7 replies to this topic

[Stephen Williams]

I am totally amazed by how quickly the camera will pay for itself, I am still shooting 35mm film & not pushing Epic at all.
In November I will shoot with it for 9 days, with at least 5 additional rental days. December looks quite busy too.

I had read of people paying off the camera in 2-3 months, thats clearly possible mine will be nearer 4 months however I had originally assumed 18 - 24 months.

[Brian Drysdale]

18 to 24 months is the traditional model for gear. I guess with the faster turnover in gear these days, you need the shorter time scale for it to make sense.

[Phil Rhodes]

Not to get too prying into your affairs, but do you find the camera has increased the actual volume of work?

Usually you can't buy work with gear (unless you give it away, which is clearly not your approach!) but I find sometimes you can.

[Stephen Williams]

Not to get too prying into your affairs, but do you find the camera has increased the actual volume of work?

Hi Phil,

In my case I may have got an extra day or two, not totally sure either way, the shoots were all projects that I knew about before I got the camera.
If I was looking to sell myself with Epic as a package, I would get more work for sure, not sure if that equates to more money or not.
There is a huge amount of general interest in the camera, it's 'The in Camera' along with 'Alexa' right now. I suspect buying Epic M today is still a better deal than buying a Scarlet, most of the projects are using high speed 30% of the time & the difference in price is far less once accessories are added. I bought Red Armour today for £1850 for 2 extra years guarantee, I think the camera is good enough to still be in demand in 3 years time.

[Thomas Dobbie]

Hi Stephen,

I'm finding exactly the same thing with my Epic X,looks like it'll pay for itself in about 4 to 6 months.
As you know I'm mainly a stills photographer,so I'm not pushing the Epic and I don't rent it.
There's certainly a lot of interest in the camera.

[Paul Bartok]

Im not sure if Phil was saying this or i miss read it but that's a good point, why don't they spend a little extra money and make a great Digital camera why is every camera now for the semi-professorial league 10-20k cant they make one both, because back 5 years ago most Cinematographers usually just rented there camera's now you kind of have to own one to compete at least out of Hollywood, lower end or mid range market. But yeah imagine a True 4K or 5K camera full Chroma sampling, no bayer up scaling, even if it was a little more expensive like 60k.

Seriously what is Panavision doing I love them but they must be shitting them selves I haven't heard a single word about development from them unless they plan to slack out again an "Panavise" the F65 (which actually looks really nice), what have they got for the future.

[Brian Drysdale]

Seriously what is Panavision doing I love them but they must be shitting them selves I haven't heard a single word about development from them unless they plan to slack out again an "Panavise" the F65 (which actually looks really nice), what have they got for the future.

They seem to be involved with a sensor: http://www.panavisio...os-image-sensor

I suspect it's difficult to come up with a digital camera based on the rental only model, when they'd earn more from the lenses than the camera.

[Paul Bartok]

They seem to be involved with a sensor: http://www.panavisio...os-image-sensor

I suspect it's difficult to come up with a digital camera based on the rental only model, when they'd earn more from the lenses than the camera.

That's Interesting, I think this is the one,
from the HDR one: http://magazine.crea...uture-of-pixels
I know most people have read this article but if you haven't give it a read well worth it.