One thing that fascinates me most about the upcoming RED Scarlet 2/3”, is what the other manufactures will make in response in the $3-5K range. Canon has showed us they know how can do low light performance and control of depth of field with EOS 5D Mark II. I would bet most prosumers would be just fine with standard HD (1920x1080). And surely the manufactures will come out with a 10 bit, intra-frame compression format that works fine. What do you think we’re in for?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What will the other manufacturers make in response to the RED Scarlet?
- Thread starter Chris7
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't think they'll even try to compete anytime soon ... maybe Sony will though. Others will just crap in their pants.
-DH
-DH
At least for Canon and Nikon I think we've already seen their response (or at least the beginning of it). After the release of the DSLRs-that-can-do-HD Red merged the original Scarlet and their DSMC (digital still & motion camera) into a single product. We'll have to wait and see exactly what Scarlet delivers but personally I don't think it's going to turn the industry on it's head over night. The gear exists today to make professional looking, award winning, marketable projects at the prosumer price point. The lack of a 3k camera for $5k isn't a real roadblock for no-budget filmmakers and the film/video production world is much larger than the vocal, indie, no-budget filmmaker that seems to be the biggest proponents of Scarlet.
Lethal
Lethal
RED are after the digital cinema world so other companies need not compete if that isn't their market. There are other companies making 5k machines etc and these are all on the RED wiki page.
But also there are camera's like the Viper Filmstream Camera as used in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which is no more than HD essentially (http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/action/button/?sr=hotnews).
There are other companies going for it but lets face it RED cams are far from cheap if you want a good picture. The lens have to be better quality so not to create bottle necks etc.
I like the idea of the 56k sensor for special effects work though!! Talk about detailed effects!
But also there are camera's like the Viper Filmstream Camera as used in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which is no more than HD essentially (http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/action/button/?sr=hotnews).
There are other companies going for it but lets face it RED cams are far from cheap if you want a good picture. The lens have to be better quality so not to create bottle necks etc.
I like the idea of the 56k sensor for special effects work though!! Talk about detailed effects!
I guess what strikes me is that, at lest the body ("brain") of the RED Scarlet 2/3" will probably be professional and not pro-sumer quality, at about a tenth the price of the professional video cameras today (e.g. the Panasonic AJ-HPX200 at $27,000). I know the Scarlet is primarily geared toward digital cinema. But I was hoping that the Scarlet would force the video market to make reasonable priced (and smaller/lighter?) camcorder bodies that perform at an extremely high level (even if they're "limited" to 1920x1080 and 10-bit color).
In a recession- WHO CARES?
Let's see how RED survives the next 2 years of economic downturn
OUCH! lol... Media should be fairly alright cause lets face it if people are out of jobs and have no money they're gunna be sat in watching TV!!
While Scarlet will have an impact just like Red One has had an impact there are just too many shooting variables for a single camera to rock the entire camera world, IMO. Not everyone wants, or needs, to build their entire camera piece by piece ('brain', lens, storage, A/V IO, view finder, rails, grips, shoulder mount, tripod plate, etc.,.). An EX1 pretty much comes ready to shoot out of the box. Red and Scarlet don't. Neither way is right or wrong they are just different tools for different types of jobs. Horses for courses.
It's kinda like the popularity of FCP forced Avid to step up as well as lower its prices but Avid still costs more than FCP (especially if you use their hardware) and Avid still is the company to beat in terms of hi-end editing.
Unfortunately some big companies that invested in filmmaking and TV shows, such as Lehman Brothers, no longer exist.
Lethal
It's also far from cheap if you want a good finish in post. The workflow is complicated and to get the most out of your DI, you need a Scratch system (not cheap) or hire a post house that operates one.
well now that you can re-wrap the r3d files for FCP, you can finish in Color with the full quality... it's definitely a big step up from transcoding to ProRes.
The latest CreativeCow magazine focuses on 2k, 4k and Pixels and is well worth a read.
View it direct from their site CreativeCow.net
Or download the magazine now!
View it direct from their site CreativeCow.net
Or download the magazine now!
I don't know if there is much to respond to yet. RED will announce a camera, and in a few months there will be a limited release, and those cameras will have many teething problems, not delivering on their full promise. Hell the RED One still doesn't have fully functioning audio capabilities and it's been out for well over a year now.
This post has been inactive for a while, but I recently talked to someone who has both the EOS 5D MkII and a Panasonic AG-HMC150. He said the video is not comparable -- the EOS is vastly superior. Anyone here think that Canon might just introduce a video camera that uses it's 36 mm sensor, and a 10 bit codec with intraframe compression? That would seem like an easy way to get incredible images, rather than squeezing the image into the the 10 mm sensor like the RED scarlet 2/3" (of course you would lose the ability to do a RAW video format with this, as there would be too many photosites, but whatever). Plus you could just use relatively inexpensive stabilized, ultrasonic lenses SLR lenses. I wonder if Canon and others specifically do not want to make as good a camera as they can for under $5K, as that would make their more expensive HDV cameras practically obsolete. What do you think?
I really hope someone makes something really new in response to the Scarlet 2/3". Upon further reading it seems the Scarlet 2/3" may vary well have no autofocus, no autogain.
I really hope someone makes something really new in response to the Scarlet 2/3". Upon further reading it seems the Scarlet 2/3" may vary well have no autofocus, no autogain.
superior in what way? I'm sure the AVCHD from the HMC would hold up better through post. And no, I highly doubt Canon would make that camera. For one thing, they'd have to license a codec since they don't have their own (unlike Panasonic and Sony).
ding ding ding
I think it will take some time for the Scarlet to really start being used. I mean loads of companies already invested tens of thousands of dollars in a system. I doubt they'll drop it all to enter a (let's face it) new working environment.
Sure it might be an industry changer as it is innovation, but innovation takes a while before it becomes a standard.
Sure it might be an industry changer as it is innovation, but innovation takes a while before it becomes a standard.
What were you expecting to see? Did you see the footage played back on a 4K monitor? Or was it downsampled to a lower res?
The RED cameras don't have magical unicorns prancing around inside them, improving every shot.
The only real advantage they have is sheer resolution, and a low cost per pixel. Today that resolution isn't all that important to anyone but high-level, big budget productions that *someday* might re-release in a higher resolution format.
Oh, and there still hasn't really been a confirmed answer yet about AF when using the cameras in a DSMC setup. This a huge thing for any photographer who leaves the studio.
One of the coolest features of Redcode RAW of the RED One it's ability to correct way over or underexposed shots in post. However, the Scarlet will have photosites that are about 1/3 the the size of those in the RED One (arithmetic below). I believe there's some debate as to exactly what the relationship is between photosite size and low light sensitivity, but if it were linear, it would seem that ISO 1600 on the RED One would have about as much grain as the the Scarlet 2/3" at just under ISO 600 (one and a half stops down for 1/3 as much light). Anyone have a better estimate?
The Scarlet 2/3" may end up being the best camera under $10K, but it does not appear it's gong to be a 16mm version of the RED One.
On the other hand I talked to a guy tonight shooting with a 5D Mark II. He said he hardly saw grain at ISO 1600 on his camera. I have read that the 5D suffers from heavy rolling shutter artifacts -- anyone heard about this?
(Photosites on the RED One are .0054mm, photosites on the Scarlet 2/3" are 0.003mm. Square these and the RED One photosites have 3x's the area.)
Looks like I'm SOL.A good tool can't fix a bad craftsman.
Lethal
You're right, it seems all most overkill, when the DVD they sell wont even play back all that camera records.
The movie was done very well, the thing I kept noticing is the highlights were blown out.