The single chip camera evaluation by ASC members

although the black magic new recorder can give you 10 bit uncompressed at 345 dollars plus cost of ssd
 
smelni said:
meaning its not a large additional cost to get 10 bit 4.4.4 out
Click to expand...

That all depends. In these calculations people make, the recorder is not going to do anything for you by itself. If you need to record 2 hours of video and have no way to transfer during your shoot, your needs and cost change. If you need to monitor the free space, you will need an external LCD as well. The cost of SSD media is pretty expensive right now. What I am getting at is when you look at your big picture, from every aspect of capture to edit, this is where the *cost* of one solution to another will really come into play. I can see situations where going with this system would be ideal for me, and others where I'd really want the Ninja instead.
 
i was only answering that barry was saying its ~5k to record to external 10 bit and its nowhere near that even when taking into account all you said.
 
OK, thanks for explanation.

The new external recorders are almost all good, and the new Hyperdeck Shuttle (silly name, wonderful tech) really ends once & for all the bs about 10-bit (and HD-SDI!) being expensive. Now, if only the cam manufacturers would wake up and smell the coffee ...
 
I wonder if they can include an addendum for next year or sooner, and include the Sony F65 and FS100, and an Epic. I'd love to see how the F65 will do against the Alexa.
 
vanvideo said:
I wonder if they can include an addendum for next year or sooner, and include the Sony F65 and FS100, and an Epic. I'd love to see how the F65 will do against the Alexa.
Click to expand...
I went to the Arri booth to inquire about the cost of an Alexa. They told me >$80,000 and a five-month wait. I think that's insane to invest in today, even though it's the hottest camera out there, because ... five months from now, who knows what will be out?

Seeing how well the F3 did against the Alexa, at 1/6th the price, I have no doubt the F65 will be capable of excelling. The one test that the Alexa didn't dominate in was resolution, the Red and Film both spanked it. The F65, being an 8k source recording to 4K, should be able to match the Red and film, which means it'd outclass the Alexa in res, and if it has better processing than the F3, it should ("should") make it a better performer overall than the Alexa. But at a price; the price I heard being tossed around was $160k-ish for the F65, so double the cost of the Alexa.

More than ever, investing in a top-end camera is for the bold who have a solid business plan and can recoup that investment in six months. There's no more three-year-shelf-life situation for top-end camera bodies. If the Alexa was available *today*, it might be a viable investment, but the five-month waiting list makes it kind of iffy to me, because of how quickly the other companies move.

Even the Red Epic... while the Red MX didn't fare nearly as well as the Alexa on several of the subjective tests or on the DR test, and we've been told the Epic uses the same core sensor tech, you still have to figure that an Epic is 1/3 the price of the Alexa and it did very very well. It didn't match up in DR (11 stops vs. 14) but maybe the HDRx feature will prove versatile enough to overcome that.

In general, what I observed is that among the comparable-generation technology, price ruled the day and you could easily rank them based on price. AF100, F3, Red MX and Alexa are all brand new technology, and they all performed comparatively in order of how they're priced. Given that metric, I would certainly expect the F65 to outperform the Alexa, since it's a more-expensive unit with even newer technology.
 
Speaking of pricey gear, the solution is -- if at all possible, whenever possible -- rent!

As Barry says, it's certainly OK to own "expensive" gear if we can it make pay within a few months or less. But renting can be a cost-effective way to go if a reliable rental house is available to you. I understand that the latter isn't always the case.

Cheers.
 
Yeah, it's nice to live in a town that has an Abel or a Birns, but not all towns do. In the entire state of Texas I think there's only two Alexas, one in Houston and one in Dallas... =:O

Owning low-cost tech makes sense, but much beyond an AF100 you really would have to be working it a lot to justify the expense. A $5,000 camera should pay for itself in a few months at most, a $20k camera is a lot harder to pay off, and a $160k camera -- well, you better have a business plan and an established client base and the knowhow to run a rental house if you want to play in those leagues.

With the pace that technology is moving and new introductions are happening (note - the F3 was just introduced on the market three months ago, and there's already an introduction of an F65!) it makes a lot more sense to rent the big toys if you can.
 
Barry_Green said:
In general, what I observed is that among the comparable-generation technology, price ruled the day and you could easily rank them based on price. AF100, F3, Red MX and Alexa are all brand new technology, and they all performed comparatively in order of how they're priced. Given that metric, I would certainly expect the F65 to outperform the Alexa, since it's a more-expensive unit with even newer technology.
Click to expand...

The problem for me is that while that is true, it's probably not a good value assessment. Diminishing returns. The F3 is better than the AF100, but is it 2x better? Is the Alexa 3x better than the Red? Hell, is an AF100 5x better than a GH2, even?
 
Lee Saxon said:
The problem for me is that while that is true, it's probably not a good value assessment. Diminishing returns. The F3 is better than the AF100, but is it 2x better? Is the Alexa 3x better than the Red? Hell, is an AF100 5x better than a GH2, even?
Click to expand...

I've always felt and calculated that return on investment with technology is logarithmic with respect to price/performance. Even when looking within a single companies offerings it tends to be true. This is why I typically always go for the middle performer (especially with laptops) as it's the best of both worlds to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top