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 :)

The Great Camera Shootout 2011 - Episode 3

Also....I think the Read-Refresh rate on the Epic is much closer to film than the Red-MX.

However I'm not 100% sure on this.
 
Graeme Nattress said:
That's the right answer! Do your own test to your own specifications based around how YOU shoot and what YOU are going to be using the cameras for. Nothing else is better than that!

Indeed doing such a test with such a wide range of cameras is hard, and mistakes and errors do and will occur. I thought Josh's comment above was important criticism though - "If the goal is to produce objective Science: when a experiment gets compromised - you throw out the results and rerun the tests". I know that if I'm doing some camera tests as I sometimes do, if I screw up I'll do the test again and again until I get it right. That's because I care about the answers and I need them to be correct. That said, I'd rarely test more than two cameras at once which makes it much easier to repeat a test.

With the earlier episodes going into measurements and graphs we were promised a white paper on their derivation which has not appeared. There has been strong and valid criticism from myself and others about these graphs. Many many viewers saw these graphs at their NAB presentation and those viewers have never been properly informed that the numbers they saw were wrong (mistakes were pointed out to them and numbers revised).

Graeme
Click to expand...

My main beef is that they ignored/failed to address some very serious issues when it comes to actually using these cameras. To compare such a wide array of cameras and not address this really blows my mind, esp. since Zacuto makes equipment designed to improve cameras' shootablity. All of these cameras have serious advantages and disadvantages when it comes to using them.

For example, do you really want to hand-hold a Red One? Do you want to put an F3 on your shoulder? Or put an F35 on a steadicam? And what's all of these cameras' post workflows? The F35's colors look lovely, but you need access to a very expensive deck to read the tapes that the camera records to. How do you post S-Log? How does 8-bit 4:2:0 from a DSLR hold up when moved around in post? These are a sample of real issues that anyone shooting a film needs at least be aware of.

The practical and post considerations for using each camera were completely ignored. So I'm left with the facts that film best records skin tones and DSLR's create punchy images w/ a lot of rolling shutter.

I found the other two installments, while flawed in some of their numbers, more helpful.
 
Digital sucks and film won again.

We still have listen carefully to Steven Spielberg when he recently said that he is not still ready for digital as a director.

Film is expensive, Fujifilm going to increase prices for motion picture films and also Kodak goes to bankruptcy soon...

But Fujifilm won the last three Academy Awards with its latest Eterna Vivid film stocks.

Probably this gonna happen again next year.

All that means if you want the highest image quality and enough money than you would be able to shoot on film.
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
Digital sucks and film won again.

We still have listen carefully to Steven Spielberg when he recently said that he is not still ready for digital as a director.

Film is expensive, Fujifilm going to increase prices for motion picture films and also Kodak goes to bankruptcy soon...

But Fujifilm won the last three Academy Awards with its latest Eterna Vivid film stocks.

Probably this gonna happen again next year.

All that means if you want the highest image quality and enough money than you would be able to shoot on film.
Click to expand...

i bet Jim Jannard and all Red Team hate you
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
Digital sucks and film won again.
Click to expand...

1) No, digital doesn't suck.
2) Film is great, film can be beautiful, but it can also be ugly and have issues.

Posts like the above comment don't really add to the discussion.

Graeme
 
I'm interested in finding out how much faster the Epic read refresh rate is than Red MX. Is it the same? In my very basic test on whip pans of a picket fence with the Epic, the motion blur outweighed any slant of the pickets, so it didn't seem like an issue. With a short shutterspeed and helicopter blades, maybe there would be a problem? Not sure.
 
Film did not win.
 
I don't recall film doing very well in low light at all, and without agressive de graining methods, it's very grainy compared to noise levels of high end digital cams especially when pushing and digging into the shadows. and in just a year's time since this was shot, we already have cameras out/coming out that surpass film in resolution, and color gamut, and matching or very close to matching dynamic range. on certain shots, Epic with hdrx can even blow it out of the water.

plus there were other factors that they didn't dive into.

mixed light?
ergonomics of the physical camera itself?
workflow?

all the stuff they tested can show you in a lot of cases what kind of image you can expect out of the camera, but the SCCE didn't do a test on how the camera and what it acquires can benefit the production as a whole with speed and ease. and if you break every factor down, including what they tested and these factors, there clearly isn't gonna be one supreme winner, but just more choices, and I think that's the point of this shootout to begin with, to show you your options and what you can expect with each option. Obviously Film can be cream of the crop in many aspects, it's the gold standard after all. but I'd like to think that going digital isn't just a cost thing, it's just a goal of being able to do better. Film as we know it is maxed out in quality, digital still has many many more generations ahead of it.
 
One of the points that really resonated with me was the last point of the 3rd episode. The narrator mentioned that you can obtain great results with all the cameras if you take into account the strengths and weaknesses of each camera. and you compose and light each scene carefully. After watching the last three episodes, I was amazed, surprised, and humbled by what I saw. It made me realize that the filmmaker doesn't really have an excuse anymore for badly shot footage. The cameras have gotten so much better, even dslr's. I would still like to get a Red when I am finally ready to shoot my first feature, just for the latitude it gives me. Those who already have an epic, you lucky dogs....
 
If RED would have won on all of these tests then this would be a happy discussion. The bottom line is that these tests do affect me( the perception of RED). I own a Red One- soon an Epic X. This is the system I am shooting with as long as RED keeps putting out innovative products that I can afford. The greatest way to show RED non-believers is to learn my camera and shoot great projects. I will teach what little I know to others who love RED products because I want them to shoot great RED projects too. I can't worry about the Alexa or whatever is the new camera out. I'll leave that for RED DIGITAL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top