Low light: Scarlet 2/3" vs Canon 7d

[Ed Ollei]

I was hoping someone may have an idea of how well the Scarlet would perform in low light compared to the 7d. I know since it has not even been released, I am happy with reading anyone's conjectures. Also, since I am a newbie, and recently sold my canon consumer camcorder and stereo equipment to wrangle up some $$ for a new camera purchase, should I use my $3000 for a Scarlett, or a 7D? What would you do with $3k?

 

[Peter Mosiman]

I was hoping someone may have an idea of how well the Scarlet would perform in low light compared to the 7d. I know since it has not even been released, I am happy with reading anyone's conjectures. Also, since I am a newbie, and recently sold my canon consumer camcorder and stereo equipment to wrangle up some $$ for a new camera purchase, should I use my $3000 for a Scarlett, or a 7D? What would you do with $3k?

If you only have 3K...go for a 7D and some accessories (external monitor, sound, etc).

 

[Stronz Vanderploeg]

I'd say save your $3k and wait a bit more and save a bit more for scarlet. Or at least wait til the 30th to find out how you want to schedule your purchases over the coming year.

If you buy a 7d now, you know canon is going to release a slightly better camera in 6 months - 1 year from and you're going to feel cheated.

After Scarlet RED is still going to be working on future cameras, but your Scarlet isn't going to be obsolete within a year of use.

EDIT* No way of knowing low light performance yet. Only guesses and yours is as good as mine.

 

[Tom.Wong]

keep in mind, 3k for scarlet will most likely end up being for the "brain" only. with all the bells and whistles, you might spending 10k or more. lcd, evf bomb, CF module, CF cards, red drives, redmote, audio module/handle. these are all things u have to buy separate. so if u think 3k is all ur gonna have for awhile, 7d might be a better choice for u, u can get a decent zoom lens and some minor accessories.

 

[Stephen Gentle]

keep in mind, 3k for scarlet will most likely end up being for the "brain" only. with all the bells and whistles, you might spending 10k or more. lcd, evf bomb, CF module, CF cards, red drives, redmote, audio module/handle. these are all things u have to buy separate. so if u think 3k is all ur gonna have for awhile, 7d might be a better choice for u, u can get a decent zoom lens and some minor accessories.

A the Complete Kit was priced at $3750, but that might change somewhat. $3000 is definitely not going to be enough though.

 

[Jon Betz]

Am I wrong or aren't the 7D and Scarlet on COMPLETELY different levels? Scarlet will be an amazing professional camera with beautiful images and pristine quality. The 7D might have full resolution HD but that's way lower res than any Scarlet, not to mention the huge problems with aliasing and the "jello effect." I would watch a lot of test videos before buying a 7D. I can't believe anyone even thinks its worth it. Maybe for highly scripted shoots where every shot is planned to the T, but for any kind of handheld gorilla shooting, the 7D seems pretty much useless. Some of the videos might look great on Vimeo, but check out the aliasing problems and try looking at the videos on a large screen. Not sure about anyone else, but I'm definitely not impressed. Does anyone know something I don't? Anyway, I'd spend the money on an actual camcorder like a XHA1 and accessories, unless you absolutely need interchangeable lenses (which I do for wildlife work), in which case I would think the best move would be to wait for Scarlet.

 

[Michael Olsen]

There was a time when lots of people felt that the 7D was a "Scarlet Killer". Now that the camera is out in the wild and people have been able to shoot some charts and run some tests that idea has largely, and rightly, died out.

If you only have $3000 and need to shoot right now the choice is obvious. 7D. There is no Scarlet.

If you only have $3000 and can make that back, with some extra change pretty quickly, then you might consider the 7D as a stepping stone to Scarlet. In other words, get a small 7D package, work it to death, use the profits for a Scarlet and have the 7D for crash/B-cam/BTS.

If you don't think you can make $1000+/mo in the next few months, wait and save for the Scarlet.

Do consider the real financial cost of owning the cameras, though. Simply buying the body isn't enough, in either instance.

There are definitely usability concerns with either camera even though they are ready "out of the box", requiring extra expenditure. Both the fixed Scarlet and the 7D share the DSLR format, which makes for some stabilization issues if you are shooting at all handheld, especially on lenses without IS and on shots with longer lenses. IMHO, you need some way to get more points of contact, be it using a loupe (Z-finder) or a rig.

Withthe 7D, you'll definitely need some sort of external sound recorder (H4n) or magic pre-amp (Beachtek), along with a mic or two.

7D and the 2/3" Cinema will need lenses, as well.

Both will need recording media.

Both will need extra batteries.

You'll want some ND filters.

In other words, $3000 can cut it for a basic 7D, but definitely won't cut it for a 2/3" Cinema Scarlet.

 

[Liam Hall]

Scarlet's low light performance seems to heading in the right direction.

I'm telling you... it is getting pretty exciting around here. We are finally "tuning" the sensor and figuring it out. The results are really incredible. It was great last week... even better today. There are a few more knobs to twist and we'll be ready to post some frame grabs.

I'm now shooting only ISO 800 and 2000 for testing. 800 is the new 320... only better.

Jim

 

[Ed Ollei]

Thanks for some REALLY great feedback. I can definitely wait till Red makes whatever announcement they are making end of month. However, with all the Legacy Canon glass that is out there at a good price, you can have a fairly well stocked 7D for low budget.... Couldn't the rolling shutter and aliasing issues be corrected in post-processing? I am not trying to compare Scarlet and the 7D at the same level, but is it safe to say that from one of you guys who do this for a living, that the 7D has the potential to produce great footage? Is $3K for a 7D and other accessories a bargain worth not passing up, or would it really be prudent to save some extra money for the Scarlet?

 

[Michael Olsen]

Couldn't the rolling shutter and aliasing issues be corrected in post-processing?

Rolling Shutter: Possibly. There are a couple of programs that deal with it, but I really don't know what they do to overall image quality.

Aliasing: The only real fix to this one is to shoot slightly out of focus and then sharpen in post. In my opinion, not really a great plan of action.

is it safe to say that from one of you guys who do this for a living, that the 7D has the potential to produce great footage?

Really, I think it depends on what you need to be shooting and how you will be displaying it. Shooting shorts for the web? Sure - great footage. Shooting interviews for DVD? Sure - great footage. Shooting a wedding in low-light? Sure, great footage. Shooting sports? Not so great...720p has loads of aliasing and rolling shutter would make fast pans tricky. Shooting a feature for display on a 2K or 4K projector? Again, not so great. Shooting for a discerning client who needs a really sharp 1080p deliverable? No go. The resolution just isn't there in the 7D.

What it comes down to is that, for $2000, the camera does pretty well with the overall image, including colors, DR, and DOF. I doubt you can get something better right now. A Scarlet will beat the snot out of it. But a Scarlet isn't $2000 and isn't for sale, either.

Is $3K for a 7D and other accessories a bargain worth not passing up, or would it really be prudent to save some extra money for the Scarlet?

Here's how I feel about this, because I'm in essentially the same situation. If I can buy the 7D and use it to make enough money to buy a Scarlet within a reasonable period (6 mo, personally), then I think it is definitely worth it.

If I buy the 7D and am essentially stuck on it because I can't use it to make any money and am constantly caught up trying to pay it back or never use it, then it would be a waste.

 

[Jon Betz]

Really, I think it depends on what you need to be shooting and how you will be displaying it.

This is right on. What are you intending to shoot? If you need moving camera shots at anything but ultra-slow speed, I would reconsider the 7D. Like a lot of people, I have seen a lot of really great 7D footage and am tempted to purchase one, but since I'm interested in filming wildlife in situations where I often have to make rather quick camera movements (such as following a bird in flight or animal running), I think I'll just wait for a Scarlet.

Depending on what you're shooting, a 7D might be great, but again, why not consider a camcorder like the XHA1? Broader depth of field, worse low-light, and no interchangeable lenses, but if you're just waiting to spend $$$ on a Scarlet setup, an XHA1 is affordable, requires fewer extras and can still make you a bunch of money. Just something to consider.

 

[Joel Kaye]

(such as following a bird in flight or animal running)

There's a guy who posted the 7D shooting motocross and that stuff looked fantastic. Not sure why birds or animals would cause a huge problem - especially when you consider low light dawn/dusk might be the best times to be shooting that stuff - which the 7D might be better at. RED doesn't talk much about superior low light capability.

Last night we had a 7D next to an EX1. The 7D with a 2.8 lens looked 2 stops brighter than the EX1 with its' F/1.9 lens. That was just looking at the lcds though. Not sure what post would reveal.

 

[Ed Ollei]

This is right on. What are you intending to shoot?

I intend to film the gamut, from wildlife to family, to short films, etc..

, an XHA1 is affordable, requires fewer extras and can still make you a bunch of money. Just something to consider.

this "making a bunch of money" thing you speak of, is a new term for me. I have never heard of this...pray tell, please define, and how does such a one as a budgetary film maker do this "making a bunch of money" ?

 

[Jerrod Cordell]

Don't think that if you spend all of your money on a 7D you're going to make that money immediately back.

Save you're money for Scarlet. In the meantime to make some more, sell your services. Direct, DP, Edit, whatever, and if you need a camera then rent it. If you're looking to shoot something with the 7D you can rent one from lensrentals.com for $150 a week ($170 insured). I wouldn't waste my money on purchasing one though.

 

[Jon Betz]

this "making a bunch of money" thing you speak of, is a new term for me. I have never heard of this...pray tell, please define, and how does such a one as a budgetary film maker do this "making a bunch of money" ?

Sorry I guess I shouldn't have said that. Obviously it's not easy to make money no matter what your setup, but what I meant was that you can probably make the same amount of money with an XHA1 as a 7D. As I'm sure you know it's all about production value and your vision as a filmmaker. If you are interested in filming for a wide range of projects what is the appeal of the 7D? From everything I have read it is only good as a specialty camera for certain low-light shots and for shallow depth of field. I don't own one and have never used one either, but again from what I have seen and read the 7D is not a good choice for general filmmaking, and would not be a good choice for a primary camera. But again, what do I know I have no experience with the thing (in fact I would love to find out it is a great choice, because then maybe I would buy one).

I have seen the motocross video and I agree it does look great. Again I have not used the camera and am going by what I have read. I would love to be wrong, and I'm definitely not saying that the 7D isn't a cool camera, it's just not a camcorder and it's not intended to be a primary video camera.

I guess I'm a little confused by the reactions here. I thought it was common knowledge that it's a bad idea to buy a DSLR for video. It doesn't project well on a big screen, has aliasing issues that you can't argue with, and also has rolling shutter problems because of the CMOS sensor. All of these problems might not show up in every video, but they are there.

 

[Erik Bien]

this "making a bunch of money" thing you speak of, is a new term for me. I have never heard of this...pray tell, please define, and how does such a one as a budgetary film maker do this "making a bunch of money" ?

One word (are you listening?): Funerals.

 

[David Stewart]

Would low light sensitivity increase at lower resolutions? Dumb question?

 

[Justin O'Neill]

Would low light sensitivity increase at lower resolutions? Dumb question?

Sensitivity would not increase if the lower resolution is achieved by 'windowing'. If the image is downscaled there could be a perceived increase in sensitivity as noise will decrease in size and some will become imperceptible. 'Sensitivity' is really the wrong word to use though, as I'm sure someone more knowledgeable then me will point out hehe.

 

[Alex Coelho]

One word (are you listening?): Funerals.

:laugh::rofl:

 

[Luis Filipe Cunha]

I´m at the same situation.
Let me be sincere. I´ve 3500-4000 to spend on a camera. More than a year (almost two) waiting for something really good..
A camera for what?
Art with video, family, short stories, documentary, short films for branding, logo animations mixing graphics with real footage and stills, etc.
I´m a graphic designer and illustrator and a fine arts artist too, using moving images and sound now. I do use photography as well. So the possibility to shoot film and stills with the same investment is nice and a practical way to work.

At the end of the month I hope to know at last how much and when I can have a Scarlet. Will it be to much far from my budget? I don´t know yet. The quality will blow the 7D - of course! But will it be my stills camera too with dedicated functions? I don´t know yet. Could I compare it with a Nikon stills FF camera? I don´t know yet.

Why I´m I looking just for the Full Frame models? Because the FF lenses work properly on them and those lenses will work well with a Scarlet, if they´re good glass, like Zeiss primes, etc. The files are better too to manipulate at my will with good quality and a fair crop margin to work. I do a lot of collage work with mixed media.

If "Mr. RED" ,-) anounce that Scarlet will be available during the next year, I´m seriously thinking about buying just a stills camera like a Nikon D700 or Sony 850 + one Zeiss prime glass (without film capabilities and spend more than half of my budget now) and try to sell my photographic work, with illustration as well, etc; and after that buy a Scarlet the next year. I think I prefer to have a good semipro stills camera and after that a really good film camera than a croped sensor stills camera and a problematic film camera that will obsolet in a year at the most like the 7D.


Am I crazy or missing something here?
Does this help our friend? I hope.

Does anyone have a similar situation/work?
Any suggestion for a good stills FF camera?
Let me have your opinion, please. It´s very apreciated.

Thanks.
Regards to you all.
L.