RED CAMERA Prelim. Specs

Policar said:
John Moore, rack framerates aren't easy. You need to open the aperture at the same rate you shift up the framerate, so you'd need an extra stop to shoot 48fps, and maybe a stop and a half to shoot 60fps. Plus, programming the camera to do that can't be simple, either.

You'd have to open the aperture AS you overcrank so either the camera has to automatically do that, or you have to use a follow focus but attatch the gear to the aperture ring...except that only PL mount lenses let you do that. So it makes sense they left out this feature. Plus, you can totally fake it in post anyhow.

Oh, and my magic price fairies tell me they're shooting for between $25,000-$75,000.
Click to expand...

Policar,

I see no reason to not have ramping... lock the shutter speed to 1/60 (for example) and then there is no need to alter the iris. On a film camera this isn't possible because exposure depends on framerate, however, this ain't film.

I'm kinda thinking that 4K is excessive.

What does everyone plan on doing with a 4k film exactly!?!

Stick with 2K and save teh cash IMO.
 
Since Jim wanted to get feedback from people here on what they would like for it to be like, what about the size of the body? Should it be a shoulder unit (like the XL series) or handheld (like the DVX,HVX)? Could it even be that small with the size of the sensor, circuits, attachments, etc. that it would take to make it function? What would people prefer?
 
about the ramping.. i agree with mmm.. for rampinng shoot at a higher speed and in post cut it down.
 
eqwalker said:
Since Jim wanted to get feedback from people here on what they would like for it to be like, what about the size of the body? Should it be a shoulder unit (like the XL series) or handheld (like the DVX,HVX)? Could it even be that small with the size of the sensor, circuits, attachments, etc. that it would take to make it function? What would people prefer?
Click to expand...


Personally, I'm with John - I like the Arri design more than the minima though

I see no reason to base this camera on any existing video camera.
I swear I'll run away screaming if come NAB we see yet another ENG BetaSP-type form factor.
ugh.
 
eqwalker said:
Since Jim wanted to get feedback from people here on what they would like for it to be like, what about the size of the body? Should it be a shoulder unit (like the XL series) or handheld (like the DVX,HVX)? Could it even be that small with the size of the sensor, circuits, attachments, etc. that it would take to make it function? What would people prefer?
Click to expand...

I see no reason to put such a beast inside a handycam body. In my opinion that's a limitation of the HVX200.
 
Mr. Blonde said:
Red will be in the range of 40-50g's, and with these specs, I'd pay that money in a second for this cam.
Click to expand...


Is that a quote based on the equipment it's going to use or from somewhere else?

I mean, it makes sense, and I suppose it would be very very VERY good when offering comparison to the fact that the cinealta costs just a little bit more and thompson's are about just the same.

Unfortunately enough, 40-50g's is something I like to call my college tuition, so I'm gonna stick to the ol' hvx until i get rich or become a giant hollywood filmmaker (optimism is such a let down, isn't it?:happy: )

Body wise, i think a shoulder mount thing would make sense, yeah. This things probably gonna be fairly big in comparison to most of the cameras being put out for "prosumers." The arri style looks cool becuase you can hold it and it also looks like you can put it on your shoulder; but it also seems small enough so that you could just carry it around, you know?
 
eqwalker said:
Since Jim wanted to get feedback from people here on what they would like for it to be like, what about the size of the body? Should it be a shoulder unit (like the XL series) or handheld (like the DVX,HVX)? Could it even be that small with the size of the sensor, circuits, attachments, etc. that it would take to make it function? What would people prefer?
Click to expand...
How about both... since this is not necessarily going to be based off of or limited by a current design, why wouldn't it be feasible to make a camera that can be used both on the shoulder and in the hands? Maybe have a removable/foldable shoulder mount that is included with the camera? Is it possible to have the best of both worlds or am I just dreaming? Then again, this camera sounds pretty dream-like already!

-pasty
 
pastywhiteboy said:
How about both... since this is not necessarily going to be based off of or limited by a current design, why wouldn't it be feasible to make a camera that can be used both on the shoulder and in the hands? Maybe have a removable/foldable shoulder mount that is included with the camera? Is it possible to have the best of both worlds or am I just dreaming? Then again, this camera sounds pretty dream-like already!

-pasty
Click to expand...

Thats exactly what i was hoping for when Pany first announced HVX, in my opinion all handheld cams should come with a removable/foldable shoulder mount... its an essential in my case.... hey and i wouldn’t mind if manufacturers throw a sweet looking mattebox in the supplied accessories too :)

i know m dreaming too much here lolz but hey 4k @ 60FPS is worth dreaming about :cheesy:
 
A handheld/shoulder mount design would need a clever viewfinder... like attempted in the Z1 with the LCD. Any ideas guys?
 
mmm said:
A handheld/shoulder mount design would need a clever viewfinder... like attempted in the Z1 with the LCD. Any ideas guys?
Click to expand...


It's not that difficult.
Just look at the Arri 235 & Aaton Minima bodies that John posted pictures of.
Like I said earlier, the Kinetta has a very similar design.
For example, the handle atop the Kinetta looks like it came straight off the Arri.

I think this project would be much better off taking it's cues from film camera designs.
But I suppose that is just a matter of preference.
 
mmm said:
A handheld/shoulder mount design would need a clever viewfinder... like attempted in the Z1 with the LCD. Any ideas guys?
Click to expand...
Odd idea, but it just kinda popped into my head... what if there were a bayonette style lens hood included (similar to the Z1) that had a flip out LCD on the side of the hood. The bayonette mount that the hood would go onto would serve as a sort of "video hot shoe" through which the video signal passed to the LCD (would that be easy to do?). Being on the hood, the LCD would not be in the way of any buttons, knobs, lenses, etc.

The "LCD hood" wouldn't even necessarily need to be included with the camera, since not everyone uses an LCD, but it could be a pretty sweet accessory... selling it separately would also help bring the camera body price down. It'd probably actually be more like an "LCD matte box" than it would a hood.

Not sure if this idea even makes sense, but it's the first thing that popped into my head.

-pasty
 
razamalik said:
Thats exactly what i was hoping for when Pany first announced HVX, in my opinion all handheld cams should come with a removable/foldable shoulder mount... its an essential in my case.... hey and i wouldn’t mind if manufacturers throw a sweet looking mattebox in the supplied accessories too :)

i know m dreaming too much here lolz but hey 4k @ 60FPS is worth dreaming about :cheesy:
Click to expand...



It would be OK, but not perfect because the weight distribution will still be landing on your wrist. Ever used the Canon XLx series? NEVER AGAIN. If there's gonna be a shoulder attachment let it have a compartment to put extra weight (e.g batteries etc) in it so the centre of gravity is directly on your shoulder.

thanks
Fo
 
They could use a body like the HD100, it's still the better balanced and ergonomic among these light cameras. But I don't believe they will make a small and light camera, it will be a Cinealta style and will probably cost even more.
 
fomoDVXpal said:
It would be OK, but not perfect because the weight distribution will still be landing on your wrist. Ever used the Canon XLx series? NEVER AGAIN. If there's gonna be a shoulder attachment let it have a compartment to put extra weight (e.g batteries etc) in it so the centre of gravity is directly on your shoulder.

thanks
Fo
Click to expand...

Yeah i know what you mean mate but no i did not mean a shoulder mount like Canon's XLx series they can kill your wrist. I was talking about something more like the DvRig Pro or the PAG Orbitor with a compartment for External FW or USB2 HDD or batteries etc.

They could use a body like the HD100, it's still the better balanced and ergonomic among these light cameras. But I don't believe they will make a small and light camera, it will be a Cinealta style and will probably cost even more.
Click to expand...

Yes i must say i love the form factor of JVC HD100 its got the look and with some weight on the back it can balance nicely on the shoulder yet light enough to be handheld... but i will have to disagree about the size and price you mentioned.... from what i have read on this forum and on the RED webiste i truly believe it will be much lighter than CineAlta and priced much more reasonably... though they could probably sell it for much more than the price of CineAlta as from the specs it beats the CineAlta hands down on paper... but thats what this project is all about if you read Jim's posts here... its about making the camera affordable enough for US (DVXUSERS / independent/low budget film makers/enthusiaists/prosumers).

Thanks
 
About lenses (and design): with a 35mm sized chip this new design needs 35mm sized lenses, exactly the same glass 35mm film cameras use, or 35mm slr lenses (used as primes mostly, as the slr zooms are short range and/or slow). This means that even if the sensor unit is small and cheap (?), the lens is not. This means you can forget all DVX100 -style design dreams, shooting handheld etc. And the $5000 price tag for a working unit. Just take a look at the cine lens price lists, pick a good zoom (weighing XX kg), add $xxxx to that. There is your final price.

I find it really funny that somebody would think that the electronics price/performance trend would also apply to "physical" things like optics. Why are the cars not capable attaining the speed of sound, weigh 10 grams, carry 1000 people and cost 10 cents. They should, if the car designers were as good as the electronics engineers... The same applies to the optics. Setting up a new factory is not going the change the laws of optics and the cost of making good lenses.
 
thirst:

Petrus said:
...This means that even if the sensor unit is small and cheap (?), the lens is not. This means you can forget all DVX100 -style design dreams, shooting handheld etc. And the $5000 price tag for a working unit. Just take a look at the cine lens price lists, pick a good zoom (weighing XX kg), add $xxxx to that. There is your final price...
Click to expand...

That just confirms that camera head should be sold separately [and bundled with RED lenses, just to have a easy option if one wants everything to be from one vendor], that way I get chance to buy cheap 4k eCinema cam with possibility to rent cine lenses from my local rental or buy few later if my economy is getting better.

second:

It is absolutely very important that frame-rates are compatible with PAL and NTSC in one package. Just not to make the same mistake as panasonic with HVX. It sucks to sit here in europe and know that US/Japan are very happy HVX´ing and I can´t and have to wait. [24fps next to 23.98fps, and 25 and 50 - you know what I mean - 50hz and 60hz able cam.]
 
One question comes to mind: How are we going to enjoy this huge resolution? Even the best LCD/plasma screens have only a quarter of the proposed RED resolution, and digital cinemas have and will have just the normal HDTV projectors? At least that will be the case for a long time. Why burden the whole system with 4X the data compared to what is going to be seen at best. Or is this just future-proofing to the extreme?

I am not against quality, but why bother if nobody can see it?

(sorry, I have not read thorough all the posts, maybe this has been answered already)
 
Congrats, guys. You had me drooling.

drool.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top