EPIC's Price Point can be justified...

[A. Bastaki]

if there's 13 stops or more of latitude at a given ISO level.

I honestly wouldnt care for the extra 1k.. its absolutely meaningless. as the 4k we are getting now is pretty good... and most screens out there are 2k.. when you down-rezz redone's footage you lose a lot of that noise. And with the B16 coming up im really hoping i could shoot at ISO 500 without much noise.

if RED wants to bump up the price, it better add way more dynamic range to their new sensor, or this epic thing may go kaput...

I'd want a 16-bit image with 13.5 stops of lat.
that would justify the extra big chunk they're asking for epic.

At the 40k price-point thats what i think would justify its price. because noise-wise.. we can pretty much suppress it with the 4k we have now.

4k screening isnt happening yet.. by not happening.. i mean out of every 1000 theatres there'd be one that prolly could be one.
hence leaving the whole point of a 4k sensor for noise reduction would be rather pointless.

.. just mumbling my thoughts... i can be corrected..... hell.. what do i know.

as for redray with its 4k.. movies we are watching now on hd really look fake on bravias... it would take atleast a couple of years for the consumer market to go 4k. And HD displays are still having a difficulty crossing all over europe because well.. hd broadcast is the main issue.

so unless we find cheap 4k screening solutions and have them sold all over the world.. by say 2009... yeah.. having the whole industry going 4k could be seen as happening. but truth be told.. people are satisfied with HD.. they are not satisfied with HD content distribution.

i say.. 4k it all. cheap 3k projectors for home... cheap 4k projectors for theatres. and the red ray/epic could be sold.
________
Ryoko tani

[reality]

If they got a 16bit image and 13.5stops, they could be charging $400,000 because that's what they could get away with.

[John Cordell]

The value proposition for Epic is a little more complicated than just the DR of the sensor and the bump to 5k. Things that make it interesting are: high-frame rate 4k/5k shooting, four pounds lighter, improved sensor, standard sized connectors, higher quality real-time outputs, higher bit-rate recording/encoding.

Each of these differentiating features will appeal to some segment of pro users. I believe there will be a sizable pro market that won't be sensitive to the price difference between Epic and Red One -- they'll just want the additional features and pay what it takes to enjoy using them.

[Meryem Ersoz]

i say.. 4k it all. cheap 3k projectors for home... cheap 4k projectors for theatres.

I'm not sure that i even understand this thread. If all of the above is true for you, you should be thrilled with your RED ONE and not even considering an EPIC.

For many of my applications, the 4 lb. weight reduction and standard XLRs are the main attractions. 5K is more like an add-on. I don't know yet if I'll pull the trigger, though it is tempting.

[Zack Birlew]

I think people aren't thinking hard enough about what can be done with more resolution. I remember reading the cover of, I think, PC World years ago and the big title on the front was "Do we really need more than 400mhz?". Look where we are now with 3ghz+ processors, not just single processors but dual, quad and, pretty soon, octo configurations. The same goes for resolution. Some are obviously aware of what 4K gives over 1080P, physically 4K is four qaudrants of 1080P material. If you want to move in for a closeup instead of a wide shot, you can do it with a little post work without anybody noticing too much. Imagine what we could do with more than 4K. Take 8K for example; you basically could use a wide angle lens all the time and zoom in post for all of your shots. Too close? Okay, scale it back. Too far away? Punch in a bit.

Remember the scene in "Blade Runner" when Harrison Ford is zooming in on the picture? I always laugh at that scene because they start out fine but then turn into more of a 3D picture when he starts moving around corners and stuff. But, even so, the idea is there. Everything is crisp and clear even when zoomed in. Imagine the possibilities for composition during editing. We may not have the ability to film from one angle and move the image in a 3D space in post for OTS shots, but with people working on those weird insect-eye 3D lenses, we're getting there.

Epic's 5K resolution is just the first step in that direction.

[Miltos Pilalitos]

Maybe Epic is too soon. Maybe they should think how to better upgrade the REDONE in 2009 and keep on developing EPIC a couple of years more.

[Noah Kadner]

Maybe some folks are never satisfied or forget to spend more time on their scripts and less time figuring out the K/$/f-stop ratios in their head. Here's a hint- there's no magical one that will lead you to a better movie...

Noah

[amrrahmy]

it's not a 1k difference as u think.
1- red one records 4k, but actually the image is 3k so epic is at least 2.76 times bigger.
2- red epic will have full frame, equivalent of a 35mm film camera, that would work natively with any 35mm film lens and can take full advantage of any 35mm lens and any anamorphic lens.
3-red epic would record 100MB/s

just using a 35mm lens without an adapter alone is enough to make red one look like a consumer hd camera.

[Miltos Pilalitos]

it's not a 1k difference as u think.
1- red one records 4k, but actually the image is 3k so epic is at least 2.76 times bigger.

And what makes you think that Epic's 5k will actually be 5K?

2- red epic will have full frame, equivalent of a 35mm film camera, that would work natively with any 35mm film lens and can take full advantage of any 35mm lens and any anamorphic lens.

Just like RED ONE

just using a 35mm lens without an adapter alone is enough to make red one look like a consumer hd camera.

?????

[amrrahmy]

cause it says full frame, and not a 1.5 factor weird one.

no the 35mm lens doesn't fit the 16:9, where the epic would use the whole lens in 4:3.