Michael Olsen
Veteran
There is a lot of misinformation going around about resolution and imager quality. You can in theory shoot 4k with the dvx100 in the same way you shoot 4k with the red one. In post , with your dvx100 footage - you can enlarge it and output at 4k.
Er...woah, what? You start by saying there are misconceptions about resolution and imager quality. Sure, that's true. But then you go on to say that you can get 4K from a DVX100 in "the same way " one can get 4K from a RED ONE. I'm afraid that I really dont understand you. DVX100 shoots a 3CCD system with about 500 lines of horizontal resolution (or counting total RGB, 1500 lines). RED ONE shoots a 4.5K crop of a 5K sensor with 4500 lines of horizontal resolution. I'm already seeing massive differences here - 3CCD versus single CMOS, 1500 lines of horizontal resolution versus 4500 lines of horizontal resolution.
Then you suggest that you can just upscale the output of the DVX100 and end up with 4K. Sure you can. You can upscale whatever you want to whatever size you want. But RED doesn't upscale - ever. If anything, it downscales in the Bayer conversion from 4.5K to 4K (or 3K or 2K or 1080p...). So again, there are massive differences here. You are talking about scaling DVX footage up more than twice, but RED footage is being downscaled during the debayering process to its desired resolution - where it resolves a very pristine 4K image.
Will it look good? Probably not.
You bet it wouldn't. It would look awful. Which is why you can't shoot 4K "the same way " using a DVX100 as you do on a RED ONE - or an EPIC or an F65, for that matter.
I don't want 8K size if there are compromises and tricks like the Red One does to get there.
Erm...what "compromises and tricks" are you seeing on the RED ONE?
The use of a bayer pattern CMOS sensor? Because that is what extremely high-end image conscious still photographers have been using for some time now. In fact, if you didn't know, the Mysterium-X sensor in RED ONE has been used for a number of professional fashion spreads in magazines like Vogue, Esquire, W, and Esquire - numerous times - as well as large print ads and branding for fashion companies. It's not a one-trick pony or a gimmick. And additionally, it's the same technology being used in just about every large sensor camera now - including the Alexa and (when turned 45-degrees) the F65. The RED ONE has an excellent imager, unless you can point out some major flaws that a massive amount of people seem to be missing.
The use of a visually lossless RAW Codec?
The use of oversampling to produce a rich, detailed image without artificial sharpening or aliasing?
Now with the F65, we finally have a mechanical shutter, which addresses the biggest concern I have with the red one - that the motion doesn't quite feel like film to me. This is where the F65 will prove more interesting, possibly moreso than even the Arri Alexa if the workflow is fairly simple, the files sizes are managable, and it has the colorspace of the Alexa.
I agree, I think the mechanical shutter is a great idea for the F65, and I'd like to see it in every digital cinema camera if it works well. Unfortunately, the F65s workflow is still very nebulous. People aren't sure how exactly support for RAW will be handled by Sony - whether it will be all in house, 3rd party, or a mixture of the two. And the filesizes will be absolutely nuts. 60minutes for 1TB of footage, or 17GB per minute. Not what most would call "manageable". Still, I'm excited to see what it's bringing to the game. Oh, and speaking of problems with imagers - it is expected that the F65 may very well have some pretty obvious chroma aliasing.
