QuickHitRecord

I'm offsetting my timetable by a month. I allowed myself to take advantage of Cyber deals through the end of November. If all goes according to plan, I'll be able to hold off on purchases until Cyber Week 2024 -- I wouldn't deny myself that opportunity!

For me, it's a kitchen remodel and some new clothes. Your reasons are much less selfish. I'm two weeks in and still holding strong! Lol.

I have so much (including cameras and lenses I've never actually even shot anything with) and yet how many narrative short films have I worked on in the past year? ONE. Something has to change!

I have been spending too much money on equipment in recent years, and WAY too much time researching it. I really don't need anything else in terms of kit. What I do need is to replace my wardrobe and make some repairs to my home and my vehicle. Also, I'd like to spend more time producing passion projects. So, I'm making a commitment that I will not buy any new gear between November 30th, 2023 and November 29th, 2024 (got to give myself the option to take advantage of Black Friday deals). If I need a specialty piece of gear, I will rent it. The exceptions are expendables and direct replacements, should anything I'm using break down. I've never done this before and I'm posting this to help keep myself accountable.

You're right, there's no money to be made. At least not in 2023. I don't even bother mentioning to my existing clients that I have two older Red bodies. If I do, it's basically to sell them on my C70s. And honestly, if hired me to use them without a crew, it would be a pain and more stressful to me without the conveniences of modern features. Also, I don't want to be hired for a passion project based on my camera. So I don't bring it up when networking with people in the local indie scene, unless they specifically ask. All of this being said, I enjoy owning the camera that produces footage that just looks right to me. And it will be ready to go when I finally helm another of my own passion projects.

There is an proprietary triangular mounting point on the back of the DSMC1 brain that requires a Wooden Camera Quick Back to act as an intermediary between the brain and the actual v-mount plate which usually has to be purchased separately -- between the two components, this could easily end up in the $400+ range. Of course, it's always an option to mount with rods instead, if you can find a 4-pin lemo v-mount plate instead of a 2-pin. But the WC option is tidier. I've read that there is a component within the Epic is that often fails and since Red won't service them anymore, it could turn your camera into a paperweight. The design was improved in the Scarlet-X, which was released after the Epic. DSMC2 bodies are supposed to be built even better, but they are also quite a bit more $$$. Ryan Walter of Indie Film Academy did a great three-part comparison between the MX and Dragon sensors. It's still on Vimeo. The Dragon has several advantages, but low-light noise performance was not one of them (unless paired with the low light OLPF, which negates the boost in the highlights). The Dragon originally shipped with the new skintone/highlight OLPF and was not designed to have interchangeable OLPFs, but there were a lot of complaints about the noise performance so they started shipping the other two OLPFs alongside a kit for user replacement. I was actually shocked by the weight of the Scarlet-X. It is 6lb lighter than my R1MX setup but it doesn't really register when I pick them up; I just know that I'm holding a heavy camera. The biggest improvement that I can see if the shape of the body. In my opinion, the only reasonable place to mount the battery on the R1MX without creating an extremely top-heavy camera is at the rear behind the LCD, and that makes for a very long camera. The Scarlet is much shorter: The R1MX sensor appears to be a different shape than the Scarlet-X's MX sensor. So while they're both "Mysterium X", I think that they must be a little different. I also think that the OLPF of the R1MX probably plays a role in the differences in image.

Is the Epic image actually different? Lower compression ratios and a wider field of view but it's the same 5K MX sensor, right? I've often heard about the magenta shadows the Epic-X but in my comparisons, the Scarlet-X has more neutral shadows than the magenta-leaning R1MX.

I just bought a Scarlet-X that I am looking forward to working with. So that's my answer to the question posed in this thread. I already had lenses, batteries, and a monitor, so I purchased: Scarlet-X brain with mini mag side module with dual fan replacement 2.0 (important!) 2x 480GB mini mags Side grip Red Pro top cheese plate Red aluminum EF mount V-mount battery solution (pretty difficult to find at a workable price!) Nitze top handle and monitor mount All in all, it set me back just under $3K. I did a lot of research on the other legacy Red cameras before making this purchase. The Epic-X brains seem prone to failure. The Dragon-upgraded Epics and Scarlets have three OLPFs to choose from: Low Light (which is basically the same as the OLPF in front of the MX sensors and offers clean shadows but more limited highlights), Skintone/Highlight (nice highlight capture but noisy shadows above ISO 200), and the "Standard" OLPF which seems to fall somewhere in between the two extremes. Ultimately, I decided that clean shadows were more important to me than extra highlight range so I opted for the older MX sensor/OLPF. Regarding crop, the more budget-friendly Scarlet-Xs are in the same boat as the Raven. The max resolution (disregarding the 12fps at 5K) on the Scarlet-X has a 1.14x crop when compared to 3perf Super35 film while he Raven has a 1.12x crop but is limited to a wider aspect ratio at that resolution. So they are pretty close in this regard. One thing to consider is that the Raven requires the ~$1K IO module if you want to plug a non-Red monitor into it, while the Scarlet comes with both SDI and HDMI ports standard. This pushed me over the edge and I decided to go with the older camera. I did some side by side shots of the Scarlet-X with my Red One MX and have to say that I slightly prefer the image from the older camera (which is softer, cooler, and less contrasty). My original plan was to sell the R1MX, but now I'm having second thoughts.

I figured I would just go down the list of the local directories and check out people's websites, and then reach out on LinkedIn. I already have the coveted "500+ connections" status and I hear that it makes you harder to ignore. That's a Red One MX and a Red Scarlet-X. I picked up the R1MX at the start of the pandemic at a really low price. I think I feel the same way about it as people who own classic muscle cars -- I don't use it often, but I love it. When two of my four cheapo v-mount batteries died, I realized that it might actually be more economical to exchange it for a camera that didn't have the same power requirements as the R1MX (80w) rather than shelling out for a whole new set of v-mounts. The Scarlet can be had for about the same price these days, and it only draws 60w. It also has a 12sec boot time (vs 90sec for the Red One), a lot more customizable buttons, lower compression ratios, and the ability to use a locking lens mount (I love these). I bought it with the idea that it would replace my R1MX. But when I shot them side by side, I found that I liked the R1MX image more. So now I am going to see if I can get the Scarlet to look like the Red One, and maybe create some kind of LUT.

Great thread idea. Maybe we can all hold each other accountable as we strive towards our goals. I'm a career DP/videographer. I'm 14 years in at this point. In 2024, I want to: Finish updating my reel (always a struggle) Finally put profiles up on Mandy, StaffMeUp, and IMDB Reach out to a different producer every other week Write and direct at least one short scripted narrative Not spend any money on camera gear (unless something breaks and needs to be fixed) And shoot a couple of projects with each of these two old MX bodies, so that I can decide which to keep and which to send back out into the world

Thanks. That worked. Funny how not all BRAW files are measured equal.

This is a great resource. Thanks for sharing. However, my version of Resolve 18.5 Studio cannot see the BRAW files. I click on the folder in Media Storage, but it appears empty in the browser. Has anyone else been able to get it to work? Or are these files just too new for the latest version of Resolve?

Initially, I was disappointed that it wasn't a box cam. But watching some of the demo footage, this might be their first sensor ever that I really like the look of. I just bought an old Red Scarlet-X and that is going to keep me busy for (hopefully) a few more years. But I am looking forward to seeing more footage from this camera. The included OLPF is a big deal and can have a major effect on the look of footage in either a good or bad way. I'm thinking that it might be a good way here.

My guess is a new modular Pocket-style box camera with built-in NDs like the 6K Pro.

How about renting a Canon C70? If the sun is out, shooting in a forest can require a lot of dynamic range, and the C70 will deliver on that end. Also, it has long battery life and with a relatively small file sizes. Since you are working alone, the built-in NDs and dual pixel autofocus will make your life a lot easier and your "keeper" rate will be higher. Of course, the C200 covers these bases too, but is either a bit soft (H264) or will require denoising (raw) in post. I made a living with two C100s for five years, including several shoots in the forest. I loved that camera, but it didn't have the dynamic range necessary to capture pools of light as well as shadow detail in the woods. Of course, it's possible to work around it: Otherwise, you might look at the FX30 or S5ii/x -- but I haven't used either of these cameras.

I ended up ordering a Leofoto BV-30M, which has the distinction of being one of the few flat-base fluid heads with an continuously adjustable counterbalance. The caveat is that there aren't many reviews (I only found one) so I'm going to be a guinea pig on this one. It looks like they have a good return policy and a 10-year warranty, so I'll see if it works for me.

Do they even exist? I think it would be great to have one for the versatility. And to be clear, I'm not talking about the giant studio heads with weight capacities of 33lb+, or Mitchell heads. My camera payload is around 10lb and I don't see that number going up. Also, before anyone suggests them, I don't consider Manfrotto or Benro to be smooth enough. The only totally flat base head I've found from a top-tier company is the new Miller ArtX line. These are basically an à la carte version of the CX heads and by default they are flat base. I could configure the lowest entry of that line, the ArtX3 with a 17.6lb capacity, with a 501PL plate receiver and a pan bar. I think that this would work for my ~10lb payload. The only problem is that it's around $1500 to get a base model configured the way I'd want it, and they do sit a little high for my liking. There are some well-regarded bowl heads that can be flat-mounted using the flat space at the bottom of the bowl: Miller DS, Compass, CX, and Air heads Sachtler Ace L and XL Libec HS, TH, NX, RS, and any of the older heads that end with a 'D'. But with these, you're basically stacking two 75mm bowls on top of each other and again, it just seems unnecessarily tall. Then there are the emerging companies: Sirui Leofoto iFootage SmallRig E-Image I have never used any of these, so I'm wondering if anyone else here has and can comment. Are there any standouts? I'd ideally like a head that can give me smooth pans, tilts, and (importantly) diagonals with little to no backlash. Counterbalance is not important to me for this head which is just as well because most of these do not have one.

Much appreciated, Kye. I had fun with this. I do my share of corporate talking heads but THIS is what I like to do. I even added a line to my website about offering a special rate for conservation and climate-related projects.

One of my favorite projects from 2022 (I just wish they used a better thumbnail):

That's exactly what I needed to know. Thank you.

I have a question for @Matt Kieley (or any other owner) about the Angenieux 8-64mm mentioned earlier in this thread. Does the filter thread on this lens rotate when focusing? Also, I see the filter thread is 46.5mm, which is a very uncommon. Pro8mm sells an adapter to 58mm but it's $50. Have you had any luck with, say, a 46mm step up ring?

Sounds like a fun project. I'd buy a cheap red tablecloth, hang it from the wall, and steam out the creases.

Great idea. I'm psyched about this latest EOS-M build but I need a little push to get moving with this camera. I think the simpler the prompt, the better. I propose calling it something like the 'No More Camera Tests Magic Lantern Challenge', make the criteria that all entries be scripted, and leave the rest open to interpretation. And then we all share at the same time, perhaps at the end of May?

I haven't tested it extensively, but I do get a fullscreen view on my little monitor when in 2.8K (that and 2.5K are really the only modes that I care about) whereas before the image was tiny and jammed up into the corner, or low res and stuttery. I was able to record for 90 seconds before I stopped recording. The buffer indicator went into yellow a couple of times, but never red. And the footage looked really nice. I didn't see any pink frames or anything. Bilal is releasing new versions of this new build every other day or so, trying to meet the community's requests. It's progressing a lot faster now than when it was a couple of unpaid devs putting in a little time in here and there.

I own two C70s, a Red One MX, and even a 5D iii that also runs ML with more stability and at higher resolutions. I keep asking myself why I even care about this cheap little camera that I have never shot an actual project with, and why I haven't sold it yet. On the surface, it's because I think that once the ML firmware gets straightened out, the EOS-M has the potential to be one of the few raw-capturing cameras that can work with 16mm lenses. But it's dawned on me that it's not so much the camera as it is the community collaboration around this camera. The "movement" (mostly happening in the FB group) is reminiscent of the early days of DSLR and mirrorless video, when people were all trying to squeeze every inch of quality out of these cameras that were never intended for cinematography. Nowadays, every camera has great IQ and a pleothera of custom-fitted accessories and perfected workflows. But 10-15 years ago, there were no dedicated cages or practical battery solutions and the cameras were full of quirks. You had to lean on the community for workarounds if you wanted to have a chance of creating anything worthwhile with these difficult cameras. Despite all of the hurdles, some people were able to do it and it always felt like a team victory. I think what's going on with the EOS-M reflects the evolving hacks for the GH1 and GH2 in lot of ways. There is no dedicated cage for this camera either. Plug it into a battery and you have to find a place to hide the unruly adapter cable. Moire and aliasing abound in the lower resolutions. Rolling shutter is horrendous in the higher ones. The ergonomics make the GH cameras look like a dream. And it just doesn't make sense to throw a lot of money at a defunct $150 camera, which really ups the ante for DIY solutions. People share their rigging experiments freely (with lots of 3D printed parts), as well as their footage since the software is constantly being tweaked and improved. That group is experimenting, tinkering, and collaborating like it's 2011. It's the fun side of camera geekery all over again.