RED size- same as HVX200?

[Bokes]

Will a basic RED system- Camera, lens, rails, battery, etc- be similar in size to the same set-up on a HVX200?
I have only seen photos of the camera alone. I suppose I would have a better sense of it's size if there is a photo of the RED being handheld.
Thanks

[CVB]

Its been discussed a number of times.. the search tool is your friend ;)
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=43036&postcount=1
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=43054&postcount=11
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=43055&postcount=12

[Brook Willard]

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/5_1185476821.jpg
http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/5_1185476852.jpg

As for how big it is with the accessories...

[Keep in mind that these are the old accessories... the new ones are smaller. This is also an older body design. Furthermore, the images are only representative of one possible setup using pretty much every accessory built by NAB.]

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/5_1185477037.jpg
http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/5_1185477138.jpg

This (http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/5_1184997563.jpg) is more recent.

The exact dimensions are on RED's site and in the FAQ [link in my signature].

So yeah, it's bigger than an HVX but smaller than something like a D-20 or Varicam or HVX w/adapter.

[Antoine Baumann]

Well when you add rails, battery, RED-DRIVE, production pack, matte box, LCD, EVF, it gets fairly big. When I saw it (with all options) at NAB it was really bigger than the standard set up of an HVX200. But then if you are used to add to your HVX a mini35 and some primes lens, matte box, then it is also "an other beast".

So it would depends on what accessories you put on, but yes the body only plus a primes is not so big, but will you use it like that most of the time?

antoine.

[Bokes]

Great thanks Brook.
(I did search- but it didn't bring up those photos)

[David Battistella]

Brook,

I have to say that those images solve so many of my "minds eye" images of the RED compared to the images onteh site alone.

When you see the RED along side some common cameras it puts things into perspective.


Thank YOU!



David

[Patrick]

The top photos surprised me, I thought the F900 was bigger than that.

[John Brian]

I note the red is shown with no battery, no viewfinder, no tape/hard drive recording unit to make it a working unit. Doesn't the Red need a cage to attache the other needed objects already shown on the other cameras in the shot? The other two cameras can be picked up as shown and shoot/record material. The Red unit shown can not.

I would prefer to see apples compared to apples instead of two complete apples to a partial apple.

Is it possible to view a picture with all the cameras together with all the same equipment? Even just batteries and viewfinders would help in the decision making process.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

John,

The cage is not needed to attach accessories, there are mount points directly on-camera. Pieces of the cage are modular so you can use any combination , even just a base or top plate.

This thread -> http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3209 shows the RED being used in a pretty minimal configuration with top plate and handle, battery, CF, LCD and 18-50 lens.

RED should be compared with other cinema cameras -- film or digital cinema like the D-20, etc.. A direct comparison of a shooting-capable RED to something like the F900 isn't exactly apples to apples either. IMO, a stock HVX isn't great to shoot with and shouldn't be considered that way. The onboard LCD is borderline unusable for any serious work to start with and if being compared to RED should be considered with a 35mm adapter and not just the stock lens. As an absolute minimum config, the RED could shoot with just a lens, CF media slot and battery attached.

The handheld RED configuration shown in the above link is still smaller and lighter than that F900.