Red Bashing On Forbes Website

[Phil Holland]

“Theoretically, other Hollywood filmmakers should have been eager to order their own custom cameras from Sony. But they didn’t. They looked for cheaper alternatives, hence the success of the RED One. Unfortunately for moviegoers, this means that digital-only movies tend to look much worse than those that were shot on film.”

That last bit makes me scratch my head so hard it bleeds.

I hate to be an elitist scum, but when people outside of the industry write about technology and "how things happened", it makes me feel grumpy. It's like asking a lawyer to construct a airplane. It's just not gonna fly.

 

[Ruben and Sheri O.]

Nice =)

Are you seriously arguing that Canon can't make a perfect EF mount?

It controls iris, focus, works with 2x adaptors and all EF lenses (RED's doesn't), and supports the even field illumination correction Canon does on their DSLRs for EF lenses. That's all pretty useful stuff to C300 buyers.

[sarc]But yeah, I'm sure the Birger mount is just as good.[/sarc]

Look, Canon doesn't have to lose for Red to win. They can both thrive. RED sells everything they make, and has for years (continual backorder is the only thing at RED that doesn't change).

 

[Puven Pather]

I don't think these guys (FORBES) are selling camera's. I don't think they could care less who sells what, how or where it is made. These guys are selling shares and you can't buy shares from a private company which is what RED is. So why would they promote or talk positively about a private company their readers and advertisers have no way of making money from.

But if RED floated and became public, they would be a lot more positive because every single person on this forum and a lot of investors, and people/companies from Sony, Canon etc. would become shareholders before you could get to the end of the first minute of the initial offering. Jim and many at RED would be rich beyond their wildest dreams, well actually I think most of them are already rich beyond their wildest dreams - I've seen the carpark at RED Studios. But in the end that would be the demise of RED camera's.

So maybe Forbes should be thanked so that it scares of any ideas of RED ever floating on the stock exchange and staying a private company so that it keeps making great camera's and pushing the boundaries of imagination and technology.

 

[Peter Moretti]

What an utter bullshit comparison...

BTW, I thought it was the F900 that was created for the Star Wars movies? Those cameras were bought up at quite a pace and are still in use today. And who ever thought of buying shares in a movie studio based on camera prices? That's absurd, the DSLR or Red or Aaton Penelope aren't going to float or sink any studio.

 

[Puven Pather]

Whats bullshit about it? I think your missing the point. People don't buy shares in Apple because of the cost of an ipod or laptop. People buy into Apple because they think it is a good investment and is going to make a good return. And companies buy into other companies to assimilate the technology and their product line or just kill the competition. Has nothing to do with the cost of the product. Microsoft has invested in Apple for mutual benefit.

 

[Peter Moretti]

The camera comparison was utter bullshit b/c the Canon in a significantly more expensive and worse performer in every way, except the one that the article didn't mention. The Canon comes w/ balanced audio inputs; the Scarlet does not.

Even if the C300 is a "game changer," the investment advice is absurd:

"•If Canon wins by selling smaller, lighter, and lower-cost cameras, so will Hollywood. From big studios like Disney (NYSE: DIS) and Lions Gate (NYSE: LGF) to Paramount (NYSE: VIA) and the Comcast-owned (NASDAQ: CMCSA) Universal Pictures, studios can always benefit from lower costs.

•Fox, the News Corp.-owned (NASDAQ: NWSA) TV network, is already a fan of Canon’s DSLR format, shooting an entire episode of House with the 5D Mark II. Expect at least one new Fox pilot to use the C300 in the 2012 or 2013 season."

 

[Stuart English]

The camera comparison was utter bullshit b/c the Canon in a significantly more expensive and worse performer in every way, except the one that the article didn't mention. The Canon comes w/ balanced audio inputs; the Scarlet does not.

You can scratch that perceived Canon advantage, Scarlet and EPIC both support balanced or unbalanced audio inputs as standard features ...

 

[Sinh Tran]

Canon is scared shitless of Scarlet. I bet they did not anticipate such a big change with the accouncement on nov 3rd. They probably assumed (like many of us did) that scarlet was going to be a 3k cam and that the c300 was going towards a different crowd. I am willing to bet that this article came about on the golf course between the two executives discussing how to save the c300 in terms of sales :wink:

 

[Michael Millichamp]

Oh dear....

Now this is just silly.

 

[Zeb B]

Me thinks that the magazine industry is bought and paid for by advertisers - Canon has just a little bigger marketing budget than does RED so will warp journalistic opinion accordingly. Also, who the fuck cares what Forbes thinks about cine cameras? They didn't see the oncoming domestic bank failure, mortgage bubble and European meltdown . . . and that's their business!

 

[Roshdi Alkadri]

But don't companies cause hype and conspiracy theories to get more hits/views/attention. Bashing something that's popular at the right time (now) when all the hype is up in the air is part of the "marketing strategy" from pretty much all companies, magazines, websites etc. Its part of the "bread", rotten bread to say the least

 

[Peter Dmitriyev]

I came across this article on Forbes website. It's the biggest heap of bullshit lies and anti-Red rhetoric I've ever read. I copy/pasted some of the ridiculousness below. It's good for a laugh. Enjoy.

”At first glance, Scarlet might sound like the better deal. But RED cameras typically require a bunch of expensive extras. That’s part of the company’s strategy; lure filmmakers with a low base price and hit their pockets later with a plethora of expensive add-ons.”

“Theoretically, other Hollywood filmmakers should have been eager to order their own custom cameras from Sony. But they didn’t. They looked for cheaper alternatives, hence the success of the RED One. Unfortunately for moviegoers, this means that digital-only movies tend to look much worse than those that were shot on film.”

• In addition to beating the RED One at its own game, the C300 undercuts the release of Scarlet, RED’s long-awaited low-cost alternative (at twice the price, mind you).
• More importantly, the C300 gives tomorrow’s filmmakers a superior upgrade option when they move beyond their low-cost indie roots.
• The transition from the 5D Mark II to C300 should be fairly seamless.
• The compact size makes it insanely versatile.
• Unless Scarlet proves to be a vastly superior camera, the C300 is likely to take over this area of the market.
• Expect smaller and cost-cutting studios to be the earliest adopters of the C300. Look for a few heavy hitters in Hollywood to experiment with the format.
• This could easily become a prominent player in commercial development (an area where Canon’s existing cameras already excel).
• The C300 could become a leader in television production as well.

My god..seriously? This was utterly egregious in how vitriolic, vile, and utterly specious, base, fatuous and STUPIDLY OFF BASE that joke of an article was.

 

[Timur Civan]

Now instead of DSLR bashing it will be C300 bashing? Seriously guys who cares. Focus on learning the Scarlet and prove it's worth by posting great content.

I am gonna shoot the shit out of my scarlet. i literally havent been this excited since i got my DVX100a 6 years ago.

 

[Joost de jonge]

I worked in the media to and obvious this is just a piece of advertising from canon. The reporter problably get a nice DSLR or something.
Luckly the reall camera-fanatics can see whats BS and what not.

 

[Shane Betts]

Can someone - anyone - tell me why these two cameras are being compared at all? One records 1080 MPEG2 4:2:2 and the other records 4k RAW.

Yes, your pickup truck will tow a boat better than a Ferrari...

 

[Petri Teittinen]

Considering that the writer describes himself as "Staff writer at Benzinga.com by day, aspiring filmmaker by night", I'd say he saw an opportunity to score a free C300...

 

[Häakon]

Did you read the article? He's not predicting that Scarlet will be a dismal failure, he's predicting that the C300 will sell well.

I'd love to meet someone that actually buys it. I mean, obviously someone will, right? I just want to know what kind of person could somehow convince themselves that it's a better option than the Scarlet. And I'm not speaking as someone who owns RED equipment, I'm speaking as a rational human being.

There is a market for a 50mbps, MPEG-2, 1080p camera, but not at $20,000+.
There is a market for a smaller sensor camera that doesn't have the DoF restraints of the Scarlet, but that's not what the C300 is.

I do think the "$9,750 vs. $20,000" thing is unrealistic, but even if they both end up being in the neighborhood of $15K (Scarlet with the accessories you need, and Canon at street price... actually, the Canon won't be that low), you're still comparing a camera that shoots 4K RAW to one that shoots 8-bit 1080p. On top of that, the 4K camera can be upgraded in the future to an even better sensor.

I just don't get it.

 

[Elan Gunos]

Will someone give this writer a Pulitzer for in-dept explanatory journalism.

 

[Paul Hudson]

Did you read the article? He's not predicting that Scarlet will be a dismal failure, he's predicting that the C300 will sell well.

Oh yes, I read it. Anyone who believes and writes of the virtues of the C300 over the Scarlet can't see reality just as the writers that predicted the failure of the IPhone.

 

[Max M.]

The article, in a nutshell: Canon is poised to sell a ton of C300 cameras, despite RED's slightly cheaper (or not) Scarlet-X introduction.

I know RED people won't be buying them, but onboard 50-Mbit 4:2:2 from a 3 pound camera with a gorgeous 4K sensor and kick-ass low-light capability, perfect EF mount compatibility, that can record hours of footage to cheap, ubiquitous CF cards for $16K street is something A LOT of people will want/use, especially to rent. And it comes with everything, even built-in ND.

I may be the only one around here who think so, but the C300 is going to be hugely successful, as an A-cam for pilots and indie filmmakers, and a B/C-cam for everything else.

P.s. My Epic-X is in transit as I type this. Epic-X is my A-cam.

Couldn't agree more, everything you say is correct, it's going to be success, just a different market than the scarlet. I can run and gun a full day with the c300 following someone, with 2 battery's in my pocket, edit overnight, and deliver next day. Something that is not (yet) possible with scarlet of epic, just different use...
Where canon made a real fault was, the two separate versions for PL and EF. Nobody is going to by 2 camera. If they made the camera with both the option for PL an EF, they would sell heck of lot more...