Hasselblad vs RED Epic for stills.

[Laco Zamba]

I'm not sure I understand your meaning.

I'm just trying to understand the reason why some would find their images less sharp while Hurley doesn't even mention it. The reason I suspect, is the OLPF and the failure of some to compensate, or allow for sharpening before making a comparison. That is why I asked you if you did or not. I assume that Hurley did. Were he involved in this discussion I would ask him too.

I know RCX well. I did full debayer, tried various sharpness and detail setings too.

Open two pictures from Hurley's article, zoom it to 100% and compare hair and brow.

 

[Scott Crawley]

Oh I see. Hurley was comparing 8x10 prints, not 100% blow ups. That might explain the differences in perception.

if you take his observations in context it's hard to argue with his conclusions. For 8x10 printed studio head shots, the Epic can hold it's own with a Hassy (DOF differences not withstanding). Not bad.

I know RCX well. I did full debayer, tried various sharpness and detail setings too.

Open two pictures from Hurley's article, zoom it to 100% and compare hair and brow.

 

[Peter Lyons Collister ASC]

They were Kino-Flos

 

[Bruce Allen]

RED sucks on skin tones... yeah right. More FUD killed (as if we needed to any more)

Mike

It is an interaction between skin tones, lighting and camera.

1. RED does best in daylight studio lighting - which are the test conditions here.

2. Gums and lips still have that classic RED washed out pink look. Reflection of pink of blouse onto skin on the right looks odd.

3. The ratio of saturation of reds vs the other colors is off.

4. RED doesn't seem to be able to tell the difference between the pinks in the whites of the eyes and the more saturated red colors on the blouse. It seems to think they are the same color when the H2D can see the difference. This has always been a problem for me - RED just seem to think that saturated red = pink.

5. The transition from blouse to BG goes through a weird luma shift in the EPIC footage - the pink seems to get a little darker as it blurs towards blue. Whereas the H2D just does a smooth transition. What's up with that?

6. Personally, the baseline for good natural filmic skin tones for me would be film... not a Hasselblad from approx 2007 era

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Scott Crawley]

I had asked if Hurley was using Fluorescents or LED and Peter was kind enough to answer.

They were Kino-Flos

Yes, thanks, but were they LED? Sorry for deleting the question.

edit: I decided not to be so lazy and took a closer look for myself. They were Kino Vista-beams; fluorescent.

 

[C.H.Haskell]

I did a blind guess and I was wrong...and I am ok with that.

 

[Scott Crawley]

6. Personally, the baseline for good natural filmic skin tones for me would be film... not a Hasselblad from approx 2007 era

Haha, yea a good baseline for a film comparison *would be* film... duh! :wink: Of course that wasn't the point of the exercise.

 

[paul ross jones]

Oh I see. Hurley was comparing 8x10 prints, not 100% blow ups. That might explain the differences in perception.

if you take his observations in context it's hard to argue with his conclusions. For 8x10 printed studio head shots, the Epic can hold it's own with a Hassy (DOF differences not withstanding). Not bad.

an iphone pic probably looks pretty good at 10 x 8 size

paul

 

[Les Dittert]

I'm sorry to say, but when the dude held up the 8x10's I pretty much started laughing.

Saying that, the advantage of having the 'fastest motor winder' on the planet is the big plus.
It is perfect for 8x10's or pictures in a magazine article.
Or high school year book pictures ..... OMG did I just say that

The Red is a fine motion picture camera, it is optimized for that.

an iphone pic probably looks pretty good at 10 x 8 size

paul

 

[Scott Crawley]

I'm sorry to say, but when the dude held up the 8x10's I pretty much started laughing.

Saying that, the advantage of having the 'fastest motor winder' on the planet is the big plus.
It is perfect for 8x10's or pictures in a magazine article.
Or high school year book pictures ..... OMG did I just say that

The Red is a fine motion picture camera, it is optimized for that.

Wow Les, don't hold back or anything. I'll admit that I wasn't particularly moved either way by what I saw there but I wouldn't laugh out loud or proclaim it in public. That's pretty harsh. WUWT?

By the same token, most of us understand that DSMC is optimized for cinema but some of us keep an open mind and are even eager to explore it's potential applications for still photography.

I'm the last guy you'll find on the negativity police but even I have to say that both remarks seem to piss on just about everyone they address; the local portrait tog, magazine and advertising togs, Hurley and even Jim Jannard. You are of course entitled to your opinions, but a little decorum is a good thing to have too. Damn.

 

[Casey Green]

Scarlet-X 5K@12fps & 4K/30fps is a great cost savings alternative too!

 

[Zeb B]

Wow Les, don't hold back or anything. I'll admit that I wasn't particularly moved either way by what I saw there but I wouldn't laugh out loud or proclaim it in public. That's pretty harsh. WUWT?

By the same token, most of us understand that DSMC is optimized for cinema but some of us keep an open mind and are even eager to explore it's potential applications for still photography.

I'm the last guy you'll find on the negativity police but even I have to say that both remarks seem to piss on just about everyone they address; the local portrait tog, magazine and advertising togs, Hurley and even Jim Jannard. You are of course entitled to your opinions, but a little decorum is a good thing to have too. Damn.

It's these type of comments and attempts at behavior modification, that seem to have the goal of homogenous group think, that makes for a middle grey, fanboy based forum that speaks in a single boring voice providing little value, color and contrast. If something doesn't square with field or market reality I'm sure the folks at RED can take hearing about it without sugar coating. Epic is a great movie camera and not so good at shooting real world (hand held) studio fashion work and . . . it doesn't make a very good webcam either!! There you go - I said it.

 

[Jannard]

I guess a lot of people would disagree with you... since a ton of covers and spreads are currently being shot on EPIC... by the best in the business. There you go... I said it.

Jim

It's these type of comments and attempts at behavior modification, that seem to have the goal of homogenous group think, that makes for a middle grey, fanboy based forum that speaks in a single boring voice providing little value, color and contrast. If something doesn't square with field or market reality I'm sure the folks at RED can take hearing about it without sugar coating. Epic is a great movie camera and not so good at shooting real world (hand held) studio fashion work and . . . it doesn't make a very good webcam either!! There you go - I said it.

 

[Les Dittert]

Scott,
Yes, I'm a bit brash. I don't hold back, and have little tolerance for the illogical or lame.
Few advancements are made with a British type of still upper lip.

I said nothing negative about the local photo tog, magazine people, or anyone in particular.
I like my two Scarlets, and highly respect Jim and his group for they themselves are brash and disruptive to the Japanese and Germans who run the slow moving and non customer friendly camera companies.

Didn't you too react a little ' what ???? ' when the guy held up the little photos ? They looked even smaller than 8x10's for a second. He set up the shot by saying something about his lab, potentially a high end lab, and how they printed his work. So I was expecting some 24 inch prints or something bigger, and then he brings up what my eyes first thought were 5x7's. It startled me a bit, and others as well, I'm guessing.

Wow Les, don't hold back or anything. I'll admit that I wasn't particularly moved either way by what I saw there but I wouldn't laugh out loud or proclaim it in public. That's pretty harsh. WUWT?

By the same token, most of us understand that DSMC is optimized for cinema but some of us keep an open mind and are even eager to explore it's potential applications for still photography.

I'm the last guy you'll find on the negativity police but even I have to say that both remarks seem to piss on just about everyone they address; the local portrait tog, magazine and advertising togs, Hurley and even Jim Jannard. You are of course entitled to your opinions, but a little decorum is a good thing to have too. Damn.

 

[Jannard]

http://www.red.com/shot-on-red/photography

Jim

 

[Zeb B]

I guess a lot of people would disagree with you... since a ton of covers and spreads are currently being shot on EPIC... by the best in the business. There you go... I said it.

Jim

Holy Crap . . . Jim replied to me even if to shoot me down!!

There is no doubt the Epic is up for the task technically and can do amazing work. It is ergonomics and everyday workflow (LR4) that remain challenging. Hand holding a fully loaded Epic for an all day shoot is not a problem for Big Lu but for us little people a different task.

A recent frame grab from my Epic - yeah RED fuckin rocks:

Right click and open image in PS to see at 2K rez . . . 5K is mo betta yet but Flickr no workie with the big files

 

[George Petersen]

Last night I saw a video comparing a Hasselblad to a Nikon D800. Tonight I was out for a walk and was thinking it would be nice to see a similar comparison with Red in terms of dynamic range; the Hasse clearly was a bit better than the Nikon. Got home and jumped on, and here it is!

It all really boils down to what the end use of the images is going to be. For huge blow ups, you need huge resolution, Nikon D800 or medium format territory, but they are comparatively slow, so situations where speed isn't paramount they fill the bill very well. For sports action, for print, such as magazine and newspaper coverage; even wedding shoots, I see tremendous advantages to Red - all those frames mean never missing the perfect shot. I for one would never complain about having too many frames to choose from - that's exactly what I want! For example, say you are shooting from behind home plate, you can pre-focus on a point, say where the ball is going to connect with the bat, shoot 120 fps and get the perfect shot every time. Something that is much harder to do with a "mere" 11 or 12 fps DSLR. The Redvantage (I just coined a new word!) along with speed is it's silent, unobtrusive shooting - those speedy DSLRs are about as subtle as a fart in an elevator. Granted, the ergos of the DSLRs are better, but real pros will rise to the occasion to get the competitive advantages. As Red gets higher and higher resolution sensors, and their bodies shrink even more, you will see more and more pros making the move. I also think Nikon and Canon will soon be trying to catch up on frame rates with higher res. They are already pretty close in terms of processor power to being able to shoot 4K or 5K. Double up the CPU on the D800 or D4 and they could shoot 30+ FPS at 4K, if they were so inclined.

I'm really looking forward to the Dragon sensors and most especially the medium and large format stuff - I see new uses for these that nobody is even thinking of - yet. They will be a huge game changer in numerous applications. I'm really looking forward to it.

 

[Konstantin Silakov]

Josh Beadle: What lens did you use?

 

[Scott Crawley]

I'm not promoting groupthink man, he is welcome to his opinions. What I reacted to was the apparent mocking of an artist and his work.

It's these type of comments and attempts at behavior modification, that seem to have the goal of homogenous group think, that makes for a middle grey, fanboy based forum that speaks in a single boring voice providing little value, color and contrast. If something doesn't square with field or market reality I'm sure the folks at RED can take hearing about it without sugar coating. Epic is a great movie camera and not so good at shooting real world (hand held) studio fashion work and . . . it doesn't make a very good webcam either!! There you go - I said it.

 

[Rob Ruffo]

I think the point of the article and thread is that the picture quality is remarkably close, not that it matches exactly.

yes - and a few hairs of extra sharpness mean little compared to being able to capture action and dramatic moments so well. Also, when models run $500 an hour having that much coverage of the shoot becomes a big plus for the client. Clients generally might not even WANT every pore to be visible.

We have done side by side between our Red MX and Canon 5D Mk II (stills mode, video mode we refuse to use after many bad experiences). The Red One all told contained about the same amount of real info - and Canon pixels are very ugly up close - MX Red looks like film grain.

We have not yet done this test with out Epics, but it would without a doubt be even better.