Red posts zone plate chart of 7D

steventimothy

steventimothy

Well-known member
http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=41220

They have another chart on page 3 of the thread showing their own camera and the Sony F35.

I have two thoughts: first, I don't think most end-users watching video notice or care about moire. Seriously. They don't even see it.

Second, I think a DSLR company will release, and soon, a raw video option with HDTV-specific anti-aliasing.

Why?

Because 90% of the DSLR market is rich hobbyists or nerdy pixel counters. Those are the guys (yes, not girls) providing the profits.

And those guys have endless debates about technical minutia. Seriously, page after page after mindless page on photo sites.

If you think you guys (yes, not girls) are overly technical on this site, go onto DPReview or other forums on the still side. There are 50 page flame wars over photon spacing.

So the hobbyists and nerds on all the photosites will suddently feel they need to have HDTV video. And they'll see the current deficiencies and have 50 page flame wars. And they'll leap on and buy each new product that improves on it.

And before we know it, the state of the art in video will finally equal that of stills, which leapfrogged it exponentially, because of the nerds & hobbyists.

So Red better get cracking.
 
I used to be driven nuts by this kind of stuff. I would sit on DPR all day. It is what it is, and knowing information like this can only benefit you. Knowing weaknesses helps build strength.

It still boils down to use the best tool you can possibly use for the job. For a lot of first time filmmakers, RED pricing, even rentals usually, is just out of the question.
 
haha they banned hdslr from their forum but like to post tests where hdslr looks bad, lame
 
Last edited:
they closed forums pertaining cameras not related to Red. People still talk about the cameras on there, when the unfortunate infinite looping 7/5D-to-RED comparison arises.

I wouldn't be ticked at Hummer for closing a Jeep forum on their website.
 
I argue that soon the video specs for DSLR's will match those for Red. That's because the hobbyists and specs guys who buy all this gear will demand it.

And they pay the freight for Canon, Nikon, etc.

If you go to a DSLR photo discussion form, and ask someone to post one of their shots, that usually stops the discussion cold.

That's because the only things they take pictures of are charts.

But they're the ones that buy most of these cameras. And because of the video buzz with the 7D, GH1 etc, they will want video. "Hey! I need some HD video of these charts! Where's my jello chart!" They'll want it raw, pristine, de-moired and anti-aliased.

So I've changed my tune. I didn't see before why Canon or others would want to cannibalize their video camera market. But if you're selling 75,000 D90s a month (as Barry mentioned), that's more money than their pro/prosumer video division could dream of.
 
steventimothy said:
http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=41220
I have two thoughts: first, I don't think most end-users watching video notice or care about moire. Seriously. They don't even see it.
Click to expand...

This is probably true. Anecdotally, however, I have noticed more people who get HDTV complaining of "jagged edges" and the like. But where does this problem come from? I'd argue that most of the cameras that shoot HDTV don't alias very much at all (in fact, this is the whole point of the BBC's rather strict guidelines for cameras). Rather, the aliasing people notive on DVD or HDTV is likely to be introduced during the encoding for delivery. So does this mean we can justify using a camera that aliases in the camera with one that doesn't because aliasing and moire will be introduced eventually? Personally, I think not. I believe in the idea of "better in, better out" and believe that a high quality video encoded down to DVD or HDTV would look better than a lower quality video encoded down to DVD or HDTV. But everyone is more than free to think differently!

steventimothy said:
Second, I think a DSLR company will release, and soon, a raw video option with HDTV-specific anti-aliasing.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand your argument. I'd think that at least 90% of those who purchase DSLRs are purchasing them not for video, but primarily for photos. In fact, look at all of the annoyance the addition of video caused. Sure, there are some people who are embracing the "hybrid" nature of things and they would likely to see an improvement for professional purposes. But I really do believe that the vast majority of those (probably more than 75%) who purchase DSLRs are completely uninterested in using the video in a professional way.

This, more than anything, is what makes me think is that we won't see Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, or Sony introduce a DSLR which has video that is more than "good enough" for a camera less than $3,000. That is not to say they won't introduce a video camera to compete with REDs offerings. But that will be a video camera - it will have a viewfinder and an LCD, it will have XLRs and levels, etc. DSLRs exist to serve a market which is already very embedded - the professional photographer.
 
Last edited:
Michael Olsen said:
I'm not sure I understand your argument. I'd think that at least 90% of those who purchase DSLRs are purchasing them not for video, but for photos.
Click to expand...

That's my point! I think that a lot of these photo (still) hobbyist types are going to suddenly get interested in DLSR HD video. Still guys are going to morph into video types, and new video nerds will spawn out of the geekosphere.

I mean these still guys are photo enthusiasts who don't take pictures, so they might as well become HD fanatics who don't take video, right?

The DSLR game might have fewer video aficionados, but the video part has huge buzz with the 7D et al. That's bound to redirect a lot of the stampede into this direction, n'est-ce pas? It's a whole new world of techno-nirvana, what with the jello, the pixel-binning, 23.97P, XLR. The techno-types will be WTF? I never heard of that! And then they'll want to learn all about it and get into it.

Since these guys just sit around and compare specs, they'll force the manufacturers to quickly up the ante. Then they'll snap up the latest and greatest models, and we'll see the same growth curve as for still/photo DSLR.

And we professionals will benefit :)
 
Last edited:
Just had a thought. What would stop Canon from producing a DSLR handle like this or this that has a couple of the lacking features typically found on full fledged video cameras? Say...XLR inputs, line out for monitoring, etc...

Someone made an excellent point the other day that DSLRs are nearly identical to the whole modular approach RED is taking. A DSLR body is your brain.
 
Calomile said:
<insert argument comparing camera a to camera b, which is 10 times the price.>
Click to expand...

It helps to make decisions.

I now know, I´m not gonna get away with a cheap consumer still camera thou some footage looks awesome. When I saw the first 7D/5D footage I thought that might be a nice way to save some money.

Now I know it´s not. I need a Drama or Scarlet.

Frank
 
I'm a big fan of RED but it's pretty disingenuous to ban the forums on DSLR cameras and then post crappy looking zone plate test results from those same cameras as if people who are shooting with them are somehow delusional. Very ironic too- considering detractors used the exact same sorts of arguments against RED when it first appeared. You can't have it both ways...

It's obvious JJ is incredibly frustrated that people 'don't get it' that DSLRs like the 7D and 5D are not ideal motion picture cameras and they're buying and shooting on them anyway. And yet the folks who are making images with those cameras are exactly the scrappy sort of rebel filmmaking RED was supposed to embrace when it first appeared and no one took them seriously. It's also competition- did RED really think that people would only buy their cameras for life because of their inherent technical superiority? All of this is good for the consumer because there are ultimately more choices and opportunities to make movies. And most of us don't know or care what a zone plate is anyway.

Noah
 
Ryan Farnes said:
Just had a thought. What would stop Canon from producing a DSLR handle like this or this that has a couple of the lacking features typically found on full fledged video cameras? Say...XLR inputs, line out for monitoring, etc...

Someone made an excellent point the other day that DSLRs are nearly identical to the whole modular approach RED is taking. A DSLR body is your brain.
Click to expand...

Hi Ryan,

That was actually me who made that comparison.

And I don't really think there would be anything that kept them from doing that. Beachtek already makes something similar (though not quite as pretty) which screws onto the bottom of the camera and offers all those features you mentioned - XLR, line-out, levels, etc.

Canon could make a DSLR rig, or handles, or an external monitor, or even a little clip on mattebox. But they don't.

Could Canon do this? Absolutely.
Have they? I haven't heard anything about that.
What does that mean? 1) It's simply too soon. They are a big company and the process of design, prototyping, testing, and production takes a while.

2) They just don't care about providing fully featured video capabilities on their DSLRs right now. They are more than happy to bring in an extra 5-10% revenue on the 7D because of video buyers, but that proportion isn't large enough to constitute significant support via additional products (which, despite their size, are still costly to manufacture).

The bigger impediment, I think, is that photogs just aren't all that interested in the video technology. It'd be a bit like making a racecar that could also drive on water (though poorly). People race on water, too, but the racecar drivers are already doing their thing. And while a few might look into that new feature and embrace it, most just keep on driving on asphalt.

Here's another way of looking at it: What if it was announced that all of the 1/3", 1/2", and 2/3" inch camcorders out now gained a magical "Full Frame Stills Mode" - the video remained 1/3", 1/2", or 2/3" but you could now take 18-20 Megapixel Full Frame stills with it. Whenever you wanted! Wahoo, right?! Maybe...but how many people would decide to embrace that feature in a professional capacity? So...perhaps not really wahoo. I mean how many people on this forum are really embracing the stills mode of the DSLR? There are people who bought it specifically for that purpose - they wanted a stills camera that also took okay video. And there are certainly people who bought it for video and are really exploring its photographic capacity, but I'd reason a far larger majority bought it for use only as a video camera and the fact that it can take a picture is totally arbitrary - it might as well be a little compact camera for taking BTS shots, family photos, etc.
 
Last edited:
NoahK said:
I'm a big fan of RED but it's pretty disingenuous to ban the forums on DSLR cameras and then post crappy looking zone plate test results from those same cameras as if people who are shooting with them are somehow delusional. Very ironic too- considering detractors used the exact same sorts of arguments against RED when it first appeared. You can't have it both ways...
Click to expand...

I don't understand this either. That zone plate thread just reopened a can of worms that they tried to boot with axing the other cameras forum. I think Red is going to put out an amazing camera, I'm just not sure that it will happen this year. Not when the first people with access to the crop will be the original Red One owners. I would be very surprised if Scarlet appeared before 2011. And by that time we might be owning GH2's and Canon's next offering that don't line skip. At that point are you going to still care about a Scarlet camera when the cost of accessories and the processing power is going to cost about 10K versus just spending 2K on a new DSLR and keeping all your lenses? That's the part that I'm not sold on.

If Scarlet is available this summer then that's one thing, but end of the year, eh. You can't put your projects on hold while Red gets it right.
 
Michael Olsen said:
The bigger impediment, I think, is that photogs just aren't all that interested in the video technology. It'd be a bit like making a racecar that could also drive on water (though poorly). People race on water, too, but the racecar drivers are already doing their thing. And while a few might look into that new feature and embrace it, most just keep on driving on asphalt.
Click to expand...

I think that could change because Red is courting the photo market. I'm thinking of that recent Esquire photo spread with Meghan Fox. If Canon perceives Red as a threat to their photo dominance then I think they'll respond across the aisle.
 
Ryan Paige said:
I just resent the whole "if you're not renting a Red One" then you're not serious about filmmaking aspect of the whole thing.

"Rent a Red One or Sit on Your Ass" is not a viable strategy, in my opinion. Especially when "everything is subject to change"
Click to expand...

Exactly- I completely have faith in RED's ability to eventually deliver a ground-breaking camera. But to expect everyone else to just wait around until that happens and belittle their efforts to shoot with what's presently available doesn't do them any favors. Also- it smacks of a gear elitism that runs counter to what I thought was the company's whole reason for being.

When RED first came onto the scene they were doggedly fighting the notion you had to shoot film or you had to shoot a Sony F900 or Panavision Genesis to achieve high-quality images. They put forth the concept that there were less costly alternatives that could do the same job. Now it feels like the shoe is on the other foot...

Noah
 
If RED's modular "brains" are so much like DSLR "bodies" why didn't RED just use the term "body" and be done with it? That term has been around for decades and would translate well across many industry pros. I brought this up when the term was first coined and people said I was wrong for even thinking it. I just find the term "brain" tacky for any use other than the primary. Yes I understand that there are differences between a DSLR body and a RED brain but the term "body" doesn't imply any specifics other than its the main/keystone piece.

/rant
 
Now it feels like the shoe is on the other foot...
Click to expand...
Well, to be fair to Red -- their plan was to make a less-costly alternative that didn't involve huge compromises in the footage. They go toe-to-toe with cameras costing 4x to 10x as much, and while they don't do many things those others do, at least the resultant imagery is comparable.

But with the 7D, 5D, 1D, GH1, etc... that is not true. The resulting imagery is occasionally comparable, and occasionally hideously worse.

If the DSLR was always comparable, I'd say your point is very valid. But it's occasionally so much worse that it's actually comical, and so therefore I do see Red's point in trying to point out the difference.
 
NoahK said:
I'm a big fan of RED but it's pretty disingenuous to ban the forums on DSLR cameras and then post crappy looking zone plate test results from those same cameras as if people who are shooting with them are somehow delusional. Very ironic too- considering detractors used the exact same sorts of arguments against RED when it first appeared. You can't have it both ways...

It's obvious JJ is incredibly frustrated that people 'don't get it' that DSLRs like the 7D and 5D are not ideal motion picture cameras and they're buying and shooting on them anyway. And yet the folks who are making images with those cameras are exactly the scrappy sort of rebel filmmaking RED was supposed to embrace when it first appeared and no one took them seriously. It's also competition- did RED really think that people would only buy their cameras for life because of their inherent technical superiority? All of this is good for the consumer because there are ultimately more choices and opportunities to make movies. And most of us don't know or care what a zone plate is anyway.

Noah
Click to expand...

I was going to post something, but then Noah here got in my head and beat me to it.
 
Michael Olsen said:
I mean how many people on this forum are really embracing the stills mode of the DSLR? There are people who bought it specifically for that purpose - they wanted a stills camera that also took okay video. And there are certainly people who bought it for video and are really exploring its photographic capacity, but I'd reason a far larger majority bought it for use only as a video camera and the fact that it can take a picture is totally arbitrary - it might as well be a little compact camera for taking BTS shots, family photos, etc.
Click to expand...

How many people use an SUV for "sport" or "utility"? How many T2i owners will use anything other than automatic mode? How many Core i7 iMacs will just be used to surf the web and watch movies instead of heavy number/pixel crunching? Just because something is wasted doesn't mean it should change or is a failure.
 
Ryan Paige said:
But I don't think a "brain" is quite the same as a "body"

A Canon 7D body includes a CF card slot and battery slot, viewfinder and camera controls, etc. You just stick a lens on, insert a CF card and you're ready to go.

A RED brain is just a brain. Stick a lens on it, and it still doesn't work. The capture device is separate, the battery is separate, the viewfinder/LCD is separate and even the bulk of the camera controls are separate.
Click to expand...

As I said before, the term "body" doesn't imply it should have anything specific. Only that it be the primary/keystone piece. The term body predates CF cards, batteries, EVFs so how could it mean those things? There are many different types of camera "bodies" out there. Not all of them are in the SLR format and not all of them share the same level of functionality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top