#4K4ALL

[sam karr]

Seems like a great marketing choice if it's got everybody talking about it....

I guess there would be even more talks if it were "5K4ALL". Anyway we'll know soon. I'm sure it will be a great camera once again. People should just lower their expectations when they think it will be almost as good as a weapon.

 

[Jeffrey Loewe]

I guess starting the tease with "4K4ALL" would be a really bad marketing choice if the camera could do 5K. I guess i would call it .... "5K4ALL" then.

Have you noticed how they're not continuing with any real theme for hash tags? Just when we think it's figured out its different. The things we know don't need to be re-hashed. But I'm sure there are a few more surprises involved. For all we know this camera could shoot 6K, have an 8K upgrade path, have different trade ins, there could be two bodies, one fixed, one non-fixed. Or none of those. It's really all unknown at this point.

 

[Donald MJ Anderson]

Seems like a great marketing choice if it's got everybody talking about it....

I like my marketing to be accurate.

I guess once the details are out, especially the "for all" price, we will know whether to take a RED hashtag seriously.

 

[Adam Rook]

I get this. But what I am trying to clarify is that when we speak of crop are we saying that a 20mm lens will be like a 35mm due to this crop factor? This crop notion in the link is only meaningful as it relates to the crop on say a 6K Dragon sensor to get 4K. I would assume that this 4K camera is a full sensor readout - not reading a portion of a larger sensor. And for lenses it is 1:1. That is what I was trying to fathom when we are speaking about crop factor. Because if it were the former in terms of lensing - it would be a complete turkey and I can't believe they would do such a thing.

I do hope you are right on this one. I mainly shoot architecture and so the largest FOV I can squeeze out of a sensor the better. I continually find myself in tight spaces attempting to fill the screen with as much as possible. Ultra-wide lenses are my bread and butter and that's the reason a full-frame camera is quite appealing to me. Hopefully it IS a full sensor readout. Gosh this would end up being my absolute dream camera if it were.

I mean come on... what do we know so far?
4K @ 120FPS
Weapon body
Dragon sensor

This is shaping up to, indeed, be my dream camera. Even if it's a crop I can find ways to work around that. (I'm talking to you, Speed Booster)

 

[Tarquin Cardona]

Exactly. And RED was always pushing oversampling for true 4k-delivery...

I think this is why I am scratching my head. Regular old 4KHD from Epic is not so good in my opinion. But shooting 5K or 5.5K to get to 4K produces the 4K and field of view in 4K that makes the Dragon so good. So the idea that the camera will not provide Red's best 4K is a disappointment to me. I realize as I say this that I am really going blue sky on how I thought they were getting to this, but with the IQ potential of BM4.6 and C300MK2 etc this approach could yield a quality of 4K that will just look old school. Which is a pity. So any concern about Dragons being in jeopardy from this are totally misguided.

 

[AndreeMarkefors]

We don't know yet what the resolution will be limited too. All we know is it it has 4K 120.

I know. I've seen all the leaked material so far.

I fully expect the Raven to at least offer a S35 sensor. I'm assuming that RED wants to expand and get a larger user base. A smaller sensor makes that more difficult I'd say. It's already hard enough as it is when a customer can choose between the whole URSA Mini 4.6 camera, or RED's new viewfinder /w mount rack for the same money. That says something, I guess.

 

[Ben Scott]

I like my marketing to be accurate.

How we like our marketing has nothing to do with how effective marketing is.

 

[Mike P.]

It's got a fixed mount because it has a speedbooster style element built-in to the mount for a 4k FF35/VV FOV.




....naw, but the point is, Sept.25th. I personally wouldn't invest in a smaller sensor, since RED crops to those sizes at lower resolutions anyway. Maybe it's an 8k VV sensor, that uses twice as many pixel groups per debayered pixel, so it's twice as light sensitive and twice as colour accurate... OR, ka-kaw, the bird is getting ready for flight.

How we like our marketing has nothing to do with how effective marketing is.

Not to troll, but I wouldn't be surprised if the only people really talking about it are REDusers (mostly in this thread and on Jarred's Facebook).

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

If, in fact, the sensor in the Raven is M43-ish, perhaps a lens mount that functioned like a MetaBones Speedbooster would be an excellent way to accommodate S35/APS-C glass - and get more light to the sensor.

Cheers - #19

Mike beat me to it

 

[Alex Larson]

I agree...I think a MFT RED cam with the right specs and an E mount would be a hit. If the right system was set up to adapt to S35...and this truly is a less expensive camera....it would wipe the floor with the competition.

There are not very many good e-mount lenses so I hope it is a Canon lens mount. I like that there are a lot of the cheaper still lens companies making Canon film-style lenses lately.

If it is in the 5k to 6k price range with the same pixel quality of dragon I am jumping in. If the sensor is 20mm wide that is going to be a great size for gimbal work. We already shoot 4k out of 5k on Scarlet when we goto camera mounts so we can actually hit focus. I do like full frame sensors but they are nearly impossible to focus on a gimbal which seems to be 90% of my shooting lately.

 

[Ben Scott]

The thing about E mount is that it is easily adaptable to just about every mount out there. On my Full Frame A7s and my S35mm FS7 I regularly use EF, Contax, Leica R ad Nikon glass. Plus plenty of PL mounts out there for it too.

 

[Donald MJ Anderson]

How we like our marketing has nothing to do with how effective marketing is.

Some how I get the feeling you don't need to be persuaded too hard by RED to get excited by a new product. This PR works for you. Great. But don't think this PR is effective marketing for everyone.

 

[Ben Scott]

And here you are talking about it... Doing exactly the one single thing the marketing wants you to do.

As for me, I have a very specific set of criteria that will denote whether this is a camera I am slightly interested in. I've already sold up and ducked out of the Red ecosystem once when I felt it was no longer right for me. I've no loyalty to anyone.

 

[Michael Jarvis]

There are not very many good e-mount lenses so I hope it is a Canon lens mount. I like that there are a lot of the cheaper still lens companies making Canon film-style lenses lately.

If it is in the 5k to 6k price range with the same pixel quality of dragon I am jumping in. If the sensor is 20mm wide that is going to be a great size for gimbal work. We already shoot 4k out of 5k on Scarlet when we goto camera mounts so we can actually hit focus. I do like full frame sensors but they are nearly impossible to focus on a gimbal which seems to be 90% of my shooting lately.

I think the draw that people have towards the E mount is not because of its native E mount lens selection but more of a shallow flange distance that makes it possible to adapt most lenses to it.

 

[Mike P.]

And here you are talking about it... Doing exactly the one single thing the marketing wants you to do.

Yeah, but you're suggesting current REDusers talking about RED cameras on a RED forum is a sign of successful marketing... That's a little myopic.

I think the draw that people have towards the E mount is not because of its native E mount lens selection but more of a shallow flange distance that makes it possible to adapt most lenses to it.

I get this, but... really... why wouldn't you just make the lens mount swappable in that case? Then at least RED would sell more mounts (which, I'm sure they get a decent profit from). I still don't see how fixed mounts make the production costs lower... I also don't know what advantages a fixed mount can have for functionality in the RED ecosystem (though I'm sure I'll find out Sept.25th).

 

[Michael Jarvis]

Yeah, but you're suggesting current REDusers talking about RED cameras on a RED forum is a sign of successful marketing... That's a little myopic.


I get this, but... really... why wouldn't you just make the lens mount swappable in that case? Then at least RED would sell more mounts (which, I'm sure they get a decent profit from). I still don't see how fixed mounts make the production costs lower... I also don't know what advantages a fixed mount can have for functionality in the RED ecosystem (though I'm sure I'll find out Sept.25th).

I completely agree.

 

[Alex Larson]

Yeah, but you're suggesting current REDusers talking about RED cameras on a RED forum is a sign of successful marketing... That's a little myopic.


I get this, but... really... why wouldn't you just make the lens mount swappable in that case? Then at least RED would sell more mounts (which, I'm sure they get a decent profit from). I still don't see how fixed mounts make the production costs lower... I also don't know what advantages a fixed mount can have for functionality in the RED ecosystem (though I'm sure I'll find out Sept.25th).

Using a PL or Canon or Nikon mount on an E-mount is not optically sound. There are many tests out there you can refer to but if you make an E-Mount the sensor needs to have the micro lenses on the sensor to accommodate E mount lenses and, and you can't do both without issue as the ray angles between back focal depths are very different. That is the true reason why Sony has an optical adapter on their still cameras to go from E-mount to their bigger Alpha mount and is also the biggest complaint people have with the F55 F5 Sony cameras. You can see those optical issues in the footage as soon as you get out of center. LensRentals.com did an optical bench test.

But a Canon mount can accommodate a PL adapter without that issue and really in the cinema world PL-mount lenses and recently Canon mount lenses are the only legitimate 2 options.

If this is a camera that sits under the Scarlet in the lineup I can see how a built in mount reduces cost price and complexity and more importantly (in my opinion) weight.

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

Using a PL or Canon or Nikon mount on an E-mount is not optically sound. There are many tests out there you can refer to but if you make an E-Mount the sensor needs to have the micro lenses on the sensor to accommodate E mount lenses and, and you can't do both without issue as the ray angles between back focal depths are very different. That is the true reason why Sony has an optical adapter on their still cameras to go from E-mount to their bigger Alpha mount and is also the biggest complaint people have with the F55 F5 Sony cameras. You can see those optical issues in the footage as soon as you get out of center. LensRentals.com did an optical bench test.

But a Canon mount can accommodate a PL adapter without that issue and really in the cinema world PL-mount lenses and recently Canon mount lenses are the only legitimate 2 options.

If this is a camera that sits under the Scarlet in the lineup I can see how a built in mount reduces cost price and complexity and more importantly (in my opinion) weight.

Sorry but this is just a bunch of nonsense. The optics in the Alfa adapter are for phase detect AF function- not for any optical correction. If anything, retrofocal DSLR lenses would work better than range finder type lenses such as e-mount lenses because they are more telecentric and their illumination on the sensor is more even and does not reach the radical incidence angles that range finder lenses do.
And BTW Sony F5 and F55 come originally with PL mount that also accommodates mostly retrofocal lenses because of the rotating mirror shutter on film cameras.
Not to mention that we built and sold ridiculus amount of EF adapters for Sony PMW cameras to Sony and never once heard about this...

 

[Ben Scott]

Yeah, but you're suggesting current REDusers talking about RED cameras on a RED forum is a sign of successful marketing... That's a little myopic.

The sole purpose of the pics being released on Reduser and on Jarred's FB (where he is followed by people interested in Red) is to get those same people talking about it. Which they/we/you are. Absolutely nothing myopic about it. He's now built an anticipation for details amongst a load of potential customers...

Anyway I'll leave this alone now as it's not really contributing to anything.

 

[Alex Larson]

Sorry but this is just a bunch of nonsense. The optics in the Alfa adapter are for phase detect AF function- not for any optical correction. If anything, retrofocal DSLR lenses would work better than range finder type lenses such as e-mount lenses because they are more telecentric and their illumination on the sensor is more even and does not reach the radical incidence angles that range finder lenses do.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09/there-is-no-free-lunch-episode-763-lens-adapters