Rumor: Canon 4k super35 camera

Seems the consensus is there are going to be cameras on the 3rd....if indeed one of them is a 4k PL mount camera at 15-17K, that would be a definite upset of the apple cart for the other manufacturers. I'm excited to find out what Canon is going to show.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com
 
Jim Martin said:
Seems the consensus is there are going to be cameras on the 3rd....if indeed one of them is a 4k PL mount camera at 15-17K, that would be a definite upset of the apple cart for the other manufacturers. I'm excited to find out what Canon is going to show.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com
Click to expand...

Damn Jim, I thought you being out in Hollywood with your ear to the ground would know the scoop!:lipsrseal
 
My ear is so on the ground it is actually underground......Canon is saying absolutely NOTHING to us and even with my many long time friends there, all I get out of them is "be patient and you'll find out on the 3rd"......which makes me think something really special must be coming.....which makes me think of RON Howard in "The Music Man" ..."OOh the Wells Fargo wagon is a-coming down the street, I wish I wish I knew what it could beeee"

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com
 
There better be a teired announcement:

$1k-$2k s35mm sensor in small camcorder body (the much-hoped for VG20-killer)
$3k-$7k s35mm sensor in large camcorder body (AF100/FS100 competitor)
$10k-15k s35mm sensor in new cine-style body (F3 competitor)

anything less and I quit!
 
I'm in for tier one, please. And if they are going with EF mount there better be some new video-specific lenses to go with it. Not everyone can afford the $20k PL mounts.

A range of 2.8 zooms with a decent manual focus ring. (consumer priced version of the zeiss variable primes) A cheap super zoom can only be slow. Sensitive sensor is not an excuse to only deliver slow lenses.
 
Where is Panasonic in all this? They could put out a VG-20-style camera with the GH2's sensor (tweaked for video) and the 10-bit 4:2:2 AVC-Ultra Long-G codec running at 25-50 Mbps. All for less than $1,500.
 
Tzedekh said:
Where is Panasonic in all this? They could put out a VG-20-style camera with the GH2's sensor (tweaked for video) and the 10-bit 4:2:2 AVC-Ultra Long-G codec running at 25-50 Mbps. All for less than $1,500.
Click to expand...

That's called the af100. I don't think there is a 10bit long gop codec. I don't think its efficient at that data rate.

If they could deliver those specs at that price point they would.
 
Paul V Doherty said:
There better be a teired announcement:

$1k-$2k s35mm sensor in small camcorder body (the much-hoped for VG20-killer)
$3k-$7k s35mm sensor in large camcorder body (AF100/FS100 competitor)
$10k-15k s35mm sensor in new cine-style body (F3 competitor)

anything less and I quit!
Click to expand...

Quit what?
 
So glad I have not purchased a new cam yet. Unless I get 10 bit from canon Under the $10,000 price tag My 5d will continue to see action. I'm not even satisfied with the look of sony's f100 enough to make me jump ship. It will take canon to really announce something big.
 
TimurCivan said:
I don't think there is a 10bit long gop codec. I don't think its efficient at that data rate.
Click to expand...

Maybe not yet released, but it has been announced. According to Wikipedia: The most efficient new parameter within AVC-Ultra is by Panasonic called, AVC-LongG. AVC-LongG enables compression of video resolutions up to 1920x1080 @ 23.97, 25 and 29.97p, with 10 bits of pixel depth at 4:2:2 color sampling, at data rates as low as 25 Mbit / sec.

Also discussed in this thread: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?261959-AVC-Ultra-revamped&highlight=avcultra
 
dcloud said:
if all this is true id say itll be 6-7k
the main reason af100 and fs100 is cheap is beacuse it recorded in avchd now if canon does do it with mpeg2 4:2:2,etc like xf, itll atleast be much expensive
Click to expand...

There is no reason that mpeg2 4:2:2 would be more expensive. Codecs are just algorithms. Even an iphone could encode 4:2:2 footage at 50mb/s. Manufactures just like to lead you to believe there's some magical "cost" associated with better codecs so they can sell cameras with higher color-spaced at higher prices. The hardware in the little $900 GH2 is capable of writing nearly 200mb/s of all I-frame footage to consumer SD cards... it's still 4:2:0... but you get the point...

Besides Canon's XF100 with the 50mbs 4:2:2 codec is about $3500... that's less than the AF-100.
 
I talked to Panasonic at IBC. They don't have a s35 sensor, thus there will be no s35 camera from Panny, at least anytime soon.
 
TimurCivan said:
That's called the af100. I don't think there is a 10bit long gop codec. I don't think its efficient at that data rate.

If they could deliver those specs at that price point they would.
Click to expand...
Well, no, the AF100 is comparable to Sony's FS100. I was thinking something like this. In addition to 10-bit 4:2:2 AVC Long-G, it might also be helpful if it permitted 10-bit (or even 12-bit) HDMI out with timecode (a la the FS100). And, if possible, I would like to see AVC Long-G at 60p.
 
Last edited:
GH2user said:
There is no reason that mpeg2 4:2:2 would be more expensive. Codecs are just algorithms. Even an iphone could encode 4:2:2 footage at 50mb/s. Manufactures just like to lead you to believe there's some magical "cost" associated with better codecs so they can sell cameras with higher color-spaced at higher prices.
Click to expand...

In fact, if one were to cost more R & D, it would be the more highly compressed, lower-bit-rate codec.

All cameras start off with RAW, or 4:4:4, uncompressed, coming off the image sensors. They all start off at hundreds of megabits per second. Which do you think takes more ingenuity: to turn 800 Mbps* into 100 or 25 Mbps?

* number off the top of my head
 
Last edited:
The higher the bit rate you are passing thru to the recording medium, the more bandwidth and processing power it takes. If you are also scaling a 4x resolution sensor to 1080p at high quality, which has to be done before encoding and compression, you need some serious processing power for that too. The quality of the scaling will seriously impact the encoding process and final image quality if it is not done well to start with.
I expect what Canon is calling a 4k sensor is actually QHD. This would allow them to efficiently debayer a 4 pixel group,2g:1r:1b, to a single 4:2:2 RGB pixel at 1080p before compression.
 
Razz16mm said:
The higher the bit rate you are passing thru to the recording medium, the more bandwidth and processing power it takes. If you are also scaling a 4x resolution sensor to 1080p at high quality, which has to be done before encoding and compression, you need some serious processing power for that too. The quality of the scaling will seriously impact the encoding process and final image quality if it is not done well to start with.
I expect what Canon is calling a 4k sensor is actually QHD. This would allow them to efficiently debayer a 4 pixel group,2g:1r:1b, to a single 4:2:2 RGB pixel at 1080p before compression.
Click to expand...


If they can do that with a decent OLPF then they may have something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top