CCD Imagers

J

Jim Simon

Veteran
OK, I'm just putting this out there.

Will somebody please make a large sensor, CCD, hand held camera with servo zoom for under $5,000.

Please?

It seems I can get a large senor for under $4k, but it uses the inferior CMOS chips. Or I can get large CCD chips, but they're over $4K and shoulder mounted.

C'mon, will somebody please get this right.
 
andythefilmer said:
Too bad the Sony F3 will be $16k+... Just wait for the Scarlet.
Click to expand...

Where do people keep getting this? The F3 is about $13k, already has a viewfinder, PL mount, will be easier to use than a scarlet and has a better form factor, will have Sony support which is everywhere, even comes with a mic and from tests I have seen, it holds up to the red one. Yes it has a more compressed codec and is 1080 but the proof is there and hook up a KiPro if you need more bit depth. I bet most people wont need that 90% of the time though.

I bet if enough rental houses get them, it will end up getting asked for on most shoots and the red will collect dust. Who wants red workflow and ergonomics anyway? Not me, big bricks and DSLR bodies are old news.
 
Is the F3 PL? Why did I hear it would be their new stupid E-Mount? Hmm, well GOOD! That thing will be pretty awesome when it is released...
 
Shoots56 said:
Who wants red workflow and ergonomics anyway?
Click to expand...

Having played with some R3D files, I like the RAW aspect of the footage, that I can change the white balance or ISO of a shot AFTER I SHOOT IT. I also like the I-frame only recording. I like that audio, video and metadata are contained in a single file, so there no "folder structure" to worry about.

There's a lot to like about RED. Their main disadvantage is the use of inferior CMOS technology, which looks just awful in a flash heavy environment.
 
Jim, I feel your pain, but i don't think it's gonna happen any time soon.
Large (2/3 or larger) Global shutter sensors are too expensive right now to get into a camera
under $4000. But technology marches on... with a bit of patience, perhaps.

-tim
 
Large CCD sensors are prohibitively expensive.

In our pan tests skew was a non-issue with this camera. We shot wides at around 100mm of someone jogging in front of storefronts (lots of doorframes and windows) and the skew was not an issue.

There were plenty of flashes from the still photographers' strobe systems at the NHL game, and they did the half frame deal (as expected), but to me it wasn't an issue.
 
You can put global shutter electronics on a CMOS and use a rolling shutter on a CCD, but what it comes down to is with global shutter electronically on a CMOS, no one wants the hit to active area. The electronics cause your active area for photosites to shrink, and that means not as sensitive anymore, and reduces the area you can create noise rejection methods as well.

Not tested by me, but spoken by a few engineers at Red is that film exhibits around 4ms of equivalent skew compared to a read/reset rolling shutter based on most shutter options in film cameras. They of course have different effects too for something like a spinning shutter. They claim the Red One is 8ms and the Epic if 5ms.

Independent rough tests have shown 10-11ms for the Red One shooting the whole sensor. 5Dm2/GH1 about 25ms in 1080p and 7D about 21ms. Just to give you an idea where the technology is.

I don't see global shutters getting used anytime soon, I just see them continuing to push the speed of the silicon for the rolling shutter as NO ONE wants to give up that sensitivity! :)

I will be testing the AF100 to see where the skew sits as well. Hoping at least a little better than the 7D, maybe in the 15s would be nice.
 
grimepoch said:
You can put global shutter electronics on a CMOS and use a rolling shutter on a CCD, but what it comes down to is with global shutter electronically on a CMOS, no one wants the hit to active area. The electronics cause your active area for photosites to shrink, and that means not as sensitive anymore, and reduces the area you can create noise rejection methods as well.

Not tested by me, but spoken by a few engineers at Red is that film exhibits around 4ms of equivalent skew compared to a read/reset rolling shutter based on most shutter options in film cameras. They of course have different effects too for something like a spinning shutter. They claim the Red One is 8ms and the Epic if 5ms.

Independent rough tests have shown 10-11ms for the Red One shooting the whole sensor. 5Dm2/GH1 about 25ms in 1080p and 7D about 21ms. Just to give you an idea where the technology is.

I don't see global shutters getting used anytime soon, I just see them continuing to push the speed of the silicon for the rolling shutter as NO ONE wants to give up that sensitivity! :)

I will be testing the AF100 to see where the skew sits as well. Hoping at least a little better than the 7D, maybe in the 15s would be nice.
Click to expand...

Vision Research's Phantom v12.1 has a global shutter CMOS...apparently it has pretty decent sensitivity, but it's also only ~720p max.
 
LightMast said:
Large CCD sensors are prohibitively expensive.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but I can't help but question that. The HPX500 can be had for about $10,000 at B&H. Once you take away the larger shoulder-mount design and stick with a smaller HVX form factor, once you take away the 5 P2 slots and associated technology and substitute the more affordable SDXC slots, once you take away the CAC, HD-SDI connection, 1.5" viewfinder and other certain high end features that the broadcast industry may like but that us event shooters don't really need, is it then not possible to approach the $4,000 price point with a 2/3" CCD?

I also can't help think about economies of scale. The more camera makers use CMOS, the fewer CCDs are produced and sold. If everyone was using CCD technology in every camera made, it seems like the price for the larger ones would come down faster.
 
LightMast said:
they did the half frame deal (as expected), but to me it wasn't an issue.
Click to expand...

It is for me. The flash banding of CMOS technology is ugly and something I just cannot deliver to a client. I'm really baffled how anyone could possibly accept this artifact.
 
Jim Simon said:
Perhaps, but I can't help but question that. The HPX500 can be had for about $10,000 at B&H. Once you take away the larger shoulder-mount design and stick with a smaller HVX form factor, once you take away the 5 P2 slots and associated technology and substitute the more affordable SDXC slots, once you take away the CAC, HD-SDI connection, 1.5" viewfinder and other certain high end features that the broadcast industry may like but that us event shooters don't really need, is it then not possible to approach the $4,000 price point with a 2/3" CCD?

I also can't help think about economies of scale. The more camera makers use CMOS, the fewer CCDs are produced and sold. If everyone was using CCD technology in every camera made, it seems like the price for the larger ones would come down faster.
Click to expand...

The HPX500 uses half resolution sensors and uses pixel shifting like the HVX/HPX170. A full raster chip would likely be a lot more expensive.

There is no way CCDs could ever be produced as easily or cheaply as CMOS sensors...this is inherent to their nature, a CMOS sensor uses the same manufacturing process as other CMOS circuits, which are used for most electronics. It's inherently cheaper and easier, and this is why they have become so popular and why you see large CMOS sensors in much cheaper cameras than CCD sensors.

I think it's more practical to look at making CMOS sensors without a rolling shutter than to look at using CCDs at this point. CMOS sensors are always improving, whereas CCDs will always be more expensive and harder to manufacture.
 
Yep, I am a chip designer and can tell you, almost all circuitry both analog and digital is done in the CMOS process these days. Pertaining to the phantom, if it's S35 sized then yes, doing a 720p pixel resolution means you are going to have A LOT of free room to play with and still keep the sensitivity of a 1080p sensor in S35 size. I will say, it amazes me RED can do 5k at S35 and have that good of sensitivity.

I've also not seen CCD be as sensitive as CMOS personally. The beauty of CMOS is that you can actually have analog or digital circuitry ON the same silicon which really opens up the possibilities of what you can do.

I agree with the scan line flash issue, however, it really is easy to fix in post. Someone needs to write a plugin that detects them and fixes them for you when it's a crazy amount :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top