There seems to be a lot of interest in comparing the Scarlet with that old standby of no-budget Indie filmmaking, the HVX200. It’s a little screwy to compare a camera that’s already on the market with one that won’t be out for a year (or more; I love Red, but they don’t exactly have the greatest track record for delivery dates), but I suppose it’s useful to put things in perspective for folks who are familiar with the HVX.

Scarlet is clearly going to generate a better image than the HVX, which resolves, in testing, somewhat less than 600 vertical lines. If Scarlet’s measured resolution is around 75-80% of its sensor’s pixel dimensions (which is about what the Red One is; can’t think of why Scarlet should be different), it should resolve about twice that many vertical lines, meaning around four times as much detail overall.

Now add high-bitrate raw recording. Processing the Scarlet’s 3K raw recorded image down to 1080p is going to produce something hard to tell from a 4:4:4 image, vs. the HVX’s 4:2:2 recording. So, we’ve got super-sampled 4:4:4 1080p vs. subsampled 720p 4:2:2. (Yes, the HVX has a 1080p recording mode as well, but the chips resolve a bit less than 720p, so the only real benefit is fewer compression artifacts.) Plus, you get all the advantages of raw recording, that I’ve discussed extensively in the past.

Of course, Scarlet is single chip, and three chip cameras sometimes do better in low light. But keep in mind it has a 2/3″ sensor. That’s measured across the diagonal. If you double the diagonal, you quadruple the surface area, so Scarlet’s single sensor is larger than the HVX’s three sensors combined. And that nice large sensor gets you shallower depth of field as well.

The HVX will probably still have some advantages for workflow (though it’s not impossible that by the time Scarlet ships, working with 3K REDCODE RAW in FCP will be as easy as working with DVCPRO HD currently is). And it does have a more conventional form factor, which might make some folks more comfortable. But specifically for no-budget indie filmmakers, the Scarlet is clearly the better camera, hands down, no contest. And even if Panasonic does introduce an HVX replacement by then, it’ll probably still cost twice as much as the Scarlet.

First off, go familiarize yourself with Scarlet’s tech specs, if by some unlikely chance you haven’t yet.

I’m still trying to puzzle out the relationship between the Epic and the Red One (which Red will continue to sell after the Epic starts shipping). The Scarlet, though, Red’s new 3K (and $3K) “professional pocket camera”… I’m pretty sure I’ve got that all figured out.

Why no interchangeable lenses?

One issue that has been raised over on RedUser is why the Scarlet doesn’t have interchangeable lenses, perhaps using low-cost SLR lenses. This notion doesn’t make a great deal of sense.

I think there’s definitely a market for a reasonably priced indie filmmaker’s camera with a photo lens mount. But it requires a Super 35 sized sensor to be practical (the widest 35mm SLR lenses available aren’t nearly wide enough for a 2/3″ sensor sans adaptor) which is substantially larger than a 2/3″ sensor. If my math is right, the Red One’s sensor has about three times the surface area of the Scarlet’s sensor, and anyone who knows anything about chip fabrication knows that costs climb very steeply as chip size goes up.

In other words, that indie filmmaker’s camera with a photo lens mount? It’s a Red One with a Nikon or Canon EF mount, which you can buy today (or soon, with EF). Would it be nice if there were a substantially cheaper and smaller camera body that did everything the Red One did? Sure. And there probably will be… if you’re willing to wait a few years.

Seriously though, this thing is nuts

Scarlet has a 2/3″ sensor. That’s already pretty nuts for $3K. I’m not aware of anything with HD resolution and 2/3″ sensors for under $10K, though I admit I haven’t been paying as much attention to the HD camera market since we jumped on board with Red.

Scarlet also has a 3K bayer sensor and records fairly lightly compressed raw data. This means it’ll probably produce a better 1080p image than any sub-$10K camera. (At least with good light… three chip cameras might do better in low-light conditions.) Maybe any sub-$20K camera (with the obvious exception of the Red One). That’s freaking insane! Oh, and it records across a wider variety of frame rates than a $50K Varicam. For $3000! This thing is nuts!

Who wants one?

The relatively slow lens may make this camera impractical for e.g. event videographers and documentary folks, unless the new sensor has higher sensitivity, of course. Record times might also be an issue, though larger CF media may solve this problem before the camera is shipping.

As a camera that can go places a full Red One rig can’t easily go, Scarlet will certainly be a great second camera for Red One owners. Perhaps even more importantly in the long run, though, every film student and low-budget filmmaker in the country who can scrape together $3K (but not $35K for a shootable Red One package) is going to buy one. And incidentally, become familiar with Red workflow…. In other words, Scarlet is a sort of “gateway drug” for higher-end Red products. This is absolutely brilliant, and I predict it will have some significant negative consequences for Red’s competitors over the years to come.

So… we haven’t been posting much in the last few weeks because we’ve been too busy running around with the camera. The good news is, we’ve learned a lot, and we’ve shot some great footage, and over the next couple of weeks we’re going to be sharing a lot of that.

This first post is going to discuss some physical aspects of working with the camera.

A full Red rig is a bit heavier than the 10 pound body weight might lead you to expect. Red’s accessories are cast steel, and pretty heavily build. They’re solid, but not exactly light. That said, we have managed to build rigs down to 17 pounds with Red Drives (not including lens, matte box, or follow focus, which introduce too many variables). Using CF can knock that down to 14 or 15.

We’ve found the most practical way to get a lightweight rig for handheld use is to eschew all the mounting hardware on the bottom of the camera, and the bottom rails — toss two top mounts, 12″ rails, the top handle (and top handle extension) on the top of the camera, along with a universal mount out in front of the forward top mount to attach the LCD screen to. Another universal mount hangs the Red Cradle off the back of the camera, with enough space to still reach in any use the controls (you don’t really need to see the screen on the back of the camera if you have the LCD screen attached). You can simply sit the camera on your shoulder and reach your arm around to hold it there by the top handle — works pretty well.

On the other end of the spectrum, with bottom rails, lens, matte box, follow focus, etc. a full rig can easily weigh over 30 pounds. Substantially more with a large zoom lens.

As far as Red’s mounting hardware goes, we’re generally happy overall, though the bottom plate shoulder dovetail could use some work. As has been widely reported, the bottom plate + shoulder dovetail wobbles a bit on a tripod. And it’s so heavy, and provides so little padding, that unless you absolutely need bottom rails when going handheld, it’s much easier to just leave it off for handheld configurations as well. As such, we’ll probably replace these parts with Element Technica hardware. (It’s not surprising that the ET stuff is a bit better… it costs a fair bit more.) We’ll probably pick up ET’s aluminum rods as well, to cut weight down more. We’re on the East Coast, where it’s not that hard to find 19mm gear, so we’re planning to stick with 19mm to maintain compatibility with the Red Cradle and QuickPlate.

Up next: using camera features