Brains - upgrade path

[roryhinds]

Looking at the "Brains" it appears these cameras do not offer a upgrade path.

Having to buy a new camera every time a sensor is released seem against the RED ethos.

Am I missing something here?

 

[Jason Ing]

Buying a brain isn't the same as buying a new camera. Just because the sensor is "boxed" doesn't make it a camera.

When you upgrade, you buy a brain (a boxed sensor module), but the rest of your modules, "camera", remains the same.

It's their solution of upholding the Red ethos.

Or to put it another way, if I bought a Canon Rebel XTI and then bought a Canon 40D, I would be buying another LCD monitor, another "viewfinder", another mirror, another vertical handmount, another flash, another shutter button, etc. etc.

 

[Brook Willard]

It seems to me that the "brain" really is just a camera body with a different name. They have monitor ports, power ports, an HD-SDI port, etc. Sure it doesn't have the port module and a control unit, but it's not like swapping a brain is just swapping a movement. It's still a full-on camera body with a different name... that can't be upgraded.

Think of the accessories like magazines. You can use a 435 mag on a 235, an LT mag on an ST, etc. Furthermore, you can use something like an RCU or CCU on almost Arri, many IVTs are exchangeable, movements can be swapped, etc. The lens/mattebox/follow focus/head/batteries/etc. are just a given, so it's not worth comparing.

Similarly, you'll be able to use the port module and control unit on any Epic and Scarlet, you can swap all those parts back and forth, no problem. It's just making sure that all accessories are cross-compatible - a concept that film cameras have generally relied on for decades that has been brought to RED's lineup in a very specific way.

Doesn't really phase me that the camera bodies can't be upgraded. Buy once... and rent the ones you don't own. It's nice to see this concept brought to RED's lineup, even if it's not a completely new one. They have taken it a few steps farther in some ways, but one could still compare something like the port module to a video tap, the control unit to a CCU, the battery module to any onboard battery system, etc.

Where RED took it further is with the still camera integration. That's a new one...

But to me? One man's opinion is that the "brain" is just another word for "camera body" - even if it is a groovy little one.

 

[Joseph Ward]

It seems to me that the "brain" really is just a camera body with a different name. They have monitor ports, power ports, an HD-SDI port, etc. Sure it doesn't have the port module and a control unit, but it's not like swapping a brain is just swapping a movement. It's still a full-on camera body with a different name... that can't be upgraded.

Think of the accessories like magazines. You can use a 435 mag on a 235, an LT mag on an ST, etc. Furthermore, you can use something like an RCU or CCU on almost Arri, many IVTs are exchangeable, movements can be swapped, etc. The lens/mattebox/follow focus/head/batteries/etc. are just a given, so it's not worth comparing.

Similarly, you'll be able to use the port module and control unit on any Epic and Scarlet, you can swap all those parts back and forth, no problem. It's just making sure that all accessories are cross-compatible - a concept that film cameras have generally relied on for decades that has been brought to RED's lineup in a very specific way.

Doesn't really phase me that the camera bodies can't be upgraded. Buy once... and rent the ones you don't own. It's nice to see this concept brought to RED's lineup, even if it's not a completely new one. They have taken it a few steps farther in some ways, but one could still compare something like the port module to a video tap, the control unit to a CCU, the battery module to any onboard battery system, etc.

Where RED took it further is with the still camera integration. That's a new one...

But to me? One man's opinion is that the "brain" is just another word for "camera body" - even if it is a groovy little one.

Not that I'm disagreeing with you but this is strange coming from one of the moderators of Reduser? :blink: If the Brain were to be upgradeable, it would just be the metal box that would remain, right? Anyway I'm glad to see some of the moderators still have a different opinion from Red because the moderators are neutral. This can be helpful for Red in the long run, as well as customers. I'm not against you or Red by the way, so don't take this the wrong way. Just committing on your commit. Cheers.

 

[Stephen Williams]

Anyway I'm glad to see some of the moderators still have a different opinion from Red because the moderators are neutral..

Hi,

It's great that Brook is back.

Stephen

 

[Jason Ing]

It's still a full-on camera body with a different name... that can't be upgraded.

A full-on camera body to me is something I can attach a lens to, pop in a battery and start shooting. Can't do that with a brain.

I think Red succeeded with the brain. They reduced it down to the lowest common denominator. Anything lower might be something like a PC in which you can swap out the sensor like a processor. But the sensors are so different or ability/features (Epic size vs Scarlett size), I think the "motherboards" have to be different to; hence the different chassis/body/module/box.

But I get what you mean Brooke.

 

[Brook Willard]

A full-on camera body to me is something I can attach a lens to, pop in a battery and start shooting. Can't do that with a brain.

I disagree. By that logic, the RED ONE is not a camera, but a "brain" as well.

In order to shoot with the RED ONE, you must connect a battery system, connect storage, connect a monitor, put on a lens and shoot.

With a "brain," you must connect a battery system, connect storage, connect a monitor, put on a lens and shoot.

From the renderings, an Epic "brain" still has at least one monitor connector, a power connector, a data connector and an HD-SDI connector. It doesn't have a built in CF module, but neither does the RED ONE. Sure, it lacks multiple BNC connectors, audio and timecode connectors... but it's only a small breakout box away [the "port module"] from having them. In that respect, the RED ONE needs a breakout box to have BNC connectors as well.

The biggest thing that the Epic "brain" lacks when compared to the RED ONE in this light is an integrated control unit. The Epic's is just removable and dockable - a generation of growth from the RED ONE.

I don't want this to seem like I'm badmouthing the design at all... I'm not. If the camera shipped as it is today, I'd be thrilled. I just think that if you step back, the concept is very similar to what has already existed... it's just executed in a more graceful way.

 

[Stephen Williams]

I disagree. By that logic, the RED ONE is not a camera, but a "brain" as well.

In order to shoot with the RED ONE, you must connect a battery system, connect storage, connect a monitor, put on a lens and shoot.

With a "brain," you must connect a battery system, connect storage, connect a monitor, put on a lens and shoot.
ay.

Hi Brook,

The brain also needs a controller, that would make RED One a smart brain:biggrin:

Stephen

 

[Brook Willard]

Heheh, good point. I have to assume that there will be an "essentials" package that one can buy at a discount with their "brain" - a package that would include a controller, port module and maybe a monitor.

Hell, the "brain" might even ship with a control/display unit.

Although you could always connect an external trigger to roll the camera sans control/display unit... and make my point

 

[Jason Ing]

I disagree. By that logic, the RED ONE is not a camera, but a "brain" as well.

In order to shoot with the RED ONE, you must connect a battery system, connect storage, connect a monitor, put on a lens and shoot.

With a "brain," you must connect a battery system, connect storage, connect a monitor, put on a lens and shoot.

From the renderings, an Epic "brain" still has at least one monitor connector, a power connector, a data connector and an HD-SDI connector. It doesn't have a built in CF module, but neither does the RED ONE. Sure, it lacks multiple BNC connectors, audio and timecode connectors... but it's only a small breakout box away [the "port module"] from having them. In that respect, the RED ONE needs a breakout box to have BNC connectors as well.

The biggest thing that the Epic "brain" lacks when compared to the RED ONE in this light is an integrated control unit. The Epic's is just removable and dockable - a generation of growth from the RED ONE.

I don't want this to seem like I'm badmouthing the design at all... I'm not. If the camera shipped as it is today, I'd be thrilled. I just think that if you step back, the concept is very similar to what has already existed... it's just executed in a more graceful way.

I consider the Red One the original brain. That was Red's intent and philosophy from the beginning. It's just become more sophisticated and elegant.

I wonder if it can be further reduced. I'm sure they tried and came up with this design.

 

[roryhinds]

Having no upgrade part for the camera "brain" call it what you will - is a bad thing IMO.

IF the "brains" where priced lower maybe it would be economical to buy a new one every time a new sensor comes out, which is likely to be often.

Isn't that what RED was said to avoid.

The brains aren't just the sensor, they have the computer controllers and everything else that is needed to communicate and control the sensor.

Modular design has been around for some time and you still need all the bits to make up a working camera. If I purchase a new Canon 5D, I have a new camera, even though I'm using my old lenses, batteries and memory cards.

Same same if I went from a Arri D20 to D21. RED should call it was it is and cut the marketing mumbo jumbo.

The whole taking Stills with a motion camera seems to be fad to me. With very little real world production use. I'm mean you need the right tools for the job. DSLR's are made for taking stills using still lenses with a direct through the lens view finder.

I'm pretty sure most professional photographers will scream at the idea of not having a optical viewfinder to take stills with. A DSLR is considerably cheaper than any motion camera, and Cinema lenses function way differently to a still lens.

 

[Jannard]

Having no upgrade part for the camera "brain" call it what you will - is a bad thing IMO.

IF the "brains" where priced lower maybe it would be economical to buy a new one every time a new sensor comes out, which is likely to be often.

Isn't that what RED was said to avoid.

The brains aren't just the sensor, they have the computer controllers and everything else that is needed to communicate and control the sensor.

Modular design has been around for some time and you still need all the bits to make up a working camera. If I purchase a new Canon 5D, I have a new camera, even though I'm using my old lenses, batteries and memory cards.

Same same if I went from a Arri D20 to D21. RED should call it was it is and cut the marketing mumbo jumbo.

The whole taking Stills with a motion camera seems to be fad to me. With very little real world production use. I'm mean you need the right tools for the job. DSLR's are made for taking stills using still lenses with a direct through the lens view finder.

I'm pretty sure most professional photographers will scream at the idea of not having a optical viewfinder to take stills with. A DSLR is considerably cheaper than any motion camera, and Cinema lenses function way differently to a still lens.

Sorry, Rory. I have to disagree. That is the problem we have with the RED ONE. Electronics (and their capabilities) are matched to current sensor technology. If we upgrade only the sensor, you are stuck with the features of the electronics. And unlike a Canon 5D, you can upgrade each part if there is a significant "new technology".

As for the stills part being a fad... maybe just to you.

There is no reason to upgrade to an EPIC if you see no advantage to it over a RED ONE. You can keep the RED ONE just as it is, or upgrade the sensor... just as we promised. To dismiss a DSMC as a fad only takes your point of view into account. If you don't need stills capability, an EPIC still represents an incredible price/performance camera for motion only compared to anything ever released into the market.

Your post really surprises me...

Jim

 

[Evin Grant]

It will be interesting to see how the market reacts to the DSMC concept. For still photographers the Scarlets seem an interesting intro into motion imaging with a comfortable form factor. The Epics seems more like high end cinema and that will mean for the most part a certain separation between church and state. Although I'm sure the 645 Epic will be of interest to fashion photographers who want more frames to fiddle with. The 617 is obviously the landscape dream camera, not to mention the perfect format to film whales! (not joking!)

Travel and documentary photography seem to be the real sweetspot for the "Still & Motion" combination. I did a feature documentary in Africa in O6 and I would have killed to have a combo cam like the Epic FF that could take my Nikon lenses and offer me such amazing quality in a handheld combo. Using a DSLR form factor for doco is gonna take some getting used to though.

Lastly I'll be curious to see how much still market penetration Red can have without photo retailers. Most photographers buy their Nikons, Canon's even Hasselblads and Phase Ones from pro camera shops. Of course Jim you could always follow your pal Stevo and open some Red stores:construction:

 

[Jason Ing]

You're right, the "market" will react after they see the professionals and artists work their magic with Red's DSMC.

Who among the still photographers will be the Peter Jackson, etc. I'm sure Jim will make sure [insert your favorite world class photographer here] will have a prototype in their hands soon.

 

[Colin Sheldon]

Having no upgrade part for the camera "brain" call it what you will - is a bad thing IMO.

IF the "brains" where priced lower maybe it would be economical to buy a new one every time a new sensor comes out, which is likely to be often.

Isn't that what RED was said to avoid.

The brains aren't just the sensor, they have the computer controllers and everything else that is needed to communicate and control the sensor.

Modular design has been around for some time and you still need all the bits to make up a working camera. If I purchase a new Canon 5D, I have a new camera, even though I'm using my old lenses, batteries and memory cards.

Same same if I went from a Arri D20 to D21. RED should call it was it is and cut the marketing mumbo jumbo.

So lets say you purchase a 2/3" scarlet brain for $2500. Then you spend $5000 on modules for it. So, being $7500 in, you're in the same price range as an EX1

Now lets say you want to upgrade to the S35 scarlet. So you sell your old brain on E-bay for $1500, and pay and extra $5500 and all of a sudden you have a S35 scarlet.

To me it's like paying someone to "supersize" your 16mm gate and throw in a ground glass. For you get to reuse virtually every other aspect of the camera. It's not the perfect analogy, but I think you're underestimating the amount of camera parts that will not need to be upgraded when you go through a brain upgrade.

It's this same principle that attracted me to the ActionCam - the ability to grow and expand your package without breaking the bank. Doing these sorts of upgrades with Sony or Panasonic cameras is a financial bloodbath. That's why there are SO many Betacam SPs that are still floating around...

 

[Jannard]

So lets say you purchase a 2/3" scarlet brain for $2500. Then you spend $5000 on modules for it. So, being $7500 in, you're in the same price range as an EX1

Now lets say you want to upgrade to the S35 scarlet. So you sell your old brain on E-bay for $1500, and pay and extra $5500 and all of a sudden you have a S35 scarlet.

To me it's like paying someone to "supersize" your 16mm gate and throw in a ground glass. For you get to reuse virtually every other aspect of the camera. It's not the perfect analogy, but I think you're underestimating the amount of camera parts that will not need to be upgraded when you go through a brain upgrade.

It's this same principle that attracted me to the ActionCam - the ability to grow and expand your package without breaking the bank. Doing these sorts of upgrades with Sony or Panasonic cameras is a financial bloodbath. That's why there are SO many Betacam SPs that are still floating around...

Your assumptions sure are interesting... $5K for modules?

Jim

 

[Imran Farouk]

well that $5000 for mods is probably a guess that each would be a 1000...at the very least I'm personally thinking $500 a mod...depending on which one...it may vary to 400-600...

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

guess:
i/o module 1000
i/o module pro 1500 ------more connectors etc

(i would use sizes like s, m, l instead of pro, but who i am...hehe)

 

[Tarek S. Kandil]

sorry i'm a newbie, but big picture reminder.

Call it a brain, call it a body, it still delivers more info in less time and for much less cost.

If RED have just separated the modern camera setup into smaller parts, i just don't get how that can be negative.

My personal opinion is that this is something new, that hasn't really been done before. The closest thing i can relate to would be assembling a DSMC much like i assemble a PC.

Reading the first few posts, my brain wandered off into hardware stores buying sensors and doing chipwork and welding at home, cause honestly that's really all that's left past RED. Build your own camera.

RED's a business. They have to sell to everyone, and come up with the lowest common denominator.

These guys retained full credit on 'old' gear of theirs, which still hamstrings any other image solution in the market price wise and quality wise.

And they threw in resolutions big enough to withstand the next several years of imaging if not define them.

And they're waaaay cheaper than anything out there.

There's a new sony 'digital cinema' cam out there that still catches at 1080.

The physical rule i think is that if you catch bigger, you grab more info, your result will look better at the end and manipulate precisely during post.

If you're sensor's as big (size. physical size) as a film, the surface area to your lens is gonna react like a film. If its bigger, it'll react like a larger format.

Even if you shoot 28K to downsize it'll treat better and look better.

This sony sells at 150,000

I would buy new cameras from red ready assembled, I still wouldn't lose money as a business like if i were buying from ANYONE else.

Last month the R1 wasn't old. It's just a month. We didn't have cellphones twenty years ago I miss that. But now we can't live without em.

So, end of the day, if they haven't truly truly tangibly redefined and revolutionized and embraced and danced with and realized and conceived modularity etc etc (which i think they have cause they actually executed a concept) they still went a long way for our pockets' sake.

I'm probably gonna afford an R1 after scarlet comes out. Still buying it if Epic's expensive.

The friggin monster (617) costs as much as i can find an HD cam here that still compresses files.

The only other format i film with till i can have RED signals in my pc is super8mm.

It serves my purpose, gives me a progressive scan at really nice blowup-able quality for cheaper than anything else. That's what i want

Until I get my scarlet, cause it'll give me the same, for about the same amount of cash i spent on my Beaulieu, and the mods will cost me as much as my home lab cost to set up.

It meets my needs better than anyone else. That's the big picture.

Some appreciation, that's all.

No one knew this last year.

(no offense this is a nice 2 pages to think about, and yeah that's a badass moderator. A moderator with balls. Cheers RED. Badasses in every department.)

 

[Zach Nelson]

... just ... make.. it .. all .. affordable.

and yes "affordable" is a relative term, unfortunately.