Why isn't Compact Flash slot standard?

[Michael Hastings]

If I'm not mistaken the CF requires a separate module that goes on the port side of the camera. Seriously wondering why the Compact Flash slot isn't standard. Given how often compact flash is incorporated in low cost digital cameras wouldn't it be pretty inexpensive just to mount the CF card holder on the mother board with the small card slot in the rear, top, or side of the camera. Seems like the extra connectors and ribbon cable to enable a side panel option are virtually as expensive as the CF slot itself.

[Jason Francois]

I would think it's for the sake of future-proofing. When some new type of memory comes out, just swap out that panel and you're good to go.

[Steve Freebairn]

One big reason is that if CF was standard it would take away the uncompressed port option which uses the same slot.

[J. Bernard Vallon]

Furthermore, with all the money this team is saving us, i'm not opposed to them making us pay a little extra for the parts we want on a per-option basis. As far as i'm concerned, i'm getting a 80k camera for 25k. It could come as 10,000 pieces in a box with an allan wrench and instructions in Thai and i'd count my blessings.

I'm not groveling or anything, I just want my damn camera.

[Jim Exton]

Furthermore, with all the money this team is saving us, i'm not opposed to them making us pay a little extra for the parts we want on a per-option basis. As far as i'm concerned, i'm getting a 80k camera for 25k. It could come as 10,000 pieces in a box with an allan wrench and instructions in Thai and i'd count my blessings.

I'm not groveling or anything, I just want my damn camera.

I am with you on this.

The key is modular. Some people don't want CF, I do. I have no need for Raw, others do. Etc, etc.

It can be almost whatever you want it to be.

[TimothyD]

I vote that it is ok as well.

I just want two slots. It makes little sense to me to have to change media after 4.5 mintues, and totally stop shooting to do so. I can live with it if I can keep running at the same time.

How about a double or a single CF as an option? Charge maybe 50-100 more for the double slot. Whatever it costs to produce...

Tim

[Joe Aurili]

Or even better, a quad slot.

Even a manual swich to select the slot would be better then pulling out the CF every time.

[Matthew Lochman]

Is the Raw Port still something that one would need to have installed by the RED guys, or maybe they are making it an option for us to intall ourselves...

[TimothyD]

Is the Raw Port still something that one would need to have installed by the RED guys, or maybe they are making it an option for us to intall ourselves...

Has to be installed by Red. It is super complex in comparison to the CF slot.

I would be willing to put money on the fact that at least for many years to come less than one-percent of people will buy/use the RAW port because it requires so much storage in terms of both speed and size.

jlaurili,

I think that 2 slots is as much as I want protruding next to my head:)

I think that making a 4 slot enclosure out of a Red Drive/Red Ram box would make a lot of sense though...

Peace,

Tim

[Matthew Lochman]

I would be willing to put money on the fact that at least for many years to come less than one-percent of people will buy/use the RAW port because it requires so much storage in terms of both speed and size.


less than one percent what is that- less than 20?-
You're on.

[Matthew Lochman]

120 fps of 4.5k will appeal to a lot of beer commercial shooters, vfx, etc.

[TimothyD]

I think that while Red will definitely have a hard time meeting demand for a while, there will be 100 ENG/EFP shooters for every narrative shooter within 2-3 years. ENG/EFP will not be moving to uncompressed RAW until you can pop a drive in a carriage that will hold the data. That will take many years to come to fruition.

So I would put a Red One on it...

Tim

[Matthew Lochman]

Make it a RED ONE with a RAW PORT and you've got a bet!

HAHA!

[Matthew Lochman]

I think you may be underestimating the demand for this type of solution in Motion Pictures... I mean the camera's not even out yet and there are already what, 2 movies using it? Sure the codec may be good enough, but those computer guys like their resolution, and 120fps...

[Vincent Rice]

I think that while Red will definitely have a hard time meeting demand for a while, there will be 100 ENG/EFP shooters for every narrative shooter within 2-3 years. ENG/EFP will not be moving to uncompressed RAW until you can pop a drive in a carriage that will hold the data. That will take many years to come to fruition.

So I would put a Red One on it...

Tim

Actually I think you have the narrative/ENG ratio completely the wrong way round.

[TimothyD]

Actually I think you have the narrative/ENG ratio completely the wrong way round.

At first probably, maybe even for the first year after release, but then it is just a numbers game after that. Once ENG/EFP starts to adopt this camera it will definitely sell 10x as many for ENG/EFP. At least if it is everything that they have set out to make it, and all indications are that it will be.

Anyway, I am working on the assumtion that it will replace most of the ENG/EFP cameras pretty rapidly. I know that there have been other claims of cameras/technology that would make that big an impact. To me, I think this will be an industry wide revolution that rivals what NLE's have done on the editing end of things.

Peace,

Tim

[Matthew Lochman]

again though, what does a 4.5K camera that records at 120fps gonna run ya? (ENG/EFP or Narrative becomes a moot point...)

[IAN SUN]

again though, what does a 4.5K camera that records at 120fps gonna run ya? (ENG/EFP or Narrative becomes a moot point...)

Mlochm I think you have some misconceptions re. the specs. Recording RAW to an off board Recorder (RED RAID or some such mega speed recording device) you will "only" get 60 fps @4.5K. To get 120 fps, you have to drop down to 2k RAW.

[Matthew Lochman]

Thanks for the correction. My point still stands but we'll change it to 2K @120fps... Or 4.5k @60fps... but I should stop arguing as the point is futile.

[TimothyD]

I'm not trying to argue. I just think that it is very likely that more Red One's will be in the hands of ENG/EFP shooters when it all shakes out. It will take at least two years, and maybe more. But Red has a great window of opportunity, and a price point their competition can/will never meet.

Peace,

Tim

[Finner]

Gibby will probably jump all over me for this but when I try and look objectively at it I see the camera not being the best choice for fast paced EFP and a poor too plain wrong choice for ENG. Any way you slice it this camera lends itself to being 90% a cine style production camera.

[Jason Murphy]

I'm not trying to argue. I just think that it is very likely that more Red One's will be in the hands of ENG/EFP shooters when it all shakes out. It will take at least two years, and maybe more. But Red has a great window of opportunity, and a price point their competition can/will never meet.

I agree with you, but it won't be at a 100:1 ratio, certainly. Maybe 3:1. I sincerely doubt that there will be much more than 10,000 of these cameras out there, even after 4 years or so (if I recall correctly, 'only' 3,000 F900s have been sold, and that's been considered a ridiculously successful camera; I can see RED tripling that number; in fact, I imagine they're close to having that number matched now in pre-orders).

But RED is still a very high powered solution that I imagine many broadcast people will (rightly or wrongly) see as overkill, even at its price point (not to mention that even one very successful camera from RED won't change the fact that the entire broadcast industry is very heavily invested in Sony/Panasonic/Etc. workflow models, and most people, lets face it, hate change, even if it makes life easier). Plus, even though it does have some distinct advantages for ENG/EFP, the RED one's design still seems somewhat better geared towards cine-style work than ENG/EFP work.

We are also, of course, leaving out the many experimental filmmakers who will pick this camera up and use it for their work. Does anyone care about them? Hey? Anyone? :)

[Jarred Land]

One big reason is that if CF was standard it would take away the uncompressed port option which uses the same slot.

just so everyone realizes.. the uncompressed port isnt standard issue either :)

[Matthew Lochman]

Gibby will probably jump all over me for this but when I try and look objectively at it I see the camera not being the best choice for fast paced EFP and a poor too plain wrong choice for ENG. Any way you slice it this camera lends itself to being 90% a cine style production camera.

Hence the Red Professional Pocket Camera??? perhaps...

[Ken Willinger]

I very much doubt you'll see RED in the hands of ENG newsguys at local stations. The news game has become a very low budget medium that requires very fast turnaround. They are more inclined to go the XD cam or P2 (which many stations already have) route. I see the HPX500 being a big hit in the newgathering field. RED is too much camera for those shops. Some of the real small stations are using dv cameras. I see RED being real big in EFP doc and commercial circles as well as cine style.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Gibby will probably jump all over me for this but when I try and look objectively at it I see the camera not being the best choice for fast paced EFP and a poor too plain wrong choice for ENG. Any way you slice it this camera lends itself to being 90% a cine style production camera.

I'm inclined to agree with that. I can see using RED for EFP... If you don't mind the hurdles of cine-style shooting to gain the benefits of 4K, 35mm FOV, etc.. For ENG it does seem like an odd choice. I know it will get used for that, but it wouldn't be my first choice of cameras (even with the amazing features for the price) if my primary function was going to be ENG.

[Sam Druckerman]

Gibby will probably jump all over me for this but when I try and look objectively at it I see the camera not being the best choice for fast paced EFP and a poor too plain wrong choice for ENG. Any way you slice it this camera lends itself to being 90% a cine style production camera.

Oh Oh! Now you did it.... LOL


I'm inclined to agree with that. I can see using RED for EFP... If you don't mind the hurdles of cine-style shooting to gain the benefits of 4K, 35mm FOV, etc.. For ENG it does seem like an odd choice. I know it will get used for that, but it wouldn't be my first choice of cameras (even with the amazing features for the price) if my primary function was going to be ENG.

Quick, everybody duck!

[TimothyD]

I guess to me it just makes sense that people who are used to using a BetaSp camera will be fine with the form factor. And as much as people like to act like those of us who shoot ENG/EFP rely heavily on automatic functions, I have never known anyone who is a decent shooter who used anything other than a powered zoom and the occasional auto white balance. No one likes to see the exposure changing erratically, so not too many people use auto iris, and a "real" camera doesn't have autofocus, so that is out...

At any rate, it seems to me that the only thing in the way of the Red One being a great ENG/EFP camera is the wait for Canon and Fuji to start making 2/3" lenses that are meant to work with a single sensor, thereby getting rid of the cost and compromises of a B4 adapter.

And as far as 4k being overkill goes, I don't think that it is for many facets of EFP and as for ENG everyone will be shooting 2k windowed... So that seems like a moot point to me.

Tim

[Mike the beginner]

I would also like to see a two card CF slot. I hope red can make it so:biggrin:


On the question of ENG users? I think some people have to re-read Gibbys posts. Shooters that are replacing their cameras/equipment etc AND wish to give themselves maximum opportunity of work could do a lot worse than buying a red camera. Gibby already stated that red is not the best for ENG but he gives a plethora of ideas why it is worth buying.

Mike the beginner

[Vincent Rice]

Gibby will probably jump all over me for this but when I try and look objectively at it I see the camera not being the best choice for fast paced EFP and a poor too plain wrong choice for ENG. Any way you slice it this camera lends itself to being 90% a cine style production camera.

Have to agree. I've no doubt that ENG with RED will be fine and dandy but if that was my focus I would still be looking at Panasonic and Sony.... until Pocket RED of course.

[Joe Aurili]

I can't see this camera a choice for ENG IN 4k, unless the magic focus assistant is truly MAGIC. It would just be to hard to focus at the moment when you can't do a retake. I don't see why it can't be used for ENG in 2k or 1080 mode though, but then there are a lot of options in the market for that.

[Stuart English]

"I very much doubt you'll see RED in the hands of ENG newsguys at local stations. The news game has become a very low budget medium that requires very fast turnaround. They are more inclined to go the XD cam or P2 (which many stations already have) route. RED is too much camera for those shops. Some of the real small stations are using dv cameras. I see RED being real big in EFP doc and commercial circles as well as cine style."

I think that this posting summarizes my feelings about the likely utilization of the RED ONE camera outside Digital Cinema very well. Its absolutely suitable for EFP, but for ENG (at least in the US market) it really is too much camera. Which does not mean you can't sucessfully shoot ENG with it, but its unlikely to be your first choice if that was your primary application.

[TimothyD]

I think that assuming it won't be adopted for use in ENG at 4k is missing the point. I am looking for an ENG camera (I shoot EFP style, but you get the point) and I don't see any reason to spend the same money on something that is just as big and heavy and has nowhere near the resolution of Red at 2k.

To me the lack of a 2/3" ENG lens meant for a single sensor is the only drawback at the moment.

I can see how this camera will be viewed as overkill by many, but to me it comes down to size, weight and flexibility. I think when you compare it to the competition it easily blows everything away... It is going to be no heavier or larger than a Beta camera (of whatever variety) and the workflow should be considerably faster, even faster than the HPX-500 considering how quickly you can transfer the media to disc for editing.

I myself don't have to hand off tapes, so that is not a consideration for me. I do everything myself all the way from shooting to deliverables. I can see how some short sighted news people might prefer to stick with tape and would use HDV, but I would never want to make that kind of compromise.

I want to future proof my setup, and I feel like the alternatives be they HDV, XDCAM or P2 are all just stop gaps (no offense Stuart, I know you worked for Panasonic prior to coming to Red.)

Would you disagree with this statement: "I think Red is likely to take a whole lot longer than the formats mentioned above to become outdated."

That is the real crucial aspect for me personally. I am getting this camera for work, and I will not be able to make a case that I need a new camera as long as the one we have is "HD" and that is what we need for broadcast. So I am faced with a far different situation than the average ENG/EFP shooter. As a point of reference, the DXC-637 we have now is 12 years old. How useful will a XDCAM EX camera be in 12 years? How about an HPX-500???

I don't want to get the sick feeling that I made a bad decision one or two years after I buy my camera. (That includes the purchase of a Red, so let me know if you really think I'm wrong to go with it.)

Thanks,

Tim

[Michael Hastings]

Since I started this thread lead let me elaborate. (tim snuck in there while I was writing this so pardon the redundancy)


Furthermore, with all the money this team is saving us, i'm not opposed to them making us pay a little extra for the parts we want on a per-option basis. As far as i'm concerned, i'm getting a 80k camera for 25k. It could come as 10,000 pieces in a box with an allan wrench and instructions in Thai and i'd count my blessings.

I'm not groveling or anything, I just want my damn camera.

First of all, LOL you are spot on - I'm not bitching that the CF slot isn't standard, it just seemed like it might be pretty easy to incorporate right on the motherboard at almost the same cost as the connectors themselves.



I would think it's for the sake of future-proofing. When some new type of memory comes out, just swap out that panel and you're good to go.

Again, it wouldn't affect this if it were on the motherboard. You would still have the option of the side panel for raw port or maybe additional CF slots, etc.


"I very much doubt you'll see RED in the hands of ENG newsguys at local stations. more...

I agree with everything Stuart said. I think the RED, because of the resolution, workflow, and price is the perfect EFP camera. I deal with a lot of guys in the EFP market that really have to agonize over the camera decision - not that they couldn't afford whatever it takes, but it is a little hard to justify the $50-100K for the Varicam/Cinealta options (you feel a little bit gouged) yet the HVX500 and XDCAM types definitely feel stripped down.Then you factor in the proprietary media issues of P2 and Bluray, tape, etc. and you feel like you are getting abused again. All of them feel like they have one foot in the technological grave the day you buy them.

Then along comes RED - not cheap but a manageable price point. Multiple computer industry standard media options. 4K resolution which is as future proofed as you are likely to get. My only regret in the entire RED experience is that I only ordered one.

[TimothyD]

Since I started this thread lead let me elaborate. (tim snuck in there while I was writing this so pardon the redundancy)I agree with everything Stuart said. I think the RED, because of the resolution, workflow, and price is the perfect EFP camera. I deal with a lot of guys in the EFP market that really have to agonize over the camera decision - not that they couldn't afford whatever it takes, but it is a little hard to justify the $50-100K for the Varicam/Cinealta options (you feel a little bit gouged) yet the HVX500 and XDCAM types definitely feel stripped down.Then you factor in the proprietary media issues of P2 and Bluray, tape, etc. and you feel like you are getting abused again. All of them feel like they have one foot in the technological grave the day you buy them.

Then along comes RED - not cheap but a manageable price point. Multiple computer industry standard media options. 4K resolution which is as future proofed as you are likely to get. My only regret in the entire RED experience is that I only ordered one.

Future proofing is key for me personally, and the remark about one foot in the grave is exactly how I feel about all of the other "HD" formats out there. Now I just need someone to make a damn 2/3" lens that is meant for a single sensor.

Sorry to go so far off topic,

In getting back closer to the original thrust of this thread. I still very strongly support two slots for CF, but don't feel like a free CF slot is necessarily a major concern for me.

Tim

[David Mullen ASC]

Future proofing is key for me personally, and the remark about one foot in the grave is exactly how I feel about all of the other "HD" formats out there. Now I just need someone to make a damn 2/3" lens that is meant for a single sensor.


Not being an equipment owner, I'm not sure, but don't people buying equipment for business purposes have some sort of realistic plan (based on past experience, earnings, work, etc.) for the equipment to pay for itself within two to three years?

A 2/3" lens made for a single-sensor is called a Super-16 lens...

[I Bloom]

Related to the CF slot.

How possible is it going to be to swap out the CF extension for the RAW extension in the field. For example if you are going from high vibration shooting (i.e. car mount) to wanting to overcrank.

I imagine this scenario on a lot of rap videos.

IB

[Finner]

I don't want to get the sick feeling that I made a bad decision one or two years after I buy my camera. (That includes the purchase of a Red, so let me know if you really think I'm wrong to go with it.)

Thanks,

Tim

It seems a little to me that you are fighting tooth and nail to convince yourself that the red one is the best choice. I feel if you are a 1 man band most of the time when it comes to shooting a red would not be the best choice and even Stuart is saying the same thing. In EFP you usually have a little bit of a crew so you have help to swap ND filters and carry them with you. The way I see it crew of 2 or more most of the time and red will work, crew of 1 most of the time and red will be a bit of a burden to deal with and shooters will get much less accomplished in a day of shooting in comparison to a HD camera. You already say that you don't even want 4k and won't use it so either wait for the RED pocket 2k camera or buy a panasonic. The red pocket camera will also allow you to get the stealth shots you want and have had trouble getting with your beta cam and will have trouble getting with a RED1. I have bought power tools before where I got the biggest and most powerful thinking it would be the best and learned the right tool for the job you need to do is the most important factor. It sounds like a small HD or 2k camera is the right tool for you Timothy.

just my thoughts.

[SF Geek]

ibloom. It is not feasible to change from the CF to RAM port either in the field or at home. Red has stated that you'll have to send the camera to them to switch from any version of a solid state slot to the Raw port.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

At any rate, it seems to me that the only thing in the way of the Red One being a great ENG/EFP camera is the wait for Canon and Fuji to start making 2/3" lenses that are meant to work with a single sensor, thereby getting rid of the cost and compromises of a B4 adapter.

And as far as 4k being overkill goes, I don't think that it is for many facets of EFP and as for ENG everyone will be shooting 2k windowed... So that seems like a moot point to me.

...But if you don't already own 2/3" glass, why would you want to buy some in order to use with RED? Save your money, save your time, increase your resolution, etc.. Shoot with 35mm glass. IMO, the only reason to consider the B4 adapter and 2/3" glass for RED would be if you already have a bunch of B4 lenses at your disposal. If you're thinking of buying 2/3" B4 glass to put on RED just because this is the ENG norm and that's your targeted purpose, you're cutting yourself short. IMO, doesn't make sense.

I think you'll also find most people are going to shoot 4K with this camera because of how straight-forward the workflow is in FCP. Shooting 2K windowed is going to be less common than many figured a few months ago and the primary reason to do so will be to get full 60fps recorded as REDCODE RAW onboard. If you can live with RGB and still want the 35mm FOV, then the RGB functions should allow for 30fps to 60fps at 1080p/2K, scaled from the 4K area. ...Once all those RGB functions are enabled.

Sure, there will be other reasons to shoot 2K. I'm sure there's a bunch of people coming from 16mm workflows who already have [s]16mm glass to use. But for someone buying into RED and buying new glass to go along with it, I would really question the logic behind a 2/3" B4 approach.

[TimothyD]

Not being an equipment owner, I'm not sure, but don't people buying equipment for business purposes have some sort of realistic plan (based on past experience, earnings, work, etc.) for the equipment to pay for itself within two to three years?

I wish:) In the education field we have a lot of budgetary problems, particularly here in Michigan considering the state of the economy. Also, my DSC-637 is 12 years old, and while we could have probably replaced a while ago, but since we only needed to deliver SD, and it is a perfectly good SD camera there was no way to make a case that we needed a new camera. The same thing will be true of whatever "HD" camera I buy.


A 2/3" lens made for a single-sensor is called a Super-16 lens...

:)

I hear you... If I could get one with a zoom rocker I'd buy it...

I am still considering an S16 with the supergrip and redmotor. Just wish Red would post prices for them...


Finner,


It seems a little to me that you are fighting tooth and nail to convince yourself that the red one is the best choice.

Actually, it's not so much that I'm trying to convince myself, it is that I am trying to find the best camera available for my needs. I am very put off by the other "HD" cameras, mainly because of the lack of full raster 1920 x 1080, interlacing, color resolution, and primarily these screwy formats which I see as transitional. I feel like this is a tough time to choose a camera because of the fact that there is no "standard" that I can trust for the long term. It seems like the Red One is likely to be my safest bet...


I feel if you are a 1 man band most of the time when it comes to shooting a red would not be the best choice and even Stuart is saying the same thing. In EFP you usually have a little bit of a crew so you have help to swap ND filters and carry them with you. The way I see it crew of 2 or more most of the time and red will work, crew of 1 most of the time and red will be a bit of a burden to deal with and shooters will get much less accomplished in a day of shooting in comparison to a HD camera.

The thing is, based on the fact that I rely on no automatic functions aside from the very occasional auto white balance, the Red One should be very similar to shooting with the BetaSp camera I have now. I realize I will either need to screw on filters or use a matte box, but aside from that I don't see how it will be any different?



You already say that you don't even want 4k and won't use it so either wait for the RED pocket 2k camera or buy a panasonic. The red pocket camera will also allow you to get the stealth shots you want and have had trouble getting with your beta cam and will have trouble getting with a RED1.

Well, while I don't plan to shoot 4k much, I would like to use it to shoot campus scenics that will be suitable for archival purposes. If I do get an S16 it will be fairly simple to put on a 35mm PL mount lens and shoot scenics in 4k. (I will have to wait to get a 35mm PL mount lens, but I can make a case that it is a worthwhile investment in terms of archival video)

Anyway, I'm not completely solid on the choice of the Red One, but I've been closely following this forum for months now and asking any questions I can think of. After explaining exactly what my needs are to Gibby, he assured me that this camera is a good choice for my very specific and wide-ranging needs.

The bottom line is this: I don't feel like the competition is very flexible in terms of modularity and recording formats. I also think that "sort of" HD is not good enough for archival video, and has many other problems associated with it. Long gop being a key problem, but there are others. This decision is without a doubt the most difficult technical choice I have ever had to make. I just want to make sure I'm making the right one, I suppose I will only know that in hindsight down the road. But right now the other cameras that are out there seem full of compromises to me, so I can't really feel confident in choosing one.

If I had to choose today, I'd probably be forced to go with the HPX-500, because:

1. It is not long gop.

2. It is 2/3" (XDCAM is 1/2")

3. It is a shoulder mounted camera (I don't like handycams, except for shooting home movies)

The drawbacks however, are:

1. It is not true full raster 1920 x 1080

2. It does not shoot 1080p60 (I don't want interlaced video, as only a small portion of what I shoot is for broadcast, much is for the web and interlacing is nothing but a pain in the ass. Yes, I know that HD is overkill for the web, but I also have to shoot commercials and scenics.)

3. P2 cards are an annoying proprietary rip-off. Same with XDCAM's "professional disc" format.

Well, there it is. Do you still think I should get an AG-HPX500? If so, why? I'm still in heavy deliberation here...

Tim

[TimothyD]

...But if you don't already own 2/3" glass, why would you want to buy some in order to use with RED? Save your money, save your time, increase your resolution, etc.. Shoot with 35mm glass. IMO, the only reason to consider the B4 adapter and 2/3" glass for RED would be if you already have a bunch of B4 lenses at your disposal. If you're thinking of buying 2/3" B4 glass to put on RED just because this is the ENG norm and that's your targeted purpose, you're cutting yourself short. IMO, doesn't make sense.

I think you'll also find most people are going to shoot 4K with this camera because of how straight-forward the workflow is in FCP. Shooting 2K windowed is going to be less common than many figured a few months ago and the primary reason to do so will be to get full 60fps recorded as REDCODE RAW onboard. If you can live with RGB and still want the 35mm FOV, then the RGB functions should allow for 30fps to 60fps at 1080p/2K, scaled from the 4K area. ...Once all those RGB functions are enabled.

Sure, there will be other reasons to shoot 2K. I'm sure there's a bunch of people coming from 16mm workflows who already have [s]16mm glass to use. But for someone buying into RED and buying new glass to go along with it, I would really question the logic behind a 2/3" B4 approach.

I agree with much of what you said Jeff. The reason I would choose 2k over 4k is the DOF. I run and gun all the time and don't need to deal with finicky focus. S16 is seeming like a better idea than 2/3", but the zoom is a bit more complex, fragile, and IMO a pain in the ass in comparison to a built in zoom rocker on a 2/3" lens.

What about using filters to get the DOF I'm used to with 35mm glass? Would that work, and could I get a zoom for under ten grand that is at least 10x?

Peace,

Tim

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I agree with much of what you said Jeff. The reason I would choose 2k over 4k is the DOF. I run and gun all the time and don't need to deal with finicky focus. S16 is seeming like a better idea than 2/3", but the zoom is a bit more complex, fragile, and IMO a pain in the ass in comparison to a built in zoom rocker on a 2/3" lens.

That's understandable... In your situation, I think I would still seriously consider s16 or even sticking with 35mm still glass. I know you don't get the handy zoom control right on the lens, but there are options coming like the RED motor and wireless gear from ViewFactor. 35mm DOF can be in issue, depending on the lenses and subject and lighting and so on...


What about using filters to get the DOF I'm used to with 35mm glass? Would that work, and could I get a zoom for under ten grand that is at least 10x?

Less than $10K for a 10X or better zoom? Hmmm... Could always try ebay! Hehe. Not a problem using Nikon or Canon still glass. Most of the better Canon and Fujinon broadcast lenses are way over the $10K price tag anyway, so I'm not sure what you're comparing with.

Personally, if I had to do any ENG type work with my RED (and it may happen, who knows). I'd probably go with the 18-50mm short zoom and shoot 4K. I can do a 5X zoom in post and still have superior detail to any HDV or XDCAM system. But the flaw in that logic is the whole ENG style workflow needing a fast turn-around. May not have time to push in on something in post and render it out. Perhaps the camera can shift modes on the fly and go to 2K cropped shooting quickly for the equivalent of a 4X digital zoom right on camera.

I understand why you're looking at RED and how your budget and timing are huge factors. I don't want to steer you away from RED as you're trying to future-proof this camera purchase for the next 10 years or so. But I would hate to see you buy the "wrong" camera just because it has a lot more capability and underlying potential than something else that may fit your needs better. Like I said, I'm not trying to turn you away from RED. It may not be the right camera for you, but I'd also hate to see you buy something like an HPX500. It's little more than an upgraded HVX200 with interchangeable lens options and it will cost you just as much as a RED setup. Perhaps the thing to do is for you to rent or demo RED and see if it will fit your needs before you actually buy.

[TimothyD]

Thanks Jeff,

Good ideas. I hadn't thought about the possibility of going 2k for a "digital zoom". I had just looked at the fact that the 18-50 is a 2.8x zoom and figured that since my 16x is not enough sometimes, it probably wouldn't cut the mustard.

As far as the HPX500 goes, it really seems like it is probably the best camera out there in this price range. I would imagine it has to be better than a 1/2" XDCAM, or am I wrong on that one?

I wish I could rent before I buy, but this is a university purchase, so no such luck:(

The only other camera I have been seriously considering is the new XDCAM EX, and that probably won't be ready to ship by the time I have to place my order (July 1st). In fact, I have to get the info to the guy in purchasing soon, and once I do I'll be stuck with whatever I choose.

The one big benefit to getting the 18-50 zoom is that it would leave me a ton of money for the supergrip and redmotor, problem is, they have to post prices for them or I can't order them either...

This is just a super difficult situation...

Thanks for the info,

Tim