GH2 Should I keep my RED ONE MX?

Jaime Valles

Jaime Valles

Veteran
Hey there. Hope you're all doing well.

I'm writing because I'm conflicted. When RED announced the fire sale of Battle-Tested RED ONE MX cameras for only $4000, I immeditely jumped on the bandwagon. Now that I have the camera with me, I'm wondering if it was a rash move on my part. Financially it was a big stretch for me to purchase it, but I managed it.

I was very happy with the image I was getting from the GH2 with the Driftwood hacks, and had a nice collection of m4/3 lenses. I was planning on shooting an indie feature film with it. Now, with the RED ONE, I can still shoot the movie, and can do so in 4K RAW instead of 1080p 8-bit 4:2:0 footage. But I'm trying to figure out if there's going to be THAT much of a difference in image quality between the two, and if it's worth the expense and storage hassle of shooting in 4K in the first place. Also, the lenses I can afford for the R1 are not nearly as good as the ones I already have in m4/3 format.

I know that 4K distribution is coming, and having 4K masters is good for future-proofing any footage. But, honestly, the only way to future-proof your movie is to make a GOOD movie. So... I'm not sure if I should sell my R1 or not.

Anyway, that's all. I know you're all going to say "only you can make that decision" but right now I'm very torn, and any advice is very welcome.

Thanks!
 
I don't think there's any doubt a film on an R1 would look... amazing. RED is incredible, especially if you know what you're doing. Thing I've noticed is that it takes someone who knows RED well to make it shine the way it should- this is true about any camera... but RED more so than others I think. I've seen a lot of inexperienced RED shooters end up with very strange looking skin tones (kind of white hot & waxy or "cosmo girl-like), and a strange looking image that I can't really define...

That said, every one of us have probably seen mind blowing images from films shot on RED. If I personally was in your position, it would come COMPLETELY down to experienced support / crew. If this was more a one-man-band type of endeavor, no way in hell would I take responsibility for the entire setup and implementation of an R1... it's almost scary to think about. However, if I had 2 or 3 guys there to support in all facets of cinematography, well hell, why not? It would be harder of course... but you would end up with a beautiful result.

Think I've seen you BMCuser, so if you were one of those that were waiting for a BMC like myself... I'll take a guess and say that was your preferred choice. Personally, even if an EPIC / SCARLET kit was the same price as a BMC, I'd still go with the BMC... I like the image that much, it's downright incredible. But since shooting BMC is off the table for many of us, RED seems like a decent option, but a bit more cumbersome than what one might like.

So if you're not completely comfortable with RED, do you really want to invest time and money into an actual feature with it? What shots are going to directly benefit from 4K? If this is primarily going to be distributed across the web, the hacked GH2 is a pretty strong competitor IMO. Just today, I was browsing around on youtube and came across this little short, and was again surprised by what the GH2 can do... even after using this camera CONSTANTLY for well over a year, I'm still stunned.

 
Thanks for the feedback, L1N3ARX. Yeah, it's a one-man-band type deal, so that's what I'm nervous about...

I was waiting for the BMC, but I figured 4K for $4K was too good to pass up. But now, I'm just nervous about the purchase. Especially if the footage will end up being seen on Blu-ray, DVD and the web primarily.
 
If you're shooting RED MX on a feature you should be concerned with the post process in general. It's not difficult, but you'll likely fall flat if you're not familiar with color. Then again, you could just REDGAMMA3 everything and leave it at that, provided that you shoot for a look in camera. It wouldn't be the worse that you could do, believe me.

Also, if you aren't accustomed to running and gunning with a larger camera, then you'll have to sit on sticks for a lot of shots. That camera is heavy from the get-go and will required a somewhat decent support package. When we shot our feature, we used two RED MX's, one of which lived with a cooke 18-100 on it. That setup was about 35lbs fully built and stripped down maybe 25-28. This was before SSDs. THe only reason I even considered doing some of the days without a tripod was because I carried the thing around on jobs for quite some time before hand. Even I had to sit on sticks to make it through the day, and I can't stand being locked like that. Sometimes I used a sandbag on the tripod or a pillow just to effect some sort of looseness.

Storage isn't a big deal. THat's just an expense you pay for better material, and honestly should be the least of your worries if you plan on selling something to someone. Never understand the complaining... you can get 3TB platters to store raw on for less than 100.00 US right now.

All things considered equal, you will get a better image out of the MX, technically. That's kind of a no brainer, and it doesn't matter who notices and who doesn't, the only thing that matters is the value of that fact to yourself.

All THAT said... nope! I would not shoot an ultra low/no budget feature on a RED MX today. If the choice is between a stripped down RED MX or GH2 HacK? I would rather shoot with a GH2, PL Mount, excellent primes or anamorphic. The value in being able to cram something into a small space on location, or create interesting shots goes well beyond the gains that RED MX will lend you in my opinion. In fact, before Blackmagic I was planning on doing just that, a pair of GH2s and Anamorphic glass.

Today, I wouldn't shoot an ultra low or no with either of them as a primary camera. But I would take either one for Slow Mo/quick B-Cam inserts.
 
Thanks, Kholi. The size and weight of the camera don't bother me, as it will mostly live on a tripod throughout the shoot. And you're right, of course, that technically the R1 will produce a better image, everything else being equal. But that's just it. Everything else is NOT equal. On the R1 I'll be using a couple of cheap-o Nikon lenses, whereas on the GH2 I had some really nice, fast options for glass that had a lot of character. But then it would only be 1080p, and the world will soon move to an all-4K distribution system. So... that's why I'm torn.

Thanks for all the feedback. It really helps, even though I still don't know what to do...
 
Jaime Valles said:
But then it would only be 1080p, and the world will soon move to an all-4K distribution system. So... that's why I'm torn.
Click to expand...

Most of my concerns have been covered by the previous posts. To me the thing is a RED project will cost more to produce. Perhaps substantially. Do you have the resources and the funds?

And be brutally honest with yourself, is the project worthy of the expense? Perhaps it is the new "Gone with the Wind", but it could quite as easily languish in the never-world of obscurity. Will the added cost justify that?

And I wouldn't worry about 4K distribution yet, unless you have a distributor already lined up who ready to take your project to a wider audience. Even film festivals will be slow to move in that direction. There's plenty of life left in 1080p.

Give yourself a worry free environment unless you need anxiety to perform well.
 
Actually... it's hard for me to imagine, right now, just how much more it would cost to shoot MX over GH2 if you don't have to rent the camera and glass, and you're only renting Tripod.

As far as I can tell, you're gonna move kinda slow with both. Gh2 you'll need more grip and lighting than you would with RED, but RED you may need ONE extra guy to help you really move the camera quickly so that you aren't doomed to an extra four minutes of just setting up camera alone. You're gonna need more storage space for RED, and I would say if you want to really maximize your investment you're gonna hire a colorist...

But you're gonna do that ANYWAY no matter what you shoot on, it's just gonna make it easier on the Colorist if you shoot MX.

I would just opt for the GH2 to do more setups and make my days, and put the extra guy on grip and lighting to have a better composition before the lens.

If anyone can think of anything that really separates the as far as cost goes if you already own both or either and are ready to shoot... let me know. Just can't think of anything else.
 
We are a complete RED shop...3 cameras(MX, Scarlet and Epic). I just would like to say make sure you have plenty of horsepower in in post suite or you may learn to hate RED. If your post is set up properly you can do far more with 4K RAW images than you could even imagine with a GH camera.
 
Paul Hudson said:
We are a complete RED shop...3 cameras(MX, Scarlet and Epic). I just would like to say make sure you have plenty of horsepower in in post suite or you may learn to hate RED. If your post is set up properly you can do far more with 4K RAW images than you could even imagine with a GH camera.
Click to expand...

Actually this is what I forgot: it will take you a lot of time to actually even begin the post process in a healthy way without RED ROCKET(S) or dedicated workhorses to spit out Proxies as fast as possible. SO add more post time to the list of things that'll cost you.
 
Any reason you couldn't rent the Red camera for your feature? If working independent you can film a short Movie in 2 weeks or less.

Also I really do not understand the 1080 to 4k thing, it's nice but people don't care. We still have people using Sd daily in the tv world let alone 720-1080p. Stop worrying about the future and work in the now, by the time 4k is standard you could have made a couple of more films.

I worked on a project that was shot on RED and looked horrible, you really need to know how to use that camera to get the best out of it. Me personally I would shoot the Movie on hacked Gh2's or GH3 and invest in some nice glass, lighting and a great dp. That is going to make your film look great, not it's up to you which is more important than anything to create a good story.

A bad story will not look good on any camera......
 
Jaime Valles said:
... But that's just it. Everything else is NOT equal. On the R1 I'll be using a couple of cheap-o Nikon lenses, whereas on the GH2 I had some really nice, fast options for glass that had a lot of character. ...
Click to expand...

Jaime,

4K is a mixed blessing with the Red. It's nice to have, but you have to pay for it in terms of computer horse power and capacity. And honestly, the extra rez is nice to have, but it's quickly going to get lost in context of the rest of the film.

Where a Red One MX will be a huge advantage is in dynamic range and low light performance. You can spend substantially less time on lighting, which is huge. Also, what do you mean by "cheap-o Nikon lenses"? I didn't know Nikon makes crappy lenses, even their kit lenses aren't that bad, but they are slow of course.

But in terms of field of view and DoF, S35 has an advantage over m4/3 in most circumstances. So is f/4 on a Red One really worse that f/2.8 on a GH2?

Finally, the project is going to be taken more seriously by everyone involoved if it's being shot on a Red.

So I suggest biting the bullet and learning the Red One and its workflow inside out... and don't look back.
 
BobbyMurcerFan said:
Jaime,

4K is a mixed blessing with the Red. It's nice to have, but you have to pay for it in terms of computer horse power and capacity. And honestly, the extra rez is nice to have, but it's quickly going to get lost in context of the rest of the film.
Click to expand...

Do not underestimate the value of perceived value. Pretty soon you'll be asked "Do you have a 4K master?" By potential distributors or buyers. On the low end, if you don't have names that sell, you're being asked "was it shot on a DSLR?"- Not even kidding.
Where a Red One MX will be a huge advantage is in dynamic range and low light performance. You can spend substantially less time on lighting, which is huge. Also, what do you mean by "cheap-o Nikon lenses"? I didn't know Nikon makes crappy lenses, even their kit lenses aren't that bad, but they are slow of course.
Click to expand...

In comparison, yes. You'll trade that time out for moving the camera. 11 stops is still generally very scarce to work with, so you're going to need grip and lighting.
But in terms of field of view and DoF, S35 has an advantage over m4/3 in most circumstances. So is f/4 on a Red One really worse that f/2.8 on a GH2?
Click to expand...

I would NEVER walk out with any of my important primes having a max aperture of F4 on RED MX. It's better than GH2, but not THAT much better by any stretch.

Finally, the project is going to be taken more seriously by everyone involoved if it's being shot on a Red.
Click to expand...

Largely true, sadly.

I do believe that people should start learning the RAW(ish) process sooner than later. Belaboring it out of fear is nonsensical.
 
BobbyMurcerFan said:
Jaime,

4K is a mixed blessing with the Red. It's nice to have, but you have to pay for it in terms of computer horse power and capacity. And honestly, the extra rez is nice to have, but it's quickly going to get lost in context of the rest of the film.

Where a Red One MX will be a huge advantage is in dynamic range and low light performance. You can spend substantially less time on lighting, which is huge. Also, what do you mean by "cheap-o Nikon lenses"? I didn't know Nikon makes crappy lenses, even their kit lenses aren't that bad, but they are slow of course.

But in terms of field of view and DoF, S35 has an advantage over m4/3 in most circumstances. So is f/4 on a Red One really worse that f/2.8 on a GH2?

Finally, the project is going to be taken more seriously by everyone involoved if it's being shot on a Red.

So I suggest biting the bullet and learning the Red One and its workflow inside out... and don't look back.
Click to expand...

My 2010 iMac handles RED footage pretty well with FCPX. Granted, it's a i7 quad core with 12gb of RAM, but still it's not the latest and greatest.

And definitely agree with you about cast/crew taking it more seriously if it's shot on the RED. It's unfortunate, but true.
 
I think you made great choice in grabbing that MX. Go ahead and shoot with it. Think of all the features shot on that camera. Think how much better your film will look on the big screen in festivals. You can use still glass. Just figure out how you can offload it and make your pages. Otherwise it's the same deal. It's just a camera... just a freakin' great camera.

NLEs handle it natively. You got a used Ferrari. Nail it and don't look back.
 
Why not find an experienced RED DP to work on your shoot? Then you get max quality and real world training live on set.
 
Thank you all for the really great advice. I'm glad we can have a serious discussion without the thread degenerating into a "how can you compare X camera to Y camera if they're not even in the same price league" or "it's not the camera that counts it's the story" type debates. Believe me, I'm the first one to say that a RED camera won't make a good movie out of a bad script, any more than any other camera can save bad acting, dialogue, lighting or post-production. But I already have the script (which I've been working on heavily for the past year) and I'm very happy with it. The cast, crew, and almost all the other equipment will be exactly the same regardless of which camera I use, so now we need only discuss the technical elements of shooting with the R1 vs the GH2.

The R1 is not a camera I purchased with the intent of hiring it out to other projects or to rent out. This was to shoot a self-financed, low-budget indie feature. I'll be doing the editing on my home computer, whether it's shot on a GH2 or on the R1. Nobody except me will be waiting on the finished film (there are no clients or investors involved) so it doesn't really scare me if post takes longer with RAW than with H.264 footage. The actual shoot may take longer, because of the size of the RED rig compared to the GH2, but as Kholi said, I'll need more grip equipment with the GH2 to combat the limited dynamic range of the camera, so I kind of think it's a wash. And as Paul Hudson wrote, I have a lot more flexibility in post when shooting Redcode Raw than H.264.

As far as the lens situation goes... I have a Nikon 50mm f/1.4 and a standard 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens for now. They both look great, actually, but they don't have the character of the Voigtlander, Canon FD and SLR Magic lenses I was using with the GH2. That's why I referred to them as "cheapo Nikon lenses." Not because they don't produce good, sharp images, but because they're not as interesting, at least to my eye. But I'm starting to feel that I can overcome the blandness of those Nikon lenses with good post coloring techniques.

As far as the 4K vs 1080p thing... Well, I made my first feature film on a DVX100 on MiniDV (the link is in my signature). The footage looked great, at the time. Good enough, in fact, that HBO decided to acquire our little movie and put it up on their channels and on DVD. We were ecstatic, and very proud. However, distributors nowadays insist on 1080p masters, and they won't even touch our MiniDV feature with a 10 foot pole. That's why I think want to shoot this one in 4K. We've gotten burned because of shooting SD in an increasingly HD world, and I fear the same will happen once we move to 4K. It won't be this year, or maybe even in 3 years, but it's coming, and I want to be ready for it.

So, after reading all your excellent thoughts on the matter, and in the course of writing this lengthy reply, I feel like I'll stick with my gut reaction and shoot it with the RED ONE MX. My biggest obstacle right now is fear. Fear that I don't know the camera nearly as well as I know my GH2. But I'll learn, dammit. I'm just going to have to suck it up and take it like a man. :evil:

As soon as I'm able to talk more about the project (which is very cool, I promise) I'll post more stuff here. Until then, I thank you all sincerely for your invaluable time and expertise.
 
Good deal. As you know no matter what tool you choose, go all in. xD If only locations and set design were as simple as saying "I want this one!"
 
Well one thing I can tell you right now is that if you decide to sell your R1 you won't go minus but plus. I mean financially you can definitely sell it for a bigger price than you bought it for, and use that money for the pre-pro-post for your feature or even buy lenses, support gear, gh3 or whatever you need for your film.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top