Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.

[Jeffrey Loewe]

But by Jim's own words. This camera has already aged. Professional is a finish in 4k (according to RED). This camera only shoots 12fps at a finish of 4k. So I don't see the value of investing in the first generation Scarlet.

As I said, this is not anything close to the camera that I was expecting. I agree, it is better for some, that being the Epic-S crowd. As for me, I really wanted the Scarlet interchangeable, but would have settled for the Scarlet fixed for this season. Now that the usable frame rates have gone, the Scarlet-X is not appealing to me.

Also, I'm intrigued as to why everyone is so sure that this is such a good camera. We haven't seen any footage from it right?

Same chip as the epic. Jim himself said the shot's match up. I too was hoping for the interchangeable scarlet, just for size, form factor and mini-primes as well as the frame rates. Your right, it isn't the camera for everybody. I posted this somewhere else and I'll post it here. We all have to keep in mind this is there third camera. What they've done with 3, is as far as companies like Sony and Arri are just starting to catch up to after easily 30-40+ cameras. This will further drive prices down and force things to be more affordable as time goes on. In my mind they accomplished alot with this camera. It's only a sign of things to come.

Looking forward in time, prices will drop, it will force other companies to catch up and release similar equipment at lower prices and allow for RED to respond. Sure there is a limit to that, but the fact is, it's competition and RED just stole alot of thunder from the F3, EOS300C, possibly even the Alexa crowd.

It's not exactly what I expected, but it really ends up being what I want going forward. Then again I was sold on the epic from day one. You give me the ability to shoot 4K at 24 fps, and still have anything all the way down to 1K at 120. Which I was hoping would be at 3K but that could be something that comes in the future.

I've been skeptical of stuff before. Trust me I've been frustrated and down about things but I really like what they've released. No it's not what every body wanted. But RED themselves said it will be more expensive, there will be changes...4K is the future. They pretty much gave it away before it was released.

 

[Robert Jackson]

Indeed. Even 'cause talking heads is TV Sorry, I couldn't resist

But I saw My Dinner with Andre in a theater. Heh...

 

[Robert Jackson]

4K is the future.

That's a tagline, not a philosophy. If I remember right, back when Mr. Jannard was plugging the Scarlet he claimed that 35mm film scans have 4K of information on them and 16mm film scans have 3K. You know, back when the goal was to sell Scarlet as an alternative to 16mm. Now the philosophy is, "All recording moving images must be in Super Panavision 70!"

 

[Vance Colvig]

I beleive Jim mentioned that the 2/3 sensor would not give the resolution required for 4k. 1080p is not going to be the standard very much longer. Red has spent a ton of money on a 2/3 project, and then decided to do one better with a S35 sensor. Red Digital Cinema is a business driven by a passion to build excellence into their cameras at an affordable price to the masses of professional and aspiring professional movimakers. They are manufacturing lens mounts for other brands of lenses that they don't even sell! They are trying to make cameras that will not go obsolete by the next NAB show unlike other manufacturers. It is so simple, I just can't figure how anyone can't get this. If anyone doesn't like a big sensor, go buy a 2/3 size from someone else.........or accomodate your possible future needs and use 2k on a Scarlet.

I personally will be glad when the ones who feel they have been betrayed by RED either see the light or move on so the noise level will go down. Only then will it be easier and more fun to navigate through Redusers.net.

O.K. Rant over. Better now. Cheers!

 

[Emanuel A.]

But I saw My Dinner with Andre in a theater. Heh...

 

[Emanuel A.]

That's a tagline, not a philosophy. If I remember right, back when Mr. Jannard was plugging the Scarlet he claimed that 35mm film scans have 4K of information on them and 16mm film scans have 3K. You know, back when the goal was to sell Scarlet as an alternative to 16mm. Now the philosophy is, "All recording moving images must be in Super Panavision 70!"

Well, Jim always defended 4K. When I came here to read him, I was used to think to myself, how he will try to sell the 3K formula from now on?

It could not work.

 

[Robert Jackson]

Well, Jim always defended 4K. When I came here to read him, I was used to think to myself, how he will try to sell the 3K formula from now on?

It could not work.

I dunno. I thought it worked fine as "Digital 16mm." But then he'd get cooties from people who don't work on feature films exclusively. Heh...and who knows what the real motivation for dumping the 2/3" rig was? Now they have to sell it as, "We were saving you from an inferior product!" But it sounds more like they just weren't able to bring it to market.

 

[Emanuel A.]

I dunno. I thought it worked fine as "Digital 16mm." But then he'd get cooties from people who don't work on feature films exclusively. Heh...and who knows what the real motivation for dumping the 2/3" rig was? Now they have to sell it as, "We were saving you from an inferior product!" But it sounds more like they just weren't able to bring it to market.

Yes, as matter of fact, if RED ONE / EPIC were always still in development from (delivery) day one, we can only imagine what might happen with large thousands in a new plataform as 2/3" would be. I'd predict a nightmare for all of us. I must admit, I was worried. This announcement was a relief.

 

[John Stamets]

Well,

As great as it is, I can't afford it anymore than an Epic. So, I guess it really doesn't matter how great it is for the price... Maybe I can scrape it together, but wow. I wasn't expecting THAT big a price increase...

J

 

[Robert Jackson]

Yes, as matter of fact, if RED ONE / EPIC were always still in development from (delivery) day one, we can only imagine what might happen with large thousands in a new plataform as 2/3" would be. I'd predict a nightmare for all of us. I must admit, I was worried. This announcement was a relief.

What, because you thought working on the continuing development of the 2/3" system would take resources away from the 135 development team?

 

[David Mullen ASC]

The Scarlet is an amazing bargain for a pro digital cinema camera... my only disappointment was that the 2/3" fixed-lens Scarlet looked FUN, pro quality with prosumer ease-of-use and size, whereas this new Scarlet looks like a serious pro camera. I look at it and I think of work, not running in my spare time around shooting my own personal projects with my friends. And I can't drop $12,000+ on a package for personal use... $7000 was more doable. To justify buying a Scarlet now I'd have to figure out how to rent it to my productions as a C-camera, and I'd probably have to invest in it with more lenses and accessories than I would care to for personal use. In the end, I may end up spending over $20,000 and I don't normally rent equipment at all so I don't have a clue as to the process of paying off such an investment in a timely fashion. A $7000 personal movie camera like the fixed-lens Scarlet, that I wouldn't have to justify spending the money on.

The new Canon is a disappointment, $20,000 just to get 8-bit 4:2:2 1080P at 50 mb/sec. Six years ago, that would have been something amazing, now I think most people were hoping for 4K RAW motion images out of a Canon for under $10,000.

Personally I think $10,000 or under is what the Canon and the Sony F3 really should be selling for, and that the Scarlet is a steal at that price range.

 

[Emanuel A.]

What, because you thought working on the continuing development of the 2/3" system would take resources away from the 135 development team?

Even 'cause the 35mm factor has been RED territory for years. Also economies of scale in the 35mm sensor size territory, as written before:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...S16-a-request.&p=859183&viewfull=1#post859183

I've had talks with industry reps along these years, and they effectively fear RED. They start to laugh, they end nervous (to admit) to curse the billionaire Canon, for example, should say thanks to Jim for the glass to sell with the RED cameras. But they've always been to try to follow Jim Jannard. And even replicate his marketing. Did you remember the new firmware for 5D Mark II to be announced as Epic? They think he can steal their still photography market, without mention the Cinema/TV segment. And both. They are even aware of his passion for photography as photographer, etc.

PL lenses, now the C300, the 4K M-JPEG all this is their response. I'm speaking based on inside contact with them. And yes, they become fully surprised with the number of 5D Mark II units to be sold exclusively for motion purpose. Once I heard something like they (the moviemakers clientele) call to ask for support more than any parallel quota of still photographers!

 

[Joel Kaye]

Personally I think $10,000 or under is what the Canon and the Sony F3 really should be selling for, and that the Scarlet is a steal at that price range.

What David said.

Canon does seem to be pushing some boundaries the DSLR world. The next 5D cinema thing will be interesting. The 1DX is interesting. The Sony FS-100 is amazing IMHO. But it's s35 so a little tougher to focus.

So what is that super fun little camera these days? A GH2?

BTW - Sweet Smell of Success (good re-title) looks amazing. Terrific work. RED should be proud.

 

[Emanuel A.]

The Scarlet is an amazing bargain for a pro digital cinema camera... my only disappointment was that the 2/3" fixed-lens Scarlet looked FUN, pro quality with prosumer ease-of-use and size, whereas this new Scarlet looks like a serious pro camera. I look at it and I think of work, not running in my spare time around shooting my own personal projects with my friends. And I can't drop $12,000+ on a package for personal use... $7000 was more doable. To justify buying a Scarlet now I'd have to figure out how to rent it to my productions as a C-camera, and I'd probably have to invest in it with more lenses and accessories than I would care to for personal use. In the end, I may end up spending over $20,000 and I don't normally rent equipment at all so I don't have a clue as to the process of paying off such an investment in a timely fashion. A $7000 personal movie camera like the fixed-lens Scarlet, that I wouldn't have to justify spending the money on.

The new Canon is a disappointment, $20,000 just to get 8-bit 4:2:2 1080P at 50 mb/sec. Six years ago, that would have been something amazing, now I think most people were hoping for 4K RAW motion images out of a Canon for under $10,000.

Personally I think $10,000 or under is what the Canon and the Sony F3 really should be selling for, and that the Scarlet is a steal at that price range.

Nice to read you over these boards as usual. Your voice is always necessary.

Thanks,
Emanuel

 

[J Davis]

Reading David Mullens post helped clarify my own reasons for not wanting to go over $7000.

I have the funds for the scarlet-x or an epic for that matter, but I also want my scarlet to be a personal camera without having to rent it out.

 

[Emanuel A.]

The Sony FS-100 is amazing IMHO. But it's s35 so a little tougher to focus.

C'mon, FS100 is a PITA but for other reasons: 8-bit 4:2:0 granted the price point.

 

[Emanuel A.]

Reading David Mullens post helped clarify my own reasons for not wanting to go over $7000.

I have the funds for the scarlet-x or an epic for that matter, but I also want my scarlet to be a personal camera without having to rent it out.

It is a pity. You are one of the guys that I'd like to read posts as Scarlet-X user. And $2,750 cannot do so much difference as you wish. You can even rent it out temporarily and pay it back.

 

[J Davis]

Thanks Emanuel. When I said $7k I meant it as a full working package so its not a 2750 difference. Its $7k vs $14k, double the money.

I appreciate the encouragement on rentals but I fear the whole rental thing will suck time away from what I love to do which is write, shoot and watch my kids grow up.
My camera stays by my side 25 hours a day, 8 days a week

Sometimes I wake up at 4 in the morning with an idea and I go out into the living room, set up lights and shoot. How am I gonna do that when my cams out on rental?

 

[J Davis]

I'm gonna put on the ego hat for a minute - I still can't believe I won an award for cinematography using a canon t2i and a bunch of AIs primes. I have so many wild ideas screaming around in my I head about what I could do shooting with decent dynamic range. Watch out if I ever get a red !!

 

[Michael Thornton]

Kyle,

I'm sorry but the Scarlet-X is still less than $6,000 after adjusted for inflation.

Please look at the price of Gold and you will see what $6,000 buy you back then vs $9,750 today.

I'd say the Scarlet-X after adjusted for inflation is cheaper than the $6,000 back then when the idea of Scarlet was out.

The fix lens thing?

You will have an option now of what ever lens you want.

On the other hand, I respect your opinions.

It's great to be able to speak your mind.

Please let me speak mine.

The Scarlet-X is a great camera at a great price.

Please refer to David M. post for some of the reasons.