New Sony Cameras NAB 2009

[Sumfun]

The thing about those consumer cams is it's 11mb/s AVCHD, not 35mb/s MPEG2 nor can consumer cams shoot overcranked footage (85mb/s), so this is an apples to oranges comparison.

Actually, I was referring to the HMC150, which shoots AVCHD at up to 24Mbps. AVCHD is based on MPEG4, which is a more efficient codec than the EX's MPEG2. So I would think that 24Mbps AVCHD should compare quite favorably to 35Mbps MPEG2 in quality. Now the HMC150 is hampered by a lot of things, such as shifted pixels, lack of variable frame rates, etc., but it can produce nice pictures, and plenty of guys on this forum make a living with that camera. But I digress. The reason I brought up that camera in the first place was just to point out that Panasonic does make a prosumer camera that records to inexpensive media.

While we enjoy discussing cameras on these forums, they're just tools, and it's what we do with them that counts. So as Vic and Mico mentioned above, just pick your tool and go out and make some good pictures.

 

[Kenny_G]

Actually, I was referring to the HMC150, which shoots AVCHD at up to 24Mbps. AVCHD is based on MPEG4, which is a more efficient codec than the EX's MPEG2. So I would think that 24Mbps AVCHD should compare quite favorably to 35Mbps MPEG2 in quality. .

Don't count on it. The best is Panasonic HD codec imo, but Sony 35mbps xdcam longgop is definitly better than AVCHD.

 

[Chamber005]

Let's get creative and break away from this 35mm adapter nonsense. Write a good story and film it using your tools to the best of your ability. You got an iris, you got lights ... or use the natural light. Why wreak your optics with a stupid non essential adapter? Who cares about some phony 35mm "look", create your own look. Be different, until the sheep start following you!

I think it's the manufacturers who need to MOVE US away from the adapter nonsense.

DOF isn't about looking like film. DOF is about an overall vision you have for your project. Using 35mm lenses and having DOF is an important tool. The manufacturers need to start making this available on their prosumer cameras the way the Scarlet plans to.

 

[Kenny_G]

DoF is important for putting the accent where you want it to be and ofcourse for giving the picture a pseudo depth.
You can also use it to rule out backgrounds for instance a background with people who you didn't ask to be in your production. Using DoF can solve your problem in this case.

 

[Matttrebor]

talking about adapter's nonsense IS a nonsense. It's the only way for low budget to have a real control on dof. The adapter gives the choice; I want everything in focus, I want shallow dof. With 1/3" or 1/2" cams, if you want shallow dof, you have to stand at 10 meters from your subject, and you can't move or turn around it, you can't shoot in a small room. I don't see where it's more creative than the addition of adapter.
Who cares about 35mm "look" ? Hey, it's not a look ! If you think so, well, you can say the same thing about people shooting with Panavision's cams. "Hey, why do you use 35 films ?"

I don't think you are against 35 film. Well, the adapter give se same dof, that's all.

Adapters are not only about fashion, it has nothing to do with some photoshop filter.

"Why wreak your optics with a stupid non essential adapter?"
Because some people are so stupid, they want to have a background out of focus per exemple.

"everyone is buying an adapter, I wan t to be different, I don't want any adapter"
I don't see any real choice here.
A lot of people use FCP. so much sheeps....

sorry for poor english.

 

[GuyB]

I think the adaptor market is now in the early phase of its way out. The 5DMKII has already started to be used in some cases where adaptors would have normally been used and as DSLRs video mode quality and flexibility improves there will simply be no need for adaptors. The adaptors are as (or more) expensive than the DSLR body and the lens are the same, but the quality will be higher as there is no ground glass etc

They arn't dead yet, but I think their days are numbered...

 

[Kholi]

I think the adaptor market is now in the early phase of its way out. The 5DMKII has already started to be used in some cases where adaptors would have normally been used and as DSLRs video mode quality and flexibility improves there will simply be no need for adaptors. The adaptors are as (or more) expensive than the DSLR body and the lens are the same, but the quality will be higher as there is no ground glass etc

They arn't dead yet, but I think their days are numbered...

SO long as industry standard formats exist and an industry exists without cameras that offer large sensors/native Academy Equivalent FOV, adapters will exist.

 

[GuyB]

SO long as industry standard formats exist and an industry exists without cameras that offer large sensors/native Academy Equivalent FOV, adapters will exist.

There simply won't be a need to bolt on an adaptor anymore though. The adaptor market is hardely an industry standard, its a hacked attempt to replicate film DOF results with low end equipment, so if something like a DSLR product can do it as well or better (which I think it will much sooner rather than later), then the adaptor market will dwindle quickly.

There could still be a market for pure mount adaptors for those who want that huge multiplication factor they provide, but 35mm adaptors will only exist for those who might want to limit themselves to film lens. Everyone else will simply go with a DSLR solution, the migration has already begun from what I have seen.

 

[basspig]

Actually, I was referring to the HMC150, which shoots AVCHD at up to 24Mbps. AVCHD is based on MPEG4, which is a more efficient codec than the EX's MPEG2. So I would think that 24Mbps AVCHD should compare quite favorably to 35Mbps MPEG2 in quality. Now the HMC150 is hampered by a lot of things, such as shifted pixels, lack of variable frame rates, etc., but it can produce nice pictures, and plenty of guys on this forum make a living with that camera. But I digress. The reason I brought up that camera in the first place was just to point out that Panasonic does make a prosumer camera that records to inexpensive media.

From a quote I found while googling reviews on this cam:

"The one thing I was surprised to see ( and let me preface this with saying that I don't have a lot of experience with AVCHD ), and I don't know if it was the tv or what, but there was a demo reel and it seemed like there was blocking on all the edges of everything in the demoreel, and a lot of what I'll deem "digital noise" in the skys etc... where there was blocking jumping around all the time in the gradients. Perhaps this is just AVCHD, or maybe it's just the TV, but it seems to me that that the overall image quality was very underwhelming. "

The use of the word 'blocking' suggests that the writer observed the familiar macroblock quantizing error, an indicator of insufficient encoding bitrate to properly handle the picture content. The fact that sky scenes are banded indicates that there may be less than 24-bit encoding of the picture, as a bitrate reduction method. So far, this is consistent with my observations of AVCHD. It looks even worse than HDV to my eye.

 

[Kenny_G]

I think the adaptor market is now in the early phase of its way out. The 5DMKII has already started to be used in some cases where adaptors would have normally been used and as DSLRs video mode quality and flexibility improves there will simply be no need for adaptors. The adaptors are as (or more) expensive than the DSLR body and the lens are the same, but the quality will be higher as there is no ground glass etc

They arn't dead yet, but I think their days are numbered...

When I bought my Nikon D300 I realized that there was not a lot more to convert the camera to a moviecam. All the ingredients are right there.
I wrote Nikon on there public site a note about this, but got no response.
To my surprice they came out with the D90, that has a movie option.

What I want to say is that the fully integration on pro level will take a while, but it is right around the corner. IMO it doesn't make out what you use to make a good production, but the 35mm hype is right here in the bodies of all those 35mm SLR-camera's. The only factor that will be a problem is the look of the camera. Someone said: Looks matters.
Perhaps the next level of 35mm products will not be the flip-adapter, but the 35mm SLR flip-housing for shoulder mounting.

 

[basspig]

I think that cameras that employ stills and video capabilities will always be a compromise in performance, but the possibilities are exciting just the same with the overlap of functions.

However, there are just certain things that a 3-chip camera can do better than a Beyer filtered single imager. I never liked the colors I saw on SiIIK and Red cameras--something about the way they handled skin tones and highlights always looked fake to me. Same goes for my D-SLR. I recently used my EX1 to shoot portrait photos and the images were distributed to quite a few people in print. I got quite a number of comments on how 'perfect' the image looked and questions on how I achieved the look and quality of the image. I credit the 3-chip imagers with better colorimetrics.

 

[GuyB]

In all honesty I can't agree, the images I get from my D3 are far superiour to my EX in EVERY way, there isn't a single element of the EX image I have ever thought was better than my DSLR.

PS: Yes the 5DMKII is heavily compressed (something like 24Mbps I frame AVCHD), which is why all I want is a full live HDMI output feed in the 'live view' mode (capture on a nanoFlash) and give me an electronic shutter like a video camera to allow me to open the iris.