View Full Version : RED Scarlet


Xylofonic
11-18-2008, 07:02 AM
Does anybody know what the Scarlet accesories cost? The body seems cheap but to get a practical camera seems a different story. Also does the 35mmFF autofocus lenses work with the 35S body?

THX

knightly
11-18-2008, 06:24 PM
Still up in the air until details are hashed out. The point and shoot version is still being nailed down. Being as they've completely retooled the scarlet/epic thing, I can't wait til it's all sorted out.

Will Vincent
11-18-2008, 06:28 PM
Whatever the price on the "accessories" (in quotes because most are required bits) ...

The ProdCo I'm working with is budgeting for one, if not two.. :D

knightly
11-18-2008, 08:06 PM
I'm looking at it pretty excitedly as well.

knightly
11-18-2008, 08:10 PM
Just read a thread on another board that Mr. Jannard stated personally that the fixed lens, point and shoot model will be somewhere under $4k for the point and shoot (?) one... 2/3" (rather than the old 16mm one) chip and 8x zoom.

Filmmaker516
11-18-2008, 09:28 PM
I am guessing everything is going to cost alot. I'll stick with buying my HV-30, but probably as soon as I buy it HV-40 will come out and I'll be pissed.

lol

Will Vincent
11-18-2008, 11:50 PM
No reason to be pissed.. the HV30 is a nice camera, and even if something new comes out that won't change.. I've got the HV20 and I'm not feeling slighted in the least that I bought it a few scant months before the HV30 came out. ;)

Xylofonic
11-19-2008, 07:46 AM
What I got to know is that the specs etc. are now fixed (more or less), they just put it on their site two days ago. There is no fixed lense model anymore, they now have AF lenses for their 35mm full format version. I love this camera although the REDone might be cheaper second hand "fully" equiped.

knightly
11-19-2008, 09:42 AM
There is a fixed lens model, they just haven't determined the price yet... but JJ said it'd be under $4k

Xylofonic
11-19-2008, 10:38 AM
There is a fixed lens model, they just haven't determined the price yet... but JJ said it'd be under $4k

What is the thinking behind such a fixed lens model? This way or the other you need all kinds of accesories to have a operating camera. The RED will never be a competitor for TV style cameras.

knightly
11-19-2008, 05:04 PM
It's not finished being hashed out, I'm imagining it'll still fulfill the promise of the original Scarlet by coming with the bits you need to make it go in a package for people who are looking for a better point and shoot than their Sony PMW-EX1's or their Canon XHA1's (both of which are fixed lens models)... I'm sure more than one of them will be outfitted behind a 35mm adaptor that someone already owns. They advertise 11 stops of lattitude as well (DV is something like 7 stops - so this is a nice improvement), so richer, smoother, more film-like gradients from light to dark.

Will Vincent
11-19-2008, 05:44 PM
If anybody hasn't looked yet.. there's a nice size comparison chart of the different sensor sizes between all the RED cameras..

the scarlet line will have cameras with the 2/3", S35, and FF35 sensors (the second two being larger than the sensor in the RED One)

The 617 is just oh my god huge.

http://red.cachefly.net/13/page12.jpg

Xylofonic
11-19-2008, 05:48 PM
It's not finished being hashed out, I'm imagining it'll still fulfill the promise of the original Scarlet by coming with the bits you need to make it go in a package for people who are looking for a better point and shoot than their Sony PMW-EX1's or their Canon XHA1's (both of which are fixed lens models)... I'm sure more than one of them will be outfitted behind a 35mm adaptor that someone already owns. They advertise 11 stops of lattitude as well (DV is something like 7 stops - so this is a nice improvement), so richer, smoother, more film-like gradients from light to dark.

As I know (but I shurly dont know everything) you have to buy your adaptor for the format of your cam. So who uses a 2/3inch (smallest version of the scarlet) cam with a 35mm adaptor today? The usual 1/3 - 35mm adaptors are worthless in this case. Also there are adaptores that directly fit onto your xl1 without the standard lens. I would say that if you want to shot 35 with any RED you go for a 35mm version.

knightly
11-19-2008, 11:21 PM
nope... depends on the type of adaptor you have... but most of the adaptors that thread on to a 72mm thread (all of the canons and panavisions have 72mm threads). They project the image form the 35mm lens onto a spinning or vibrating ground glass surface which resolves the image like a little movie screen getting the lens characteristics of the 35mm DoF and object relationships.

This image is then shot flat by what ever camera is behind it... either a DSLR, a big 2/3" 3-chip, a little 1/3" 3-chip or my little 1/6" handy cam type of thing. The image will be resolved physically the same (color and lattitude will be representative of the camera, but the rest is done by the lens and the ground glass :) ).

The only reason they make adaptors for specific cameras is if bits of the camera get in the way... and to work with the attachment of the specific camera. Most of the prosumers attach the same way... with a 72mm filter thread, or directly to the body in the case of the canon XL series... I digress, I had to research all this stuff when I built my adaptors. I find it really neat, but I'm a physics geek too :)

Xylofonic
11-20-2008, 07:00 AM
nope... depends on the type of adaptor you have... but most of the adaptors that thread on to a 72mm thread (all of the canons and panavisions have 72mm threads). They project the image form the 35mm lens onto a spinning or vibrating ground glass surface which resolves the image like a little movie screen getting the lens characteristics of the 35mm DoF and object relationships.

This image is then shot flat by what ever camera is behind it... either a DSLR, a big 2/3" 3-chip, a little 1/3" 3-chip or my little 1/6" handy cam type of thing. The image will be resolved physically the same (color and lattitude will be representative of the camera, but the rest is done by the lens and the ground glass :) ).

The only reason they make adaptors for specific cameras is if bits of the camera get in the way... and to work with the attachment of the specific camera. Most of the prosumers attach the same way... with a 72mm filter thread, or directly to the body in the case of the canon XL series... I digress, I had to research all this stuff when I built my adaptors. I find it really neat, but I'm a physics geek too :)

THX

knightly
11-20-2008, 09:19 PM
Sharing information is what I like to do :) I figured you (a general you, not specifically you) shouldn't necessarily have to redo the research I've done all over again. I'm a geek, I like to do the research, I figure not everyone likes it nearly as much as me.

I can get into the physics of it as well if you'd like ;)

Xylofonic
11-21-2008, 10:17 AM
Sharing information is what I like to do :) I figured you (a general you, not specifically you) shouldn't necessarily have to redo the research I've done all over again. I'm a geek, I like to do the research, I figure not everyone likes it nearly as much as me.

I can get into the physics of it as well if you'd like ;)

Yes thats nice. You might can answer my first question, will the 35ff lenses be compatible to the s35 scarlet? Adaptable they should be at least.

knightly
11-21-2008, 07:55 PM
it looks to me that RED is working on making the whole thing modular... the 35FF just means "Full Frame 35mm" where the S35 is "Super 35mm" so it's probably just a different module... at those resolutions, you can shoot full frame and crop without worrying about rez loss :) The S35 is a wider format.

Will Vincent
11-21-2008, 08:22 PM
If you look at the dimensions of the different chips, the FF35 is actually larger in both directions than the S35, so shooting full frame and cropping later is definitely a possibility because you've got enough additional width on the full frame chip to compensate for any resolution loss that would be there anyway.. not that anybody is going to notice at 3k or higher anyway. :P

A lot of films that are released on DVD in both wide and full screen in the past oh, 10ish years or so were shot full frame and cropped to the wider aspect for theater projection.

The example that sticks in my head is Air Force One.. If you look at the full frame image next to the wide screen image, you see all the same parts of the image, just more on the top & bottom in the full screen version. Obviously it's a better way to work than pan & scan, since that would mean you'll always loose a portion of the shot in full screen..

knightly
11-21-2008, 08:49 PM
and although it was rendered, "Finding Nemo" was framed for both full and widescreen distro according to the BTS features on the DVD by making the Full screen version, then cropping for the widescreen so as not to have to re-render all the scenes... they just considered during shot composition that they would need both to work.

Xylofonic
11-23-2008, 08:37 AM
Thanks for the answers, but still does the full frame lenses fit on the super35 body and will they work, or will the bigger image of the lens spill indirect light onto the sensor so it records strange pictures. Its all just about the AF of the 35ff lenses. As with the AF the scarlet also would work for documentary or TV style projecets. Besides the AF there is no need for the more expensive full frame model in our case. Croping the 35s image to 16:9 HD shurly will work.

Will Vincent
11-23-2008, 09:08 AM
I would say yes, but you'll probably get the best, most definitive answer from someone who actually works for RED.