First installment of SCCE shoot out to be released today...

I, for one, am glad that they are including DSLR's because people are using them for professional work and their user base is large if not in fact growing so let's see what they can do.

I doubt that any of the current DSLR's will be better than a true video/motion picture camera but line them up and let the 'clips' fall where they may.



I just wish that they could have had an FS100 in the mix becuase I don't think the F3/FS 100 will look the same side by side and I don't think anyone has done an FS100 - F3 comparo yet.

Either way I am looking forward to it... Today... I hope...:Drogar-Happy(DBG):
 
DIsappointed by no Epic. One could argue that the MX Red uses the same sensor of the Epic, but the interior processing and features (like HDRX) make it a completely different camera.
Same goes for the lack of S-Log, but I believe this was purposedly on Sony's part since an F3 with Slog was available during shooting time - I recall the first slog footage came at around the same time. Probably Sony didn't want the F3 to completely outperform their higher end cameras?

Anyway, this is still something I want to see. With Red's recent announcement of an Epic S this fall (yes, Red schedule time) I'm holding on an F3 purchase to the absolutely last minute- November 2011. I hope to be impressed!
 
Last edited:
Happy the Greats of today are put togther . I would like to remind you guys and gals :) that because of the DSLRs we have these shootouts in the firstplace.

Still wonder why the epic was not allowed to or not compared.

Looking forward to their findings.
 
Everts said:
Happy the Greats of today are put togther . I would like to remind you guys and gals :) that because of the DSLRs we have these shootouts in the firstplace.

Still wonder why the epic was not allowed to or not compared.

Looking forward to their findings.
Click to expand...


As Mitch stated earlier, at the time of this test, Epic was in extreme beta. Firmware wasn't even close to what it was even when the first Epic M production line came out. HDRx wasn't even finalized yet. The camera wasn't up to snuff just yet to even RED's standards, no point on doing a comparison test with it. It would only hurt the brand and the camera if any unsavory results came from the Epic during this test before it was a complete camera.
 
I'm still left wondering where some very important cameras were left out of this test, but DSLR's were flooding it... No F23? no 9000PL?? Heck I never even heard of the Nikon 7000 nor know anyone who has ever used it professionally at all.

I would respect this stuff much more if kept professional gear only, it just feels like a way to keep their market of super expensive gizmos selling by putting DSLR's next to 200,000 cameras. The 9000PL is a very important camera, and the lack of it being in this test makes me wonder why, specially since a completely unknown camera like the nikon is there. Its not really a great shootout to me. I'm sure it will be wonderful to watch... But it leaves a bitter taste in my mouth after because I know the only reason why the DSLRs are in there is because their entire company is making $$$$$$ off the parts. Oh well, I might just skip over the DSLR's while watching.

I like the first test much more from years back, before the days of DSLR, the lowest quality camera they had on set was a JVCHD200, which was a great camera given its image, and full HD sensors, everyone else was doing pixel shifting and other things to get its resolutions.

Eh I guess I'll just always hate dslr's in the market, to each his own. sorry for the rant.
 
Last edited:
As I understand it Zataco did not pick the cameras.
They are only making a docu about the shoot out.
 
Duke M. said:
In the sense that the codec and s-log will be the limiting factors we won't see the full capability of the camera... yet. It will still be interesting.
Click to expand...
Again, not entirely true. They didn't limit the cameras to their codecs. They recorded external on the best external recorder they could get. They did simultaneously record internally for the sake of having it, but the test wasn't about codecs, it was about the camera heads. I think the only place they used the internal codec in the test results was a test on the "Wringer" chart, to show how much of a difference the internal vs. external made.
 
SPZ said:
DIsappointed by no Epic.
Click to expand...
They tried, repeatedly, to get one. Red refused to supply them one. So they used a Red MX because that's what they could get.

Same goes for the lack of S-Log
Click to expand...
The test was conducted back in Jan or Feb. The *results* came out at NAB time, which is about the same time that Timur shot the first S-log footage. But there was no S-log available at the time they shot the SCCE test.
 
Everts said:
I would like to remind you guys and gals :) that because of the DSLRs we have these shootouts in the firstplace.
Click to expand...
Don't know why you'd say that. I was organizing six-way shootouts back in 2006, years before the DSLRs came out...

Still wonder why the epic was not allowed to or not compared.
Click to expand...
Because Red wouldn't give them one.
 
Giuseppe Pugliese said:
I'm still left wondering where some very important cameras were left out of this test, but DSLR's were flooding it... No F23? no 9000PL??
Click to expand...
If you're wondering that, then you probably don't understand the purpose of the test.

It is named the SCCE, and it stands for the Single Chip Camera Evaluation.

The F23 and F900 are three-chip 2/3" cameras.

This test was about large-sensor, single-chip cameras that have been used for cinema-style work, period.

I would respect this stuff much more if kept professional gear only, it just feels like a way to keep their market of super expensive gizmos selling by putting DSLR's next to 200,000 cameras.
Click to expand...
Well, again, you must not have seen the results then. The simplest way I can sum up the results is -- the price tag should be your guide. The Alexa dominated. And the least-expensive cameras in the group, the DSLRs, were so outclassed that the audience actually laughed out loud when their shots came up.

The 9000PL is a very important camera, and the lack of it being in this test makes me wonder why
Click to expand...
Probably because it shares a camera head with the F35, and the F35 was already included.

Its not really a great shootout to me.
Click to expand...
Don't you think your complaining is a bit premature? You don't even seem to understand what its purpose was, and you haven't seen the results! Sheesh. This was unquestionably the best, most comprehensive, most well thought out, highest-level, hardest-working "shootout" in existence, conducted by the best people in the industry!

because I know the only reason why the DSLRs are in there is because their entire company is making $$$$$$ off the parts.
Click to expand...
You "know" this? You don't know any such thing, you're just casting aspersions. And it's an insult to the 140+ people who worked on it.
 
in addition to what barry said, and just to beat the horse dead. it's a COMPARISON. not a competition, not a what's worse, what's better. it's just to show what the cameras can do. a LOT of dslrs are used in everyday production for pickups, b , c , d cams. crash cams, and having them in the comparison makes a lot of sense to me because you should know the limitation of the cameras that are used all the time. what you need to do so they match better, maybe it's a bad idea after all to use, them. It's left up to the watcher, and can save them later on.

I think it also shows off the amount of options we have nowadays, and what level of quality you can get from budget to budget. A lot of people don't get to see how good the higher end cameras are, or how much better than really are compared to to the lower end ones. It's also nice to see where certain areas a lower end camera might be stronger in than a higher end camera, again to let you decide what you need for the job. It's a large single chip camera comparison, can you imagine the uproar of those cameras WEREN'T included?
 
Mitch Gross said:
To be fair, RED decided not to have the EPIC made available for the test as they considered the camera to still be in Beta development and that it would be unfair to judge the camera in that state. A RED One MX was used and when asked, Jim Jannard himself gave suggestions on their forum as to what post processing he felt would give the best results for the camera. That sounds pretty reasonable from both sides of the fence.

I have my issues with a number of aspects of the tests and there are certain suppositions made in it that I very much disagree with. But it is impossible to make a completely accurate test of such wildly divergent technologies, so there will always be complaints. On the whole I feel it gives a generally accurate view of the relative merits of the different cameras, but I quibble about almost all of the specific benchmarks. I'm a pretty vocal guy, so I have a feeling at least a few of my comments made it into the final Zacuto documentary.
Click to expand...

I'm a pretty vocal guy too Mitch, everyone knows that, and you can quibble all you want but this test is as fair as one can possibly be and I think the most fair to date. So much prep was put in to makeing it so and you will see that in this documentary. The folks doing this test are the most qualified out there. You and I are friends Mitch so lets keep this friendly but many vendors and manufacturers had horses in the race and made that vocal at the various screenings around the world and that's understandable. Remember folks, every camera manufacturer was invited to the test to make sure that their camera was setup properly and some even got involved in the post as well to make sure their camera was properly treated. Mitch you were involved in the post as well. Bob and his team had no horses in the race. They truly wanted to see how these cameras compared. Bob is the most altruistic guy I know and gave up a lot of his life to make this fair and for the world community to see. There were two cameras that we were not able to get the raw from in time for the NAB and NY screenings and that was disclosed in the screenings and this has subsequently been fixed (and really only effected the Weiscam which we noticed when they were fixed) the fixed version will be presented in this program. Errors do happen and we were keen to fix them. With regard to RED, in phase one of our testing, the camera was a week or so prior to it's release. In phase two of our testing it was already released. When I spoke to Ted at NAB he told me "I don't believe in tests", and that's his right and I respected that. Please watch the program and then judge the test. There is no point in judging it now before anyone has seen it. I think you will have a much better understanding of how the test was done and the viewers conclusions. Our documentary is completely different from the SCCE screening and will give you a lot more information about the thinking and methodology that went into the test and comparisons. With regards to the GH2 it was not included because only cameras from the Pro divisions of companies were included and Bob had the final call on cameras included. There is a limit to the amount of cameras that can be included because of time and financial reasons. I don't think people understand the scope of this project which is the largest I've done in 29 years of production. It was a 4 day shoot divided into two phases with 1 prep day for each shoot. Phase one had 128 crew members including specialists, 141 crew and specialists in phase two of shooting & a total of 772 people who were involved in one way or another including shooting, screenings & post process.

Again hold your criticism till you get to see GCSO 2011.
 
Barry, Since you have seen the comparisons projected and this is an F3 board, I'm wondering how you thought the F3 held up and if you had any sense of how it might have faired vs the Alexa had there been an S-log 10bit 4:2:2 recording. I realize this is asking a highly subjective and speculative question , but what the heck.
 
Steve, as I said my complaintswere quibbles and in the end no one could ever make a test the would satisfy everyone. But that doesnt mean they shouldn't do it.

I also said that for the most part the tests were accurate, certainly accurate to give a sense of the relative qualities of the cameras when compared to one another.

I've seen the test (the original SCCE, not Zacuto's doc on it) so I do think I have some framework to comment. But I find it interesting to see others here complaining about a test they did not see and making suppositions that are often just plain wrong.

Oh wait, it's an internet forum.

I'll definitely watch the Zacuto docs as I'm curious to hear the comments of others. I have my opinions, but they are just that -- opinions.
 
Lenilenapi said:
Barry, Since you have seen the comparisons projected and this is an F3 board, I'm wondering how you thought the F3 held up and if you had any sense of how it might have faired vs the Alexa had there been an S-log 10bit 4:2:2 recording. I realize this is asking a highly subjective and speculative question , but what the heck.
Click to expand...
I already answered that in a prior post... I started a thread here about the SCCE and gave a report and, when prodded, a subjective summary...
 
Last edited:
Thanks, I missed that thread. I noticed somewhere in the thread it said used external recorders. I thought they just shot to SxS cards for the F3.

Also Jan says they used NORMAL as the gamma on the AF100? What did they use on the F3? Did they compare that to SLog on the Alexa. If so that's not quite apples to apples so you need to factor in those differences.

Thanks for all your thoughts. Its a brand new world every time you get up in the morning these days.
 
The first episode is up. Very nice job. They do make it very clear that the camera's were not optimized for each scene, but set to a standard for comparison. That really is the only way to get a fair comparison, IMHO. The overexposure scene really wasn't that surprising. The underexposure one was. it is amazing how the new cameras perform at the bottom end.
 
i still think any of the cameras like f3 and af100 should have used offboard recorders rather than internal codec. f3 more importantly. all the top end cameras have far superior codecs and resolve a lot more information. highlight roll off for examples and the ugly yellow you get can be directly contributed to how the footage is compressed. i've seen first hand how the highlights stay white on a ki mini off a f3, while it goes that mucky yellow/green on the xdcam. and the highlights roll off more gently too, and the detail in the shadows holds up better, while xdcam compression can add noise, and even mud up.

it's ok though, it was really fun to watch, and honestly the thing i'm most disappointed with are the high speed cameras. i've gotten plenty of phantom footage in, and it always looked amazing, i guess it's a different animal when you are lighting for 1/1000th of a shutter :P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top