Well.. the 5D is still superior in terms of still photography - and that's what these cameras are primarily meant for.

I don't know if Canon is releasing a video-type device at the end of the month. It would be great if they did, but we just have to wait and see. All the hype about Apple's tablet forever and media events have come and gone and nothing. Canon is definitely working on it (XLHD or whatever) cause they would be stupid not to.

For me, getting the 7D for my shooting needs now will work and I won't gripe about a video cam if that's what Canon does in fact release. I can replace my 40D and shoot some great-looking videos in the meantime. You know this video camera, when it comes out, will have to be in the $3k-4k range (as a Scarlet match), and then another in the $8k range with pro io (replacing their own line and matching Sony). So $1700 now for a hybrid isn't much right now.

Oh, I don't expect the Scarlet anytime soon. Jim keeps dropping hints that this Epic will be released before anything, and then that's the package for the Red 1 people anyways. That's just what I gather from keeping on top of all the news for years.

Well, here's the thing - first it was 'look at all the 5D's weaknesses, it's not a pro camera, it won't even come close to Scarlet'. Then we got the firmware update and it came a step closer - but still had enough flaws that it couldn't really compare to Scarlet. Now we've got the 7D and it's another step closer - but of course its still got several flaws that mean it can't compete with Scarlet. Next we'll probably get the 1DmkIV which will close the gap a little more, but of course it won't be perfect so it won't be able to compete with Scarlet. Maybe we'll get a video specific camera based on one of these sensors soon, or we might even see the rumored RAW module from Canon for all these cameras, each of which will get us a little closer to Scarlet.

Of course, Scarlet does have that one flaw which seems to be overlooked so often in these comparison discussions - it doesn't exist. And the way things are going, by the time it does Canon will have iterated their large sensor video cameras to the point that much of Scarlet's advantage will have been eliminated, and no one will even care how it compares to the 5D or 7D because they'll be 2 or 3 generations old by then.

In results the 5d and 7d are better than the scarlet
 

Sure the scarlet may have awesome controls, but when it boils down to price and quality the 5d and 7d probably will be better. One, the 5d and 7d will have alot shallower dof than the scarlet. Two, they'll be much cheaper, three the 5d and 7d will have alot better low light cause of their larger sensors plus because the scarlet is shooting 4k using a much smaller 2/3' sensor that will lower its sensitivity. The one thing that might make the scarlet alot better is its codec.

That one thing is a big thing, though.

Keep in mind that the Scarlet, on paper, could be 2/3" all the way up full-frame 35mm, depending on the brain you choose, so in fact it could have the same size sensor as the 7D or 5D.

Unless you get the Scarlet FF35 ($10k), you will be getting a smaller sensor than the 5D (or even the 7D if talking about either of the 2/3" options). In fact, Red can't touch Canon at the 7D's price point. At the time, $4k sounded great for a kit with a Scarlet fixed lens. But it's only 2/3"? Maybe the codec is the key, but do people in that range need to key or do tricky compositing?

I don't know that H.264 will kill me right now as I'm mainly concerned with the footage. If I need to do any keying, then I'll see how the 7D stands up (has anyone keyed 7D footage?), but will probably rent a better camera for the job.

Keep in mind that the Scarlet can be anything you want it to be, on paper; The 5D and 7D are unfortunately limited by the constraints of reality.

It's not just for keying or tricky compositing - having raw data to work with is actually a big deal even just for normal color correction. But, again, actually having any file to work with right now is better than having a theoretically perfect file to work with at some indeterminate time in the future.

[QUOTE=Evan Donn;1379082
It's not just for keying or tricky compositing - having raw data to work with is actually a big deal even just for normal color correction. But, again, actually having any file to work with right now is better than having a theoretically perfect file to work with at some indeterminate time in the future.[/QUOTE]

Yep, couldn't agree more. H264 is a terrible codec for acquisition and I'm looking forward to shooting RAW, just like my stills. That's not to say I won't continue to shoot a few things on the hybrid DSLRs in meantime.

If you're worried about keying, a sensor size with a larger depth of field would make more sense. A number of high end productions have selected 2/3" cameras for this reason. The last two Star Wars films used 2/3" cameras. The Scarlet has other advantages like high frame rates and using a codec which is now beginning to getting established with the work flows being ironed out.

Did they say they were going to announce something this month? Where did you get this info? I really hope what you say is true because that's the camera I want.

These DSLR camera's are nice when you don't have to shoot audio and can live with the 8 minute clip limit. For documentary work they are not suited.

Canon's problem is software. The further they get from precisely spec'd firmware functions, the worse they get. I'm sure Canon can do a high end compressed raw and dump it out of the camera. But then what?

As far as 2/3 Scarlet, noise performance will be an issue. I think in one year, if scarlet can be purchased with a one month wait red will be doing well. But I also expect the Japaneses companies won't get why people want more than 1080p, so they will fail to exploit Reds lack of manufacturing muscle.

Somebody said above that H.264 is a "terrible codec." Why is that? Has anybody tried keying with it? I know people said the same thing about HDV when it first came out, but I've never had any trouble keying it, as long as the lighting is done right. What specifically about H.264 is bad?

Until the camera comes out I don't think anyone is in position to say if noise will be an issue. The RED One has noise issues under certain circumstances, but until the new sensor being used in the 2/3" Scarlet has been tested in the field no one outside RED can say how noisy it actually is in practise.

The market for anything larger than 1080p is small, so why would a mass market manufacturer invest any money into a specialised product?

"the release dates for EPIC and Scarlet will be announced in October -- which doesn't leave much time for a 2009 debut for the cameras themselves."

from Red And Scarlet -- Engadget

For professional use, H264 is a great delivery format, but if you're talking about H264 as an acquisition format, "terrible" is a pretty accurate description. Canon captures with only 8bit color with 4:2:0 sub-sampling, and a very low bit rate. So the color space sucks. Plus, the compression introduces a lot of artifacts like aliasing, false detail, and banding.

Many of these are less noticeable in low DOF shooting, but when everything is sharp, the poor quality is more apparent.

Check out the full res video test, looks like a cheap camcorder:
Canon EOS 7D Hands-on Preview: 14. Samples: Digital Photography Review

Hopefully they will move to a better codec soon.