New Epic-W vs. Alexa Mini test

[Phil Holland]

And Dragon about one stop earlier than Alev III.
So talk about ISO1600 on Helium to match Alev III on 800 leaves a question mark floating above my head.

If you literally shoot in the ranges I have presented in a side by side comparison, specifically at the higher end of the range, you will find this is not true.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Okay, now that I've finished eating my popcorn, I'll simply say this.

Testing is always difficult. It requires precision, attention to detail, and a full understanding of the things you are testing, unless the testing is discovery testing where you know nothing going in and are seeking a better understanding coming out of it. I'm not going to get into too much about this specific test of Alexa and Helium, rather I would just say that when it comes to RED and Arri there is a subjective nature to comparing them because there is a subjective approach taken by the two companies about how to make an image. Therefore as endusers and as unique individuals with our own set of aesthetics that we bring to the table, we often can only come to conclusions about things such as this with our own testing, as we may want to see how a camera can perform under scenarios we are likely to put it in.

Fundamentally, there is nothing wrong with these types of tests being posted as there is always info to glean from it but when you need your own truth, a truth that can only be determined by your own set of controlled parameters that delivers the critical information you need for making an informed decision on what delivers the image you need for a given project, it simply comes down to conducting your own tests. That way, you take out a lot of the surprises.

For instance. You may love the general image characteristics of a particular camera. But for a project coming up, you will be using some specific lighting that is outside of the norm for you. Rather than assume that your favorite camera will capture it just right, you have to test it. And if it doesn't deliver the image you want, you test other cameras to see what the results are. There's really no mystery to this process, it's been happening for years going all the way back to film stocks.

So, what would a test like the one in question provide me? My takeaway is that this is how the cameras perform as tested by these individuals with the parameters they have used. It doesn't tell me everything there is to know about these cameras. It tells me specific information within those parameters. Just like the tests that guys like Phil Holland provide. They are very helpful and I appreciate the time that is put in to test because it does provide useful information. But there is still room to do our own testing. This community and others like it are great for sharing that data which in the end helps us all improve.

 

[Antony Newman]

Hrvoje,

There are IMHO two pieces to the puzzle:

1) DR - in the RED pixel design, if they read an accumulated analogue value from a pixel several times each frame. The read rate and maximum accumulation range are not necessarily linked with pixel area.
With a different 'back end' - RED could IMO increase the DR through more rapid processing.

2) SNR - this is the Magic. For Helium to surpass ALEVIII, they would need less noise per unit area.
Making smaller pixels makes this doubly hard as there will be wasted area between each smaller pixel.
The ALEV III sensor has pixel areas that are ~10x larger the Helium pixels (8.25um vs 2.65um).
As the ALEV III pixels do not have Ten times the Signal to Noise of a Helium Pixel - it is fair to say that the Helium sensor does deliver better SNR performance than the ALEV III.
The SNR is the analogue Magic IMO - as this parameter is up against the limits of physics.

AJ

<snip>However, expecting on par highlight performance with ALEV III is not realistic and leads to disappointments.<snip>

 

[Anton Esteban]

This test does have a big impact on RED Helium owners like myself. This test was showcased on nofilmschool which is, for better or worse, a high-traffic site where people in all levels of film production go to get some of the latest info on all things cinema related. As it stands, we all know that the Alexa is winning the high end cinema an TV camera war. Just take a look through IMDB. RED is still used on many productions that use digital cameras but it is now in the minority when it was once the standard (since it pretty much invented larger sensor 4k digital cinematography). This test effects owner/operators like myself because it reaffirms the film industry's bias towards the Alexa which means it will be a harder sell to my clients who already want to rent the Alexa vs my RED cameras. I already have a friend, a fellow RED owner, who is not upgrading his camera because of this test. He's sick of fighting with production. He told me that if they want the Alexa so much I might as well just leave the RED pipeline and get what the film industry is already using as a standard.

Having the camera rated at 800 iso vs 1600 iso for this test is a big deal. That would have at least dropped the highlight retention gap by a full stop. But I'm saving most of my ire, in this situation, for RED. Why did they release a camera without fully testing and refining their color science? They definitely rushed this camera because they know something big from their competitors is on the horizon. RED needs to roll out whatever they have up their sleeve to improve the Helium sensor ASAP in order to show once and for all that this camera is great and a worthy competitor to the Alexa.

I downloaded the RAW files from the test and used the RED to Alexa Truecolor LUT and definitely had a much easier time matching the shots between the two cameras (minus of course the parts of the image that we're overexposed) vs the original IPP2 LUT. Also, using the Truecolor LUT also gave me much more love in the shadows than is showcased in this test vs the original IPP2 Transform. RED needs to step up its color science game fast. Why can't they finally admit that if the film industry is leaning towards a certain image look why not beat them at their own game? Sony, Canon, and Panasonic have finally realized this and their own transforms that mimic the Alexa LUT are hugely popular. I know many a Canon C300 MKII and Sony F55 owners who are so grateful that their brands finally so the writing on the wall and built image transforms that get them closer to the Alexa look/color. I also think they should come up with a new OPLF that is specifically tuned for the Helium camera vs the other way around which is tuning the Helium sensor to older OPLF's.

I've recently been blown away by how much this sensor can resolve with good lenses. I just started shooting all kinds of stuff with my Leica R's at F22. I've never seen any other camera resolve detail like it. Now if they could only give me a softer highlight rolloff while keeping all the shadow detail it currently has with better color nuance/contrast (especially deeper cyan/blues) it really would be something special.

 

[Nick Vera]

I'm not sure about that yet, but I do know that I'm getting really good results with mine, so I'm not worrying about it too much right now... though I am going to test it to make sure that I know how to get the most with it.

it's subjective then?

I just think that if you're going to compare both cameras, they should be at the same ISO setting. Really would not mind if you set the Alexa to 1600 ISO. The DR will just move one stop towards the highlights.

Take care!!!!

 

[Nick Vera]

Interesting. Can't imagine Helium has same DR as Alev III regardless. Maybe they match better at 2000 ISO?

Possibly, I would throw in an Alexa SXT to see the improvements at ISO 2000. Saw it the other day and it was insanely clear.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Possibly, I would throw in an Alexa SXT to see the improvements at ISO 2000. Saw it the other day and it was insanely clear.

Makes sense. Just as Dragon got better in DSCM2 bodies, wouldn't shock me if Alexa is better in newer bodies too...

 

[Rakesh Malik]

it's subjective then?

I just think that if you're going to compare both cameras, they should be at the same ISO setting. Really would not mind if you set the Alexa to 1600 ISO. The DR will just move one stop towards the highlights.

Take care!!!!

No, they shouldn't, because that's not how you'd use them on set. You'd base your settings and exposures on how the camera you're using works, not on how the other camera you used on that other shoot works.

What they did was akin to taking some film stock rated at ISO 500 but exposing at ISO 250 because ISO 250 is what they're used to.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

This test does have a big impact on RED Helium owners like myself. This test was showcased on nofilmschool which is, for better or worse, a high-traffic site where people in all levels of film production go to get some of the latest info on all things cinema related. As it stands, we all know that the Alexa is winning the high end cinema an TV camera war. Just take a look through IMDB. RED is still used on many productions that use digital cameras but it is now in the minority when it was once the standard (since it pretty much invented larger sensor 4k digital cinematography). This test effects owner/operators like myself because it reaffirms the film industry's bias towards the Alexa which means it will be a harder sell to my clients who already want to rent the Alexa vs my RED cameras. I already have a friend, a fellow RED owner, who is not upgrading his camera because of this test. He's sick of fighting with production. He told me that if they want the Alexa so much I might as well just leave the RED pipeline and get what the film industry is already using as a standard.

Having the camera rated at 800 iso vs 1600 iso for this test is a big deal. That would have at least dropped the highlight retention gap by a full stop. But I'm saving most of my ire, in this situation, for RED. Why did they release a camera without fully testing and refining their color science? They definitely rushed this camera because they know something big from their competitors is on the horizon. RED needs to roll out whatever they have up their sleeve to improve the Helium sensor ASAP in order to show once and for all that this camera is great and a worthy competitor to the Alexa.

I downloaded the RAW files from the test and used the RED to Alexa Truecolor LUT and definitely had a much easier time matching the shots between the two cameras (minus of course the parts of the image that we're overexposed) vs the original IPP2 LUT. Also, using the Truecolor LUT also gave me much more love in the shadows than is showcased in this test vs the original IPP2 Transform. RED needs to step up its color science game fast. Why can't they finally admit that if the film industry is leaning towards a certain image look why not beat them at their own game? Sony, Canon, and Panasonic have finally realized this and their own transforms that mimic the Alexa LUT are hugely popular. I know many a Canon C300 MKII and Sony F55 owners who are so grateful that their brands finally so the writing on the wall and built image transforms that get them closer to the Alexa look/color. I also think they should come up with a new OPLF that is specifically tuned for the Helium camera vs the other way around which is tuning the Helium sensor to older OPLF's.

I've recently been blown away by how much this sensor can resolve with good lenses. I just started shooting all kinds of stuff with my Leica R's at F22. I've never seen any other camera resolve detail like it. Now if they could only give me a softer highlight rolloff while keeping all the shadow detail it currently has with better color nuance/contrast (especially deeper cyan/blues) it really would be something special.

I can understand the frustration if you are a camera owner and you feel the test doesn't show the camera at its best. What I would suggest is to produce a counter test. Demonstrate why you feel Helium outperforms Alexa and why clients should be using it. Will that video end up on No Film School? If done well, I don't see why not.

There's no doubt that RED has some bias against it for various reasons and the best way to take on those biases is to continue to showcase its strengths. That's all you can do.

But one thing to remember too is that some people don't have agendas, they simply like what they see. That could be a positive for Arri or RED. So not all of the biases come from misinformation or hidden agendas.

 

[Ben Scott]

This test does have a big impact on RED Helium owners like myself. This test was showcased on nofilmschool which is, for better or worse, a high-traffic site where people in all levels of film production go to get some of the latest info on all things cinema related. As it stands, we all know that the Alexa is winning the high end cinema an TV camera war. Just take a look through IMDB. RED is still used on many productions that use digital cameras but it is now in the minority when it was once the standard (since it pretty much invented larger sensor 4k digital cinematography). This test effects owner/operators like myself because it reaffirms the film industry's bias towards the Alexa which means it will be a harder sell to my clients who already want to rent the Alexa vs my RED cameras. I already have a friend, a fellow RED owner, who is not upgrading his camera because of this test. He's sick of fighting with production. He told me that if they want the Alexa so much I might as well just leave the RED pipeline and get what the film industry is already using as a standard.

Having the camera rated at 800 iso vs 1600 iso for this test is a big deal. That would have at least dropped the highlight retention gap by a full stop. But I'm saving most of my ire, in this situation, for RED. Why did they release a camera without fully testing and refining their color science? They definitely rushed this camera because they know something big from their competitors is on the horizon. RED needs to roll out whatever they have up their sleeve to improve the Helium sensor ASAP in order to show once and for all that this camera is great and a worthy competitor to the Alexa.

I downloaded the RAW files from the test and used the RED to Alexa Truecolor LUT and definitely had a much easier time matching the shots between the two cameras (minus of course the parts of the image that we're overexposed) vs the original IPP2 LUT. Also, using the Truecolor LUT also gave me much more love in the shadows than is showcased in this test vs the original IPP2 Transform. RED needs to step up its color science game fast. Why can't they finally admit that if the film industry is leaning towards a certain image look why not beat them at their own game? Sony, Canon, and Panasonic have finally realized this and their own transforms that mimic the Alexa LUT are hugely popular. I know many a Canon C300 MKII and Sony F55 owners who are so grateful that their brands finally so the writing on the wall and built image transforms that get them closer to the Alexa look/color. I also think they should come up with a new OPLF that is specifically tuned for the Helium camera vs the other way around which is tuning the Helium sensor to older OPLF's.

I've recently been blown away by how much this sensor can resolve with good lenses. I just started shooting all kinds of stuff with my Leica R's at F22. I've never seen any other camera resolve detail like it. Now if they could only give me a softer highlight rolloff while keeping all the shadow detail it currently has with better color nuance/contrast (especially deeper cyan/blues) it really would be something special.

So post a test then and redress the balance.

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

No, they shouldn't, because that's not how you'd use them on set. You'd base your settings and exposures on how the camera you're using works, not on how the other camera you used on that other shoot works.

What they did was akin to taking some film stock rated at ISO 500 but exposing at ISO 250 because ISO 250 is what they're used to.

Comparative tests are done in same setups in order to be able to see the differences.

Not in different scenarios to reach the same outcomes. You don't measure the hight of two people by putting one on a table.
The whole point is having points of reference. Same stop, same ISO, same light.

Besides, there is no official single rating of Red cameras, there is advised range, depending on how you want to distribute captured information over usable DR.

 

[Ben Scott]

But one thing to remember too is that some people don't have agendas, they simply like what they see. That could be a positive for Arri or RED. So not all of the biases come from misinformation or hidden agendas.

Absolutely.

But also getting Mx/Dragon/Helium to a place where it looks as good as Alexa is a more convoluted process in the eyes of the people in production that is a genuine issue as well.

Frankly I'd be more concerned by the bazzilion badly made Epic-W videos made by youtubers with a lot of disposable income and no production skills rather than this test. *

* Of course there are some amazing youtube production people out there too etc etc

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

Makes sense. Just as Dragon got better in DSCM2 bodies, wouldn't shock me if Alexa is better in newer bodies too...

It is. In color performance and DR.

 

[Rakesh Malik]

But also getting Mx/Dragon/Helium to a place where it looks as good as Alexa is a more convoluted process in the eyes of the people in production that is a genuine issue as well.

True, there are a lot of options that you have to know what to do with on Reds. I've ended up with some pretty lousy results just because of inappropriate color space settings.

Frankly I'd be more concerned by the bazzilion badly made Epic-W videos made by youtubers with a lot of disposable income and no production skills rather than this test.

True that. And it will pretty much always favor Arri cameras because so few youtubers with disposable income and no skill will use Arri cameras, while a lot will use Red cameras.

Fortunately, BMD is absorbing a good chunk of that crowd now...

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Absolutely.

But also getting Mx/Dragon/Helium to a place where it looks as good as Alexa is a more convoluted process in the eyes of the people in production that is a genuine issue as well.

Frankly I'd be more concerned by the bazzilion badly made Epic-W videos made by youtubers with a lot of disposable income and no production skills rather than this test. *

* Of course there are some amazing youtube production people out there too etc etc

Right, but here's the thing. If it's Hollywood we are speaking about, then they have some points of reference (they being people in charge of selecting a camera for a movie or TV show) since there have been a number of productions filmed on MX and Dragon and some on Helium. If RED is generally harder and more expensive to post, then they have that data available to them.

What I'm guessing is that we are talking about commercial and perhaps even corporate. Maybe MOW as well. Perhaps these are the clients being persuaded by hearsay or through online tests. And maybe that is where RED owners have had a difficult time because of clients who want to avoid any perceived difficulty, especially when it affects turn-around time and their bottom line.

And for anyone that is biased because of a genuine dislike for a camera or camera company it will be challenging to change their mind regardless.

So, ultimately it's up to the endusers to bring positive attention to a brand. Look at people like Christopher Probst and Mark Toia. These guys use RED cameras and just get on with it, making the best images they can and I would say in general, their work is received very well throughout the industry. And obviously the camera is just one part of the equation. All of the production elements are usually top notch as well, so their sets look amazing, the makeup is done well, sound quality is great, direction is good, fantastic colorists, etc. There's a reason why my stuff shot on a particular camera pales in comparison to their stuff shot on same camera. They have way more talent.

And that would be my advice to anyone who wants to shoot on RED and have less obstacles in the way, just do great work and let your images speak for themselves. If potential clients scoff at your choice of camera or don't want to rent from you, then it probably is what it is. Take the work using their camera of choice and hope the next time you get to choose. For those who are rental companies only and want to see more RED rentals, perhaps hold workshops, invite local producers and DPs and show them what you are achieving with REDs.

 

[David Battistella]

I'm getting fairly tired of watching tests.

The very best thing anyone can do is pick up a red (pick whatever one you like), test the shit out of it and understand the conditions required to make the images you want to make as a cinematographer.

The tech is pretty much equal in the sense that you can squeeze a nice image out of anything. It's really more i'portant to understand the response of the sensor you are shooting with than the actual sensor itself.

From my tests, with my camera lens combinations, I know what the Dragon sensor likes and I know how it will perform in many different conditions. I had shoots this week where I rated at 250iso and other where I rated 1600.

Get to know what you own, refine your craft with the tool you have. It's a better use of your time than getting insecure about the sensor in the box.

 

[Elsie N]

The only tests I care about are the DXO Dragon and Helium sensor tests... the rest are just argle-bargle.

 

[Kemalettin Sert]

Phil can you make a test Alexa vs VV ? love your tests its the most scientific and informative ones, however you dont add other cameras.

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

The only tests I care about are the DXO Dragon and Helium sensor tests... the rest are just argle-bargle.

Well... I'm not so sure. Many photographers prefer the Leica M9's CCD to almost any modern CMOS, and yet it scored only 69 points. However, DxO measured the Helium at 15 stops of DR. The Alexa does not have 15 stops, the last time I checked. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Also, it has a built-in low-con filter. The RED does not.

 

[Dan Kanes]

I'm getting fairly tired of watching tests.

The very best thing anyone can do is pick up a red (pick whatever one you like), test the shit out of it and understand the conditions required to make the images you want to make as a cinematographer.

The tech is pretty much equal in the sense that you can squeeze a nice image out of anything. It's really more i'portant to understand the response of the sensor you are shooting with than the actual sensor itself.

From my tests, with my camera lens combinations, I know what the Dragon sensor likes and I know how it will perform in many different conditions. I had shoots this week where I rated at 250iso and other where I rated 1600.

Get to know what you own, refine your craft with the tool you have. It's a better use of your time than getting insecure about the sensor in the box.

Here Here David! Perfect.