Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

What's the difference between Epic and Scarlet at 5k each?

F

Frank_L

Banned
Joined
Sep 5, 2010
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Since Epic has a higher mb/sec, does it mean say Scarlet at FF or S35, Epic will always have the better image than any Scarlet no matter how high you go up for Scarlet?
 
I expect the FF Scarlet to have a better image than the S35 Epic. It'll be using the next gen sensor and have more room to work with. But at the same bitrate an MX Scarlet and an MX Epic should produce the same image. Most of the time most Epic cameras will probably be shooting at Scarlet bitrates and framerates. If you buy Epic you're paying a premium for availability. It's not *that* much more expensive and if you need to rent an Epic many times per year then it would be cheaper to just buy the Epic.

Scarlet is for those who don't need the kitchen sink every day. Scarlet will shoot 90% of everything you'll shoot but if 10% adds up to the difference in renting you should buy an Epic. Or if the director suddenly says "I want to shoot high-speed" you have to be able to offer it not explain that you saved $200 on the rental and now have to make a run back to the rental house to pick up a different camera. In that situation Epic's image quality would be infinitely better since it is delivering the image while Scarlet can't.
 
The difference is not so much in image quality, but features. For instance, the S35 and FF Scarlets cannot shoot past 30 frames per second at their maximum resolution (as far as I remember), but the S35 EPIC can shoot 5K at something like 96 fps at 2:1 and over 100 if you go to 2.35:1.
 
And since none of the specifications are written in stone and everything is subject to change, all of this is speculative. Plus we do not know when the FF Scarlet will come into existence -- or what its initial sensor will be.
 
Love your Henry Ford signature Eirik!

Ok, most of the 8000 R1 users will want/need to benefit from their R1 trade-in value and get an Epic.
But would they do it second time round?

I suspect most of the world (the faithless) who haven't invested in a R1 won't see a business case for $22,000 towards fps over their other equipment needs.

Put another way, would you get more value from a set of Red primes with your Scarlet than buying a higher fps camera?
For $22K you could buy another complete camera setup!

Would that soften the blow for the few times you have to shoot slowmo and need to hire an Epic,
as opposed to all the times you must fork out money for lenses or the times you could've used a second camera!

Day to day, would you rather have a backup camera on standby or higher fps functionality on standby?

Dave
 
guess both can do 95% of my shoots, but things like
slo mo, frame overlay, ana mode are used by me too, so i guess epix is really the almost no compromise cam.
 
One other feature to consider in the Epic V Scarlet dilemma is the HDR modes. Usually DPs ask about the usable DR of the format rather than FPS much less max res for FPS.
We don't know if Red will enable HDR on all flavors of Scarlet or just on Epic. My guess is that there is a chance that HDR will be an Epic feature to entice the forking out of extra dosh.
 
Nir Shelter said:
One other feature to consider in the Epic V Scarlet dilemma is the HDR modes. Usually DPs ask about the usable DR of the format rather than FPS much less max res for FPS.
We don't know if Red will enable HDR on all flavors of Scarlet or just on Epic. My guess is that there is a chance that HDR will be an Epic feature to entice the forking out of extra dosh.
Click to expand...

HDR is being included on the 2/3" Scarlet now for an extra $1k. Seems unlikely they will leave it off the S35 version. You will be limited to lower frame and/or higher compression rates perhaps as a trade off.
Four times the frame rate needs four times the processing power, the main difference along with lower compression rates between the two I think. Hence about 3 times the price.
 
David Rasberry said:
HDR is being included on the 2/3" Scarlet now for an extra $1k. Seems unlikely they will leave it off the S35 version. You will be limited to lower frame and/or higher compression rates perhaps as a trade off.
Four times the frame rate needs four times the processing power, the main difference along with lower compression rates between the two I think. Hence about 3 times the price.
Click to expand...

I think we'd have to get a look under the hood to really determine if the processing power provided to the baseline Scarlet S35 tops out at 25% slower than baseline Epic S35. Processors are to some degree commoditized, so pricing structures in high volumes may be responsible for the cost difference, or it could be the addition or subtraction of a dedicated parallel processing board that turns a Scarlet into an Epic or vice-versa.

I mean, since the cameras share so many features, I doubt they have radically different board stacks. At any rate, I believe there could be some elasticity in the price difference which Red could wield to its discretion. I think such a possibility could exist here, but again, without a peek at the innards- how could we know?
 
Is it just me....or is everyone forgetting just how expensive Betacam SP camera's were 15 years ago?? To get one Beta SP camera with a Fujiion Lens was around $55k!!
A Red Epic and a set of Red Primes....$44,000.
7 times the resolution WITH slo-mo, and a far superior look for less money.
So....for me....the cost is a no brainer. Sure...7D's are cheaper, as are many HD cameras, but when I look back and see that Beta SP's were the 'must have' camera for that era, I look at the Epic as the camera for the NEXT era, and it still works out to be a cheaper investment.
Yes? No?
 
Shayne Cantly said:
Is it just me....or is everyone forgetting just how expensive Betacam SP camera's were 15 years ago?? To get one Beta SP camera with a Fujiion Lens was around $55k!!....
Click to expand...

You are correct but the difference is those Betacams were workhorses
for alot of owner/operators. There was no DV/mini-dv so if you wanted
to shoot something for TV producers shot Betacam and so people got
their money back on those cameras and then some.

Nowadays it's whole new ballgame everything seems up in the air.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top