Chris Kenny Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 FOR SOME people who got on board when it was first announced they never factored the price of rail system because they didn't need it and it wasn't necessary with respect to the form factor first announced. Really, I don't think the camera's form factor has changed as much as you say. See, for instance, this photo from NAB last year, where the first mockup was seen and where Red first started taking reservations. Scaling from the lens, the camera body is perhaps 10" long in that shot, which I believe is within a couple inches of what it is now. Maybe people who'd never seen a cine prime thought it was smaller? True, the battery and drive have gone external (they originally weren't), but they can still be mounted on top of the camera, as per various renders on Red's site. And the battery is a larger pro-level battery, while the drive has significantly better specs than people originally expected. (Red first announced the Red Drive would be 80 GB or larger and under $1000. Turns out it's a 320 GB mini-RAID for $900.) IIRC now that at least 32 gigs of flash was included in the price. But now no free flash either. This was a misconception in some of the forums, but nobody from Red ever said it. I think it arose because some people misinterpreted what "on-board" meant. (That is, Red intended it to mean "physically on the camera body", but some people assumed it meant "included feature".) When the cam comes out I'm sure we'll have a more technical and thoughful discussion of the cam and maybe Jannard will find his way here again to answer some questions but the pre market hype machine he expects some of us refuse to lockstep to will always bother him and thats unfortunate for him. I'm still not sure I understand how talking to people about what you're doing on forums constitutes some sort of over-the-type hype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Drysdale Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 (edited) Obviously this doesn't include a tripod, but this is a pretty lightweight setup, probably around 15 pounds, so you can get by with a fairly low-cost tripod. Many people in Red's market probably own something that would work. You'd really need a video type tripod as used with ENG broadcast cameras (which are this wieght). to be comfortable. DV tripods might claim that weight, but it's getting out of their comfort zone. For big screen (or drama) work you really do need a sturdy tripod and smooth head, even more if you want to use long lenses. A Sachtler Video (ideally an 18) or Vinten, O'Connor or Cartoni equivalent is what you're looking at for a good tripod at this camera weight. Edited March 17, 2007 by Brian Drysdale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary McClurg Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 (edited) I am a partner in a large commercial studio facility with around 2.5 million in lighting, grip and camera. Here I'm getting off subject again... saw your site... what's the weekly rate 3 days on a grip truck... also is it your driver, etc... The reason I might have a project in Kentucky so looking for different things... Will rental houses be able to give it to their customers, so their customers can process the footage themselves, for instance? That's not entirely clear yet. To me that's a deal breaker on a rental... I have to pay a fee to shoot... what's next a fee paid to Red when my film is shown... yeah I'm being a bit over the top... Edited March 17, 2007 by Gary McClurg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bret Weeks Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Here I'm getting off subject again... saw your site... what's the weekly rate 3 days on a grip truck... also is it your driver, etc... The reason I might have a project in Kentucky so looking for different things... Throw me an email (bret@griptruck.com) - I'm not sure what size, package list, etc.... I'm a pretty flexible guy so let me know what you'll need... if you need a guy, we can send him, but if you're insured, you can let whoever drive- bw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Wowchuk Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Those new accessories look quite cool. Combine the camera and the new accessories with my Gold Steadicam rig ... and I'll look more like Robocop than I already do. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Peploe Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 (edited) True, the battery and drive have gone external (they originally weren't), but they can still be mounted on top of the camera, as per various renders on Red's site. And the battery is a larger pro-level battery, while the drive has significantly better specs than people originally expected. (Red first announced the Red Drive would be 80 GB or larger and under $1000. Turns out it's a 320 GB mini-RAID for $900.) Again that is a cost that for some they were not expecting. How are you going to mount a v lock bat and a raid drive on top of the camera. You will need a vlock plate, a top RED bracket and who knows what else. Now how will you hand hold this top heavy thing? Shoulder mount and red rail thats how. More cost for Some when they were expecting an HVX type form factor when that was how it was initialy promoted. Maybe he'll come out with a baby red that shoots 2k on down with onboard flash and battery closer to the original form and maybe thats what some should wait for. Edited March 17, 2007 by Michael Peploe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Kenny Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 You'd really need a video type tripod as used with ENG broadcast cameras (which are this wieght). to be comfortable. DV tripods might claim that weight, but it's getting out of their comfort zone. For big screen (or drama) work you really do need a sturdy tripod and smooth head, even more if you want to use long lenses. A Sachtler Video (ideally an 18) or Vinten, O'Connor or Cartoni equivalent is what you're looking at for a good tripod at this camera weight. Ideally, but ideally you'd also be buying a set of Master Primes. Something like this will probably be enough to get by. That head gets good reviews. See here, for instance, where the reviewer explains it's "as good or better than many top-notch heads costing three-to-four times more. In fact, the head on the Cartoni Focus is like a small version of the top-of-the-line head. It can pan and tilt about as well as anything I?ve used." If you have to, you can probably knock 3-4 pounds off the weight on the head if you tape (or whatever) the battery and drive to the tripod. Not having that weight on the back of the camera shouldn't be a big deal in terms of balance with photo lenses. At that point, you're looking at 11-12 pounds on a tripod rated for 22 pounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted March 17, 2007 Premium Member Share Posted March 17, 2007 At that point, you're looking at 11-12 pounds on a tripod rated for 22 pounds. Hi Chris, Have you tried the Focus with a 22 pound load? I tend to take manufactures claims with a pinch of salt until I get a chance to try for myself. I have used a Focus with a PD 170 and that was very good, no idea what it's like with a heavier load. Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Kenny Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Again that is a cost that for some they were not expecting. How are you going to mount a v lock bat and a raid drive on top of the camera. You will need a vlock plate, a top RED bracket and who knows what else. Now how will you hand hold this top heavy thing? Shoulder mount and red rail thats how. More cost for Some when they were expecting an HVX type form factor when that was how it was initialy promoted. I guess this is a matter of perception, but... I've been following Red since before the original NAB announcement and I never got the impression the camera was being promoted as having an HVX-type form factor. In the first photos we saw of the mockup, it had a Cooke S4 lens stuck to the front. That's a four pound lens. An entire HVX weighs five pounds. And none of the body designs have had the sort of hand grip that handheld prosumer cameras have, or controls laid out to be used with such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Peploe Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 This was a misconception in some of the forums, but nobody from Red ever said it. I think it arose because some people misinterpreted what "on-board" meant. (That is, Red intended it to mean "physically on the camera body", but some people assumed it meant "included feature".)I'm still not sure I understand how talking to people about what you're doing on forums constitutes some sort of over-the-type hype. Right and even with your explanation of 'physically on the camera' thats an extra $500 so you can have an onboard anything flash module when it was presumed, 32gigs or not, that at least the ability was included in the price. Not anymore. So with reservation $200 extra for bat/lcd + $1250 for production pac + $500 for flash module. All expected by some at the beginng to be included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Kenny Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Have you tried the Focus with a 22 pound load? I tend to take manufactures claims with a pinch of salt until I get a chance to try for myself. Sure, everyone knows manufacturers exaggerate a bit, but I think it's reasonably safe to assume you can get away with 11-12 pounds on a tripod rated for 22. Isn't half the rated weight usually regarded as being about right? It's what I've always assumed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Peploe Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 I guess this is a matter of perception, but... I've been following Red since before the original NAB announcement and I never got the impression the camera was being promoted as having an HVX-type form factor. In the first photos we saw of the mockup, it had a Cooke S4 lens stuck to the front. That's a four pound lens. An entire HVX weighs five pounds. And none of the body designs have had the sort of hand grip that handheld prosumer cameras have, or controls laid out to be used with such. Oh Chris I'm done. You go right to 4lb cookes because the pic says so when it was promoted as an anything cam with any lens like maybe a 1lb super 16mm zoom or even lighter still lenses. I got here a 17.5-70mm zoom lens with pl mount that although is not up to cooke quality by any means can cover super16mm and weighs less than a pound and can get the job done for some situations. Weight w/out bat was under 7lbs originally and onboard flash with bat and small zoom or still lens we are talking about a very light pro cam when we've used 20+lbs cams without any support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Kenny Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Right and even with your explanation of 'physically on the camera' thats an extra $500 so you can have an onboard anything flash module when it was presumed, 32gigs or not, that at least the ability was included in the price. Not anymore. So with reservation $200 extra for bat/lcd + $1250 for production pac + $500 for flash module. All expected by some at the beginng to be included. Anyone who can afford to shoot to flash probably isn't that price sensitive. And previously, most people were assuming they'd be shooting to some proprietary Red flash system. The options Red has given us let us shoot to commodity flash storage. This is going to make shooting to flash cheaper than I, for one, expected it would be. Oh Chris I'm done. You go right to 4lb cookes because the pic says so when it was promoted as an anything cam with any lens like maybe a 1lb super 16mm zoom or even lighter still lenses. I got here a 17.5-70mm zoom lens with pl mount that although is not up to cooke quality by any means can cover super16mm and weighs less than a pound and can get the job done for some situations. Weight w/out bat was under 7lbs originally and onboard flash with bat and small zoom or still lens we are talking about a very light pro cam when we've used 20+lbs cams without any support. We were talking about how the camera was being promoted. The lens they chose to show the camera with is certainly quite relevant to that subject. In terms of actual physical changes, the camera body was originally going to be seven pounds + battery & storage, and now it's apparently around eight pounds + battery & storage. Is this the big form factor change people are complaining about? I don't get it. The closest thing there has been to a form factor change is that the battery and drive have gotten bigger. But you can still shoot to on-board flash, and people who were planning to do a lot of handheld were probably planning that anyway, or should have been. So, we're left with... people complaining about a higher capacity battery? Color me confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunleik Groven Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Fun part is that I just found out that I @ a price of 17.500 total actually could take this baby for a ride Body: 17.500,- Brick&Charger: 1.000,- Nikon Mount : 500,- RedDrive : 900,- Then I still have some 100 to use. -:) This is not really what I've been planning, though (have ordered the zoom and will add some other gadgets), but as I have a production SDI mnitor, CF cards and Nikon glass, I actually can take the Red for a ride at no extra cost with the bonus 2500$ I had not even vaguely anticipated that. Gunleik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Peploe Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 We were talking about how the camera was being promoted. The lens they chose to show the camera with is certainly quite relevant to that subject. Chris if you have been on top of this RED from the beginning you know full well that a 4 lb cooke lens was not the way it was first being promoted. It was a shoot anything cam. Those were put on later and you know it. It was a shoot anything cam, super 16mm, still lenses, primes. No need for the cooke poundage if you didn't want it from the start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Kenny Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Chris if you have been on top of this RED from the beginning you know full well that a 4 lb cooke lens was not the way it was first being promoted. It was a shoot anything cam. Those were put on later and you know it. It was a shoot anything cam, super 16mm, still lenses, primes. No need for the cooke poundage if you didn't want it from the start. That photo is from NAB 2006, where they first announced the price and started taking reservations. That was pretty early in the game. And it still is a "shoot anything" cam. It gained a pound and the battery went external. You can still get something probably 11 pounds with a light 16mm lens, shooting to flash. I don't know how you're supposed to hold the thing handycam style, given that it doesn't have the proper sort of grip... but it has never been shown with that sort of grip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Drysdale Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 Ideally, but ideally you'd also be buying a set of Master Primes. Something like this will probably be enough to get by. That head gets good reviews. See here, for instance, where the reviewer explains it's "as good or better than many top-notch heads costing three-to-four times more. In fact, the head on the Cartoni Focus is like a small version of the top-of-the-line head. It can pan and tilt about as well as anything I?ve used." If you have to, you can probably knock 3-4 pounds off the weight on the head if you tape (or whatever) the battery and drive to the tripod. Not having that weight on the back of the camera shouldn't be a big deal in terms of balance with photo lenses. At that point, you're looking at 11-12 pounds on a tripod rated for 22 pounds. If I was using a full cine 35mm lens kit especially the zooms, I'd tend to go for the 150 mm bowl tripods. There's no point in buying higher end kit like RED and not making the investment in the associated equipment. A good tripod will last many years, some of the DV tripods are actually impossible to repair. By making the purchase the quality of your work will also improve. The RED is the same investment as a SD broadcast camera, no camera person would dream of buying tripod that doesn't match that level of investment. You really need to match up kit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Kenny Posted March 17, 2007 Share Posted March 17, 2007 If I was using a full cine 35mm lens kit especially the zooms, I'd tend to go for the 150 mm bowl tripods. Probably a good idea with heavier lenses, yes. The package I've laid out in this thread isn't intended to be a set of recommendations, nor does it represent what I'm planning to buy. It's merely an answer to the folks who thought it would be impossible to shoot 4K without spending $60,000. It is possible. You have to make some compromises, but it can be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrizio De Sica Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 You're baiting me, but I'll bite. I'm a commercial DP, working for over 18 years in the industry in Seattle, Los Angeles and now Nashville. I am a partner in a large commercial studio facility with around 2.5 million in lighting, grip and camera. In Los Angeles, I ran the country's largest Grip & Lighting rental house for 10 years or so, loading features like Titanic, Blow, Master & Commander: Far Side of the World, The Village and a few other films you may have heard of. That's where I come from. Good for you. Industry stuff. You do not need for reduced prices. The higher the better. :P It is the end-user who pays. :D The audiences will not notice. The more they don't notice, the more I have no work. :( Mine is art work. :) I don't usually post, I've lurked for a while, and forgive my early morning call out Taken. but I'd just like to point out that this incessant whining is really completely unrealistic. You're wrong. I don't mind pay for advanced technology. NOT the Sony's price for bolts and screws. That since $1,250 up to $2,750 production package is not a honest move. Sony-like or even beyond. But it is only an example. Those of us who shoot professionally are all waiting to see what really comes out. Yes, as a company, we're taking the risk free bet that the guys at Red have done something incredible, but we still haven't seen it work- haven't touched it... however, you don't really hear too many professionals complaining and whining, particularly about prices that sure seem better than the money we've spent with Sony for the last 20 years. Sony again. The Sony quotes are also yours. I thought the Red camera would be a revolution. Pro's usually don't whine too much. That's all I was saying. About who are you talking about? Hollywood people? Bollywood? Because since a long time ago I don't watch a single movie from there. Including those you mentioned before. From bollywood, not even one. But like the microorganisms they exist and they are a lot, be sure of that. And they know of their own. Particularly with the digital age related to art-film makers, they will not need for anybody else to be alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bret Weeks Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 Good for you. Industry stuff. You do not need for reduced prices. The higher the better. :P It is the end-user who pays. :D The audiences will not notice. The more they don't notice, the more I have no work. :( Mine is art work. :) Yeah, like I don't need reduced prices. Like my customers and clients come to me with such huge bags of money. Have you seen the size of rental discounts lately? You don't have to buy the accessories- use your existing accessories. Heck, if you're that mad you don't even have to buy the camera, depending on your serial, my cameras will come that much faster. About who are you talking about? Hollywood people? Bollywood? Because since a long time ago I don't watch a single movie from there. Including those you mentioned before. From bollywood, not even one. But like the microorganisms they exist and they are a lot, be sure of that. And they know of their own. Particularly with the digital age related to art-film makers, they will not need for anybody else to be alive. I'm talking about the guy you use at the bottom of your signature. On Little Buddah, I never saw him whine once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Drysdale Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 . From bollywood, not even one. But like the microorganisms they exist and they are a lot, be sure of that. And they know of their own. Particularly with the digital age related to art-film makers, they will not need for anybody else to be alive. Any video installation pieces for artists that I've worked with have all had grants to creat the work. The art world's studio system - the arts council? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrizio De Sica Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 (edited) Yeah, like I don't need reduced prices. Like my customers and clients come to me with such huge bags of money. Have you seen the size of rental discounts lately? You don't have to buy the accessories- use your existing accessories. Heck, if you're that mad you don't even have to buy the camera, depending on your serial, my cameras will come that much faster. I'm talking about the guy you use at the bottom of your signature. On Little Buddah, I never saw him whine once. What a honor! Several months with no posts. Suddenly at least three are related to me. Don't worry, I also wish the best to who thinks that can use the existing accessories without the Red screws and the Red bolts. I regret your quote on the worst work of Bernardo. Four, five years later, I could see him working on a better way on budget (really low budget after that failed experience ala hollywood quoted by you). Edited March 18, 2007 by Patrizio De Sica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bret Weeks Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 What a honor! Several months with no posts. Suddenly at least three are related to me. Don't worry, I also wish the best to who thinks that can use the existing accessories without the Red screws and the Red bolts. I regret your quote on the worst work of Bernardo. Four, five years later, I could see him working on a better way on budget (really low budget after that failed experience ala hollywood quoted by you). have a nice day. BW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrizio De Sica Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 (edited) :) ;) Edited March 18, 2007 by Patrizio De Sica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrizio De Sica Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 Update :angry: Before these accessories were included at the $1,700 LCD package, now: RED ARM adjustable arm $175 EVF / LCD Extension Cable 3ft $200 EVF / LCD Extension Cable 10ft $300 Before JJ had announced a $200 mistake over the $550 charger (before $750) in benefit of the customer (it seemed so). A couple of hours later, there's no more RED LCD package for the same $1,700. Just a RED LCD Screen with a LCD Interface cable. Red cable, of course (but not with the $500 cables). :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts