The EF-5 of video cameras

Jody Radzik

Jody Radzik

EF2
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
193
Location
Northern California
"RED, the company whose 4K-capable 'RED One' camera — that's 4,096 by 2,160 pixels — became one of the most lusted after cameras of recent memory last year, has announced the 'Scarlet,' a hand-held Flash-memory based camcorder capable of a remarkable 3K resolution at 120 frames per second. They've stated they intend for it to sell for under $3,000. That means the relatively small Scarlet — pictured above both naked and with lots of accessories bolted on — will be capable of shooting video worthy of projection in digital cinemas, which mostly top out at around 4K these days (although typically only at 24FPS)."
 
Atlas of digital video resolutions, or why you should get a Red

digvidres.png


Here's a chart of the digital video resolutions. Number 16 is normal NTSC. Number 12 is 1080i HD, and number 8 is the 3K resolution of the new Red camera. With all that data, you'd be able to virtually zoom into your subject by cropping to 1080i res.
 
I'm very interested in the camera. I'll definitely be tracking the progress of its development.

I don't know what it's low light performance would be like, but it has a 2/3" sensor, which should help. But I don't know until an actual prototype comes out.
 
Just because scarlet has 3k pixels dosn't make it 3k resolution. It will use a bayer matrix which will reduce the resolution well below 3k. Red with it's 4k imager only manages to resolve somewhere around 2.5k.
 
Sony still sounds better for a chaser

And I see in the review that it isn't great for stuff like sports....which to me is about the same type of action we're filming (speed and resolution). The comments go on to say about the fact it's great for cinema.....but I don't think we're making a great hollywood dramatic production here.

Think I'll stick with the tried-and-true Sony products.
 
Jason Foster said:
And I see in the review that it isn't great for stuff like sports....which to me is about the same type of action we're filming (speed and resolution). The comments go on to say about the fact it's great for cinema.....but I don't think we're making a great hollywood dramatic production here.

Think I'll stick with the tried-and-true Sony products.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you found that out but that couldn't be further from the truth! I've seen the Red One used at a football game and the quality was amazing. I also saw it used during a sky dive. If it works them, there's no reason why it can't work for storm chasing.

If anything, HDV cameras should perform poorly. This is because they are highly compressed and perform poorly in low light.
 
Alister Chapman said:
Just because scarlet has 3k pixels dosn't make it 3k resolution. It will use a bayer matrix which will reduce the resolution well below 3k. Red with it's 4k imager only manages to resolve somewhere around 2.5k.
Click to expand...

That's not completely true. They suggest you shoot at 3k to get a pristine 2k image. You can shoot at 3k, you'll just get aliasing problems, which plagues any camera/sensor when shooting at the native resolution of the sensor. BTW, Red One's "optimal resolution" is just above 3k, not 2.5k.
 
A camera that uses a bayer matrix cannot resolve to the resolution of every single pixel on the sensor because different pixels are only seeing light at different wavelengths. By combing groups of pixels and interpolating the signals, R, G and B values are created for every pixel location. However as 2x2 (2xG plus 1 red and 1 blue) groups of pixels are used to create these values there is a significant drop in resolution compared to the monchrome resolution of the same sensor without the Bayer mask. Clever software can achieve an effective resolution of around 70% of the sensor resolution. The other issue with Bayer masks is that at the moment reds are difficult to reproduce as accurately as you can with a 3 chip design due to the dyes used in the filter mask. In addition cross talk between the pixels leads to colours bleeding from one channel to the other leading to inaccuracies with colour reproduction.

All the top end TV cameras still use 3 chip designs because at the moment there is no technology available that can better it. The 3 chip design is not without issues of it's own (not least of which is cost) but it's going to be with us for some time to come. With 35mm frame size sensors the prisms become so big that it's not practical and film style lenses won't work with a big prism so in that domain the only option is a single sensor.
 
With the cost of this camera alone, plus lenses, rods, accessories, editing platform, you're looking at an easy $20k.

Hope you've got good media contacts to sell what you capture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top