morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Paul - only ex digi back owners see the future of this stuff 
My H1 is long replaced with the far better nikon D600 !
S
My H1 is long replaced with the far better nikon D600 !
S
Sony 8K CineAlta rumor
- Thread starter BlackWolf
- Start date
Harry Lime
Well-known member
Even if the 4.6k performs brilliantly it still is no Alexa killer. First off as good as the IQ is out of the BM cameras and possibly the 4.6k, the color science in the Alexa is in a whole different league. There are many other factors involved like ergonomics, connectivity, reliability, service networks, build quality, wireless connectivity, politics etc. It's not just about the sensor, but the whole camera package, the track record of the manufacturer and the support it delivers. BM can't even deliver a product on time and apparently won't service them once they are out of warranty. No one on the high end is going to put up with that. I should mention that I have a pre-order in for a Ursa Mini 4.6k, but the lack of service beyond the warranty is giving me second thoughts and I may just end up sticking with my F3L. The BM cameras are a game changer for independents, but there is a reason why studios shoot on Arri, Sony and Red.
If the 4.6k cameras perform as advertised they will without a doubt have an impact on the low-end and mid range of the market, but I can guarantee you that no one is going to dump their Alexa or F55 for a BM camera.
Last edited:
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
What kills the big beasts is the stuff creeping up from the bottom. Id say C300ii AF will just make better for anything but scripted drama than an alexa.
In stills my hassy was killed by the 5d2 not because the image was better, but the size the lenses the AF, the focus punch in in Live view just made it a better image making machine - even if the IQ was 10% down on 'the beast'
Id say sony and canon are the threat to arri - not BMC - because Sony/Canon can chuck proper money at development - because it is development they need to do to feed down into their consumer cameras and the consumer cams create the millions $ turnover
Is Sony a threat to its self or own cine lines? Who knows.
S
In stills my hassy was killed by the 5d2 not because the image was better, but the size the lenses the AF, the focus punch in in Live view just made it a better image making machine - even if the IQ was 10% down on 'the beast'
Id say sony and canon are the threat to arri - not BMC - because Sony/Canon can chuck proper money at development - because it is development they need to do to feed down into their consumer cameras and the consumer cams create the millions $ turnover
Is Sony a threat to its self or own cine lines? Who knows.
S
Paul schefz
Well-known member
of course things aren't that simple for BM....i would say that the ursa 4.6 has to be better then arri and red to really make waves in the highest end.....the big problem for the highest end is simply that it keeps getting smaller and smaller and there are plenty of cameras out there now nowhere near arri and red that are eating into the rental market for commercial,....budgets are getting tighter every day....
i would argue that BM maybe has the best color science team out there and in general a software division better then anyone, they have to because they are going head to head with adobe and apple....and they are giving it away for free....i wonder how many people knew about resolve 5 years ago and how many people are using it on a constant base today.....this is a huge advantage for BM....
and in terms of connectivity i really don't see anything wrong with the ursa mini or the ursa....same sensor.....should be a pretty great combo....and buying 2 cameras for the price of the rental of one is hard to argue with, including support...in a pinch, just call up B&H and have one overnighted to save a production.....but in reality you probably have a couple on hand anyway....
i don't think this is overnight transition....it will be a slow one but that only makes it more painful for the highest end....
JMtheDP
Veteran
Ask yourselves, do we want our manufacturers to be limited to cameras that only cost a couple grand to knock out? I don't think so.
There will *always* be a demand for the best, and the best will always be better than the nearly-consumer level stuff.
Which is not to say BM etc... do not have a valid place - indeed, we have "never had it so good" in the low end, but I don't think the current crop of cameras will replace an Alexa for many of the people that use it regularly.
There will *always* be a demand for the best, and the best will always be better than the nearly-consumer level stuff.
Which is not to say BM etc... do not have a valid place - indeed, we have "never had it so good" in the low end, but I don't think the current crop of cameras will replace an Alexa for many of the people that use it regularly.
Grug
Veteran
The interesting thing with BM and their cameras IMO, is that they're not fighting a deep and storied history of broadcast/video cameras like the Japanese are - which means they have a level of freedom in designing features and menus into their cameras that the others resist - as a result they're already far more intuitive to operate and setup, and will hopefully only get better.
What's the Alexa65 rental like, about five times of the "regular"? So, it would be about $300,000. Then again, IMO, they're keeping this artificial scarcity going for some reason. Unless they're short of the rehoused Hasselblad 65mm lenses, they could have easily made several hundred of the Alexa65.
And if by 20 million, you meant half a billion, then you'd be getting close (25-30% and growing of the 1.5 billion annual unit market).sony will be more then happy to sell 20mill iPhone sensors each year
It's a technological progress. Any well heeled company will enter a territory it deems profitable and, once it's in, the engineers take over. The image acquisition advancement is due as much to its photo/video part as to mobile computing. Once photo cameras became part of a smartphone, the amounts of money that poured into the R&D at these major conglomerates meant there was going to be quick development of many various aspects - from sensors to media to processors to screens. And it'll be very difficult for the independents to stem the tide. IMO, within two years, one would be able to shoot a big budget feature with a $6,000 camera and a couple of zooms. URSA Mini, on specs alone, can do it whenever it comes out but, in 18-24 months, there'll be similar 4K-6K products from the big boys and the old adage of "80% performance for 20% of the price" will become "95% performance for 5% of the price". And the paying public won't notice those five percent anyway.
Paul schefz
Well-known member
i guess it depends on you definition of the best....
the problem arri and red has is that there is no other market....once the high end production can get the same result from a BM or Sony or canon, why would they not use it? i can understand if arri concentrates on film capture and dominates that niche (of a niche really) but if the curve in development goes up the way it has for each company, sony has cameras in 2 years that arri just can't even compete with, no matter at what price or following....
once a blockbuster DP decides to shoot on a xxxx (sony/BM/canon) because it gives a better image (and this will happen, it is just a matter of time) it's over....
the only thing dragging this out and helping arri/red stay in business is that sony, canon and BM don't even care about the top...they are perfectly happy selling 100000s cameras instead of tweaking something to sell 100......
i always thought that 8x10 photography will be the last thing to go in terms of film photography, just because there will always be that crazy person ou there....but from what i know it is almost impossible to get film and have it processed....
i also always thought that vinyl will never go away and in many ways it has survived the CD...but that nostalgia can't be compared to the film industry...
David W. Jones
Veteran
But on a "blockbuster" type movie the camera rental is such a small portion of the budget. I would still think the DP is going to choose the appropriate camera for the job at hand rather than pick an inappropriate camera because of image or price.
Paul schefz
Well-known member
that is what i meant....once productions for which the camera cost makes absolutely no difference decide on a XXX (BM, sony, canon) other people will see them in a different light....
if the next batman is exclusively shot on BM cameras because the DP decides that they provide the best image, every commercial director will be able to shoot with the camera that just shot the last batman movie.....
it is pointless to try and say this scenario is a year or 3 years off but i am pretty sure about the end result.....
IMO, the next step on the high end pro/feature/TV stage is for the multiple cam productions, such as what was done in the 1930's with all those Three Stooges shorts (they used four cams, with Curly having one for himself). I brought this up here a year ago when Nikon released that break dancing clip with a dozen cameras providing different angles of the performances and Charles Papert disagreed because he thought - not incorrectly, obviously - that it would lead to more overhead lighting, which is not the look currently in vogue. But I still think - and I am not on a set or anything, mind you - that even scripted TV is going toward a de facto live recording with many small size cameras of the Alexa Mini/C300MKII/A7RII variety controlled by robotic arms and with the director looking at a dozen monitors simultaneously in the way it's done live during the major sporting or live ceremony/award show events.
JMtheDP
Veteran
Dramatic production (ie features) is always likely to be single or very few cameras for the most part, simply because it is not possible to keep an eye on multiple monitors successfully if you are one person.
My own feeling is that the Blackmagic "type" of camera is still an awfully long way from being a serious professional tool, but that is just my opinion. I mean, seriously, their design house has only recently started to make things which make a little bit of sense. The big URSA, that fold out screen, who the hell thought that was a good idea?
Also - cameras costing £50k are always going to be better in some way or another than cameras costing £2k. Let's not forget the ALEXA is effectively 6/7 years old and is still the most popular camera for most feature and high end TV work.
My own feeling is that the Blackmagic "type" of camera is still an awfully long way from being a serious professional tool, but that is just my opinion. I mean, seriously, their design house has only recently started to make things which make a little bit of sense. The big URSA, that fold out screen, who the hell thought that was a good idea?
Also - cameras costing £50k are always going to be better in some way or another than cameras costing £2k. Let's not forget the ALEXA is effectively 6/7 years old and is still the most popular camera for most feature and high end TV work.
Viddovation
Veteran
Personally, I have a suspicion that the future of moviemaking may not even involve a camera in the sense that we think of. I think there may come a technology that allows highly accurate object motion capture, and instead of performing camera moves on set, they'll be performed in post. I'm not sure I like what I just predicted, but if the technology existed, I'm certain the effects laden blockbusters would rely heavily on it.
David W. Jones
Veteran
I'm a lens whore, but I have always thought that once we get past lenses capture systems will really advance.
It's kind of like cars. The internal combustion engine needs to be replaced with a modern energy efficient power source badly.
But I do love the popping gurgling sound of weber carbs on an early 12 cylinder Ferrari, and how I smell after driving one. :love4:
It's kind of like cars. The internal combustion engine needs to be replaced with a modern energy efficient power source badly.
But I do love the popping gurgling sound of weber carbs on an early 12 cylinder Ferrari, and how I smell after driving one. :love4:
Last edited:
Paul schefz
Well-known member
absolutely! that is why people still buy 100K manual watches or leicas or ferraris....the fun and of course status symbol.....but i seriously doubt this will apply to alexas or dragons....
i just read saw that leica is coming out with a new S series camera, new sensor and all....it will be around 20K for the body....i just saw this very objective test, no pixel peeping but a simple image comparison between this new S, the sony A7rII and the 645 pentax (also sony sensor)...the leica finished 3 and last...it wasn't much worse but the worst part is that there is absolutely no reason to get the leica...function, specs, features, quality, files....and this is not even considering the price 20K vs 9K vs 3K.....and since you can use pretty much all leica glass on the sony, there is not even the argument about the "leica look".....
again, leica knows what they are doing and most of these cameras will go to people who are not shooting professionally and will enjoy owning and handling them....and i honestly think that is great.......and in line with the 12 cylinder.....and i am sure nobody would think about taking their vintage 12 cylinder ferrari racing.....
JMtheDP
Veteran
You say that, but I believe film would have replaced digital if we were in a logical sector. But we aren't. We aren't even a logical species.
A Ferrari 250 GTO is inferior in almost every measurable way to, say, a fast diesel mercedes. But there's a reason one is £30,000 and one is £30m and it isn't just rarity.
I have sold a large number of old ARRI film cameras. There will probably be people who buy ALEXAs when they become cheap too because they aspire for what was once high end.
A Ferrari 250 GTO is inferior in almost every measurable way to, say, a fast diesel mercedes. But there's a reason one is £30,000 and one is £30m and it isn't just rarity.
I have sold a large number of old ARRI film cameras. There will probably be people who buy ALEXAs when they become cheap too because they aspire for what was once high end.
David W. Jones
Veteran
You might be surprised. I campaigned a Lola T70 in historic races till it ran my pockets dry.
JMtheDP
Veteran
Was that two or three laps before it bankrupted you? ;-)
I am always happy to see people giving these old cars a good thrashing. Far too many people with supercars with no miles on.
Last night, I was flipping through the channels and stopped for a few glimpses at it is known in the US as the "Spanish soap" (can be shot anywhere in Central/South America or the US). They were definitely using multiple (3-4) cameras but the editing wasn't as predictable on the US soaps. It didn't look like a feature, obviously, but it wasn't that bad. Their cuts were faster and camera angles fairly diverse. It was still two dimensional - as Charles Papert predicted - but IMO, one could work off that. The size of the upcoming gear and the ability to control their motion via some sort of a joystick will have its appeal.
Hypothetically, it can be done now, by scanning the scene three-dimensionally with lasers. There are companies who do this with the historical sites, where lighting/flash lights is prohibited. The problem, as I understand, there's too much data coming off those lasers but, even when pared, the virtual tour of these sites is top rate.
A gas turbine (aka a jet engine) that charges an electric battery, which then powers the electric engine (or, engines, plural) is several times more efficient than diesel in city traffic. It can also run off any liquid fuel, including the abundant (in the US) natural gas. And one can refuel at home and won't need a huge stack of very expensive batteries. The problem is the current cost of turbines, which are not in mass production (the large sized ones are for the airplanes and power stations).
And for the V-12 sound, you can always pop a nostalgia filled 8-track into your car stereo.