Sony NEX-FS100 with Super 35mm CMOS image sensor

It's a 10 bit capable standard (HDMI 1.4) but the camera only outputs 8 bit, according to Kanta Yamamoto of Sony.
 
bgundu said:
Wrong.
Click to expand...

This isn't the first time we've heard about 4:4:4 from the HDMI out though. It's definitely possible the rep misspoke or is mistaken in his info, but you would think a guy repping a new camera at NAB would know his facts.
 
echo9 said:
This isn't the first time we've heard about 4:4:4 from the HDMI out though. It's definitely possible the rep misspoke or is mistaken in his info, but you would think a guy repping a new camera at NAB would know his facts.
Click to expand...

Even the best of them mess up sometimes. I some how doubt Sony would go through the trouble of giving 4:4:4 and then only 8bit?
 
Is there a way to record that signal. To my knowledge there is no 444 hdmi recorder and it would have been much better to have 10 bit output.
 
Yeah, the difference between 4:2:2 and 4:4:4 is not soooo much a big deal, 8bit vs. 10 bit is definitely a big deal.

Frank
 
It is really sad that in 2011 people still have to use such limited format like 8 bit. When you see the photo world where you get 14 bit raw output from camera costing about $ 1000, you can clearly see how far behind the video industry is. If we did not have the dslr revolution where would we be now.
 
five fps (and even that uses a buffer and writes to cards more slowly) is a lot less data to move around than 30 fps. But Red proves it CAN be done. But no one will accept that argument until Scarlet is actually released so they need to get moving
 
TheDingo said:
You are only limited by the size of your wallet... The 12-bit Sony F-35 is always there if you want one. ( I'll take two )
Click to expand...

And Barry Green just said that the 10 bit F3 "handed the F35 it's butt on a silver platter" from the NAB shootout...so I guess it must not matter THAT much.
 
Lee Saxon said:
There are a lot of factors other than 10-bit vs 12-bit at play there. The sensor design is years older.
Click to expand...

That's true...but I'm saying it's all relative - people get way too caught up on these things IMO. It seems like the more these cameras include, the more people go looking for something else to fault them for. (remember when the "holy grail" was simply a video optimized large sensor, 24P, interchangeable lenses, and a proper form factor....)
So what would happen if the FS100 came with 10 bit....someone would still say - it doesen't have this or it doesen't have that. Both the FS100 and the AF100 are 2 of the best values ever in camera history - 8 bit is just part of the pricing structure (inexpensive to implement or not) The FS100 could not possibly have everything the $13,300 F3 does. It's missing ND filters, some internal processing stuff and 10 bit output - It still produces fantastic footage. So does the 8 bit AF100. So does the 8 bit HMC150, and so on.
 
headroom said:
The Color LUT is 3 Dimensional and thats a good thing. More insights from Juan Martinez (Sony Product Manager) shows the new Sony NEX-FS100 camera. He also talks a bit about the upcoming E-mount lenses.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-tidbits-nex-fs100-presentation-video/
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link. That video pretty much helped me decide to go with this camera when it's released. I didn't know about the 3D LUT feature. That put's it into another league when compared to the AF100. Here's hoping
Sony can recover and deliver before end of summer.
:-)
 
And he says: Both lenses are optically identical! I tell people that and they get very upset. Now Mr. Martinez confirms that notion. How about that. I guess my 36 years in the imaging business bring with them some experience after all. I want a NEX-FS100 BTW.
 
So are there more than the standard 3 R G B color filters over the pixel array? No? Thanks for the marketing hype!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top