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 :)

STOP COMPLAINING ABOUT SCARLET SPECS!

its starting to get ridicilious, a 4k camera with a MX sensor and hdrx for 10k?
well if you are dissapointed by that, i dont know in which lala land the camera you are dreaming of
comes from, but i was immediatly thinking that for 20k+ you get a whole bundle including the 17-50 lens.
man, i paid 20k for a 135mm cooke s4 alone!
when someone wants to shoot with redcode future proof 4k with 13 stops, this is the time guys.
never been more affordable to shoot lowlight highend cinestyle footage.
and in narratives slo mo shots are done only on really few shots, so scarletx is the perfect narrative cam,
you want slo mo? rent the epic for that day. there is a reason epic M costs 5x more guys.
 
Last edited:
Cüneyt Kaya said:
its starting to get ridicilious, a 4k camera with a MX sensor and hdrx for 10k?
well if you are dissapointed by that, i dont know in which lala land the camera you are dreaming of
comes from, but i was immediatly thinking that for 20k+ you get a whole bundle including the 17-50 lens.
man, i paid 20k for a 135mm cooke s4 alone!
Click to expand...

The thing that is starting to get ridiculous is that some ppl here thinks that EVERYONE wants/needs to shoot with a Super 35 mm format.

It's just like every photographer would only work with mid-format, just because you get more resolution.
 
It's so cool how everybody becomes an expert on why the FIXED Scarlet was not to be made...
 
Tim Nitsch said:
I can work with the S35 sensor instead of a 2/3". I can work with the increased price. I can work with interchangeable lenses instead of a fixed lens. I can work with a larger and heaver body. All that is fine, I have no problem with that at all.

I can not however work with 120fps @ 1024 x 540. RED says 1080 isn't enough, but 1024 x 540 is? That confused me a bit. I not sure what you can do with 1024 x 540?
Click to expand...

I do agree with you regarding the 120 fps @ 1K, not only resolution wise, but what area of the sensor are we using for such a crop ? I guess we can forget wide shots at high speed.

However, that didn't stop me from ordering as soon as I could :001_tt1: But I do wonder if later down the road we could get at least 96 fps @ 2K with much lower Redcode, something like 12:1 ?

Jim ? Jarred ?
 
This a battle between the HAVES and the HAVE NOT'S - (a Microcosm of Capitalism that is happening across the Western World right now.. - Brilliant if you have the cash - YAHEY!! - SHIT if you don't)

I'm in the latter camp and the HAVE'S camp is patronising beyond belief................
 
Steven Veldkamp said:
I honestly think Red should have notified us when they decided to ditch the 2/3" Scarlet, which I doubt just happened 1 week before this announcement.
Click to expand...

Steve, you're absolutely right. I couldn't agree any less. I don't think ANYONE is upset the Scarlet is a GREAT camera! They are upset because they weren't notified of their options. We're not crying, we're trying to make the best decision in a tough economy. That's all. My decision to buy the EPIC was not yesterday, nor was RED's decision to ditch the 2/3" Scarlet. RED has done alot for their customers over the years, which I am very appreciative. However, this was just not right at all.
 
This a battle between the HAVES and the HAVE NOT'S - (a Microcosm of Capitalism that is happening across the Western World right now.. - Brilliant if you have the cash - YAHEY!! - SHIT if you don't)

I'm in the latter camp and the HAVE'S camp is patronising beyond belief................
 
Justin Marx said:
Throw a canon zoom on the damn thing and call it a day. It's fucking amazing that it's under $12gs to have a camera that beats the quality of the $70g Alexa.
Click to expand...
Scarlet costs $14K if you wan't to be able to turn it on and record. Add few K's so you can use it on tripod and hold it from top handle. Doesn't shoot 120fps at 4K like Alexa and IQ isn't on the same level, but otherwise good camera.
 
Jeremy Wiles said:
Steve, you're absolutely right. I couldn't agree any less. I don't think ANYONE is upset the Scarlet is a GREAT camera! They are upset because they weren't notified of their options. We're not crying, we're trying to make the best decision in a tough economy. That's all. My decision to buy the EPIC was not yesterday, nor was RED's decision to ditch the 2/3" Scarlet. RED has done alot for their customers over the years, which I am very appreciative. However, this was just not right at all.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Red is a great company with a great philosphy making very good products.
But i get the idea that Red is trying to mask the problems of 2/3" and not wanting to admit that the 2/3" Scarlet might not have been such a good idea after all... and decided to not let us know about it for some odd reason?
Consequently messing my, and some of my friend's schedules up alot.

Even though I already own an Epic, I'll probably still end up buying a Scarlet, haha.

For me, the 2/3" Interchangable had some huge advantages over the X.

2.5 crop factor
120FPS at 3k
60FPS HDRx at 60FPS

For a wild-life enthuast like me, this sounded like a dream cam next to my Epic.
Oh well. Time to move on i guess?
 
Last edited:
I want to go on record to say (and then I'll shut up about this) that I am not blaming RED for anything. I think they made a wise and good decision to do what they have done with the Scarlet. I am not suspicious that they are hiding anything or playing tricks. I am sure they gave their best effort to all their development and are as disappointed as even I am (maybe more so) that the Fixed didn't work out. t am not complaining, I am not angry, I am not even the slightest bit miffed - except maybe at the folks who keep equating an expression of disappointment with a complaint.

I understand on every level - probably better than a lot of REDuser folks, since I have read just about every single Scarlet post for the last two years, what has transpired and what the reasons are. The Scarlet X is a fabulous camera. I am so convinced of this that the likelihood of my purchasing one is rapidly approaching 100%. No, it's not what I envisioned, but it is a camera like no other and a complete and total winner in today's market - and will very probably remain so for the foreseeable future.

So, can we agree that all the cameras RED has been developing were worthy of their time and efforts, and had incredible merit, each in their own right. Surely, no one will argue with Jim and RED's pursuit of the various options on behalf of us all. Right?
 
I think the Red Team will improve some specs, specially frame rates, maybe at the cost of a higher Redcode...I've decided to keep my Scarlet X, I think it can/and will be, tweaked a bit more.

I too, was disappointed. I bought it however and now I am starting to accept it, and embrace the difficulties of shooting with it.
 
Maybe I'm dumb, which a lot of people accuse me of or else why is Producer/Director buying a camera & typing away on website devoted to camera's. Anyway why does everyone want a 120fps? Yes it is a nice feature to have but what are going to do with it shoot an entire feature , a doco , drama series in 120fps? Yes it would be wonderful to shoot the yellow crested sap sucker taking off in slo-mo. I get it, I appreciate it. But when you need those type of shots you plan for it, co-co-ordinate it & then hire in the camera that's capable of it ( Epic or whatever) You do not need this feature day in day out (unless your shooting something like extreme sports). So maybe, someone can explain why this feature seems to be more important than resolution, sensor size, workflow, & future proofing. Waiting to be crucified for being dumb;)
 
revolution became evolution

revolution became evolution

As Jannard said it's due to the lens that didn't work as it should, why did RED stop the the 2/3 program - scarlet without lens?
We saw some cool examples of a working scarlet 2/3 though it was the fixed one.
But there are enough lenses out there for 2/3...... enough good 16mm lenses matching the 2/3

So why not the 2/3 without lens?
 
There are plenty of camcorders on the markett. If you want a fixed lens and 2/3 sensor, buy a camcorder.

Should RED design a camcorder? I don't see a point. Move forward, not backward, I say.
 
Mike Garrick said:
Maybe I'm dumb, which a lot of people accuse me of or else why is Producer/Director buying a camera & typing away on website devoted to camera's. Anyway why does everyone want a 120fps? Yes it is a nice feature to have but what are going to do with it shoot an entire feature , a doco , drama series in 120fps? Yes it would be wonderful to shoot the yellow crested sap sucker taking off in slo-mo. I get it, I appreciate it. But when you need those type of shots you plan for it, co-co-ordinate it & then hire in the camera that's capable of it ( Epic or whatever) You do not need this feature day in day out (unless your shooting something like extreme sports). So maybe, someone can explain why this feature seems to be more important than resolution, sensor size, workflow, & future proofing. Waiting to be crucified for being dumb;)
Click to expand...

I don't think it's just the 120. As some other guys said the 2/3 could have become a run and gun cam and not everybody in this world is so fixed on 35mm neither 4K nor 5k. Shooting 4K is great but it is not everything.
 
Cenydd Ros said:
There are plenty of camcorders on the markett. If you want a fixed lens and 2/3 sensor, buy a camcorder.

Should RED design a camcorder? I don't see a point. Move forward, not backward, I say.
Click to expand...

a camcorder with the fantastic redcode? With that organic red-look - far far away from other video-camera-looks. where can I get one?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top