Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

New arri camera at IBC

Zakaree Sandberg said:
whats with those ridiculous electronic viewfinders? I see that one of the cameras has an OVF, but the other two evfs look retarded
Click to expand...

Absolutely all my accessories are either Element T, ARRI , Chrosziel, Cook , Zeiss , Preston , Transvideo and Lentequip.

Any other product that RED makes i didn't buy.

Why?

Because they are Absolutely RETARDED.

and to point you directly to one, it would be the RED EVF.

Yes the RED EVF is so long and therefore unbalanced, that there is no way you could ever have the camera balanced on your shoulder, unless you place the EVF 3 " in front of the mattbox.

Thats retarded.
 
Stephen Webb said:
Don't knock 'em till you've seen 'em. What matters about these cameras is how usable they are and what the quality is like.
Click to expand...

Hi Stephen,

Yes the FUD is starting!

Stephen
 
It will be interesting to see what happens in this area of the market. Red has done amazingly well at carving out the price point for the Red One. The 50K Euro market is slightly different though. Less individuals are likely to buy them. Arri has a reputation for being very reliable and I would assume these cameras are no different. The Epic would have to be very reliable for me to buy one over the a-ev.
 
Raul Gonzo said:
Ugh. I don,t think they look like Red.
Red has style.
These are ugly.
Turn the lights back off and put a bag over them if you must use them.
Click to expand...

If you're more concerned by the 'look' of the camera rather than the 'look' the camera produces, you're probably not Arri's target market. These cameras are properly ruggedized, with good connectivity and a rock solid PL mount. Kind of how an Arri camera should be.
 
This is exciting!

Can't wait to get my hands on one - ARRI along the lines of RED? Small, light weight (similar to the 235?)

Optical viewfinder as well -

Should be interesting
 
I really don't get why someone would criticize the look of a camera or viewfinder.

As said:

Liam Hall said:
If you're more concerned by the 'look' of the camera rather than the 'look' the camera produces, you're probably not Arri's target market. These cameras are properly ruggedized, with good connectivity and a rock solid PL mount. Kind of how an Arri camera should be.
Click to expand...
 
from Arri "In our extensive discussions with cinematographers it was clear that the camera's sensitivity and contrast range are more essential than having more pixels."

I've believed this all along. The pixel wars seem silly with the only caveat being--once we achieve a base minimum amount. We can debate what the number is and how much we want to pay for incremental increases, but above that minimum, I want sensitivity and range instead of more pixels.

At some point more pixels becomes a diminished return. Imagine a kick-ass 2k camera that delivers incredible 1080, and has no trouble at iso 800 and above and with loads of range. I have to believe that our images will benefit from those things instead of just more pixels.

Chris
 
That EVF looks cumbersome at best. Definitely not an elegant solution. I bet many a nose will rub the side of that housing. I look for a new form factor for that by next year.
 
Chris Pickle said:
from Arri "In our extensive discussions with cinematographers it was clear that the camera's sensitivity and contrast range are more essential than having more pixels."

I've believed this all along. The pixel wars seem silly with the only caveat being--once we achieve a base minimum amount. We can debate what the number is and how much we want to pay for incremental increases, but above that minimum, I want sensitivity and range instead of more pixels.

At some point more pixels becomes a diminished return. Imagine a kick-ass 2k camera that delivers incredible 1080, and has no trouble at iso 800 and above and with loads of range. I have to believe that our images will benefit from those things instead of just more pixels.

Chris
Click to expand...


So, the Arri D21/D20 was 3k. The new cameras are 3.5k. So even though "sensitivity and contrast range are more essential" they're increasing the resolution.

As for better sensitivity and DR, that's what M-X and Monstro sensors are all about. That we can increase resolution too, is a bonus, especially as afterwards you can always trade some of that resolution for increased DR or sensitivity or lower noise. Or keep that extra resolution for when you need it.

Graeme
 
I don't agree with people who say resolution is not important.

If thousands of theaters are already switching to 4K projection, which cameras are going to provide the studios with pristine, beautiful 4K images? Material gathered at 3.5K Bayer is going to look very soft compared to material gathered at 6K, especially 6K FF35.
 
You can always trade some resolution for DR, Sensitivity or lower noise if you want. However, I know of no way in post to take some DR, and turn it back into resolution.

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
So, the Arri D21/D20 was 3k. The new cameras are 3.5k. So even though "sensitivity and contrast range are more essential" they're increasing the resolution.

Graeme
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if that is true...

From the D21:
During the down sampling process, the pixels are taken from the 2880 x 1620 area of the full sensor, then down scaled by 1.5 for 1920 x 1080

From the A:
For example, 2880 x 1620 sensor pixels are down sampled to 1920 x 1080 for the HD outputs, or 3072 x 1728 sensor pixels are down sampled to 2048 x 1152 for a 16:9 2k DI
 
Brook Willard said:
Man, it feels like I drew that thing once...

Where's my cut, Arri?
Click to expand...

I dunno... the lens-mount-to-bottom-of-body-front distance on those things doesn't look a whole lot different than the R1. And they certainly don't have the ergonomic "cat sleeping on your shoulder" look that some of the other Arri cams have.

These look like shoe-boxes with handles and a 1973 CB mic posing as an EVF on them.

The new modular RED's with the ability to mix-n-match modules, and potentially seperate them with an umbilical and shove a shoulder mount in between make it look like Arri may have lost this round on hte ergonomic front.

I'll give them props for the angled connectors tho.

-sc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top