click analytics

RED One blah blah

Post cool stuff, funny stuff whatever. Just keep it family rated!

RED One blah blah

New postby David Garvin on Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:16 pm

Michael Panfeld wrote:you are looking at a $16-$18K investment for the ability to use cinema lenses. But for that same money, you can buy a Red One camera and get, I don't know, 16 times the resolution.

The $17.5k pricetag for the Red One doesn't include a viewfinder, battery, charger, lens etc A fully useable Red One will cost you much more than that loss leader price of $17,500

Additionally, that camera doesn't even really exist as far as anybody except Soderberg & Jackson are concerned. You can't shoot anything with a Red One today, or tomorrow, or next week. It's likely most people won't be able to even rent a Red One until 2008.

Stopping production on an item like the JVC HZ-CA13U because something might come out in the future that is cheaper and higher quality would be ridiculous. If companies did that, there'd be no products available at all.

Additionally, there are already many ProHD cameras out there in use already. Buying an additional $4000 item to add to your current package is a much better deal than selling your ProHD camera and holding onto that money until you can get a Red One.
David Garvin
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 6:05 pm

New postby EJ Sadler on Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:23 pm

It's nice that everybody keeps comparing things to RED. The only problem is that YOU CAN'T GET ONE. And more importantly, with the continously slipping ship dates, you can't even tell when you're going to get one.

The JVC is available right now and when coupled with a good Zeiss prime produces images that are astounding without worrying about slipping back focus and ground glass issues. You could have the JVC paid off before anybody in the real world even gets a hand on a RED.

The biggest issue with the HZ-CA13U is that you're dealing with 16mm DOF and lack of true wide angles, so if you're looking for narrow DOF, you best be prepared to rent some master primes.

As for economic sense, in the pro market, 20K for this solution is cheap. In the indie market, not so much.
User avatar
EJ Sadler
Posts: 172
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 10:59 pm
Location: ATL

New postby EJ Sadler on Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:38 pm

Also, you can get a lensless HD200 for about $7.5K, so your starting camera price is a little high. It will also work on the HD110.
User avatar
EJ Sadler
Posts: 172
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 10:59 pm
Location: ATL

New postby Benji Wade on Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:59 pm

This is the stuff that annoys me about the RED:

Yeah, that sounds really exciting, doesn't it? Two of the world's most prominent filmmakers have access to prototypes. That doesn't exactly scream "consumer" market, now does it...
Benji Wade
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 10:58 am

New postby David Garvin on Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:21 pm

Benji Wade wrote:This is the stuff that annoys me about the RED:

Yeah, that sounds really exciting, doesn't it? Two of the world's most prominent filmmakers have access to prototypes. That doesn't exactly scream "consumer" market, now does it...

I'm not annoyed, per se, by the fact that soderbergh or jackson or whoever might be the first to get their hands on it, I just find it annoying that people are under the impression that it's a $17,000 camera and that the $17,000 indie HDV filmmaker was somehow led to believe that for $17k they'd have a full working RED package.

Everytime somebody repeats that "$17,000 revolution" mantra, another group of listeners gets convinced that they're going to be able to spend $17k and get a setup that will allow them to shoot something that it the quality level of any major multi-million dollar production. They think "Wow, for the price of just two XLH1s, I could have a RedOne and be able to shoot unbelievable quality moving images" and it's simply not true.

This thread is a perfect example of that confusion. The whole point of the original post is that buying/marketing an HDPro JVC camera with a lens adapter is a riduculous proposition because you can get a RedOne and do so much more for less money! Hogwash.

Red's original fan base seems to be made up of scrappy independent filmmakers with limited budgets. Those are the people who have been touting the $17,000 RedOne far and wide for the last couple years. Those are the people I meet who can't stop talking about the Red and how no other camera will be able to hold a candle to it.... and 99% of those people will never ever own a Red One because, in the end, it's NOT a consumer priced camera. They have, for whatever reason, come to believe things that aren't completely true.

Whether that's because they "wanted to believe" or because they drank the purple koolaid or just never read the fine print, I don't know, but there are hundreds if not thousands of indie filmmaking wannabes who saw the RedOne as their holy grail. It's the freaking iPhone of the DV/HDV world that's going to change their filmmaking lives.... except to get a working package costs much more than a $600 iPhone or the $17k pricetag that they have burned into their brains.

I have no doubt that a full $40,000+ RedOne package will be able to shoot some great pictures. I have no doubt that it will be "revolutionary" in the fact that it's less expensive than its predecessors and can make prettier pictures than they could. But you know what? That's exactly how technology works and I can show you reciepts for 4MB sticks of RAM from the 90s to prove it.
David Garvin
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 6:05 pm

New postby Nathan Troutman on Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:19 am

I'm one of the Red kool-aide drinkers. My reservation number is around #1300. For those people who were on board with the belief that $17,500 would buy them a fully functional camera Red has extended a $2500 accessory credit for all of the first 1500 reservation holders. So that means for me I can have a pretty functional camera for around $17,500.

Red has the attention of the very top people you mention - Jackson & Soderberg, but the system is also about indie-films - hence the included Canon FD and Nikon mount options. If you were planning a no-budget indie Red wouldn't make a lot of sense, but for the low-budget indie crowd it makes all the sense in the world. Red is a no compromise option for all filmmakers. I've seen the Peter Jackson short in person. Trust me - it ain't HDV or XDCAM either. What Red and Redcode RAW allow you to do is nothing short of -"IT'S ABOUT FREAKING TIME SOMEBODY CREATED A CAMERA LIKE THIS!!"

For the skeptics go over to and watch here.

This was a little test organized by a few early reservation holders that has grown into a massive organized Red camera test - by actual reservation holders. The names and credentials are pretty impressive. Early reservation holders are due to get camers in August/September. Any questions you have about how Red works, what it can and can't due, etc. are going to be shown by this test.

From design, to the chip, to the workflow, to the resolution, to the open development format RED is a revolution. I was a skeptic a year ago, but Apple is signed on with RED with an integrated FCP workflow. 4k editing on a laptop - yeah that's a revolution. Get to the apple tour and see the Peter Jackson short. The image is all that. It's not cheap that's for sure. But RED has also announced plans to develop a mini-RED "pocket camera." No details, but the buzz is RED is creating a RED style HVX/Z1. That will be the camera that more people will be watching, especially if the price comes in around $8000.
Nathan Troutman
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 12:26 am

Moved & Split

New postby Jon Wolding on Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:45 am

Talk about the JVC adapter in the other thread.

Talk about RED in this thread... but really, do we need ANOTHER message board filled up with RED talk/hype?
User avatar
Jon Wolding
Posts: 1655
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 9:53 pm
Location: Tampa, FL

Red back on schedule

New postby Michael Panfeld on Mon Jul 16, 2007 11:02 pm

Just looked at the Red site today and they announced that they are back on schedule for production. Just wanted to stir the pot a little.
User avatar
Michael Panfeld
Posts: 186
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 9:41 pm
Location: Washington DC

Return to Utterly Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests