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 :)

Scarlet 2/3": Do you want a 4K Scarlet?

Scarlet 2/3": Do you want a 4K Scarlet?

  • Aye

    Votes: 71 39.0%

  • Nay

    Votes: 111 61.0%
  • Total voters
    182
Brian Petrie said:
The Alexa isn't 4K and no one seems to mind.
Click to expand...

Yhe first part of this sentence is true.
The second... Not entirely...

I think this is a bad idea, BTW...

Not at least because one would need a new sensor to fit that many pixels on a 2/3" chip...
It just isn't an option.

And the Monstro sensor has even larger pixels than the MX, if memoy serves me well...
 
Stuart English said:
However, Alexa is an Arri. And some number of people are going to shoot that because it makes them feel comfortable. We'll just have to see if that comfort factor sustains them long term... it's certainly pretty underwhelming if projected on a big screen.

The situation on Scarlet is somewhat different. For a 2/3" sensor, 3K RAW seems to us to be the right pixel density to aim at in order to match up to the lens characteristics and offer the best balance of recorded resolution and dynamic range.
Click to expand...

Isn't the "RAW" pixelcount on the Alexa and the 3k Scarlet the same?

I thought so...
 
H. Farberg said:
I will not understand anyone who kits out their Fixed with S35 adapters...
Click to expand...

Sure, I agree.

But I am as sure it will happen. Thinking of the amount of "Frankencams" I have seen people build to get 35 "filmlook", this is actually not the worst place to start...

Anyhow.
Hvor jobber du forresten?

Cheers!

G
 
Gunleik Groven said:
Sure, I agree.

But I am as sure it will happen. Thinking of the amount of "Frankencams" I have seen people build to get 35 "filmlook", this is actually not the worst place to start...

Anyhow.
Hvor jobber du forresten?

Cheers!

G
Click to expand...

Hehe. Jeg er logger i Strix Televisjon. Ikke akkurat top of the chain enda :P
 
Kan vel hende det havner noen Scarlets der, og...
Ikke minst for highspeed...

LOL

Sorry... for the Norwegian distraction... -:)

But seriously, back OT, one of my main reasons for wanting a Scarletr fixed, too is that it is NOT 4k. Really this is the ideal "point and shoot" cam with Varicam functionality which doesn't need long time to rig.

I might change my mind on that once I put my hands on the Epic, though...

Cheers!

G
 
My main reason for wanting a Fixed is for personal projects. 2/3" and fantastic codec is something that costs a lot more than what the Fixed will sell for. The fact that it will resolve more than 1920x1080, and have framerates up to 120 fps is just icing on the cake.
 
Up until very recently 16mm/2/3" was close to the holy grail.

I still like those formats, even after allmost 3 years of R1...

And I like the mobility of the cam.
And user friendlyness.

I really miss the PD-150 in many ways... Here's the answer to that!

Robust. Small. Easy. Good images.

G
(Who had the HVX "at once it came" but still have the fondest relationship to PD 150/170 of the small cams...)
 
Tim Hole said:
Wait and see what Scarlet has to offer first.
Click to expand...

We all wait and wait and wait... and we all are going to be :emote_happyhappy:
 
First realease the 3k Scarlet. Than the S35/Epic Light... after that maby. No I think prices will rise to much if they working on to many models. Also I think 5k is the next step after stepping up
from Scarlet fixed. But maby youre want the long focus deph that 2/3 gives?
 
If you want 4k get the EPIC. Then you have 5K and can downrez to 4K. Scarlet is fine with 3K for most applications.
 
Cedric Akins said:
If you want 4k get the EPIC. Then you have 5K and can downrez to 4K. Scarlet is fine with 3K for most applications.
Click to expand...

Actually for the quite specific purpose I have in mind with miniatures and a BUNCH of greenscreen, 4K with the 2/3 sensor size would be wonderful. Come to think of it, 3K would be nice as well. :drool5:
 
To me, 3K is just fine.
But as it was said on the thread, if they had to upgrade th ScarletS, to me ot would be a true 16mm sensor* and for the Fixed a three rings lens (yes, I know we can switch and so on, but I still think it would be more comfortable to have everything manual).

*can someone explain how 2/3" sensors are just 11mm ? I'm French so I don't use inches and feet and miles (meters and so on for us) but it appears that an inch is more or less 25,4mm, so 1/3 inch would be around 8 or 9mm ans sooooo 2/3 about 16 to 18mm.... I suppose it is not that simple or 2/3" sensors would actually have 16mm size.... I need help... I... think....
 
Bastien Tribalat said:
*can someone explain how 2/3" sensors are just 11mm ?
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format
The sensor sizes of many compact digital cameras are expressed in terms of the non-standardized "inch" system, as approximately 1.5 times the length of the diagonal of the sensor. This goes back to the way image sizes of early video cameras were expressed in terms of the outside diameter of the glass envelope of the video camera tube. David Pogue of the New York Times states that "the actual sensor size is much smaller than what the camera companies publish — about one-third smaller." For example, a camera advertising a 1/2.7" sensor does not have a sensor with a diagonal of 0.37"; instead, the diagonal is closer to 0.26". [6][7] Instead of "formats", these sensor sizes are often called types, as in "1/2-inch-type CCD."
 
David Mullen ASC said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format
The sensor sizes of many compact digital cameras are expressed in terms of the non-standardized "inch" system, as approximately 1.5 times the length of the diagonal of the sensor. This goes back to the way image sizes of early video cameras were expressed in terms of the outside diameter of the glass envelope of the video camera tube. David Pogue of the New York Times states that "the actual sensor size is much smaller than what the camera companies publish — about one-third smaller." For example, a camera advertising a 1/2.7" sensor does not have a sensor with a diagonal of 0.37"; instead, the diagonal is closer to 0.26". [6][7] Instead of "formats", these sensor sizes are often called types, as in "1/2-inch-type CCD."
Click to expand...


Thanks !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top