When is it broken?

[bevan goldswain]

Not being able to answer this question seems to be the reason for much of the grumbling (and defensive praise) that I have been reading on RED USER.

What I mean by that is this: If I bought a camera and the battery latch wouldn't close properly, I could call up RED about it and they would repair/replace. The same goes for a memory card that bursts into flame or a colour camera that only records in monochrome. (None of these things have happened ) These would all be examples of something being obviously broken.

If you called RED to say: "hey my new camera has a battery latch that won't close and I can't power up my camera" you wouldn't be happy with 'oh yes we know about this issue and we are working on it' and you wouldn't settle for silence. To argue that RED is improving the camera all the time and therefore we should wait and cut them slack would of course not be the right response to THIS kind of issue, because it's broken, right, and needs fixing.

When we talk about noise levels, and highlight priority vs deep blacks, and all sorts of subtle compromises or enhancements in the image we are in territory where it's fairly hard to clearly see whether something is broken or not. Whether we can speak up and call something out for being broken, or wether we can put it down to: no sensor is perfect and of course you can mess things up when you stress the technology to its limits.

It's like sending a wine back because it isn't quite right...or sending it back because it's gone bad... It's good to know which situation is which.


What seems to heat up these debates is that redusers are often the ones responding to other redusers concerns at times when the concerns at hand are ones that require an official word from RED.

Some people come up with ridiculous criticism, and some raise genuine issues that need attention. As a REDuser I'd like to know quickly which are which. I want to know what RED is willing to acknowledge as broken and what they are committing to fix. it would make all these discussions much easier.

The red chroma noise was an example of something where RED clearly admitted something was wrong and needed some fixing. This is great, all informed, the tribe knows where they stand and await for a fix.A fix came out in good time and it really is a good fix.

some issues that are being discussed at the moment:

Dragon gate flare shadow
Magenta streaks and flares
Large amounts of CMOS smearing


Are these things that RED is prepared to admit to being broken and commit to working on a fix for?
Are these things RED can once and for all stand their ground on and say "no, deal with this, it's normal. It's in every camera, this is what you get. Maybe the next camera will be improve on the age old imperfections but for now this is it"

Or are they forever to be a grey area of debate amongst some redusers who feel it's more of an issue than others. A debate often influenced by the subject matter of what people shoot.

 

[Mark Phelan]

It has been my experience that RED is more forthcoming than any other camera manufacturer in the business. They admit it when things go bump in the night, but then they set about making things right. It is a never-ending process, building the finest camera system in the world and we get to come along for the ride. This is what I love about RED and how it works.

Trying to cast aspersions is counter productive, and it sounds like that's what you're doing here a bit. RED's only problem is they are producing a camera in the year 2014, when EVERYONE gets to chime in on the internet about how rotten this is, how they could do it better, yada, yada, yada. Jim took the crap for only so long before he decided he had better things to do.

It amazes me how I can make a suggestion here on RedUser about an idea I had on what would make the camera better, and have the company actually listen. Not only listen, but make the exact idea come to life. That would NEVER happen with Canon, Nikon, ARRI, etc. Yes, I think that's pretty slick.

It's not broken, but forums love to spread the germs. Of course I don't think it's a perfect company, but I have NEVER had better customer service or support from any other organization. Plus the cameras are not too shabby either.

 

[Bob Gundu]

I'm with Mark.

 

[Bobby Farokhzad]

Second that. Of all the companies I dealt with, RED has been the only one to admit their shortcomings and be willing to take the time to solve the problems created as a result of those shortcomings. They are not perfect but their customer support is second to none.

 

[Brian F Kobylarz]

RED continually outperforms others in the industry by being a leader in innovation. Continually pushing the limits. If they played it safe, we would not have the tool set to work with that we have today.
Would ARRI be announcing software upgrades to bring ALEXA and AMIRA closer to 4K? Would Panasonic be releasing a 4K Varicam? Add nearly every other major manufacturer to the list - but wait, for RED, isn't 4K yesterday's news?
Instead of sitting back on laurels while others played catch-up, RED moved forward to give us the Dragon sensor. Care to hazard a guess how long before the ALEXA 6K is released?

Calling out only perceived shortcomings displays a prejudice to only one side of the subject. Let's keep the discussion balanced by considering; When you are pushing technological limits, not everything is expected to be flawless on release. Actually I've seen quite a few instances of that from other film industry manufacturers over the years. The web wasn't around back then - nor was there a company that embraced feedback from users on an open forum.

Times have changed. Sensors and color chemistry are like film stocks. By applying your knowledge, investing your time and your own vision to achieve a look, an image.
If something in the technological sauce is off, you report it. In this case to a company that listens.

That's good enough for me.

 

[Charles Bergquist]

The only thing I know they admitted to on Dragon is the increased noise levels over Epic MX. Which was said AFTER everyone started showing them side by sides. When in the specs it was to perform at 2000 as well as MX 800. I think if before the camera began shipping people would have changed their minds if they knew it was a clean 250 ISO camera.

The magenta CMOS streaking issue hasn't been addressed nor has the gamma shifting problem.

The Dragon shoots Daylight exteriors better than anything out there, no question. Interiors / Night it struggles a lot and runs into hardware limitations.

Knowing when it's a broken / misadvertised camera is a tough one. I do think RED realizes that DPs are looking at other systems or sticking with their Epics. Also, I've invested my time and money into the RED sysytem and they've given some upgrade paths better than most.

The other thing I don't understand is the Dynamic Range stuff. I've seen 3 or 4 tests online showing 13.5 stops when it's supposed to be 16.5.

It's ironic that there can be so much subjectivity when it comes to something that's very much, what you see is what you get.

Hopefully there is someone working on the parts that are not working as advertised.

- Gamma Shifting
- CMOS Magenta Flare
- True 16.5 Stops DR

 

[Björn Benckert]

I'm not sure, but I think that Jarred would actually take the camera back if you feel it's not living up to your expectations, as there is simply people standing in line to to buy it if you don't want it.

It's quite simple you buy it for what it is now and then you can only hope for more, there is no guaranties, but at least to me it looks very promising.

Dragon gate flare is for sure fixable even tough a fix might limit the camera to be used with certain lenses, I think the swappable OLPF system could easily cater for a "shadow free gate".
Magnta streaks and Cmos smear I had no issues with, I can make them appear but only when really stressing the camera, again different olpf's could possibly sort things out.

But for me none of the above have been an issue when shooting. And I would not worry to much about any of it.

The only thing I know they admitted to on Dragon is the increased noise levels over Epic MX. Which was said AFTER everyone started showing them side by sides. When in the specs it was to perform at 2000 as well as MX 800. I think if before the camera began shipping people would have changed their minds if they knew it was a clean 250 ISO camera.

The magenta CMOS streaking issue hasn't been addressed nor has the gamma shifting problem.

The Dragon shoots Daylight exteriors better than anything out there, no question. Interiors / Night it struggles a lot and runs into hardware limitations.

Knowing when it's a broken / misadvertised camera is a tough one. I do think RED realizes that DPs are looking at other systems or sticking with their Epics. Also, I've invested my time and money into the RED sysytem and they've given some upgrade paths better than most.

The other thing I don't understand is the Dynamic Range stuff. I've seen 3 or 4 tests online showing 13.5 stops when it's supposed to be 16.5.

It's ironic that there can be so much subjectivity when it comes to something that's very much, what you see is what you get.

Hopefully there is someone working on the parts that are not working as advertised.

- Gamma Shifting
- CMOS Magenta Flare
- True 16.5 Stops DR

Just saying, Dragon olpf1 @ 2000ISO is at least as clean as MX @ 800ISO.

 

[Dr. Sassi]

I had that Side-handle-door-battery problem.

I wrote a short note to RED and got a little new part, which was mounted in a minute. This was in 2012. All fine since.

If there is a problem, send the information to RED. It will help everyone on the long run.

 

[Donald MJ Anderson]

I think they rushed this out the door way too fast.

Thinking back people were quite vocal about the Dragon release delay and shouting for a release. The customer base was pretty rowdy and aching for a camera to buy.

Ultimately I think we will get very close to the camera promised. Many users think the CMOS flare should be improved (I agree and really hope its being worked on in secret) but everything else the camera does is pretty strong (or getting stronger with OLPF kit release).

 

[Gunleik Groven]

OK.

This gets silly.

Have you filled an RMA with examples to RED?

Have you seen the documentation around MX vs Dragon noise- and ISOlevels?

And Luigis comparisons between the MX/Dragon/RED One on the CMOS streaking. (Kinda wish He had posted the Alexa example, too. I have seen those from other tests)

The CMOS smear is documented and happens in certain situations.
Not in denial as to that.
It's unwanted when it happens
Not in denial

But it being a general high-contrast charracteristics of Dragon. Nope. Phils, Luigis and other examples seem to negate that.
My own undocumented experience as well, but that's about as irrelevant as your undocumented comparisons Rob...

If you have shot direct comparisons - as it seems you have Rob - please: At least send them to RED in confidentiality if they are so super-secret that you cannot post them publicly.
Gee: I would even be fine with you posting them here for discussion of the differences if you think they are controlled and good.
No issues whatsoever in my book about seeing that.

Taking a small ice-pick and chip chip chip.
Undocumented FUD and neglecting of direct answers which do NOT get comments, but just popping up the same circles in new threads.
I think that's been done enough by now.

So: To be plain:
The discussion around noise and CMOS smear is a good one.
But undocumented FUD (without concrete comparative examples and files) really doesn't do much good.

If you have examples, please post an RMA and have a response to that, too.
You're more likely to get in touch directly with RED techs that way.

I am happy that you like your MX better than the Dragon Rob.
And I can follow that.
My subjective opinion was that based on my Criteria I liked the RED ONE M better than the MX.

What I did about that was not upgrading.
What I didn't do was to chip on all those who were obviously more happy for the MX.

I guess that was partly because I had no problem seeing their reason to upgrade.

So what's the point.

This thread is down.
Warning given.

Get some controlled examples out, post them to RED, even post them here.
Or kiill the FUD.

A friendly suggestion:
If you want to do comparative claims, document the comparison and how it was shot.
I still have no issues with comparative documented questions being asked, but the "I feel like Cooke is better than Zeiss" line of discussion without relevant comparisons, images, raw-files and analysis is at best useless. For all.

If you feel your camera is defect, fill in an RMA and send the camera for evaluation.



This is a warning of conduct.

Dictator-like admin or not!
This thread gets shot down because it's like discussing whether you like steak or turkey.

Take care!