vote for 3k interchangeable, scarlet-x is not future proof either

[Arun R]

The future Camera is 4k resolution with a decent codec (which people can use with current editing systems without any file transmission , 4.4.4 or maybe raw ) interchangeable lenses, Canon mount, Nikon mount etc with most accessories ready to shoot base system ( not included lenses ) strong build body under $2800 that is gonna hit the consumer & prosumer market like HOT CAKE very soon.. indifilm makers are real crazy enthusiastic film makers who don't like to give rest to the camera & if Mr' RED is not gonna realize this fact there is no doubt they will lose the game..

Time & price both are more important for buyers, People measure companies who do lot of things in short time under $$$ not with telling we are going to change everything we are going to do this & that & finally coming up with $$$$$$$$$$ which only few people can afford ..

 

[Richard_JP]

a 2/3 goes against the "professional cinema tool" benchmark they have set for themselves

Really wish people would stop saying that 2/3" is not professional. Jim was talking rubbish when he said it, and so are all the people quoting him.

Funny, he failed at making a 2/3" camera, and all of a sudden, it's not pro. Haha, what a joke.

 

[Richard_JP]

I would be with you, but I've lost all faith in RED. I don't like people who are not upfront and honest with me.

They will not be getting my money. They don't deserve it.

Panasonic and Fastec will be getting my hard earned cash. They produce exactly what they set out to produce. No bullshitting with them.

 

[Arun R]

I would be with you, but I've lost all faith in RED. I don't like people who are not upfront and honest with me.

They will not be getting my money. They don't deserve it.

Panasonic and Fastec will be getting my hard earned cash. They produce exactly what they set out to produce. No bullshitting with them.

I agree with you Richard PANASONIC do exact what they say no Bullshit like others who make people to wait long time & finally cheat ..

Mr' Jannard were telling 2 weeks back more than 100000 people gonna visit Reduser.net after the release of Scarlet on November 3rd LOL unfortunately only under 7000 people were there each time LoL finally RED lost all good customers most of them got BANNED last year & more left but few are there who still keeping hope on RED. If RED really care for their supporters (customers) or wanna keep words let them show the world they can make out at least FF camera which can deliver minimum 2k resolution out ( if the resolution is really a big matter) with 120 fps under $3000 with ready to shoot kit..
IF RED DON'T DO THIS TODAY OTHER GUYS ARE READY TO HIT THE MARKET with this spec @ any time.... just may be day after tomorrow cause am sure future is not only depends on high resolution with high price... & that will be the end of categorization between consumers & professionals .

MBP, SI2K, 5D M2, 60D

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Panasonic and Fastec will be getting my hard earned cash. They produce exactly what they set out to produce. No bullshitting with them.

Really? You don't remember Panasonic saying the HVX was a "True 1080p camera"?

RED was guilty of it too (and even said "no pixel shifting spoken here" and ignored Bayer pattern interpolation which is the same idea). I don't think anyone is particularly innocent in this marketing war.

 

[Chris Lawes]

- The Scarlet allows for super35 or super16 depending on your needs in one camera, that is cool.
- The Ikonoskop dII is CCD/global shutter and very organic nice looking image in small package, also cool.

Both are really nice options. The 2 main things about the 2/3 Scarlet that could have made a real impact were the price and the lens options.
The 8x zoom would have been wonderful and unmatched by anything else available in the price range, and the primes could have been great too.

Spending $14k (red or Ikonoskop) before going on a hellish lens hunt (how many parfocal super35 8x zooms can you afford?) is too expensive and daunting for most people.
Buying a modern 2/3" Red camera with an attached quality 8x zoom for $6k~ is just about doable for many people and would have really changed things up in an exciting way.

And it looks like with the way the economies are appearing to shift we need more quality budget gear available for mid-level professionals. I can maybe buy one Sony PMW-350K with a mediocre lens, but I need multicam. I'd rather buy 3 8x fixed Scarlets.

And for the guy making budget documentaries outside of the US, Scarlet 2/3 could have been it. Now he's still stuck with prosumer-ish EX1s or HPX170s...


I hope RED makes a 2/3" cam (lens or no lens) under $6k one day, even if it wouldn't be the most profitable unit to produce - it would "gateway drug" hook a lot of beginners, provide a very needed tool for budget professionals, buildup the brand and most of all -

it would be a service to open things up for the filmmaking world, which is what I thought RED was about in the beginning.
I'm still hopeful.

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

The "future" will never be just one option.

16 bit 3K on 2/3" would be the worthy successor to 16 mm film.

Which is still: a) cinema tool; b) professional; c) looking very good; d) serving nicely the purpose of achieving the desired look.

With 5:1 RAW CF recording ability, lighter and more compact setups and easier focusing.

 

[Jay Birch]

There is something very natural about the Ikonoscope image... I don't think it is DR, but skin tone and colour representation. It really does have a s16 feel.

Interesting (and beautiful) camera.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

...
I would also like to point out that the scarlet-x is not future proof either since it resolves 3.2k from 4k capture when at 24p /25p

...
.

You do realize that this is true of pretty much all digital motion cameras. No camera "resolves" it's nominal resolution/pixel count - if it did, moire and aliasing would be unbearable. To my knowledge, 4K film scans don't resolve at 4K either. RED cameras all "resolve" about 80-85% of the nominal resolution - thus the 3.2K. The F3, the AF100, the EX3, etc, etc don't resolve at their full nominal resolution. The HVX-200 is not a 1080P camera if you are talking about its "resolving" resolution. That's just the way it works. Scarlet-X is as "future proof" as anything can be today. And, as someone pointed out, it will be capable of an upgrade going forward.

I was as big a fan of the Scarlet 3K as anyone (albeit the Fixed, because of the lens) but let's keep the argument relevant. The 3K scarlet would only have "resolved" around 2.4K, so it would be less capable in that regard.

 

[J Davis]

You do realize that this is true of pretty much all digital motion cameras. No camera "resolves" ...

of course I do Terry, please read my first post again.

 

[Lorenzo Straight]

I for one would still like to see Red finish this camera. It's impossible to know if 3k will not hold it's own.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

of course I do Terry, please read my first post again.

Re-read, and even more confused as to your comment. Are you saying that Epic is not future-proofed because it, too, resolves less than it's full sensor size? Or is 4K the absolute threshold (forever)? There'll always be "more." And, in your argument of Scarlet not being future proof, is 3.2K not better than 2.4K?

I totally agree with the argument you are making for the viability of the 2/3" Scarlet. I just don't see how the resolution argument is either relevant or compelling. To some degree, 4K is a subjective standard. RED ONE started at 4K, went to 4.5K and now we have Epic at 5K. 6K, 8k and more (?) are going to come eventually.

 

[J Davis]

mods, don't keep this thread open on my account. I've said my piece and I'm sure red have heard it.

 

[Richard_JP]

Really? You don't remember Panasonic saying the HVX was a "True 1080p camera"?

RED was guilty of it too (and even said "no pixel shifting spoken here" and ignored Bayer pattern interpolation which is the same idea). I don't think anyone is particularly innocent in this marketing war.

Yep true. I guess now the dust has settled, it is what it is. I'm just disappointing more than anything. I feel like I have spent a lot of time telling people about how great this camera will be and that we'll finally have a relatively cheap alternative to 16mm. A lot of people were saying that it will never happen and that I was crazy to ever believe all this hype from RED. But I pointed them in the direction of the R1 and how people said that was a scam. Now it seems that those doubters were correct. I really don't want S35. It doesn't suit my purposes, but I don't see any other reasonable option.

As I said, it is what it is...