HDX900 --- Why is no one talking about it?

don't clown

don't clown

I give red a huge amount of credit, they are the only company that has the balls to do something different. Who cares how they are going to make and where. The fact is they are going to make it.
 
I do believe that the Panny will record in a few variable frame rates. You won't be able to dial on the fly like the Varicam, but it does allow frames between 4 and 60 fps. Pretty decent. It looks like it only has (3) cinegamma settings which is a bummer, but I imagine you'll be able to customize a bit as well.

It's probably my next camera as I just don't have the storage or desire to switch to P2 (200+ hours of footage per project with multiple (6-7) projects going simultanously.

Plus, I can slum my 2/3" lens on it for a while until I can save up for a proper HD 2/3" lens.
 
If this were $20,000 with a lens and viewfinder and recorded to P2 it would be very interesting.

Tape is dead, I'll go Red.
 
Haakon said:
I think there's a pretty big difference between $17,500 and $26,500. That's not to say that I think $17,500 is cheap by any means - but at the same time I don't think it's fair to lump these two cameras together. They get even farther apart when you compare specs, and considering that the one which does twice as much costs a little more than half the price of the other... I would say it's not really a surprise that no one's really talking about the Panasonic. It will probably be a decent tool, but it's overpriced and has retreated back to the world of tape. In 2004, it would've been great, but as they say... it's too little too late. (...)
Click to expand...
Haakon said:
So, yes, (...) RED is a perfect tool for the independent filmmaker.
Click to expand...
You said all.
evinsky said:
If this were $20,000 with a lens and viewfinder and recorded to P2 it would be very interesting.

Tape is dead, I'll go Red.
Click to expand...
Evin added the conclusion.
 
HVXguy said:
Red has a long way to go.....
Where are they going to build them....in the US?
There are no hardcore manufacturing facilities
like this in the US, unless Red plans on building one.
If they are going to handbuild then that opens the door for
many defects and slow delivery. I can see the owner over
in Japan or China trying to get this contracted...
Yeah right
Click to expand...

!?!?!?!?!
 
Haakon said:
I think there's a pretty big difference between $17,500 and $26,500. That's not to say that I think $17,500 is cheap by any means...
Click to expand...

Have you forgotten that you have to buy a lens and a storage device for the RED? Have you seen, what that 300mm Lens costs? $17,500 is only the camera body! This is where it starts. Oh, and maybe you´ll need one of those cages. Now you´re getting a lot closer to $26,500. Of course the RED schould be the better camera but TOO expensive stays TOO expensive, no matter how good it is. :crybaby:
 
It's called thunder stealing, that's what RED did to all the other camera manufacturers this NAB, including panasonic and it's new HDX900.

as for manufacturirng issues with RED, in the interview Jim said they have a fab for the chip already, their design but they can do it themselves.

The rest is just electronics, shouldn't be too much of a problem.
it's not like he's a software silicon valley millionare who never had any manufacturing experince, and Oakley products do have electronics stuff in them for some reason.
 
Rowlander said:
Have you forgotten that you have to buy a lens and a storage device for the RED? Have you seen, what that 300mm Lens costs? $17,500 is only the camera body! This is where it starts. Oh, and maybe you´ll need one of those cages. Now you´re getting a lot closer to $26,500. Of course the RED schould be the better camera but TOO expensive stays TOO expensive, no matter how good it is. :crybaby:
Click to expand...
No, I haven't forgotten. And the price of Panasonic's new camera doesn't include a lens either.

I'm sorry, but the arguments about the $17,500 price being vastly understated because of everything else you'll "have to buy" don't fly with me. That's like all of the people that said the HVX won't do what it promises without forking over another 3 grand in P2 and accessories. Last time I checked, a 4GB was around 600 bucks.

You absolutely will not need a cage to use RED. You don't NEED to put a spoiler and 6-disc CD changer in your car to get it from point A to point B either. Yeah, that stuff is cool, and perhaps eventually it will pay for itself and you'll be able to continually upgrade it. That's actually RED's entire plan. But to say that you'll need $30,000-$40,000 just to use RED is nonsense.

They've already announced that the storage magazines will be priced around $1,000. And there are TONS of lenses available with a PL mount that you can buy, rent, or pick up used. I think you can easily find a workable solution for RED around $20,000, and just grow as your work needs demand it. Yes, you can certainly come up with a RED package that would cost $40,000, but you don't NEED to spend that much by any stretch of the imagination. You could do the same thing with the HVX, but a lot of people have managed to make it work with just the body and one card. You get what you can afford.

Anyway (getting back to the original topic), the point I made was that Panasonic's offering of a 1080 camera with no variable framerates that shoots to tape for $26,000 (without lens) is just far too little, too late. Unless due to your current infrastructure remaining in DVCPROHD and shooting to tape is the ultimate concern, I really don't even see the point of the camera - at least at this price.
 
Last edited:
Haakon, plus they don´t include the viewfinder neither...

My guess, 25 grand for a fully funcional RED with the cage you like and a good lens; couple of magazines and extra monitor to aim well the focus. That´s a bargain! Make it 30 or a bit more with the 17-100 And still beats the price of any other camcorder around. Time to be positive!...

And imagine a good strategy for the savings.

Maybe this is just an early model for those who still feel uncomfortable with the idea of getting rid of their tape workflow and their relation with the stations (go there, pass the tape, fly away). I expect another one. I don´t know when, but sure there will be.
 
Last edited:
Haakon said:
No, I haven't forgotten. And the price of Panasonic's new camera doesn't include a lens either.

I'm sorry, but the arguments about the $17,500 price being vastly understated because of everything else you'll "have to buy" don't fly with me. That's like all of the people that said the HVX won't do what it promises without forking over another 3 grand in P2 and accessories. Last time I checked, a 4GB was around 600 bucks.

You absolutely will not need a cage to use RED. You don't NEED to put a spoiler and 6-disc CD changer in your car to get it from point A to point B either. Yeah, that stuff is cool, and perhaps eventually it will pay for itself and you'll be able to continually upgrade it. That's actually RED's entire plan. But to say that you'll need $30,000-$40,000 just to use RED is nonsense.

They've already announced that the storage magazines will be priced around $1,000. And there are TONS of lenses available with a PL mount that you can buy, rent, or pick up used. I think you can easily find a workable solution for RED around $20,000, and just grow as your work needs demand it. Yes, you can certainly come up with a RED package that would cost $40,000, but you don't NEED to spend that much by any stretch of the imagination. You could do the same thing with the HVX, but a lot of people have managed to make it work with just the body and one card. You get what you can afford.

Anyway (getting back to the original topic), the point I made was that Panasonic's offering of a 1080 camera with no variable framerates that shoots to tape for $26,000 (without lens) is just far too little, too late. Unless due to your current infrastructure remaining in DVCPROHD and shooting to tape is the ultimate concern, I really don't even see the point of the camera - at least at this price.
Click to expand...

I agree completely with everything you posted there!
 
Well, you won't find a good Super 16 zoom lens for less than 6 grand ... that's for sure. But you can find a set of Zeiss Superspeed Mk I (bayonet mount) for around 5. Zeiss Superspeed set Mk II PL mount for around $15,000

(I'm talking about used lenses)

If you go with 35mm lenses, you won't find a good zoom lense for less than 10 grand.

Buying a $17500 camera and using a shitty/cheap lens doesn't make much sense, does it ?

BUT ... you can rent good lenses for $300 - $500 a day which is a good deal ...

If you wanna have an idea of costs, check this website out:

http://www.cinematechnic.com/products/sales_lenses.html
 
Last edited:
Even with $10k on top of the body price, RED is still a bargain IF it lives up to the quality that the specs suggest.

Lets talk about what is involved in the purchase of a 2/3" camera if you are purchasing from scratch.

1. Camera (HDX900 say) $26k.
2. 2/3" broadcast HD lens, at least $20k.
3. Batteries plus charger. AB Dionic system cost me around 4k UKP, so thats around, what, $7k? You can get cheaper such as SWIT, but it is still gonna cost around $2k at least.
4. Tripod. Need a big heavy tripod for a 2/3" camera. So factor in, ooh, $3k (I'm not sure of US prices, but my Miller DS25 cost me around 2k UKP).

Want to protect your investment with a cover? How about $300? Want to upgrade that 1.5" Panny viewfinder to something decent like a true 2" 16:9 one? thats gonna cost too.

All told purchasing a 2/3" camera is a never ending list of extras, and at the end of the day, while I still love the balance of the things and the build quality etc, they are still big and heavy, and they still take up a lot of boot space in my car. Rather madly I took my 510 on my own up on the Malvern Hills last year. I carried the camera plus lens, plus the Miller Tripod, plus the jib arm, the jib counter weights, and my spare AB batteries, and forgot to take some water with me (this was in summer!) Now THAT was pain! I think the army guys who jogged past me thinking they had large backpacks to carry were put to shame rather!

So, RED has a few things going for it. First and foremost is the size. If they can sort out shoulder mounting balance issues it will be great. Second, the price. Tripods are not going to need to be as big and heavy for this thing unless you are doing wildlife style photograhy with long lenses. Even better is that RED will not require huge batteries either.

The factor in determining RED's value is in the price/performance ratio. Is it good or not? Forget whether you can afford it personally. You are not going to get this kind of performance for the price of a DVX. But by the same token this camera brings 4k shooting down to 2/3" DVCpro50 price levels.

With the HDV cameras I had reservations about the compression, and the quality of 1/3" chips. Same for the HVX, but I had problems with P2. With RED however the company is giving a full choice of how you as a user want to shoot and record your footage, with no restrictions on sampling quality, sensor resolution, or depth of field. Hell they are even making it so that the sensor can be swapped out as better models come along! I have reservations about their body design, but it is just a prototype. Other than that, whats not to like?

I will admit openly that on these very forums I accused RED of being vapourware. However what I didn't consider was that RED hasn't just started being developed this year or last. It was started in 1999. The sensor works, and has been tested, so they know what it can do. This is a camera that is reaching a mature stage of development from what I can tell.

Olus ultimately it is possibly this camera that will drive down the cost of cameras overall. Even if you never buy RED nor have any intention of doing so, you may still be directly affected by what it does to the market. IF it does what it says on the box.
 
you guys talk about red like it exists and it doesnt ,its all pretty pictures and slick marketing so far. They dont even have a working model. I highly doubt the big three are shaking in their shoes.This reminds me when the foveon chip was going to come out , it would change digital photography forever and it didnt.
 
There you've made a fatal mistake. They do have a working camera. Just not one that is ready to show the public. They haven't just been drawing up specs on paper for fun.

As for the big three not shaking in their boots, well, I think you may be surprised if the developments I have heard about are anything to go by. Things are going to be shaken up in a big way over the next year or two mark my words.
 
Simon Wyndham said:
There you've made a fatal mistake. They do have a working camera. Just not one that is ready to show the public. They haven't just been drawing up specs on paper for fun.

As for the big three not shaking in their boots, well, I think you may be surprised if the developments I have heard about are anything to go by. Things are going to be shaken up in a big way over the next year or two mark my words.
Click to expand...
if they do why not show it or the footage that makes no sense especially if they are looking for $1000 deposit. Sorry Im not ready to drink the koolaid yet lol.
 
That would be fantastic!! As soon as RED, GREEN or BLUE comes out, I am ready! If it's $17,500 or $47,500. Strap it on and I am good to go!!
Gotta fill up my website. As soon as the RED Shooters come-on board we will add the "Ultra High Def" Category!!!
 
I think people are seriously underestimating or just not facing the storage challenge with the Red. Achieving the necessary data rates for this kind of resolution is challenging for a tower computer, let alone a portable device. In a studio with Lucas's 4:4:4 CineAlta, I witnessed the tweaking and coaxing that was needed to capture full res over Fibre Channel to a cart full of equipment.

I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss a "conventional" camera for reasons of sheer handling or practicality.
 
Last edited:
No, people are not underestimating the storage requirements of RED. Each and every interview with the people behind RED is very clear indeed. 4:4:4 is there if you need it and have the capability. RED is open to record a variety of formats. You want plain old vanilla 1080p or it, then go for it and record at a much lower sampling rate. But the info still comes of the same sensor so you still get the same DoF characteristics.

With RED you have a CHOICE of how to record. Go and watch Terminator. The Future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves :)
 
Last edited:
I'm excited about Red after seeing the booth presentation at NAB. If the company delivers on all its promises, the camera will be phenomenal, and likely precipitate a sea change in the world of HD acquisition; even if you can't afford Red -- I know I certainly can't -- its success should force the big camera makers -- Sony, Panasonic, etc. -- to rethink their products and price structures, which will yield cheaper camera prices for everyone. After all, why would anyone pay $100 grand for a CineAlta if Red can do it all, and more, for much less?

The modular design of Red is quite ingenious. It took someone outside the traditional video/HD camera manufacturing system to really shake things up in a great way, and I'd love nothing more than to see it succeed. (I just wish they'd made their first lens something shorter than a 300) Even if I can't afford the Red, maybe I'll be able to afford a Varicam or Cinealta or HDX900 once Panasonic and Sony have to cut their prices to compete with Red. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top