I might ask, why do companies feel entitled? Wonder how many cars would sell, if they locked features, and asked to pay extra in order to use them. And why companies trump my right as a customer in order to make profit?
Wow, just unbelievable... Because they took the risk and spent millions to develop it. They paid for it and they own it. They can charge whatever they please but they will charge whatever the market can bear.
Yes I am. I think it's a crappy business practice to lock features, and I will never buy a product like that, regardless how good it is. It's about honesty and integrity, and I feel like this model is dishonest. The same way I don't buy from box stores, which pay minimum slave wages to their employees.
This comparison of cameras is as ridiculus as it is typical. Please do not apply consumer mentality to pro products and markets- they have very little- if anything in common. As a matter of fact they are opposite on many levels. Applying consumer product mentality to our industry has been in many ways extremely detrimental to it. Please , please stop with the go pros and the BMCC. The price tag alone should be a very obvious hint...
Some what agreed. The big guys have told us for years that it can't be done, so these other companies are coming in and doing it. But everyone seems to be short spec'd somewhere. Whether color science, form factor, workflow, codec, dynamic range, rolling shutter, low light, cost...... there is still not anyone with the trump card yet.
Yes, I know how powerful an ASIC can be, but I also have a vague idea* of how difficult it is to design one, and how difficult it is to make small changes. I'm designing an FPGA for a camera based on the CMV12000 (an FPGA is basically a slow ASIC that's a lot cheaper if you're not making millions of units). If it ever works it will dump RAW footage into an SSD drive; the level of complexity needed for debayering that footage and encoding it to a useful codec would be immensely higher. I think I have a shot at designing a RAW camera, there's no way I could design a 10-bit 422 ProRes camera. Though yes, with good in-camera debayering, that would be a better option than RAW.
That is exactly the point. They may not be done with it, but they're getting close really fast.
I think it just represents money going into another video companies pockets. They may not be in the same league, but if they're pockets end up deeper, they may start in that arena. For example they may still be making $4000 cams, but have enough money to hire the best color people because they sell so much, and the parts and tech are not as expensive or exotic anymore. Just the skill of the engineers going into it.