Canon vs. RED

Status
Not open for further replies.
Luis Caffesse said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get your point, but that's how radically things are changing just over the last couple of years (my god, has it been that long since the release of the 5DII). Red were the ones that really broke a price performance barrier by introducing a image aquisition system capable of major motion picture production for 30K which was stone cold cheap compared to where that price performance was before they came along, but still hardly cheap enough to spark the kind of revolution in film making that the DAW sparked in home audio recording for $2,500 and less.


I guess the DVX100 was pretty exciting and it produced some amazing stuff ie; November, a short lived crime drama series on A&E, a sitcom, and it generated alot of enthusiasm and also other cams that did some amazing work "28 Days Later" etc, but this DSLR stuff seems to have gotten off the hook in comparison. Consequently, Red kinda evolved into this elite Boutique brand that is known for selling a handle for $500 where it use to be leading the revolution. The revolution shifted somewhere along the way.

So now the market expects a camera to deliver a major motion picture image for under 5-6K. That is the new market. Maybe the 5DII was the pre revolution and the AF100 will be the proper revolution that the 5D will give birth to. The beginning is the big sensor. That whole 35mm adapter thing was just goofy at least to me as a still photographer watching the evolution take place. The big sensor is the proper beginning for the revolution in film making , IMO.

The more the market expands, the cheaper everything gets. It seems the DSLR has created more suction for film making tools and that's just going to bring performance that was only available in the 30K plus range into the 3-5K range. Exciting stuff.
 
Barry_Green said:
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.
Click to expand...

May I ask how you know this, where you got that information, and what was your source ?

And, when did you find this out ?

Thanks.
 
The 5d and its siblings are still cameras. Canon will not make them into practical all around motion production cameras as that would kill them for the stills market. Video recording will remain a secondary application for these models.

If they do build true pro video versions of these cameras, you can bet the price will be more in the $10k+ than under $3k range, especially if they move to any form of raw recording at motion frame rates. As motion cameras they are 2mp cameras just like any other HD camera. 90% of the data that 21mp sensor produces is ignored in movie mode as they don't have the power necessary to process it.

RED has firmly established itself with the R1 as a very competitive high level production camera at a very modest price. They will remain a serious contender in the pro industry regardless of what Canon and others do. Just don't expect them to compete on price in Canon's consumer level markets.
 
Berry isn't the af100 also not on the market yet? I know it has a more secure delivery date than scarlet, but it is not out as well, it's another non existing camera. We all have our biases as long as we understand that we can have fair and balanced vs discussions otherwise they resort to fanboy white noise.

Aside from Panasonic and back to cannon vs red and talking about future cameras. I would say as berry did that it would be difficult to accomplish what the op said in the existing form factor of the dslr's. With the high frame rates and full raw the sensor would overheat, the body would need a fan or heat sink, and the processor to handle the data would add room as well. I really doubt they will be able to fit all of that plus the extra features red is supposed to be putting in, in the same form factor and within a few years.

Hey I'm all for more camera's on the market and more choices, though I hope none of them drive the others out of buisness I like all the different approaches.
 
The Scarlet 2/3" is supposed to have a 3K mode, which delivers about 2.4k of actual resolution.
Click to expand...

No digital camera of any kind delivers image resolution equal to its pixel resolution. For any Bayer sensor camera image resolution will max out at around 75% of pixel resolution at best. For 3-chip HD cameras the best they do is about 85%. Only the very best 1080p cameras with the very best optics deliver more than 750 lines vertical resolution in the finished image, few actually exceed 600 lines, a Canon 5D is closer to SD vertical resolution than 1080p HD, making around 520 lines vertical or so in video mode.
 
f64manray said:
So now the market expects a camera to deliver a major motion picture image for under 5-6K. That is the new market. Maybe the 5DII was the pre revolution and the AF100 will be the proper revolution that the 5D will give birth to. The beginning is the big sensor. That whole 35mm adapter thing was just goofy at least to me as a still photographer watching the evolution take place. The big sensor is the proper beginning for the revolution in film making , IMO.

The more the market expands, the cheaper everything gets. It seems the DSLR has created more suction for film making tools and that's just going to bring performance that was only available in the 30K plus range into the 3-5K range. Exciting stuff.
Click to expand...

No question the real revolution is access to large sensor motion recording at bargain prices for would be narrative and creative film makers. Modest image quality with 35mm film like DOF is a huge step forward. You will have to wait for another 3 or 4 generations of Moore's law improvements in digital processing power before cameras like the 5d2 and 7d can deliver overall image quality at 2k finish similar to a Red, Arri, or Panavision camera on the big screen though. By then high end production will have moved on to 4k and beyond.

I just got back from Infocomm, the AV industry tradeshow. One of the major trends was a move toward much higher than 1080p display, especially for digital signage and medical imaging applications. Even on a 60" sized display 4k images looked much better than HD and there were many demos of large video wall and multiple projector seamless image displays with higher than 10 megapixel resolutions meant to be viewed at close walk up distances. By comparison HD from a DSLR looks like VHS. While I know that most on these sites aspire to creative entertainment film making, that is a very small percentage of the overall production market for professional shooters.
 
George D. said:
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 ??
Click to expand...
James Jannard is far too clever to be out smarted by anyone else of ANY business.
 
I wouldn't count on earlier; the HVX200 just barely barely qualified for their announcement of "by the end of the year." However, the DVX100 was a month early, if I remember correctly, so ... anything's possible.
 
The market has changed a lot since those old times ;-) This camera annoucement is already an earlier release itself.
 
Barry_Green said:
Agreed, but if you pull the handle off the AF100 it isn't really any bigger than a DSLR.
Click to expand...

But it looks like a video camera even with the handle off. People are going to say, you cannot bring that video camera in here, etc...

Barry_Green said:
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.
Click to expand...

It's a full frame 21 mp camera when not in video mode. That's a seriously pro setup.
The duality of uses is unbelievable, not mention the amount of space/weight it saves.


Barry_Green said:
The DSLR form factor sucks for shooting video in and of itself
Click to expand...
Again, I don't agree. There are a gazillion rigs already and they will keep getting better. Heck, I have an extra-long Joby with a Manfrotto quick release plate + the LCDVF and it has been pretty solid for handholding, and that is ghetto.
 
Jim Klatt said:
Again, I don't agree. There are a gazillion rigs already and they will keep getting better. Heck, I have an extra-long Joby with a Manfrotto quick release plate + the LCDVF and it has been pretty solid for handholding, and that is ghetto.
Click to expand...


well, you're kind of pulling it out of the DSLR form factor once you try to make it larger/viable for shooting in anyway that is handled, right?

So, yeah, the DSLR form factor sucks for video acquisition. It's not bad when you have an 11 - 20mm on the camera.
 
If I were Jannard I'd be seriously considering scrapping the Scarlet altogether. It just doesn't sound economically viable with RAW DSLRs not very far away. 6 months ago it would have been a different story.

The GH1 hack shows the potential for much cleaner DSLR images. Personally I don't think RAW 4k is really worth 3-4 times as much money (10+ times as much in the case of the GH1). I'll be satisfied with full frame, 1080p, 100Mbps m-jpeg, 4:2:2, a D3s sensor, and a sub 3k price tag (a Nikon D800/900?).

4/3 sensors don't really do it for me because they can't go fast/shallow at the wide end like a full frame can.
 
Last edited:
squig said:
4/3 sensors don't really do it for me because they can't go fast/shallow at the wide end like a full frame can.
Click to expand...

We'll find out if that statement is accurate tomorrow. =]

Although I know what you mean: it's hard to purchase glass that's fast enough to replicate the hyper shallow look you can achieve with cheaper glass on the 5D. This is what I've come to realize can be beneficial for a lot of things, and after seeing how TRON was shot I'm being a sheeple and wanting to shoot closer to that look myself.

The 5D makes this much easier.

Can't wait to see what this 12/T1.3 looks like on the GH13 though.
 
I'm seriously considering picking one up especially if tester cracks 24/25p m-jpeg. I've been wanting something with high bit-rate m-jpeg ever since I got the D90. I won't be ditching the 5D though.

So we've established f/4-f/5.6 on the 5D is like t/2.8 on an S35mm film camera so what's comparable shallow DOF on the GH1 f/1.4 or f/2?

With a 2x anamorphic adapter I can maintain the width on the GH1 sensor, just need some fast glass. I'm wondering whether the fast c-mount lenses will vignette with an anamorphic adapter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top