

I shoot a lot stills of hotels (for my sins) and have learned shooting RAW, also that computer perspective correction is better than a PC lens, and a comped sky is better than a graduated ND, and also that I must charge high for the implied PP time in 'shooting for RAW'

S

[Michael Olsen]

This is happening outside the Vimeo box is it not?

To be honest, HD programming often looks worse than Vimeo :(

[xbourque]

Shooting RAW and carefully exposing, you can get both the inside and outside correctly exposed using differently processed RAW -> TIFF outputs from the same RAW file

You then mask the images together and get not only a correct exposure, correct colour balance across the daylight and tungsten sources and also a very natural form of light because you have not added any 'artificial' light



So... what's your plan when someone walks in front of the window? Roto?

What about for when half the face of your character is lit by the window and the other half by tungsten lights? What white balance do you use then?

Sounds to me like you're gonna explode your post budget cuz you're too lazy to gel a window with NDs.

-X

[acoelho1]

I would hope the Red would hold up better than the Canon 5d since its 6 times more expensive and that's just the body. The question you should be asking...is it worth the price difference. Red better act quickly because the camera wars are moving rapidly and I hope Nikon pulls a rabbit out a hat with the 700x and comes through with a full frame camera with all the bells and whistles.

[entry]

In good hands, 5D and 7D are more than enough to make a movie for the big screen, that's a fact.

[Ian-T]

In good hands, 5D and 7D are more than enough to make a movie for the big screen, that's a fact.
Hmmm...with all the other technical and highly thoughtful posts in this thread yours was the most simple, true and on point. :beer:


...now people...choose your weapons.

[13th Judas]

In good hands, 5D and 7D are more than enough to make a movie for the big screen, that's a fact.

this statement is incomplete. you forgot the 'content is king' line :)

[mhood]

...and a bit verbose. Try using the words "Indian" and "arrow" and see if you can tighten it up some. :-)

[kurth]

well I didn't read all of the thread but what about 120fps ? the 7d is along way from that !

[Rakesh Jacob]

well I didn't read all of the thread but what about 120fps ? the 7d is along way from that !

The current version of Scarlet that is competing with the 7D does 0fps :grin:

[Ian-T]

Ha ha ha

[Barry_Green]

In good hands, 5D and 7D are more than enough to make a movie for the big screen, that's a fact.
But then again, so are the GH1, EX1, HPX300, HVX200/HPX170, DVX100, XHA1, HV40, Z7U, and many other excellent and currently-available products.

[J Davis]

My dream is not scarlet, its not actually the camera at all.
My dream is to make something that will still be talked about after you're dead and gone.

And J.Jannard who wants to make cameras has succeeded in that task, I salute him. Until I am making my own written features I will work double duty as DP and that means buying and flipping cameras. 7D and scarlet and everything beyond that I'll buy and flip.

[Rakesh Jacob]

In good hands, 5D and 7D are more than enough to make a movie for the big screen, that's a fact.

But then again, so are the GH1, EX1, HPX300, HVX200/HPX170, DVX100, XHA1, HV40, Z7U, and many other excellent and currently-available products.

Makes me all warm and tingly inside :)
I remember a couple years back my dad bought a D40; and the last time I was into photography was back in the early 90s. But the camera seemed so good, especially for an entry level DSLR, that I think I used it more than he did. I distinctly remember thinking "man why can't they just put these sensors in a camcorder, that would F-ing RULE!"
Some times when I think about that moment and the fact that it was ONLY a couple of years ago, it blows me away. The simple fact that we can spend all this time arguing back and forth about products that perform at this great of a level is truly wonderful. And no matter what gets said here about what is better, which is the ultimate, who's pro, who's not, we are in the midst of THE filmmaking revolution; the democratization of internet distribution and cheap, DAMN good looking (and only getting cheaper and better) video acquisition! This war of words, conflict of ideas, berating of each others preferences and choices is truly a peculiar honor and humbling luxury that I hope we can collectively apreciate.... or not, whatever. I love being, or at least trying to be (depends who you ask) A FILMMAKER!

[joe 1008]

But then again, so are the GH1, EX1, HPX300, HVX200/HPX170, DVX100, XHA1, HV40, Z7U, and many other excellent and currently-available products.

The DVX100 (I never owned it, I admit) was the last camera that was an equivalent to an artist's pencil. It was cheap and efficient.

Then things became complicated. Some cams were better than others in specific areas.

I want my pencil back. In the last couple of years we became tecnocrats, not artists.

But I'm confident that we are very close to a cam that is going to sum all the progress up as the DVX100 did in it's days.


This war of words, conflict of ideas, berating of each others preferences and choices is truly a peculiar honor and humbling luxury that I hope we can collectively apreciate.... or not, whatever. I love being, or at least trying to be (depends who you ask) A FILMMAKER!

Damn right. This incredible freedom. kudos for you.

[squig]

just found this on nikonrumors, if it's for real there might not be as much demand for a scarlet next year-

This is coming from somebody close to Nikon development (new, anonymous and unconfirmed source):

“He/she told me that he/she has been working on firmware that only supports video. Namely, his/her area is autofocus through the sensor. He/she told me to think of it as tripod mode in Live View but that it was much more complicated. Apparently speed is important and an area that is out of focus can be selected and the lens be made to jump to focus in that point in one move without hunting.

He/She told me that this required distance data and AFS from the lens. As far as I know, all AFS lenses support distance data but I’m not sure.

At any rate he/she says there’s hardware support for h.264 encoding. He/she also said that there is support from increments of 24 fps and 30 fps (so 24, 48, 72, 96 etc. and 30, 60, 90, etc) but I didn’t ask how high.

He/she said there would be no support for still image captures though it’s all progressive video which lends itself (a bit) to having still images pulled from video.

He/she said 1080p, 720p, 480p, and 320p (?) are supported.

I was discussing trading up from my D300 to a D300s just for the video support and he/she told me to wait. He/she said that there wouldn’t be anything soon but it would be in the lifespan of a D300s.

I asked him/her if it was a video only f-mount body. He/she told me he/she had very little knowledge of the hardware.

He/she did mention working with a team that is developing a NEF equivalent for video. Which was very high in bitrate necessitating high end media. He/she didn’t know if it was CF or SD.

[Rakesh Jacob]

Wait, there's a transgendered development team at Nikon?
(sorry cheap shot)

[squig]

If it's true we could be shooting raw or at least lightly compressed in a year or so for the cost of a mid range DSLR.

[Zim]

I've seen this "life span of the D300s" before. What is that? One year? Two Years?

[J Davis]

I was actually just thinking about auto focusing on video the other day.

With image recognition technology, face recognition technology, distance data,
and all of that good tech available it is bound to be exploited by the big boys
to make everybody go out and buy the same lens that they already own all over again.

[sunburst]

If it's true we could be shooting raw or at least lightly compressed in a year or so for the cost of a mid range DSLR.


it sounds great in THEORY...... but the files are HUGE! I don't know

the workflow of red . How do people work with it? Is it uncompressed?

Arent only 720p avi files like 5 GIG - - per minute! ?

[Corine]

I was just wondering and please don't shoot me it is just a question; When I film with my HVX200A with the Redrock gear attached it feels and looks like I'm shooting a real movie but I was thinking if you are shooting with a Canon 5D does it make you feel like you are shooting a movie or just taking pictures? What does your talents think when you pull out a camera that is the size of toast that just pop out of the toaster? My HVX is 3 ft long and looks pretty cool. Also I was wondering how close is the 5D and 7D to the Red. I myself is thinking of test driving the 5D just to see how it works. Soooooo this was just a question do people take you seriously when you say you are making a movie and you pull out the camera from your pocket? I know the end results are the most important so I'm just asking.

One more question - lets say I do use the 5D can I edit on the Vegas pro 8? And what frame rate would this footage be when I download it onto my computer? I know tons of questions!!!!!

[Rakesh Jacob]

I was just wondering and please don't shoot me it is just a question; When I film with my HVX200A with the Redrock gear attached it feels and looks like I'm shooting a real movie but I was thinking if you are shooting with a Canon 5D does it make you feel like you are shooting a movie or just taking pictures? What does your talents think when you pull out a camera that is the size of toast that just pop out of the toaster? My HVX is 3 ft long and looks pretty cool. Also I was wondering how close is the 5D and 7D to the Red. I myself is thinking of test driving the 5D just to see how it works. Soooooo this was just a question do people take you seriously when you say you are making a movie and you pull out the camera from your pocket? I know the end results are the most important so I'm just asking.

One more question - lets say I do use the 5D can I edit on the Vegas pro 8? And what frame rate would this footage be when I download it onto my computer? I know tons of questions!!!!!

I use the HVX200a with the LEX/Canon FD or MicroX/Nikon.
I tried out the 5Dmkii on a couple shoots 1st as a B camera and 2nd as an A camera with the HVX for sound; and a couple times just hanging out with friends. I don't own one myself so this is based just on those few experiences.
Image quality WAAYYYYY better! LCD waaaayyyy better!
I havnt been on a gig where it was the only camera but right now I think people would probably look at you crazy unless you had a whole crap load of accessories attached to it. You could also throw up some big obnoxious lights with giant soft boxes, that always makes bystanders go "ooooh."

How close the 5D and 7D are to the RED1 depends on who you ask, image wise, it's kinda there, as close as you're gonna get at this price for sure! But as mentioned ad nauseum, the actual codec, file system, etc... is light years ahead and far superior to deal with in post production, from what I've been told and I believe it. Also RED is a dedicated video system so it has what filmmakers need in terms of controls and audio.

The 5D will work in Vegas. The frame rate is 30p but it's misslabled in the metatags/header or whatever, it's actually 29.97 (hopefully some one confirm this). If you have audio coming in from another source it goes out of sync pretty quickly. If you set playback of the 5D clips to 99.9% that usually works.

Also I'm not sure what kind of toast you eat but if it's the size on the 5D you need to cut back on the carbs.

[TimurCivan]

carbs..... lol

[TimurCivan]

The DVX100 (I never owned it, I admit) was the last camera that was an equivalent to an artist's pencil. It was cheap and efficient.

Then things became complicated. Some cams were better than others in specific areas.

I want my pencil back. In the last couple of years we became tecnocrats, not artists.

But I'm confident that we are very close to a cam that is going to sum all the progress up as the DVX100 did in it's days.



Damn right. This incredible freedom. kudos for you.


exactly. the cameras are pencils.

i suggest everyone keep writing, and shoot with whats best available at the time by renting......

[mattsand]

Arent only 720p avi files like 5 GIG - - per minute! ?
raw doesn't necessarily mean uncompressed, just that it's not converted from luminosity data to your color space of choice. you can compress raw files too, and you can actually compress them more than rgb or yuv files without degrading the quality. redcode and cineform already do, it's likely that more will follow like apple prores and adobe dng.

[cjwolff]

I was just wondering and please don't shoot me it is just a question; When I film with my HVX200A with the Redrock gear attached it feels and looks like I'm shooting a real movie but I was thinking if you are shooting with a Canon 5D does it make you feel like you are shooting a movie or just taking pictures? What does your talents think when you pull out a camera that is the size of toast that just pop out of the toaster? My HVX is 3 ft long and looks pretty cool. Also I was wondering how close is the 5D and 7D to the Red. I myself is thinking of test driving the 5D just to see how it works. Soooooo this was just a question do people take you seriously when you say you are making a movie and you pull out the camera from your pocket? I know the end results are the most important so I'm just asking.

One more question - lets say I do use the 5D can I edit on the Vegas pro 8? And what frame rate would this footage be when I download it onto my computer? I know tons of questions!!!!!

1. Clients pay for results not for measuring your johnson.

2. You should still be able to use Cineform from within Vegas Pro 8 for 5d footage?

http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/47696/1252078862.jpg

[greymog]

it sounds great in THEORY...... but the files are HUGE! I don't know

the workflow of red . How do people work with it? Is it uncompressed?

Arent only 720p avi files like 5 GIG - - per minute! ?

The great thing about RED is its compression code being natively supported on CS4. At least in my opinion its much more of a breakthrough than the actual camera itself. R3D files I've been able to deal with easily on a laptop if I'm working on CS4.

Lightest big files I've seen. It's cumbersome if its not drag and drop. It's why I like adobe when it comes to RED.

The Ikonoskop's files are truly uncompressed and measure over 200 MB per second. Those I hear are really difficult and heavy. Then again that camera isn't out yet.

[greymog]

REDCODE is compressed. I remember expecting 400 GB or something after my first shoot, turned out to be 30 GB only. I was a bit scared even.

REDcode is RED's contribution.

[TheRealMe]

REDCODE is compressed. I remember expecting 400 GB or something after my first shoot, turned out to be 30 GB only. I was a bit scared even.

REDcode is RED's contribution.

To put things in perspective, how long was your recording?

To me, the Gh1/5D/7D are the perfect camera to own. Learn with it, bring it everywhere, shoot, practice, practice your composition, and heck, get paid to shoot some projects (depending on the budget).

RED is the perfect camera to rent for that higher-end project.

For me anyway ;-)

[morgan_moore]

So... what's your plan when someone walks in front of the window? Roto?

What about for when half the face of your character is lit by the window and the other half by tungsten lights? What white balance do you use then?

Sounds to me like you're gonna explode your post budget cuz you're too lazy to gel a window with NDs.

-X

All valid points

All im saying is that RAW is more flexible and that cant be a bad thing

Also - you can gel window when shooting 'cinema' (if you have the time/budget) but some, shooting is about recording, reality, events etc not staged scenes etc

If you watch the David Mullen thread on RedUser he is always suggesting huge lighting rigs and Im thinking, yeah at 320ASA you need that rig but at 1250 with the 5d you wouldnt

it seems like there are two cultures

I have the same shoting stills, people seem to boast about thier lighting rigs - to me they just seem to snuff out speed, flexibility and sponteneity

I have been there with my 25ISO Hassy and walls of softboxes, Im much more happy with my D3 and a bit of intelligent post

S

[f64manray]

exactly. the cameras are pencils.

......


No, their like paint brushes. .....or better yet, like a still camera that records moving pictures.

[Rakesh Jacob]

No, their like paint brushes. .....or better yet, like a still camera that records moving pictures.

LOL Touche!

[Terry_Lasater]

This thread reads like a game of one-upmanship to see whose quote will be the best and last.

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/5818/smileypopcorn2.gif

[greymog]

To put things in perspective, how long was your recording?

To me, the Gh1/5D/7D are the perfect camera to own. Learn with it, bring it everywhere, shoot, practice, practice your composition, and heck, get paid to shoot some projects (depending on the budget).

RED is the perfect camera to rent for that higher-end project.

For me anyway ;-)

I'm personally with you on this, this was the first time i worked with RED, I really had no idea how long things would turn out, we had about 40 min if i remember right of footage, 30 gigs. I expected more. Just me though.

I prefer the DSLR's to RED. They put the form factor into question, and I think of big rig cameras like the RED as something that has only pushed horsepower throughout the years. I'll get flamed for this, but its like a ferrari to a steam engine.

All cameras are still big boxes, These DSLR's are more like part of your arm.

No one's accounted for size, except maybe ikonoskop, and these cameras. I find most independent, mature filmmakers are not as concerned with spatial resolution, they care more about their colors and framerates, still they're ok with features that are available. They always wish gear was smaller, or easily movable and mountable, all this stuff that goes on in the field has remained the same-ish.

I have always preferred a VDSLR. I like where its going, and that's it's so new, and that the form factor is deemed 'wrong'. We're in the process of thinking techniques up for handling these things. Rules could change, whether we want them to or not.

It was the technological limit of times before that created or at least contributed heavily to creating the rules regarding shooting.

I had a D90, and it was like film more than anything else in the fact that I HAD to expose correctly on camera in order to get a usable image. I don't mind the workarounds at all, never have. Sold it for a GH1. After the 7D came out.

Indeed, cameras are pencils.

Cheers, lovely sunday for a ramble.

Disclaimer: This is an opinion, I'm not bashing RED, and not saying features aren't important. Just saying that VDSLR's are more of a breakthrough simply because they scrutinize (whether on purpose or not) the form factor in shooting a moving picture.

T

[mattsand]

If you watch the David Mullen thread on RedUser he is always suggesting huge lighting rigs and Im thinking, yeah at 320ASA you need that rig but at 1250 with the 5d you wouldnt
i'm sure you know this but big budget productions don't typically use more powerful lights because they shoot at lower iso's but because they want to put the lights further away. this makes it easier to avoid shadows, it often looks more natural, it's more easy to control, it gives you more space, and so on. moving a light just twice as far away already eats up the two stops you were ahead.

[xbourque]

Also - you can gel window when shooting 'cinema' (if you have the time/budget) but some, shooting is about recording, reality, events etc not staged scenes etc


I understand what you are getting at, I just think you might be dissapointed by "raw" for moving pictures when you actually use it.

It's going to save some shots that are slightly over or underexposed, or shot with the wrong white balance by mistake in camera (but then again, these things have colour LCDs, you'd have to be blind not to see it while shooting). It will definitely hold up a lot better in grading.

But it won't save you if you have mixed colour temperature lighting.

No matter how run and gun, your lights should be balanced to daylight if you have that window in the shot!

Also, doing masks and paint strokes is nice and fun on a still frame, it gets tedious and painful when you have to do it on 20 mins of footage.

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather use Raw than H264 if given the option at comparable prices, but I don't think Raw is the "cure all" that some people make it out to be.

-X

[Corine]

I mentioned this before on a different thread has anyone used the Canon EOS for filming? I still would like to see a short film shot with the 5D. I did look on youtube but didn't find anything except test shots which a lot of it looks pretty bad. But then we have to say it is youtube link that isn't helpping the look that you are trying to show. Are there any films on the DVX Fest that was shot on the 5D and if not this might and I say might be fun to do a DVX Fest using only the 5D/7D Just food for thought?

I did find this link on youtube that was pretty interesting and I'm sure most of you if not all of you have seen it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfUUySn3y7w

[xbourque]

Start here for good quality 5D2 videos:

http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1200

[morgan_moore]

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather use Raw than H264 if given the option at comparable prices, but I don't think Raw is the "cure all" that some people make it out to be.

-X

We basically agree. Im still in favour of being able to make decisions on my Eizo in a dim lit office rather than on 2inch screen, at 480p, or on a steadicam pilot monitor on a sunny day,

[Rakesh Jacob]

I mentioned this before on a different thread has anyone used the Canon EOS for filming? I still would like to see a short film shot with the 5D. I did look on youtube but didn't find anything except test shots which a lot of it looks pretty bad. But then we have to say it is youtube link that isn't helpping the look that you are trying to show. Are there any films on the DVX Fest that was shot on the 5D and if not this might and I say might be fun to do a DVX Fest using only the 5D/7D Just food for thought?

I did find this link on youtube that was pretty interesting and I'm sure most of you if not all of you have seen it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfUUySn3y7w

This is a pretty cool channel on vimeo for 5Dii narrative stuff. Not all of it's good but there's a couple of gems in there.
http://vimeo.com/channels/47418

This on in perticular has some nice compositions
http://vimeo.com/5410762

[sunburst]

raw doesn't necessarily mean uncompressed, just that it's not converted from luminosity data to your color space of choice. you can compress raw files too, and you can actually compress them more than rgb or yuv files without degrading the quality. redcode and cineform already do, it's likely that more will follow like apple prores and adobe dng.

thanks all, for the heads up on RAW and REDCODE.

Will be very interesting to see what Nikon, and likely others, have up there
sleeve for newer forms of { lossless } compression.

[Zephyrnoid]

thanks all, for the heads up on RAW and REDCODE.

Will be very interesting to see what Nikon, and likely others, have up there
sleeve for newer forms of { lossless } compression.

Long time Nikon user here. Don't look to Nikon for newer forms of lossless codecs that will also deliver a fully functional Video capability. Read my post in Cinema5D.

[f64manray]

Rodney Charter's 7D. This must be for his Face Book page video blog. He surely couldn't be using it in a professional capacity. From Philip Blooms Blog:
http://philipbloom.co.uk/2009/09/01/7d-with-a-big-cinema-lens-on-it/

http://philipbloom.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/27105166-760020cbaae303892e3a64551bd75a3d.4a9da5e4-full1.jpg

http://philipbloom.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/27106170-36049dc55b6d19ced77798976f6462c3.4a9df0ce-scaled.jpg

This might be enough to crush someone's Scarlet dreams. Panavision made custom supports for the 7D to attach it to these lenses. Amazing, the time and trouble to go through to get these lenses to work with a $1,700 DSLR.

[Taylor Rudd]

Is it confirmed that Panavision made the mount? I have reason to believe otherwise, but was just curious...

Everyone, including myself, laughed when Rodney Charters showed up to the ASC/PGA camera test earlier this year with the 5D... now I respect him for utilizaing its potential / ignoring the critics.

[f64manray]

Is it confirmed that Panavision made the mount? I have reason to believe otherwise, but was just curious...

Everyone, including myself, laughed when Rodney Charters showed up to the ASC/PGA camera test earlier this year with the 5D... now I respect him for utilizaing its potential / ignoring the critics.

Bloom says it was custom made by Panavision: http://philipbloom.co.uk/2009/09/01/7d-with-a-big-cinema-lens-on-it/

http://philipbloom.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/27154123-94a0e44b50900d77b00803f4be0fc2a2.4a9df688-full.jpg

[j]

Wow, a "panavised" 7D... A Pana7D.

That means you can go out and rent panavision anamorphics for your 7D... Droool.

[TimurCivan]

lets figure out how to get a PL on this thing already.... even if that mean cutting out its guts.

I'll buy 2..... one for PL one for Everythign else...

[DJK]

Just how much better than superb do you think Scarlet will be. Since you made a prediction, permit me to as well. I've seen the Izzy video. Put the same Iguana in front of the 5DII and see if you can tell a difference.

I predict the image quality between the DSLRs (5D & 7D) and the Scarlet which will be well in excess of $6,000 dollars in S35 will be so close that VDSLRs will actually increase in sales as people sitting on the fence waiting for Scarlet after seeing side by side comparisons won't be able to justify the extra expense.

I'm sorry, but I can't believe that no one has said this sooner -- are you honestly suggesting that there won't be a noticeable difference between the 5/7D, at 1080p with line-skipping, and the S35 Scarlet at 5k?? I mean, I don't claim to be an expert on this -- I don't own any of these cameras yet (obviously nobody owns a Scarlet yet); I'm just a guy who's been following all this, and looking at sample footage, etc. But how would it even be possible for the S35 Scarlet, shooting at 5k, to not achieve vastly superior image quality than the 5/7D? I mean, what am I missing here?

Forgive me, but it just sounds like you're a RED hater who's lost all perspective on this matter. Looking at things objectively, it seems as if there's no reason to believe that even the 2/3 Fixed Lens Scarlet, shooting at 3k, won't beat the 5/7D by a significant margin in terms of image quality. Again, how could it not? If the new Mysterium-X sensor is anywhere near as good as they claim (do you have reason to believe it isn't?), the Scarlet's 3k would have to blow away 1080p with line-skipping. That would be the only possible result, unless RED was exceedingly incompetent on a technical level... and does that really seem likely?

[ydgmdlu]

Forgive me, but it just sounds like you're a RED hater who's lost all perspective on this matter.
I came to that conclusion a long time ago. But, to be fair, he does sound a lot more level-headed than most RED haters.

His main thing is that he likes to equate sub-$2K equipment with high-end, studio-quality equipment. The comparison isn't fair, so dismissing the high-end gear the way that he does just isn't valid. It's like saying that the Canon HV20, however good it is, makes the XH-A1 a pointless investment. It's apples and oranges.

[PaPa]

im confused why the two are being compared?

RED: professional cinema camera, records uncompressed, XLR audio for sync sound with the cinema form factor
Canon: Very affordable camera with manual controls and 24p.

Two completely different tools. What's the issue here?

I think if the Canon had XLR ports, with manual sound control, no recording limit and uncompressed image, then i dare say there would be room to compare.

But now for the price, I'm hella excited for the 7D. But if i had the money, the clear winner would be with red/scarlet.

[f64manray]

I came to that conclusion a long time ago. But, to be fair, he does sound a lot more level-headed than most RED haters.

His main thing is that he likes to equate sub-$2K equipment with high-end, studio-quality equipment. The comparison isn't fair, so dismissing the high-end gear the way that he does just isn't valid. It's like saying that the Canon HV20, however good it is, makes the XH-A1 a pointless investment. It's apples and oranges.

I believe I was responding to someone that was saying that once Scarlet is released, it will put an end to all this VDSLR stuff. I was just saying that there will not be enough of a quality difference for most of those people to want to spend thousands more on a S35 Scarlet. It will be a much different playing field than it is now when Scarlet is released.

Do I believe Scarlet will have the edge in IQ and in post work flow? Yes, but will it be worth thousands more to most people. No, I don't think it will.

Rodney Charter is using the 5DII and now apparently the 7D in a professional capacity on a network series. It seems apparent that the 5DII is at least clearing the bar IQ wise even if it doesn't have all the features that Red has.

IQ between the 5dII and Red One is being compared by many professionals everywhere. I didn't start it. Quite frankly, I was amazed when I started seeing discussions on it.

[Nik Manning]

The 7D is being compared to the Scarlet because it now has the largest sensor under $10k. Before Scarlet was coming to the market it was going to give us a 2/3 sensor for around $4k. That offering isn't as impressive now that we have a super 35mm sensor video camera for under $2k. I know that for the last 5 years or so we have been asking for bigger chips, better compression,more dynamic range, and better low light performance. We have just recently gave a damn about an image larger than 1080P. The fact is that most professional cameras that are used on tv and for film will shoot 1080p. So realistically we don't need anything bigger than 1080p if you are going to film,blu-ray,tv,youtube, or iphone.

Canon hit a homerun with the 7D. It is an amazing camera at an amazing price. We really can't complain about image quality, dynamic range, low light, sensor size, or price anymore.

[Kholi]

I believe I was responding to someone that was saying that once Scarlet is released, it will put an end to all this VDSLR stuff. I was just saying that there will not be enough of a quality difference for most of those people to want to spend thousands more on a S35 Scarlet. It will be a much different playing field than it is now when Scarlet is released.

Do I believe Scarlet will have the edge in IQ and in post work flow? Yes, but will it be worth thousands more to most people. No, I don't think it will.

Rodney Charter is using the 5DII and now apparently the 7D in a professional capacity on a network series. It seems apparent that the 5DII is at least clearing the bar IQ wise even if it doesn't have all the features that Red has.

IQ between the 5dII and Red One is being compared by many professionals everywhere. I didn't start it. Quite frankly, I was amazed when I started seeing discussions on it.


DVX's and everything after it have done the same thing. There's no real bar. You can compare dog poop to cement all day long, but that doesn't mean you should try to use dog poop to hold your home together.

[f64manray]

DVX's and everything after it have done the same thing. There's no real bar. You can compare dog poop to cement all day long, but that doesn't mean you should try to use dog poop to hold your home together.

Yes, but if you know anything about UBC (univsersl building code). Nowadays, dog poop is exactly what's holding your home together (glued together wood chips, styrofoam, stucco and chicken wire anyway) .... :-) I'm sure there's a good analogy in there somewhere.

[Amr Rahmy]

the problem with most people...

more pixels does not mean more quality.

there was a reason way most people did not buy into the sony dslr, the one with insane pixel count over there canons and nikons. image quality is not measured by pixel count.

there are many problems(fundamental fatal problems) with the red and most people just choose to ignore.

to state a few:

the way they crammed too many pixels and the optical filter works, you don't get aliasing but you pay dearly for it, you loose most of the information and sharp image, the image becomes soft, the light you loose(that's a price you pay on every single frame you record).(the very reason people would consider this camera. the pixel count, is the reason it does not function properly).

the amount of light you loose right off the bat(worse than anything else including consumer camcorders), the really near clipping point(also worse than anything else), and the noise you get everywhere in the image will limit you to no end(all that is better in consumer camcorders again), and even then while abiding to all these rules that you don't normally have to(that will affect your story), you will never be able to make an entire episode or film without the weird noise creeping in.

the list can go on and on...

if i would say one thing that would work, but not considered a film, a weird cg tv production shot entirely or mostly on green screen, they are made badly anyway, so no one would mind, and the camera would look appealing to producers.

just stating one benefit on the dslr side, you can actually use the full range of lens set, and be able to frame from ultra wide to close up and anything in between. the camera will allow you to shoot things impossible on the red, from sets that actually would look like houses and dark places and streets, low light footage that actually look similar to the real world in real conditions.

some other things that may not seem very interesting like the setup time needed to make the sets and shots is dramatically different when you dont loose light to the camera, when you don't need a powerhouse to generate light for a small room. when you don't have to make a decision to change a key scene in the story because the camera cannot capture the image without noise. when you would not have to change every single light source in a location to be able to film a few seconds of footage. when you cannot shoot in public places during the day, when you cannot shoot outdoor footage most of the day or be limited to a certain direction. the production costs adds up pretty quickly.

and the out of focus area in the image of the red is not too pleasing to the eye.

i'm guessing that's enough to consider a dslr.

[Emanuel]

Kholi, something we must admit, as Nik said, this camera is a homerun. It seemed an unexpected business only 10 days ago.

[DJK]

I was just saying that there will not be enough of a quality difference for most of those people to want to spend thousands more on a S35 Scarlet. It will be a much different playing field than it is now when Scarlet is released.

Yes, but before (in the post I was replying to), you didn't seem to be referring to future DSLRs. So which is it? I mean, it's one thing to suggest that, when Scarlet is finally released, there may be DSLRs which can rival it's image quality. But to suggest that current ones (shooting 1080p with line-skipping) will... it seems a little absurd.

I mean, sure, maybe if everything is compressed to 720p on YouTube or Vimeo, there might not be a very noticeable difference. But how shortsighted would a person have to be in order to buy a camera based on what they could get away with when compressing their footage to the current standard of web video? Even if that's the only place your videos are going to be seen, things are certainly going to advance beyond that.


Do I believe Scarlet will have the edge in IQ and in post work flow? Yes, but will it be worth thousands more to most people. No, I don't think it will.
I would imagine that by "thousands more", you're referring to the difference in price between the 5/7D and the S35 Scarlet. But even suggesting that it would take the S35 Scarlet to beat the current crop of DSLRs seems far-fetched. As I said before, it seems likely that even the 2/3 Fixed Lens Scarlet will blow the 5/7D away in terms of image quality, not to mention features. If 3k RAW and 120 fps isn't worth a little more to you than a 1080p line-skipping H.264 camera with a max framerate of 60 in 720p, did you ever really need a camera like the Scarlet in the first place?

My perception of this is, sure, RED is trying to reach an entirely new segment of the market with the Scarlet, but still, if you'd be willing to settle for a 1080p line-skipping DSLR with limited framerates, over what RED has to offer, you were never part of their intended market in the first place. That's the impression I get, anyway.

[f64manray]

Yes, but before (in the post I was replying to), you didn't seem to be referring to future DSLRs. So which is it? I mean, it's one thing to suggest that, when Scarlet is finally released, there may be DSLRs which can rival it's image quality. But to suggest that current ones (shooting 1080p with line-skipping) will... it seems a little absurd.

Seems a little absurd? It seems mega hella absurd, but here we are discussing it, and their discussing it on the Red forums as well. This current state (never mind the future) of VDSLR technology is being compared not to the non existent Scarlet but to Red's premeire camera Red One. I hear repeatedly that 5DII can be intercut with the Red One successfully. The 5DII is being intercut with whatever main cameras are being used on the network series "Washington Field". You keep saying it's absurd, but it's being done. The quality is there now, so say the pros with much more experience than you and I. h.264 may be more of a finishing codec, but if you can get it right in camera with picture styles, so much the better. It's my understanding that the 5DII image can be flattened out to some extent which will allow it to be tweeked even more in post. Sure it's not Red Raw, but at $1,700 for the 7D, I think it's a sacrifice many will make. Right now I'm trying to make decisions about exactly what I need to acchomplish my goals with the image quality that I need at this time and people like Charter, Laforet, Bloom and others are saying the 5DII IQ is there now. I was on my way to buy a DVX100, then the D90 was released, and it's been a roller coaster ride ever since.

Red makes a fine camera, but if I can finish out in camera with only moderate grading in post, I think that work flow would suit me better at this time.




I mean, sure, maybe if everything is compressed to 720p on YouTube or Vimeo, there might not be a very noticeable difference. But how shortsighted would a person have to be in order to buy a camera based on what they could get away with when compressing their footage to the current standard of web video? Even if that's the only place your videos are going to be seen, things are certainly going to advance beyond that.

Yes, Jim. They probably will. I'm glad I could inspire you to become a DVXuser member. :-)

[Rakesh Jacob]

but still, if you'd be willing to settle for a 1080p line-skipping DSLR with limited framerates, over what RED has to offer, you were never part of their intended market in the first place. That's the impression I get, anyway.
Dude don't be condescending, the reason people in here are using Panny, Canon and Nikon DSLRs is because they EXIST and they are cheap! Plain and simple, not a big deal really. We want tools that give us the best price to performance ratio that is within our financial reach and that means different things to different people but there is no denying what these new cams bring to the table. And once Scarlet gets to the table we can all go to reduser and troll about how Canon is gonna kick their a$$ when the xDmkxx comes out or what ever the f--- is on Canon rumors next year.

[Justyn]

From another stand-point who's to say that the next generation of Red cameras won't be plagued with build after build to get things right. Here in town, at the big red showcase they weren't able to get the camera to boot up and work for the presentation. On another shoot the next day, they had to ice the camera down from the heat. Now, that's something rather disconcerting and I read in a report from a DP that he had to usually start and restart the Red one atleast 3 times and sometimes as many as 6 times. With the long boot up time, that could be a deal killer. Maybe its the nature of being a true start up and competition being what it is, these other manufacturers have their tech worked out.. and have the resources and experience to deliver something that is ready for primetime from day one.


Either way, I think the time is here to consider a purchase for my next feature and possibly to purchase 3 of them.. Whatever it may be. Shooting film, renting a film camera, or renting an expensive HD camera doesn't seem like a smart decision.. My shoot goes down in 18 months or so... during that time, maybe these buggers will be given away in kids cereal.. who knows...


I will say it's exciting times and all of this explosion within the last 5 years. Amazing!

[Justyn]

Johnny... You are right there, that did sound a bit condesending.. but that's the point and the arguments those will have who have vested themselves in higher end stuff. I remember being told that you can't edit full motion video on ATA drives when my buddy was doing his editing on expensive SCSI drives and expensive capture cards.. Firewire was a huge advance there and it left a lot of people pissed who invested so heaviliy in systems that were.. well bloated.

It's like anyone who had a varicam.. I used to rent that camera but then when the HVXs came out... I didn't see much point.. Sure, nicer glass and all that but there were limits to its usability and it was also 1500 bucks a day to rent.

you'll always get those condesending looks and comments but who cares when the results speak for themselves. There's quite a bit of footage out there that compares the cameras and there really isn't that much of a difference..

Maybe you get a snobby attitude, a beret and a free steak dinner when you buy a Red. Hey... that's some good marketing.

[Rakesh Jacob]

LOL Thnx Justyn I need to hear that.

[ChipG]

From another stand-point who's to say that the next generation of Red cameras won't be plagued with build after build to get things right. Here in town, at the big red showcase they weren't able to get the camera to boot up and work for the presentation. On another shoot the next day, they had to ice the camera down from the heat. Now, that's something rather disconcerting and I read in a report from a DP that he had to usually start and restart the Red one atleast 3 times and sometimes as many as 6 times. With the long boot up time, that could be a deal killer. Maybe its the nature of being a true start up and competition being what it is, these other manufacturers have their tech worked out.. and have the resources and experience to deliver something that is ready for primetime from day one.


Either way, I think the time is here to consider a purchase for my next feature and possibly to purchase 3 of them.. Whatever it may be. Shooting film, renting a film camera, or renting an expensive HD camera doesn't seem like a smart decision.. My shoot goes down in 18 months or so... during that time, maybe these buggers will be given away in kids cereal.. who knows...


I will say it's exciting times and all of this explosion within the last 5 years. Amazing!

My exact experience with Red but it dosen't stop there, just as many if not more nightmares in post.

Dude, if your not shooting for another 18 months wait 16 months, you will have one sweet cam by that time :thumbup: a 7dii or something, maybe the Scarlet issues will be worked out and we will have 24 core computers by then.

[DJK]

Seems a little absurd? It seems mega hella absurd, but here we are discussing it, and their discussing it on the Red forums as well. This current state (never mind the future) of VDSLR technology is being compared not to the non existent Scarlet but to Red's premeire camera Red One. I hear repeatedly that 5DII can be intercut with the Red One successfully. The 5DII is being intercut with whatever main cameras are being used on the network series "Washington Field". You keep saying it's absurd, but it's being done. The quality is there now...

Hold on now, I never said it was absurd for the 5DII to be intercut with the RED ONE. I wasn't disputing any of that. What I was saying seems absurd, is the notion that the Scarlet won't offer a noticeable improvement in image quality over the 5DII or 7D. Right now, the 5DII may be the best alternative to something much more expensive. But the Scarlet hasn't even been released yet, so it's not as if anyone has the option to choose it instead, or has made the comparison and deemed it not worth the extra money.

Plus, remember that the Scarlet will be using a next generation Mysterium-X sensor, and thus should perform even better than the original Mysterium in the RED ONE. Of course, the RED ONE will be getting that upgrade as well, so everything will be different by then. Let's see how many people are still intercutting the 5DII or 7D with an upgraded RED ONE, when they have the choice of a Scarlet instead. Because I'm certainly not saying that the 5DII or 7D are crap -- just that it seems like the Scarlet will be significantly better... at least when things are compared "outside the Vimeo window", as someone put it earlier in this thread.


Red makes a fine camera, but if I can finish out in camera with only moderate grading in post, I think that work flow would suit me better at this time.Well, the Scarlet is also supposed to have the FF1080p option...


Yes, Jim. They probably will. I'm glad I could inspire you to become a DVXuser member. :-)Hahahahaha!!!! Right... :grin: Does he post on forums in disguise?? I doubt that. Also, I actually registered here a few months ago, if you look at the date next to my name. Although I did post here for the first time because of you, so there's that... :D


Dude don't be condescending, the reason people in here are using Panny, Canon and Nikon DSLRs is because they EXIST and they are cheap! Plain and simple, not a big deal really. We want tools that give us the best price to performance ratio that is within our financial reach and that means different things to different people but there is no denying what these new cams bring to the table. And once Scarlet gets to the table we can all go to reduser and troll about how Canon is gonna kick their a$$ when the xDmkxx comes out or what ever the f--- is on Canon rumors next year.

I apologize if it came across that way. But, I mean, if the Scarlet manages to deliver on it's promises, one would be settling if they used a 1080p DSLR instead -- especially one with line-skipping. And if someone would rather save a little money that way, I honestly don't believe they're a part of Scarlet's intended market. If you read their forums, you see that RED is always talking about how much they care about image quality, and how they scoff at shortcuts which comprimise it. So it's obvious that with the Scarlet, they're targeting people with lower bugets, who still have the highest standards. So I'm sorry if I offended you, but I don't know how to put it any other way.

[tnle2]

I apologize if it came across that way. But, I mean, if the Scarlet manages to deliver on it's promises, one would be settling if they used a 1080p DSLR instead -- especially one with line-skipping. And if someone would rather save a little money that way, I honestly don't believe they're a part of Scarlet's intended market. If you read their forums, you see that RED is always talking about how much they care about image quality, and how they scoff at shortcuts which comprimise it. So it's obvious that with the Scarlet, they're targeting people with lower bugets, who still have the highest standards.

I think most (but not all) of the Scarlet market is actually more interested in value than the highest possible image quality. This market probably mainly consist of cost-conscious enthusiast so they will rather pay less if what they get for their money is at the sweet spot of "good enough." I think buying based on value is the best strategy with technology products because they get better all the time and way too soon.

When it was first announced, Scarlet was the best value because they were only competing against 1/4", 1/3" and 1/2" cameras that often cost $8K and RED was the only company willing to make a killer camera like that. This is why the Scarlet line started at 2/3" (to be just a bit better than the competition).

But now this whole thing has been turned upside down by HDSLRs. In a matter of weeks we will have shipping cameras that do 1080/24P and 720/60P on an S35 sensor for $1700. That's just astounding!! For many, this will be good enough because you're not risking a lot in depreciation. So it's reasonable to expect that a big majority of Scarlet's market will migrate down to this lower price point. This could possibly impact Scarlet's sales volume, which it needs in the first place just to exist at its price point, unless RED has finds a way to really cut cost.

Edit: True, HDSLRs are still lacking in monitoring, audio inputs/controls (and AF/AE for those that need it). But a 7D is already basically an S35 brain for $1700 (except it can't do 120 fps). If Canon can just add a tilting screen or VF and audio inputs for another $1000, 2/3" Scarlet will still be competing against an S35 sensor camera.

[powervideo]

I'm getting a 7D but may well get a Scarlet 2/3" as well when it comes out. It's not just picture quality. Scarlet will (should) have videographer-focussed tools like a proper EVF, on-board XLR sound, compatibility with V-mount/AB battery systems, 120fps, blah, blah, blah. Both platforms will have different strengths. DSLR's are not going to necessarily wipe out Scarlet.

Peter

[Nik Manning]

I agree the 7D will not wipeout the Scarlet camera but it will cut into there sales. The scarlet will sell less as a direct result of the Canon 7D being on the market. How do I know? Because I am not buying a scarlet! This is a ridiculous amount of quality and functionality for under $2k. The cheapest scarlet will be $4k. I just don't need what scarlet is offering at that price. I am sure there are a lot of shooter who feel the same way. Compare the 7D to all other cameras on the market under 10k. I think anyone who isn't shooting video as there fulltime or primary job should probably get the 7D over the scarlet.

The canon 7D is a 1080p24 camera with a super 35mm sensor for under $2k. That is the bottom line.

[dantewaters]

Ok I wasn't the best at math so I'm asking if someone can explain to me how big these sensors really are using something like a dime or penny to compare the sizes.



1/3" HVX
1/2" Ex1
2/3" HPX 500 / orginal scarlet

and how big is a 35mm sensor (how big is a mm in comparison to an inch).

[seven.b]

no 1/3" or 1/2" but it might help you out a bit... http://www.red.com/images/pages/cameras/technology/formats.jpg

[daveswan]

The economy killed my Scarlet dreams that and the plummeting Pound. The original "3k for $3K" Scarlet would have come in at ~£2000 or a bit under, now it's looking more like £3500.
I'm a hobbyest, an amateur enthusiast who wants the best image I can afford, which the original Scarlet would have given me, not now, £3500 is well beyond both budget and sense, whereas £1700 or (As PB has hinted) less is both.
I already have a 5D mkI and very good it is too, the 7D would be fore cine, or where I may need / want to do both but don't want to lug two cams around.

So, the 7D looks like the first vDSLR that's both usable and affordable for me and others like me. Oh yes, before anyone mutters about Mysterium-X, remember Canon have their own sensor line and can turn out new itterations faster than Jim can brew a coffee.

And I can use the glass I've already got...Game On!
Dave

[squig]

Ok I wasn't the best at math so I'm asking if someone can explain to me how big these sensors really are using something like a dime or penny to compare the sizes.



1/3" HVX
1/2" Ex1
2/3" HPX 500 / orginal scarlet

and how big is a 35mm sensor (how big is a mm in comparison to an inch).

If I've got this right the 7D is roughly 1 and 1/4" and the MKII is almost 2" but I was never that great with Math so don't quote me.

[Ian-T]

Ok I wasn't the best at math so I'm asking if someone can explain to me how big these sensors really are using something like a dime or penny to compare the sizes.



1/3" HVX
1/2" Ex1
2/3" HPX 500 / orginal scarlet

and how big is a 35mm sensor (how big is a mm in comparison to an inch).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sensor_sizes_overlaid_inside.svg
I hope this helps a little.

From here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format

[squig]

I was close, more like just short or 1 and 3/4", stupid imperial system.

[Barry_Green]

1/3" HVX approx 5.25 x 2.95mm, for 15.5mm2
1/2" Ex1 approx 33.75mm2
2/3" HPX 500 / orginal scarlet approx 9.6 x 5.4mm, for 52mm2

35mm movie film: 22x12mm, for 264mm2

[squig]

So is it safe to say the 7D has approx a 5/3" sensor?

[Barry_Green]

Well, see, the thing about the "inch" naming convention has really nothing to do with actual inch measurements. A 1/3" sensor is, in no way, 1/3". And a 2/3" sensor doesn't even begin to approach 2/3" in any direction.

If you read the specs carefully, they typically will call it something like a ' 1/3" type sensor '. And what they're getting at is, if you were using an original old tube-type camera with 1/3" tubes, then this silicon sensor will have about the same imaging surface area as that tube had.

I don't know if it's true, but I've heard the 4/3 sensor system was named that because of two reasons: a) it's a 4:3 aspect ratio, and b) it's as large as a 4/3 of an inch "type" of sensor would be (meaning 1.333 inches).

If that's the case, then 5/3 (1.67 inches) might be an appropriate name for what the 7D has.

I prefer to just say that it has a sensor the same size as 35mm movie film, and be done with the whole confusing "inch" thing.

[Rakesh Jacob]

If you read the specs carefully, they typically will call it something like a ' 1/3" type sensor '. And what they're getting at is, if you were using an original old tube-type camera with 1/3" tubes, then this silicon sensor will have about the same imaging surface area as that tube had.

Cool info on the "type sensor" convention Barry.


1/3" HVX approx 5.25 x 2.95mm, for 15.5mm2
1/2" Ex1 approx 33.75mm2
2/3" HPX 500 / orginal scarlet approx 9.6 x 5.4mm, for 52mm2

35mm movie film: 22x12mm, for 264mm2
I definetly find the surface area of the sensors the easiest way to compare size.
4/3" ~ 225mm2
Canon APS-C ~ 329mm2
Nikon DX ~ 374mm2
S35 ~ 464mm2
Canon APS-H (1.3x crop) ~ 548mm2
FF 35mm still ~ 864mm2
Obviously sensor design and DSP play extremely significant roles, and size isn't everything... depending who you ask... I'm in the how you use it camp myself :(

But 1/3" 15mm2 from using my HVX200a last summer to 864mm2 5Dmkii this summer HOLLY CRAP! I love life and where it's heading!

EDIT: Of course the proportions are very important also because the more square a sensor is, the more unasable surface area on it for when you shoot 16:9

[DJK]

Holy cow, it's a quote-o-rama!! :D


I think most (but not all) of the Scarlet market is actually more interested in value than the highest possible image quality.


Well sure. By "the highest standards", I didn't mean literally the highest image quality in existence. I meant more like, the highest image quality a person could afford. Obviously, if a person simply can't afford Scarlet, nothing else really matters. But if you were considering a 5DII or D7. The fixed lens Scarlet isn't that much more expensive. The S35 Scarlet may be, but at 5k, it seems like it couldn't help but deliver far superior image quality than a DSLR at 1080p with line-skipping. As for whether a dramatic increase in image quality is worth the extra money, I guess that's a matter of opinion.



But now this whole thing has been turned upside down by HDSLRs. In a matter of weeks we will have shipping cameras that do 1080/24P and 720/60P on an S35 sensor for $1700. That's just astounding!! For many, this will be good enough because you're not risking a lot in depreciation. So it's reasonable to expect that a big majority of Scarlet's market will migrate down to this lower price point.


But then were they really Scarlet's market in the first place? Again, it seems to me that anyone willing to forget about all the Scarlet will offer, is not the type of person Scarlet is aimed at. I mean, I think that by definition, you're not a part of Scarlet's intended market if you could afford it, but choose a 1080p line-skipping H.264 DSLR instead because you'll save a little money.



But a 7D is already basically an S35 brain for $1700 (except it can't do 120 fps).


But with the line-skipping, you're not exactly getting all the advantages of a sensor that size, right? For that reason alone, could video from the 7D really be compared to video from the S35 Scarlet? Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how I understand it -- it employs line-skipping, and only records heavily compressed 1080p. That's a lot different than the S35 Scarlet using all the sensor, and recording to 5k RAW, is it not?



The scarlet will sell less as a direct result of the Canon 7D being on the market. How do I know? Because I am not buying a scarlet! This is a ridiculous amount of quality and functionality for under $2k. The cheapest scarlet will be $4k. I just don't need what scarlet is offering at that price.


It seems to me that the 7D is only going to take away the Scarlet sales of those who never really needed it in the first place. Again, I've said it a million times, but 1080p with line-skipping, H.264, and very limited framerates... how is that an answer for Scarlet at 3k and up resolutions, and 120 fps with the 2/3? It isn't. Anyone who's serious about needing/wanting what Scarlet will offer is simply not going to settle for a 7D instead. That's why I don't see how it's really cutting into Scarlet's market. Do you see what I'm saying here?



I am sure there are a lot of shooter who feel the same way. Compare the 7D to all other cameras on the market under 10k. I think anyone who isn't shooting video as there fulltime or primary job should probably get the 7D over the scarlet.


Well, I'm not shooting video as a job. It's purely a hobby for me right now, and I can tell you that if the Scarlet works as advertised, I wouldn't even consider getting anything less at this point. I'm getting at least a 2/3 Fixed Lens Scarlet, because image quality is simply too important to me. I mean, it's not as if it's $20,000 more expensive. At only twice the price of the 7D, I just can't justify settling for something that's "good enough". Because even if it really is, for how long will it be? It seems silly to shoot in only 1080p when such higher resolutions are becoming available for reasonable prices, especially since higher resolution displays are sure to follow. I don't want to worry about how my 1080p footage is going to look on a 4k display.

[Rakesh Jacob]

But with the line-skipping, you're not exactly getting all the advantages of a sensor that size, right? For that reason alone, could video from the 7D really be compared to video from the S35 Scarlet? Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how I understand it -- it employs line-skipping, and only records heavily compressed 1080p. That's a lot different than the S35 Scarlet using all the sensor, and recording to 5k RAW, is it not?


For me this is the only HYPOTHETICAL argument for the Scarlet, however... the 7D is a LITERAL camera :grin:

[dantewaters]

Thanks a lot gentlemen... I know a mm was smaller than an inch but I never really had anything tangible to compare it to so I used an inch, but looking at that pic with all the sensors I have a good Idea what I'm dealing with.

[griffin86]

DJK- no offense but what is the problem with shooting with a real camera that is here today and moving up if the Scarlett or who knows comes out tomorrow?

on the technical side of things I think the measurbation has gotten a little overboard, we forget sometimes that manufacturers tout performances specs beyond that of which may be in the range of human perception anyhow-
http://media.panavision.com/ScreeningRoom/Screening_Room/Demystifying_Part1.html - watch these videos given by two leading authorities (vids 1-7) to get a sense of what I am saying. Also take a read into home cinema systems and how does the human eye and brain pick up on certain things- there isn't much detail beyond 50-70 lp/mm (equates to around 1000 lp/in now that ive checked) that a human eye can detect at a normal viewing distance (1.5x the screen size) under most circumstances. (see Nyquist Theorem)

I gotta find the link but the notion of 4k displays would be nice but trust there is more to worry about than a pixel count on the screen or your acquisition- not to mention that there is more to a "pixel" than meets the eye and then you ask whats 3k and all this stuff really mean? everything and nothing;-)

that is a blurb just to state that it will be a lot more than just a cam's spec that'll make headlines at the next big film fest or whatever, it'll be a filmmaker with a vision or something clever... Let's invest a lot more time here trying to work on making these limited tools reach their full potential rather than hack away until some dream camera shows up on the scene...
I, like many of the posters here would love a Scarlett or any of these cool new cameras because they'd be cool and new things just to try out but we lose sight of what's most important when we drag ourselves into a "my cam is bigger and better than xx's" debacle.

at the end of the day if you don't like anything but the non-existent scarlett to shoot with then go and use only that- while the remainder of the community will trek with a whatever kind of cam they find to suit their budget and needs;-)

much love and all the best,
Elijah

[griffin86]

the inch designation was always confusing- the inch and the entire customary system is confusing- what the hell is an inch? 12"= a foot? 3'= a yard!? 5280'= 1760 yards= a mile? all the other nations have it easy doing math:-) lol

[Ryan Paige]

But with the line-skipping, you're not exactly getting all the advantages of a sensor that size, right? For that reason alone, could video from the 7D really be compared to video from the S35 Scarlet? Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how I understand it -- it employs line-skipping, and only records heavily compressed 1080p. That's a lot different than the S35 Scarlet using all the sensor, and recording to 5k RAW, is it not?

The true comparison is how the resultant image looks when I'm finished with it. I hardly care what magic the gnomes that live inside the camera use to get that image.



Well, I'm not shooting video as a job. It's purely a hobby for me right now, and I can tell you that if the Scarlet works as advertised, I wouldn't even consider getting anything less at this point. I'm getting at least a 2/3 Fixed Lens Scarlet, because image quality is simply too important to me. I mean, it's not as if it's $20,000 more expensive. At only twice the price of the 7D, I just can't justify settling for something that's "good enough". Because even if it really is, for how long will it be? It seems silly to shoot in only 1080p when such higher resolutions are becoming available for reasonable prices, especially since higher resolution displays are sure to follow. I don't want to worry about how my 1080p footage is going to look on a 4k display.

If it doesn't mean anything for you to wait an indefinite amount of time for a camera that may be better, then more power to you. But there's always going to be something better over the horizon. At $1,700, a compromised (everything has compromises of some sort) camera that lets me shoot now (or a month from now, as the case may be) has much more value than a camera whose availability to me might be a year or more away and that may or may not live up to the specs. It's not like it costs $20,000. And even if I stop using the Canon as a video camera in favor of something better, it still has use as a still camera. But, it may well be that the $1,700 Canon does everything I need it to do, negating the need for anything better for an even longer period of time.

[Zephyrnoid]

we forget sometimes that manufacturers tout performances specs beyond that of which may be in the range of human perception anyhow-
http://media.panavision.com/Screenin...ing_Part1.html (http://media.panavision.com/ScreeningRoom/Screening_Room/Demystifying_Part1.html) - watch these videos given by two leading authorities (vids 1-7) to get a sense of what I am saying. Also take a read into home cinema systems and how does the human eye and brain pick up on certain things- there isn't much detail beyond 1000 lp per inch that a human eye can detect at a normal viewing distance (1.5x the screen size) under most circumstances.

Echoes what I've been saying for years - to deaf ears. Resolution wise, the human eye perceives with the equivalence of a 40 megapixel sensor. But that's only at roughly a 3mm diameter area off axis to the fovea. So in fact, we are very closely approaching content display that finally 'matches' what the eye can resolve.
But this is besides the point. In human visual perception, it's the 'impression' that a visual experience makes that matters most to our brains. That impression is resolution independent.
Keep in mind that about 90% of the data that you see in detail with your eyes is 'trashed' in a form of biochemical compression. We only vaguely recollect summary details, since the hyper-detail of the 40 megapixel sensor only serves us for a fraction of a second at a time.
This is why film making is mostly about everything OTHER than resolution. :grin:

[Barry_Green]

That's why I don't see how it's really cutting into Scarlet's market. Do you see what I'm saying here?
Well, it obviously depends on what you consider Scarlet's market.

When Scarlet was announced, the cheapest HD camera on the market with a sensor 2/3" or larger was the HPX500, at $14,000 for the body alone.

Everyone in the indie filmmaking crowd wants a big sensor and interchangeable lenses.

So 2/3" was considered a big sensor, and the HPX500 had interchangeable lenses, and it was $14,000. Along comes the Scarlet, and suddenly *everyone* is interested. 2/3" at $2500? Why, of course, sign us all up! Ted Schilowitz is famous for saying that "soccer moms" would buy a Scarlet. Obviously professional shooters were/are interested, as were filmmakers, just about everyone other than broadcast was extremely interested in a 2/3" camera at $2500! Scarlet's potential market was massive.

Only... now, the landscape is very different. Now you don't have to pay $14,000 for a 2/3" sensor body-only camera. Now you can have a large-sensor (much larger than 2/3") interchangeable-lens HD camera for under $1000 (the D90). You can get one with a great lens and 1080/24p for $1500 (GH1). Or you can get one with a full movie-sized sensor, body-only, for $1700 (7D).

For those who were in the market for a large-sensor HD camera with interchangeable lenses, surely these provide a compelling alternative to the much-more-expensive fixed-lens Scarlet ("full shooting kit at $3750"). I dare say that that whole segment of the market, who would otherwise have gone for a Scarlet, are probably not going to anymore.

So yes, I think the DSLR video revolution is definitely cutting into Scarlet's market, unquestionably.

Thing is, the announced Scarlet offers a lot more than huge swaths of the audience would ever want or need. 3K? 4K? 5K? 6K? Do you NEED that? Are you willing to pay more for it? Maybe you are, maybe they aren't, see? Raw workflow -- do you need it? How many people shoot raw on their DSLRs, vs. just shooting JPG? I'd dare say that the overwhelming majority shoot JPG, and the hardcore pros shoot raw. And I think we'll see those same numbers reflected in adoption rates of inexpensive HD cameras.

Scarlet is a world apart from the DSLRs. It's designed as a pure cinema rig. It's extendable and modular and upgradeable and etc. etc. etc. To some people that will be very appealing. To others, you're getting a fantastic 1080p image out of a $1500 DSLR with a great autofocusing 10:1 zoom and interchangeable lenses, and that is going to be incredibly appealing. To others, you can get (potentially) even better imagery out of a $1700 DSLR, with interchangeable lenses. And that will be incredibly appealing.

So why should they pony up $3750 for a Scarlet, for features that they may not ever even use or want? A Hummer is a big vehicle and has certain offroad capability, but a Hyundai Accent will get you from point A to point B too, costs about 1/5 as much, and is better on gas. You could argue that the Hummer does everything the Accent does, plus has offroad capability, plus can haul more equipment, it's "future proof" because what if you need to go offroad someday, and it's "safer" in an accident, even if it costs more it's "better", right? -- but seriously, which one do you think sells more in the market?

Point being, there's a massive market out here, and the number of folks who can afford a $1500 camera purchase is probably 100x as large as the number of folks who can afford a $7500 body-only, and probably at least 10x as large as the number of folks who could stretch out a $3750 2/3" fixed-lens Scarlet kit.

(p.s. you keep talking about "line-skipping" -- have you seen quality GH1 or 5DMkII footage on an HDTV?)

[Michael Olsen]

Barry, you have a great way with words. Maybe you should write a book? :beer:

[Barry_Green]

(and in case anyone fails to recognize this) -- I consider myself absolutely 100% the bullseye target market for the Scarlet. Without a doubt, unquestionably. Been looking forward to since the day I sold my Red One. Definitely will be the earliest of early adopters.

But that doesn't stop me from seeing that there's a vast market out there with different priorities, needs, and budgets.

[Nik Manning]

Well, it obviously depends on what you consider Scarlet's market.

When Scarlet was announced, the cheapest HD camera on the market with a sensor 2/3" or larger was the HPX500, at $14,000 for the body alone.

Everyone in the indie filmmaking crowd wants a big sensor and interchangeable lenses.

So 2/3" was considered a big sensor, and the HPX500 had interchangeable lenses, and it was $14,000. Along comes the Scarlet, and suddenly *everyone* is interested. 2/3" at $2500? Why, of course, sign us all up! Ted Schilowitz is famous for saying that "soccer moms" would buy a Scarlet. Obviously professional shooters were/are interested, as were filmmakers, just about everyone other than broadcast was extremely interested in a 2/3" camera at $2500! Scarlet's potential market was massive.

Only... now, the landscape is very different. Now you don't have to pay $14,000 for a 2/3" sensor body-only camera. Now you can have a large-sensor (much larger than 2/3") interchangeable-lens HD camera for under $1000 (the D90). You can get one with a great lens and 1080/24p for $1500 (GH1). Or you can get one with a full movie-sized sensor, body-only, for $1700 (7D).

For those who were in the market for a large-sensor HD camera with interchangeable lenses, surely these provide a compelling alternative to the much-more-expensive fixed-lens Scarlet ("full shooting kit at $3750"). I dare say that that whole segment of the market, who would otherwise have gone for a Scarlet, are probably not going to anymore.

So yes, I think the DSLR video revolution is definitely cutting into Scarlet's market, unquestionably.

Thing is, the announced Scarlet offers a lot more than huge swaths of the audience would ever want or need. 3K? 4K? 5K? 6K? Do you NEED that? Are you willing to pay more for it? Maybe you are, maybe they aren't, see? Raw workflow -- do you need it? How many people shoot raw on their DSLRs, vs. just shooting JPG? I'd dare say that the overwhelming majority shoot JPG, and the hardcore pros shoot raw. And I think we'll see those same numbers reflected in adoption rates of inexpensive HD cameras.

Scarlet is a world apart from the DSLRs. It's designed as a pure cinema rig. It's extendable and modular and upgradeable and etc. etc. etc. To some people that will be very appealing. To others, you're getting a fantastic 1080p image out of a $1500 DSLR with a great autofocusing 10:1 zoom and interchangeable lenses, and that is going to be incredibly appealing. To others, you can get (potentially) even better imagery out of a $1700 DSLR, with interchangeable lenses. And that will be incredibly appealing.

So why should they pony up $3750 for a Scarlet, for features that they may not ever even use or want? A Hummer is a big vehicle and has certain offroad capability, but a Hyundai Accent will get you from point A to point B too, costs about 1/5 as much, and is better on gas. You could argue that the Hummer does everything the Accent does, plus has offroad capability, plus can haul more equipment, it's "future proof" because what if you need to go offroad someday, and it's "safer" in an accident, even if it costs more it's "better", right? -- but seriously, which one do you think sells more in the market?

Point being, there's a massive market out here, and the number of folks who can afford a $1500 camera purchase is probably 100x as large as the number of folks who can afford a $7500 body-only, and probably at least 10x as large as the number of folks who could stretch out a $3750 2/3" fixed-lens Scarlet kit.

(p.s. you keep talking about "line-skipping" -- have you seen quality GH1 or 5DMkII footage on an HDTV?)

Thank you so much Barry. I will refer back to this post as the foundation for so many arguments in the future. :) As soon as I saw the Canon 7D specs I knew that the scarlet was going to be on hold for me. I have never bought a video camera over $800 or a still camera over $500. But I was very interested in putting the money up for a scarlet. But now I feel as if I don't need it to be confident in what I will be shooting. I immediately put up the cash for a 7D. I get 2 cameras for the price of 1!
It is an amazing value.

[TimurCivan]

line skipping doesnt matter when its skipping every other line on a sensor that has 3.5k lines....

[Barry_Green]

Well, to be fair, it *can* matter on items such as extremely fine detail in horizontal or vertical lines, etc. You can get some aliasing and moire that wouldn't happen on a every-pixel full-coverage sensor.

The question is whether it *does* matter.

[TimurCivan]

even when subsampled to 1080?

[Barry_Green]

Well, yeah, that's where the issue can occur if it's going to occur. Look at the complaints about aliasing on the 5D. That's what causes it.

Of course, that's what it is *conjectured* to be causing it. I don't know of any official source that has ever confirmed that the Canon cameras are, indeed, skipping lines.

[Rakesh Jacob]

(and in case anyone fails to recognize this) -- I consider myself absolutely 100% the bullseye target market for the Scarlet. Without a doubt, unquestionably. Been looking forward to since the day I sold my Red One. Definitely will be the earliest of early adopters.
.

Hey Barry I'm curious about your reasons for selling the Red One, I'm not trying to read anything into it, just curious, thnx

[Barry_Green]

I had it early, early, early. I was #364. At that point there was simply *no* workflow for Windows users, nor was there going to be for months and months and months. When we'd ask about workflow, we were told "Buy a Scratch system." That's $50,000. I mean, I'd already spent $30k on the Red, and the only other answer anyone would give on workflow was "get a Mac". Great. Thanks. Another $4,000 or $5,000 for a Mac Pro with FCS, a huge learning curve, starting over with everything... and remember, back at this time the was Red's OS was build 13 when I got it, so many, many things just weren't working or hadn't been implemented yet. 3K mode, for example, didn't exist. Lots of things weren't there, it was still very beta (and Red was very clear and upfront about that, by the way, so I'm not complaining about that aspect, just pointing out that what I had wasn't what Red One users today have.) The audio was awful and hissy and required special cables and nonstandard TA3F connectors, in fact I think when I first got it the audio wasn't even enabled! I think that got enabled in a later build. My monitor wouldn't work properly with the Red, a fact I didn't know about until after I'd gotten it. I didn't buy the Red LCD because I had a nice BT-LH80, a $3,000 HD-SDI monitor; but you couldn't use it properly because the Red put out a 1280x848 image and all of the menu options and focus assist and all sorts of things were put outside of the image area. So my monitor could show a downconverted version of the video image, but none of the menus or user-assist tools! So, now, to get the thing working, I'm looking at having to buy a $4,000 EVF -- except they didn't exist at that point other than as extreme backorders. Or the RED LCD, which just bugged me because here I already had a $3,000 8" HD-SDI monitor with pixel-to-pixel display, it grated on me to have to buy another $2,000 worth of LCD and even then it'd be a little 5.6"... and then I stressed about the lens situation, we kept hearing about a Nikon mount coming out, some fancy Berger mount, but that never happened during the time I owned it ... eventually I went with a Cooke 20-100 zoom that I found at Wooden Nickel for $3,000. It showed up and it worked well, but it was bigger than the Bacon-Ets woman's patootie. I mean now the whole package was obscenely huge and heavy, and while I had a decent tripod (nothing exceptional, just a decent Cartoni that's fine for ENG-style cameras), it was completely inadequate to handling the Red+Cooke bulk. I put out bids to various places to get a proper Red-capable tripod. Another $7,000 to $10,000. Sigh. So I was already into the system for $30k, looking at having to pay another $15k or so to get it functional, and even then it wouldn't work with Windows (at that time) and lots of features weren't enabled and nobody could tell me when it'd be able to work the way I wanted it to.

Actually the final straw for when I sold it? After Cineform produced a Red-compatible version of their utility, and Red shut it down, they gave as a reason that Apple and Scratch were the ones who had "answered the call", and so they had an exclusive commitment to basically only honor Apple and Scratch as the only allowable workflows, for a certain period of time. Which meant that even if Avid or Sony or Adobe wanted to provide support, *they couldn't*. So no help was coming. And I didn't want to go Mac again; I'd bought one for the P2 system early on and a month was long enough with that, so...

... between the additional expense, and the editing hassles, and the lens situation, and the functionality, and the more expense, and the lack of rentals coming in...

Bah.

So I figured I'd sell it for now, and buy again once it was done, stable, with a working workflow. I put out a feeler for what I could get for it, and found out that I could sell the package for more than I paid for it, getting enough profit to put both my kids through college for the entire year.

So -- no brainer, ka-ching, sold.

Now the system is more stable, functional, and predictable. Now Vegas and CS4 have workflow options. The Red Primes are shipping, and the Nikon mount is a reality. Things are much, much better in Red-land. I've looked at getting back in, but frankly I don't need what the One does, so the Scarlet seems like it would be plenty enough. So when it comes out, I'll get one.

[Rakesh Jacob]

Cool thnx, what do you think of Vegas 9's handeling of RED files?

[filmmaker's gang]

I had it early, early, early. I was #364. At that point there was simply *no* workflow for Windows users, nor was there going to be for months and months and months. When we'd ask about workflow, we were told "Buy a Scratch system." That's $50,000. I mean, I'd already spent $30k on the Red, and the only other answer anyone would give on workflow was "get a Mac". Great. Thanks. Another $4,000 or $5,000 for a Mac Pro with FCS, a huge learning curve, starting over with everything... and remember, back at this time the was Red's OS was build 13 when I got it, so many, many things just weren't working or hadn't been implemented yet. 3K mode, for example, didn't exist. Lots of things weren't there, it was still very beta (and Red was very clear and upfront about that, by the way, so I'm not complaining about that aspect, just pointing out that what I had wasn't what Red One users today have.) The audio was awful and hissy and required special cables and nonstandard TA3F connectors, in fact I think when I first got it the audio wasn't even enabled! I think that got enabled in a later build. My monitor wouldn't work properly with the Red, a fact I didn't know about until after I'd gotten it. I didn't buy the Red LCD because I had a nice BT-LH80, a $3,000 HD-SDI monitor; but you couldn't use it properly because the Red put out a 1280x848 image and all of the menu options and focus assist and all sorts of things were put outside of the image area. So my monitor could show a downconverted version of the video image, but none of the menus or user-assist tools! So, now, to get the thing working, I'm looking at having to buy a $4,000 EVF -- except they didn't exist at that point other than as extreme backorders. Or the RED LCD, which just bugged me because here I already had a $3,000 8" HD-SDI monitor with pixel-to-pixel display, it grated on me to have to buy another $2,000 worth of LCD and even then it'd be a little 5.6"... and then I stressed about the lens situation, we kept hearing about a Nikon mount coming out, some fancy Berger mount, but that never happened during the time I owned it ... eventually I went with a Cooke 20-100 zoom that I found at Wooden Nickel for $3,000. It showed up and it worked well, but it was bigger than the Bacon-Ets woman's patootie. I mean now the whole package was obscenely huge and heavy, and while I had a decent tripod (nothing exceptional, just a decent Cartoni that's fine for ENG-style cameras), it was completely inadequate to handling the Red+Cooke bulk. I put out bids to various places to get a proper Red-capable tripod. Another $7,000 to $10,000. Sigh. So I was already into the system for $30k, looking at having to pay another $15k or so to get it functional, and even then it wouldn't work with Windows (at that time) and lots of features weren't enabled and nobody could tell me when it'd be able to work the way I wanted it to.you're improving dude.. why didn't you use paragraphs?? :huh:

it'd be more clear to read :zombie_smiley:

[ChipG]

If you guys feel the need to buy a Red I'd wait to see what's going to happen to all these (500+) Red for Epic trade ins.

[Barry_Green]

I'm still on 8. I've been migrating over to Adobe because of its realtime AVCHD and 7D file playback.

[Rakesh Jacob]

If you guys feel the need to buy a Red I'd wait to see what's going to happen to all these (500+) Red for Epic trade ins.

You think they are gonna refurb and resell em or just scavange them for parts?

[filmmaker's gang]

eventually I went with a Cooke 20-100 zoom that I found at Wooden Nickel for $3,000. now that me got to have a full read at last.. you did a good sale on that Cooke at ebay :thumbsup:

[ChipG]

You think they are gonna refurb and resell em or just scavange them for parts?

Dunno dude, we all know Jim has the money to burn them if he wants but he could also do something more productive like donate them to every college / film school. Build a base with students like Avid does.

It would be a shame to see them burned but I think we are past a point where Red needs a price reduction and that will probably happen after Epic, they could even be discontinued after Epic /Scarlet. Who knows, I just hope he does something good with them.

I'd think a refurb one would have to sell for $7k to move them in large volume.

[Jason Ramsey]

If you guys feel the need to buy a Red I'd wait to see what's going to happen to all these (500+) Red for Epic trade ins.

think you mean 6,000+ :)

[Rakesh Jacob]

Wow I'd pay 7k for a R1 brain in a heartbeat LOL

[ChipG]

think you mean 6,000+ :)

I didn't know all 6,000+ people who owned a Red will be trading them in on Epics. Yea, then they will have to sell them even cheaper to move them fast in large volume before technology narrows the performance gap even more or upgrade them to 6k and call them a Red Elite or something.

[ChipG]

Hey Jason,

Have you heard any future plans for all the trade ins?

[ChipG]

Wow I'd pay 7k for a R1 brain in a heartbeat LOL

The cheapest I have seen a body sell for was $11,300 6 months ago but yea, they would have to be cheap enough to want to make people buy serious computers, cc monitors, raids, aja to handle the footage / post. Most of the maket who is willing to do that already has.

[f64manray]

I had it early, early, early. I was #364. At that point there was simply *no* workflow for Windows users, nor was there going to be for months and months and months. When we'd ask about workflow, we were told "Buy a Scratch system." That's $50,000. I mean, I'd already spent $30k on the Red, and the only other answer anyone would give on workflow was "get a Mac". Great. Thanks. Another $4,000 or $5,000 for a Mac Pro with FCS, a huge learning curve, starting over with everything... and remember, back at this time the was Red's OS was build 13 when I got it, so many, many things just weren't working or hadn't been implemented yet. 3K mode, for example, didn't exist. Lots of things weren't there, it was still very beta (and Red was very clear and upfront about that, by the way, so I'm not complaining about that aspect, just pointing out that what I had wasn't what Red One users today have.) The audio was awful and hissy and required special cables and nonstandard TA3F connectors, in fact I think when I first got it the audio wasn't even enabled! I think that got enabled in a later build. My monitor wouldn't work properly with the Red, a fact I didn't know about until after I'd gotten it. I didn't buy the Red LCD because I had a nice BT-LH80, a $3,000 HD-SDI monitor; but you couldn't use it properly because the Red put out a 1280x848 image and all of the menu options and focus assist and all sorts of things were put outside of the image area. So my monitor could show a downconverted version of the video image, but none of the menus or user-assist tools! So, now, to get the thing working, I'm looking at having to buy a $4,000 EVF -- except they didn't exist at that point other than as extreme backorders. Or the RED LCD, which just bugged me because here I already had a $3,000 8" HD-SDI monitor with pixel-to-pixel display, it grated on me to have to buy another $2,000 worth of LCD and even then it'd be a little 5.6"... and then I stressed about the lens situation, we kept hearing about a Nikon mount coming out, some fancy Berger mount, but that never happened during the time I owned it ... eventually I went with a Cooke 20-100 zoom that I found at Wooden Nickel for $3,000. It showed up and it worked well, but it was bigger than the Bacon-Ets woman's patootie. I mean now the whole package was obscenely huge and heavy, and while I had a decent tripod (nothing exceptional, just a decent Cartoni that's fine for ENG-style cameras), it was completely inadequate to handling the Red+Cooke bulk. I put out bids to various places to get a proper Red-capable tripod. Another $7,000 to $10,000. Sigh. So I was already into the system for $30k, looking at having to pay another $15k or so to get it functional, and even then it wouldn't work with Windows (at that time) and lots of features weren't enabled and nobody could tell me when it'd be able to work the way I wanted it to.

Actually the final straw for when I sold it? After Cineform produced a Red-compatible version of their utility, and Red shut it down, they gave as a reason that Apple and Scratch were the ones who had "answered the call", and so they had an exclusive commitment to basically only honor Apple and Scratch as the only allowable workflows, for a certain period of time. Which meant that even if Avid or Sony or Adobe wanted to provide support, *they couldn't*. So no help was coming. And I didn't want to go Mac again; I'd bought one for the P2 system early on and a month was long enough with that, so...

... between the additional expense, and the editing hassles, and the lens situation, and the functionality, and the more expense, and the lack of rentals coming in...

Bah.

So I figured I'd sell it for now, and buy again once it was done, stable, with a working workflow. I put out a feeler for what I could get for it, and found out that I could sell the package for more than I paid for it, getting enough profit to put both my kids through college for the entire year.

So -- no brainer, ka-ching, sold.

Now the system is more stable, functional, and predictable. Now Vegas and CS4 have workflow options. The Red Primes are shipping, and the Nikon mount is a reality. Things are much, much better in Red-land. I've looked at getting back in, but frankly I don't need what the One does, so the Scarlet seems like it would be plenty enough. So when it comes out, I'll get one.

Wow, reading your experience, just took my breath away. I know they're better now, but wow.

[Michael Olsen]

Wow, reading your experience, just took my breath away. I know they're better now, but wow.

There is a reason that early adopters receive preferential treatment with RED.

[f64manray]

There is a reason that early adopters receive preferential treatment with RED.

They should also get a spa and massage treatment with happy ending.

[sblfilms]

^^:grin:

[ydgmdlu]

They should also get a spa and massage treatment with happy ending.
Well, at least you have a dirty sense of humor, I'll give you that! :beer:

[Barry_Green]

Red does indeed know how to take care of their customers. They took back the first 100 units entirely, and replaced them with "100X" units. They gave a free replacement of the audio boards to everyone who bought one. They gave the first several hundred of us a $2500 credit towards accessories. And now they're giving 100% trade-in value for a Red One against an Epic X.

Nobody else treats their customer like Red does.

I knew I was getting in early, I just didn't want to take the effort to ride it out all the way, I had many other opportunities to pursue while they sorted out the various issues. I'm not blaming them for anything, if anything I'm saying that it had to be a pretty big clusterbomb of issues that would get me to consider selling it. The images (even then, back in build 13-build 14 days) were just sooooooo nice... I really liked many aspects of it, and had it been what it is now, I'm sure I would have kept it. But there were too many hoops to jump through, too many compromises to be made, so I just got out. And this was a *long* time ago, folks. The Red experience is obviously much, much better now.

[DJK]

DJK- no offense but what is the problem with shooting with a real camera that is here today and moving up if the Scarlett or who knows comes out tomorrow?


I wasn't trying to suggest that everyone should stop what they're doing and wait for the Scarlet. I simply disagree with the notion that cameras like the 7D are a suitable replacement for it.


on the technical side of things I think the measurbation has gotten a little overboard, we forget sometimes that manufacturers tout performances specs beyond that of which may be in the range of human perception anyhow-
http://media.panavision.com/ScreeningRoom/Screening_Room/Demystifying_Part1.html - watch these videos given by two leading authorities (vids 1-7) to get a sense of what I am saying. Also take a read into home cinema systems and how does the human eye and brain pick up on certain things- there isn't much detail beyond 50-70 lp/mm (equates to around 1000 lp/in now that ive checked) that a human eye can detect at a normal viewing distance (1.5x the screen size) under most circumstances. (see Nyquist Theorem)

I gotta find the link but the notion of 4k displays would be nice but trust there is more to worry about than a pixel count on the screen or your acquisition- not to mention that there is more to a "pixel" than meets the eye and then you ask whats 3k and all this stuff really mean? everything and nothing;-)

that is a blurb just to state that it will be a lot more than just a cam's spec that'll make headlines at the next big film fest or whatever, it'll be a filmmaker with a vision or something clever... Let's invest a lot more time here trying to work on making these limited tools reach their full potential rather than hack away until some dream camera shows up on the scene...
I, like many of the posters here would love a Scarlett or any of these cool new cameras because they'd be cool and new things just to try out but we lose sight of what's most important when we drag ourselves into a "my cam is bigger and better than xx's" debacle.


Alright, I actually watched all 7 parts of that, and I did actually learn a few things I hadn't known and/or fully understood. Although, I was already aware of the fact that the output resolution doesn't mean much unless everything else is done well. But I'm still not sure I understand what's leading people to believe that RED won't do everything else well with the Scarlet. Sure, 3k or 5k don't guarantee anything on their own, but why are some people automatically assuming that RED won't get it right, and that their 3k+ images won't reach their full potential? I mean, with REDCODE, and the new Mysterium-X sensor, it seems promising, does it not? Maybe there's something I'm still missing here...




If it doesn't mean anything for you to wait an indefinite amount of time for a camera that may be better, then more power to you. But there's always going to be something better over the horizon. At $1,700, a compromised (everything has compromises of some sort) camera that lets me shoot now (or a month from now, as the case may be) has much more value than a camera whose availability to me might be a year or more away and that may or may not live up to the specs. It's not like it costs $20,000. And even if I stop using the Canon as a video camera in favor of something better, it still has use as a still camera. But, it may well be that the $1,700 Canon does everything I need it to do, negating the need for anything better for an even longer period of time.


Again, I never meant to suggest that people shouldn't get anything else in the meantime. But some are acting as if cameras like the 5DII and 7D have already made the Scarlet obsolete, even if it does live up to the specs. My point is simply that, if the Scarlet performs as advertised, it doesn't seem like current 1080p DSLRs would be any match for even the 2/3 fixed lens version, and certainly not the S35 version shooting at 5k.


I mean, despite all the talk about how the sensor size of these DSLRs makes them comparable to Scarlet, a while ago I saw a comparison of the RED ONE vs the 5DII. While the 5DII obviously killed the RED ONE in low light performance (not sure what build it was, as I read recently that low light performance has improved significantly), the RED ONE actually had significantly better dynamic range. And RED is saying that the new Mysterium-X sensor has even more DR and less noise, and that even the Scarlet will have more DR than the RED ONE does (before an upgrade to Mysterium-X). So think how much more DR the Scarlet should have than the 5DII and 7D... plus higher resolution, higher framerates, REDCODE, etc. Those are the reasons why I don't understand how these current DSLRs could possibly be a match for Scarlet.


For those who were in the market for a large-sensor HD camera with interchangeable lenses, surely these provide a compelling alternative to the much-more-expensive fixed-lens Scarlet ("full shooting kit at $3750"). I dare say that that whole segment of the market, who would otherwise have gone for a Scarlet, are probably not going to anymore.

Okay, I do see what you mean there. But after spending some time on RED's forums, there are a lot of people who specifically want features the Scarlet will have, and a 5DII or 7D would not meet their needs. So sure, maybe Scarlet's market would've been even larger if not for cameras like the 7D, but then that's only because those people never really needed it in the first place. Like you said, it offered far more, and now these DSLRs bridge the gap.

Athough, there's also the entire prosumer video market, which you'd think Scarlet could completely take over. I mean, if a 2/3 fixed lens Scarlet could outperform camcorders more than twice the price, why would anybody buy anything else? Plus, people like that would probably be a lot less likely to settle for a DSLR, as they would've been paying a lot more for a prosumer camcorder anyway, and thus a Scarlet would still save them money. That, to me, seems like it's true market. I mean, if Scarlet lives up to the specs, every single prosumer camcorder over $3750 would essentially become obsolete. Right?


To others, you can get (potentially) even better imagery out of a $1700 DSLR, with interchangeable lenses. And that will be incredibly appealing.

Better? I'd imagine you mean, if Scarlet doesn't live up to the hype. Right?


(p.s. you keep talking about "line-skipping" -- have you seen quality GH1 or 5DMkII footage on an HDTV?)

Well, I wasn't very impressed by the little footage I've seen from the GH1. I saw one clip with horrible aliasing. As for the 5DII, I realize it can look fantastic in the right conditions, but there can also be aliasing under the right circumstances. And I saw a 7D clip with shockingly bad aliasing on a diagonal railing. I have a hard time overlooking things like that. The thought of a 3k Scarlet without those issues, and all the other features it'll have... it seems well worth the extra money to me.

[Nik Manning]

Scarlet will definitely be worth it at $4K I don't think anyone is saying that it won't be. I think we are just saying that for less than half we can have a camera that does enough. All we really wanted was 1080p24 without pulldown crap, bigger chips, and better compression than hdv. We would have been happy with that for under $4K but to have it all for under $2k is amazing and it still is a DSLR!. The problem we see is that soon every DSLR manufacturer will add video to their cams effectively making all of them cinema cams. The compression is already better on the 7D than it was on the 5D.

[Ryan Paige]

And in the year or two years or five years or twenty years it takes to actually get Scarlet to market, no telling what else will be out there.

[alpi69]

I was thinking about this very topic this morning. Originally I was in the 7D might have killed off the 2/3" Scarlet camp but the more thought I put into it the more I began to change my mind.

For video people, the second the 2/3 Scarlets hit the market we'll be slapping ourselves on the forehead and chiding ourselves for even considering some of these early vDSLRs as viable options. .

Totally agree. If you ever used a pro-cam with the shoulder-formfactor and a good lens with fast zoom and 2/3 DOF you will hate to use anything like a HPX170, EX-1 etc. But we do for the money they cost.

Now these DSLRs are worse: they have the image we want, but much cheaper....and a formfactor that kills you. You need to build around and buy lenses and oops you are up in the 7k region again at least. Still no audio though, no decent monitoring, no RAW codec......there is still a lot left to be developped.
The good news: you only buy lenses once. so after your initial setup, these vDSLR become really really cheap....but a scarlet with the features you need when doing film will easily come my way if the pricedifference is reasonable

[ydgmdlu]

I wasn't trying to suggest that everyone should stop what they're doing and wait for the Scarlet. I simply disagree with the notion that cameras like the 7D are a suitable replacement for it.
Well, here's the thing. I don't think that anybody here, except for f64manray, would disagree with you, if money were not an issue. But that is a major issue for a lot of people here. You have to remember that before the D90 and 5D Mark II were announced, people were used to spending a grand for the Canon HV20, or four for the Canon XH-A1 or Sony Z1/V1, or six for the HVX200. Two years ago, that was considered to be ground-breaking price/performance ratios. And then when RED announced the Scarlet, people were over the moon, because it offered state-of-the-art imagery at a price competitive with what people were used to spending for prosumer camcorders.

But then the Scarlet suffered delays and price increases, and the DSLRs were announced. Like Isaac said, a couple of years ago he never dreamed that he could get the image quality that the GH1 and 7D offer for less than $2K. Before the Scarlet was announced, nobody dreamed that RED-quality footage could be had for less than $30K. People want stunning imagery, but not everyone can afford it. I'll bet that many avid followers of Scarlet only had HV20s, etc., as the best that they could afford. So when the GH1 and the 7D come along and offer what they do for less than $2K, it's a sigh of relief for those people who were worrying themselves over how they were going to scrape together even $3K-4K for the Scarlet.

The other thing though is that there are plenty of people who don't want to deal with RED's workflow, who are worried about first-generation bugs (and the RED One experience has been painful for the early adopters), and who actually prefer the DSLR form factor. For them, being able to capture footage that's casually comparable to RED's is good enough, and they're happy to lose all of the other things that the Scarlet's offering. If you go over to the GH1 forum, you can read commanderspike complaining about how the 7D is "too heavy" to be very usable for him. The Scarlet, compact though it might be, is still larger than a DSLR, according to the most recent renders.


But I'm still not sure I understand what's leading people to believe that RED won't do everything else well with the Scarlet. Sure, 3k or 5k don't guarantee anything on their own, but why are some people automatically assuming that RED won't get it right, and that their 3k+ images won't reach their full potential? I mean, with REDCODE, and the new Mysterium-X sensor, it seems promising, does it not? Maybe there's something I'm still missing here...Plenty of people want to be cynical and skeptical. That's natural for any promised product, even one from the big boys. It's not an unreasonable stance. I'm personally very optimistic because the RED team has proven itself in my eyes. But that's also because I am a fan, though not yet user, of RED. More people are RED skeptics, critics, and haters than you might think.


Again, I never meant to suggest that people shouldn't get anything else in the meantime. But some are acting as if cameras like the 5DII and 7D have already made the Scarlet obsolete, even if it does live up to the specs.
If they don't need all that Scarlet offers, then it has become "obsolete" for them.


Athough, there's also the entire prosumer video market, which you'd think Scarlet could completely take over. I mean, if a 2/3 fixed lens Scarlet could outperform camcorders more than twice the price, why would anybody buy anything else? Plus, people like that would probably be a lot less likely to settle for a DSLR, as they would've been paying a lot more for a prosumer camcorder anyway, and thus a Scarlet would still save them money. That, to me, seems like it's true market. I mean, if Scarlet lives up to the specs, every single prosumer camcorder over $3750 would essentially become obsolete. Right? I whole-heartedly agree with you here, which is why I think that all of the grumbling about RED's pricing is ridiculous. I mean, come on, there are still small-chip HDV, XDCAM, and DVCPro HD camcorders being sold in the $9K-25K range, so how can the Scarlet, which should outclass them all, possibly be considered "overpriced"? But again, people just don't want to pay for that quality. And again, those are the people who are used to lower-end equipment, and hence, lower-end prices.

[puredrifting]

The vast majority of non-feature filmmakers could care less about RAW. It will have an even lower penetration than RAW has with still photographers. A good portion of pro still photographers find RAW to be a nuisance rather than an advantage. I think the Scarlet and other RED cameras will be mighty impressive when and if you can actually buy one, but having a format that requires so much extra time, effort and computing horsepower to deal with can be a real drag.

If RED gave you a choice of say H.264, AVCINTRA (or something like it) OR RAW, then they would be talking but am I correct in thinking that the Scarlet will only shoot REDCODE RAW? I gave up on trying to keep up with the ever changing specs about a year ago.

I also don't think that most DVXers understand how small the market is for a serious cinema camera, it is really only a few ten thousands worldwide, if that and a significant number of those potential buyers have already moved on to pastures where you can actually buy a camera whether it is the HPX300, 5D MKII/7D, GH1 or higher end stuff like the S2K, etc. It will be mighty interesting to see if RED can successfully turn Scarlet into a more mass market product or if it will remain a boutique product with just a few thousand sold worldwide.

Dan

[Barry_Green]

I wasn't trying to suggest that everyone should stop what they're doing and wait for the Scarlet. I simply disagree with the notion that cameras like the 7D are a suitable replacement for it.
Yet, for many people, it certainly will be. The DOF of the S35 Scarlet, for 1/4th the price. It won't do everything the Scarlet will do, but does it do enough? Does it do what they need? If so, then they may very well find it to be a suitable replacement. For those wanting a RAW workflow and 120fps overcranking and 5K imaging, of course the DSLR wouldn't even be under consideration.


Okay, I do see what you mean there. But after spending some time on RED's forums, there are a lot of people who specifically want features the Scarlet will have, and a 5DII or 7D would not meet their needs.
Undoubtedly agreed! Red is a pure digital cinema company, making digital cinema products. The 7D is, like it or not, a still camera with a video feature added on. The GH1 is a little bit more of a hybrid, but essentially the same thing. Yet the Scarlet is targeted to be a dedicated cinema camera. Therefore, it will certainly offer many more features. Features that cinema shooters will want and crave. But not everyone will, not everyone has the same requirements, and the half-price or 1/4 price or whatever of the DSLR will most likely remain an enchanting alternative for that segment of the market.


So sure, maybe Scarlet's market would've been even larger if not for cameras like the 7D, but then that's only because those people never really needed it in the first place.
Exactly true. What I said earlier is that there was simply *nothing* in the marketplace that had a 2/3" or larger sensor, for under $14,000, so of course the Scarlet looked tantalizing to everyone... it did things nothing else did, and therefore everyone wanted it, whether they needed all that it could do or not... But now, there are several products with a MUCH larger than 2/3" sensor, for under $2,000. For folks who wanted that, who wanted an HD 1080/24p camera with cinema DOF, they now have a few potentially very viable alternatives, that are available today.

I expect Scarlet to offer more. Much more. Frankly, I think the best move Red could make would be to ditch the ultra-cheap Scarlets, don't try to get in a knock-down drag-out with Canon and Nikon and Panasonic in a race for the bottom-dollar customer, and instead make a truly great product. The $7,000 to $10,000 segment has proven popular enough, and it's a high enough price point that they could make a great, great product that does way more than a $1700 DSLR ever could. Then again, I'm not (yet) a billionaire businessman like Jim Jannard, and I'm certain he has carefully considered the landscape of today and what it's likely to be tomorrow and will make the right move, whatever that move is.


Athough, there's also the entire prosumer video market, which you'd think Scarlet could completely take over. I mean, if a 2/3 fixed lens Scarlet could outperform camcorders more than twice the price, why would anybody buy anything else?
Because the Red One isn't a video camera, shooting to Raw format isn't a video system, it's its own thing. Presumably Scarlet will follow suit. Prosumer video means weddings and events and local commercials and news stringers and freelancers and kids' sports audition tapes for college recruiters and memorial videos at funerals and ... well, dozens of markets, none of which are likely to require or even benefit from using a dedicated digital cinema camera. And none of which would likely benefit from using a video-enabled DSLR, either. Those are markets where a traditional video camera would be the much preferable tool.


I mean, if Scarlet lives up to the specs, every single prosumer camcorder over $3750 would essentially become obsolete. Right?
I would dare say no, and not only "no", but "not even close". Video cameras are sold to an entirely different industry than digital cinema cameras are. Unless... perhaps Red is modifying the Scarlet to be a true video camera in addition to a raw digital cinema camera... oooh... if *that* happens, then all bets are off.

[xbourque]

I wish everyone in this thread would either:

A) Compare the 5D2/7D to a PDF file.
B) Compare *future* theoretical offerings from Canon/Sony/Nikon/Panasonic to Scarlet.

Comparing *current* DSLRs with *future* Red cameras is ridiculous.

My question to all the Red fans on this thread: In your opinion, once Scarlet actually ships in decent volume, when will the Big Four release products that will compete head to head with it?

[Rakesh Jacob]

Frankly, I think the best move Red could make would be to ditch the ultra-cheap Scarlets, don't try to get in a knock-down drag-out with Canon and Nikon and Panasonic in a race for the bottom-dollar customer, and instead make a truly great product. The $7,000 to $10,000 segment has proven popular enough, and it's a high enough price point that they could make a great, great product that does way more than a $1700 DSLR ever could. Then again, I'm not (yet) a billionaire businessman like Jim Jannard, and I'm certain he has carefully considered the landscape of today and what it's likely to be tomorrow and will make the right move, whatever that move is.


I've been thinking the same thing ever since the manual control update on the 5D2. RED has carved out such a bad-ass niche for themselves. That niche is threatening the hell out of Arri, Panavision and Cinealta. Creating the relatively cheap cinema camera that could. And now that they're a proven formula with blockbuster releases, their "Base" is more loyal than ever, more credible than ever, expanding rapidly and will buy anything that's marketed to them. They are the Apple computers of cameras and Jannard is the new Jobs. I think he needs to stay in the lower end pro/higher end prosumer range and become the new industry standard or atleast a niche-standard like FCS.
Obviously I don't know squat compared to Jannard, but that seems like a space for his company to operate in while the Japanese bohemoths fight for the walmart/bestbuy customers. Which is not an insult, if you came to my house you would see how much of a walmart/bestbuy average schlep I am :)

[Dingos8mybaby]

For those wanting a RAW workflow and 120fps overcranking and 5K imaging, of course the DSLR wouldn't even be under consideration.

Not to be pedantic Barry, but the 5K Scarlet (aka S35 Scarlet) "only" does 72fps burst mode or full at 2K.

FWIW, I don't think RED has scrapped the 3K Scarlets. Scratch that. I hope they don't.

[alexdias]

Not to be pedantic Barry, but the 5K Scarlet (aka S35 Scarlet) "only" does 72fps burst mode or full at 2K.

FWIW, I don't think RED has scrapped the 3K Scarlets. Scratch that. I hope they don't.

The Scarlet doesn't exist yet. The announced product called S35 Scarlet is supposed to do "only" 72 fps @ 2K.
All could change tomorrow as far as I know, but today that's the situation.

[Richard J. Johnson]

the horse is dead I think.

[puredrifting]

Horse meat is lean and low fat. So said Janet Street-Porter on "The f-Word" last week.

Dan

[ChipG]

Ha! LOL :)

[TimurCivan]

the horse is dead I think.

better hit it with a stick just in case.... make sure....

[jamesmallonuk]

I wasn't trying to suggest that everyone should stop what they're doing and wait for the Scarlet. I simply disagree with the notion that cameras like the 7D are a suitable replacement for it.




Alright, I actually watched all 7 parts of that, and I did actually learn a few things I hadn't known and/or fully understood. Although, I was already aware of the fact that the output resolution doesn't mean much unless everything else is done well. But I'm still not sure I understand what's leading people to believe that RED won't do everything else well with the Scarlet. Sure, 3k or 5k don't guarantee anything on their own, but why are some people automatically assuming that RED won't get it right, and that their 3k+ images won't reach their full potential? I mean, with REDCODE, and the new Mysterium-X sensor, it seems promising, does it not? Maybe there's something I'm still missing here...






Again, I never meant to suggest that people shouldn't get anything else in the meantime. But some are acting as if cameras like the 5DII and 7D have already made the Scarlet obsolete, even if it does live up to the specs. My point is simply that, if the Scarlet performs as advertised, it doesn't seem like current 1080p DSLRs would be any match for even the 2/3 fixed lens version, and certainly not the S35 version shooting at 5k.


I mean, despite all the talk about how the sensor size of these DSLRs makes them comparable to Scarlet, a while ago I saw a comparison of the RED ONE vs the 5DII. While the 5DII obviously killed the RED ONE in low light performance (not sure what build it was, as I read recently that low light performance has improved significantly), the RED ONE actually had significantly better dynamic range. And RED is saying that the new Mysterium-X sensor has even more DR and less noise, and that even the Scarlet will have more DR than the RED ONE does (before an upgrade to Mysterium-X). So think how much more DR the Scarlet should have than the 5DII and 7D... plus higher resolution, higher framerates, REDCODE, etc. Those are the reasons why I don't understand how these current DSLRs could possibly be a match for Scarlet.



Okay, I do see what you mean there. But after spending some time on RED's forums, there are a lot of people who specifically want features the Scarlet will have, and a 5DII or 7D would not meet their needs. So sure, maybe Scarlet's market would've been even larger if not for cameras like the 7D, but then that's only because those people never really needed it in the first place. Like you said, it offered far more, and now these DSLRs bridge the gap.

Athough, there's also the entire prosumer video market, which you'd think Scarlet could completely take over. I mean, if a 2/3 fixed lens Scarlet could outperform camcorders more than twice the price, why would anybody buy anything else? Plus, people like that would probably be a lot less likely to settle for a DSLR, as they would've been paying a lot more for a prosumer camcorder anyway, and thus a Scarlet would still save them money. That, to me, seems like it's true market. I mean, if Scarlet lives up to the specs, every single prosumer camcorder over $3750 would essentially become obsolete. Right?



Better? I'd imagine you mean, if Scarlet doesn't live up to the hype. Right?



Well, I wasn't very impressed by the little footage I've seen from the GH1. I saw one clip with horrible aliasing. As for the 5DII, I realize it can look fantastic in the right conditions, but there can also be aliasing under the right circumstances. And I saw a 7D clip with shockingly bad aliasing on a diagonal railing. I have a hard time overlooking things like that. The thought of a 3k Scarlet without those issues, and all the other features it'll have... it seems well worth the extra money to me.


I tried in vain to halt the flood of over expectation ridiculous comparisions between the Red and DSLR's but they wont have any of it. They want as amateur as possible even they are given pro equipment and wont be happy until they have a camera that costs the price of a bigmac it seems. They'll tell you its all about the artist and not the tools, to justify their annoyance that the just bought a 7D and are trying to convince themselves its as good as the soon to come Scarlett. Save you energy for something positive and go to Reduser and learn the workflow. Those who cling to the The Underground out of choice are losers.

[ChipG]

In 4ish months there will be a Scarlet killed my Canon 7D dreams thread btw

I don't think anyone is saying a 7D will be as good as a Scarlet or Red, maybe close enough for some people though, I think it's more about the price and easy workflow on basic computers wthout raids / aja card. For me it's about a high quailty camera I can use stealth in places I'm not wanted and have it fit in the palm of my hand. Low key, good images in a small package, mount it anywhere you want, easy to work with in post etc.

[Nik Manning]

I am not shooting anything that is targeting theatrical release. I like the fact that this cAMera does video and stills. I will use both functions. I currently have a hv20 nothing professional at all. It works but it just doesn't give me what I want when shooting music videos. The canon 7d seems like it will be a great camera to own and Red's offerings maybe great to rent.

[SPZ]

I'm 100 sure we'll see a major Indie film festival winning film shot with one of these DSLR's. Its all about creative control and value for money for the picture you get, and not about ultimate picture quality. WIth a 7D, you have better low light and more controlable DOF than a 2/3rd camera, and you are capable of having multiple camera shooting simultaneously for perspective shots by the price of one 1/3 camera. Once, an Oscar winning film, was shot in HDV 1080i (Z1), for example. And major Hollywood blockbusters where shot with HDV or DV cameras, Like 28 Days later (Xl1). a D7 is definitely better than both these offerings.

Tomorrow is the start of IBC. I'll be waiting for what Red has to say, as well as for any surprise announcement. I'll also be looking into the confirmed September 29 event/announcement from Canon. But I think that with a 7d one is more than capable of doing a feature film for cinema distribution- with proper grading, of course.

Its really incredible. Last year, I was ranting about not having the option of being able to achieve total creative freedom with my camera gear. Today, I have options that I couldn't even dream of back then. With cameras like the 7D, I can trully say that its finally all about the artists. We are trully living trough a new era of filmmaking democracy. yay!

[ydgmdlu]

I tried in vain to halt the flood of over expectation ridiculous comparisions between the Red and DSLR's but they wont have any of it. They want as amateur as possible even they are given pro equipment and wont be happy until they have a camera that costs the price of a bigmac it seems. They'll tell you its all about the artist and not the tools, to justify their annoyance that the just bought a 7D and are trying to convince themselves its as good as the soon to come Scarlett. Save you energy for something positive and go to Reduser and learn the workflow. Those who cling to the The Underground out of choice are losers.
I just thought that those words really needed highlighting, especially since Jame's thread has now been closed. I don't think that any further comments are necessary.

[ydgmdlu]

OK, just one comment: I'm a bit surprised that for a "certified therapist," he seems to be unaware that he has a bit of a messiah complex.

[Zak Forsman]

As a matter of fact, ydgmdlu, i'm glad you did. because this is exactly the sort of BS that doesn't fly. we welcome intelligent and passionate debate on the merits of this technology. definitely, 100%. but not at the expense of civility. there have been at least two warnings posted publicly about getting personal and leveraging insults at each another. the vast majority of this community conducts itself with great respect for one another. and they come here to be informed and to share insights, not to be called "losers".

you know I love you guys, but if you can't restrain yourself, we'll do it for you.