Fixed or Interchangable

[George William Allen]

Since i'm not one for pacing out posts, I will try and make this as short and sweet as possible. As far as I am aware with the RED scarlet there will be essentially 2 choices available to anyone wanting to buy a 2/3 chip camera:
(a) - A complete kit with a fixed lens. (~$5,000 after you bought a spare memory card)
(b) - An incomplete kit with no lenses at all. (~$11,000 after you buy the primes & very essential accessories / ~6,000 without RED primes)

I find myself in a dilemma when considering the options available to me... As a student I tend to film low budget productions, every spare penny always goes towards extra lights, gels, filters or indeed most importantly - time! As a cinematographer I much prefer to shoot on primes, especially as you get a lot better quality for your money. However I have to consider if in this scenario it is really worth it! Also, in turn this brings me on to my second dilemma - I am not awfully fond of RED lenses. (This would also pose a problem for the fixed zoom, although hopefully RED are paying extra attention to making it excel).

Now, here is the flip side to the coin. In the event where lenses are not an issue, in your (the general readers of this post) opinion, would you think it would be worth paying ~$7,000 for the cinema system, utilising a mix match of expensive still lenses?

My only problem with using still lenses:
-breathing (not such a big issue for me as I am mainly using primes)
-lower quality? / Is this debatable depending on the quality of the still lens? I know it cuts out the FoV of the lens, but surely a really decent stills prime would perform better than the fixed on 7x?
-iris width doesn't reset until shutter is released on some still lenses (or until you reset f stop).
-harder to pull focus

But would I be willing to sacrifice all this to tie me over until I get a better set of lenses for the cinema system!?

As a cinematographer I seriously value being able to choose a set of lenses for a shoot (even if its rental), I feel its a big part of doing what I do! Man this is a choice I hoped I would never have to make... Short term or Long term satisfaction.

Please help.

Edit: By the way, first post - Hello everyone!

[Stephen Gentle]

Hi, and welcome!

(a) - A complete kit with a fixed lens. (~$5,000 after you bought a spare memory card)
(b) - An incomplete kit with no lenses at all. (~$11,000 after you buy the primes & very essential accessories / ~6,000 without RED primes)

Wow, I'd forgot that the fixed was so cheap - for some reason I thought it had gone up to $5,750 (which I still thought was a bargain), but checking again it actually is $4,750. I still can't believe that people are complaining about the price of a camera that shoots higher resolution and frame rates than the F23 (and in REDCODE, a better codec than the Sony) that is cheaper than an EX1...

Right, anyway, back to the question - In my opinion (and I'm sure some will disagree with me), I don't think its worth it to get the interchangeable if you want to use 35mm still glass. I'd only really be leaning that direction if I already had an investment in 2/3" B4 lenses or 16mm Cine glass. The RED primes for 2/3" would be a good option, but personally I don't want to commit to buying 2/3" glass at the moment.

You could use 35mm still glass, but I don't like the idea of my 18mm lens on Scarlet looking more like a 40mm one would on an S35 or DX camera.

Personally I intend to get the fixed and use that for a few years, and then upgrade to the s35 brain so I can use my still lenses.

[George William Allen]

Interesting, but ofcourse so many people will have the same plan surely the cameras will depreciate like hell!

[Stephen Gentle]

Interesting, but ofcourse so many people will have the same plan surely the cameras will depreciate like hell!

I don't think I could ever bring myself to sell my first RED camera, so I don't think that'll be a problem for me!

[Cid J Salcido Uyarra]

I'm on the same boat and I've been giving it much thought. I'm always going back and forth. I like the interchangeable because it's a smaller body than the fixed. But what I hate is that if you do go interchangeable you're pretty much are forced to get mini Primes and I don't like that idea (You could buy another Fixed Scarlet for the price of a full complete Mini Primes Kit). I could use my Canon glass and old Nikkor but the crop is going to be a pain not to mention having to deal with lens mounts all the time. Plus what happens if Red decides not to support 2/3'', your stuck with MiniPrimes that will work for...?

After being sold on interchangeable I decided to go with a Fixed once released. Let me tell you why....

-Do you really need to swap out lens that's a 2/3'' sensor? Why not have a camera that does it all. I mean the fixed Scarlet is a EX1 on steroids. Plus it's one lens (THAT'S FREE)and it does all you really need, lets be honest here (Unless you want super wide you may have to get a lens attachment)

-If you have someone new(amateur) or are renting your equipement it will be easier for an them to put it on Auto and let them rock out.

-This will be my primary camera since it does everything my MkII can't do. So when the MkIII comes out, I will get one and that will be my 35mm interchangeable camera that I can tweak my rig to however I please and have my Fixed Scarlet for Run-Gun type shooting plus super frame rates. It'd be the best of both worlds until I can work up to an Epic. Unless Red can give me a Scarlet S35 brain for $4K then I would go that direction.

www.vivaelcid.com

[David Rasberry]

For many reasons, 2/3" is not going away anytime soon. It is a popular robust and capable format on its own terms. Think of it as the digital equivalent of 16mm film.

No question fixed Scarlet is an exceptional value. Think of it as a full fly-by-wire remote controlled zoom lens with a free camera attached. The combination of a high quality 16mm or B4HD zoom lens of similar quality and the servo controls to run it would cost significantly more than a fixed Scarlet, even for used glass. A Scarlet cinema rigged this way will be larger than the fixed for the most part due to the size of the lenses. I have chosen to go this route to get a broader range of focal lengths, especially on the long end, than the fixed likely will offer even with extenders. My two primary zooms, a Cooke 9-50, and an Angenieux 12-240, will wind up costing around $3k-4k for both with service and conversion to PL mount. All manual operation, no electronic anything. Add another $1.5k for a used servo zoom setup minimum. To me the deciding advantage to 2/3" is the availability of compact wide range fast zoom lenses. Something that just is not available for 35mm.

For primes, the mini-primes will be the best cost vs performance value too. Good used 16mm primes are getting scarce and expensive due to their popularity with the LUMIX M4/3 shooters. If you move to S35 later, the mini-primes will still be usable for the 2k crop mode or you can keep the 2/3" for high frame rates and specialty shots in tight spaces. The next best value in a 16mm prime set is the Optar Illuminas, very fast at T1.3, but around twice the price of the mini-primes. You could use 35mm still lenses, but getting wide is a problem considering that the "normal" focal length lens for 2/3" is in the 12mm-16mm range and wides are more like 6mm-8mm.
Cheap 35mm lenses will not be sharp enough to get the best out of a 2/3" 5mp sensor.

[David Rasberry]

Interesting, but ofcourse so many people will have the same plan surely the cameras will depreciate like hell!

Considering the cheapest 2/3" camera package available today is just shy of $20k, I don't think this will be true for a very long time. Not all of us want or need 35mm as a shooting format, and 2/3" Scarlet at 3k will offer better resolution as an acquisition format than any 2k or 1080p native camera can at any price. I think people seriously underestimate the potential of this little camera.

[Daniel Valle]

If Scarlet 8x 2/3 benefits from the same low light capabilities as the MX Sensor on Epic/RED One it'll be the dream camera for run and gun documentaries.

Using ISO 2000 and having a useable image will be pretty big in this medium.

No more putting those god awful sun guns on top of the camera.