No more FF35 Scarlet?

[G Lap]

This from Jim, in response to a post in another thread http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=41253 (my bold):

Slight advantage to Scarlet S35 (no FF35 Scarlet) at 3K due to pixel size and sensor size (5.4 micron pixels vs. 3.3 micron). But the 2/3" performs incredibly well for a 2/3" sensor. Incredibly well... did I say that?

Jim

 

[Scott Crawley]

They were comparing sensors... I could be wrong but it appears that Jim was simply indicating that there is no Monstro sensor yet for comparison.

 

[G Lap]

They were comparing sensors... I could be wrong but it appears that Jim was simply indicating that there is no Monstro sensor yet for comparison.

Yes, I hope so

 

[Sterling Wescott]

I think he meant that the FF35 doesn't shoot 3k.
Thats what the Nov. 18, 2008 pamphlet said.

 

[Ralph B.]

The FF35 Scarlet shoots in 6K, 4K, QuadHD, 2K, and FF1080P at last check.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

The FF35 Scarlet shoots in 6K, 4K, QuadHD, 2K, and FF1080P at last check.

And of course the sensor doesn't exist yet, so this may all change.

I think it's safe to say there will be an FF35 Epic model still. Scarlet model probably as well if there is enough demand for it. And I really think there will be, I know I'd love to own one or two.

 

[Hans von Sonntag]

And of course the sensor doesn't exist yet, so this may all change.

I think it's safe to say there will be an FF35 Epic model still. Scarlet model probably as well if there is enough demand for it. And I really think there will be, I know I'd love to own one or two.

Jeff, because Canon is so successful with their VDSLRs and are for many already (in a crippled way) the tool what Scarlett FF35 is meant to become it may happen that the Scarlet will see the light only in 2/3".

I always found that the Scarlet S35/FF35 are cannibalizing the Epic line-up. The next Canon VDSLR generation my have also a RAW recording mode and/or solved the compression/aliasing issues. In this context leaving the prosumer market to Canon makes a lot of sense.

Red's current competitors are Sony and Arri, not Canon. It is often better to concentrate your troops only on one front-line.

Apart from that I don't see that Jim's quote indicates that Red may drop the FF35 Scarlet. It has been taken out of context, IMHO.

Hans

 

[David Rasberry]

Scarlet S35 is still in the lineup. May not see it until the initial demand for Epic is satisfied though. Why waste good sensors on the low end model until the pipeline is full for the high priced version?
Nobody is saying anything about timeline or specs for Monstro in any form at this point.

 

[Lee Saxon]

I always found that the Scarlet S35/FF35 are cannibalizing the Epic line-up.

Kinda feel that way too. The Epic S35 & FF35 were the only brains whose price phased me. I'm not convinced 5K @ 100fps is worth 4 times the price of 5K @ 30fps. But I'm not a VFX kinda guy, so that explains that.

That said I'm absolutely sure there are more than enough people who disagree with me to make both models worthwhile.

 

[Jaime Vallés]

Kinda feel that way too. The Epic S35 & FF35 were the only brains whose price phased me. I'm not convinced 5K @ 100fps is worth 4 times the price of 5K @ 30fps. But I'm not a VFX kinda guy, so that explains that.

I agree. The S35 Scarlet seems ideal for regular shooting, and if you need overcranking, just rent an Epic brain for the day, and use all your current Scarlet accessories on it.

Like Lee said, you can buy FOUR S35 Scarlets for the price of one S35 Epic. Or better yet, spend the $21,000 difference on the Red Pro Primes!

 

[Jeffrey T. Morgan]

Kinda feel that way too. The Epic S35 & FF35 were the only brains whose price phased me. I'm not convinced 5K @ 100fps is worth 4 times the price of 5K @ 30fps. But I'm not a VFX kinda guy, so that explains that.

That said I'm absolutely sure there are more than enough people who disagree with me to make both models worthwhile.

I understand what you guys are saying. On the other hand current market cameras that do significant overcranking cost 4x as much as their otherwise similiar siblings. I think its a steal that 5k at 100fps is only that much more. BUT if you aren't hardly ever able to use overcranking, I totally agree with the rent model...

I am personally getting 2/3 scarlet over anything else because I think over-cranking is a much more artistic tool and high production value device that DOF or even jumping up to 5k. I would love to have it all, but at sub $15k, scarlet 2/3 has me by a mile.

Jeff

 

[David Rasberry]

I understand what you guys are saying. On the other hand current market cameras that do significant overcranking cost 4x as much as their otherwise similiar siblings. I think its a steal that 5k at 100fps is only that much more. BUT if you aren't hardly ever able to use overcranking, I totally agree with the rent model...

I am personally getting 2/3 scarlet over anything else because I think over-cranking is a much more artistic tool and high production value device that DOF or even jumping up to 5k. I would love to have it all, but at sub $15k, scarlet 2/3 has me by a mile.

Jeff

Me too. I like the 2/3" as a practical all purpose production format.

 

[Ralph B.]

I don't know if there will be any cannibalization within the line because of a FF35 Scarlet, but I do know that the FF35 Scarlet is the only camera that will even remotely compete with the Pro 35mm bodies out and coming out. Sure the 645 and th 617 Epics will have no peer, neither film or digital bodies out now or on the drawing boards come anywhere close to what those cameras will be able to do, and the prices will warrant the capabilities.

However, in the 35mm image size only the FF35 Scarlet is comparable to a D3x or 1ds at anywhere near the price point. The last price for the Scarlet FF35 was somewhere between $12,000-$9,750 which would place it at the top of the Canon and Nikon bodies in price but RED would have infinitely more capability. If Epic is the only RED product that is going to do a FF sensor then they won't be able to compete in the FF stills market. $35K for what the FF Epic is is a effing bargain, but if you are doing stills it really is going to lose out when you can buy 3 bodies for the price of one Epic. In commercial work $35k-$45k is within the rounding error of a full Hasselblad body. But without that FF Scarlet RED just won't compete in that 35mm space, and it is by far the most popular format for shooting professional stills

 

[Lee Saxon]

I am personally getting 2/3 scarlet over anything else because I think over-cranking is a much more artistic tool and high production value device that DOF

I am totally thrown by this [pretty common, I'm finding] idea that manipulating DoF is just some stylistic affectation, like how all action pictures these days have to use bleach bypass & lots of shaky-cam.

I guess it's because I work primarily in, and went to school for, still photography, where DoF control has been much more readily available. But to me it's just a fundamental part of the process. I can't imagine not having that option.

 

[Joseph Hutson]

Last word from Ted that I heard was that there is currently an ongoing discussion of whether to release an FF35 Scarlet in addition to the FF35 EPIC.

As far as setting your expectations, have none. Just remember RED owes you nothing of the sort of an FF35 Scarlet...

Specifications, prices and delivery dates are subject to change. Count on it.
We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone with a bad attitude.

 

[Steve Das]

... The Epic S35 & FF35 were the only brains whose price phased me...

Slo-Mo is expensive..no matter if you're talking film or digital..

Jannard said at Red Day of prices being directly related to development
costs combined with the number of expected units to be sold. Hence
the high(er) cost of Epic.

Always thought Epic market was for Camera Rental Houses and feature DPs
who shoot 1 or 2 features a year. Scarlets are for everyone else.

 

[G Lap]

Last word from Ted that I heard was that there is currently an ongoing discussion of whether to release an FF35 Scarlet in addition to the FF35 EPIC.

As far as setting your expectations, have none. Just remember RED owes you nothing of the sort of an FF35 Scarlet...

If there is an ongoing discussion within RED concerning FF35 Scarlet’s future (one interpretation of Jim’s comment could suggest that the discussion is over ) then I can imagine that their dilemma revolves around just what exactly do they intend the S in DSMC to imply. And remember that it was RED themselves who ‘invented’ DSMC.

As Ralph B mentioned above, in the high-end 35mm stills world FF35 is now the de facto standard, having been the Holy Grail for a number of years previously (Nikon’s D3X/D3s/D700, Canon’s 1DsMkIII/5DMkII, Leica’s M9 and Sony’s A900 are all full-frame, with the Canon 1dMk1V being the exception to the rule, Canon having chosen the APS-H route for it’s sports and journo shooters), so if RED’s intention is for DSMC to be a real player in that world then they probably need FF35 Scarlet. Of course if FF35 Epic were to come in at a lower price point then that would do it, but at the moment its cost puts it way up alongside MF systems rather than FF DSLR’s.

In reality it’s more complicated than that though, given the convergence (current buzz amongst pro stills photographers) between stills and video for many end users. Hence the recent rise to prominence of the VDSLR, some of which are capable of shooting both video and the very high quality stills upon which their success depends.
However if much of that video is needed primarily for tv or the web (think clips embedded in magazine or newspaper stories read on an iPad for example) then how much video capability is actually required or necessary for that type of shoot?

Which brings us back to RED. Given that Epic and Scarlet will have cinematography in their DNA, perhaps a FF35 Scarlet will have just ‘too much video’ for the converged stills world? In that case RED might argue that S35 Scarlet is indeed (more than) enough and hence all that they need or can afford to offer, especially given other, more business oriented, concerns.

Personally I don’t particularly want to have to go back to the mental and visual gymnastics that cropped cameras necessitate so, please RED, make FF35 Scarlet happen if you can.

 

[Felix K.]

For me it comes down to this: There are two reasons for a FF-Sensor

1) Motion: Anamorphic lenses. Red just annouced that they want to release their own anamorphic lenses. Sure, they can be used on other sensors as well but the most sense they make on an FF sensor.

2) Stills: Standard aspect ratio for photography is 35mm FF. If the DSMC does what its name says, it will try to work in both areas. And that does not just come down to shooting RAW. Still photography means FF amongst other things. Also, RED's idea was to break down the wall between the stills and motion world, thus giving photographers the possibility to shoot (with continuous lighting) with up to 100 frames a second.

All this will of course all happen in the Epic FF camera.
The Scarlet line to me always was the budget option for the equivalent Epic option. So why should it not be the same for the FF35 sensor? I am not sure if a photographer would spend all the money for a FF-Epic if he can have a MF-camera for the same amount of money. Only if shooting high quality motion as an added value is included as an advantage over your regular DSLR, you could be tempted to maybe have a Scarlet FF in your collection of cameras instead of several Nikons and Canons.
So the FF-35 Scarlet makes sense. I don't think that it will cut into the Epic market, I rather think that it will open up new markets.

All in all, I'd like an official word of Jim, Jarred or Ted on the subject. Would be cool if they would discuss that with us openly.

 

[David Rasberry]

I am totally thrown by this [pretty common, I'm finding] idea that manipulating DoF is just some stylistic affectation, like how all action pictures these days have to use bleach bypass & lots of shaky-cam.

I guess it's because I work primarily in, and went to school for, still photography, where DoF control has been much more readily available. But to me it's just a fundamental part of the process. I can't imagine not having that option.

Why do people dismiss 2/3" as having no DOF flexibility at all? As if it is the same as the 1/4"-1/3" prosumer cams out there now. This is not the case. 16mm-2/3" format is capable of a useful and pleasant range of DOF flexibility when handled properly. Shallow DOF is possible. It isn't FF35 by any means but it is worlds apart from the limitations of the smaller sensor formats.

Over my varied and long career I have shot both stills and motion in about every common film and electronic format out there from 4x5 on down.
The demands of cinematography where you have a very limited range of frame rates and exposure times that are of practical use require a very different creative approach than stills photography. Despite the fact that motion picture shooting formats have gone as large as 70mm/IMAX, the current popular formats, S35mm and 16mm/s16mm/2/3" have prevailed because they best fit the practical requirements of the craft. Especially with the currently popular shooting styles that involve a lot of dynamic camera movement, FF35 and larger formats become impractical because one can not get enough DOF under normal shooting conditions.

If one wants to capture motion sequences using still photo techniques for extraction of stills as the end product, that is a very different thing. Studio fashion photography comes to mind for example.

 

[Jeffrey T. Morgan]

Why do people dismiss 2/3" as having no DOF flexibility at all? As if it is the same as the 1/4"-1/3" prosumer cams out there now. This is not the case. 16mm-2/3" format is capable of a useful and pleasant range of DOF flexibility when handled properly. Shallow DOF is possible. It isn't FF35 by any means but it is worlds apart from the limitations of the smaller sensor formats.

...

this was kind of my thought.

Also, 2/3" is a best of both worlds thing for me. If I am in the slums of Nairobi again, or on a feature film set, 2/3" is going to give me the most flexibility, and keep me happy in both situations. I appreciate super shallow DOF, but there are situations (low light run and gun) that 35mm focus demands will render the footage unusable. Be this my own failures, or a simple reality, I dont know.

For me its about the most tools with the least hinderances.

If I get on more huge budget flicks, I guess I can afford more hinderances, lol

but i WILL say I dream of a FF35 Epic with anamorphic lenses... that would be so fun!

Jeff