4.5K RED ONE M-X Battle Tested- $4000 <<<<---- amazing

The largest bomb in Cinema History was just dropped with battle tested Red One-MX 4.5K RAW starting at $4K!!!

If you think of it PURELY from a collector's standpoint, some of those cameras were used on major motion picture productions... I wonder if they'll keep the original Serial numbers or issue new ones?

We'll see at the Sony response and also at new players that will emerge at raw market.

@rockroadpix

More like

Interesting times ahead..checked my RED wish list shopping cart, even with camera price drop it's approx $25K to kit up a Scarlet with drives, cage and required accessories for commercial production, so it will be very interesting to see what the Sony F5 pricing ends up in comparison.

@NickBen

Do not worry, this time Sony outplayed this guys. Pushed them to announce price reduction and after this did not provided the prices. So, they can properly position their cameras eliminating Red as major competition.

VK, are you kidding or biased?? You can have the camera 'The Social Network' was shot with for $4K. 'The Man With The Iron Fist' will open in cinemas soon, brand new, and it was still shot on that camera. $4000. That's just a little more than the oh so great Canon 5DmkIII.

What else do they have to do to make you satisfied?? ;)

Btw, lets first see how those Sony's perform before talking about death of RED (ridiculous).

the F65 is their flagship, and it looks like garbage. I've still yet to see anything from that camera that looks like film. It all looks like 4K high res video. I have hard time believing that their lesser sensors are going to do any better)

Sony, Canon, and Panasonic all have the same problem. They are all FAT. Their framework and infrastructure don't allow them to change direction very quickly. Which is why it took this long for them to adopt and develop anything resembling a modular approach to their cameras. And they need SO MUCH MONEY to sustain that infrastructure that they can't price their products in a competitive manner. They are big, fat, slow, and will get crushed by more nimble competition.

Those battle tested M-X's that are now 4 grand, were trade-ins for Epics. If the other companies want to compete with RED they need to adapt. I'm done buying cameras that will be obsolete in less than a year. For BMCC and the others to get my money, they better learn and learn quick that RED has the best model in this regard. I should be able to upgrade until the technology changes so vastly that I have to trade in my camera and buy the next leap forward, and then the cycle continues... That was a promise RED made form the beginning: NO MORE PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE.

adapt or die

What do you guys think a used RED one M-X body will be worth on ebay now that the price has totally bottomed out. I am now keen to look at one of these to use in TVCs and Chroma shoots..

I will say that I think this is very cool on RED's part, but I also think it takes A LOT of work to make the footage look not so "crunchy". Soderbergh calls it really organic, I don't see it, for the most part...

NO MORE PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE.

Whole Red is big planned obsolescence. Huge one.

Sony, Canon, and Panasonic all have the same problem. They are all FAT. Their framework and infrastructure don't allow them to change direction very quickly. Which is why it took this long for them to adopt and develop anything resembling a modular approach to their cameras. And they need SO MUCH MONEY to sustain that infrastructure that they can't price their products in a competitive manner. They are big, fat, slow, and will get crushed by more nimble competition

Let's just use proper word - they are big. Not fat.

Thing is that their size is huge plus.

Look at the Red cameras internals. They all screams - not enough engineers and not enough skill.

Today highly integrated LSI and ASICs require very high skill and big number of people. Same goes for sensors.

This will be the reason for Red going out in the super thin niche market where it'll die in agony.

Biggest thing that Red supporters ignore is that only two areas prevents wide raw video - interfaces and media.

Both are catching blazingly fast. Look at BMCC - thunderbolt and stock SSDs.

Red will be killed by progress in this areas and .. economics, they just could not sustain expenses in the niche they'll be pushed.

I don't follow the logic of assuming that RED won't innovate and refine their electronics. Seems tome that many companies like this that get successful are then able to re-engineer their products and higher better people to work on R&D for future products. Big companies like Sony have more resources, but smaller but successful companies can focus their efforts on key projects and get similar if not better results.

Clearly we are on opposite sides of this issue.

Some background. I was a big Sony supporter back in the day. I still have my old PD150 for sentimental reasons. I loved the look of their 3 chip cameras. Loved the F900. pleaded for years for them to develop single chip cinema technology - every year at NAB. They turned their noses up at the idea. Can't be done. No need, No desire.

Then RED comes along and completely changes the game. A single chip 4K camera for less than 100K... way less. At first a lot of scoffing, the product had some problems but eventually they start making major motion pictures with the damn thing, and then Panavision made the Genesis, Arri makes the D21, (then later the Alexa) DSLR's start shooting video, and THEN Sony gets around to making single chip cameras, and they still do a shitty job of it.

I used to be their biggest fan. I want to like them. But they make really bad decisions... really slowly.