New RED V-RAPTOR 8K VV 120FPS Camera

[NorBro]

Looks great, per usual a high-end RED, but the question I've always had is who's willing to pay an extra $10K-$15K-$20K for that extra 10-15% of quality.

It seems like you're paying more for paper specifications than a jarring visual improvement.

We all know RED is awesome, but this footage could look practically identical from other cameras, or at least 85% there.

As the ultimate pixel analyzer, I'd say quality is just about overrated and AF and IBIS are simply more important for day-to-day hustling.

[P.S. Maybe I'd reevaluate my opinion watching it on an 8K monitor.]

 

[jonpais]

Accounting for inflation, the Raptor is only around $3,000 more than the original RED ONE sold for in 2007.

 

[NorBro]

Ironically, the ONE was an amazing deal back then given the best-of-the-best like the F35 was approximately $250,000.

The V-RAPTOR - in 2021 - is also going to be a great camera for the 1% who may be using their own money and not house money since it's relatively cheaper than a LF or Venice package.

 

[ahalpert]

I actually think it's kind of a big deal. It outguns the venice and Alexa LF in both resolution and framerates. I dont know if those users would consider it as an alternative, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't consider anything less, so comparisons to lower end cameras are sort of moot. Meanwhile, it costs 60% as much as the venice and 30% as much as the LF. Which means that if you're budget-conscious, you could go multi-camera with RED vs single camera with the others. Non-proprierary media, too.

Definitely in price range of high-end owner-ops, too. Is the value proposition there vs ursa 12K or mavo, z-cam? I dunno. But if telling someone you have a RED is the difference between getting the job or not, then it's totally worth it. And you can get a cheap Komodo for a b-cam, potentially

I'm not saying that it's for ME. My clients are happy with fs7/a7siii... I'll probably get an a7iv next and then maybe sell all my lumix gear

 

[NorBro]

RED's been outspecing everyone for the last 15 years and that's always been a big selling point of theirs for those people so nothing has really changed on that end.

Same raising the bar product roadmap.

Considering the amount of money spent on cars and boats and clothes and stuff - like millions of dollars - it's not that much in retrospect, ha.

 

[Liam Hall]

Coming soon (Jarred says it's being certified)



They're saying they're getting around an hour per battery, so I'm guessing around 60 watts.



I think so. I was hoping they'd be scaled, but it seems like BMD stands alone in that still.



They're testing and certifying cards, starting with an upcoming updated Angelbird card that the Red branded cards are.

The 800 MBps data rate is pretty intense. I think that only the BMD 12K has higher when running in 12K. And is the only other camera in even close to the ballpark that can record 8K at 120fps, but I believe that the 12K is still the only one that can do that with the full field of view and still record raw.

Is there a ProRes record option? Yes

What's the power draw? One hour for a 98Wh batt

Are those frame rates/resolutions 'windowed'? No

What CFexpress cards work with this baby? So far, Red's and a new Angelbird card are approved.

Why does it look like a cheap toaster?
Expensive toasters would make feel like you're getting a toaster. Cheap toasters makes you feel like you're getting an expensive camera. This is well studied in several peer reviewed journals.

Thanks for the responses.

60WH or 98WH!! Wow, that's a lot of power draw. More than twice as thirsty as my C500MKII. Makes me wonder how loud the fans are.

Good to see no windowing. I hate that with a passion.

On paper it looks a solid update for Red. Shame so many accessories will be obsolete though.

I wonder if they'll make one with the controls on the smart side??

 

[Liam Hall]

Oh, and I was wrong about it looking like a toaster. Clearly, it looks like a washing machine.

 

[DLD]

I actually think it's kind of a big deal. It outguns the venice and Alexa LF in both resolution and framerates. I dont know if those users would consider it as an alternative, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't consider anything less, so comparisons to lower end cameras are sort of moot. ..

This depends on what Canon comes out with at/before this NAB. A, let's say, 8K 60p (Canon is unlikely to match Red's specs) for $15,000 with Dual Pixel AF can have the C300 effect on the non-narrative portion of the high end pro market.

PS. Phil really got a great look on the interior shots.

 

[Liam Hall]

This depends on what Canon comes out with at/before this NAB. A, let's say, 8K 60p (Canon is unlikely to match Red's specs) for $15,000 with Dual Pixel AF can have the C300 effect on the non-narrative portion of the high end pro market.

PS. Phil really got a great look on the interior shots.

I think 8K60p is about right, maybe with windowed 4K at 120fps and probably $15,000 or a touch more. That sounds very Canon.

 

[Grug]

I really don't understand this camera at all. I was really interested to see what Red would come up with (and the mid-range of the camera market has been painfully empty for last few years). But a stills lens mount (even with a locking mechanism)? No accessory power outputs? A v-mount plate that will only fit a very few mini v-mount batteries that are out there? No internal ND solution (beyond the hodge podge "slot-in" style lens adapters that are just a dust super highway to the sensor)? And a $2750 USD, 7" monitor (for a small camera body) that appears to require mounting directly on top of the camera?

As much horsepower as they've squeezed under the bonnet, it's those operational aspects that make a camera appealing these days (they all make good-enough pictures). It's why the Mavo Edge is such an appealing camera - they've squeeze all the OPERATIONAL bells and whistles on to that thing. That's what's exciting.

So why would you not address those KEY elements on a $24,500 camera? How many of the solo-shooter "put a stills lens and monitor on and go" types are going to spend that much on a camera (especially one with the controls on the assistant's side? It's a camera priced, and (at least partially) designed for a camera crew to work with it, and yet it's going to require a tonne of rigging gack to make it operational for that.

I guess the question now is, is the Raptor worth all of those operational compromises for the relatively reasonable price of $24,500 USD? You'll have to add some irritating v-mount-to-v-mount power distro box out the back of it. And you'll need to add RF adapters up front, possibly with additional bracketry to brace them to that slew of 1/4"-20s on the front of the body (so that they don't flex due to the structural costs of the filter slots, and the undersized flange of the RF mount).

Personally, I'm finding it pretty hard to see the appeal. It just doesn't bring much to the table except higher resolutions and framerates that I very rarely need.

The simplified control panel on the assistant's side is nice though. Needing breakout cables just to jam timecode etc? Not so much.

 

[jonpais]

I actually think it's kind of a big deal. It outguns the venice and Alexa LF in both resolution and framerates. I dont know if those users would consider it as an alternative, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't consider anything less, so comparisons to lower end cameras are sort of moot. Meanwhile, it costs 60% as much as the venice and 30% as much as the LF. Which means that if you're budget-conscious, you could go multi-camera with RED vs single camera with the others. Non-proprierary media, too.

Definitely in price range of high-end owner-ops, too. Is the value proposition there vs ursa 12K or mavo, z-cam? I dunno. But if telling someone you have a RED is the difference between getting the job or not, then it's totally worth it. And you can get a cheap Komodo for a b-cam, potentially

I'm not saying that it's for ME. My clients are happy with fs7/a7siii... I'll probably get an a7iv next and then maybe sell all my lumix gear

Who are you referring to when you say "they wouldn't accept anything less". What is less? pixel count? frame rates? Twenty of the 52 feature films premiering at Cannes 2021 were shot with Arri Alexa Minis. Seventeen of the thirty-three narrative feature films at Sundance 2021: Alexa Minis. 2.8K, 7.5mpx of cinematic goodness. Sundance looked like it had much more diversity. Anyhow, most of us aren't shooting feature films for Hollywood or Netflix, and there are no bad cameras, only bad photographers. A camera suitable for a feature film might not be the best choice for a single operator shooting music videos, real estate, wedding photography, product shots, corporate work, fashion, documentary, nature and travel, interviews, food and drink, aerial, fitness videos and on and on.

 

[Teddy_Dem]

Grug, not sure if this addresses one of your points, but one thing to add is that the RF mount is a locking mount and during their launch video Jarred showed that they do have an RF-PL mount adapter with an e-ND. I think this something that they should have highlighted more, but it has sort of been buried under the 8K 120FPS and up to 2K 600FPS spec.

 

[ahalpert]

RED's been outspecing everyone for the last 15 years and that's always been a big selling point of theirs for those people so nothing has really changed on that end.

Monstro 8K could only do 60fps at 8K 17:9. Anything faster was a crop or windowing. Sony venice was 72fps 6k 17:9 and alexa lf was 90fps 4k 17:9. So, the monstro underperformed with uncropped framerates

 

[ahalpert]

This depends on what Canon comes out with at/before this NAB. A, let's say, 8K 60p (Canon is unlikely to match Red's specs) for $15,000 with Dual Pixel AF can have the C300 effect on the non-narrative portion of the high end pro market.

PS. Phil really got a great look on the interior shots.

120fps is a selling point. And now, red has "AF". Red brand name will probably still carry more weight with some people. But otherwise I agree

 

[ahalpert]

Who are you referring to when you say "they wouldn't accept anything less". What is less?

Less is a cheaper camera with a lower standard of manufacturing or reliability or simply brand reputation. Plus codec, etc

When brawley tested cameras for the Great, I think he compared the dxl2, the venice, and the Alexa LF. Something like that. So, in that context, would he have considered the raptor as well?

In the end, I think they went with Alexa classic plus his ursa g2 for handheld work. So, the client decided they didnt need true 4K capture after all...

i remember him saying he later shot an indy feature that was going to go Alexa but he convinced them to use the ursa so they could afford a 3-camera package instead of 1. (I can't remember if it was ursa g2 or 12k.) But they probably wouldn't use a C200 instead (although I suppose they could have). But a raptor? Sure, why not

 

[Grug]

Grug, not sure if this addresses one of your points, but one thing to add is that the RF mount is a locking mount and during their launch video Jarred showed that they do have an RF-PL mount adapter with an e-ND. I think this something that they should have highlighted more, but it has sort of been buried under the 8K 120FPS and up to 2K 600FPS spec.

No it doesn't unfortunately. Because the RF mount is designed for mirrorless stills cameras, and has a fraction of the usual amount of metal, we'd use to hold conventional cinema lenses in place. And where structural rigidity is concerned - there's no replacement for displacement.

Will this be an issue for anyone using something like Zeiss Supreme Primes or Sigma Cines with the camera? No. I'm sure it'll handle 1-2kg well enough. But 3.5kg Cooke S7s? Or zooms that can get up to 10kg+? How far are you willing to trust those little slivers of metal that hold an RF lens in place? Canon never designed it with those kinds of tolerances in mind (why would they), but in the motion picture world, we work with much heavier hardware, and it needs to be considered.

Here are some photos that help illustrate the issue better than I can:

This is an RF Lens Mount, you can see the grooves that do the load bearing and hold the lens in place:

This is Arri's LPL mount (which is also a reasonably short flange and can be adapted to other mounts) note the size of the bracing sections on the body cap:

This is Sony's (sadly) discontinued FZ mount:

And this is an adapter that fits into Kinefinity's "Kinemount" universal mounting system (again, note the size of the structural sections that brace the mount in place):

I think it's pretty immediately apparent which of these mounts is the odd one out.

Add to that the prospect of lens adapters that have large holes cut out of the side of them (for drop-in filters), and you're adding yet more structural concerns (there's plenty of videos online showing the flex that units like the Kippertie Revolva (RF) will display when weight's applied to them. And you can hardly blame the accessory manufacturers for that - they're working with a lens mount that's inherently compromised for this purpose.

Again, that's not going to stop it working just fine with lightweight lenses, but it's something that's going to have to be considered when using larger glass.

Hopefully someone can do a video and prove that actually, Red have built an unflappably rigid version of the RF mount, that won't flex no-matter the pressure placed on it. Then I'll by all means retract my suspicions. But I'm not hopeful they've achieved it - there's a reason all of the "proper" interchangeable mount systems I've posted above, all use similar amounts of metal to hold everything in place.

 

[DLD]

120fps is a selling point.

It is. And, as as Liam and Grug pointed out, 120p not a super high necessity.* Which limits the camera appeal. And then there are other caveats for the high end/pro market, which was mentioned above as well.

And Canon is unlikely to aim that high.

*Let's say Canon does 8K60 and 4K90 and you're kind of/sort of in the same ballpark anyway. And then Canon might do its own "cinema glass". With the AF motors. And that may not be what one shoots a big budget production with but should suffice for the reality/documentary, live performance/stage, sports, comedy.

Of course, Canon may show up empty handed too.

 

[NorBro]

Monstro 8K could only do 60fps at 8K 17:9. Anything faster was a crop or windowing. Sony venice was 72fps 6k 17:9 and alexa lf was 90fps 4k 17:9. So, the monstro underperformed with uncropped framerates

I know you don't mean it to be, but that statement is a bit misleading in several ways:

(1) Sony didn't have that 72fps FW update until last year, 3 years after the Monstro started shipping.

(2) ARRI's 90fps is only possible with ARRIRAW (IIRC), which isn't internal (camera maxes out at 60fps internally).

(3) As far as the crops, you're right about them - but that's how it's always worked starting at top with high resolution sensors. It's not a fair comparison to ARRI's 4K/90fps because the camera is designed differently. The HFR that low of resolution for the RED sensor will suffer.

But with that said, it's best to mention output dimensions (which are separate from windowing/cropping although they are related). And it's best to mention exactly what the comparison would be because the crop factors range from 1.1x+ to 1.5x+ (in the most important specs).

So while it's not worth comparing the Monstro's 4K high-speed offerings to ARRI's 4K, it can shoot a close 75fps @ 7K 2.4:1 with a 1.11x crop.

(4) And this one involves post-production and is not too worthy of a note, but you could take some of those higher-resolution funky ratios and clear most of a DCI 4K frame in post. (You seem like you've supported that in the past.)

But in general, yeah, newer cameras having better specs is going to happen, but the Monstro was shipping before both of the above were announced.

 

[Eric Coughlin]

Looks like the only interesting thing here is 600 fps at 2K. I saw two conflicting answers in this topic whether that is windowed or not. I'd like to have a camera with good super high speed and a 4K Phantom Flex is out of my budget. I wonder how good the image quality is with 600 fps. I suppose the Freefly Wave high speed camera is still the better choice for a high speed camera at 40% the cost and twice the frame rate capabilities, though with both the Phantom and the Freefly no one seems to be using them for non high speed shots, while this is not a dedicated high speed camera. Not that I'd generally want to use a Red for an A-cam when I have Arris available.

 

[NorBro]

IMO, RED is making it sound like the 2K/600fps is full-frame, not cropped, but IDK. (It's cropped in their other cameras.)

I was close to purchasing a Wave (for like a hot GAS second) and actually was called up on their wait list but I bailed because I couldn't get over how mediocre the dynamic range was at what looked like barely 10 stops.

It's very conflicting because the camera obviously needs light for indoor work, but the reflections from the lights looked so harsh. (Supposedly they had a FW update which slightly improved DR.)

And although the 4K looked amazing (saw some FPN here and there), I didn't think the 2K mode looked too great in the Wave (although amazing for that price) - and I wouldn't bet on it looking that great from the RED (although very happy to be proven wrong because we're getting into that next level of modern technology).

Also considered that 422fps in the 4K mode on the Wave wasn't that slow when you really need higher speed for certain applications.

Check out the Chronos 2.1. It's another option around $5K with impressive framerates, but still not the greatest quality (although it's not as expensive as $10K - but it's also HD):

https://www.krontech.ca/store/Chrono...era-p133345424