First night shoot with my scarlet.

[Roshdi Alkadri]

@ Roshdi

I know that but Scarlet has "less boards" so there are differences & not just in frame rates & rez. Its good to see material from a Scarlet it helps create very positive impressions of the camera whilst Epic X already has so many.

"Does Scarlet have the same native dynamic range as EPIC?
Yes."

http://www.scarletuser.com/showpost.php?p=90187&postcount=4

At 4k 24fps, the Scarlet X and the Epic are the same

 

[John Bannister]

..having the right tool for the job is one thing....knowing how to get the best out of it is another thing entirely. Great images David and Gunliek!

 

[Nick Morrison]

In regards to comparing our 24 2.8 Nikon night test shot to the FS100 or even the 5D, a couple of things:

1) This is one test. Shot at 2.8 (on a lens that gets sharp probably at 5.6). It's also probably underexposed.
2) I think Will mentioned he even shot if from his car?
3) Im sure as many have said, when scaled down to 1080p, it will look fine. (And for most of us, that is the ultimate deliverable: even most features grade and deliver in 2k)
4) I've shot a ton on Canon DSLR, and anything above 640 gets terrible noise, so for me having CLEAN 800 is awesome.
5) In regards the FS100, yes its a lowlight killer. It's also based off of Sony's new sensor, which is NEWER than the MX. I think our lowlight expectations need to wait until Dragon, which I'm sure will match or supersede all current lowlight standards (and also quite possibly be true full frame, like the 5D).

Expecting the Scarlet to be PERFECT I think is folly. For the money, you are entering a cinematic world and buying a piece of gear that can shoot cinema, just like the big boys can. Neither the FS100 or any DSLR can say that in the same way.

And you are buying into a CONCEPT that evolves with the industry.

Expecting perfection is getting lost in the details. Part of the creative process is accepting a certain amount of failure and lack of perfection, and working with what you have. A perfect, noiseless shot that is exposed PERFECTLY may still be totally boring and insipid.

Embrace the tool for what it is. And move on. And shoot something. That you like.

Expending a ton of energy on shades of grey that are purely technical I think is just an exercise in hamster like futility.

This is supposed to be a tool that opens up new creative possibilities, and expands the limits of what is possible for indie filmmakers.

That's what matters, and that's what's important.

I personally CAN'T WAIT for our Scarlet to arrive. I will embrace and accept it for what it IS. Not for what it has MISSING. I have faith that whatever is lacking will be fixed and adjusted in future firmware upgrades or sensor changes. I can live waiting. I'm more interested in what I'll be shooting next month when I get this camera.

-NICK

 

[Jack Shanahan]

A colorist is not Jesus or Santa Claus. You can't do miracles even on a moving pic in RAW.

LMAO

i love that.

 

[Mike Garrick]

@ Nick +1

@Benoit-Joan
You'r quite right they are neither Jesus Or Santa Clause ...............................They always leave me with the impression they're God.

 

[Pascal Payant]

Man,

I know what you mean...

This whole night shot noise thing has me down...

what was the Iso and lenses used for that. it look beautiful

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Maybe it's some voigtlaender glass...

I knew it! Well, close enough for a pat on the back anyway. Wouldn't have ventured the guess though.

I'd push them quite a bit though.

 

[Roshdi Alkadri]

@pascal

Post #71

EPIC X 111

Everyone knows I am a 320 ISO man. I don't like to push past 800.

Maybe it's some voigtlaender glass...

I can't remember...

 

[David Battistella]

Really? Because the Red 18-85MM from another thread had much more noise then yours in low-light.. how fast do you think the glass was on yours, if you can't remember the specific lens?

P

robaly F2.8 or F1.8...or something in there...



David

 

[David Battistella]

what was the Iso and lenses used for that. it look beautiful

Some of these shots are 2K 3:1 compression on a long lens....

No photoshop, just all the tools in RCX.



David

 

[Francesco Cammarata]

+1, all depends of wich kind of work and situations, for this i need to know what to buy before spend money for a piace of gear that don't make what I need.

In regards to comparing our 24 2.8 Nikon night test shot to the FS100 or even the 5D, a couple of things:

1) This is one test. Shot at 2.8 (on a lens that gets sharp probably at 5.6). It's also probably underexposed.
2) I think Will mentioned he even shot if from his car?
3) Im sure as many have said, when scaled down to 1080p, it will look fine. (And for most of us, that is the ultimate deliverable: even most features grade and deliver in 2k)
4) I've shot a ton on Canon DSLR, and anything above 640 gets terrible noise, so for me having CLEAN 800 is awesome.
5) In regards the FS100, yes its a lowlight killer. It's also based off of Sony's new sensor, which is NEWER than the MX. I think our lowlight expectations need to wait until Dragon, which I'm sure will match or supersede all current lowlight standards (and also quite possibly be true full frame, like the 5D).

Expecting the Scarlet to be PERFECT I think is folly. For the money, you are entering a cinematic world and buying a piece of gear that can shoot cinema, just like the big boys can. Neither the FS100 or any DSLR can say that in the same way.

And you are buying into a CONCEPT that evolves with the industry.

Expecting perfection is getting lost in the details. Part of the creative process is accepting a certain amount of failure and lack of perfection, and working with what you have. A perfect, noiseless shot that is exposed PERFECTLY may still be totally boring and insipid.

Embrace the tool for what it is. And move on. And shoot something. That you like.

Expending a ton of energy on shades of grey that are purely technical I think is just an exercise in hamster like futility.

This is supposed to be a tool that opens up new creative possibilities, and expands the limits of what is possible for indie filmmakers.

That's what matters, and that's what's important.

I personally CAN'T WAIT for our Scarlet to arrive. I will embrace and accept it for what it IS. Not for what it has MISSING. I have faith that whatever is lacking will be fixed and adjusted in future firmware upgrades or sensor changes. I can live waiting. I'm more interested in what I'll be shooting next month when I get this camera.

-NICK

 

[David Battistella]

Guys,

There is another important note.

RED lets you have the RAW image, pre sharpening, pre noise processing and then they LET YOU DECIDE how you want it to be to taste. These other sensors are doing a lot of the workd for you and recording the images with processing done in the camera.

You have to think of RED more like expose/process, more like film than digital.

The OLPF is better on the EPIC along with onboard processing, but how you post process low light material matters a lot. 2.8 is not enough really. 1.8 and below is much better. The sensor like that extra stop.

David

 

[Tim Blaney Davidson]

Is there some motion footage available of the Epic in combination with the Voigtländer? Would love to see that!

 

[Erik Franzén]

Man,

I know what you mean...

This whole night shot noise thing has me down...

WHY ISN'T THERE A DAMN LIKE BUTTON FOR THIS?!

 

[Jesper Sichlau]

I don't care how good the FS100 look in comparison to Epic/Scarlet in low light conditions - I still see some amounts of noise in the FS100 picture.

 

[PatrickW]

lets see it with the Leica Noctilux

 

[Gunleik Groven]

I don't care how good the FS100 look in comparison to Epic/Scarlet in low light conditions - I still see some amounts of noise in the picture.

LOL

Don't understand. In the Epic/Scarlet or FS100 image?

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Regarding the FS100. Yes, it does well in low light. And there is a reason (maybe a couple). Anyone want to dissect one (hardware/firmware) and report back. Not knocking it at all, it just takes a different approach, one that gives you a bit less control. RED's approach is to let you decide how much noise stays and how much goes. Some people may prefer that that decision is made for them in camera, and I can't argue that point. If it looks good, it looks good.

If you want low light RED imagery without Hollywood lighting, you need fast lenses. But with fast lenses wide open, you run into other challenges. Perhaps your shot needs deeper depth of field, maybe your lenses are too soft wide open, etc. Once again, this always comes back to the same overused (but accurate) phrase - right tool for the job. If the FS100 gets you the shot as intended, and the Scarlet doesn't (perhaps no time for post process, whatever the case may be) then the choice is easy. If the shot needs to be 4K or even 2K, that eliminates the FS100. In the real world of production, it's these types of things that get discussed and usually decisions are made based on what is needed to get the shots based on technical requirements, budget, and logistics. So if one says that Scarlet sucks because you can't pull it out of your bag and shoot in zero light, that doesn't mean it sucks if you use the appropriate approach and actually play to its strengths. I think it's cool that the 5D can shoot in available light at night. Problem is, many of those shots I have seen get a lot of attention, I was not that thrilled with. Yes, they can see at night. The problem is, the light is often not right to my eyes. Cool that they are able to get shots with no lighting and zero budget, but I can only go by the results when watching and I often come away thinking it would have been great if they had some large sources with better light quality. But the fact that you can do it is certainly better than not being able to do it because not everyone agrees with me about the lighting part of my statement.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

I think much is in the term photography:

Photo = Light
Graphy = drawing

Drawing with lights.

If you want controll, you need to controll light, not the other way around.

The benefits of an Epic/Scarlet is not that it can see in the dark, but how they handle and represent light.

Couldn't possibly have been happier...

 

[Adam Michael Carr]

I think much is in the term photography:

Photo = Light
Graphy = drawing

Drawing with lights.

If you want controll, you need to controll light, not the other way around.

The benefits of an Epic/Scarlet is not that it can see in the dark, but how they handle and represent light.

Couldn't possibly have been happier...

This deserves my first post on this forum. Great words my friend. Drawing with light = control over light. I have always felt that a good DP is like a super hero and his super power is light manipulation. Cant wait for my Scarlet!