What Will Red One's Lifespan be?

[Manfred Lopez]

I'm not sure if it's okay to ask this here, since I saw this question come up in another forum... but I thought I could get a more authoritative answer if maybe someone from the red team answers. People on that forum are calculating the lifespan to be about 10 years (with others putting it at 5 for rental houses). Is this right?

I am considering a purchase of the Red Camera if the price doesn't go up too much after orders are opened up again and if 4k monitoring gets resolved.

[Don Woods]

It will last as long as you take care of it. I plan on my two cameras lasting a long long time.. I still shoot on a Bata sp camera that is 10 years plus old. Works fine.

[Ace]

Whats great about the RED is that the sensor is supposedly easily replaceable. As would be other components by the service team. So I submit that why should there be a lifespan placed on such a camera?

Unless your talking about the number of hours you can clock on the average CMOS sensor, or the lifespan of the encoding CPU etc etc.. In any case, if your using the camera that much, it would surely pay for itself in terms of repairs or replacements.

[Manfred Lopez]

In any case, if your using the camera that much, it would surely pay for itself in terms of repairs or replacements.

I'm not talking from a financial point of view since, as far as I am concerned, the camera would have paid for itself after a couple of features. What I am asking concerns the "usable" lifespan of the camera.

Now I know that one of the slogans of the Red Company is "rendering obsolescence obsolete"... but I still can't imagine the red one being useful in 20 years since the world of HD is changing so fast. I also understand that you can keep replacing the hell out of the red one, but eventually, just like computers, it will make no economic sense since red four or five could be had for a lot less with a far better (I imagine) body design.

EDIT:

Just to give an example, the average PC user keeps his computer for 4 years. The average Mac user keeps it for 6 years. The average video camera probably tops out at 10 years. Film cameras can go easily into the 30 to 40 year range.

[Ace]

I'm not talking from a financial point of view since, as far as I am concerned, the camera would have paid for itself after a couple of features. What I am asking concerns the "usable" lifespan of the camera.

Now I know that one of the slogans of the Red Company is "rendering obsolescence obsolete"... but I still can't imagine the red one being useful in 20 years since the world of HD is changing so fast. I also understand that you can keep replacing the hell out of the red one, but eventually, just like computers, it will make no economic sense since red four or five could be had for a lot less with a far better (I imagine) body design.

I guess you just answered your own question then?

[Manfred Lopez]

I guess you just answered your own question then?

What? Are you refering to the 20 years I mentioned? I was just pulling that number out of the air as an example. I was wondering what others tought the lifespan would be. With video and HD cameras my thinking has alway been to use and sell a few years later. With film cameras (well, I have bought just one) my thinking has been buy to keep because of extremely stable format. Now with red, I am not sure how to think about the camera since it combines very durable design principles with extremely outdateable capture technology.

[Poi Boy]

At the price it is selling for I would be happy with a two or three years; naturally I would like it to be 10 years but that is not what I base my decision on.It is a tool and it has to make you money unless it is just a hobby. If a better tool comes along in 5 years and it can make you more money you buy it. Fortunately most of the support items can carry over from one system to another (lenses, tripods,lighting, etc.).
Aloha
-A

[Michael Schrengohst]

This is the LAST camera I am buying.

[Poi Boy]

you know, it very well could be, but technology has a way of changing rather quickly.
Aloha
-A

[Michael Schrengohst]

By the time camera technology changes beyond the RED I will
be long retired and you guys can go for it!

[Ace]

Now with red, I am not sure how to think about the camera since it combines very durable design principles with extremely outdateable capture technology.

Sorry, how is the capture technology outdateable exactly?

The drives are 100% interchangable, the ports for raw output are there. The sensor, provided it fulfills the promise of 4k @ 11 stops of latitude cannot get any better without moving to 16bit technology. So from where I see it, the camera is the opposite of "extremely outdatable". It could very well be the last camera you will ever buy.

And If it replaces the use of a 35mm camera, then technically it should last a hundred years the same way you could still pick up a 60 year old 35mm film camera today and still produce good images from it.

[Poi Boy]

come on dude everything is outdateable..I'd like to think it is the last camera I'll ever buy but I know it is just not the case. everything changes and rather quickly.
Aloha
-A

[Manfred Lopez]

... the camera is the opposite of "extremely outdatable".

Well, maybe the words "extremely outdateable" are a bit strong (not my intention, I apologize). What I mean is that a few years ago I read a technical article in the American Cinematographer book that pronounced 4k to be overkill when scanning 35mm film and that 2K was good enough. Now people barely think 4K is enough. And 15 years ago people where saying the audio cd would be the last copy of a record one would ever buy (remember "perfect music forever").

Now, don't get me wrong, I LOOOVE what red will do. I have been dreaming of this day for a while now. But I just wonder how money-hungry the technology will be in order to stay up-to-date. I know that the upgrade path will probably resemble that of the computer world and not that of the video gear world. I think that Red is a promise to a lot of people who could otherwise not afford this level of performance. And I know many people on this board will be able to BARELY afford red as it is. So, my question still stands... if one sells the farm to own red and everything required to make it work, how long before one has to start replacing mayor parts of the camera or the whole camera itself? I'll be shoked if Red One turns out to be completely --and I mean completely-- upgradeable forever.

[Chris Kenny]

Ten years from now it'll probably be possible to do something significantly better than the RED ONE (higher resolution, higher frame rates, HDR), with a body the size of a present day digital SLR, capturing to commodity storage (hours of footage on the future equivalent of a CF card), for a few thousand bucks. This is an information technology market now, and that's the kind of progress I think we can expect to see, especially as RED's competitors react to RED, or more companies enter the market with RED's outlook, and we get rid of the sort of market segmentation nonsense that has plagued the market thus far.

At the same time... RED looks like it's going to deliver an image good enough for almost any purpose, up through 4K theatrical projection. And there probably isn't much point in going over 4K for projection, due to limitations in the resolution of human vision. The 4K RAW + REDCINE file-based workflow also eliminates a lot of artificial barriers in terms of data and tape formats as well. This means, unlike with more limited cameras, you won't be praying for something better starting from the day you unpack your RED. Though better things will come out, the camera should have a very good useful life span, compared with products which are much more compromised out of the gate, like today's prosumer cameras.

Also, many of the accessories you buy for your RED (PL mount lenses, matte boxes, etc.) are built to industry standards that have already lasted for decades, and will probably last for decades more. This is, again, a considerable improvement over the prosumer market, where accessories are often specific to one camera or one vendor. It will do a lot to help protect the value of a serious investment in this sort of kit.

[Bruce Allen]

Chris Kenny, I agree 100%. I'm taking a more extreme path though - I'm going to get an HV20 and a 35mm adapter (total cost for that is around $2000) and spend the rest on accessories that don't go out of date (eg matte boxes, follow focus, lights, lenses, microphones...). I'll rent the Red.

AFAIK, people should plan for the Red to last them one or two features. They should just make those projects great. If they make one outstanding feature, they will not be in a totally different position in terms of getting funding, opportunities for further projects, etc.

The long term prospects of Red will depend on workflow - for example if in 5 years' time all cameras are recording pristine sync sound from digital inputs and you are still having to do dual-system and sync in post, that's a good motivation to change cameras. Similarly, if the other cameras have a RAW codec that you can directly edit with in Avid / FCP without going through RedCine (which still seems like a 2nd-best option to me)... you'll want to get one of those. But Graeme is very smart so I'm sure he'll do a Quicktime codec one day.

What else? Again, if the Red Three automatically records lens / camera / take settings as metadata, that's another motivation to upgrade. 3D might or might not make a big splash. Auto lens cleaning a la current digital SLRs would be great, as would a moving anti-shake CCD for some uses...

Finally, the sensor, although excellent, will definitely improve by leaps and bounds. It is very low noise but not noise-free, and that will improve a lot. Imagine a 800 ASA Red with the same picture quality! Similarly, latitude can and will be improved in future versions.

Of course, I don't really mind, as long as they one day release a cheaper or smaller and less obtrusive version! The Red is just too expensive-looking a camera to be carrying in the parts of the world where I sometimes go... in America it's a 4k Ego Statement. In other parts of the world, it's a sign saying "Rob Me". Hence the HV20... which looks like a $300 camcorder.

There are a lot of other beautiful things about the Red, though - for one thing, no stupid tape mechanism. Very few moving parts ;). Hardware-wise, it should last a very, very long time...

Bruce

[JohnF]

I'm considering RED in this way:

If I buy RED it it'll probably be the last camera I'll purchase until it breaks! (or I need another one for back up/multiple cam shoot)

The other point is that RED will be future HD-market proof in the near term, 5-10 years, (remember for transmission it's going to end up 1080p) so all footage shot on RED@4k will have a greater lifespan than material shot on other HD cameras/formats - giving a better chance of actually making a comfortable profit before having to upgrade.

JohnF

[PaulClements]

Well Sony started digital cinematography proper back in 1998 with the HDCAM and they are still pushing the same 1080p format today.

I think the biggest thing to remember is the cinema formats that will be standard in the future:

In ten years time the current Red format may well have been surpassed but it will still be a very usable camera for shooting for cinema.

In ten years no cinema will be using more than 4k projectors, if anything this will be the norm and I dare say a good many will still be behind in installing digital.

4k once established will probably form the digital footprint for at least the next 20 years... look how slowly cinemas have been changing to a 1080p proprietary format. Changing again to 4k and then to another one within a few years simply won't happen.

HDTV won't go passed 4k for at least 20 years, it simply doesn't need too. Most of the HDTV's on the market aren't even 1080p yet (Or wide equivilent).

Once cinemas do go higher, such as 10k you would still be able to shoot 4k and enlarge comfortably to 10k anyway, people will still be using the current 1080p cameras to film with and up to 4k for a good few years yet, so why shouldn't you do the same with 4k to the next format.

To summarize, I doubt if you would need to replace it within 20 years should you choose and it will probably be usable in 30, heck maybe even 40 if you wanted. The fact is though that new cameras will come out with some gizmo attached, be the size of a stamp or do something extra special that will catch your eye and you'll think, yeah that sounds better than my RedOne I might upgrade to that or buy one to compliment it and gradually move over to it. It's the nature of the beast, we want what's new, even if RedOne is completely usable in 40 years some people might say it's an antique and refuse to use it on that basis (They'll probably be the people saying RedOne was vaporware a few months ago, and finally be able to stand there in 40 years time and say "See I told you it wasn't good enough :)).

[PaulClements]

Oh and also, years down the line we'll be able to attach some form of media (Probably holographic) to the redone that is portable and has no moving parts that allows us to record completely RAW rather than RedCode RAW which will put it on a par with any other 4k camera that is released in the near future.

[Rob Lohman]

but I still can't imagine the red one being useful in 20 years since the world of HD is changing so fast.

HD changing fast? I think it's going extremely slow. After years and years we're finally starting to see good HD penetration in north america. Blu-Ray & HD DVD are on their way but still both exist.

How many theatres do you know that project digital 4K?

Here in Europe we're way behind. Holland for example is just really starting with digital broadcast and most is still SD!! HD TV sales are going up, but the penetration is very low as of yet. HD DVD & Blu-Ray still have to (sort of) start selling here.

While the acquisition world changes quite rapidly the delivery seems to be a lot slower. Of course, if it's true that we will get most (all?) of our content over the internet in the future then this could change quite drastically. But that's at least another 5 - 10 years away in my humble opinion.

[Hrvoje Simic]

Talking about lifespan......people forgot a few facts here...

The camera is going to evolve with time
and you will be able to upgrade it.

- Oakley sunglasses really didn't have to be made from titanium.
But they are.
What do you think Jim will do with his favourite toy ?

Personally, the term "lifespan" hasn't even crossed my mind.

[planet e]

what renders "obsolescence obsolete" is that RED is putting their foot down regarding the Big Four's trickleware business model. of course the camera is revolutionary and will stay ahead of existing technologies for awhile. but what is equally revolutionary is the end to trickleware. they aren't holding back on the features and are doing everything to put out the best possible camera with maximum features and flexibility. THAT'S the revolution, in my opinion. no more crippled products. it may be out of date, eventually, but only because technology has moved forward, and not because RED held anything back.

i was on a shoot several weeks ago with a guy who has been shooting film and video for 40 years, and he volunteered to come teach us a few things, as a mentor. he shows up with his Sony PD 100 with a cracked lens housing (lens was fine) and a Beachtek unit and offers to be a third camera on our shoot and collect a bit of B roll while giving us some lighting tips, etc. of course, his footage was fantastic, coming out of this old, cracked camera. what a great lesson.

i fell in love with my original prosumer camera, a GL2, all over again.

when does the shooter become obsolete?

[Ivan G]

"This is the LAST camera I am buying."

That' what I said about 3 cameras ago.... But I think this it!!!

[Eugene]

I would like to know how long it would last too. But how can we expect an answer. They don't know how long it will last either. They don't even want to make a guess, and I wouldn't either.

my original prosumer camera, a GL2
I just upgraded my GL1 to a GL2. Yeah, it was obsolete 5 years ago, but I bought it anyway. Hell, I just bought a SD tube TV too. The price of my TV was less than the amount of a mail in rebate on a HDTV. If I wait a year the price of HDTVs will come down. When the RED ONE comes out, maybe I will be able to get a F900 for the price of a GL2. Good things come to those who wait. I love RED even if I can't afford ONE, because they will force the industry to change.

[Chris Kenny]

While the acquisition world changes quite rapidly the delivery seems to be a lot slower. Of course, if it's true that we will get most (all?) of our content over the internet in the future then this could change quite drastically. But that's at least another 5 - 10 years away in my humble opinion.

Right, once distribution moves to an IT model, the way acquisition is starting to, we won't be rigidly locked into specific formats on that end either. If the Apple TV (or similar) of ten years from now can drive a 4K monitor (not all that crazy, as they'll probably be common for desktop computers by then) and play back any QuickTime file, people will be able to distribute whatever they like, basically.

[Phil Becque]

Well all this talk of techology life span is all very interesting and I probably agree with various points raised as far as they go. But no one so far has really mentioned a few key points about life span for various different types of technology.

First I should come clean - I've been in electronics since 1962 - think germanium transistors OA71's etc. I've worked in Analog, Digital and RF areas extensively. I've just resigned from one of the leading US companies that makes the software, that designs and verifies many of the electronic toys we all like playing with so much.

And there is no question that over the last 45 years the hardware has become increasingly smaller and increasingly more powerful in line with Moore's Law; which states that you can get the same performance in half the area footprint roughly every 18 months. So that's all right then, no problems with the hardware it's just going to get faster and smaller ad-infinitum. Well no not really. There may still be a way to go, but each successive cycle see a whole raft of new problems; one of the recurring ones is power dissipation. Which leads us neatly on to 'Electromigration'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromigration

If you want to talk about life span in terms of reliability you have to take this into account. In an way this is like designed in obsolesence. If the guys who make the chips for the RED team have done their sums right, there's no reason why these chips shouldn't last for 20 years. So that's all right then? Well yes and no.

If no new standards for high speed communication were going to be developed we could just stick with the chips we've got. But new high speed comms standards will continue to get faster and faster and cheaper and cheaper, certainly over the next 10-20 years. So the current chips will be obsoleted by new standards sooner than they will fail in field because of electromigration. Phew! So that's all right then?

Well yes and no. Although it's excruciatingly obvious; the main limit imposed on new technology development has nothing to do with the hardware and everything to do with the software..

Ask Graeme, pretty much any project like the RED Camera has a significant amount of software in it. This takes far more time to develop and maintain than the hardware. I've seen estimates for mobile phones where the ratio is in the region 4-6 times greater effort for the software than the hardware. In all likely hood - the hardware for the RED camera was fixed some time ago - it may not have been delivered yet but the team know what they will get. We're most likely waiting on the software?

And even when we get V1 of the RED camera the software team will be hard at work ironing out - usage issues - and adding new code to meet the ever increasing demands of the new emerging interconnect and storage options that will come along in the next ten years.

Now, if the RED team have modularized all of the main components in an appropriate fashion; each element can be retro fitted as and when the need arises. You just need a standard interface specification between these elements that doesn't get out of date in a hurry. Hence the idea that RED renders obsolesence - obsolete. But what do I know?

All the best, Phil

[Jarred Land]

We have 16mm and 35mm cameras here from the 80s that are still being used. People still use Konvas that are 30 years old.

The technology will get better, no doubt. But im sure Red will last generations... resolution will maintain itself.

[Jim Arthurs]

We have 16mm and 35mm cameras here from the 80s that are still being used. People still use Konvas that are 30 years old.

30 years? Those are mere babies compared to some!

My serial number 54 35mm B&H 2709 dates from the 'teens of last century and works perfectly fine today. The same film stock that work with the latest, greatest Arri works with this camera. And it's dead solid registration... equal or better than ANY modern camera due to its fixed-pin optical printer style type 1 shuttle. I used it as a dedicated rotoscope/animation down-shooter camera until the mid '90s... Now it just looks cool sitting there.

I look at the RED this way... every camcorder I've owned has/had 18 months of shiny new-ness associated with it. Before the HVX I had the ZI, and before that the DVX, and before the Canon XL1. All the RED has to do is perform for five to seven years to be more of a financial bargain than those cameras ever were.

It's hard to predict the potential upgrades... it could be like that old joke; "I own George Washington's axe he used to chop down the cherry tree. It has had six new handles and three new blades since then, but it is the real deal..."

[Antoine Baumann]

In my opinion 4k resolution will last at least 10 ten years for cinema, an other ten for TV or home cinema, but the sensor will not last that long. In a film camera the sensor is the film emulsion, therefore not part of the camera itself, that is why film camera last so long. Now you might be able to update the sensor and camera port, in the same design, so you are all good. Just have to pay for the updates, but it could be see as a part of the economy done on not using film.
If the sensor is truly updatable in the same design, I think the RED I camera could last decades.

[Jared VanLeuven]

"4k should be enough for anyone" - Gill Bates

[Billy Summers]

"4k should be enough for anyone" - Gill Bates

Hell, at this point, I'm happy with 2k!:sorcerer:

[Ace]

"4k should be enough for anyone" - Gill Bates

I get your point, but 4k has been more than good enough for the human eye for the past 90 years. And will be fine for another 90 in the 2D motion picture genre.

Where I do see advancement is in completely new genre's of image delivery, i.e 3d Laser image projection onto your retina and or directly into your mind. You may have seen that there are audio projection technologies today that allow a user to sit in a completely quiet room yet hear any music they want to hear through laser audio projection into the persons head. Meaning there are no physical sound waves present in the room.

</tangent>

[Ronnie Silos]

There comes a point when there is enough resolution and you don't want more. I've come to this point in my still photography. I've been upgrading my Canon bodies for a while and now have the 1Ds for protrait/landscape and 1D Mark II for sports. I bring this up because Mark IIIs are coming out and I don't want any part of it. The files are bigger which means it will take up more space when I don't need to print super large prints. It takes longer to process the pictures in PS as the files are big (raw). All I want is a very reliable, dependable workhorse. Something that works, something I can be an expert on. Upgrade lenses, memory, harddrives, computer, but I don't see upgrading my camera body until this thing dies. That's how I feel about the Red One. I'm sure we will have software upgrades, accessories, etc. But if this does the job now, it will do the job 10 years from now. At some point, we just have to focus on the art and creativity, not the tool.
Ronnie

[Jared VanLeuven]

I get your point, but 4k has been more than good enough for the human eye for the past 90 years...

Yeah, my "quote" was a bit of tongue-in-cheek levity on a Friday afternoon. I think it rather amazing that we're here at a milestone in technology where we're able to able to muse on what's beyond 4k. Imagine that 2 years ago. Who knows that the next 10-20 years will bring? I agree with you Ace, we're due for some serious evolution in delivery over the next several years. :sorcerer:

[P Andersson]

sure they might go beyond 4k but no real need for most applications, different manufacturers will focus on making variations of the stuff that people here have been wanting, higher frame rates, improved sensor sensitivity, various codecs and compression, optical image stabilization, auto focus and aperture, easier interfaces or more super complex ones with the depth mapping and all that, different form factors, like little ones that will fit in your purse with the one green auto on button in 4k perhaps even cheaper versions in pink and yellow, it'll be cool

[Ken Corben]

Long enough to make a profit on the hardware costs unlike some other systems I could name.

[Robert Jackson]

We have 16mm and 35mm cameras here from the 80s that are still being used. People still use Konvas that are 30 years old.


Older than that sometimes. I have a Konvas 1M that I use for hand-cranking. Its lens and body test sheets indicate a production date in 1967:

http://home.comcast.net/~jackson.robert.r/konvas_tests.jpg

And it's holding up pretty well for its age:

http://home.comcast.net/~jackson.robert.r/konvas1m.jpg

It's smooth and reliable. Magazine changes are instant, too. No threading. You just slap the magazine into place until it clicks and you're ready to shoot.

There's something kind of soothing about hand-cranking footage, too. No batteries or electronics. I take the 1M and a light meter out with me. I get an idea where I'm going to need the aperture/speed set and crank at a frame rate roughly consistent with my readings. The most comfortable speed is around 16 fps. You can get it to 24, but you're really cranking by then. I'll vary the speed a little so there's some exposure variation, since I usually hand-crank for effect.

Nothing wrong with using older cameras.

[Robert Jackson]

I bring this up because Mark IIIs are coming out and I don't want any part of it.

Wow, the Mark III actually seems like a pretty nice upgrade to me. I'm really looking forward to seeing what they do with the 1Ds Mark III. If it has all the upgrades they've included on the 1D it will be a must-own camera, no matter what resolution the sensor ends up being.

[Stephen Williams]

We have 16mm and 35mm cameras here from the 80s that are still being used. People still use Konvas that are 30 years old.

The technology will get better, no doubt. But im sure Red will last generations... resolution will maintain itself.

Hi Jarred,

I often use a 1944 Mitchell on a motion control rig. I know of another Mitchell from 1923 being used at least every week in Germany!

Stephen

[tj williams]

Always a risk when you are an early adopter. RE Oxide betacam was quickly superseded (in about 2 or 3 years) by BetacamSp. Is that 12 years now?? and you can still get work with a BetacamSp.

The red model is clever marketing. If your camera becomes obsolete you search the market for a new camera... Maybe you buy from a different mfg.?
With an up-gradable camera (which is how the RED describes itself) you must buy the upgrade from the same mfg. As long as the upgrades are cheaper than buying a new camera the original company will never loose your business. I suppose there is a reason why this guy is a billionaire! This combines the best parts of the Sony and Panavision business models.

[Manfred Lopez]

I wonder if red will license their specs to third parties or will they be more like Apple? It would be interesting to see drives from several manufacturers.

[Michael Schrengohst]

I wonder if red will license their specs to third parties or will they be more like Apple? It would be interesting to see drives from several manufacturers.

I am sure RED has an exclusive with a drive mfg. to produce the RED drives.
The drive mfg. will help with R&D if they can get a head start in the sales process or there would be no incentive to produce such a drive on it's own.
Same thing with the chip....I would not imagine RED has the mfg. capabilities
to produce a CMOS chip....so whoever is making it probably has an exclusive deal with RED. Jim knows once the cameras ship all the competition will be getting a hold of a RED and tearing it apart. Maybe that guy who buys electronic gear and then tears it apart to see what components are inside has a RED on order? OOOOhhhhhh the humanity!!

[Joel Kaye]

a technical article in the American Cinematographer book that pronounced 4k to be overkill when scanning 35mm film and that 2K was good enough. Now people barely think 4K is enough. And 15 years ago people where saying the audio cd would be the last copy of a record one would ever buy (remember "perfect music forever").


Hmmm... if holographic cameras and cheap players hit the scene RED might become obsolete.

Red is modular so it should be very upgradable.

The main reason I think Red will have a very long lifespan (10+ years easily) is because display technology - particularly installed projectors - aren't going in fast enough to make 4k obsolete. I just saw a 2k projection in a local theater of a movie shot with the Sony ZR1U and it looked amazing. It'll probably take a decade for 1080P TV's to hit 70% installed base.

If RED is upgradable to include more low light sensitivity, HDR and 2 REDS could be setup for stereo imaging then I just don't see what else on the horizon obsoletes it. I can see cooler things coming along (GPS Metadata), and maybe even for less money - but that doesn't mean RED won't still be good enough to compete for a viewers attention.



Chris Kenny, I agree 100%. I'm taking a more extreme path though - I'm going to get an HV20 and a 35mm adapter (total cost for that is around $2000) and spend the rest on accessories that don't go out of date (eg matte boxes, follow focus, lights, lenses, microphones...). I'll rent the Red.

Bruce - I just shot a HV20 and I thought the same thing to myself. It would be a great match for an adapter. I'm still going to get RED because it will shoot better quality (better codec, colorspace, range and resolution). The time to own RED will be in the first year or two. After that selling it and renting might make more sense. I love the idea of owning the means to production and keeping it with me at all times to grab footage though.

I'll re-evaluate RED vs. the field every year or so. Somehow I think they'll find a way to stay ahead of the field - but we'll see.

[Milan Nikolic]

In ten years 8K will be the standard digital movie format but we, the early RED ONE adopters, will have the privilege to reserve RED TWO with even higher resolution!