Reasons to go for C300 over RED Scarlet X?

[Jim Martin]

The $150 Canon BP-970 will run the C300 for about 7 hours...the XF300/305 for about 8 hours.....and it doesn't weigh anything......compared to the traditional bricks.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

[Simon Wood]

Originally Posted by Jim Martin

The $150 Canon BP-970 will run the C300 for about 7 hours...the XF300/305 for about 8 hours.....and it doesn't weigh anything......compared to the traditional bricks.

Hmmm....the same batteries I use on my vintage (but venerable) XLH1 (never been serviced in its long life - knock wood).

I was filming with it in a swamp yesterday, and I only had to use 2 batteries throughout the whole day (plus one for a nanoflash). When you are in the field you really do appreciate a long lived compact battery (especially when filming wildlife so you have the camera on standby the whole day).

On that trip I just chucked 5 batteries in a rucksack (along with my lunch) and was good for more than a days shooting.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Regarding a 2/3" RAW cam with 3K for $3K, RED "de-invented" the market. ;) Too bad, too!

RED certainly re-invented the market above $15K and transformed the conversation - especially regarding RAW.

Nikon's D90 opened up new possibilities, and Canon brought adequate quality to truly re-invent the market from $1K to $5K. Now they're refining the market above $15k, but with a different approach from RED.

It's a great time to be shooting video. But it's a shame that Scarlet 2/3" didn't come to fruition. It certainly wasn't for a lack of effort and investment. Hopefully we will see results from that effort over time. Maybe RED will take part in re-inventing some of the sub $15K market before long...

[Buba Kastorski]

i didn't see any so i went with RED;
I am not a fan boy of any camera brand, and I don't "love" RED team and Jim like some red forum users, i hate that flip with the fixed, and I do feel tricked into a scarlet X, but since I've touched R3Ds first time about 3 years ago, there is no question to me, i want raw, I don't even care that much if it's 4K, but I'm sure for some my clients it'll be important;
I know I can't run Scarlet all day on one small battery that weights nothing, and media is kinda expensive, but I also know that I will get image identical to R1MX, but smaller and lighter, and Epic (except for 5K and high frame rates) and that is pretty high quality for the price; I appreciate opinions from all informed sources including Mr Bloom's comments about their experience with RED cameras, but I need to have my own, i might just get rid of it after couple months or so, and get F3, or maybe even something better after NAB 2012, but not C300;

[Jad Meouchy]

just wait until fluid lenses start reaching the market...

[Dylan Couper]

Originally Posted by David Heath

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".

Just to clarify... You mean an explosion of people shooting S35, not an explosion of new shooters. I wouldn't say they reinvented that market, as much as redefined it. Same user, different tool. But I'd agree that it's probably the most important revolution since digital video.

[Tim Le]

The posts in the thread tend to be weighted towards the C300 because the original poster specifically asked why you would choose the C300 over the Scarlet. On paper it seems like Scarlet crushes the C300 mercilessly, but when you dig deeper into the operational aspects, the C300 can actually be much more attractive. So that's what this thread was exploring.

I didn't mention Red Bricks or large batteries in my comparison because the C300 would still run longer comparatively and using them would require building up both cameras with more accessories and cabling. At that point, power might not be big issue.

But if you're trying to keep the camera light and compact or just looking at the start up costs, then I think comparing the internal batteries is fair. It's a very big difference. Furthermore, with the C300, you don't even need the side handle to power it so you could strip it down further if you wanted, unlike Scarlet which requires the side handle or another module to power it.

I think lower power draw is a great benefit that adds convenience and lowers heat dissipation. Less batteries are needed so that's good for the environment too.

Regarding the interchangeable lens mounts, Canon did think of this but according to Larry Thorpe they made a conscious decision not to. The reasons were they didn't want issues with tolerances and a fixed mount could be made to be more rigid. It's just a decision they made. We'll see if that was the right one. A standard EF mount does have some rotational play, like Charles mentioned. I'm not sure if they did anything about this (like RED did on their Canon mount), but I'm guessing they didn't since it looks like just a standard EF mount.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Dylan Couper

Just to clarify... You mean an explosion of people shooting S35, not an explosion of new shooters. I wouldn't say they reinvented that market, as much as redefined it. Same user, different tool. But I'd agree that it's probably the most important revolution since digital video.

Arguably a bit of both - yes, an explosion of people shooting large format video, but possibly more people in total as well. The ground glass adaptors involved not just their own cost, but that of the base camera as well - with DSLR video that was a huge drop in cost, and it's quite likely led to users coming along who previously hadn't been able to afford the equipment.

And the ground glass adaptors had their issues - loss of light etc. Many people likely just put up with the depth of field of 1/3" chips to avoid the hassles and cost of adaptors. That's why I do think here it was video DSLRs that "reinvented" the market.

The initial effect of Red was at a much higher price point. A profound effect, but maybe not truly revolutionary. Not in the way of DSLRs.

It also maybe needs putting in perspective. Not everybody wants shallow depth of field, and the call for it came out mainly from those only able to afford such as 1/3" - for a lot of work 2/3" was seen as optimum. And still is for many for that matter. Large format video may have been a revolution for some - others just had no need or interest at all. Hence the continuing and large market for 1/3" - 2/3" cameras.

[Alister Chapman]

Another reason why the C300 might be preferable is noise. I assume the Scarlet will need the same noisy fan cooling between shots that the Epic does. For long takes you may have heat issues without the fans running.

C300 and Scarlet really are very different tools. C300 will I expect be great for quick, no fuss, portable shooting for factual programmes like documentaries, corporate etc with some cross over into shorts, while Scarlet is more suited to narrative work like drama, low budget movies and shorts. Of course you can use either for both, but it might not be the most effective solution.

[Brian Drysdale]

Given how many of the comparisons are with the Alexa, the C300 could end up being used as the B or grab camera on TV dramas, replacing the DSLRs that have been used in recent years on those productions. Assuming that it was the size rather than the cost or fashion was reason for opting to use the DSLRs in this role.

[Don Miller]

I believe the C30 has a small fan that is not user controllable. We can assume that from the run time per battery that the C300 fan noise is not an issue.

It seems to me that buying the C300 for episodic television currently using DSLR was literally "made to order". I don't understand the position that no one's going to buy it. I expect a projects look to be dialed in "in camera" and an easy post production. Perhaps not state of the art in southern Cali, but a very real world solution for those trying to get the job done.

Part of the C300 positioning is to keep DSLR television from going F3. It's likely well positioned to fight the F3 in that market.
There are also probably many productions who would like an Alexa but can't afford it. The cost of the C300 rented or depreciated over 3 years isn't much.

Assuming the C300 is clearly more filmic than the F3, it should sell well. Specs are secondary. Canon competing in this way is historically exactly their thing. 5dII video happened because the images were beautiful, despite the many flaws.

A short answer to the O.P. is that you're going to need to shoot the Scarlet at 4K to produce great 1080p files. The C300 is easier. Time is usually money.

[Meryem Ersoz]

The posts in the thread are weighted towards the C300 because there's no RED forum here, therefore RED shooters don't tend to spend time on DVInfo. I happen to have friends and deep roots on dvinfo, so periodically wind up representing the RED viewpoint, in the absence of a larger voice.

(Not always crazy about that...but, as I said, I believe they have earned the right to be represented honestly, and, in the absence of a dvinfo presence, that does not always happen....)

A few inaccuracies that need addressed:

1) Tim, you don't need a side handle or module to power a brick. That is not accurate. My super light configuration consists of a single rod mounted to the back of an old RED ONE top handle, using a Zacuto widget and one 4'' 15mm rail. And a $200 ET battery plate. There are other 3rd party manufacturers who also have built plate systems (ViewFactor, Action Products, and also RED's own Backpack system, which I don't particularly like, I find it heavy and expensive). A lot of RED ONE users have simply recycled their RED Quickplate with v-mount...there are quite a few available options besides the ones you mention. I like my set-up because it counter-balances the lens - the EPIC can become front-heavy, with a big lens, so a bit of weight off the back can be a good thing.

2) I would say Larry Thorpe's decision not to make an interchangeable mount is simply a poor choice, whatever his rationale. Frankly, I'm a little amazed by it - we have people hacking still cams to build PL mount cameras. We have RED ONE owners, myself included, who have been falling all over themselves waiting on an affordable, workable EF solution, since 2008.

Not that many individual owners buying cameras at these price points are shooting a single style...

That he would admit that the success of the hybrid DSLR is a surprise, rather than a consequence of listening to what the customers wanted, should tell you something. I can ask Jim Jannard or Jarred Land direct questions, I tell them what I want and need. If you do it politely and respectfully, they'll respond more frequently than not. I would say they have probably given me direct answers to about 60% of my personal pestering questions on an open forum. That is pretty amazing, really. RED knows its customers very well. Not saying Canon doesn't - I own and like tons of their gear - but I think their agenda for selling product has a different approach - they watch what their competitors are doing and respond to that. Nothing wrong with that model, particularly, but I do think it puts limits and constraints on innovation.

3) I agree with Don that this will be a great broadcast camera option - I think it will be more apt to challenge Alexa than RED, in that regard, since Alexa owns more of the broadcast market....it would definitely be a great crash cam or B cam.

But Don, it isn't accurate to say that you have to shoot 4K to get good 1080 files out of a SCARLET. 3K is a very good option which saves space, still gives the advantages of oversampling, and allows faster playback and transcoding. 2K is an option - I have heard rumors about a lack of quality at 2K at 23.98, but I have not shot any EPIC at 2K, except for high-speed 300fps - and it looked frickin' amazing! (usually, I've found that people who get bad images overcranked are failing to re-calibrate the black shading of their cameras...done right, it's soooo awesome.)

Sound Devices Pix is a very popular monitoring/1080 recording device. It isn't cheap, but to say that you have to shoot 4K to get 1080 is not the full story.

4) And lastly, I can see where you and I differ on the definition of "revolutionary," David - you are measuring it by the number of units sold. I am measuring it by impact on both the industry and individuals. By your measure, number of units, I suppose you're right. But I don't know any Academy Award-winning films shot on a DSLR. Major successful businesses have originated around RED camera expertise (LightIron and Offhollywood come to mind). I don't know jack about fashion photography, but in under a year, the EPIC has been used by many of the top names in photography to shoot spreads for all of the major magazines. When you see major motion pictures like the Hobbit and Pirates 4 shot on a camera built by a company that is about five years old - well, I would call that a revolution. Not just "profound" - but totally radical, dude!

Arri, Panavision, and Aaton did not making film cameras this year because of DSLRs. It is a RED (and Alexa and Genesis and SI-2k) phenomenon. A digital cinema phenomenon. That is a paradigm-busting change.

At a personal level, I started shooting RED cameras about three years ago, and I landed my dream job shooting a Nat Geo special (would never have happened with a DSLR, never) and am friends with several A-list actors, with whom I've worked - and, remarkably, all done from Colorado, a state that doesn't even have film incentives, let alone a film industry - without RED cameras, that never happens.

I don't know what your yardstick for revolution is, but my ringside ticket to the RED sideshow has parked me next to some remarkable paradigm-shifting, revolutionizing stories.

I don't hear these same stories from DSLR shooters - I hear people being much happier with the quality of their images - but I don't hear story after story about how that the camera has launched them into new realms of experiences.

Those days may be over, to an extent, now that there are so many S35 choices - I think the window to travel through that wormhole was somewhat limited and is already closing again. But there is no doubt in my mind that RED changed the paradigm for imagining what was possible, rather than just making prettier pictures.

I'm willing to entertain the possibility that I'm wrong on this one - but really, I know tons of people shooting DSLRs - and for the most part, they are shooting better images of the same stuff they were shooting before - it hasn't re-defined their business.

Sorry for the lengthy post...

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Meryem Ersoz

... there's no RED forum here, therefore RED shooters don't tend to spend time on DVInfo.

Actually it's the other way around... RED shooters don't tend to spend time on DV Info, therefore there's no RED forum here. All of the RED shooters are on reduser.net where they rightfully belong. I'm grateful that some of them such as yourself come back to DVi from time to time, but reduser.net is where Jim and Jarred are, it belongs to Jarred, and it's a real-names-only forum. *Everybody* is there, including me, I read it regularly. Therefore there's not much point to having a RED forum here.

We used to have one here, but people were using it mainly to post links to reduser.net, but that's not how DV Info works. DV Info runs message boards about gear, and how to use gear. DV Info doesn't run message boards about other message boards. That's meta-discursive, and that ain't us. So the obvious solution was to replace our RED forum, which was mostly filled with reduser links, with a direct link to reduser itself. I can't think of anything more foolish than trying to compete with reduser for its own traffic, and I sure as hell don't want to make any enemies.

[Meryem Ersoz]

fair enough, Chris - no intent to misrepresent you or DVinfo here....I was not taking issue with your decision -

but I don't think the reason that the thread tends to be weighted towards the C300 is as Tim says - because the OP asked the question about why you would choose the C300 over SCARLET - I think it tends to be weighted that way because the RED user base is absent. Otherwise, I wouldn't be the sole person trying to straighten the record. I can let it go, though.

...just happy when I have a camera in hand, that is good enough for me!

[Dom Stevenson]

Meryem

As i recall, two weeks ago this forum was full of people moaning about the Canon's shortcomings and hailing the second coming of the Scarlet, so i don't think there is any shortage of Red fans on DVinfo. Now things have settled down, many are starting to have a second look at the C300, aided by reports of far more reasonable prices than originally suggested, and sobering articles by Red owners like Phil Bloom.

Further, AFAIK nobody here has actually seen a single frame of footage from this camera we've been hearing about for several years, and we shall be none the wiser till we do. All we know is it's more than tripled in price since all the fanfare about a 3 grand professional camera back in the day. Given that nobody has seen this camera in action it seems a little early to be comparing it with anything at all. However there are several reasons - outlined by Tim Le and others - why the Canon will make more real world sense for many users, regardless of how good the Red turns out to be.