Martin Weiss
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2008
- Messages
- 6,156
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 36
- Age
- 56
- Location
- Switzerland/Norway/Germany
- Website
- weiss.no
Thanks for keeping this discussion (almost) civil.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Wait, how does changing ISO to 1000-2000 change the cameras dynamic range ?I seem to remember Red M in Tungsten light showed about 8 stops in many tests, rather less if you rated the camera at 1000-2000 iso!
Speaking on behalf of those who cannot afford a Red One, let alone an Epic, I can't help but be reminded of the same arguments I've heard over and over in the music industry with larger analog studios having a hard time competing with smaller digital studios with a lower cost basis, and in their opinion, inferior sound.
How is most music distributed today? MP3, Radio, Streamed? Quality? DEFINITELY lower. People don't demand high quality.
As someone else mentioned, the ironic part of all this is that film people DO say the same thing about the RED ONE. I was working on a budget for a full length film and the investors said absolutely NO to a RED ONE. They wanted us to shoot it on film (and still do, it's in pre-production). I pulled out of the project because of this.
It's the same argument. While the RED ONE output is acceptable for you (and me), for some it isn't. For many clients the 7D/5D is acceptable to them, not to you. You won't get an argument from me about the limitations of the 5D/7D as I have one as well, but this doesn't stop me from using my 7D on the weekends to make money shooting various things. I'm sorry this makes you mad, but I am giving people what they want. I have NEVER had a dissatisfied client so far with every 7D shoot I have done. That said, *I* have been dissatisfied on almost all of them as I've had to throw amazing shots away because the camera ruined them.
That said, what's going to happen when you have an Epic and I have a Scarlet S35 and can charge less as well given a MUCH lower cost basis? Are you going to complain why can't customers see the benefit of the Epic? The Epic is going to give YOU more latitude as a shooter. You can still make crap with an Epic, just as you can with film.
Times are changing and you are stuck in the middle of it. We are in a serious transition period in the video acquisition world and I am sure there are some pissed of 35mm film operators that people don't want to spend the money on doing real film anymore. Same shoe. I bet you probably took some business from them as well.
Sounds like to me you have the wrong clients though if they are so easily swayed towards technology. You want to show them the difference? then show them the difference! Prepare material that shows what value-add you offer with your setup. There are PLENTY of examples out there showing why using a 5D/7D is not a good solution. I wouldn't be on REDUSER if it were!It's not that hard to show value if you have value.
I can certainly understand your frustration, but I will say this, these are the growing pains of technology. While we wait for SUPERIOR cameras from RED right now, that's what it is. If you can't convince your clients easily of why RED is superior for what they want, why do you expect other people to do this? Just like when the 35mm DIY adapters came out and people shot some amazing things, I think people have shot some amazing things on the 7D. The FORM FACTOR is what I think drives a lot of it as well.
Imagine Epic/Scarlet with this same form factor. I personally CANNOT wait to start seeing the video from these all over the place!
Wow Rick valid points at the end it's what the client wants, even though in this case it seems it's what the shooter wants. Good point though I can attest.
Actually seems they did some tests on "Lockdown” one of the most recent episodes. Notorious aliasing and moiré. At least what I was able to watch trough DirecTV.Regarding the House episode, maybe we should wait to see it before criticizing ? They seem to have good reasons to have chosen that camera for that particular episode, so let's see how it turns out first, then we can discuss it. Let's not act like those morons that spread FUD all over the place about the Red One when it came out a few years ago.
I'm with Ian on this one, I'm pretty happy to see that big DPs and big Studios are open to trying new tools...
But I also agree with all the issues mentionned above by others, the H264 compression is terrible, rolling shutter is a huge issue on quick pans, definition is very far from 1080P, aliasing and moire are very visible in wide high detail shots, and most of all it lacks of a lot of features that you'd expect even from the cheapest pro video camera... And you need to add a lot of accessories to make it usable as a decent camera.
That's why I'd absolutely avoid using them on any project where I can use a Red instead.
I also agree that there is a lot of misinformation about these cameras, and what they can really do.
Wait, how does changing ISO to 1000-2000 change the cameras dynamic range ?
ISO is only metadata, so I can't see how that would have any influence on dynamic range...
No, you clearly don't know me at all. I didn't say 5D footage looks good blown up or that the 5D compares favorably to higher-end cameras on overall image quality. I know that it doesn't, that's why I own a Red.
IBloom
Very ironic and elitist thread.
I know they forbid DSLRs, very strictly, and as far as I know only accept EXs if used with Nanoflash, but I also hear this last rule is given more slack. Reds are 100% fine for 100% acquisition..
Not sure about your tests, I tested a Red V a 5DMKII, the director chose the 5D because of how it handled tungsten light & highlight roll off.
Not sure about the highlight roll off. First camera burns it in with a pre-set curve. With second, RAW acquiring one you can control highlight roll off.
Director choosing 5D over Red based on picture performance? Interesting...
Sorry, but no it isn't...Thats exactly the problem with R1, every stop you increase the ISO is a stop of DR lost, a Canon DSLR does it differently!
Exactly my point.Rewind two years and you will find the exact same thing with RED v Film.
People were pissed that their $xxxxxx cameras were losing rental/production value to a camera that had problems/workaround (eg, offered less DR, operational problems, bad workflow etc etc.... yes, we know those issues are generally solved now).
Canon are doing what RED did.... they have just done it in a sub $4k market, rather than a sub $40k market.... that brings even more severe problems/workarounds.
If you like what R1 acheived.... you should applaud what Canon did too.
Sorry, but no it isn't...
If you switch from 800 to 1600 ISO, you lose 1 stop of latitude in the shadows, but gain 1 stop of latitude in the highlights, and the overall dynamic range stays 100% the same. That's even more true now that we have the FLUT™™ color science that avoids clipping when changing ISO, so you really keep all your DR at whatever ISO you chose.