Does anyone have Scarlet vs Mark II or III low light footage? Or just low light alone

[Devon Music]

I also want to see how the depth of field compares to a t2i for example

[Scott Crawley]

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

[Nick Morrison]

For lowlight the 5D MKII has a native ISO of 160. It shoots clean at 320, usable at 640. For me, unusable at 1280.


The MX sensor is native 800 ISO. And seemingly can be pushed to 1600 w/ no problem. So that's at least a stop and half extra light.

Don't know about MKIII. We shot once on it, and from our chatter with the crew, it's seems to shoot clean even at 1280!


But all this is a moot point. None of this matters because Dragon is due to come out later this year. RED is promising new levels of DR and lowlight, so that's where the focus should be.

Why focus on the past when the future is knocking at our doorstep?

[Jeffrey Loewe]

For lowlight the 5D MKII has a native ISO of 160. It shoots clean at 320, usable at 640. For me, unusable at 1280.


The MX sensor is native 800 ISO. And seemingly can be pushed to 1600 w/ no problem. So that's at least a stop and half extra light.

Don't know about MKIII. We shot once on it, and from our chatter with the crew, it's seems to shoot clean even at 1280!


But all this is a moot point. None of this matters because Dragon is due to come out later this year. RED is promising new levels of DR and lowlight, so that's where the focus should be.

Why focus on the past when the future is knocking at our doorstep?

I'll shoot my Scarlet at 800 and it'll look like a completely different camera at 2000 ISO sometimes haha. I've found using different RED's has sometimes given me different results.

[Trevor Meeks]

The MX sensor is native 800 ISO. And seemingly can be pushed to 1600 w/ no problem. So that's at least a stop and half extra light.

MX sensor "native" ISO is 320.... you're shooting at 800 to protect highlights.

When you switch to raw preview, you're seeing what the sensor sees and that's 320 ISO. Try it out.

[Joseph Hutson]

MX sensor "native" ISO is 320.... you're shooting at 800 to protect highlights.

When you switch to raw preview, you're seeing what the sensor sees and that's 320 ISO. Try it out.

Ditto. I find myself at 500 or 640 ISO most of the time. It's easier to pull up/down from there than 320 or 800 in my opinion...

[Nick Morrison]

Ditto. I find myself at 500 or 640 ISO most of the time. It's easier to pull up/down from there than 320 or 800 in my opinion...

Cool, thanks guys. I always like adding new tools to the shed. This all sounds totally reasonable.

[Hector Berrebi]

here is a small freestyle comparison test of low light conditions we ran on our Scarlet and a C300

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD71BOhgjaI

and c300

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_xd78hfwW8&feature=plcp

hope this helps

[Leo. C. Rogers]

here is a small freestyle comparison test of low light conditions we ran on our Scarlet and a C300

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD71BOhgjaI

and c300

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_xd78hfwW8&feature=plcp

hope this helps

Nice.

I read the overview on the youtube vids and agree that the Scarlet looks way more cinematic. I would hazard a guess that the c300 was a lot easier to use and set up... As a Scarlet user I can testify that it's not a "plug and play" instrument. It's nothing like as tactically challenging as shooting on actual film but it is a natural bridge between celluloid and digital.

I have been shooting quite a lot in low/natural light and will try to upload some clips on this thread.

[Philipe Ratton]

At the end of the week I will post a fashion piece shot entirely with only available light at ISO 800.
I'm very impressed with Scarlet's low light after some grading. Very little noise.
And the small amout of noise in the image is the kind of texture I actually like.