No detachable lenses, Truly a Pro or Professionasumer?

[Zemper]

Can it really be pro pro cam withouit swappable lenses, perhaps with a flip, I hope Red offers some kind of option, maybe they will have it all worked out by then... Im not grouping it with the prosumers either, a new class seems to emerge out of Reds red dust... Professionasumer.

Is the lens to small is that the issue? Give us a smaller lens mount, although Om sure if there is to be only one lens on Jims precious Scarlet it will be one perfectly suited lens for the application

Still Im not down on it just yet, I want to reserve one, I love it with or without lens support, however I would love to hear whats gonna be going on in regards to audio...

[David Dennis]

If you go out and look at the shoulder-mount video cameras used by photojournalists, I think most of them have interchangeable lenses.

But I don't get the impression that most of those zooms are ever removed from the camera.

So effectively, they pay the size and weight penalty of interchangeable lenses, but they don't actually use the interchange feature!

I think Jim noticed that fact and decided that for run and gun style shooting, the fixed-lens tradeoff was worth it. It also meant an enormously lower price point - with interchangeable lenses that same camera would be $3,500 for the camera and $1,500 for the glass.

I think it's a little sad that people look at some specific features of these cameras and act as though Jim was a sinner and he owes them penance for doing such an awful thing. I suppose I'm biased, because Jim did the right thing for me and people similar to me - I could afford $3,000 for a camera but would have a tough time with $5,000, let alone the $10,000 a more macho version would have cost.

Scarlet looks like a cool camera at a price I could afford and so right now I feel happy about everything save the ship date :-).

D

[jaadgy akanni]

I think Jim noticed that fact and decided that for run and gun style shooting, the fixed-lens tradeoff was worth it. It also meant an enormously lower price point - with interchangeable lenses that same camera would be $3,500 for the camera and $1,500 for the glass.
D

I'd rather pay $5k with interchangeable lens capability than $3k without it, but I guess I'm a fool.

[Johan Malmsten]

That is a good point... When I get around to buy one of these buggers I'll probably won't actually have benefited the interchangeability. But I'm just tired of put on extra glass for extra wide angles or extra long lenses.

Also I'm not that big of a fan of the whole 35mm adaptor-thing either... miniscule DOF ain't that of a deal-breaker since I honestly have trouble finding good movies that actually use it to make the look look better.

3000 dollares for a cam that provides 3 times as many pixels as my HV20? in 120 fps? In friggin' redcode RAW!? To solid state? I don't care about changing the lens... I don't care about audio-inputs... as long as the wide angle is wide enough with the of-course-soon-to-come wide-angle-adaptor I'll happily shoot MOS or with secondary sound-recording...

I'll put the money saved from lenses on upgrading my workstation so I'll be able to actually edit and output this sickly big images in 25fps...

EDIT: And if the fixed zoom lens is there to stay... then please! give me a lens that actually has zoom & focus-rings that actually connects physically to the lens mechanism... I'm sick and tired of not being able to do any kind of follow-focus because of the focus-ring just spins regardless of the actual lens... and the small zoom-stick that sticks out of the Sony Z1 camera-lens is something I really like.

[tweakmanson]

I have an arsenal of nikon glass it would have been nice to utilize. now it looks as if we will be shopping on image degrading wide adapters that are still in the $1k price range. hopefully the lens is super wide to start out with.

[Aiden Cornwell]

If it had interchangeable lenses I would say it would be competing with the Red One.

Jim got this one right and made a camera that has the quality that was not avaible in the sub 5k market. After 5k there are tons of options from JVC, Cannon, Sony.

Scarlet stands all alone at 3k. There is nothing that can match it. This is the same way that Redone came in. Though I imagine after accessories one will be looking at closer to the 4k mark.

I am so pumped right now and the wait is not an issue as I need save a little more cash so 2009 is perfect for me.

[Dom Ziker]

a new class seems to emerge out of Reds red dust... Professionasumer.


Or maybe Confessionals :-). I would be exactly the guy for something like scarlet. Too professional for all the HDV crap but not professional enough to handle a red one. I sometimes like auto-stuff, but want all the manual options as well. BUT – interchangeable lenses and 4 Channel audio would be a must for a cam of my taste!

[Buck Forester]

This sounds like a great camera at an amazing price! I have no doubts this will have use in professional applications. I agree with the other poster about the ridiculously miniscule DOF that some people keeping hammering on. Going 1.2 DOF on every shot gets old. Most 'real' flicks don't use such shallow DOF to that degree. I don't understand this craze about going so shallow? And those wanting interchangeable lenses and full sensors, etc., don't they have One camera that does that with another on the way? This Scarlet is not in that category and some of us appreciate this niche. Obviously not all of us, but plenty enough to make a camera for those of us who do. Hey, I'm just voicing my opinion like everyone else. I think there's a camera out there for pretty much everyone... nothing perfect, but it's getting better and better out there all the time! Good luck to everyone with their projects, the future is lookin' GOOD!

[Gene Crucean]

If you go out and look at the shoulder-mount video cameras used by photojournalists, I think most of them have interchangeable lenses.

But I don't get the impression that most of those zooms are ever removed from the camera.

So effectively, they pay the size and weight penalty of interchangeable lenses, but they don't actually use the interchange feature!

Maybe true but none of those cameras use Nikon or Canon mounts. BIG difference.

[David Dennis]

Jaadgy, just to clarify, I wasn't calling anybody a fool.

I was simply saying that the camera is likely to suit my needs perfectly and it's nice to see a camera that fits my way of doing things.

You have a different way of doing things and I think that means you're more in the Red One than the Scarlet market. I have absolutely nothing against you or your brain power ... just trying to say there are other markets and obviously Jim is pursuing both of them with a nearly unprecedented vigour and flair.

D

[oldphart]

If you go out and look at the shoulder-mount video cameras used by photojournalists, I think most of them have interchangeable lenses.

But I don't get the impression that most of those zooms are ever removed from the camera.

So effectively, they pay the size and weight penalty of interchangeable lenses, but they don't actually use the interchange feature!

D

Photojournalists have more use for convenience than quality. Their output will end up broadcast with all manner of compression artifacts, so the mediocre quality of the zoom lens will not be all that obvious.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

No let me see...

Scarlet 3K....

1. 2/3" Mysterium X Sensor - Expected - now fact. Great!

2. 3K Resolution - better than expected! So that actually means 3K CMOS Bayer and a clean 2K out of it - Superb. And that's the whole point with 3K Scarlet and 5K EPIC - to get clean 2K and 4K out of the cams.

Otherwise: 3K and 5K for delivery - what's that?!

The point is - clean 2K and 4K DeBayered.

3. 1-120 FPS (180FPS BURST) - This is MUCH better than expected! OMG.

4. UP TO 100 MB/SEC REDCODE RAW AND RGB RECORDING TO DUAL COMPACT FLASH

Another very nice surprise. Yes, I was surprised :).

5. ~ 3000 $ Price for the body [+LCD??] - Now that's the killer !!!

Changes the game completely and maybe saves me [us] from [I]the sword of Damocles that a huge bank loan for a RED ONE is.

BUT !... I have a BUT. And not a small one:

6. Fixed lens.

That's a disappointment.

Please, Master Jim, make it 6000 $ but make it compatible with 16mm and\or Nikon glass.

Save us from 35mm adapters inconveniences.

Scarlet sounds like she's almost the perfect girl for me.

If only I could change... you know.. her lens :).

This is important and it could ruin the dream.

You gave us the sensor, you gave us RAW, you gave us all.... but the ability to look at the world with a new and different set of "eyes".

Anyway - Amazing! All the other specs ARE a very pleasant surprise.

Please, Master Jim, give us 16mm glass.

And win our even bigger love and respect for all eternity.

:)

[David Dennis]

Old, I think of myself as more a photojournalist than any other kind of shooter and so this suits me very well. Doesn't mean it has to suit you well, just that there is more than one type of person out there who loves creating film/video, and they could use different equipment. Scarlet's more for me than you. I hope that's OK.

You have a camera that was made for you, the purist, in the RED ONE. Now RED has a camera made for me, the non-purist.

Surely there is room for both of us in the world?

PS Alas, for both of us, the end product of our hard work to create as near-perfect images as we can winds up being seen on 10 year old TVs running through a digital cable system with all kinds of errors and distortions. Don't think that's exclusive to documentary filmmakers.

[Gene Crucean]

I read in one of these threads where someone suggested that if the scarlet had a Nikon mount, it would compete with the red one. I just wanted to comment and say that I disagree. If scarlet had a Nikon/Canon mount but no PL options I think it would be a perfect compliment for the red one while not competing. Serious users will still opt for the One and PL glass which is what the One is targeted for.

... my 2 cents anyway

[Mike Bozulich]

Old, I think of myself as more a photojournalist than any other kind of shooter and so this suits me very well. Doesn't mean it has to suit you well, just that there is more than one type of person out there who loves creating film/video, and they could use different equipment. Scarlet's more for me than you. I hope that's OK.

You have a camera that was made for you, the purist, in the RED ONE. Now RED has a camera made for me, the non-purist.

Surely there is room for both of us in the world?


Very well said David. I couldn't agree more.

I kind of figured it would have a fixed lens (it was part of my prediction) in order to make the camera small enough. Plus a swappable lens really does put it too close to the Red One. So I'm not entirely surprised. This camera far surpasses my needs especially at this price. I'll be the first one in line come reservation day. :biggrin:

[Matt Setnes]

Definitely odd how audio isn't available, though I'm sure it'll turn up soon. And with all the negative energy about the fixed lens issue, I'm sure that will end up changing as well. Many downs and ups on this camera that even them self out, but the biggest downer is the fixed lens.

[Zach Nelson]

Or maybe Confessionals :-). I would be exactly the guy for something like scarlet. Too professional for all the HDV crap but not professional enough to handle a red one. I sometimes like auto-stuff, but want all the manual options as well. BUT – interchangeable lenses and 4 Channel audio would be a must for a cam of my taste!

I totally agree .. interchangeable lenses and 4-channel audio = must-have and worth an extra $1000 if need-be!

[Florian Stadler]

Why on earth would you want to put a Nikon full frame 35mm lens onto a 2/3" size sensor? You will be able to get a much better lens performance and speed from a lens designed for a smaller format. If you want a 35mm size sensor, you should go Red One. You can't have the cake and eat it too.

Scarlet would have been so much more attractive to me if it were to produce 3K in a sensor size that matches 3K windowed on the Mysterium. Somewhere between Super16 and 35mm depth of field with fast, light lenses...

But for under 3K$ impossible...

[Gene Crucean]

Remember, they didn't say that audio wasn't included. It's just not in the list like a lot of other things that most likely are included.

[Choptop]

No let me see...

Scarlet 3K....



6. Fixed lens.





where does it say this?

[Jun-Dai]

Another vote for interchangeable lenses (S16, 35mm with serious crop, . . . anything!)

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

where does it say this?

I meant un-detachable. It's a zoom lens.

[Axe]

Remember, they didn't say that audio wasn't included. It's just not in the list like a lot of other things that most likely are included.

Like where the heck is the power source for that baby beast?

[FractureD]

Why on earth would you want to put a Nikon full frame 35mm lens onto a 2/3" size sensor? You will be able to get a much better lens performance and speed from a lens designed for a smaller format. If you want a 35mm size sensor, you should go Red One. You can't have the cake and eat it too.


But this is exactly what people have been doing with Canon Series cameras since the L's back in the early nineties and throughout the XL line of cameras today. And those sensors are even smaller. Also, 2/3 lens are not usually within the budget of an indie film maker as they command a hefty "professional broadcast" price.

But even compared to a 35mm motion picture frame, the "full-frame" Nikon lens are designed for 35mm Still Pictures, a format considerably larger, but they still perform well.

-liam

[Chosei Funahara]

I rather have fixed lens than B4 mount or C mount lenses.
The censor is 2/3".
Only good, or super good B4 mount lenses are Zeiss DigiPrimes.
Can you afford it?
Scarlet is pro camera.

[Gene Crucean]

Like where the heck is the power source for that baby beast?

Look at the back of it. "RED 12 volt"

I was assuming that's a drop in battery the size of an HVX battery.

[oldphart]

Old, I think of myself as more a photojournalist than any other kind of shooter and so this suits me very well.

Well, I'm really a computer geek so when it comes to photography I'm just a goddamn amateur. That's why I really want something lighter than the ONE, and am quite happy with 2k output.

My point is that the world has enough fixed-lens cameras. The only fixed lens I have which is GOOD is the one in my Minox B. Now, THAT would have been a cool pocket digital camera - for small pockets.

There is no doubt the Scarlet will be a big hit with the more enthusiastic home video crowd. If the price speculations are anywhere near reality, the Scarlet will be cheaper than my wife's Sony. That means it could be made with an exchangable lens and still be very reasonably priced for a professional tool, but it would probably move the price out of range for the great mass of amateurs. I guess RED have seen a need for high production volumes.

So, the main reason I'm disappointed is that I was expecting a professional pocket camera rather than a nice, cheap point-and-shoot camera. I have a little Panasonic in the side pocket of my laptop bag. It will serve until I can get a replacement, even though the quality leaves a lot to be desired.

[shalom]

As much as I would like a swappable lens, I understand the reasoning behind not putting one on the Scarlet, which is meant to be a "pocket cam" (or has that moniker been dropped now?). I just hope and trust that the lens is a good one that focuses well, and that manual focus-pulling can be done precisely. Obviously, a tremendous lot hinges on this point.

[Tom Lowe]

This sounds like a great camera at an amazing price! I have no doubts this will have use in professional applications. I agree with the other poster about the ridiculously miniscule DOF that some people keeping hammering on. Going 1.2 DOF on every shot gets old. Most 'real' flicks don't use such shallow DOF to that degree. I don't understand this craze about going so shallow? And those wanting interchangeable lenses and full sensors, etc., don't they have One camera that does that with another on the way? This Scarlet is not in that category and some of us appreciate this niche. Obviously not all of us, but plenty enough to make a camera for those of us who do. Hey, I'm just voicing my opinion like everyone else. I think there's a camera out there for pretty much everyone... nothing perfect, but it's getting better and better out there all the time! Good luck to everyone with their projects, the future is lookin' GOOD!

Hey Buck, it's great to see you here! I'm one of your biggest fans over at flickr. I didn't know you had an interest in moving images.

The reason a lot of people are talking about fixed lenses is everyone knows that most cinema people are going to try to mod this thing with 35mm adapters and any other way they can to shoot with interchangable lenses. You are a great still photographer, but I doubt you would want to shoot "point and click" cameras with fixed lenses for your stills. Same thing with video.

[Gene Crucean]

Exactly. I want interchangeable lenses mainly because of image flexibility.

[Axe]

Look at the back of it. "RED 12 volt"

I was assuming that's a drop in battery the size of an HVX battery.

Thanks,
I did not see that on the pictures of the unpainted prototype under glass.

(On a side note) Looking at the back the prototype again (and I understand its a prototype) I am not sure how comfortable I am about the cf slots being seemingly uncovered when sans cf card and exposed to all the gunk floating around in the world. That is probably not a big issue and I guess that's why we have plastic bags and gaffers tape.

[Dylan Reeve]

At a $3k price point people are going to want a camera that 'just works' - that means has a lens.

Potentially RED could make a few lens options and have their own lens-mount on the camera - but otherwise I don't think removable lenses would really work out - there's no obvious candidates. 35mm Still lenses are too big (physically and image size). C-mount are expensive and not well suited. Anything that's not built in, or built for the camera will introduce operation difficulties (no zoom rocker, for examples, no autofocus). How are you going to control a big lens and hold the camera? You can't rest it on your shoulder.

Hopefully 8x is enough - should be.

Personally I'd like to see it offered with a couple of interchangable lens options (specifically designed for the camera) but I think the attached lens is okay too.

[John Caballero]

I guess you get what you pay for. Red may make Scarlet an interchangeable lens camera along the way but most likely not. If you have good range, sharpness, etc. with the fixed lens and that is what they give you, then buy it and use it to the best of its abilities. If you want something else and they don’t grant you your wish, then get a Red One, or better yet an Epic.

[David Dennis]

Why are people thinking this is subject to change at Jim's whim?

It seems to me that to create a camera body that would work with interchangeable lenses, you'd have to redesign the whole thing, and of course it would be a lot bigger/fatter/etc.

D

[killfilm]

Why are people thinking this is subject to change at Jim's whim?

It seems to me that to create a camera body that would work with interchangeable lenses, you'd have to redesign the whole thing, and of course it would be a lot bigger/fatter/etc.

D

from red.com

SPECIFICATIONS, DELIVERY DATES AND DESIGN ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE... COUNT ON IT

[Buck Forester]

Hey Buck, it's great to see you here! I'm one of your biggest fans over at flickr. I didn't know you had an interest in moving images.

Hola, Tom! Gracias, and yes, actually I like moving images better than stills. I'm in the process of building an HD studio for some wilderness adventure flicks... can't wait! I wanted to wait until NAB before I bought my camera... still looks like it'll be the EX1 for now. This Scarlet sounds really cool but it's not ready yet.


The reason a lot of people are talking about fixed lenses is everyone knows that most cinema people are going to try to mod this thing with 35mm adapters and any other way they can to shoot with interchangable lenses. You are a great still photographer, but I doubt you would want to shoot "point and click" cameras with fixed lenses for your stills. Same thing with video.

I agree that the 'cinema indies' will probably try to do the 35mm adaptors, but there's a whole market out there that is not just cinema indies. I plan on selling adventure flicks, creating wilderness stock footage, and possibly some high-def broadcast on cable channels. I don't need 35mm adaptors (I actually get bored of the shallow DOF flicks I keep seeing... it's a craze or something, sorta like HDR for digital photography). I'm sure this camera, like the EX1, has plenty of DOF for most uses, including cineman stuff. I don't see many movies at the theater with hugely shallow DOFs throughout the movie, so I'm at a loss why it's so popular. Maybe a backlash because for so long digital camcorders had such deep DOF, and film had shallow capabilities, that now everyone just wants to shoot a leaf or twig at F 1.2 to go "wow, cooOOool!", ha! I don't know. I'm not savvy yet in the videography world so take everything I say with a grain of salt and a shot of tequila. In still photography most pros shoot interchangeable lens cameras, but most pros expect to pay top dollar for them. If a point-n-shoot with a fixed lens came along that could shoot RAW at 21 MP, and only cost $400, there'd be some great applications for such a camera and I'd sure buy one. Like I said, for the stuff I plan on doing (and plenty of other people I'm sure) is to use a camera like the Scarlet for certain types of applications (mounted to kayak, mounted underneath car, use for backcountry underwater shots, strapped to top of backpack, crammed into a crevice for a cool perspective shot, making unobtrusive public footage, having a camera ready at all times while hiking instead of packed away inside the backpack, attach to the base of my flyrod while casting for a different perspective, etc., etc., stuff that would be hard with a larger camera with bulky lenses). I would think (and I'm just thinking outloud) that people wanting to make cinema movies with interchangeble lenses and no real "space/weight" constraints would not want such a small unit. And if they're thinking cinema indie flicks, I would think if it's a "serious" flick they'd have some resources behind them to buy or rent a camera with those types of features (unless it's just a hobby or making fun cool flicks for family and friends). I mean, think about it. If RED made this camera like so many people are whining about, why would they bother making the RED One model? I'm guessing there's a reason why some cameras are 2-3 grand and some are 17 grand and some are 80 grand. Canon could make a DSLR still camera that shoots 21 MP with a fast shutter and charge $1,000, but why would they do that? The market says they can get a lot more than that. For the features I don't think anything can touch the specs of Scarlet (yet, anyways, I doubt the competition is giving up and may have something by the time its released). I'm sure Jim Jannard is a really nice guy and everything but I don't think he formed a RED ONE 501(C) and uses it as his charitable donation vehicle! :Þ Remember, I'm just jabberin' like everyone else here.

[Tom Lowe]

Buck for deep-focus landscape stuff and some of the other things you are mentioning, yes, scarlet will be ideal (not sure how wide the lens is yet, though). For indie cinema, not so much. There is just a gap in the prosumer cinema camera field right now, and some people thought scarlet might fill it. Turns out to be a different type of camera, with its fixed lens. That's not good or bad, it's just good for some people's needs, bad for others. :)

BTW, we should try to hook up this summer if you're up in the sierras. I'm going to be in Lone Pine-Yosemite-Bridgeport and that general area for a couple of months this summer shooting DLSR timelapses. Maybe do a day hike or something. I'll shoot you a pm on flickr one of these days.

[Isaac Brody]

I'm gonna guess that since Jim owns just about every lens made that whatever he puts in front of Scarlet will have to meet his expectations. I think that's it's a good bet that the glass will rock.

[Luis Caffesse]

I'm guessing that's a safe bet, Isaac.
I still can't believe we're even talking about 3k at $3k, much less RAW.
My god, that's nearly what I paid for my first DV camera and it didn't even have 1/3" chips!

I for one will be thrilled with a fixed lens on Scarlet - if all other specs stay relatively in the ballpark.
I can't imagine RED would bother releasing a 3K camera with a junk lens on it.
That wouldn't make any sense.

That said - the things I really hope we see are some real 'on lens' manual controls - Focus ring, Iris, and Zoom.
But - given the form factor I'm doubting that's going to happen.