DvSLRs and RED Scarlet

Jay Birch · October 31st, 2009, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Watson

Seems to me that every still photographer I've spoken with despises the fact that the option even exists on their camera.

People like to moan.... I know loads of photographers that like the video mode, they just don't rush online to say so.

As for still photographers not using RAW, what???? Maybe wedding photographers or something, but I don't know anyone who doesn't shoot RAW.

Anyway, fair play to RED.... they might have slightly upset their fanboy indies.... but they have really treated their old customers well... the upgrade path from RED one is truly revolutionary, in terms of spec and new levels of customer service/appreciation.

Erik Andersen · October 31st, 2009, 02:14 PM

I think Brian was referring to RAW video. I don't think adding RAW would necessarily add much to the cost of the camera. Just to the cost of your new CF cards!

The only thing photog's in my industry hate about DvSLRs is that now videog's have superior lens collections.

Brian Drysdale · October 31st, 2009, 02:20 PM

High end photographers may use RAW, but for most people, which I would say is the mass market for stills cameras tend to just use JPEGS. One reason being you can get a lot more pictures on your card.

There's a lot of data to be processed with RAW for video, that's what you're paying for on the RED series.

David Chapman · October 31st, 2009, 02:59 PM

I can't think of any photographers—professional commercial or wedding and event—that shoot JPG over RAW. They have tons of CF cards and at high capacity. Why not shoot raw? I did have a photographer buddy that shot JPG, until last year. Now he's all RAW. Every photography studio I know shoots RAW too! (even Walmart, I think).

Almost all of the photographers that have the 5DM2 just shoot stills—but want to start shooting video more. They don't know anything about frames rates. A very prominent photographer in Houston said, "So I tried to shoot some video, since I have Premiere, but I think this 5D shoots 28 or 34 frames a second and it's supposed to be 26 or 29 or something..."

Photographers that don't understand frame rates don't shoot video. That's the reason. Check out still-motion.ca cause they have 5D's and are shooting a ton of video!

Brian Drysdale · October 31st, 2009, 03:45 PM

I didn't mention professionals, although I do know do one wedding photographer who does shoot high quality JPEGs. As you mention, the reason for professionals not shooting RAW has largely gone.

Canon and the other camera manufacturers seem to caught onto the replacement for the 35mm adapter market having brought out a product initially intended for photojournalists. RED seem to have noticed them introducing these cameras and have responded with what would appear to come from the other direction: digital motion cameras that can also be used for stills. Although, from the price viewpoint this would appear to be more a Scarlet idea than a proposed use for the Epic, even if the RED One has been used on stills shoots.

Kalulu Ngilo · October 31st, 2009, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay Birch

As for still photographers not using RAW, what???? Maybe wedding photographers or something, but I don't know anyone who doesn't shoot RAW.

are you kidding?! We shoot RAW especially for weddings. Memory technology is cheap as dirt and we like to take our CF cards for a wild ride! Its like having a box of cookies you know...

I use RAW even if I am shooting leaves or ants on my backyard. :)

Erik Andersen · November 1st, 2009, 04:46 AM

So what will come first, the Canon 5D Mark III or a hybrid that borrows more from HD cams like the XH and XL series? Or is Sony or Nikon going to drop the next bomb?

Steve Maller · November 1st, 2009, 09:41 AM

In my experience shooting a 5D Mark II side-by-side with my Mark III bodies over the last year, I would say that a HUGE piece of the joy of my 5DM2 for video is hanging my Canon glass off of it. Being able to go from the 70-200/2.8L IS to the 85/1.2 to the 35/1.4 to the 15/fish to the 24TS is simply divine. I still shoot some video with my Canon XL2 with the brilliant 16X manual lens (a great combo), but the image quality that I get from my 5D is an order of magnitude better.

Does it have a way to go? Of course. Someday we'll look back at it as we do now at the Instamatic, Polaroid and Super8 cameras of our youth. But it's a really important step forward.

And if Mr. Jannard's team can help to push all this forward, all power to them. I hope they're having fun at what they're doing, and I wish them well!

Steve Maller · November 1st, 2009, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erik Andersen

So what will come first, the Canon 5D Mark III or a hybrid that borrows more from HD cams like the XH and XL series? Or is Sony or Nikon going to drop the next bomb?

We have to remember that the potential market for this new-ish category of camera is fairly narrow, and the R&D costs of developing new systems is quite high. I would expect we'll continue to see "hybrid" designs because they're cheaper to develop.

Mike Watson · November 1st, 2009, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erik Andersen

So what will come first, the Canon 5D Mark III or a hybrid that borrows more from HD cams like the XH and XL series? Or is Sony or Nikon going to drop the next bomb?

Canon will release an HD video camera at NAB (or surrounding NAB) with similar (but somehow crippled) DOF, but all the other issues (limited clip length, lack of audio inputs, frustrating user interface) fixed. Unfortunately it'll be in the $10k range, so there will still be a significant userbase for the 5D.

Keep in mind that I am talking strictly out of my ass - but this is where my money is.

Floris van Eck · November 1st, 2009, 01:10 PM

You forget that Canon makes glass for 2/3" cameras. They earn a lot of money in that market. They will upset all their customers (Sony, JVC, Panasonic) for which they make and sell lenses. They would also have a internal fight to fight. The canon DSLR and video teams are two separate teams that are competing. If they release a Canon 5D Mark III that competes with the most expensive videocameras, they upset so many people internally and externally. I hope the video team licenses the sensor and lensmount from the photography unit and builds a XL-H1 like body around it with proper video buttons, knobs, dials and audio inputs.

Big thanks to Jim and his team. Although I also kinda lost my faith in the Scarlet. It doesn't live up to the original promise and I don't think it will be out untill 2011.

Also don't count out Sony in this market. They bought Konica Minolta and have a good codec in house. I am eager to find out what they are up to in the DVSLR market.

Dave Blackhurst · November 1st, 2009, 02:16 PM

All that's surfaced from Sony are vague quotes from executives who appear to be mostly clueless as far as adding a DSLR-V to the Alpha line... Not holding my breath.

I am certain Sony CAN do it, when they will is probably not "too" far in the future, but not this model year, so conservatively it's another year at the least before they join the market mix. I think they've announced all that will be seen this year.

Sony released the compact superzoom DSC-HX1, and it's not a bad little camera - but they are apparently waiting to either work out the bugs or "see what develops" before they add the video feature to the Alpha line. Since good glass is fairly cheap and available for the Sony mount, and I've got a nice selection already, I'm just taking a wait and see approach. Sure would be nice to have the in-body IS and video though... sigh.

David Chapman · November 1st, 2009, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Floris van Eck

You forget that Canon makes glass for 2/3" cameras. They earn a lot of money in that market. They will upset all their customers (Sony, JVC, Panasonic) for which they make and sell lenses. They would also have a internal fight to fight. The canon DSLR and video teams are two separate teams that are competing. If they release a Canon 5D Mark III that competes with the most expensive videocameras, they upset so many people internally and externally.

I would say that JVC, Panasonic, and Sony all have cameras in the -7K range that are tapeless, where Canon has yet to take its own XL line. They are still on mini dv! This is a range that does not upset the broadcast line at all, since I can't think of a studio that "really" uses the XL-H1 or the EX3 studio edition. Canon HAS to bring its cameras into the card media realm where everyone else is. The question would have to be what lens group to use? The 2/3" lenses or the EF line. Does Canon support mostly low to mid-range videographers that are independent or event related? Would they have EF lenses already with other photo gear?

Whether this new "dream" camera came out with a 2/3" sensor/mount or not, that wouldn't upset the Canon broadcast lens adaption for other companies IMO. JVC and Sony don't make lenses, hence the Canon or Fujinon.

Codec? Well it wouldn't be Redcode, but that doesn't mean it has to be H.264 either. JVC is writing MOV files and can support the EX format too. Who knows. I'm sure not spending 10K at this point for a Scarlet fixed lens. Definitely a rental if needed. I would be happy with the 1DM4 for half the price—although still plenty happy with my 7D. :-)

Dan Brockett · November 1st, 2009, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

I kindly disagree. I think DSLR manufacturers added video because photojournalists asked for it, and because it was not difficult to start saving the liveview stream to a file. My opinion is that RED didn't affect it. I think RED's future products may affect the actions of DSLR manufacturers, though.

I concur, I interviewed Chuck Westfall for an article for a magazine I write for and this is exactly what he and Canon told me. I don't think that RED or the Scarlet were anywhere on their radar.

I will give RED props that they did shake up the status quo but I think also that Canon and Nikon should share in that honor as well, even if they didn't plan to shake things up as much as they have. The D90 and the 5D MKII are much more revolutionary products than vaporware like the Scarlet. Until they start deliveries, Scarlet is nothing but talk and 3D renders.

Dan

Mark Holmes · November 1st, 2009, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

I concur, I interviewed Chuck Westfall for an article for a magazine I write for and this is exactly what he and Canon told me. I don't think that RED or the Scarlet were anywhere on their radar.

I will give RED props that they did shake up the status quo but I think also that Canon and Nikon should share in that honor as well, even if they didn't plan to shake things up as much as they have. The D90 and the 5D MKII are much more revolutionary products than vaporware like the Scarlet. Until they start deliveries, Scarlet is nothing but talk and 3D renders.

Dan

I stand corrected. I see both of your points.

With the rush of technological growth, it's easy to misinterpret the whys and wherefores of product releases.

At any rate, I'm excited and grateful to both companies for their cameras. Only four years ago I was shooting my first feature on a DVX100 and excited that it was 480p at 24p.

Crazy.

October 31st, 2009, 02:14 PM	#17
Erik Andersen Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Vancouver Canada Posts: 122	I think Brian was referring to RAW video. I don't think adding RAW would necessarily add much to the cost of the camera. Just to the cost of your new CF cards! The only thing photog's in my industry hate about DvSLRs is that now videog's have superior lens collections. __________________ Erik Andersen, wedding filmmaker www.lovestorymedia.com

October 31st, 2009, 02:59 PM	#19
David Chapman Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: The Woodlands, TX Posts: 271	I can't think of any photographers—professional commercial or wedding and event—that shoot JPG over RAW. They have tons of CF cards and at high capacity. Why not shoot raw? I did have a photographer buddy that shot JPG, until last year. Now he's all RAW. Every photography studio I know shoots RAW too! (even Walmart, I think). Almost all of the photographers that have the 5DM2 just shoot stills—but want to start shooting video more. They don't know anything about frames rates. A very prominent photographer in Houston said, "So I tried to shoot some video, since I have Premiere, but I think this 5D shoots 28 or 34 frames a second and it's supposed to be 26 or 29 or something..." Photographers that don't understand frame rates don't shoot video. That's the reason. Check out still-motion.ca cause they have 5D's and are shooting a ton of video! __________________ www.yourvisualimage.com David Chapman

November 1st, 2009, 04:46 AM	#22
Erik Andersen Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Vancouver Canada Posts: 122	So what will come first, the Canon 5D Mark III or a hybrid that borrows more from HD cams like the XH and XL series? Or is Sony or Nikon going to drop the next bomb? __________________ Erik Andersen, wedding filmmaker www.lovestorymedia.com

November 1st, 2009, 09:41 AM	#23
Steve Maller Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Burlingame, CA USA Posts: 186	In my experience shooting a 5D Mark II side-by-side with my Mark III bodies over the last year, I would say that a HUGE piece of the joy of my 5DM2 for video is hanging my Canon glass off of it. Being able to go from the 70-200/2.8L IS to the 85/1.2 to the 35/1.4 to the 15/fish to the 24TS is simply divine. I still shoot some video with my Canon XL2 with the brilliant 16X manual lens (a great combo), but the image quality that I get from my 5D is an order of magnitude better. Does it have a way to go? Of course. Someday we'll look back at it as we do now at the Instamatic, Polaroid and Super8 cameras of our youth. But it's a really important step forward. And if Mr. Jannard's team can help to push all this forward, all power to them. I hope they're having fun at what they're doing, and I wish them well! __________________ www.stevemaller.com

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

October 31st, 2009, 02:20 PM	#18
Brian Drysdale Trustee Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 1,456	High end photographers may use RAW, but for most people, which I would say is the mass market for stills cameras tend to just use JPEGS. One reason being you can get a lot more pictures on your card. There's a lot of data to be processed with RAW for video, that's what you're paying for on the RED series.

October 31st, 2009, 03:45 PM	#20
Brian Drysdale Trustee Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 1,456	I didn't mention professionals, although I do know do one wedding photographer who does shoot high quality JPEGs. As you mention, the reason for professionals not shooting RAW has largely gone. Canon and the other camera manufacturers seem to caught onto the replacement for the 35mm adapter market having brought out a product initially intended for photojournalists. RED seem to have noticed them introducing these cameras and have responded with what would appear to come from the other direction: digital motion cameras that can also be used for stills. Although, from the price viewpoint this would appear to be more a Scarlet idea than a proposed use for the Epic, even if the RED One has been used on stills shoots.

November 1st, 2009, 01:10 PM	#26
Floris van Eck Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 860	You forget that Canon makes glass for 2/3" cameras. They earn a lot of money in that market. They will upset all their customers (Sony, JVC, Panasonic) for which they make and sell lenses. They would also have a internal fight to fight. The canon DSLR and video teams are two separate teams that are competing. If they release a Canon 5D Mark III that competes with the most expensive videocameras, they upset so many people internally and externally. I hope the video team licenses the sensor and lensmount from the photography unit and builds a XL-H1 like body around it with proper video buttons, knobs, dials and audio inputs. Big thanks to Jim and his team. Although I also kinda lost my faith in the Scarlet. It doesn't live up to the original promise and I don't think it will be out untill 2011. Also don't count out Sony in this market. They bought Konica Minolta and have a good codec in house. I am eager to find out what they are up to in the DVSLR market.

November 1st, 2009, 02:16 PM	#27
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 2,244	All that's surfaced from Sony are vague quotes from executives who appear to be mostly clueless as far as adding a DSLR-V to the Alpha line... Not holding my breath. I am certain Sony CAN do it, when they will is probably not "too" far in the future, but not this model year, so conservatively it's another year at the least before they join the market mix. I think they've announced all that will be seen this year. Sony released the compact superzoom DSC-HX1, and it's not a bad little camera - but they are apparently waiting to either work out the bugs or "see what develops" before they add the video feature to the Alpha line. Since good glass is fairly cheap and available for the Sony mount, and I've got a nice selection already, I'm just taking a wait and see approach. Sure would be nice to have the in-body IS and video though... sigh.