Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Why DSLRs suck...

Jannard

Jannard

Red Leader
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
8,248
Reaction score
7
Points
0
If DSLRs did it right... we could fold our business and buy their cameras. Life would be a lot easier. We could retire and go to Fiji.

Line-skipping. The sensors are too slow so they need to resort to the worst possible work-around. Line-skipping. The scourge. Tell Canon and Nikon to get it right and build a camera with a sensor that actually records full frame at a reasonable frame rate. RAW. Without line-skipping.

H.264. This is a delivery codec for the internet. Not a codec for acquisition and grading for real productions.

Don't make us buy a new camera every time you add a feature. The list of cameras that have been offered with minor improvements is incredible. Give us RAW. Give us 24P. Give us 60 frames a second. Give us 100 frames a second. There would be no RED if you did that. You have the technology... release it. Stop teasing our customers with line-skipping, almost, and H.264 technology. Really. You make good cameras for stills, but if you want to really make a difference in the motion space... get with it. You can do it. I challenge you.

So what if your cameras are cheap. Make them matter.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Right on Jim, I couldn't agree more! I know some people who are shooting a feature on a DSLR. It just boggles the mind!
 
Interesting. I agree and all but isn't that why RED is here to begin with? Good competition is great for everyone no doubt. But, Canon and Nikon have their business models and RED has theirs. I prefer more for less but some like to be teased a bit. Different strokes.
 
mikeburton said:
Interesting. I agree and all but isn't that why RED is here to begin with? Good competition is great for everyone no doubt. But, Canon and Nikon have their business models and RED has theirs. I prefer more for less but some like to be teased a bit. Different strokes.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what "more for less" means... but if you are saying 1080P that actually measures about 1.5K of resolution (shoot a zone plate) for $1,000 then this is the right place.

Jim
 
I'm over the Canon boys as much as you are, don't get me wrong, but I was surprised to find the 7D does overcrank to 60fps - in SD mode only though. Perfect for home videos!
 
Jannard said:
I'm not sure what "more for less" means... but if you are saying 1080P that actually measures about 1.5K of resolution (shoot a zone plate) for $1,000 then this is the right place.

Jim
Click to expand...

More for less means, I bought RED because I got more camera for less $$, best bang for buck. I didn't intend for it to sound like I wanted more H.264. I'm with ya Jim, I was just a bit thrown back by your enthusiasm for a Canon/Nikon rebirth if you will. I know its part of the reason that drove you to begin with and its honorable that you continue to welcome the competition for the overall good of the filmmakers.
Cheers!
 
This "Other Cameras" thread is a joke. Sorry. Buy a $1000 camera to shoot professional work? In H.264? Really?

I'd love it if it was real. I'm anxious to retire. But a thread about cameras that line-skip is a waste of bandwidth here. The best companies in the world doling out capability? And you guys are buying it? And justifying it how? This should be a thread on "Ican'taffordsomethingpro.com". You should demand that they build something worthy instead of drooling over missing the mark.

If I were still a fan of the DSLR companies... I would demand that they step up. Demand that they quit selling me half of what they are capable of...

Jim
 
Joseph Hutson said:
On the flip side, the same can be said about the Scarlet. Buy a $2,750 camera to shoot professional work? In 3K REDCODE RAW? Really? :thumbup:
Click to expand...

Heh heh... I've always liked you.

Jim
 
Jannard said:
And this deserves bandwidth here?

Jim
Click to expand...
It would be better @1080p or 3K acquisition, yes. Without mentioning 5K (or 6K) -> 4K (former RED RAY) -- that's what we all are waiting for, right? ;-)

Cheers,
E. :-)
 
Interesting, looking back at this post from Jannard, literally every complaint he listed is addressed in several modern mirrorless cameras. How times change.
 
Yes, how times have changed, and so have requirements. What DSLRs should have had in 2010 is barely what I'd expect from a DSLR in 2022. Getting up to the requirements from 2010 now ten+ years later is not what I'd call rapid progress.
Shooting at where a fast moving target was some time ago is somehow the right direction but still a miss :)
 
Alex Zeder many of today’s flagship mirrorless bodies far exceed what could have been imagined in 2010. It’s just interesting to note that even mid range mirrorless bodies are providing these features and more.
 
I want to say only one :

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR BUSINESS

I had all the cameras RED, and every time every new model is a Revolution....

Now my favorite camera is the RED V-Raptor.

With RED my dreams really came to true .

Thank to Your Parents for such a Talented Son.
 
Right on. Conservative as Canon may be, they do customers a disservice. And, I keep reading about ppl having issues trying to use H264 as a mezzanine codec. WTF?
 
Bill Ravens said:
Right on. Conservative as Canon may be, they do customers a disservice. And, I keep reading about ppl having issues trying to use H264 as a mezzanine codec. WTF?
Click to expand...

How exactly? Very few start in this business being able to afford a high end camera. Canon provided a really affordable camera that, with skill, could produce some nice images using real lenses. It gave us all the ability to learn. As we grew they had affordable cameras to buy and use on professional shoots. And upgrading Canon's was a decent propostion, they held their value and RED's obsolescence obsolete didn't work out so well. All things being equal it cost about the same.

Technically Jannard was on point but his attitude towards those who couldn't afford his cameras was offensive and he created / influenced a whole group of douchebag fanboys who hurt the brand. And those who were disparaged were never going to develop any kind of brand loyalty you need for longevity especially now when so many other companies offer the image quality close or close enough to RED.

I'm sure he didn't care about that but it will be interesting to see the direction of RED in the near future especially once the patents run out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top