Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 8x vs Epic-S

Yannick Verry

Yannick Verry

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
209
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
45
Location
Shanghai, CN
Just wondering...

Camera price, required processing power and files size put aside, is there any reason Scarlet 8x could be prefered to Epic-S with decent lense from Canon/Nikon ?

Like better/faster AF system (because it's built-in) than an Epic-S + Canon 24-70L ? Or smoother change of iris during shooting ?

Yannick
 
i think it just depends on what you are planning to shoot/how you prefer to work. i imagine the scarlet 8x would appeal more to doco/run n' gun type shooters(like myself). Other than that the higher framer rates are an advantage to sway you to the Scarlet side.
 
As Brian says -- plus a slight size-weight advantage -- and there aren't any T 2.4 8x zoom lenses by either Canon or Nikon that I know of (if I missed any, please let me know). The lens you mentioned is 3x, so obviously not nearly the reach. So you'd have to switch lenses to another longer, heavier zoom to get the reach/range of the fixed Scarlet.

Having an integrated fly by wire camera makes all the automation work well. That doesn't mean epic S won't, but it's possible it won't, as you suggest, be as fast or comprehensive.

In some situations having a closer to 16mm depth of field i to deal with rather than 35mm can be an advantage -- obviously in run and gun, doc type shooting.

Nice to be able to dismiss cost factors. Obviously both cameras are incredible bargains, but the Scarlet is a remarkable deal.
 
Run and gun is probably the best one. I can see a lot of opportunities where I could get shots on Scarlet that would be out of the question with Epic-S. Snowboarding is one of them - I could fit a Scarlet on a backpack with a compact tripod and take it up the mountain but I'd be very hesitant to take up a heavier, more expensive setup including a couple of delicate lenses.

Also, the ability to shoot 120fps is something that Scarlet will do that I don't think Epic-S will. I think Epic-S tops out at 60 (30 with HDR-X).
 
I think at 3k, the Epic-S will also do 120fps.
But yes, lense range is a +
 
Yannick Verry said:
Like better/faster AF system (because it's built-in) than an Epic-S + Canon 24-70L ?...
Click to expand...

Yes..AF should work better on Scarlet since it's all designed integrated
in the same system. But perphaps Canon AF lenses will work just
as well in the Epic systems. We will have to see.

But am seriously considering going with 2 or 3 Scarlets vs. just one Epic.
All depends on how good Scarlet zoom lens is. Red has suggested it is
very good.
 
You can get a decent Scarlet fixed package and an interchangeable body with mini-primes or mounts for PL or other aftermarket lenses both for less than the price of an Epic-S.
 
Yannick Verry said:
I think at 3k, the Epic-S will also do 120fps.
But yes, lense range is a +
Click to expand...

Yeah, the 120 fps thing is right up at the top of the list, IMO. I don't know how fast Epic-S will go in a windowed mode, but a camera this inexpensive that can shoot at 120 fps is like a minor miracle.

I mean, what have you got in the way of cinematic vocabulary basics? Space compression and expansion via telephoto and wide-angle lenses is a big one. Time compression and expansion via overcranking and undercranking is the other big one.
 
DUST

DUST

One thing to keep in mind is that in any camera that the lens comes off of you can get dust on the sensor, so having a "sealed" camera with a zoom lens helps avoid that issue.

Since Scarlet "2/3"" is much smaller sensor the dust is much bigger on the processed frames, so that may be a reason alone to go fixed if you are shooting in dust storms and need to change the lens frequently...
 
The ideal system for me would be a Scarlet fixed AND an Epic-S. Different use, but "same" qualities.
... really think of selling my car ;)
 
Lee Saxon said:
If not even more.

And I see lens range as a negative of the Fixed. Since it's, ya know, Fixed. An interchangeable lens mount that can be adapted to any lens ever made = more than 8x!
Click to expand...

The big thing is how well the fixed lens performs. Like, I've suffered from more than a little in the way of lens fetish issues over the years, but coming out the other side (so to speak) has left me primarily concerned with artifacts. How bad does the lens distort? Is there going to be purple fringing everywhere? And to a lesser degree I look at how close the lens focuses and if it seems to perform better up close or far away, etc. All the esoteric things are still there, but I feel like I can work around the generally pedestrian aspects of the imagery if I have to. It will be really interesting to see how the 8x lens hits the major bullet points. Decisions about which body to grab can wait until then...for me, at least.
 
Another question is : how about low light performances ? How far from epic ?
Maybe using hdrx on scarlet could be a way to avoid pushing iso too much ?
 
Yannick Verry said:
Another question is : how about low light performances ? How far from epic ?
Maybe using hdrx on scarlet could be a way to avoid pushing iso too much ?
Click to expand...

People who've used it can obviously tell you better than I can, but it seems like hdrx will be something to control highlight clipping more than something to extend the upper limits of ISO range.
 
Robert Jackson said:
People who've used it can obviously tell you better than I can, but it seems like hdrx will be something to control highlight clipping more than something to extend the upper limits of ISO range.
Click to expand...

Yea IIRC hdrx takes two images per frame, one normal, and one highlight protection. So no extra information on the dark side there. :(
 
Ok, i thought so. As i'm interested in Red mainly for the low light performance, i'm really curious about the final results with scarlet.

I got pretty good results with my ex1, and from what i've seen in the shadows with the tiger video, i'm wondering how better (i'm just talking about low light here) will be the scarlet.


Ex1 @ Saigon by night (ungraded) : Noise level is acceptable, blacks are good and highlights almost not clipped.
http://www.sunless-films.fr/ex1insaigon.jpg
 
The EX-1 is a very good low light camera. It has three 1/2" chips, and prisms are more efficient at passing light than colored filters are. So the Scarlet should be better, but not THAT much better than the EX is; I'd say about a stop. This is of course a guess.

Epic-S will of course be considerably better in low light than either. Wild guess, Scarlet 400 ISO; Epic-S 800+ ISO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top