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 :)

Possibilities for scarlet 645 and/or 617?

F

Fritz M.

Active member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Has Red poopoo'd the chances of there being a Scarlet 645 and/or Scarlet 617. If they were to make something like that and follow the pattern of pricing the scarlet at about 1/3 the price of the epic, that'd put the scarlet 645 at about 13-15k range and the 617 at around 17-19k.

All I'd have to do is put off buying my next car another 3 or 4 years and I could afford one of those.

They say their specs are subject to change and that I wont be disappointed. Something like this certainly wouldn't disappoint me ;)
 
Plus, I have a feeling the internal data paths are slower on the Scarlet, hence the lesser frame rates, and therefore perhaps unable to sustain 24fps from those larger sensors?
 
Yeah Shane.

But the point is, if they can build 645 and 617 brains that does 2xFPS they can very well build the same brains to do 1xFPS.

However... I don't think there will be enough demand for that.

How much costs the lenses alone for those systems? Someone who has the money for those lenses will invest in a lesser system?
 
While getting video rates off the full frame might not be workable, I would see this as more targeted towards the still image market. Hasselblads are already $18-30k range with 30-50 MPixels. If for that same kind of money one could get a 50-250 MPixel camera, that'd almost be a no brainer.

The 6x4.5 and 6x17 formats are derived from the medium format still world, not video world. The scarlet versions of these camera would be replacing those cameras. The movie studios (with their big dollars) would be getting the epics, while still camera people would be getting the scarlets.

In my case, I'm currently looking at getting the FF35 scarlet. If for $3k more i could get a Scarlet 645, that's probably where I'd be. And depending on the schedule and how my finances work out, I would almost spring for a Scarlet 617. But I cannot afford any of the epics, and while those insane frame rates would be really nice, I don't really need them.

edit: With regards to the lenses, I get the impression that the sensors they're making are pretty close to the resolution of film. And as such, lenses that work on still 6x4.5 and 6x17 cameras should produce good images on the scarlets. While granted the still lenses may not be practical for video work. For those that want to shoot video at the full 6cm resolution, you'd have to go with epic. If the video you're shooting requires that kind of resoution, then your budget would have to include account for the additional cost of epic.

With the 6cm scarlets, if you want to shoot video, you'd have to window down to maybe FF35 resolution and use lenses for that size sensor.
 
amacher said:
While getting video rates off the full frame might not be workable, I would see this as more targeted towards the still image market. Hasselblads are already $18-30k range with 30-50 MPixels. If for that same kind of money one could get a 50-250 MPixel camera, that'd almost be a no brainer.
Click to expand...

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=24040

Great minds...
 
IMHO: AS I understand it, lenses for 65mm are very expensive, right? Whoever can afford lenses that work on medium format or 65mm cameras won't care about 1/3 bodyprice or not.
 
I'd love to shoot motion with 645, it's not a resolution thing, but is about field of view vs perspective.

I personally don't think Red are about ever not doing motion, Red are about the future of imaging, not the past or present.
 
Felix Knöchel said:
IMHO: AS I understand it, lenses for 65mm are very expensive, right? Whoever can afford lenses that work on medium format or 65mm cameras won't care about 1/3 bodyprice or not.
Click to expand...

Hasselblad 645 lenses are somewhere in the $2-6k range. Just because you can afford that kind of lens doesn't mean you can afford the $30k more for the body. Mamiya lenses are less than even half the price of the hasselblads.
 
Medium format lenses are not expensive at all. Some, even AF models, can be had for under $1K.

I really don't think we'll see a "Scarlet" version of the 645. I suppose anything is possible, but there is a point of diminishing returns at which it just doesn't make sense to produce and support more camera brains. Also, with the larger cameras, the bulk of the cost is in the sensor itself and not the rest of the camera. In the case of the 617, it seems to be an entirely different animal than the other Epic and Scarlet models.

Looking at the preliminary specs thus far, I really don't see what they could possibly trim out of the 645 and 617 to drop the price for a "Scarlet" version. It makes no sense to cripple the camera to offer it at a lower cost and there really isn't a way to scale down power or abilities of the ASICs while still maintaining what is needed for the full sensor operation.
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
Framerates? Why would anyone buy EpicS35 if they can get a Scarlet for 10 grand less?
Click to expand...

my thoughts exactly.....


chips are cheap.. weather they can handle faster frame rates or they dont.. the electronics are dirt cheap. maybe 50 bucks difference (in real life)
 
Felix Knöchel said:
IMHO: AS I understand it, lenses for 65mm are very expensive, right? Whoever can afford lenses that work on medium format or 65mm cameras won't care about 1/3 bodyprice or not.
Click to expand...

As has been stated you can get 645 lenses quite reasonably. Zeiss Contax 645 lenses sell from $400 to $1400 or so. KEH has a bunch of them and they are regularly on ebay both new and used.

One thing that people seem to miss is that although the film/digital trade off is significant for 35mm it is exponentially greater for something like IMAX which is just absurdly expensive and requires huge cameras.

The 645 9k gives us the resolution of true IMAX (not some uprezzed F900 or even RED).

As an example of what I am talking about, the underwater Imax housing is huge and has to weigh about 500 pounds and requires huge budgets and personnel. With Epic 645 it will fit in the regular Epic underwater housing that will be about 40 pounds. I can use a Contax Zeiss 645 AF 35mm lens (equivalent to about a 15mm on REDONE) that costs about $1400 on the used market and get 9K images that should print very well to IMAX film for release.

All of the version of 645 have Flange focal distance much longer than PL so PL adapters or direct mounts should be easy for Contax, Mamiya, Pentax, Hasselblad, Kiev, etc.

Zakaree Sandberg said:
but, maybe im missing something.
Click to expand...

Jeff Kilgroe said:
I really don't think we'll see a "Scarlet" version of the 645. I suppose anything is possible, but there is a point of diminishing returns at which it just doesn't make sense to produce and support more camera brains.
Click to expand...

Business model. Most of the cost of the 645 will be development and testing - but no guarantee that you can spread that cost over a lot of units - so you need to pick a target of features/price that will have an audience that will pay for it even if you only sell a small number of units. Later if you can justify it you can bring it down the line.

There's a reason we don't get all the ASICs and other circuitry that make an F900 in a $500 Handycam.
 
I mean, if Epic 645 only shoots 50FPS at full resolution, and Epic 617 shoots 30fps, how would you "cripple" it to lower the cost so dramatically?
You'd lose motion entirely on the 617, and if you don't get motion out of it there's little reason to go above 5fps.
You'd only halve the processing resources needed if you limit the 645 to 24P barring other measures.
Consider also that the sensor itself must cost a lot more due to the much larger size. An FF35 sensor is 36mmx24mm- 864 square mm. The 645 sensor would be 56x42mm-2,352 square mm- a 2.7x greater area. That has to decrease yields significantly.
 
Zakaree Sandberg said:
my thoughts exactly.....


chips are cheap.. weather they can handle faster frame rates or they dont.. the electronics are dirt cheap. maybe 50 bucks difference (in real life)
Click to expand...

lol this is so far from the truth its comical.. but maybe you were just kidding?
 
if i remember right, the rejection rate goes up logarithmically when you increase the size of the chip. Meaning a scarlet 2/3 chip might be "good" 1:2 times, a s35 chip 1:4 times, a ff35 1:8 times, and a 645 chip 1:16 times.

That kind of thing really puts a damper on production costs. And thats just assuming its goes by a power of 2, not 10.
 
Reading this discussion is giving me the horn. If an Epic 645 can shoot 24fps, then a Scarlet 645 that could shoot, say, 5 or 7 fps would sell like hot cakes. A medium format camera with a "motordrive" like a Nikon or Canon? Gimme, gimme, gimme. And it would fit so well with the whole modular philosophy. Buy a 645 Scarlet for stills work, build your kit of lenses ('Blad, Contax 645 - yeah baby) and then, if an IMax project drops, hire or buy an Epic 645 brain and plug it all in. Lovin' it!
 
Scarlet 645 at 5 or 7 fps??? Why compromise and make such a version? If they were to make a crippled version or a Scarlet version, then it would be crippled compared to the Epic model at all other modes and frame rates. I don't see the point. If all you need is a medium format stills camera, there are currently options for that out there. The DSMC system is all about MOTION and STILLs.

I can't wait to get my hands on a 645 brain. I bet that thing would pay for itself in the first month. Not to mention, shooting full motion at 6x4.5... Oooooh... And with REDCODE workflow. Seriously, who is going to want to shoot IMAX 15/70 once the EPIC 645 and 617 arrive? Sure, there's film purists, but suddenly IMAX level cameras will be available to ordinary documentary and narrative filmmakers. Can't wait... Can't wait... Me wants 645 now... Who cares if the brain costs as much as a new car, a nice new car. Still cheaper than a Sony F23 body and should be dirt cheap to rent. There's going to be a whole lot of Scarlet and EPIC-X / EPIC-S35 owners out there and lots of people renting EPIC FF35 / 645 / 617 brains.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top