7D or Mysterium X

Ian-T said:
Exactly.

Also, why is it that all of a sudden people think a camera like the 7D can't make a theatrical release? I mean....I don't get that. It's most certainly not a Red or a film camera....but neither are (______,______,_____ etc.) <<<fill in the blank >> and yet most people won't argue the fact that these DSLRs make better looking images than some of those cams. It's like all of a sudden when we are talking about a Red camera...these DSLRs don't cut it anymore. Sure ...to some they never did....but tell that to those who have already put them to the test. Face it...it might not work for you....but it does/did for someone else....which to me totally contradicts what some others are saying.
Click to expand...

Well, I really think its all about standards and concepts.

Take clothing, for example. There are people out there who are fine buying their suits at Target and never get them tailored. There are people who shop designer for the sake of fashion. And there are people who have their bespoke tailor on Saville Row on speed dial. Does anyone need a $6000 suit, $800 shoes, and a $400 tie to look presentable? Most people think not. Other people have different ideas of what is presentable and what that is worth to them.

I can imagine some people would feel fine screening cellphone video footage on a 40 foot screen, so long as the content was what they wanted. Indeed, I've seen it done. Well...didn't actually see it, but saw that it was being done.

Others feel the 7D is perfectly adequate. It has the DOF they want, the sensitivity they want, and while the picture isn't perfect it can deliver some beauty.

Others want to press the possibilities of what's possible. They feel that 1080p should really measure out and resolve 1080p, and that 2K projection should not just be an upscale. They want to shoot and project 4K before its standard. They want to grade RAW, practically never worry about aliasing or moire, and own a state of the art piece of equipment.

The thing that really stuns me is that the price difference between the Target suit (Canon 7D) and the bespoke suit (RED) is no longer that much. It's only three to ten times the price instead of...well...twenty-five to fifty times more (looking at CineAlta cameras)
 
I originally posted this thread, not to direct a comp. between the 7D and RED. What I was stating was that after seeing that footage I have decided that my 7D is all I need for now. Like I said from the beginning I am a huge advocate of the scarlet. I have followed it religiously since the concept was introduced almost 3 years ago... I have even brought RED to the attention of hundreds of people who were none the wiser, never with a negative comment. I love RED for what they have done all that I had said was that with the right settings, lighting and lenses I feel as if I could recreate that footage, at least to the point to satisfy my likings...
 
Ian-T said:
lol...byotch!!

@ Michael...I get my clothes at Wal-Mart...... ok...that's a lie...lol
Click to expand...

I was gonna say... you know DAMNED well you don't shop at Wal-Mart for your own clothes. Maybe for your KIDS. I remember that arguement...

"I'm not wearing this! It came from Payless!"
 
In fact, I just looked up a little history -- do you know how many times a #1 seed has failed to make it to the Sweet 16 in the last 25 years? Once.

I think my favorite upsets are when a #15 beats a #2. It seems to happen all the time, but in reality it's only ever happend four times. The overall record of #2's against #15's is 88 to 4.

Know how many times a #16 has beaten a #1? Never.

The lowest seed to ever win the tournament? #8, Villanova. So even though half the tournament is made up of underdogs, not one has ever won it.

So, yeah, the perception is that there's a lot of upsets, but the reality? Not really. Maybe in the early rounds some posers will lose, but when it counts -- in the Final Four -- you can pretty much count on it consisting of #'s 1 through 4. In fact, in the last 25 years, how many teams ranked lower than #4 have won the tournament? Three. Twice a #6 has won, and once a #8 won.

So even though everyone gets all excited and fills out their brackets and picks their upsets and ditches work to watch the games, in the end, any team seeded lower than 4th is just taking up space, because they pretty much have no practical shot of winning.

On the other hand, how many times has a #1 seed won the tournament in the last 25 years? 13 times. And a #2 has won it about five times (can't find the exact #) so that means 18 out of 25 times, a #1 or #2 has won, and 22 out of 25 times it was won by a #1, #2, #3, or #4.

There's perception, and there's reality. I prefer to deal with reality. But lots of folks love the fun of the perception anyways. Witness, the American Idol tryouts... each year they get about 137,000 people auditioning, from which about 140 make it through to Hollywood... meaning the odds are almost 1,000 to one against them even making it to the next round!

The lottery is also very popular, tens of millions of tickets are sold every year, but who wins? Really? Yeah, the odds are pretty steep against winning, but the perception is that if you play the lottery you could win a lot of money and escape the doldrums of your humdrum life...

And yeah, the perception is that the 7D is as good as the Red.

But in reality... no.
 
Jason Ramsey said:
you should check out what mark from offhollywood shot at iso 1600 if you haven't yet. All available light around the city. Also, some good shots in there as far as skew would be concerned.
Click to expand...

Wow, i could barely see any skewing... They have really made a huge improvement. And... what can be said about the sensitivity vs noise.. I am completey blown away. I don't know if it gets any better from here..
 
Ian-T said:
LOL..aww man...this is too true. My oldest just turned 9...and she's starting to catch on. I'm gonna need a third income soon....just for her...lol

.
Click to expand...

It's SO over for you, man. She's gonna start asking for FOREVER 21 and she's not even TEMPORARILY 10 yet.
 
Barry_Green said:
In fact, I just looked up a little history -- do you know how many times a #1 seed has failed to make it to the Sweet 16 in the last 25 years? Once.

I think my favorite upsets are when a #15 beats a #2. It seems to happen all the time, but in reality it's only ever happend four times. The overall record of #2's against #15's is 88 to 4.

Know how many times a #16 has beaten a #1? Never.

The lowest seed to ever win the tournament? #8, Villanova. So even though half the tournament is made up of underdogs, not one has ever won it.

So, yeah, the perception is that there's a lot of upsets, but the reality? Not really. Maybe in the early rounds some posers will lose, but when it counts -- in the Final Four -- you can pretty much count on it consisting of #'s 1 through 4. In fact, in the last 25 years, how many teams ranked lower than #4 have won the tournament? Three. Twice a #6 has won, and once a #8 won.

So even though everyone gets all excited and fills out their brackets and picks their upsets and ditches work to watch the games, in the end, any team seeded lower than 4th is just taking up space, because they pretty much have no practical shot of winning.

On the other hand, how many times has a #1 seed won the tournament in the last 25 years? 13 times. And a #2 has won it about five times (can't find the exact #) so that means 18 out of 25 times, a #1 or #2 has won, and 22 out of 25 times it was won by a #1, #2, #3, or #4.

There's perception, and there's reality. I prefer to deal with reality. But lots of folks love the fun of the perception anyways. Witness, the American Idol tryouts... each year they get about 137,000 people auditioning, from which about 140 make it through to Hollywood... meaning the odds are almost 1,000 to one against them even making it to the next round!

The lottery is also very popular, tens of millions of tickets are sold every year, but who wins? Really? Yeah, the odds are pretty steep against winning, but the perception is that if you play the lottery you could win a lot of money and escape the doldrums of your humdrum life...

And yeah, the perception is that the 7D is as good as the Red.

But in reality... no.
Click to expand...

I had no idea what you were talking about, but, it's pretty much the right analogy. Good words, as always.
 
Perry Wilson said:
I originally posted this thread, not to direct a comp. between the 7D and RED. ...
Click to expand...
Don't worry Perry...I think you made your point good'n clear. I'm also satisfied "right now" with my 7D. At some point though, probably after watching all the fantastic footage folks will be shooting with their new Scarlet I think the 7D might start pissing me off. It's at that point where good enough won't be "good enough" (4 me) anymore. Until then....it's happy shooting for me.
 
Ryan Paige said:
I like how detailed the NCAA Tournament metaphor got.
Click to expand...
Oh, I just found it gets even better: Know how many times a #1 team has either won, or been a runner-up, in the last 25 years? 24 times. That means that at least one #1 seed has reached the title game practically every year. And the average "Final Four" features 1.8 #1 seeds.

The craziest Final Four? In 2000, two #8's (Wisconsin and North Carolina) and a #5 (Florida) made it all the way through, to meet up with the only #1 who made it that year, Michigan State. (Do I even have to tell you how that turned out? Yes, the #1 won the title.)

Upsets? Not really. "On any given day?" Yeah, but -- not really.

Have fun with your underdogs, but when it comes time to put your money where your mouth is and place your bets, bet on the #1's.

And that sums it up -- play around with your 7D for fun, but when you get a budget and you're going to make a real movie with real intent for theatrical release... I mean, seriously ... you go with the Red or the film camera. For a hundred thousand different reasons.
 
Last edited:
Just read over on REDUSER that M-X sensor will have 13(+) stops of Dynamic Range, at least according to their test. Exciting times.

Also, I guess RED now owns Ren Mar studios in Hollywood....

CITED
 
Kholi said:
...Actually, now Barry is making me sad.

Can I borrow a Pitch Fork from one of yous guys?
Click to expand...

Hey, it's like Terry Pratchett said:

"If you really believe in yourself,
And you follow your dreams,
and you wish really really hard...

... you'll still get beat by someone who spent THEIR time working and studying, and wasn't so lazy."

So don't buy into the hype, don't "follow your dream" -- instead, just get off your butt and get to work, and the rest will pretty much take care of itself. If you have the talent, you'll make it through, and if you don't have the talent, sooner or later Simon Cowell will let you know.

Speaking of which -- how many times have you heard the Idol judges tell somebody that they're no good -- and that person was actually good, and went on to have a successful recording career?

Uh huh.

Yeah.

How many times have you seen those crying/upset people yelling at the camera "this is not the last you'll hear of me!" -- and, yeah, that's pretty much the last we ever heard of them?

There's perception, and there's reality. The perception is that this is a country in which anyone can grow up to be president. The reality is, that in your lifetime, only about 10 actually will, out of the 350 million of us.

So learn the facts, arm yourself with actual information, and go do what you do best, instead of head-in-the-clouds dreaming.
 
Barry_Green said:
But they're absolutely true. And anyone and everyone who thinks they're going to get into business or big-budget production should read them.
Click to expand...

Indeed, which is why I linked it right here in this thread. Reality is reality.

Michael Olsen said:
Kholi, that was an excellent read. Very insightful, and makes sense...the industry definitely has standards. Gotta come dressed for the party.
Click to expand...


Uh oh... I don't have any dress shoes. iFrown
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top