What Will Red One's Lifespan be?

[Manfred Lopez]

I'm not sure if it's okay to ask this here, since I saw this question come up in another forum... but I thought I could get a more authoritative answer if maybe someone from the red team answers. People on that forum are calculating the lifespan to be about 10 years (with others putting it at 5 for rental houses). Is this right?

I am considering a purchase of the Red Camera if the price doesn't go up too much after orders are opened up again and if 4k monitoring gets resolved.

 

[Don Woods]

It will last as long as you take care of it. I plan on my two cameras lasting a long long time.. I still shoot on a Bata sp camera that is 10 years plus old. Works fine.

 

[Ace]

Whats great about the RED is that the sensor is supposedly easily replaceable. As would be other components by the service team. So I submit that why should there be a lifespan placed on such a camera?

Unless your talking about the number of hours you can clock on the average CMOS sensor, or the lifespan of the encoding CPU etc etc.. In any case, if your using the camera that much, it would surely pay for itself in terms of repairs or replacements.

 

[Manfred Lopez]

In any case, if your using the camera that much, it would surely pay for itself in terms of repairs or replacements.

I'm not talking from a financial point of view since, as far as I am concerned, the camera would have paid for itself after a couple of features. What I am asking concerns the "usable" lifespan of the camera.

Now I know that one of the slogans of the Red Company is "rendering obsolescence obsolete"... but I still can't imagine the red one being useful in 20 years since the world of HD is changing so fast. I also understand that you can keep replacing the hell out of the red one, but eventually, just like computers, it will make no economic sense since red four or five could be had for a lot less with a far better (I imagine) body design.

EDIT:

Just to give an example, the average PC user keeps his computer for 4 years. The average Mac user keeps it for 6 years. The average video camera probably tops out at 10 years. Film cameras can go easily into the 30 to 40 year range.

 

[Ace]

I'm not talking from a financial point of view since, as far as I am concerned, the camera would have paid for itself after a couple of features. What I am asking concerns the "usable" lifespan of the camera.

Now I know that one of the slogans of the Red Company is "rendering obsolescence obsolete"... but I still can't imagine the red one being useful in 20 years since the world of HD is changing so fast. I also understand that you can keep replacing the hell out of the red one, but eventually, just like computers, it will make no economic sense since red four or five could be had for a lot less with a far better (I imagine) body design.

I guess you just answered your own question then?

 

[Manfred Lopez]

I guess you just answered your own question then?

What? Are you refering to the 20 years I mentioned? I was just pulling that number out of the air as an example. I was wondering what others tought the lifespan would be. With video and HD cameras my thinking has alway been to use and sell a few years later. With film cameras (well, I have bought just one) my thinking has been buy to keep because of extremely stable format. Now with red, I am not sure how to think about the camera since it combines very durable design principles with extremely outdateable capture technology.

 

[Poi Boy]

At the price it is selling for I would be happy with a two or three years; naturally I would like it to be 10 years but that is not what I base my decision on.It is a tool and it has to make you money unless it is just a hobby. If a better tool comes along in 5 years and it can make you more money you buy it. Fortunately most of the support items can carry over from one system to another (lenses, tripods,lighting, etc.).
Aloha
-A

 

[Michael Schrengohst]

This is the LAST camera I am buying.

 

[Poi Boy]

you know, it very well could be, but technology has a way of changing rather quickly.
Aloha
-A

 

[Michael Schrengohst]

By the time camera technology changes beyond the RED I will
be long retired and you guys can go for it!

 

[Ace]

Now with red, I am not sure how to think about the camera since it combines very durable design principles with extremely outdateable capture technology.

Sorry, how is the capture technology outdateable exactly?

The drives are 100% interchangable, the ports for raw output are there. The sensor, provided it fulfills the promise of 4k @ 11 stops of latitude cannot get any better without moving to 16bit technology. So from where I see it, the camera is the opposite of "extremely outdatable". It could very well be the last camera you will ever buy.

And If it replaces the use of a 35mm camera, then technically it should last a hundred years the same way you could still pick up a 60 year old 35mm film camera today and still produce good images from it.

 

[Poi Boy]

come on dude everything is outdateable..I'd like to think it is the last camera I'll ever buy but I know it is just not the case. everything changes and rather quickly.
Aloha
-A

 

[Manfred Lopez]

... the camera is the opposite of "extremely outdatable".

Well, maybe the words "extremely outdateable" are a bit strong (not my intention, I apologize). What I mean is that a few years ago I read a technical article in the American Cinematographer book that pronounced 4k to be overkill when scanning 35mm film and that 2K was good enough. Now people barely think 4K is enough. And 15 years ago people where saying the audio cd would be the last copy of a record one would ever buy (remember "perfect music forever").

Now, don't get me wrong, I LOOOVE what red will do. I have been dreaming of this day for a while now. But I just wonder how money-hungry the technology will be in order to stay up-to-date. I know that the upgrade path will probably resemble that of the computer world and not that of the video gear world. I think that Red is a promise to a lot of people who could otherwise not afford this level of performance. And I know many people on this board will be able to BARELY afford red as it is. So, my question still stands... if one sells the farm to own red and everything required to make it work, how long before one has to start replacing mayor parts of the camera or the whole camera itself? I'll be shoked if Red One turns out to be completely --and I mean completely-- upgradeable forever.

 

[Chris Kenny]

Ten years from now it'll probably be possible to do something significantly better than the RED ONE (higher resolution, higher frame rates, HDR), with a body the size of a present day digital SLR, capturing to commodity storage (hours of footage on the future equivalent of a CF card), for a few thousand bucks. This is an information technology market now, and that's the kind of progress I think we can expect to see, especially as RED's competitors react to RED, or more companies enter the market with RED's outlook, and we get rid of the sort of market segmentation nonsense that has plagued the market thus far.

At the same time... RED looks like it's going to deliver an image good enough for almost any purpose, up through 4K theatrical projection. And there probably isn't much point in going over 4K for projection, due to limitations in the resolution of human vision. The 4K RAW + REDCINE file-based workflow also eliminates a lot of artificial barriers in terms of data and tape formats as well. This means, unlike with more limited cameras, you won't be praying for something better starting from the day you unpack your RED. Though better things will come out, the camera should have a very good useful life span, compared with products which are much more compromised out of the gate, like today's prosumer cameras.

Also, many of the accessories you buy for your RED (PL mount lenses, matte boxes, etc.) are built to industry standards that have already lasted for decades, and will probably last for decades more. This is, again, a considerable improvement over the prosumer market, where accessories are often specific to one camera or one vendor. It will do a lot to help protect the value of a serious investment in this sort of kit.

 

[Bruce Allen]

Chris Kenny, I agree 100%. I'm taking a more extreme path though - I'm going to get an HV20 and a 35mm adapter (total cost for that is around $2000) and spend the rest on accessories that don't go out of date (eg matte boxes, follow focus, lights, lenses, microphones...). I'll rent the Red.

AFAIK, people should plan for the Red to last them one or two features. They should just make those projects great. If they make one outstanding feature, they will not be in a totally different position in terms of getting funding, opportunities for further projects, etc.

The long term prospects of Red will depend on workflow - for example if in 5 years' time all cameras are recording pristine sync sound from digital inputs and you are still having to do dual-system and sync in post, that's a good motivation to change cameras. Similarly, if the other cameras have a RAW codec that you can directly edit with in Avid / FCP without going through RedCine (which still seems like a 2nd-best option to me)... you'll want to get one of those. But Graeme is very smart so I'm sure he'll do a Quicktime codec one day.

What else? Again, if the Red Three automatically records lens / camera / take settings as metadata, that's another motivation to upgrade. 3D might or might not make a big splash. Auto lens cleaning a la current digital SLRs would be great, as would a moving anti-shake CCD for some uses...

Finally, the sensor, although excellent, will definitely improve by leaps and bounds. It is very low noise but not noise-free, and that will improve a lot. Imagine a 800 ASA Red with the same picture quality! Similarly, latitude can and will be improved in future versions.

Of course, I don't really mind, as long as they one day release a cheaper or smaller and less obtrusive version! The Red is just too expensive-looking a camera to be carrying in the parts of the world where I sometimes go... in America it's a 4k Ego Statement. In other parts of the world, it's a sign saying "Rob Me". Hence the HV20... which looks like a $300 camcorder.

There are a lot of other beautiful things about the Red, though - for one thing, no stupid tape mechanism. Very few moving parts . Hardware-wise, it should last a very, very long time...

Bruce

 

[JohnF]

I'm considering RED in this way:

If I buy RED it it'll probably be the last camera I'll purchase until it breaks! (or I need another one for back up/multiple cam shoot)

The other point is that RED will be future HD-market proof in the near term, 5-10 years, (remember for transmission it's going to end up 1080p) so all footage shot on RED@4k will have a greater lifespan than material shot on other HD cameras/formats - giving a better chance of actually making a comfortable profit before having to upgrade.

JohnF

 

[PaulClements]

Well Sony started digital cinematography proper back in 1998 with the HDCAM and they are still pushing the same 1080p format today.

I think the biggest thing to remember is the cinema formats that will be standard in the future:

• In ten years time the current Red format may well have been surpassed but it will still be a very usable camera for shooting for cinema.
  
• In ten years no cinema will be using more than 4k projectors, if anything this will be the norm and I dare say a good many will still be behind in installing digital.
  
• 4k once established will probably form the digital footprint for at least the next 20 years... look how slowly cinemas have been changing to a 1080p proprietary format. Changing again to 4k and then to another one within a few years simply won't happen.
  
• HDTV won't go passed 4k for at least 20 years, it simply doesn't need too. Most of the HDTV's on the market aren't even 1080p yet (Or wide equivilent).
  
• Once cinemas do go higher, such as 10k you would still be able to shoot 4k and enlarge comfortably to 10k anyway, people will still be using the current 1080p cameras to film with and up to 4k for a good few years yet, so why shouldn't you do the same with 4k to the next format.

To summarize, I doubt if you would need to replace it within 20 years should you choose and it will probably be usable in 30, heck maybe even 40 if you wanted. The fact is though that new cameras will come out with some gizmo attached, be the size of a stamp or do something extra special that will catch your eye and you'll think, yeah that sounds better than my RedOne I might upgrade to that or buy one to compliment it and gradually move over to it. It's the nature of the beast, we want what's new, even if RedOne is completely usable in 40 years some people might say it's an antique and refuse to use it on that basis (They'll probably be the people saying RedOne was vaporware a few months ago, and finally be able to stand there in 40 years time and say "See I told you it wasn't good enough ).

 

[PaulClements]

Oh and also, years down the line we'll be able to attach some form of media (Probably holographic) to the redone that is portable and has no moving parts that allows us to record completely RAW rather than RedCode RAW which will put it on a par with any other 4k camera that is released in the near future.

 

[Rob Lohman]

but I still can't imagine the red one being useful in 20 years since the world of HD is changing so fast.

HD changing fast? I think it's going extremely slow. After years and years we're finally starting to see good HD penetration in north america. Blu-Ray & HD DVD are on their way but still both exist.

How many theatres do you know that project digital 4K?

Here in Europe we're way behind. Holland for example is just really starting with digital broadcast and most is still SD!! HD TV sales are going up, but the penetration is very low as of yet. HD DVD & Blu-Ray still have to (sort of) start selling here.

While the acquisition world changes quite rapidly the delivery seems to be a lot slower. Of course, if it's true that we will get most (all?) of our content over the internet in the future then this could change quite drastically. But that's at least another 5 - 10 years away in my humble opinion.

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

Talking about lifespan......people forgot a few facts here...

The camera is going to evolve with time
and you will be able to upgrade it.

- Oakley sunglasses really didn't have to be made from titanium.
But they are.
What do you think Jim will do with his favourite toy ?

Personally, the term "lifespan" hasn't even crossed my mind.