Has the DSLR Hybrid craze effectively killed the desire for a Red Scarlet camera?

christriplet

christriplet

Active member
I wanted to know if you guys think the DSLR Hybrid camera craze has effectively killed the buzz about the Red Scarlet and even the desire to own one. I think
the Red Scarlet is effectively dead upon arrival whenever that might be.
 
Absolutely not. There's no way that the Scarlet will be DOA. There will be a waiting list just as long, if not longer than the RED One when it came out.

But that's just MHO.
 
christriplet said:
I wanted to know if you guys think the DSLR Hybrid camera craze has effectively killed the buzz about the Red Scarlet and even the desire to own one. I think
the Red Scarlet is effectively dead upon arrival whenever that might be.
Click to expand...

Why would you say this, and based on what evidence? I think you're absolutely incorrect. I can't think of a single feature that my Canon 7D has over RED Scarlet, and I'm sure the same goes for all the other HDSLR cameras as well. Every single professional filmmaker I know is extremely interested in Scarlet and what it offers. Personally, I only purchased a Canon 7D so I would have something decent to shoot with until Scarlet actually ships - once it does, the Canon 7D is going up for sale along with all the glass.

So, I ask you again - what makes you say that the HDSLR revolution (which is geared towards a lower end of film/video production) has killed Scarlet (which is geared towards an entirely different type of film/video production)?
 
I think the enthusiasm has waned a bit for Scarlet because of the DSLR craze, but I hardly think it will be DOA. I think there is more enthusiasm for a large chip camera because of the DSLR craze, and that may translate into less enthusiasm for a fixed lens 2/3rd size chipped Scarlet. I think many now want at least a S35 sized sensor, and they want to change lenses. The expectations of the market have changed significantly since the fixed 2/3 Scarlet was announced. I think users are just going to want a S35 Scarlet and that's going to be in the $10K territory which will make alot of them consider the new AF100 from Panasonic for about $5K less. They'll just have to weigh if that RAW codec is worth the extra coin. As a film photographer, I'm used to working within narrow exposure tolerances and getting it right "in camera". I previsualize, others seem to want the ability to make great changes in post. Red's codec will keep the Scarlet alive. I think the AF100 will be a bigger threat to Scarlet than the DSLR. You'll get the close to the S35 sensor most likely without image artifacts in a complete working package for $5K.

Personally from what I've been seeing, I think I like FF35, and I'll play to the strengths of the 5DII.
 
Finnegan said:
Why would you say this, and based on what evidence? I think you're absolutely incorrect. I can't think of a single feature that my Canon 7D has over RED Scarlet,
Click to expand...

2/3" vs ASP-C.

1) You can use and own a multitude of incredible lenses (totally unavailable for the 2/3" market) which will not be turned into telefocals by a tiny captor.

2) You can cheaply shoot multi-format with several bodies.

3) Lowlight performance is better than even the current REDone, let's not even talk about the Scarlet on that one.

4) It exists.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely, the DSLR's are stealing significant amounts of Red thunder, without a doubt. But, I'm guessing the specs for Scarlet will change by the time it's released and then of course by that time something will be released that will eclipse the current DSLR cameras (maybe another DSLR).

For broadcast use - commercials, music videos, promos - that all have short lifespans, it makes little sense on many levels to shoot on Red in my opinion. Currently, SO many large budget projects that could easily (and I mean easily) be shot on film or Red are being shot on 5D and 7D. The 5D's and 7D's are being chosen over Red for a reason that in many cases has nothing to do with budgets.

I think Scarlet will appeal to some when it becomes a reality, but then who knows what the actual price will be. The more time work is shot on the DSLR's, the smaller the market will be for Scarlet in my opinion.

.
 
Finnegan said:
Why would you say this, and based on what evidence? I think you're absolutely incorrect. I can't think of a single feature that my Canon 7D has over RED Scarlet, and I'm sure the same goes for all the other HDSLR cameras as well.
Click to expand...

I can think of one feature: price. If the next generation of Canon still cameras with video comes out (using the DIGIC V chip) and solves the remaining image qualities issues but still cost $2500 or less, that's a huge advantage. If they add some niceties like uncompressed out and wireless control of Canon lenses or some kick-ass autofocus method, it's going to be pretty hard to justify paying two or three times as much for only 20% more features, especially if you are a hobbyist. This stuff costs too much and they get better too soon, so I say go for the best value. Personally, I don't think Scarlet, the AF-100 or anything above $3K is the best value anymore unless you have a business and it can pay for itself really fast.

Here's a nice article and audio interview about future Canon developments posted in another thread:

http://www.definitionmagazine.com/j...ywood-squeeze-more-out-of-canons-5d-mkii.html
 
If it's DOA it will be if the AF-100 drops and sells well and is amazing, not because of the HDSLRs.
 
I agree the biggest threat will be the AF-100, If it delivers.

Personally the 2/3 inch scarlet was never all that interesting to me. If I was shooting a feature with a decent budget, then I'd go for a Red One for sure. But Scarlet hasn't ever got my attention like the DSLR's did.

I think the DSLR's have really sparked interest in a whole new type of camera, and previously RED where the only people focusing on that market. However, now there is serious competition and that's always going to be good for the end-user.
 
Hunter007 said:
Troll.
Click to expand...

Agreed. My only issue with Scarlet is if I REALLY want to drop the money on it. That has zero to do with the Canon's.

The OP lists 2/3" as an issue. I don't think the real market for this camera is interested in that. I think those of us seriously looking at this camera are interested in at least the S35 model.

Codec is another issue. I think many people have shied away from the RED (or more specifically RAW) workflow because you can't just drop it in the timeline, cut it, and deliver. It's not an option built for speed. I grade everything I shoot, and I am set up to accommodate RED, ARRI RAW, and Cineform RAW. At least at the level I need for my purposes. I'd take ANY of those formats over the H.264 in the Canon cameras for digital cinema work.

Now this is nothing against the Canon cams at all. I'll have one in a few months, and I am doing my second HDSLR film in 6 weeks. They work fine when given some care. And they are CHEEEEP.
 
yoclay said:
2/3" vs ASP-C.

1) You can use and own a multitude of incredible lenses (totally unavailable for the 2/3" market) which will not be turned into telefocals by a tiny captor.

2) You can cheaply shoot multi-format with several bodies.

3) Lowlight performance is better than even the current REDone, let's not even talk about the Scarlet on that one.

4) It exists.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I disagree entirely. Your first point deals with lenses. It is true that 35mm lenses are unusable on Scarlet, since they will suffer crop issues. However, to assert that there is not a "multitude" of available lenses is simply incorrect. There is a whole host of awesome 16mm prime lens sets from Panavision, Cooke, and Zeiss that are perfectly 100% usable on Scarlet (or any other 2/3 chip camera), in addition to the RED mini-primes which are of MUCH higher quality than the still lenses that are available for HDSLR systems. In fact, that's one of the big selling points of Scarlet cinema (the interchangeable lens model) - the ability to use S16 lenses.

Your second point deals with price, which is in my opinion, an invalid argument. Scarlet is a camera system that is engineered and designed for a higher end production market than HDSLR systems are. The reason a lot of people purchase an HDSLR system is because its affordable way to get pretty good quality 1080p video. Scarlet is designed for much, much more. Comparing the price of an HDSLR to Scarlet and saying the HDSLR has the advantage is like comparing the price of a Porsche to a Ferrari and saying the Porsche has an advantage. Yeah, they're both Italian made sports cars, and they both kind of do the same things here and there, but they're cars made for ENTIRELY different markets.

Your last point is particularly disturbing. Everyone knows that the sensor in the RED One isn't great as far as ISO rating. RED claims it's 320, but I ran tests with John Hora, ASC, and we peg it around 160. The Mysterium-X chip (M-X) is an ENTIRELY different beast. I refer you to the following clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJpLgdD7r3c

That clip is a sequence shot by David Fincher (Seven, Fight Club) with Leonardo DiCaprio testing out the new M-X chip - ISO 2000 with the lens slightly below a T1.4 if I remember correctly. You'll notice the only key light is a match, a single match. Not only does it look properly exposed when Leo lights the match, but it looks GREAT artistically. I saw this video projected on RED's 4K projection at Renmar Studios and it is almost flawless. The noise is almost not noticeable since it looks like film grain.

In my professional opinion, no HDSLR out there is capable of delivering a product that looks flawless on a 4K projection at ISO 2000. Sure, ISO 2000 looks pretty good on a Canon 7D but you've got to remember most of the videos we watch are on our computer screens. For me, and other Scarlet potenial buyers, we are thinking feature film screen finished format - not computer screen. And the concensus is that HDSLR rigs don't cut it for a feature film going to the big screen for a theatrical release. Not enough resolution, not enough image control, big problems with rolling shutter effects, heavy moire issues, and complex artifacting.

Don't get me wrong. I own a Canon 7D and I love it. It's a cheap, affordable APS-C sized sensor that gives me a shallow depth of field, and access to pretty great lenses. But it is not geared for the high end professional filmmaking - and that is what RED is marketing Scarlet as. As I said before, comparing an HDSLR to a RED doesn't do you any good because they're made for different markets.

Tim Le said:
This stuff costs too much and they get better too soon, so I say go for the best value. Personally, I don't think Scarlet, the AF-100 or anything above $3K is the best value anymore unless you have a business and it can pay for itself really fast.
Click to expand...

This is exactly my point. RED isn't coming to the table with Scarlet saying "Hey wedding videographers, come check out our new camera!" Scarlet is a machine designed for a higher market - broadcast television, feature filmmaking, and other such parts of the industry which demand a high amount of image control, manipulation, and resolution - things that the HDSLR systems are not capable of delivering.

TL; DR Comparing Scarlet to HDSLR systems is counter-productive since each is designed with entirely different markets and entirely different projects in mind.
 
Last edited:
Finnegan,

Agree wholeheartedly, but I will say 2 things.

1. As a car guy I have to pick a nit. The Porsche is German, the Ferrari is Italian (sorry had to do it)

2. I was pretty pleased with the look of the 5D on theatrical screen. You won't confuse it with 4K or film, but it really surprised me how well it held up. Not sure I'd use it for budgeted feature, but you know what I'm saying....

Also, did I miss a memo. Is the S35 option gone on the Scarlet? Did it somehow morph into a 2/3" only product?

Finnegan said:
TL; DR Comparing Scarlet to HDSLR systems is counter-productive since each is designed with entirely different markets and entirely different projects in mind.
Click to expand...
 
Sean Finnegan, despite this tread being Troll-inspired, what an excellent and WELL INFORMED post you've made.

Thank you.
 
Finnegan said:
Scarlet is a machine designed for a higher market - broadcast television, feature filmmaking, and other such parts of the industry which demand a high amount of image control, manipulation, and resolution - things that the HDSLR systems are not capable of delivering.

TL; DR Comparing Scarlet to HDSLR systems is counter-productive since each is designed with entirely different markets and entirely different projects in mind.
Click to expand...


Make sure you tell that to Shane Hurlbut, Gale Tattersall, Jonathan Sela, Max Goldman, the DP shooting "True Blood" for HBO, Vincent Laforet, Philip Bloom, etc., etc., etc.

.
 
kind of hard to judge whether something is dead on arrival when it is not even complete and hasn't been released...

Probably best for all potential purchasers to wait until stuff is actually out to determine whether or not it will be a compatible and useful tool for them.
 
In my opinion a 2/3" scarlet has always been DOA and I have never understood the point. There are plenty of great 2/3" cameras. was it supposed to be cheaper - so what. Higher resolution- who cares.
The big question is who will come out with a reasonably priced full frame or APS-C sensor camera with the features and codec of a real video camera. When that happens the 5D will be dead. If scarlet does that they'll do well/.

At this point I also suspect the AF-100 is not going to be a gigantic hit because the sensor is too small. The appetite is there for full frame or APS-C ( super 35) at a minimum.

Lenny Levy
 
Man, that nails it. Seriously, when shooters get used to the massive 5D sensor, why would they care about another 2/3" camera? That's exactly where the new frontier is - huge sensor size with less line skipping and a pro codec.

And yeah, apparently it's not so much about resolution as it is about sensor size. You only need so much resolution for a TV commercial, promo, music video, or industrial video anyway.

.
 
Chris Santucci said:
Make sure you tell that to Shane Hurlbut, Gale Tattersall, Jonathan Sela, Max Goldman, the DP shooting "True Blood" for HBO, Vincent Laforet, Philip Bloom, etc., etc., etc.

.
Click to expand...
Amen to that.

I'm tired of the same old argument that a camera (specifically these DSLRs) are not good enough for theatrical release. I go to the movies like anyone else (all digital theaters) and I have not seen a 4K movie. I'm sure it looks magnificent...but for me and most folks that go to the movies the 4K thing is moot. It might be the future...but it aint right now for many.

I'll agree with a lot of the points brought up about where Scarlet is aimed at but heck...if Red didn't exist where would we be? Still shooting our HVXs, DVX's etc. Those $100,000 cameras were always out there and out of reach for many folks. But why is it a movie like "28 Days Later" ( and other movies) can be made with a DV camera and hold its own in theaters while a DLSR...that looks so much better can't? I think "Not Ready" is way off. You want to talk compression artifacts, artificial sharpening etc. then that movie has it all. You won't get that from these DSLRs...not to that extreme anyways. The images we get today are sharper, cleaner and higher in dynamic range than the DV cameras of yesteryear. Just because a Red camera can do better in most areas does not disqualify the potential of these DSLRs or modern handycams.

How many times do we have to read or hear from folks who have seen these images on the large screen saying that they were blown away before we are convinced? The same argument keeps coming up..(you are watching it on a computer screen...a tv screen...etc..). No one is comparing these cameras to a Red One, and F35, and Arri...etc. They are what they are...good enough for many folks. Sure....Scarlet is aimed at folks who want quality high end images etc....but it doesn't mean the operator is always going to get that quality (I've seen some terrible looking Red One footage by the way).

If people are going to continue comparing these DSLRs to a "potential" Scarlet then that is a flaw right there. Even to argue the same points over and over again is in a way validating the oposing viewpoint (sort of like adding fuel to the fire). There's no reason to go there.

The OP wants to know if the DSLR craze killed the buzz for the Red Scarlet etc.... I say Heck Yeah it did. The argument people keep brining up is that Scarlet is aimed at a totally different market... Well...yes....and an emphatic NO. From day one JJ talked about aiming these cameras at the "Soccer Moms" (in ADDITION to the other markets mentioned)....remember that? If you don't then I do...and so did a lot of other potential Scarlet buyers. The thing is though...that this segment of the market waited and waited ...but no Scarlet. So what happened in between? The D90, 5Dll, GH-1, 7D, 550/T2i and on and on happened. The people who waited for Scarlet found themselves buying and using these cameras. AND that includes many professional which includes those Chris Santucci mentioned above.

Sure I believe if Scarlet were availbale many of those professionals would have probably used it on their production...then again....maybe not. For example, "House" would have passed on the opportunity because they wanted crazy shallow DOF. They needed the full frame of the 5Dll. Then there's the DP Sam Nicholson on "24" using them for background plates and for the upcoming movie "The Walking Dead." You think he would have used a Scarlet if it were available... I don't think so especially based on his comment:

"In that case you have a per unit of cost of everything including lenses of about $10,000 so if you’re doing multiple cameras the Alexa and Sony F35 are too expensive as is the RED. The Canon camera becomes the best camera for that particular application.

He's referring to using ten of these cameras at the same time. Budget wise it all adds up. So the Canon here is the right camera for the job.

This is just the beginning. I believe by the time the Scarlet surfaces a second generation of these DSLRs will surface and we will see some great improvements. I'm encouraged by some of the comments Mr Nicholson has made in regards to him currently using some new Canon prototypes and the fact that he's working closely with Canon engineers for these new improvements. It's just a matter of time. So, if you don't think these DSLRs haven't made some sort of dent in Red's prospects then wait until the new year.

With that said I would love a Scarlet myself...but if I can get most of what it does in a more affordable DSLR type package then I'll be one happy camper. :Drogar-Happy(DBG):
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top