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 :)

Camera Shootout

That could be the 3 stops over-exposure compared to the film.
 
Borzoifilms said:
There should have not been any changes in DOF between RED and film. Same lens = same DOF.
Click to expand...

Sure there could be differences -- for example, if you loaded 100 ASA film stock in the film camera, which in turn would affect the lens aperture chosen, which affects depth of field.

But it should have been easy to match the 35mm and RED shot in terms of f-stop & lens to reduce those variables.

RED is technically 320 ASA, so you'd probably use a 500 ASA film stock to compare it to, although there is a 400 ASA Fuji stock and a 250 ASA Daylight stock from Kodak & Fuji that would be closer to the RED sensitivity and color balance. You could just rate the 500 ASA stock at 320 ASA if necessary. Or split the difference, rate the RED and the film stock at 400 ASA.
 
We'll take this into account next time. If you want to see a more accurate RED vs 35mm film test, check out version 1 of the Camera Comparison test. Although I wasn't there for its production, I was told that both RED and 35mm film had the same f-stop and therefore same DOF. Thus that's a more accurate comparison.
 
For anyone that might be interested. I've posted a brief clip of the RED vs the Canon 5D2 on vimeo. It doesn't include discussion or even audio, but helps to show a side-by-side of the two in action and their true difference you get with the money you pay for a RED ONE.

http://vimeo.com/2356055
 
David Mullen ASC said:
RED is technically 320 ASA, so you'd probably use a 500 ASA film stock to compare it to, although there is a 400 ASA Fuji stock and a 250 ASA Daylight stock from Kodak & Fuji that would be closer to the RED sensitivity and color balance. You could just rate the 500 ASA stock at 320 ASA if necessary. Or split the difference, rate the RED and the film stock at 400 ASA.
Click to expand...

I would rate RED 160-200 when shooting tungsten.. At least thats what ive been doing to eliminate noise in the blue channel, and it works like a charm
 
Well, then, perhaps you'd test the RED against a 200T 35mm stock. That might make the grain of the 35mm test closer to the RED look, though 35mm would look even better in terms of overexposure latitude... compared to testing the RED against a 500T stock, both rated at 400 ASA.

Just shows that there are many variables in testing that will affect the outcome, not to mention the post. For example, it could be argued that transferring the 35mm footage to HD tape is not really showing off the 35mm to its best advantage, and is "dumbing it down" closer to the level of other HD cameras, making the differences harder to see.
 
The original link

Zacuto's "Great Camera Shootout 08"

The guys at the shootout were really nice.

I would choose for both,

1 million $+ feature and Amazon documentary RED1.
 
Go for it Sanjin! I'd still prefer a small HDV camera if I'm being chased by natives! But I'd probably be shooting very guerrilla style anyway so I wouldn't want a lot of stuff to bring. Initially we hadn't planned on including film in the test and it was added last minute. So getting film stock, a film camera, and the works was very rushed. That's really why there's the discrepancies here. It was a last minute addition and next test you'll see a much better comparison of all cameras! However, I wouldn't expect to see a ton of adapter cameras... maybe 1-2. An adapter comparison test is something I'll be doing in the coming months. I don't see why a RED vs 35mm Film vs 16mm Film test wouldn't also be possible to do.
 
Casey Green said:
Also, the RED was shot at REDCODE 28. Why not 36? Oh well. Next time. Thanks again for you efforts.
Click to expand...

All my hard drives were tied up with another production, so I used 8 gig CF cards. (For the uninitiated, the CF cards are a bit slower than the hard drives.) We felt that the change in datarate was preferable to changing other variables--sensor "size" and aspect ratio. For the purposes of this test, rc28 isn't that huge of a loss.

Borzoifilms said:
. . . I did however notice some clipping in the candle flame, while film did not have this shortcoming.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the aperture choice was responsible for any clipping.



Great discussion--I think the feedback and questions are all productive and appropriate, and it helps put the test in perspective. It helps to see what were the functional limitations and constraints--I suppose I'm reiterating Mr. Mullen's point.

I hear the point that someone made about throwing up the moniker "unscientific test" as a cover for criticism, but I really don't think that applies in this case. Seeing what this test was and what these guys were doing, I think they were working within real world limitations of time and budget, and giving fair warning of that in advance.

You have a few general choices in tests like these:

(1) spend lots of time (therefore lots of money) getting all the details worked out in pre-pro, having VERY scientific controls--and run the very real risk of never publishing the results (this stuff was finished and on the web within a week!); or . . .

(2) you can work within whatever budget and goodwill you can ask working professionals to provide and plow through a quick test to see what a bunch of cameras look like together.

Jens did an excellent job, I thought. It was very last minute it was under very strict time contstraints. Things were added and changed, and some things got lost in the shuffle. This thread has brought all that to light, which is helpful.

So, great test guys! It has been enlightening to me to see the DSLRs up against some indy mainstays.



And Joseph, kudos, man. You've got the guts and the drive to make it in this business. You are taking helpful criticism like a man, and with more maturity than some guys twice your age. You'll go far with that M.O.

Let me know when you are back in Chicago and we can go have coffee.

-Chris
 
Chris Gearhart said:
All my hard drives were tied up with another production, so I used 8 gig CF cards. (For the uninitiated, the CF cards are a bit slower than the hard drives.)
-Chris
Click to expand...

heh heh... Im not sure if your kidding or not with the above.. but regardless, I think you guys have realized the expectations of a "shootout" by now..

Shootouts can be incredibly valuable for customers to make decisions with.. and that carries a bit of responsibility... specially if you are marketing it as such.

This reminds me.. David Mullen did a DVX vs Sony test way back in the day that actually pointed me away from the Sony and towards the DVX, and, well, you all know where that lead me...
 
Jarred Land said:
heh heh... Im not sure if your kidding or not with the above.. but regardless, I think you guys have realized the expectations of a "shootout" by now..

Shootouts can be incredibly valuable for customers to make decisions with.. and that carries a bit of responsibility... specially if you are marketing it as such.

This reminds me.. David Mullen did a DVX vs Sony test way back in the day that actually pointed me away from the Sony and towards the DVX, and, well, you all know where that lead me...
Click to expand...



Heh heh. Yeah. I don't expect we'll see a D5user.com site spring from this.

You make a good point--this was probably mis-named. "Shoot-outs" are usually considered to be a bit more "scientific", although most do seem to be limited in scope in some way. I was kinda surprised to see the banner and the name.

Oh, and yeah, my drives were all being used on another production. Our DIT made archival copies on set, but the production also wanted to have copies made directly from the RED drives, and they were still out. I could only offer the "shootout" so much for free! :innocent:
 
That was great that you went to all the trouble to do a side be side comparison. That's always difficult at best.

It's a shame the Red footage wasn't better and the 5D footage wasn't matched better, maybe next time.

I was amazed that the A1, HPX170 and EX3 footage was so similar. The 3000 footage seemed a little over sharpened.

Great effort.
 
The RED looked the worse of all of them? Did you look at the D90 footage at all?

I mean look at the highlights and shadows in the female violinist's arm as well as the detail in the black portion of the wall. I think the RED camera fairs quite well in that respect.

I wish we had had more time with the 5D2. Unfortunately, we didn't. I think with time though... people will get a "magic recipe" to make it look optimally at its best.
 
Sean said:
I was surprised by the Red footage. Dare I say it looked the worst of all of them! Based on this test alone, I'd have bought an HVX with an adapter. Disappointing. Interesting, but disappointing.
Click to expand...

go back and look at the blacks on the 5d footage. tell us what you think.
 
What a joke!

That's all I have to say about this so called "shootout". I loathe tests of this sort, they accomplish nothing but confusion.

Let's see one single, raw, uncorrected frame of this scene in TIF format from each camera at maximum camera resolution using the best lens available for each camera and optimal lighting for the sensor. And to make it impartial, find an expert or a factory rep for each camera that knows what they are doing to make sure iris, shutter speed, shutter angle, exposure and everything else is optimal for the camera, lens, & light.

That's the only way you can compare two cameras, let alone multiple cameras.

-shooter
 
Jason Ing said:
go back and look at the blacks on the 5d footage. tell us what you think.
Click to expand...

I've seen 5D footage adjusted properly on other forums. Interestingly when you change the saturation/gamma the data is still in the blacks and you can bring out details.

I think the adapter footage tests the adapter rather than the camera. That should be a different shoot out. The HVX should have been shown separately.

It will probably require someone fairly expert with each camera to have a really close comparison simply because you get better with an individual camera if you shoot it every day.

It was an interesting test, if not definitive for the Red, or 5D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top