RED Mini-Mags Exposed, or just Business As Usual?

Z Can should gave their sensor boxes out pretty soon, that should give a bit of pressure on other manufacturers. Mini Red cameras at fractional prices.
 
Greg_E said:
Z Can should gave their sensor boxes out pretty soon, that should give a bit of pressure on other manufacturers. Mini Red cameras at fractional prices.
Click to expand...

Z-Cam is more directly taking on Gopro, Black magic, kinfinity, mirrorless canikony. Red is still a more complete solution with better sensors for the time being. That may change quickly, but should take a few years.

I am very interested in the zcam for multicam car rigging. Going to test them out soon. The e2 is a little limited on dr, from what i noticed in a recent shoot, but totally usable. Feels like ~11stops. But the highlights are ugly right before clipping, so idk, it could be better. Idk, the F35 is not a dr king, but it clips more gracefully with out color seperation and uneven saturation. Hoping the M43 zcam has good rolling shutter control. Should be interesting.
 
Last edited:
The Kinfinity LF is about $12K list in the US, but they are closer to $6.5K in China, so, the Z-Cam will be under cutting some of the more budget concious users in China.
 
DLD said:
Click to expand...

Watching Tom's test on a color calibrated 65 inch Samsung HDR set, his color is all over the place. The processed image for some of these cameras is not neutral, when we all know that each of these cameras can produce a neutral image when properly processed.

It's also the first test I have ever seen where the ALEXA did not crush the competition when it comes to dynamic range, which makes me very suspicious of the competency of this test. Pretty much in every test I've ever seen the ALEXA is able to hold on to detail when over-exposed by 4-5 stops. The P6K skin-tone looks "hot" on the woman on the right, even when exposed normally. So something is very screwy with this test.
 
TheDingo said:
Watching Tom's test on a color calibrated 65 inch Samsung HDR set, his color is all over the place. The processed image for some of these cameras is not neutral, when we all know that each of these cameras can produce a neutral image when properly processed.

It's also the first test I have ever seen where the ALEXA did not crush the competition when it comes to dynamic range, which makes me very suspicious of the competency of this test. Pretty much in every test I've ever seen the ALEXA is able to hold on to detail when over-exposed by 4-5 stops. The P6K skin-tone looks "hot" on the woman on the right, even when exposed normally. So something is very screwy with this test.
Click to expand...

If that white chart is supposed to be neutral, then none of them are white balanced.

Camera comparison tests always come down to the processing of the image for display. They're all just sampling devices after all. It's what you do with that data that matters. Steve Yedlin has shown that to be true. I think the Alexa is probably still the best at being that optimal sampling device than all the others.

As far as the RED footage goes, it says that he did IPP2 & REDGamma4? So he combined current color but an old tone curve? That's an odd choice.

Also a strange choice to put Zeiss lenses on the RED and Arri and Xeen/Rokinon on the BMD cams. Not to mention, the Ursa Mini Pro is the only one with a matte box and possibly reducing flares more so than the others.

On the subject of factory color, I really am not a fan of the BMD stuff turning skin a mono chromatic burnt brownish/yellowish. The Alexa shows a wonderful array of colors in the skin where the BMD is kind of just turning it samey. Also the tone curve is making the skin hot as you noticed. I hope he releases DPX log frames or even better the actual clips so we can dive in there and see where these cameras are really performing.
 
Steve Yedlin will probably end up being the most quoted out of context of the early digital cinematography era.
 
This blind test was very interesting, and for me the conclusion is that these cheaper cameras are so good nowadays that, even in capable hands, small differences in how you process your image are going to create differences that are big enough to alter the ranking. Get your WB or your focus slightly off, or add a bit more contrast than necessary or tweak your shadows towards a slightly uglier hue when coloring your footage, and that's more important than using an Alexa instead of a p6k.
 
Samuel H said:
This blind test was very interesting, and for me the conclusion is that these cheaper cameras are so good nowadays that, even in capable hands, small differences in how you process your image are going to create differences that are big enough to alter the ranking. Get your WB or your focus slightly off, or add a bit more contrast than necessary or tweak your shadows towards a slightly uglier hue when coloring your footage, and that's more important than using an Alexa instead of a p6k.
Click to expand...

Kind if misses the point of having better cameras.

It is more that “bang for buck” is no longer an issue. Almost any camera can make a usable image. No more need to say how cheap it is to make up for where it lacks. They are all ok. But better is still better, and saying something about correct wb is completely missing the point.
 
Last edited:
TheDingo said:
Watching Tom's test on a color calibrated 65 inch Samsung HDR set, his color is all over the place. The processed image for some of these cameras is not neutral, when we all know that each of these cameras can produce a neutral image when properly processed.

It's also the first test I have ever seen where the ALEXA did not crush the competition when it comes to dynamic range, which makes me very suspicious of the competency of this test. Pretty much in every test I've ever seen the ALEXA is able to hold on to detail when over-exposed by 4-5 stops. The P6K skin-tone looks "hot" on the woman on the right, even when exposed normally. So something is very screwy with this test.
Click to expand...



+1


Doing your own tests before a job

And include 100 feet of film shooting in the tests
 
James0b57 said:
Steve Yedlin will probably end up being the most quoted out of context of the early digital cinematography era.
Click to expand...

A few years ago, I asked Charles Papert about remapping the lighting in post. He said, "Ya, it can be done but with a lot of rotoscoping, which costs a lot of money".

Of course, some projects do have it.

Central to this methodology, of course, was making sure the actors’ faces were readable and complex, which meant that Lubezki’s lighting of faces was properly highlighted, but also that environmental lighting was, as Bunnag puts it, “shaped to help the audience focus on the faces, while still keeping a realistic look. One of Chivo’s goals in the color grading of ‘Birdman,’ therefore, was not just to simply brighten up a face, but to also bring out as much modeling and dimension as possible.”

Using the Autodesk Lustre 2013 Spec 4 color-correction platform, Scott drew complex power windows that followed the contours of the faces of each character to either highlight one side or darken the shadow side, while being careful to plot lighting on the actors’ faces in a realistic manner. This same level of detail and complexity was also utilized with background and environments in the form of animated vignettes, articulated multi-point shapes and god-rays for added atmosphere. The workflow generally involved Scott setting such looks on single frames, and handing the shots over to Bunnag to carry out the animation of those shapes and creatively solving any problems that might arise later in the sequence. This detailed “lighting” in the color grading, combined with the long nature of each shot, provided a three-dimensional quality to the images...
Click to expand...

https://www.indiewire.com/2015/02/h...ecipe-for-best-picture-winner-birdman-188705/
 
48624901021_623116be6d_z.jpg
 
Liam Hall said:
The absolute state of this. Who takes this kind of crap seriously? I mean, who? ...
Click to expand...
He's got 332,000 subscribers and this video has 31,455 views with 608 likes and 64 dislikes. (for the record, I am neither a subscriber or a voter). Somebody must be watching it.
 
I always compare cameras in a way that i can’t tell the difference of which one looks the worst.
 
Samuel H said:
This blind test was very interesting, and for me the conclusion is that these cheaper cameras are so good nowadays that, even in capable hands, small differences in how you process your image are going to create differences that are big enough to alter the ranking. Get your WB or your focus slightly off, or add a bit more contrast than necessary or tweak your shadows towards a slightly uglier hue when coloring your footage, and that's more important than using an Alexa instead of a p6k.
Click to expand...

I see it more as: the sensor is no longer the main thing you're paying for. So in a sense it's like a return to the film era, where the features of the body and operating quality are what make the biggest difference rather than image. In this case there's the added wrinkle of software quality and ecosystem, too.
 
IanTheM said:
I see it more as: the sensor is no longer the main thing you're paying for. So in a sense it's like a return to the film era, where the features of the body and operating quality are what make the biggest difference rather than image. In this case there's the added wrinkle of software quality and ecosystem, too.
Click to expand...

It's a bit like the still camera market when the Megapixel race stopped (for professionals). In the DSLR market the sensors in the consumer market have a higher MP count than the pro bodies (other than the ones aimed at the medium-format/Studio market.

Other things became more important like dynamic range, handling etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top