Paul Watt

Really like the review. But I'd like to see more than lockoffs at night to get a feel for the unit. Looks very nice tho. I do question whether anyone ever gets a job with any of these non-mainstream cameras. Can anyone chime in? Do you actually make a living running anything other than an Epic or Alexa? I think I work a pretty broad range of productions in terms of budget, and no-one wants anything but these two cameras right now. There's an occasional request for a C300, but that's it.

Well, if you're gonna nitpick, T-Stop is the same on any sensor, F-Stop is gonna vary depending on the lens.

Wow.  Amazing.  The excuses for why the 5D Mark III won't work in a pro environment are falling one by one.  It'll be interesting to see the comparison between the new BM when it comes out and this camera.  

Interested in the observation that there was more colour info than in the Epic. I'd like to hear more of an explanation. If it's the case then this interests me even more.

Reading just the chapter and section titles I want to get a 5Diii, so I have a reason to get the book. I bet if you did a Scarlet/Epic one, with the same informative form you'd sell a buttload. You'd have to listed to even more bitching than usual from the disgruntled peanut gallery, but I'd buy it.

Funny, they take off the fixed lens, add a dumb mount, then triple the price.  It does 60p, but that's all you can really say positively about this cam.  You could have a loaded Scarlet for that, or a useable used Epic for just a few grand more.  Or a loaded F700, or even an F5 for just a touch more.  Or, a base Scarlet and a Black Magic.  Or two Black Magics, and a Mac Pro.  JVC, wow! 

Yeah, with used shootable Scarlet setups for 10 000 USD including a monitor this is a pretty tough sell.  Slow rolling shutter and 1080p is a bit behind the times.

looks great, but rolling shutter problems kills it for me.  

Don't think Arri or RED or Blackmagic have too much to worry about from either of these cameras.  A year or so away, probably quite expensive, probably a bit of a clumsy workflow.  Canon, on the other hand, is in trouble.     Great to see a crowded marketplace driving innovation and prices, tho.  

Global shutter is such a huge upgrade.  That with 4K will make it an amazing mini-heli cam.  The obvious weaknesses are the file-sizes (especially compared to R3D files), and the lack of higher frame-rates.  I don't think the higher end camera manufacturers are too stressed either.  Regardless of how amazing this camera is, many producers are going to insist that the cameras used on their projects cost a lot more than 4 grand.  

Those two episodes of Top Gear were epic.  Maybe the best Top Gear road trip ever.  I did notice rolling shutter jello on some shots on the show though.  Great shots and a great tool for their shoot.  

I did check out Sony's new 4K tv a while ago.  It was stunning, and there was a group of guys ogling it.  We started chatting, and it turned out every one of the 7 or so guys standing there worked in the motion picture industry.  A colourist, a couple editors, a dp etc.  It's true that no-one else really seemed to care.  Well, I want one, but truth of the matter is I hardly watch anything on the TV I have, so it would probably be a waste of time.  I'd love to see the World Cup in 4K 3D though.

Checked prices on that line of Toshiba SSDs, and the markup isn't that much.  I was wondering if I could get a 48Gig one and slap in a 256Gig drive and save some cash, but it's definitely not worth it.  Interesting to see though.

Every producer I know wants to know one question:  Do you have a RED?   The versatility of RED raw and the established workflow seems to be taking over the mid-level market.  I don't think dropping 15G on a 1DC makes any sense at all when, as was stated above, you could put together a pretty decent (and somewhat upgradeable) Scarlet system.  

After seeing the new Sony 4k TV a couple weeks ago, I think they'll find an eager market once the price becomes reasonable.  And all of the 4k TVs are 3D as far as I can tell.  The problem with most current 3d TVs is that they are crap.  You're either seeing half res, or dealing with active glasses and ghosting and flickering.  The Hobbit HFR 3D was very comfortable to watch, and the 3D looked great, even if the image looked videoish, and this problem ruined the fantasy of the movie.  Sports or docs in HFR 3D are things I'd be stoked to see.     Also worth mentioning, The Hobbit was finished in 2K, so you can't blame 4K projection for the inconsistant makeup, or seeing Gandalf's contact lenses.  I never saw The Hobbit at 24 fps.  Did the makeup and other set problems show up there too?

I'm on my second Hackintosh for editing.  As Andrew stated, it took a little while to get to rock solid stability, but now my machine cooks hard.  One thing I'd recommend is using an external RAID 5 or 10 as a media drive, with (as suggested) an SSD system drive, and a second SSD as a media cache drive.  Then use another big 7200 drive (or even better, two in a RAID 1 setup) as an output drive for rendered files.  This doesn't cost as much as you'd think, and it lets your machine snap through data even faster.  Plus, if your Hackintosh runs into problems, you can plug the media drive into another computer and keep on working without too much stress. Love the Hackintoshs!

There are no cameras out there that do what the Epic does.  Internal S35 highspeed raw.  REDraw is amazing, as has been stated above.  It fires right into Premiere, and REDCineX is a great tool for colouring.  And there's a long ass waiting list to get one now that the price has dropped.     Red's also delivering RedRay players and soon, projectors.  And they're putting together a 4K digital distribution network for theatres and individuals.  As far as I can tell, they're crushing it, and they're not going anywhere.   I think that it's more likely Canon will be in trouble.  C300s and especially C500s are going to be very hard sells at their current prices.  The HDSLRs are crippled and over priced, and the lens business is getting more competitive every year.

Interesting cameras, to be sure. Global shutter would be so sweet. Gotta say though, that the Epic can be built much much smaller, and I can edit 4K RED raw on my laptop. Bet the image is insanely amazing, but I have a feeling the workflow will be slow, very data heavy, and complex in comparison.

Stoked we may see 60p on this some day. It makes the camera a lot more interesting to me. And I was pretty interested already. On another note, the childish and bizarre rants and insults in this thread are beyond unprofessional. Avro, I don't know what kind of work you do, but I can tell you, with the attitude expressed here, I would never hire you for any sort of work.

So, Allupons, do you think that while editing the orignal .mts file, and lowering contrast, are we missing any information compared to a conversion?  Or is it still all there compared to editing on a PC.

After throwing a high contrast clip into 5D2RGB and loading both it and the original into CS5.5 I found that by lowering the contrast on the original clip to -14, it was virtually identical to my eye, and very close on all of the scopes to the converted clip.  Very interesting though.  Some more testing is needed for sure. Nice find!

[quote author=Germy1979 link=topic=637.msg4706#msg4706 date=1335388973] Just a thought, did anybody come to the conclusion why they chose 48fps...?...  Why not 60 if we're going video frame rates.  It's a bold game changing move to tamper with the standard of Hollywood for so many years....  But so was digital.  Screenings at 48fps may fail, then it wouldn't look ridiculous or have been a total waste of time if they cut it in half at 24?  Who knows... I sure don't but it sounds better than pulling a professional big budget 24fps feature from 60fps had they gone that route...  48fps sounds like they're testing the waters. [/quote] Probably so it can easily go out as a 24fps print for film screenings, and for non-48fps theatres as you said.

So much vitriol from many who have not seen the clips, or any 48fps 3D.  Why all the hate?  So Peter Jackson took a risk and tried something different.  No-one's forcing anyone to make any aesthetic choices for future films.  Do whatever you like.  I find it a bit hypocritical that people criticize new technology when it's someone else pushing the envelope, then bemoan the fact that they can't get their hands similar technology at an affordable price.