IronFilm

If you can settle for only 720, then the nice Samsung NX500 is going for a very cheap $344

Haha, something like that! ;-)
 
Edit: darn, they won't let themselves be contacted on eBay!! 
Sent a message to customercare at 6ave.comcom instead. 

This camera highlights why Canon have been successful and profitable.
Wish I could sell a 2MP sensor for $30,000 and have it all makes sense in eyes of the customer!! There is demand for this camera and it will be lapped up by broadcast and industry.
No more infrared B/W shots on Big Brother!
Yes they could have sold it to consumers and enthusiasts for $2000... it's only a new sensor, with massive 19 micron pixels (A7S is around 8 micron) but most would have looked at the crappy megapixel count and then struggle to get any use out of the 4 million ISO - even the creative filmmakers we are would have only a very limited use for that! 1 scene out of every 100 kind of thing.
So they have done the right thing for business and dollars...this is a specialist use camera for the industry.
Is it valid to say "no internal recording and only 1080p for $30,000 - that sucks?" well the customers who will buy this camera for the set of Big Brother or an astrophysicist up in his telescope will say that isn't a valid criticism at all - they will want a live feed off the back of the camera, no need for internal recording, no need for 4K either as delivery will be in 720p or even SD...but it is valid in the sense that there must be quite a bit of margin in this camera!! And it is a shame that Canon are not so innovative in their DSLR imaging at the moment by comparison.

"Ok ,you sir, yes you the male Lion.. could you move closer to the Arri light and Esteban can you walk up and put a reflector on that crocodile. Sweet, everyone ready?
Ok, "On the African River Banks at Night", Scene 5, Roll Sound, Camera, Action!... Cut!,
Ok someone explain why they are all running away? and Esteban stop putting your head in the crocodiles mouth...."

You put a 30000$ camera in place to shoot lions or hyenas(or what not) at night and pray to God that an elephant or a rhino doesn't come by 

RX100 MK IV / RX10 II are best for this, hands down. Forget the interchangeable lens mount options if you need a sharp image & moire free.
That's a good budget choice. Way off the RX100 IV for quality but not so far off NX1's 1080/120fps, which looks like upscaled 720p anyway.

The first Epic footage I shot had some right dodgy stuff going in the blacks. I put it down to user error, but I was surprised at how very very careful you have to be with it. 
Just like that Chinese website www.pchood.com that rehouses lenses so they look more expensive. I might just get an URSA Mini and stick a RED badge over the BM logo and say its a Limited Edition version: RED Magic Dragon. Ha!

Someone needs to make a RED shell that houses other cameras. Most clients wouldnt know the difference but would be STOKED.

The kind of client that would ask specifically for RED would also probably scoff at a Scarlet, even though the Scarlet dragon looks the business. You also have to consider the OLPF situation, the skintone OLPF is pretty shocking in low light (even 1600).. As you always light your work, that might not be a concern.

I'm glad to hear it!
It would be interesting to see how a "Shot On Red" tag would work to attract more clients. A lot of people are drawn to it. Many clients do ask if they can shoot on RED, but those clients are usually a pain to work with. If someone mentions the camera before the ideas, I roll my eyes. 
I've done Epic work before so I know the workflow etc. Purchasing this camera would take up all my budget and with the URSA Mini on the horizon, it seems hard to justify. Like I said, it would be interesting to see the behaviours if I sold my services with a RED stamp on it. 

Not to mention that most people are not only unwilling to learn grading, but downright offended when you suggest that maybe their grade is the problem. A problem that affects 80% of us--not being colorists--is impossible to acknowledge without pissing people off. Isn't that insane? 

Some flat/log profiles, like C-Log (faux-log designed for 8-bit), Nikon's FLAT profile (not true log), and V-LOG L (I don't really know why) respond perfectly to nothing but an S-curve in post, but they're by far the minority cases and you're still thinning out your skin tones.

People realized a while back that 10-bit ProRes (Blackmagic) and 12/14 bit RAW (Blackmagic and ML) held the key to great image quality, then 75% of us promptly forgot the second 4K hit the affordable market. The other 25% are blessed with an amazing gift: the power to remember things! 

I read on PV that the NX500 does not have focus peaking a in 4k mode - does anyone know if that is that still the case?
Does anyone know what is is the native luma range is (as Andrew said there is no setting option?)
Does anyone know if the NX500's HDMI outputs a signal when recording 4k and if so is what the resolution is and if it is clean?
Thanks!

I have FedEx confirmation that my shipment is on it's way. 

alpha4k ;-) 

Where is your area of expertise, then? Not an attack--honestly curious. 

Totally agree with the post, though. Why everyone isn't using the GH4's 10-bit out is beyond me. 
Also, how many times have you read this exact conversation:

"I can't get great colors with X-LOG!"
"Yeah, you'll have to learn more about color grading to get the most out of a LOG profile."
"But that's so much work! I'm a filmmaker, not a colorist. Isn't there an easier way?"
"Well, you could always buy some LUTs and let professional colorists do the work for you."
"LUTs are too expensive! I want something I can grade myself!"
"Um...how about just not using LOG? Your camera has lots of other color profiles that are easy to handle."
"Then I won't get the best DR the sensor can give me! What kind of noob doesn't use LOG!?"
-_-

Ah well as with all lucrative markets my opinion is that the corporate world is both difficult to crack and yet if you get your foot in the door it can be surprisingly easy to become a company's agency of choice just because in big business people often like to have a safe option. Once they know you can do a decent job it'll take a lot to dislodge you.
Which brings us back to the discussion about gear. I don't think for one second that most of the people with the power to hire you know much about camera specs or the latest and greatest technology. However they do care about results. There's actually a lot of pressure on people in the corporate world to 'do things'. Whether those 'things' actually make an impact or not is often not the point. The point is to be seen in the company to be a do-er, and to have something you can put on your list of 'achievements' when bonus time comes around. Which in marketing can translate to making/commissioning a cool looking and expensive video. And yes, it often is important that it's expensive.
When a marketing team commission a video they want it to be impressive, and to look better and sexier and bigger than the previous ones. Hiring a crew with a big and sexy looking camera is part of that, but another aspect (that's debated on this forum at times) is that there is such a thing in my opinion as an expensive look, which expensive cameras tend to give you. Sure you can make the greatest and most creative work of genius ever on a GH2, but something shot on a Red Epic carries a kind of weight in it's imaging that affects people even if they don't know what it is or why it has that effect.
If you're a marketing person you're more likely than not a little obsessed with image and look and feel. So it makes sense that an expensive crew with an expensive camera producing an expensive looking 'hollywood' type image is going to seem very attractive. Just my opinion.

Cool.
We were debating in the office today how a small boutique like ourselves, who have a history of music video production but can also do corporate/commercial work just as good (we have examples), would approach this market? This is where we are at. We've obviously done our research and have a development plan in place, thought it would be interesting to ask your view? Everyone's answer is different.  

There's a whole world of clients out there that don't know the first thing about cameras. On rare occasions, there will be someone involved who's played with DSLRs for video and asks tons of questions. Maybe people shooting national TV spots get into these issues, but for small corporations, startups, entrepreneurs doing web marketing, email blasts, Facebook video campaigns and internal communications/training - they pretty much want to see your reel or examples of stuff that is in line with what I'm proposing or what they envision. If an agency I work with gets the gig, I don't even show a thing - the end client trusts the agency.
That said - if I shoot with a kitted-out DSLR - matte box, follow focus, rails, monitor, loupe, a big geared prime or zoom and an audio recorder - it does look pretty cool on the tripod. Now the total costs of all that may be well under $2k, but I've had clients squeeze through a tight set in terror of bumping the camera and, literally, they've said "I bet that cost more than my house!" It doesn't hurt for a client to perceive that you're using very high-end gear. 
But you could be shooting a national TV spot for Revlon and tests showed the BMC pocket with a super-16 lens from the 70's gives the exact look, and the director wouldn't blink an eye - whereas one of my clients would be "hey, you just stuck a lens on a iPhone, right??" For the size of clients I mention above (and in a big city, you can make a good living at that level) setting up an $800 Kessler crane makes them feel like they're getting a lot of bang for their buck. Don't disregard this sort of perception from people without knowledge of the tech side, who are writing the checks.

"Do you shoot with a RED?"
"RED...? Sir/Mam I think we can do a little better than RED,  I mean if you ask me your company deserve more, something with a bit of panache.... bla bla. .. BS BS. .."
Sell Sell Sell

 

Got a call yesterday...this is the first thing he said: "Hi, I want to shoot my video on the RED Epic. Can you do that?" My reply was: "You need to tell me everything else first, like, what's your name?" This client turned out to be a bit of a moron really and I chose not to work with him. 
I have a feeling the URSA Mini 4.6k is going to be incredible. If I end up buying one, if anyone asks for RED, I'll reply with: "We shoot with the new kid on the block - the brand new, just released Blackmagic camera. It's incredibly cinematic. We don't need RED when we have this!" It's likely that 99% will soak that one up very nicely - it's just the way you say it!
 

You're talking about wedding videos here. That's meant for a very select audience and hardly a grand production you would whip out a RED for or something. I have no idea why you bring that up in this topic. How about we don't stray from the matter at hand here? Just to set straight what it is we're discussing here:
He's talking about music video production and corporate stuff (advertising). Now, someone wants a music video or ad shot... guess what? Chances are it's not their first. What ever happened to the last guys? Maybe those are too busy or something. Could be. But might well be that the client wants to up their game by selecting a production company to up it for them. And having some previous experience, they will tell the difference between a camcorder and a rigged up cinema camera, especially when the name 'RED' is involved. They probably have their own ideas in mind, with a creative marketing team. They just need someone to get their thoughts and run with it and turn it into an actual quality production. Knowing that you're good is one thing. Knowing you shoot on a RED is a dealsealer.

Yes, in a fair world, you'd never have to part with your T3i to get better business, as long as you know how to tell a story and create something visually interesting. But guess what? The world's a messed up place. If you can manage to get about without ever having to drop brands and people knowing or hearing of you, thats the best. But in a crowded and talented market, looking for new higher profile clients, you have to appeal somehow. And be it fair or not, having a RED lying around people won't assume you suck, because if they would, that would only make him or her suck in the most EPIC of ways. But the image that people will have is that someone with a RED probably has worked his or her way up from something smaller. Again, status... and 'status' is not just social standing, it's 'the situation at a particular time'. So if you have a RED you also give off that you have quite a bit of experience/are quite far along. And too be honest, they probably do have the talent and experience. Because I'm pretty sure you're going bankrupt in notime if you make those kind of investments, but can't see any return on that, because you are crap, lose clientele, never getting recommended and having a bad rep...
Anyways. Like I said. It can't hurt to have something saying you shoot on a RED. That doesn't mean that I would actually go and get one. Like Oliver says, for him it's hardly a topic when talking to clients, because he can sell his ideas. That's a great position to be in. And as long as that is the case and business is blooming, why not go with that URSA Mini 4.6K/Sony FS7? You need to smack a RED label somewhere? Ok. Sure. Who says you can't still do that? You can still mention clients can have their productions shot on a RED. Just rent one, if the demand is there, which in Olli's case is hardly so. You don't have to use it exclusively. Although I get owning one would make you super familliar with the RED system and workflow, allowing for smoother turnarounds.

It depends on the 'client' you're talking. Producers hire Cinematographers based on talent, knowing full well they're going to have to hire a camera system. This is usually budgeted for. If the Cinematographer in question happens to own their own camera that the production can use, in this case it's generally used as a win-win for the production and the DP - the production pays a discounted rate for camera hire, and the DP gets more money as a camera hire rate. At this level, the DP is rarely chosen simply because of the gear he owns (and I have many friends who were making good money before buying cameras - they realised that 9 times out of 10 they were hiring Alexas for jobs, so they decided to buy one and take the camera hire rate themselves).
On lower budget productions, having a decent camera can sometimes help to secure work. However, in this case, clients are generally looking for someone with a full package - usually camera, lights, lenses.
A friend of mine is a Gaffer who works on high budget films, but also owns a RED, and tries to shoot low budget stuff (decently paid), and his gear always gets a hammering on the low budget stuff as you just can't afford the crew you regularly work with, and the general wear and tear that happens on every shoot is less likely to be compensated for than on something that has a bigger budget. He shoots quite nice looking stuff, but a DP he works (who also worked their way through as a Gaffer) said to him 'if you really want to work as a DP - sell all your gear' 

I thought this could be an interesting topic inspired by another thread about buying gear for business. 
Personally, I believe in ideas and how they are executed - that's how I sell myself really. Most clients never really question the camera, and if they do, they are usually clients who can't see that a production is much more than a pretty camera. 
Let's just assume you know what you're doing, you have talent and have the money to spend on a RED package. You not only sell yourself on your ideas and current portfolio, but also the fact you shoot on RED. Because you are skilled, have talent and resources, the images you provide will quite likely look stellar. 
In your view, do you think this knowledge by the client that you shoot RED would create more business?
Certainly in my local arena of competition, you would have an additional, very distinct USP. But generally I do feel with current technology, that the camera is much less important than the people behind it. But having better image capabilities really does help. 
There's a lot of different people doing different things in different areas. What's your perspective? 

​
Hallo Ed?!:)
 
would you allow to watch your piece and provide the password? By the way, really digged your modelshoots and your differnt grading approaches to it.
 
cheers, Martin