Why would Arri need a new sensor, when their old one is still the industry standard after so many other newer sensors have been released in these 10 years? Other manufacturers even have LUTs to emulate the Arri sensor. No need to have something new when it's clear this is what people still want. I guess their sensor was so ahead of its time that 10 years later it's still top. That's how you do it correctly!
F5: Anybody Using Anymore?
- Thread starter Ben_Ericson
- Start date
Why would Arri need a new sensor, when their old one is still the industry standard after so many other newer sensors have been released in these 10 years? Other manufacturers even have LUTs to emulate the Arri sensor. No need to have something new when it's clear this is what people still want. I guess their sensor was so ahead of its time that 10 years later it's still top. That's how you do it correctly!
But do you really think that at the side of the market these cameras are aimed at, price of the camera really makes a difference? I can't see that.
I think the LF will continue the Arri industry standard legacy, till Sony stops worrying about giving people too much and go full Blackmagic Design, but done correctly. In other words, have a camera which can rival the Arri image and workflow and is loaded with everything and the kitchen sink. Then maybe they can lure the market in.
I like the Venice. It's the first Sony camera since the F35 which seems made to make cinema images. But the more I think about it the more I see Sony missed a few opportunities with it.
Grug
Veteran
Every shoot has it own particular needs, and if the Venice is able to deliver pretty pictures out of the box (which, from the samples we've seen so far, does look plausible) I think its particular set of features could absolutely make Sony some headway in the high-end of the market.
It's one of only three cameras in the world that currently offer 4k, full-height, 4-perf anamorphic recording (the others being Monstro and DXL2). That's a big draw card for anyone needing wanting to shoot 2x anamorphic, but having to deliver a natively 4k master. And it's massively cheaper than both of those other two options.
The 5 second boot time, and 8-steps of internal ND are going to hold a lot of appeal for productions that have to move FAST.
And the dual-native 2500 ISO base, could help DoPs negotiate better gear packages for themselves (better lenses, more technocrane or steadicam days etc.) by allowing them to more than halve their lighting and electricity requirements for studio work or night exteriors.
The lower rental cost of the camera itself, could also be enough to allow people to shoot with nicer, more-expensive lens packages they otherwise mightn't have the budget for.
All of these things are considerations that can push someone towards shooting something other than Arri.
The LF is magnificent though, and having all of your wireless functionality built-in is absolutely the way of the future.
I also just got to see the DXL2 in the flesh this week, and that camera is just beautifully setup for camera teams to work with. Hugely appealing stuff.
On the whole, we're just thoroughly spoilt for camera choices at the high-end for the moment. But, yes, I think the very appealing price point Sony has put it at, is going to translate into a lot of work for the camera.
Your joking right ?.. you would pay $100K for a camera with 2 x 10 year old sensors stuck together.. things havnt changed in sensor tech for 10 years .. what was wrong with the tube cameras.. great picture..
Grug
Veteran
Your joking right ?.. you would pay $100K for a camera with 2 x 10 year old sensors stuck together.. things havnt changed in sensor tech for 10 years .. what was wrong with the tube cameras.. great picture..
Moore's Law may apply to computer processors, but it doesn't apply to the sensors in digital cameras - they're analog devices with their own particular sets of strength and limitations.
I think there has been alot of progress in sensor design in 10 years , but yes less than computers maybe..but not sure of the comparison TBH.. but to think Arri dont have to bring out a new sensor ? everyone was expecting one from the LF.. but yet another camera with the old ones stuck together.. sure I would buy a cheap older Alexa if I have the work for it, alot of people are.. but throwing down the big bucks for a 10yr old sensor you would really have to be an Arri fan.. it almost seems they shoved it out the door to coincide with the Venice release.. no..?.. no one arguing what they have is good.. but they have to come up with something new I would think.. they have to be working on one..
Grug
Veteran
The Kinefinity has only just been announced hasn't it? Is it available already? Also, I'm not sure I'd count an obscure, low-cost Chinese brand with no market penetration (on western sets at least), in the running against the aforementioned cameras.
It simply doesn't have the localised support levels to be relied upon for high-end productions.
In terms of what? Smaller photosites? Okay, but they've come at the expense of noise and dynamic range.
Latitude? Despite the claims of numerous manufacturers, I'm yet to see tests from a single camera that manages to exceed the Alexa's tolerance to under and overexposure, some match it in underexposure, but none have matched or beaten it in overexposure.
Color? That's the most subjective of the lot, but the Alexa does just fine on that front.
Sensitivity? Only Panasonic have really trounced the 800 ISO mark significantly with a new sensor technology (and Venice will possibly join it, if its 2500 ISO dual-native setting works well), Canon's cameras can also be pushed quite far, but you sacrifice overall image quality to do so.
By doubling the size of the sensor with the Alexa LF (it isn't 'two sensors stitched together', but rather a larger cut of the silicon wafers used to produce them), Arri have kept all of the advantages of their Alev III sensor, whilst shrinking their noise structure by half, and gaining a significant boost in resolution.
So while you could justly complain about the size and weight of the new camera, about how power hungry it is, and how it lacks modern conveniences like internal NDs. Complaining about the sensor technology really doesn't make sense - it's the industry standard for a reason, and it literally just got twice as good.
digitalinnovations
Well-known member
The VENICE seems to have lots of things going for it and in some ways it’s better than Alexa / Amira but what I am the most curious about is how the color / skin tone of VENICE will stack up against the Alev III?
Kinefinity has been around for many years now, but yes they did just last week announced another two more cameras. The MAVO S35 and the MAVO LF.
But they've had out a camera which can do 4K anamorphic for a few years now, which is what I was specifically replying to. That there are more than just those three listed.
Yes I know its not 2 literally stuck together .. or the 65 is 3 stuck together ..
.. its just a descriptive term.. but at the end of the day Arri do need to come out with a new sensor surely .. if ?? the Venice has "good" color .. etc..at a much lower price, Arri could lose their crown..to think they can just go along with an old sensor just because its the good now then we would still be shooting with tube cameras .Im sure they are developing one.. and that would be a reason I wouldn't buy the very expensive ,old tech LF.. and I even wonder why they made it.. with the added lens "restrictions".. it did seem to be a rush job to try to steal a bit of thunder from the Venice..look at how Panasonic dropped the ball after the big success of the C300.. too little too late C700.. could happen to Arri if they lie back on their laurels ..Yes I know its not 2 literally stuck together .. or the 65 is 3 stuck together ..
Do you mean Canon, not Panasonic?
And I suspect the Arri Alexa LF was in response to the demand from some sectors for "true 4K" productions (not upscaled), not Venice specifically.
Grug
Veteran
4k? Sure, but Red's had that too for ages. My point is that no one else has had a proper 4-perf 35mm equivalent sensor until now. Without a 'full aperture' 18mm high sensor, you've had to crop in on 2x anamorphic glass on every camera except Alexa's 4:3 sensor, or the newer Red Monstro, Sony Venice, and soon Kinefinity's LF.
Yes I know its not 2 literally stuck together .. or the 65 is 3 stuck together ..
Again, my question is 'why?'.
What more do you need a sensor to do, that Alev III isn't providing? Is being 'new' an objective criteria that's important to you? If so, sure, the Arris aren't going to be appropriate for you.
Personally, I just can't think of an objective reason why the age of the sensor design has any baring on my own work as a DP. I'm concerned about image quality, and I'm concerned about having the necessary feature-set within a camera to achieve the specific shots that I need to for a given project. But outside of that, I really can't think of much else I need to worry about - outside of the usual matters of budget/crew/aesthetics.
And I think releasing the LF was a masterstroke on Arri's part. It doesn't make regular Alexas obsolete, it doesn't make the Alexa65 obsolete, it just slots right in the middle, and shuts up the few broadcaster who were demanding 4k masters.
No one is upset by the camera, and we get a fantastic new tool for ultra-high-end imaging.
Oh yes sorry Canon.. too early in the morning.. yes Im sure Arri need a "true' 4K sensor for good or for bad.. if they want their gear on Netflix etc.. so why not come out with one.. rather than just cutting cutting out a double size old one..
But surely R&D is of huge importance for a digital camera manufacturer .. they cant keep gluing the old ones together for the next 10 years.. how ever good they are.. I wonder they have held their cards too long.. look how Pana and Canon have fallen in the s35 camera world..or even Panavision who had an almost 100% lock on high end in the film work when Arri was very much number 2 way back..they have lost alot of ground in the digital age..by not reacting fast enough.. the odd broadcaster.. Netflix and Amazon must account for alot of gear rental these days.. even corp shoots/commercials now alot are 4K.. all else aside.. yes I if had shares in Arri I would be very much hoping they have a new sensor coming up pretty soon..
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Sensors have been "stuck together" for years.
The thing about arris old design is that it is still well specced in terms of pixel density.
"Resolution bloat" (my new word!) means that a lot of new sensors are poorly specced right from the drawing board.
So a well designed old thing is still the best until a well designed new thing comes along.
The thing about arris old design is that it is still well specced in terms of pixel density.
"Resolution bloat" (my new word!) means that a lot of new sensors are poorly specced right from the drawing board.
So a well designed old thing is still the best until a well designed new thing comes along.
What other camera have "stuck" sensors together..the 65 was 3 "stuck together top to bottom.. the LF is 2 side ways.. Venice is new and FF.. RED,s are new sensors ..
Yes thats my point.. Arri have to have a new sensor in the wings or they will be not in a good position when the new thing does arrive .. which might be the Venice ..just a simple point .. not questioning how great Arri Alexa is .. who would.. just that they have a very old sensor and surely must be working on a new one.. rather than just cutting out a bigger old one.. thats all..which alot of people were expecting with the long awaited 4K Arri..
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Phase One
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
'a lot of people' might not realise that even todays tech struggles to make a really good S35 4k sensor.
Especially when todays tech developments are pushed by people with the 'wrong' priorities.
The other camera makers have managed it.. Arri Im sure has the money and know how.. I doubt that holding them back..cant be that hard for Arrfi to knock out an original 4K or FF sensor
Phase one..? sorry dont know that camera