Robert Torrance

What I don't get is why they couldn't call it 2K camera for $17500 and be happy, and be able to avoid all this criticism.

As it happens having seen and played with quite a lot of Red footage now, it seems to me that the choice is between clippy or noisy (especially in the blue) and it really doesn't make terribly nice pictures, but that is, amazingly, not the point at issue!

P

Because if you put a 4K R3D file in a 2K timeline (2048x1080) it doesn't fit. Most HD cameras resolve differently, yet they are called HD cameras and fit in a HD timeline. I actually really like the picture of the RED camera (the F35, D21 as well). Sorry you don't . Oh well.

bob

Since it's fresh in my mind I thought I'd list a few interesting things that stuck out to me while browsing the NAB show.

 

An engineer who was working with the F35 was obviously a little frustrated when someone asked him about those red 4K claims. He said by their standards the new F35 is a 6K camera but that they are not going to call it that. He also made comments about their noise (db) claims that were very misleading and how overall the 4K claim is simply "a lie" and is "barely even 2k".

 

Which leads me to the F35, the 35mm sensor version of the F23. This was by far the best looking footage I saw from any of the digital cameras and while still video looking, it sure was the best video of all.

Vincent, was this engineer an independent or working for Sony? I agree that the F35 looked great but still kind of video like in areas. I don't want video. I thought the RED images had a nicer texture. All this 2K or 4K stuff is silly. The F35 has an HD output that makes it 1920 x 1080. The RED output is 4K (open a file in AE and look). What it looks like on screen is what matters. They both looked very good. Soon the market will tell us what is going to happen. I think you will see both working all the time.

bob

I can never understand why you care.

Maybe Jim doesn't like being called a liar over and over. When I opened a RED file in after effects it was a 4K file. What matters is what that file looks like when on TV or projected in a film theater. I don't know why, but I (me, just me) found the RED footage texture to be nicer than that of the f35 (at NAB). But we are splitting hairs. It's evolving all of the time. I think the more interesting part of the whole RED thing is the RAW workflow (and I've got it working fine).

bob

Did anyone see this? April 17. Looked digital.

Hi Bob,

 

Guess you don't get the importance of quality cables.

 

The best DP's in the world have also used Sony F900 cameras, Sony went on to build better cameras based on what they were told.

 

Red's new PL mount is a vast improvement over the original, had they got no negative feedback then I am sure the new one would not have happened.

 

Stephen

Huh? Stephen, the cable comment was my attempt at humor (not very funny, I guess). I have all kind of quality cables around, if that helps. Sure Sony went on to build better cameras based on what they were told (I would argue that their motivation was the competition in the market) but you have to buy a new camera to get the improvements. Reds PL mount fix was free and would have happened anyway because Jim likes cameras (he has lots of them) and wants to sell them. Lets be careful about making blanket statements about what a company policy would be, ie "I am sure the new one would not have happened".

Bob

Jim,

 

Looks like the cable is well made!

 

Stephen

That cable is a new 4k digital cable that will replace a film cable. This thread is funny. You've got the best DPs in the business already testing and using the camera and still people go on and on and......... Give someone a chance to finish a film and then go see it - then make your comments. So there are a lot of fanboys - big deal. It's a new type of camera and it's a clever idea that seems to work pretty well.

Bob Torrance

Josh,

I would be interested in your take with the RED camera in tungsten lighting. Especially in low light night interiors.

Thanks in advance.

Bob Torrance

Did you not read the very first line:

 

"I am not sure which is the best folder to put this in, as it covers quite a few issues, including RED. It's interesting wherever it belongs."

"Including Red" not only Red. Just thought Genesis thread would make sense or how about 2k vs 4k sensors. Sony has also stated that they are making a 4k camera. Maybe Sony vs Sony.

bob

"Also, what kind of dynamic range does a Nikon D3 have?"

 

"Apples and oranges when trying to compare still cameras to motion picture cameras. One is designed to take a great still and the other take a great still while still weaving it into a series of frames that maintain temporal integrity."

 

This was a serious question. Jeeeze, I'll look it up. I was thinking about Gaults' comments about giving up dynamic range and speed to go to 4K. I will soon be testing 35mm (motion) against Red and D3 (still) output to quicktime with a DP friend. I've been around for a while (try NPR - camera not radio station). I go by what I see and like. I've seen some nice RED (output from .r3d files in Scratch and Color). I like the other cameras, too. Why is a Genesis thread in the Red forum?

 

Thanks

 

Bob

> The main reason we didn?t do that is the pixel would get so small we?d lose two stops of sensitivity

> and two stops of dynamic range

 

I'm sure there's a camera out at the moment which has very high resolution but really crappy dynamic range. Can't remember what it's called...

 

P

Phil, would mind posting your sources for this crappy dynamic range. And how many stops is "crappy". Being that this is the Red thread I assume you mean the Red camera. Also, what kind of dynamic range does a Nikon D3 have? This is really interesting.

Thanks

Bob Torrance