www.red.com

It's not a photo camera, it's only for filming.

 

It was in development since around 2005. The project was partially funded by the founder of Oakley (the sunglasses company).

A few feature films have been shot on it. It's a lot cheaper than other cameras in that capability range.

 

Your saying this camera is cheap? What is the most expensive cameras out there?

 

?

https://acurazine.com/forums/cameras-photography-44/red-dslr-thread-695942/

 

Welcome to Ramblings...


<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jefford_e/2581337734/" title="untitled by Jefford_E, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3079/2581337734_ac6fbf68db.jpg" width="500" height="282" alt="untitled" /></a>

 

Welcome to the big leagues. I don't know what the most expensive out there is, but the de facto standard camera that the Red competes with is the Sony Cinealta HDW-F900. These cameras start at $80,000 new and that's body only.

 

Sonys F35 ( I believe) goes for 150K body only, and that's just a paperweight until all the rest of the acessories are added. A decent Red kit can be put together or around 50k. All the other cameras like the viper, genesis and there's another, I forget what it's called, are significantly more expensive.

 

The F900 is an outdated camera that doesnt compete with the RED. The REd was made to compete with newer and full chip cameras. The Genesis, The D21, F35...etc

The RED while being inexpensive and an OK camera to use is really a giant pain and require a lot of back end technical knowledge to not fuck it up.

For a company with no prior knowledge of making HD cameras, the RED is a good first entry...but its not the end all be all.

Personally, I'd rather shoot on a F35 if given the option. The RED doesnt blow my skirt up like some people.