NAB 2023 Rumors & Wishes

The other rumor is a Sony APS-C camera with a F30 26 MPX sensor and similar features.

Another is something more affordable with the old (but updated) 24 MPX sensor.

I can see a video-centric version similar to F-30. On the other hand, Fuji has a 40 MPX XT-5 for $1,700 in the same APS-C size, so a model with 24 MPX would have to come way below it, likely at sub-$1000 threshold. Canon had a 32 MPX R7 out for a while too. Sony has to decide if it wants to go under Fuji. At the same time, it has a 33 MPX full frame A7IV, making the next likely step in FF with a 42 MPX A7V (with a relatively old but updated sensor from A7RIII). Then an APS-C model in the mid-30's would make sense.
 
Somewhere on the Intertube, there's a rumor about a photo-centric Canon R1 with a 102 MPX sensor. If that is a reasonable gossip, then it means that the spec race is back on. And if it's on in stills, it could be/should be on in video as well. One of the reasons for it is that the total sales, after a short lived improvement over the second half of 2022, are slumping again and the current generation of smartphones are making the ILC's irrelevant for a casual user and that the next generation of smartphones - iPhone 15, Samsung Galaxy 24, etc. - will make even a diehard photo enthusiast shrug his shoulders at cartel's latest. And if so, it's damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead and every man for himself.
 
I'm mostly waiting to see what Canon has in store for their cinema line. If they actually do release new RF mount cinema cameras then that would be interesting to me. I've seen all of the same rumors regarding C200 mark II, a new C700 update, etc.

I've been holding on to my original C200, waiting for this NAB. At the very least if there isn't any "game-changing" updates I may be able to snag a used C500 II or C300 III for much less.

Or go a different route altogether...who knows what may come out.
 
There's a few things I'd like to see. Now that some of this tech has become easier to implement, I'd like to see some compact cinema cameras either be updated, or redesigned.

The Red Komodo was a huge hit, and if they implemented a model with an ND system, and a proper SDI unit that won't fry if the cable gets jiggled, that would be cool.

My biggest wish would be to see Fuji implement a true camera dedicated to video, succeed in the market where Kodak failed. The HS2 has an incredible image, but is hell on any professional production sets. If that sensor could be in an FX6 type body, with SDI, Timecode, and NDs, it would be the quickest buy I've ever made. Maybe even use Prores4444HQ, use that 14 bit readout to its full extent. Their color science is great, and having something that can be used for cinema, interviews, documentary, etc, that would be huge.

I'd also like to see if Blackmagic updates any of their models. Something, again, more dedicated to professional shooting, utilizing a body more attuned sets. The heavy body of the Ursa Mini G2 needs a redesign.

If there last few years had proved anything, it's that top end cameras are overpriced. What you can get sub $10k is amazing, and if adding a fan, NDs, and pro IO costs $60k more, I call BS. Moore's Law has been quite correct, but the cost hasn't changed with it, and the bloated markup of certain brands seems like greed. Just my two cents.
 
When the X-T3 came out, it was the first 10-bit S35 mirrorless and we were all blown away by everything it offered, and were saying the same thing (they need to make a true cinema camera!).

At the time, in 2018, AF was pretty good from Canon and Sony but many people still weren't on board.

Today, Fujifilm would have to make drastic improvements in video AF to have most consider it.

Hopefully they will after Panasonic did...

___

As far as the expensive cameras, definitely mostly BS, but nobody sells $60K+ cameras anymore besides ARRI. (There's the Venice 2 and there are 1-2 REDs coming close but people are buying more of their cheaper cameras.)

The $15K-$20K is most common for the more expensive "almost flagship" systems while 90% of everything else is already below $10K.
 
Of course, I wrote right here that Sony should come out with a "video camera" looking A7S .... and they did. About seven years after the fact but they did copy the third iteration of the model.

But Sony has a full line of both pure video and the hybrids. Fuji just has the hybrids. Nikon just has the hybrids. Panasonic has ... eh, sorry, had the video line some time in the past but has recused itself from the market (it still has camcorders and PTZ's). That's what a fixed market does. It limits the competition between the members.

As to the general market outlook - companies still have to decide where the bulk of their sales and profits come from and it's from the mid-to-high end of the consumer market. Alexa's are great but they don't move many units. For Sony, Venice is a more of a vanity project. They may not make much money, if any, off it but it's good for name dropping in its ad brochures. And they can use the R&D from Venice to trickle down to the affordable lines - the FX-9, 6 and 3.

There will be new cameras, maybe not at the NAB but then likely at CineGear. The question is what feature will be yearned for the most.
 
DLD said:
The question is what feature will be yearned for the most.
Click to expand...
1) Higher frame-rates (4K @ 240 fps)
2) More dynamic range.
3) Continue to improve auto-focus performance.

Those are pretty much the only things on my wish list right now.
 
Doug Jensen said:
1) Higher frame-rates (4K @ 240 fps)
2) More dynamic range.
3) Continue to improve auto-focus performance.

Those are pretty much the only things on my wish list right now.
Click to expand...

How about an internal simultaneous recording to two CFexpress cards (a la the external pro tier recorders) for 8K Raw?

BTW, the Packers posted a bunch of photos from their official photographer Evan Siegle. He is on 1D MKIII and A1. I asked for the reason of having two different mounts (the assumption is that EF is legacy). Not sure if anyone will answer but this is the page.

https://www.packers.com/photos/through-the-lens
 
In 2014, when earth didn't have fast enough media to handle the amount of data Blackmagic's URSA was capable of, they made it so it cleverly recorded Cinema DNG 4K/60p RAW on two CFast cards but split the frames on both cards.

Card 1 - Frame 1
Card 2 - Frame 2
Card 1 - Frame 3
Card 2 - Frame 4

...then you'd combine the frames from both cards into one folder and Resolve would then see it as a video clip...a recipe for disaster with hundreds of clips, lol.
 
JVC's GY-HMQ10 that came came out in 2014-15, was the first 4K camcorder that recorded to four cards for 4K. I'd think that software in 2023 would be able to stitch everything without problems.
 
DLD said:
How about an internal simultaneous recording to two CFexpress cards (a la the external pro tier recorders) for 8K Raw?]
Click to expand...

Nope, I am not interested in anything that requires recording onto two cards. Nor I do I have any interest in 8K RAW even it it can be recorded on one card.
 
Mainly I dont or cant double card it.. but if it doesnt compromise features it is something one should really do. Ive lost a crad or two in my career (sinar back is the only one I can remember 2003) I fogged two or three rolls of film. Each event leaves a deep scar.
 
morgan_moore said:
Mainly I dont or cant double card it.. but if it doesnt compromise features it is something one should really do. Ive lost a crad or two in my career (sinar back is the only one I can remember 2003) I fogged two or three rolls of film. Each event leaves a deep scar.
Click to expand...

I've been fortunate over my career and have never physically lost a card or lost any important footage to card corruption. But I have seen it happen and I have had a scare or two(thank you Canon). Did a shoot maybe one or two years ago and the audio guy dropped the CF card from the mixer and it literally went down a storm drain. Fortunately SD mixers have two card slots and most people record the WAV's to both cards. The Canon deal was weird, the computer couldn't see the files, but when you put the card back in the camera, they were all there and played fine. Was eventually able to successfully dump the card. The remainder of that shoot, I double rolled. P2 has been absolutely bullet-proof. I have had a couple of issues with SxS/XQD, but fortunately, again, no important stuff was lost. No issues, so far with CFast 2.0 and my Amira, but I know of people who have had CFast 2.0 issues, epsecially with Canon. My personal cards for my Amira are all Arri Certified AngelBirds, sold by Arri.
 
morgan_moore said:
Mainly I dont or cant double card it.. but if it doesnt compromise features it is something one should really do. Ive lost a crad or two in my career (sinar back is the only one I can remember 2003) I fogged two or three rolls of film. Each event leaves a deep scar.
Click to expand...

In the 17 years since I went tapeless, I have never lost a single frame of video with any of my Sony cameras or Sony media. I feel 100% secure recording on just one card at a time. But don't even ask me about Betacam!!
 
I’ve lost a few RED cards. No recovery. I’ve lost Arri clips (not cards) and I’ve lost Sony clips (not cards)

I think in most cases it was the camera corrupting on record, not the media itself per se.

I don’t think there’s a huge need for dual card shooting. Those that want to for redundancy can use an external recorder.

With the Arri clip that was lost, the operator had a little Blackmagic on-board that just happened to also be recording in ProRes. They were able to use that clip for the show after painting out all the Arri overlay and frame lines.
 
P2 is a quadrupled SD card. The only problem with the proprietary media is their price. Obviously, it's less of a problem on a high end but can be cost prohibitive for many with the budget friendly production. The alternative to the proprietary media - greater compression aside - is an in-camera recording to multiple cards and the subsequent "stitching" of images via software in post.
 
DLD said:
The alternative to the proprietary media - greater compression aside - is an in-camera recording to multiple cards and the subsequent "stitching" of images via software in post.
Click to expand...

What a waste of time. I'd rather quit the business entirely than jump through such hoops. If you can't afford the media, you can't afford the camera.
 
Doug Jensen said:
If you can't afford the media, you can't afford the camera.
Click to expand...

That's true but rather condescending. Everyone looks for value and the quest is for the best bang for the buck. Camera companies, however protective of one another, still advance the technology with every release. The debate was ascertaining where in particular such advance should take place. Canon shocked the world with their consumer tier 8K R5 but it can only do Raw recording externally in 5K. With the dual card recording, it would be able to do a full 8K Raw internally. So, while I reckon one definitely shouldn't buy R5 if he can't afford it, a more reasonable discussion would be about having an internal vs. an external recording or, to paraphrase the above response, "Don't release an 8K Raw camera if it can't record 8K Raw". Sony, which is dead set on CFexpress A cards, doesn't even offer Raw 8K video with either.A1 or A7RV. That is its wont. But, at some point, it'll have to. Without Atomos around to provide an assist,
 
DLD said:
That's true but rather condescending.
Click to expand...

It's not condescending, it is just a statement of fact. There are always a bunch of wannabes and amateurs who always want the latest, greatest, technology without any regard for whether they actually NEED it. Not just for cameras, but also computers, cars, airplanes, etc. The more someone obsesses over having cutting-edge technology, the less likely they are to actually need it or know what to do with it if they had it. I will rephrase my initial condescending remark: "There is nobody who can't afford 8K RAW who actually needs 8K RAW." Hell, even 99.9% of professionals who CAN afford it don't need 8K RAW.

Talk to someone who thinks they need 8K RAW but can't afford it, and I'll bet you find they are also shooting with a $300 tripod, a $200 lens, and with their camera set on auto-exposure. But by god, they need to shoot their daughter's 3rd birthday party or stupid zombie movie in 8K RAW!!!

If you think that having higher resolution or more dynamic range is going to elevate a piece of **** production to something that will actually be enjoyable to watch, you are as deluded as the people who are always lusting after technology and blaming their lack of success on not having the latest and greatest. If you can't afford the media, you can't afford the camera.
 
Doug Jensen said:
It's not condescending, it is just a statement of fact. There are always a bunch of wannabes and amateurs who always want the latest, greatest, technology without any regard for whether they actually NEED it.
Click to expand...

To borrow a quote from "Cool hand Luke" - " What we've got here is failure to communicate".

That's because we're not talking here about cinematography skills, shot composition or life experiences. It's purely a gear talk. It's lumen, CRI, F-stops and kilowatt hours. It's megapixels and megabits/bytes per second. One can contribute to the topic of conversation by discussing the technology in question. Or one can take a low road.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top