Jump to content


Will the RED kill the Dalsa, Kinetta, just about every other high end high def camera?


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#1 razerfish

razerfish
  • Guests

Posted 24 April 2006 - 12:45 PM

MSRP of $17500, not including the lens. Even with the lens (they're speculating about $5K per) and the recording device, it will still be cheap compared to the F900's, D20's, and especially, the Dalsa camera. Did this camera just bury those other ones, assuming it's not vapor (which I don't think it is)?

Will the Kinetta even bother now that it's thunder has been completely stolen by a deep-pocketed rival?
  • 0

#2 Rik Andino

Rik Andino
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 783 posts
  • Electrician
  • New York City

Posted 24 April 2006 - 02:00 PM

Come on we're talking about a camera that doesn't exist yet.
We're already making market predictions...?

If it does come out and is as good as it implies...it'll be a best seller...
But I'm sure all the other companies will come up with something that's just as good...
It happens all the time in other markets.
To predict what wil happened before we even see the camera's performance is ridiculous.

Folks were saying the HVX200 would explode the film industry...
And be the demise of higer-end HD cameras like the VariCam and F900
It turns to just be another camera and not as spectacular as once thought.

Now let's see what will happen with this other miracle camera.



On bogus predictions why don't we try to guess who the next U.S. president will be...?
  • 0

#3 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 24 April 2006 - 02:03 PM

MSRP of $17500, not including the lens. Even with the lens (they're speculating about $5K per) and the recording device, it will still be cheap compared to the F900's, D20's, and especially, the Dalsa camera. Did this camera just bury those other ones, assuming it's not vapor (which I don't think it is)?

Will the Kinetta even bother now that it's thunder has been completely stolen by a deep-pocketed rival?


Hi,

Like the Kinetta it does not exist as yet. I would wait until there is a back to back shoot out and see what happens then, until then film is king. Arri have just released the 416 film camera today!

Stephen
  • 0

#4 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5070 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 24 April 2006 - 02:06 PM

MSRP of $17500, not including the lens. Even with the lens (they're speculating about $5K per) and the recording device, it will still be cheap compared to the F900's, D20's, and especially, the Dalsa camera. Did this camera just bury those other ones, assuming it's not vapor (which I don't think it is)?

Will the Kinetta even bother now that it's thunder has been completely stolen by a deep-pocketed rival?


The price of $5k for the 300mm is around the normal price for that type of lens.

Not being on the shoulder for hand held work will be a problem for what already weighs 7lbs without a lens, flash memory/hard drive or battery (12v ?). So, if I was shooting docs this isn't the camera I'd go for.

Looking at what seems to be just the sensor unit, they're planning a modular system. However, if you're wanting to put a serious production package together it's going to cost a lot more than this base price.

Price wise there are a number of HD cameras in that range, it's big selling point is the 35mm chip. That really increases the cost of the lenses and on low budget films it could be the limiting factor.

There are a couple of $20K cameras which do exist and would make more sense for a film with limited budget. The cameras would also be more versatile for other types of work. There's also the new, less stylish looking SI camera, which does exist and would make great sense and you have the choice of all the Super 16 film lenses.

In the higher end picture quality is everything, it has to stand up against cameras that are going for the highest dynamic range etc. Specs on the page mean nothing, it's the images that will count.

It'll be interesting to see what they do with it, assuming it goes into production. I'm sure it'll have its place. However, it's not what the hype makes it out to be.
  • 0

#5 razerfish

razerfish
  • Guests

Posted 24 April 2006 - 02:09 PM

Come on we're talking about a camera that doesn't exist yet.
We're already making market predictions...?

If it does come out and is as good as it implies...it'll be a best seller...
But I'm sure all the other companies will come up with something that's just as good...
It happens all the time in other markets.
To predict what wil happened before we even see the camera's performance is ridiculous.

Folks were saying the HVX200 would explode the film industry...
And be the demise of higer-end HD cameras like the VariCam and F900
It turns to just be another camera and not as spectacular as once thought.

Now let's see what will happen with this other miracle camera.
On bogus predictions why don't we try to guess who the next U.S. president will be...?


Don't play along if you don't like then.

And who was saying the HVX200 would "explode the film industry?" Maybe if was touting 4K resolution and priced way, way under cameras that couldn't even get halfway there in terms of resolution, then maybe.

As for the next President, I predict McCain. If you don't like those kind of predictions, then you may want to stay away from the news channels for the next few years. You'll be seeing lots of them. Griping about it won't make it less prevalent either.
  • 0

#6 Chien Huey

Chien Huey
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 76 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • New York, NY

Posted 24 April 2006 - 11:24 PM

Don't play along if you don't like then.

And who was saying the HVX200 would "explode the film industry?" Maybe if was touting 4K resolution and priced way, way under cameras that couldn't even get halfway there in terms of resolution, then maybe.


Well, lots of people were claiming that the HVX would revolutionize filmmaking. That claim was definitely made - on this board and others. Certainly, RED raises the bar but only if they deliver - which is uncertain given that what photos I've found online from NAB show a clay model. As for the price, let's assume that the camera is priced at about $25K-$50K for a shootable configuration. What are you going to do with the massive amount of data that the 4K camera is going to generate? And more importantly, can you afford the equipment and expertise to handle all this data.

I don't like to be such a cynic and in general I'm not. But all the excitement about the RED specs announcement drives me nuts because it represents this huge misconception in the industry (though I think more so at the low end). It's the idea that all you need is this mega-high-res camera and your film will be great. Films are a conglomeration of a vast array/range of talents and resources. You can run out in the street with your mega camera, wave it around and get a great film.

Edited by Fast Chieney, 24 April 2006 - 11:25 PM.

  • 0

#7 Scott Fritzshall

Scott Fritzshall
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 584 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 24 April 2006 - 11:33 PM

I don't like to be such a cynic and in general I'm not. But all the excitement about the RED specs announcement drives me nuts because it represents this huge misconception in the industry (though I think more so at the low end). It's the idea that all you need is this mega-high-res camera and your film will be great. Films are a conglomeration of a vast array/range of talents and resources. You can run out in the street with your mega camera, wave it around and get a great film.

That won't stop all the people on the DVXUser boards from trying.
  • 0

#8 Chien Huey

Chien Huey
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 76 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • New York, NY

Posted 25 April 2006 - 06:18 AM

That won't stop all the people on the DVXUser boards from trying.


I meant you CAN'T run out in the street, wave your camera around and get a great film. But you got the idea. B)
  • 0

#9 razerfish

razerfish
  • Guests

Posted 25 April 2006 - 07:34 AM

I meant you CAN'T run out in the street, wave your camera around and get a great film. But you got the idea. B)


But the question posed was if Red spelt danger other high end cameras like the Dalsa, Sony F950, Arri D20, Genesis, not whether it means it alone will mean amatuer film makers will make great films just by virtue of having one.

I happen to think this camera has a better than fair chance of coming out, and if so, puting the boot to a lot of higher priced cameras. That's my feeling.
  • 0

#10 Häakon

Häakon
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 97 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 25 April 2006 - 07:50 AM

Certainly, RED raises the bar but only if they deliver - which is uncertain given that what photos I've found online from NAB show a clay model.

The HVX was nothing more than a non-working model prototype at this identical time last year, and they delivered (albeit in ridiculously low quantities) by the end of Q4. That's the same production target that Red is aiming for. They've also stated a billion times that they are completely in the middle of a production phase and what they'd be showing at NAB would only be a non-working model with a glimpse into where they are aiming for in the current year. If you were expecting to see test footage or a fully finished prototype, then you obviously didn't do your research very well prior to the convention.

As for the price, let's assume that the camera is priced at about $25K-$50K for a shootable configuration. What are you going to do with the massive amount of data that the 4K camera is going to generate? And more importantly, can you afford the equipment and expertise to handle all this data.

Who says you have to shoot at 4K? Sure, the Red camera is unbelievably attractive for a studio picture that can afford the expense of all of the equipment you're talking about - it's essentially a Genesis for $17,500 - but I don't think anyone at Red is assuming the low-end user of this camera to be going out and shooting/editing/delivering 4K images. It's got fully capable 720p and 1080p modes as well. Your next question is probably, "why spend $17,500 on a 4K camera if you're just going to use it for 1080?" Well, that answer is pretty obvious, too - it's the only 1080 camera on the market that's going to give you 35mm DOF, FOV, and vastly superior latitude, which are huge concerns of any filmmaker. The price is way under what most people expected this camera would be, and that opens it up to a much wider base of users.

I don't like to be such a cynic and in general I'm not. But all the excitement about the RED specs announcement drives me nuts because it represents this huge misconception in the industry (though I think more so at the low end). It's the idea that all you need is this mega-high-res camera and your film will be great. Films are a conglomeration of a vast array/range of talents and resources. You can run out in the street with your mega camera, wave it around and get a great film.

There are probably some 15 year olds who think that, but I really can't believe that there are many professionals who hold that attitude. That being said, there is a reason that serious filmmakers use serious gear, and given a choice, I'm sure you want the best tool you can afford as well. The fact that a camera is poised to come out within a year that delivers 4K imagery for $17 grand is huge, and I think all the "excitement" is completely warranted. It's obvious that there are some people who will refuse to accept the camera's immense potential and strengths until they can hold a finished production model in their hands, but we know it's coming, we know the company has a real backing, and we know the specs that they're aiming for. How on earth could you not be excited?

Edited by Häakon, 25 April 2006 - 07:52 AM.

  • 0

#11 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 25 April 2006 - 10:13 AM

But the question posed was if Red spelt danger other high end cameras like the Dalsa, Sony F950, Arri D20, Genesis, not whether it means it alone will mean amatuer film makers will make great films just by virtue of having one.

Well that question is too early to answer because the Red currently is only an empty shell. Once we get to see the pictures and compare it to other cameras and 35mm can we tell how successful it will be in the professional market, which is where all these other cameras belong to.

Also it seems to me that the claims for 4K seem a bit overblown. Yes, you have 11.4 Megapixel in there, but as per their own spec the camera outputs these 4K in RAW format, so once you do the conversion you will lose some resolution. This seems to be a similar issue than with the Dalsa. The Genesis for instance has 12 Megapixel too and it only outputs a HD image.
  • 0

#12 Kim Vickers

Kim Vickers
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 67 posts
  • Other

Posted 27 April 2006 - 04:23 PM

Red could hurt the current crop of high def cameras. (It shouldn't be hard to beat the F900 -- 3:1:1, 7:1 compression, 2/3 inch format, 3-chip, etc., etc.)

I think the bigger question is how will companies like Sony and Panasonic respond to Red? If they don't come out with something that's roughly equivalent, with a 35mm size chip, they could lose a lot of business. If you're an episodic TV show that's having to make do with 2/3 HD today, Red will be very attractive to you. Why would you keep using your F900 or Varicam when you could have 35mm dof and 1080p -- for the price of a week's rental of the old gear?

If Jannard's gambit with Red forces Sony and Panasonic and Canon to change their d-cinema strategy (which seems to based on 2/3 inch technology), then he will have truly sparked a revolution. The establishment's response to Red could be more interesting than Red itself.

Edited by Kim Vickers, 27 April 2006 - 04:23 PM.

  • 0

#13 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 April 2006 - 02:51 AM

Let's put it this way, if Red ends up with a picture quality similar to that of the Genesis or these other HD cameras then it will be a big step forward considering the price. But on the other hand I find the Genesis woefully overpriced for the image quality it gives. Panavision is aiming it at films that have a big enough budget to shoot on 35mm, yet if you have that kind of money I really don't see the point of shooting with the Genesis, since it gives you a less good image. Talk about the price/quality ratio being not in favour of this camera.
  • 0

#14 Rik Andino

Rik Andino
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 783 posts
  • Electrician
  • New York City

Posted 28 April 2006 - 03:12 AM

If you're an episodic TV show that's having to make do with 2/3 HD today, Red will be very attractive to you. Why would you keep using your F900 or Varicam when you could have 35mm dof and 1080p -- for the price of a week's rental of the old gear?

No they won't because they're already used to the system of working with Sony or Panasonic cameras
And television studios hate changing the system worse than members of the GOP
Why do you think it's taking so long for networks to adopt HD...
because studios hate to break the system moving to a new format.

That's why the RED doesn't have a good chance in the broadcast world...
It'll be aimed at filmmakers who are more welcoming of new technology.

But first it'll have to pass the guantlet and prove itself worthy. (Just like the rest of us.)
  • 0

#15 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5070 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 28 April 2006 - 10:06 AM

Interesting that the Silicon Imaging SI-1920HDVR $20k HD camera received the Mario Award at NAB that recognizes manufacturer's products which represent significant technical breakthroughs.

RED has won an award for presentation.

I suspect RED had to get in early because they were aware that other manufacturers were ahead of them in the hardware front and by going hard on the marketing this year they could get reservations on RED before the other cameras got established in the market.
  • 0

#16 getho

getho

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 April 2006 - 07:42 PM

Well, that answer is pretty obvious, too - it's the only 1080 camera on the market that's going to give you 35mm DOF, FOV, and vastly superior latitude, which are huge concerns of any filmmaker.


No 35m DOF when shooting 1080 or 720. It uses a small section of the sensor, not distributed pixels over the large sensor.
  • 0

#17 Matt Lazzarini

Matt Lazzarini
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 53 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Toronto, ON

Posted 28 April 2006 - 07:55 PM

If Jannard's gambit with Red forces Sony and Panasonic and Canon to change their d-cinema strategy (which seems to based on 2/3 inch technology), then he will have truly sparked a revolution. The establishment's response to Red could be more interesting than Red itself.


I'm not holding too much excitement about RED, but I am definately pulling for it to succeed at least in some of its goals, so that the 'big dogs' of the camera world will be forced to provide a competitive alternative.
  • 0

#18 Balazs Rozsa

Balazs Rozsa
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 25 posts
  • Digital Image Technician

Posted 29 April 2006 - 01:44 AM

No 35m DOF when shooting 1080 or 720. It uses a small section of the sensor, not distributed pixels over the large sensor.


When you shoot 1080 and 720 you have a choice of using the full sensor area or only the middle section of the sensor. When you use the full sensor you have 35mm DOF but you are limited to a maximum of 60 fps. When you use the middle section you can have a maximum of 120 fps.
  • 0

#19 Michael Collier

Michael Collier
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1262 posts
  • Gaffer
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 29 April 2006 - 02:09 AM

It should be noted however that the resolution is probably refering to a one-chip design. So yes 4K resolution, but when you have contrasting colors with hard edges, apperent sharpness is reduced. I assume the bayer RGB data is pulled after the file is written in RAW, so I would assume they can apply a high quality processing regime without worry about FPGAs and heat disapation and battery life weight etc.

This is the true value of what they are talking about. It is as close to a film workflow as possible. You maintain all possible quality until later.

Yes its only in theory right now, but they are serious. They have serious cash and even got a guy from AJA to come on board, so tech wise, they may be capable of it. In theory its actually quite simple design. I bet they have everything down and working except the actual imaging sensor, that they will be fine-tuning before mass production. They have made several bold statements, given they dont have a working product. If they dont come out with what they claim, they will loose this gamble.

Acording to most calculations, at 24fps, you would yeild about 300Mb/sec, or aprox 1TB per hour. A TB today costs somewhere between $1000 - $600, lower if you get a high capacity server. Assume a 10:1 shoot of a 2 hour feature. Thats 20 TBs of data. 16K for the server, maybe 5K for double tape backup.

The 160GB drives they support presumably hold 6 minutes of footage, about the same as 200' in 16mm. If you need more you can hook up a Raid drive (more set up time of course, a downfall. hopefully they can support more space in the future?) Also its doubtfull that even a SATA could ingeste 300megs a second. I would imagine you would need more. Perhaps this camera can hold more than one drive, but each drive is limited to 160Gb.

There are a lot of varibles to this project, but given the limited data they have released, it seems promising. No it wont change filmmaking, but it will put a dent in the super16 market. The idea is to spur higher quality productions. I doubt any 35mm film will turn to this camera, but maybe one that planned to shoot on an SDX-900 would trade up to this.
  • 0

#20 getho

getho

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Other

Posted 29 April 2006 - 02:58 AM

When you shoot 1080 and 720 you have a choice of using the full sensor area or only the middle section of the sensor. When you use the full sensor you have 35mm DOF but you are limited to a maximum of 60 fps. When you use the middle section you can have a maximum of 120 fps.


Fair enough, but the original post was talking about saving money shooting 720P - you'd need to bung a 35mm lens on it which aint cheap.
ANyway I cant beleive I'm getting sucked into this!

It takes digital still camera manufacturers about 12 months to go from preview models to production models. This camera has got to be 3-4 years away!!??
  • 0


Tai Audio

FJS International, LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

Visual Products

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Opal

Willys Widgets

The Slider

Opal

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Glidecam

CineTape

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine