Spec change...

[Jannard]

As we have said countless times, "specs can and will change". I have made the decision to make the body more "tank-like". It will be much more stout and bulletproof. The consequence is that it has gained a pound or so. We are not likely to meet our original goal of under 7 pounds. Somewhere around 8 lbs. is more accurate. I am sure that it is worth it. We'll publish a final weight in a few weeks after we make sure there are no more changes.

We promised to keep you posted... just so you know.

Jim

[Alex Boothby]

Rugged and dependable beats sleek and elegant, IMHO. I'm actually happy to hear this.

[Emanuel A.]

We know you're trying to get the baby as lightweight as you can. So far so good. One pound won't be a big deal but thanks anyway for your care. Our back is in your hands and in good hands.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I like tanks. :) Tough is good, I want the RED One to handle a beating! Not that I'm going to intentionally treat it poorly. :)

[wshultz]

Good call.

[Mark Thorpe]

I'll just have to take 1lb off of my weight belt I guess. I've only got 8 more lb's to play with Jim so take it easy huh?

[Roberto B]

well.. tiffen's flyer away.. i guess.. no more.. where can we find a steadi now?

[Poi Boy]

"tank like" yet still elegant...not unlike myself. I trust it still goes to 11.
Aloha
-A

[Shawn Nelson]

Hey Jim, thanks for the update, I appreciate it. I definitely want the most expensive thing I've ever purchased (except my house) to be as rugged as possible. I'm already having nightmeres about dropping Red...

[Jannard]

Every day we find ways to improve the project. We are looking at every detail possible to finish up the best we can. There are a million things to do and consider. If we get most of the first thousand right, we'll have a great foundation for the future.

Jim

[Jason Francois]

I'm buff, I can take it. OK, I'm a bit out of shape, but I can still take it.

Thanks for the update. I love this place.

[Brook Willard]

So now I'll be able to mount that 300mm without a lens support? ;)

Kidding. A pound here, a pound there... a stronger camera is much more important to all of us. In camera speak, 8lbs is still ridiculously light. Thanks for keeping us posted, really.

[Jason Francois]

8 lbs? I'm gonna have to strap 3 of them together just so I can feel right at home.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'll just have to take 1lb off of my weight belt I guess. I've only got 8 more lb's to play with Jim so take it easy huh?

eat more Twinkies -- fat floats.

[Owen]

That just means you get more RED for your money!

[Finner]

I'll just have to take 1lb off of my weight belt I guess. I've only got 8 more lb's to play with Jim so take it easy huh?

Can't you just add neoprene or some other floatation to the housing to make it neutrally boyant?

[Thom Steinhoff]

That just means you get more RED for your money!

Or "We've been working very hard and managed to reduce the cost per pound..."

[Alexander Nikishin]

Thank you Jim! The meaner and more "stout-esque" the better in my opinion.

By saying more tank-like, are you referring to a more square body type? If so, I would be in agreeance with that look!

[Gordon Prince]

In camera speak, 8lbs is still ridiculously light.

The camera is not only the body.

[Brook Willard]

The camera is not only the body.
Arri's 235 is about 8lbs unloaded. Add the EVF to the RED and it'll be shy of loaded 235 territory... and certainly shy of the Arricam Lite. Lenses are lenses.

[Gordon Prince]

Understood. But what actually counts is the full pack, including lenses...

[Brook Willard]

Of course. But as I mentioned, lenses are lenses. A Master Prime on an Arri will weigh just as much on the RED. So will rods, follow focus, mattebox, etc. With all else equal, 8lbs is very very light.

[Don King]

But for those who are coming without experience in any way other than as the 1/3" world, it'll count. Maybe just not now, on the paper.

[Gordon Prince]

Different perspectives.

[Roberto B]

But for those who are coming without experience in any way other than as the 1/3" world, it'll count. Maybe just not now, on the paper.

a great majority..

[Finner]

Understood. But what actually counts is the full pack, including lenses...

Sure but you throw a mag on the camera and a film cam will weigh more. Especially when you consider how light flash memory will be and it will hold much longer footage then a 1000 foot mag.

If you want a top end camera you have to take weight. If weight is that big an issue shoot HVX. Because other then the aaton minima I dont know of a single 35mm camera that is smaller or lighter then the red. The kick in the head was when I used the minima I could only get 200 foot mags (just over 2 minutes). Maybe they have bigger mags for it now?

[Emanuel A.]

Well, I left the HVX option for the RED ONE (both RED reservations), Häak the same thing and so on...

[Alexander Nikishin]

If you're worried about Red weighing 8 lbs. then you need to hit the gym boys. :D

In Arnold's words, "Don't be such a girly man!".

[Jared VanLeuven]

Just more stability in the wind when it's on the sticks.

[Emanuel A.]

Maybe he is a she...

EDIT -- There is a she among us. Her name is Kristin. As well, many others. Silent.

[Finner]

Maybe he is a she...

EDIT -- There is a she among us. Her name is Kristin. As well, many others. Silent.

What girls?

Don't they know film-work is an all "BOYS CLUB".




Oh man I'm going to eat shit for that one.

[Alexander Nikishin]

Well then he or she needs to go to the gym. :)

[Don Woods]

I love it. Make it big bad and can stand a hurricane. Keep it up jim I love the looks of the camera and I want it to look like something different not like something everyone else has.. And I like it beacuse it will fit on bigger tripod heads eaiser.

[Emanuel A.]

Sorry guys but I prefer the girls indeed!

[Jochen Schmidt-Hambrock]

The consequence is that it has gained a pound or so.
Jim

Gained a pound or two (about 4 actually) over the holiday season myself.
Already feel connected to the Red somehow....

[Andrew Benz]

Besides the obvious gain in ruggedness and reliability, will this redesigned RED further aid in the cameras ability to dissipate heat?

[Mark B.]

Is this design change in response to my suggestion that the control knobs be inset into the body? I'd feel special if it was.

[Mark Thorpe]

Can't you just add neoprene or some other floatation to the housing to make it neutrally boyant?

Yep, just like these tubes for the Gates Z1 Housing. Always better to make the person heavier than the cam for obvious reasons.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/55_1169194988.jpg

[Charles Perkins]

thanks for the update. it feels so strange to be able to view the development in such detail.

[Jason Francois]

thanks for the update. it feels so strange to be able to view the development in such detail.

Wonderfully strange. The way RED is handling this is going to spoil most of us for other product development cycles.

I think I'll call Steve Jobs next and see about us getting in on the iphone development. :)

[Jim Arthurs]

My 35mm Wall (Mitchell competitor around WW2, an ENG camera of the day, so to speak) has these instructions in the original Signal Corps manual for destroying it in case the enemy was approaching...

1.) Remove movement.

2.) Insert gernade.

3.) Close door and run.

Glad to see RED will be a solid camera.

[Clayton Harper]

8lbs.....

Anyone wanna buy a recently serviced Steadicam Flyer?

[shaftbond]

i'm all for the RED looking different. it is different, might as well look it.

one quick question though: did you literally mean bulletproof? not that i plan on shooting my RED (or getting shot at for that matter), but talk about durability...

[Emanuel A.]

thanks for the update. it feels so strange to be able to view the development in such detail.Indeed. And I agree with insanityfw, as well. My bet is: this CARE with us coming from the part of Jim, made my decision, my confidence in him as my provider. That's why I'm relaxed on the future hassles. I have my own belief Jim feels what we need.

Of course, there are distinctive needs over here. If for some the weight is not a problem, for others it is. Handheld work, small crews, etc etc etc. My safety, our safety (for those who need it!) -- Jim is there, taking care on and in our own behalf.

Paying attention to the detailed one pound, this proves it. It says a lot of what we can expect as RED customers and deserves applause.

[Gordon Prince]

Agreed. Chiefly the handheld concern.

[Mike Devlin]

I am not sure I understand the handheld concern at 8 lbs. 2/3" ENG cameras (XDCAM, HDCAM, etc) are used 8-20 hours a day handheld and they all weigh more than 8 lbs for the body. The key is an ergonomic design.

[Gordon Prince]

I am not sure I understand the handheld concern at 8 lbs. 2/3" ENG cameras (XDCAM, HDCAM, etc) are used 8-20 hours a day handheld and they all weigh more than 8 lbs for the body.

But not the 1/3" small and light cameras.


The key is an ergonomic design.

On this key, I second that quote.

[Don King]

I'm afraid there will be a lot of 1/3" owners behind this new camera.

[Brook Willard]

Users that are used to 1/3" cameras may consider trying to get their hands on a 35mm camera before the RED ONE ships. Even if all they do is swing by a rental house and look through a camera for a few minutes, actually seeing "high end" equipment and looking through the viewfinder can be invaluable. Maybe try and get a few people together to fund a short film test. At the very least... spend a lot of time on wikipedia. This may be a subject for another thread...

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Yep.

I'm a 1/3" guy here... I know I'm not alone. But I'm in a position where the 1/3" cameras just don't offer what I need and I find myself renting 2/3" (mostly Varicam) to do a lot of projects. Rental fees are eating me up and it makes more sense for me to own a Varicam or Sony XDCAM or something in the $35K range. That means *USED* Varicam or an XDCAM with one, maybe two decent lenses. RED is offering me a whole lot more camera for what appears to be less money (I know, subject to change at any time).

I personally know a couple other reservation (not all on this forum) that are coming over from 1/3" cameras (XL1/2/H1, HVX, JVC HD10/100, etc..). Financially it makes sense. Considering capabilities/features it's mind-blowing.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I guess I should add that I have used 16mm film equipment before (although several years ago). I realize there will be a learning curve, but that goes with learning any new hobby or trade. I'm ready and will be signing up shortly.

[Gordon Prince]

To be a 1/3" guy doesn't mean not to be a film guy at all. All my education was made there but I prefer the video versatility. I and many others. That's there where we all can find the Red market. Who prefers the small handheld light easy form, instead the typical film stlyle shooting.

Doesn't mean we wouldn't handle with this. Only we just don't want to.

[Brook Willard]

Doesn't mean we wouldn't handle with this. Only we just don't want to.

Of course. My point was mostly regarding DOF characteristics.

[Don King]

...coming over from 1/3" cameras (XL1/2/H1, HVX, JVC HD10/100, etc..). Financially it makes sense. Considering capabilities/features it's mind-blowing.
There's the answer.

[Mark B.]

How large a helium balloon would I have to tie to the camera to make it seem to weight nothing? Would a weather balloon do the job?

Yeah, I'm a little lazy, but at least I'm inventive.

[MarkJLyon]

Because other then the aaton minima I dont know of a single 35mm camera that is smaller or lighter then the red. The kick in the head was when I used the minima I could only get 200 foot mags (just over 2 minutes). Maybe they have bigger mags for it now?

The Aaton A-minima is super 16 format, and a great camera. A 200' mag gets you a bit over five minutes at 24fps. It will forever be limited to 200' mags, as the design is intrinsic to the camera, and it uses special flexible-flange loads from kodak.

In small/light 35mm, check out the new Aaton Penelope, as well as the Moviecam compact.

Cheers--

Mark Lyon

[Roberto B]

How large a helium balloon would I have to tie to the camera to make it seem to weight nothing? Would a weather balloon do the job?

Yeah, I'm a little lazy, but at least I'm inventive.

eheheh.. a helium balloon cam would be a great invention.. maybe you should look for a place among the red team.. if jim will find a lazy job there for your skills.. :confused:

[Stephen Gentle]

eheheh.. a helium balloon cam would be a great invention.. maybe you should look for a place among the red team.. if jim will find a lazy job there for your skills..

There's a rig like that in a book I have called "Killer Camera Rigs you can build"

You can check it out here (http://www.dvcamerarigs.com/)

-Stephen

[Zk2007]

This is great news. I've always thought RED should go for a more film camera form factor, meaning it shouldn’t be as tall as it is now and much wider. The lens mount should be set lower on the body as well. Blocky rather than long.

[Red Oz]

This spec change is fine by me. And in all honesty, for the features offered in this camera and at this pricing, the Red Team can go ahead and change specs to their heart's content if it means a better camera overall. I'll adjust.

Because seriously, this isn't a 1/3" camera afterall. Although it may be true that many 1/3" camera users will upgrade to Red, weight is not the only issue they have to account for anyway. Raw workflow, different lenses if you're used to fixed lenses - as most 1/3" cameras are fixed - manual focusing, editing requirements, etc.

And just for comparison, the Dalsa Origin, another 4K camera (4096x2048) weighs 35lbs. The Canon XLH1, with far less features, weighs 8.3lbs fully loaded according to Canon's website (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelTechSpecsAct&fcategoryid=175&modelid=12152). We've used the XLH1, and with extra accessories, it's definitely more than 8.3lbs.

In the end, I too agree that ergonomics will be the deciding factor on how this weight spec change will affect us. As always, keep up the great work.

[Jeff Deveraux]

As we have said countless times, "specs can and will change". I have made the decision to make the body more "tank-like". It will be much more stout and bulletproof. The consequence is that it has gained a pound or so. We are not likely to meet our original goal of under 7 pounds. Somewhere around 8 lbs. is more accurate. I am sure that it is worth it. We'll publish a final weight in a few weeks after we make sure there are no more changes.

We promised to keep you posted... just so you know.

Jim

Just as long as it's not as big as a Dalsa. Now that's a tank:D

[Gordon Prince]

The Canon XLH1, with far less features, weighs 8.3lbs fully loaded according to Canon's website (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelTechSpecsAct&fcategoryid=175&modelid=12152). We've used the XLH1, and with extra accessories, it's definitely more than 8.3lbs.

This comparision isn't fair. Are you counting the Red camera full loaded? Nope.

[Roberto B]

yeah.. apples with oranges.. dalsa.. xlh1.. you're there.. :D


And just for comparison, the Dalsa Origin, another 4K camera (4096x2048) weighs 35lbs. The Canon XLH1..

[Red Oz]

This comparision isn't fair. Are you counting the Red camera full loaded? Nope.

No it isn't because the Red is not an HDV camera, does not record to MiniDV, and a whole host of other reasons, reasons for which we were attracted to Red in the first place.

I know what you're saying: ideally, perhaps, it would be better if the camera was lighter, and maybe one day soon technology will advance such that the features will not be bound by size requirements. It will move in this direction as it has in the IT world (Intel recently successfully tested an 80-core processor of a size similar to today's Dual Core for example, and at 100W too).

But bottom line is that for the feature set, and if delivered as we expect, it will be pretty incredible for its size. In other words, whatever perceived disadvantages, there are more advantages to Red so far.

Additionally, on another note, consider the advantages of some extra weight (provided ergonimics are in place): it keeps the camera steady. One reason home movies look like home movies is because of how light consumer cameras are and the predisposition of every person who has one to swing it around helter skelter. Vacation videos and birthdays give us nausea for a reason. Both Robert Rodriguez and Scott Billups (http://www.pixelmonger.com/home.html), for example, have brought this point up before.

Question: Is an extra pound or two reason enough to abandon Red?

[Red Oz]

yeah.. apples with oranges.. dalsa.. xlh1.. you're there.. :D

My point exactly: can we even compare Red to 1/3" cameras anymore? No, we shouldn't except by way of how we are going to upgrade, adjust, and account for the new workflow Red will provide us.

I brought up the Dalsa because it is a 4K camera. I brought up the XLH to also bring up a point that there are 8lb 1/3" cameras afterall.

[Roberto B]

My point exactly: can we even compare Red to 1/3" cameras anymore?

yes.. size

[ericyoung]

eheheh.. a helium balloon cam would be a great invention.. maybe you should look for a place among the red team.. if jim will find a lazy job there for your skills.. :confused:

Just hang tightly onto it when you take accessories off or change batteries, or you could see your new RED floating off into the sky!! :D

[Red Oz]

yes.. size

And therien lies the challenge of an open discussion during product development I guess. Can't please everyone.

I still think Red's size is just fine, even compared to 1/3" cameras ;)

[Don King]

Because seriously, this isn't a 1/3" camera afterall. Although it may be true that many 1/3" camera users will upgrade to Red, weight is not the only issue they have to account for anyway.

Maybe our first worry? Most of us don't have a crew behind.

[Roberto B]

And therien lies the challenge of an open discussion during product development I guess. Can't please everyone.

I still think Red's size is just fine, even compared to 1/3" cameras ;)

exactly.. there's no complaints here.. just points..

size is fair.. lightweight too..

[Appleton]

just wondering, using the RED zoom on the flyer ? if it's approx. 8 pounds; you'd need more than the steadi-flyer anyway. (15 pounds max. weight) - add a mattebox, LCD, filters, follow focus etc... 1 pound added to the cam is inconsequential, IMO... personally i wouldn't buy a $15K steadi cam and not be able to use zooms on it. the archer is a better choice...

making a cam like a tank -> rugged, stands up to environmental factors is much more important than a pound or two. they get one shot at a first impression.

[Blair S. Paulsen]

*Speculation alert*

I can't help but wonder if there was an "incident" while testing the prototypes that led them to conclude it needed a stronger casing? :D

[Appleton]

*Speculation alert*

I can't help but wonder if there was an "incident" while testing the prototypes that led them to conclude it needed a stronger casing? :Dvery much doubt it.

they've got a lot of field testing and benchmarks to meet.

good thing they're out to make the 'best" cam for the cake they can... nothing goes from the drawboard to production without changes. this seems like a case of pride in craftsman ship more than anything else...

[Roberto B]

just wondering, using the RED zoom on the flyer ? if it's approx. 8 pounds; you'd need more than the steadi-flyer anyway. (15 pounds max. weight) - add a mattebox, LCD, filters, follow focus etc...

it'll be difficult to go w/ Flyer.. changing plans..

[Jim Exton]

*Speculation alert*

I can't help but wonder if there was an "incident" while testing the prototypes that led them to conclude it needed a stronger casing? :D

My baseless speculation was that they need either more or an alternative cooling system which neccesitated enlarging the body.

[Chris Gearhart]

They have heard the masses. They're putting a larger Wedge in.