How much would You pay for mid-range RED with interchangeable lenses? (NOT Scarlet)

[Peter Majtan]

FIRST OF ALL - THIS POLL IS NOT ABOUT SCARLET OR CHANGES TO SCARLET.

It is in response to the constant demand for interchangeable lenses - which is NOT going to happen on Scarlet. RED is most likely already playing around the idea of mid-range camera (read Scarlet with interchangeable lenses).

There are two options in doing that:

A) Basically same Scarlet but with interchangeable lens mount - which will limit us to use 2/3" lenses designed for CMOS/FILM (not 3xCCD). Lot cheaper, but limiting...

B) Putting in new 35mm 3K sensor (to resolve pristine 2K after de-bayering). A lot more expensive, but You can then use many lenses designed for 35mm film and photo...

Please note that the POLL has two sections:

First please choose which one of the above HW configs would You prefer.
Then choose how much would You pay for such a camera...

Let's assume that the specs are going to be equal to Scarlet, the only difference being the interchangeable lens mount...

This should give RED idea about the viability of such a camera...

[Christoffer]

A Scarlet 2.0 with interchangable lenses with a 3K 35mm sensor... ehm, what is the difference beside 1K to a Red One?
With all you get with the Red One is there a reason to pay let's say $12000 for Scarlet 2.0?

I'm more then happy to start out with Scarlet and then evolve into One or Epic.
There's no need for a middlestep in my view. Red One is still a very cheap camera and if you use Scarlet with alot of accessories then you only need the Red One camera body when the time comes.

Let's face it... everything you need for a Red One you will need for a Scarlet (in terms of workflow etc.)
With the quality that Scarlet delivers you will earn the money needed for a Red One in no time. When a client say "we need 1080p for this, can you deliver that?" you can reply "well, I can give you 2K if you want" - "what's 2K?" will be the response in most cases.
Most videohouses aren't even into this type of resolution so even freelancers will be able to outclass some videohouses and deliver 2K from their home office... like me :P

[Peter Majtan]

1K is a lot of difference - just see EPIC 5K vs RED ONE 4K and You have Your answer...

[Peter Majtan]

They both have a S35 sensor and interchangeable lens mount with majority of accessories being the same.

RED ONE - $ 17000,- body
EPIC - app. $ 40000,- body

[Peter Majtan]

Keeping the sensor 3K allows You to re-use all the internal electronics from Scarlet - a huge saving on its own!

[Peter Majtan]

Plus it will be great complimentary camera to Scarlet - having the same RAW files, so they match up in Your RAW workflow...

[Peter Majtan]

If priced bellow $10000,- I personally believe it will satisfy many who are crying out for interchangeable lens mount on Scarlet.

[Christoffer]

The difference between One and Epic is that Epic is for 4K delivery while One is for 2K delivery.

So, Red One and Scarlet is both about 2K delivery. That's why Epic is more expensive. And of course that is a better built body and some special features.

[Peter Majtan]

RED one is also used and designed for 4K delivery. Not as sharp as EPIC is going to be, but never the less. Did You see the 4K projection of RED ONE footage at NAB?

Also saying "better built body" is very misleading. The build is great on RED ONE. If You meant better "designed" - then perhaps, but that is personal preference.

And with all the other "special features" - this why (amongst other things) EPIC is $ 23000,- USD more then RED ONE.

No that even makes perfect sense if the new camera will be priced bellow $ 10000,- USD (read $ 7000,- less then RED ONE)...

[Peter Majtan]

You will end up with 4-tier camera classes:

1) Scarlet - 3K designed for 2K & HD delivery and Soccer Moms - fixed lens
$ 3000,- USD

2) NEW-RED - 3K designed for 2K & HD delivery - inter-lenses
$ 10000,- USD (or bellow)

3) RED-ONE - 4K designed for 4K, 2K and HD delivery - inter-lenses
$ 17000,- USD

4) EPIC - 5K designed for 4K delivery - inter-lenses
$ 40000,- USD

Looks like great line-up to me satisfying 99% of users out there. It will be hard to imagine You could not choose from this selection...

[shaocaholica]

Here's my 2 cents. The still photo industry has already been vastly consumerized and competition is fierce. You can get low end $500 still cameras that can shoot RAW, has the same sensor size as $5000 cameras, takes high end lenses, etc. The only factors that govern the other cost differences are build quality, speed and other non image related features.

Thats where I want the video and digital film industry to go.

Sony's A700 DSLR has a ~4K S35 sized CMOS sensor that can sample at 30fps. They sell this camera for $1300 but it only takes stills. They could very easily repackage the base components suited to take motion picture but it conflict with its video line. Basically, the tech already exists to make cheapie S35 4K cameras for under $2k. The ability to take interchangeable lenses isn't really a matter of cost but a matter of market politics.

[Jared Caldwell]

First: Why so many posts, Peter!?!? You could have put all of those into one!:eek:

Second: Even though interchangeable lenses would be awesome, I tend to agree with Christoffer. For my purposes, Scarlet will be a Godsend, and a great step before going up to a Red One.

Would 3k for under $3k with interchangeable lenses be awesome?

Totally.

However, I don't think we could get all of that for under $12k (even though Jim said ~$8k).

Just my thoughts.

[Peter Majtan]

You could also look at it from this perspective:

Scarlet - Entry-2K - $ 3000,- USD
NEWred - PRO-2K - $ 10000,- USD
RED-ONE - Entry-4K - $ 17000,- USD
EPIC - PRO-4K - $ 40000,- USD

[Peter Majtan]

Also remember You can upgrade RED-ONE to the new Mysterium-X sensor...

[Peter Majtan]

This also explains why RED came out with Scarlet 3K and EPIC 5K. After the RED ONE was released many complained that is it not "PRO" 4K and that it is little "OVERKILL" for 2K. Which is also why the new cam is not urgent and in the meantime RED-ONE can serve as PRO-2K cam, albeit little more expensive...

[Jaime Valles]

I imagine a "Scarlet Pro" with 3K, 2/3" CMOS & Interchangeable lenses for $7-8K would be the final nail in the other Digital Cinema camera companies' coffins.

[Peter Majtan]

First: Why so many posts, Peter!?!? You could have put all of those into one!:eek:

Second: Even though interchangeable lenses would be awesome, I tend to agree with Christoffer. For my purposes, Scarlet will be a Godsend, and a great step before going up to a Red One.

Would 3k for under $3k with interchangeable lenses be awesome?

Totally.

However, I don't think we could get all of that for under $12k (even though Jim said ~$8k).

Just my thoughts.

When I post - look at it and want to add something. By editing the previous post I could "render" someone else's reply incorrect - therefore I only tend to edit my post when I make spelling mistake... Sorry mate...

And please remember - I am not bashing Scarlet. I have been defending it since the beginning of the interchangeable lens invasion...

The idea behind this poll is to see what would people (especially here on the forum) like to fit between Scarlet and RED ONE. The difference between $ 3000 and $ 17000 is simply to huge for not to be able to fit something in between...

[Barry Green]

If I was gonna explore this path, I'd say take the Scarlet as-is, lop the lens off, put on a c-mount, and sell it for the same price, maybe even $1,000 more. Probably would have to charge more because you'd be selling so many fewer of them, but for those who want/need interchangeable lenses, a c-mount should suffice. You can easily adapt any still-camera lens to c-mount, and there are some decent c-mount lenses out there (mainly the Switars) and there's lots of modern TV/security lenses being made in c-mount that would be plenty wide-angle-enough to work and support the market.

Purists might call for PL mount, but I think that would be the exact opposite direction that they should go in. If you want PL mount, get a Red One. If you just want interchangeable lenses, a c-mount is about the cheapest way to go, it'll cover the sensor size, etc. A single PL lens will cost more than a Scarlet; the Scarlet customer is more likely to be looking at price tag, and c-mount is the way to go for that.

But, then again, there's not really a reason for Red to do this at all. If Les Bosher can saw the lens off and install a c-mount for under $1,000 -- why even bother Red with the task?

[Jaime Valles]

But, then again, there's not really a reason for Red to do this at all. If Les Bosher can saw the lens off and install a c-mount for under $1,000 -- why even bother Red with the task?

I think Red might do this (at a later date) the same way that Canon has the XL-H1 and the XH-A1 at the same time. Red makes more money by offering the C-mount Scarlet at $8000, and we don't have to hack up the original Scarlet and void the warranty. Everybody wins.

[Peter Majtan]

You are right Barry, but what about some of us who have already invested huge $$$ into good quality 35mm still glass (such as the Canon L-series). I absolutely adore those lenses for my still photography and they give You great footage when fitted to XL2 or XL-H series video cams. I will most-likely end up buying one RED ONE (besides of several Scarlets) just to be able to use my L-glass...

[Jaime Valles]

You are right Barry, but what about some of us who have already invested huge $$$ into good quality 35mm still glass (such as the Canon L-series). I absolutely adore those lenses for my still photography and they give You great footage when fitted to XL2 or XL-H series video cams. I will most-likely end up buying one RED ONE (besides of several Scarlets) just to be able to use my L-glass...
The problem with still glass is the lack of super-wide angle lenses for use on a 2/3" sensor. You'd need to have a 7mm still lens to get decent wide angle on Scarlet, and I don't think Canon or Nikon make still lenses nearly that wide (that aren't fisheye). You could use your L lenses for super telephoto, but that's about it.

[Barry Green]

You are right Barry, but what about some of us who have already invested huge $$$ into good quality 35mm still glass (such as the Canon L-series).
No problem -- get a Canon->c-mount adapter and use it on your modified c-mount Scarlet...

[Luis Caffesse]

..... will most-likely end up buying one RED ONE (besides of several Scarlets) just to be able to use my L-glass...


Well then it seems like all the LESS motivation for RED to offer up a lower priced interchangeable lens camera.

They would have to offer it up for more than the Scarlet to make up for the lack of volume, and on top of that they would have to consider any possible lost sales on RED Ones.

Personally I would rather not see them go this route.
The more camera models RED offers the more they may paint themselves into a corner of becoming exactly what they first set out to stop - namely the purposeful crippling of lower end cameras to protect a higher end line.

[Peter Majtan]

The problem with still glass is the lack of super-wide angle lenses for use on a 2/3" sensor. You'd need to have a 7mm still lens to get decent wide angle on Scarlet, and I don't think Canon or Nikon make still lenses nearly that wide (that aren't fisheye). You could use your L lenses for super telephoto, but that's about it.

Which is why I have proposed in the first place to design new 3K 35mm sensor... I had a great (and colorful) explanation about such such a camera and why RED is most likely already thinking about one - back on REDUSER.NET, but all those threads are gone...

Not all was rubbish - please copy them to a "closed" sub-forum titled "OLD POSTS FROM REDUSER.NET/SCARLET FORUM" so we can at least reference to them...

[shaocaholica]

Which is why I have proposed in the first place to design new 3K 35mm sensor... I had a great (and colorful) explanation about such such a camera and why RED is most likely already thinking about one - back on REDUSER.NET, but all those threads are gone...
Why 3K for a 35mm sensor? Why not just go for the even 4K? Its not like it costs more to make it 4K, its the physical size of the chip that determines the majority of the cost, not how many pixels are on it.

Edit: Perhaps you want a lower resolution for a higher max/burst framerate?

[Peter Majtan]

The main cost factor is not the size of the sensor, but the number of photosites (due to required electronics connecting them all together...

But the main reasons I am suggesting 3K sensor are:

A) 4K sensor already exists in RED ONE - there will be no difference and therefore no new product that could fit between RED ONE and SCARLET...

B) 3K - so they could re-use ALL the exact internal electronics from Scarlet (besides of the sensor, if it is to be updated to 35mm size...)

[shaocaholica]

The main cost factor is not the size of the sensor, but the number of photosites (due to required electronics connecting them all together...


This is actually totally wrong. The sensor is made from essentially what is a stencil. The complexity of the stencil is a one time cost. The actual physical size of the sensor is a recurring cost. The individual photosites aren't wired together by a robot, its literally painted in by the "stencil" using UV and other light sources in one or more passes.

Think of it as traditional printing. It costs roughly the same to print 100 stamps on fixed size sheet of paper as it does to print 10 really big ones on the same sized sheet regardless of how detailed the picture on the stamp is. Its actually cheaper to make smaller more detailed stamps because if any of them are bad, you're only throwing away 1/100 of your physical media at a time per error where as for the bigger stamps, you throw away 1/10 of your media per error.

[Gordon JL]

The poll's a little useless, as there's no way to know who voted for A or B, and what their selection of the prices were for A or B. Is the vote of 7-8k for A, or for B? Probably not the 35mm sensor version, but still, what's the point of the poll if you already know who chooses what?

1K of pixels is not a big difference, not even between Epic and Red, since I doubt 4K delivery is going to be advancing much for years to come. 1K more worth of pixels is still, in my opinion, not worth the extra large sum of cash you have to pay up front, for most filmmakers. But of course, for decent budget productions, that extra cash won't really make much of a dent, so might as well go for the Epic. For most people, an extra 1K isn't worth it.

[shaocaholica]

1K of pixels is not a big difference, not even between Epic and Red, since I doubt 4K delivery is going to be advancing much for years to come. 1K more worth of pixels is still, in my opinion, not worth the extra large sum of cash you have to pay up front, for most filmmakers. But of course, for decent budget productions, that extra cash won't really make much of a dent, so might as well go for the Epic. For most people, an extra 1K isn't worth it.

The point I've been saying is that putting more pixels on the same sized sensor doesn't actually cost more to design and manufacture. Maybe a little but its not even close to the actual pixel increase of 33%.

Look at DSLRs. Entry level DSLRs have just about the same number of pixels as mid and high end ones while costly considerably less. Its also why you see lower MP chips get phased out relatively quickly once a higher MP version comes out since it costs the camera maker roughly the same to make the newer sensor.

[Christoffer]

Why 3K for a 35mm sensor? Why not just go for the even 4K?


This is just an example of the pointlessness of this thread and any like it.
During the discussion, people are moving twords the specs of a Red One.
They want this and that without being rational at all.
Yeah, I would also like a 3K camera with a 35mm sensor so I can use my canon L-lenses. The problem is that there already is a camera like this and that is the Red One.

They already have the trilogy of marketkillers; Scarlet to kill the prosumer small cameras, Red One to kill the medium budget feature film cameras and Epic for the blockbuster large budget cameras.

You can go on and on about what you want instead of Scarlet; that you want something in between but Red is not going to do that. They have three really good cameras under a price of a fraction of the others in the same league.

I think this thread and any like should be called "Threads of Greed" because that is what it is; you get a camera that is super and at a price that people thought was a joke and you still want more... give me a camera with interchangable lenses; give me a camera with 35mm sensor, give me a camera with 4K etc.

I think you who have a big wishlist of irrational wishes should stop spending your time here and instead use that time to work and earn money to buy a Red One instead; it will give you exactly what you want.

[Peter Majtan]

This is actually totally wrong. The sensor is made from essentially what is a stencil. The complexity of the stencil is a one time cost. The actual physical size of the sensor is a recurring cost. The individual photosites aren't wired together by a robot, its literally painted in by the "stencil" using UV and other light sources in one or more passes.

Think of it as traditional printing. It costs roughly the same to print 100 stamps on fixed size sheet of paper as it does to print 10 really big ones on the same sized sheet regardless of how detailed the picture on the stamp is. Its actually cheaper to make smaller more detailed stamps because if any of them are bad, you're only throwing away 1/100 of your physical media at a time per error where as for the bigger stamps, you throw away 1/10 of your media per error.

Wow - what a news for me. You keep interpreting my words and then making it look like I have actually said that. I have never said anything about robots wiring circuits between photosites...

I know it is "printed" - but there is Your dilemma. Printers that can print finer details are A) more expensive and B) more-likely to make an error and C) much slower...

When it comes to the cost of silicon slice - You are right that the surface is what matters. Sure. But the physical size of the "printed" circuity matters as well and not necessarily in the way You are portraying...

If I use Your terminology - it does not cost the same to print Letter size image at 72 DPI as it costs to print the same area at 2400 DPI. The first one will use lot less ink and will be done at least 10x faster. Not to mention that You will need better quality paper to print the high-res images...

Surface size is important, but the quality of printing even more... I can get canvas printed here at $ 15 / sqm, but it costs $ 50 to get A3+ digital photo...

[Peter Majtan]

The poll's a little useless, as there's no way to know who voted for A or B, and what their selection of the prices were for A or B. Is the vote of 7-8k for A, or for B? Probably not the 35mm sensor version, but still, what's the point of the poll if you already know who chooses what?

1K of pixels is not a big difference, not even between Epic and Red, since I doubt 4K delivery is going to be advancing much for years to come. 1K more worth of pixels is still, in my opinion, not worth the extra large sum of cash you have to pay up front, for most filmmakers. But of course, for decent budget productions, that extra cash won't really make much of a dent, so might as well go for the Epic. For most people, an extra 1K isn't worth it.

The relation between the two are not that important. Think of it as two independent polls. But I see Your point. Anyway - the poll is public...

[Peter Majtan]

This is just an example of the pointlessness of this thread and any like it.
During the discussion, people are moving twords the specs of a Red One.
They want this and that without being rational at all.
Yeah, I would also like a 3K camera with a 35mm sensor so I can use my canon L-lenses. The problem is that there already is a camera like this and that is the Red One.

They already have the trilogy of marketkillers; Scarlet to kill the prosumer small cameras, Red One to kill the medium budget feature film cameras and Epic for the blockbuster large budget cameras.

You can go on and on about what you want instead of Scarlet; that you want something in between but Red is not going to do that. They have three really good cameras under a price of a fraction of the others in the same league.

I think this thread and any like should be called "Threads of Greed" because that is what it is; you get a camera that is super and at a price that people thought was a joke and you still want more... give me a camera with interchangable lenses; give me a camera with 35mm sensor, give me a camera with 4K etc.

I think you who have a big wishlist of irrational wishes should stop spending your time here and instead use that time to work and earn money to buy a Red One instead; it will give you exactly what you want.

There are still people who don't read properly the threads they are complaining about. The proposed camera is as close to red one as BMW 3-series to BMW 5-series. Are they both great cars? Sure. Are they same? Hmmmm....

If You don't like such a threads - don't post inside and create Your own instead of bit**ing about here...

[shaocaholica]

Wow - what a news for me. You keep interpreting my words and then making it look like I have actually said that. I have never said anything about robots wiring circuits between photosites...

I know it is "printed" - but there is Your dilemma. Printers that can print finer details are A) more expensive and B) more-likely to make an error and C) much slower...

When it comes to the cost of silicon slice - You are right that the surface is what matters. Sure. But the physical size of the "printed" circuity matters as well and not necessarily in the way You are portraying...

If I use Your terminology - it does not cost the same to print Letter size image at 72 DPI as it costs to print the same area at 2400 DPI. The first one will use lot less ink and will be done at least 10x faster. Not to mention that You will need better quality paper to print the high-res images...

Surface size is important, but the quality of printing even more... I can get canvas printed here at $ 15 / sqm, but it costs $ 50 to get A3+ digital photo...

I didn't mean to put words in your mouth and I apologize if it came off that way. However, I got the impression from you that the cost from going from 3K to 4K photosites on the same sized silicon was a drastic increase in cost and other users have even stipulated some ridiculous figures in that reguard.

In addition, your "ink cost" analogy is misleading since the process used in IC production uses light which is a fixed rate cost regardless of your pattern complexity. The cost the "stencil" is a one time cost based on size and complexity and according to the still photo industry, manufacture of sensors up to APS-C size are all relatively "cheap" to come by but going up to full frame 35mm incurs a steep increase in price. So futzing around with Super35 sized sensors and smaller with varying pixel counts below 4K shouldn't incur a huge manufacturing cost difference especially in the $1000s of dollars per unit.

[Christoffer]

BMW 3-series to BMW 5-series. Are they both great cars? Sure. Are they same? Hmmmm....



Are you seriously comparing cars to cameras?
Main thing here is that you don't realize that Red isn't the same kind of company as on the usual prosumer market. They are making Scarlet to A) earn alot of money from those that can't buy a Red One B) Kill the prosumer market of similar cameras C) Create an entry point into the world of Red.

And it's also irrational because Red is currently working on Red Ray, Epic, Scarlet and improvments on Red One, which means that this discussion is pointless at this time. Wait until those cameras and accessories are out, wait until you test the Scarlet with it's fixed lens and wait until Red has finished what they are doing now!

What exactly is the reason for this thread? Do you think Red will listen and "oh, yeah, he's right let's do a middleweight camera right now"?

If this was to be rational, then this thread would be more convenient to be active during the fall/winter of 2009 then at this time.

And the most pointless thing of all is that no one has seen any footage from Scarlet.
If it's almost as good as Red One, then what is the point of a middleweight camera when the next natural stage is the actual Red One?

Just explain the point of this thread when we know what the Scarlet will be and we know that something like what you are suggesting won't happen for at least two - three years from now (when Red One might be lower in price perhaps).

It's greed that feeds this thread, not rational thinking...

[number6]

There was no place to vote for "I would not buy a Scarlet if it had an interchangeable lens, at any price" I would have punched that chad out if it had been listed because I am afraid that an interchangeable lens will make it more difficult to shoot 3D with two Scarlets. I could be wrong about that, but I also could be right.

[kmikami]

Huh? People have been doing 3D with interchangeable lenses since 3D was invented. Just put on two identical primes and make sure they're focused the same.

[Barry Green]

Huh? People have been doing 3D with interchangeable lenses since 3D was invented. Just put on two identical primes and make sure they're focused the same.
Sure, until something moves. Or you want to rack focus. The point of Scarlet's 3-D capabilities is that the two cameras can be locked together so that any focus or iris or zoom changes will be reflected immediately, simultaneously, and perfectly.

[Christoffer]

Huh? People have been doing 3D with interchangeable lenses since 3D was invented. Just put on two identical primes and make sure they're focused the same.


This is the same thing as the geata effect (bullettime). If the lenses aren't perfectly similar to eachother there will be bad distortion in the image. Better to go with something that is fixed and alligned in factory then trying to do this with consumer lenses.

And of course, Scarlet will never have interchangable lenses... live with it, or die trying.

[Floris van Eck]

Christoffer, with all the respect, I suggest that you don't participate in threads like this. Its obvious that you are irritated by everyone who talks about the interchangeable lens issue. That's fine, I respect that. But other people do like to talk about it. This is a discussion forum. There are valid arguments in here. There is no need to tell us this thread is pointless around 20 times in the same thread. You made your point. People are not asking for the Scarlet to have an interchangeable lens, people are discussing the idea of a second version of Scarlet with interchangeable lens mount.

Sony released a PMW-EX1 and people asked for better ergonomics and a interchangeable lens mount and they got it. RED listens to customers and I am sure that they understand that many ask for interchangeable lenses. I am quite confident that we'll see the camera we are discussing. It won't be Scarlet (not the first model) but we have the right to discuss this. And you have the choice not to participate.

[Christoffer]

I am quite confident that we'll see the camera we are discussing
Why is that? Red already has their series of three and covered the market on these three different areas. How can you be confident that Red will make a middlecamera?
How can you be confident that the market value of such a camera is high enough to be able to survive? There are alot of people that use adapters but not that many that it can be sustained as a selling product.

Scarlet is also secondary to Red One and Epic. Their main focus is digital cinema and they have not shown any interest into becomming a company that market themselves like Panasonic, Sony, JVC etc. or spew out cameras like them.

I'm into this discussion too and with the idea to challange these ideas, because frankly, some are flying away on dreamy clouds about the camera of their dreams...

Reality check, what makes you so confident?

[Dances With Cameras]

I think what is being discussed here, in this thread, is very reasonable, but won't happen soon.

Eventually it will happen, I hope.

Apart from being revolutionary camera-makers, RED are also a business and business is a war for survival.

If RED start losing money and go down as a business, there would be no RED cameras at all.

And I think all of us agree that the RED phenomenon has been\is a very good thing for the whole camera-making industry and, of course - especially for filmmakers.

Nobody would want to see them go down as a business, so we have to try and think not only as camera-geeks, but also as businessmen trying to survive and be successful.

...

Such a mid-range cam would certainly be a marvel but, simply put, it could threaten their current RED One in terms of business.

I foresee that, some years from now (3, 5 or more), the current RED One category would actually "descend" into what we're asking here - financially and in terms of specs.

...

So we're probably gonna have these three categories:


1. The proconsumerish Scarlet - 3-5k $

2. The [future] mid-range: 35mm sensor, interchangeable mount, 3K? etc. - ~10k $

3. The [future] high-end - 35mm and\or 65mm sensor, 6-8-12k? resolution, downrez-able to pristine 4K, etc. - 25k+ $, 40k+ $, etc. Whatever the market dictates.


So in this [bright-er] future, the big-$ boys are gonna enjoy the benefit of RED's high end, but the middle-guys will be pretty happy as well.

...

Imagine... a camera with a s35mm sensor, interchangeable mounts, 3K resolution [de-Bayered for 2K], high framerates, etc.... at around 10k $ [for the body]. That would be the real indie dream come true.

A s35mm sensor with a 3k resolution could be capable of some extraordinary DR\low-noise.

I haven't watched a movie in 4K yet, but the movies I have seen projected digitally at 2K looked pretty amazing [for what I want]. Maybe I sound a bit old-school, LOL. :)

Remember, we're talking middle-man's budget.

And of course, there will be the Scarlet for us soccer moms\dads :), giving impressive image at the low-end.

Only the future will show what RED have in their pockets. I bet they already have loads of ideas, but it can't hurt to give them some more ;).

...

Just my 2k.

[kmikami]

This is the same thing as the geata effect (bullettime). If the lenses aren't perfectly similar to eachother there will be bad distortion in the image. Better to go with something that is fixed and alligned in factory then trying to do this with consumer lenses.

And of course, Scarlet will never have interchangable lenses... live with it, or die trying.

LOL. You're too much. I don't even want interchangeable lenses and never said that I did. I'm simply pointing out that the 3D sync features on Scarlet, while interesting, are hardly a requirement for making a 3D movie since people have been doing that for over 100 years.

[Jared Caldwell]

LOL. You're too much. I don't even want interchangeable lenses and never said that I did. I'm simply pointing out that the 3D sync features on Scarlet, while interesting, are hardly a requirement for making a 3D movie since people have been doing that for over 100 years.

Too bad 3D movies notoriously suck. Until recently, the technology has been laughable, nothing more than a gimmick or a novelty.

With recent movies such as Polar Express/Beowulf/ the upcoming Avatar, 3D has gotten a lot better. Even though these advances in 3D have increased significantly, it still isn't quite right.

Any extra features that Red could offer on the Scarlet that would lend well to 3D is pretty important to making a legitimate 3D film that truly suspends the audience's disbelief.

It is my hope that Scarlet will be a great 3D cam that I can use to study in grad school to try to improve these technologies. If not, it still sounds like a lot of fun! :thumbsup:

[Dances With Cameras]

Just a thought..

Imagine The Godfather in 3D....

F*** that!

[number6]

I think what is being discussed here, in this thread, is very reasonable, but won't happen soon.

Eventually it will happen, I hope.

Apart from being revolutionary camera-makers, RED are also a business and business is a war for survival.

If RED start losing money and go down as a business, there would be no RED cameras at all.

And I think all of us agree that the RED phenomenon has been\is a very good thing for the whole camera-making industry and, of course - especially for filmmakers.

Nobody would want to see them go down as a business, so we have to try and think not only as camera-geeks, but also as businessmen trying to survive and be successful.

...

Such a mid-range cam would certainly be a marvel but, simply put, it could threaten their current RED One in terms of business.

I foresee that, some years from now (3, 5 or more), the current RED One category would actually "descend" into what we're asking here - financially and in terms of specs.

...

So we're probably gonna have these three categories:


1. The proconsumerish Scarlet - 3-5k $

2. The [future] mid-range: 35mm sensor, interchangeable mount, 3K? etc. - ~10k $

3. The [future] high-end - 35mm and\or 65mm sensor, 6-8-12k? resolution, downrez-able to pristine 4K, etc. - 25k+ $, 40k+ $, etc. Whatever the market dictates.


So in this [bright-er] future, the big-$ boys are gonna enjoy the benefit of RED's high end, but the middle-guys will be pretty happy as well.

...

Imagine... a camera with a s35mm sensor, interchangeable mounts, 3K resolution [de-Bayered for 2K], high framerates, etc.... at around 10k $ [for the body]. That would be the real indie dream come true.

A s35mm sensor with a 3k resolution could be capable of some extraordinary DR\low-noise.

I haven't watched a movie in 4K yet, but the movies I have seen projected digitally at 2K looked pretty amazing [for what I want]. Maybe I sound a bit old-school, LOL. :)

Remember, we're talking middle-man's budget.

And of course, there will be the Scarlet for us soccer moms\dads :), giving impressive image at the low-end.

Only the future will show what RED have in their pockets. I bet they already have loads of ideas, but it can't hurt to give them some more ;).

...

Just my 2k.

Radoslav, not pickin' on your post, but it is useful for making my point. Which is, I don't think it is good business for a new company to try and cover all aspects of the market. Even an old company like the car company Ford, in the 1950s introduced the Edsel (in between the Ford and the Mercury lines). IMO, the Edsel was a beautiful and futuristic car (with buttons in the center of the steering wheel to change gears for the automatic transmission), but people who were buying cars simply skipped the Edsel and bought either the Ford or the Mercury.

I'm just thinking that the extra support troops required to maintain another line of cameras as you have described, are more trouble than the rewards from trying to cover that niche market in between the Scarlet and the RED One.

Of course, you are very knowledgeable so you could be right and I could be wrong:yikes:

[Barry Green]

Why is that? Red already has their series of three and covered the market on these three different areas. How can you be confident that Red will make a middlecamera?

Reality check, what makes you so confident?
Well, if you want a true reality check, NONE of us can be confident AT ALL about ANYTHING that RED is going to do. They put a specific disclaimer on there that lets us know that anything they do is likely to be subject to change, and not only subject to chane (in specs, features, dates, prices, etc) but they in fact tell us to "Count On It."

Threads like this are people just chatting. We can let Red know what we're interested in, etc., and frankly until the Scarlet actually gets released there's not a tremendous amount else for us to do.

[Christoffer]

Well, if you want a true reality check, NONE of us can be confident AT ALL about ANYTHING that RED is going to do


About the specs of the cameras yes, I was refering to the idea of an entirely new camera in between Scarlet and Red One.


since people have been doing that for over 100 years.

Not in the way it's being done today.

[Floris van Eck]

Well, if you want a true reality check, NONE of us can be confident AT ALL about ANYTHING that RED is going to do. They put a specific disclaimer on there that lets us know that anything they do is likely to be subject to change, and not only subject to chane (in specs, features, dates, prices, etc) but they in fact tell us to "Count On It."

Threads like this are people just chatting. We can let Red know what we're interested in, etc., and frankly until the Scarlet actually gets released there's not a tremendous amount else for us to do.

Exactly Barry.

[number6]

Scarlet is also secondary to Red One and Epic. Their main focus is digital cinema and they have not shown any interest into becomming a company that market themselves like Panasonic, Sony, JVC etc. or spew out cameras like them.

Christoffer,

I'm taking this out of context of your original post, but while I'm not privy to what's in RED'sHEAD, I'm thinking the Scarlet may be their intended cash cow. I see it as the RED idea of the "Everyman's" camera, that enables thousands, hundreds of thousands.... millions? of people worldwide to not just "youtube" their content, but theatrically release their (good) content. Just my little attempt at trying to guess what they see.

[Peter Majtan]

Christoffer - You clearly don't know much about R&D cycles...

First of all - look at EPIC and Scarlet. For RED to be able to announce both at NAB with actual specs and design prototypes, they must have been working on it for at least a year. That means - they have been working on both cameras WHILE preparing RED ONE for release. Even thou there was a leak about Scarlet - no one had any clue about EPIC. That actually goes well with standard R&D cycles:

Stage 1 - Idea
Stage 2 - Research
Stage 3 - Designing a prototype
Stage 4 - Developing the prototype to a final product
Stage 5 - Release of the product to market
Stage 6 - Upgrades & Updates

Each stage takes certain amount of time and even company like RED can't fall asleep on the roses. Competition will for sure respond and respond swiftly. Many of the top 5 had a simillar technology available in their R&D labs, it was a marketing decision holding them back from release so they can sell more of the "old" stuff. Now since RED has gone out in open about Scarlet & Epic and they have RED ONE to prove they are serious and that they can deliver - You will see the top 5 to follow the cause very very soon.

So - where is RED now?

Red One - Stage 6 - Upgrades & Updates
Scarlet & Epic - Stage 4 - Developing the prototype to a final product

So I can be pretty sure that the "new" camera is way past the "idea" Stage 1 and at least in a stage of heavy research, if not already in a design of a prototype.

So if anything - NOW is the perfect time to discuss such an issue.

Now please let this go and if You don't like to participate - leave us alone...

Howgh!

[Christoffer]

It's not that I don't understand the process, I'm trying to be rational about the strengths of the trilogy. With a middle camera, they might just kill the reason for a Red One and also the reason for a Scarlet.
They can't throw money into new projects all the time and expect everything to pay back in gold. With a middle camera like what is suggested the individual selling for each camera might drop. There are strengths and weaknesses with Scarlet as well as Red One and Epic, but they complement eachother in a perfect way and the trilogy of them make up a perfect line of products.


You clearly don't know much about R&D cycles

As for psychology, this is just something people say when they need to place themselves higher in the foodchain during a discussion. Downside is when the comment attacks something the argument wasn't based upon... just as a footnote on how the headline shouldn't try to tease the other into anger.

[Dances With Cameras]

Of course, you are very knowledgeable so you could be right and I could be wrong:yikes:



Yeah, nobody knows...


Maybe it will be just the Scarlet category moving up to a s35mm sensor\interchangeable.

The important thing is how-many-people are ready to pay this-amount-of-money for such-a-kind-of-camera.

You know, the market. But knowing the market is an entire art in itself. :)

So...

I just see that people are interested in such a middle-camera, but maybe this whole thing is pointless, cause probably Scarlet will rock big time.

We'll see. :violin:

[Peter Majtan]

Scarlet will rock - no doubt there. I'm getting few for our studios as soon as they are out...

And the "new" camera won't kill Scarlet, nor Red One. A) it's not going to be $3K, but somewhere between $7-10K - read: it won't see mass production/sells like Scarlet will...
B) it won't give You entry to 4K - like RED ONE does.

There is actually a perfect space for it in the lineup - not all things cinema are by the rule of three...

[Christoffer]

Scarlet is the entry to the lineup of Red cameras... it's stated by themselves actually.

A) it's not going to be $3K, but somewhere between $7-10K - read: it won't see mass production/sells like Scarlet will...

There is no "new" camera, stop speaking like you are on the developing techteam at Red. There is nothing to imply they are making or talking about anything like this and being objective about how Red as a company is working with development it seems that they want 1 product to sell alot and use as a marketing tool but Red One and Epic is what Red is all about.

The market for the kind of camera you speak about isn't realistic in that even if they don't mass produce it, the sold units will be much less then both Scarlet and Red One.
Most people who are ready to use something like the camera you describe are probably already as advanced as DP's or directors that they're ready for Red One.
As I also said before: many of the accessories and postproduction equipment used with Scarlet will be used with Red One so you will only need the body (because I assume you already have a budget for lenses if you want interchangables).

There isn't a large enough group of people that will buy it so the cost of developing and making the camera will be more then the income from sold units.

My opinion is that there is alot of dreaming... I would love the camera you describe, I just don't see how it's gonna hold in the long run.

Just because that is exactly what YOU need doesn't mean it's going to be strong on the market.

[Peter Majtan]

You don't give up - do You?

This thread is dedicated to such a "new" camera - if You don't like it - pack Your sh** and get outta here! And stop putting words in people's mouths - I have never said I am on the RED R&D team and I have never made any interpretation towards the same.

As far as the market goes - I base my assumptions on 15+ years in the industry working in 50+ countries - therefore have a broad and up-to-date intel. Majority of the 15+ years I have worked in R&D field as well as DOP and VFX & Post Supervisor. I know for certain that such a camera will outsell RED ONE fold-wise - i.e. You could easily add "0" at the end of the number RED-ONE's have sold so far...

Maybe for You there is no difference between $7000,- USD and $ 17000,- USD - but for many this is huge and very important. Far more important then 4K. Majority of serious indie filmmakers will be way to happy with pristine resolved 2K. For the price of the RED ONE body alone one could get the "new" camera and outfit it will all the accessories ready to shoot...

And I don't speak for my personal interest - I do speak on behalf of many indie filmmakers who have and are working with our company - some have actually become our employees...

We - as a company - are even going to get at least one EPIC for out "high-end" customers - because they require resolved 4K. We are also going to get two RED ONE's bodies along with several Scarlets.

Many of my clients and friends can't afford spending $25~30K on RED ONE - especially when most need at least two cameras - which makes a difference of app. $30~40K. Many could shoot a basic feature or doco on that budget...

[Isaac Brody]

Relax everybody. Take a deep breath, and chill out.

[Peter Majtan]

I'm cool Isaac - I just don't know how else to explain to Christoffer to stop trolling. I (and others) have tried it the subtle way and it doesn't seam to work...

[Christoffer]

stop speaking like you are on the developing techteam at Red

That was a description in the form of an adjective about how it sounds when you speak about it. It doesn't mean I meant that you said you are, read posts twice before flaming around...


I'm cool Isaac - I just don't know how else to explain to Christoffer to stop trolling. I (and others) have tried it the subtle way and it doesn't seam to work...


I am NOT trolling, stop flaming and trying to silence criticism you get.
You are trying to prove your point by adding how many years you ahve been in the industry but that doesn't mean a thing. I've worked with people who worked with Tarkofsky and they were still wrong in some discussions. So, your 15 years does not mean a thing...


I (and others) have tried it the subtle way and it doesn't seam to work...


What others? I have not heard anyone call me a troll and you are the only one who can't discuss in an adult way. I've used credible arguments and you return with this shit... sorry, but if someone needs to tell the moderators about trying to be subtle it's me.

I've been cool the whole time, it's Peter who are flaming around getting all "incredible hulk" over the smallest criticism, Peter doesn't have monopoly on this discussion. I think he should calm down and discuss in a normal way because it may even take this thread down to earth and get something out of it instead of dreaming away of what might be the perfect camera without any words from the Red team.

Now to get back on the subject without going in to your unnecessary substories about your carrier...


And I don't speak for my personal interest - I do speak on behalf of many indie filmmakers who have and are working with our company - some have actually become our employees...


So, do you have the numbers on how this interest is compared to a larger scale market of customers? Did you ask all of those customers and employees about this idealistic camera? Or are you saying this based on what you think they want?

Many of my clients and friends can't afford spending $25~30K on RED ONE - especially when most need at least two cameras - which makes a difference of app. $30~40K. Many could shoot a basic feature or doco on that budget...

30~40K minus
1. the idealistic camera times 2 = $14000
2. FCP = $2100
3. Macbookpro = Around $3400
Lenses, for two cameras, at least $4300

Bottom line: 30K budget with all that is about $6200 = not much of a budget for a feature. Also, I've calculated that $25 000 is what you need to able to use a Red One through the workflow + around $3000 for Canon lenses. And if you buy two of the same "not yet made" cameras you will need double up on the accessories.
Red One in it self isn't really such a great cost when you look at the big picture.


Now, stop being an arse and calling me a troll when you are the one not being able to keep your anger out of a debate.

[Peter Majtan]

Now that must be the funniest post of the day... LOL

[Peter Majtan]

Just to "clarify" Your calculation and "assumption"

Red-One package = $25K (according to You - and I've said basically the same anyway...)

2x Red-One package = $50K

Proposed "new" camera package = $10K
2x that = $20K

$50K - $20K = saving of $30K

Majority of them already have their own computers and SW - besides, You will need it for both workflows - so no saving there what so ever.

PS1: I was clearly talking about the saving - not the actual cost of a camera and accessories. Therefore You will end up with $30K saving AFTER buying two of the "new" cameras instead of two RED ONE's. Now $30K is more then enough for some to shoot on - considering You ALREDY have the two cameras with basic accessories...

PS2: YES - we do discuss this all the time. And for the last time - we are not putting down Scarlet, nor RED ONE - they are both great and perfect for what they are...

In the end the interesting thing is that You end up mentioning that You would personally like such a camera - and then in another posts keep repeating over and over how useless this thread is. And if repeating of "why this thread is useless" over and over and over is according to You a criticism - well - I have nothing to add...

You have some constructive criticism based on something "real" - please bring it on...
And please do point out the "criticism" I can't handle...

I do admit I get irritated when someone keeps misleading other users on this forum with questionable statements designed only to channels someone's frustration or other issues.

But then - who does not?

[Jon Sagud]

Peter - 1
Christopher - 0

Now, can't we all just get along ;-)

Christopher, RED has plans for many exciting future products. Conjecture on them at this point is a fun exercise and an interesting exchange of ideas. AND, it is all very helpful for our process. As Barry has said, the forum members have no inside knowledge of the product development going on behind the big RED door, so don't stress out about it. Rest assured that there are professionals on the job and that the community will all benefit from the amazing things that will come forth. I've said it before, I'll say it again, chill out and enjoy the ride.

[Christoffer]

Peter - 1
Christopher - 0


Well, if this is a "battle" then I'm perfectly fine with loosing because I don't see an end to a debate about something theoretical where ALL the arguments are plausable.
Even Peter have to admit that I have a point when saying that it might not be worth the expense of developing a camera when the market might not be big enough for covering the sales... just like I can't say that his arguments are 100% certain.

So, I have just dropped it, loosing battle or not.


Rest assured that there are professionals on the job


That I have no worries about... That is why I trust Red...

[Peter Majtan]

Jon, I don't think this is battle either - in the end we all loose if we turn this godsend forums (both reduser and scarletuser) into a battlefields...

Lets keep it on topic and lets contribute as much as we can. Constructively...

Peace Chris...

:cheers2:

[Christoffer]

I'll drink to that too... we are grown ups so :)

Peace

[Jon Sagud]

That's the spirit boys!

[Dances With Cameras]

... we are grown ups :)


I wish I could claim that too. :happyhappy:

[Oldphart]

Peter - 1
Christopher - 0

Now, can't we all just get along ;-)

Christopher, RED has plans for many exciting future products. Conjecture on them at this point is a fun exercise and an interesting exchange of ideas. AND, it is all very helpful for our process. As Barry has said, the forum members have no inside knowledge of the product development going on behind the big RED door, so don't stress out about it. Rest assured that there are professionals on the job and that the community will all benefit from the amazing things that will come forth. I've said it before, I'll say it again, chill out and enjoy the ride.

Sounds great - and I expected nothing less.
For my own use - I would immediately buy a more expensive Scarlet with a C mount. A camera with NO other changes (except the disabling of the automatic functions wich would not make any sense with that kind of mount.

I would also buy a more compact (true pocket) Scarlet-like camera, maybe something with a f:1.8 3x zoom.

While I wait for that to happen. I will buy a Scarlet. :thumbsup:

[shaocaholica]

What's a good resource for C mount lens reviews and buying C mount lenses? Or are they long since stopped production and relegated to ebay and the used market?

The thing is, I wonder if any C mount lens overlapping in the Scarlet's fixed lens range will be any better. Otherwise, what would be the point.

[John Caballero]

We still are talking about interchangeable lenses. I thought that argument was settled long ago.
I am willing to pay $3K for the Scarlet as announced because it sounds pretty good to me. There is no need to worry about something that Red is not going to make at the moment and probably won’t. But of course there is a year to go and in the meantime we need to talk about something, I guess.

[Peter Majtan]

We still are talking about interchangeable lenses. I thought that argument was settled long ago.
I am willing to pay $3K for the Scarlet as announced because it sounds pretty good to me. There is no need to worry about something that Red is not going to make at the moment and probably won’t. But of course there is a year to go and in the meantime we need to talk about something, I guess.


John - YES - we are talking about interchangeable lenses - but NOT for Scarlet. Please read the whole thread - or at least the first post...

[John Caballero]

OOOps! I am sorry Peter. My apology.

[Peter Majtan]

No worries mate...

[Oldphart]

What's a good resource for C mount lens reviews and buying C mount lenses? Or are they long since stopped production and relegated to ebay and the used market?

The thing is, I wonder if any C mount lens overlapping in the Scarlet's fixed lens range will be any better. Otherwise, what would be the point.

There is demand for them, since cameras like the SI 2-k can use C-mount lenses and have a 2/3" sensor.

I believe the biggest maker of C-mount lenses today is Fujinon, they have some nice f:1.2 primes at around 400 USD. Lenses for this format are significantly smaller and less expensive than for larger formats. If you step up to super-16, you will have to pay a lot more.

With a CS mount, you can use an adapter for almost anything, so you can use both old C-mount and s-16 PL-mount lenses. PL lenses are more expensive, though. Both Optar Elite and Optar Illumina (not the same factory) are more affordable than Cooke and Zeiss.

Expect about 13000 dollars for a set of six Illumina primes, a bit over twice that for a set of five Zeiss Super Speed.

[BenKoning]

I agree with Peter that such a 4-tier lineup covers all the bases.

And I think it's fine for a "Scarlet-2" to stay with the 2/3" sensor and electronics from the Scarlet, especially for under $10K and especially considering what the other camera manufacturers (don't) offer in the $3K..$10K price range.

[shaocaholica]

Since the Scarlet is a fixed lens camera, RED won't make a dime selling interchangeable lenses to Scarlet owners so they might as well make a few Scarlets with an interchangeable non-electronic mount which should cost the same if not less than the original Scarlet.

However, I think it would be greedy of RED to sell this product substantially more than the fixed lens version just because people are willing to pay more for it. After all, thats the same philosophy that the other big makers have used and thats why competing cameras to REDs offerings cost so much more.

What I would like to see are 2/3", Super35mm and Full35mm all with interchangeable lens mounts that can be swapped out. Perhaps its too ambitious at the moment but in 2 years, I would like to see that lineup at $3000, $10,000 and $20,000 respectively and reduced every year as sales increase.

[Peter Majtan]

It's really all about two destinations - 2K and 4K. And You need an entry point and a "pro" version for both (don't crucifice me just yet...), therfore:

2K entry - Scarlet ($3000 with fixed lens)
2K pro - New Red (~$7000 body only)
4K entry - Red One ($17000 body only)
4K pro - Epic ($40000 body only)

There are many who don't care about 4K. And sure (by definition) You could use both Red One and Epic as the "pro" 2K (or even entry 2K) camera - but at what cost??? And this is where the proposed camera fits in. People who don't care 4K at all, but want to have no compromise 2K delivery camera which could be priced bellow $10K. And as I have mentioned number of times - the only thing needed for such a cam (besides new body) will be the new 3K 35mm (or even S35!) sensor, as ALL the existing Scarlet's electronics could be re-used without ANY modification (if the number of photosites remains the same). Coincidently it will benefit with higher DR and less noise, besides of the 35mm "look" and the ability to use photo glass...

This will take on directly cams like the XL-H series from Canon, etc... And that is understatement...

I believe there is a huge (relative word) market for such a cam - I would estimate it at being in tens of thousands (based on the fraction of the XL-H-type camera's market share), maybe even shooting up to 6-digit territory...

But that is just me and I don't want to provoke any more arguments - just trying to explain my reasoning behind this thread...

[Dances With Cameras]

A 3K S35mm sensor could have bigger DR and lower noise than the RED One\Epic at the expense of resolution. That's what "the books" say.

I don't care much about a resolution, higher than 2K.

But I haven't seen a 4K projection, so...

I wonder, is the DI\film prints for Indy 4 made at 4K?

They should be, cause it's a high-profile film.

One of these days, I'm gonna go and see it, and I'm wondering if what I'm gonna see was filmed out of 4K?

[Peter Majtan]

Rado, You might be surprised that vast majority of (even high-profile) 35mm features - especially the ones who went the DI route (read: all with VFX/CGI stuff) are only recorded back to film at 2K. 4K recording is utterly expensive and slow, not to mention the cost of 4K DI, VFX and CGI...

[Peter Majtan]

A 3K S35mm sensor could have bigger DR and lower noise than the RED One\Epic at the expense of resolution. That's what "the books" say.

Just to clarify - I was referring to Scarlet with 2/3" sensor. But hypothetically it "could" be even better then Red One, or Epic... :thumbsup:

[NoahK]

I think it's almost a given once EPIC, Red One and Scarlet are all completed and on the market that a 'mid-range' camera with interchangeable lenses would be a viable product. I for one see a huge gap between $3,000 for the Scarlet and 17.5K for the RED One- really more like $30K with a barest set of zoom lens and accessories.

So yeah a nice $9,995 3K camera with a decent included HD-style lens and the possibility of interchanging for different lenses sounds like a great product. It would be the EX3 to the Scarlet's EX1 to borrow a model from Sony. At some point in the future RED is likely to have several camera lines going much like the 'big boys.'

Noah

[Peter Majtan]

Rather then more cameras I can see them going more into accompanying products, such as 4K monitor, 4K projector, special storage, etc... - just as indicated by RED-REY...
Yeah - and tons of cool and/or useful accessories!!!

[shaocaholica]

I for one would like to see more modularity in order to suit the camera to your needs rather than more cameras. I think 4 tiers would be enough after the market stabilizes.

[NoahK]

I for one would like to see more modularity in order to suit the camera to your needs rather than more cameras. I think 4 tiers would be enough after the market stabilizes.

What's interesting however is that RED's idea of a tier is different from everyone else's. Especially as their entry level tier has better specs than most camera companies offerings at any price.

Noah

[Dances With Cameras]

Especially as their entry level tier has better specs than most camera companies offerings at any price.

Noah


Hahaha. :)

[Joseph Hutson]

Christoffer, with all the respect, I suggest that you don't participate in threads like this. Its obvious that you are irritated by everyone who talks about the interchangeable lens issue. That's fine, I respect that. But other people do like to talk about it. This is a discussion forum. There are valid arguments in here. There is no need to tell us this thread is pointless around 20 times in the same thread. You made your point.

He has only said that it is pointless to talk about Scarlet having an interchangeable lens, 2 maybe 3 times. It is the truth. But, again, you can talk about it if you wish.

Sony released a PMW-EX1 and people asked for better ergonomics and a interchangeable lens mount and they got it. RED listens to customers and I am sure that they understand that many ask for interchangeable lenses. I am quite confident that we'll see the camera we are discussing.

Please don't compare Red to Sony. Red won't expect people to pay another $13,000 after spending $7,000+ for better ergonomics. They either get it right the first time, or offer a free upgrade.

[Peter Majtan]

Joseph - yes - we are talking about interchangeable lenses - but not for Scarlet. Please see the post #1... We all know Scarlet won't have this and no-one is asking for it...

[RED-Tank2]

For the price of two Scarlets plus a little..., if that is possible then I would love to have one Scarlet-2 instead of 2 Scarlets.

I don't need auto zoom or auto focus, just Nikon or Canon mount would make Scarlet-2 the king of my video world.

But before the king returns, I am very happy to have two queens :happyhappy:...

[shaocaholica]

For the price of two Scarlets plus a little..., if that is possible then I would love to have one Scarlet-2 instead of 2 Scarlets.

I don't need auto zoom or auto focus, just Nikon or Canon mount would make Scarlet-2 the king of my video world.

But before the king returns, I am very happy to have two queens :happyhappy:...
This is exactly what I'm thinking about making(DIY):

http://www.scarletuser.com/showthread.php?t=94

You should read all the caveats in my thread but if you're willing to buy 2 Scarlets and convert one, you will have what you are looking for.

[Peter Majtan]

He is looking for Nikon or Canon mount. No matter how You mutilate Scarlet the sensor will remain 2/3". Good luck with the wide shots...

[shaocaholica]

He is looking for Nikon or Canon mount. No matter how You mutilate Scarlet the sensor will remain 2/3". Good luck with the wide shots...

Thats what the un-modified Scarlet is for.

[RED-Tank2]

He is looking for Nikon or Canon mount. No matter how You mutilate Scarlet the sensor will remain 2/3". Good luck with the wide shots...


Hi Peter, I'm sorry, I guess my statement is misleading, I voted for

B) new 35mm sensor with interchangeable lens mount &
3) $ 6000 ~ $ 7000 USD

So what I means is, I am willing to pay for your new version of Scarlet (If RED could ever make it in within the cost), the Scarlet-2. Instead of purchasing 2 sets of Scarlet.

But I don't know whether that is possible and when it will happen, so I will save my money just for 2 sets of Scarlet. If the dream of Scarlet-2 comes true in longer future, (and I earned enough money from Scarlet), I will definitely go for Scarlet-2 because I have few Nikon & Canon lens.

Hi shaocaholica (http://www.scarletuser.com/member.php?u=363), I understand the limit of putting 35mm lens on Scarlet, without adapter you will always get cropped image, that is why it is unlikely I will hope for an interchangeable lens mount with the existing Scarlet since it is 2/3" sensor.

Thanks for your info, nice stuff :).

[Peter Majtan]

Let me get this straight:

A) Majority here are concerned about the wide-end of the lens for which You are going to use unmodified Scarlet
B) Scarlet is going to have matched pair of RED-made wide and tele adapters
C) DOF is not going to be major issue with 2/3" sensor
D) and if You still want more - there is 35mm DOF adapters

So You are going to bastardize the second Scarlet exactly for what reason?

EDIT:

This post was addressed to Shaocaholica...

[RED-Tank2]

Hi Peter,

If your option of B) new 35mm sensor with interchangeable lens mount is specific for cine-lens only, then I am sorry, I have joined the wrong poll because I don't think I would ever have the fortunate to buy or rent or use cine-lens.

Please exclude my vote if Nikon & Canon mount is not talking here.

And sorry to mess out your poll.

[Peter Majtan]

Hi Peter, I'm sorry, I guess my statement is misleading, I voted for

B) new 35mm sensor with interchangeable lens mount &
[I]3) $ 6000 ~ $ 7000 USD

So what I means is, I am willing to pay for your new version of Scarlet (If RED could ever make it in within the cost), the Scarlet-2. Instead of purchasing 2 sets of Scarlet.

But I don't know whether that is possible and when it will happen, so I will save my money just for 2 sets of Scarlet. If the dream of Scarlet-2 comes true in longer future, (and I earned enough money from Scarlet), I will definitely go for Scarlet-2 because I have few Nikon & Canon lens.

Your statement was loud and clear. And yes - it is possible. Will RED do it? We shall know by EARLY 2009 (NAB 2009 the latest). Just remember how EPIC took everyone by surprise. There was no hint about it what so ever. I wouldn't be surprised if the new proposed camera gets released at the exact same time as Scarlet - it is doable...

I knew You have chosen the 35mm sensor for the reason to be able to use your photo-glass. Same reason I am suggesting it in the first place - and same reason why I am trying to explain to Shao that bastardizing Scarlet won't allow You to use 35mm lenses. Sure You can do that and mount the lenses on Scarlet. Is it going to be useable and worth killing Your warranty and possible the Scarlet as well? Double NO...

[RED-Tank2]

Hi Peter,

Wow you reply real quick. I plan to purchase two Scarlets just for my business, nothing bastardize here.

And thanks for the info, now I understand your interchangeable lens is specific for RED lens only, please drop my vote, I didn't read it correctly this morning.

Sorry again to mess out your poll.

I do have an adapter, but I thought this poll is about get 35mm without adapter...

[RED-Tank2]

Sure You can do that and mount the lenses on Scarlet. Is it going to be useable and worth killing Your warranty and possible the Scarlet as well? Double NO...


Hahaha.. Peter, sorry for my damn poor english, I am not buying two Scarlet and make one bastardize just for fun/35mm/void the warrant.

I have no such luxury, every penny is hard earning money, I am just an event videographer mainly for wedding only :).

I need two Scarlets just for better coverage of the event, but if RED ever make a photo-glass mount, even it has no all those auto control, I will still buy it.

With adapter, the work is really difficult because practically you hardly get good exposure below f4, I don't need so many DoF but I do need some, that is why I hope for a straight 35mm mount for photo-glass.

Okay, no hope, wrong place.

sorry again.

[Peter Majtan]

Hi Peter,

Wow you reply real quick. I plan to purchase two Scarlets just for my business, nothing bastardize here.

And thanks for the info, now I understand your interchangeable lens is specific for RED lens only, please drop my vote, I didn't read it correctly this morning.

Sorry again to mess out your poll.

I do have an adapter, but I thought this poll is about get 35mm without adapter...

No need to apologize - You understood it the first way around. As I have stated in the post #1 - the reason I am proposing 35mm sensor is to be able to use both cine and PHOTO lenses. I have myself now almost $15K worth of Canon L-series glass that I would love to use with digital cine camera. And yeah - I know I can do that with Red One, but when we get one it will be primarily for business (and I can imagine quite busy). I always carry my DSLR with the L-glass on my frequent travels ann I would love to include small digital cinema camera body with it.

So Your vote is correct and so was Your understanding of the poll...

[Peter Majtan]

Hahaha.. Peter, sorry for my damn poor english, I am not buying two Scarlet and make one bastardize just for fun/35mm/void the warrant.

I have no such luxury, every penny is hard earning money, I am just an event videographer mainly for wedding only :).

I need two Scarlets just for better coverage of the event, but if RED ever make a photo-glass mount, even it has no all those auto control, I will still buy it.

With adapter, the work is really difficult because practically you hardly get good exposure below f4, I don't need so many DoF but I do need some, that is why I hope for a straight 35mm mount for photo-glass.

Okay, no hope, wrong place.

sorry again.

That was not meant at You - but at Shao - he is trying to push forward the idea of buying two Scarlets and bastardizing one by cutting off the fixed lens and get made (or made himself - good luck) custom mount...

I apologize I wasn't clear...

[RED-Tank2]

Thank you Peter, I re-read the thread again and realize it was me misunderstood, I got to apologize for this, really sorry to you.

15K of L-glass, I am sure you love photo a lot, I am in the same shoe (smaller one) :o.

Scarlet or Scarlet2, without RED, the world of videography is just too limited.

[Peter Majtan]

I have box with 60,000+ 35mm transparencies taken with my old & trusted EOS-5 and another 1,000+ medium panoramic (3x medium format - 6x19 cm) transparencies of landscapes. All this before I've switched to DSLR (I have now EOS-30D and EOS-1Ds). So yes - I love photography a lot - especially with Canon...

:hippie:

[RED-Tank2]

God! why do you want to do video then ? (okay, to up a bit, why do you want to do motion picture then ?).

I am just a damn event video guy for more then 10 years (my father is even poorer, 30 years ;p), kind of feeling hopeless about video so I started to pick up a DSLR three years ago, spent a lot into a 5D + 70-200L when I started to understand why my video never looks as good as photo... then a 580, then 17-40L, then 50L, then fisheye, then 30D. Man, every bit I put into DSLR, I was rewarded more then what I ever could in video equipment, you just have so much flexibility and fun to make good shoot.

But somehow RED has pulled me back to what I love the most :)...

[Peter Majtan]

I do see cinematography as a logical and natural extension to photography. They are almost the same. I have been to so many beautiful places around the world wishing I had a cine camera with me. If a photograph is worth thousands of words - imagine motion photography... Things like Baraka make me speechless... Which is why I will focus my cinematography efforts at nature-related documentaries. I have done three so far, but on Canon SD gear...

[shaocaholica]

So You are going to bastardize the second Scarlet exactly for what reason?


B)A proper lens is better than any front mount adapter
C)Then why are people using 35mm adapters on other 2/3" cameras? This is a matter of opinion.
D)35mm adapters have their own issues but my proposed solution should be vastly cheaper than any 35mm adapter. I'm not saying better, just way cheaper. And there is also the possibility that the process will be reversible with no physical modification to the camera, just a bolt-on.

[Christoffer]

D)35mm adapters have their own issues but my proposed solution should be vastly cheaper than any 35mm adapter.


You will not get 35mm DOF by using 35mm directly on Scarlet. Other aspect to use 35mm adapter is to get a good wide, which you can't with direct mounting.
I don't think it's going to be 100% reversible if you don't have a lab.

You will have better quality then any adapter if you are able to micro collimate the lenses.

I actually wonder what the reason is. The only place to justify the extreme tele use of mounting directly on the camera would be nightshoots at a distant. So if you are a safari nightcruiser then it's perfect.
What are you intended to shoot with that thing? Or are you doing it just to show that you can?

[shaocaholica]

Or are you doing it just to show that you can?
Pretty much. Although I've seen enough tele night shots in mainstream film that I'm sure people out there would find a use for it.

[Peter Majtan]

B)A proper lens is better than any front mount adapter

Scarlet already has a "proper" lens... And even with the front-mounted adapter (be it wide or tele) I am sure is still going to be "proper" quality. But I guess we have to wait and see...

C)Then why are people using 35mm adapters on other 2/3" cameras? This is a matter of opinion.

Which is why I have exactly recommended it to You instead of bastardizing Scarlet. Also - could You be more specific as to who have used 35mm DOF on a (which) 2/3" camera? I would like to see some footage as to understand the reasoning behind it... (not trying to disprove it)

D)35mm adapters have their own issues but my proposed solution should be vastly cheaper than any 35mm adapter. I'm not saying better, just way cheaper. And there is also the possibility that the process will be reversible with no physical modification to the camera, just a bolt-on.

If You want cheap and "bad" - buy Sony's or any other consumer camera...
Forget reversible - You need a collimator and other pro-equipment just to bastardize Scarlet. I totally agree with Chris. In the end You could not compare Your solution with 35mm DOF adapters and they will offer You full 35mm framing instead of Your crop-factor. Don't mix oranges with apples...

[shaocaholica]

If You want cheap and "bad" - buy Sony's or any other consumer camera...
Forget reversible - You need a collimator and other pro-equipment just to bastardize Scarlet. I totally agree with Chris. In the end You could not compare Your solution with 35mm DOF adapters and they will offer You full 35mm framing instead of Your crop-factor. Don't mix oranges with apples...
I never intended to compare my pet project with a 35mm GG adapter. I've realized a long time ago that it would only be for wide aperture tele use and I've said that many times.

Also, would you be willing to wager $1 million imaginary dollars that the scarlet fixed lens can't be removed with standard drivers and ring wrenches? This is coming from a guy thats gutted many a lens/camera from many an era. I have faith in RED to not engineer the camera to be overly complicated to disassemble like most consumer cameras. Even the RED One has brazenly exposed bolts and I expect the same for Scarlet.

[Peter Majtan]

You can remove it with a hammer or a piece of rock if You want. I wasn't talking about removing the lens, but rather fixing in a custom mount - now that is something else entirely... I just don't see how You going to pull that of with "standard drivers and ring wrenches". If You do - good on You mate...

[shaocaholica]

Scarlet already has a "proper" lens... And even with the front-mounted adapter (be it wide or tele) I am sure is still going to be "proper" quality. But I guess we have to wait and see...
I'm not questioning the fixed lens. The only lenses I forsee myself and others using are those outside of the range of the stock zoom. The specs right now say that the zoom tops out at 50mm. For tele, a >50mm high quality 35mm prime should outperform any front mounted tele adapter. And your selection of >50mm lenses will give you many more tele options that you can't get with just the stock lens and adapter.

[shaocaholica]

You can remove it with a hammer or a piece of rock if You want. I wasn't talking about removing the lens, but rather fixing in a custom mount - now that is something else entirely... I just don't see how You going to pull that of with "standard drivers and ring wrenches". If You do - good on You mate...
The specific camera system mount you can cannibalize from extension tubes. The piece that will hold the mount and connect to the camera will have to be precision machined on a CNC lathe but its just a solid piece with no moving parts. That I will have to design and fabricate at a local shop. I've done this all before so its nothing alien to me.

[Peter Majtan]

As I said - if You can do it, good on You mate!

[Peter Majtan]

I'm not questioning the fixed lens. The only lenses I forsee myself and others using are those outside of the range of the stock zoom. The specs right now say that the zoom tops out at 50mm. For tele, a >50mm high quality 35mm prime should outperform any front mounted tele adapter. And your selection of >50mm lenses will give you many more tele options that you can't get with just the stock lens and adapter.

Remember that even if the 50mm cut-off was correct - it was certainly not in a 35mm equivalent, but rather 2/3" scale. Just keep that in mind...

[shaocaholica]

Remember that even if the 50mm cut-off was correct - it was certainly not in a 35mm equivalent, but rather 2/3" scale. Just keep that in mind...

Yep, I know. 50mm = 200mm equiv so anything longer will be really really long :thumbsup:. Time to start planning a docu on something dangerous I don't want to get near.

[Peter Majtan]

How about Sony's HQ's after Scarlet and EPIC is out - especially if You going to wear a RED t-shirt...

[shaocaholica]

How about Sony's HQ's after Scarlet and EPIC is out - especially if You going to wear a RED t-shirt...
A docu about the RED and the general video industry? Sounds fun but I doubt I'll need a super tele. I was thinking more about dangerous animals and stuff in conflict areas.

[aidenvfx]

If priced bellow $10000,- I personally believe it will satisfy many who are crying out for interchangeable lens mount on Scarlet.
But will kill Red One.

[Peter Majtan]

But will kill Red One.

Don't think so. Red One is entry to 4K acquisition for possible 4K delivery. The new cam will be 3K acquisition for 2K/HD delivery. A very different market. It's like saying the Red One will kill the EPIC once it is out, because they are basically the same - S35 sensor, interchangeable lenses, etc... - the "only" difference is 1K resolution and Red One is so much cheaper... Why would they even bother with Epic if they have think like that...

[aidenvfx]

Don't think so. Red One is entry to 4K acquisition for possible 4K delivery. The new cam will be 3K acquisition for 2K/HD delivery. A very different market. It's like saying the Red One will kill the EPIC once it is out, because they are basically the same - S35 sensor, interchangeable lenses, etc... - the "only" difference is 1K resolution and Red One is so much cheaper... Why would they even bother with Epic if they have think like that...

I'm pretty sure Epic is a different sensor then the Red One. Also the Red One is still a very Indie style camera in many ways compared to the F23 or F35 or film. The Epic is aimed at the top, top end of productions and will offer far more then just the 1k resolution diffrence.

While kill may have being a little to strong I would say that Red would loose a fairly large Red One market if they offered a less expensive camera with interchangeable lenses.

[shaocaholica]

Epic has a full frame 35mm sized sensor. Thats 2x the surface area of S35/Super35/APS-C which is in the RED One

[Peter Majtan]

Epic has a full frame 35mm sized sensor. Thats 2x the surface area of S35/Super35/APS-C which is in the RED One

EPIC has a full-frame S35 sensor - exactly the same size as Red One. Don't mistake full-frame S35 cine sensors with full-frame 35 still-photo sensors...

[Peter Majtan]

I'm pretty sure Epic is a different sensor then the Red One. Also the Red One is still a very Indie style camera in many ways compared to the F23 or F35 or film. The Epic is aimed at the top, top end of productions and will offer far more then just the 1k resolution diffrence.

I think is fair to say that the difference between Red One and Epic will be about the same as between the new camera and Red One...

While kill may have being a little to strong I would say that Red would loose a fairly large Red One market if they offered a less expensive camera with interchangeable lenses.

Even if so - "loose" is not the right word. The market share will transfer to the new camera. RED wins no matter what. Also remember that RED can't rely on Red One forever. At some point newer, better and cheaper cams will appear as a natural progress of development...

[shaocaholica]

EPIC has a full-frame S35 sensor - exactly the same size as Red One. Don't mistake full-frame S35 cine sensors with full-frame 35 still-photo sensors...

My mistake. I don't get the point of using "Full Frame" and "S35" in the same term. Its confusing. Its like saying Full Frame APS-C.

[Peter Majtan]

When You see image from Red One - You will understand. The image actually has areas "outside" of the main data frame, kind off like a "under-scan". Basically the active photosites are covering the entire (full) S35 frame - hence the use of the term. I agree tho it is a little confusing...

[Peter Majtan]

UPDATE: Having a look at the poll results so far two things are emerging clear:

A) Majority would prefer the new cam to have 35/S35 cine-size sensor instead of the 2/3"
B) No one is willing to pay above $10K for such a camera

[BrettA]

Yes, Peter! This makes complete sense and without a lens, there would be no need to come close to $10K - I'd hope for under $5K but I voted $5-6 because if the sensor was good enough, I might go to $6K. You're right on about the huuuuuge gap between Scarlet and One - this would be a clear win/win. ... Your only flaw is the Canon lenses jk ... ;-).

[Peter Majtan]

Well - You would be able to change the mount to what ever You want PL, FD, EF, Nikon, etc...

[Peter Majtan]

BTW - Mods - can we please move this thread to Off-Topic section... Thanks :D

[BrettA]

I was only giving you a little 'dig' - as a 40+ year Nikon user - yes I know I could use Nikon. But the Off-Topic section only has 2 second level subsections - 'Film & TV Discussion' and 'Terry's Corner' - the thread would get lost there and is far more appropriate here, in my opinion (those sub-section names are largely why I didn't use 'Off-Topic' before - they give no indication at all for something like this).

BTW, Peter, I agree with other(s), use of 'Edit' is far better than all these multiple posts, I think. Especially - but not solely - when the posts are 1-5 minutes apart. For what it's worth.

[Peter Majtan]

I don't do it on purpose and since we are no longer counting the posts I became a little careless in this regard - I will try to improve... :D :D :D

As far as the sub-section goes - I have been asking for few more for a little while. If I could pick just one to add - it would be "GEAR" - and this thread would fit there just right... :D

Come on mods - please give us a "GEAR" section... :D :D :D

PS: Where is begging emoticon??? :furious3:

[Ayoji]

Damn, I wish it was an Interchangeable Lens camera with Optical Viewfinder. lol:laugh2:



Just to be clear, it is a joke(with some truth though)!HEHE

[Peter Majtan]

Why joke man? The cam we are proposing would have that (except for the OVF - I prefer that as an accessory...)

[Ayoji]

Peter, I think you could of had more results with 2/3 Interchageable Lens Camera if you didn't put S35mm size into the mix. RED maybe would see, that more people want a differ camera from RedOne with lens interchangeability.:thumbsup: Scarlet could still be under $10,000 and be 2/3 with interchangeable lenses.

[Peter Majtan]

You can't put 35mm still lenses directly on 2/3" sensor camera. It won't work without massive crop-factor = no wide angles...

35/S35 sensor is the only way to go for interchangeable lenses... :D

[Ayoji]

Yeah but B4 lenses?

[Peter Majtan]

B4 lenses are mostly not designed for single CMOS, but rather 3xCCD - so that wouldn't work either.

Another major issue - do You know the prices for good B4 lenses and how many people out there with DSLR's have B4 lenses?

Anyway - I did put the 2/3" option in the poll out of respect - Option A)...

:D

[Ayoji]

I dont know, seems any lens can be worked if someone wants it and RED can create compatible lens anyway. RedOne like camera? Just get RedOne.:happyhappy:

Unless it is a lipstick RedOne camera!

[Peter Majtan]

You should really take a time and read the whole thread from post #1... :D

[Ayoji]

I did. If you want another in between camera thats a differnt story.:thumbsup: I don't see the big difference with S35mm and RedOne. If it was a lipstick camera that would be cool.
By the way you post fast! lol

[acoelho1]

I agree with Peter that Red might be already working on such a camera. To get a Red One with the most basic package, you are looking to spend at least 30k, which is well out of my price range. The Scarlet will run you 3k plus accessories depending on how you want to trick it out. So that leaves us a lot of room inbetween price range to slip in a 35mm sensor and detachable lens camera at about 6k to 9k. Now some will argue that people will just bypass the Scarlet for this new camera but not everyone will be able to do that. There are lots of people who use the Canon A1 but would love to use the Canon H1 but cannot because of that desparity in price. It makes sense to me but whether it makes good business sense, is up to RED.

[Jared Caldwell]

I think that the Red One was to get RED's foot in the door. They are fulfilling pre-orders for the Red One as fast as they can, but I would wager that RED hasn't made back a lot of money as of yet.

Since Scarlet is going to be mass produced and accessable to many people, Scarlet is going to be the real money maker for RED.

I predict that after RED starts rolling in the $$ from Scarlet, they will make a new cam to place in the current Red One slot and start selling Red Ones for the prices you are speaking of.

Just my opinion, and I may be way off! :P

[Peter Majtan]

I agree with Peter that Red might be already working on such a camera. To get a Red One with the most basic package, you are looking to spend at least 30k, which is well out of my price range. The Scarlet will run you 3k plus accessories depending on how you want to trick it out. So that leaves us a lot of room inbetween price range to slip in a 35mm sensor and detachable lens camera at about 6k to 9k. Now some will argue that people will just bypass the Scarlet for this new camera but not everyone will be able to do that. There are lots of people who use the Canon A1 but would love to use the Canon H1 but cannot because of that desparity in price. It makes sense to me but whether it makes good business sense, is up to RED.

Business sense? Absolutely :D

It's not like they will loose Scarlet sale and that is it. If they do loose a Scarlet sale - it will be because the same person went ahead a purchased some more expensive RED camera. So the total revenue will rise as a result (and I believe even profit margin - as I don't see them having huge margin on Scarlet...). But also consider the alternative - RED will loose ALL the sales for people who need interchangeable lenses, but can't afford Red One - these buyers will settle for less specs at higher price and buy video cams from the competition. Also, comes NAB'09 - You will see some "answers" from the competition... :D

[acoelho1]

No argument here. We definitely need a mole at red to let us know what they are thinking.

[Ayoji]

Im wondering if most people will even use interchangeable lens. Does anyone know what are the sale figures of lenses with interchangeable camera versus interchangeable camera without anyone buying lenses other than what comes with camera?

[Isaac Brody]

I couldn't see a 3K S35/35 sensor camera being announced until 2010 or 2011. It would pretty much just cannibalize the Red One market. And it seems like the market for a 10K camera is much less than the potential sales of a 3K scarlet. It would be great if it were offered, but just from reading Reduser I get the sense that The Red Team has their hands pretty full burning the candle at both ends to finalize Red One, and design and prototype Epic and Scarlet.

I'm very curious on how Sony, Panasonic, and Panavision and Arri will respond.

[Jaime Valles]

I couldn't see a 3K S35/35 sensor camera being announced until 2010 or 2011. It would pretty much just cannibalize the Red One market. And it seems like the market for a 10K camera is much less than the potential sales of a 3K scarlet. It would be great if it were offered, but just from reading Reduser I get the sense that The Red Team has their hands pretty full burning the candle at both ends to finalize Red One, and design and prototype Epic and Scarlet.
I think you've summed it up well. I'd love a 3K/S35 camera with Nikon lens mount, but it probably won't happen anytime soon. I feel we're going to have the Scarlet/RED-ONE/Epic triumvirate for several more years.

[John Caballero]

I am sure Red won't be thinking of any new camera other than Scarlet 3k and Epic for a long while. They are still delivering Red Ones as we speak. It takes a lot of resources and money to develop a camera.

[Peter Majtan]

Please don't make me again explain the R&D process. RED is almost guarantied to have started the process for additional camera(s). EPIC is a great example - nobody saw that one coming, yet it must have been cooking in the RED kitchen for at least a year to announce it the way they did at NAB... :D

[Isaac Brody]

Please don't explain the R&D process again. :)

I understand the R&D process, and I know the technology is there to create this intermediate camera, but I'm still thinking that it's a bad business move to release a camera that destroys the market for the Red One. What's the Red motto? Render obsolescence obsolete? The camera we're clamoring for renders Red One redundant and probably obsolete. It would be awesome if they offered it, but it's basically offering a Red One with 1K less of resolution for under 10K. They need to make money, Scarlet seems like the big money maker to make back all that money that went into Red One R&D. And I think we're right in a sense, Red is definitely focusing resources on their next cameras, those cameras are Epic, Scarlet, and the next gen Monstro sensor.

And in between designing and producing Epic and Scarlet they're busy squashing codec errors, delivering Red Ones, and catering to the fickle masses. :thumbsup:

[shaocaholica]

If people want a cheaper RED One without cannibalizing sales, the simplest way to go about that is to make the RED One cheaper. Have the Epic fill in the top tier and push the RED One down. Instead of releasing consistently more expensive models, simply bump everything down. I think that $10k for the RED One v.3 and $20K for the Epic v.2 are reasonable goals down the road for RED. Not to mention $2k for the Scarlet v.2.

[Jannard]

We have lots cooking... :-)

Jim

[Cedric_Akins]

HHMMMM....Interesting.:happyhappy:

[Peter Majtan]

Please don't explain the R&D process again. :)

I understand the R&D process, and I know the technology is there to create this intermediate camera, but I'm still thinking that it's a bad business move to release a camera that destroys the market for the Red One. What's the Red motto? Render obsolescence obsolete? The camera we're clamoring for renders Red One redundant and probably obsolete. It would be awesome if they offered it, but it's basically offering a Red One with 1K less of resolution for under 10K. They need to make money, Scarlet seems like the big money maker to make back all that money that went into Red One R&D. And I think we're right in a sense, Red is definitely focusing resources on their next cameras, those cameras are Epic, Scarlet, and the next gen Monstro sensor.

And in between designing and producing Epic and Scarlet they're busy squashing codec errors, delivering Red Ones, and catering to the fickle masses. :thumbsup:

Why does everyone think such a camera would cannibalize Red One sales? Red One can't be made fast enough - just see the dredged wait-list. The proposed cam will really only be 2K (RGB) out of the 3K-RAW - in the same way Scarlet is. So if anything - it would "cannibalize" Scarlet sales - but in a business such as this - this is not a negative thing. Keeping the photosite count equal to Scarlet will allow the 100% re-use of all Scarlet internal electronics making it a perfect companion to Scarlet.

You could also prevent the "cannibalization" of the Red One sales by simultaneously releasing sensor upgrade for Red One. But even without this remember that Red One is not really 4K - but actually 4.5K and as such is clearly destined for 4K deliveries...

I think all these cams will in fact improve overall sales and profits for RED and they will coexist together. In fact they would offer a more complete lineup and as result more users will turn to the RED solution...

RED will only gain with such a cam as the only heavy-duty R&D will be related to the 3K S35 sensor (besides of new body...)...

Just my two pesos... :D

[Peter Majtan]

:D I just saw Jim's post... :D

[Joseph Hutson]

We have lots cooking... :-)

Jim

Does "REDRUSHES", "RED QUICK" the software you have been developing, be a part of it?

I noticed you all have gotten "REDVISION" trademarked also.:thumbsup:

OOOPS!!! Was I not supposed to say this?:happyhappy::happyhappy::happyhappy:

[Peter Majtan]

I am going to shoot here in the dark, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if comes "EARLY 2009" RED ships Scarlet and the new cam AT THE SAME TIME... Think of it as two versions of Scarlet - one with fixed lens 2/3" sensor (lower model) and one with interchangeable lens mount with S35 sensor - but otherwise both identical when it comes to specs and resolution. Of course the body would have to be slightly modified to accommodate the larger sensor and the mount - but otherwise identical...

This is totally doable and it would only increase the potential user base...

By NAB 2009 I think the RED would (please note the "By" - things can happen before NAB):

- Release Red One as a "production-ready" camera
- Release EPIC to public BETA (as Red One is right now)
- Release Scarlet 3K fixed lens camera with 2/3" sensor
- Release (Maroon) 3K interchangeable lens camera with S35 sensor
- Release tons of new accessories to "pimp" the 3K cameras...
- Release Red-Ray optical/magnetic 4K media player
- Release "Red-Light" 2K/4K projector to plug into Red-Ray
- Release tons of dedicated SW (Red Cine, Red Alert, etc...)

and

- Announce officially Monstro technology
- Announce 65mm and/or Vistavision digital "monster" camera(s)
- Announce (or maybe even release) field-editing/backup station (ala Sony's HD Walkman) for R3D media

We will see in 10 months whether I have some genes from Nostradamus... :D :D :D

I am out for today - will be back tomorrow hopefully with some goodies... :D

Peace to everyone :hippie:

[Ayoji]

VistaVision!!!!!!!:happyhappy:

[Joseph Hutson]

VistaVision!!!!!!!:happyhappy:

Why VistaVision, when Red.com has just trademarked "RED VISION"?

[acoelho1]

I don't think a midlevel camera is that much of a stretch. Look at Panny for instance.

HPX 3000 48K
HPX 2000 28K
SPX 800 19K
HPX 500 14K
HPX 170 5.9K
HVX 200a 5.5K

As I stated before, the Red One at 17.5 is really misleading in that it will really cost you 30K for basic package. Therefore, a 3K with 35mm sensor is quite sensible at 6k to 9k and at this price they would be able to sell more of them as in the case of the Scarlet. One thing we can all agree on is that we would like to see this camera produced.

[Joseph Hutson]

I personally don't want a camera for my own selfish reason.:) I know I am a bad boy, but if this is true, I won't have a cool "Maroon"...just a Scarlet.:embarassed:

[Isaac Brody]

It's good to dream, but also good to cook a meal and cook it well. :)

I think if Red announces something it will be something out of left field. Last February we all thought 2K and they busted out 3K. They love to surprise, and I'm sure Scarlet has some tricks up its sleeve.

Come on Red, let's see some prototype stills!

[Ayoji]

Why VistaVision, when Red.com has just trademarked "RED VISION"?

What is Red Vision?:)

[Joseph Hutson]

Rental of camera equipment and systems for use in the creation, delivery, manipulation, recording, playback or viewing of video, music, graphics and audio and video broadcasting

Filed on June 11, 2008

[Joseph Hutson]

RED QUICK is "Computer software programs for the integration of text, audio, graphics, still image and moving pictures into an interactive delivery for multimedia applications" that Red is developing.

[Isaac Brody]

Red Quick, that sounds like an NLE.

Velly intellesting...

[Joseph Hutson]

Red Quick, that sounds like an NLE.

Velly intellesting...

The soccermoms need it quick, and easy.:thumbsup:

[Tim Hole]

Ummm.................