In my case, it's just ignorance. I have NOT considered Red due to its cost. Scarlet wasn't a serious consideration because of the 2/3 sensor.....so I just haven't "dug" around so much. Although I didn't know about it (in the other cams), to find out about it (for me) was a GOOD thing. More flexibility....so cool. Didn't know about the others because I wasn't even going to consider the price along with the "bulky" form factor and other aspects of the overall investment. 9750 (body only) is pretty freaking amazing. 14K for the package up for grabs is breakthrough in my opinion as well. So for me....not knowing was just ignorance based on lack of interest due to lack of offerings from Red that fit my needs. Cheers, Barry!
Which announcement were you more satisfied with?
- Thread starter Hutchman
- Start date
In my case, it's just ignorance. I have NOT considered Red due to its cost. Scarlet wasn't a serious consideration because of the 2/3 sensor.....so I just haven't "dug" around so much. Although I didn't know about it (in the other cams), to find out about it (for me) was a GOOD thing. More flexibility....so cool. Didn't know about the others because I wasn't even going to consider the price along with the "bulky" form factor and other aspects of the overall investment. 9750 (body only) is pretty freaking amazing. 14K for the package up for grabs is breakthrough in my opinion as well. So for me....not knowing was just ignorance based on lack of interest due to lack of offerings from Red that fit my needs. Cheers, Barry!
For some of us we're very grateful that Red did NOT deliver what was promised. For some of us it's ***MUCH*** better. I understand that's not your opinion and fair enough. Just know that some of us are thrilled with the GAP in the market that this fills. (Better than F3, less cost than Red MX) 12-18K with 35-45K functionality....that's pretty special. (For some of us...)
And FYI, most of us aren't Red fanboys. This site doesn't have many of them....we're just thrilled with the offering: True Cine camera package - 14K. (I know that I'm no lemming....)
Also note that many of us would have HAPPILY jumped on the "Canon Cine Bandwagon", but their offering at first glance is "lesser value" for more money. Maybe they'll show us that their offering is actually a better value: KNOW THIS - I'll be the FIRST to celebrate if they do. For now....it appears that they didn't even beat the existing offerings (Sony F3). I KNOW that this isn't definitive, but there is no denying the "perception". Appx 90% here on DVXUser think Canon got owned....although we'll need to compare these cams side by side, Red won the battle that matter NOW...which is perceived value from the group of people who can buy their product.
I'm no one, but I feel like the C300 was a sure-fire winner if put up against the AF100 and the FS100....above that (at first glace) it doesn't look like a real competitor...(not that it won't be), but for now....many folks (90% on this site) are looking elsewhere. How can that be a good thing for Canon...???!!!
Last edited:
What do you mean? This has been the Scarlet S-35 specs for sometime, and actually . Do you mean it has went through multiple name changes? The original Scarlet S35 guess price was around $7K for the body alone. (Back when 3k for 3K was stated.) The it turned into the Epic-S for $12K for just the body. Now it is the Scarlet X for $10K. So things have changed, but it is not too far off what was originally planned.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Yes and no. It was enough to get me to go to the order page and click on the "place deposit now" button. Bit then as I was figuring exactly how to configure it, I got a little annoyed that it seemed to be pretty much all Canon mount, and the PL mount is a $1500 option. My Red One was a native PL mount and the Canon mount was an extra cost option. I've got tons of PL and Nikon lenses but not a single canon-mount lens at all. So that gave me enough pause to think: do I really NEED this right now? Do I have a project I'm itching to shoot, that my AF100 can't handle and that would benefit from a Scarlet, that would make it necessary to spend $15,000 today?And the honest answer is: no. So I didn't. If I was in the market for a digicine camera in the $15k price bracket, the Scarlet would be it. But right now, today, I don't NEED it, so I'm taking my own advice and not pulling the trigger until the need is there.
This is the ONLY thing stopping me from "pulling the trigger" too. (And a couple of weeks/months scraping funds together...) Do I REALLY need this? I have a project RIGHT NOW that I'm working on, ...but would the overall outcome be better? Yes. Would the IMAGE (from camera) be the "weakest link" on this project? Uhhhh.....I'm pretty sure the weakest link in the equation IS ME. Barry is different in this light....so, I hear you loud and clear, Barry.
One thing to consider about RED, which has turned me off to them, is the cost of ownership and all the little pitfalls. The media cost is pretty steep, especially since the run times are so low. And at this time, it's all proprietary media, something I've always disliked since P2 and SxS cards. With all that data you're generating, your long term storage requirments will go way up.
You'll also have to invest in a substantial battery system because the little Redvolts only last like half an hour. And I read you can't connect the VF and an LCD at the same time? There's also this black shading thing you have to do fairly regularly. However, I understand this all goes with the terroritory of being on the bleeding edge.
It's just not for me, especially since tech goes so fast, bleeding edge today is normal edge in just a few years. These are just computers so for personal use, the best value is never on the bleeding edge.
You'll also have to invest in a substantial battery system because the little Redvolts only last like half an hour. And I read you can't connect the VF and an LCD at the same time? There's also this black shading thing you have to do fairly regularly. However, I understand this all goes with the terroritory of being on the bleeding edge.
It's just not for me, especially since tech goes so fast, bleeding edge today is normal edge in just a few years. These are just computers so for personal use, the best value is never on the bleeding edge.
Melvin Harris
Black Flag Member
Hey, don't misunderstand. The OP's survey asked for one to explain why you were more satisfied with one announcement or the other. I was satisfied with Red's announcement because it solidified a few things for me. That being said, the differences are significant. When Panasonic debuted the proposed AF100, and then delivered the AF100 it was, for the most part, a straight line. Same with the F3 and FS100. The over the river and through the woods approach to this camera has been fraught with detours... and have ended at a vastly different house. The road map is not the same and multiple brains have become one.
Consider this fight fans, if they announced Pacquiao and Mayweather, build it up, announced that the fight venue would change and the pay-per-view would be a little more expensive, but that it's actually happening, built it up, then on the night of the fight explained that they wouldn't be fighting each other but would be a co main event of them fighting other challengers, people would ask questions and would be interested in getting the answers.
That is my point.
Frankly, I don't care about Scarlet S-35 or 2/3 or any of that... all I cared about was does A(what was promised)+B(what was announced)=Scarlet or was it something more, or less. Also, without question, people took the leap and put their money down. It has nothing to do with fanboyism. It has everything to do with popping that Scarlet cherry that's been building up for years. If I had the money at the time, I would have too. Again, my point was not a judgement but what I wondered and what happened.
I didn't expect any thing significant out of Canon and, after so much time, I turned my eyes toward RED rather than Canon.
Consider this fight fans, if they announced Pacquiao and Mayweather, build it up, announced that the fight venue would change and the pay-per-view would be a little more expensive, but that it's actually happening, built it up, then on the night of the fight explained that they wouldn't be fighting each other but would be a co main event of them fighting other challengers, people would ask questions and would be interested in getting the answers.
That is my point.
Frankly, I don't care about Scarlet S-35 or 2/3 or any of that... all I cared about was does A(what was promised)+B(what was announced)=Scarlet or was it something more, or less. Also, without question, people took the leap and put their money down. It has nothing to do with fanboyism. It has everything to do with popping that Scarlet cherry that's been building up for years. If I had the money at the time, I would have too. Again, my point was not a judgement but what I wondered and what happened.
I didn't expect any thing significant out of Canon and, after so much time, I turned my eyes toward RED rather than Canon.
Melvin Harris
Black Flag Member
This was also my point, did everyone who pulled the trigger think like this?
...Piqued my interest, that's all.
Melvin Harris
Black Flag Member
Because Canon is not aiming at 90% of the folks on this site. They have stated that they have a specific market and they believe that they will effectively service that segment. Who am I to refute? If the EOS-C line takes off, bully for them; if not, we can say a collective, "I told you so!"
Very true. (They're not aiming at us...) Fair enough. Would be interesting to know exactly WHO they thought they were aiming at? Cheers pharpsied. Good points all.
A little evil comment for Canon's aim:
Maybe they were aiming at people who wanted to pay more money for an F3.....and get less functionality...that says Canon on the side? :evil:
cowpunk52
Veteran
No need to guess, they've already stated exactly what the target market is for the C300:
"As Canon's flagship 1080p HD cameras, the EOS C300 and EOS C300 PL are designed to fit a wide variety of production needs. They are at home as A Cameras for Independent Films, Commercials, Television and Dramas as well as B Cameras on Major Motion Pictures, offering in addition to the more common 23.98P frame rate, several selectable frame rates including a straight 24.00P setting for intercutting directly with film originated material. Full HD 1920x1080 (1080p) is currently the most used and needed deliverable frame size for these applications. The EOS C300 and EOS C300 PL provide easy adoption and simplified workflow that 4K cameras currently cannot deliver."
source: http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2011/c300_for_cinematographers.shtml
Now you're just trolling to stir up trouble.
Satisfaction would come if it led me to purchase either system, which it did not. I think for most, the lower priced cameras would be good enough in terms of picture quality. I don't see anyone shilling out 15k for their personal projects. Now, if a client wants to use them then you can simply go the route of renting. It's gotten to the point of diminishing returns when a camera reaches a certain price point. From the footage I have seen from the Canon, is it really 3 times better than a FS100? Is the Alexa or Epic that much better than a F3 and SLog? Could anyone in the audience notice a difference other than dvxusers? 
Because this is the internet and everyone compares cars to technology, so will I.
The C300 feels like the Acura NSX of the camera world. You don't need the high cost to maintain it, it is realible, and does everything that a "affordable" exotic should do, and it does it really well. The Scarlet feels more like a Viper, has a ton of horse power under the hood, but you need to know how to drive it to really take advange of it, and it is costly to maintain. Each suits a different driver. A Viper is overkill if you are on a daily communte, and the NSX will never take a Viper in a drag (unless the viper has a really poor driver.) Around the Twisties it is anyones game.
As for the rest of us we are dealing with Camaros and Civics.
The C300 feels like the Acura NSX of the camera world. You don't need the high cost to maintain it, it is realible, and does everything that a "affordable" exotic should do, and it does it really well. The Scarlet feels more like a Viper, has a ton of horse power under the hood, but you need to know how to drive it to really take advange of it, and it is costly to maintain. Each suits a different driver. A Viper is overkill if you are on a daily communte, and the NSX will never take a Viper in a drag (unless the viper has a really poor driver.) Around the Twisties it is anyones game.
As for the rest of us we are dealing with Camaros and Civics.
Last edited:
digital_walnut
Active member
Being the owner of an XF300, I have to praise the platform's ability to grab pretty good quality footage all day on a couple batteries and a couple memory cards. I don't think there's a ton of overlap between people who need that and people who are best suited with an S35 full-manual system, but the C300 will be handy for people who need to do cinematic shoots in remote locations without regular access to power and computer systems. Aside from that, I'm kind of at a loss as to why anyone would choose one over an F3 or a Scarlet.
bruceallen
Well-known member
My guess would be the combination of image quality, light weight, small size, built-in Canon mount, plus easy post pipeline to "broadcast approved" fits their needs?
Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
digital_walnut
Active member
Aside from the "easy post pipeline" part, those are all qualities of the Scarlet, too. As I said, the C300 has its applications, but I'm not anticipating a lot of crossover between people who will want to shoot full manual S35 and people who don't want to put significant effort into grading their footage.
cowpunk52
Veteran
Actually, the C300 is smaller and lighter than the Scarlet. It likely will have better low-light performance.
The world of commercials and television definitely falls very deeply into this category. There are very fast turnaround times and shooting 4K RAW does not make for a quick and simple post workflow, even for narrative dramas - but there is a constantly increasing desire across TV genres for a cinematic look and feel. For instance, here's a quote from an email I just received last week from a television director: "I am looking for a camera to shoot the New Years Eve Music Pretapes on that will deliver what viewers at home are use to seeing as "live" similar to the Today Show Concert Series; but at the same time deliver something more cinematic..."
Last edited:
bruceallen
Well-known member
Scarlet will use 5x the power, is 2x the weight (more once you start adding batteries, EVF etc), is considerably larger, does not have built in ND filters, has some color issues, and is not as good in low light.
I'm a RED fan - but you have to see that these cameras are quite different and the Canon has some definite advantages.
Ask yourself: what if you were doing a Scarlet shoot but wanted to rent something more mobile for certain shots or stuff that has to be shot very quickly or in challenging conditions?
DSLR? But the quality is bad. F3 with external recorder doesn't save much in weight and workflow over Scarlet. F3 with internal recording is too compressed and still bulky. Maybe FS100... but codec issues, it doesn't accept PL or Canon lenses by default and it has no NDs.
How is the C300 not the winner here?
1. There are a bunch of remaining film holdouts in Hollywood who hate digital cinema camera complexity on set and in post. If Canon wins them over, it'll be a major coup for them and good for their brand.
2. It's not about putting effort into grading the footage or not. It's about getting the shot, with the best quality possible, under difficult shooting conditions.
That's why big TV shows and Hollywood use the 5D despite all of its disadvantages.
This is drop-in replacement for the 5D in almost all of those conditions... and can expand roles from there to do more. I's a good way to get the Canon name trusted on set. So they want a conservative design with rock solid, tested reliability and no post issues, in a light and easy to use camera.
Sets the stage for further Canon incursions into cinema.
I really think that this is about Canon wanting to build a trusted brand like Arri.
This is not the indie camera that DVXusers want. Weird that they get so angry and insulting about it though!
Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
brian hanson
Active member
i haven't held a c300 but i have held a few scarlets and epics, they are not as light as you might think. A working rig at minimum is going to weigh at least ten pounds. Not all that light in my book.
Last edited:
digital_walnut
Active member
Again, I'm not saying that the camera doesn't have its uses - but what you're describing are niche uses. Shooting for 5-6 hours on a single battery and being able to stick the camera in awkward places aren't going to factor into most of the filming happening in the world. Cowpunk has a fair point about commercials and TV that need quick turnaround, but I just think the C300 is an odd animal for Canon to debut as its flagship cinema product.