Latest Scarlet news. Expect 2/3" early summer, s35 late summer

http://philipbloom.co.uk/2009/11/30/scarlet-announcements/

Wasn't it supposed to be 3k for 3k?

At least they've got a timetable now. Sounds like it'll be awesome.

3K for $3K was a nice marketing slogan, but it just didn't happen. The price still seems pretty good for what you're (supposedly) getting.

There are some snarky comments over on the twitter, but I for one think the price seems very reasonable considering what your getting.

Will be interesting to see if $4,750 will be the street price. If this was any other company but RED I would be confident of a 10 to 15% price drop by time it got to B&H and Amazon...

Red plans to sell this to dealers? I thought Red only???

<<<I added two more items to the comparison>>>

The fixed lens Scarlet, is not a much better deal, than the Sony PMW-350 EX. Of course Scarlet costs $4750 and the Sony $19000 but you get a lot more for you spending money:

16X lens instead of 8X, plus the ability to interchange it.
3cmos instead of one (better color, more pixels and probably better low light).
Color EVF (extra for Scarlet)
The Scarlet achieves 1080 through scaling. That may cause aliasing and moire problems so many users find annoying in the 5DII
Shoulder mount form factor (in the scarlet you have to add a pad).
Compatibility with industry standard peripherals (some of them you might already own).
Sony service (very important outside US) and abundance of similar behaving cameras to replace yours in emergency.
Much more efficient and faster workflow for broadcast/corporate assignments.
In most Europe, Sony has a 24 months 0% interest finance.

Scarlet is a more compact lightweight camera and has the ability to record Raw which is a big advantage if you plan a film out (and a pain for everything else). You have to add, at extra cost, the Nanoflash or the Kipro to get similar results from Sony.

On the other hand Scarlet is a much better deal than the similarly priced NXCAM.

Comparing a $5K camera to a $20K is just plain ridiculous.

There was some talk that they might be using dealers on the 2/3" Scarlet, but that could be just that - talk.

I expect it will be the usual thing with RED (plus other pro cameras), a good shooting kit is going to cost more than the base price. You'll need more than one battery for a start.

I'm assuming that you can fit a PL mount on the interchangeable 2/3" Scarlet.

RAW should be fine as long your post production schedule allows for it, but it's not suitable for every production.

I guess it's a case of not keeping all the people happy all of the time (which is impossible). Sony seem to be using their EX series pretty well, although they seem to thrown some of the ergonomics out. That could be something that might cost extra on the Scarlets: rigging them out for shooting hand held for long periods.

Comparing a $5K camera to a $20K is just plain ridiculous.

I disagree when the $5K camera has more resolution and uses the same size lens mount.

This is RED throwing a wrench in the prodcut lines of the other camera makers and comparisons need to be price independent imho.

Two questions I have:

I wonder how ENG lenses will fit into this cameras world. Is this camera meant to stay a "film only" type camera or do they want the ENG crowd to be whoo-ed over.

RED offers a PL to B4 adapter for $3,500.

After the body and accessories with the $3,500 adaptor, it will be interesting to see how close or far away from the PDW-350 you will get in the end.

Is RED RAW the only way to record images?

Will us Nano owners be able to hook up over HD-SDI and treat this camera like a 1080p video camera if we are so inclined?

The 2/3" Scarlet should have approx 2k + resolution (3k Bayer), which should place it amongst the 3 chip 2/3" cameras. However, until tests are done with real cameras it's hard to do any direct comparisons.

Regarding workflow, I believe that Scarlet will record in RAW -or- Full HD. I don't know what the codec will be for HD, and what platforms will support it, but the intent is to make the camera viable for fast turnaround projects.

In the forum area, I thought it was quite interesting the back and forth between RED fans and DSLR fans. Good points on both sides but it looks like whenever the two REDs come out, the pricing structure will mirror the RED 1......not a 5K camera but really a 25K camera. The biggest point is that the 5d and 7d are out now with affordable pricing and are being used now on many projects....docs, spots, and features.

Jim Martin

Red's major selling point was their outstanding value for money, thus their marketing department, always compared their product (Red 1) with considerably more expensive cameras (F35,Viper, Genesis etc.). From this point of view, comparing the 350 with Scarlet is not without reason, since they share same size chip and roughly same resolution.
The fixed lens Scarlet, complete with EVF, IN/OUT module and everything, will probably sell around $12000. IMO the lens difference alone justifies the price for the Sony 350. The Scarlet (body only) with a 16X broadcast lens, the B4 adapter and everything will probably be more expensive than the 350. All I'm saying is that Red's value for money is no longer indisputable.

The biggest point is that the 5d and 7d are out now with affordable pricing and are being used now on many projects....docs, spots, and features.

Jim Martin

This really depends on the markets you're aiming at. Certainly, if you're aiming at the web they're fine, doubtful for many other markets except as specialised cameras.

This camera has been talked about for so long, I'll believe it when I see it. Growing very tired of the hype....want to see some REAL product.

We are witnessing here the birth of a Blue Ocean. (RED in a Blue Ocean, how absurd that sounds?)

Clearly RED went towards a blue ocean strategy with value innovation. Actually it is not really the 3k or 5k or whatever k they offer.

It is the modular build of their system by which they will be saving endless head aches for those who previously tried to get a good rig based on a camera which was purpose-built imperfectly by adding optical connecting elements for huge bucks just to make use of their existing still camera lenses, then went out for solid state recording options and tried tons of adapters and matching cards to replace the ridiculously overpriced proprietary media of the camera makers. Let alone the monitors you had to replace your useless LCD screen or viewfinder with in case if you wanted to make that HD shot sharp.

With this system this all will be gone.

Just like Cirque du Soleil abandoned elephants and lions and gave us something much better than that (without the complimentary smell), RED has abandoned most everything which was created by the big boys of the video industry.

At a price that most videographer would consider a steal.

I am not in any relation with RED. Just like what they are about doing.

Scarlet is arguably the best named camera ever, after being so excited and then waiting to buy a camera and then buying a camera and then waiting and waiting and seeing so many flips and price changes and waiting some more, I feel like saying "Frankly, my dear . . . ."

Many of us are already using the Scarlet, except it's made by Canon and called the 7D. While I don't doubt many people will jump on board the RED marketing bandwagon next year, nobody is going to put their productions on hold until then to see if the camera actually comes out. In other words, RED has just lost 2010's purchasing decisions.

IMO the lens difference alone justifies the price for the Sony 350.

What does that mean? Are you saying that the lens on the Scarlet is a lot better than the one on the 350? If so, it's impossible to say that as you don't even know how good the Scarlet lens is - it may be awful, you don't know until it exists, and also the lens on the 350 by all accounts is actually very good.
Steve

Many of us are already using the Scarlet, except it's made by Canon and called the 7D.

I think the major difference that most video shooters will point to is that the 7D was always meant to be a stills camera with a small video add-on and therefore any video use was always going to be a bit clunky, while the Scarlet was designed at least as a half and half camera, if not more so a video camera with stills capability. From a video useability standpoint you'd assume it'd be a lot better and I'm sure that's what a lot of poeple have been waiting (a bloody long time!) for.
Steve

To be honest, Scarlet looks less comfortable to hold than a DSLR.

It does look like a block, but add a handle to it and there you go. Now you've got a block with a rounded handle.

...therefore any video use was always going to be a bit clunky...
Steve

Not sure I quite agree. Having shot with lens adapters like redrock and brevis I would say that the 7D is MUCH easier than those setups, and much sharper with no vignette. For run and gun, maybe not, but for production it is actually very quick. The scarlet looks like a pain to operate compared to even a dslr like the 7D.
Touchscreen? might as well label it a Sony consumer camera. Tactile external controls are faster. In REDs quest for new ways of doing things, it seems thar though their images will be second to none, their ergonomics are beyond lacking.

Rather like the RED One I suspect you have to check out the accessories to discover how an operational Scarlet is configured. RED have received quite a few comments about ergonomics with the One, so hopefully they've taken everything on board.

I'm not expecting the base Scarlet to be a neat little unit without having accessories fitted.

To be honest, Scarlet looks less comfortable to hold than a DSLR.

Well that says quite a lot really. Video/Cinema shooters are not likely to want to handhold their cameras very often (I hope!) Typically you'll have a big tripod, support bars, follow focus, matte box etc.
Steve

I agree. Pros don't generally run cameras naked.

One advantage for Scarlet (if you have the budget) is that the EVF can be mounted up front and on the side. That will allow a better balanced shoulder setup than a DvSLR with a loupe.

On tripods, dollies, sliders, jibs and balance rigs, form factor doesn't mean much, as long as the camera isn't overly large, heavy, and imbalanced.

True, but for those pros who DO handhold on occasion neither a DSLR or the Scarlett look appealing. A "normal" video camera has them both beat... Time and reviews will tell...

The fixed lens Scarlet, is not a much better deal, than the Sony PMW-350 EX. Of course Scarlet costs $4750 and the Sony $19000 but you get a lot more for you spending money:

16X lens instead of 8X, plus the ability to interchange it.

Then dont buy fixed.

3cmos instead of one (better color, more pixels and probably better low light).

More pixels? Scarlet is 3k!(I guess you mean more photosites pr color) Mysterium X does iso 800 without added noise. Which is unpresidented. Talking about low light.

The Scarlet achieves 1080 through scaling. That may cause aliasing and moire problems so many users find annoying in the 5DII

You have no basis for that statement, unless you really are trying to compare it to the 5D. In which case.. Shame on you.


Shoulder mount form factor (in the scarlet you have to add a pad).

Have you seen all the acessories for the reds? Oh right. It's extra. Curse Red for not letting me keep all of the 14000$ I saved by not buying the sony.

So now you do a fair comparrison, and spend 19000$ on a red package, and tell me you still chose sony.

Which camera you buy may depend on what format your clients require. I know productions that have gone for Sony F35 rather than RED because of the post production schedules. There are a number of factors involved in selecting a camera other than the price of the camera.

Sony? Red? DSLR? Other?

It all depends on what you're doing with it, of course, but one thing is for sure: competition is a good thing for the customer. Better specs, better prices.

Plus, it gives us all something to argue about!

Well that says quite a lot really. Video/Cinema shooters are not likely to want to handhold their cameras very often (I hope!) Typically you'll have a big tripod, support bars, follow focus, matte box etc.
Steve
That depends on the type of work you do. But photogs and event videographers use hand held all the time. Goes the same for documentary work- example The Deadliest Catch, where majority of shots are on the run and from hand held position.
This is a trailer for my documentary- almost no tripod shots. YouTube - Climbing Porn (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWxiMM-z9i4)
A lot of us actually do care about ergonomics.