- Thread starter
- #41
Jason Honeycutt
Well-known member
I've been talking to RED directly and they've been awesome, as usual. My impression is that just taking your Scarlet in and getting the Dragon isn't happening... you have to trade in your Scarlet and you get a credit to buy an Epic with the Dragon at a discounted price. The figure was always $6K for the Epic, TBD for the Scarlet. However, there're about a $12K difference in body price between the Scarlet and Epic right now... then factor in the $6K more for the sensor... and it's roughly an $18K difference in camera price. If they knock it down, say, $6K, it would still be $12K out of pocket.
And again, I do agree that no other company does trade-ins like RED does. It was awesome of them to retro-fit the original R1's when they didn't have to. The Scarlet's launch has been, honestly, a mess... all of the delays, the changes in design (thank God getting rid of the fixed lens), etc... and RED's owned that. So when it came out, Ted was at NAB touting the upgradability of it. He shouldn't have said a word and nobody could possibly "whine" about it. But it'd be like selling someone a hybrid car and saying that when the battery dies, you can pay a little more an swap it out... but then you buy it and, nope, if you now want that option, you're going to have to buy the more expensive car and THEN you can get originally what you were told you were buying.
At least it's "something" to keep the camera from being obsolete, if they're not going to support the Scarlet. I love the Scarlet... it has a great picture... but I also love the R1MX and all things being equal, they're identical. The Epic's advantage (currently) is the 5K.
And someone mentioned it... when you buy into RED, you're paying for this family mentality that they're a different kind of company than the Sonys, Panasonics, etc. I think the key issue with this is the over-promise of what Scarlet will be able to do. It shouldn't even have been released, honestly, it doesn't make any business sense. You dilute your Epic buyer base and you chop the value of the owners with the R1MXs. If they didn't release Scarlet, then people like me wouldn't be on here expecting anything... we would have just bought one of the hundreds of R1MXs out there.
Make sense?
And again, I do agree that no other company does trade-ins like RED does. It was awesome of them to retro-fit the original R1's when they didn't have to. The Scarlet's launch has been, honestly, a mess... all of the delays, the changes in design (thank God getting rid of the fixed lens), etc... and RED's owned that. So when it came out, Ted was at NAB touting the upgradability of it. He shouldn't have said a word and nobody could possibly "whine" about it. But it'd be like selling someone a hybrid car and saying that when the battery dies, you can pay a little more an swap it out... but then you buy it and, nope, if you now want that option, you're going to have to buy the more expensive car and THEN you can get originally what you were told you were buying.
At least it's "something" to keep the camera from being obsolete, if they're not going to support the Scarlet. I love the Scarlet... it has a great picture... but I also love the R1MX and all things being equal, they're identical. The Epic's advantage (currently) is the 5K.
And someone mentioned it... when you buy into RED, you're paying for this family mentality that they're a different kind of company than the Sonys, Panasonics, etc. I think the key issue with this is the over-promise of what Scarlet will be able to do. It shouldn't even have been released, honestly, it doesn't make any business sense. You dilute your Epic buyer base and you chop the value of the owners with the R1MXs. If they didn't release Scarlet, then people like me wouldn't be on here expecting anything... we would have just bought one of the hundreds of R1MXs out there.
Make sense?