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 :)

RED vs SONY EX1

Hdv and EX1 compression are similar. In my opinion, the worst thing about this compression is not artifacts per se (although they ARE there), but chroma resolution, which is the exact same for both. In any case, you can get extremely professional looking results from hdv cameras if you know what you're doing ;)
 
Both r nice but for broadcasting i think ex1 is affordable to save money and time ...
 
point of view

point of view

From my experience work using xd..
i guest..
video on the right is Red one
 
PLEASE I FEEL WORRIED ABOUT RED NOISE !!! IT IS A CINEMA CAMERA SO IT SHOULD NOT HAS THIS ISSUE !!! I AM STILL WAITING FOR MY CAMERA ... I DO NOT WANT TO BE SHOCKED WHEN I RECEIVE THE CAMERA, NOW I AM USING XDCAM EX, NO NEED TO HAVE REDCAM EX .... I NEED MORE FOOTAGE'S OF B16 IN DARK LOCATION PLEASE.:glare:

(I AM TALKING ABOUT RED CAMERA AND XDCAM EX1 IN SD TV).

BEST REGARDS
 
arun said:
Both r nice but for broadcasting i think ex1 is affordable to save money and time ...
Click to expand...

absolutely true.
red is a movie camera, for those who value 4k.
beijing olympics do not use red; but they use few non-red 4k cameras, though.
 
Adam Levins said:
If you look arround the face/nose area you can see a halo of artifacts on the EX1 footage. the RED in this regard looks much cleaner.
Click to expand...

That's because both are highly compressed screen grabs, the Red grab has the same problem. I bet you can't see this in the original footage on either camera.

There are edge enhancement halo issues with the EX1, but it's easily fixed. Just switch detail off in the menu. Out of the box detail (aka artificial sharpening) is on. The EX1 is plenty sharp even without detail on.
 
Steve Sanacore said:
The EX1 and 3 are HDV cameras right? Is there no problem editing GOP compressed footage? I was under the impression HDV was very low quality compression, but the images here look very good.
Click to expand...

HDV is actually surprisingly un-low-quality. When you look at the bitrate it's hard to believe, but the results are quite good. They are not as good as many other less-compressed HD options, but they do hold up. Look at Discovery's Deadliest Catch, shot entirely in HDV.

But yeah, actually XDCAM EX (what the EX1 and EX3 shoot) is pretty much HDV. But it's not that simple. Compare to HDV as implemented in the Z1 it has some crucial improvements:
- Full Raster: EX is 1920x1080 native, with no horizontal sub-sampling, unlike HDV's 1440x1080 and P2's 1280x1080 (60Hz) or 1440x1080 (50Hz)
- Full Sensor: The EX's sensor is native 1920x1080.
- Bitrate: EX's HQ mode is 35Mbit, which doesn't seem like a lot, but in an Inter-frame codec is actually pretty high. A significant improvement on 25Mbit.
- Newer Technology: XDCAM EX comes after about three years more codec development than HDV - even at 25Mbit (where is is just HDV) it performs better than earlier HDV compression.

There are still drawbacks, it is a 4:2:0 sampled codec still, although that is 4:2:0 at Full Raster, rather than 4:2:2 of a thin-raster like P2. It is a 15-frame GOP, but applications are now much better performing when editing Long-GOP footage, and this isn't really a problem in post.

EX can still suffer motion artifacting in high-motion scenes, but the threshold at which this appears is much higher than in HDV, and also the impact is less obvious.

The next step up from Sony is their new XDCAM HD422 - a 4:2:2 Full Raster Long-GOP codec at 50Mbit/s stored on Sony's XDCAM Professional Disc. It is being embraced in HD series field production.
 
Sycophant said:
Bitrate: EX's HQ mode is 35Mbit, which doesn't seem like a lot, but in an Inter-frame codec is actually pretty high. A significant improvement on 25Mbit.
Click to expand...

And you need the higher bitrate (1,4 times) because of the higher res. (1,33 times).


Sycophant said:
- Newer Technology: XDCAM EX comes after about three years more codec development than HDV - even at 25Mbit (where is is just HDV) it performs better than earlier HDV compression.

EX can still suffer motion artifacting in high-motion scenes, but the threshold at which this appears is much higher than in HDV, and also the impact is less obvious.
Click to expand...

That's not completely true - it is all dependend on the capabilities of the hardware encoder used in the camera. XD-Cam and HDV are the same except for the mpeg profile used. It all really breaks down to the hardware encoder. I have the Sony HVR-V1E recording in HDV - it has severe problems with motion artifacts, while the Canon XH-A1 has none with the same scene. Both recorded 1080i. I have also seen motion artifacts in XD-Cam footage where the Canons had none, but the XD-Cam has much better motion artifacts protection than Sony HDV cams. And that is because Sony has to offer an excuse to buy XD-Cam over HDV, while Canon can deliver the full quality in HDV. I talked to Sony support about the problems and the answered me to buy a XD-Cam if I want to prevent the artifacts. If I hadn't the comparison with the same Canon footage I would have believed them.
 
EX-1/Ultimate/Zeiss combo

EX-1/Ultimate/Zeiss combo

Kholi said:
Did you order your Letus Ultimate yet? I Should have the EX-1 Tuesday. I had some footage from that and my Letus Ultimate but never got around to editing it.

I can say that it's damned close to the stock lens which is amazing. Some good primes and it's even better. With Zeiss ZF's it was sick, going to try to shoot a music video with the EX-1/Ultimate/Zeiss combo if possible just for my own experience.
Click to expand...


WOULD SOMEONE KNOW WHERE I COULD RENT THE EX-1/Ultimate/Zeiss combo IN LOS ANGELES? IS IT EVEN AVAILABLE?
THANKS!
 
Nano-25 said:
PLEASE I FEEL WORRIED ABOUT RED NOISE !!! IT IS A CINEMA CAMERA SO IT SHOULD NOT HAS THIS ISSUE !!! I AM STILL WAITING FOR MY CAMERA ... I DO NOT WANT TO BE SHOCKED WHEN I RECEIVE THE CAMERA, NOW I AM USING XDCAM EX, NO NEED TO HAVE REDCAM EX .... I NEED MORE FOOTAGE'S OF B16 IN DARK LOCATION PLEASE.:glare:

(I AM TALKING ABOUT RED CAMERA AND XDCAM EX1 IN SD TV).

BEST REGARDS
Click to expand...

Just because it's a cinema camera does not mean it doesn't have noise (Film/F23/Viper/Genesis certainly do). The Red does indeed produce noise in the lower quarter tones when it, or one of it's channels (most likely blue) is starved of light. The Sony's EXs have a pretty good gain system going on but they sacrifice all the advantages a RAW workflow has including post noise/grain reduction. I have seen Red footage that I shot at 640 ISO at night in Downtown LA projected at 4K and it looks stunning! Is there noise? a little, but comparable to any 500 ISO film stock I've ever seen.
Learn how to expose your camera correctly and you'll be astonished.
 
adamills said:
I like the one on the left better. The is more detail in the blacks, and skin tones feel more natural. We did a little more comprehensive comparision.

See: http://www.highendtv.com/shootout/ShootoutFINAL.pdf
Click to expand...

I know that you put the disclaimers about the faults in your test in the PDF , but to judge the quality of the Red based on it's 720p preview with a B4 mount lens on it is like judging the quality of 35mm film by the SD video tap.
 
For sheer convenience, the EX-1 is a great camera for run and gun. I have contemplated getting one in addition to my Red, but the problem is I love the 35mm DOF, so the first thing I'd want to do to the EX-1 is throw an adapter on it and use my Nikons. At that point, I might as well use the Red. Especially since I have managed to strip it down to the point that it's not really that much of a beast for run and gun. In fact, pretty light as far as broadcast cameras go.

Few things going against Red in comparison to EX-1 in these situations

Boot up time. You can keep the camera powered up, but not always practical.

Lack of Push Auto Focus. Okay, I never really use autofocus on any camera, but there are those times when it can come in handy. Not a showstopper for me, but maybe others.

Workflow - Not so much that Red is harder, but to get the most out of your Red footage you need to go through some steps that will add time. EX-1 is going to be easier to deal with the camera's footage because you're getting the best it can do right away. For quick turnarounds, EX-1 probably makes more sense. However, if we get some issues resolved with Red's playback system through the 1080 outputs (Timecode added to HD-SDI, improvements in image quality) this could be a better debate. Red has already made a lot of progress in this regard.

Audio - EX-1 probably wins with functionality. Need to test the new Red audio board, but currently the 1st gen boards are limited. Nothing I can't get around though.

Picture quality - In controlled situations, i.e. a set that has lighting, and lots of tools to control light, the Red is going to win hands down. But thrown out into the wild wild west of shooting situations, it may not be so obvious. The EX-1 does pretty well in low light. The Red will depend on what lenses are on the camera, as well as shutter speeds, how you monitor it (setting ASA values), etc. Also, some knowledge about how to manipulate your footage through RAW workflow is important. You'll notice that some people seem to really get great low light imagery with Red One while others struggle, and that is an experience type of thing.

Bottom line. Two different cameras used for different tasks, with some crossover too. There have been few jobs that I felt I couldn't have shot with Red. Any challenges would be outweighed by the quality of images you can attain. On the other hand, there have been some projects that would not have survived the Red workflow. Not due to any fault of Red, but just the time involved to process the larger amounts of data in a smaller post production pipeline.

I will rent the EX-1 or similar cameras when appropriate. I have never felt this is an us vs them argument. I love that there are a lots of options out there for producing content. Until you have to mix them on the same timeline of course :-)
 
Evin Grant said:
Just because it's a cinema camera does not mean it doesn't have noise (Film/F23/Viper/Genesis certainly do). The Red does indeed produce noise in the lower quarter tones when it, or one of it's channels (most likely blue) is starved of light. The Sony's EXs have a pretty good gain system going on but they sacrifice all the advantages a RAW workflow has including post noise/grain reduction. I have seen Red footage that I shot at 640 ISO at night in Downtown LA projected at 4K and it looks stunning! Is there noise? a little, but comparable to any 500 ISO film stock I've ever seen.
Learn how to expose your camera correctly and you'll be astonished.
Click to expand...

Hi,

For all you uniformed yet I already showed here at the forum some test footage shot with RED (Leica Noctilux 50mm f/1.0, Canon 50mm FD L f/1.2 and Voithlaender Nikoton 35mm f/1.20.

Conclusion:

If you have IMS for RED and those type of lenses you are safe.

Next:

If you are looking for a sort of cine pro lenses then call for Arri/Zeiss Master Primes to get a bit of similar (better or worst) results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top