Page 80 of 118 FirstFirst ... 307076777879808182838490 ... LastLast
Results 791 to 800 of 1174
  1. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Ralph Oshiro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    2,458
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by alaskacameradude View Post
    I think that would be fine with me. I wasn't saying that I wanted them to figure
    out a way that I could put a broadcast lens from a 2/3 camera on the thing
    (although that would be cool).

    I was saying I hoped that they would figure out a way to include some sort of lens
    with this camera that offers similar functionality to what you get on those cameras
    .....and NOT be forced to only use still lenses or primes. As this is
    the thread for those type of requests, I thought I'd throw in my opinion. As I said,
    if it can't be done, I won't whine about it, I just won't buy this camera....no big deal.
    If it can be done, then yay, Panasonic gets another customer.
    I would guess that if 4/3rds cameras became popular for ENG applications, that Fujinon and Canon would adapt, and make 4/3rds-format "TV zooms." They would likely introduce a "broadcast line" and an "industrial line." They know that they can't price the industrial lenses out of the market's willingness to buy them (e.g., local affiliates with small budgets). They would be incentivized to make affordable TV zooms, if the market size warranted the development of such a product. Panasonic may in fact be talking with Fuji or Canon in preparation of just such a lens to address this market.
    Sony NEX-FS100 + FMU | Kinotehnik LCDVFe | Nikkor FX primes | Cavision IRNDs | Vinten Vision 5 | Steadicam Flyer



     

  2. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Ralph Oshiro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    2,458
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry_Green View Post
    The networks are consisting of their own "Owned & Operated" stations, plus a number of affiliate stations. CBS O&O stations are standardized on XDCAM-HD, for example, but there are plenty of individual CBS affiliate stations that are running P2. Whereas all NBC and Fox (and I think ABC) O&O stations are all standardized on P2, but there are some NBC, ABC or Fox individual affiliates that are running XDCAM.
    Hey, Barry! Long time no talk!

    There's an even finer distinction. The "network" may often buy different gear than even the network-owned local affiliates, i.e., the O&Os. XXX Sports and XXX Net News buy in tandem, but the local O&O affiliates of that same network have totally different gear, mostly due to budgetary considerations. ABC seems to be the most integrated so far, and I believe most, if not all ABC O&Os are mostly P2. I say "mostly" because there are also many instances of transitional growing pains. For a while (and, I believe, still), while some ABC guys are shooting with fancy new Panasonic HPX2000s, a bunch of ABC shooters still just have tape-based JVC HD100s to shoot with--and this is at the same station!

    A local ABC shooter told me that they're consolidating their servers in Fresno, among several of the West Coast affiliates. Pretty neat! CBS initially bought 2/3" XDCAMs for their networks guys, but skimped on the locals and bought them the 1/2" XDCAMs, but at least they were all recording on the same media. Curiously, the network I work for is currently shooting on HDCAM.
    Last edited by Ralph Oshiro; 06-12-2010 at 07:27 AM.
    Sony NEX-FS100 + FMU | Kinotehnik LCDVFe | Nikkor FX primes | Cavision IRNDs | Vinten Vision 5 | Steadicam Flyer



     

  3. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Mike Harvey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Seattle-ish
    Posts
    2,470
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Oshiro View Post
    Jan said on one of the trade show floor video clips that the camera records 4:2:0.
    But what it records and what it puts out via the HD-SDI socket are two different things. The HMC records 4:2:0, but the HMDI out bypasses the compression and puts out 4:2:2 straight from the chips.


     

  4. Collapse Details
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by robertrogoz View Post
    Here is another rumor from dvinfo:
    "Last news are saying the Af100 will feed the HD-SDI with 4:2:0, not 4:2:2...
    The NanoFlash will be useless, and so is the SDI output.
    I hope it's a mistake. If it's not, I don't think Panasonic will sell a lot."
    Anyone can confirm? However if it is true it will be a consumer cam with high price tag.
    That sounds ridiculous. Every camcorder on the market that has HD-SDI feeds out 4:2:2.

    Probably somebody heard something wrong, they might be talking about 8-bit vs. 10-bit; some cameras like the Canon XLH1/XHG1 and HPX500 output 8 bits of data on the SDI port, embedded in a 10-bit word. Others, like the EX1 and HPX300/370, output a full 10 bits. I would guess the rumor (which is all that that could possibly be, is a rumor) is just wrong and they're thinking 8-bit vs. 10-bit.

    But anyway, it's totally ridiculous to even report something like that -- there's no functional AF100 model, and won't be for months. How could anyone possibly know something like that?


     

  5. Collapse Details
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by robertrogoz View Post
    So correct me if I am wrong- if the GH1 kit lens is used (or such equivalent), why would I buy this new camera? It will yield about the same DOF and be actually worst in low light then EX1 and cost the same? why bother then- I'll just buy another EX1 and at least I don't have to deal with AVCHD.
    Well, let's examine this carefully -- we're saying that at the very worst, the AF100 should have an equivalent DOF, better low light, and equally sharp pictures as the EX1, when the EX1 is at its very best.

    Then, if you put on a 35mm lens, the AF100 *destroys* the EX1 in low light and DOF.

    So in the worst possible case, it's as good as the EX1 in the EX1's best possible case. And in its best possible case, it embarrasses the EX1.

    So -- the question becomes -- why would you ever even *consider* an EX1?

    And while you may not want to "have to deal with AVCHD", there are plenty of us who'd much rather "have to deal with" a better more robust codec that takes up half the file space.


     

  6. Collapse Details
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Oshiro View Post
    Jan said on one of the trade show floor video clips that the camera records 4:2:0.
    Yes, AVCHD is 4:2:0 in the recording. But that has nothing to do with the uncompressed HD coming off the HD-SDI port.


     

  7. Collapse Details
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Oshiro View Post
    I would guess that if 4/3rds cameras became popular for ENG applications, that Fujinon and Canon would adapt, and make 4/3rds-format "TV zooms." They would likely introduce a "broadcast line" and an "industrial line." They know that they can't price the industrial lenses out of the market's willingness to buy them (e.g., local affiliates with small budgets). They would be incentivized to make affordable TV zooms, if the market size warranted the development of such a product. Panasonic may in fact be talking with Fuji or Canon in preparation of just such a lens to address this market.
    The saving grace here may be that the actual resolved detail doesn't need to be all that high, in order to deliver the best the chip can handle. On a 1/3" chip, the amount of resolved detail the lens needs to deliver is incredibly high; 1920 pixels across a 5mm chip width. But on a 4/3 chip, while the lens needs to cover a larger area and use bigger glass, the actual resolution doesn't need to be nearly so high. It only needs to resolve 1920 pixels across a 19mm chip width. That much-looser tolerance might open the window to Fujinon/Canon being able to make a decent lens that doesn't cost an insane fortune.


     

  8. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Hollywood, USA
    Posts
    754
    Default
    Leica might also be in the mix to produce a lense for the AF-100.


     

  9. Collapse Details
    Bronze Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    336
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry_Green View Post
    Well, let's examine this carefully -- we're saying that at the very worst, the AF100 should have an equivalent DOF, better low light, and equally sharp pictures as the EX1, when the EX1 is at its very best.

    Then, if you put on a 35mm lens, the AF100 *destroys* the EX1 in low light and DOF.

    So in the worst possible case, it's as good as the EX1 in the EX1's best possible case. And in its best possible case, it embarrasses the EX1.

    So -- the question becomes -- why would you ever even *consider* an EX1?

    And while you may not want to "have to deal with AVCHD", there are plenty of us who'd much rather "have to deal with" a better more robust codec that takes up half the file space.
    Really the answer is in the pudding- when we see the actual footage, then we can judge it.


     

  10. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Kellar42's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Panama
    Posts
    620
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucknfl View Post
    Leica might also be in the mix to produce a lense for the AF-100.
    Yeah, plus Leica M already works on it!
    Stuart Hooper


     

Page 80 of 118 FirstFirst ... 307076777879808182838490 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •