<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Scarlet: first look</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.indie4k.com/archives/85/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.indie4k.com/archives/85</link>
	<description>A blog about the technical, financial and creative aspects of HD and Ultra-HD independant filmmaking.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:59:54 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Prune</title>
		<link>http://www.indie4k.com/archives/85#comment-2256</link>
		<dc:creator>Prune</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 10:45:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indie4k.com/?p=85#comment-2256</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Hi there,
One question : Why do people compare the Scarlet to the HVX200 ? Why not comparing it with the Sony's EX1 or EX3 ?
Will the Scarlet have a place considering that ?
Will it have better image, sensibility, workflow and price ? Not sure... Time will tell, as usual :)
I just hope RED will sell this camera finished, not as a Beta like the RedOne still is :)&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi there,<br />
One question : Why do people compare the Scarlet to the HVX200 ? Why not comparing it with the Sony&#8217;s EX1 or EX3 ?<br />
Will the Scarlet have a place considering that ?<br />
Will it have better image, sensibility, workflow and price ? Not sure&#8230; Time will tell, as usual <img src='http://www.indie4k.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> I just hope RED will sell this camera finished, not as a Beta like the RedOne still is <img src='http://www.indie4k.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sky1walker</title>
		<link>http://www.indie4k.com/archives/85#comment-1491</link>
		<dc:creator>sky1walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 15:37:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indie4k.com/?p=85#comment-1491</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;but it certainly good to have a OPTION. look at sony's EX3. it comes with the standard fujion lens, but you can put a 35mm lens if you want or have to.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>but it certainly good to have a OPTION. look at sony&#8217;s EX3. it comes with the standard fujion lens, but you can put a 35mm lens if you want or have to.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Kenny</title>
		<link>http://www.indie4k.com/archives/85#comment-1490</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Kenny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 23:36:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indie4k.com/?p=85#comment-1490</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;The issue with putting (probably) a PL mount on the Scarlet to let it work with Super 16 lenses is that such lenses are &lt;i&gt;not&lt;/i&gt; cheap. Unless Red wanted to introduce its own line of cheap S16 lenses as well, there wouldn't have been any widely available glass options for a PL-mount Scarlet. Yes, there is some interesting used S16 glass circulating... but there just isn't enough of it out there compared with the volumes the Scarlet will probably sell in.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The issue with putting (probably) a PL mount on the Scarlet to let it work with Super 16 lenses is that such lenses are <i>not</i> cheap. Unless Red wanted to introduce its own line of cheap S16 lenses as well, there wouldn&#8217;t have been any widely available glass options for a PL-mount Scarlet. Yes, there is some interesting used S16 glass circulating&#8230; but there just isn&#8217;t enough of it out there compared with the volumes the Scarlet will probably sell in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joakim Ziegler</title>
		<link>http://www.indie4k.com/archives/85#comment-1487</link>
		<dc:creator>Joakim Ziegler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 23:16:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indie4k.com/?p=85#comment-1487</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I was kind of hoping for the Scarlet to have an approximately S16mm sized sensor and use S16 lenses, which would have been a great compromise. A 2/3" sensor is about 8.8x6.6 mm, while a full aperture S16 frame is about 10.25 x 7.5. That's 1.66 aspect, though, so a 16:9 sensor of the same width would be 10.25x5.75 or so. That's not a whole lot bigger than the 2/3" sensor they're promising now, and would probably make the camera worth another 1000-2000 dollars. Getting S16 glass is quite cheap, many documentary filmmakers own some, and it's cheap to rent.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Personally, I think that would have been an awesome option, especially since it would fit the Red model so well, with the Red One/Epic being 35mm replacements, and the Scarlet being a S16 replacement.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was kind of hoping for the Scarlet to have an approximately S16mm sized sensor and use S16 lenses, which would have been a great compromise. A 2/3&#8243; sensor is about 8.8&#215;6.6 mm, while a full aperture S16 frame is about 10.25 x 7.5. That&#8217;s 1.66 aspect, though, so a 16:9 sensor of the same width would be 10.25&#215;5.75 or so. That&#8217;s not a whole lot bigger than the 2/3&#8243; sensor they&#8217;re promising now, and would probably make the camera worth another 1000-2000 dollars. Getting S16 glass is quite cheap, many documentary filmmakers own some, and it&#8217;s cheap to rent.</p>
<p>Personally, I think that would have been an awesome option, especially since it would fit the Red model so well, with the Red One/Epic being 35mm replacements, and the Scarlet being a S16 replacement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
