Jan, look at the impact this thing has made

Jack_Felis said:
does Panasonic want to lose the indie film crowd, though small it apparently is, to RED Digital Cinema? That is exactly what is going to happen as soon as Scarlet comes out.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's true at all. Conversely, what I see happening is RED Digital Cinema is losing sales right now due to the GH1 and the fact that the Scarlet isn't available.

There's always disagreement amongst fans of the RED about whether the Scarlet is a camera for professionals or a camera for the soccer moms. Some claim it's one, some claim it's the other, some claim it's both. No matter who is correct in that disagreement, the fact is that a good number of potential Scarlet buyers are low low budget 'indie filmmakers'. The ones who were very excited and started saving their pennies for 3K for $3K. Some in that crowd were already disappointed by the price hike, and were even more disappointed that the Scarlet that they REALLY want would cost them $7,000+ THAT is the crowd that will be all over this camera. That's the crowd that would have saved up $3,000 or gone on a payment plan but who will now spend $1,500 instead.

The GH1 is taking sales away from the Scarlet, not vise versa.

Jack_Felis said:
Can you honestly say that you would rather film your first feature on a 1080P VDSLR (ie. GH1) when you could film it on a 3K+ full professional cinema quality camera for about the same price?
Click to expand...

What Scarlet configuration is $1,500?
 
Alright so from you guys talking it sounds like we all think our market is too small for Panasonic to really have any sort of vested interest in competing with what is sure to be a tremendous battle of features that were impossible two years ago at prices that are very very small.

When scarlet comes out it will kill everybody in this market. But it isn't out yet so it seams that Panasonic can either sit back and surrender this small market of 24p, s35mm Dof, indie people when the time comes, or it can come out with what we are asking for and give RED a run for their money.

I don't want this conversation to be based solely around RED, but I understand they are really the only other people playing hardball in this category. What does everyone else think?
 
I think making cameras that produce higher quality output due to larger sensor, strong codec, multiple features and settings, etc., and still retail at bellow $10k,would broaden their appeal and include higher level professionals in the busines but then again this very same fact would probably hurt sales of the higher end models. The next couple of years in this business are gonna be pretty interesting.
 
William_Robinette said:
When scarlet comes out it will kill everybody in this market.
Click to expand...

I really don't understand why people say this as if it's a fact. Maybe the "market" that you're talking about is different than the "market" that I'm talking about. The indie film market that gobbled up DV and then HDV and still buy sub $2,000 cameras just aren't going to suddenly come up with $10,000 to buy a FF scarlet with a battery, an LCD screen and a lens mount.

For years and years you could buy a sync-sound 16mm camera package for under $5,000. You could spend some money on film stock, processing and telecine and resell that camera package 5 years later for exactly what you paid for it. Did every indie filmmaker own a 16mm camera package? NO Did they spend much less money to get video cameras that they WISHED produced footage that looked like film? Yes. Why didn't they buy the film camera? Because $5,000 + stock + processing + telecine wasn't in their budget even though it was a lock that they could get that $5,000 back years and years later.

There have always been $1,500 cameras and there have always been more expensive cameras that were of a higher quality. The existence of the latter has never wiped out the existence of the former and these very forums are full of people who have been chasing the results of the latter at the pricetag of the former. The GH1 is one step closer for all those people. The fact that the Scarlet is going to be "better" than the GH1 doesn't mean that Nikon, Canon or Panasonic are going away, no matter how many times people insist it "will" happen.

The $1,500 HD camera market is going to be "killed" by a $4,000 2/3" Scarlet or by a $10,000+ FF Scarlet.

Ain't
gonna
happen
 
Last edited:
There will always be people that will work overtime and save up for the $4000.00, (or $10,00.00 for that matter) cam if they believe it will give them value for the investment and would produce the desirable look they are looking for in their work. Especially a camera (the 2/3) that would compete and most likely beat cameras much more expensive in its class. I believe that if you want to compete in this business you need the best equipment that you can afford and that you work harder for the one you can't afford yet. The only problem with the Scarlet is that it doesn't yet exist. We are all hoping it will come sooner than later. In the meantime we can use what is available or very shortly available, like the GH1, and start saving more money until the Scarlet, or whatever else better comes along.
 
I don't know how things will shake out with this tech, but I would love to have a large sensor, removable lens mount, 1080p or 2K HD video/cinema camera with reliable/affordable recording media. Not just for narrative shorts/features, music videos, and docs... but also for my wedding videography work, corporate and commercial videography, and other types of standard video work.

There is the rumored Canon APS-C sensor XL-body-style camera with the same robust h.264 codec that the 5D mk2 uses, that is supposedly going to be coming out or be announced in 2010 for approx. $7,000 including a zoom lens. Honestly, if this thing is not just a wild rumor, that would be the camera for me. I don't want to have to own more than three cameras just so that I can do indie filmmaking, basic videography, and still photography.

For something like wedding videos, I would be able to take advantage of shallow DoF for a more cinematic look. It would also allow for much better low light capabilities which is a huge problem for shooting wedding receptions. You have to add light, but be unobtrusive at the same time. I'd rather be able to use much less light or no additional lighting if possible for some shots. And for anyone that says the wedding and event video market wouldn't want this I say FEEHWY!!!!! There are companies that now use 35mm adapters to shoot these types of events with. Remember 35mm adapters and their weight, set-up time, and light loss?

I also think that for news, event, and corporate videographers the low light advantages of a larger sensor would be a hugely desired aspect of a camera of this type. How about for corporate video work where an interview is needed? With so much more control over depth of field, throwing the background out of focus behind the interviewee would be so much easier, let alone not having to add as much light if there is not a lot of time to properly set up it all up. CEO's and business people don't always have lots of time to sit around while you tweak your lighting to perfection.

I like and admire what Red is attempting, but right now I'm not sure about the workflow. :badputer:

I really don't need 3-4K size images unless I'm making a well funded feature film. Who knows how much all the necessary Scarlet accessories will cost? Also, previous Red One owners get first dibs on all Scarlets and Epics. With Red the price, specs, and delivery date could change at the drop of a hat (they actually state in their press releases to "count on it"). They've already been delayed a bit past their estimated delivery date. They could easily announce that they are going to be even more delayed.:violin:

I'm excited to see some Scarlet and Epic footage and more pics of the completed cameras, but until these things hit the streets I'm not sure if it is the best option for me. I'd feel better about a Canon APS-C video camera, or a Panasonic m4/3 one with 24mbps AVC-HD or these newly announced low cost P2 cards.

And here is food for thought. I was going to possibly switch from a Canon XH-A1 to an HMC150 later this year, but now with the GH1 I don't think it is worth it to go to an HMC150. I'd rather get a GH1 and use it while I wait for a dedicated HD video camera that has removable lenses and a large sensor before I spend much more than 1500 bucks.
 
Last edited:
John Caballero said:
There will always be people that will work overtime and save up for the $4000.00, (or $10,00.00 for that matter) cam if they believe it will give them value for the investment and would produce the desirable look they are looking for in their work.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There always have been and always will be. There were people who saved up and shot film and there were people who shot DV and HDV. There will be people who shoot with the Scarlet and there will be plenty who are shooting with cameras like the GH1.
 
Nektonic said:
And for anyone that says the wedding and event video market wouldn't want this I say FEEHWY!!!!! There are companies that now use 35mm adapters to shoot these types of events with. Remember 35mm adapters and their weight, set-up time, and light loss?
Click to expand...

Yes, there are, but if you've noticed 35mm adapters is used only for specific glamour shots and they always have an adapterless camera/wide angle lens to cut into. Why is this? This is because when you have a live event and paying clients, ANY out of focus footage is unacceptable, and no AC can pull perfect focus 100% of the time, especially when unexpected things happen. I'm all for low light capabilities and such but IMO having shallow DOF makes it more difficult to do live event coverage. At best they're an extra feature that you can offer but it's always gonna be better to grab a camera with deeper DOF to give you that extra room for error.

Also, I wonder if the people who said that Scarlet will blow the market open have considered it's availability once it comes out. I've said this many times before: how long is is going to take you to get your hand on the camera once it comes out? When the RED was first released, the lead time was about six months to a year. When Panasonic/Canon/Sony releases a camera, it's available everywhere, can you say the same for Scarlet? RED as a company simply do not have the distribution capability that Pana, Canon and Sony have. If it takes you six months to get your camera, that's an opportunity cost that have to be taken into account and that's gonna discourage some people. When the camera finally becomes widely available, there may already be other options on the market. So I really doubt if Scarlet will "kill" the market like everyone is saying.
 
Last edited:
I remember years ago when DV was first surfacing, working on job with a 3 chip camera ( I think it was the vx1000 ). The shoot was a multi cam Digi Beta shoot. In the edit suite there were a few open jaws when the b roll from the little dv cam was compared to the digi beta footage. Okay there was a difference, but the difference wasn't that huge and I remember thinking at the time that the days of these overly expensive cameras were numbered. Over a decade later, they're still an industry standard for TV production and largely unchanged since then. Compact DV then HDV have become as much a part of the industry though and you could even say they've revolutionised a very slow changing business.

There is now IMO a new emerging sector that includes the indie film crowd, that is the "content creator" ( BTW I f*$£@ hate that term :badputer:). Photo journalists, video bloggers etc. wanting some more creative control and just enthusiasts will probably drive this section of the industry, so I do see cameras like the 2/3" Scarlet fighting it out with likes of Panasonic/Sony etc. in this area. And, I think this might even end up being a larger market than the current broadcast industry. While RED might loose a few sales to the GH1 and Canon MK II amongst the low budget indie filmmakers, they might gain some from the photo journalist/pro photographer side.

For me personally, the GH1 looks like a great companion to something like the 2/3" Scarlet ( especially if there was a Four Thirds mount for it ). And so I'd say yeah, the Scarlet hopefully will be what we're asking for here. If Panasonic are listening then hopefully the competition will hot up over the next year or two, which will mean more choices us. Just my tuppence worth.

Adrian
 
Everyone speaks of scarlet like it is the Messiah of acquisition systems. Come to save the world from low resolution and over priced cameras.

I think panny is right on track. They have AVC-Ultra in development. I dont think any of the big players are rushing to own a 2k-4k low cost cine camera without knowing the profitability of this market.
I also truly believe we would not even be having this conversation if Janard had not promised us The No Film Maker Left Behind approach to selling cine cameras.

This is still a business and their has to be a measured return. I know of an NBC affiliate who bought 15 HPX170s. Broadcast buys cameras not camera. From a business perspective it makes good business sense to give film features (24p, vari-frame rate etc) on broadcast cameras, because you can sell to indie film makers and news organizations.

As much as we indi guys love p2 its a dream workflow for a news department. When they buy p2 cards they buy 25 p2 cards. When I buy, I buy one. Its a proven profitable business model.

The thing Panasonic has kept doing is reinventing the codec and not the camera. That is smart. Avc Ultra and who knows whats next.

This cine cam market is still small. If you think every 5DMK II was sold to an indi film maker you are wrong. You know who loves the MK II, Photographers. So until this market is quantifiable I believe they are right for multipurposing features. Like putting big sensors in still cameras w/ video and giving film features to broadcast cameras. Even the mighty RED has done this. Scarlet can be a film camera or a still camera.

Do I still want a Scarlet. YES
Would I want a panny camera with Scarlet features. Absolutely.
DO I think they are missing a huge opportunity by not having this yesterday. No
 
Last edited:
Well said Jason! It's pretty easy to forget how much a PITA workflow can become if all you think about is your "dream cam". Panasonic's is very well thought, it has been proven numerous time to be rock-solid and their codecs have beautiful color rendition. That's why I went down the P2 road. Others might prefer versatility and DoF of a Nikon or Canon VDSLR, or the 3K resolution of a Scarlet, I say, to each his preferred workflow. There's isn't just one way to do what you want, and I think Panasonic knows that.

FWIW, I don't see TVs, computer screens and much less broadcasters getting to 2K, 3K or 4K res anytime soon, so is it a good idea to invest lots of money in R&D to develop ASAP a 4K VDSLR camera? Maybe, but Panasonic can take its time to do it right. The market doesn't seem quite there yet.
 
William_Robinette said:
Alright so from you guys talking it sounds like we all think our market is too small for Panasonic to really have any sort of vested interest in competing with what is sure to be a tremendous battle of features that were impossible two years ago at prices that are very very small.

When scarlet comes out it will kill everybody in this market. But it isn't out yet so it seams that Panasonic can either sit back and surrender this small market of 24p, s35mm Dof, indie people when the time comes, or it can come out with what we are asking for and give RED a run for their money.

I don't want this conversation to be based solely around RED, but I understand they are really the only other people playing hardball in this category. What does everyone else think?
Click to expand...

William,

I have been doing some research on DSLR sales numbers, I don't have all the numbers in yet but I do know in the last couple years Canon has had a 333% increase in DSLR sales. I'll have Nikon and the other brands data n this week.

HVX's have sold over 100,000 units worldwide not countng HPX170 sales. Not sure of the DVX 100 sales but I imagine they are WAY over 100,000+ units. Going off the 'content is king' law I'd bet the camera's are better than 90% of the people who use them, knowing the above I'd say the GH1 is going to do some BIG numbers at $1500 and it'll be to good of a camera for 90% of the people who use it. The remaining 10% should really be shooting on a Red or F900 or HPX3000. I'll also be buying a Scarlet (they could be on a GH2 model by the time Scarlet comes out) but from my experience with Red I'm expecting problems with it in the field for at least 1-2 years and multiple fixes and firmware updates along the way (the price to pay when buying a premature camera). It's been 2 years since Red was released and it still has lots of problems that have not been resolved.

I think the VDSLR market is going to be HUGE, with the trend for internet content they are perfect cameras.

I'm buying atleast 1 GH1, maybe 2-3. I'm shooting a project for a network right now and am going to sneek in some GH1 footage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top