Canon R5 Announced with 8k

I picked my 55 up with the OLED VF for $20K five years ago. It had been used on a Netflix show and the rental house had made their money on it, I'm sure. That saved me probably $15K-$18K vs. new. 20-25 days of use or rentals and then it was gravy. A quick look on eBay and it looks like there are ones going between ~$7k and ~$13K, now, but I didn't look at what all they come with or hours.
 
Yeah, like the Amira you can find some cheaper used deals, but the price new for the F55 is $28,990 and it originally sold new on release for $34,900, so the price new has really held its value well for a camera over seven years old.

Now if only there was a B&H or AbelCine listing for the Sony F35 still saying $250k, and I could get a used one for a few grand, and then rent it for a few grand per day based off of client perception of the price when buying the camera new.
 
NorBro said:
This has to be the most frustrating part about being a loyal RED user.

Many appeared to be a little upset over Raven's release - and quite frankly, I would be furious after hearing about the KOMODO.

I understand the more expensive cameras are different in many ways including specifications and hardware, but I couldn't say this wouldn't really, really hurt if I had just invested $20K+ into a system.
Click to expand...

Run&Gun said:
There's already a thread a few days old on RU with guys worried about Komodo killing the used market for DSMC2 RED's.
Click to expand...

Yeah but in that same thread people said that every time there's a new release, RED owners worry about resale value. But it never fundamentally changes the equation, although yes RED cameras suffer massive depreciation. (But you can buy an FS7 used for $3k now, so it happens to everyone. An F35 can be had for $10k. An OG Alexa for under $10k. An OG C300 for $1500.)

As for Komodo making higher-end REDs obsolete - I think that's where the limited frame rates come in. On Komodo, you can only do 40fps in FF 6K. And only 60fps in cropped 4K. So, if your director wants the option to switch to slow-mo, they'll have very limited options with Komodo.
 
Last edited:
It's a bit different. And it's going to change this time, no doubt about it.

It's a new world with a different RED camera. With the Raven, you still needed another $5K-$6K to get it up-and-running.

With RED, there were always various accessories that were invested in and some couldn't be used with the newer cameras. Talking $5K-$10K-$15K worth AFTER the brain purchase. And you couldn't re-purpose them for other non-RED systems.

And it's also the constant upgrades and turnovers that had people spending amounts totaling more than some house purchases.

The FS7 held its value for many years before the virus.

___

Also...

2014 = FS7

2019 = FX9

Those are the gaps people would like to see. And it should be that way to make people feel better about their investment(s), but obviously it's not going to be (and understandably so from a business POV).
 
Last edited:
ahalpert said:
Yeah but in that same thread people said that every time there's a new release, RED owners worry about resale value. But it never fundamentally changes the equation, although yes RED cameras suffer massive depreciation. (But you can buy an FS7 used for $3k now, so it happens to everyone. An F35 can be had for $10k. An OG Alexa for under $10k. An OG C300 for $1500.)

As for Komodo making higher-end REDs obsolete - I think that's where the limited frame rates come in. On Komodo, you can only do 40fps in FF 6K. And only 60fps in cropped 4K. So, if your director wants the option to switch to slow-mo, they'll have very limited options with Komodo.
Click to expand...
Those cameras all held their value much longer than a typical Red camera does.

Not everyone needs high frame rates. I don't use them often, but speak of the devil, I am wanting high frame rates for my next short film. I wish the Amira did more than 200 fps. Maybe if the Phantom Flex 4K has lost its value on the used market and I could snatch one up for a few grand for some glorious 1000+ fps in beautiful 4K.

...

https://www.ebay.com/itm/PHANTOM-Fl...299683?hash=item3f2d616ea3:g:Z3IAAOSwgqZdljbc

Welp, $87k on EBay. Just gotta wait another 95% price drop before it's possibly in my price range to consider for a dedicated high speed camera.
 
Is it cheaper to buy a camera that serves you 90% of the time, and rent one for the other 10%?

(As opposed to trying to buy a camera (or set of cameras) so that you're ready for anything)
 
Eric Coughlin said:
Those cameras all held their value much longer than a typical Red camera does.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but I bought a RED scarlet package for $16k all in like 8 years ago (which was a cheap total cost because I kept the accessories limited and went third-party where possible.)

The Scarlet ended up being a terrible investment because the people who were excited to shoot with it had no money. Anybody who had money would just spring for an Epic. Meanwhile, my typical clients loved the C300.

The C300 debuted for $16k. I sold my Scarlet for $6k (while keeping my v-mount batteries and ikan monitor, about $1500 of my original purchase) and bought a C300 for $4k after the C300mk2 came out.

So at least on that specific case, the Scarlet held much better value than the C300. Now the C300 is selling for $1500 on Ebay and the Scarlet for about $3k.

And yeah - I'm not a big slow-motion guy either, but it's more marketable to have the option.
 
I like to purchase cameras that are $3,000 MAX. (But would prefer to stay under $2,000.)

That way...even if I sell it for $2K, I'd still get $1000 use out of it for a job or two at the very least. (And then it's like renting, but you'd get to keep it longer.)

IMO, it is very difficult to sell expensive used cameras these days. You have to find the right set of eyes at the right time. And hope the potential buyer isn't too technically-involved and knows about what kind of other technology exists. (Like someone who'd purchase a used FS7 for $6K because he/she thinks it's still the best and most popular camera out there.)
 
combatentropy said:
Is it cheaper to buy a camera that serves you 90% of the time, and rent one for the other 10%?

(As opposed to trying to buy a camera (or set of cameras) so that you're ready for anything)
Click to expand...

Yes, assuming that the 10% camera is not the same camera every time.

What you're describing is what I do - I tell prospective clients that I have the camera that they want, then just rent it if they hire me. (Or I already own the camera, so great.)
 
If that number is correct, that would put its speed in the top 5 of worst rolling shutter cameras ever.

IDK about that...but haven't used it and who knows anymore.

But some of the clips I've seen online didn't look horrific...like when you could easily tell with an a6300 (@39ms).
 
Well, all those that bought a C500mkii can breathe easier. The C5002 has some really good rs for ff35
 
NorBro said:
If that number is correct, that would put its speed in the top 5 of worst rolling shutter cameras ever.

IDK about that...but haven't used it and who knows anymore.
Click to expand...

The sensor does 16ms at full 5.5K raw readout when shooting at 60fps.

The 32ms (double 16ms) readout at 24-30fps seems to indicate that the sensor operates in two speed modes. But since it's not a hardware problem, it would be nice if it could be brought to Canon's attention and have them address it.
 
AndreeOnline said:
The sensor does 16ms at full 5.5K raw readout when shooting at 60fps.

The 32ms (double 16ms) readout at 24-30fps seems to indicate that the sensor operates in two speed modes. But since it's not a hardware problem, it would be nice if it could be brought to Canon's attention and have them address it.
Click to expand...

I bet it's a bit-depth issue. It probably takes twice as long to read the sensor at 12-bit versus 10-bit.
 
Then I'm baffled - unless it's doing a 14-bit readout at lower framerates and a 12-bit readout at higher frame rates
 
ahalpert said:
Then I'm baffled - unless it's doing a 14-bit readout at lower framerates and a 12-bit readout at higher frame rates
Click to expand...

Canon typically extracts 4 individual RG[SUB]1[/SUB]G[SUB]2[/SUB]B channels without any debayering (via algorithm) per se. For raw, the OETF is then applied and THEN the bitrate reduction happens.

For non-raw, the individual components are interpolated to "fill in the holes" and then filtered and downsampled. With Canon Log on, you get 10bit, 422 HEVC and with Canon Log off you get 8bit, 420 h.264.
 
I don't grasp the implications of what you're saying in this context.

But I know, from reading Sony sensor datasheets, that Sony sensors can always achieve progressively higher frame rates at progressively lower bit-depths, which I assume indicates a faster readout time and therefore faster rolling shutter?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top