Red Dragon 6K for $6000 upgrade & Red Brand Loyalty

So instead of saying "RED has made huge innovations in imaging technology and is proud to offer our new Epic-X camera with the Dragon sensor for $34,500 starting in 2012." they have essentially given a 94% discount to current owners by offering them the ability to upgrade for only $6000.

Imagine the implications of this catching on...
 
In regards to Scarlet, is it possible to build a new Scarlet around a Dragon sensor, or is Dragon only for those that currently own a Scarlet?
 
There will definitely be Epics and Scarlets that ship with Dragon in 2013. But like the M-to-MX upgrade on the Red One, don't expect to see Epics and Scarlets ship with Dragon until after all the current owners have been given the opportunity to upgrade.
 
Last year Jim said that upgrading Scarlet will be more expensive than upgrading the Epic becase they have to exchange cirquit boards which have insuficient computational power to handle the Dragon. But he can change it 10 times till the 2013, because real final cost will depends on many other factors.
 
Michael Olsen said:
So instead of saying "RED has made huge innovations in imaging technology and is proud to offer our new Epic-X camera with the Dragon sensor for $34,500 starting in 2012." they have essentially given a 94% discount to current owners by offering them the ability to upgrade for only $6000.

Imagine the implications of this catching on...
Click to expand...

Can you explain this? I don't know what you mean by a 94% discount.
 
Steve R said:
Can you explain this? I don't know what you mean by a 94% discount.
Click to expand...

I think he means you don't have to buy a whole new camera over to get the new sensor,
like buying a Canon C300 and then having to sell it to get a C500 if you want more resolution
or faster frame rates 6 months-1yr later.
 
J Bellari said:
I think he means you don't have to buy a whole new camera over to get the new sensor,
like buying a Canon C300 and then having to sell it to get a C500 if you want more resolution
or faster frame rates 6 months-1yr later.
Click to expand...

Except,mother c500 and c300 have the same chip........
 
Saw this on Reduser today that made my day/month/year:

from Jarred Land:
" Heh Heh your gonna love the next build... :)

Which.. btw.. is also the first build where we turn on the Gyro and Accelerometers that have been sitting in the camera patiently waiting :) "


If that ain't a good enough free customer loyalty perk,
I don't know what is...
 
EndCredits said:
What do you mean?
Click to expand...

It is my opinion, which there are some who disagree, that FF cinematography is not superior than typical S35mm or thereabouts sensor size, aesthetically in regards to perspective and etc. FF cinematography forces you to use longer lenses to get equivalent field of view. This means FF will inherently have the potential to have much less depth of field in similar circumstances to a smaller format. It is in my humble opinion that super shallow depth of field is not good, unless story calls for it, and seldom at that. At normal or long focal lengths, a T/2.8 on S35mm is decently shallow. A T/1.4 on S35mm is very shallow in my opinion. I pull focus as an AC and I shoot films as a DP. Aesthetically, I like out of focus but not globs of color and shapes to the extreme. I typically shoot at T/4 on S35mm. If the world went FF over night, if I were in the exact same situation but had a 5DmII, I'd have to use a longer lens to get the FoV I wanted, and thus the DoF would be more shallow. If I wished to get my image back to where it was, I'd have to stop down the lens. I don't have the math with me, but I'd assume a stop and a half or so. Lighting to a T/8 is not what I want to do, but would be what I'd have to do in order to get some of my DoF back. Also, there are not any good FF cinema lenses out there. The CP.2's are pretty good, don't get me wrong. But I don't want to live in a world where CP.2's are my ONLY option. Oh great, I can either shoot with CP.2's or photography lenses. Not to mention a total lack of cinema zooms. Cinema glass is expensive now, so I can't imagine if a cinema lens maker would make a lens that covered full frame and performed as high. We'll either see compromises in quality or lenses that make the typical $125,000 set of Cooke 5/i's look like bargain pricing.

And you may ask, "well if you don't like it, why don't you just not use it?"

And that is a great point... however, producers seem to pride themselves in not knowing anything about cinematography, yet still making big decisions based off of things they overhear others say. So despite all the reasons, I would inevitably be hired by producers who's nephew convinced them with his 5DmII that full frame video was better for some dumb reason like 'it can see more' or something. Now I can't use cinema zooms, any cinema primes except CP.2's, which are good but are no S4's, Ultra's or etc. I'll either have to push ISO to close the lens down and regain depth, or I'll have to light to a higher stop, or I'll have to see my image get really shallow and my focus puller get stressed. Pulling focus is not easy. You read ASC DP's in American Cinematographer talk about shooting wide open at a T/1.4 or T/2 and feeling really bad for the AC. That is on s35mm film... and those are the best focus pullers in the union. I'm not looking forward to having to take time to reshoot something because of focus issues when the image doesn't need to be that shallow. Deeper DoF is my thing, and it helps speed up production by eliminating possible focus issues.

Again, I'm not advocating Citizen Kane deep focus. I'm talking about your standard shallow DoF at a T/2.8 or T/4 on s35mm.
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
producers seem to pride themselves in not knowing anything about cinematography, yet still making big decisions based off of things they overhear others say.
Click to expand...

Agreed 1000%.
The worst term to come to the forefront in the past couple of years is "full frame"
(though it may be a tie with the erroneous 'good DOF')

When people don't know specifics that name implies that anything that is not 'full frame' is somehow LESS capable... and therefore a worst choice.
I can't tell you how many times I've gotten the question "Is it full frame?" (when asking about an FS100, F3, Red, etc).
 
Luis Caffesse said:
I can't tell you how many times I've gotten the question "Is it full frame?" (when asking about an FS100, F3, Red, etc).
Click to expand...

Annoying isn't it?:)

I hate FF. s35 and 4/3 is perfect. The shallow DOF of FF is absolutely horrific. Mostly because it's used to excessively, but even if not so, it's just to shallow. And the reason why it's so popular is because there are lot's and lot's of amateurs and people who never used larger sensor/format cameras that got this gear in their hands. And this is because the gear is so cheap.

I hope RED wont go FF somewhere in the future. Although it's possible. It's the market that finally decides on what it wants to shoot on. If everybody will be screaming for FF than that's what companies will produce eventually I guess... I've never shoot on RED but this would definitely have an impact on the market, forcing others to develop cameras with FF sensors.
 
For those that don't own a current RED Scarlet, is there a rough estimate of how much a Dragon sensor is going to cost? Do you think they will offer a pre-packaged Scarlet with a Dragon sensor already inside?
 
Luis Caffesse said:
Agreed 1000%.
The worst term to come to the forefront in the past couple of years is "full frame"
(though it may be a tie with the erroneous 'good DOF')

When people don't know specifics that name implies that anything that is not 'full frame' is somehow LESS capable... and therefore a worst choice.
I can't tell you how many times I've gotten the question "Is it full frame?" (when asking about an FS100, F3, Red, etc).
Click to expand...
LOL

You should post more often, Luis, I miss your posts :-)
 
"I can't tell you how many times I've gotten the question "Is it full frame?" (when asking about an FS100, F3, Red, etc)."
then i answer YES...
s35 is full frame in cinema world...
 
Luis Caffesse said:
Agreed 1000%.
The worst term to come to the forefront in the past couple of years is "full frame"
(though it may be a tie with the erroneous 'good DOF')

When people don't know specifics that name implies that anything that is not 'full frame' is somehow LESS capable... and therefore a worst choice.
I can't tell you how many times I've gotten the question "Is it full frame?" (when asking about an FS100, F3, Red, etc).
Click to expand...

Exactly. If it's not full frame, they feel it's just less. Why shoot Alexa? Isn't the 5dMII full HD, too? lol.
 
vista vision is annoying format and there are reason why is ditched in 1960 ...
need more light and its harder to follow focus ...
nothing revolutionary about FF ...
 
maarek said:
RED Epic is already at APS-H size which is only a 1.3x crop. It's very close to being fullframe.
Click to expand...

Not quite.

The 5k Epic sensor is around 27.7 by 14.6mm ... APS-H is 28.7 by 19mm... so it's not there yet, especially in vertical height. Image circles (from lenses) have a harder time covering large sensors when square, since the circle's horizontal coverage increasingly shrinks as you move away from the center. Hence, the width can be much longer than the height when maximizing out a lenses ability to fit a large rectangle into the circle.

Full Frame is 36x24... a very far cry from either.

Right now the Red Epic 5K sensor has a surface area of 404mm2, APS-H has 545mm2, and full frame is 864mm2. FF is over double the surface area of Epic 5k.

I believe 6k will be 30×15.8mm... which is more like APS-H sized... larger in length, shorter in height. That is an area of 474mm2, which is almost exactly between Epic 5k and APS-H.

So Epic Dragon sensor is right between Epic MX and APS-H. Neither one reaching that surface area, albeit the horizontal width being there.

6K Dragon sensor at the size mentioned above, is still only 55% of the surface area of Full Frame.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top