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

Jens stated it best. Let's not get all hung up on these tests. As my DP for 25 years Jens could make all of these cameras look almost exactly the same with proper lighting. Now if you don't have proper lighting then this test is going to be very important to you to see if you have highlight or lowlight issues. Life has changed from the old days where we rented the right camera for the right job. Now people buy cameras and expect it to work for every situation. Sorry, it's just not that way. Just like our friend from the BSC mentioned: All of this is irrelevant to a great script and excellent actors". Let's focus on the important ****.

My list of how I would spend my budget and where I would put my money on a production would actually go like this:
1. script
2. script doctor
3. actors
4. rehearsals
5. food
6. extra shoot days
7. great sound man
8. great DP
9. great gear
 
I greatly appreciate the post from Zacuto and the insight it gives into the company's background and intentions and I thank you for all you've done for the industry. BTW - who at Zacuto was writing?

If anyone can point us to an email address to get the info on the gammas and knee settings used on the F3 and the AF100 that would be extremely valuable.

I only need to point to Petemack's conclusion a few posts away " Definitely going to be leaning towards under exposing my f3 or maybe I'll just pawn it and swoop up a 7D " though to reinforce the dangers of these tests. Probably he was being facetious about the 7D but likely not about underexposing the F3. But without knowing the F3 set-up why would you start underexposing. What if the knee was off entirely? Perhaps justa switch to cinegamma is a better solution.
 
tom.wong said:
no test is perfect, but i think they got a lot of their bases covered. absolutely cannot wait for the blu ray, hope there are tons of special features and side interviews.
Click to expand...

Oh, sorry if I came off as unhappy with the test. I can't see how anyone could complain about it, personally, but each person has their own set of eyes and values so it's all good. As far as I am concerned this test showed exactly what I already knew,from the Alexa and MX being tops right down to the 7D being the better performer of the Canon cameras. Been saying that forever, only reason to get a 5D is for wide angle tight-quarters shooting. Everything else about the 7D was better in image.

Also puts to rest the silly "Can't tell on the internet!" debate/phrase.

Just re-affirms why I choose MX as my digital flavor.
 
Barry_Green said:
"also how is it possible that the same external recorder was used for all cameras"

Because ... everything has SDI out, and those that don't (like the DSLRs) could use HDMI->HD-SDI. What's the problem with that?
Click to expand...

Well the problem is that as I understand DSLRs do not out put a clean HD signal via HDMI so I bet that not all cameras used the same external recorder. If some one knows how to use a external recorder with a 5D please post how, I would be delighted to be shown how to do it.
 
Don't know which is the most official SCCE test thread, but these are my reactions.

I was really hit by the resolution differences. Red One MX and Weisscam you could see and feel the resolution differences even when downrezzed to 1080p (I'm pretty sure this was at 1080). It also seemed to me that the DSLR cams just didn't match the resolution of F35, F3, AF100, Alexa. This is in part due to the nature of the codecs.

As a current AF100 user, I'm super impressed with it's performance here. For under $5000, I really didn't see anything that did quite as well price-per-dollar. F3 was nearly as bad in the highlight test, and the resolution and low light of the AF100 seemed to me much better than the DSLR contenders and near the the top enders. These results just tell me to be careful to not over-expose the AF100 as it has weakness to over exposure. But in most circumstances, I'll work around it without issue and have an amazingly great camera for low light.

RED MX impressed me alot. I've been super impressed with Alexa lately and have loved everything I've seen with it. But with the RED MX in these tests I could feel the superior resolution. I think I still prefer Alexa's image quality, but resolution does matter even when downrezzing. I can only imagine that Epic would probably have done REALLY well in these tests.
 
Kholi said:
to the 7D being the better performer of the Canon cameras. Been saying that forever, only reason to get a 5D is for wide angle tight-quarters shooting. Everything else about the 7D was better in image.
Click to expand...

I'm kind of confused why everyone is saying this. The 7D handled the highlights better where as the 5D handeled the shadows better. The dynamic range was just about equal, and if anything the 5D had the edge. Unless I am understanding the results incorrectly (and yes, I am talking about the results from the scene, not the chart).
 
Last edited:
LeavingTheCandy said:
What statement is Red trying to make by not allowing the EPIC in this test?
Click to expand...
The Red didn't do well in the Producer's Guild/ASC Camera Assessment Series, and Red seems to be not very interested in supporting tests after that one. Someone else posted that Ted from Red said something on the order of "We don't support tests."
 
Duke M. said:
No, the second time they asked Red the Epic was out of beta and released.
Click to expand...

If the Epic was in production and released, then why would they have to ask Red for one? They said that Clairmont Camera donated most of the gear, and the Clairmont website says they have them for rent now. Red may not want to participate in tests like this, but with the Red MX on the line, you would think that Clairmont, if they had theirs (And wouldn't they be one of the first ones to get them) would want it used.
 
Many of the posters here have alot to wake up too in terms of this testing. It's said over and over again, but people seem to miss it and overreact time and time again.

No camera is perfect. Make observations, learn limitations, work around them. People have learned to deal with DSLRs lack of functionality, but seem to gawk at the idea of setting up lights and properly planning a shoot.

Wake up! True cinematography is NOT available light. Like it was said and even looking at the graphs, pretty much all of these cameras can make great images for a video or film. But they are limited and will break down at some point, and this evaluation is AMAZING for helping you determine the warning spots for your equipment.

Trying to nitpick what settings the camera had as if the test was flawed is ludicrous. There has not really ever been a test as wide or as deep or as thorough as this. I promise that there was someone better than you working on this, and this is guaranteed when you sum up the collective.

Learn from the tests. That's why it was made. It's not meant to be taken as Bible or anything, just a very valuable informative tool.
 
David G. Smith said:
If the Epic was in production and released, then why would they have to ask Red for one? They said that Clairmont Camera donated most of the gear, and the Clairmont website says they have them for rent now. Red may not want to participate in tests like this, but with the Red MX on the line, you would think that Clairmont, if they had theirs (And wouldn't they be one of the first ones to get them) would want it used.
Click to expand...

They did the tests in two phases. They asked twice. Supposedly Ted said something along the lines of not believing in tests.

Any conjecture is irrelevant. I guess to get it straight from the horse's mouth you'd have to ask Ted or the SCCE.
 
Last edited:
Giuseppe Pugliese said:
and before I get attacked about the whole SCCE thing.. this is directed towards Zacuto's putting these videos online for the world to see, not the SCCE. Im sure the SCCE has logged every bit of information they possibly could with these cameras. But I say shame on zacuto for not putting this information in the videos or at least on the web text. Its so hugely important to know these values before you can evaluate any kind of footage you're seeing. Leaving that data out really negates the whole process that the SCCE did to create a quality and equal test.
Click to expand...

The SCCE hasn't published the information for me to put out yet. This all came together very quickly and Bob and team are working on there white paper.
 
Lenilenapi said:
I greatly appreciate the post from Zacuto and the insight it gives into the company's background and intentions and I thank you for all you've done for the industry. BTW - who at Zacuto was writing?

If anyone can point us to an email address to get the info on the gammas and knee settings used on the F3 and the AF100 that would be extremely valuable.

I only need to point to Petemack's conclusion a few posts away " Definitely going to be leaning towards under exposing my f3 or maybe I'll just pawn it and swoop up a 7D " though to reinforce the dangers of these tests. Probably he was being facetious about the 7D but likely not about underexposing the F3. But without knowing the F3 set-up why would you start underexposing. What if the knee was off entirely? Perhaps justa switch to cinegamma is a better solution.
Click to expand...

It's me Steve Weiss commenting in this post
 
TheReverend said:
Many of the posters here have alot to wake up too in terms of this testing. It's said over and over again, but people seem to miss it and overreact time and time again.

No camera is perfect. Make observations, learn limitations, work around them. People have learned to deal with DSLRs lack of functionality, but seem to gawk at the idea of setting up lights and properly planning a shoot.

Wake up! True cinematography is NOT available light. Like it was said and even looking at the graphs, pretty much all of these cameras can make great images for a video or film. But they are limited and will break down at some point, and this evaluation is AMAZING for helping you determine the warning spots for your equipment.

Trying to nitpick what settings the camera had as if the test was flawed is ludicrous. There has not really ever been a test as wide or as deep or as thorough as this. I promise that there was someone better than you working on this, and this is guaranteed when you sum up the collective.

Learn from the tests. That's why it was made. It's not meant to be taken as Bible or anything, just a very valuable informative tool.
Click to expand...

Thank you, well put. As Bob said, no matter what camera you are given you work learn it's strengths and weaknesses and work with it. It's just a tool, the talent is in the man.
 
David G. Smith said:
If the Epic was in production and released, then why would they have to ask Red for one? They said that Clairmont Camera donated most of the gear, and the Clairmont website says they have them for rent now. Red may not want to participate in tests like this, but with the Red MX on the line, you would think that Clairmont, if they had theirs (And wouldn't they be one of the first ones to get them) would want it used.
Click to expand...

Clairmont camera hadn't had one at the point of phase two of the test.
 
This may have been addressed somewhere before, but to what format was the Alexa recording. I saw some information labeled raw but not always. Was any of the material recoded log-c to via pro-res on board cards during the comparisons. Saw a few behind the scene shots with a codex on top. Would of been great to have s-log for F3 available.

Do we know what gamma was used?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top