Quote Originally Posted by rob norton View Post
Then why stop at venice's sensor block? Why not make a camera the size of an SD card? Other than physical limitations, it's because there's a sweet spot in size. People will have different ideas of what that sweet spot looks like. Hollywood and other professionals have a different idea of what that sweet spot is compared to you and DLD. It doesn't need to stay the same either - it ideally should be project dependent. For jcs' shooting needs, the smaller the better. You a) don't need to and b) can't apply your philosophy across the entire video production landscape. There's no one size fits all. DLD doesn't shoot any video at all so while it's fun to live in broken record theory land, not everyone will agree, after forming their own opinion from working in the field. I'm sure you're a really nice guy DLD but you say the exact same thing with every single post, I don't get it?

For every venice sensor block separation success story there are 100x larger camera success stories. We're just not hearing about it at trade shows because it'd be ridiculous if cinema5d asked a DP how they were enjoying a way of working that's been going on for decades. I love small cameras if I'm by myself and am only talking about a crew environment (I obviously would have no argument if only speaking about a solo shooter that has few needs). For crew/camera interaction, we're headed for wireless controls across the board but there still needs to be enough real estate for mounting hardware.
You're right, why stop at the sensor block? I was recently thinking, what is the practical limit in this universe for the smallest possible camera? Yeah, thinking down to the Planck Length, then working back up to deal with photons, as both particles and waves, and how it might be possible to capture light as waves in addition to particles and effectively unlimited resolution capture. The primitive Light Field cameras (not using traditional lenses) already provide a glimpse of what's coming, and giant heavy lenses won't be needed as computational cameras evolve. If we look at nature, for example the eyes of eagles & owls, we can see what's possible in fairly compact and lightweight optics and sensors (currently blows away anything on the camera market). Future cameras will blow away birds of prey. Understand working folks don't want to constantly hear about whats coming someday, what's more important is what's here now and will be here in the very near future.

Regarding applying philosophies across the board: if we have the option, the flexibility to use a smaller, lighter system, that's an advantage. We can always add more size + weight + mounting points as needed. However if the camera system can't be slimmed down, that's a limitation and less flexibility. Camera systems that are more flexible will always win in the market when other factors are effectively equivalent (this is true in nature too).

What's the most popular rental at the top pro level: the big ARRIs or the ARRI Minis?

Is the new Red Komodo bigger or smaller than their other cameras?

Is there a pattern here?