RED vs SONY EX1

[Francis Kenny]

Thanks Taubkin for the hospitality. I truly enjoy the great discussions, and passion, that goes on these boards.

Reminding me of WW2 was like putting lemon juice on a paper cut. But I do appreciate your compliment. Thank you. Francis

 

[proaudio4]

Low light was horrible. Anything but 0 or -3db was filled with gold balls.

Not believing this one bit.

Myself and Joelnet had both of these cameras in extreme low light over the last two weekends. We had both cameras hooked up via SDI to a 24" JVC monitor.

The EX1 performed very well in low light.
As far as compression artifacts, If they are there, they're not obvious. Also, there are portable SDI solutions about to be released, so sticking with the XDCAM codec will not be the only option.

As mentioned by Macgregor, these cameras at 1080P have a smiliar look, but of course the RED will have the creative control of DOF and the EX1 will not.

As mentioned a million times over, they are really two different beasts.. The EX1 would make a great live event camera... concerts..ect..

Having said that, of course the RED is better than the EX1. LOL...
It had better be! I'd pick the RED any day over the EX1.

 

[Kholi Hicks]

One other thing. I posted a response about the EX-1. I love the fact that Zk2007 disagreed with me and had a point of view. Having a point of view is lacking in the film business. It is the secret of good work. I respect the person for saying what they believed. Francis

Totally off-topic (as usual) but I've been hearing this SO much from older gents who're working and have great credits and experience like yourself. I'm speaking on the "having a point of view is lacking in the film business" part. I suppose it's a lot more common than I realized now that I read it here on these forums.

You'd think that EVERYONE had a point of view in this "business", but I guess Point of View and Opinion are two different things?

 

[William Wedig]

So was there ever a consensus on which one is which in Macgregor's test?

From the first clip (compredvsex1.mov) I think Red is on the left. The roll off of the blown out parts is smoother and the DOF is much shallower. The blown out buildings in the sun still resemble a neon 80's future though (blown out).

Forgive me if this was clearly revealed somewhere, I thought I read everything in the post.

 

[fightordie]

Dude- wow show some respect. Francis is a way more experienced and professional DP than you are. Well actually I can't be 100% certain because unlike him you haven't bothered to give your real name. But I'm kinda guessing you're not a fellow ASC member... :red_bandana:

-Noah

Hey Dude what does respect have to do with stating an opinion which I think was right on the money. Does he have to defer to someone because of of experience even when the person of experience may be wrong, Dude?

 

[Francis Kenny]

Older! I have a seven year old!
When I spoke about having a "point of view" I was referring to what an agent once told me while I was shooting Heathers. It has to do with a recognizable style. When you watch films shot by Vittorio Storaro or Greg Toland the viewer knows immediately who is the author of the images. I took that advice with me to the next film I shot, New Jack City. I guess you could also call that an opinion. Unfortunately, the cinematographer gets his or her work watered down by the army of producers, writers, and others who are watching a monitor. It gets frustrating sometimes. Hopefully, as a Director of Photography, all of us can be on the same wavelength as the director and illustrate their vision. But we also assume that we have been hired because they have seen something in our work that is special, or having a "point of view". Which brings me back to the question of this board, Red vs. EX-1. Tests can be misleading. Similar to how statistics are reported. Many times the person testing has a bias towards one system. The real test is to see how each camera holds up on a "film out". When I shot How High, the first digital feature film for Universal, all of us were seduced by what we were seeing on the 30" monitor. The film out looked pretty good projected on a small screen (which we were seeing along the way) but fell apart when we made the release prints for the big screen. I was disappointed to see that the Sony Cameras did not have that extra resolution for a release print. I know that the process has taken leaps forward in seven years but it is still no where near film, or the Red Camera. For me, and my eye, the Red Camera is the only digital camera that can go the extra mile. This is what my criticism was about with the EX-1 (along with other technical things). It is a silly comparison. But that is only my opinion from working with the different camera systems. There are lots of opinions out there and I am only one of them. I deeply respect those around me that have a point of view and can express it in there work. The great cinematographers that I have learned from may not be able to express these things in words but certainly do so with their work. I guess once you have achieved something with cinematography you're allowed to have an opinion that means something. Otherwise you're hot air. Lastly, please don't misunderstand me about the necessity to shoot a one billion dollar feature film to be recognized. I have sent several emails of praise to Red Cinematographers that have been shooting for two months. Some of their work is breathtaking. And I let them know that they have communicated to me a visual "point of view". I am in this with all Red owners. I believe in the system because it is amazing.

God! Why did I ever use this term? Best, Francis

 

[Kholi Hicks]

LOL. I use the word "older" with pure respect. I'm the youngest of anyone I work with at the time, all being DGA, Repped, etc etc. I have the utmost respect for the true working professional. =P

Thanks for that detailed-- albeit off-topic-- response, Francis. Greatly appreciated! Sorry folks!

 

[Joel Kaye]

So was there ever a consensus on which one is which in Macgregor's test? I think Red is on the left.

RED is on the right.

This is probably the cogent point of the thread. People are wondering about the difference between the EX1 and a RED with a master prime at between SD and 720P for a couple shots. That's a pretty limited situation but I can promise that if an HVX was tossed in the mix everyone would pick it out.

@RedSail
The real test is a filmout? I didn't realize that was the discussion here. See I wasn't even speaking the same language.

A TINY fraction of what people considering these cameras will be producing will ever see a film out. The real test for me is a BluRay out. I'll defer to you as to what a film out from the EX1 looks like because I've got no clue. I think it'll project digitally well based on what I've seen from lesser cameras.

I do agree these tests can be misleading because there are things that RED can do that the EX1 is simply not capable of. RED can mount literally any lens. That's HUGE. RED 4K footage can easily be cropped, tilted, stabilized and still have real 1080P left over when you're done.

As to what the EX1 is capable of - well everyone will have to test and decide for themselves. Unless they don't trust themselves... but that's a different issue.

 

[J.Burger]

The other RED major advantage, of course, is future-proofing. I don't think 4K footage will be obsolete in what is left of my lifetime. It may be eclipsed, but it won't be obsolete. And with 1080 footage, the risk of obsolescence is higher within the next 10 years.

That is a major point to consider

 

[Francis Kenny]

This post is too long.
I recently agreed to tutor my friend's son who is taking a film course this summer. In the first class I had to keep telling him to forget about all of the automatic settings on the camera because if he never learned the physics behind focal length, aperture, and distance he would never have control of the image. The funny thing about this comparison post is that Sony once traveled me around the country to be their spokesman on shooting digital. I think I was too honest with the audience when it came to the comparison of panning speeds and digital technicians. Sony's philosophy still has an ENG mentality. I don't know if they ever listened to the ASC Technology Committee regarding things like viewing systems, extended coverage in the eyepiece, and large sensors. My feeling is that "What was good enough for the US Congress was good enough for us." For example, the zoom lens still has the zoom grip that will never be able to work with the pace and tone of the words or actions of the scene. It is always late and not very subtle. The menu does not allow you to slow, or feather the beginning or end of the zoom without an extension made from third parties. It is never accurate or on time. The remote inside the menu only allows for it when you use the remote transmitter. Why would any cinematographer need a remote zoom that also can start and stop the record? On a crane? Sony is not making such thing for crane shots. A bank would need it. Good cameras don't have automatic anything on them. The cinematographer makes that choice. Someone mentioned that you can put the camera on full manual for all of the settings? Sony gives you a choice of some manual settings. Their choice. The EX-1 even has something called Manual Assist. That is an oxymoron.

Look...the camera is a tool. You could give a moron a Panavision camera with Primo Lenses and they might screw everything up. You could give a talented cinematographer a HDV camera and they would do something terrific. It is a tool. Like a paint brush. I respond to the work. My personal choice would be to have a camera that gives me control of the image. I don't want a camera that was created to be half "I don't know what I'm doing I need automatic" and half "this camera is great I can shoot my story on it." If people want to go out and make a film, and the only way they can do it is to purchase a camera for under 10K, maybe the EX-1 is for them. The rental of a camera is not a big budget item on a film, any film. Just don't expect to be happy when you sell the project and the distributor wants to sell it for a theatrical release. I recently played on the Kodak Golf Team (my first time playing golf). I asked them about how many theaters have digital projection in North America. It was a little over 2%. Forget about Asia or India, which is a huge market, because it is less than 1%. It is all film out.

The other thing that bothered me is that when the EX-1 was released the EX-3 had already been built. Doesn't it bother anyone that if you bought a camera it would be obsolete by the time you finished the second payment? How much is the camera worth when you want to upgrade? Do you think you could trade the EX-1 in for the price you paid and then get the EX-3? Car manufacturers have been doing this forever. Jim Jannard is a whole lot smarter than people know. He is brilliant. Besides creating a camera that is better than anything out there he has created a base of young artists that will remain loyal to him. People responded to one thing. Passion. Talk to anyone at Red. They are amazing. I recently went to a Creative Commons seminar at Stanford University. The man who created Wikipedia, the head of MIT, and some other smart people were in attendance (I don't consider myself to be in that group of smart people). The concept of sharing and involving all artist in a common goal actually created more art, and more profit. They have proven this. The Red concept goes way beyond hardware. It is silly to think about the EX-1. Those who need to drive an automatic will drive it. I am happy that they are happy with their Sony.

 

[Sean R.]

Francis your posts are poetry and they always ring true. Thank you for the "point of view"

 

[proaudio4]

Good cameras don't have automatic anything on them. The cinematographer makes that choice. Someone mentioned that you can put the camera on full manual for all of the settings? Sony gives you a choice of some manual settings. Their choice. The EX-1 even has something called Manual Assist.

You are correct regarding manual assist mode.

The EX1 has three modes:

Full manual
Manual Assist
Full Auto

I'm sure everyone here will agree to stay away with assist anything modes.

Having said that, the EX1 is a $6.5K high quality run and gun camera. The RED is in a different league.

Although, I must admit the EX1 is not that great at auto run and gun features. Not that I care about them - just an observation.

I would NEVER use auto anything on an EX1. Period.
The full manual mode works fine.

 

[Dj Joofa]

Good cameras don't have automatic anything on them.

Redsail, I understand what you are saying, however, you are perhaps missing a point that is frequently overlooked and is certainly not helped by remarks as the one below:

Having said that, the EX1 is a $6.5K high quality run and gun camera. The RED is in a different league.

It is a common misconception among people not fully familiar with the camera science that lead to such notions.

A camera that provides you a native unprocessed signal (say Red) vs. a processed signal (say Ex1) is actually cutting down on some very sophisticated algorithms required to preempt the behavior of a novice user (can't seem to remember if it was you who termed them old ladies and film students?).

Take auto white balance (AWB) for example. Red will probably relegate such items to a human for later post production. Where as a "run and gun" will try to do it internally. And, I can tell you AWB is not a trivial problem to solve in all cases on full automatic mode. Significant research and development has gone into on how to accomplish it. Where as Red will just output the signal without even bothering to do anything with it.

Therefore, in some sense Ex1 is much more sophisticated than Red, and I don't think that one should overlook that point.

I don't think that one should trivialize the amount of scientific development that went into making something more automatic, even if one does not want to use it.

 

[Joel Kaye]

Just don't expect to be happy when you sell the project and the distributor wants to sell it for a theatrical release.

I think everyone here probably agrees with the essence of what you say about higher budget filmmaking. I'm not sure I've seen a post to the contrary. We're all just one big happy family, I guess.

But how many movies outside the majors and the mini majors were picked up for theatrical last year? 1%? John Sayles can't get wide release North American theatrical right now. Neither can Soderberg last time I checked. That's how tough it is to come from outside the system right now. So the film out argument for me is not RED's strongest one because they are trying to sell 10,000 cameras and 150 movies will get a film out. EDIT: I'm not saying it's not helpful... but it's really out of touch with a lot of potential buyers.

 

[PerroneFord]

Wish I could have joined you on this, but I had $7k, and because of budget, HAD to purchase by June 30, 2008. The new Panny was dicey, Scarlet was unavailable. So I went with the EX1. I don't shoot features, and likely won't do anything more than my current commercials/event/corporate work, most of which will be delivered on SD DVD for the foreseeable future. The EX1 will give me everything I need a this point.

I really hate these pissing contests. I wish I could afford a RED, but honestly, it's more camera than I need or want right now. I still think there is something to be said for people (like me) admitting that their skills simply aren't up to the camera put in front of them. The EX1 will be a very nice introduction into real higher resolution work, and will be more demanding in every way than the DVX I currently own.

The guys are RED have changed the game and I thank them for that. I bought a new notebook computer (couldn't get a MacBook Pro at the office) expressely with an NVidia card so I could run RedCine and just learn and play.

Sorry, to but in, but these discussions always get to me. Ansel Adams did more with an old view camera than most can do with D3. It's not always about the technology.

-P

Just so we're clear here I've talked at least one person out of the EX1 and into buying a RED. I like the EX1, but I'm not buying one. My next little camera will be a Scarlet.

 

[DanWood]

EX1 is a good camera. You get everything you need for $7K. Red is not bad. But it costs more. With everything you need, around $50K. Then there are post processing hassles. EX1 is easy to handle for ordinary people. RED will require more specialised skill and technology and time and money to post process.
It is not fair to compare EX1 with RED. Both have their place.
In the world of 35 mm PL mount digital movie cameras, RED has killed off the competition and is the king of the hill. Competition has simply thrown in the towel and headed for the mountains.
But, in the amateur video camera world, Sony and Panny and Canon are still making waves. When Scarlet arrives, these waves will also die down.
Nobody has the business savvy or marketing genius of Jim.
Jim is simply unbeatable.
Until Scarlet comes to the market, EX1 will continue to be the king of the amateur market.
After considering all the competition including, three of my friends have recently purchased ex1. (not ex3 because they do not plan on changing lenses.). According to them, EX1 has everything they need in a very compact easy to use package. They liked the quality of the camera and its output and the ease of its use and compact card storage, etc. According to them, RED is good for making movies in a studio setting (not for ordinary mortals doing ordinary things).

 

[Jan Reiff]

ultimate letus

ultimate letus

i will get the new ultimate letus on the ex1 in a few weeks. it should be a visible improvement to the letus extreme.

also i expect my red this month, so i will do same comparison tests with the same lense on the cams. i am sure red will be in front, but i am curios how close i can get with the ex, planing it for use as a 3rd camera on set for some close ups...

 

[Kholi Hicks]

Did you order your Letus Ultimate yet? I Should have the EX-1 Tuesday. I had some footage from that and my Letus Ultimate but never got around to editing it.

I can say that it's damned close to the stock lens which is amazing. Some good primes and it's even better. With Zeiss ZF's it was sick, going to try to shoot a music video with the EX-1/Ultimate/Zeiss combo if possible just for my own experience.

 

[Fergus Meiklejohn]

I'm curious.. I cancelled my RED order and bought an EX1, mostly because of the weight/ergonomics/run-and-gun usability issues with RED, especially versus the EX1. And it was the right choice: I cancelled 2 months ago and we still don't have a birger mount or decent onboard mic level audio on the RED camera.., and it still weighs a ton lol. BUT I have been astonished at how bad the colour rendition can be on the EX1. I'm talking about the IR filtration issues. On my EX1 it is TERRIBLE; often totally unusable without heavy colour correction on anything but the bread and butter corporate stuff I've been hacking away at over the last few months. I'm amazed that it is so much worse that any other camera I've ever used. Does RED have anything like as bad a problem? I notice it all the time on the bog standard stuff: interview with a man in a suit under Tungsten light.. These are some samples: in every instance the real colour of the suit was grey or dark blue..

 

[Joel Kaye]

interview with a man in a suit under Tungsten light.. These are some samples: in every instance the real colour of the suit was grey or dark blue..

Tough to know how two cameras compare without side by side testing. No camera renders every color accurately. I'm not aware that RED has much trouble with IR issues until you get ND filters on. Some have said IR CUT filters help in tungsten situations. You could try a IR Cut filter on the EX1 and see if it helped.

Check out all the Hot Mirror threads here for more info:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=32