Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: RED Announces combo of all combos  (Read 18222 times)
lecter
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 41


« on: November 13, 2008, 04:53:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Anyone got any thoughts on that??

Looks amazing

Vaporware of course, at the moment, but still amazing.

Also, notice the "We will fund it through giving deals on red one now" which is brilliant marketing!!

http://red.cachefly.net/DSMC/epic_scarlet_brochure_large.jpg

Logged
Imaginara
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 114


« Reply #1 on: November 13, 2008, 05:11:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: lecter
Anyone got any thoughts on that??

Looks amazing

Vaporware of course, at the moment, but still amazing.

Also, notice the "We will fund it through giving deals on red one now" which is brilliant marketing!!

http://red.cachefly.net/DSMC/epic_scarlet_brochure_large.jpg
Well everything looks amazing until reality hits usually

What i noted was that the Epic 645 which if i understand it is supposed to be equivalent to a 645 medium format full format sensor will cost... $45 000 Huh? If you are an established photographer (with probably a lot of $ sunk into an existing system), in what way would investing in the Red system there give you a competitive edge? The resolution of Leaf/Phase One/H-Blad/Sinar etc today is more than enough for pretty much all client applications (and quite often too much). And how many photographers need a 9K (which is RED's naming btw, you can read a lot of people not agreeing with them on the net  camera that does 1-50 FPS? In fact, how many clients want to pay for that resolution? And if you are a new photographer who havent' gotten money invested in an existing system, i bet that you wont be sinking that ammount of money into a RED system. Rather you will be trying to get the cheapest deal you can on a used MF or pro-level small format system. We all wish we could buy a brand new system when we started out, but how many of us could do that?

if you look at the overview chart further down, their own estimation is that the Mosntro 645 is a 65MP back... for $45k?Huh

Maybe im just being to jaded but the Red company, allthough makes good cameras which they have proven already, seems to be more hype than brains sometimes. So i do question how many of these models we will actually see on the market and if so, what price. Remember that they are stating a release for Spring 2010 on the 645 version. Thats over a year from now, when the competition already outputs 60MP backs today.

So sorry Red, im not buying it. (pun intended

*edited to fix that i missed that it was "just" 45k not 55k for the 645 brain.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2008, 05:16:12 AM by Imaginara » Logged
situgrrl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 342


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 13, 2008, 06:52:15 AM »
ReplyReply

These announcements have really blurred the lines between video and stills.  The 617 camera is mental and I want to play!

Whether they all make sense or not though, I don't know.  The resolution for stills is there in all but the 2/3" cameras - and that's cool - but they don't compete on price with stills cameras.  On the other hand, for video, I'm not sure I see the point of all that resolution at the moment - because output devices don't come close.  Finally - how do you edit this stuff?  We are going to need cluster farms in our homes and studios!

Logged

Graeme Nattress
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 582



WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 13, 2008, 08:12:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Editing? The REDCODE RAW codec keeps the datarate more manageable. The 4k RED One footage is very editable on home computer of today, although I would go for a top end one. Yes 617 is completely bonkers and my favourite of the line-up too. That at 25fps will make for stunning landscapes in motion, or even amazing panoramic stills without the problems of a scanning back.

Graeme
Logged

www.nattress.com - Plugins for Final Cut Pro and Color
www.red.com - Digital Cinema Cameras
RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 594


« Reply #4 on: November 13, 2008, 11:07:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Imaginara,
5K, 6K, and 9K video isn't for your "clients."  It's for filmmaking using video, but instead of crappy 1080 resolution, you're shooting in amazing resolution that is superior to film.

If you want to shoot video for your clients, go buy a Sony.
Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2218


WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 13, 2008, 11:44:47 AM »
ReplyReply

I really like the concept of modular..

How much waste of money and landfill of rare materials is caused by my redundant F3, F5, F4, D1 (three) , D100, D200 etc- the performance partiularly of the D1/F4/F5/F3 bodies is still amazing but redundant because the chips/buffers could not be upgraded

BUT

With no AF (AFAIK) these are not going to be DSLR beaters

and with no AF/ Steady Shot they are not going to be 'video' beaters

Great for shooting considered stills or 'films' however

(my personal definition is 'video'=handheld + cheap and 'film'=tripod/dolly/steadycam + expensive)

I cant see myself trading 'everything' to go Red - shame..

EDIT

It would appear that Stabilisation and AF are part of RED lenses

If someone could confirm..

SMM
« Last Edit: November 13, 2008, 12:19:11 PM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
Imaginara
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 114


« Reply #6 on: November 13, 2008, 02:16:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: T-1000
Imaginara,
5K, 6K, and 9K video isn't for your "clients."  It's for filmmaking using video, but instead of crappy 1080 resolution, you're shooting in amazing resolution that is superior to film.

If you want to shoot video for your clients, go buy a Sony.

No i totally agree. The RED for film and video application is definately kicking the butt. What i'm wondering about is the "brains" they seem to aim towards battling the medium format still market. Where video (or motion film) isn't a requirement at all. They look then a bit overpriced compared to the normal still solution just to add the moving image features if its not really requested.

However going with Red instead of the high end 24P solutions from Sony and others is definately a better solution imho if you need to be working with moving images.
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1843


« Reply #7 on: November 13, 2008, 03:09:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Imaginara
No i totally agree. The RED for film and video application is definately kicking the butt. What i'm wondering about is the "brains" they seem to aim towards battling the medium format still market. Where video (or motion film) isn't a requirement at all. They look then a bit overpriced compared to the normal still solution just to add the moving image features if its not really requested.

However going with Red instead of the high end 24P solutions from Sony and others is definately a better solution imho if you need to be working with moving images.

Red is looking forward to a future that is already here.  You can shoot a high end broadcast commercial on super 16 or 35, and then have a seperate shoot with different crew for the stills.  Or, if your chosen photographer/videographer has a Red 645, shoot the commercial, add a day of production (or less) for the stills.  See?  You just made $100,000 and saved the ad agency you work for a bunch of cash, while earning more for yourself that would have gone to a stills guy.  You can of course do the same thing now with a 5d2 and a Red One, but for really highend work, the 645 will be really nice.

The future is a convergence of stills and motion.  There will always be still photographers, but they will be increasingly marginalized for commercial work over the next five years.

Logged
Dan Wells
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 339


WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 13, 2008, 03:47:50 PM »
ReplyReply

How competitive will it be as a DSLR with a movie mode? The Scarlet FF35 seems to be the closest to that right now (apart from the $45,000 medium format solution) It's likely to be about a $14,000 camera once you put a viewfinder and a grip on it, competing with the $7000 1Ds mk III (probably the 1Ds mkIV by the time you can buy the RED) and the D3x, however much that turns out to cost ($6500?). Right now, the 1Ds mk III doesn't shoot video, but the 1Ds mk IV probably will, and I would guess that the D3x will as well (although Thom Hogan doesn't think so, and he tends to know these things).
     Right now, judged as a still camera, the RED has better specs than anything you can buy today in two areas. The less important is frame rate - because it's a movie camera shooting stills, it has a continuously variable frame rate up to anything you might want in a still camera. I would be surprised if any other camera in the 24+ MP arena goes over 5 fps in the next year (unless it's a similar surprising hybrid) - the RED allows D3 speed with 1Ds mkIII resolution simultaneously. The second area where the RED is beyond anything on the market is dynamic range - they claim 13 stops (although the RED One claims 11 and is said to have about 8+ really good stops)... Even if they get 11 printable stops (the darkest two may be fine in a moving image, but too noisy for a fine-art print), that will be at least as good as next year's best DSLRs, maybe slightly better (I have high hopes that the D3x may be close to an 11-stop camera - the D3 and the Alpha 900 are both pushing 10 from RAW).
    Assuming that the RED's DR is superb, but not a quantum leap over what else is out there - let's call it just about the same as the best pro DSLR -, and assuming that the competition has a pretty nice 1080p movie mode (EX1 level, likely without all the audio capabilities of an EX1, with FF35 depth of field)  in a pro still camera by that time (neither DR nor movie mode guaranteed, but both seem like reasonable guesses), the real difference will be 1080p movie mode versus RED's full resolution movie mode.
    RED is saying "pay twice as much for your camera (compared to a Canon or Nikon pro DSLR), and get a full-fledged movie camera (resolution as good as anything in Hollywood) built in". Would you be willing to pay this if the Canon and Nikon DSLRs had decent 1080p video? What if they didn't?

                                -Dan

Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2218


WWW
« Reply #9 on: November 13, 2008, 04:23:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dan Wells
Would you be willing to pay this if the Canon and Nikon DSLRs had decent 1080p video? What if they didn't?

                                -Dan

no yes
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
Robin Balas
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 51



WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 13, 2008, 04:48:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dan Wells
How competitive will it be as a DSLR with a movie mode? The Scarlet FF35 seems to be the closest to that right now (apart from the $45,000 medium format solution) It's likely to be about a $14,000 camera once you put a viewfinder and a grip on it, competing with the $7000 1Ds mk III (probably the 1Ds mkIV by the time you can buy the RED) and the D3x, however much that turns out to cost ($6500?). Right now, the 1Ds mk III doesn't shoot video, but the 1Ds mk IV probably will, and I would guess that the D3x will as well (although Thom Hogan doesn't think so, and he tends to know these things).
     Right now, judged as a still camera, the RED has better specs than anything you can buy today in two areas. The less important is frame rate - because it's a movie camera shooting stills, it has a continuously variable frame rate up to anything you might want in a still camera. I would be surprised if any other camera in the 24+ MP arena goes over 5 fps in the next year (unless it's a similar surprising hybrid) - the RED allows D3 speed with 1Ds mkIII resolution simultaneously. The second area where the RED is beyond anything on the market is dynamic range - they claim 13 stops (although the RED One claims 11 and is said to have about 8+ really good stops)... Even if they get 11 printable stops (the darkest two may be fine in a moving image, but too noisy for a fine-art print), that will be at least as good as next year's best DSLRs, maybe slightly better (I have high hopes that the D3x may be close to an 11-stop camera - the D3 and the Alpha 900 are both pushing 10 from RAW).
    Assuming that the RED's DR is superb, but not a quantum leap over what else is out there - let's call it just about the same as the best pro DSLR -, and assuming that the competition has a pretty nice 1080p movie mode (EX1 level, likely without all the audio capabilities of an EX1, with FF35 depth of field)  in a pro still camera by that time (neither DR nor movie mode guaranteed, but both seem like reasonable guesses), the real difference will be 1080p movie mode versus RED's full resolution movie mode.
    RED is saying "pay twice as much for your camera (compared to a Canon or Nikon pro DSLR), and get a full-fledged movie camera (resolution as good as anything in Hollywood) built in". Would you be willing to pay this if the Canon and Nikon DSLRs had decent 1080p video? What if they didn't?

                                -Dan


The point is RAW video - will the Canons and Nikons provide RAW video at full rez which lets you pull off stills Huh If not you are not comparing apples and apples etc.
MHO.
Logged

[span style='font-family:Arial']Robin Balas
DIGITALIS

Professional Photographer, Engineer, Teacher and Consultant[/span]
CUclimber
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« Reply #11 on: November 13, 2008, 04:57:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The point is RAW video - will the Canons and Nikons provide RAW video at full rez which lets you pull off stills Huh If not you are not comparing apples and apples etc.
Exactly.

Not to mention XLR audio inputs, variable framerates, synchronized multi-camera setups, more/better grip options, PL/Canon/Nikon lenses, etc.

The Epic is obviously geared towards feature productions, but the Scarlet is going to fit perfectly into small production houses.  I have a friend who does a lot of in-house marketing video material for a clothing company, and he is ecstatic about the Scarlet.  I think he fits right in to RED's target demographic (they already own a Red ONE, which is overkill for their needs), and adding a Scarlet or two into the mix will help their production tremendously.
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3499



WWW
« Reply #12 on: November 13, 2008, 05:58:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Morgan_Moore
With no AF (AFAIK) these are not going to be DSLR beaters

and with no AF/ Steady Shot they are not going to be 'video' beaters

Great for shooting considered stills or 'films' however

(my personal definition is 'video'=handheld + cheap and 'film'=tripod/dolly/steadycam + expensive)

I cant see myself trading 'everything' to go Red - shame..
I see them competing more with Film or high end video cameras like the Genesis, not the usual small sensor video cameras.
Besides lot of film is shot handheld.  
They are aiming at high end video/filmaking and by those standards they are very cheap.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
Dan Wells
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 339


WWW
« Reply #13 on: November 13, 2008, 06:03:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: CUclimber
Exactly.

Not to mention XLR audio inputs, variable framerates, synchronized multi-camera setups, more/better grip options, PL/Canon/Nikon lenses, etc.

The Epic is obviously geared towards feature productions, but the Scarlet is going to fit perfectly into small production houses.  I have a friend who does a lot of in-house marketing video material for a clothing company, and he is ecstatic about the Scarlet.  I think he fits right in to RED's target demographic (they already own a Red ONE, which is overkill for their needs), and adding a Scarlet or two into the mix will help their production tremendously.

I'm not disputing that the RED provides a lot of things that the Canons and Nikons don't - I'm just wondering from the viewpoint of someone who primarily works in stills and uses video as a supplement, whether those things are worth it. Obviously, if you don't care about the video, they aren't (RED didn't just announce a DSLR in there, as much as some were hoping for one), and if you're primarily a cinematographer, they are a revolution - my question is getting people to think about where the breakpoint is for those of us coming from a still background, but adding motion to our work... For myself, I don't know which side I'll fall on. I want to see what Mr. Nikon has for us next week...

One thing that would make the REDs much more appealing is some way to project high-res movies. Right now, I don't see any way of displaying a moving image above 2560x1900 (and only one way - a 30-inch monitor - of displaying one above 1080p). Will RED be releasing a high-resolution projector on the order of 6000x4000 pixels? That would be absolutely fantastic for both still and moving images, assuming that it didn't weigh 200 lbs or cost $100,000. 4K (4000+ x 2000+)digital cinema projectors exist, but they both weigh 200 lbs AND cost $100,000

One appealing application for the FF35 RED is to use a 30-inch monitor (in a tasteful frame) as the world's largest digital picture frame... Have a slowly changing landscape image (perhaps a timelapse) in a picture that, at first glance, appears to be a 16x24 print. There are some very cool applications for that in getting people to think about change in nature(how about a landscape that went through a year in an hour, or one in which the stream was flowing?). Hopefully RED's new REDRay player will be small, quiet and inexpensive enough to use in installations like this (right now, the need to use a noisy $3000+ Mac Pro to drive the screen is as much of a barrier to an installation that remains up for a month as the $1000+ screen itself)

I assume they won't have a projector capable of displaying the images from the 617 - WHAT are we meant to do with THOSE? A 24 inch printer can't print all the pixels on the short side of that imager (a 24x72 inch print is still a native 388 dpi, requiring a downsize to 300 for most printers) - do they really mean for people to make 32x96 inch prints at 300 dpi as its standard display format? There's no projector that approaches that, even at OMNIMAX costs... Even major science and natural history museums (who have the best projection currently available in IMAX and OMNIMAX) have no way of showing that output - is there something like that on the horizon?

                                           -Dan
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1843


« Reply #14 on: November 13, 2008, 06:53:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: CUclimber
Exactly.

Not to mention XLR audio inputs, variable framerates, synchronized multi-camera setups, more/better grip options, PL/Canon/Nikon lenses, etc.

The Epic is obviously geared towards feature productions, but the Scarlet is going to fit perfectly into small production houses.  I have a friend who does a lot of in-house marketing video material for a clothing company, and he is ecstatic about the Scarlet.  I think he fits right in to RED's target demographic (they already own a Red ONE, which is overkill for their needs), and adding a Scarlet or two into the mix will help their production tremendously.

Exactly!  This is my situation as well.  We have a Red One but it is over kill even for music videos.  A Scarlet would be fantastic, as it will be better than our Sony EX cams.  

I want the Epic 645 for stills. This is want, not need.  But yeah, if we were all Red, we could use the accessories on different brains.  I love it.  Exciting times.
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1843


« Reply #15 on: November 13, 2008, 06:58:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dan Wells
I'm not disputing that the RED provides a lot of things that the Canons and Nikons don't - I'm just wondering from the viewpoint of someone who primarily works in stills and uses video as a supplement, whether those things are worth it. Obviously, if you don't care about the video, they aren't (RED didn't just announce a DSLR in there, as much as some were hoping for one), and if you're primarily a cinematographer, they are a revolution - my question is getting people to think about where the breakpoint is for those of us coming from a still background, but adding motion to our work... For myself, I don't know which side I'll fall on. I want to see what Mr. Nikon has for us next week...

One thing that would make the REDs much more appealing is some way to project high-res movies. Right now, I don't see any way of displaying a moving image above 2560x1900 (and only one way - a 30-inch monitor - of displaying one above 1080p). Will RED be releasing a high-resolution projector on the order of 6000x4000 pixels? That would be absolutely fantastic for both still and moving images, assuming that it didn't weigh 200 lbs or cost $100,000. 4K (4000+ x 2000+)digital cinema projectors exist, but they both weigh 200 lbs AND cost $100,000

One appealing application for the FF35 RED is to use a 30-inch monitor (in a tasteful frame) as the world's largest digital picture frame... Have a slowly changing landscape image (perhaps a timelapse) in a picture that, at first glance, appears to be a 16x24 print. There are some very cool applications for that in getting people to think about change in nature(how about a landscape that went through a year in an hour, or one in which the stream was flowing?). Hopefully RED's new REDRay player will be small, quiet and inexpensive enough to use in installations like this (right now, the need to use a noisy $3000+ Mac Pro to drive the screen is as much of a barrier to an installation that remains up for a month as the $1000+ screen itself)

I assume they won't have a projector capable of displaying the images from the 617 - WHAT are we meant to do with THOSE? A 24 inch printer can't print all the pixels on the short side of that imager (a 24x72 inch print is still a native 388 dpi, requiring a downsize to 300 for most printers) - do they really mean for people to make 32x96 inch prints at 300 dpi as its standard display format? There's no projector that approaches that, even at OMNIMAX costs... Even major science and natural history museums (who have the best projection currently available in IMAX and OMNIMAX) have no way of showing that output - is there something like that on the horizon?

                                           -Dan

If you build it, they will come.  Two years ago no one in their right mind would have realistically thought that a 6x17 sensor, much less a 50 frame per second 645 size sensor, would ever be slapped into a camera by anyone not NASA or the NSA.  Perhaps the flexible LCD screens can get even higher res and cheaper?  I think its all coming, sooner than we realize.
Logged
Carl Johnson
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #16 on: November 13, 2008, 10:45:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: TMARK
If you build it, they will come.  Two years ago no one in their right mind would have realistically thought that a 6x17 sensor, much less a 50 frame per second 645 size sensor, would ever be slapped into a camera by anyone not NASA or the NSA.  Perhaps the flexible LCD screens can get even higher res and cheaper?  I think its all coming, sooner than we realize.

When the product is scheduled for intro in 2010 and currently estimates a price of $55k for the back alone some of us still question whether anyone will still. A 6x17 sensor will be incredibly expensive to fab.

Almost as interesting as the cameras is REDs channeling of consumer product marketing into a very specialized and professional oriented market.
Logged
melgross
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 46


« Reply #17 on: November 14, 2008, 04:53:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, it just seems to me that these cameras are not even remotely ergonomic from a still shooters viewpoint.

They are big, awkward, and heavy. I can't see them replacing most people's sports models such as the 1D mkIII, or the D3.

They make claims that we can't verify, so the claims are questionable right now.

I can see some medium format users being interested. I can see film makers being interested.

But I really can't see Canon and Nikon losing any sleep as RED has been saying they will. In fact, I think they are relieved at what RED is SAYING they will come out with, at the prices mentioned, and at the timescale they are projecting.

It gives both Canon and Nikon plenty of time to spruce up their next offerings.

While the high speed shooting is very good, how useful will it be for most shooters? That's a lot of memory being chunked out at those rates.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2008, 04:54:07 PM by melgross » Logged
Graeme Nattress
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 582



WWW
« Reply #18 on: November 14, 2008, 05:06:55 PM »
ReplyReply

If you just want stills, I'm sure there will be cheap enough / good enough cameras to meet your needs from Canon / Nikon etc. If however, you want a parity of quality across stills and motion, very high speed, or very high resolution, RED will suit your needs. The visually lossless REDCODE RAW codec would allow you to shoot many times more stills on a CF card than you can today, while keeping all the advantages of RAW. After going through about 6 CF cards doing a wedding earlier in the year, I'd certainly have found that useful, not to mention the hard drive space to back it all up.

As for claims, well, the proof is in the pudding, but the pudding is in the oven right now. The cooks are working on baking it as well and as fast as they can. I hope you can enjoy trying the puddings when they come out of the oven.

Graeme
Logged

www.nattress.com - Plugins for Final Cut Pro and Color
www.red.com - Digital Cinema Cameras
timescapes
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60



« Reply #19 on: November 14, 2008, 09:07:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Graeme Nattress
Editing? The REDCODE RAW codec keeps the datarate more manageable. The 4k RED One footage is very editable on home computer of today, although I would go for a top end one. Yes 617 is completely bonkers and my favourite of the line-up too. That at 25fps will make for stunning landscapes in motion, or even amazing panoramic stills without the problems of a scanning back.

Graeme

Yeah, but where the heck are you going to view it?  
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad