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 :)

No detachable lenses, Truly a Pro or Professionasumer?

Another vote for interchangeable lenses (S16, 35mm with serious crop, . . . anything!)
 
Gene Crucean said:
Remember, they didn't say that audio wasn't included. It's just not in the list like a lot of other things that most likely are included.
Click to expand...

Like where the heck is the power source for that baby beast?
 
florianstadler.com said:
Why on earth would you want to put a Nikon full frame 35mm lens onto a 2/3" size sensor? You will be able to get a much better lens performance and speed from a lens designed for a smaller format. If you want a 35mm size sensor, you should go Red One. You can't have the cake and eat it too.
Click to expand...

But this is exactly what people have been doing with Canon Series cameras since the L's back in the early nineties and throughout the XL line of cameras today. And those sensors are even smaller. Also, 2/3 lens are not usually within the budget of an indie film maker as they command a hefty "professional broadcast" price.

But even compared to a 35mm motion picture frame, the "full-frame" Nikon lens are designed for 35mm Still Pictures, a format considerably larger, but they still perform well.

-liam
 
David Dennis said:
Old, I think of myself as more a photojournalist than any other kind of shooter and so this suits me very well.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm really a computer geek so when it comes to photography I'm just a goddamn amateur. That's why I really want something lighter than the ONE, and am quite happy with 2k output.

My point is that the world has enough fixed-lens cameras. The only fixed lens I have which is GOOD is the one in my Minox B. Now, THAT would have been a cool pocket digital camera - for small pockets.

There is no doubt the Scarlet will be a big hit with the more enthusiastic home video crowd. If the price speculations are anywhere near reality, the Scarlet will be cheaper than my wife's Sony. That means it could be made with an exchangable lens and still be very reasonably priced for a professional tool, but it would probably move the price out of range for the great mass of amateurs. I guess RED have seen a need for high production volumes.

So, the main reason I'm disappointed is that I was expecting a professional pocket camera rather than a nice, cheap point-and-shoot camera. I have a little Panasonic in the side pocket of my laptop bag. It will serve until I can get a replacement, even though the quality leaves a lot to be desired.
 
As much as I would like a swappable lens, I understand the reasoning behind not putting one on the Scarlet, which is meant to be a "pocket cam" (or has that moniker been dropped now?). I just hope and trust that the lens is a good one that focuses well, and that manual focus-pulling can be done precisely. Obviously, a tremendous lot hinges on this point.
 
Buck Forester said:
This sounds like a great camera at an amazing price! I have no doubts this will have use in professional applications. I agree with the other poster about the ridiculously miniscule DOF that some people keeping hammering on. Going 1.2 DOF on every shot gets old. Most 'real' flicks don't use such shallow DOF to that degree. I don't understand this craze about going so shallow? And those wanting interchangeable lenses and full sensors, etc., don't they have One camera that does that with another on the way? This Scarlet is not in that category and some of us appreciate this niche. Obviously not all of us, but plenty enough to make a camera for those of us who do. Hey, I'm just voicing my opinion like everyone else. I think there's a camera out there for pretty much everyone... nothing perfect, but it's getting better and better out there all the time! Good luck to everyone with their projects, the future is lookin' GOOD!
Click to expand...

Hey Buck, it's great to see you here! I'm one of your biggest fans over at flickr. I didn't know you had an interest in moving images.

The reason a lot of people are talking about fixed lenses is everyone knows that most cinema people are going to try to mod this thing with 35mm adapters and any other way they can to shoot with interchangable lenses. You are a great still photographer, but I doubt you would want to shoot "point and click" cameras with fixed lenses for your stills. Same thing with video.
 
Gene Crucean said:
Look at the back of it. "RED 12 volt"

I was assuming that's a drop in battery the size of an HVX battery.
Click to expand...

Thanks,
I did not see that on the pictures of the unpainted prototype under glass.

(On a side note) Looking at the back the prototype again (and I understand its a prototype) I am not sure how comfortable I am about the cf slots being seemingly uncovered when sans cf card and exposed to all the gunk floating around in the world. That is probably not a big issue and I guess that's why we have plastic bags and gaffers tape.
 
At a $3k price point people are going to want a camera that 'just works' - that means has a lens.

Potentially RED could make a few lens options and have their own lens-mount on the camera - but otherwise I don't think removable lenses would really work out - there's no obvious candidates. 35mm Still lenses are too big (physically and image size). C-mount are expensive and not well suited. Anything that's not built in, or built for the camera will introduce operation difficulties (no zoom rocker, for examples, no autofocus). How are you going to control a big lens and hold the camera? You can't rest it on your shoulder.

Hopefully 8x is enough - should be.

Personally I'd like to see it offered with a couple of interchangable lens options (specifically designed for the camera) but I think the attached lens is okay too.
 
I guess you get what you pay for. Red may make Scarlet an interchangeable lens camera along the way but most likely not. If you have good range, sharpness, etc. with the fixed lens and that is what they give you, then buy it and use it to the best of its abilities. If you want something else and they don’t grant you your wish, then get a Red One, or better yet an Epic.
 
Why are people thinking this is subject to change at Jim's whim?

It seems to me that to create a camera body that would work with interchangeable lenses, you'd have to redesign the whole thing, and of course it would be a lot bigger/fatter/etc.

D
 
David Dennis said:
Why are people thinking this is subject to change at Jim's whim?

It seems to me that to create a camera body that would work with interchangeable lenses, you'd have to redesign the whole thing, and of course it would be a lot bigger/fatter/etc.

D
Click to expand...

from red.com

SPECIFICATIONS, DELIVERY DATES AND DESIGN ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE... COUNT ON IT
 
Hey Buck, it's great to see you here! I'm one of your biggest fans over at flickr. I didn't know you had an interest in moving images.
Click to expand...

Hola, Tom! Gracias, and yes, actually I like moving images better than stills. I'm in the process of building an HD studio for some wilderness adventure flicks... can't wait! I wanted to wait until NAB before I bought my camera... still looks like it'll be the EX1 for now. This Scarlet sounds really cool but it's not ready yet.

The reason a lot of people are talking about fixed lenses is everyone knows that most cinema people are going to try to mod this thing with 35mm adapters and any other way they can to shoot with interchangable lenses. You are a great still photographer, but I doubt you would want to shoot "point and click" cameras with fixed lenses for your stills. Same thing with video.
Click to expand...

I agree that the 'cinema indies' will probably try to do the 35mm adaptors, but there's a whole market out there that is not just cinema indies. I plan on selling adventure flicks, creating wilderness stock footage, and possibly some high-def broadcast on cable channels. I don't need 35mm adaptors (I actually get bored of the shallow DOF flicks I keep seeing... it's a craze or something, sorta like HDR for digital photography). I'm sure this camera, like the EX1, has plenty of DOF for most uses, including cineman stuff. I don't see many movies at the theater with hugely shallow DOFs throughout the movie, so I'm at a loss why it's so popular. Maybe a backlash because for so long digital camcorders had such deep DOF, and film had shallow capabilities, that now everyone just wants to shoot a leaf or twig at F 1.2 to go "wow, cooOOool!", ha! I don't know. I'm not savvy yet in the videography world so take everything I say with a grain of salt and a shot of tequila. In still photography most pros shoot interchangeable lens cameras, but most pros expect to pay top dollar for them. If a point-n-shoot with a fixed lens came along that could shoot RAW at 21 MP, and only cost $400, there'd be some great applications for such a camera and I'd sure buy one. Like I said, for the stuff I plan on doing (and plenty of other people I'm sure) is to use a camera like the Scarlet for certain types of applications (mounted to kayak, mounted underneath car, use for backcountry underwater shots, strapped to top of backpack, crammed into a crevice for a cool perspective shot, making unobtrusive public footage, having a camera ready at all times while hiking instead of packed away inside the backpack, attach to the base of my flyrod while casting for a different perspective, etc., etc., stuff that would be hard with a larger camera with bulky lenses). I would think (and I'm just thinking outloud) that people wanting to make cinema movies with interchangeble lenses and no real "space/weight" constraints would not want such a small unit. And if they're thinking cinema indie flicks, I would think if it's a "serious" flick they'd have some resources behind them to buy or rent a camera with those types of features (unless it's just a hobby or making fun cool flicks for family and friends). I mean, think about it. If RED made this camera like so many people are whining about, why would they bother making the RED One model? I'm guessing there's a reason why some cameras are 2-3 grand and some are 17 grand and some are 80 grand. Canon could make a DSLR still camera that shoots 21 MP with a fast shutter and charge $1,000, but why would they do that? The market says they can get a lot more than that. For the features I don't think anything can touch the specs of Scarlet (yet, anyways, I doubt the competition is giving up and may have something by the time its released). I'm sure Jim Jannard is a really nice guy and everything but I don't think he formed a RED ONE 501(C) and uses it as his charitable donation vehicle! :Þ Remember, I'm just jabberin' like everyone else here.
 
Buck for deep-focus landscape stuff and some of the other things you are mentioning, yes, scarlet will be ideal (not sure how wide the lens is yet, though). For indie cinema, not so much. There is just a gap in the prosumer cinema camera field right now, and some people thought scarlet might fill it. Turns out to be a different type of camera, with its fixed lens. That's not good or bad, it's just good for some people's needs, bad for others. :)

BTW, we should try to hook up this summer if you're up in the sierras. I'm going to be in Lone Pine-Yosemite-Bridgeport and that general area for a couple of months this summer shooting DLSR timelapses. Maybe do a day hike or something. I'll shoot you a pm on flickr one of these days.
 
I'm gonna guess that since Jim owns just about every lens made that whatever he puts in front of Scarlet will have to meet his expectations. I think that's it's a good bet that the glass will rock.
 
I'm guessing that's a safe bet, Isaac.
I still can't believe we're even talking about 3k at $3k, much less RAW.
My god, that's nearly what I paid for my first DV camera and it didn't even have 1/3" chips!

I for one will be thrilled with a fixed lens on Scarlet - if all other specs stay relatively in the ballpark.
I can't imagine RED would bother releasing a 3K camera with a junk lens on it.
That wouldn't make any sense.

That said - the things I really hope we see are some real 'on lens' manual controls - Focus ring, Iris, and Zoom.
But - given the form factor I'm doubting that's going to happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top