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 :)

Camera shootout 2011

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's something much more useful:

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118029071?refCatId=1009

however, as usual, full of misconceptions stated as fact. I especially love "While the consensus from users is that the Alexa appears to be a new favorite" Which users? To write a sentence like that is just bad journalism. Did they do a scientific statistical analysis? The younger DPs I knwo do not prefer Alexa more often - most prefer Red MX.

Also the idea that Red Mx is harsh on women's skin is simply ludicrous. Use different filtration, use different lighting and harsh will be nowhere near your images. Rabbit Hole the DP of which made the Red harshness comment is lit harshly and filmed in a harsh doco style, and seems to use no filtration - that's why the women don't look so good.

It;s the line-skippers that make skin look awful.

I hate misinformation - it really makes me mad.
 
Last edited:
I was at the event yesterday at cinegear. Pretty sad representation and thinly veiled bias towards Alexa. The pure fact is the red one mx was only slightly less statistically behind the Alexa in some categories and ahead on others. But the epic would have blown away in all categories particularly with HDRx. sad that they had to compare these new tools with an almost 4 year old red one to justify their bias. Also interesting that they redid some of the footage since NAB for firmware updates from sony but could not contact one of the hundreds of epic-m owners to add that camera to their "comprehensive test". The test made me very proud and happy to be a red customer.
 
Tests are hard to do. Good tests are even harder to do. Good tests that stand up to expert scrutiny are harder still. Tests that can't even measure a simple parameter like resolution accurately and not produce stupid results are laughable.

Graeme
 
Rob Ruffo said:
Here's something much more useful:

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118029071?refCatId=1009

however, as usual, full of misconceptions stated as fact. I especially love "While the consensus from users is that the Alexa appears to be a new favorite" Which users? To write a sentence like that is just bad journalism. Did they do a scientific statistical analysis? The younger DPs I knwo do not prefer Alexa more often - most prefer Red MX.

Also the idea that Red Mx is harsh on women's skin is simply ludicrous. Use different filtration, use different lighting and harsh will be nowhere near your images. Rabbit Hole the DP of which made the Red harshness comment is lit harshly and filmed in a harsh doco style, and seems to use no filtration - that's why the women don't look so good.

It;s the line-skippers that make skin look awful.

I hate misinformation - it really makes me mad.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. To me the object of the game is firstly to know your kit. Secondly capture as much information as possible. Thirdly use your knowledge of the kit to create the right look. This could be with lighting, on-camera filtering, post grading and colour correction. How people can say that 'RED' isn't nice to women is ridiculous, when it is merely someones shortcoming as a practicioner. I shoot RED to get the flexibility, taking as much away from incamera processing as possible.
 
Funny the mention of women and RED. I'd just bumped into Ted and saw some footage he'd just shot and it was a woman singing. Great skintones, great texture - nothing exaggerated. To say RED is harsh on skin is ludicrous.

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Funny the mention of women and RED. I'd just bumped into Ted and saw some footage he'd just shot and it was a woman singing. Great skintones, great texture - nothing exaggerated. To say RED is harsh on skin is ludicrous.

Graeme
Click to expand...

one of the problems we experience out on the front lines is misconceptions formed at one point in time that make no allowances for change. so if someone did a job with a red in october of 2007 and the camera was set to a funky gamma and color setting ( old redspace in an early build in tungsten light) then that is what they think it still is. it is quite sad, just because some other manufacturers release products and never ever upgrade those products or do firmware changes, doesnt mean that is the way it is with red, ( as we all know). but if that has been your experience for 20+ year with the others, then that is what the expect from red.

good news is that all it takes is one epic job and people tend to stay loyal to epic.

happy shooting.
 
Dino, I do believe that the Epic is THE most addictive camera there is. I certainly find it so!

Graeme
 
dino g said:
one of the problems we experience out on the front lines is misconceptions formed at one point in time that make no allowances for change. so if someone did a job with a red in october of 2007 and the camera was set to a funky gamma and color setting ( old redspace in an early build in tungsten light) then that is what they think it still is. it is quite sad, just because some other manufacturers release products and never ever upgrade those products or do firmware changes, doesnt mean that is the way it is with red, ( as we all know). but if that has been your experience for 20+ year with the others, then that is what the expect from red.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

All camera companies upgrade their cameras often. Red is the only company that doesn't make you buy a whole new camera every time they make some improvements to it. Never before did a camera get better over time. The misconceptions live on because people use it once (or someone they know uses it once) and they form opinions based on that experience. Most of these people probably have no idea that the same footage they shot in 2008 can look even better with the improvements made to RedCineX.

For people that have been shooting for decades, the idea of a camera getting better over time just flat out doesn't compute.

It would be like a car company that would add power windows, heated seats, a booming stereo, an all leather interior, and (in the case of MX) install a new engine at a discounted price 3 years after you bought it. Then when they start building top of the line luxury sports cars, they let you trade it in and pay a fraction of the cost. Yeah, that is never going to happen with a car company, unless RED starts making cars.
 
"Red is the only company that doesn't make you buy a whole new camera every time they make some improvements to it" - although I'd like to agree I cannot. Some companies do software and firmware upgrades to cameras and charge you an arm and leg for the privilege to turn on features. Got to say that if I was one of their customers I'd be more than pissed.

Graeme
 
I think Steve posted here and partly in their defense, I don't think Red wanted them to use an early version of the Epic for the test for fear it might
somehow be misrepresented and then become common perception/fact.

What's kinda weird though is if there is a bias toward the Alexa, I can't see how Zacuto really benefits. I would guess most of their money (by far) is now made
in selling DSLR accessories (viewfinders, EVF, support rigs, etc - just think how many more DSLRs are out there compared to other cams). So I could understand them pushing DSLR's but Alexa doesn't bring much to their business.

At any rate, I think Steve and Co are honest and mean well. The real proof is those who are choosing to shoot their features on the Epic. Just imagine if it were more widely available
with fully enabled firmware, etc?

Epic doesn't need to "win" the shootout, it's already winning a much bigger and more meaningful battle ...
 
But the test is being recorded by Zacuto, but it's not being done by them. This really has nothing to do with Steve and co, but to do with the "image quality geeks" who can't measure resolution correctly and report cameras to have more resolution than they have pixels due to measuring aliasing as real resolution. I'd be embarrassed to put out such obviously wrong figures to industry professionals at a major trade show.

Graeme
 
I have a RED and Alexa, I love them equally, and both have an asthetic that defines themselves in a way that I never thought digital would be capable of.
 
We did a test recently for a company where skintones are paramount.
It was against another popular camera that was assumed to be the best.
Epic won.
 
Deanan said:
We did a test recently for a company where skintones are paramount.
It was against another popular camera that was assumed to be the best.
Epic won.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY!
 
Rob Ruffo said:
I especially love "While the consensus from users is that the Alexa appears to be a new favorite" Which users?
Click to expand...

If you change the rather generic term "users" to "network television production companies," the statement is rather true, as Alexa is the dominant choice for both pilots and upcoming series for this season. How long that will last is anyone's guess, with things like Epic, a finished Scarlet, and the Sony F65 all likely being available in quantity by next pilot season. But at the moment, Alexa does occupy a rather dominant position in that particular market.
 
Carsten Fenstermacher said:
How many cameras do you think the episodic cameras is?
2-3 cameras per show?
Click to expand...

Yes. Sometimes 4 if a lot of 3 camera setups are used (the 4th body would be a backup). Most shows that are traditionally referred to as "single camera" style use at least 2 cameras on most setups these days.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top