waiting for scarlet

[Mark Holmes]

I am coming across this more and more lately, even here in a 25fps environment where the conversion from 30fps reduces quality even further. It's mainly the TVC market but the impact is obvious. The deciding factor to this is the full frame depth of field advantage. A lot of these companies were shooting RED but have bought themselves a 5D with a few lenses and away they go. It's a shame and the problem being is that it is commonly the people making these decisions don't have the skillset looking at image quality and the flaws and restrictions to what the DSLR's are giving them. But they CAN see the great depth of field and a 'pretty' pic when a skilled DP is handling them...so they are sold. And these are not all low budget TVC's either!
The arrival of Scarlet will definitely make ground back but i am certain that with only having a 2/3" sensor(to start until FF) , despite being overwhelmingly better than any DSLR, will limit their usage in this particular situation. Of course they can use their lenses on the 2/3" Scarlet but the FOV crop will drag them down. RED will need to bring out the FF Scarlet to make serious inroads against this trend in my opinion as this is the BIG and pretty much only advantage with the Canons. And i am pretty certain Canon will be launching a new DSLR (of types) of their own soon enough without line-skipping, without the bad artefacts, much faster re-write, more control, no H264 and probably Canon RAW or similar. If this happens it will be critical for RED to get their FF out there ASAP.
It's still a niche market and it will settle out when reality sets in, as it did when the Red One came out with all its hype and after a while the reality set in and it has settled into it's market. It's exciting times and the choices are becoming very good and very wide...it just bothers me when apparently 'professional' people use tools for a job that are not suited because they are blinded by the hype. It happened with the Red One, it's happening with the 5D...and will continue with such large leaps being undertaken in this day and age.

THIS in particular - "The arrival of Scarlet will definitely make ground back but i am certain that with only having a 2/3" sensor(to start until FF) , despite being overwhelmingly better than any DSLR, will limit their usage in this particular situation. Of course they can use their lenses on the 2/3" Scarlet but the FOV crop will drag them down. RED will need to bring out the FF Scarlet to make serious inroads against this trend in my opinion as this is the BIG and pretty much only advantage with the Canons. And i am pretty certain Canon will be launching a new DSLR (of types) of their own soon enough without line-skipping, without the bad artefacts, much faster re-write, more control, no H264 and probably Canon RAW or similar. If this happens it will be critical for RED to get their FF out there ASAP. "

ASAP is right. I would love a Scarlet with a 35mm sized sensor or larger, but after months of use with the 7D and 5D MKII, I do not want to step back down to a smaller sensor. This combined with the knowledge that every Canon EF lens I buy is an investment in a kit I can continue to use with future Canon DSLR offerings makes me doubtful that a Scarlet is in my future.

 

[David Rasberry]

I am more interested in the best possible affordable (relatively) digital replacement for a 16mm/S16mm film camera. I frankly prefer the smaller format for my range and style of shooting.
That is why Scarlet appeals more to me all things considered. Uncompromised image quality, more flexible configuration, better ergonomics and practical for the widest possible range of shooting situations without hacks or workarounds.
I like premium cine grade lenses for both mechanical and optical quality. I prefer shooting mostly with wide range, compact, relatively fast zoom lenses, eliminating the need for lens changes in the field under most conditions. For an example of how well this works catch a rerun or two of Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman, a prime time dramatic series that was shot almost entirely with one camera and one lens: an ARRI SR2 S16mm with an Angenieux 11-138mm T2.4 zoom.
Affordable in this context for me means staying well under $15k, hopefully around $10k for a full up practical field package with all necessary accessories. Scarlet fits the bill very nicely.

 

[chrislancaster]

I am more interested in the best possible affordable (relatively) digital replacement for a 16mm/S16mm film camera. I frankly prefer the smaller format for my range and style of shooting.
That is why Scarlet appeals more to me all things considered. Uncompromised image quality, more flexible configuration, better ergonomics and practical for the widest possible range of shooting situations without hacks or workarounds.
I like premium cine grade lenses for both mechanical and optical quality. I prefer shooting mostly with wide range, compact, relatively fast zoom lenses, eliminating the need for lens changes in the field under most conditions. For an example of how well this works catch a rerun or two of Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman, a prime time dramatic series that was shot almost entirely with one camera and one lens: an ARRI SR2 S16mm with an Angenieux 11-138mm T2.4 zoom.
Affordable in this context for me means staying well under $15k, hopefully around $10k for a full up practical field package with all necessary accessories. Scarlet fits the bill very nicely.

Totally agree i think anyone running around shooting video with 7d or 5d

needs to get a fixed scarlet ..it would keep your cost down and you would be able to run and gun with scarlet

and the 7d can shoot your close up DOF shots

sounds amazing ..i cant wait

the dslr has done nothing more than peaked my interest in scarlet when i had almost lost it

:yesnod:

 

[Jimmy Odom]

I ENJOY this discussion, possibly more than any other thread I've come across here on REDuser. No fanboy/elitism from either side, just hardcore unbiased, consumer focused P.O.V.'s, cause the buyers matter.

I was on the Scarlet kick, so much so, that I sold ALL of my Canon gear (7D+rig& accesories) in hopes that the Scarlet had a soon to be released date, but it never happened, and considering I had projects which I wanted to greenlight (I'm a micro-budget filmmaker), I choose not to wait any longer. So I pulled the trigger, once I heard the official release date for the 24p firmware update for the 5D Mark ll and bought one.

I had about $11K set aside for RED, but could never get away from the thought of diminishing the sensor size from an ASP-C to a 2/3, even though I was going to in turn get a TON of REZ, but my audience doesn't seem to care much. If my stories are inviting, and grab their attention, they don't care WHAT I shot it on, and if it is 2K or 1.5K or even 4K. Only I and my colleagues care, and most of the time, to be honest they are not my audience.

I fell in love with the almost instant 35mm DDOF the 7D was able to produce for me, on such limited budgets, that I went ahead and re-bought into Canon, as I have heard many have also done. With the understanding that I would eventual return to RED when the time was right.

I must say that when i red Jim's thread about why 4K was the future, and why people should think about future proofing their projects, I begin to consider why I was even venturing to the 2.3 Scarlet, considering it was no more future proof than the 5D/7D was. I mean this was coming from the man who founded the company I was going to do business with in the future, and he seems to be a visionary made such a strong case as to why not shoot anything other than 4K that i began to question the need.

That then opened me up to the look, and the ability to tell the best story I could, and if the Scarlet 2/3 would allow me to do that, and the answer once I contemplated became NO; it wouldn't. By me going down on sensor size I would loose a great number of abilities afforded by larger sensors, so i couldn't go that route. This also became solidified when I read another post which jim commented regarding the M-X characteristics between the Epic, and the S35; and he stated that they were reasonably similar. So that pushed me away from the 2/3 and towards the S35.

My dream was to be Red'd out, but reality soon popped my dream of 2010 being that year. So I decided to invest the remanning $$$ into glass (Zeiss ZF set) which I can then use with the S35 Scarlet, which is now my goal, but considering that the dates around it's release are even further away (speculated) than the 2/3 release I have a feeling I'll be moving up to the 5D Mark lll before I'm able to get that. which is OK, because U will just make what i can with that paint brush in the meantime.

So that brings me to my choice. I will go with the Fixed kit, for any shots, which will require Deep DOF, as we know that the 5D is GARBAGE when concerning this, and when I need to be up close and personal, I'll just use the 5D mark ll, with Zeiss.

I really hope RED is able to release its new cameras before the end of this year, because I would hate to see where the marketplace flows around that time, and what the eventual other manufacturers come up with in the meantime. As i am a perfect example that the market is fickle, and they are not always looking for THE BEST THING ON WHEELS, just the best for the job. And canon has seemingly provided the micro-budget indie field with enough tools to justify it's existence; lets just pray Scarlet 2/3rd will still be accepted once released as much as it is in it's concept, because the team developing RED scarlets deserve for all they're hard work to be used by as many people as possible.

And that my friends is my 2c

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I'm playing around with my new Canon T2i 550D (too cheap to pass up)... and the HD image is just not very sharp, it's barely HD actually. I'm looking at the footage on a 47" 1080P LCD TV screen, it doesn't really hold up to scrutiny except in close-ups where most of the background is out of focus. But in wide shots, you can see that it's not very detailed and it has all sorts of chroma aliasing issues. It would be fine for something very fast-cut but I can't imagine shooting a whole project for HD release on the thing.

 

[chrislancaster]

great post.. i find it to be very truthful


right now the web rules.. thats where we are now and probably most of our time when interacting with entertainment or education so 1080p is good enough for my small time projects

the scarlet with a smaller sensor will do just fine and i dont know exactly how but im sure we will be able to combine 7d or 5d footage with scarlet 2/3 easily

so many 3rd parties bridge the gaps in tech

whatever they may be ..

its really a great time to be a indie film maker probably the best time ever

im also convinced that adobe, final cut, foundry, etc...

will come up with some way to blow up your 2k to 4k and make it look really great .. by the time 4k dominates the web

if i had the money it would be no question

i would buy epic and not sacrifice and i think we all would but i dont, yet.

I'm playing around with my new Canon T2i 550D (too cheap to pass up)... and the HD image is just not very sharp, it's barely HD actually. I'm looking at the footage on a 47" 1080P LCD TV screen, it doesn't really hold up to scrutiny except in close-ups where most of the background is out of focus. But in wide shots, you can see that it's not very detailed and it has all sorts of chroma aliasing issues. It would be fine for something very fast-cut but I can't imagine shooting a whole project for HD release on the thing.

i would not trade down for the 900 difference ..no way !

Scarlet will own these dslrs but i dont think a majority of people will give up their DOF close ups .. they will just add them together with a fixed

imo

 

[Kemalettin Sert]

I'm playing around with my new Canon T2i 550D (too cheap to pass up)... and the HD image is just not very sharp, it's barely HD actually. I'm looking at the footage on a 47" 1080P LCD TV screen, it doesn't really hold up to scrutiny except in close-ups where most of the background is out of focus. But in wide shots, you can see that it's not very detailed and it has all sorts of chroma aliasing issues. It would be fine for something very fast-cut but I can't imagine shooting a whole project for HD release on the thing.

550D ! Best HDSLR under 1000$
Im gonna buy that camera in few months.Im not a professional DP and dont have much money my limit is 2500$ for short film project, so buying 550D is going to be smartest move ever i ll

One day im gonna get scarlet but not in next 6-12 months

 

[John Caballero]

I am not denying that they're capable of some great looking footage, because they certainly are, but in the end they're still still cameras that can shoot HD video.

And that is all you need. Like the good old film cameras they shoot 24 images per second at a certain shutter speed and aperture. Capturing moving images. Like good old film the camera includes a different set of color settings to work with. The images end up beautiful. Competing perfectly with traditional film or dedicated video cameras. The handicaps are really in the users capabilities and creativity with them.

 

[Neil A Russell]

I'm playing around with my new Canon T2i 550D (too cheap to pass up)... and the HD image is just not very sharp, it's barely HD actually. I'm looking at the footage on a 47" 1080P LCD TV screen, it doesn't really hold up to scrutiny except in close-ups where most of the background is out of focus. But in wide shots, you can see that it's not very detailed and it has all sorts of chroma aliasing issues. It would be fine for something very fast-cut but I can't imagine shooting a whole project for HD release on the thing.

That's distressing news.

The T2i was going to be my "proto-Scarlet", I was going to start shooting with it and start collecting up Canon glass in anticipation of Scarlet's release.

I've been reading good reviews of the T2i, some comparing the quality to the 7D. (or maybe it's actually not so hot either?)

Frankly, I'll take your word for it and back off for a while, and as the thread title says; continue "waiting for scarlet".

 

[chrislancaster]

i have heard some bad news about the T2I

the build quality is cheap junky plastic the buttons are noisy and feel cheap and its not as comfortable to hold...

these are the rumors i hear anyway ...

the EPIC/Scarlet look heavy duty ... i hope so thats a big plus for a lot of people

 

[David Mullen ASC]

AThe images end up beautiful. Competing perfectly with traditional film or dedicated video cameras. The handicaps are really in the users capabilities and creativity with them.

I think you are under-emphasizing the real technical weaknesses of DSLR video which cannot simply be overcome by how you use them. They cannot resolve 1080 lines, they have major aliasing issues, and they have blocky pixels due to the compression. That's all technical, not creative. They certainly don't "compete perfectly" with 35mm film or high-end 1080P (like from an F35) unless you are only viewing things at DVD resolution levels.

They have advantages due to their size and cost, and the depth of field due to the size of the sensor, and certainly they can be useful tools... but as with any format or technology, the first step in getting good results is being aware of the weaknesses.

 

[Steve Das]

i have heard some bad news about the T2I the build quality is cheap junky plastic the buttons are noisy and feel cheap and its not as comfortable to hold...these are the rumors i hear anyway ...

Yes that's what Phillip Bloom said on his website review..he had footage
comparison with the 7D and the T2 had highlights that really blew out
compared to the 7D.

 

[Aaron Newsome]

I'm playing around with my new Canon T2i 550D (too cheap to pass up)... and the HD image is just not very sharp, it's barely HD actually. I'm looking at the footage on a 47" 1080P LCD TV screen, it doesn't really hold up to scrutiny except in close-ups where most of the background is out of focus. But in wide shots, you can see that it's not very detailed and it has all sorts of chroma aliasing issues. It would be fine for something very fast-cut but I can't imagine shooting a whole project for HD release on the thing.

Seriously, I've been on the forum a few years now. Nothing is going to top this post. David Mullen, messing around with a DSLR. This is great. The only problem is, I was thinking about buying one until I read this. ... sigh.

 

[David Rasberry]

Seriously, I've been on the forum a few years now. Nothing is going to top this post. David Mullen, messing around with a DSLR. This is great. The only problem is, I was thinking about buying one until I read this. ... sigh.

Its an $800 consumer camera. For what it is the video is pretty decent.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Yes, it works great as an under $1000 video camera, and the shallower DoF is pretty, if making it harder to focus during a camera move.

In fact, since many of the image problems are more visible in wide shots with a lot of DoF, it seems that the current trend towards using them to get close shots with a very shallow DoF is perhaps using them to their best advantage -- you can't get that look on a smaller sensor camera, and the background being out of focus hides a lot of sins.

I got one because I can think of some shots where I can't get them any other way (ala "Southland", like passing the camera off through an open car window, tracking underneath low barriers, sticking them onto a dashboard looking back at the driver, etc.)

Obviously with all the nice-looking footage being posted on the internet, people are managing to get the best of these cameras but let's first being honest about what we are working against. Many of these problems won't go away until these cameras offer RAW recording in movie mode... or use the entire pixel array for conversion from 18MP RAW to 1080P video, rather than line-skipping or pixel-binning.

Now maybe my 550D isn't delivering the same video quality as the 7D, but all the articles said it was the same sensor, the same 1080P quality, etc. and the cheaper body build/construction shouldn't be a factor.

When I get back to Chicago and finish prep on this pilot I'm on, I hope to shoot a comparison test between the 550D, EX1, and M-X Red (in 4K HD mode converted to 1080P) just to see the resolution differences at 1080P.

 

[Stephen Williams]

When I get back to Chicago and finish prep on this pilot I'm on, I hope to shoot a comparison test between the 550D, EX1, and M-X Red (in 4K HD mode converted to 1080P) just to see the resolution differences at 1080P.

Hi David,

I upset a director who is a fan of the 5DMKII, I told him that IMO the EX3 had better resoloution even with the stock lens than a 5DMKII. I am interested what your back to back tests reveal.

Stephen

 

[Aaron Newsome]

I'm interested to know if the 550D is identical to 7D for video purposes. Does anyone know for certain?

 

[Steve Das]

I'm interested to know if the 550D is identical to 7D for video purposes. Does anyone know for certain?

Phillip Bloom had a comparison but apparently it's been removed..
I remember the highlights of the 550D being much hotter than the
7D and someone posted the same observation in a comment.

Probably a focus issue or quality difference in lenses. Really
if the sensors are the same...it's the only explanation.
Test must have been misleading and hence it was removed.

http://philipbloom.co.uk/2010/02/26/first-thoughts-on-rebel-t2i-550d/Thanks%20to%20Nino%20Leitner

 

[chrislancaster]

No they are not the same ... besides build quality


better build,
weatherproofed,
better ISO ranges. You'd want that 160, 320, 640 ISO not available on the T2i,
wireless flash control( trust me, it will be appreciated once you get a speedlite)
dual Digic 4's... The time will come when that extra Digic will be used for video,
white Balance superioriority,
LCD on top for quick access,

magnesium vs plastic

david says the picture is very soft

i would say the only similarity would be sensor size but thats not enough for me to down grade


:jacked:

i intended this thread not to be 550d vs 7d vs scarlet

but more of where is the evolution of the industry taking these smaller cameras

Hands down i say ..web is where it will be


what is keeping apple from making a 50 inch imac that can be mounted on your wall

they wouldnt need more internals what they have in the 27 would be good enough just the size needs to be bigger

and then the net speeds updated by light peak or google technologies will match cable tv easy

4k on the web!


entertainment will be separated into regions .. emerging countries wont be watching Hollywood forever or not as much

what does china care about matt damon??

the times are changing ..where do we stand?

my 2cents

 

[chrislancaster]

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118016409.html?categoryid=13&cs=1&ref=vertfilm

A new generation of movie consumers -- reared on the Internet, iPods, iPhones and PlayStations -- is far less interested in building physical libraries of movies than digital ones they can access anywhere, anytime. And as traditional disc sales continue to decline, the major studios are working overtime to turn that shift in buying behavior into a lucrative new revenue stream.
As a result, Hollywood is brokering as many deals as possible with companies that can digitally sell or rent its releases, and in the last month alone they've been winding down ugly distribution disputes with services like Netflix, a shift that will result in more movies being streamed online nearly a month after they bow on DVD and Blu-ray.




makes my case a bit