Nicolas Christakis
Active member
Any suggestions on that 35/1.4?
Canon 7D killed my scarlet dreams!
- Thread starter Nik Manning
- Start date
- Status
Any suggestions on that 35/1.4?
J Davis
Veteran
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.
Rakesh Jacob
Veteran
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
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.
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
Veteran
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 ***** by it.
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
Veteran
I bet you smell... hahaha
xmephestox
Carbonite Member
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...
it's all gonna change i know, but it's not gonna happen overnight...
Rakesh Jacob
Veteran
Jason Ramsey
Admin
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.
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.
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.
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
Well-known member
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.
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.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
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.
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.
- Status