Comments

Permalink Reply by Todd Marks on November 6, 2011 at 5:17pm

Haha, ah the life of a camera geek.

 

The C300 sensor is actually 4k and it has HD output. The reason the max output you'll get is 1080p even though the sensor is seeing 4k is due to all that compression happening in the Canon camera. It is indeed MPEG2, but it's 50MB 4:2:2, which beats the internal recording of a Sony F3 (better color space and less compressed). So the internal recording is pretty good, great times for indie filmmakers as these quality cameras become less and less expensive!

Permalink Reply by Ryan McCalla on November 6, 2011 at 5:34pm

Thanks Todd...

Mpeg2 seems like an Odd choice for compression... I am curious why they chose this and how its going to go with playing with it in Post...

 That's the big thing with me - I want as much freedom in post as I can get, as much as I love having limitations that force me to think outside the box on how I can make it work for me... there is alot of things I just cant do because if i push the footage to far I start to get that dreaded "Tearing" or "Blocking" effects.

Permalink Reply by Todd Marks on November 4, 2011 at 11:19am

Totally agree. The downside of the Scarlet is that if you aren't already in the RED "system" it costs a lot to outfit the camera. Recording media (SSD's), lenses, monitor, handles, cables, batteries...all very expensive. They have the Scarlet kit you can purchase which is basically the camera+the minimum recommended accessories and it's around $14,000. Of course, having back up media and batteries means even more. However, the camera will be upgradeable and the new sensor should be out early next year which Scarlet can upgrade to as well (for a cost). 

 

Agreed that the big difference would be seeing the footage on a big screen. On the internet, RED is certainly overkill.

 

I've seen the 4k footage at RED studios projected with their 4k projector and it was unbelievable. No comparison to 1080p. Of course, until theatres/TV's become 4k friendly, it doesn't really matter! :)

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ryan McCalla on November 6, 2011 at 12:21am

Great points Todd!!

The Red scarlet does support the Canon Lens so its a little bit of a kick start there - but the argument of adding extras can even apply to the 7D. 5D etc... you end up paying alot more by the time you have lens.. batteries... storage space.

The film I have worked with is usually scanned at 2k resolution for when its brought over for doing VFX work.. I believe most films unless they are going for IMAX stick to 2k - correct me if I'm wrong though.. just going off things I have worked on  and people I have chatted to in Sydney on the tech side of things. 

 

Anything over 1080p is overkill... but lets ignore the resolution and look at the other features instead... uncompressed footage, better sensors, better handling of low light (no external lights are needed apparently on the canon)...

people will notice these things in your production value, but lot of people don't look at these just at the resolution of the camera... Quality is not always in your resolution.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael Flores on November 6, 2011 at 9:01am

The scarlet has a sensor size almost double that off the Canon:  

 

Scarlet 14 MEGAPIXEL VS CANON 8.3 MEGAPIXEL -

 

I just read the specs of the Canon too, I'm not sure how they are justifying that price just doesn't seem worth it. I'd buy the Scarlet over the Canon just based on what I just read. For 20k you're ready to shoot with the Scarlet. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael Flores on November 6, 2011 at 9:12am

Also, I'm not buying into 4k being an overkill for the internet. You can see vast difference in color, depth, and overall picture quality of the footage when compared to standard 1080p. Just look at episodes 1-3 of my series and compare the picture quality to new episodes. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ryan McCalla on November 6, 2011 at 1:13pm

100% agree mike!!

I think people get too focused on the resolution of cameras - there is so much more that goes into them than that to justify the price..

What res to do you edit and master at? At least your stuff is cinema ready before you drop it to 1080p for web... And I agree - looks sharp and clean.

Video like print you should always work at a higher resolution than what you expect yoiur out put to be..... IMO,  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ryan McCalla on November 6, 2011 at 3:47pm

okay so I found some more info on the resolutions and frame rate speeds... not too bade actually...

so it looks to do 1080p (1k) at 120fps... so really that's fine for web series production and television. 

Quoted from Techcrunch.

"Well, it does 4K, for one thing. That’s 4096×2160, at up to 25FPS, or quad HD at 30. This is at compression rates that are superior to what they’ve been shooting movies on for years, yet at a data rate that’s still eight times what Canon’s new C300 system shoots at. That’s 50 megabytes per second, or 400mbit/s for those keeping track. The full sensor size is 5120×2700 for stills.

It’ll also do 3K at 48fps, 2K at 60fps, and 1K at 120fps, which is fairly low-resolution but retains the color depth and so on. It’s a Super 35-sized sensor and they’re using leftover chips from Epic brains, which cost almost three times as much. In fact, if you shoot the same type of footage with the same lenses using the Scarlet and the Epic, the images should be “identical."

http://techcrunch.com/2011/11/03/reds-scarlet-gets-official-4k-for-...

Looking at the press release for the C300 on the other hand...

"Frame rates between 1 and 60 frames per second (fps)iii can be adjusted in increments of 1 fps. Additionally, a selection of Custom Pictures lets users freely adjust image quality for greater control over how content looks."

I just think its a tad overpriced in comparison to the Red... but its hard finding any information about the C300 at this point to make a better call. 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page