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 :)

Nov 3rd Scarlet Prediction

I believe that if you kept the same pixel density as in Scarlet Fixed 2/3 but increaed the sensor size to Super 16 size, it could handle 4k resolution. So it wouldn't even have to go up to apsc.
 
I dont understand why people are so against the idea that Red would make the scarlet S35 & 4k ... CANON is putting out a 4k S35 camera for around 10k - 15k. Reds main goal is to beat the hell out of the competition. They definitely will make it S35 & interchangeable & i'm thinking 4k... in 2008 he said 3k for 3k. Its now almost 2012. 4k is Not out of the question. EPIC is always going to be better then the Scarlet even at those specs. and Big budget films put $100,000 glass on it. Scarlet will have HALF the info thru put. So people who don't need that, will get scarlet. Scarlet is the money maker. Its the quantity of there business.
 
Steven Hammer said:
I believe that if you kept the same pixel density as in Scarlet Fixed 2/3 but increaed the sensor size to Super 16 size, it could handle 4k resolution. So it wouldn't even have to go up to apsc.
Click to expand...

This is definitely a possibility too.
 
Wait, from the first post it made it sound like RED had killed the Epic-S, is this true?
 
If a 2/3" sensor can't resolve to more than 3K, does this mean there is no future in 4K or in 2/3" sensors? Or will it over time be possible to make sensors that resolve to ideally 4.5K/5K through a 2/3" sensor?
 
Jesper Sichlau said:
If a 2/3" sensor can't resolve to more than 3K, does this mean there is no future in 4K or in 2/3" sensors? Or will it over time be possible to make sensors that resolve to ideally 4.5K/5K through a 2/3" sensor?
Click to expand...
I think a 2/3-inch sensor could resolve 4K, because Canon has demoed a 4K 2/3-inch "hairdryer" concept camera and JVC, a 4K2K (i.e., QuadHD, 3,840 x 2,160) 1/2-inch camera. The problem is developing 2/3-inch-format lenses that can resolve that level of detail, at an affordable price (there really is no point in a $10K camera that requires $100K lenses). Even 3K appears to be pushing it.
 
Louis Maddalena said:
Wait, from the first post it made it sound like RED had killed the Epic-S, is this true?
Click to expand...
Nobody but Red knows. But even if a camera by that name no longer exists, Jim Jannard has indicated that a comparable camera will be announced by the end of the year. Whether that means November 3 will be known in just a few days.
 
Sensor resolution should be optimized for the optical resolution of the best available lenses for a given format. There is no practical advantage for measurable optical resolution on 2/3" sensor to go beyond 3k. It is physically impossible for lenses to resolve 4k 2/3" at normal working apertures due to diffraction limits. Why sacrifice DR and sensitivity for no useful gain in visible resolution?
 
David Rasberry said:
It is physically impossible for lenses to resolve 4k 2/3" at normal working apertures due to diffraction limits.
Click to expand...


This. It's a complete mystery to me why people are asking for more data overhead when it would offer no benefit. Or for an 8x T2.4 constant zoom designed for 2/3" to magically cover S35 without doubling in size, weight and cost. Fortunately I doubt that RED's design team will have overlooked the necessary compromises imposed by physics the way many of the armchair camera designers here seem to be doing.
 
FrankApollonio said:
We think there just gonna make it the scarlet with s35 now
Click to expand...

If this is the case I don't think we'll see full resolution (3k, 4k, or 5k) fps past 60- 72 or so. Which is still fine as there is nothing that competes with that for probably a year or so :)
 
Phil Holland said:
If this is the case I don't think we'll see full resolution (3k, 4k, or 5k) fps past 60- 72 or so. Which is still fine as there is nothing that competes with that for probably a year or so :)
Click to expand...

Yes thats true, but thats normal for all the rep cameras... it will still do 120 fps at 2k if not better... i just can't wait to preorder.... alchemy alone is gonna make this camera insane
 
As things change so could this, but the reason I think the scarlet is still a smaller sensor is due to the FAQ in the scarlet section, as well as comments about Gizmodo and Engadget being happy about the naming scheme when the scarlet s35 went from that line to the epic line, and they said all s35 and above sensors were now epics.

"The net result is that Scarlet is an EPIC with a professional 2/3" sensor. It is what defines a Scarlet and EPIC. A 2/3" broadcast format 3K sensor = Scarlet. An APS-C S35 format 5K sensor = EPIC"

Now things can change but this made sense to me me and fit in nicely, so it's the reason why I think it will be a smaller sensor camera when they say scarlet is being released.

Now things can change and as they do it could be possible that the scarlets are now just the lower end models which will now have s35 sensors... I find it much less likely but it could happen.

so who knows just pointing out the evidence for smaller sensors.

Anything can happen so.... I'm out, have fun and play nice!
 
Well, I firmly believe one thing. That it will support RED Pro lenses. I won't speculate to the size of the sensor, but I do believe there will be some version without a fixed lens. Why would RED trouble with taking the check mark from the SSD module, and Sidehandle, while leaving the checks next to the lenses?

As long as I can afford the body and some form of mount, that will be the one I go with. It could be a tease as well, but I don't think they'd pull that. That really isn't even speculation, just common sense based on what the RED store already shows there lenses will be usable.

My wishes for this camera would to be relatively the same, have the mini primes, but also have the ability to use Canon and or PL lenses with the Scarlet.

At some point in my life I hope to upgrade to an Epic, or whatever comes after, and being able to invest in lenses at this point already would be awesome! I'd work with the crop factor if still 2/3 as I do shoot sports mostly.

Ok that's my "prediction", possibly stating whats obvious for the 3rd.
 
Jeffrey Loewe said:
Well, I firmly believe one thing. That it will support RED Pro lenses. I won't speculate to the size of the sensor, but I do believe there will be some version without a fixed lens. Why would RED trouble with taking the check mark from the SSD module, and Sidehandle, while leaving the checks next to the lenses?

...

Ok that's my "prediction", possibly stating whats obvious for the 3rd.
Click to expand...

What's curious about your observation is that the side handle was, all along, supposed to work on the Scarlet - as we have seen with Ted in his travels with the Scarlet Fixed. And, to be honest, I can't imagine that it no longer does. (But, what do I know.)

So, how does that fit into the "evidence" that the web site holds keys to what Nov 3rd will bring. If RED is "spot on" with their compatibility chart on RED.com, then the side handle no longer works with Scarlet while all lenses and LCDs do. Then again, nothing is indicated next to the matte box - what does that mean?

And, what seems "obvious" to some is not at all so to others.

Only 5 days left...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top