Four Thirds Scarlet?

[Aaron Newsome]

SI2k is 2048 x 1152, vs (last known) 3072 x 1620 for Scarlet.

That's a lot of resolution in a 2/3". Can't wait to get my hands on one. Well, actually, I probably won't get a 2/3" Scarlet. I mean to say, I can't wait to get my hands on ANY Scarlet.

 

[Jim Retar]

What I am saying is they are not a match for Cine lenses though. I've not heard of any 4/3 lens that would better a top notch DSLR lens. Maybe a little more reach, but you will lose out on the wide end.

 

[David Rasberry]

What I am saying is they are not a match for Cine lenses though. I've not heard of any 4/3 lens that would better a top notch DSLR lens. Maybe a little more reach, but you will lose out on the wide end.

Those Olympus lenses are not cheap and are pretty much competitive in optical and mechanical quality with any of Canon's or Nikon's DSLR premium offerings.

I prefer the more precise mechanics of cine lenses myself. You do pay a premium for them though.

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

A 4/3" Scarlet?

No I don't think that's a killer product.

A cheaper S35 Scarlet would clean up though.

I want an S35 Scarlet brain with the same specs (and price!) as the 2/3" Scarlet Brain.

It leaves plenty of room for the value of the currently planned S35 Scarlet brain and Epic S35.

I also propose changing the name of the 3K REDs from "Scarlet" to "Indie." At the same time I propose making the enclosures Red and Black, to set them visually apart from Scarlet and Epic.

In fact... one huge difference between the S35 Scarlet and the S35 Indie I propose, is that I can crop to 3k on the Scarlet and use 16mm or B4 glass and change my camera's application dramatically. The Indie would lose too much resolution if you did that... so you'd have to either step up to Scarlet or own both Indie brains to gain that flexibility.

RED still makes a pile of cash on the modules, which they plan to have work across all their products. And lenses... after all I'll need good glass for my S35 Indie right?

That is the answer to the DSLR craze, and gets us real professional cameras at price points that should shock Canon Sony etc.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

A 4/3" Scarlet?

No I don't think that's a killer product.

A cheaper S35 Scarlet would clean up though.

I want an S35 Scarlet brain with the same specs (and price!) as the 2/3" Scarlet Brain.

It leaves plenty of room for the value of the currently planned S35 Scarlet brain and Epic S35.

I also propose changing the name of the 3K REDs from "Scarlet" to "Indie." At the same time I propose making the enclosures Red and Black, to set them visually apart from Scarlet and Epic.

In fact... one huge difference between the S35 Scarlet and the S35 Indie I propose, is that I can crop to 3k on the Scarlet and use 16mm or B4 glass and change my camera's application dramatically. The Indie would lose too much resolution if you did that... so you'd have to either step up to Scarlet or own both Indie brains to gain that flexibility.

RED still makes a pile of cash on the modules, which they plan to have work across all their products. And lenses... after all I'll need good glass for my S35 Indie right?

That is the answer to the DSLR craze, and gets us real professional cameras at price points that should shock Canon Sony etc.

You totally lost me on the difference between the two S35 Scarlets. If you bump the 2/3" Scarlet to S35, what is the difference between them? And now we're telling RED how they should name their products - and what color they should be? Jim -I hope your listening. :willy_nilly:

 

[John Caballero]

Yeah - I am just going to race out and buy a "bad codec."

But the truth is AVCCAM is a pretty good codec. The footage from AF100 should be pretty nice indeed. While people wait a couple of more years for the Scarlet some others will be doing some nice shooting with this one. You can count on that.

 

[Ken Martini]

But the truth is AVCCAM is a pretty good codec. The footage from AF100 should be pretty nice indeed. While people wait a couple of more years for the Scarlet some others will be doing some nice shooting with this one. You can count on that.

That is my point. 4/3 gives me depth of field control, and access to many affordable lenses. It is the answer to the limitations of the DSLR's.

The huge amount of of these cameras people are buying should be very telling about where the market is, and perhaps where Red should be.

 

[chrislancaster]

But the truth is AVCCAM is a pretty good codec. The footage from AF100 should be pretty nice indeed. While people wait a couple of more years for the Scarlet some others will be doing some nice shooting with this one. You can count on that.

No one is going to stop you and no one expects you to wait for Scarlet people are encouraging you to buy a camera now and when Scarlet comes out you can buy it if you want it.

 

[Bruce Allen]

Matt Uhry asked for a 4/3rds Scarlet back when they were just setting specs and the 2/3rds wasn't announced - a few years ago. Personally I agree that in hindsight it may have been a smart move in view of the AF100.

Compared to Scarlet 2/3rds - it is likely that coupled with good lenses, the AF100 will have better low-light performance (unless you do very clever NR). Once you add an EVF, the AF100 will be cheaper too.

Yes, it's 3K RAW vs 1.9K AVCCAM - but if the AVCCAM-compressed image is less noisy and more detailed than the Scarlet, comes with nice colors out of the box... and you don't have to use some slow single-threaded decoding RedCineX software or buy a $4750 decoder card to get full quality images...? For many people who just want nice footage quickly and easily, the AF100 will be a winner.

Scarlet S35 will beat everything of course but last time we heard prices, it was easily hitting $12K for EVF + REDmote + Battery etc before you've even got an I/O module - eg double the AF100.

I loooove high speed and 3D - so I'm looking at Scarlet 2/3rds. Also, I think I can work some good noise reduction tricks by shooting everything 48fps and then using the data in the "unused" frames to clean up the ones you do see. 48fps will be useful in the future if we can get 3D projected at 48fps and the extra info will help with motion tracking etc for effects shots too.

But I realize I'm not a normal customer at all - most people just want a good, cinematic image quickly for their clients, without all of the post craziness!

If they made a 4/3rds or a s35 Scarlet that did 48fps then cool - I'd get it over the 2/3rds even if it cost several thousand more. But they don't seem to be. With no one camera really fitting my needs, I may just continue renting. Depends on the low-light performance of the 2/3rds fixed vs the AF100 really - providing they have the 3D sync working well of course.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

You totally lost me on the difference between the two S35 Scarlets. If you bump the 2/3" Scarlet to S35, what is the difference between them? And now we're telling RED how they should name their products - and what color they should be? Jim -I hope your listening. :willy_nilly:

You completely misunderstood. You are also dismissive, but I'll give you a serious answer. Its my responsibility to be clear after all.

I am proposing the following:

Adding a removable lens S35 sensor 3K camera to the planned line-up. Aside from sensor size, the camera I propose would match the specifications of the current planned 2/3" Scarlet Cinema.

I propose a name change to cover all the 3K cameras under one aegis, and separate them from their higher end brethren. That is frankly unnecessary... but its the sort of thing done in marketing all the time. For that matter, we don't need the names "Scarlet" or "Epic" either... but they serve a purpose.

Here is my updated line-up:

Three cameras called "Indie." The Indie cameras have 3K sensors. They are:

2/3" fixed zoom with 3K brain
2/3" interchangeable lens 3K brain
S35 interchangeable lens with 3K brain

I am proposing that both interchangeable lens cameras in the "Indie" line have the same feature set, aside from sensor size, and be priced the same.

Two cameras called Scarlet, both models are already extant in the RED plans. I don't propose changing the plans for these cameras at all. They are:

S35 5K brain
FF35 6K brain

I propose no change to the Epic camera line.

The difference between the Indie S35 and the Scarlet S35 is that the Scarlet has a 5K sensor as opposed to Indie's 3K sensor.

In practical terms, this means that the Scarlet 5K S35 can mount 16mm lenses or B4 lenses and be used as a 2/3" camera with 3K resolution. Indie can not do this, if you window the Indie sensor you would have less than a 2K bayer pattern sensor- not even a 1080p camera, possibly not even 720p when all is said and done.

Why am I suggesting this?

Have a look at the specifications and pricing for the 2/3" Cinema brain. Aside from sensor size that camera competes in the price and performance range of the DSLR's and low end "prosumer" camcorders, like the EX1 and HPX300.

The main exception is REDCODE and a wicked fast framerate. Bringing a 2/3" sensor into that price range could really change ENG style work.

The same camera but with an S35 sensor would be impressive, and certainly clean up the market for independent & student cinema.

Why might RED not be able to make such a camera? It may be cost prohibitive to make another S35 sensor. There may be other engineering factors I don't know about. It seems straighforward though. Almost exactly the same electronics package as the 2/3" Cinema brain.

Frankly, I think that such a sensor would be easier to produce than the 5K Scarlet and Epic sensors, and pricing would be such that economies of scale should be able to kick in to great effect.

Why I really want RED to do this: Economies of scale. With lots of S35 RED's out there there will be a much larger market for cinema lenses and RED modules of various sorts. Those economies of scale will trickle up to Scarlet and Epic.

Frankly, the S35 3K Indie makes more sense for RED than the 2/3" sensor cameras. Well, at least it does so for me looking in from the outside.

Of course I want it all. 2/3" brains, cheap S35 brains and more expensive S35 brains too.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Some good insights given here, but unfortunately rationality hijacked again. I noticed I mentioned the upcoming Panasonic GH2 in another thread which wasn't even noticed. It has improved sensor and 1080p50/60, and the GH1 hack is already reaching 44mb/s h264 with much improved picture.

The real issue with 4/3rds, is that Red already has s35 cameras, why have a s35 scarlet it overlaps. Why have two full35mm cameras? The fixed scarlet, it is meant to be a cheaper option for a larger market. So, 4/3rds appeals more.

A 4/3rds scarlet makes much better sense. As I suggested way back, that you could make a scarlet with interchangeable lens format, so that a 2/3rd lens with an image circle covering 2K (or 3k) could be fitted, as well as a 4/rds lens that could still do 2K (binned or windowed) video and 4K (or 6K) stills. All the scarlets could be replaced with 4/3rds detachable and a fixed (and a full manual/auto lens package on the detachable could replace the fixed). This would be cheaper to produce and develop and overlap less with Epic. But everything is already too late now, we will have to wait for scarlet 2 etc.

 

[David Rasberry]

Biggest drawback to 4/3 for motion currently is that you are very limited on lens choices, especially cine lenses and zooms. 2/3"/16mm/S16mm lenses won't cover it on the wide end. So you are limited to using either 35mm still or cine lenses or 4/3 still lenses.
There is only about 1-1/2 stop difference in DOF between 2/3" and 4/3, and 2/3" is capable of a very broad and flexible range of creative control over DOF, so I don't think this is a big advantage.
Fixed lens in the larger formats makes no sense at all as the cost size and weight of the lens will more than double for the same optical performance, pushing it out of a reasonable size and target price range.
S35 Scarlet will offer exactly the same image quality as an Epic with a more modest feature set and limited frame rates. It makes a very reasonable entry level camera for 35mm cinema use as well as high performance stills.
Personally I will take 5mp raw 1:85 cinema format in a 2/3" camera with close to Epic performance and features over 1080p video anything, even ff35.

We were suggesting 4/3 format to Red more than two years ago. But given the current professional market, it would be kind of a red headed step child with no significant cost/performance advantage over S35. It is a very young format. Give it a few years.

 

[John Caballero]

No one is going to stop you and no one expects you to wait for Scarlet people are encouraging you to buy a camera now and when Scarlet comes out you can buy it if you want it.

But I did a very long time ago.The GH1 soon to be GH13.

 

[David Rasberry]

But I did a very long time ago.The GH1 soon to be GH13.

Someone mentioned you can get GH1 body only for around $600 or so now. That has me thinking about picking up a body to play with in the interim. At least be able to shoot some evaluation tests of some of my 16mm lenses in 2x digital zoom mode.

 

[Jim Retar]

Yea, for $600 you can't really go wrong... I think you will be quite happy with the quality when you stick on some nice glass (assuming you use the hack).

I have sold on my 5DII and 7D since the GH1 hack was released. The quality is very good.

 

[Charles Angus]

But the truth is AVCCAM is a pretty good codec.

As far as I'm concerned, interframe codec = joke codec. I just can't trust those codecs to deliver consistent performance.

If it was AVC-Intra, then we could talk about pretty good codecs.

 

[Joseph Hutson]

The huge amount of of these cameras people are buying should be very telling about where the market is, and perhaps where Red should be.

I've never known RED to be in the business that everyone else is in. Also, though they may be anticipating a wide release of the Scarlet, I don't think their ultimate goal is just to see how many cameras they can get out the door. I always thought it was the quality of the camera that got out the door first...

 

[Subhadip Sen]

I agree with Joseph. Jim has made it clear from the very beginning that RED are all about quality over quantity. They don't want to be a mega enterprise like Canon or a Sony - they just want to create the best cameras on the market (and related products), but also make it available to the widest customer base possible.

This does raise the question - So why doesn't RED create the best camera in the sub-$2k market too? I think, today, a truly cinema quality digital camera isn’t possible under $2k. There are just too many compromises involved. RED have stringent quality standards, and RAW and clean 2K seems like the bare minimum today. Scarlet is the closest they are going to get to reaching a large volume for a while.

Having said that, in the future, technological advancements might mean a pocket sized RAW camera will be a possibility. Perhaps RED will step in to address a new market then.

But, 1080p AVCHD cameras is simply not "good enough" for Jim & Co. RED is a company as much as it is a labour of love.

 

[Ken Martini]

From a practical standpoint a 4/3rds camera makes a lot of sense. Even if comes with a fixed zoom lens, it would give better depth of field control than any 2/3rds camera. It would be an instant crossover camera; allowing typical corporate, and cinema style work. Not to mention a sensor with more real estate for light to fall on, which interprets into less noise and more resolution.

Yes, I would be very happy to own a camera that does that. I would be even happier if it had Redcode.

 

[David Rasberry]

From a practical standpoint a 4/3rds camera makes a lot of sense. Even if comes with a fixed zoom lens, it would give better depth of field control than any 2/3rds camera. It would be an instant crossover camera; allowing typical corporate, and cinema style work. Not to mention a sensor with more real estate for light to fall on, which interprets into less noise and more resolution.

Yes, I would be very happy to own a camera that does that. I would be even happier if it had Redcode.

I like the format a lot. Fixed lens doesn't make sense as it would be either slow and not constant speed or very large and heavy if it had any range to it. Either way not a very good option. F4 would be the fastest you could expect at a reasonable size and weight. You just lost any advantage over 2/3" for DOF or sensitivity in that case.
I have an antique Angenieux 18-180 f1.8 constant speed zoom that was designed for a similar image sized 1" plumbicon video camera. The front element diameter is 6" and it weighs 21lbs.