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 :)

ISO 500-4000 comparison...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stick some Canon L series on the red and compare, infact compare some Cooke S4's with the Canon L series primes. It'd be interesting to see if the Cooke's were much greater in all honesty.
 
Häakon said:
That's actually an interesting theory, Steve. Since both cameras are ~12MP it would be very interesting to do a side-by-side and see how the results differ. After all, many people are calling RED a "dSLR on steroids." Perhaps we can add some XTi test shots to the LART; I'll add that suggestion to the list.
Click to expand...

I believe Evin has been using his Nikon D2X as a comparision frame CMOS sensor DSLR - it's 12 megapixel. The XTi is 10 megapixel. In a lot of it's technology, RED One is a "DSLR on steroids", no doubt. Sensor type, sensor size, and pixel size are one thing, but the rest of the processing capability that RED One has should make a significant difference in the final product frames IMO. Also, other things like cine glass, etc. If it was a D2X frame with the same exact Nikkor lens used on a RED One, now that would be a more interesting comparison. Again, because of the capabilities of the RED One processing in-camera + REDCINE, my inclination would be to say that the RED One frame would be a fair amount better than the D2X frame. A RED One/Birger/Canon 10-22 frame compared to an XTi/Canon 10-22 frame, lets say, would IMO still find the RED One frame significantly better.

I shot all the magazine pics for my RED at NAB, Part 1 article of the Boris with the RED 18-50 CF zoom with an XTi. In that, I was shooting a $24k camera package (RED) with a $1.5k package (XTi + lens).

I love the XTi...it's my "go anywhere" DSLR nowdays.
 
gunleik said:
Would be nice to see what 10k$ worth of glass would do to a rebel's image... -;)

Or did I misintertpret where you plan to put the PL lenses? -;)

I Certainly hope the glass only will be a big advantage for the Red.

Cheers!
Gunleik
Click to expand...
Touché, although there are users interested in using the Canon and/or Nikon mounts on RED (and I believe that will be a big part of the LART as well, since Evin is directing). It would also be worth noting just for properties of dynamic range, et. al more than just overall sharpness, abberation, etc.
 
Gibby do you anticipate people using a RedOne with Canon or Nikon lenses for shooting sport for still photography?

The biggest problem I see with it is the lack of autofocus.
 
PaulClements said:
Gibby do you anticipate people using a RedOne with Canon or Nikon lenses for shooting sport for still photography?

The biggest problem I see with it is the lack of autofocus.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...good question Paul. I don't have an answer for that. I guess time will tell. I've shot tons of sports for television and also stills for magazines, and I'm getting one of the first RED One cameras, so I'll definitely be shooting some action sports with #8 right after I get it. We don't know the final specs on RED One, but I'd hazzard a guess that still frames grabbed from motion sequences shot on RED One should be real good. There will still be advantages of using a dedicated DSLR for photography of sports still photos though. I use various Canon DSLR's for my sports still photography, and the L series lenses with autofocus are tough to beat for nailing fast action sports. Some guys swear by Nikon though. I still have my original Nikon F that I bought in Hong Kong in 1969, and occasionally I still shoot film with it...still works great.

It may only be as short as about 6 weeks now before the first RED One cameras ship and we start getting a flood of info from early shooters, to build upon what is being currently learned from the excellent beta testing of RED, and after that, the LART sessions. Gonna be a fun Autumn for sure!
 
Gibby said:
I'd hazzard a guess that still frames grabbed from motion sequences shot on RED One should be real good.
Click to expand...
Besides the autofocus, one reason that still cameras are better for sports is the shutter speed you can set to freeze the action. Of course, you'll be able to do this with RED, too, but the resulting video is going to be hyper-jerky (think Gladiator or Saving Private Ryan, but several times more severe). That's why I'm interested to see just how much better the RED picture will actually be over a solid dSLR; the difference in price alone may not be very worth it if you're thinking of using it primarily for pulling sports grabs.
 
I don't think anyone would be buying a RED One just to function as a dedicated "DSLR", but if the still frames grabbed for motion sequences are good, then they could be nice for use as stills on web sites, certain mag articles, etc. It would just be a pleasant bonus item by an already highly utilitarian camera. But yes, for serious specialty still photography I'll continue to use a dedicated DSLR.
 
Gibby said:
I don't think anyone would be buying a RED One just to function as a dedicated "DSLR"
Click to expand...
It's true, but you never know... some newspapers are now sending out journalists with HDV cameras and pulling grabs from them for headline photos in their papers! With all of this convergence, if a RED frame is really that much superior than one from a dSLR, there's certainly a case to be made for using one. The cool thing is that we have options - if you know that you're going to use your footage for grabs, you can crank up the shutter speed and go to town. You just probably won't want to watch the resulting video as a series of moving pictures... it'll be one or the other.
 
Yup...gonna be fun seein' what the possibilities are!
 
i kind of knew all this already, i was hoping someone would chime in with how the xti rolls off the highlights, or how the dynamic range compares, or the noise levels, stuff like that...


but seroiusly if the red didnt even match the xti in terms of quality (i know it will be better though) i would still love the hell out of it
 
Was that you at the other counter in Kowloon?

Was that you at the other counter in Kowloon?

Gibby said:
Some guys swear by Nikon though. I still have my original Nikon F that I bought in Hong Kong in 1969, and occasionally I still shoot film with it...still works great.
Click to expand...

Was that you at the other counter in Kowloon? :w00t:

I bought mine there the same year. I also bought a 21/4' Rolliflex in a RollieMarine U/W housing custom built by Hans Hass. Still have it.

Comment about RED shooting stills for sports: As I spent over ten years on the running and triathlon circuit shooting for major mags with my Nikons, I wonder about how the rolling shutter will effect sports stills?

Also, will we be able to get the shutter speeds we need?

But most of all how long will the camera/record cycle be?

Me thinks it will not be setup for sports shooting. maybe an occasional landscape but sports, I think not.

But the ninjas may surprise me. :ph34r:

One never knows, do one?

aloha,

Keith
 
Keith @4k you can shoot 30 frames a second for at least 6 minutes (CF Card) nonstop.

I would assume you can get at least 1/250th shutter. Which would have very very minimal rolling shutter artifacts.

If you just wanted stills I would bet you could shoot 30 frames per second @ 1/1000th shutter for 6 minutes non stop. Then it would just be a matter of grabbing the exact frame you want later. Of course... without autofocus... I would rather just grab a Canon DSLR. Might not get the exact moment I want, but at least it would be in focus.
 
im.thatoneguy, I'm an old school schooter that never had auto-focus or autoexposure.

I've shot professional sports manually for so many years I think autofocus and autoexposure would get in the way.

That's why RED is going to seem so natural to me.

With video, I am used to a rocker switch for focus control, however, but still manual focus.

As I (and you) said earlier, a DSLR would still be a better choice for stills because it is designed for it.

RED will work - in a pinch - but it might be awkward I think.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top