Scarlet At $10K

Heath McKnight · November 7th, 2011, 04:48 PM

Thanks for the clarification, Chris.

heath

Buba Kastorski · November 8th, 2011, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylan Couper

How do you know when yours is shipping?

it's on the red site, AI Canon mount strat shipping Dec1, TI Canon mount start shipping Nov 17,
but with red everything is subject to change,
i guess :)

Heath McKnight · November 8th, 2011, 03:45 PM

I won't believe it until people start receiving their RED Scarlets. Because anything can and HAS changed since NAB 2008.

Heath

Brian Drysdale · November 9th, 2011, 02:29 AM

Yes, RED start shipping on a certain date, but that doesn't mean they don't have a back log of orders. There are a number of products that RED have been shipping for a while, but people are still waiting to receive the item they've ordered.

So, you won't know your camera is shipping until RED confirm it's ready and want the balance of the payment.

Buba Kastorski · November 9th, 2011, 10:10 AM

oh yeah, that's why I say start shipment,
my rep told me Xmas at best

Dylan Couper · November 9th, 2011, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buba Kastorski

it's on the red site, AI Canon mount strat shipping Dec1, TI Canon mount start shipping Nov 17,
but with red everything is subject to change,
i guess :)

Here's my guess...
There was probably 1000-10,000 Scarlets ordered Nov 3rd I'd be surprised if Red could deliver more than 500 a month. I think when the Red One went out they were delivering 100/month (thats 2nd hand info though). I'm expecting to see mine (and I ordered it FAST) in March-May, and I'd be pretty damn happy if that was the case. If you ordered a day or two later...

Chris Lawes · November 9th, 2011, 08:50 PM

Yep Scarlet looks like a decent deal, cool camera.
But I'm one of "those doc guys" that wants a pro-grade (ideally 10bit) 2/3 camera for around $5k, or less if possible.
There's already the F3 which is a good super35 cam in the $10-15k range, and there are decent $5k super35 cams with the AF100 and FS100.

But 2/3 or 16mm would be great for narrative filmmakers on a budget and documentary people. Just to get a decent parfocal zoom lens in the 2/3 or 16mm size is a lot easier to build, buy, and focus.

Still waiting for that. Now we have all these cool super35 cams but to get a decent modern 2/3 cam costs what, $18k?

I'd rather spend $4k on the body and $6k on a decent 16mm zoom then $12k on the body and then be stuck with primes because all the super35 zooms don't have much range and are crazy expensive.

The Ikonoskop RAW DII looks cool.. just wish it was half the price and came packaged with a 8x zoom like they were trying to do with the original 2/3. That Red 2/3 cam would have actually shaked things up... hope it still happens.

Paul Cronin · November 10th, 2011, 07:51 AM

Chris,

I agree with your voice of reason. They would have had me at 2/3".

Don Miller · November 10th, 2011, 11:14 AM

I think people would have been disappointed with low light performance at 2/3". I find 4/3 a nice compromise, I hope Panasonic continues with that size.

Jon Fairhurst · November 10th, 2011, 01:38 PM

There's no question that the documentary community suffered when the 2/3 Scarlet product got the axe. Many would like an inexpensive alternative to shooting Super 16. Four thirds is nice (very nice), but there's a lot of S16 and 2/3" glass out there that begs to be used with a modern digital solution.

Hopefully, RED is aware of this market and fills the need - but more quietly than they did during the Scarlet saga.

Tim Polster · November 10th, 2011, 02:07 PM

I agree, 2/3" was going to be a win for me too. I gave up on Scarlet earlier this year as it just seemed like things were being held up for a reason. Now we know that reason.

The 2/3" chip broadcast market is such a core market for the larger companies that I do not hold out much hope for an inexpensive 2/3" camera. Red gave an opportunity as it is outside of this circle but I do not see this product from them any time in the near future.

All of these large chips flying around and all we want is 2/3" ! Seems like it would be easy to deliver but there is more involved.

Brian Drysdale · November 11th, 2011, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Miller

I think people would have been disappointed with low light performance at 2/3". I find 4/3 a nice compromise, I hope Panasonic continues with that size.

RED were pushing how well the 2/3" looked at low light levels during demos at the various trade shows. How satisfied some people would be in reality is another matter, given the black cat in a dark coal cellar ISO's now available on the 35mm sensor cameras from Sony and Canon. In the end it really depends on the type of subject matter you film.

Don Miller · November 11th, 2011, 11:13 AM

Considering how the F3 and probably the C300 are considerably better than Epic in low light I don't see how S35 Scarlet and especially the now defunct 2/3 Scarlet could be considered good under those conditions.
It's ironic but Scarlet may bring in users who are more publicly critical of some of the Red shortcomings. Red needs to get past the teething stage with the reliability of its cameras as a larger market with direct Japanese competitors won't be as forgiving as most of the current fan club.
For all the hoopla for Red specs the actual sensor performance/sophistication doesn't look particularly good compared to what Sony and now Canon do with their CMOS expertise.

Brian Drysdale · November 11th, 2011, 11:48 AM

There's a 3k 2/3" market out there, with quite a few high quality 16mm and Super 16 lenses out there to be used on productions. I suspect the price of these will have dropped a bit now that the 2/3" scarlet has been put on the back burner, at least for a while or until someone comes up with one.

All the current 2/3" single sensor cameras are 2k, which probably don't get the best for 1080p in resolution terms, but do still gather attention and are working on a number of films.

It's nice to have the option of the extreme ISOs, but practise as long as it's pretty clean at say 3,000 that will cover most productions.

Jon Fairhurst · November 11th, 2011, 01:32 PM

Much of the 2/3" market is for live applications where one must balance low light performance with the ability to hit critical focus with an EVF. For live capture, whether it's studio news, ENG, sports, or events, it's a 1080 market, rather than a 4K market. RAW isn't helpful for live shoots in the moment. For RED to be successful in this segment, it needs to compete on live production features in the studio and for ENG-style shooting. Those requirements don't necessarily match the current EPIC modular approach.

3K isn't exactly right either. Frankly, Canon's C300 nailed it. With a true qHD sensor, one can simply read out the pixels for 1080 16x9. De-Bayer it and you can record 4K when needed.

There is certainly a 2/3" professional market. But Scarlet was originally designed for budget narrative shooters (and soccer moms). To be successful in 2/3", RED needs to focus on the traditional 2/3" market needs first with 4K, fast frame rates, RAW, and HDR as secondary features that happen to expand their reach to the filmmaker who wants a shallow DOF look.

November 7th, 2011, 04:48 PM	#61
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Re: Scarlet At $10K Thanks for the clarification, Chris. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 8th, 2011, 03:45 PM	#63
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Re: Scarlet At $10K I won't believe it until people start receiving their RED Scarlets. Because anything can and HAS changed since NAB 2008. Heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

November 9th, 2011, 02:29 AM	#64
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,143	Re: Scarlet At $10K Yes, RED start shipping on a certain date, but that doesn't mean they don't have a back log of orders. There are a number of products that RED have been shipping for a while, but people are still waiting to receive the item they've ordered. So, you won't know your camera is shipping until RED confirm it's ready and want the balance of the payment.

November 9th, 2011, 10:10 AM	#65
Buba Kastorski Trustee Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 1,414	Re: Scarlet At $10K oh yeah, that's why I say start shipment, my rep told me Xmas at best __________________ I love this place!

November 9th, 2011, 08:50 PM	#67
Chris Lawes Regular Crew Join Date: May 2010 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Posts: 33	Re: Scarlet At $10K Yep Scarlet looks like a decent deal, cool camera. But I'm one of "those doc guys" that wants a pro-grade (ideally 10bit) 2/3 camera for around $5k, or less if possible. There's already the F3 which is a good super35 cam in the $10-15k range, and there are decent $5k super35 cams with the AF100 and FS100. But 2/3 or 16mm would be great for narrative filmmakers on a budget and documentary people. Just to get a decent parfocal zoom lens in the 2/3 or 16mm size is a lot easier to build, buy, and focus. Still waiting for that. Now we have all these cool super35 cams but to get a decent modern 2/3 cam costs what, $18k? I'd rather spend $4k on the body and $6k on a decent 16mm zoom then $12k on the body and then be stuck with primes because all the super35 zooms don't have much range and are crazy expensive. The Ikonoskop RAW DII looks cool.. just wish it was half the price and came packaged with a 8x zoom like they were trying to do with the original 2/3. That Red 2/3 cam would have actually shaked things up... hope it still happens.

November 10th, 2011, 07:51 AM	#68
Paul Cronin Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Rhode Island Posts: 4,048	Re: Scarlet At $10K Chris, I agree with your voice of reason. They would have had me at 2/3". __________________ Paul Cronin www.paulcroninstudios.com

November 10th, 2011, 11:14 AM	#69
Don Miller Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Chicago Posts: 706	Re: Scarlet At $10K I think people would have been disappointed with low light performance at 2/3". I find 4/3 a nice compromise, I hope Panasonic continues with that size.

November 10th, 2011, 01:38 PM	#70
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	Re: Scarlet At $10K There's no question that the documentary community suffered when the 2/3 Scarlet product got the axe. Many would like an inexpensive alternative to shooting Super 16. Four thirds is nice (very nice), but there's a lot of S16 and 2/3" glass out there that begs to be used with a modern digital solution. Hopefully, RED is aware of this market and fills the need - but more quietly than they did during the Scarlet saga. __________________ Jon Fairhurst

November 10th, 2011, 02:07 PM	#71
Tim Polster Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Arlington, TX Posts: 2,231	Re: Scarlet At $10K I agree, 2/3" was going to be a win for me too. I gave up on Scarlet earlier this year as it just seemed like things were being held up for a reason. Now we know that reason. The 2/3" chip broadcast market is such a core market for the larger companies that I do not hold out much hope for an inexpensive 2/3" camera. Red gave an opportunity as it is outside of this circle but I do not see this product from them any time in the near future. All of these large chips flying around and all we want is 2/3" ! Seems like it would be easy to deliver but there is more involved.

November 11th, 2011, 11:13 AM	#73
Don Miller Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Chicago Posts: 706	Re: Scarlet At $10K Considering how the F3 and probably the C300 are considerably better than Epic in low light I don't see how S35 Scarlet and especially the now defunct 2/3 Scarlet could be considered good under those conditions. It's ironic but Scarlet may bring in users who are more publicly critical of some of the Red shortcomings. Red needs to get past the teething stage with the reliability of its cameras as a larger market with direct Japanese competitors won't be as forgiving as most of the current fan club. For all the hoopla for Red specs the actual sensor performance/sophistication doesn't look particularly good compared to what Sony and now Canon do with their CMOS expertise.

November 11th, 2011, 11:48 AM	#74
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,143	Re: Scarlet At $10K There's a 3k 2/3" market out there, with quite a few high quality 16mm and Super 16 lenses out there to be used on productions. I suspect the price of these will have dropped a bit now that the 2/3" scarlet has been put on the back burner, at least for a while or until someone comes up with one. All the current 2/3" single sensor cameras are 2k, which probably don't get the best for 1080p in resolution terms, but do still gather attention and are working on a number of films. It's nice to have the option of the extreme ISOs, but practise as long as it's pretty clean at say 3,000 that will cover most productions.

November 11th, 2011, 01:32 PM	#75
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	Re: Scarlet At $10K Much of the 2/3" market is for live applications where one must balance low light performance with the ability to hit critical focus with an EVF. For live capture, whether it's studio news, ENG, sports, or events, it's a 1080 market, rather than a 4K market. RAW isn't helpful for live shoots in the moment. For RED to be successful in this segment, it needs to compete on live production features in the studio and for ENG-style shooting. Those requirements don't necessarily match the current EPIC modular approach. 3K isn't exactly right either. Frankly, Canon's C300 nailed it. With a true qHD sensor, one can simply read out the pixels for 1080 16x9. De-Bayer it and you can record 4K when needed. There is certainly a 2/3" professional market. But Scarlet was originally designed for budget narrative shooters (and soccer moms). To be successful in 2/3", RED needs to focus on the traditional 2/3" market needs first with 4K, fast frame rates, RAW, and HDR as secondary features that happen to expand their reach to the filmmaker who wants a shallow DOF look. __________________ Jon Fairhurst