New 3D 4K Camera

[Richard Luke]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufUj3...layer_embedded

[Zach Gray]

Going... going...

I see a thread close in the near future.

Seem to be ripping a bit of red philosophy, but not executing it with style. And lenses...

[Eren Ozkural]

Well, I'm not going to begrudge any start up from creating their own camera platform and taking a shot at improving the marketplace with innovation. Good luck to these guys.

However...this is a prime example on the lower side of the competition of why Jim has decided not to telegraph products and feature sets anymore. Everything from the body design, NATO rigs to the very language used in the video (modular, obsolescence etc) screams of a poor imitation of RED rather than creating a unique brand. Plus there's no footage, swapping out sensors smells like a Ricoh-alike hassle, they look like 2/3" chips and the whole open source approach screams of an un-unified potential for unreliability. If i'm renting a camera I need to know it'll function perfectly or at least know that it's currently on build-x and potential pitfalls/solutions are in the back of my mind.

Nice try and good luck.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Competition is good. Interesting system. Lacks a lot of style and flair that RED has. But this is just further evidence of the modular approach being the way of the future.

Like RED, they are adopting the NATO/STANAG / Picatinny rail system for accessory attachment. It makes total sense -- it's a total no-brainer that I'm surprised so many have overlooked it for so long.

Based on the side by side layout of the camera and overall size, it seems like 4/3rds or 1/2" is probably about the largest sensor that the camera can use for 3D shooting, unless I'm missing something.

Agree with Eren on the open source aspect. Not sure I'm a big fan of it... Not if I want a reliable camera system that is set up to work a certain way, whether I buy one or rent one or whatever. OTOH, if they can get the price down, it would be a great specific-use camera or hacker camera that could be adaptable where other closed systems are not.

[Curran Giddens]

I heard a rumor that at least one of these guys used to work at Red... And yeah, lenses.

[peter roehsler]

GREEN ONE anyone?

:-)

[Wolfgang Woehl]

... and the whole open source approach screams of an un-unified potential for unreliability.

Ok, I'll bite. Eren, it works like this: Put an open platform out and let people do whatever they want with it. That's cool in its own right: Freedom, owning your tools and all. But of course people will come up with staggering crap. Some won't. They'll build great stuff which just might flow back to the main platform. Platform progresses while the crap turns into embarrassing bitdust (Yes, well, except with the GNOME dudes). The process can be excruciating and violent and extremely rewarding at the same time. It is, I reckon, on all platforms, be they closed or open. Only with open source it is happening in broad daylight. And being able to know what's really going on is not the worst customer experience, in my book.

So you don't know the first thing about software development. That's alright, it's not the greatest skill on earth. I know zip about Ricoh cameras. Hence I won't pinknoise about them.

[Michael Olsen]

I think the "open" sensor-swapping capability is what will probably get people excited about this camera. Unfortunately, the $50,000 or $27,000 pa 4-year lease takes it out of the hands of most of the people who care about "open" cameras.

Also, it seems, most of the "industry" types that frequent Certain Mailing Lists hate just about anything that has any possibility of being multiple things. RED is hard to swallow for a lot of people because they have to deal with figuring out whose rig it's using, what firmware it is on, etc. People like a camera, like Jeff was saying, that just is. A RED Epic-X only ships with the RED S35 Mysterium-X sensor. No third party sensors, no different formats. Want a different format? Buy a different brain.

We'll see what happens!

[Jeff Kilgroe]

While I think an open source camera like this will generate a large amount of crap, it will still be a compelling solution for some. It's a chance for larger houses like Cameron-Pace, Panavision, BandPro, AbelCine, etc.. to work with some competent developers and build their own color science, operating software, etc.. Stuff that they can market as their own. Sure, there may soon be a dozen places to rent this camera, but it could end up where everyone only wants to rent from Panavision because they have the best onboard software and companion toolset to work with it.

I think the open source aspect is what could ultimately make or break this camera platform. I think Michael is right though. The majority of independent users and hacker types who will be passionate about an open system like this will probably be priced out of the game.

Potentially still a great opportunity for those who can acquire the camera and still have the resources to build a powerful toolset to go along with it.

[Michael Olsen]

It's a chance for larger houses like Cameron-Pace, Panavision, BandPro, AbelCine, etc.. to work with some competent developers and build their own color science, operating software, etc.. Stuff that they can market as their own. Sure, there may soon be a dozen places to rent this camera, but it could end up where everyone only wants to rent from Panavision because they have the best onboard software and companion toolset to work with it.

I didn't even think of that, but it makes huge amounts of sense.

I also think it's interesting that one of their two in house sensors is 4/3". Hum.