The answer is...

[jbeale]

I wouldn't take my color chart too seriously, especially given Jim's comments that color adjusting was by eyeball and in a different color space anyway.

Re: MvG, my chart would mean more if it was based on a TIFF developed from raw with this particular test in mind. But you do need to develop somehow; RAW files are in a universe of their own and they have to be transformed into some working color space, be it Adobe 1998, sRGB etc. to make comparisons. I'm sure Red's color match could be easily refined; just a touch more saturation for color values in the (b* > 0) region would get you fairly close to the 1Dmk3, for example.

Hope it made some sense... I figure if I make enough tech-geek posts, maybe Red will hire me to help them play with their toys.

 

[Marc Berger]

mmmh...I have to learn a lot and looking really forward to get my Red in hands for practice.
What a wonderful world!
Thanks Jim!

 

[Alexander Nikishin]

Knew it. :turned:

The difference was visible in the shadow detail of the screw.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Also I knew it from before but I wanted that better picture was from RED.

Then made mistake claiming all the time that the top was from RED

even after knowing that color checker rendition chart at the bottom picture has black and

all color rendition the same as in the samples that Jim showed before shot on RED B16.

So my campaigning the top image for RED failed.

Sorry!

Now I lost but happy for RED high picture quality.

Also I did not make any deeper scientific testing, saturation, blue channel, etc...

all it was more like a naked-eye test .

 

[Patrick Tresch]

Good that people don't have to eat their pants!!!



Pat

 

[Fix]

ah got me fooled . But what the heck. Its produce great picture anyhow.

I guess the top picture was almost a tad too sharp if you hunt for that filmic feel.

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

Also I knew it from before but I wanted that better picture was from RED.

Oh please! Then what was all that "people here don't know Canon" blather about?

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=232591&postcount=49

If you're going to hold yourself forth as a lens expert, you better deliver the goods...

Speaking of lenses, I would be curious to see some similar comparisons in the future that try to get a better lens match than the 50-150mm and 70-200mm -- not that these were bad choices (I wouldn't know! I'm still waaaaiting on my 50-150mm!), but sharpness is definitely a function of lens choice. Sigma has a 50mm macro lens which is f2.8 and nice and sharp -- maybe see how the 18-50mm CF works against it, it would certainly make focusing on the tiny little letters easier...

I think the sharpest lens that I own at f2.8 is the Canon 100mm macro, my copy is even sharper than the 70-200mm f.2.8, I think. It would be interesting to see the 50-150mm at 100mm for comparison, except that a macro lens compared to non-macro in a close-up shot is not a fair fight...maybe a different subject matter.

Most interesting comparison of all would be to match Canon on RED and Canon on Canon, once the Birger mount is released. That would *really* be the most telling comparison. Although I suppose a Nikon/Nikon comparison is available right now.

Anyway, the point being, the lens has a lot to do with color rendering and sharpness, and I'd love to see a do-over with the lens as a static variable, just for fun.

Build 16 looks like it is going to be wonderful. Will EPIC have a still function, like SCARLET? That would be fantastic, to finally see a real convergence of still and motion technologies. I could sell my Canon bodies to finance EPIC.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

If you're going to hold yourself forth as a lens expert, you better deliver the goods...

I did not claim any role here as a lens expert.

I make concepts.

To take something that I was not so sure from the beginning didn't work in this comparison test.

I did a bad concept without digging in deep.

Sorry again.

Learning from mistakes is almost a part of daily life here at the REDusers forum.

 

[purefilm]

wow I was wrong.

 

[Jonathan Payne]

I am going to post a new thread on how to almost exactly match RED with Canon, and visa-versa.

Jim

No disrespect Jim. I suppose my preference might be for a little more per pixel sharpness at the expense of aliasing (as jbeale suggests) and that isn't a fault of the camera. I also realize that the look of the Red in this shot is most likely affected by the AA filter and (thankful) lack of default image sharpening. I also realize as Graeme has said that these things are more important in a motion picture due to motion judder, moire and the like.

That said, it's always fun to see new posts from you about image quality and characteristics.

on a completely unrelated note, way back when you were showing footage from the test bed camera prototype (the milk girls footage) in Santa Monica/LA at the Nuart i saw you outside of the theater smoking a cigar and thought I should go up and shake your hand to thank you for making this camera but I chickened out.

So if we ever happen to cross paths again(and if you're cool recieving thanks from people who appreciate what you've done), I won't chicken out next time

 

[Lauri Kettunen]

Got it wrong, but it's amazing that we are comparing Red and the Canon top model DSLR at the first place.

I'm involved with wildlife documents, and there are some subjects, such as the Northern lights, which are still difficult to shoot with Red One. The longest exposure time is just too short. So, one needs a DSLR aside the Red.

If I've got it right, 1 sec is technically the maximum exposure time one can get with Red One. But, what about if the camera allowed virtual exposure times longer than 1sec. That is, if one sets 20s, then the camera or Redcine/RedAlert will arithmetically add up 20 different frames to compose a single frame out of the 20. Of course, the same can be done in post with Photoshop, but that's a rather slow and time consuming process.

Meryem, yes, it will be interesting to test Red and Canon using the same lens.

 

[Mark K.]

Interesting, I picked it wrong (made my judgement based on the CA visible in the top image). I simply assumed the 1DIII and 70-200mm would handle CAs better than Red (which has been developed so recently).

Impressive little test Jim, I'd be very interested to see how the two cameras compare in terms of latitude (i.e. a high contrast shot outdoors with bright sky and harsh shadows in the foreground).

 

[sbcooler]

Ultimate Test

Ultimate Test

Jim, only you know this. But if you look closely with your own eyes at the desk and color chart and then compare both both the Canon and RED....which to your eyes looks like a more accurate presentation of the colors.

So real life as the base: now compare RED vs Canon

I'm interested if you've done this test!

Either way, I'll take any of those images in a heartbeat! Great work! Thx-

 

[Jannard]

Jim, only you know this. But if you look closely with your own eyes at the desk and color chart and then compare both both the Canon and RED....which to your eyes looks like a more accurate presentation of the colors.

So real life as the base: now compare RED vs Canon

I'm interested if you've done this test!

Either way, I'll take any of those images in a heartbeat! Great work! Thx-

I think the charts show we can tweak our color science just a bit... and Graeme is on that right now. We are infants in the camera business. I love the comparisons. It tells us what we need to work on. Having said that, about 40% of the people guessed wrong which tells me we are extremely close to the image quality of the best quality DSLR... while we shoot 24fps. Not bad for yesterday. Tomorrow we will be even better.

Jim

 

[Pawel Achtel]

Tomorrow we will be even better.

Is that a subtle hint for B16 availability? :biggrin:

OK, I have an SD card freshly formatted, created /Update folder, looking at www.red.com/support and refreshing the page every 5 minutes with immense anticipation....