7d vs Red

[Steve Das]

Film festivals don't pay your mortage.

Nope. On the contrary 10 years ago you had to take out a second mortage on your house to shoot a film with an Arri 535 or BL3,4.

 

[Liam Hall]

Yes, of course, as most of the artistic projects. I wrote about film festivals because there aren't a lot of other opportunities to show your work. If the plan is to pay your mortage, well, maybe working in a bank or at an insurance company is worth trying but certainly not the film business.:thumbsup: Most people I know who succeed making a living in this business are daddy's boys/girls counting on their parents' relationship. Being able to buy a good Red package often requires family funding too, at least in Europe. Back to topic...

Jean Charles, I know plenty of people who have found success in this business from humble beginnings. most people in fact. Also, there are more places to show your work today than ever before - way more. Indeed, the barriers to entry into this business have never been lower.

 

[Leo Ticheli]

This isn't 8-track boys and girls. This is real.

Not diminishing what the Red One has done, but the HD DSLR cameras are changing the world. They're going to get a lot better, and fast, because the market for them is huge. I mean really, really, huge, far beyond the accomplishment of 6000 plus cameras. Use a factor of 100x, 1000x, more...

Convergence is on the doorstep; in very short order, you'll be hard pressed to find a commercial photographer who does "stills only." Sure, the stills guys have some things to learn, the language of motion, and how to use continuous lighting, but don't forget that these people are incredibly talented. They'll catch up fast. And every single one of them is going to buy multiple HD DSLR cameras. Canon, Nikon, Red, and others, are going to have a field day if they recognize this unstoppable trend.

Photographers will do everything; shoot stills of the chemical plant for the annual report and some movies for the web; advertising product stills for print and motion for the iPad. By the way, those tablets are going to save the publishing industry.

As stills shooters offer video, many of us will include stills as a part of the job. Except for the movie guys, we'll all be the same; image makers by whatever name.

Brave new world.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

 

[Bryce O]

I think people are also forgetting a few "artistic" advantages of the images the DSLR's have over the Red One...

1. Even though it has noticeably more artifacts and lower resolution the 7D, 550D, and GH-1 can do 35mm format slo-motion. Red One windows... Which honestly, kind of blows.

2. The 5D is the ONLY full-frame motion imager in the world right now. I know the compression sucks... But for non-pixle peepers, the advantages of full-fame are huge. Throw something like the Canon 24mm 1.4L on the 5D and the images are amazing. Shallow DOF in that wide of a shot is something hyper-real and completely unique and cannot be achieved on anything else except the 5D right now. And well, and Imax of course. This is why House shot the finale on the 5D... It wasn't some buy-out from Canon for the sake of viral marketing. That's just some insane jealousy theory.

I'm not even going to mention the advantages of the Red One... That's just obvious and not really the point. I was just pointing out what the DSLR's CAN do that the Red and other systems can't... Regardless of price-range. Hell even the Genesis can't do 35mm 60fps.

 

[Rick Burnett]

I cannot release the footage yet until our short film is done (3 weeks) but I have an example of Moire that I did not see in camera on the 7D that is THE WORSE moire I have seen to date. It was so bad, I was actually laughing! I was considering telling the director maybe the viewer can be assumed to be having an acid trip during that scene!

This scene is not just a few wavy rainbows, it is in your face and it is obnoxious. Shooting with the 7D requires YOU to be perfect in knowing ITS flaws and CONSTANTLY watching for them. It takes your mind OFF of the actual artistic value of what you are shooting and requires you to examine the scene from a TECHNICAL level.

Shooting on the RED will give you piece of mind that what you are shooting is NOT going to have all those flaws in it that you might not know about and allow you to worry about the artistic choices more.

We cannot afford a Red yet, so we are using what we have, but I can tell you WITHOUT question, the first big budget production we do, I've already told them we are shooting on an MX minimum.

I will share a story though that happened last night. I have been doing free score work for SCAD students for a few years now. It's allowed me to practice my scoring and meet a lot of neat people. The last two films I scored from the same director and DP looked very different. (Same editor as well). The first film looked good, and would be something worthy of TV, but the detail wasn't the best. The second film was amazing and looked like something I'd see on projection. I thought they were just getting better, but that wasn't the case. The first was shot on an HVX200 with a 35mm adapter. The second was shot on a Red One with an M sensor. The difference between the two was amazing.

It was an ahhhh moment when I heard this. Having been very intimate with ALL the shots of both these 15 minute films, and knowing the same people did both, and having all the experience with the HVX200 as we do, it made me VERY excited to shoot on the RED in the future.

 

[Leo Ticheli]

5D can't do slow motion, unless you regard 30 fps in a 24 fps timeline slow motion. I don't. Unless I missed something, I believe the 7D has to window to 720 to do 60 fps, and there's no 48, no 36, etc., not to mention no 96 or 120.

As for the shallow DOF wide shot, that's sort of a one-trick pony, isn't it? The only real "creative" advantage I can think of for the DSLR cameras is related to physical size; they can go where the others can't. That can well be a substantial advantage, but it's not a general use, best camera for a complete job advantage. It's what we all recognize; B-camera/crash camera.

Furthermore, there are many scenes that look unacceptable with the HD DSLR cameras at this point in their development. Period. End of story. Unless you regard banding and moire as acceptable. I don't. Of course one can often shoot around these problems, background selection, for example, but sometimes you can't. Not saying HD DSLR cameras don't have a place, even as flawed as they are today; I will use them, but they are not in the same league as Red.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

 

[Rick Burnett]

I believe the 7D has to window to 720 to do 60 fps, and there's no 48, no 36, etc., not to mention no 96 or 120.

It doesn't window, as the image doesn't crop when switching modes between 720p and 1080p, HOWEVER, the moire and aliasing are WAY WORSE. While I've read that Canon claims they pixel bin, they are definitely doing something WAY worse. It's so bad, I can see aliasing in the display on the back. We've stopped using 720p altogether. It's not worth the slow-mo when we edit scenes together and the quality between the 720p and 1080p reduced to 720p looks SO BAD!

 

[Dustin Brown]

I mean, just look at the difference here between the 7D and HMC40:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=186334

It seems that for some people, getting the shallow-focus look trumps all the technically-better aspects of these smaller HD camcorders.

This is very true. I own a Panasonic HMC150 and have seen many short films both on computer, tv, and theatrical screen on the 7D. Shallow depth of field does not make a camera great. Many prosumer HD cameras don't get nearly the hype or credit as the dslr's when they shoot just as good images and have far more capabilities; however, they don't have as narrow depth of field.

It would be a lot better to see footage comparing the two cameras, red and 7d. Having seen many films on 7d the line skipping and jittery movement is very noticeable. Pans and dollies aren't as smooth and the brightness has a real "video" look. (although this could have to do with exposure and color correcting more). Either way, I think many of the dslr's get more hype than deserved simply because they have a shallow depth of field. There's more to filmmaking than that.

 

[paul ross jones]

This isn't 8-track boys and girls. This is real.

Not diminishing what the Red One has done, but the HD DSLR cameras are changing the world. They're going to get a lot better, and fast, because the market for them is huge. I mean really, really, huge, far beyond the accomplishment of 6000 plus cameras. Use a factor of 100x, 1000x, more...

Convergence is on the doorstep; in very short order, you'll be hard pressed to find a commercial photographer who does "stills only." Sure, the stills guys have some things to learn, the language of motion, and how to use continuous lighting, but don't forget that these people are incredibly talented. They'll catch up fast. And every single one of them is going to buy multiple HD DSLR cameras. Canon, Nikon, Red, and others, are going to have a field day if they recognize this unstoppable trend.

Photographers will do everything; shoot stills of the chemical plant for the annual report and some movies for the web; advertising product stills for print and motion for the iPad. By the way, those tablets are going to save the publishing industry.

As stills shooters offer video, many of us will include stills as a part of the job. Except for the movie guys, we'll all be the same; image makers by whatever name.

Brave new world.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

this is my first post in this forum, after reading a bit of it for a while.


I've been watching this closely as well, being a stills photographer. I also watch many of the best photographic agents in the world a lot - to see what is happening. I would say 50% of the worlds best photographers would be, if they aren't already now, doing some form of motion.
these are guys who have no issue buying a red, as a red is cheaper than most photographic digital backs.
most good photographic agencies websites now have a "moving image" category. and before you say- photographers wont be able to "tell a story"- most advertising images is telling a whole story in one image or a series.
A few successful car photographers i know of are basically replicating their stills in motion, and it looks great.
many advertisements arent storys, they are a collection of "moving" stills. look at bruno Aveillans work.

I've just bought a 7d to learn a bit of stuff, but i wouldn't ever expect to ever shoot a commercial with it. its just a way of learning to convert what i know in stills to motion. if successful, i will definitely buy a red.

just another point to get off my chest, i do think " sharpness" is over-rated. Its just one possible feature in a range of techniques. often i prefer to watch a soft grainy film, than a super sharp one crisp one.

paul

 

[Bryce O]

This is very true. I own a Panasonic HMC150 and have seen many short films both on computer, tv, and theatrical screen on the 7D. Shallow depth of field does not make a camera great. Many prosumer HD cameras don't get nearly the hype or credit as the dslr's when they shoot just as good images and have far more capabilities; however, they don't have as narrow depth of field.

Most prosumer cameras technically do shoot better video that the HDSLR's... But they just don't look like film. For some reason these SLR's do. Even on shots without shallow DOF they still look like film where prosumer cams look like... well, video still. I say it's the dynamic range... but people insist the SLR's are still poor in that area. I'd believe something like the ex-3 might have more latitude in the highlights... but in the shadows (where it's most noticeable) the HDSLR's have just as much DR as film and completely stomp any prosumer and some professional systems. The 7/5D are defiantly hitting 11 stops... but it's biased towards the shadows. EX-3 might have 10 stops... but biased towards highlights. It's looking like the Epic is going to be the best of both worlds though... so that's good.

 

[Eki Halkka]

The 7/5D are defiantly hitting 11 stops... but it's biased towards the shadows. EX-3 might have 10 stops... but biased towards highlights.

That depends on the settings of the camera... both have linear sensors, AFAIK.

 

[Dustin Brown]

Most prosumer cameras technically do shoot better video that the HDSLR's... But they just don't look like film. For some reason these SLR's do. Even on shots without shallow DOF they still look like film where prosumer cams look like... well, video still. I say it's the dynamic range...

I wouldn't necessarily agree with this. In my experience, when I've seen films shown in theaters shot on DSLRs and prosumer cams, EX3 and HMC150... the prosumer cams have often times looked closer to film. I think the most important factor in whether footage will look like film is not the dynamic range or the depth of field but it's the lighting and proper exposure. Shorts shot on prosumer cams that have better lighting look a lot closer to film than the 7d with poor lighting. I have never done any direct comparisons with same lighting condition, etc. But my main point is that the prosumer cams have far more capabilities regarding form factor, manual controls, audio capabilities, etc. They were designed for filmmakers to use. Like the RED, the cameras are designed for filmmakers. Either camera can look better than the other depending on the conditions and the user; however, the capabilities are what draw me to the prosumer cameras. There's too many issues with the HDSLRs that I've seen time and time again with jittery footage and line skipping and limited audio capabilities. Just my point of view.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

I did my last 7D vs R1MX test using Kessler's Cine Slider.

LINK>>>

Let me know what you think?

 

[Dan Sturm]

Shoot something with detail and pattern... come on. You guys know how to break something.

Jim

I think we can agree that all cameras have their flaws. In varying situations they each show their weaknesses. But when it comes to shooting high detail, we were recently able to 'break' the RED One. And unfortunately for us that didn't mean aliasing, it meant the camera was overwhelmed and dropped frames on nearly every take. In this one regard I think I would have taken a bad image vs no image. Let me finish by saying I love RED and I will continue to back you. But I think simply saying shoot something with detail to see the difference between the 2 cameras might not give you quite the evidence you're anticipating.

 

[Álex Montoya]

What were you recording to, Dan? I've never encountered this problem.

 

[Dan Sturm]

We were recording to a RedDrive. I gave the bomb squad a very detailed account of the circumstances that caused the problems. They were unable to give me an explanation other than based on settings and the scene we shot we most likely overwhelmed the data path in the camera. They said shooting to a ram drive and replacing the cameras main board might fix it, but no guarantee. Though the camera has never had a problem before or after that shoot, likely because we haven't shot anything with as much detail since then.

 

[Ignacio Walker]

Got my Canon 7D, and I can't be happier! is great for the web and to share HD content. But I'm still looking forward to Epic! a more convenient size! specially for wildlife filmmaking

 

[Jean-Charles Wolfarth]

Jean Charles, I know plenty of people who have found success in this business from humble beginnings. most people in fact. Also, there are more places to show your work today than ever before - way more. Indeed, the barriers to entry into this business have never been lower.

Well, I would love to meet all these successful people... That's a good explanation of the misunderstanding of some Red owners in this thread about the success of 7d against the Red. You share your life between Dubai and London, two very expensive cities, like Paris where I live. It's obviously an other world...

A lot of people on this forum concentrate on the technical aspect of choosing a camera but again the price is the main concern, whether you're a top producer or an independant filmmaker. It's hard for someone who usually charges $500-$1000 per day to understand that for 2 days of rental a lot of clients prefer to buy a DSRL kit. I know it must be a shock to some but the vast majority of workers in Europe have to work 1 month to earn $1000. If they still have a job.

If you really want to rent your Red against a 7d, just lower the price (for me $200-$300 per day is the right price). You'll have to lower it anyway when the Scarlet will be out. As a renter it's all about this choice : rent your Red $10000 for 1 week per year, or more weeks cheaper. I understand that it's easier to work less :lol:

None of the Red owners I know succeeded in funding back their investment just by renting it. Several even sold their Red package and bought a 7d.

For me Red is the state of the art gear, I'm so grateful to have the possibility of using it, but it's too expensive and we are numerous to hope for a S35 sensor camera with RAW recording at $6000. It will happen, but when ?

 

[Casey Green]

I never do this, but I thought these two posts were so dead on that they needed a bump. Well put, gentlemen!:

It's hard to counter all the hype because to some degree, it also means raining on people's parades, dampening their enthusiasm... and never underestimate enthusiasm in the market.

On the other hand, it's important to not ignore basic facts as long as you present them in relative and practical terms. If you are only shooting for iPhone release, for example, your technical requirements are going to be a bit lower than for cinema release. 720P/1080i broadcast is another distribution market with their own standards, and even there, you have some flexibility depending on shot duration, level of post work needed, etc.

However, I do find it ironic that many people in the industry who nitpicked the Red One to death seem to be embracing DSLR video without reservations. I suppose to some degree it's because the manufacturers of DSLR's have never pushed their video features that heavily (probably because they are well-aware of their shortcomings), so there hasn't been a kneejerk pushback due to aggressive marketing, the hype has mostly been generated among users (which has created a kneejerk pushback in skeptical people like me...) It just seems that some people are pointing out the dust speck in Red's eye while ignoring the log in Canon's eye, to use biblical analogies.

I mean, just look at the difference here between the 7D and HMC40:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=186334

It seems that for some people, getting the shallow-focus look trumps all the technically-better aspects of these smaller HD camcorders.

David, thanks for your comment! I'd agree that there is irony in some members of the industry relating to their perceptions of various camera systems. Indeed, there is a similar perception disconnect in photographers who, to me, appear to be even more fastidious about image quality and pixel peeping than the average cinematographer, but utterly forget such image quality criticism once the image starts moving.

Similarly, if we'd taken the same short-cuts that Canon have done to make their stills cameras do video, we'd have been (deservedly) roasted alive.

But I'd also remember that image quality criticism is a learned faculty, and it does need cultivating as appreciation of fine whisky needs cultivating. Ask your mum about the image artifacts in that over-compressed broadcast and you'll get a "what?" - but I remember the first VHS recording I ever made back in the early 80s and I remember thinking the image quality was perfect to the broadcast source. Oh how perceptions change as you learn to see through new eyes.

Graeme

 

[Casey Green]

I think people should stop pixel peeping and focus on why clients are requesting shoots on the 5D/7D rather than RED. In the last week alone I've been asked to shoot two commercials on the Canons where before those jobs would have been RED or film. It cant simply be economics. What is scaring them off?

I think we are seeing a swell of curious productions trying the DSLRs and this will subside as crews experience just how unprofessional shoots can end up as when using the wrong tool for the job.

I also have heard a couple of stories of jobs going to the Canons, but the next time I saw the crew members, they both had frustrating stories to tell about trying to find ways to make the Cameras work in the ways they are accustomed to from Pro Cinema cameras. Lotsa of workarounds, problems with accessories, monitoring issues, and of course, image quality from the compression used. I think the more people use the Canons, the less they will want to on their next project (depending on the content, of course).