Canon T2i with L Glass vs RED Camera

[Barry_Green]

And to bring it full circle on Timur's post -- I subsequently hired Timur to be the D.P. over a short film we did up in NJ called "Cold Calls". And am I ever glad I did, because it looks absolutely stunning, and was accepted by one of the top 10 fests in the world, Tribeca, into their Delta Fly-In Movies program. Thanks Timur!

 

[Jason Adams]

Lots of good info and lots of emotion. DVXUSER has taken this turn and I blame DSLRs for this rise in personal vendettas and hallelujah fanboy revivals.

We all want to believe that our 1700 bucks is enough to dethrone celluloid, Red, Varicam, F900, Alexa and ______________ fill in the blank with tomorrows camera. Its all a bit silly.

I think if many on these boards spent the time developing their craft instead of defending their purchases we we would have a greater community of artists and not gear purchasers.

I count it a privileged that this place even gives me the means to talk to guys Like Barry, Kohli, Tumur and the so many others. Why not listen to the guys who have been there and done that.

Hobbiest point to their gear. Pros point to their work. Good Luck to all.

end rant...

 

[Barry_Green]

Thanks Jason. We welcome new technology and new users, of course -- but we're going to have to insist that they behave politely and appropriately and follow the rules that have made this such a successful community. Simple courtesy, for one. And a zero-tolerance policy on trolling, for another.

If someone can't communicate with another human being politely, then that someone simply does not belong on this forum.

Thanks to the tens of thousands of members who conduct themselves in a courteous and professional manner. You set an example that makes us proud.

And for those who absolutely can't (or won't) comply? Go away. Come back when you learn to behave appropriately in polite company.

To the community at large: if you see a post that bothers you, if a member is treating another member inappropriately etc., you can always just click the "report this post" button. Thanks!

 

[thekeygun]

I totally appreciate the mods. thanks guys!

 

[Rory_B]

I think the most revelatory fact in this entire thread was Kholi making me jealous you guys have 99 cent wendy's nuggets still in the states. Now I am fricking hungry.

But on a more serious note. The commercials that all come through the company I work for will not shoot on anything less than an f23, viper, genesis or a red. 99% still shoot film.

7D/5D2 get some playtime as a b/c cam and I make some decent money renting my 7D out when needed; however, as much as the DP's and Directors love the image that comes from it, they are still not making it the go-to camera. They recognize the shortcomings and then use it where it'll shine.

Even when the budget needs cuts, nobody goes "Time to grab the DSLR and cancel the film order".

 

[stephenvv]

This is very true -- and this is how this thread started out. But how much technical discussion can there truly be, between a $799 consumer DSLR, and a $17,500 dedicated digital cinema camera? Isn't that discussion kind of "over and done in one"?

Actually, having owned the 6th DVX in the US and been a member here since 2004, I think this is the heart of the matter.

The first DVX owners took all sorts of flak from other cam "experts" about "strobing" and other issues (read the archives here and in the DVX forum on DV Info where I was the original mod and where Jared first floated the idea of dedicated DVX site ). The very reasons this forum are in danger of being forgotten..

While I have tremendous respect for the knowledge and experience of Barry, Kholi and many other here et. al, I think it's fair and truthful to point out that the impression I get is their critiques of DSLR video and the statements about RED etc. are eerily familiar as reasons the DVX was a not taken seriously.

The DSLR video revolution is a game-changer. I see it everywhere - indie filmmakers, ad agencies, rental houses, client choices and the business of Red (and other high end cam) owner-operators. And now House.

The point that is needs to be shouted from the rooftops and celebrated here is not that DSLR have aliasing, moire, don't have this or that "pro" features. It's that for $800 or $1600, you can buy a camera that opens creative doors, that in HiDef 1080p rivals what cameras costing many times over can do.

DVXUser has never been (and hopefully never will be) a place that people with million dollar gear and 100 million dollar production budgets come to point out the flaws in people of lesser means. It's the place where people who scrape together funds for gear on average salaries to pursue their dreams.

And DLSR video is the best, greatest thing that has ever happened for that group of image makers. Better than the DVX, better than the HV20, better than the HVX. Sure, you have to know the limitations (the first 7D footage I posted was my aliasing/moire demo), but what's really needed here is not what's wrong with DSLR, but how to make your footage rock.

As for cameras that cost more than my car, they're "Irredevalent" :cheesy:

 

[Rory_B]

If people spent this time and energy in threads of people posting actual videos and critiquing composition, CC'ing, editing, etc, instead of having cam vs cam threads go on for pages then I think you'd get your wish of more people learning to make their footage look better.

Of course nothing gets the juiced flowing more than a "my camera can beat your camera up" arguement.

Kids these days just don't have the same respect in discussion and debate. Especially over the net.

 

[Jason Ramsey]

DVXUser has never been (and hopefully never will be) a place that people with million dollar gear and 100 million dollar production budgets come to point out the flaws in people of lesser means. It's the place where people who scrape together funds for gear on average salaries to pursue their dreams.

Most definitely... That is and pretty much always has been the core audience of dvxuser... the no/low-budget filmmaker. Which is why the dslr's quickly became popular here, and many new users have gravitated here as well.

However, there are some growing pains going on here... We've always experienced good, steady growth, but the last year has seen a ton of new membership, and a reduced cost of entry into this world... Many of them not familiar with the flow of this community, and a lot of noise has overridden that good vibe.

This is meant to be a community where people can find all the info they need. Having a few guys who fight the tough fight and make sure the ugly side of these dslr's is known here as well, is needed compensation to the fervor surrounding these cams that can lead to misinformation about products, and/or costly decisions on set. And, when Barry or others risk beheading by beating those points home, it is needed contrast to people who watch a web video and proudly proclaim that everyone else's viewpoint (no matter how experienced on the matter) is worthless. Balance. Objectivity. Less emotion. People coming here looking to add to the information pool. Not trolls, troublemakers, people with agenda's, etc... Back to the days when people showed one another a mutual respect on the board, and were slower to take and give offence.

Growing pains...

Later,
Jason

 

[Barry_Green]

The very reasons this forum are in danger of being forgotten..

Flawed analogy though. As one of the original DVX users, and one of the guys who really tore into that beast and figured out how it worked, I can say pretty confidently that the two situations are entirely not the same.

For one, there was no flaw in the DVX's picture. It DIDN'T strobe any more than an F900 or a 35mm film camera, and I went and tested it against film to determine that. It had great audio. It did everything the way it was supposed to. For a DV camera, it did everything right, right out of the box. Did it have flaws? Well, it has 4:1:1 color sampling, but you can't fault the DVX for that; every DV camera (in NTSC) has 4:1:1 color sampling, and yes that can cause problems. I shall never forget when a guy I was lighting for, was shooting a Santa Claus video, and he had red/green barber poles decorating the set. They looked HORRIBLE on 4:1:1 DVX. Fortunately some chroma smoothing helped that out.

But seriously -- a DVX can't ruin a shot. There were no hidden surprises, no "gotchas". That isn't the same way anymore; with cmos and now with point-sampling line-skipping dslr technology, there are serious gotchas out there.

Secondly, the DVX was purpose-built for the purpose we put it to. The dslr is exactly the opposite -- it was designed for a totally different purpose than what people are putting it to. Yes, you can frankenstein a rig together that makes it more usable, but did you have to do that with a dvx? Of course not; it recorded sound and was hand-holdable and you could focus it and everything, right out of the box.

The challenges with integrating DSLRs are not, largely, based on core image. The DVX certainly wasn't ever accused (at least in its early days) of having a substandard image! The challenge is that the dslr isn't made for the purpose, and the hoops people have to jump through to make it work are ... well, that's what we end up discussing a lot. But you didn't have to jump through any hoops to put a dvx to work. At all.

Yes, there's a total DSLR revolution on. Yes, it's awesome that the caliber of footage that Bloom or Tattersall can get out of one, comes from a camera that costs as little as $799. But no -- as being one of the roots of DVXuser, one of the first members, I certainly reject the idea that we've "forgotten where we came from".

If you want to compare the DSLR to a camcorder, the DVX is the wrong one. The better comparison would probably be to the HV20, another unit that made a big splash, mainly because of its surprising quality compared to its miniscule price.

 

[stephenvv]

For one, there was no flaw in the DVX's picture. .

That's not my recollection - and the archives back me up. When I posted my first DVX footage, image flaws were attacked with some viciousness. The "black bars" down the side the image, the purple fringing on high contrast edges. The 4.1.1. People insisted that DV 4.1.1. 24 (despite your well-done test) that is strobed more than film. They criticized the highlight handling, the compression (compared to BetaSP or DV50). Lack of Genlock

The mocked the size and form factor (not stable enough for compared to big cameras). And oh the noise - noise this, noise that. Surely you recall all of this.

The DVX was revolutionary.

Sure, lots of this was simply because it was a 4.1.1 DV cam with 1'3" in chips. But a DSLR is DSLR with pixel skipping to create video. The HVX went through a similar ringer.

When a groundbreaking camera (if not technology in general) is released, especially costing a tiny fraction of what camera used to have the key feature, all hell breaks loose, forums erupt. (The DVX offered true 24p, the DSLR offers cinema DOF with DSLR DR, color and noise).

And then people starting shooting tons and the noise dies down until the next big paradigm shift. I know, just based on what I see online and what has happened in little ol' GSO, NC, the DSLR is bigger, faster and more revolutionary change than the DVX ever was.

Let's embrace that. That does not mean understanding the limitations is of no value - it's very important to know what the problems are.

But I just feel a little lack of respect for those of us who think that the flaws of the DLSR are being overstated vs. their advantages being highlighted. Our perspective matters as well. And more time should be spent on how to do great things with these cameras.

 

[DavidK]

If you stop, look, listen, and get a job ACing, you will learn

I feel like getting a job ACing with one of the better DPs out there is probably not something most people are going to be able to do. I certainly hope I'm wrong, though.

AC = assistant cinematographer, right? It's been a long time since I've had to talk this talk...

I've got 37,000+ posts on this board. I think someone should go through and do an analysis about what those posts were about. I think 36,000 of them would be answering questions and advising folks on how to navigate the minefield of the entertainment business so that they can succeed.

If you have 36,000 posts like the ones in this thread, I think I've found my reading for the next week... I'm not compiling stats, though.

 

[stephenvv]

However, there are some growing pains going on here... We've always experienced good, steady growth, but the last year has seen a ton of new membership, and a reduced cost of entry into this world... Many of them not familiar with the flow of this community, and a lot of noise has overridden that good vibe.

This is prime evidence of the impact of the DSLR revolution that exceeds anything that has come before. The film community here online and here in my area has literally exploded with people buying them. After the DVX release, it took 3 years before I knew of more than 10 DVXs in my area. Right now, I know of 50+ shooters with DSLRs bought expressly for video to replace a video camera.

It's always a challenge to bring in new users. But Newton's laws and basic human psychology are of value here. Sometimes, what some of the seasoned vets having been emphasized about DSLR's comes across as quite negative and critical - so it's no surprise that the threads sometimes turn ugly. Negativity breeds negativity. I understand the intention might be "objectivity" but objectivity does not exist, not in nature and certainly not in views on cameras, even by the most brilliant DP or camera engineer.

I totally agree we need to respect the experience of those who've been here from the start (I consider myself in this camp, actually). But we need to respect those that disagree and respect the enthusiasm and excitement that the new DVXuers' are bringing.

There's a way to discuss limitations but remaining positive. And I will be bold enough to suggest if you are not positive and excited about what DSLR video means for low-budget/no budget filmmakers, you're not paying attention. You don't have to personally agree or purchase one but the tide has already turned.

 

[dcloud]

But I just feel a little lack of respect for those of us who think that the flaws of the DLSR are being overstated vs. their advantages being highlighted.

i think its the opposite

 

[Jason Ramsey]

But I just feel a little lack of respect for those of us who think that the flaws of the DLSR are being overstated vs. their advantages being highlighted. Our perspective matters as well. And more time should be spent on how to do great things with these cameras.

We're after the same thing... we're just seeing it from different perspectives... From mine, being able to highlight all the great things they can do is dependent on first identifying the surprises. From my side of the fence, I see thousands of people singing the praises of the DSLR. There is certainly no lack of that. I see a fraction of that number here who dare to consistently try to make sure people are aware of the flaws. It's easy to say everybody knows... But, I don't see the balance there...

Again, we are looking at it from different sides of the fence, so obviously our perspectives don't match up. But, I can definitely tell you that we likely want the same thing. Well-rounded, comprehensive information on these tools available to all, without a bunch of noise and banter, trolls, haters, and new (or old) members making **** personal.

There are some people who are sensitive to what they view as persistent bashing, and there are others who are sensitive to what they consider people wearing rose colored glasses with respect to the dslrs. In between the two, are a whole bunch of people who are not as informed and are just looking for answers and information. And, it can get overwhelming for them.

I feel that the best way to highlight the capabilities of the dslr is to shoot on them and share the results. Share the process of getting there. I've seen some kick ass work shot on them floating around. I like to try to acknowledge people when they do kick ass work. And, on the boards, the important part is sharing the process of getting to that kick ass work. Bottom line is, these cameras all have gotcha's that were not really things people had to look out for before cmos (which is still relatively young technology for video use) and the additional, new considerations of dslrs shooting motion. These are new issues in relative terms, and while it may seem like they are well-known to everyone, there are an awful lot of people who don't know about it. B/c they have unrealistic expectations based on the work they have seen that members have posted.

When the flaws of dslrs don't have to be constantly reinforced, it will be a good thing... b/c either everyone will know about them, or (hopefully) the cameras that people are using will have moved beyond those limitations, but kept the things that have made dslr's so attractive.

Nobody really wants it to stop here do they? I mean the progression of the equipment we use. I'd hope we all want to see the priceerformance ratio continue to improve. shooting S35 frame size without aliasing, color contamination, improved rolling shutter performance, improved resolved detail, etc, etc for the same cost as a 7d is a good thing, obviously. And, if people aren't out there pushing for that, then it'll take a lot longer to get there...

 

[aeroboy]

If someone told me that Fat Joe Music Video that posted by Koli was shot with a Red/Sony F35 or any High end Camera by I would have believed it, so professional lighting/editing/directring and grading plaid a major role to get this look out of 7D. That is true for using any camera whether red/film/7D/hvx and etc.

 

[dvxhutch]

I'm flattered (once more in this thread) that someone actually knows stuff about me.

Guys like you and Timur have enormous respect on these boards. Great to have you both on the one post and still taking the time out to help newcomers, even if they sometimes are unappreciative. Most aren't, I can assure you.

I am a massive PRIMER fan and, trust me, I always think about what Shane would've done with the tools we have today. I can't speak for him, but I wager/guess that he would've probably shot with 16mm anyway, and today 16mm Film is even CHEAPER than it was when Shane Shot and better.

But surely shooting on a DSLR would be the ideal situation for someone wanting to make a film like PRIMER these days? Very similar look, far cheaper, don't have to shoot just one or 2 takes per shot...I'm more than happy to work around moire, jello, etc., if it means having as many takes as I want to get the shot. And on the RETURN OF THE KING EXTENDED DVD, Elijah talks about watching the rushes from the previous day for an emotional scene...only to see they were all OUT OF FOCUS and had to be reshot! Even on the biggest movie project in history, there are workarounds!

As much as people want to believe this industry is about story-telling, it really is not. First and foremost, it is a business. That means you need to be a business man and/or woman if you want to survive here. Second, it's about ideas. You don't need to be a great storyteller to have great ideas. You only need to watch the BTS of movies like DAYBREAKERS for this to really hit home.

You're right with what you say, but that's probably why most movies and TV shows are pedestrian. They come up with a cool idea....and fail to develop characters or a proper story around it. Yet none of the major studios are going into liquidation, so they must be making a profit so this cycle will continue. I should have said "GOOD movies are about storytelling".

For those who don't know about the Spierig brothers: they shot a movie called UNDEAD (australian) with whatever they could raise and ended up selling it to Lionsgate.

Yeah, I'm from Australia and attended a Q&A with them a few years back. They'e shooting a 3D sequel to the DARK CRYSTAL here next year. Should be interesting!

If you want to be a true artist, pick up a paintbrush.

NOOOOOO!!!!!! That is the whole point of this digital revolution, and especially DSLRs. Now anyone can be a participant in what has traditionally been the EXHORBITANT cost of filmmaking. It's Coppola's dream of a 12 year old being able to make a film that gets worldwide distribution. Let's face it, the DVX was a revolution, but to be honest it only looked like BAD 16mm. My wife, who knows nothing about filmmaking, watched NOVEMBER and thought it looked like crap. But on a big HD TV, DSLRs can look very similar to what the majority of people outside the industry (99% of viewers) see on TV. HOUSE is a perfect example of this. And let's not forget the 5D can get SHALLOWER DOF than 35mm!!! So for the first time in history, these consumer products can actually do something better than a 35mm film camera. Wow.

When I say that you need to put your best foot forward? I mean you need to play ball like Michael Jordan. Because, there are hundreds upon hundreds of tall, lean, mean ball playin' machines in the NBA.

How many of them do you know by name?

Well, basketball's not big at all in Australia for some reason, so...Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Luc Longley....? :smile:

Again, it's back to storytelling. Sure, there are so many slick productions out there, but good storytelling is a rare commodity. Chris Nolan made his debut for 6K, and has gone from strength to strength, but he's an English major and with his brother he makes sure his scripts are always super tight.

PS do you know anything about Shane's second film - been a while!

 

[PaPa]

The nice thing about this thread is it has given me roughly 30 minutes to throw away at work. Makes the day go by a little bit faster.

But man, so many of these comparisons. Apples to Oranges. DSLR's are great, they are beautiful, amazing, innexpensive. You can produce great work with them. Red is something else however. Something else completely.

I would venture to argue that if you are tossing up between using a DSLR versus a RED, you probably don't need the RED. I don't know if i could ever come to that question, because the answer should be more obvious than that.

 

[stephenvv]

We're after the same thing... we're just seeing it from different perspectives...

I appreciate your very thoughtful response - and I agree we do want the same thing. I can summarize that my primary concern is for the long-term success of DVXuser. It's a subtle thing - I would like the overall message on DSLR to be "we think they are fantastic and the best tool ever to arrive for low-budget imagemakers - but read the limitations here before you buy" vs "yeah, DSLR can get great footage but they are not really HD, that are not really professional, they alias/moire like crazy and will ruin shots" and "if you have the money, get a real pro cam".

My concern is that DVXUser may end up being perceived as the grumpy old man "get off my lawn". RED was treated the same way when it first came out and those users tend to go elsewhere over time.

And as you pointed out - this has just begun. But DVXUser, like it was with the DVX and HVX should be way ahead of the trend, not perceived as resisting it.

 

[PaPa]

Yeah Stephen,

I give myself a few rules

I understand the DSLR game and I choose my shots accordingly.

1) If I have a wide shot with deep depth of field, don't move the camera. This avoids aliasing and distracting moire
2) Try to keep the depth of field shallow as the camera shines more this way.
3) Keep wardrobe simple and avoid too many fine details.
4) Don't shoot handheld with anything more than a 50mm lens to avoid skewing.
5) Expose for the highlights.

Besides point 5, all of these issues are pretty much none issues for RED. But that also means that my style of filmmaking is dramatically different and my shots change due to the restrictions. That's a simple enough reason why I stopped trying to compoare DSLR with RED. Completely different game in camera work.

If none of those issues are of concern and you can plan accordingly, then DSLR is a great alternative for filmmakers who are going for short films, features for festivals, but anything beyond that I would think that the obivious choice would be going with the RED camera, if budget permits and you cannot create your piece if compromising artistic choice due to a camera's "lack of" ability are unacceptable to you.

DSLR's are absolutely fantastic tooks in honing your craft, being experimentative with a minimal budget and gives people room to grow and explore.

Take it for what it is, love it, learn, but be realistic.

"Low budget idealism" seems to be somewhat of a brainwashing tactic on these forums. These cameras should not be meant to persuade anyone that they are competing with something like a professional tool, RED.

Enjoy the easy access to the innexpensive tools, but don't convince yourself that they are the be all end all bridge between consumer and professional tool. You don't cut hair with hedge clippers, and you won't trim a tree with scissors. Use what's best for the situation and don't live in blissful ignorance.

Let's keep it positive and realistic. No one ever gained anything by convincing themselves of lies to better their ego's and "low budget idealisms". So if there are posts like Kholi's that you would consider negative or rude, it's simply because there have been a plethora of posts just like this one trying to keep the brainwashing alive. It's just a matter of turning the lights on so you can see what's really there.

Cheers.

 

[stephenvv]

"Low budget idealism" seems to be somewhat of a brainwashing tactic on these forums. These cameras should not be meant to persuade anyone that they are competing with something like a professional tool, RED.

.

I agree with most of your post, but in fact the 5D/7D is competing very well in the marketplace with RED. My friend with a RED is losing business now to them. One of clients is having me shoot new inserts for shots shot on a RED with my 7D and loves the results and the price. Personally, for quite a wide range of situations, my clients see no visual difference even at 1080. Sure, expert pixel peepers will, but they are not my paying clients.

Yes, there are some shots the RED does better. But stay tuned, I have news about that forthcoming soon.