A1 replacement thoughts

Joel Peregrine · September 23rd, 2008, 03:06 PM

Chris,

The blog referenced is not inaccurate and refers to Jannard's own post on a public forum. I would consider that to be as close to the real story as possible. Anything else, including the conjectures of the moderator on the same forum, are hearsay. Scrap may be a poorly chosen word, but the meaning is the same. Links to the post are in the blog entry and readers are free to make any judgement they wish to make based on the information (or lack of it) that has been provided.

Chris Hurd · September 23rd, 2008, 05:10 PM

Joel, the word "scrap" is not just a poorly chosen word, it's downright misleading. The meaning is certainly *not* the same and it seems to be intentionally chosen in order to negatively spin the fact that the camera is simply being redesigned.

If you want to get "as close to the real story as possible," just refer to the source, as I did, by pointing to Jim's original link at scarletuser.com. I don't see how anyone can possibly consider a third-party blog (which can't even properly identify RED's company CEO) as being more credible than RED's own domain. And yes, their forum moderator, being much closer to the source and much more closely involved, has exponentially more credibility than a passing blogger who obviously has not bothered to take in the full context of Jim's announcement.

I guess I'm adamant that readers be given the *full* story in order to be free to make any judgement they wish to make. They can get that full story in proper context by reading Jim's post in entirety along with the 550 replies it has generated so far. That's why it's so important to reference original sources as opposed to skewed, ill-informed and selectively quoted blurbs by third-party bloggers.

Joel Peregrine · September 23rd, 2008, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Joel, the word "scrap" is not just a poorly chosen word, it's downright misleading. The meaning is certainly *not* the same and it seems to be intentionally chosen in order to negatively spin the fact that the camera is simply being redesigned.

How about 'scrubbed':
Red Scarlet Concept Scrubbed, Re-Designed at FreshDV

'Replaced':
Camcorders: Red Scarlet Cam Replaced With a "New Vision"

'Starts over':
Red One starts over with Scarlet | Mystic Hackers

'Cancelled':
Technorati: Discussion about “Red Scarlet camera cancelled”

The fault is not with the bloggers, its with the company for not stating their plans clearly. Whether you like it or not the way news is reported and discussed is something the newsmakers need to think about before they start typing.

Chris Hurd · September 23rd, 2008, 07:05 PM

I take issue with "Cancelled." It is not cancelled.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joel Peregrine

The fault is not with the bloggers, its with the company for not stating their plans clearly. Whether you like it or not the way news is reported and discussed is something the newsmakers need to think about before they start typing.

Well on that point I agree with you wholeheartedly. I appreciate your stating it that way because it is of course absolutely true.

Yang Wen · September 23rd, 2008, 09:44 PM

Ah yes, good point on the lens size being an issue..

How about this idea though.. The camera will have the full 35mm sensor like the 5D2 (or an APS-C sized sensor).. The body will accept EF lenses which will work with the full sensor to achieve shallow DOF. It will also have a cropped sensor mode where you can mount a smaller lens designed specifically for this cropped area of the sensor? Nikon has this feature on the D3, I don't see why it wouldn't work in a video camera..

This will basically combine the DOF adapter into the camera.

Jonathan Shaw · September 23rd, 2008, 10:56 PM

Lets face it, these are exciting times and RED is cutting edge. I'm sure the reason why Jim hasn't stated their full plans is that it stirs more interest and in his company. He probably doesn't care whether Joe Bloggs puts on a forum a word that isn't completely accurate he just wants people to be talking about RED and getting excited and passionate about his product.
Scarlet probably has a few different flavours that she could come in and they are waiting to see what the competition is doing and what their tech guys can do to make her the best possible product.

Louis Maddalena · September 23rd, 2008, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yang Wen

Ah yes, good point on the lens size being an issue..

How about this idea though.. The camera will have the full 35mm sensor like the 5D2 (or an APS-C sized sensor).. The body will accept EF lenses which will work with the full sensor to achieve shallow DOF. It will also have a cropped sensor mode where you can mount a smaller lens designed specifically for this cropped area of the sensor? Nikon has this feature on the D3, I don't see why it wouldn't work in a video camera..

This will basically combine the DOF adapter into the camera.

That does sound like a good idea and I don't know enough about the theory behind it to know if it would work or not... but I don't think the camera needs a 20x lens just to be considered a video camera. I think just an EF mount would be sufficient and a good kit lens.

Petri Kaipiainen · September 24th, 2008, 01:12 AM

Cameras with larger sensors and exhancable lenses are there in the shops waiting for buyers. They cost around $100000 and up. Why would you like XH-A1 to be turned into one of those??? It is a perfect compromise considering size, features, quality and price. Why add a 12-wheel semi to a BMW and think it would be an improvement?

Besides a SLR lens is not a good video lens for many reasons. A pro video lens needs motorized zoom, precise manual focus with a possible rack focus, longer zoom ranges than typical high quality still lenses etc.

Kevin Shaw · September 24th, 2008, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petri Kaipiainen

Cameras with larger sensors and exhancable lenses are there in the shops waiting for buyers. They cost around $100000 and up. Why would you like XH-A1 to be turned into one of those???

If Canon could make an HD video camera with a large sensor and interchangeable lenses for a fraction of the cost of the cameras you mentioned, wouldn't that be a good thing? Oh wait, they just did it...

Jeff Kellam · September 24th, 2008, 08:23 AM

I believe full frame sensors will be relegated to the next generation UHD cameras. I really don't get why full frame is even suggested (except for DOF) when we don't need a 21MP sensor to downconvert to a 2.07MP (1920X1080) image.

If DOF were the only concern, the mfgs could increase the lens backfocus distance to the sensor and accentuate the DOF effect. Mfgs. are not going to do this because correct focus in video is critical and having greater DOF would only make getting perfectly focused shots even more difficult. For those of us using DSLRs, just think how hard it is to get the correct area focused when using a F1.4 aperture. You don't want that on an ENG video camera.

Maybe a micro 4/3 sensor though.

Kevin Shaw · September 24th, 2008, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Kellam

If DOF were the only concern, the mfgs could increase the lens backfocus distance to the sensor and accentuate the DOF effect. Mfgs. are not going to do this because correct focus in video is critical and having greater DOF would only make getting perfectly focused shots even more difficult.

Say what? If we wanted everything razor-sharp all video cameras would use smaller sensors and no one would even mention depth of field, but there are many situations where a larger sensor is preferable. And the new Canon SLR reportedly works very well in low light settings, which is another issue concerning many videographers.

As far as an XH-A1 replacement is concerned, a camera with a large sensor recording 39 Mb/sec on CF cards for under $5000 would be pretty sweet, and Canon has effectively shown they could do that.

Yang Wen · September 24th, 2008, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petri Kaipiainen

Cameras with larger sensors and exhancable lenses are there in the shops waiting for buyers. They cost around $100000 and up. Why would you like XH-A1 to be turned into one of those???

I do'nt get what you're trying to say.. should we be going "Hey lucky us, they have cameras costing $100,000 and up for what we want!" Lucky us that we have the option of spending that kind of dough if we want shallow DOF and good low light performance. Lucky for us that if we can't afford that price, none of cameras available to us for $4000 would offer those attributes!

Petri Kaipiainen · September 24th, 2008, 03:20 PM

What I was trying to say was that XH-A1 is what it is (and a great one) and that it is impossible to turn it into a 35mm FF video camera, and there is absolutelly no reason to do it. There are that kind of cameras already available, but for several reasons they cost a fortune. It is cheap to make a video capable DSLR or compact, but video capability does not turn them into serously usable video cameras. Usable for some applications, maybe, but a 5D2 is not a Panavision. There are good reasons why movie/video cameras are what they are and still cameras also. Technology does change things and progress is being made, but things like DOF are not governed by electronics, it is an optical thing. Software costs nothing to duplicate and sharp sensors are getting cheaper, but making a fast big zoom lens for a FF size sensor costs almost the same it has always done. And it is just as big as it always was, and there is no way around it.

Would you really like to carry around a XH-A1 MkII, about three times the size of MkI (three sensors and splitter prisms) and a 35-700mm F1.6 zoom? The front lens alone would be size of a dinner plate...

Asking for that would be akin to wanting the next BMW to be like a open pit 120 ton dumpster, because then you could move really big loads with it...

Different jobs, different tools.

September 23rd, 2008, 05:10 PM	#17
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Joel, the word "scrap" is not just a poorly chosen word, it's downright misleading. The meaning is certainly not the same and it seems to be intentionally chosen in order to negatively spin the fact that the camera is simply being redesigned. If you want to get "as close to the real story as possible," just refer to the source, as I did, by pointing to Jim's original link at scarletuser.com. I don't see how anyone can possibly consider a third-party blog (which can't even properly identify RED's company CEO) as being more credible than RED's own domain. And yes, their forum moderator, being much closer to the source and much more closely involved, has exponentially more credibility than a passing blogger who obviously has not bothered to take in the full context of Jim's announcement. I guess I'm adamant that readers be given the full story in order to be free to make any judgement they wish to make. They can get that full story in proper context by reading Jim's post in entirety along with the 550 replies it has generated so far. That's why it's so important to reference original sources as opposed to skewed, ill-informed and selectively quoted blurbs by third-party bloggers. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

September 23rd, 2008, 10:56 PM	#21
Jonathan Shaw Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sydney Posts: 552	Lets face it, these are exciting times and RED is cutting edge. I'm sure the reason why Jim hasn't stated their full plans is that it stirs more interest and in his company. He probably doesn't care whether Joe Bloggs puts on a forum a word that isn't completely accurate he just wants people to be talking about RED and getting excited and passionate about his product. Scarlet probably has a few different flavours that she could come in and they are waiting to see what the competition is doing and what their tech guys can do to make her the best possible product. __________________ www.ginclearfilm.com www.facebook.com/ginclearfilm

September 24th, 2008, 08:23 AM	#25
Jeff Kellam Major Player Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 656	I believe full frame sensors will be relegated to the next generation UHD cameras. I really don't get why full frame is even suggested (except for DOF) when we don't need a 21MP sensor to downconvert to a 2.07MP (1920X1080) image. If DOF were the only concern, the mfgs could increase the lens backfocus distance to the sensor and accentuate the DOF effect. Mfgs. are not going to do this because correct focus in video is critical and having greater DOF would only make getting perfectly focused shots even more difficult. For those of us using DSLRs, just think how hard it is to get the correct area focused when using a F1.4 aperture. You don't want that on an ENG video camera. Maybe a micro 4/3 sensor though. __________________ Panasonic HMC150/Canon A1/JVC HD1/Sony Vegas 8.0c

September 24th, 2008, 03:20 PM	#28
Petri Kaipiainen Major Player Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Espoo Finland Posts: 380	What I was trying to say was that XH-A1 is what it is (and a great one) and that it is impossible to turn it into a 35mm FF video camera, and there is absolutelly no reason to do it. There are that kind of cameras already available, but for several reasons they cost a fortune. It is cheap to make a video capable DSLR or compact, but video capability does not turn them into serously usable video cameras. Usable for some applications, maybe, but a 5D2 is not a Panavision. There are good reasons why movie/video cameras are what they are and still cameras also. Technology does change things and progress is being made, but things like DOF are not governed by electronics, it is an optical thing. Software costs nothing to duplicate and sharp sensors are getting cheaper, but making a fast big zoom lens for a FF size sensor costs almost the same it has always done. And it is just as big as it always was, and there is no way around it. Would you really like to carry around a XH-A1 MkII, about three times the size of MkI (three sensors and splitter prisms) and a 35-700mm F1.6 zoom? The front lens alone would be size of a dinner plate... Asking for that would be akin to wanting the next BMW to be like a open pit 120 ton dumpster, because then you could move really big loads with it... Different jobs, different tools. Last edited by Petri Kaipiainen; September 25th, 2008 at 02:27 AM.

September 23rd, 2008, 03:06 PM	#16
Joel Peregrine Major Player Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 689	Chris, The blog referenced is not inaccurate and refers to Jannard's own post on a public forum. I would consider that to be as close to the real story as possible. Anything else, including the conjectures of the moderator on the same forum, are hearsay. Scrap may be a poorly chosen word, but the meaning is the same. Links to the post are in the blog entry and readers are free to make any judgement they wish to make based on the information (or lack of it) that has been provided.

September 23rd, 2008, 09:44 PM	#20
Yang Wen Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 991	Ah yes, good point on the lens size being an issue.. How about this idea though.. The camera will have the full 35mm sensor like the 5D2 (or an APS-C sized sensor).. The body will accept EF lenses which will work with the full sensor to achieve shallow DOF. It will also have a cropped sensor mode where you can mount a smaller lens designed specifically for this cropped area of the sensor? Nikon has this feature on the D3, I don't see why it wouldn't work in a video camera.. This will basically combine the DOF adapter into the camera.

September 24th, 2008, 01:12 AM	#23
Petri Kaipiainen Major Player Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Espoo Finland Posts: 380	Cameras with larger sensors and exhancable lenses are there in the shops waiting for buyers. They cost around $100000 and up. Why would you like XH-A1 to be turned into one of those??? It is a perfect compromise considering size, features, quality and price. Why add a 12-wheel semi to a BMW and think it would be an improvement? Besides a SLR lens is not a good video lens for many reasons. A pro video lens needs motorized zoom, precise manual focus with a possible rack focus, longer zoom ranges than typical high quality still lenses etc.