thisisapocalypse
Well-known member
Depends on what I want to shoot
but a Scarlet with a fast zoom will be a killer tool for the right projects!
Has the DSLR Hybrid craze effectively killed the desire for a Red Scarlet camera?
- Thread starter christriplet
- Start date
Depends on what I want to shoot
but a Scarlet with a fast zoom will be a killer tool for the right projects!
thisisapocalypse
Well-known member
Not sure this makes sense to me - these still lenses resolve plenty of detail for pro DSLRS resolving 12-25MP (albeit on bigger sensors with bigger image circles), so they can definitely resolve 3K, but maybe not in a 2/3" area...is that the issue?
slimjimmed
Well-known member
What was the date/year when the Scarlet was announced?
Carlos_Nieto
Member
A 2/3" area corresponds to the "sweet spot" area of a 35mm lens -the center of the glass, capable of resolving more resolution than the borders- so this can't be the issue.
I also find pretty strange to read such things as "(...) still lenses from Canon or Nikon would very likely not resolve the amount of detail at 3K resolution in RAW format" ...? This means that the last generation of Nikon or Canon glass, -let's say the superb Nikon 14-24 2.8 or the Canon 85 1.2 L-, designed to be used with such cameras like the D3X -6048x4032 = 6K resolution- or the 1DsMkIII -5616x3744 = 5,5 k resolution- are not up to what these cameras sensors can deliver? Sorry, but I seriously doubt this.
In fact, and until recently, the point has been quite the opposite: what camera sensors could deliver (8-12 Mpx) fell far behind what the best still lenses in the market could resolve. I'm quite sure that when I attach my Leica R 28-90 ASPH to my 7D, the lens easily outresolves the 1920x1080 video definition and it's clearly up to the 18Mpx in still RAW mode (5K).
I'm not saying that still photography lenses are equally suited for cinema or video applications as especifically designed cinema lenses and that they do not show some unquestionable disadvantages, but to say that they are clearly inferior in terms of pure optical quality is absurd in my opinion.
For me, there is still a great deal of interest in Scarlet.... 120 fps, redraw and, what I can only imagine to be an amazing 2k finish are trump cards.
BUT...
They have to move fairly soon. If any of the competitors can bring out a 1080/60p camera (and I mean close to 1080 lines of resolution) with a strong codec, pro video features and large chip for the $5k mark... then things will get very interesting.
Sacrifices come in many forms:
sensor size
resolution
fps
form factor
price
codec
workflow
availability
local service centers
video features
sound
etc, etc
The Scarlet s35 seemed to tick most of my personal boxes..... but I fear it is going to be a long, long time until it comes to market... it may even get dumped.
After trading in my HVX for a 5DII... I have become very accustomed to the small form factor and love it... so this may still be a key factor if the battles come down to Scarlet v video camera with large sensor.
For me it it now next gen DSLR v Scarlet with regards to who gets my money next.
Another key point is that those of us who took up the 5DII option as possibly a stop gap to Scarlet s35 have now amased a good collection of glass and accesories for s35/FF usage.
BUT...
They have to move fairly soon. If any of the competitors can bring out a 1080/60p camera (and I mean close to 1080 lines of resolution) with a strong codec, pro video features and large chip for the $5k mark... then things will get very interesting.
Sacrifices come in many forms:
sensor size
resolution
fps
form factor
price
codec
workflow
availability
local service centers
video features
sound
etc, etc
The Scarlet s35 seemed to tick most of my personal boxes..... but I fear it is going to be a long, long time until it comes to market... it may even get dumped.
After trading in my HVX for a 5DII... I have become very accustomed to the small form factor and love it... so this may still be a key factor if the battles come down to Scarlet v video camera with large sensor.
For me it it now next gen DSLR v Scarlet with regards to who gets my money next.
Another key point is that those of us who took up the 5DII option as possibly a stop gap to Scarlet s35 have now amased a good collection of glass and accesories for s35/FF usage.
William_Robinette
Shallow Member
NAB (April) 2008.
Barry_Green
Moderator
And it's not welcome here. The animosity can just go away as far as we're concerned.
Excellent point.
Absolutely correct.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Yes, that's exactly the issue. The SLR lens can resolve 12 mp over a 36x24 area, but a 2/3" chip is only 1/17th that size, so the window the chip is seeing might be resolving only 1/17th of 12 megapixels, or .7 megapixels... about halfway between standard-def and 720p.
Now, in reality, that's probably not the case, because the center of the lens is typically the "sweet spot" of the lens where it's sharpest and the least distortions, so you probably would get a good solid 1080p worth of resolved detail shining onto a 2/3"-sized sensor. Maybe more, maybe less; each lens would need to be tested.
Barry_Green
Moderator
It was buzzed about before NAB 2008, but it was formally unveiled in its first form at NAB in April 2008. That's when the first brochures with the now famous "3K for $3K" slogan were printed and distributed.
slimjimmed
Well-known member
It is remarkable how much has changed since then.
The D90 wasn't announced until later that summer.
slimjimmed
Well-known member
I am guessing that the D90, GH1, and maybe 5d(which were all released after the Scarlet announcement), will release the second generation of their HD video cameras prior to Scarlet's initial release.
For me this is kind of the key point in the Scarlet vs. DSLR digital video smackdown... :laugh:
The current crop of DSLRs have the advantage of actually exisiting. Something I persoanlly see as a big advantage.
However, the specs for the upcoming Scarlet do look superior for film making in many ways...
But the real questions are: What will the new crop of DSLRs offer and when will they- and the Scarlet- come to the market?
Barry_Green
Moderator
The question of what an upcoming product may or may not offer, and when, is largely ... IRRELEVANT!
Because if you need something now, what does it matter, in any way, as to what some future product may or may not have? That wouldn't help you today, with what you need to do.
And if you don't need it now, why bother buying at all? Something better and cheaper will always, always, always be right around the corner.
That's why I say -- ignore the Scarlet, ignore the GH2, ignore the ... what, 5D Mark III or whatever, because they don't exist. Look at the products that are on the market today, and make an evaluation: is what it offers, worth the price they're charging, to ME? Now?
If the answer's yes, get it -- you'll still have something that's way better than anything we had 10 years ago, and a lot of great films were being made 10 years ago. Just because something new comes out, doesn't make what you already have "stop working" or anything, nor does it diminish you or your skills or worth -- unless, of course, your entire ego and sense of self-worth is tied up in what equipment you happen to own, which is a pretty bad place to be in.*
On the other hand, if there's an announced product with a definite ship date that looks ideal to you (yes, AF100, I'm lookin' at you) and you have pretty strong assurances that the company will actually deliver, then there's nothing wrong with looking forward and planning on it. But that actually reinforces my original point -- if you CAN wait, then obviously you don't NEED it now... and if you don't NEED something... why are you buying it?!?
*unless you're a professional rental house, in which case you should already know all this stuff anyway, and will be making decisions based on what's available today and if you think you can make your money back on it before it's obsoleted, because it all will be obsoleted sooner or later.
Because if you need something now, what does it matter, in any way, as to what some future product may or may not have? That wouldn't help you today, with what you need to do.
And if you don't need it now, why bother buying at all? Something better and cheaper will always, always, always be right around the corner.
That's why I say -- ignore the Scarlet, ignore the GH2, ignore the ... what, 5D Mark III or whatever, because they don't exist. Look at the products that are on the market today, and make an evaluation: is what it offers, worth the price they're charging, to ME? Now?
If the answer's yes, get it -- you'll still have something that's way better than anything we had 10 years ago, and a lot of great films were being made 10 years ago. Just because something new comes out, doesn't make what you already have "stop working" or anything, nor does it diminish you or your skills or worth -- unless, of course, your entire ego and sense of self-worth is tied up in what equipment you happen to own, which is a pretty bad place to be in.*
On the other hand, if there's an announced product with a definite ship date that looks ideal to you (yes, AF100, I'm lookin' at you) and you have pretty strong assurances that the company will actually deliver, then there's nothing wrong with looking forward and planning on it. But that actually reinforces my original point -- if you CAN wait, then obviously you don't NEED it now... and if you don't NEED something... why are you buying it?!?
*unless you're a professional rental house, in which case you should already know all this stuff anyway, and will be making decisions based on what's available today and if you think you can make your money back on it before it's obsoleted, because it all will be obsoleted sooner or later.
Last edited:
Chris Santucci
Veteran
Absolutely. These cameras are developing a reputation and in fact supplanting film and other HD cameras for use on large budget commercial projects. And not just because they are smaller, or lighter, or easier to shoot with. Sure those aspects come into play, but I see DSLR's being used on projects that could easily have been shot with any other pre existing film, HD, or digital cinema cameras.
So, with respect to the 5D/7D cameras, the whole "best tool for the project" aspect doesn't really come into play in a lot of cases because they actually make very awesome looking footage that seems to rival film and Red and whatever else.
Man, I wish the Andromeda guys were still around.
.
iHartVideo
Well-known member
Why do people spend $30k on Harley when they aren't a pro rider?
Why do people spend thousands on golf club memberships when they aren't pro's?
etc.....
Barry_Green
Moderator
Well, yeah, great point. Again, people are free to spend their money on whatever they want, even if it doesn't make sense to you or me.
Martti Ekstrand
Veteran
Totally agree with this sentiment. It was just somewhat strange to use Avatar as a example that a 2/3" camera should be fine for everybody's need for a shorter DOF when the DP of said movie has publicly stated that he found it tricky to achieve that.
Speaking of down the drain - why do I get drunk on 18 year old single malts when rubbing alcohol would do the job?
Also, in my mind, the parts of Avatar that worked poorly in 3D all featured shallow DOF. You eventually do need to pull the audience into the characters and you can't do that from a stunningly three-dimensional football field away. Still, I found the shallow lens work jarring.
Ben_B
Veteran
Especially shallow DOF with out of focus objects in the foreground. (ashes falling.)