IronFilm

1 hour ago, kye said:

I was talking about if digital didn't exist, not just if digital cameras didn't exist....   

So you'd even be editing in an analog basis?? Cutting and gluing strips of film together?? 😮 

1 hour ago, kye said:

I mean, how on earth could you scan film but not be able to scan the world directly?

It is quite different. Digital scanners / workflow existed for some years before fully 100% digital filmmaking became mainstream. 

8 hours ago, Jedi Master said:

Just some clarification of my intentions: I plan to use this camera for nature documentaries, strictly on an amateur, hobbyist basis. I'm not a professional and concerns like what others in my area are using and what clients want is not a consideration at all. I'm an electrical engineer during the week and go out on weekends to national and state parks and the coast to film and I cut it all together into short (15-30 minute) documentaries with background music and narration along with lots of Ken Burns effect shots of still images that I share with friends and family.

Interesting.... "nature documentaries" is a bit vague, but I assume you don't need AF from your other comments. 

I strongly feel that something along the lines of a BMD Pocket 4K (or perhaps one of the ZCam E2 series), or the latest Blackmagic Design Cinema Camera 6K (with the Lecia L mount) or Panasonic S5mk2 (also L mount) would be the best pick for you. (or something closely similar to these options, perhaps the Sigma fp camera, or the Kinefinity MAVO)

This is the latest BMD that just came out:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1787634-REG/blackmagic_design_cinema_camera_6k.html

While even the likes of the little older P4K would still be an extremely good choice, as the Pocket 4K with a pair of DZOFilm zooms would be an ultra compact and very high quality setup, that you could easily take hiking far into the woods. 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1507681-REG/dzoptics_dzo_6226611_13_bundle_10_24mm_20_70mm_t2_9.html 

I wouldn't worry at all about the reliability of BMD, as you're not having a multi million dollar production riding on your shoulders. The concerns of professionals are not the same as yours. You can tolerate the odds of the 0.01% happening. 

Likewise I wouldn't worry about XQD cards existing or not, as the most popular of all popular cameras use them! XQD cards are not going away anywhere. 

4 hours ago, kye said:

Think about it - no more CGI / VFX!

They might not be too badly impacted as you'd think, other than the general massive downturn in volume of productions made. 

As once the film has been processed and entered the digital workflow to be edited, the CGI/VFX is done with Super35 film no differently than if it had been shot on an ARRI ALEXA instead. 

14 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

Man I could do it but it would be tough. I mean moreso than my ability, all my jobs would be gone as none of the productions I am on can afford to shoot motion picture film LOL. 

heh, I was just thinking "it wouldn't impact me" (as I am in the Sound Department), but true, just simply seeing the industry shrink by 90% (if digital was to disappear) would have a major impact upon me

16 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

Unfortunately or maybe fortunately depending how you look at it, the skill to get in now doesn't need to be as high anymore. Even many people at very lofty levels of the film industry are not as skilled as they used to be. 

DP's can utilize high resolution color accurate monitors to see what they are getting rather than light metering. Cameras are so sensitive now you don't need crazy light fixtures. A lot of big budget shows are now are using mostly small LED fixtures combined with natural lighting. There's certainly a level of skill still required especially on the biggest of productions but it's become less and less. 

Think about changing a 35mm film mag vs digital media. Same with getting good results shooting 35mm film for a wedding vs digital. Night and day 

Plus experimenting with lighting now is very easy to do, so as to find and refine the look you're seeking. 

No more dealing with hot tungsten lights and gels for them. 

@bjohn, you need to get a digital camera that looks like a film camera such as the Nikons Df and then she'll never be able to tell if you're being responsible shooting digital or being evil using film 😉

7 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

I am seeing Venice 6k kits with all the licenses and the RAW recorder for 20k now. I just saw one go for 17k, another for 13k(with no licenses). Pretty wild considering a few months ago they were around 30k + 

The strike? People being forced to sell, so that they can keep on paying their mortgage, least they have to sell their house instead 

19 hours ago, kye said:

Actually, here's my nomination for best-bang-for-buck camera nowadays - the Blackmagic Micro Studio Camera 4K G2 just announced by BM.

Here's why:

• It's tiny, and fits the entire ecosystem of the previous Micro models, including battery type (Canon LP-E6)
• It can record BRAW up to DCI 4K60 to USB-C....    so you don't need a big expensive external recorder, you can use any old HDMI monitor you like!
• BM specifies 13 stops of DR, the same as all their previous cinema cameras, and up from the 11 stops they quoted for the previous Micro Studio camera
• It has AF (it won't be fast, but the previous BMMCC didn't have AF, and the OG BMPCC one was quite useful)
• It's $995!

So, it's smaller and cheaper than the P4K

Yup! That's why I rated it as one my camera releases of note from 2023: 

8 hours ago, IronFilm said:

 ... at work asked around "hey have you heard about that new blockbuster scifi film shot on a mirrorless?" then I'd probably get a few bites

I didn't need to even wait until my next gig on Monday! I'm here at a Halloween Party 🎃

And totally unprompted, Captain America himself brought up "The Creator" and that it was shot on a Sony FX3: 

19 minutes ago, Kino said:

The FX6 is perfectly fine the way it is with the direct RAW output to the Atomos. The FX9 has the problem in that it requires the XDCA extension unit to do the same thing as the FX6. They need to allow for direct RAW out.

Yeah it's crazy the FS7 and FX9 needed the XDCA unit but the FS700 and FX6 did not??? 

Why do you think this is??

I am currently trying to sell my FS7, I hope I get a good price for it due to the fact I've selling it with the rather expensive XDCA!! But I am doubtful 😞

19 minutes ago, Kino said:

Brand new, the Venice 6K and 8K barely have any price difference as you note, but you can get a used Venice 6K for almost half the price. A Burano 6K would be amazing if they could get the price down to where the F5 was ($16K).

That would put it too close in price to a Sony FX9mk2? 

Maybe the "Burano 6K" could be the same inflation adjusted price as the Sony PMW-F5 was? 

4 minutes ago, Llaasseerr said:

There may be a bit of confusion because I think kye said the reason the FX3 was used instead of the FX6 was for marketing, which I disagreed with. Or that's how I interpreted his comment. 

Don't think anybody is saying that is the primary reason for the FX3 being used (unlike for some movies shot on an iPhone). 

But we're just debating if it was "a factor"? 

I think yes, maybe. 

Heh, while on the topic of the early days of RED and then their decline, this was just posted on Movie Set Memes: 

Quote

> be a struggling cinematographer in the late 2000s/early 2010s

> find a paid gig on Mandy dot com for a low budget indie film in need of a cinematographer

> director insists that you absolutely need to shoot on the Red camera because it’s new and trendy

> explain to director that the Red camera records a flat image to preserve as much detail as possible so you’ll need to also hire a digital imaging technician and a colorist to manage the footage and do color correction

> director says they can’t afford that but it absolutely 100% needs to be shot on the Red or else his movie is going to suck balls so just make it work

> just out of film school and hungry for work so you say yes

> first day of filming director says the lighting looks flat

> explain to him that it’s the raw image and not the final product

> director doesn’t understand this and thinks you’re a hack

> complains about you the entire shoot even though you’re working 12+ hour days doing like 3 peoples’ jobs

> filming finally ends

> you get a call from the director 2 weeks later

> director still doesn’t understand why the footage looks bad

> explain again that he needs to hire a colorist to finalize the look of the film but you’d be happy to do it for a reasonable price

> director goes ballistic and accuses you of being a con artist and extorting him

> never get a copy of the finished film

> director tells everyone in your local film scene who will listen that you ruined his movie and to never hire you for anything ever

16 minutes ago, Llaasseerr said:

I think in the first week of release once the embargo on discussing the camera was lifted, it was definitely a topic of conversation. But by then it's too late since these kinds of films live or die on their opening weekend. So there's no way it was part of a coherent marketing strategy for the film. But I agree it wouldn't hurt.

 I agree, they should have mentioned earlier on that a Sony FX3 was used to film this. Not leave it so late. 

17 minutes ago, Llaasseerr said:

I got a bit confused about whether you and kye were talking about marketing for Sony, or the film. I already mentioned that Sony had zero influence on the financing of the film and there's no way Gareth would choose the camera for marketing purposes over a different camera he would rather use, and the studio instructed the crew to not mention the camera until after release.

Absolutely, I don't think it was Sony who was pushing the FX3 being used back during pre-production. They just took advantage of what landed on their lap, to do a bit of marketing. 

When I mean using the FX3 for marketing purposes, I mean to film and market "The Creator".

And I'm not saying it was a major factor in the FX3 being used, but I suspect was "a factor". 

17 minutes ago, Llaasseerr said:

So no, it doesn't seem to be marketing in the traditional sense, but good press after release. 

"good press" = marketing 

11 hours ago, kye said:

So the old RED cameras don't get any credibility anymore?

Have they ever???

Even when REDs were more popular on production, a few years back, it was still easy enough for producers (especially in big markets such as LA or NYC) to demand the latest. Because there was a big oversupply of RED shooters vs jobs suitable for a RED. 

11 hours ago, kye said:

Wow..  considering how great the image is, and considering RED was never perceived as a consumer brand, it's a pretty fickle attitude!

Their RED Raven and RED Komodo pushed them rather close to consumer territory 

RED even at the best of times never really gained heaps of traction. 

Their market segments were:

1) RED fanboys 

2) cutting edge experimenters, who would dabble with the the RED ecosystem when it was new. Probably got burnt by RED. And would move along to abandon RED as soon as something better was available. Be it a Sony PMW-F3 / Sony FS700 / ARRI ALEXA / or whatever. 

3) people who needed a compact cinema camera , be it for a drone / gimbal / crash cam / whatever

4) people who want "higher quality" but can't afford the best. (i.e. ARRI ALEXA cameras, or Super 35 film, or something similar-ish such as Sony F35 or F65)

#1 has been in decline for years. 

#2 has completely disappeared. 

#3 got very gradually chipped away at with the likes of better mirrorless cameras + BMD's BMCC & BMPCC. But the release of the ARRI Alexa Mini almost completely demolished this niche for RED. Then the P4K / VENICE / FX6 / etc killed whatever small teeny remaining niches RED might still have in this market. 

#4 initially this gap for RED to live in used to be very big. As when the RED ONE was released the ARRI ALEXA didn't exist at the high end, not even the Sony F35 existed yet. And the HDSLRs didn't exist on the low end. So RED had all to themselves a massive huge market between the likes of Panasonic DVX100 etc on the low end and shooting on Super 35mm (or perhaps the Sony PWM-F900R) on the high end (which is VERY expensive!). Maybe RED's most direct competition was Super 16? (it's a middle ground between DVX100 vs S35) So it was easy to make a strong case for RED. 

But within a couple of years things very quickly changed:

ARRI ALEXA & Sony F35 etc got released, which meant the very high end for digital was no longer RED's. 

HDSLRs & HD camcorders such as the Sony EX3 got released so that the low end HD was no longer RED's. 

But as each year went by, it became worse and worse for Sony. 

As quickly you got RED being squeezed and attacked from all directions:

1) HDSLRs / mirrorless got better with 4K and even 10bit, killing even more of the low end market for RED. A filmmaker that in the past might have been happy to financially overstretch themselves to the max to try and get Scarlet-X for their thesis film, is now happy to shoot it on a newly released Panasonic GH4 with an Atomos recorder. 

2) Mainly Blackmagic (but to a lesser extent ZCam/Kinefinity/AJA/etc as well) killed off a lot of appeal for RED in the low end raw/ProRes niche of the market. And even attacking them hard in the mid range once the URSA Mini came out. Plus once the likes of ALEXA XT etc got released, making older ALEXA Classics increasingly more affordable to rent, then that too killed away the mid range for RED> 

3) The low/mid end for slow motion got killed by Sony FS700, and once the Phantom cameras came out they killed the high end for RED. And with time this just got worse and worse for RED, as more and more cameras could do better and better slow motion. 

4) compact cameras (for gimbal / steadicam / crash / cranes / etc) on the high end got killed once the ALEXA Mini was released, and had already been chipped away at by the mirrorless and BMPCC on the lower end

5) the low/mid range for documentaries / corporate / advertising / etc got massively eaten away at with the release of the Canon C300mk1 & C100, and then full on demolished once the Sony FS7 came along, almost no point for using RED at all. 

What was once a big area for RED between S35 level vs DX100 level filmmaking when the RED ONE was released has shrunk now to almost nothing. 

Remember too, that the camera rental is a very small part of an overall budget for a production in many cases. The difference between renting a RED Gemini vs an ARRI Alexa Mini is a rounding error for them. So why choose the RED?? 

And if someone is super strapped for cash, will they want to splurge on renting a RED Gemini or will they be happy to settle for the likes of an URSA Mini Pro or a Sony FX6 or Canon C300mk2 etc? (and probably, these cameras will be even better suited to the nature of this type of filmmaking) 

11 hours ago, kye said:

However did you guess?!?!

❤️❤️❤️

Actually, after recent releases, the second hand market for them might have gone vertical!

Indeed, you might have missed the boat on getting your hands on your dream camera! They're unaffordable now. 

3 minutes ago, TomTheDP said:

The RED naming has always confused me. But I am talking about the RED Epic Dragon vs the RED Scarlet X. 

Having used both the Epic Dragon has a lot more highlight latitude and the colors are more neutral. 

ah right, two totally different sensors

Would make more sense to compare a Epic-X vs Scarlet-X that are both using the same MX sensor. 

5 hours ago, Kino said:

If the FX9 II does come along, it will not be an incremental upgrade like the FS7 II. It has to compete with Canon's next generation Cinema EOS cameras, so it will need to offer 8K recording, better external RAW recording options, and proper 4K 120 internal.

I don't think they need to boost the raw capabilities of the FX9/FX6, those are nice to have features for marketing rather than core features for the bread and butter purchasers of them. 

Neither is 8K being demanded strongly by this market segment at all. 

If 4K 120fps (which now even the Sony FX30 can do internally) is the only "major" feature in the FX9mk2 and everything else is tweaks around the edge (such as giving more anamorphic options), then I'd say this is a fairly incremental upgrade like the FS7mk2 was (but a bigger update than the FS5mk2 was!). And the type of possible update I'm expecting from Sony. 

5 hours ago, Kino said:

There is a possibility for X-OCN 16-Bit at 4K or 6K, but I doubt it. I suspect they plan to replace the discontinued F5 ($16K) with a Burano 6K (using the Venice 1 sensor) and that camera will be the cheapest entry point for Sony's X-OCN. Then the Burano line would mirror the Venice 8K and 6K perfectly.

That would be a nice release!

But where would they price it? There is only a $5K difference between the two VENICE bodies. 

Perhaps instead of $25K, they'll make it be $20K?? Would definitely put it within the reach of more FX9 owner-ops 

11 hours ago, Llaasseerr said:

I would be fine shooting 24p on this camera most of the time. I don't really see a reason to get one, but I can fantasize about wasting some money on it. I went through similar thoughts about a Canon C200B earlier this year, but talked myself out of it. Maybe the OP should consider a C200/C200B? I don't think the fact it only shoots raw is a huge problem now that the Resolve workflow is so manageable on an M1 Mac.

Not a bad idea. Plus OP said they did all their shooting on a tripod, suggesting to me their documentary style involves a lot of interviews. So if going for a C200 instead of a C300mk2 means they can have two cameras that would be extremely beneficial. 

And CFast cards have dropped down in price a lot since the C200 was released. You can get a 1TB card for just $500:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1452851-REG/angelbird_avp1tbcf_av_pro_cf_1tb.html

That gives you 2hrs of recording time with 4K 12bit raw. 

Maybe grab another 512GB card for US$300, gives you another 1hr of recording as a spare back up card (something to use while backing up your main cards footage). 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1422513-REG/angelbird_avp512cf_512gb_av_pro_cf.html

US$2K ish for a C200 on eBay plus another $1K-ish in media and batteries? 

11 hours ago, kye said:

That would be interesting, but wouldn't it compete with their A6xxx line too much?

Not really. It wouldn't have a mechanical shutter. 

11 hours ago, kye said:

Sadly, what you're talking about would actually make a half-decent vlogging camera.  I suspect Sony is too spec-focused to do such a thing.  Rather than remove resolutions and frame rates they'd rather just remove reliability.

Quite so, for any vlogger which doesn't want slow motion (although a lot do!) this FX300 would be their perfect camera. 

11 hours ago, Llaasseerr said:

personally disagree that it was marketing, because we are in a fishbowl where we "affordable cine camera enthusiasts" are seeing saturation coverage on it. But outside of that world, hardly anyone knows that - and that would actually be Gareth's and Oren's point, that hopefully no-one would know any better. Other films don't attract press for the camera they shot on because they're shot on an Alexa or maybe a Venice, and that's not news.

Sure, we're seeing oversaturating as we're people who post on EOSHD but it is leaking out to a wider audience. If I tomorrow at work asked around "hey have you heard about that new blockbuster scifi film shot on a mirrorless?" then I'd probably get a few bites. 

Plus it is a "hook" that even mainstream channels might spur them to write a report on or do a video on, even if that aspect is only a glancing mention in the overall reporting. 

11 hours ago, Llaasseerr said:

There is also the fact that the film did really badly, so at best it can be seen as a failed experiment.

Yes, but how much worse would it have done with even less press? 

11 hours ago, Llaasseerr said:

It also seems like a pretty compelling story that he went on holiday to all those locations and took the FX3 with him, and he probably just really liked using the camera.

"a pretty compelling story"

Isn't there is another name for that? 😉

It's marketing! 

8 hours ago, JulioD said:

Likely because even a slightly heavier camera would have precluded them ever balancing the lenses they were using on the gimbal they were using FULL TIME.  Have you seen the way the camera was operated?

There is rather little difference in weight between a stripped down FX6 and a stripped down FX3, plus when you're using heavier anamorphic lenses like they are, then it makes it easier to balance the gimbal if your camera is a little heavier rather than weighing nothing at all 

16 minutes ago, QuickHitRecord said:

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.

Ah, I was linking to 2 pin lemo not 4 pin lemo. Here you go then:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1470777-REG/hedbox_unix_1b4_v_mount_adapter_power.html

Or just get a battery plate with a pig tail then wire it up yourself! (although lemo connectors are a pain to solder)

However, not needing to always use rails is convenient. 

Maybe there is a 3D printed solution here??

19 minutes ago, QuickHitRecord said:

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 $$$.

Ah true, the RED Scarlet bodies are slightly "newer". 

2 hours ago, QuickHitRecord said:

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.

Yeah and even mounting the V Mount at the back of the RED One still blocks the screen at the back. 

8 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

lmao, why the hell did they not use the FX6. It's such a way better ND option than a vari ND. It's not even a pound difference 1.4lbs vs 2lbs. 

That's what I have been saying all along!

I reckon "marketing reasons" was a big factor. 

Just like why people sometimes choose to "shoot on an iPhone" for a project, to promote it like this. 

Would any of us be talking about this film for 6+ pages if he'd  used a FX6?? (or FX9)

2 hours ago, Llaasseerr said:

Yeah, the FX6 has true 24p, proper timecode input, SDI monitoring, the nice internal NDs, is still very lightweight and small, etc. I wonder if it came down to the fact the cameras were so hard to get hold of at the time

Good point. The FX6 was incredibly new then. And although the FX6 was announced a few months earlier than the FX3, the demand for the FX6 was white hot. It took a very long time until you could easily source a FX6, especially a large number of them like Gareth needed. Yet the Sony FX3 from basically day one you could walk into any camera retail store and grab a couple off the shelf. 

Many of us do underestimate just how very long pre-production takes on these big productions, they'd have long before been running tests on their cameras before they started shooting. So they needed the cameras ready and available to buy way back then. 

5 hours ago, Kino said:

I wouldn't buy either one at this stage unless you absolutely must have a camera today. The C300 III has been discounted to $9K from $11K and is likely to got down even more as Canon replaces it with an RF mount version with higher resolution. The Sony FX9 is selling for $10K and is now 4 years old. Sony has registered a new camera (WW279317) in China that could be its replacement:

https://weibo.com/2424567755/NoKDocBsC

This registration will be produced by the Shanghai plant (like the FX6 and FX9), so it is most likely an FX camera (or possibly a new camcorder). In any case, the FX9 II is close and when it drops so will the price of the FX9. At that point, you can decide which camera is better for your needs.

Wonder how big the update will be if it is a FX9mk2

Maybe just a very small modest one like the FS7mk2 and FS5mk2 was?

I hope for a brand new FX model, such as a "FX300". The FX30 does 4K 120fps and is $1600 by itself (or $2K with the audio handle). And that is after the $200 price drop! ($1800 and $2,200 beforehand)

Having a sub $1K (or even sub $800) cinema camera would be awesome. Maybe if it was 4K 60fps, or even just 4K 30fps, that a new Sony FX300 is. But keep all the same codecs, cooling fan, timecode, full size HDMI, etc of the FX30/FX3. 

2 hours ago, Llaasseerr said:

I have heard they are slow to boot up and have a bad menu system, also that the rolling shutter is about 15ms which is really the maximum you would put up with these days for a 35mm sensor. But it just seems very robust and properly targeted at a film maker. So if you were buying it for your own creative or doc projects, it doesn't seem like a bad option.

Yes I remember when working with the Varicam LT that it had slow reboots. And it fairly often needed to be rebooted, for instance any time you wanted to switch to offspeed mode and then back again 

15 hours ago, kye said:

I'd challenge your concept about worth..  all cameras are tools to do a job, and maybe that job is to create footage or to provide nostalgia or demonstrate taste or status, but they're all outcomes.

I'm saying "in the real world" as shorthand for saying in a professional setting working with and for others on a filming production. 

Of course, if it is just for your own personal pleasure, then just use whatever warms your heart! 

Even the Barbie Doll Camera could be the right choice for you! 

8 hours ago, QuickHitRecord said:

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.

Nice!! Start up your own thread @QuickHitRecord to track your Scarlet MX journey? Would be fascinating to follow. 

8 hours ago, QuickHitRecord said:

V-mount battery solution (pretty difficult to find at a workable price!)

Why was this so difficult and expensive? Just need a setup for V lock to lemo power ? 

Such as:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1597736-REG/indipro_tools_vmrdk_v_mount_plate_with_15mm.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1470774-REG/hedbox_unix_0b_v_mount_adapter_power.html 

8 hours ago, QuickHitRecord said:

I did a lot of research on the other legacy Red cameras before making this purchase. The Epic-X brains seem prone to failure.

Interesting... more prone to failure than the Scarlet-X?? That's curious

8 hours ago, QuickHitRecord said:

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.

Isn't the Dragon sensor a bit better at low light? As well as a stop more dynamic range? Thought Dragon also has more naturally accurate colors and better skin tones? 

8 hours ago, QuickHitRecord said:

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.

Cheers for that detailed analysis! I would have thought the newer DSMC2 body of the RED Raven vs the older DSMC1 makes it a slam dank case for the RED Raven (if they're both at the same price. Unless you want PL lenses, which the Raven can't handle. Which to be fair, is by itself a strong argument against the RED Raven)

8 hours ago, QuickHitRecord said:

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.

That is just begging to be reversed engineered.... ! Make your own DSMC2 I/O module. 

8 hours ago, QuickHitRecord said:

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.

Even though they've both got "the same MX sensor" I've heard others who prefer the RED ONE as well. Perhaps all that extra weight and processing power gives it a little extra magical something?

On 10/30/2023 at 2:59 PM, zlfan said:

 He used ex3 as the crash cam for his fx9. Makes sense. 

Exactly! That's why I shared the video, I thought it was quite interesting. 

As it is amazing that such a very old camera could be a stand in for the latest and greatest (the Sony FX9). 

Should make us pause and appreciate about what's so great and accessible that we have already available to us now in eBay very cheaply 

41 minutes ago, PannySVHS said:

Would love to check out a BS1H and a FX30. @IronFilm But that is just nerdom. And you already made me buy the awesome Cinealta F3 which I only have done test shots with so far.:) BS1HII with an inhouse clickon monitor like Red and a cooler name please.:)

haha, yeah, put the Panasonic BS1H inside a Tilta camera cage, slap on a few RED stickers, and use it with the RED branded lenses (nobody will guess it isn't "a RED"! haha):

I have been very often tempted to get the RED 17-50mm or 18-50mm Cine Zoom. Or even the utterly insane RED 18-85mm lens!! It is a beast. Well, for me to use it. As I'm not used to that. But I work every week with camera ops using lenses such the Canon 17-120mm T2.95 and the Canon 25-250mm T2.95 Servo PL Lenses:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1633520-REG/canon_4573c011_cine_servo_25_250mm_t2_95_pl.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1043631-REG/canon_9785b002_cn7x17_kas_s_cine_servo.html 

But more seriously, did you know you can get a RED Scarlet brain for just a grand and a half on eBay? (sadly just the MX sensor though, but for another US$500ish to a grand more, you could pick up a RED Scarlet Dragon. Or the RED Raven brain can be found for roughly sub US$2K, it is a Dragon sensor within the newer DSMC2 system. But with the RED Raven you're stuck with EF mount only, and it's sensor is unfortunately a little smaller than S35)

Maybe slightly over $2K-ish for a more complete RED Scarlet package that you just need to add lenses and V Mounts to. 

Perhaps I should have added one more option to this:

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

1) just shooting ultra low budget indie drama stuff, not really caring too much about the money, simply doing it for the love of it, and whatever 

That means buying one of: 

RED Scarlet MX camera for US$2K (or RED Raven). Is a little more expensive than going with a Pocket 4K or Micro Studio G2 setup, but a fair bit cheaper than a BMD URSA Mini Pro and a lot cheaper than an ARRI ALEXA Classic. Yet this camera body will be a lot more portable than either! (for gimbals / steadicams / car rigs / ceiling rigs / cranes / jibs / sliders / etc)

Of course in "the real world" a RED camera is fairly worthless, especially one as old as this. But in the no budget indie / student filmmaking world, a lot of them still drool over the "RED" name. 

23 minutes ago, PannySVHS said:

Great input on the business side of operator-ownership! @IronFilm Even though your friend knew his stuff super well, it didnt prevent him from one of our and my biggest lacklusters, GAS, which even hinders creativity as @John Matthewshas pointed out in another thread. I didnt shoot anything meaningful this year and have been hiding behind lower end color grading gigs. That Varicam LT story is perfectly illustrating temptation and consequenes going along with purchases. It's also beautifully written. Thank you😊

Glad it was appreciated 🙂

I don't think the Varicam LT hindered his creativity too much (although, it was a modestly heavier camera than the FS7, and more power hungry, but nothing you couldn't muscle your way through with a bit of grit), if anything the better quality of the Varicam LT opened up more creative options (you could for instance get away with a much smaller lighting package with the Varicam LT than a Sony FS7, and work in more difficult conditions). 

It is more than the Varicam LT hindered his bank account... 

(although yeah, I guess it is also limited him in terms of who he could/would work with) 

16 hours ago, John Matthews said:

IMO, the cameras that are truly small for what they are: 1) GR, 2)A5100, 3)GM1/5. I just want a GR that does video, even better with a zoom and IBIS. It won't happen though. To be really small, it needs to be a POS; although the GM1 + 14mm f/2.5 comes really close.

A modern 2024 Sony a5100 and Panasonic GM1 would be really nice to have. 

On 11/1/2023 at 3:14 AM, John Matthews said:

I'm fairly certain all these cameras will have moiré patterns at some point whether it be 1080p, 4k, or 6k. The only difference is how visible it becomes and if you can recognize it on playback. The worst of patterns can also be controlled by understanding the frequencies with each lens and the fabrics and buildings causing them. This is a huge topic and merits considerable discussion. I still believe AI should/must "correct" it automatically. Many would pay for that.

That's a good idea, and a good little money maker to develop a plugin which automatically fixes moiré.

5 hours ago, kye said:

It really depends on what you're used to.

There was forum member on here years ago who was an ex ENG camera operator, so was used to handling a full-sized shoulder-rig in emergency situations and was also used to pissing people off while shooting (which is an integral part of ENG work).

He and I used to disagree on what "small" and "large" meant, because to him a 1DXii was a "small" camera and to me it's absolutely enormous!

I too think the 1DXii is a small camera 😛 😉

3 hours ago, kye said:

One of the things that I find hugely ironic is that if I had $10K to spend on a camera, the GX85 might still be the best choice.  If I had $100,000?  Still the GX85.  If I had $1,000,000?  Maybe I'd call up Panasonic and ask for them to CUSTOM MAKE me a camera!  

Sorry, US$1M is far too little money for them to even answer the phone.