Space between Scarlet and RED ONE

[Peter Majtan]

Designing the new chip would have costs. Maybe not huge, but not nothing, which is what the current 4K design costs Red going forward, seeing as how they've already paid for it.

I never said it would be free. In fact I have clearly mentioned that I do know thing or two about the cost of sensors. What I said was that it (downscaling 4K to 3K) would be definitely easier and cheaper the upscaling 4K chip to 5K. Plus they are already going to produce two new sensors - the S35-5K Epic's and 2/3"-3K Scarlet's Mysterium-X...

How many more cameras would Red sell if they offered a 3K version of the Red One that was all of $1500 cheaper? Practically none.

Going to sleep is a great idea! Happy dreaming of the half-price Red One.

The problem is that You guys always think of it as 3K version of Red One.
None of the components (besides of lens mounts) will come (or be equal) from Red One. Majority can be reused from Scarlet. The only new thing would be the body and new sensor (again nothing to do with Red One). So please stop thinking and referring to "it" as "crippled" Red One, but far more appropriately "step-up" from Scarlet. Then You will start seeing the light at the end of a tunnel...

 

[Peter Majtan]

I'm completely sympathetic to the desire to own a 35mm-sensor digital cine camera for under $10,000 -- it would be lovely. I'd like to own an electric car for under $15,000....

Yes, You can (actually for $11,200.-):

http://www.zapworld.com/electric-vehicles/electric-cars/xebra-sedan

So is the camera idea completely realistic...

And it may be possible in a few years (either the camera or the car). We saw the first 2/3" 24P HD camera come out eight years ago for $100,000 and now there are prosumer and consumer ones for a few thousand dollars (with 1/3" chips though). The idea of a 4K 35mm-sensor camera sold for under $20,000 (body only) seemed like an impossibility a few years ago. The RED ONE is still revolutionary today, especially considering the price.

I have never discounted that and I agree that Red One is (and always will be) the pioneer of the affordable cinematic cameras that don't compromise on quality... Kudos to Jim and all his team...

So it certainly may be something coming down the road, the under $10,000 35mm-sized single-sensor camera, whether HD, 2K, 3K, or 4K. But considering the RED ONE is still in an early stage of distribution and Scarlet and Epic are coming next year, I'd say that unless a RED-like new company appears out of the blue, you aren't going to see this under $10,000 35mm-sized single sensor camera for a few years, so don't make plans for projects about to go into production next year around a non-existent product.

Our project start in couple of months (not next year) and I have already decided on the Canon range of HDV cameras (7 in total)...

Of course, as someone else said, in a few years you may be able to get a used RED ONE for under $10,000...

Maybe even sooner, but in the same way You can buy second-hand SAAB Aero...

Besides, some major productions have been shot on 2/3" sensor cameras (Star Wars prequels, Zodiak, Speed Racer, plus many TV series) so I don't see a problem with a low-budget feature or TV production going that route. 2.5-stops more depth of field is not the end of the world.

I bet You few of them were shot on fixed-lens cameras... Star Wars certainly was not...

David, I can see as an ASC where You are coming from, but that does not justify Your stance on this issue - no offense. As I have already pointed out in another thread (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=11180), there already are few Red One buyers upset about Scarlet. Sure such a camera (3K 35mm) will upset even more, but that is the industrial revolution and RED is definitely in the front line (miles ahead of anyone else). I hope they don't stop now...

 

[Chris Kenny]

I never said it would be free. In fact I have clearly mentioned that I do know thing or two about the cost of sensors. What I said was that it (downscaling 4K to 3K) would be definitely easier and cheaper the upscaling 4K chip to 5K. Plus they are already going to produce two new sensors - the S35-5K Epic's and 2/3"-3K Scarlet's Mysterium-X...

It's worth it for the Scarlet because it'll sell a lot of units, and it's worth it for the Epic because each unit is $40K and because of the prestige (read: marketing value) of building a camera at that level. It doesn't seem like it would be particularly worth it for a camera that was only marginally cheaper than the Red One.

The problem is that You guys always think of it as 3K version of Red One. None of the components (besides of lens mounts) will come (or be equal) from Red One. Majority can be reused from Scarlet.

I suspect, from the form factor of both Scarlet and Epic (remember, the Epic is 40% lighter than the Red One) that Red has, in fact, managed to figure out how to substantially reduce the number of chips required to do everything that needs to happen in a Red camera. And this would reduce costs. But the most sensible thing to do, as a result of that development, is to introduce a smaller and cheaper Red One when the timing is right. Not continue using the old electronics package in the Red One and use the new advances to introduce a 3K Super 35 format camera.

 

[Peter Majtan]

It's worth it for the Scarlet because it'll sell a lot of units, and it's worth it for the Epic because each unit is $40K and because of the prestige (read: marketing value) of building a camera at that level. It doesn't seem like it would be particularly worth it for a camera that was only marginally cheaper than the Red One.

$10K down from $30K is not "marginally cheaper" than the Red One...
That is like saying that BMW 3-series cost "almost the same" as 7-series...

 

[Peter Majtan]

I suspect, from the form factor of both Scarlet and Epic (remember, the Epic is 40% lighter than the Red One) that Red has, in fact, managed to figure out how to substantially reduce the number of chips required to do everything that needs to happen in a Red camera. And this would reduce costs.

Precisely my point...

But the most sensible thing to do, as a result of that development, is to introduce a smaller and cheaper Red One when the timing is right. Not continue using the old electronics package in the Red One and use the new advances to introduce a 3K Super 35 format camera.

A) I've said 35, not S35
B) I believe that Red One's electronics can do few extra tricks as compared to Scarlet's. And the S35 Mysterium-X is going to be available as update for Red One. That should keep enough edge to differ from both Scarlet and the proposed 3K 35mm camera...

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I'm just trying to explain to you why a 35mm-sensor version of the Scarlet with interchangeable lenses for under $10,000 is not likely to happen in the next two years. If such a camera does appear, then obviously I was wrong and you were right. After two years, such a product may appear given trends.

As for 35mm versus Super-35, that's the difference between 22mm and 24mm wide... not enough of a difference to make a sensor significantly cheaper to manufacture.

A 3K 35mm sensor versus a 4K Super-35 sensor is basically the same sensor with 2mm shaved off of it. In fact, it would probably be cheaper, due to the economies of scale, to just use the same sensor rather than make two similar sensors.

To me, it still sounds like you want a RED ONE for half the cost basically. Making it 3K 35mm instead of 4K Super-35 is not going to reduce the cost of manufacturing in half. For the camera to be half the costs, it has to be more significantly "hobbled" or limited compared to the RED ONE features or else all it would do it steal orders away from the RED ONE -- I mean, you'd be saving $10,000 if you're just willing to live with 3K instead of 4K. There are a lot of people who would jump at that bargain and drop their orders for the RED ONE.

 

[Peter Majtan]

Dear David, please for once do not look at it from the perspective of "reduce the cost of manufacturing in half" (Red One), but rather "increasing the cost by 200%" in relation to Scarlet. RED has proven that they can manufacture 3K camera with a fixed lens (that is worth "three-times-as-much"!!!). So if You remove the "expensive" lens and add a 35mm 3K sensor (that should by all accounts be bellow $5K) - why could RED not come out with that camera for under $10K? Please just once see it from this perspective...

 

[mralmostpopular]

Dear David, please for once do not look at it from the perspective of "reduce the cost of manufacturing in half" (Red One), but rather "increasing the cost by 200%" in relation to Scarlet. RED has proven that they can manufacture 3K camera with a fixed lens (that is worth "three-times-as-much"!!!). So if You remove the "expensive" lens and add a 35mm 3K sensor (that should by all accounts be bellow $5K) - why could RED not come out with that camera for under $10K? Please just once see it from this perspective...

I don't think anywhere here is saying that they can't. I think we're all saying that they won't. At the end of the day, RED is still a business.

 

[Peter Majtan]

I don't think anywhere here is saying that they can't. I think we're all saying that they won't. At the end of the day, RED is still a business.

And good business makes the right decisions (no matter how emotionally painful they can be...).

Such a camera will outsell RED ONE several times over (providing RED could keep up with the demand) and as result will make far greater $$$ profit for RED.

Plus RED has shown that they will reward their loyal customers by offering 100% refund on Red One body towards EPIC.

So far less the 2000 Red Ones have been shipped. Still not a big number to smoothen out with some great compensation... Mind You - many Red One owners will not settle for 3K "simplified" supercharged Scarlet...

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Dear David, please for once do not look at it from the perspective of "reduce the cost of manufacturing in half" (Red One), but rather "increasing the cost by 200%" in relation to Scarlet. RED has proven that they can manufacture 3K camera with a fixed lens (that is worth "three-times-as-much"!!!). So if You remove the "expensive" lens and add a 35mm 3K sensor (that should by all accounts be bellow $5K) - why could RED not come out with that camera for under $10K? Please just once see it from this perspective...

I'm just trying to explain to you why it is unlikely to happen in the near future. I may be wrong and you may be right. If Jim announces this dream camera of yours, then I'll admit my reasoning was flawed and your request was reasonable afterall.

But from my perspective, such a product would be too similar to the RED ONE and much cheaper to own, and thus hurt the sales of the RED ONE, and thus I don't see the motivation for RED to do it yet, not for two years at least. They don't want to destabilize a market for a camera that they just introduced. The Scarlet is so radically not a RED ONE that they address different markets.

If there is some serious competition for RED in the same price/feature categories, then I can see RED making the leap over the competition with this idea of yours. Or conversely, it's an idea for some new company to leap on and get a jump on RED. But for now, there is no reason for RED to jump on itself!

 

[Peter Majtan]

Look at SONY for example. As much as I hate them they do "kill" some new products even less the 3 months into their release, if it makes business sense.

Good example was Qualia 004 true HD (1920x1080) SXRD projector. Even before it had a chance to worm up its place on the shelfs - it was "killed" and SONY released VPL-VW100 with almost the same (if not superior) specs as Qualia 004, but priced (originally) at $10K. The Qualia 004 was $25K. Go figure...

PS: Right now You can get VPL-VW40 (true HD 1920x1080 SXRD) projector for $3K!!!

I rest my case...

 

[Peter Majtan]

I'm just trying to explain to you why it is unlikely to happen in the near future. I may be wrong and you may be right. If Jim announces this dream camera of yours, then I'll admit my reasoning was flawed and your request was reasonable afterall.

But from my perspective, such a product would be too similar to the RED ONE and much cheaper to own, and thus hurt the sales of the RED ONE, and thus I don't see the motivation for RED to do it yet, not for two years at least. They don't want to destabilize a market for a camera that they just introduced. The Scarlet is so radically not a RED ONE that they address different markets.

If there is some serious competition for RED in the same price/feature categories, then I can see RED making the leap over the competition with this idea of yours. Or conversely, it's an idea for some new company to leap on and get a jump on RED. But for now, there is no reason for RED to jump on itself!

Except for the post #69 above...

I'm not trying to prove You wrong. That is not my objective at all. I am just reasoning my idea...

 

[Peter Majtan]

I'm just trying to explain to you why it is unlikely to happen in the near future. I may be wrong and you may be right. If Jim announces this dream camera of yours, then I'll admit my reasoning was flawed and your request was reasonable afterall.

But from my perspective, such a product would be too similar to the RED ONE and much cheaper to own, and thus hurt the sales of the RED ONE, and thus I don't see the motivation for RED to do it yet, not for two years at least. They don't want to destabilize a market for a camera that they just introduced. The Scarlet is so radically not a RED ONE that they address different markets.

If there is some serious competition for RED in the same price/feature categories, then I can see RED making the leap over the competition with this idea of yours. Or conversely, it's an idea for some new company to leap on and get a jump on RED. But for now, there is no reason for RED to jump on itself!

Just another aspect of the same equation:

As I have mentioned before, I had a working prototype (back in 2001) of Canon-XL1-based digital camera that recorder variable frame rates (without compression) to "film-like" RAM cartridges. Canon rep told me it will "kill" their current range and that it is "too ahead" of what the current market "expects". Not to mention the "unspoken" understanding between the top-5. Tape could have been dead long time ago. There's also no need to 4:2:0 "bastardization" of video signal.

RED has shown that they won't play the same "game" and took the top-5 (especially Sony :shiftyph34r: ) head-on. I applaud that and Jim and his team has my outmost respect for having the guts and determination...

Let's see what's next...

 

[dieseljunkie]

Besides, some major productions have been shot on 2/3" sensor cameras (Star Wars prequels, Zodiak, Speed Racer, plus many TV series) so I don't see a problem with a low-budget feature or TV production going that route. 2.5-stops more depth of field is not the end of the world.

With $20,000 DigiPrimes that is.

But I agree with most of you. People (including me) want a Red One but can't afford/justify it. They can afford a Red Scarlet but they want it to be a Red One. I think that is the problem. But I think it is not that simple. The Red Scarlet will be terribly underpriced, or the Red One is overpriced. It depends on how you look at it. Of course in comparison to the competition the Red One is as cheap as it gets (the price, not quality). Extreme value for your money. However, if a $3,000 Scarlet does practically the same (maybe even more, 120fps en 180fps burst), where does the $14,500 price difference come from? The answer I think is mass production. Maybe the Scarlet is what is needed to get the Red One down under $10,000 in a year or two. I think RED knows what they are doing so we just have to see.

And if the Scarlet is as good as they promise it will eat Red One sales. People say that the fixed lens will be very good so we don't need an interchangeable lens. If the fixed lens is really good, why would this camera not outperform every other camera? The 3k resolution is higher then every other camera besides the Red One and Red Epic but not all Red users need the 4k or 5k resolution. It is also far more suited for run and gun work and you can 3 equipped bodies for the price of one Red One package. If Red delivers with the Scarlet, it will compete with everything between the Canon HV-20 and Red One. Sony, Panasonic, Canon and JVC won't be very happy with this. That's why I hope that RED will deliver, because I am sure it will bring the prices of other gear down by 30 - 50 %. How awesome is that.

 

[Peter Majtan]

With $20,000 DigiPrimes that is.

But I agree with most of you. People (including me) want a Red One but can't afford/justify it. They can afford a Red Scarlet but they want it to be a Red One. I think that is the problem. But I think it is not that simple. The Red Scarlet will be terribly underpriced, or the Red One is overpriced. It depends on how you look at it. Of course in comparison to the competition the Red One is as cheap as it gets (the price, not quality). Extreme value for your money. However, if a $3,000 Scarlet does practically the same (maybe even more, 120fps en 180fps burst), where does the $14,500 price difference come from? The answer I think is mass production. Maybe the Scarlet is what is needed to get the Red One down under $10,000 in a year or two. I think RED knows what they are doing so we just have to see.

And if the Scarlet is as good as they promise it will eat Red One sales. People say that the fixed lens will be very good so we don't need an interchangeable lens. If the fixed lens is really good, why would this camera not outperform every other camera? The 3k resolution is higher then every other camera besides the Red One and Red Epic but not all Red users need the 4k or 5k resolution. It is also far more suited for run and gun work and you can 3 equipped bodies for the price of one Red One package. If Red delivers with the Scarlet, it will compete with everything between the Canon HV-20 and Red One. Sony, Panasonic, Canon and JVC won't be very happy with this. That's why I hope that RED will deliver, because I am sure it will bring the prices of other gear down by 30 - 50 %. How awesome is that.

No matter how great the fixed lens is going to be, it can't compete with external lenses. Broadcast and "Hollywood-style" productions won't accept it for the same reason. Is not just the higher frame-rate. The are other details that puts Red One to a different class. Dual-HD-SDI, XLR Audio and (I think) greater and more precise control over image functions, not to mention follow-focus on external lenses, etc...

Scarlet is great for what is meant to be and so is Red One. The only conflict will arise for people who opted for Red One, but only really needed Scarlet - it just wasn't there... Put Scarlet out of the picture and Red One is by far the most affordable professional cine camera. No wonder many went for it (even if it was a little overkill for what they needed).

But I can see clearly Yours (and David's) point. Let see what RED does next...

 

[Chris Kenny]

Peter.... Can the Red One electronics do tricks that Scarlet's can't? Right now, the Scarlet specs mention processing-intensive things the Red One can't do, like RGB recording.

You mention that the Red One has high-end features like dual-link HD-SDI... but its dual-link HD-SDI currently serves no function, because its live monitoring outputs don't go above 720p. You say the Red One has XLR audio... it has mini XLR connectors, which I wouldn't be too shocked to see on the Scarlet. You say it has more precise control over image functions, but I'd be very surprised if the Scarlet didn't have the same controls; since it actually has an RGB mode, it actually has more of a need for them.

My guess is that Scarlet's price (and size) is largely the result of Red taking an electronics package that probably used as many off-the-shelf parts as possible, and replacing it with a package that uses more custom parts, but many fewer of them. If you're planning to make something in large volume, this sort of thing can significantly reduce costs, while lowering power consumption and increasing performance. But like I said previosuly, it doesn't make any sense to introduce a camera with the newer, smaller, cheaper electronics package alongside a camera with the older electronics package, when the only other difference between them is a bit of sensor resolution. The "Scarlet with a 35mm sensor and interchangeable lenses" isn't a product to occupy a niche between the current Red One and the current Scarlet. The "Scarlet with a 35mm sensor and interchangeable lenses" is the Red Two.

 

[jpp]

So if You remove the "expensive" lens and add a 35mm 3K sensor (that should by all accounts be bellow $5K) - why could RED not come out with that camera for under $10K? Please just once see it from this perspective...

Didn't Jim Jannard explain this, shortly before his "hiatus"? He needs to sell a lot of these cameras, in order to sustain production. He can't afford to produce a low-volume product, at this sort of price.

Your ideal full-frame sensor with a removeable lens may or may not be producible for $10K. But no camera for $10K is going to become a mass-market item. The key to these prices is volume.

 

[Peter Majtan]

Didn't Jim Jannard explain this, shortly before his "hiatus"? He needs to sell a lot of these cameras, in order to sustain production. He can't afford to produce a low-volume product, at this sort of price.

Your ideal full-frame sensor with a removeable lens may or may not be producible for $10K. But no camera for $10K is going to become a mass-market item. The key to these prices is volume.

Do not underestimate the volume if this market - Pana alone has sold tens of thousands of HVX cameras. Add Canon, Sony, JVC/Victor and other manufacturers and You start talking hundreds of thousands...

 

[dieseljunkie]

I think they will gain economies of scale with the Scarlet. Once that camera succeeds more models will follow or the price of the Red One and Epic will come down. Although there is no need for them, as they are already cheap compared to the competition. But that assumes that the competition does not stop Red from taking away customers. Which I think they won't. The big four (Panasonic, Canon, Sony and JVC) will need to fight RED. So I think they will lower their prices and introduce models with only the things users need and not all extra stuff nobody is using anyway. But I might be wrong. In three years, Red may belong to the big five and keep its prices high.

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

Do not underestimate the volume if this market - Pana alone has sold tens of thousands of HVX cameras. Add Canon, Sony, JVC/Victor and other manufacturers and You start talking hundreds of thousands...

Probably low hundreds of thousands. Don't overestimate the volume of the market. Between One and Epic, five or six thousand units -- maybe a little more. For Scarlet, possibly twenty thousand; if the price drops eventually to $2,000, maybe double that. But most nonprofessionals (and maybe even some professionals) probably won't tolerate the workflow, even if they can afford the camera.