Which Budget RED Camera?

[JT Thurlow]

Hello,

I need to upgrade my Scarlet MX, primarily because I need usable high-speed filming (lots of 120fps for a project in development).

I will most likely be buying used.

Outside of high-speed filming, low light performance is crucial.

Physically lighter is obviously better but not a huge issue.

I only have EF lenses at present; fixed mount is sub-optimal but not critical.

Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.

Many thanks

 

[M Harvey]

Sounds like inflection point #1 is framerate, so I'll concentrate on that.

Komodo is great, but can only achieve 120 fps at 2k. If that works for you, though, Komodo might be the right choice. I do this from time to time, but 1) lens sharpness and speed can become an issue, and 2) I often wish I had just a little more gas in the tank, and could push it perhaps to 180fps.

After that, the cheapest used options are probably
-DSMC1 Epic Dragon (120fps@4k, 150fps@3k, 240fps@2k)--no longer supported by Red, but still a great camera.
-DSMC2 Scarlet-W 5k (same frame rates)-- better support, somewhat better low light performance than the Epic Dragon.

If you can to spend a little more, you can check prices on used current line-up cameras:
-DSMC2 Dragon-X 6k s35 will do those same frame rates above, hitting 120fps at 4k full frame.
-DSMC2 Helium and Gemini also hit these frame rates at these resolutions, but Gemini adds stronger low light performance.

You might also be able to save some money if you find a used Epic-W or Weapon, which essentially have the performance of the Helium.

 

[Mike P.]

Epic-W doesn't do high-speed. Gemini might fit best, as it has the least amount of cropping when going to 4k/120 (and does 5k/96fps), but even used it won't be good budget/value. Low-light isn't the best on any of them either... Gotta be honest, no budget RED is that great at either of those things (slow-mo and low-light) much less combined. Plus you gotta black shade for the different speeds on the older/in-between models that have gotten budget-friendly.

Have you thought about BUMP12k? It does 12k/60fps and 8k/120 without cropping, 12k/75fps and 8k/160fps at 2.4:1, and 4k/240fps with a super16 crop. Also has built-in ND and very inexpensive large capacity media for long high fps takes (compared to mini-mags) since you can use external off-the-shelf USBc SSDs... OH! And it only costs $6k brand new ready to shoot and with a copy of Resolve (so buying used would be even less).

 

[Zack Birlew]

Going from Scarlet MX? Well, the Sony FS700/FS5/FS7 cameras could do the trick for budget friendly S35 (or full frame with speed booster) options with slightly better low light and up to 2K 240fps RAW recording but then the Sony A7S III is supposed to be really great for 4K 120fps too. I would also look hard at the URSA 12K for its frame rate options and future proof features as Mike has described. If you want to stay in the RED family, then I think stepping up to an Epic Dragon would be the more sensible option for accessory crossover unless you can grab a Helium for roughly the same price as the used market for Helium is often hovering alongside Epic Dragon these days. Don't forget that the Nikon Z9 and Canon R5C came out too and they're doing 4K 120fps as well so it depends on your budgetary needs and what you think you could get by with for slow motion use.

 

[Andrew Reese]

Gemini is at the best used price it's ever been. The sensor is S35+ and has extra height for anamorphic shooting. It shoots 5k/120fps 2.4.1 and 96fps full height with no crop unlike any other RED camera... 3K/240 FPS & 2K/300FPS are also the most usable on Gemini for this reason (least amount of crop) compared to other RED offerings. It has Dual ISO, which could actually come in handy with the light loss from HFR and has the best sensitivity / DR IMO due to having the largest photo sites (pixel pitch) of any RED camera to date. I own a Gemini and a Komodo and shoot on Monstro and it still takes the cake... Komodo is not even close to Gemini in terms of IQ, trust me. Komodo is a great cam but a BMP6K is not far off it...Haven't shot on V-Raptor but thats probably out of your budget and I would wait to see what Raptor XL or the next Gen Komodo brings due to the split sensor issue anyhow... If you need to go cheaper than 13-15k, and want to stick with RED the Scarlet-W is the best option and is at all time low prices right now (5-10k). I shot on Scarlet-W before I had Gemini and the dragon sensor is killer and super filmic... Outside of the RED ecosystem the BMUMP12K, R5C, A7SIII, are all great options. Really comes down to what codec you want, sensor size, and form factor. I still say Gemini for the win, now is the time price wise...

 

[Václav Formánek]

If Red then Gemini, otherwise A7SIII or similar Sony offerings. Ursa 12k is nice and has a great value for money but it is imo a big camera. Definitely rent before you buy.

 

[Alex Lubensky]

If you're working without an AC (i.e. focus puller) and SDI isn't crucial - then I suggest to look at Canon C70.

Otherwise to stay in RED ecosystem and to have a lighter body / better low light means you have to look for Gemini or V-Raptor, both are above 10k upgrade and nothing close to "budget".

Komodo doesn't have enough juice for slow-motion, while has much better low light capabilities (cleaner shadows), prores and is light. If 48fps is enough - then I suggest looking at Komodo.

Budget option will be upgrading to a Scarlet-W - lighter body, foolcontrol capable, or if possible - DSMC2 DragonX. Those two are basically the same cameras with Dragon Sensor, but less noise compared to DSMC1 Dragon, and lighter body. Scarlet-W is limited to 5K and has worse compression ratios than DSMC2 Dragon X, and DSMC1 Epic Dragon. Basically DSMC2 Dragon-X has the same capabilities as DSMC1 Epic Dragon, but less noise and lighter cam body (1,5kg vs 2.4kg, which to me when kitted out is not much).

DSMC1 Epic MX (which is the same as Scarlet MX, but having both - can tell that it's much better because of 5K wider FOV, less overall noise (downsampling from 5k), but otherwise the same DR and colors.

And Red Raven - which has it's own limitations, like ONLY EF MOUNT, and as much cropped sensor as Scarlet MX @4K and @3K. But it has a dragon sensor, high speed (rather compressed one, but still decent), dunno about low light performance - I bet it's somewhat better than epic dsmc1 dragon at same resolution, but worse than downsampled from 6k in some occasions.

 

[Mike P.]

Problem with Epic-X is that Pocket 6k is better than MX in pretty much every department, and less than the price of a used Epic-X... and comes with resolve. Even though P6k only does 120fps at 2.8k, it's 2.8k is actually sharper than MX at 4k... It's 6k is sharper than Monstro/Raptor at 8k. It's also dual ISO to help with low-light, whereas MX kinda taps out at ISO1600... OH, and p6k's ISO is actually meter-accurate (MX has to be ISO1600 to be as bright as P6k at ISO800) and it's got way better over/under exposure ... Epic-X/MX is just not a strong option, IMO.

Raven might work; it does 4k/120p or 4.5k WS/120p. Low-light would be an issue though (ISO1600 would probably be max... and again, that meters closer to ISO800, as I don't think it has ISOcal2). It's also fixed EF.

Outside of Monstro, Raptor (from what I've seen), and maybe Gemini (with LLO), RED's aren't that good at low-light, which OP said is crucial, and can quickly get messy if you have push fps/shutter...

...Is there a reason it has to be a RED?

 

[Phil Holland]

If you are on Scarlet-X, DSMC and not looking to go to DSMC3, DSMC2 would be a logical next step.

I'd focus on Dragon 6K or Gemini 5K, if you can foot the bill, Monstro 8K VV. Critical to your Low Light desires, invest in the 3 OLPFs RED makes for these cameras. The Low Light Optimized OLPF is certainly cleanest. I worked the most with the Standard which is just a hair less sensitive and the Skin Tone - Highlight OLPF probably more than many people.

Clean RAW data is an interesting topic, but understanding how those OLPFs work and have an impact on your apparent image noise across ISO Ratings will set you up for success.

My general "Phil's favorite RED sensors" sort of looks like this:
- V-Raptor 8K VV
- Monstro 8K VV
- Dragon 8K VV (you won't be finding one)
- Dragon 6K S35
- Komodo 6K S35
- Gemini 5K (if low light is your goal, this is probably what you want)
- Helium S35 8K (does go actually higher than Gemini for me at times on this list)
- Mysterium-X 5K S35
- OG R1 M 4K

If you want my absurdly personal-yet-strong thoughts on pixel pitch and all things related to that, you'll notice I'm very fond of the color and pixel size of around 5 microns, which is why the first 4 slots on that list populate that way.

I haven't ever regretted upgrading along the way, but sensors I wouldn't have minded holding onto are mainly Dragon related. I currently own V-Raptor, Komodo, and Monstro cameras.

But based on your statements, Gemini is likely what you are after if you don't need higher resolution and favor lower light.

 

[Eric Santiago]

Great post Phil as usual
Do you know if the DSMC2 OLPF LOW LIGHT work on DSMC1?
I have a DRAGON 6K S35 DSMC1 I do believe.
I have the SKINTONE and STANDARD, want to add the LOW LIGHT.

 

[Mike P.]

Great post Phil as usual
Do you know if the DSMC2 OLPF LOW LIGHT work on DSMC1?
I have a DRAGON 6K S35 DSMC1 I do believe.
I have the SKINTONE and STANDARD, want to add the LOW LIGHT.

No, it will *not* work; the OLPF housing is completely different (DSMC2 OLPFs use a quick release latch, and don't have four mounting bolt holes through them like DSMC1 OLPFs).

That said, despite its purple orb light sources, LLO seems to offer the most malleable image to me. With 4k downscale/compression to delivery codec, you can get away with ISO3200 easily (not for low-light so much as a more even over/under). So it sets the dynamic range to the most useable/functional starting point.

 

[Eric Santiago]

No, it will *not* work; the OLPF housing is completely different.

Thanks, Mike, saves me from buying the wrong one.

Anyone selling a DSMC1 LOW LIGHT, DM me please

 

[JT Thurlow]

Thanks very much for the responses.

I think stepping up to an Epic Dragon would be the more sensible option for accessory crossover unless you can grab a Helium for roughly the same price

So, there is quite a price difference in used 120fps RED cameras (currency converted into USD, from deals I’ve found, and adding basic used DSCM2 accessories where applicable) with:

• Gemini at $15K
• Dragon-X 6K at $12K
• Helium at $10.2K
• Scarlet-W at $5.5K
• Epic Dragon at $4.2K
• Epic-X MX at $3.4K

From those options, the Scarlet-W, or Epic Dragon seem to make sense. Unless the Gemini is really in a different class and worth the huge increase in price which it doesn’t appear to be. With the Scarlet-W being DSMC2 (increased image quality overall apparently?) and working somewhat better in low light than the Dragon, I’m guessing it’s worth the extra grand? The Scarlet-W is also physically lighter that the others (3.5lbs, not 5lbs), though I’m not sure if this means it’s light enough that I could use a less heavyweight tripod, slider etc.? (I also need to upgrade these and was thinking that I really need a 100mm tripod for instance).

I read that Terrence Malick’s A Hidden Life, one of my favourite films from recent years, was shot on the Epic Dragon. And that (as per Malick’s style) it was mainly shot with available light, and often with little of it. I re-watched the Blu-ray last night and it looks fantastic—a bit noisy in some low light shots perhaps but I certainly didn’t notice this on previous viewings, including in the cinema.

Regarding the Gemimi’s low-light capabilities—it seems that it is actually better than human vision? I shoot a lot at twilight (I almost exclusively use available light, and unless it’s an event or similar I almost only ever shoot outdoors at golden-blue hour), and dislike noise in general, but don’t need to get past what can actually be seen. Of course, if it can noticeably avoid noise in general and provide cleaner shots in low light settings that’s something else, but then we’re back to the enormous price difference.

In relation to low light, and watching videos about how these cameras perform, I was surprised to keep hearing that not shooting everything as low as ISO 250 is recommended, although I was under the impression that going above this can introduce visible noise (this was how the DP I worked with (albeit not a seasoned pro) shot everything on my first feature, and I’ve taken his advice since).

 

[JT Thurlow]

...Is there a reason it has to be a RED?

I’m not set on RED, though I was generally very pleased with results from the Scarlet-X for my first film, outside of some noise that was noticeably bad in a few shots when shown on cinema screens (to me at least).

Until getting into all of this, I had been out of the loop with film tech and wasn’t aware of any companies outside of RED and Arri that produce similar results. If these cameras can actually provide the same kind of quality, a lightweight alternative would be very appealing as I was also planning to upgrade my tripod and slider and need drone and Steadicam-style shots too, which would make all of that so much easier.

However, looking into these cameras, the impression that I’m getting is that they are still a cut below cinema cameras, or at least not as cinematic in the images they produce, and the benefits are mainly in terms of price and size.

By far the most important thing for me is what ends up on screen (i.e. beautiful cinematic images), so if I have to shell out way more, lug around annoyingly heavy things etc. then so be it…but if no one is really going to notice the difference then obviously it isn’t worth it.

 

[M Harvey]

With the Scarlet-W being DSMC2 (increased image quality overall apparently?) and working somewhat better in low light than the Dragon, I’m guessing it’s worth the extra grand?
[...]
Regarding the Gemimi’s low-light capabilities—it seems that it is actually better than human vision? I shoot a lot at twilight (I almost exclusively use available light, and unless it’s an event or similar I almost only ever shoot outdoors at golden-blue hour), and dislike noise in general, but don’t need to get past what can actually be seen. Of course, if it can noticeably avoid noise in general and provide cleaner shots in low light settings that’s something else, but then we’re back to the enormous price difference

-I think that you'll find that the Scarlet-W is a little cleaner than the Dragon. Since it's also DSMC2 and therefore has better repair support, it's hard to argue with it for the modest additional cost. (That said, I personally like the image out of the Epic Dragon a little better-- I see more "organic texture," others see noise.)

-Support gear: well, lighter is lighter, so it could decide in favor of the Scarlet-W if there's a particular rigging scenario (say a gimbal) or task (longs hikes?) that you often encunter. But if 1.5 lbs makes the difference between tiers of support gear such as tripods, I'd generally still choose to go to the heavier duty tier; after all, 1.5 lbs might easily be the difference between a zoom and a prime lens. And in my experience, lightweight sliders always sound like a great idea, but then tend to generate lots of shaky footage even with cameras well within load spec. So if you're trying to figure out if you can save $1k on accessories, then I'd say maybe-- but be aware that it might come back to bite you.

-As for Gemini, it clearly has the best low light capability. I don't know about "better than human vision"-- I recall someone saying that about the Canon 5D mkII years ago!--, so it's kind of a conceptual moving target that doesn't recognize how different human vision actually is from a camera system. I think you'd probably have to test Gemini yourself in order to really know. But you can save yourself some effort if you're honest with yourself: is there any chance you'd be willing to spend an extra $10k for 1 more stop? 2 more stops?

 

[JT Thurlow]

-I think that you'll find that the Scarlet-W is a little cleaner than the Dragon. Since it's also DSMC2 and therefore has better repair support, it's hard to argue with it for the modest additional cost. (That said, I personally like the image out of the Epic Dragon a little better-- I see more "organic texture," others see noise.)

-Support gear: well, lighter is lighter, so it could decide in favor of the Scarlet-W if there's a particular rigging scenario (say a gimbal) or task (longs hikes?) that you often encunter. But if 1.5 lbs makes the difference between tiers of support gear such as tripods, I'd generally still choose to go to the heavier duty tier; after all, 1.5 lbs might easily be the difference between a zoom and a prime lens. And in my experience, lightweight sliders always sound like a great idea, but then tend to generate lots of shaky footage even with cameras well within load spec. So if you're trying to figure out if you can save $1k on accessories, then I'd say maybe-- but be aware that it might come back to bite you.

-As for Gemini, it clearly has the best low light capability. I don't know about "better than human vision"-- I recall someone saying that about the Canon 5D mkII years ago!--, so it's kind of a conceptual moving target that doesn't recognize how different human vision actually is from a camera system. I think you'd probably have to test Gemini yourself in order to really know. But you can save yourself some effort if you're honest with yourself: is there any chance you'd be willing to spend an extra $10k for 1 more stop? 2 more stops?

Thanks for the info.

Another point--I am wondering at what ratio REDCODE compression starts to visibly compromise the image?

I was going to go for the Scarlet-W, until I discovered that it apparently can only shoot 120fps/4K at 11:1, while other DSMC2 cameras can do the same at 9:1 or 6:1. Is 11:1 noticeably worse?

 

[Alex Lubensky]

Yes, it is - but still it is better in comparison to say an URSA G2, compression-wise. An old EPIC MX also shoots 11:1 in 96fps@5k and 120@4k, but everyone was ok with that. I'd say it vastly depends on your market and expectations - like if you do hi-end commercials, this might be the case, But if you don't - I wouldn't bother at all.

 

[JT Thurlow]

Yes, it is - but still it is better in comparison to say an URSA G2, compression-wise. An old EPIC MX also shoots 11:1 in 96fps@5k and 120@4k, but everyone was ok with that. I'd say it vastly depends on your market and expectations - like if you do hi-end commercials, this might be the case, But if you don't - I wouldn't bother at all.

Thanks. Well, it will be used for independent narrative films, and documentaries with a cinematic aesthetic, so I would like the large volume of high-speed shots in these projects to look great in theaters (even if the films will largely be seen in homes). Is there a clear cut-off point with compression where things start to look worse (and is it as low as 6:1)?

 

[Mike P.]

Yes, it is - but still it is better in comparison to say an URSA G2, compression-wise. An old EPIC MX also shoots 11:1 in 96fps@5k and 120@4k, but everyone was ok with that. I'd say it vastly depends on your market and expectations - like if you do hi-end commercials, this might be the case, But if you don't - I wouldn't bother at all.

This might be the case for the g2 shooting cDNG, but not BRAW in my experience. Everything that shipped with BRAW (Pocket 4k & 6k, BUMP12k) has waaaaay better compression ratios and compression options. BMDs can hold really low ratios across their entire fps range (as low as 3:1), have amazing variable ratio options, and the delta in IQ between its lowest and highest ratios is better/less noticeable than r3dcode (DCT or Wavelet) IMO.

Thanks. Well, it will be used for independent narrative films, and documentaries with a cinematic aesthetic, so I would like the large volume of high-speed shots in these projects to look great in theaters (even if the films will largely be seen in homes). Is there a clear cut-off point with compression where things start to look worse (and is it as low as 6:1)?

Depends on taste and source resolution. With wavelet, supposedly the more resolution you feed it, the less noticeable it gets the higher you go. I typically go with K:1 ratio as a good base (so 4k use 4:1, 6k 6:1, 8k 8:1), but also have no qualms using 9:1~12:1 for HFR (for a 4k deliverable). Don’t forget that a DCP is lower datarate/older codec than even 22:1, so you’ll still be going “downhill” to the delivery codec. Also with wavelet, when you push it too far, it merely gets softer (which gets mitigated a bit when you downscale to 4k.)

The real problem you’ll be facing is that you’re going HFR (which zaps your compression ratio) and then doing low-light on top of that… it’s basically the worst case scenario. Again, you might be better getting something else; like an A7s3 (which can shoot at 4k/120 at ISO6400) or using BMDs for their dual ISO.

 

[JT Thurlow]

Don’t forget that a DCP is lower datarate/older codec than even 22:1, so you’ll still be going “downhill” to the delivery codec. Also with wavelet, when you push it too far, it merely gets softer (which gets mitigated a bit when you downscale to 4k.)

The real problem you’ll be facing is that you’re going HFR (which zaps your compression ratio) and then doing low-light on top of that… it’s basically the worst case scenario. Again, you might be better getting something else; like an A7s3 (which can shoot at 4k/120 at ISO6400) or using BMDs for their dual ISO.

Which makes me wonder if 11:1 will really be noticeably worse? (But I guess it could be similar to shooting in 4K and delivering in 2K and the results being better than shooting in 2K?) I'm also not sure what properties of the image are particularly affected by compression; is it an overall degradation in image quality or just specific things?

I feel a bit wary about BMP/AS7III etc. as I've heard them being described as having a lower overall image quality and with the latter that the image is kind of hard and digital looking. A cinematic quality to the images is really essential for my projects.