$9,500 for epic...

[Mike Garrick]

@ Carlos words of wisdom from Terry .

My personnel view, never go out on a financial limb for tech (particularly high end cameras ) .

Despite the serious "placebo" response by some new Epic owners Scarlet is still a highly viable production tool . That is more than equal to many pro camera choices out there right now or in the immediate future.

 

[Nick Morrison]

The big difference I find shooting with Epic over my Scarlet is I'm shooting nearly everything 5K at 5:1 with some variety in there for different frame rates and formats. Sensor size, noise benefits, and resolution gains are a lot of the perks that come with that.

This is exactly the reason I want to upgrade to Epic. Being able to stay at 5K or 4K and not have to "reframe" for slomo will be a big time saver on set. Also being able to shoot 5:1 is another plus.

 

[Tom Greenberg]

I recently had a situation develop from a shoot with my Scarlet. Everything looked great when scaled for 1080p delivery, but when projected at 4K, the footage was a tiny bit soft. I decided that this softness was due to a slight loss of resolution that happened in the debayer process. My client was somewhat freaked out by this result, and expressed that the Scarlet might be inadequate for the job. The implications of his reaction to our future business definitely sped up my plunge into an Epic.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Hey Tom. I am interested in your findings. Why do you think that the projection looked soft? If I recall correctly the Scarlet can record the same res as an R1 no?

Hey Kirk, correct me if I'm wrong, but can't the R1 MX's record at 4.5k....allowing for a better debayer down to 4k? Whereas the Scarlet is unfortunately limited to only 4k...which when debayered...yes will end up being about 3.X k.

I too...am considering a plunge to Epic, for a number of the reasons in this post...

 

[Brian Merlen]

What amazes me most about the transition is how I can now shoot overcranked at high res. With Scarlet I was constantly windowing down for frame rates, but with a huge amount of loss in potential image quality. With Epic provided I again don't window down excessively I can shoot 4k at high rates, and suddenly have amazingly better looking images. That is what blew my mind about the process. People all yammering on about Dragons, hell with it I love my Epic, and my Dragon will just be a bonus whenever I get emailed one day!

 

[Paul Schneider]

I shoot a combination of Epic and Scarlet nearly every week. Given the same settings and lighting the results are indistinguishable between the two. The only edge is the downsampling from the 5K vs. the 4K to HD which can eliminate some noise...especially if you are shooting at ISO800.

At low ISO (320ish) and enough lighting it's impossible to tell the difference.

Scarlet has been good to me. It's worked like a mule as a B-Cam and paid itself off, but the $9500 Epic upgrade price (while expensive) is a no-brainer on the production side. Say what you want about RED, and I've been guilty of many complaints, I don't think any company would even consider giving this kind of trade-in or path to higher end equipment.

 

[Paul Schneider]

I'll toss this in as I did the upgrade from Scarlet to Epic MX. Yep. It's a chunk of change. But the amount of that chunk of change is less than anything that comes close to competing with the Epic at that price point. My Scarlet was paid off fairly early on so recouping on my investment wasn't exactly in the cards as it became profitable quickly. To me that equaled a deal and a deal worth going for. And it's also important to acknowledge you are essentially getting a brand new camera out of this. $9500 for a 5K digital cinema camera with these specs is really okay. There isn't anything like that.

The big difference I find shooting with Epic over my Scarlet is I'm shooting nearly everything 5K at 5:1 with some variety in there for different frame rates and formats. Sensor size, noise benefits, and resolution gains are a lot of the perks that come with that.

When Dragon comes I'll be shooting 6K through 5K a lot. I don't know if I'll need to explore under 4K. I'll use 3K/2.5K if I want to use S16 glass for any reason, but that's typically not my playground.

Exactly. Not sure if I'll need Dragon as we light everything 99% of the time, but the features of Epic are still impressive.

 

[Nick Morrison]

I shoot a combination of Epic and Scarlet nearly every week. Given the same settings and lighting the results are indistinguishable between the two. The only edge is the downsampling from the 5K vs. the 4K to HD which can eliminate some noise...especially if you are shooting at ISO800.

At low ISO (320ish) and enough lighting it's impossible to tell the difference.

Scarlet has been good to me. It's worked like a mule as a B-Cam and paid itself off, but the $9500 Epic upgrade price (while expensive) is a no-brainer on the production side. Say what you want about RED, and I've been guilty of many complaints, I don't think any company would even consider giving this kind of trade-in or path to higher end equipment.

Agreed about Scarlet as B-Cam. When Epics and Scarlets are all at 4K very hard to tell the difference at all.

 

[Paul Schneider]

I am in the need to upgrade my scarlet but if I do I will be having some serious financial issues.

NEVER, never go into dept for a camera unless you know that dept can be resolved within a few months of owning that camera.
Thats my mantra anyway.

 

[Paul Schneider]

Agreed about Scarlet as B-Cam. When Epics and Scarlets are all at 4K very hard to tell the difference at all.

I would say when shooting well-lit, low ISO (320 for example) the results are so clean that even the 4KHD is fairly indistinguishable from 5KHD. We do that combo all the time and I can never see it in post. The differences certainly start to drift apart at 800ISO.

Seems its really just about knowing the tools and their limits. Commercials are all over the place, but if I was running a TV series or shooting a Feature that mainly required 24fps sync-sound I'd see little reason not to just use the Scarlet to save some cash.

 

[Nick Morrison]

I would say when shooting well-lit, low ISO (320 for example) the results are so clean that even the 4KHD is fairly indistinguishable from 5KHD. We do that combo all the time and I can never see it in post. The differences certainly start to drift apart at 800ISO.

Seems its really just about knowing the tools and their limits. Commercials are all over the place, but if I was running a TV series or shooting a Feature that mainly required 24fps sync-sound I'd see little reason not to just use the Scarlet to save some cash.

True. The only other diff is the Scarlet can only get you to 6:1 compression, and the Epic can obv get you better...but agreed...for me having 1 Epic and 2 Scarlets is enough for a small production company.

 

[Tom Greenberg]

If your end product is 1080p or 2K, and both are shooting 4K, I agree that there is basically no difference between Epic and Scarlet. I've intercut that combination seamlessly many times. However, when your end product is 4k, or even if you just examine both at 4K, there is a noticeable difference between Epic footage shot at 5K and Scarlet footage shot at 4K. And that is not even taking into account the lower compression ratios with the Epic.

For me, the upgrade is a no-brainer, and I would have done it long before now if finances had permitted. I'm thrilled that RED has given me the opportunity to finally get the camera I wanted all along. Scarlet is a fantastic camera, and I loved mine dearly...but Epic is clearly a notch or two better, even in MX form.

 

[Kirk.Attard]

well glad its working out for you Tom. I just hope hope that with Scarlet dragon I'll be just as happy. I really like the clean darks, thats the main reason I opted for it. hope I'm not mistaken. I dont want to shoot without light, at the contrary but Dragon seemed liked a good in between. Sure I'll be happy. Just have to be patient for a while.

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

I would say when shooting well-lit, low ISO (320 for example) the results are so clean that even the 4KHD is fairly indistinguishable from 5KHD. We do that combo all the time and I can never see it in post. The differences certainly start to drift apart at 800ISO.

Seems its really just about knowing the tools and their limits. Commercials are all over the place, but if I was running a TV series or shooting a Feature that mainly required 24fps sync-sound I'd see little reason not to just use the Scarlet to save some cash.

Its' not about noise and resolution, the constant needless obsessions of Reduser - it's the field of view of the lens. An Epic gives you a wider field of view, Scarlet is more cropped. The wider field of view will look different, and generally it will look better in many ways. If you are doing heavy grading, then lower compression becomes very important. Anyone with a good eye for visuals can see the difference immediately.

Save $250 a day in price difference, to lower the quality of an entire shoot - I mean every shot will look less good. Not exactly smart.

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

If your end product is 1080p or 2K, and both are shooting 4K, I agree that there is basically no difference between Epic and Scarlet. I've intercut that combination seamlessly many times. However, when your end product is 4k, or even if you just examine both at 4K, there is a noticeable difference between Epic footage shot at 5K and Scarlet footage shot at 4K. And that is not even taking into account the lower compression ratios with the Epic.

For me, the upgrade is a no-brainer, and I would have done it long before now if finances had permitted. I'm thrilled that RED has given me the opportunity to finally get the camera I wanted all along. Scarlet is a fantastic camera, and I loved mine dearly...but Epic is clearly a notch or two better, even in MX form.

if you see no difference in a 1080p finish it's because you can't tell that a larger sensor looks completely different. I suggest an optometrist, and learning a lot more about how lens optics work. I also suggest you learn more sophisticated post techniques - then you will see another kind of difference when you try to grade 3:1 material in Full 5K, you will be amazed at what is possible.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Its' not about noise and resolution, the constant needless obsessions of Reduser - it's the field of view of the lens. An Epic gives you a wider field of view, Scarlet is more cropped. The wider field of view will look different, and generally it will look better in many ways. If you are doing heavy grading, then lower compression becomes very important. Anyone with a good eye for visuals can see the difference immediately.

Save $250 a day in price difference, to lower the quality of an entire shoot - I mean every shot will look less good. Not exactly smart.

Robert, not all of us want or need to work at 5k. I sometimes like shooting at 4K because I'm using classic SUPER 35 "language"....the language of Hollywood...where a 21 "feels" like a 21, the way Spielberg intended, not like a 19mm. I don't understand why a "wider FOV' is always better? Ridley Scott mostly shoots on telephotos, I can't see why he'd need or notice a wider FOV. I think you're assuming a lot...that your workflow is necessarily what we all need...all the time.

I agree that lower compression is generally better, but I work in broadcast and to be honest...my clients find the difference between 5:1 and 8:1 hard to nice. And I work in long multi-cam shoots where the use of higher compression would sometimes be overwhelming. Shooting single cam, fine. But multicam on long interviews at 5k 5:1? You may have the budget to handle that kind of data, but I generally don't. I don't see why a compromise of shooting 4K 8:1 is so bad it merits ridicule. You shoot what you can. Not what empirically is always "best".

And I don't see why being focused on noise is "needless". Its sort of the basics of Red filmmaking isn't it? Being aware of your histogram and knowing how to manage your tool and avoid noise...is sort of RED 101...so I don't understand why you need to mock such a basic part of our workflow.

if you see no difference in a 1080p finish it's because you can't tell that a larger sensor looks completely different. I suggest an optometrist, and learning a lot more about how lens optics work. I also suggest you learn more sophisticated post techniques - then you will see another kind of difference when you try to grade 3:1 material in Full 5K, you will be amazed at what is possible.

Robert, this is getting pretty aggressive sir. Can you tone down the rhetoric? We are talking about cameras here, not religion. Questioning Tom's education (he's a professor btw) and his eyesight is probably going too far. No one's saying that an Epic isn't better than a Scarlet (that's why most of us on this thread have or ARE upgrading...as Tom already has)....and it's also pretty obvious that shooting at 5K 3:1 is the best image quality RED currently has to offer (outside of Dragon) however we are also saying that the Scarlet is a perfectly acceptable B-Cam.

I shot this trailer with 2 Epics and a Scarlet, and in post we found the camera's indistinguishable (as Paul has also noticed on his projects).

 

[Adam Beck]

Tom also worked in the industry a long time before becoming a professor. He's a really nice guy whom I'm fortunate to call a friend.

I shot this trailer with 2 Epics and a Scarlet, and in post we found the camera's indistinguishable (as Paul has also noticed on his projects).

Nice job Nick.

 

[Carlos Reyes]

Robert is hell bent on bashing anything that doesnt mirror his workflow or way of doing things.

We all know the Epic is the superior camera in every way, is that even a question? 5K is a better image for reasons other than a wider FOV. That being said the Scarlet is a hell of a camera, and a perfectly capable A camera, especially for what is was intended to be used for, cinema i.e. 24 FPS narrative work. If you can't make killer images in 4K 6:1 24fps than it's you who has issues. Consider Fincher extracts his image from within the full FOV to have look around and room for reframing in post, first on the RED One at 4K and then Epic at 5K.

"Scarlet is more cropped" making it inferior? Since when is the gold standard of S35 inferior? I guess all the top DPs who've made a career shooting and framing for S35 were making inferior images because they werent shooting at a wider FOV. So when future productions shoot Dragon at 5K (as I understand it about S35) to be able to use their S35 glass (as in almost all cinema glass) their images will suffer? I think not.

Nick's video proves that you can absolutely with out a doubt use the cameras in conjunction to shoot great content without compromising image quality.

 

[Kirk.Attard]

Totally agree Carlos. It.s natural to feel you have inferior equipment when you know there.s something superior. But the truth is that we need to do the best with what we.v got.

I am getting confused again now. Scarlet dragon or Epic ! Both have what i need and more. Till now i.m leaning towards the scarlet dragon but I dont know anymore now.

 

[Mark K.]

Just get financing/a business loan. You'd be doing the exact same thing getting a payment plan through Red directly.