Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Alexa vs. Dragon vs. MX

I didn't shoot it lol

Wish they would have processed all in log as well. Alexa looks like it has a less aggressive curve on the footage.
 
Looks like the Alexa still has more dynamic range, although the dragon was clearly sharper. Would have liked to see an uncompressed version though.
 
Also if I'm to be pedantic, Depending on the ISO and T stop configuration, I preferred certain combinations on the Alexa, and other combinations on the Dragon. Both will do a good job.

I do feel that Red should be more conservative on their advertised dynamic range. There does not seem to be 16.5 stops in there particularly as the Alexa only claims 14. With the Scarlet and the F5 which I work with regularly, there isn't half a stop of dynamic range between them (thats what you would assume if you read the spec sheets). It's more than that, probably 2 stops.

...This is just my humble opinion... others may say different... and they may be right, as we all test in different conditions.
 
Well geez. Somebody should toss a low con on Dragon or something. Cause... You know. It almost seems like..... Anyways. I know I know. Nobody officially acknowledges that. Don't mind me. I'm crazy.
 
Hi Phil

It's great to meet you on here. I posted a series of questions on another thread. Would you be kind enough to address some of the key Q's. I've read all your opinions on the Schneiders.. but some of the q's bellow have not been addressed in your comments.

Would really appreciate your opinion before I pull the trigger.




Hi Everyone

Sorry to be a bother, but I'm going crazy trying to make my mind up. (1) Are the Schneiders noticeably sharper than the Canon CNEs? (2) I find Canon glass a little too dull on skin tones. In my humble opinion Ziess renders skin tones better, they seem more alive. Where would you put the Schneiders? (3) For drama/feature purposes, will I miss the Canon CNE 14m & 135m? (4) Should I compromise a little on the image quality and get an existing full set? (5) I'm getting a bit confused - I've shot with the CNE's, the CP2s, Masters and Ultras. However, I have never really had to pay attention to the final details - now I do. As 4K seems to be the "in" thing, am I silly to assume that they all resolve 6K as well just as good? (this particular project will be shot on our new Dragon)

I have read the whole thread (in case anyone wants to refer me back to it) and I have shot a few tests, but I'm going mad pixel peeping (I wear glasses, and don't trust the colour rendition of my eyes anyway). I still cant make up my mind. I have to pull the trigger on these soon, and at the moment, I seem to be loosing perspective. Any reasoned advice by Red Users who have used both on the Dragon will be helpful.

A few details about the project: It's an independent film shooting in April 2015. I know I will have the 5 set Schneiders by then but there still won't be a wide (14m) and a Long (135m). Also, Once i pull the trigger, that is it for lenses.


Thanks for reading through this long post. Will consider all advice. Cheers everyone.
 
Phil Holland said:
Well geez. Somebody should toss a low con on Dragon or something. Cause... You know. It almost seems like..... Anyways. I know I know. Nobody officially acknowledges that. Don't mind me. I'm crazy.
Click to expand...

agreed
 
dino g said:
agreed
Click to expand...

I dig the dudes at Radiant Images and like these tests. This actually more than anything really shows the difference between Mysterium-X and Dragon, which is pretty apparent.

Personally I get the need and desire to do these tests as Alexa has become popular over time. However, it's never going to be apples to apples because of too many other variables. Some of which people tend to look over. For me this isn't really a conversation because the Dragon's color is that much "truer" and denser. We have something good and solid there. Also, I don't shoot under 4K these days, but that's not going to be an issue for everybody even though I think it should :)


NOSA OBAYIUWANA said:
Hi Phil

It's great to meet you on here. I posted a series of questions on another thread. Would you be kind enough to address some of the key Q's. I've read all your opinions on the Schneiders.. but some of the q's bellow have not been addressed in your comments.

Would really appreciate your opinion before I pull the trigger.
Click to expand...


Heh. Must have missed that one.

To answer your questions quickly to not stray from this particular topic to much:

1. Canon CN-E vs. Schneider Xenon-FF sharpness. Both have similar resolving power wide open. CN-E primes stopped down to T2 will actually perform better slightly of course.
2. Schneider Xenon-FF Primes have a smooth rendering. It's more Leica-esque than Zeiss-like.
3. Depends on your format and shooting style (locations and shot list too). If shooting 6K FF I certainly can see the desire and need for a 135mm for CUs. 14/15mm is pretty damn wide :)
4. Don't know what you mean here. Don't compromise. Get lenses you want to use to tell that story.
6. The Canon CN-E, Zeiss CP.2, and Schneider Xenon-FF Primes all cover 6K FF (18mm Zeiss doesn't). Resolving 6K is an interesting topic, none of these lenses are the "best resolvers" out there.

Personal Thoughts. The Schneider Xenon-FF Primes from the ground up are motion picture lenses. Canon CN-E and Zeiss CP.2 are more or less close relatives to their still lens brothers and sisters. A few changes, coatings and one single element in a couple cases. Mechanics, the Xenons are pretty damn good. If you need the speed, I would favor the CN-E Primes personally. I own the still version of these and still shoot them occasionally. If PL is important, Duclos Lenses can now make CN-E Primes PL mount, which is hot and rad. If you don't need the speed the Xenons are likely the better choice. In your particular situation given the focal lengths and concerns you've mentioned it might be smart to get a set of the Xenons and the Zeiss 15mm T2.9 and 135mm T2.1 to problem solve when needed.

I will say if you are going into zoom lens territory, check out the Zeiss Compact Zooms. Those are unique and new designs. I'm rather fond of those.
 
It's almost impossible to see the difference except a bit in some color tones and in DR, but I don't know why test after test after test is always about charts, unmoving stuff without any grading whatsoever. It's like taking an undeveloped 35mm neg and try to see the difference between Fuji and Kodak.

Can people please do a real test without charts and stuff, where they test the cameras in REAL shooting situations with actors on location together with lightning and post production. The purpose is to create a natural looking image and see motion. See how it works in the real world. I've got some good respons on the test we did with the HDRx down below... was it because we showed charts and stuff like that? No, we just took the camera and shot on location, in real locations, in real situations where you might need HDRx. We aren't tech-people but creative people and we don't care about charts, really. We care about how it actually looks with our work.

I want to see a test between these three cameras where the result is supposed to be a final graded image, as natural as possible. This is where Alexa shines and where Dragon needs to show it's wings.
 
NOSA OBAYIUWANA said:
Hi Phil

You're moving me closer and closer to the Canons.
Click to expand...

Up to you :) Seriously though. Test them out. The Canons have the speed, the Xenons have the look and the mechanics.
 
Christoffer Glans said:
It's almost impossible to see the difference except a bit in some color tones and in DR, but I don't know why test after test after test is always about charts, unmoving stuff without any grading whatsoever. It's like taking an undeveloped 35mm neg and try to see the difference between Fuji and Kodak.

Can people please do a real test without charts and stuff, where they test the cameras in REAL shooting situations with actors on location together with lightning and post production. The purpose is to create a natural looking image and see motion. See how it works in the real world. I've got some good respons on the test we did with the HDRx down below... was it because we showed charts and stuff like that? No, we just took the camera and shot on location, in real locations, in real situations where you might need HDRx. We aren't tech-people but creative people and we don't care about charts, really. We care about how it actually looks with our work.

I want to see a test between these three cameras where the result is supposed to be a final graded image, as natural as possible. This is where Alexa shines and where Dragon needs to show it's wings.
Click to expand...

The cameras are so similar that if someone did a test the way you ask, you would not be able to tell the difference, or if you could, the difference could be shifted and modified either way to compensate the difference. No what I mean? I love these tests that are popping up everywhere because they truly show that even with a scarlet, you can acquire results just like the best in the biz do.
 
Question.... Is it true that at ISO 800 the Dragon is a stop darker than the Alexa is at ISO 800?

If this is true, why? And, when using meters, which one is technically correct at 800 ISO?

Also, yes, I agree Phil, a low-con on the Dragon would change things. :)
 
Martin Stevens said:
Question.... Is it true that at ISO 800 the Dragon is a stop darker than the Alexa is at ISO 800?

If this is true, why? And, when using meters, which one is technically correct at 800 ISO?

Also, yes, I agree Phil, a low-con on the Dragon would change things. :)
Click to expand...


It's not in this test. They are near identical. Also, to my calibrated Sekonics it is spot on. I expose via the meter and 18% gray "often".
 
Phil Holland said:
It's not in this test. They are near identical. Also, to my calibrated Sekonics it is spot on. I expose via the meter and 18% gray "often".
Click to expand...

Thanks Phil,

Okay, so if this is so, why have I seen and read that there is a stop difference at ISO 800 between them? I always
thought this was confusing.

Perhaps what is supposed to be middle gray is not standardized, as in, to some it is 50 IRE, and to others
it is not. Is middle gray at IS0 800 on any digital cinema camera supposed to land at 50 IRE?
 
Got this in my email last week.

11.jpg

21.jpg

http://www.cineverse.net/images/2014_Camera_Comparison_Chart_v11.pdf


According to this the F5/55 has more DR as well. Has anyone had a chance to do a Dragon F5/55 comparison other than the CML test? I find these results hard to believe after shooting with both. I'd say Dragon is a 1/2 to 1 stop more but that is subjective as I didn't shoot them side by side.

What I will say is I could care less if the DR was 1/2 a stop less than others. The Dragon produces amazing images and in a real world scenario 1/2 a stop is nothing and would be hard to differentiate. I will continue to shoot Dragon for many reasons, just think these comparisons are interesting.
 
Martin Stevens said:
Thanks Phil,

Okay, so if this is so, why have I seen and read that there is a stop difference at ISO 800 between them? I always
thought this was confusing.

Perhaps what is supposed to be middle gray is not standardized, as in, to some it is 50 IRE, and to others
it is not. Is middle gray at IS0 800 on any digital cinema camera supposed to land at 50 IRE?
Click to expand...
iso is supposed to be a standard but in reality the numbers seem to be pretty flexible....this goes for all manufacturers....my scarlet and epic's 800 was and is more like a 400....don't know about alexa but canon's 800 is usually more like a 640....nikon is similar....
it makes sense to calibrate your light meter to your camera to keep things simple....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top