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 :)

Buying Epic/Dragon or Scarlet Dragon ?

M

Mert Icgoren

Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2014
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hi guys,

I'm trying to decide which brain to purchase.

Is processing power only the difference between Scarlet and Epic ? I don't mind not being able to shoot slow motion, but as far as the image quality goes, do you think they will both be the same since it's the same sensor ?

thank you !
 
Same sensor. Not same resolution. Epic Dragon shoots 6K. Scarlet Dragon shoots primarily 5K (though can shoot timelapse at 6K 12fps). That extra "K" in resolution on Epic allows for better downscaling and lower noise. Otherwise the same, yes. So they have same sensor, but Epic uses ALL of it, while Scarlet is slightly cropped in at 5K.

That said, Scarlet Dragon looks to be an AMAZING camera.
 
If you're shooting 4k 24FPS then techinally you shouldn't be able to tell the difference. For the difference in price this would be extremely tempting, knowing you could rent an Epic Dragon a few times if you needed 6k or high frame rates.
 
Thats what I do rent when I need it, HFR is way over rated IMO !
 
Last edited:
I've ordered a Scarlett DRAGON to use as my "A" camera, but will use an EPIC DRAGON as my other "A" camera as follows. My "A" lens is a Fujinon Premier 24-180 lens, which is just brilliant. It ticks all the optical quality boxes except...it really doesn't cover 6K at the wide end. But it is unbelievably sharp from across the mid- and tele range. The long zoom range and T2.6 aperture are perfect for my needs. For that lens, the Scarlett DRAGON gives me what I need (a 5K crop, with full DRAGON goodness within that crop) with a $10K discount compared to EPIC DRAGON. The EPIC DRAGON comes in handy for my Fujinon Cabrio (wider at the wide end, also more frame coverage than the Premier) and FF lenses. And for when I need slow motion (which is always fun).

For me the question is no whether to get a Scarlett DRAGON or an EPIC DRAGON, but whether to get two Scarlett DRAGONs and one EPIC DRAGON or two EPIC DRAGONs and one Scarlett DRAGON. That will end up depending somewhat on whether I get another Premier lens (such as the 14.5-45 T2, which will again be limited to 5K FF coverage) or whether I tend toward lenses like the Cabrio 14-28 and/or Zeiss 15-30.

It is great that RED offers the two DRAGON options that they do, so that we need not be forced to buy either more camera than we need, nor less.
 
Other difference is compression options. Hard to make a call on that until more wisdom gathers to prevail....
 
Hey Mert

Are you talking about Scarlet Dragon vs starting with Epic X or M and then upgrading to Epic Dragon later? I find myself in a similar position as the price of a Scarlet Dragon setup is around the same ball park as setting up a basic kit for the Epic X. If it's not to much like hijacking your thread, I'd be interested to hear some opinions on a choice between Scarlet Dragon or an Epic X with a potential to upgrade later but one that's not guaranteed. In my situation, I know I can get a lot of work happening with a Red purchase but I'm not sure it will free up the cash for the Dragon upgrade in the very near future.

Damn you for giving us choices Red.
Rich
 
Ian D said:
Definitely compression is a huge factor in the decision, the original scarlet mx would be a great camera if could of gone below the 8:1 compression.
Click to expand...

Good thing Scarlet MX does do 6:1 in any resolution and 5:1 in 4k ws!
 
I think buying a Scarlet is a terrible idea (I did it once already). You save a little bit of money but you're going to be spending $50k for the full camera package anyway. Why pay 1/2 as much for something that is 1/10th the performance? And if you're shooting green screen you will want uncompressed redcode options (3:1). You also have a harder time finding sufficiently wide-angle lenses. It's just all around limiting and dollar for dollar the Epic is a way better value. I upgraded to Epic last year and last year I picked up several extra jobs that I wouldn't have gotten on Scarlet paying off the upgrade price.
 
I'm not sure saying the Scarlet has 1/10 the performance is a fair statement. Shooting 4K 24FPS at 6:1 is a pretty useful setting and for many of us would be fine 90% of the time.

If you have an absolute REQUIREMENT for 5K/6K then you probably have the budget to back it up and no one will ever dispute getting the right tool for the job. But for most of us 5K-6K is a choice and luxury, not a requirement, so saving $20k for features you don't usually need can be the right decision.

I have both the Epic and Scarlet and 90% of the time they are interchangeable for my needs. Given the choice I'll always pick up the Epic cause it makes me feel cool, but I don't whince when I get back to the studio after using the Scarlet, for all intensts and purposes it's the same.
 
Apologies for the miss-information I have said, 6:1 is the lowest compression, but I still think it needs to go lower, its very clean in daylight but under low light tungsten I think it could be a lot better with lower compression.
 
Ian D said:
Apologies for the miss-information I have said, 6:1 is the lowest compression, but I still think it needs to go lower, its very clean in daylight but under low light tungsten I think it could be a lot better with lower compression.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid you have merely added to the misinformation. When you are shooting low-light tungsten, you can get to RED's nominal 5000K white balance point one of two ways: you can filter out all the orange with a CTB filter (cutting the light hitting the sensor by about 2.5 stops, which then needs an addition 2.5 stops of ISO gain to keep all else equal) or you can let the brain do the work (amplifying the blue channel by about 2.5 stops). In either case, it would be completely incorrect to blame REDCODE 6:1 compression for any deficiency of the image. Rather, it's a lighting problem, easily solved by using daylight-balanced sources and/or pushing enough light to the sensor that you are not amplifying noise. Moreover, your histograms and stoplights will tell you that you have a lighting problem, not a compression problem.

I've learned all this shooting a DRAGON, btw.
 
Michael Tiemann said:
DRAGON does not suck under tungsten. It properly exposes bad lighting craft for what it is.
Click to expand...

So low level tungsten lighting is bad, by definition, in your book?

The M and MX suck under tungsten, especially low level. Godfather looked pretty good to me, to shoot that on M or MX would have required filtering the lens, or lights, or both.

Alexa and Sony's do not share this problem to the same degree. panasonic has the problem too but likely because of processing its not as bad IMHO

Is dragon about the same as M or MX in regards to not liking CT on the 'warm end'?

In my experience bad lighting craft looks like bad lighting craft no matter what camera....M and MX made tungsten look like bad lighting craft when other cameras would not.
 
When trying to work with large indoor areas where you want the house lights to register. Say a stop and a half under your key light for your talent, setting your stop at 2.8 its not feasible with out a major lighting change to make the scene work. 2.5 stops of additional light to compensate for a filter or to use daylight is a real curse, like Ivan said bad lighting is bad lighting, excessive noise specific to a camera that is not easy to compensate for is a bit of an issue, yes work arounds are there but they are not ideal. Point : I wrongly assumed if I had a lower compression I would be able to limit the noise. - I'll put a disclaimer that I am asking questions not declaring any facts so I don't perpetuate any misinformation, or head line material -

Michael, what iso would you work with under tungsten lighting with the use of a ctb filter (81 filter is it ) on dragon ? Would you go lower in compression than 6:1 ?

Cheers
Ian
 
jimhare said:
I'm not sure saying the Scarlet has 1/10 the performance is a fair statement. Shooting 4K 24FPS at 6:1 is a pretty useful setting and for many of us would be fine 90% of the time.[...] saving $20k for features you don't usually need can be the right decision.
Click to expand...

Scarlet 6k: <12fps
Epic 6k: 100 fps.

Right around 1/10th the performance.

($14.5k vs ?$24.5k-27k) So about $10-12.5k.

Ultimately it's about a 20% more expensive to go Epic (after top plates, batteries, side modules, risers etc) vs about 1000% more performance. If you then need to shoot Greenscreen at 3:1 suddenly you're renting an Epic again for the day. So there is an additional $1,000. It's true it'll be different for everyone but let me ask it this way. How many days will you need to rent an Epic if you only buy a Scarlet? If your answer is > 10 days over 2 years it's cheaper to go Epic and you get an Epic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top