alexa v mx

[Kemalettin Sert]

We have seen and tested an Alexa and don't feel the least bit threatened. Actually... the other way around.
Jim

Of course this will be your comment. It wouldn't be possible for you to say: "alexa is better than our epic". Nobody would say anything like that for their own product.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Sanjin,

I think you are probably right but it's not a good test. It looks like possibly a little more being pulled from the blacks on the first image. But who can tell, since we don't have much information about the Alexa footage or how it was processed. And frankly the Alexa footage is better composed, better lit and got a free wet down to boot.
So you may be right but I think you should wait until you can do a better test between two shots of the same scene, with similar post, before we make any "conclusions".

Much love,

IBloom

Exactly what I was thinking.

Sanjin, absolutely appreciate the efforts you put in with doing your tests. I don't doubt the spirit you bring to the table.

However, I've learned over the years that there's no way to trust any of these tests. Yours, Arri's, even Red's (not that I don't trust RED). It's seeing the images first hand, under circumstances you are involved with. Specs, tests, etc. give us a starting point. Shooting these cameras side by side, getting the most out of each and understanding how each camera responds to light and shadow is the true test. Watching with your own eyes at the imagery that unfolds. Even a dynamic range test chart only tells me part of the story. There are a lot of other factors that make up an image, and personally it's too early for me to tell which image I prefer under which circumstances.

The win win for everyone in this situation is to embrace both of these cameras. It's good for Arri to have RED It's good for RED to have Arri. And it's good for all of us to have both of these companies pushing the limits. Marketing aside, there's no reason for bashing. There was no reason to bash Jim early on with RED, and although there has been some marketing speak that's entered the mix, I don't see any reason to bash either one of them (Jim or Michael) at this point. Let the images speak for themselves, let competition drive progress, and may all of us reap the many benefits of advanced camera design at relatively reasonable price points. That's what this should all be about. Now let's all go shoot some cool content and toast both these companies for what they have done!

 

[Dylan Macleod CSC]

How did the rolling shutter look?

I saw no artifacts. And they had some pretty active shots - like that soccer stuff that Sanjin posted. I am sure it is there, but no more or less visible than RED.

 

[Dylan Macleod CSC]

The win win for everyone in this situation is to embrace both of these cameras. It's good for Arri to have RED It's good for RED to have Arri. And it's good for all of us to have both of these companies pushing the limits.

And this is what I said after leaving the presentation - always good to have options. RED still has REDCODE which enables high quality images on portable recording media at a very reasonable price.

If I had to shoot on the ocean at night the low light performance and "sealed" body design of the Alexa might be more of a priority.

Options are always good.

 

[Tom.Wong]

The direct to edit option, as much as people want to tear it apart and what not, is one of the key factors broadcast will so easily adopt the Alexa. Arri has gear their camera to appease 3 primary factors, as they have clearly stated. They asked industry professional, DP's, Post Facilities, and Colorists what they want out of a camera. Price point is a bit mute when it comes to the level of people they are marketing their camera to. Television first, than film. 70kish is nothing to tv shows that have been shooting 35 mm on all their episodes, now that it's cheaper, easy to get to edit right out of box, and gives them a form factor and responsiveness very close to film, a lot of people will be all over it.

MX, Alexa, Epic, they all have amazing phenomenal benefits. It's now down to apples and oranges. It's like being a canon fanboy and nikon fanboy, what gives better pictures? In the end, all that matters now is that we have more choices of every price range, price bracket, quality and so on, than ever before.

I don't really see anybody bashing DP's choices on going for fuji stock over kodak stock, why does this always have to keep happening?

 

[Subhadip Sen]

What we really need is an independent, unbiased, objective test report. Easier said than done, of course, but I anticipate it.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

What we really need is an independent, unbiased, objective test report. Easier said than done, of course, but I anticipate it.

You are that test report. Seriously. Either by watching something shot with one of these cameras that says to you that you love what they were able to get with that, or you do your own tests/shoots and make a judgement. I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but I truly believe this. Too many things can get in the way of tests, even when intentions are good.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Exactly what I was thinking.

Sanjin, absolutely appreciate the efforts you put in with doing your tests. I don't doubt the spirit you bring to the table.

However, I've learned over the years that there's no way to trust any of these tests. Yours, Arri's, even Red's (not that I don't trust RED). It's seeing the images first hand, under circumstances you are involved with. Specs, tests, etc. give us a starting point. Shooting these cameras side by side, getting the most out of each and understanding how each camera responds to light and shadow is the true test. Watching with your own eyes at the imagery that unfolds. Even a dynamic range test chart only tells me part of the story. There are a lot of other factors that make up an image, and personally it's too early for me to tell which image I prefer under which circumstances.

The win win for everyone in this situation is to embrace both of these cameras. It's good for Arri to have RED It's good for RED to have Arri. And it's good for all of us to have both of these companies pushing the limits. Marketing aside, there's no reason for bashing. There was no reason to bash Jim early on with RED, and although there has been some marketing speak that's entered the mix, I don't see any reason to bash either one of them (Jim or Michael) at this point. Let the images speak for themselves, let competition drive progress, and may all of us reap the many benefits of advanced camera design at relatively reasonable price points. That's what this should all be about. Now let's all go shoot some cool content and toast both these companies for what they have done!

Sanjin,

I think you are probably right but it's not a good test. It looks like possibly a little more being pulled from the blacks on the first image. But who can tell, since we don't have much information about the Alexa footage or how it was processed. And frankly the Alexa footage is better composed, better lit and got a free wet down to boot.
So you may be right but I think you should wait until you can do a better test between two shots of the same scene, with similar post, before we make any "conclusions".

Much love,

IBloom

I love it this RED User's OPEN LABORATORY much better than ARRI's hidden marketing tricks.

Also my comparison tests of course can't be accurate just because I do not have an original Alexa footage anyway.

But let you show now my "footage-denoise-cleaner" pipeline:

My "footage-denoise-cleaner" pipeline: 4.5K R3D imported in RSX output at 1920x823 AppleProRes 4444, Camera RGB, REDLog>>>FCP7 import>>>GenArts-Sapphire-FilmEffects-Kodak-5245-print2383, default grain added>>>

>>>Neat Video de-noise>>The Foundry>>FurnanceCore>>DeNoise>>after that a bit saturated in FCP7 3-color filter>>then rendered as ProRes 4444>>>output cropped as a h264 @ 1920x800.

Super clean footage even with h264 compression.

If you want more color use Color slider in QuickTime7 A/V controls.

Download here 1920x800 test footage sample 14.6 MB>>>>

 

[Subhadip Sen]

You are that test report. Seriously. Either by watching something shot with one of these cameras that says to you that you love what they were able to get with that, or you do your own tests/shoots and make a judgement. I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but I truly believe this. Too many things can get in the way of tests, even when intentions are good.

I agree. I wish I could get my hands on an Alexa, then. But since that is not possible, I look forward to a test by someone who has access to both an Alexa and a R1 MX.

 

[Tim Morten]

I saw no artifacts. And they had some pretty active shots - like that soccer stuff that Sanjin posted. I am sure it is there, but no more or less visible than RED.

Good looking images is what it will all be about at the end of the day.

That said, I would DEFINITELY wait for an objective test. The Alexa specs on paper are inferior in every regard except DR (where they are only comparable). The main thing that Alexa is trying to capitalize on is ProRes out of the camera, which is its own debate.

1/4 the resolution for 4x the price is a tough sell... anyone willing to accept those compromises just to get ProRes out of the camera has questionable judgement IMO (here come the flames).

- Tim

 

[J. P. Sendall]

One thing is missing from this argument and that is the continuous convergence of delivery mediums. Internet and TV are coming closer and closer with I think finally delivery in 2K/4K home screens of a large size. If Alexa can deliver good images the resolve well on a 2K screen (home system) then I think they have a product that will have legs for a while (how long is difficult to say). I'm not matching this against anything Red is producing, I just think that Alexa will fill a slot successfully whether based on marketing, pro perceptions or anything else. Personally I'm more interested in what the Epic will do but that is purely a personal opinion. If a producer said to me they have done a deal and are shooting with the Alexa, would I worry? For TV no, for film out, maybe. Jury is still out on that one. No point discussing something and saying what you favour until we see it in proper action in all types of environments.

 

[Kyle Presley]

I'm not crazy about "clean" images anyway. I love texture.

 

[Robert Frank]

One thing is missing from this argument and that is the continuous convergence of delivery mediums. Internet and TV are coming closer and closer with I think finally delivery in 2K/4K home screens of a large size. If Alexa can deliver good images the resolve well on a 2K screen (home system) then I think they have a product that will have legs for a while (how long is difficult to say).

Maybe not for long? Have you seen this thread? -> Lupe and this video? -> Lupe on Youtube

So are people now going to UP-REZ Alexa footage for 4K delivery?

 

[Tim Morten]

If Alexa can deliver good images the resolve well on a 2K screen (home system) then I think they have a product that will have legs for a while (how long is difficult to say). I'm not matching this against anything Red is producing, I just think that Alexa will fill a slot successfully whether based on marketing, pro perceptions or anything else.

I still question why I would pay more though... Red looks great at 2k, and has so many other advantages.

The slots that Alexa seems to fill are:
1. I love the Arri brand so much that I'm willing to pay a 4x premium
2. I have to have ProRes and I'm so impatient that I'm willing to pay a 4x premium
3. I believe Arri's marketing so much that I'm willing to pay a 4x premium

If there's some qualitative difference that Arri demonstrates where their images look clearly better than Red, that's another story. We'll see when cameras are widely available... meanwhile, I remain (highly) skeptical.

- Tim

 

[Matt W.]

And the red fills one niche:

1. I believe red's marketing so much I'm willing to put up with a horrible interface, buggy camera, awful ergonomics, time and money wasted on set troubleshooting/booting the camera, questionable color rendition, difficult workflow on the high-end (in terms of screening dailies and communicating with post houses), difficult workflow on lower-budget projects (in terms of having to process footage just to edit it in the first place and 4k's general unwieldiness for virtually no return on end product).

(I'm exaggerating, but no more than you are.)

Obviously most people here will prefer the red; most people here own one or wish they did. But to question the judgment of professional rental houses and producers for choosing a non-red camera is hubristic and silly. Arri has a long history of backing up its promises with performance and the clip that was posted looks great. The build quality of Arri products is unmatched. When you're renting a huge grip and camera package, a $20,000 camera vs a $50,000 is immaterial; a shorter boot time, familiar interface, and instant dailies aren't.

The red and alexa are both incredibly far beyond what was available at the price-point years ago and both products have pushed the other further. If you're happy with what you're shooting on that's all that matters.

 

[Dylan Macleod CSC]

Went to the SIM event today and heard Michael Bravin and co. talk. Saw some pretty incredible low light footage - looked cleaner than RED to me. The form factor appears better and the build seems more solid.

Kept hearing that "Red is 10.5 stops and Alexa is 13.5" - so really want to get a test happening with the Dynamic Range Test Chart to get to the bottom of that one.

I have to say - today was the first time I felt like jumping the RED ship...

Red still has a price advantage and REDCODE.

I just want to clarify that the 10.5 stops was not something Michael said - nor was it in the presentation he did. It was likely mentioned by someone else at the presentation. There were a number of speakers there.

 

[Giancarlo Morieri]

i think there is good espectation for the alexa because arri uses to check their cameras a lot before releasing them, still i think they should upgrade the camera fps to at least 100. if its possible.
ciao

 

[Tim Morten]

And the red fills one niche:

1. I believe red's marketing so much I'm willing to put up with a horrible interface, buggy camera, awful ergonomics, time and money wasted on set troubleshooting/booting the camera, questionable color rendition, difficult workflow on the high-end (in terms of screening dailies and communicating with post houses), difficult workflow on lower-budget projects (in terms of having to process footage just to edit it in the first place and 4k's general unwieldiness for virtually no return on end product).

(I'm exaggerating, but no more than you are.)

Even subtracting out "exaggeration", those are some pretty strong words for an MX... you might find some who agree if you were referring to an early release R1, but the MX interface, stability, ergonomics, colorspace, workflow... those are harder arguments to back up. Anyhow let's see how Alexa actually fares on all those counts. Right now, there are a lot of MX cameras in the wild. Alexa... not so much. That leaves lots of room for "marketing".

Cheers,
Tim

 

[Matt W.]

Fair enough, but we've given Red an incredible amount of benefit of the doubt (for years) for them to get to the relatively stable (and generally very impressive) platform that's available today. Contrast the early promises of a nearly-usable 2000ISO on the original sensor against the camera struggling to render tungsten-lit footage without blue channel grain at anything above an effective 200ISO (before the new color science).

I think it's fair to give Arri a little while before before the claws come out--and it's never fair to hold producers and rental houses in contempt for not choosing your favorite brand. This goes both ways: I've been exasperated before with producers who refuse to give Red a fair shake due to how bad some early footage looked--before the platform matured and operators learned its quirks. (And personally I'd be thrilled to shoot on either camera, but I'm not up to that level yet--still using mostly hvx and dvx.)

 

[David Battistella]

Matt,

To be fair. The Alexa they were showing in Toronto was not fully functional. There was no SxS module, there was no timecode, no audio enabled, it's not exactly gleaming any totally functional out of the box, yet.

When RED did this everyone crapped on them for releasing a product that was not ready, with ARRI they get a lot more leeway (because of their reputation I am sure).

In the 1980's we had "video" camera's tethered to a big 3/4" tape deck. Two person crews hauled this crap around and the camera had to be attached to a recorder.

When the all in one camcorder came around everyone was so happy to be liberated (like portable 16mm).

Now they build these high end cameras to be tethered to high end decks to go to High end post facilities that produce high end images with the use of high end expensive decks tied to expensive color correction systems.

It pisses people off that RED put 4K into the hands of people who could use inexpensive tools (correctly) and produce High bit depth, uncompressed HD finishes from home. This is what pissed off printers who owned presses when Desktop publishing came around.

We all know who one that game.

Portable, REDCODE RAW produces incredible images. Photographers have known the importance and benefit of capturing RAW for a long time, they also have a bit more processing time, etc.

But this is the crux of the whole thing, If you want to capture 4K to CF card or be attached to an expensive deck?

The prores module is nice and all, but that will be equalled then it will come down to the what is easiest and cheapest. So will it be worth it to shoot prores on an 80K camera? Is that really what it is built for?

David