Comments on: Why is the RED SCARLET Four Times the Cost of a Canon 5D Mark III?

By: Barri Hitchin

Barri Hitchin — Mon, 08 Apr 2013 15:22:22 +0000

i’m NOT impressed with either,

By: A Little Bit Of Everything | CanonWatch CanonWatch

A Little Bit Of Everything | CanonWatch CanonWatch — Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:30:27 +0000

[...] Why is the RED SCARLET Four Times the Cost of a Canon EOS 5D Mark III (specs&price)? –> read it here [...]

By: Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista)

Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista) — Wed, 13 Feb 2013 02:19:06 +0000

Why is a Resolution test being done with L ZOOMS? Would love to see one done with Leica R or at least Zeiss prime glass.

By: Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista)

Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista) — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:53:02 +0000

Really? Doesn’t seem that soft to me https://vimeo.com/49263653

By: Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista)

Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista) — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:49:07 +0000

I think if it happens a lot of RED owners are gonna be a little…well, I’ll leave it at that.

By: Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista)

Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista) — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:43:37 +0000

Even though I love to do some pretty heavy color grading myself, the question is not stupid. Some people really do not have the inclination or time to grade extensively. It is a creative choice, not a requirement.

By: Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista)

Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista) — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:41:09 +0000

Applies to HDSLRs too.

By: Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista)

Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista) — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:39:01 +0000

I think the answer to that question (WTF is the ongoing obsession people have with Canon cameras for video?) is that it opened a lot of doors to a lot of people. Red is niche. Anybody can buy and use a 5D. In the right hands, it can be stunning (thinking about Act of Valor more than any other example). It OBVIOUSLY is not even in the same league as a RED. Can the audience apart of the pixel peepers tell the difference? If they do, do they care?

By: Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista)

Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista) — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:35:25 +0000

No Red digital cinema camera can give you the flexibility and freedom during a shoot as a HDSLR.

By: Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista)

Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista) — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:33:44 +0000

Not 3 grand in practice (you need to accessorize it), and it isn’t even really available almost a year after launch.

By: Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista)

Ruben Fernandez (@DSLRista) — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:28:17 +0000

I totally agree with Heiko. If the story is a good story, for example, Like Crazy, Act of Valor (ok not the best example but still…), Newlyweds, then this pixel peep is a non issue. Too many people are concerned that they aren’t getting enough quality out of their DSLRs and HAVE to shoot on RED because of it and are not paying enough attention either writing good scripts for films or good concepts for videos/commercials. Who really cares if you shoot on RED and your image is razor sharp if your writing (and for that matter, your sound, your production design, and your editing) are crap?

By: Heiko

Heiko — Sun, 10 Feb 2013 23:54:10 +0000

In my opinion, you don’t always need the sharpest and most detailed picture. First of all no film is shown in a 1:1 comparison with a second camera, and second filmmakers very often soften their shots for different purposes through filters or by using older lenses and whatnot.

Of course a Red or Alexa is the better tool than a DSLR, but the DSLR is really cheap in comparison and you can still make nice looking movies with it. Only ten years ago it was almost impossible for a small filmmaker to achieve a professional look, but today we expect the 2K DSLR to be 100% on par with a professional 50K film camera? That is crazy!
It is amazing how close the DSLRs come for such a low price, let’s be happy about that!

I mean I have a 7D for shooting stills (which I do as a hobby) but I can use the same camera to shoot professional video and even make some money from it. How cool is that?
Of course it is not the same as a Red or an Alexa, but it doesn’t have to be, it is just an add-on to my photo camera!

By: Trevor

Trevor — Sun, 10 Feb 2013 15:22:56 +0000

All above comments are interesting and it is apparent that most of you know more of the technical stuff than I do. However, surely the the one simple fact that affects most independent filmmakers, at least at my level, is the cost! I have to try to put out the best imagery I possibly can with the dollars I can afford for equipment….period. I would not go after business or projects that obviously require a level of quality that is unachievable with my facilities. I am not planning on doing a feature film for the silver screen, or competing in other arenas where 4K or 8K would blow my stuff out of the water. This comparison is like taking a Ferrari and a Volkswagen onto a track and asking “Is the money for the Ferrari worth the speed difference?” I will continue to make my short films and web business videos with the equipment and savvy I have and salivate at times about the cameras I wish I could afford but much more meaningful would be true comparisons of equipment withing reasonable price ranges, Just saying :-)

By: Chris Simmons

Chris Simmons — Sat, 09 Feb 2013 17:02:59 +0000

It’s like comparing 16mm reversal with 35mm Negative.

By: zeeshan tahir

zeeshan tahir — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 09:27:23 +0000

I wouldn’t blame the people who are hobbyists & not from Audio visual industry, comparing these machines you need to carefully understand the purpose of these machines, people who do short films and stuff for the web are DSLR Fans with HD video, low aperture photo lenses and elements like ambient light get them to swear & argue upon these kind of things.

its not just RED or alexa or panavision its the after purpose of the content you shoot on them.

By: Huseyin K.

Huseyin K. — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 08:14:29 +0000

As far as I am concerned, 5D is good enough for most projects. I don’t see a big huge difference. If you want to shoot National Geographic stuff, than RED is better. But if you are shooting people subjects, 5D is good enough. The most important thing is the content. No matter what camera we use, if we are not good in directing, using bad actors, bad sound and light systems, less than professional people to work with, that movi can be shot with a million Dollar camera, it will not mean s..t. That is my 2 cents worth…

Cheers.

Huseyin

By: Jeffrey

Jeffrey — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 03:19:06 +0000

Amen to that. 5.1. It’s all in the way that you use it. I think the footage in your video is what I’m used to with my 5d2. I would like to get the 3, but frankly don’t feel a need for it.

By: Augusto Alves da SIlva

Augusto Alves da SIlva — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 01:19:55 +0000

You can check on IMDB how many movies have been shot on Canon…it is quite surprising….not to mention cmmercials.

By: Augusto Alves da SIlva

Augusto Alves da SIlva — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 01:17:20 +0000

There you go…It is a tool…some like heavy grading and many tweak their cameras on set…Of course you can shoot as is and then post process your RAW files in post…It´s your choice.

By: Augusto Alves da SIlva

Augusto Alves da SIlva — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 01:12:00 +0000

I agree. I shoot for HD TV and movie theaters and didn´t hae the need to shoot 4K yet. Files too big and side-by-side comparisons didn´t impress me too much. Once Canon releases the uncompressed output firmware we will have much more information on the files. I am not saying RED is not better but surely can say it is different. I am not getting into 50k cameras at this stage. Soon we will have the same quality from 1K ones. This is certain.