Red = Canon Digital SLR CMOS Chip?

[Jason Ing]

I was thinking of getting a Canon digital SLR (xti, 5d, mark) just to shoot and do some digital post to get a feel for what is possible.

Red uses the CMOS chip, right?

My guess is that Red is using a better cmos chip then the ones that are in the canon digital slrs, right? Or are they the same, but just bigger?

So, what are the similarities/differences between a canon digital slr and Red (in regards to the cmos chip and a photography/photoshop/fusion/post processing point of view)?

I hope this post makes sense. I just want to play around with "equivalent" images for now until I get my red (I use photoshop and digital fusion).

thanks.

[Evin Grant]

The Mysterium is a proprietary chip available only in the Red one. It's hard to say exactly how it compares to a CMOS from other manufacturers but it certainly out performs them for speed. My guess is it will out perform others chips for dynamic range, noise and detail too, but it's hard to say without one in my hands.

[Brook Willard]

When the camera ships it'll be easier to compare the sensor's performance to that of still cameras on the market, but as Evin said... the Mysterium sensor is a proprietary sensor that you won't find in any camera but the RED ONE, period.

[Jason Ing]

Red should make a Red SLR Camera!!! :)

[E.J. Sadler]

My guess is that Red is using a better cmos chip then the ones that are in the canon digital slrs, right?

The Canon CMOS chip in the 1D/1Ds mkIII would be an insane chip to have. Unfortunately, RED is unlikely to ever get close to Canon's CMOS chip. As Canon unifies thier consumer/pro still/motion platforms on CMOS chips, Canon's R&D budget will be nearly impossible to compete with, and equally impossible to have such an enormous base of consumer products upon which to recover R&D costs.

[Brook Willard]

No way to know until it ships, man... I think we'll all be in for an interesting surprise at the end of the month.

[E.J. Sadler]

No way to know until it ships, man... I think we'll all be in for an interesting surprise at the end of the month.

Well unless there was some quantum leap from the chip used to capture the stills from "Crossing the Line", the Mysterium is almost as good as Canon's last generation chip, but it's nowhere close to Canon's current CMOS. Not that it matters though. The footage from the RED is better than anything out there and more than enough to work with, so nobody's going to be complaining.

[Tonaci Tran]

Unfortunately, RED is unlikely to ever get close to Canon's CMOS chip.

But can their sensor do 60fps?

[Graeme Nattress]

But can their sensor do 60fps?

That's the trick though, isn't it....

"nearly impossible to compete with...." - I remember the Titanic was unsinkable.

Graeme

[Joe Carney]

Well unless there was some quantum leap from the chip used to capture the stills from "Crossing the Line", the Mysterium is almost as good as Canon's last generation chip, but it's nowhere close to Canon's current CMOS. Not that it matters though. The footage from the RED is better than anything out there and more than enough to work with, so nobody's going to be complaining.

Apparently someone forgot to tell Canon how superior their cmos tech was when they shipped the HV20. hehehe.

[E.J. Sadler]

But can their sensor do 60fps?

They're certainly pounding out great stuff from the $1K tiny 1/3", generation old CMOS, HV20 running 1080p/24fps. And, I'm betting that they aren't oblivious to the excitement RED has gathered, and all the interest in DOF adapters.

Canon always tests new technology with consumer low-end roll outs, and I won't be at all surprised to see a full frame professional 1080p camera with an EF mount from Canon.




"nearly impossible to compete with...." - I remember the Titanic was unsinkable.

Graeme

I'm not trying to dump on you or Red in anyway, and I'd be shooting with a RED weekly if I had one, but Canon is going to have more CMOS chips in just the demo cameras in Best Buy and Walmart this year than RED is going to sell in three years. The market size for the RED One is a statistical anomaly compared to the size of Canon's CMOS consumer/professional product market.

There's a reason that factory teams in any competition tend to be at the top of the heap, and it's all about the size of the R&D budget.

I'm just hoping you become one of the Factory teams.

[E.J. Sadler]

Apparently someone forgot to tell Canon how superior their cmos tech was when they shipped the HV20. hehehe.

Non HDV compressed footage from this chip is pretty amazing for a generation old 1/3" chip in a consumer camera.

[Joe Carney]

Non HDV compressed footage from this chip is pretty amazing for a generation old 1/3" chip in a consumer camera.

A bad case of rolling shutter in progressive mode sort of ruins the whole game (clearly visible when panning the camera, even slowly).1080i seems to work fine though.

[albert rudnicki]

They're certainly pounding out great stuff from the $1K tiny 1/3", generation old CMOS, HV20 running 1080p/24fps. And, I'm betting that they aren't oblivious to the excitement RED has gathered, and all the interest in DOF adapters.

Canon always tests new technology with consumer low-end roll outs, and I won't be at all surprised to see a full frame professional 1080p camera with an EF mount from Canon.




I'm not trying to dump on you or Red in anyway, and I'd be shooting with a RED weekly if I had one, but Canon is going to have more CMOS chips in just the demo cameras in Best Buy and Walmart this year than RED is going to sell in three years. The market size for the RED One is a statistical anomaly compared to the size of Canon's CMOS consumer/professional product market.

There's a reason that factory teams in any competition tend to be at the top of the heap, and it's all about the size of the R&D budget.

I'm just hoping you become one of the Factory teams.

Canon supplies a lot of high-end lenses for ENG cameras. This would be a complete change in there tactics.
Sony&The Gang would not like IT :angry03:


Albert

[Joe Carney]

Sadler, I'm curious as to what you do for a living. You sound more like a statistician or an accountant instead of a film maker or vido pro. I'm not trying to be provacative either.

You're comparing two completely different worlds, with different rules, different goals and different econmics.

Also, based on threads both here and other places, once cameras like the Red and Dalsa become more common place, 1080p will no longer be an acceptable aquisition format for making features. It's barely tolerated today.

[E.J. Sadler]

Canon supplies a lot of high-end lenses for ENG cameras. This would be a complete change in there tactics.
Sony&The Gang would not like IT :angry03:
Albert

The ENG lenses are expensive because of the difficulty in designing glass for three plane image capture, and the rather small market size. CMOS chips change this rather dramatically. The single image plane of a CMOS camera would let Canon leverage existing EF lenses, some of which are just about as good as glass gets. Any new glass could be marketed across the pro and consumer video market, as well as the pro/consumer still market. An ENG wide zoom that sells for $25k on a 2/3" 3 chip camera, could easily wind up selling for $2K for a single chip CMOS camera.

With the low light performance of CMOS, the power savings of one CMOS over three CCDs, and what comparatively looks like lenses for free, Canon could take this opportunity to move into ENG/Docu/High end production arena. And, yeah, I'm betting the gang wouldn't be so happy about that.

[E.J. Sadler]

Sadler, I'm curious as to what you do for a living. You sound more like a statistician or an accountant instead of a film maker or vido pro. I'm not trying to be provacative either.

I'm just a lowly photographer eagerly awaiting the day when I can capture motion footage with the same quality I get from our 1D mkII with prime lenses from a camera that doesn't cost $2k a day to rent.



You're comparing two completely different worlds, with different rules, different goals and different econmics.

They're different now, but I don't think they're going to stay that way. Canon is moving to a unified CMOS platform for all of their products. From the littlest pocket digital still cameras, to consumer camcorders, all the way up to the mammoth 22meg CMOS in the 1Ds. Having this broad base of products is going to allow Canon to produce better chips in larger sizes and larger quantities at lower costs. You can spend a lot more money in R&D when you're going to be selling a few million products rather than a few thousand.

The Canon L primes we use on our still cameras would cost as much as an Arri Master Prime if the R&D and manufacturing costs couldn't be recouped over the pro/consumer still market. When Canon can sell the same lenses across pro/consumer/ENG/doco/indie/cinema market as well, we'll get even better glass, even cheaper.

Cinematographers are finally going to enjoy the economies of scale photographers have been.


Also, based on threads both here and other places, once cameras like the Red and Dalsa become more common place, 1080p will no longer be an acceptable aquisition format for making features. It's barely tolerated today.

I have no argument with that at all. But there's no shortage of people who want a RED who would be completely satisfied for a very long time with 35mm DOF, 1080p and a clean CMOS image. I'm betting that if you took a poll and asked how many people wanted a 1080p RED today rather than a 4K RED in seven months, an awful lot of hands would go up, including mine.

[WILLIAM SPENCE]

I don't know a lot about the internal workings of Canon, and know nothing at all about their R&D department... so I guess that really qualifies me to say nothing at all. :) But I do remember a post by Jarred that stated:

"Canon makes some bad ass cameras ( my new mark III is a testament to that ) but there real strength isn't in sensor design but in DSP"

I have often wondered if Canon actually makes their own CMOS chips, or if they only make glass and develop signal processing, and put cameras together based on chips fabricated outside of Canon. Does anyone know if Canon makes their own CMOS chips?

[pat@hpnc.com]

TOKYO (Reuters) - Canon Inc. (7751.T: Quote, Profile, Research) will invest about 55 billion yen ($451 million) to build a new factory in Japan to double its production capacity of image sensors used in digital cameras.

A spokesman for the world's largest digital camera maker said it broke ground in May on a new building on an existing site in Kanagawa Prefecture near Tokyo and expected it to start operations in July 2008.

The factory will make complementary metal oxide semiconductors (CMOS), a component used in digital cameras and video cameras to convert light into an electric signal.

The new plant will have roughly the same annual production capacity as another factory in Kanagawa that can churn out 3 million CMOS chips a year, the spokesman said.

The CMOS chips will be used in both single lens reflex (SLR) models as well as in some compact models. Canon's compact cameras have to date used a different type of image sensor called a charge-coupled device (CCD).

Canon has procured CCDs from other suppliers such as Sony Corp. (6758.T: Quote, Profile, Research), but it has been developing CMOS sensors for compact models as part of its strategy of bringing key component production in-house to lower costs.

Canon is aiming to produce 24 million digital cameras this year, including 3 million SLRs, which are high-end models that use interchangeable lenses.

http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNewsAndPR/idUST14022720070715

[Ezana Tekeste]

From the littlest pocket digital still cameras, to consumer camcorders, all the way up to the mammoth 22meg CMOS in the 1Ds. Having this broad base of products is going to allow Canon to produce better chips in larger sizes and larger quantities at lower costs. You can spend a lot more money in R&D when you're going to be selling a few million products rather than a few thousand.

Hi E.J,

First, the Canon 1Ds Mark IIis a 16 mega pixel DSLR, not a "mammoth 22meg." Second, although a Nikon guy myself, I do admire Canon's CMOS sensor--especially its handling of noise in lowlight situations.

As for Canon passing on the cost-savings resulting from the economics of scales it enjoys over other companies such as Red in producing a full frame CMOS sensor, I can't say I see the evidence of that just yet. Even if Canon realizes a truck load savings over Red and other CMOS chip makers/buyers, I suspect Canon would probably elect to keep most of the additional profit for itself.

Of course, based on the motion picture grabs I've seen so far, if Red were to make a full sensor DSLR, the new camera would probably emerge as a serious competitor to Canon and Nikons DSLRs.

Mike

[vidalsosa]

The Canon CMOS chip in the 1D/1Ds mkIII would be an insane chip to have. Unfortunately, RED is unlikely to ever get close to Canon's CMOS chip. As Canon unifies thier consumer/pro still/motion platforms on CMOS chips, Canon's R&D budget will be nearly impossible to compete with, and equally impossible to have such an enormous base of consumer products upon which to recover R&D costs.

As someone who has reserved a Red camera and visiting this forum to learn new things about the camera that's soon to ship, I don't see the relevance of this line of argument, quite frankly. I'm learning nothing new here, especially when you make blanket statements like "Unfortunately, RED is unlikely to ever get close to Canon's CMOS chip" The Red One is a given and the Canon CMOS chip applied in 4K motion photography, unfortunately is NOT.

This is not a Canon VS Red board, its supposed to be a board where we learn as much as possible form each other about applying Red to our individual filmmaking needs.

The facts:

- Red One - Ships in 30 days or less...

- "Canon Unified CMOS range" (or whatever) - Ship date unknown

Canon already has a market niche, one that has an ardent and satisfied consumer base... but until they come out with their own 4K camera capable of even half of Red's proposed specs, then its a no brainer for me with regards to a viable choice. Red One will do for now.

[Corey Culp]

As someone who has reserved a Red camera and visiting this forum to learn new things about the camera that's soon to ship, I don't see the relevance of this line of argument, quite frankly. I'm learning nothing new here, especially when you make blanket statements like "Unfortunately, RED is unlikely to ever get close to Canon's CMOS chip" The Red One is a given and the Canon CMOS chip applied in 4K motion photography, unfortunately is NOT.

This is not a Canon VS Red board, its supposed to be a board where we learn as much as possible form each other about applying Red to our individual filmmaking needs.

The facts:

- Red One - Ships in 30 days or less...

- "Canon Unified CMOS range" (or whatever) - Ship date unknown

Canon already has a market niche, one that has an ardent and satisfied consumer base... but until they come out with their own 4K camera capable of even half of Red's proposed specs, then its a no brainer for me with regards to a viable choice. Red One will do for now.

Stop making sense! ;)

[Ramesh Jai]

"I have no argument with that at all. But there's no shortage of people who want a RED who would be completely satisfied for a very long time with 35mm DOF, 1080p and a clean CMOS image. I'm betting that if you took a poll and asked how many people wanted a 1080p RED today rather than a 4K RED in seven months, an awful lot of hands would go up, including mine."

Give me 720P with a 35mm DOF today and I will take it. 3 years from now majority of people across the world (not just the US) will still be watching SD TV. By then I would have more than recovered my investment in RED 1 and moved on to RED 3.

[Christoffer Glans]

Then again, if you're aiming at the silverscreen, 4k is a good thing.

[E.J. Sadler]

Hi E.J,

First, the Canon 1Ds Mark IIis a 16 mega pixel DSLR, not a "mammoth 22meg." Second, although a Nikon guy myself, I do admire Canon's CMOS sensor--especially its handling of noise in lowlight situations.
Mike

The 1Ds mkII's chip will be 22, based on the current 1d mkIII chip.

I've got some ISO 6400 images washed through some post noise reduction that's cleaner than we used to get from 400 speed film. What I don't know is if the level of noise reduction seen in the raw 6400 images can be accomplished @24fps. If you could bring that level of light sensitivity to motion capture, even at ISO1600, people would adopt CMOS capture just for the lighting budget reduction. Hell, if you could shoot at 1.2, you could just hand out flashlights to the grips and be good to go.



As for Canon passing on the cost-savings resulting from the economics of scales it enjoys over other companies such as Red in producing a full frame CMOS sensor, I can't say I see the evidence of that just yet. Even if Canon realizes a truck load savings over Red and other CMOS chip makers/buyers, I suspect Canon would probably elect to keep most of the additional profit for itself.

They've just started to move to CMOS, so it's not here yet, but it will be. My primary point was that with all of their products using CMOS, Canon's CMOS R&D budget will be difficult to complete with to say the least.

However, everybody will be able to benefit when Canon can design and sell glass for their entire range of products and have a broader base of consumers help subsidize the cost.



Of course, based on the motion picture grabs I've seen so far, if Red were to make a full sensor DSLR, the new camera would probably emerge as a serious competitor to Canon and Nikons DSLRs.

Although I'm completely stoked about having RED quality motion footage, the stills from Crossing the Line just weren't nearly as good as stills from our DSLRs. Is it far better than any other motion camera out there? Yes. Is it more quality and resolution than I'll ever need from motion capture? Yes. I'm just not going to pretend the stills are as good as what we're getting from our stills.

[Stephen Williams]

Hell, if you could shoot at 1.2, you could just hand out flashlights to the grips and be good to go.



Hi,

At 500 asa you could already.

Stephen

[E.J. Sadler]

As someone who has reserved a Red camera and visiting this forum to learn new things about the camera that's soon to ship, I don't see the relevance of this line of argument, quite frankly.

My initial response was to jing who said he guessed RED is using better CMOS chips than Canon has in it's DSLRs. The ensuing posts revolved around how Canon's CMOS R&D budget was about to get much bigger, and much harder to compete against.



I'm learning nothing new here, especially when you make blanket statements like "Unfortunately, RED is unlikely to ever get close to Canon's CMOS chip" The Red One is a given and the Canon CMOS chip applied in 4K motion photography, unfortunately is NOT.

That must be why I said "Not that it matters though. The footage from the RED is better than anything out there and more than enough to work with, so nobody's going to be complaining."

I'm all about the RED and can't wait to be shooting with one. But if anyone thinks the still frames from the RED are as good or better than Canon's current generation DSLRs, they're just hittin' the kool-aid a little too hard.

[Tom Lowe]

Why are people bagging on this Sadler guy? Give him a break. Generally speaking, he's correct in what he's saying.

[Dave Cooper]

Seems some people in here don't want to hear about a company having a better CMOS chip than another company. It makes them see RED.

[Joe Carney]

Once again, apples and oranges. Stills captured from a frame of Video will never look as good as a still from a DSLR. That's an established fact.
The same applies to film based sources.
You don't want each frame of video to look perfect, you want it slightly soft so motion looks smooth from frame to frame.

I say again, comparing DSLR stills to a video frame capture is pointless. Their purposes are entirely different.

[Yannick Hagman]

Of course, based on the motion picture grabs I've seen so far, if Red were to make a full sensor DSLR, the new camera would probably emerge as a serious competitor to Canon and Nikons DSLRs.

In 4k?

E.J. Sadler got the point. The danger for RED is not Sony nor Arri, it's Canon, Hitachi, JVC and Panasonic. And Canon did a really great job so far. I wouldn't be surprised to see a bigger CMOS pretty soon from them.

[Julian Banos]

For me to see a real thread from any other company they need to achieve not only a 4K + image, but also a camera that is so flexible, in both its workflow and its structural design.
Maybe Canon or JVC will come up with something in the next years that comes close to the RED One (maybe better). But for now there is a reason why we are all reading throuh this forum. Seriously when was the last time a Canon forum attracted so much attention and feedback that was taken in consideration?

[Yannick Hagman]

www.hv20.com

[androbot2084]

I don't think you can compare the image from a 12 megapixel Canon still camera to RED because a moving image will always have more apparent resolution than a still image. For example a lot of still photographers sneered at my high definition 720p camera and called it low resolution because it cannot resolve even 1 megapixel. But in my opinion I think the 720p image quality can hold its own up to any 3 megapixel digital still image. If this analogy is correct then the motion pictures from RED should compare with images obtained form a 30 megapixel Hasselblad.

[Yannick Hagman]

30 megapixel Hasselblad

LOL. This gave me a good laugh.

[Jack Wester]

But in my opinion I think the 720p image quality can hold its own up to any 3 megapixel digital still image.
Right you are, the eye perceives several frames together and makes out more detail. Just as when you look through a fence standing still or driving in your car. You perceive more of whats behind the fence while driving. Freeze your DV footage and a single frame looks way worse than when playing. But there is still a problem with your reasoning as 22 megapixel images at a decent framerate and given reasonable motion blur will look more like 100 megapixel to the eye.

Still, in my opinion, the RedOne is the coolest thing on the market. A superior product and a company you want to do business with. A canon cmos does not a red make.

[Eddie]

Calls for speculation...

You are comparing a camera that hasn´t been released with one that isn´t announced....

Maybe its time for some new material from the red team.

[Blair S. Paulsen]

How about practicality and workflow? Unless Canon can get Graeme to write them something like RedCode what are you planning to do about the giant data set your spiffy new Canon CMOS head generates? What about the operational and ergonomic advances we've been reading about in this forum?

Even if the chip is the most critical piece it is essentially useless without the rest of the infrastructure.

RED has committed to making a camera of "Cinema" quality designed to work with industry standard lens and accessory tools that enable professional craft levels. With RedCode and Final Cut there should be a very effective post pipeline that offers a huge leap forward in the quality to cost equation over existing options (props to SI2K - Cineform due here as well).

To paraphrase Mike Curtis - the RedOne is a point of inflection in the biz.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

They're different now, but I don't think they're going to stay that way. Canon is moving to a unified CMOS platform for all of their products. Having this broad base of products is going to allow Canon to produce better chips in larger sizes and larger quantities at lower costs.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/06/21

[E.J. Sadler]

How about practicality and workflow? Unless Canon can get Graeme to write them something like RedCode what are you planning to do about the giant data set your spiffy new Canon CMOS head generates?

I'm not trivializing the amount of work this is, but it's not like Graeme is the only codec engineer in the world. But, this is part of the reason Canon will probably continue with 1080p for a while.



What about the operational and ergonomic advances we've been reading about in this forum?

Well, Canon knows a little about the EF mount, so you could obviously expect wireless FF and aperture control with no external motors. Also, it wouldn't be much of a leap for Canon to stream camera and lens meta data into the data stream like they do with their DSLRs. Canon's systems are integral in the generation of the projected first down and scrimmage lines you see during televised football so they have a little experience with camera information systems. If Canon would offer this system to a larger audience, you could have frame accurate axial POV, GPS, elevation, focal length, focal distance, aperture, shutter speed and just about everything else rolled into your data stream. That kind of CIS would make your post guys giddy.



-------------------------

Just for entertainment, I'll throw this out there. If Canon introduced a full 35mm frame(36.0mm x 24.0mm) CMOS motion camera, and decided to stick with EF lenses and forgo the use of PL mount lenses, they would have a significant physical advantage over any PL sized sensor.

Regardless of your chosen resolution, 720p, 1080p, or 4k, a 36.0mm x 24.0mm sensor just has more real estate than a 24.4mm x 13.7mm sensor. This larger chunk of sensor real estate allows you to have significantly larger sensor pixels. Bigger pixels have two significant advantages over smaller pixels. First, the larger surface area allows more physical light to fall on the pixel, which increases the sensitivity of the chip and provides better low light performance and a wider dynamic range. Secondly, larger pixels are less susceptible to quantum noise and thus provide a much cleaner image.

Sensor size is a big deal. It's why DSLRs with six meg chips outperform pocket digital cameras with ten meg chips. It's why 2/3" cameras outperform 1/3" cameras.

[Clint Johnson]

Canon will be focusing on 1080p HD CMOS with almost every effort on carving the last penny off of producing chips that turn out an image that is "acceptable" to the lowest common denominator.

A smaller portion of this will be spent on making a CMOS sensor that can capture very high quality still images.

There will be no time or money to waste on a market that won't give an ROI equal to the low end video and still, or the high end still cameras. Misappropriating R&D towards 4K cinema might be grounds for discipline if not outright firing. In the 4k digital cinema world, Canon isn't even a niche player.

I wonder if every other manufacturer of 4k digital cinema cameras on the planet combined will sell as many cameras as Red?

It is all about where you focus your spending, not how much money you spend.

[E.J. Sadler]

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/06/21

I might have pointed out that looks a lot like using bittorrent to distribute your reel, but people already seem to think I'm an anti-reddite so I'll skip that observation. Ooops, too late.

[E.J. Sadler]

Canon will be focusing on 1080p HD CMOS with almost every effort on carving the last penny off of producing chips that turn out an image that is "acceptable" to the lowest common denominator.

A smaller portion of this will be spent on making a CMOS sensor that can capture very high quality still images.


With a unified CMOS platform and EF lens mounts, it makes much more sense to wind up using the exact same sensor. Given that their current CMOS chips and glass don't cater to the LCD, I can't see why you would assume they would take this road.

[Dave Cooper]

Once again, apples and oranges. Stills captured from a frame of Video will never look as good as a still from a DSLR. That's an established fact.

I wouldn't apply this logic to RED's camera. It's basically a DSLR that can capture 24+fps. We've all see stills from the camera. What we haven't seen is them in all their RAW glory and they still look like they could have came out of a DSLR.

[Clint Johnson]

With a unified CMOS platform and EF lens mounts, it makes much more sense to wind up using the exact same sensor. Given that their current CMOS chips and glass don't cater to the LCD, I can't see why you would assume they would take this road.

With consumer products, the cost of the component rules. With professional products, the quality of the component takes greater import. Canon will spend Red's R&D budget on shaving the last dollar off the production cost of their low end cameras... and rightly so. The design criteria for the two markets are as different as apples and lugnuts.

As of 2007 Canon has no high end digital cinema cameras. That isn't to say that they won't, but the world demand for high end digital cinema cameras probably won't reach 10,000 any time soon and Red's pricing kicks the crap out of any profit that a Canon sized company would find interesting.

They are trying to get the fps up on their SLRs but there is a big gulf between a sensor that works in conjunction with a mechanical shutter to get 8 fps and a sensor designed to capture as high as 60 fps... and the financial incentive to bridge that gap isn't as high as the one to carve another dollar off production costs.

[Tonaci Tran]

They're certainly pounding out great stuff from the $1K tiny 1/3", generation old CMOS, HV20 running 1080p/24fps. And, I'm betting that they aren't oblivious to the excitement RED has gathered, and all the interest in DOF adapters.

The best analogy I can think of regarding all of your statements is this:
Imagine going into a forum for Ferrari cars and telling all of the Ferrari enthusiasts that Ferrari will never come close to selling the same amount of cars as Toyota does, nor can they ever make a car that is as efficient with gas.

Until Canon has a 4k digital cinema camera with some amazing compression like redcode raw, then it would make for a more purposeful discussion.

I think it is important to point out that RED has coming out of nowhere and so far has shown a camera that even the veteran camera producers: sony, arri, panasonic, jvc, and canon et al have yet to produce.

[E.J. Sadler]

With consumer products, the cost of the component rules. With professional products, the quality of the component takes greater import. Canon will spend Red's R&D budget on shaving the last dollar off the production cost of their low end cameras... and rightly so. The design criteria for the two markets are as different as apples and lugnuts.

You keep acting like Canon doesn't have a huge professional market for their still cameras and still/motion glass. You're also ignoring Canon's well established practice of using consumer markets to leverage better pricing in their professional products.



As of 2007 Canon has no high end digital cinema cameras. That isn't to say that they won't, but the world demand for high end digital cinema cameras probably won't reach 10,000 any time soon and Red's pricing kicks the crap out of any profit that a Canon sized company would find interesting.

I agree that the cinema camera market is small. However, I'd be willing to bet anything that RED's counting a lot on sales to people who won't need anything more than 1080p for quite some time. It's the 1080p market that will drive Canon.

I also don't buy into the thinking that Canon couldn't market a competitively priced highly profitable product. They already have all of the base components and volume manufacturing in place. Having a full size 1080p/24p CMOS in an A1/G1/H1 form factor with an EF mount and flash memory slots instead of the transport is all stuff they know how to do and have been doing, just in separate platforms. A camera like this would be instantly appealing to anybody with EF glass, anybody who bought the A1/G1/H1s, and anybody who's using a DOF adapter. Once this platform is established, throwing in a higher resolution sensor would just be a matter of time. This is exactly how the high resolution 1Ds DSLR evolved from, and was subsidized by, the 1D, and is exactly how a 1080p camera would help subsidize a 2k/4k cinema camera.

[E.J. Sadler]

The best analogy I can think of regarding all of your statements is this:
Imagine going into a forum for Ferrari cars and telling all of the Ferrari enthusiasts that Ferrari will never come close to selling the same amount of cars as Toyota does, nor can they ever make a car that is as efficient with gas.

You're also ignoring the fact that Canon has a huge professional market, and makes very high end products that are best in class. Cannon has Ferrari class glass and DSLRs.

You're also ignoring that Canon traditionally rolls out new technology in consumer class equipment first. The HV20 is a testbed for a professional level camera on it's way.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I might have pointed out that looks a lot like using bittorrent to distribute your reel, but people already seem to think I'm an anti-reddite so I'll skip that observation. Ooops, too late.

Yeah I'm just saying I've seen a lot of "cost cutting" moves by companies in the past. The last frame is the most accurate description of the results. :)

[Joe Carney]

EJ, here is a link over a dvinfo.net/conf. Scroll down to the post made by Charles Papert on this very subject. He puts it very clearly and succintly the difference between still and motion photography and the issues involved. In case you're wondering, he is a seasoned pro and worth listening too.

http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=39155&page=3

[John Godden]

Non HDV compressed footage from this chip is pretty amazing for a generation old 1/3" chip in a consumer camera.

I sold mine because it handled motion so poorly. Otherwise a nice camera.

JohnG

[Tonaci Tran]

But if anyone thinks the still frames from the RED are as good or better than Canon's current generation DSLRs, they're just hittin' the kool-aid a little too hard.

So you are saying Jim is a Kool Aid addict?

[Yannick Hagman]

The best analogy I can think of regarding all of your statements is this:
Imagine going into a forum for Ferrari cars and telling all of the Ferrari enthusiasts that Ferrari will never come close to selling the same amount of cars as Toyota does, nor can they ever make a car that is as efficient with gas.

That's a very accurate analogy. Ferraris can't be driven at full speed in almost every country. But they are instead used for shopping tours or just to show off in front of neighbors. There is more than a handful of such guys in this forum with the same intention. :)


I sold mine because it handled motion so poorly.

Ever seen fast moving shots in a hollywood picture apart from Bruckheimer high speed shots with special cameras? 24P can't handle motion. But archives a specific look. I like this look.

[mdo]

"War has a way of masking the stage with scenery crudely daubed with fearsome apparitions."

-- Carl Von Clausewitz, "On War"

The history of innovation is one in which brilliant and creative entrepreneurs ignored fearsome apparitions that, when push comes to shove, seem to be so gawd awful REAL.

Yeah, Canon, and a half a dozen other companies, could make a really killer camera. Currently that datum has the force and substance of a fearsome apparition. Not even that, actually. There are such an enormous number of variables affecting the outcome of this game, that information about Canon is pretty close to irrelevant.

After all, what are the chances that anyone could have hammered out a successful eyewear company in the face such a glut of eyewear? Jim Jannard accomplished that by doing a better job than anyone else of finding out precisely what his customers wanted.

The fact is that the golden ring is going to go to the person who is most accomplished at listening to customers needs. Big companies are notoriously bad at that. From what I hear, it's Jim Jannard's specialty.

[Tonaci Tran]

[QUOTE=muroshi;68635]That's a very accurate analogy. Ferraris can't be driven at full speed in almost every country. But they are instead used for shopping tours or just to show off in front of neighbors. There is more than a handful of such guys in this forum with the same intention. :) [QUOTE]

Perhaps..but to fine tune my analogy. To me, red is offering a ferrari for the price Toyota Camry that can be used daily and is efficient (due to redcode raw).

Anyways, the point of my analogy was identify how pointless it is for EJ Salder to compare sensors, stating that one is better than another when the two companies, although they both make digital motion cameras, are still very different just as Ferrari is so different from Toyota.

Ej Sadler's: "the Mysterium is almost as good as Canon's last generation chip, but it's nowhere close to Canon's current CMOS"

As smokin as Canon is with their cmos, they currently have not shown anything sensor that can do 60fps at 4k. My response, therefore, is that Canon has not shown any 4k cmos 60fps sensor anywhere close to the Mysterium, nor has Sony, Arri or Panasonic.

[Joe Carney]

Red has another big advantage over the 'big' companies. It's privately held, so no stockholders to deal with.
Another problem the biggies have is layers of mid level white collar workers who's only goal is to retire with a nice pension and health care. Anything that rocks that boat gets attacked. Those people are why it sometimes takes forever for policies and procedures to get changed.

Let's hope Red never gets turned into a bloated mega corp.

[Yannick Hagman]

Good points, it will certainly rock. There are a lot more important factors than cameras tough. Many seem to forget this. I would rather buy a 2k camera for a third of the costs.

As for the sensor: We don't know who builts it, but it's certainly not RED. You can compare their situation with Hasselblad.

[Michael Hastings]

In 4k? E.J. Sadler got the point. The danger for RED is not Sony nor Arri, it's Canon, Hitachi, JVC and Panasonic. And Canon did a really great job so far. I wouldn't be surprised to see a bigger CMOS pretty soon from them.

I would suggest Nikon is the company that has the most to gain and the least to lose since they don't sell highend glass to Sony Panasonic etc, who could switch to Fujinon exclusively if they became annoyed by Canon doing a RED/F900 competitor. Nikon used to make some broadcast lenses but abandoned the market. If an SLR manufacturer increases their frame rate to 24 on their cameras (maybe a bulkier version to allow additional electronics) they have a hell of a package. Nor does Nikon have a full line of camcorders that would be disrupted if they came out with a RED type camera.

One of the things that could boost the market for REDs from thousands to tens of thousands would be a broadcast video style zoom lens for the RED - say a 20mm - 300 mm zoom with integrated servo zoom/motorized iris.

I know birger and others are making zoom motors for the Cine and still lenses but it just doesn't seem to be as slick for handheld/shoulder work as a typical ENG/EFP zoom.

[Ezana Tekeste]

That's a very accurate analogy. Ferraris can't be driven at full speed in almost every country. But they are instead used for shopping tours or just to show off in front of neighbors. There is more than a handful of such guys in this forum with the same intention. :)

Implicit in your assertion seems to be that people buy a Ferrari primarily for its speed. The Ferrari, like many other highly-coveted, expensive items, is mostly a status symbol. It's probably a safe guess that for a large percentage of people (mostly guys, really) who buy a Ferrari, the car is used to non-verbally announce "I've arrived."

As for the Red One, I don't think the overwhelming majority of the public would look at the Red One and think "wow, I want to own that sexy beast one day." Sure a Red One owner would probably impress a few of his or her friends who also happen to be fellow traveling geeks. :-) But, unlike the Ferrari, the general public would look at the Red and shrug.

My point is that I'm unconvinced that people would buy the Red One so that they can flash it as a status symbol. What has made the Red One such a phenomenon in such a short period of time has been not how nice it looks, but how well it seems to deliver on its primary advertised purpose: capturing moving images.

Mike

[vidalsosa]

Okay, now that's it, I've had enough of this petty patronizing b*&^%^it!! Who's the real Canon of America VP Sales & Marketing - Muroshi or Sadler - Hands up... now!

Give it up big boys... Red's here to stay.

[Tonaci Tran]

But if anyone thinks the still frames from the RED are as good or better than Canon's current generation DSLRs, they're just hittin' the kool-aid a little too hard.


Although I'm completely stoked about having RED quality motion footage, the stills from Crossing the Line just weren't nearly as good as stills from our DSLRs. Is it far better than any other motion camera out there? Yes. Is it more quality and resolution than I'll ever need from motion capture? Yes. I'm just not going to pretend the stills are as good as what we're getting from our stills.


EJ, I think you should get Jim some more kool aid.
After seeing more stills and video..and especially now after working with the camera..I can confidently say that the stills from RED are AS GOOD as the digital slr cameras. Granted, it's not the same resolution as Canon's new 22 megapixel camera, but how many of us REALLY need to make images that will print as large as a side of a building?



I do have a friend on the island... but I have to admit, he is not much help.

Shot with the 300mm lens. A couple of apples coaxed this guy in pretty close.

I have put my Canon 1Ds MkII away for good...

Jim

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/9_1189839065.jpg

[Graeme Nattress]

Crossing the line was done on older hardware, older demosaic. The current stuff is vastly superior. As we've said all along, the image quality on crossing the line is the worst you should ever see from the camera :-), and that it looks utterly amazing is the talent of the crew. We could take those raw files and reprocess to a superior quality, and will be able to do so in the future due to the recording of raw, not processed video.

Graeme

[Jannard]

EJ... I am/was a Canon fan for years. Their still cameras are terrific. And I had fully intended to carry a 1Ds MK whatever along with a RED ONE wherever I go. But I'm not going to do that anymore. While the Canon has the advantage in sensor size and automation, the side by side images of the newest RED ONE DSP and image chain make it very hard to tell the difference between the two on a still shot. And we are just learning how to get the best image from our camera.

It is so close that I have decided to leave the Canon in the closet. When I say closet, I really mean the studio. Not because the image is bad... it is great! And it is not because the RED ONE is better for stills. I just don't need to take two systems around with me anymore.

"Crossing" is not a fair comparison. That is like comparing our newest stuff to the original 1D. We have come too far in the last 5 months.

This deer frame grab was taken from a 24fps stream. Something the Canon can't do. And the shutter speed was 1/48th sec. Motion blur will keep the image from being crisp compared to shooting at 1/1000 sec, which I can do with RED if I choose.

The other reason I am putting the Canon away is that I love being a photographer/cinematographer again. The Canon now is designed to do everything for you. It is a temptress of automation. Manual focus is just not done anymore with that camera. Silly me... I just love to spin the aperture dial and have to pay attention to exposure. I love being more a part of the process with the RED ONE.

When we started to build this camera from scratch, the best Canon had to offer was the original 1Ds. 11+MP and 4fps. The images from the RED ONE look quite similar to the images from that camera, except the RED is 24fps. I think we have made up a lot of ground in a short time. After all, Canon has been building cameras for almost a century.

The simple fact that you can carry one camera that can make motion pictures and stills at the same time is compelling (to me). I am not saying it is to others.

Jim

[Vladimir Eugene]

That's kind of what I wanted to hear. As i've been near the edge of buying a DSLR for a couple weeks now.

Thanks,

Vladimir

EJ... I am/was a Canon fan for years. Their still cameras are terrific. And I had fully intended to carry a 1Ds MK whatever along with a RED ONE wherever I go. But I'm not going to do that anymore. While the Canon has the advantage in sensor size and automation, the side by side images of the newest RED ONE DSP and image chain make it very hard to tell the difference between the two on a still shot. And we are just learning how to get the best image from our camera.

It is so close that I have decided to leave the Canon in the closet. When I say closet, I really mean the studio. Not because the image is bad... it is great! And it is not because the RED ONE is better for stills. I just don't need to take two systems around with me anymore.

"Crossing" is not a fair comparison. That is like comparing our newest stuff to the original 1D. We have come too far in the last 5 months.

This deer frame grab was taken from a 24fps stream. Something the Canon can't do. And the shutter speed was 1/48th sec. Motion blur will keep the image from being crisp compared to shooting at 1/1000 sec, which I can do with RED if I choose.

The other reason I am putting the Canon away is that I love being a photographer/cinematographer again. The Canon now is designed to do everything for you. It is a temptress of automation. Manual focus is just not done anymore with that camera. Silly me... I just love to spin the aperture dial and have to pay attention to exposure. I love being more a part of the process with the RED ONE.

When we started to build this camera from scratch, the best Canon had to offer was the original 1Ds. 11+MP and 4fps. The images from the RED ONE look quite similar to the images from that camera, except the RED is 24fps. I think we have made up a lot of ground in a short time. After all, Canon has been building cameras for almost a century.

The simple fact that you can carry one camera that can make motion pictures and stills at the same time is compelling (to me). I am not saying it is to others.

Jim

[Chris Kenny]

As I've posted about fairly extensively in my blog, the big deal with what Red is doing isn't the technology, it's the mindset. Of course, I don't mean to downplay the technical challenges Red has had to overcome, which were quite significant and which Red has tackled on a schedule that's difficult to comprehend. But really, what Red has over companies like Canon and Sony, IMO, is that they're willing to let the technology define the product capabilities and price, instead of playing games with market segmentation and planned obsolescence.

Could Canon or Sony have a product like the Red One on the market in a couple of years? Almost certainly. Will they? Almost certainly not. Established companies tend to react to disruptive products and technologies by putting their fingers in their ears and humming. Not by immediately jumping into the deep end and shipping similar products at similar price points. Of course, they'll do that eventually, possibly after leadership changes in the relevant divisions... by then Red will probably be pretty well established and hard for them to get rid of.

[Hrvoje Simic]

I know birger and others are making zoom motors for the Cine and still lenses but it just doesn't seem to be as slick for handheld/shoulder work as a typical ENG/EFP zoom.

There will be more options.

[Aldo Ruggiero]

1st post here, thank you all for the great reading.

Canon and Red.. this is what I found out about Canon (everybody knows about RED and his founder here)

From Wikipedia on history of Canon

"In June 1934 they released their first camera, the Kwanon (see "Origins of company name" below). Three variations of this product were marketed, however, none were actual products. Of the ten Kwanon cameras that were rumored to be produced, none were ever known to reach the market."

and about the Canon's founder motivation
at Canon.com

"......the price of the Leica camera was 420 yen.

This high-end camera was considered to be a "takane no hana (something far beyond reach)" for ordinary people. During those years, there was a Japanese man who attempted to make the first domestic 35mm focal-plane-shutter rangefinder camera (hereafter called as the 35mm rangefinder camera) by disassembling and studying the inner workings of a "Leica Model II." This person was Goro Yoshida (1900-1993)."

It looks to me like Canon had a worse start then RED.
It is a good thing that there are people like Jim Jannard and the less known Goro Yoshida that might look inside other people technology and make it cheaper.

On my end I hope we'll see more Red cameras at a price point of an HVX in the near future and for the rest I think it is going probably to be history repeating itself with Red a pushing down the bloated companies that cannot keep up, and maybe one day people thinking to buy a camera at fry's will look at the Canon and Red as people had a chance to compare Canon to Leica.


full articles here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_%28company%29
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/history/canon_story/1933_1936/1933_1936.html

[joe12south]

You can guess all day and night what Canon MIGHT do, but it is a FACT that prior to the RED ONE Canon and all of the other major manufacturers clung to their vested interest in inferior video technology and eaked out tiniest incredmental, the lowest quality, digital motion cameras that they could get away with and still sell.

They had no incentive to do better. Today, thanks to Jim J. they do.

If Canon, or Sony or the like decides that they want to sell a kick-ass digital motion picture camera, they can certainly do so. They can probably even do so better than RED, at a lower cost. Again, if they wanted to. Do they? Will they? Who the hell knows.

[Tim Lüdin]

Of course Sony and Panasonic could easely bring out a similar cam like the RED one at a similar pricepoint but they would shoot themselves in their one foot because of their high priced highend models like the F23, Varicams etc.
If they start dropping their prices to heavy it would also show that they ripped us off all the time.

The only player that realy could bring some heat against the RED ist Canon. They got great sensors and no high end videocameras with big pricetags on it. They could make a RED One in short time.
The big players are kinda screwed right now. They can't realy do to much about the REDolution.:bleh:

I hope RED will go their own way with it's update path and reusable components, rechangeable sensor etc. so this will become a real big successtory and they will have me as a customer for live.

Go get them boys

:w00t:

[albert rudnicki]

EJ... I am/was a Canon fan for years. Their still cameras are terrific. And I had fully intended to carry a 1Ds MK whatever along with a RED ONE wherever I go. But I'm not going to do that anymore. While the Canon has the advantage in sensor size and automation, the side by side images of the newest RED ONE DSP and image chain make it very hard to tell the difference between the two on a still shot. And we are just learning how to get the best image from our camera.

It is so close that I have decided to leave the Canon in the closet. When I say closet, I really mean the studio. Not because the image is bad... it is great! And it is not because the RED ONE is better for stills. I just don't need to take two systems around with me anymore.

"Crossing" is not a fair comparison. That is like comparing our newest stuff to the original 1D. We have come too far in the last 5 months.

This deer frame grab was taken from a 24fps stream. Something the Canon can't do. And the shutter speed was 1/48th sec. Motion blur will keep the image from being crisp compared to shooting at 1/1000 sec, which I can do with RED if I choose.

The other reason I am putting the Canon away is that I love being a photographer/cinematographer again. The Canon now is designed to do everything for you. It is a temptress of automation. Manual focus is just not done anymore with that camera. Silly me... I just love to spin the aperture dial and have to pay attention to exposure. I love being more a part of the process with the RED ONE.

When we started to build this camera from scratch, the best Canon had to offer was the original 1Ds. 11+MP and 4fps. The images from the RED ONE look quite similar to the images from that camera, except the RED is 24fps. I think we have made up a lot of ground in a short time. After all, Canon has been building cameras for almost a century.

The simple fact that you can carry one camera that can make motion pictures and stills at the same time is compelling (to me). I am not saying it is to others.

Jim


i think Canon is listening to you Jim.
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/eos/EOS_1Ds_MarkIII/1dsmk3_586x225.gif

[Clint Johnson]

/*the following numbers are for illustrative purposes only, I have no inside knowledge of the finances of Red, Sony or Canon.*/

Red may gross something like $70 million dollars next year... Canon isn't gonna be interested in investing the time and money into a camera that would compete with Red One unless they can net $70 million.

It is the same thing with Sony and the F23- the difference between the $20,000 it cost to make and the $120,000 they sell it for is the only way they can fund the R&D and marketing that they've concentrated on a microscopic number of sales.

A company like Sony or Canon would probably have more than a thousand people behind a product like the Red One... they would need to cover that no matter how many cameras they sell. They could sell a 1,000 cameras for $100,000 over cost to manufacture - or a 100,000 cameras for $1,000 over cost. What they can't do is sell 1,000 cameras for $1,000 over costs.

[Greg Voevodsky]

I don't think Jim is only making 1000.00 over costs... After reading earlier Jim Posts... he did say.. Red went over budget, break even was 500 cameras... but now with 2000, they are doing just fine...

I'd assume they are doing ok.... with margins between 10-30%... once those first 1000-1500 cameras with accessories are sold... The good news is low overhead, few employees and a Mad Scientist... who unlike Ebay is not going to nickel and dime us.

[Clint Johnson]

I don't think Jim is only making 1000.00 over costs... After reading earlier Jim Posts... he did say.. Red went over budget, break even was 500 cameras... but now with 2000, they are doing just fine...

I'd assume they are doing ok.... with margins between 10-30%... once those first 1000-1500 cameras with accessories are sold... The good news is low overhead, few employees and a Mad Scientist... who unlike Ebay is not going to nickel and dime us.

Yeah, I was just grabbing numbers out of the air to illustrate the point... being that the $17,500 cost of the camera probably wouldn't be enough for Canon or Sony if they were only going to sell a few thousand of them, even if it was all profit. I'm pretty sure that either one of them could make a Red One... as long as they could sell it for more than $200,000. They can sell a small number of cameras for a lot of margin or a lot of cameras for a small margin, that is the lot of massive publicly traded companies.

Red Digital Cinema is a small company privately owned by Jim Jannard and it only has to meet his demands. Since he probably won't have trouble with his ends meeting any time soon, his demands can reasonably be anywhere between; not costing him that much out of pocket to keep it going- on up to demanding that it have an ROI of more than 25%... his call.

[E.J. Sadler]

EJ... I am/was a Canon fan for years. Their still cameras are terrific. And I had fully intended to carry a 1Ds MK whatever along with a RED ONE wherever I go. But I'm not going to do that anymore. While the Canon has the advantage in sensor size and automation, the side by side images of the newest RED ONE DSP and image chain make it very hard to tell the difference between the two on a still shot. And we are just learning how to get the best image from our camera.

It is so close that I have decided to leave the Canon in the closet. When I say closet, I really mean the studio. Not because the image is bad... it is great! And it is not because the RED ONE is better for stills. I just don't need to take two systems around with me anymore.

"Crossing" is not a fair comparison. That is like comparing our newest stuff to the original 1D. We have come too far in the last 5 months.

Jim

Before this the only images available to see were the crossing the lines images, which just weren't as good as current Canon's. I was only responding to people who were telling me they were. I do still stand by the belief that I think Canon will maintain an image quality advantage.

The irony is that I've had a similar discussions on a pro wedding forum were shooters think I'm high on crack thinking any motion camera can deliver stills as good as a DSLR and that a still/motion convergence was inevitable, despite the fact that even the 'Crossing' images are better than the first three DSLRs that we used professionally.



This deer frame grab was taken from a 24fps stream. Something the Canon can't do. And the shutter speed was 1/48th sec. Motion blur will keep the image from being crisp compared to shooting at 1/1000 sec, which I can do with RED if I choose.


That's the reason I said relative image quality comparisions really didn't matter, since the Red has by far the best motion capture resolution and quality. The deer image just hammers this home even more.




The simple fact that you can carry one camera that can make motion pictures and stills at the same time is compelling (to me). I am not saying it is to others.


This is very compelling to me, and my dream. Right now I'm flying an HD camera with a DOF adapter so that I can sling it to the side and shoot with the still camera when needed. Being able to shoot motion and just extract stills later is ideal. I've already tested my gimble mounted radio slave trigger to fire off our strobes so I can still get flash imagery as well as continuous light imagery.

If you want a poster child for someone would is going to use stills as much as motion, let me use #1 once a month and I'll evangelize as fast as I can type.

[Tonaci Tran]

I do still stand by the belief that I think Canon will maintain an image quality advantage.


By the way, no one here is saying the Red has an image quality advantage over Canon when it comes to stills.

[kunal2]

Well Jim,

It's great time now to build a Red DSLR, why not:w00t:,i currently use Canon 20D,and would really love to shift....will wait patiently
cheers

EJ... I am/was a Canon fan for years. Their still cameras are terrific. And I had fully intended to carry a 1Ds MK whatever along with a RED ONE wherever I go. But I'm not going to do that anymore. While the Canon has the advantage in sensor size and automation, the side by side images of the newest RED ONE DSP and image chain make it very hard to tell the difference between the two on a still shot. And we are just learning how to get the best image from our camera.

It is so close that I have decided to leave the Canon in the closet. When I say closet, I really mean the studio. Not because the image is bad... it is great! And it is not because the RED ONE is better for stills. I just don't need to take two systems around with me anymore.

"Crossing" is not a fair comparison. That is like comparing our newest stuff to the original 1D. We have come too far in the last 5 months.

This deer frame grab was taken from a 24fps stream. Something the Canon can't do. And the shutter speed was 1/48th sec. Motion blur will keep the image from being crisp compared to shooting at 1/1000 sec, which I can do with RED if I choose.

The other reason I am putting the Canon away is that I love being a photographer/cinematographer again. The Canon now is designed to do everything for you. It is a temptress of automation. Manual focus is just not done anymore with that camera. Silly me... I just love to spin the aperture dial and have to pay attention to exposure. I love being more a part of the process with the RED ONE.

When we started to build this camera from scratch, the best Canon had to offer was the original 1Ds. 11+MP and 4fps. The images from the RED ONE look quite similar to the images from that camera, except the RED is 24fps. I think we have made up a lot of ground in a short time. After all, Canon has been building cameras for almost a century.

The simple fact that you can carry one camera that can make motion pictures and stills at the same time is compelling (to me). I am not saying it is to others.

Jim

[Tim H.]

The better question is why has Canon ingored this market?

It's obvious there is a large market for low cost video(HD) cameras that provide 720p/1080p 24fps and 35mm low depth of field. How many people have purchased an HVX, JVC, Sony, etc? How many are throwing a Mini35 or RedRock M2 in front of it to get this "film" look?

Take the Canon 5D or EOS-1Ds Mark II Full Frame censors that have been available for years now. They already get 5fps out of these chips and these are far larger than what is needed for Super 35mm chips. Are you telling me that Canon does not have the resources and R&D in place to get these chips up to 24fps/60fps? Please. Especially if they dropped the resolution to 1080p instead of the 4992 x 3328.

Canon obviously is interested in the HD market or they wouldn't have released a HD camera at all. The fact that they are not wise enough to see how to transistion their cmos and lens technology to a true low cost cinematic solution is a personnel problem not a R&D budget problem, cost problem or technological limitation.

So RED is the answer. They filled the void and actually figured out what people want. There is no reason to spend 100K+ for an HD camera other than the greed and price fixing of the industry. Look how much they charge for just the Mini35? Give me a break.

Thank RED for shaking up the industry, I actually hope it takes everyone else a while to catch up because RED deserves the sales.

[Videoteque73]

I never read a post in a forum by the president of Sony or Canon or Panasonic...

[Ronnie Silos]

I never read a post in a forum by the president of Sony or Canon or Panasonic...

If I was the president of Canon, this is what I would say in this forum.

I'm too old and too tired of this. Let's not rock the boat. For about $20k, I can enjoy a Red One. Streamline like Jim and just have 1 camera, retire and be a bad film maker or just shoot family videos. Ok, I will also get the Birger mount so I can use the Canon Lenses I got with my employee discount. When I'm bored, I'll just post here and if I'm lucky and get a rise out of Jim or Graeme, maybe they'll respond back. This would be more fun than trying to make my CMOS chips capture 60 fps and all the marketing/packaging/legal crap I have to deal with. :shiftyph34r:

Ronnie

[Tom Lowe]

I doubt Jim is making any money off this, at least not until they start selling over a thousand cameras, at least, at which point they will probably raise the prices a bit. At this point, he's just having fun and keeping his world to all of us who believed in him.

[Shawn Nelson]

Back to the original point. My guess is that Jim either purchased an existing CMOS design then had people modify it, or purchased the chips themselves and figured out how to do some nice hardware mods. There simply wasn't enough time for them to have designed out there own sensor. Unless....there was an entire shop of people we've never heard about. I'm sure sooner or later it will leak where the Mysterium is from, though I hope that's a long time. Viva la Red!

[Evin Grant]

Once you've met Jim you really have no doubt's that he could...
A. Make this camera right and make it profitable.
B. That the Mysterium was his baby and whoever he might have broght on board to help him with it will keep thier mouths shut. Canon is generations behind the tech in that chip.

On a more intersting note Canon is no longer the king of low noise CMOS chips. Nikon's new D3 spanks anything that's previously existed for high ISO low noise and does it up to 9FPS full frame!

Check out the ISO 6400 sample.
http://nikonimaging.com/global/products/digitalcamera/slr/d3/sample.htm
Here's some more.
http://www.moosepeterson.com/moosenews/index.php