AnthonyFlores
Well-known member
I'm not sure if the Scarlet "interchangable" is still coming ... but as I've been researching lenses lately, one of the things that struck me is that there are some AWESOME lenses for the Micro 4/3 cameras ...
First among them are the Leica M lenses (easily adapted to 4/3), and then the super fast Voigtlanders (25mm/.95, 35mm/1.2, 50mm/1.1), etc.
So if I were in Red's shoes, I keep the fixed Scarlet at 2/3 ... but why not make the interchangeable Scarlet a 4/3 sensor??? You keep all the specs the same (3k, etc), and come in around $5-6,000 for the brain. Do that you will CRUSH Panasonic and the coming DSLR updates from Canon and Nikon.
Is it really that much work to switch to a slightly larger sensor? Because it seems like that's the biggest and really the only gripe people have with the Scarlet fixed. Yet, judging from the early reception of the AF100 and the Lumix GH2 -- people are very comfortable and excited about great 4/3 performers .......
Anyway, these are just my thoughts and I know Red knows best
i'm be curious to know what anyone else thinks about this :001_huh:
I think part of the issue with 2/3 sensor is not just depth of field limitations -- but also having fast lens options at wider angles. For instance, even at 4/3 -- you can get fast apertures at 21mm and 25mm. The Leica Summilux-M is 1.4 ($6000!) and the Voigtlander 25mm is .95. However, when you factor in the crop -- these lenses equate to 42mm and 50mm in full frame.
In other words, it's tough to find something really fast on 4/3 that translates into a 21-35mm FOV (relative to full frame) -- and it's that much tougher on a 2/3 camera.
At the end of the day, I also just think having the interchangeable Scarlet as 4/3 will just plain help Red sell more cameras .......
Anthony
First among them are the Leica M lenses (easily adapted to 4/3), and then the super fast Voigtlanders (25mm/.95, 35mm/1.2, 50mm/1.1), etc.
So if I were in Red's shoes, I keep the fixed Scarlet at 2/3 ... but why not make the interchangeable Scarlet a 4/3 sensor??? You keep all the specs the same (3k, etc), and come in around $5-6,000 for the brain. Do that you will CRUSH Panasonic and the coming DSLR updates from Canon and Nikon.
Is it really that much work to switch to a slightly larger sensor? Because it seems like that's the biggest and really the only gripe people have with the Scarlet fixed. Yet, judging from the early reception of the AF100 and the Lumix GH2 -- people are very comfortable and excited about great 4/3 performers .......
Anyway, these are just my thoughts and I know Red knows best
I think part of the issue with 2/3 sensor is not just depth of field limitations -- but also having fast lens options at wider angles. For instance, even at 4/3 -- you can get fast apertures at 21mm and 25mm. The Leica Summilux-M is 1.4 ($6000!) and the Voigtlander 25mm is .95. However, when you factor in the crop -- these lenses equate to 42mm and 50mm in full frame.
In other words, it's tough to find something really fast on 4/3 that translates into a 21-35mm FOV (relative to full frame) -- and it's that much tougher on a 2/3 camera.
At the end of the day, I also just think having the interchangeable Scarlet as 4/3 will just plain help Red sell more cameras .......
Anthony