A piece of thought.......................

[Antony Newman]

When the Dragon 8k is eventually replaced by the next sensor - RED will need a way to differentiate the new Sensor + Readout block + higher_speed_SSD on/in the Weapon body.

That would IMHO be the logical point to replace the Dragon branding.

Ironically as the Stealth badge is only available on the Weapon - perhaps this 'suppression' of the Weapon naming is actually the most visible differentiator?

And after seeing the Panavison pics - It's understated but way-cool looks have got me contemplating switching to the Stealth badge.

AJ

 

[Christoffer Glans]

In my experience many very professional and hard-working DoP's making high-end images for expensive productions, simply don't have time to navigate an ever expanding pro-camera plethora.
I think that has been one of Alexas forces, actually, that "No mater which u choose, it's basically still an Alexa like you know it"

Which of course isn't true, but brings a lot to the table of perception of easiness of handling.

Actually "it's a Dragon, just a lot easier to handle and it records prores" could be a pretty good sell...

Any cinematographer who shoots digital should know what their options are. There isn't really an ever expanding pro-camera plethora, the actual pro-cameras that are made for real productions aren't that many.
Of all the cameras used today, the top choices are the Alexa, Red Epic Dragon, Phantom Flex 4K, Sony F65 and Sony F55. Then you could look at DSLRs as crash cams or GoPros for that matter, but the companies making cameras for real productions aren't that many. You could add the C-serie from Canon, but I've not heard about many productions here that really use them over the mentioned ones.

As a cinematographer, you should know the differences between the cameras, their strengths and weaknesses. As a cinematographer you don't skip out on knowledge about what type of lights there are, so why skip out on what kind of cameras there are.
For most productions there are only two choices, Arri or Red. Those are the top cameras used and Sony on a third place with their F65. This is the case here in Sweden at least. It doesn't take much time to read up on camera news whenever they happen, like once a year at NAB. Just get the knowledge once or twice a year and you are pretty set on what to use. I don't see any reason why top cinematographers wouldn't have time to look up these things. My own opinion is that it should be a mandatory knowledge if you're going to work with high end productions. Learn the tools, learn what tools there are, why limit your ability as a cinematographer by skipping out on this knowledge? Times change, this is a new set of skills that should be demanded from the cinematographer, just as us editors have been forced to learn basic compositing to stay on top.

 

[ignition]

IMO the ProRes etc. is incremental; the critical is a form factor change - lighter, more compact - more versatile particularly in gimbal (HH/aerial) situations. That's very important to us with what we want to achieve to differentiate in the coming 12-24 months, but admittedly may not mean a great deal in traditional shooting scenarios.

Yet even that said.. I don't think we've seen enough of what's on the emerging Weapon/POGO connector/3rd party integrated hardware ecosystem horizon, to really appreciate all the benefits this will bring. So naturally current consensus is judging the Weapon and cost on just the merits of "different body, same sensor, and ProRes". I think this is just the tip of the iceberg in flexibility to come (and I hope I'm right as if I'm not.. yeah, I'm spending way too much for some form factor benefits and incremental change)

I used to work in building very high end PCs etc and CPU technology would incrementally increase every year, yet it was mainboard architecture that would unleash the potential of the next quantum leap. I'm fairly subscribed to the belief digital cameras are mostly 'platform and technology' coupled with sensors; and you have to periodically introduce a new architecture to support the next iterations of CPUs (or sensors, in this case) that ensures the overall ecosystem can unleash the full potential of that CPU/sensor.

I guess I'm saying most of the upgrade cost is in the internal 'next gen' architecture of the camera that will be capable of a whole lot more than the Dragon sensor it's being immediately equipped with. Because the sensor upgrade steps are relatively cheap when the architecture is right. That's why the 8K upgrade - an actual sensor change - was, during NAB at least - just a 1/3rd the price of the actual Weapon upgrade?

The majority of technology manufacturers - whether digital image acquisition or otherwise - are perfectly happy to entirely re-engineer their products and release entirely new models. This seemingly expensive "stepping stone" of Weapon that doesn't give all the "stats on paper" benefits the immediate price tag delivers.. seems to me what any company has to do if they're trying to provide hardware upgrade paths to a legacy user base.

I guess they could of just announced an 8K Weapon product - a bundled Weapon+8K sensor price - and most of this debate IMO would be moot...

And maybe I'm wrong too

 

[Patrick Kendall]

Not to change the subject, but I wish I could get back the "Dragon" front medallion when I upgrade to Weapon, like I got back the "Epic" medallion when Red sent me back my old fan with the last upgrade... would be kind of a cool memento of the red cameras we've owned...

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Any cinematographer who shoots digital should know what their options are. There isn't really an ever expanding pro-camera plethora, the actual pro-cameras that are made for real productions aren't that many.
Of all the cameras used today, the top choices are the Alexa, Red Epic Dragon, Phantom Flex 4K, Sony F65 and Sony F55. Then you could look at DSLRs as crash cams or GoPros for that matter, but the companies making cameras for real productions aren't that many. You could add the C-serie from Canon, but I've not heard about many productions here that really use them over the mentioned ones.

As a cinematographer, you should know the differences between the cameras, their strengths and weaknesses. As a cinematographer you don't skip out on knowledge about what type of lights there are, so why skip out on what kind of cameras there are.
For most productions there are only two choices, Arri or Red. Those are the top cameras used and Sony on a third place with their F65. This is the case here in Sweden at least. It doesn't take much time to read up on camera news whenever they happen, like once a year at NAB. Just get the knowledge once or twice a year and you are pretty set on what to use. I don't see any reason why top cinematographers wouldn't have time to look up these things. My own opinion is that it should be a mandatory knowledge if you're going to work with high end productions. Learn the tools, learn what tools there are, why limit your ability as a cinematographer by skipping out on this knowledge? Times change, this is a new set of skills that should be demanded from the cinematographer, just as us editors have been forced to learn basic compositing to stay on top.

Generally I have come to that noone "should" know anything specific. If it works, it does. if it doesn't, something sucks.

I know DoP's who have a list of merits and awarsds long as the road from me to you, who don't know their filmstocks from eachother or a Dragon from an iPhone.

People know different stuff and tend to use what they feel works for subjective or objective reasons.

Artists are not less so than plumbers.

Or put another way:

I might know a bit about how digital sensors work, but he/she knows her/his photography. Even if he/she cannot explain.