RED Ranger For Sale / No Longer Just A Rental Item

At the end of the day, still no 4K/60p.

If the 1080/120p looks good via ProRes RAW then maybe that slow-motion will be good enough. (IMO, 120p looks incredibly bad in its current state.)

But if not...what else does the camera have that I would pay $1800 for? A FF sensor and RAW recording...that's pretty much it.

They are nice, but I would pay double for AF and IBIS.
 
ahalpert said:
Good news from EOSHD, James! No need to waste your money on Komodo.

"This makes the Sigma Fp the first ever full frame camera to offer BRAW support (with the View Assist), and the first to shoot 2K 120fps in ProRes RAW.

Given the size of the Sigma Fp is barely larger than a Sony RX1 this is an extraordinary capability.

For cinema production it puts the Sigma Fp in the same league as the RED Komodo but at a significant cost and size advantage, with a larger sensor."
Click to expand...

Haha, yes, good days!

I doubt I would buy anything new this year. I love dynamic range, so I am happy with my camera and renting an Alexa depending on the client. And my buddies all have the A7's and the BM's so I just rent from them when needed. I just can't keep up with all the small updates in those cheap cameras. I am tired of learning new cameras. EVERYONE talks about how cameras are good enough or toooooo good. And there is some truth to that. I can do just about any gig with an A7sII. So, I just don't care about all the incremental updates and external raw options going on. Komodo is the exception because of Global shutter in that form factor looks cool, but it is way out of my budget this year. A month or two ago I was considering it, but I have had to buy so much for OMB work lately, that I am just not interested in cameras. They don't offer sh4t of improvement without a good light or microphone leveling up first. In LA we drive to gigs, so have a cart to off load to is another huge thing when doing OMB. Trew Audio has an awesome small light cart that is easy handle and fits into any car. As a test I once pushed it about two miles of city block fully loaded, so I guess it wold be good for NYC as well, if you have a second person to help with curbs or just overall sense of security with all that gear. The only camera that is exciting is the Komodo, S1HmkII, and Sigm FPmkII. And none of those exist yet.
 
That all makes sense - and I was only joking about FP = Komodo because Andrew Reid of EOSHD clearly has codec tunnel vision. I've read underwhelming performance evaluations of the Fp, aside from the fact that it has a 20ms RS readout and Komodo has GS (plus internal compressed RAW recording etc etc etc)
 
I once had a producer pull me aside. She said listen, camera ownership is only a stage in a DP's career, and an early stage at that. The reality is that there comes a point when you work on a certain level of production that you can't possibly own all that you need. The fact is if you are still thinking in those terms it is very revealing to the people who count in the higher echelons of filmmaking. There is afterall a reason the only thing Deakins owns, is a light meter. The fact is the further you get into filmmaking the more coverage may require multiples of cameras, and I don't mean just a B or C cam, not to mention all the rest. However, at that level of work the camera choice is only a detail. It is the qualitative level of the DP's thinking for the entire production that really matters. If you ever dreamt about being a fimmaker, this is where you want to be at.

As people on DVXuser, EOSHD, etc mull the merits of these little cameras, they should pause and think about whether they are really putting their energy in the right place. They should think about what this producer was saying. She was absolutely right, though I couldn't see it at the time. It really is an important shift that will take you a lot further than what the next generation of dslr/mirrorless cameras will provide.
 
Last edited:
yoclay said:
I once had a producer pull me aside. She said listen, camera ownership is only a stage in a DP's career, and an early stage at that. The reality is that there comes a point when you work on a certain level of production that you can't possibly own all that you need. The fact is if you are still thinking in those terms it is very revealing to the people who count in the higher echelons of filmmaking. There is afterall a reason the only thing Deakins owns, is a light meter. The fact is the further you get into filmmaking the more coverage may require multiples of cameras, and I don't mean just a B or C cam, not to mention all the rest. However, at that level of work the camera choice is only a detail. It is the qualitative level of the DP's thinking for the entire production that really matters. If you ever dreamt about being a fimmaker, this is where you want to be at.

As people on DVXuser, EOSHD, etc mull the merits of these little cameras, they should pause and think about whether they are really putting their energy in the right place. They should think about what this producer was saying. She was absolutely right, though I couldn't see it at the time. It really is an important shift that will take you a lot further than what the next generation of dslr/mirrorless cameras will provide.
Click to expand...
Good to think about that.
 
yoclay said:
I once had a producer pull me aside. She said listen, camera ownership is only a stage in a DP's career, and an early stage at that. The reality is that there comes a point when you work on a certain level of production that you can't possibly own all that you need. The fact is if you are still thinking in those terms it is very revealing to the people who count in the higher echelons of filmmaking. There is afterall a reason the only thing Deakins owns, is a light meter. The fact is the further you get into filmmaking the more coverage may require multiples of cameras, and I don't mean just a B or C cam, not to mention all the rest. However, at that level of work the camera choice is only a detail. It is the qualitative level of the DP's thinking for the entire production that really matters. If you ever dreamt about being a fimmaker, this is where you want to be at.

As people on DVXuser, EOSHD, etc mull the merits of these little cameras, they should pause and think about whether they are really putting their energy in the right place. They should think about what this producer was saying. She was absolutely right, though I couldn't see it at the time. It really is an important shift that will take you a lot further than what the next generation of dslr/mirrorless cameras will provide.
Click to expand...

For the narrative, episodic and commercial worlds, yes. But there are lots of other market segments that ownership is a necessity and how you really make the money.
 
yoclay said:
As people on DVXuser, EOSHD, etc mull the merits of these little cameras, they should pause and think about whether they are really putting their energy in the right place. They should think about what this producer was saying. She was absolutely right, though I couldn't see it at the time. It really is an important shift that will take you a lot further than what the next generation of dslr/mirrorless cameras will provide.
Click to expand...

GREAT POST.

I think owning gear means it ends up owning you.

Are you a cinematographer or are you a rental company ? When you’re both then you going to have conflicts of interest and I think it stunts career progression.

The only gear I own is the kind of gear that isn’t mainstream enough for a rental company to own. For a very long time I never owned cameras, and the only cameras I own are the ones I use for specific work, and are set up in a very specific way that rental companies don’t want to do.

I ALWAYS ask the rental company if they want to bid on those components I have built in the way I like and they usually don’t see any value in doing so, mostly because I’m the only way that uses them like that.

I get that not everyone wants to progress to being a drama / commercials DP, but the sooner you un-hitch from a GEAR TO RENT mentality the better.

I think the real test is when you no longer list “gear” on your website.....

JB
 
Last edited:
Can't argue with that. Although usually DPs own something small for no-budget shoots (a 5D before, maybe a pocket6k now or something)

A lot of the stuff I do is not solely as DP. I'm essentially producing as well. Doing the editing. There may be rentals as well.

Then there's a vast array of owner/op hiring. I agree it's not the same track as drama/commercial DPing (although one could do both)

I think shooting crewed projects with gear rented specifically to achieve those aims is generally the most visually/creatively satisfying and exciting.

But it can be hard to accommodate family life with 12-hour+ consecutive shoot days and travel. A lot of the other stuff I mentioned (interviews, conferences or whatever) lets me stay closer to home and change more diapers. Life is complicated. There can be a lot of talking past each other on dvxuser as far as discussing goals and best practices. You can do an awful lot of good work adapting a generic set of tools (whatever your camera and set of prime lenses is)

But I agree with John's statement that your gear will own you. You can limit the success of the project (and your long term career success) by trying to put the gear you happen to own to work in order to pocket a few more bucks instead of renting the right thing
 
If you’re doing events, conferences etc, you don’t HAVE to make it about gear.

I have a rule about gear when talking to someone new about a prospective job. Don’t talk about gear until you’re well down the road.

At the beginning you’re talking about ideas, about a “take” on something, about a way to do it differently or better, even if the “client” thinks they want A, you should be trying to think about how to add value to that to show them another way that’s better (if you happen to have one of course)

By taking the creative high road, it suddenly makes it very hard for said client to compare you to someone else that will just do what they’re asked to do for a lower price. The clients that are happy to do that and maybe even “steal” your take aren’t the clients you should be working with anyway.

If you just rent cameras and gear, and you get clients because you rent cameras and gear what are YOU doing differently to others that will keep a client retuning to YOU when they can get the same camera and gear from somewhere else for less. Why should they return to you ? Because if you’re competing on price alone, there’s ALWAYS someone else prepared to do it for less.

We are in show business aren’t we ? We’re all in a creative business ?

JB
 
Most of my clients don't know/ask about gear (perhaps beyond resolution and how many cameras). The discussion is all about what we want to do and how much it will cost to do it.

So in that case I try to buy equipment that will look as good as possible within the budget my work affords me.

And then I have other clients who request a specific camera (such as FS7/C300mk2) or have an accepted list of recent mirrorless cameras (sony A7 series or Lumix GH5, for example). There's definitely an element of offering a discount rental to that type of shooting. But the economics work out for everyone.

But even if they're hiring me in part for the camera, my shooting has to be up to snuff. They're not going to hire some kid out of school with no reel but a better camera and willing to work for free. And if I outperform the other shooters on their roster, I will get first dibs on their shoots or can demand a higher rate.

I would shoot on UMP G2 & Pocket 4K if i didn't have specific-request clients. Or maybe Komodo. In any case, if there is any specific camera I want to use 80 times a year, it is cheaper to own than to rent it. The question is if I want the same camera repeatedly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top