Re: Questions from the video world

A few thoughts...

Red does not cost 17 - 18K; although it can be configured for 25 to 35K, it's more likely to cost 75K or more for a really versatile package.

Shooting 4K, Red is much more like shooting a 35MM film camera than a 2/3" High Definition camera in every way except loading and processing film. Red is big, heavy, expensive (don't be fooled by the low price of the body), and requires crew to pull focus and change filters. Those not experienced with 35MM film may be in for some unexpected surprises.

By the time you buy a follow focus, matte box, decent zoom and a set of primes, you'll invested some serious money. Add a crew member or two on the shoots and slow down the pace of production and Red becomes more costly for your clients. You've got to ask yourself if they are eager to pay more for the stunning images; they'll pay more for the package rental, crew, production pace, and more than likely, the post process.

At 4K, Red costs more than 2/3" HD. Period.

There is a way to overcome many of these liabilities; shoot 2K. At 2K you can use 16MM film camera lenses, much lighter and far less expensive than monster 35MM zooms and almost impossible to find prime sets. You'll also have about the same deep depth of field as 2/3" video cameras, so pulling focus is far less critical. You'll still have to add filters to a matte box, so the Red is not nearly as convenient as a modern HD camera such as the VariCam.

The 2K files render much more quickly than 4K in RedCine and you can use the proxies directly in Final Cut (same goes for 4K).

Of course the whole idea of Red is the beautiful subject isolating shallow depth of field of 35MM and brilliant 4K images, so shooting 2K is not without limitations.

The real danger of the Red camera is that once you see the images from it, you just don't want to shoot anything else again. I'm not being flippant; the Red will ruin you for any 2/3" HD camera.

I hope this helps.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo