Right now, isn't it probably cheaper in the long run for Sony or Canon to write Jim Jannard a $4 billion check like Geroge Lucas just got, and tell him to retire early, in order to protect their prices?

@rockroadpix you probably misunderstood the term 'color science', it's not just about 'color', it's the whole way they create an image out of the raw sensor data.

@stip - NO, I knew what you meant. I have sat in on MANY post production sessions (spirit/flame/DaVinci/You name it). I am referring moreso to motion within the frame and the edges of objects within. If Film is the target, I have always felt that RED just missed. ARRI hit it.

Right now, isn't it probably cheaper in the long run for Sony or Canon to write Jim Jannard a $4 billion check like Geroge Lucas just got, and tell him to retire early, in order to protect their prices?

Red is not a threat to all this companies. It is just small little bug who happened to live two sunny days.

Is the whole point of RED to look like film? I never really got that. The movies i've seen shot on RED have had some new and unique looks that I think become their own sort of standard like a new film stock. I LOVE the look of ARRI, but I also have loved the look of movies shot on RED. I think it fits well with the modern movies that are artistically edgy. Sci Fi and action films in particular. I think that they are more than a blip on the screen to the big companies.

@shian

Well, that's not all correct. Even if I think in a similar line like you, let me give you a few facts: Sony was already developing the Genesis together with Panavision and Arri was working on the D20 when RED came along. It was in the air. Look at the concept of the ill-fated Thompson Viper.

Even without RED, we would have seen a large single sensor camera from both Sony and Arri sooner or later – but probably at a higher price point. Yes, RED kicked some ass…s, but they didn't change the world. And I still hate Sony for propagating 2/3 for movie making one year before the Genesis was ready…

And Canon? They stumbled into the game and had no plan at all. They are the ones who are really late with a great sensor and crappy recording format for too much money.

@nomad I was oversimplifying. The Viper was a 3 chip, but I remember it being a bridge to the the cams we have now. And they were all taking their sweet time, while RED just went for it.

what's the reason for this reduction? To many systems on stock? Lower number of orders? Under pressure by Sony & BMD (for shure not by Canon..)

Between the overly positive and negative comment, I think there is more a middle ground. Things like red has a 444 sensor is not correct, you cannot get 444 from a bayer sensor at 1.1 pixel. The second thing about obsolescence obsolete!!!!!!! So what will happen when you buy this $ 4000 body redone, will you have other sensors etc.... no. Those that are buying at the new epic price won't have Dragon update. They will have to pay for it. And what difference does it make, you can sell your old camera and add the money for a new one.

Let say you are a Sony F3 user and you want to buy an F5 for $ 15 000. You sell your camera for 9/10 k and add the remaining money. In fact you are not just upgrading but get a completely new camera.

Now red has there part in the democratization of high-end s35 camera. To deny that is really biased. While the dslr was more of the low and mid, the high-end was more because of red. They did bring some very nice technology at very competitive prices. The religion and adoration of the red boss that comes with it that is disturbing.

The latest reduction is really nice even if is more about competition than some generous act by Jannard. It could also be a move into the mid and lower end of the market. A market that they had abandon but perhaps that as they have loss to Alexa in the high-end it was better to reposition themselves. In the end this move is good for all of us customers because it will force others to compete. For example the Canon C300 pricing looks ridiculous compared to a scarlet if you do a feature. Now lets see what Sony will do.

If you are doing quick turnaround TV work being able to record a 50mb/s 422 codec is amazing and the reason the C300 became the go to camera for TV production on the low end and Alexa on the high end. TV does not want to deal with the cost and resources required for 4K. To achieve that quick workflow on the Epic or Scarlett you need to spend another $13K for a module.

The F5 with XD50 codec will cut into the C300 market a lot but the C300 has had a great headstart.

Much of the industry has very little need or want for the added expenses of 4K Raw. Give me a good compressed codec any day of the week.

Different strokes for different folks.

@vicx Is RED 4K or not?

Well, yes and no. The Epic is close to true 4K resolution, since it can shoot 5K@24p, the Scarlet or R1-MX is not. You need an overhead to decode the needed resolution from a Bayer pattern. Graeme Nattress did a great job with his decoding, about 80% for luma, and you can measure close to 4K on the Epic – if you have very good and expensive glass on it!

The sensor outresolves all middle-class cine lenses like rehoused Zeiss or Leica-R and even some older cine lenses. You'll need master Primes or cine Summicrons to see it's limits. Imagine cameras with true 8K! You'd need all new glass for them…

Sony's mumbo-jumbo about the tilted sensor in their cameras and "8K" aside, it resolves a tad more but at the cost of some aliasing. I've never seen any aliasing for luma with RED.

Can't say anything about the new cameras, of course.

Their concept of "obsolescence obsolete" is pure marketing, as Vitaliy and Danyyyel explained very well.

The only true 4k camera, as far as I know, is sony f65. (which has a completely even sample of all channels)

You'd need all new glass for them…

@Nomad

Now this is if you believe that people will actually want maximum resolution. Thing is, people would complain that the footage looks like video. Whereas lens imperfections migh introduce a desired look. This thing is certainly not linear in what is "good" and what is "bad".

I see what you mean. And yes, redraw is indeed a great innovation!