- Nov 19, 2001
- 27,727
- 16
- 81
Originally posted by: KLin
Only $17,500? I think I'll get 2.![]()
Originally posted by: binister
I didn't read the specs but how in the world would you transfer that stuff to a computer. It would take weeks to transfer a 45 minute movie.
Originally posted by: Tango
Hum.. too cheap to be good... especially the lenses...
Am I missing something?
Originally posted by: Koing
Originally posted by: Tango
Hum.. too cheap to be good... especially the lenses...
Am I missing something?
They should be shipping sometime this year.
The owner is the owner of Oakley afaik. Slick products from a cool guy.
They REALLY gouge you on HD's and extra space! But no one has a product like him on the market.
Koing
Originally posted by: SampSon
Why? Trying to compete with Tarentino?
Of course it's below film. This is not optical, it's digital. It's recording pixels.Originally posted by: drinkmorejava
It says raw recording at 27mb a second, which is significantly below the capabilities of film used in studio productions.
It used to be a blank red page.Originally posted by: AgaBoogaBoo
I wonder how much red.com cost them...
Originally posted by: ThePresence
It used to be a blank red page.Originally posted by: AgaBoogaBoo
I wonder how much red.com cost them...
I actually went to the site because I'm testing a new monitor and wanted the old red screen that used to be there.![]()
