RED S35 or Panasonic AF100

[Nelson Alexandre]

Sorry if this seems to be a stupid comparison for all you RED fans but I'm REALLY a newbie regarding RED cameras.

A year ago I was planning to buy a Scarlet 2/3 but it was been delayed since, and there's this new contender in town by Panasonic which is really getting things hotter.

I know that everybody raves about the "not so good" AVCCAM codec and the 4:2:0 color sampling which seems to be a major drawback against RED cameras, but if you don't mind, can you RED experts give me some advice on:

- I see so many extras for the "S35 Brain Only" camera that I really don't understand how much do I have to spend (besides the brain and the optics), if I'm only searching for a film camera with good audio INs and preferably TC IN/Out options (I assume a Marshal monitor will do just fine and will be much cheaper than RED's 7" option).

- If both cameras are about the same price (7k+accessories??? for RED vs 6K for Pana), which one you will really choose and why? (no sentimental answers here please).

- Anyone really knows if this S35 Scarlet will hit the market in the next months, or is it probably going to happen the same thing that's happening with the 2/3 Scarlet?

Every bit of help's really appreciated. Thanks in advance.

[MichaelHalsell]

It was just a matter of time before this question would come up.

[David Mullen ASC]

Seems like, price-wise, the Panasonic would be competing with the fixed-lens 2/3" Scarlet, not an S35 Scarlet package which I assume would add up beyond the $10,000 mark easily.

[Carlbattreall]

The Panasonic can only do 1080 60i, I really don't understand how people can compare, Scarlet 120 at 3k! I see no competition with RED Scarlet until somebody can a least produce a 1080 60p camera.

[Bruce Allen]

The Panasonic can only do 1080 60i, I really don't understand how people can compare, Scarlet 120 at 3k! I see no competition with RED Scarlet until somebody can a least produce a 1080 60p camera.

Well, the 2/3rds sensor is smaller. It just might lose in Low-light performance to the AF100. Plus those who love shallow focus will have problems.

BTW, actually there are cheap true 1080p 60p cameras already out - eg Panasonic TM700 for $750. It has three 1/4" CMOS sensors - so actually larger surface area than Scarlet 2/3rds, plus a f1.5 - f2.8 lens... they compress down to 28mbps though.

But you can see why RED are playing their cards close to their chest now - eg what if Panasonic bothered to make a pro version of that camera, with less compression and sync for stereo 3D... or heaven knows, maybe even RAW?

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Daniel Valle]

Someone made the math some time ago that the most basic working Scarlet S35 kit would run about 8,500 dollars.

So I still think it's competitive with the AF-100 (rumored at 6,000), not to mention vastly, vastly superior.

If RED manages to manufacture the basic and most common modules in large quantities, perhaps they can put out a S35 Starter's Kit for about 8K.

I think they should make the S35 as competitively priced as they can, so people who are really serious about their video but can't get an EPIC can skip DSLRs and future cameras such as the AF-100.

The masses have tasted shallow DOF, and a lot of them won't look back.

[Subhadip Sen]

Someone made the math some time ago that the most basic working Scarlet S35 kit would run about 8,500 dollars.

This is news to me. I would love to know how this is possible.

Here's a basic config:

Scarlet S35 Brain - $7000
2.8” LCD - $900
REDMOTE - $550
Side CF Module - $500
Battery Module - $1200 (this could be cheaper if using a RED Volt and travel charger were an option - but I have a feeling the battery would be over in no time - this is a 5K S35 RAW camera)

So, that is about $10,000 without lenses, once you account for CF cards, accessories, etc. One might also consider I/O Module as a basic requirement. Not sure I would want to use anything less than high quality glass for 5K. Add a basic RED Pro 17-55 and we are up to $16k. Could be nearly double the price of an AF100, considering the lens is far more critical for the Scarlet. Still, a great deal, considering how much superior it is to an AF100 in every way.

The real question, though, is AF100 vs. Scarlet 2/3". A basic Scarlet 2/3" Cinema will set you back roughly $5000. Scarlet 2/3" Fixed at $4750 including the lens is of course irresistible.

[David Rasberry]

The masses have tasted shallow DOF, and a lot of them won't look back.

Shallow DOF is currently a big fad due to the novelty of being available in cheap video cameras for the first time. At some point it will return to its place as just another tool in the box and people will make camera decisions on a more practical balance of factors for their overall needs. For some uses 35mm DOF, especially FF35mm DOF, can be as much a nuisance as a benefit.

[Robert Rogoz]

Seems like, price-wise, the Panasonic would be competing with the fixed-lens 2/3" Scarlet, not an S35 Scarlet package which I assume would add up beyond the $10,000 mark easily.

David, you must understand 2 things. First of all Panasonic will not offer any lens with this camera, so tag on another couple of grand to the bill. The other thing is a codec, simply AVCHD sucks imo. It might look OK at first, but if you go through any postproduction precess the quality simply doesn't hold up- hence you have to transcode it into something like ProRes, which makes you files HUGE! Now also in order to capture in some native 422 format you'll need to spend close to 3K on Nanoflash, so the price will be most likely above any RED.

[Eki Halkka]

It might look OK at first, but if you go through any postproduction precess the quality simply doesn't hold up- hence you have to transcode it into something like ProRes, which makes you files HUGE!

Transcoding to ProRes doesn't improve the quality of AVCHD - quite the opposite. Every time you transcode / recompress, you LOSE quality.