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 :)

S35 Scarlet/3K/with lens for $3000 - Why?

M

Michael Stein

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Could it be that Scarlet at the "entry level" had been planned with a full frame sensor and a Canon or Nikon mount like its DSLR-competitors Canon and Nikon are offering soon around est. 2500 (with lens) $$ ...

- if there was no S35 Scarlet without lens for $7500?

Isn't a better Scarlet at the entry level threatening more advanced (more expensive RED combinations) very much*** - just like the EX3 is pushing the big, expensive Cinealtas or the Canon 5D Mark II is threatening the whole camcorder division at Canon? Maybe that is the reason why there has been no 5D MarkII a year ago? RED has changed the game but now it seems it has difficulties playing by the tough rules it set itself.
You have to think differently at that "entry level" and it might not be as much fun as thinking Epic either. But hey, these little new "black" DSLRs by Canon and Nikon have been mainly the reason for RED having changed the whole product line - as far as I understood.

To me it all seems like at first you are pushing the big guys – and then you are a big guy yourself. First you are hunting and all of a sudden you are prey. Paradoxically it seems that the better you are the quicker this happens.

And isn’t RED really good? - Count on it! :watsup:

* Think REVERIE is not for big guys? Caught yourself laughing at the following link? Well, ... :bye2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgmrOrzPVvk
** What if the new DSLRs are soon considered as hot as the RED ONE has been considered? Right. They sell and start getting better quickly. And the competition between Canon and Nikon works just fine with no further help from RED. I am sure we will be seeing a billion REVERIEs sweeping the planet very soon and that is heat! So be red and hot, too, and ...

start selling the S35 Scarlet with 3K and with lens for 3000 $$.
And still I would not call this a DSLR-Killer. Only a tough competitor.

How about everybody else???? :help:

*** If there is simply no business model for that suggestion - no one can be of help I am afraid. :innocent:
 
There are some people clamoring for a S35 3k sensor. I am not one of them. However the 2/3" sensor does not make sense. A" 4/3" sensor does.
 
Count me in on a 3k Scarlet w. c-mount, will take a 2/3, but ideally a 4/3 (which will be more expensive of course..).

My observation of RED's process to get a product pipeline is a bit worrying and in my opinion, they are not to be counted among the big ones yet (like Sony, Canon etc.). And that is good, because that will give them a competitive edge to change specs in one afternoon (which they did).

Hopefully they now reach through and make their 2nd product happen, whatever it may be. Momentum is key...
 
Jim stated in a similar thread that the s35 sensor alone costs more than the entire 2/3 scarlet does. So whether you want 3K or 5K the price will be the same.
 
I honestly cannot follow this guy's posts. I'm scratching my head to try to figure out what he is even saying.

:help:
 
They have the same conversation going in other threads as well... pointless and the tones sounds more like when a little kid got the red train for Christmas but he wanted the blue one... There will be always something that you will like to have no matter how many option RED gives to us so bottom line I am very happy that at least a company took the time to go back to the drawing board taking all of our previous imputs to come up with several packages for the different needs...
 
diskojerk said:
Jim stated in a similar thread that the s35 sensor alone costs more than the entire 2/3 scarlet does. So whether you want 3K or 5K the price will be the same.
Click to expand...

Right, because you're still using the same amount of silicon regardless of res on the chips.

Unless you re-use old Mysterium sensors from upgrades to Epic.
 
The 2/3" Scarlet with the interchangeable lenses is great for all things broadcast, docs, reality, you name it. The price is reasonable too. The challenge is in finding a decent HD motorized (B4 broadcast type) zoom lens that won't cost the $15-30k + It doesn't seem that Red is going to be making any 2/3" zoom lenses, which leaves us with Fuji, Canon and Angenieux, bringing the overall price of the kit easily to the $20-40k range. Any suggestions anyone?
 
bakalaj said:
The 2/3" Scarlet with the interchangeable lenses is great for all things broadcast, docs, reality, you name it. The price is reasonable too. The challenge is in finding a decent HD motorized (B4 broadcast type) zoom lens that won't cost the $15-30k + It doesn't seem that Red is going to be making any 2/3" zoom lenses, which leaves us with Fuji, Canon and Angenieux, bringing the overall price of the kit easily to the $20-40k range. Any suggestions anyone?
Click to expand...

I keep saying this but no one listens. A 4/3's sensor is what we should want. It should cost ~$4-4.5k instead of $2.5k. Worth every bit for the amount you'll save in glass and not needing to use stupid adapters to achieve shallower DOF!
  • Plenty of very decent lenses available.
    http://www.four-thirds.org/en/products/lense.html
  • Better depth of field. Not only that but you can get shallower DOF by opening up the Iris in conjunction with ND filters. Something that won't be a real option with the smaller 2/3" sensor because of the tiny 3.2 micron cell size.
  • Better S/N
 
REDneck said:
you sure the silicon is the big cost?

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Cost_of_silicon
Click to expand...

When someone discusses the cost of silicon they aren't just considering the raw elemental cost. It includes the raw material plus fabrication costs. The point is you want to yield as many chips per wafer as possible. In the case of the 2/3 sensor however, I don't think the tradeoff will be acceptable to people expecting RED quality.
 
brainburst said:
I keep saying this but no one listens. A 4/3's sensor is what we should want. It should cost ~$4-4.5k instead of $2.5k. Worth every bit for the amount you'll save in glass and not needing to use stupid adapters to achieve shallower DOF!
  • Plenty of very decent lenses available.
    http://www.four-thirds.org/en/products/lense.html
  • Better depth of field. Not only that but you can get shallower DOF by opening up the Iris in conjunction with ND filters. Something that won't be a real option with the smaller 2/3" sensor because of the tiny 3.2 micron cell size.
  • Better S/N
Click to expand...

I am listening but the lenses you are talking about are not broadcast type. I need a built-in zoom control and a handle with start/stop button and other typical controls right on the lens. Many people like myself also work alone without focus pullers and other crew and we need the ability to quickly control the image via the zoom lens assembly. And frankly, for my work (and again I am sure I am not alone), I am quite happy with the DOF I get from a 2/3" chip/lens. As a matter of fact, there are plenty of situations where a little 'help' in the form of a wider DOP is a good thing, namely when it's a quick shoot with small or one-man crew.

And for those who want the 35mm DOP and film-style camera, there are plenty other Red options. :-)
 
As a matter of fact, there are plenty of situations where a little 'help' in the form of a wider DOP is a good thing, namely when it's a quick shoot with small or one-man crew.
Click to expand...

Then close down the iris and turn up the gain. That's the look you'll get with the 2/3" sensor anyway.

I need a built-in zoom control and a handle with start/stop button and other typical controls right on the lens.
Click to expand...

Does it really matter where the precise location of the zoom control as long as it is convenient? Any camera with a 4/3rd lenses can be adapted to have a zoom control in a convenient location. You could even put an extention on the front of the camera body on the side of the lens. Much easier to do than trying to find a decent cost effective lens solution for the 2/3" sensor.
 
Hi everyone, this is my first post after lurking for a year. I am very excited by the possibilities available now thanks to RED, Canon and others. I do however feel a bit frustrated that I still can't get all the capabilities that exist in one camera. I shoot stills and video for a living and have a 5D and EF lens collection. The 5dII is a fantastic step forward but hindered by its AVCHD codec and lack of exposure controls. I imagine these could be resolved with firmware upgrades? I dont know enough about it to be sure. Once I got my head around the awesome range that RED has just announced I was still disappointed that there is no RED option with a FF35 sensor in the $3K region. I realize RED sensors are faster than any others including Canon's and am not in the know enough to say what other features make them so pricey but if Canon can deliver a FF 35 5K chip at $2700, why is the nearest RED equivalent still $12000(Scarlet FF 35)? It has been amazing watching this all develop and I am sure there are lots more great things to come.
 
brainburst said:
Does it really matter where the precise location of the zoom control as long as it is convenient? Any camera with a 4/3rd lenses can be adapted to have a zoom control in a convenient location. You could even put an extention on the front of the camera body on the side of the lens. Much easier to do than trying to find a decent cost effective lens solution for the 2/3" sensor.
Click to expand...

Well, your suggestion means a separate motorized zoom control with a cable leading to an extension and probably also rails would be necessary. Then adding a "convenient" start/stop button somewhere on the extension with additional cabling as well... oh yes, also a 'return' button, 'auto iris' switch and button and a whole host of other functions that broadcast zoom lenses typically have built-in. You are still in the mindset of 'feature style' production while I am talking television, docs, sports.... etc., or as some like to call it run-and-a-gun.

Let's not turn this into a war or words; with Red's amazing modular concepts, there are clearly options for all of us. Those who want a full 35mm aperture have a number of choices already and so do those working in the tv field.

My original question was about suitable HD broadcast zoom lens and whether Red would be offering this type of a solution in their lens lineup.
 
i have to admit a little disappointment that there's no 35mm sensor for the sub-3k scarlets.

HOWEVER.

i am reserving all judgement until i've seen some mysterium-x footage. depth of field is but one part of the equation. i'd like to see the dynamic range of mysterium-x in action. i'd like to take advantage of a raw workflow.

not until mkII is in people's hands will we have some idea of its capabilities.

i just want to say that it is entirely possible the lowest end scarlet will blow away the mkII both in specs as well as in totally subjective A/B footage comparisons.
 
the lowest end Scarlet has a fixed lens, so that doesn't compare to the MKII. You have to go up to the $7,000 brain before you can use your canon or nikon lenses, and compare image quality with the MKII.
 
I was personally hoping for a Four Thirds format Scarlet, before the announcement, but I wasn't the least bit disappointed with the 2/3" spec and what was proposed. It looks like it will be a great alternative to S16 shooting and I could live with the crop on Four Thirds lenses if an adapter becomes available.
The great thing about the modularity, is there is always the S35 ( to rent? ) if you need it. I'm waiting to see the footage, to really make any kind of real judgement.

Adrian
 
yes, all good points, here's to hoping that future RED announcements are just as great.
 
Well, your suggestion means a separate motorized zoom control with a cable leading to an extension and probably also rails would be necessary. Then adding a "convenient" start/stop button somewhere on the extension with additional cabling as well... oh yes, also a 'return' button, 'auto iris' switch and button and a whole host of other functions that broadcast zoom lenses typically have built-in. You are still in the mindset of 'feature style' production while I am talking television, docs, sports.... etc., or as some like to call it run-and-a-gun.
Click to expand...
I hear you, but here's the thing: No such affordable lens exists for the 2/3" version of the camera right? So it's not as if there's a reasonable alternative. No such affordable decent lenses exists at all for the 2/3" camera which is why RED will offer mini primes. If instead they went with a 4/3 sensor they could scrap the silly idea of all the mini primes since there are plenty of options already for the 4/3 with optical stabilizers to boot, and just make 1 zoom lens like the one you want which would be more cost effective since the glass wouldn't have to be THAT good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top