Canon vs. RED

[George D.]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but according to the research I've done so far IF Canon or Nikon comes out with just three things to improve their cameras for video:

1 - Eliminate Moire problems.

2 - Eliminate line skipping.

3 - Allow video to be shot in RAW.

They will literally put RED out of business.

If we could buy a camera from a reputable manufacturer like Canon or Nikon, why buy a RED-One or a Scarlet ? Especially, when it will probably be 1/4 the cost of a RED camera.

I think it's just a matter of time, and I hope it's sooner than later.

What are your feelings on this ??

 

[Calomile]

They haven't yet, nor have they really shown any willingness to do any of the above.

I agree if the current range of DSLRs could shoot RAW with no line skipping they'd be near enough to god like at the price range they're at, but as far as I'm aware, the sensor cannot offload its full sensor data to compact flash fast enough (not enough buffer to write to). RAW with 1080p & line skipping would likely be more reasonable to expect, but the amount of ground work required to get that up and running (embedding the raw sensor data into a codec, or making a new codec that the camera could write to that could later be interpreted, á la REDCODE) is huge, and would require immense firmware changes.

In terms of what they might release, RED will likely push the bar higher, especially when Scarlet comes about. I expect that DSLR video will skip a few generations of upgrades and probably jump in with something like 2.5k RAW footage.

 

[Ian-T]

I think all of this will eventually happen (I don’t know about putting Red out of business though). The way I see it Canon will probably do it first especially since they have a lot of heavy hitters currently whispering in their ear about what they want and need. I don’t know about the next generation of cameras though but give it a couple more.

 

[f64manray]

Well, on the surface, your statement seems correct, but if I could draw a parallel to the audio world that was at this similar junction about a decade ago.

It really was unheard of to get a good large diaphram condensor microphone under the $2,500 mark, then in the late 90s, Audio Technica released the AT4050 for around $700. As the years went by others introduced some pretty fine mics even cheaper than that and now there's a whole industry that caters to the home recording market selling gear that only large studios would have bought in the past at much, much higher prices. But now because tens of thousands are recording at home, the prices have plummeted. But still companies like Manley, Avalon, Universal Audio manage to still eek out a living selling mic pres, compressors etc for $2,500 and up, and Neuman seems to have no problem selling mics between $2,500 & $4,000 despite the fact any world class album could be recorded with a $700 Shure KSM44 or AT4050.

Even in the photo world, Canon can sell a 1DsIV for $8,000 to amatuers despite the fact that there are pros getting fantastic results running their business with a T2i in LA.

Does anyone ever need a BMW or a Mercedez? I mean look at the top of the line Honda Accord Coupe or S2000. There are some fine autos that will do the job for a fraction of the price.

I think it's a simple rule of marketing that you can only sell to some people if the product is out of reach of most people. Then they will gladly pay four times as much. And I think that's where Red will fall, and they will be successful doing it.

 

[shaocaholica]

...but the amount of ground work required to get that up and running (embedding the raw sensor data into a codec, or making a new codec that the camera could write to that could later be interpreted, á la REDCODE) is huge, and would require immense firmware changes.

I've said this before

You can, in theory, save a lot of R&D but putting RAW data into H.264. But H.264 is pretty lossy right? Not really. There are lossless and close to lossless H.264 profiles that no one really uses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC

Check out the Hi422P and Hi444PP profiles. They also support up to 14bit color.

With RAW, you can either store the original monochrome RAW data or split it into RGB channels with G having 2x more data than R and B. Those H.264 profiles support both monochrome 4:0:0 and 422 at 14bit depth. You won't need 444 for RAW since not all the channels have equal data. They still need to be debayered but as long as your codec on the other end knows to do that after decoding the H.264, you're all set.

 

[dantewaters]

I've said this before

You can, in theory, save a lot of R&D but putting RAW data into H.264. But H.264 is pretty lossy right? Not really. There are lossless and close to lossless H.264 profiles that no one really uses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC

Check out the Hi422P and Hi444PP profiles. They also support up to 14bit color.

With RAW, you can either store the original monochrome RAW data or split it into RGB channels with G having 2x more data than R and B. Those H.264 profiles support both monochrome 4:0:0 and 422 at 14bit depth. You won't need 444 for RAW since not all the channels have equal data. They still need to be debayered but as long as your codec on the other end knows to do that after decoding the H.264, you're all set.

Hmmm interesting lets see what Canon does.

 

[Barry_Green]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but according to the research I've done so far IF Canon or Nikon comes out with just three things to improve their cameras for video:

1 - Eliminate Moire problems.

2 - Eliminate line skipping.

3 - Allow video to be shot in RAW.

They will literally put RED out of business.

Of course not. You'd still be stuck with an SLR form factor that can't even take a proper audio signal in. Nor will you have 3K, 4K, or variable frame rates or any of many other features!

If we could buy a camera from a reputable manufacturer like Canon or Nikon, why buy a RED-One or a Scarlet ? Especially, when it will probably be 1/4 the cost of a RED camera.

What you're asking for is almost completely being delivered by Panasonic this winter, the AF100. No moire, no line skipping, a proper cinema/video form factor, professional audio, variable frame rates, everything. Only thing missing is raw, and you can at least hook up a recorder to the HD-SDI and HDMI ports to get full uncompressed 1080p/4:2:2 out of it. Major manufacturer, and three year warranty, and 1/5 the cost of a Red One package (which is still the only Red camera on the market).

So once it's out, I think your question will be able to be answered -- we'll know at that point who'd buy a Red One, who'd buy an Epic, who'd buy a Scarlet, and who'd buy a Panasonic. No need to speculate, you just have to wait a few more months.

I think it's just a matter of time, and I hope it's sooner than later.

Well, five months is sooner rather than later.

What are your feelings on this ??

My personal feeling is that any thread with "vs." in the title is a thread that's going to devolve into fanboy bashing and sooner or later will end up being closed. :engel017:

 

[slimjimmed]

For me, the form factor of a small dslr is a tremendous strength. For documentary work, or event production it opens up the doors to the whole world. For narrative, it can make the talent RELAX and feel less self-conscious(and cut down budgets).

Plus you are shooting with a full-frame, 21 mp camera.

Making the form factor larger again to accomodate a few utilities (that will be ironed out in the next few years anyway for the hdslr's) is a step backwards for me.

I am not tempted by the AF100, at all. I would very much prefer to have these compact, discreet, hybrid systems that make strangers think you have a stills camera. The form factor is unmeasurable in its advantages.

 

[Pirata]

I'm pretty sure that when that camera is released by Canon with a sensor and processor fast enough to read RAW video at 24fps it will probably cost very close to a Scarlet S35 or FF35 anyway. For instance, the new Panasonic is still using a slow, still frame sensor, will be recording a pretty baked in image with its 1080p codec and will still be around $6,000. Anything less with known technology is a compromise in some for or another. RED being put out of business by any competition is highly unlikely at this point. The price point of their entry level systems will be very competitive.

 

[acoelho1]

Raw is not a deal breaker for me but maybe they could provide a more robust codec. I also like the form factor although may not be ideal for video, I do like the fact that it doesnt draw too much attention.

No matter which camera system you decide to invest in, the next year or so should be pretty exciting for us in the market for a new camera.

 

[George D.]

What you're asking for is almost completely being delivered by Panasonic this winter, the AF100. No moire, no line skipping, a proper cinema/video form factor, professional audio, variable frame rates, everything. Only thing missing is raw, and you can at least hook up a recorder to the HD-SDI and HDMI ports to get full uncompressed 1080p/4:2:2 out of it. Major manufacturer, and three year warranty, and 1/5 the cost of a Red One package (which is still the only Red camera on the market).

Thanks for the input. I just checked up on the Panasonic, a company I happen to love, and it would seem to me that an AF100 "with" a Nano Flash would be every bit as good as a Scarlet.

 

[Barry_Green]

would be every bit as good as a Scarlet.

For your purposes, perhaps -- but there are still things the Scarlet is going to do that the AF100 won't. Such as 120fps, and 3K res.

Then again, it really is pointless to talk about the Scarlet at all. It doesn't exist now, and what it will be when it does exist, is anybody's guess. The latest Red announcements cast the future delivery date of the Scarlet out the window. So, like I keep saying -- the only information about Scarlet that anyone should care about, is when it shows up in www.red.com/store. Until then, it's wasted energy to even debate about a product that doesn't exist, whose specifications are all subject to change, and which doesn't even have a timeframe at all at this point, because they've lost the relationship with the manufacturing partner because the partner they were going to use (presumed to be foxconn) is restructuring. And, because the bug in the Epic exists, which they've been working on for two months, they've been unable to resolve. As an ex-programmer I can testify that what Jim's saying is exactly true -- they might resolve it in the next day, or they might be fighting it for months to come, so they truly don't know when the Epic will be released, and Scarlet is going to trail Epic, and they don't know who's going to be building the Scarlet anyway, so ...

All future talk of comparing to Scarlet is wasted breath. Nobody is going to be buying a Scarlet any time soon, so ... if you need something now, buy what's available now.

 

[Barry_Green]

For me, the form factor of a small dslr is a tremendous strength. For documentary work, or event production it opens up the doors to the whole world. For narrative, it can make the talent RELAX and feel less self-conscious(and cut down budgets).

Agreed, but if you pull the handle off the AF100 it isn't really any bigger than a DSLR.

Plus you are shooting with a full-frame, 21 mp camera.

Only when shooting stills. When in video mode it delivers about 720p worth of resolution. The full frame comes into play for field of view purposes, but you aren't using more than about 1/13th of those 21 megapixels when in video mode.

I would very much prefer to have these compact, discreet, hybrid systems that make strangers think you have a stills camera. The form factor is unmeasurable in its advantages.

Agreed very much that the stealth of the DSLR form factor is a big advantage in scenarios where you need stealth. The DSLR form factor sucks for shooting video in and of itself, but when you need to be discreet it's incredibly advantageous.

 

[jmarkham]

The price point of their entry level systems will be very competitive.

Assuming they ever get them out the door.

 

[David G. Smith]

I think Red knows which side of their bread is buttered, and that their future survival is more dependant on the success or failure of the Epic cameras. The Red One pretty much created a new market for the moderately priced digital cinema camera, and they need to solidify their place in that market, with the Epic. The lower end, with the Scarlet, is a lot more competitive and has lower margins, I would imagine. Even if the Scarlet goes away and is never produced, I think that Red will endure, if Epic succeeds.

 

[George D.]

For your purposes, perhaps -- but there are still things the Scarlet is going to do that the AF100 won't. Such as 120fps, and 3K res.

The latest Red announcements cast the future delivery of the Scarlet out the window.

All future talk of comparing to Scarlet is wasted breath. Nobody is going to be buying a Scarlet any time soon, so ... if you need something now, buy what's available now.

Thanks Barry for your input.

Even if the AF100 is not capable of 120fps, the 3/4" sensor is close to 3K res, isn't it?

And, what announcement are you referring to that "...cast the future delivery of the Scarlet out the window." ??

Thanks again.

 

[Luis Caffesse]

Well, on the surface, your statement seems correct, but if I could draw a parallel to the audio world that was at this similar junction about a decade ago.

It really was unheard of to get a good large diaphram condensor microphone under the $2,500 mark, then in the late 90s, Audio Technica released the AT4050 for around $700. As the years went by others introduced some pretty fine mics even cheaper than that and now there's a whole industry that caters to the home recording market selling gear that only large studios would have bought in the past at much, much higher prices. But now because tens of thousands are recording at home, the prices have plummeted. But still companies like Manley, Avalon, Universal Audio manage to still eek out a living selling mic pres, compressors etc for $2,500 and up, and Neuman seems to have no problem selling mics between $2,500 & $4,000 despite the fact any world class album could be recorded with a $700 Shure KSM44 or AT4050.

Even in the photo world, Canon can sell a 1DsIV for $8,000 to amatuers despite the fact that there are pros getting fantastic results running their business with a T2i in LA.

Does anyone ever need a BMW or a Mercedez? I mean look at the top of the line Honda Accord Coupe or S2000. There are some fine autos that will do the job for a fraction of the price.

I think it's a simple rule of marketing that you can only sell to some people if the product is out of reach of most people. Then they will gladly pay four times as much. And I think that's where Red will fall, and they will be successful doing it.

That analogy is kind of funny to me, even though it makes sense on the surface..but let's not forget that RED came on the scene as the low priced alternative... not as the high end option. They may seem like the high end option to many of us here, but the RED One was competing with the Vipers and F-950s of the production world when it was released, at a fraction of their price.
They would be closer to the Audio Technica in your example, than the Neuman.

 

[Barry_Green]

Even if the AF100 is not capable of 120fps, the 3/4" sensor is close to 3K res, isn't it?

It's not 3/4", it's 4/3", much larger. It's 4x as large as the Scarlet 2/3" sensor.

But no, the maximum resolution on the AF100 won't be anywhere near 3K, it'll be 1080p (which is about 93% as large as 2K).

The Scarlet 2/3" is supposed to have a 3K mode, which delivers about 2.4k of actual resolution.

And, what announcement are you referring to that "...cast the future delivery of the Scarlet out the window." ??

I meant to say the future delivery DATE. I'm not implying there won't be a Scarlet, all I'm saying is -- any guesses on delivery dates have to now be completely thrown out the window. Scarlet's manufacturing partner, foxconn, is not going to be producing the Scarlet, so Red has to make an alliance with a new manufacturer now. So any guesses about Scarlet's delivery date are now pure fantasy, as they don't even have (as of today) a manufacturer lined up to produce them.

 

[Sao_Bento]

That analogy is kind of funny to me, even though it makes sense on the surface..but let's not forget that RED came on the scene as the low priced alternative... not as the high end option. They may seem like the high end option to many of us here, but the RED One was competing with the Vipers and F-950s of the production world when it was released, at a fraction of their price.
They would be closer to the Audio Technica in your example, than the Neuman.

That brings into question who REDs real market is. On one hand they came out as the low-cost indy friendly camera revolution guys, but now their the name dropping, big hollywood guys who reneged on 3K for 3K, charge $1500 for a viewfinder, and are super vague about shipping their "low cost" product. They may love the rabid fanboyism they get from the indy and wannabe crowd, but it's clear their new target is the high end (relatively speaking). In the mean time, everyone else is catching up fast. A camera like the 5D MkII might not be perfect, but for many people, having a camera to shoot with is far preferable to fighting over a line position to buy something that may never even exist. Hold onto the dream if you want, but I've got stuff to shoot.

It's also funny that there's a comparison between the Scarlet which doesn't exist except as 3D rendered CAD models and the Panasonic, which apparently only exists only as an illustration.

 

[Centro]

Making the form factor larger again to accomodate a few utilities (that will be ironed out in the next few years anyway for the hdslr's) is a step backwards for me.

I agree. And that's why Epic/Scarlet form factor isn't too distant from dslr's.