Trade-in Epic X for Epic FF35

[Dominic Jones]

I am now wishing their was a trade in allowance on the FF35 EPIC

There is - the $17,500 rebate on the Red One body can be applied to any brain in the Epic line.

You do lose out a little when trading in for the FF35 Epic vs the Epic X, however, in that you don't get the additional free accessories (which is a fairly major disadvantage, but probably won't outweigh the loss you'd make from selling your Epix X brain and buying an FF35 one when they're released) and you'll have to wait a little longer to upgrade, probably taking a hit on rental cost and also demand for your Red One in the meantime...

In my thinking it's a fairly finely balanced gamble on whether to go for the Epic X package and sell on the brain to finance the FF35, or whether to wait for the FF35 in the first place. I'm leaning toward the latter, but I guess I'll have to decide when the Epic X starts shipping...

Either way, you're going to get a hell of a camera for a bloody good price!

Cheers,
Dom.

 

[Andrew Walker]

=Good point, but Im thinking the caveat "doesnt line skip" could be a bigger hurdle than we know. And I remember Jim saying (trying to find the thread) that nobody was as close to RED in compression tech and FPS... thats obviously a HUGE difference and cost. Not to mention cooling systems...
the latter is what has my interest as shooting 250 FPS is going to generate some incredible heat issues.

I am now wishing their was a trade in allowance on the FF35 EPIC

If I am mistaken the trade-in works towards any Epic brain...at least the 5K and 6K FF35 brains. Has someone heard something different.

 

[J. Bernard Vallon]

Canon wont be able to make a 24fps raw camera for <$3k anytime soon. Remember when JJ floated the idea of a Raw Recorder for Epic/Scarlet? Asking for a $100k deposit from 10 people? Record speeds are the killer. Throughput costs epic dollars. You just cant push data through a big pipe for cheap.

Thats the real reason epic costs so much more than scarlet, its not processors, its datarates.

Your investment will be safe until you can cheaply write 250MB/s to a 64 GB CF card. When that happens, buy more glass.

 

[Michael Hastings]

Canon wont be able to make a 24fps raw camera for <$3k anytime soon. Remember when JJ floated the idea of a Raw Recorder for Epic/Scarlet?

When people say Canon will make a 24fps "raw" camera, I think they mean a "compressed raw" similar to redcode rather than H.264 or other compressed color formats.

I'm eagerly waiting my Epic-X and counting on Jim and team to give it enough extra oomph and pro-level features to make me happy with that extra expense for awhile.

But it would be foolish to ignore the expertise in all of the relevant areas that Canon brings to the table i.e. lenses, sensors, capture, ASICs, large scale manufacturing, etc. - simply because we are fans of what RED has done so far and promised for the future.

BTW someone made an interesting point to me recently which was that the Epics specify REDCODE 225 but don't explicitly state that they will ALSO do lower data rates like the current REDCODE36 and that it may be because although it takes greater data transfer, it actually takes LESS processing power to do less compression (ala H.264/Mpeg4 vs. Mpeg2). Has anything been stated that we will ALSO get the higher compression codecs? Don't get me wrong I like that we can get closer to the "raw" raw but it is also nice to have the option - or are we going to be stuck with extreme data rates for field recording and/or field editing?

 

[Lauri Kettunen]

REDCODE 225 but don't explicitly state that they will ALSO do lower data rates like the current REDCODE36 and that it may be because although it takes greater data transfer, it actually takes LESS processing power to do less compression (ala H.264/Mpeg4 vs. Mpeg2).

We'll see, but not sure whether the efficiency of a framewise wavelet compression should be compared to H.264, Mpeg4, and Mpeg2, which include temporal compression.

If the market segments overlap, all camera manufactures whose equipment are sold by dealers will be pricewise in a kind of uphill battle compared to RED.

Excluding 16 stop dynamic range, for my needs --wildlife stuff and HD productions-- it sounds Epic-X will already contain everything needed. Consequently I have some faith, or is it wishful thinking, that will not need to change Epic-X to another camera for some time. Or, even if so Epic-X should be a great 2nd camera for along time.

 

[J. Bernard Vallon]

People will be very upset of the option to shoot RC36 isnt available. The whole point of why red was so cool in the first place was you can do all this and still record 5 minutes to an 8GB CF card on your shoulder.

RC225 is something like 30 sec/8GB card. no dice.

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

I don't Know where i̇s the datarate of redcode 225 confirmed. It could also mean redcoder nr2. Size 25 MB.

 

[Dominic Jones]

No-one (outside of Red) knows the actual datarates of the new compression types - but we do know that the numbers are not an explicit reference to MB/s.

It has also been stated here that lower bitrate modes will be available on the Epic systems - I can't remember where or when, I'm afraid, but it has definitely been discussed, no need to worry!

Cheers,
Dom.

 

[Rocco Schult]

I just like to have a different upgrade path. Some don't like the batteries, others never use CF , some don't like the sensor and would like to have FF35.
I bought the base production pack just because of the "package deal" and still the crappy bottom plate and dovetail are unused, because they are what they are.
Choice is what matters, and the current upgrade forces resale.

 

[Shawn Nelson]

After thinking on this further I'd like to take back what I said, especially since I poorly worded it in the first place. I think it will take Canon years to catch up to even where the Red One is (if they even have the brains to go there), much less go to the Epic level. That and form factor, alternate lens choices (which you know Canon won't do) and more. So while I still hope Red FF35 gets cheaper (for obvious selfish reasons), I dont think a $3k DSLR will be even a speck on its horizon.

 

[David Collard]

My two cents...
If the Epic X extends its latitude significantly where it approaches the FF35, then I'm sold on the Epic X for that reason. The other reason is the fact that 3-D film recording may be thrust upon us in a big way, so we need to be thinking about other things beside resolution. The FF35 sounds the best on paper, but I believe the "look" of the sensor's image becomes the key factor once resolution hits the 5K bayer image threshold.

 

[Dominic Jones]

If the Epic X extends its latitude significantly where it approaches the FF35, then I'm sold on the Epic X for that reason.

And that, my friend, is where the rubber meets the road, because it won't. We have been consistently told that the Mysterium-X sensor (in the Epic X and below) will have ~1 stop more DR than the R1, whilst the Monstro sensor (in the FF models and above) will have ~2 stops more than that, for around 3 stops more latitude than the R1...

Decisions, decisions...

Dom.

 

[Humberto Rivera]

S35 vs. FF35

S35 vs. FF35

I was just thinking, it’s really hard to decide between the two, but looking at the fowling factors in theFF35; there is the dynamic range of 13 stops over the Red One of 10 stops, the pixel size of 6.0 microns, there is the matter of 16 bits over the 10 bits for the Red One.

Comparing the S35 to the FF35 there is the matter of the sensor 30mm X 15mm for the S35, and for the FF 35 36mm X 24mm. In a 2 to 1 configuration of the S35 to the FF35 you pick up 1.2 xs in size. But it does not stop there, you can also cover the 1.85 area by adding the height, and the 16:9 by adding even more height, never surpassing the 24mm height of the FF35.

Now you would have to forget about all the cine lenses, but there are some good lenses available. First there are the Leica Summilux M 21mm, M24mm, and M35mm lenses all at f1.4, and the M50mm f0.95 all with latest technologies applied. On the other side of the scale in mm are the Arri Compact Primes. There is also the Red zoom lens with the Metadata build in. Of course there is also what is yet to come at NAB 2010.

It’s not the 22 stops of dynamic range you get with film, but 13 stops and a larger sensor, that should account for something.

Anyhow I’m still thinking of which way to go.

Humberto Rivera

 

[Shawn Nelson]

22 stops of DR on film? I presume that's a joke. I've heard somewhere in the 10-13 stop range for well exposed 35mm, much less once the full process takes its toll

 

[Michael Hastings]

My two cents...
If the Epic X extends its latitude significantly where it approaches the FF35, then I'm sold on the Epic X for that reason. The other reason is the fact that 3-D film recording may be thrust upon us in a big way, so we need to be thinking about other things beside resolution. The FF35 sounds the best on paper, but I believe the "look" of the sensor's image becomes the key factor once resolution hits the 5K bayer image threshold.

And that, my friend, is where the rubber meets the road, because it won't. We have been consistently told that the Mysterium-X sensor (in the Epic X and below) will have ~1 stop more DR than the R1, whilst the Monstro sensor (in the FF models and above) will have ~2 stops more than that, for around 3 stops more latitude than the R1...

Decisions, decisions...

Dom.

But that information is many months old and since Jim has told us that many new things are in the works and that they will not be announcing the latest developments (presumably to avoid tipping off the competition)

With that, and all of the extra development time we may see the Mysterium-X move closer to Monstro performance. With the encroachment of Canon and the other manufacturers I believe it will be in RED's best interest to make the Epic-X all it can be - in order to make it truly the workhorse of the industry.