Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Guys like this are the ones that are pulling the camera market down

Robert Ruffo New said:
This is crazy thinking that bankrupts many people. You can RENT the same camera and do the same work - it will not look any different. Only buy if it puts you $$$ ahead of renting to do the same work with the same (rented) camera, or buy if you cannot rent a particular item in your area and it is important to the work you want to do.

Of course creativity and talent are very important, but they are 100% unrelated issues to whether you should buy vs rent any particular item on an equipment list.
Click to expand...

Rob, funny....I debated long and hard about renting REDs vs owning them for past 2 years. I assumed it didn't make a difference, but I have to admit now that I OWN a RED, it has certainly made a difference to my clients. I'm booked MUCH MORE OFTEN. It's been a dramatic difference. Before I was a director with ACESSS to REDS. Now I'm a director that OWNS a RED, and so when they have quick turnaround jobs (ie..."can you shoot this tomorrow"), or hope I can be flexible with the budget, they think of me MUCH MORE. I'm getting a lot more "calls".

For some reason the fact I own all my own gear (camera, lenses, support, filtration, red rocket, editing suite) gives them piece of mind I can deliver on time and I know what I'm doing. There are a lot of "directors" out there. But far fewer that own the means of production and can deliver on their own terms (ie my workflow is not determined by whether a rental house has or does not have a certain camera or lens I need...I own it ALL).

So, OWNING...at least in my case, and I have numerous clients, this doesn't apply to just ONE...does seem to have a "value" that goes beyond $$$. It makes a statement. Across the board, my colleagues that have INVESTED have generally gotten FURTHER AHEAD than those that DID NOT. It would appear that OWNING gear, and LEARNING ON IT, has an intrinsic value that renting a long cannot provide.

Food for thought.
 
Robert Ruffo New said:
This is crazy thinking that bankrupts many people. You can RENT the same camera and do the same work - it will not look any different. Only buy if it puts you $$$ ahead of renting to do the same work with the same (rented) camera, or buy if you cannot rent a particular item in your area and it is important to the work you want to do.

Of course creativity and talent are very important, but they are 100% unrelated issues to whether you should buy vs rent any particular item on an equipment list.

With advances that plummet prices too fast it will soon no longer be a good idea for anyone to buy a camera, at some point even rental houses will stop buying them. Then what?
Click to expand...

So rent a camera and stop complaining about the fact that technology is moving along faster than you personally can find work to pay for a camera if you decide to buy. I paid for a red one when it first came out, top dollar, it's paid for itself many times over because I found work to pay it off, I wasn't so foolish to rely on recouping some of my original investment when I went to sell it to make it pay fully for itself. That's no way to do business. There is nothing crazy about people selling things for what they want to sell them for, it is however absurd for people not to mind their own business and go sticking their noses into other people's affairs.
It's also absurd to think that cameras would somehow just stop being available....nothing more to say to that point.
 
Last edited:
Nick Morrison said:
Rob, funny....I debated long and hard about renting REDs vs owning them for past 2 years. I assumed it didn't make a difference, but I have to admit now that I OWN a RED, it has certainly made a difference to my clients. I'm booked MUCH MORE OFTEN. It's been a dramatic difference. Before I was a director with ACESSS to REDS. Now I'm a director that OWNS a RED, and so when they have quick turnaround jobs (ie..."can you shoot this tomorrow"), or hope I can be flexible with the budget, they think of me MUCH MORE. I'm getting a lot more "calls".

For some reason the fact I own all my own gear (camera, lenses, support, filtration, red rocket, editing suite) gives them piece of mind I can deliver on time and I know what I'm doing. There are a lot of "directors" out there. But far fewer that own the means of production and can deliver on their own terms (ie my workflow is not determined by whether a rental house has or does not have a certain camera or lens I need...I own it ALL).

So, OWNING...at least in my case, and I have numerous clients, this doesn't apply to just ONE...does seem to have a "value" that goes beyond $$$. It makes a statement. Across the board, my colleagues that have INVESTED have generally gotten FURTHER AHEAD than those that DID NOT. It would appear that OWNING gear, and LEARNING ON IT, has an intrinsic value that renting a long cannot provide.

Food for thought.
Click to expand...

Robert Rodriguez: Rebel without a crew.

In my opinion, you did the smartest thing in this market. And also: your customers have more respect for you, you are not the guy that comes there and ask for certain equipment vs other, or who need to test cameras before the job, to see how operate in the best way.

I embrace your mentality (i'm buying everything too), and unless you are not into movies and big $$$, in my opinion that's the best way to go.
 
shashbugu said:
Kwan, you've hit 2790 posts, all pretty calm and positive. This officially makes you the coolest guy on Reduser.
Click to expand...


I disagree!

Not on Kwan attitude, but on the post number: 66% of Kwan comments are "Nice..." and "Interesting...".

So, Kwan is cool, and i like him, but he faked the posts number!

LMAO (Just kidding Kwan, you are a great guy!)
 
You have over 50,000 reduser now in this battlefield, 85% smartest, 10% confused and 5% dummies by choice (best of the Three World Cuisines to get help - lol)

Yes I agreed, I don't write much since I am back in school, I am Medaholic now (but I'm willing post some reviews when I get chance)

Note: trust me reduser.net is fastest growing addiction, Once you're in it, you feel like your body needs it (LOL).

Now please get back to the subject and cry on camera market, ain't no shame in it.
 
Nick Morrison said:
Rob, funny....I debated long and hard about renting REDs vs owning them for past 2 years. I assumed it didn't make a difference, but I have to admit now that I OWN a RED, it has certainly made a difference to my clients. I'm booked MUCH MORE OFTEN. It's been a dramatic difference. Before I was a director with ACESSS to REDS. Now I'm a director that OWNS a RED, and so when they have quick turnaround jobs (ie..."can you shoot this tomorrow"), or hope I can be flexible with the budget, they think of me MUCH MORE. I'm getting a lot more "calls".

For some reason the fact I own all my own gear (camera, lenses, support, filtration, red rocket, editing suite) gives them piece of mind I can deliver on time and I know what I'm doing. There are a lot of "directors" out there. But far fewer that own the means of production and can deliver on their own terms (ie my workflow is not determined by whether a rental house has or does not have a certain camera or lens I need...I own it ALL).

So, OWNING...at least in my case, and I have numerous clients, this doesn't apply to just ONE...does seem to have a "value" that goes beyond $$$. It makes a statement. Across the board, my colleagues that have INVESTED have generally gotten FURTHER AHEAD than those that DID NOT. It would appear that OWNING gear, and LEARNING ON IT, has an intrinsic value that renting a long cannot provide.

Food for thought.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but last time I added up my rentals grip truck it was close to one million of total rented gear (plus what I rented of my own to the shoot). That's a lot of coupon clipping…. Plus when you rent you can try things that you may not like, or only like for certain very limited situations/. But you're probably right, owning a camera can aid the perception that you KNOW that camera, and that has an intangible benefit worth its weight in gold, but it would be crazy to buy, store and pay insurance on items we use on every 20th shoot. Some things, really, should only be rented.
 
Robert Ruffo New said:
Fair enough, but last time I added up my rentals grip truck it was close to one million of total rented gear (plus what I rented of my own to the shoot). That's a lot of coupon clipping…. Plus when you rent you can try things that you may not like, or only like for certain very limited situations/. But you're probably right, owning a camera can aid the perception that you KNOW that camera, and that has an intangible benefit worth its weight in gold, but it would be crazy to buy, store and pay insurance on items we use on every 20th shoot. Some things, really, should only be rented.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah I'm not against renting. Don't get me wrong. I had a DP last month that wanted to rent a $20k light. I'm certainly not going to buy that! And there's a bunch of gear I'm looking to test. But so many of my jobs (mostly promo interviews) are so last minute, and so doable with our established workflow, it makes much more sense for me to have a BASE KIT (that covers my basic needs for camera, lighting, etc). Whatever falls out of that BASE I'm open to renting, for sure. But right now over 75% of my jobs I can handle with my own gear, which is comforting.

But...there's always more gear to get, so owning is not a decision to be taken lightly.

This business is not for the faint-hearted, that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
There are arguments for renting and for owning.

For me, rentals are prohibitive of developing most of my own projects.
When I work for others, usually I want them to rent. Who they rent for, I do not care.

But I got into this because there is stuff I want to do.
Not so much because there is stuff I can do for others.

Do not get me wrong.
I work for others.

But the equipment I own, lets me learn and develop and work on my own skills, projects and ideas.
And eventually (over time) my own projects have triggered most of my commercial work and the ways I have managed to get into work I want "more" when working for others.
Even though if I initially had tried to pitch that without a record of being able to show what I mean, I would never had any funding.

Owning is good, when you need it.

rental is better when you do not need to own.

I agree, btw, that unless you are a rentalhouse OR have a production that pays for your camera, rentals should be considered a bonus only, in current markets, unless you have a good way to support customers with full packages at their specifications.

G
 
Most good cameramen, DPs don't own a camera. There are many reasons not to do so. And, of course, there are reasons to own a camera, mostly to make money out of it. Freelancing Cameramen/DPs sell their craft. To be tied to a certain camera model and lenses restrains creativity unnecessarily.

I own an Epic but I'm not working as freelancing DP but as a producer/director. In my case I'm the one who writes the checks an hence can choose whatever I want to shoot with. If I were a freelancing DP I would never own an expensive technical item, let alone a camera. Travelling with cases, babysitting them... no thanks.

Hans
 
Actually Hans you are not quite correct, many Features and commercials DoP's own there own cameras, especially in USA due to Tax etc
However, I learned form a young age never worry about what other's do, because you never know what their needs are to survive,
Only ever worry about your own needs, how much you need to survive, where you want to be in your life and career, because only you will pay the bills no one else.
I promise you I have been working in this wonderful industry for 34 years, never worry about what the others are doing and never get jealous, worry about what you are doing.
Because you are the one that must succeed and survive, if someone is doing better than you, ask yourself why and then improve yourself.
If they sell equipment off cheaper than you would like, that is their prerogative, move on :)
 
RikiButland said:
Actually Hans you are not quite correct, many Features and commercials DoP's own there own cameras, especially in USA due to Tax etc
However, I learned form a young age never worry about what other's do, because you never know what their needs are to survive,
Only ever worry about your own needs, how much you need to survive, where you want to be in your life and career, because only you will pay the bills no one else.
I promise you I have been working in this wonderful industry for 34 years, never worry about what the others are doing and never get jealous, worry about what you are doing.
Because you are the one that must succeed and survive, if someone is doing better than you, ask yourself why and then improve yourself.
If they sell equipment off cheaper than you would like, that is their prerogative, move on :)
Click to expand...

Well said. Not to mention that even though I direct and own camera the client might request a different camera, for instance Walmart has been wanting to shoot on the C300, in that case my red sits at home and we rent, that's how it goes.
 
Last edited:
I can only speak to my situation, but if I need to dig a ditch that will take a few days, I rent. If I were in the ditch digging business and could justify buying the ditch witch taking into consideration taxes, amortization of the purchase over time, etc... then I would buy.

The same goes with my cameras under normal circumstances. That is, if I needed a camera a known specific amount of time and it would be cheaper to rent, then I would rent. But if the time I spend using my cameras is great, over a year's time, I would purchase.

I said under normal circumstances. In my case, the nearest rental house for a RED camera is probably 300 miles away. Possibly only a hundred miles, but my best guess is 300 miles. It is more convenient, if not cheaper, to own due to that factor alone.

Plus, owning affords me spontaneity and hours of recreation when not doing work.
 
Bingo. A high profile DOP friend of mine said he learned years ago to stop chasing tech and owning gear. Never pays off in the long run and cameras especially get better so frequently its a never-ending pit to throw your money away into to keep up. Rent gear, buy property.

Hans von Sonntag said:
Most good cameramen, DPs don't own a camera. There are many reasons not to do so. And, of course, there are reasons to own a camera, mostly to make money out of it. Freelancing Cameramen/DPs sell their craft. To be tied to a certain camera model and lenses restrains creativity unnecessarily.

I own an Epic but I'm not working as freelancing DP but as a producer/director. In my case I'm the one who writes the checks an hence can choose whatever I want to shoot with. If I were a freelancing DP I would never own an expensive technical item, let alone a camera. Travelling with cases, babysitting them... no thanks.

Hans
Click to expand...
 
Robert Ruffo New said:
By your logic everyone should only rent as there is no financial benefit in owning.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the depreciation issue, not the ownership issue.

Ownership for many people (especially in stills where we can often talk in hundreds, not thousands of dollars) is an affordable luxury.
 
This is a bit like debating if an investment in stocks are a good or bad investment. Well, it all depends on timing, what stocks you buy etc etc. Saying that it's all ways bad to own gear or all ways bad to not own gear is a bit silly. It's very much up to each and every one to weight it out. For us it was easy the epic was paid of on the first job, then we used it, rented it out and learned from having it and gained jobs, won pitches for being able to do proper test films etc. So compared to not owning it for us then owning has been a plus. But the for a DP that has his own gear and want to rent it out to production etc, you very much step into a different category than the guy that rents it all. The producer will look at you differently. Some will make a face and say that you just want to gain from renting out your gear, while you think you are helping them by providing them with a great deal. So it's not really so that having your own camera is an only win situation, especially if you need to force it onto clients etc.
 
For me the value of my Red One MX is the beautiful pictures it makes, the reliability by knowing where it has been and how it has been treated, that it can be placed in high risk situations where I do not want to put my Epics in, and it goes out on jobs as often as my Epics as budgets dictate. My Red One will probably never become obsolete for making fantastic images, and will only be retired when repair costs exceed income generated by it. So far it has been 100% reliable since I purchased it new (SN 0269). How about that Canon, Arri, Sony, Panasonic, etc.? Someone a few years ago predicted that 4K raw was the future and the way to go. Thank you Jim Jannard and Red Team. The Red One MX's value has always exceeded its cost when placed in capable hands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top