Scarlet or Epic?

[Andy Taplin]

Any opinions out there about the way the industry (outside of big budget movies) will embrace the new S35 and FF35 Reds? Is Scarlet going to dominate with Epic used mostly where higher frame rates are required? Or might Epic be the de-facto 'standard' Red - ready for anything - and Scarlet filling the 'budget' niche and perhaps seen (erroneously) as slightly 2nd class?

This is my concern: Potential client: "We want you to shoot Red for our next production, what kit do you have?

Me: "I've got a Scarlet based kit including some nice prime lenses."

Potential client: "Oh, we really wanted to shoot with the Epic..."

Should I be worried? :scared:

 

[Chad Clemans]

I see "the industry" of motion-picture production as being many very different industries, and even more-so when lumping in the "stills" side of DSMC. I suspect each of these industries will utilize the modularity of the DSMC system on a case-by-case basis according to each project's requirements. No potential client should be favoring an Epic over a Scarlet EVER unless they need the higher framerates/datarates. If most of your work has potential clients needing those higher framerates/datarates you may want to go with Epic, and if not, rent the right brain for the job on the limited jobs that require such and bring any modules you already have with you -though a setup lacking the back-stacking modules can likely capture equally nice media, but may require more legwork during the shoot to swap disks and batteries, etc.

As to S35 vs FF35 brains, initially that is more of a question of whether a project or purchaser wants higher dynamic range, higher resolution, or if they are really planning to get their money's worth on the "stills" side of it; if those are important, they will likely go with FF35, otherwise S35. And what glass they have access to will be another major factor. Best-

 

[Andy Taplin]

I agree with your analysis Chad.

For me Scarlet makes sense as a purchase option and Epic as a hire when necessary.

 

[Jaime Vallés]

I agree with your analysis Chad.

For me Scarlet makes sense as a purchase option and Epic as a hire when necessary.

Agreed. According to current specs, the 5K S35 Scarlet will shoot better looking footage than the RED ONE, and only costs $7000 for the brain, as opposed to $28,000 for the Epic S35 brain.

That's a $21,000 difference.

You can buy an entire RPP lens set for that. Or a complete badass editing workstation. Or a good tripod, lighting kit, sound kit, mattebox, & follow focus. Heck, you could even buy THREE ADDITIONAL S35 Scarlet brains for that cash!

If I want super slo-mo, then I can rent an Epic brain for the day, while still using all the same Scarlet modules on it. That's the beauty of the modular system.

Rental facilities and high-end Hollywood production companies will likely fork out the cash for the Epic cameras. But for everyday shooting, I can't imagine ever needing anything more than an S35 Scarlet.

 

[Andy Taplin]

Yes, if prices and specs stay as is (which I'm sure they won't) S35 is probably going to be the biggest seller - although the extra 2 stops (possibly?) of DNR on the Monstro sensor in the FF35 is tempting...

 

[David W. Jones]

Any opinions out there about the way the industry (outside of big budget movies) will embrace the new S35 and FF35 Reds? Is Scarlet going to dominate with Epic used mostly where higher frame rates are required? Or might Epic be the de-facto 'standard' Red - ready for anything - and Scarlet filling the 'budget' niche and perhaps seen (erroneously) as slightly 2nd class?

This is my concern: Potential client: "We want you to shoot Red for our next production, what kit do you have?

Me: "I've got a Scarlet based kit including some nice prime lenses."

Potential client: "Oh, we really wanted to shoot with the Epic..."

Should I be worried? :scared:

I don't know, should you be worried?

In my little world clients don't hire me because of the camera I own.
They hire me for my expertise, knowing fully well that I will select the proper tools needed for the job at hand.

You are fretting over cameras that haven't even been released yet.

And even when they are available remember, almost any camera can be found for rent and quickly shipped to your location.
It's not practical for me to own a 435 high speed, Red One, HDX900, 35BLIII, or a number of cameras I shoot with, but I can have any of them here tomorrow if it were required for a shoot.

 

[Michael Hastings]

This is my concern: Potential client: "We want you to shoot Red for our next production, what kit do you have?

Me: "I've got a Scarlet based kit including some nice prime lenses."

Potential client: "Oh, we really wanted to shoot with the Epic..."

Should I be worried? :scared:

This is actually a pretty good point. To avoid confusion within the industry it seems like it may be a good idea to separate the 2/3" cameras from the S35s with a different name. (I've also wondered if since the lowend prosumer market is now replete with APS-C/S35 and Full frame HD video DSLRs with 15 to 24MP still resolution priced from $700 to $2400 - whether RED might just drop the 2/3" scarlet altogether.)

I agree that the S35 Scarlet is better than a REDONE, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to associate it with the clearly lesser 2/3" cameras. Seems to me you might as well just call the "budget" S35 and FF35 cameras something like RED2 and RED3.

While those DSLRs clearly use poorer motion techniques and codecs, that is esoteric enough to be lost on a lot of producers and corporate clients - not to mention who knows what Canon/Nikon have up their sleeves for introduction in the next 6 months to a year.

 

[Andy Taplin]

I don't know, should you be worried?

In my little world clients don't hire me because of the camera I own.
They hire me for my expertise, knowing fully well that I will select the proper tools needed for the job at hand.

You are fretting over cameras that haven't even been released yet.

I take your point and most of my clients don't ask what camera I'm using either - only format.

Red is becoming a key industry brand associated with quality and innovation. Being linked to the Red brand could be quite important in the coming years - at the very least it will show you take your craft seriously.

I just hope that Red's range is clearly understood by non-camera people and they don't make false assumptions and insist on an Epic when Scarlet would be just as capable for that particular job. I don't like hiring gear for all sorts of reasons.

At the end of the day though price will dictate what we buy. And as long as the differential is as wide as it currently is I'll be buying a Scarlet.

 

[Eki Halkka]

I agree that the S35 Scarlet is better than a REDONE, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to associate it with the clearly lesser 2/3" cameras.

They're not "lesser" really, they're just different tools for a different purpose. Sometimes compactness and ease of focusing are very useful features indeed.

Shallow depth of field, extreme low light ability or extreme dynamic range, which are the main benefits of a larger sensor, arent's always needed (assuming 2K or lower as delivery format and no need for cropping the image).

 

[Andy Taplin]

This is actually a pretty good point. To avoid confusion within the industry it seems like it may be a good idea to separate the 2/3" cameras from the S35s with a different name. (I've also wondered if since the lowend prosumer market is now replete with APS-C/S35 and Full frame HD video DSLRs with 15 to 24MP still resolution priced from $700 to $2400 - whether RED might just drop the 2/3" scarlet altogether.)

I agree that the S35 Scarlet is better than a REDONE, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to associate it with the clearly lesser 2/3" cameras. Seems to me you might as well just call the "budget" S35 and FF35 cameras something like RED2 and RED3.

While those DSLRs clearly use poorer motion techniques and codecs, that is esoteric enough to be lost on a lot of producers and corporate clients - not to mention who knows what Canon/Nikon have up their sleeves for introduction in the next 6 months to a year.

Indeed, I can see a place for the fixed lens 2/3" but less so for the interchangeable lens version (unless you have a bunch of 16mm lenses) when the world is moving towards at least APS-C size sensors?

 

[Eki Halkka]

Indeed, I can see a place for the fixed lens 2/3" but less so for the interchangeable lens version (unless you have a bunch of 16mm lenses) when the world is moving towards at least APS-C size sensors?

The world? Really?

I'd say well over 90% of video cameras sold in 2010 will have a sensor size of 2/3" or less.

 

[Andy Taplin]

The world? Really?

I'd say well over 90% of video cameras sold in 2010 will have a sensor size of 2/3" or less.

Perhaps, but will these be used for filmic, narrative work. My current camera has a 2/3" sensor - I'm looking for something different.

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

depends on the project, small indies will get away with a scarlet. larger productions will opt for the epic.

 

[Eki Halkka]

depends on the project, small indies will get away with a scarlet. larger productions will opt for the epic.

...then there's tons of television work, industrial videos and so on, which are prime candidates for 2/3" Scarlet. And documentaries of course, both for big screen and for TV.

Larger productions can benefit from the 2/3" too: Crash cams. Cams that are rigged in confined spaces, or somewhere where weight is an issue. Shots that need very deep DOF. Shots that need extreme tele lenses. Shots that need wide zoom range. Hard to reach locations. Multi camera shoots. Bullet time rigs. Stereo rigs. Greenscreen work, miniature work.

There's plenty of applications where a smaller, cheaper camera with reasonably sized sensor (and thus much smaller lenses) would be the best choice even in bigger productions - and deeper DOF is actually a plus in many situations...