Reasons to go for C300 over RED Scarlet X?

[Brian Drysdale]

The RED Brick batteries are somewhat larger than the Canon Battery Pack BP-955. I don't know about the Scarlet, but the RED One has been pretty power hungry any time I've been on a shoot with one. Although, I'd assume it's better.

I guess how good the sensor actaully is within the C300 will decide if it becomes an item that needs upgrading during the working life of the camera.

There are a number of factors to decide when selecting a camera, because none are perfect and they all have strengths and weakness. They won't be the right camera for every project or its workflow requirements, so you need to work out which one you either rent or buy.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Meryem Ersoz

I would say that we have RED to thank for re-inventing the market - without RED pushing the envelope, you would be waiting a very, very long time for that F3 or C300.

Hmm. I'm not sure. I think the original Red was pushing up and competing against the higher end of the market, not really re-inventing it.

I think the real spur for the market re-invention was video coming onto stills cameras, especially DSLRs, and especially Canon. And Larry Thorpe has admitted they were taken by surprise themselves, and the C300 is the reaction to that. It was also DSLR video which spurred Panasonic and Sony on, surely?

And whilst Panasonic then just boxed a still sensor in a more ergonomic video-friendly body, then I'd say it was Sony with the F3 and FS100 who took the next really big step with a large format sensor specifically designed for video. At that time Scarlet seemed a long way away.

As far as upgradeability, then I'm reminded of computers I've bought with just that in mind. Each time, when the time came to think about it, it just seemed more sensible and cost effective to start again from scratch with everything brand new......

[Ken Diewert]

Hey Meryem,

Good to hear from you on this. I was on the outside looking in at Red without paying too much attention until recently when a friend bought an Epic and i had a chance to use it. So I started to look seriously at the Scarlet as it's price is do-able for my next cam. I say do-able in that the 15k base production pack seemed very reasonable. I was surprised (it didn't take too much digging) to find that the base kit was not nearly enough to get going with, and that it would be reasonable to add at least 5k in media/power to get going.

Jim Jannard pushed the technology forward. There is no doubt. In 5 short years, he has reconfigured the landscape and we all benefit. I love Red and what they've done. But personally, I'll wait a little longer before sipping the Cherry kool-aid.

One of the companies will be getting 15 or 20k from me in the next year or so, I just don't know yet which one.

[Meryem Ersoz]

Originally Posted by David Heath

Hmm. I'm not sure. I think the original Red was pushing up and competing against the higher end of the market, not really re-inventing it.

I think the real spur for the market re-invention was video coming onto stills cameras, especially DSLRs, and especially Canon. And Larry Thorpe has admitted they were taken by surprise themselves, and the C300 is the reaction to that. It was also DSLR video which spurred Panasonic and Sony on, surely?

And whilst Panasonic then just boxed a still sensor in a more ergonomic video-friendly body, then I'd say it was Sony with the F3 and FS100 who took the next really big step with a large format sensor specifically designed for video. At that time Scarlet seemed a long way away.

As far as upgradeability, then I'm reminded of computers I've bought with just that in mind. Each time, when the time came to think about it, it just seemed more sensible and cost effective to start again from scratch with everything brand new......

That's an interesting re-write of history, which effectively eliminates RED's influence entirely. I don't buy it - that's pure bias.

You should also give a shout-out to all those years of third-party 35mm ground glass adapters. People wanted 35mm imaging way before Canon surprised themselves with their first hybrid. Demand was high. The problem was that no one was giving it to them, at a price that anyone could afford.

The first RED ONE was an attempt to fill that gap - you can actually dig into the archives here in the dvinfo.net Panasonic forum and find a post by Jim Jannard feeling annoyed with the trickleware business model, expressing his frustration at how the major camera manufacturers were withholding features from their customers. That was his impetus for developing RED.

I have no bias here. I own an EX-1r and like it very much. I own a 1DsMark II and a 7D - use it primarily for timelapse, because I find it a bit fiddly for video, unless I decide to dump another bunch of money into the right accessories. I've owned a GL2, XL2, XHA1, HV-10, HV-20 - not to mention a boatload of Canon lenses. I like Sony and Canon gear. I've shot the F3 - it's a bloody marvel. I'm sure I'll wish I owned a C300, too, I like the form factor personally. It's cute.

I only chimed in, because some of the assumptions about SCARLET on this thread seemed limited or incorrect. Since there is no RED forum here, the discussions tend to be thin on reliable information about the cameras and, in some cases, oddly biased or hostile.

I can never really understand bias or hostility towards particular cameras. I love em all. I want them all. Heck, my ten-year-old and I enjoy making her short films with my Flip....everything is beautiful and nothing hurts.

to Brian - just fyi, the RED brick battery life on an EPIC isn't in any way comparable to a RED ONE. I got about 45 minutes/brick on the ONE. I get 2-1/2 - 3 hours from a Brick on my EPIC (I think - I've never timed it, but I usually only change out the battery once before lunch and have never run through two before lunch) - so they've done a remarkable job of building a more power efficient camera - also, the 8-second start-up time versus the RED ONE eternity wait, makes shutting down and re-booting very easy...you'll be amazed at the improvements, if you get your hands on an EPIC or SCARLET.

I don't expect RED cameras to be for everyone, necessarily - but I do like them to be represented honestly - I think they have earned that, at least. Never has any company inspired such loyalty and such FUD, at the same time. Kind of a wild ride, in that way.

[David Knaggs]

Originally Posted by Ken Diewert

it would be reasonable to add at least 5k in media/power to get going.

The media/power costs for a Scarlet are a real concern (and thanks to Meryem for pointing out that the Red Bricks perform better than the RedVolts). I guess I've been "spoiled" for nearly 2 years with the PMW-EX1R, which just required buying an extra battery for a couple of hundred bucks to give me close to six hours running time (along with the supplied battery). This was a welcome change from the $2,000+ I'd spent on an Anton-Bauer system with my previous camera. And it looks like Canon battery solutions (for the C300, etc.) are similarly inexpensive like the Sony.

Media costs are a similar issue. The C300 records directly to CF cards (a massive winner in terms of media costs!) and I wonder if Red will "play nice" as people seek cheaper alternate media solutions with the Scarlet. I remember waiting a year or two before jumping on the EX1 bandwagon until I knew that:

1) The alternate media solutions had matured (MXM, MXR, etc.). I think I spent about $500 on an MXM solution which gives me 4 hours of recording at 1080p25 and I haven't had a glitch in nearly 2 years (although I have an SXS card for non-repeatable events).
2) Sony would "play nice" with these alternate media solutions and not issue new firmware to "lock out" these solutions or void everyone's warranty, etc. Sony were very smart about this and I'm sure that they sold a heap more cameras because of it. I'm not so sure about RED's attitude to this with the Scarlet.

So the "hidden" media/power costs actually make the C300 seem a slightly better financial proposition overall. (Unless better alternate solutions emerge for the Scarlet.)

The biggest issue for me (always more than 50%) with any camera I buy is: my personal aesthetic response to the images the camera produces.

I can't tell a thing from the C300 footage I've seen so far. It's all so heavily stylized and graded that I have no idea what the camera by itself can do. For example, I loved it when Doug Jensen took out an F3 and shot correctly exposed footage with a really good Picture Profile (scene file) and no (or very minimal) grading.

It's a bit like the days before the Digital Intermediate. The DP would select the film stock, correctly expose the footage and the lab would develop it. Today, I would equate the old-style "film stock and development of footage" to the modern camera's processing of the footage (sensor, A/D conversion, Optical Low-Pass Filtering, quality of the internal electronics, etc.) plus the selection of the Picture Profiles.

This is what tells me "what the camera can do", rather than "what an expert colorist can do".

The footage which made me fall in love with the "look" of the Epic was shot by an early Epic-M owner who just plopped the camera on the dashboard of his car (but he really knew how to shoot) as he drove home from picking up his camera and issued it ungraded (or with very minimal grading). I love how the Epic creates its images (sensor plus electronics) and that has nothing to do with the RAW workflow (which, I feel, is more of a bonus for the colorists). I'm not so sure at this point about the Scarlet with its lesser spec'd sensor and reduced electronics. The very early Scarlet footage I've seen has left me underwhelmed to this point. But it's only early days and I look forward to other DPs shooting with it as they roll it out more broadly.

I'm really hoping that Doug Jensen (or someone similarly skilled at exposure and setting up great Picture Profiles) shoots with a C300 soon and releases the ungraded footage.

Perhaps there are two different "camps" forming up? Those who want 100% control of the final image in the camera (with only minor tweaking needed in color correction) and those who like to shoot as flat as possible to give their expert colorist the most to work with?

The cameras are certainly getting good enough these days to accommodate both.

[Steve Kimmel]

I've been very impressed by the footage I've seen so far but I agree that we have to wait to see ungraded footage to get a better sense for the "native" sensor (realizing that there really isn't anything that's totally ungraded -- except for perhaps log or raw footage that looks horrible because it is so flat).

One thing I haven't heard mentioned much is how much the new Canon lenses had to do with the look of the footage that's out there. Certainly, the lens has a major influence on the image. I'd like to see C300 footage with a lens I can afford on it.

[Dom Stevenson]

Slightly Off Topic, but i wonder when JVC will throw their hat in the ring? as they surely will. They're an interesting company in that they don't have any high-end models to protect and could come up with something interesting in the future.

[Dylan Couper]

Originally Posted by David Knaggs

Media costs are a similar issue. The C300 records directly to CF cards (a massive winner in terms of media costs!) and I wonder if Red will "play nice" as people seek cheaper alternate media solutions with the Scarlet. I remember waiting a year or two before jumping on the EX1 bandwagon until I knew that:

There is a Kingston 128gb 1.8" SSD for $250... Red's is $1800. It may not be as fast, but at that gap it won't be long before someone else starts cutting meat off Red's bone, esp if the Scarlet sells 10x more cameras making much more demand.

[Charles Papert]

I guess I've never quite understood why people need a single battery to run all day, unless they are climbing up Everest or something. Obviously the longer the better, but after a reasonable amount of time, is there that much difference between running for two hours or three? Especially since many of the people who are the most interested in long run times are the same ones who seem content to have their camera powered by one battery, their monitor by another, any other accessories by a third, all different types of batteries requiring different chargers...that to me is true inefficiency.

Can't really see why the C300, like the F3, couldn't be powered by an external battery (gold or v-mount) in a comparable form to the RED bricks. There are plenty of inexpensive versions of these batteries out there for those who don't want to spend the money on the name brands. A quick boot-up time means powering down is not exactly diabolical, but if it is, hot swap is as simple as getting a dual battery mount.

Guess I'm not seeing why this is even a discussion point between the cameras. All three can use shorter run small batteries, and all can be powered externally by larger packs.

[Meryem Ersoz]

Hi Charles - it was only a discussion point, because so much concern was repeatedly expressed over the short run time of RedVolts, without a clear understanding that Redvolts are not the only available option. But no need to beat the horse...

As far as the quality of SCARLET footage, it is fairly identical to EPIC footage, since they use the same sensor and same ASIC. Less resolution - 5K is really only good for stills on the SCARLET, fewer compression options, less data rate - but not much that will be visible to the naked eye - probably tough to distinguish side-by-side even.

What this means is that crappy shooting will look like crappy shooting, and good imaging will look good - it will be the hands, not the camera....I feel confident saying that F3 footage, SCARLET footage, and C300 footage will all have the capacity to look amazing...or not!

[Simon Wood]

Originally Posted by Meryem Ersoz

I can never really understand bias or hostility towards particular cameras. I love em all. I want them all.

Best quote of the day.

[Gavin Owens]

Originally Posted by Dom Stevenson

Slightly Off Topic, but i wonder when JVC will throw their hat in the ring? as they surely will. They're an interesting company in that they don't have any high-end models to protect and could come up with something interesting in the future.

I agree with this Dom. For me, they hit the nail on the head with thier ergonomics. Couple that with large sensor and an ability to swap between B4 lenses and PL/EF glass (if thats scientifically possible). Throw in a great codec and then it would be the camera of my dreams.
These "build your own camera from the brain up" scenarios prove combersome, costly and have too many variables that can go wrong in a run and gun shooting enviroment.
The C300 and Scarlet both look like wonderful cameras but also look high maintenance which if fine if it's a beautiful woman but not so much for a tool of the trade.....

[Brian Drysdale]

Originally Posted by Charles Papert

Guess I'm not seeing why this is even a discussion point between the cameras. All three can use shorter run small batteries, and all can be powered externally by larger packs.

I suspect it only becomes a factor when you're filming in a remote location where power for recharging batteries isn't available. The smaller capacity, but long running time can be easier manage using solar cells etc.

If you're getting 2 to 3 hours from a battery that's fine for most productions; you do start to notice the 1 hour battery changes and the RED One wasn't unique in that regard.

RED is an important player on the camera scene and have pushed the industry in new directions. Unfortunately, some of their fans seem to be blind to the reasons why not every production isn't shot with a RED.

People having strong reactions to different cameras isn't new and it can get to silly levels. One 1st camera assist insisted on having a specially ordered Selvyt lens cleaning cloth with Arri printed on it instead of the rental company's name because the Arri one was better. I guess he was blind to the fact that they were both made by the same company.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Meryem Ersoz

That's an interesting re-write of history, which effectively eliminates RED's influence entirely. I don't buy it - that's pure bias.

No, I'm not biased, I actually regard Red quite highly, and mine wasn't intended to be an anti-Red comment. I just think "Red re-invented the market" is over the top. There is no doubt they have had a profound effect, but until very recently mostly at the higher end, and I think it's more the $5-15,000k end that's being most referred to here.

You should also give a shout-out to all those years of third-party 35mm ground glass adapters. People wanted 35mm imaging way before Canon surprised themselves .......

Going back further, yes. But they were very much a minority interest - maybe seeding the market rather than re-inventing it. It wasn't until video on DSLRs came along that there was an explosion in the numbers of users - and that's why I'd maintain it was video DSLRs that did most to "reinvent the market".

Look at the time scales. It takes maybe a couple of years to bring a brand new camera to market, depending on how much technology gets recycled, and it's pretty obvious that Panasonic, Sony, and Canon started about the same time - the time that the use of video DSLRs started to explode.

[Meryem Ersoz]

I wasn't just referring to cameras, David, with the "RED re-invented the market" comment - I was also referring to a way of doing business - that is, withholding feature sets from their customers - as I mentioned, that was the issue underlying the invention, expressed right here at dvinfo, back in the day.

No matter how imperfectly they execute their schemes at times, RED does try to put their best technology forward at their best price points. They stay very true to that commitment. I'm pretty sure that they have forced a lot of hands in that regard.

This may change - as other companies begin to force *their* hands - in the beginning, they had no one to position themselves against, because there really wasn't anyone doing what they were doing, at the price point. DSLRs came shortly afterwards, forcing RED to re-consider the original SCARLET "pocket cam" concept, as well as 3K for $3K...and the Alexa, of course, on the other end. These have forced them to find a more refined identity for the company, beyond the desire to challenge trickleware.

But that is where it started. I respect those roots...it really did change the landscape for what other manufacturers are willing to do.