Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

  • 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 Scarlet or Sony NEX FS 100 ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ruben and Sheri O.

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
290
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
www.facebook.com
I LOVE RED ,I hate to say this but have been considering the Sony NEX FS 100 for the meantime to hold me over if the Scarlet does not come out soon , do u think Sony can measures up to the awesomeness that is RED ??
 
Last edited:
I think we're allowed to discuss other cameras at DVX user, and Cinema 5d has lots of discussions about the FS100 as well. I think Red forums only allow discussion of Red cameras.
 
I think you need to consider 5 key things, if you have time...

Do you need everything in focus? Scarlet wins...
Shallow depth of field? Sony wins...

Who is your clientel?

What is your budget?

What is your workflow? If you don't have sufficient drive space and
editing software, Sony is the appropriate choice

Do you own a complete set of stills glass that adapts to the Sony body?
If not, Scarlet fixed wins...
 
Just wondering if the NEX FS 100 even measures up to the awesomeness that is Scarlet !!!!!! it is a fair question and still discussing RED
 
Just wondering if the NEX FS 100 even measures up to the awesomeness that is Scarlet !!!!!! it is a fair question and still discussing RED

Well, here's the hard thing. You can go out and buy an FS-100 and shoot with it right now. You can't do that with a Scarlet. And while we have been told what the specs are for the Scarlet, they may yet change.

So, based purely off of what we have been told...

No. There is no camera other than EPIC or for less than about $50,000 that will match the announced resolution, dynamic range, frame rates, compressed RAW capability, modularity, and form factor of Scarlet.

But then again, you can't go shoot on one tomorrow, either.
 
The FS100 was the camera I thought was perfect for me. Modular, interchangeable lenses. I thought Red was out of my league. (New to moving pictures, present camera: Canon XL2, don't lol) But the more I learned about Scarlet the more I thought they were making it for me. Plus, I can wait.

I agree:

are you fuckin kiddin me?
1080 21mbs AVCHD vs 3K 120fps R3Ds?
 
are you fuckin kiddin me?
1080 21mbs AVCHD vs 3K 120fps R3Ds?

A hypothetical 3K RAW is no better than an actual 1080p compressed. ;)

I don't even get why people post such things, of course Scarlet is "better", but it's not available, move on, use one of the DSLRs or the AF-100/F3/FS100 or whatever, they are extremely capable systems, not RAW, not 3K, but they can be used NOW.
 
(with Yoda's voice)

It will be... It will be.

A hypothetical 3K RAW is no better than an actual 1080p compressed. ;)

I don't even get why people post such things, of course Scarlet is "better", but it's not available, move on, use one of the DSLRs or the AF-100/F3/FS100 or whatever, they are extremely capable systems, not RAW, not 3K, but they can be used NOW.
 
It’s my first post and I was too scared to ask, but I havethe same question as the OP. I wrote some features and I’m fairly new to thecamera domain. I’d like to shoot shorts and maybe later some features but haveno urgent need to start shooting immediately.

From the responses it sounds to be a no brainer but I haveso little knowledge that to me it’s not a no brainer and it’s not that easy tofind the information because it’s spread over numerous websites, many forumsand thousands of posts.
I would like to know how I should think about the problem.What should I look out for? What are the trade offs? How do I know what my needis and whether Scarlet would fit?

I’ve had a prosumer Panasonic but decided to sell it. The35mm adapter idea doesn’t work that great. I’ve worked with the 7D but I’m noteager to go that route. I’m waiting for the new Nikons to come out because wehave significant Nikkor glass at home and the full frame would be nice. Thenthere’s the Scarlet in the horizon because I cannot afford the Epic. I’mwilling to spend up to $10k but it’s important to me that I get a camera that Iwon’t regret.

Then I read all this horrible news about the awful Spidermanclips. It’s demotivating to know the best one to get is the Epic, but it simplyisn’t reachable for a guy like me.
The ideal would be a large sensor (Super 35 and up), amazinglow light, interchangeable lenses so that I can use my Nikkor glass, RAWfootage of at least 3K and 120fps and a price tag of $10k and below. Because thatdream won’t come true, what do I do? How do I tackle this problem?
 
The ideal would be a large sensor (Super 35 and up), amazinglow light, interchangeable lenses so that I can use my Nikkor glass, RAWfootage of at least 3K and 120fps and a price tag of $10k and below. Because thatdream won’t come true, what do I do? How do I tackle this problem?

Well, keeping this Scarlet and RED centric...

It sounds like Scarlet - as we know it today - will give you at least some of that.

It has a 2/3" sensor which is pretty close to S16mm size. Not the same, and certainly not close to S35. Depending on what you need and how you shoot this may not matter so much, or may even be a benefit, or it may make or break things for you.

Lowlight - well, we don't know a whole lot here, other than the benefits of oversampling and a low noise floor inherent to the M-X sensors would most likely give great low light performance. Can it give you clean footage if you walk into a totally unlit space and flick open your zippo as the key light? We'll have to see about that.

Interchangeable lenses - Absolutely. PL, Mini-PL, Canon, and Nikon - the latter two with full electronic mounts. The only caveat here is that there is a significant crop factor using a 2/3" sensor - about 3.5x - so you will probably want to supplement you kit with some wider lenses (5-10mm) like the RED mini-Primes or a wide angle adapter to get wider angles.

RAWfootage - RED shoots REDCODE, which is visually losslessly compressed RAW. Which, in the opinion of many, is just as good as real RAW without having to shoot five to ten times more data.

3K - Got it.

120 fps - Last we heard, Scarlet could even do about 160fps in burst mode for a few seconds. No firm numbers on the duration, yet.

$10K and below - Yep...maybe barely, but yep.

--

Shopping around might get you a large sensor (s35), interchangeable (dumb) mounts, and great low light, but you'll throw everything else on your list out the window - it'll be 1080p, AVCHD, and 60 fps at the very most.

--

Edit: awful Spiderman clips? What?
 
@Japieson

Epic-S ? Slightly more expensive and I still do not know the frame rate at the lower resolutions.
 
It depends on your finances, clients, shooting style ... so many factors.

Can you afford to lose money selling the FS100 when a better option comes out?
Will you be happy moving from s35 to 2/3"?
Do your clients like the s35 or 16mm look?
Do you shoot in studio setups, where HDR is not needed?
Do you need 120fps?
Can you wait for 3+ months for a camera?
Do you need the 30db low light of the FS100?
Can you work with the drawbacks of AVCHD or attaching a HDMI recorder?
Do you have s35 glass?
Do you need the 3k resolution for reframing etc?

Both cameras have setbacks for certain shooting styles. Make a check list of what you and your clients actually want and find the product that best matches your check list, with the money you have.... if the product is not yet out, then try and work out if and how much money you will lose for each month you have to wait.
 
I remember conversations like this a few years ago when the Scarlet was supposed to come out, and people were torn between the Canon 5D MK2 and the Scarlet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top