ALEXA | F65 | DRAGON | HELIUM | Holiday shootout!

[Justin McAleece]

Here's a link to a Photoshop file I made with the middle, high and low exposures. This is the easiest way for me to determine stuff, so that's how I've assembled it. Please take a look!

https://www.dropbox.com/s/1ret2wrde...s F65 Alexa Helium Helium LUT Dragon.psd?dl=0

 

[Joel Arvidsson]

And if you shoot something VFX heavy with lots of keying and you need crazy sharp images for cropping in and stuff like that there is still only one champ: F65.

Do you mean F65 is much sharper?

 

[Christoph Tilley]

Do you mean F65 is much sharper?

Yes, I think so. and one more thing only the F65 has of these tested cameras: mechanical shutter which has some magic motion blur to it compared to global shutter.

 

[Akin A]

Hard to say - I don't like shooting with the Alexa Mini due to bad ergonomics. The Weapon really shines here. But you can't ignore the color accuracy, highlight rolloff and the nearly perfect image without lots of adjustments in post. But you can get there with Helium, and the low noise enables shooting at ISO1600 and when you expose to the left you get really rich colors and smooth rolloffs. But you need to know what you are doing and expose right - Alexa is more easy to handle imo.

And if you shoot something VFX heavy with lots of keying and you need crazy sharp images for cropping in and stuff like that there is still only one champ: F65.

How about the # of stops in the difference between Dragon vs Helium in shadows and highlights? Also Alexa vs Dragon/Helium # of stops in shadows/highlights? Thanks

 

[Jan Reiff]

Difficult- the pdf of Justin McAleece is interesting - as there is the F65 really good in detail in those pdfs - but i did check some dpx and i saw better Helium details, maybe i did wrong, but in the pdf Helium looses lots of details in comparison to the dpx files... and the F65 has closer framing as the other cameras.
The difference between Helium and Alexa is really impressive, close to the step PAL - HD. I don´t see so much those "advantages" of the Alexa - if you check the pdf they are pretty close in overall look and feel and we still have to wait for the final colors of Helium.
I know there are other opinions, but for me Helium is another significant step within the Red evolution and when we are used to it and expose it in the right way (and color science is perfect) it´s a big deal in a small and light box.
i was bit sceptical at the start of Helium some month ago (lots of bad exposed clips out there, just wrong exposures) - but now i am really a fan of it.

 

[David J. Buchanan]

That green cast is such a bummer. I hope they fix that soon.

It's funny about the mandate for Netflix. Worked on a couple production with them now and yeah they won't allow Alexa on set so I've seen guys shooting with F55, FS7 and even Canon C300 MK II... Which I think are far less superior, but maybe Arri is only worried about the Film market anyway?

 

[luigivaltulini]

Christoph Tilley
good job, thank you.
I also agree on your thoughts.
However, I would have liked to see Dragon Weapon but with OLPF standard and not an Epic dragon with OLPF Skin tone

How about the # of stops in the difference between Dragon vs Helium in shadows and highlights? Also Alexa vs Dragon/Helium # of stops in shadows/highlights? Thanks

Akin, Weapon Dragon and ALexa Mini, always depends on where you want to keep the dynamic range, if you want it to be equal to ALexa Mini then you need to close the aperture 1 stop, and go up to 1280 ISO, Helium is still 1/2 stop in if you do not complete the first aperture stop. But this has the advantage in case of low-light scenes.
But try 'better the next day.
For example, this get shot now, just out of curiosity, have not exposed on the medium gray but the highlights, even if wrong as a concept but for me worth gold when shooting with Alexa beside.
These parameters.
Zeiss lens 28-80
T2.9 ALexa, and close aperture 5 ​​stop T16 second shot
T4 Weapon Dragon, and close aperture 5 ​​stop T22 second shot
Then in Davinci or with the help of x-REDCINE a.d.d if extreme able to achieve better results than with ALexa Denoise applied.

However they are all of the tools and should be used as appropriate.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/3pspsaxv95p3ozk/drag-alexmin.rar?dl=0

 

[Sabovic Adis]

By how much was the white balance off?

E:
Regarding Red, that is. :biggrin:

 

[Björn Benckert]

Christoph Tilley
good job, thank you.
I also agree on your thoughts.
However, I would have liked to see Dragon Weapon but with OLPF standard and not an Epic dragon with OLPF Skin tone




Akin, Weapon Dragon and ALexa Mini, always depends on where you want to keep the dynamic range, if you want it to be equal to ALexa Mini then you need to close the aperture 1 stop, and go up to 1280 ISO, Helium is still 1/2 stop in if you do not complete the first aperture stop. But this has the advantage in case of low-light scenes.
But try 'better the next day.
For example, this get shot now, just out of curiosity, have not exposed on the medium gray but the highlights, even if wrong as a concept but for me worth gold when shooting with Alexa beside.
These parameters.
Zeiss lens 28-80
T2.9 ALexa, and close aperture 5 ​​stop T16 second shot
T4 Weapon Dragon, and close aperture 5 ​​stop T22 second shot
Then in Davinci or with the help of x-REDCINE a.d.d if extreme able to achieve better results than with ALexa Denoise applied.

However they are all of the tools and should be used as appropriate.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/3pspsaxv95p3ozk/drag-alexmin.rar?dl=0

Agree, the only thing that makes sense to me when comparing these cameras is to set the clipping point to the same on all cameras. Possibly the easiest way to do that with least amount of contamination is to adjust shutter speed and then keep every thing else the same, Fstop filtering and what not. Simply just touch clip with the brightest part in frame, preferably something small then make sure the image have a lot of different steps down from that which can be compared. Simply an image that touch the brightest bright and then goes down below the noise floor.

 

[Bill Totolo]

Agree, the only thing that makes sense to me when comparing these cameras is to set the clipping point to the same on all cameras. Possibly the easiest way to do that with least amount of contamination is to adjust shutter speed and then keep every thing else the same, Fstop filtering and what not. Simply just touch clip with the brightest part in frame, preferably something small then make sure the image have a lot of different steps down from that which can be compared. Simply an image that touch the brightest bright and then goes down below the noise floor.

As long as you do a wedge test for skin tones, determining where skin tones look accurate and not waxy or over-exposed.

 

[Anton Shavlik]

Agree, the only thing that makes sense to me when comparing these cameras is to set the clipping point to the same on all cameras. Possibly the easiest way to do that with least amount of contamination is to adjust shutter speed and then keep every thing else the same, Fstop filtering and what not. Simply just touch clip with the brightest part in frame, preferably something small then make sure the image have a lot of different steps down from that which can be compared. Simply an image that touch the brightest bright and then goes down below the noise floor.

So, a xyla chart? Nice to see how under and over exposed colors behave as well, of course.

 

[Björn Benckert]

So, a xyla chart? Nice to see how under and over exposed colors behave as well, of course.

Charts are good to put in there but a little scenery with lot of gradients and and full range of exposure preferably have skin in both high and lowlights.

But what I'm stressing is that tests like these are done from a mid point a lot of times, like same setting on all cameras and then to me that usually don't say much, except that one camera has the "mid point" higher or lower than the other. So to really compare I think it's best to align the clipping points, the true clipping points, where there is nothing more to get out of the raw file. On red thats when all three R G B lights flag on. If time is adjusted to reach that, then its easy to calculate how much quicker one clip from the other which is an easy find and that alone I think is interesting to many. Then such procedure also gives a just comparison in the low end.

Simply align the 4 cameras DR on the right hand side with time and see how far they reach towards the left.

 

[Mark K.]

My conclusion from this? They're all so good now, that it doesn't really matter. Literally. The Arri still wins out for highlight handling, but they're all so good that only incompetence or unpreparedness is going to lead you to substandard images.

What makes this a great thing? Well mainly the fact that it's just down to lighting and lensing now (which, frankly, is how it should be).

So in summary - well done everyone! You've all made lovely cameras.

 

[Josh Wilkinson]

Wow my takeaway is that Alexa still beats helium for color, shadows and highlights... But the detail on helium is pretty amazing for 4K output, though at 2K output the difference seems isn't nearly as much.

Not quite what I was expecting. I was certain that helium would beat Alexa at least in shadow noise. The difference in detail and noise detail is bigger than expected as well, perhaps some noise reduction would quickly level the playing field?

Its funny I would say the opposite, the Alexa is the least favorite of the 4. All 3 of the other cameras looked much better at 5.6, the F65 prolly needed to be at 6.3 to match the midpoints and for overall aesthetics.
Although, I have no interest in realism for my work or in what I watch.

 

[BRANDON JAMESON]

Thank you SO much for doing this test for us!!!

So very appreciated.

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

Hats off to Christoph and his crew.

What makes this a great thing? Well mainly the fact that it's just down to lighting and lensing now (which, frankly, is how it should be).

That is not fact, that is your interpretation. And it is incorrect. Every one of those cameras still requires a proper post treatment and a creative skilled Human to get the most of what is shot.

I understand your point, however.
This just needed to be stressed to avoid wishful thinking, unrealistic expectations and sour faces later.

But what I'm stressing is that tests like these are done from a mid point a lot of times, like same setting on all cameras and then to me that usually don't say much, except that one camera has the "mid point" higher or lower than the other. So to really compare I think it's best to align the clipping points, the true clipping points, where there is nothing more to get out of the raw file. On red thats when all three R G B lights flag on. If time is adjusted to reach that, then its easy to calculate how much quicker one clip from the other which is an easy find and that alone I think is interesting to many. Then such procedure also gives a just comparison in the low end.

Simply align the 4 cameras DR on the right hand side with time and see how far they reach towards the left.

Proper tests are done with mid point as a reference because that way you can see how much usable DR you get above mid grey and how much below, which, if you have measured the scene, is much more informative about camera's dynamic range capability and provides insight to the DoP for required proper exposure. Which also depends on implementation of camera log, not just the sensor available DR.

One shot is not telling you the full story, which is why proper camera DR tests consist of a range of stops, from complete underexposure to complete overexposure.

 

[luigivaltulini]

Hats off to Christoph and his crew.




That is not fact, that is your interpretation. And it is incorrect. Every one of those cameras still requires a proper post treatment and a creative skilled Human to get the most of what is shot.

I understand your point, however.
This just needed to be stressed to avoid wishful thinking, unrealistic expectations and sour faces later.



Proper tests are done with mid point as a reference because that way you can see how much usable DR you get above mid grey and how much below, which, if you have measured the scene, is much more informative about camera's dynamic range capability and provides insight to the DoP for required proper exposure. Which also depends on implementation of camera log, not just the sensor available DR.

One shot is not telling you the full story, which is why proper camera DR tests consist of a range of stops, from complete underexposure to complete overexposure.

Certainly this is the right thought.
I wanted to say, and I think Bjorn, aligned dynamic range ALexa and Dragon and Helium are equivalent in noise and high lights but no resolution.
BUT when you look at these tests people think the exact opposite.
So ALexa is not better in dynamic range and even the "background noise" vs DRagon or Helium.
What I see in this test is simply "filmstock" everyone with One of their characteristics, the choice of a movie before the shooting.

Hrvoje your Lut DRagon to give realistic images .. see you soon by email

 

[Daniel Stilling]

That is not fact, that is your interpretation. And it is incorrect.

If Marks viewpoint is an interpretation, that makes your viewpoint an interpretation as well. How can your interpretation be more fact than his by you stating his is incorrect?

And I do agree with Mark. If you are decent at what you do, light it right, point the camera in the right direction, apply a decent LUT in camera, make the right camera move or not (basically being a good DP), then you should be able to put it in a timeline and cut it together and output it without doing any fancy post color grading/correction and have good results.
I am not saying here that a project, however well shot, wouldn't take advantage of some good grading. I am saying that the better its shot, the less "fixing" it'll need in post.

 

[Patrick Tresch]

However they are all of the tools and should be used as appropriate.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/3pspsaxv95p3ozk/drag-alexmin.rar?dl=0

Thanks for your test Luigi,

I like RWG and sRGB curiously I've never used this combo. I find it really good even if I have to put some slight contrast and saturation but I like the look of it. I do prefer the colors from RED. I've thought that Alexa would have had much better color renditions as they usually say.

See you.

Pat

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

If Marks viewpoint is an interpretation, that makes your viewpoint an interpretation as well. How can your interpretation be more fact than his by you stating his is incorrect?

And I do agree with Mark. If you are decent at what you do, light it right, point the camera in the right direction, apply a decent LUT in camera, make the right camera move or not (basically being a good DP), then you should be able to put it in a timeline and cut it together and output it without doing any fancy post color grading/correction and have good results.
I am not saying here that a project, however well shot, wouldn't take advantage of some good grading. I am saying that the better its shot, the less "fixing" it'll need in post.

There is no subjective interpretation in the statement that the adequacy of final outcome depends on the proper post treatment as well. Post can be only as good as the shot material allows but proper shot doesn't remove the need for proper post.

Someone needs to create that "decent LUT" and that doesn't fall from the sky into the lap or come from exporting something from Resolve from a few test shots but from thorough analysis and testing, and more complex methodology reaching far wider and deeper.

Also, with that decent LUT at hand the final outcome still depends on quite a few factors, which depend on the person sitting in post using it. LUT can provide improved results and reduced offsets, not a perfect camera match. That part still requires - a competent person in post.

As I said, I understand the point which was suggested - that the motion imaging tools quality has improved and certain issues are reduced. But...let's not get ahead of ourselves here and expect a fool-proof one-click solution to all variables and troubles, thinking the story ends by pressing the red button.