Scarlet vs. Canon 1DMK4 @ High ISO performance in cine mode

[Sanjin Jukic]

Scarlet vs. Canon 1DMK4 @ High ISO performance in cine mode.


What do you think?

Pros and cons?

.........................


Scarlet @ high ISO:

"My test bed is a modified RED ONE. ISO 2000 is the highest it goes.

The new cameras will go higher. The cleaner the sensor, the more you can push it.

I have just stopped down the aperture to the equivalent of ISO 16000.

Amazing to get a useable image.

Jim"


LINK>>>




Canon 1DMK4 @ high ISO:

"Photographers and documentary filmmakers working in available light will be impressed

by the low-noise image quality of the 1D Mark IV, capturing amazing still images and video

footage even at speed settings as high as ISO 12,800."


LINK>>>


............

 

[Carl Larsen]

A poor OLPF still equals aliasing regardless of ISO. After reading the latest posts on DVX user and Prolost on the aliasing problems of HDSLR's, I have no reason to doubt Red's footage will be superior.

 

[Lars Steenhoff]

My guess is that Red will look sharper and cleaner if enough light is available, in low light the canon may give a brighter softer image, question is how often do you really need this.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Aliasing is a really huge problem with HD DSLR's video and you always have to be careful about it like a fabric pattern, facade,...

Also I do have anti-aliasing filter for 7D that cuts a bit sharpens...

 

[Tom.Wong]

from the beta testers i've been reading about, ISO wise withe mk IV, they've been saying the camera has no standards in ISO just like how scarlet will. 800 is the new 320, 3200 is the new 1600, their 12,800 is probably their new 6400 ISO. Jim merely claimed usable at 16000 ISO, usable can be very subjective. but PRO with scarlet? full raster professionally geared cinema system, 1d mk iv? pro still photography system, water proof etc. does good video.

 

[Ralph B.]

Won't the Canon always spit out h.264? For motion RED is the PRO tool. I just can't imagine a shoot where given the option you wouldn't shoot on RED, unless Mysterium X is less capable than Mysterium.

Isn't the 2/3" interchangeable about half the cost of the 1DMK4?

For the cost of an additional really good lens you get a camera with exponentially more capability (10fps vs. 100fps to start) by going with a Scarlet S35.

 

[chrislancaster]

I love the look when shooting at night .. it really just make some shots look so amazing


the lights or fires ..the shadows ..yes, i am in love with night shooting ..

I am really looking forward to seeing what scarlet can do

till then :emote_popcorn:

 

[Andrew Rieger]

I have asked this question myself and I still can't make up my mind. My question is, when projected on the big screen, will there be a huge noticeable difference between the Canon and the Scarlet 2/3". I know I am going to purchase the Scarlet 2/3". I want to rent out the Canon when I shoot at night or when super shallow dof fits the mood of the piece. Everyone says that the DSLR's can make good B cams for 35mm productions, but I am still a little hesitant. I really wish there was some sort of RAW capture option for the Canon's. Philip Bloom did some tests for Lucasfilm and they say it looked good projected. Others have tested 35mm film outs that they say look good as well. There is no doubt that the new Canon 1D has jaw dropping low light abilities. I imagine that Scarlet S35 and 2/3" will have much more digital noise so in night situation without any external lights, the Canon may be the best thing out there. Aliasing is the big issue but you need to know what situations to avoid to get the best footage.

I saw The Hurt Locker in theaters and it had some of the grainiest night time footage I have ever seen and I did not really mind. It was shot on Super 16mm and that could be some indication of the 2/3" sensor at night. You never know, it could be great at night. Collateral and Miami Vice have many low lights situations that seem to do fine with a 2/3" chip. The big question for me would be, in a situation where your film will be digitally projected on the big screen or transfered to 35mm, do the low light abilities of the Canon outweigh the aliasing problems and resolution drop if your main cam is a Scarlet s35 of 2/3" I think they would but others would disagree.

 

[Peter Corbett]

If you need to shoot now or in the next six months, buy/rent/shoot on the 1D IV, 5D or 7D. Scarlet doesn't exist as a production camera for us to use today, or tomorrow. So many people here are waiting for the Holy Grail when they should be out there making films/TVC's/docos with the DOF tools that are available now. I too want a Scarlet but everyone take a reality pill please.

Peter Corbett
Powerhouse Productions
www.php.com.au

 

[Andrew Rieger]

Chill, most of us have cameras already that we are using, we are simply discussing our options down the road. Nothing wrong with that. Sure, some are holding on to their money waiting for Scarlet but most have experience with other gear. First timers are not investing thousands of dollars in pro video gear. Besides, no one wants to invest in gear that will be beat in half a year. Its one thing when you don't see next gen products coming but when you know its coming, than you wont waste your money now. Thats smart shopping, patience is a virtue.

 

[Tim Hole]

On a set I was on recently they were using a 1D as a B-Cam. Its not a small shoot by any means Paul Giamatti is in the leado opposite other well known stars. It was a five camera shoot shot on F23 mostly. They were quick snappy over the shoulder and picking up action - of which there is a lot.

I am sure though Scarlet will likely replace this type of thing in future for small b-cameras on big shoots, for it small and robust nature but also for its raw nature - for colour correcting to the A-cameras.

 

[Peter Corbett]

Chill, most of us have cameras already that we are using, we are simply discussing our options down the road. Nothing wrong with that. Sure, some are holding on to their money waiting for Scarlet but most have experience with other gear. First timers are not investing thousands of dollars in pro video gear. Besides, no one wants to invest in gear that will be beat in half a year. Its one thing when you don't see next gen products coming but when you know its coming, than you wont waste your money now. Thats smart shopping, patience is a virtue.

Point taken.

Peter

 

[Andrew Rieger]

Tim, I would be interested to learn about this Paul Giamatti film. Were these prototype 1D Mark IVs? I am curious to learn about other A List films using Canon VDSLR's as B cams. I hear Iron Man 2 is using 5D's. Also, on the set, could you tell if they were stock, or were they modified with stuff like PL mounts and uncompressed recording modules. I find it odd that they were willing to deal with the annoying Canon codec.

 

[David Rasberry]

My question is, when projected on the big screen, will there be a huge noticeable difference between the Canon and the Scarlet 2/3".

Considering that you are starting with an image that is about 2-1/2 times the resolution of any HD camera before it is scaled down to a 2k cinema format, I expect Scarlet will be significantly better on the big screen, especially in 1.89:1 wide screen or 2.35:1 scope presentation where HD gets cropped and then scaled up. Canon resolves around 500 lines vertical in video mode. Scarlet 2/3" should exceed 1100 lines vertical if the lenses used are up to the task.

 

[Andrew Rieger]

True, but as you said, the scarlet will be scaled down to 2K which, according to the attached chart, is only slightly larger than full HD.

 

[Andrew Rieger]

Also, I read an article about the new Sherlock Holmes film and they shot with both 2K and 4K cameras and the DP said that there was not a huge difference and the footage intercut well together. Talk about a huge difference in resolution. Yes, the Scarlet will look better but the Canon will allow you to film in unheard of low light levels which should make up for the softer image. I would probably use diffusion filters on both cameras or just the red to make up for the extra 2k sharpness.

 

[Tim Hole]

To be completely honest with you I didn't pay too much attention to them, was too busy. I only noticed them and asked offhandedly which model they were using. But Andrew I can easily find out! The cameras themselves were far from rigged. One of the operators though was wired up to something on his belt. Not sure whether it was additional power. Does the 1D support any live output through HDMI to bypass the compression? I've heard of cam's being used in various places but never more than quick shot style. Few people really trust them.

I was pushed into IMAX training the other day and was talking to their rep (someone from Canada - the name escapes me now) he said they tested some 2x4K projectors with a panel of experts and the outcome was that they preferred 2x2K as the standard. I assumed that IMAX were installing 4K projectors but apparently not. I watched some preview trailers in IMAX (on the projectors we just had installed) and its super sweet IMAX 3D. Annoyingly though there was some slight windowing on the top and bottom but I think it was because they were wide and not scope. I hope AVATAR isn't like this. To me the point of IMAX is wall to wall floor to ceiling. No interruptions.

 

[Vince Doran]

I'm wanting to mount a new cam on the front of my surfboard for early morning and late arvo tube rides, Canon has what I need right now, Red doesn't....simple as that

 

[M Most]

Also, I read an article about the new Sherlock Holmes film and they shot with both 2K and 4K cameras and the DP said that there was not a huge difference and the footage intercut well together.

According to what I've been told, Sherlock Holmes was shot primarily on film, with specialty shots done with both Silicon Imaging 2K minis and Phantom HD cameras, neither of which are 4K imagers. Of course, they might have been considering the film cameras to be the 4K cameras.

 

[Andrew Rieger]

All I heard was that they were mixing 4K and 2K with great results. Most os it was shot on film which is considered to be much better than 2/3" 2K.