Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

Red One vs. SI-2K

what i like about the si-2k:

- modularity (front and back)
- optional optical view finder

what i dislike:
- sensor size
- OS

my two cents,
martin
 
I have to step back here and say that one cannot judge the performance of a camera based on how one has seen someone else use it. Slumdog did what they did and got what they got for their own reasons. I can tell you that the SI-2K can look great or it can look like crap depending on how you use it. I can also say the same for the RED One. I would even go as far to say -- here it comes -- that under certain conditions the SI-2K can deliver a more pleasing, attractive image than the RED One.

This is from someone who has worked with both, dealt with both over a very long time, rents out both, deals with material in post from both, doesn't sell either so has no axe to grind, etc., etc. They are both nice cameras and there is a place for each in the market.
 
Mitch Gross said:
I would even go as far to say -- here it comes -- that under certain conditions the SI-2K can deliver a more pleasing, attractive image than the RED One.
Click to expand...

Mitch, now you got me too curious. Can you please give us an example of a set of conditions where the SI-2K would (or has been able to) deliver "a more pleasing, attractive image" In fact you can be specific as to when, in your experience, this has happened. Thank you.
 
On a bright, sunny exterior with lots of shadow areas. I find the rolloff of the highlights to be less clippy and generally a more pleasing, natural contrast to my eye. This is from playing with both in post and tryng different exposures.

That's just one example. I'm not going to bash either camera, as they both have excellent virtues. Just wanted to make the point that the SI-2K can deliver excellent images.
 
I have seen extremely good stuff come from SI-2K, really good stuff, but the post support is not good.
 
Thanks Mitch and the others who responded with qualitative feedback. That was more what I was looking for. To be honest "this clip looks like crap" and "my HVX could shoot that" dont really help much in evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of equipment for particular situations.

ian
 
IanK said:
Thanks Mitch and the others who responded with qualitative feedback. That was more what I was looking for. To be honest "this clip looks like crap" and "my HVX could shoot that" dont really help much in evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of equipment for particular situations.

ian
Click to expand...

sorry that my comment wasnt american cinematography magazine article quality.
It was late.. I was thinking outloud.. and was shocked that the particular clip posted could have been thought to look good.
it was flat and dull.. not to mention boring.

moving on
 
Zakaree,

Thank you for your thoughtful clarification. Unfortunately I am not blessed with your keen eye nor your discriminating taste. I apologize for shocking you with my opinion. I hope you have recovered after a good night's rest.


Ian
 
Mitch Gross said:
Just wanted to make the point that the SI-2K can deliver excellent images.
Click to expand...

Mitch, Other than the fact that you have actually seen the SI-2K, shot with the camera and know what images it can make, what makes you qualified to express such an opinion?
 
Michael Bravin said:
Mitch, Other than the fact that you have actually seen the SI-2K, shot with the camera and know what images it can make, what makes you qualified to express such an opinion?
Click to expand...

Apparently the fact that I can type on a computer keyboard.:laugh:


Mike & I , we kid. Please no one take offense. It's how we relieve the doldrums of the day.
 
Slum Dog looks like "Crap"? Sheesh, everyone is entitled but it reminds me of a party I was at where some loudmouth high school English teacher (honors!) was dumping on Macbeth. Whatever dude.
 
Silicon imaging is an amazing camera

Silicon imaging is an amazing camera

Look I love the RED but The Silicon Imaging camera is amazing. It has many features the the RED does not have, for example tethering the camera from the brain to your lap top no body on the camera needed. Or what about the software that comes with it live green screen compositing. If you want to check out good footage from the camera go look at the Sherlock Holmes 1080p trailer on apple amazing shot 100 % on the 2k camera directed by Guy Ritchie who just came off of shooting with the D-21 for Rockenrolla and now swears by the 2k Guy Ritchie who is a heavily involved director when chosing camera and look for his film. Just because every one here is a RED HEAD and loves including me it doesn't mean you should crap on other great cameras. Like the new DSLA 4k evolution camera witch could beat the RED out which was just used to shoot Tim Burton's new Alice in wonderland. Check out this commercial, this is whats possible when you can tether just the brain and lens to a remote location a nike commercial by Guy Ritchie http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anwlpTgbQTE
 
a perfect 1080p video of the 2k

a perfect 1080p video of the 2k

look at the Sherlock Holmes trailer on apple shot 100 % with the 2k except the slomo sequences which we shot at 500 fps with the Phantom HD Camera.

watch the 1080p trailer

http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/sherlockholmes/
 
sorry one more thing

sorry one more thing

The music video posted early does look like a straight RAW image or it could be the look the Director wanted. The white Stripes have worked with many revolutionary directors and dont think they would have put up with anything less than perfect. If you look at the video being raw or not the is an amazing amount of dynamic range you can see every cloud in the sky perfectly and with color correction you can deff bring the colors and darks out in the image preserving the high dynamic range in the video.
 
I actually read further into it and they did shoot some 35mm in Sherlock Holmes but they chose the 2k because it seamlessly fit into the 35mm footage. The rig on the film was just the brain and lens with a recording device in a back pack for alot of point of view shots. Not sure the lens set up but Its super 16mm film-sized sensor design produces the same shallow depth characteristics of Super 16 and enables the use of lower cost 16mm film style lenses. Shooting flexibility is enhanced with its interchangeable mount system, supporting the use of B4 2/3in video lenses, high-quality 35mm cinema PL-mount lenses as well as F-mount and compact C-mount lenses. And yes it is RAW.

Here are two pics the cameras used in the movie the 35mm for some bigger shots the middle camera for slow motion and the 2k for everything else and also a rig that was used with the 2k in the movie.

Im having trouble uploading the images?

check it out

URL to images

http://www.definitionmagazine.com/artwork/si2kfilmtest.jpg
http://www.definitionmagazine.com/artwork/si2khelmet.gif
 
SI2k is 2/3" format sensor, similar to standard 16mm, smaller than super 16. Reference width for 16:9 format 2/3" sensor is 9.6mm vs 12.75mm for S16
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top