Video equal, will you sell your 7D for a T2i?

[squig]

It's easy to get rid of -- just engineer a sensor that can read a full oversampled image at 60 fps. Like Red has done.

Of course, if you do that, it'll cost $17,500 like Red does.

You want the $799 pricetag? Sorry, something's gotta give.

It's $17500 for a a small company producing relatively small quantities. If Nikon were to bring oversampling to the D4 it would cost around $5000. It remains to be seen if Nikon has woken up to the fact that a significant amount of pro bodies would find a new market with filmmakers, the fact that they put full manual control on the D3s and they have video enabled DSLRs from Canon to compete with suggests they may be listening. A few months ago I noticed a patent application for a raw video codec, I can't remember if it was made by Nikon or Canon.

 

[Ryan Farnes]

Not according to this:

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos550d/page8.asp

This is also true for its predecessor the T1i. Hopefully you can just work around that either using the ND filters you already have or compensating with aperture.

Hmmm, that ISO thing is sort of a big deal. Not a deal killer, but certainly starts to make the jump a little more painful?

However, it is exciting to think that video on par with the 7D (we think) is now available for 1/2 the price. Certainly for those in the market right now. I'm definitely with Kholi though and want the alias and moire thing fixed. I am missing my HVX's 60fps setting. In some situations, the 7D's 720p60 is so aliased as to render it completely useless.

I hope that this new camera is all part of an overall strategy by Canon to push the envelope on cinema features in their DSLRs, particularly on the higher end towards the 1D and 5D. (7D?) Check out how the show 24 is using 5Ds for some scenes:

http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?p=2215

Regarding how you have to have hefty hardware to read every line on the sensor, is it possible that one of these DSLR manufacturers makes a DSLR or similar form factor camera that just forgets all the stills functionality and complexity in favor of dedicated video functioning? And still hitting the pricepoint of like a 5D?

This technology in the cameras seems to be outpacing computers. I still feel like my 2+ year old Macbook Pro can run with most laptops. All these DSLRs didn't exist that long ago.

 

[Kholi]

It's $17500 for a a small company producing relatively small quantities. If Nikon were to bring oversampling to the D4 it would cost around $5000. It remains to be seen if Nikon has woken up to the fact that a significant amount of pro bodies would find a new market with filmmakers, the fact that they put full manual control on the D3s and they have video enabled DSLRs from Canon to compete with suggests they may be listening. A few months ago I noticed a patent application for a raw video codec, I can't remember if it was made by Nikon or Canon.

That's a pretty firm statement. I assume it's coming from an experienced POV and not conjecture.

Also strange that the newest 1D already costs an excess of that figure.

 

[Kholi]

Regarding how you have to have hefty hardware to read every line on the sensor, is it possible that one of these DSLR manufacturers makes a DSLR or similar form factor camera that just forgets all the stills functionality and complexity in favor of dedicated video functioning? And still hitting the pricepoint of like a 5D?

Everything's possible, probable is the proper inquiry term. And, probably won't happen for several years, especially not at the pricepoint of the 5D.

Seven to Ten thousand would still be a steal for that kind of imaging power.

 

[Ryan Farnes]

A few months ago I noticed a patent application for a raw video codec, I can't remember if it was made by Nikon or Canon.

Now that is what makes this interesting. Maybe....maybe....that is partially why Jim Jannard said they were increasing some of the REDCODE rates on the Scarlet models.

Hmmm...given the tendency for Canon to introduce stuff right before release, who knows what is in the works.

Bless the Japanese. (and the Americans too I guess) :cheesy:

 

[Ryan Farnes]

That's a pretty firm statement. I assume it's coming from an experienced POV and not conjecture.

Also strange that the newest 1D already costs an excess of that figure.

Yeah, but I wonder if they made a camera that simply did not do stills. You get rid of all the engineering and complexity of making a camera that shoots stills up the wazoo...and instead throw all the R&D and hardware into just video functionality.

But yes, I am totally conjecturing from the bottom of the mountain.

 

[squig]

That's a pretty firm statement. I assume it's coming from an experienced POV and not conjecture.

Also strange that the newest 1D already costs an excess of that figure.

Just consider the hundreds of thousands of bodies Nikon and Canon sell opposed to the 4000 red have sold. The Japanese companies have huge R&D budgets so if they want to produce a body with oversampling and a raw codec they can.

 

[Kholi]

Just consider the hundreds of thousands of bodies Nikon and Canon sell opposed to the 4000 red have sold. The Japanese companies have huge R&D budgets so if they want to produce a body with oversampling and a raw codec they can.

I could see that as a light possibility, how does that equate to the cost of a fictional product? Sounds like a great price, by the way. Very far-fetched, but great.

 

[shaocaholica]

Hmmm, that ISO thing is sort of a big deal. Not a deal killer, but certainly starts to make the jump a little more painful?

How are 1/2 stop ISO adjustments that bad of a pill to swallow?

 

[squig]

I could see that as a light possibility, how does that equate to the cost of a fictional product? Sounds like a great price, by the way. Very far-fetched, but great.

How is it far fetched? That's what Nikon and Canon are selling their pro bodies for, those are the bodies they put their latest tech into. It stands to reason it will be introduced into the new pro bodies and they won't be increasing the price of the bodies.

Fictional product? Are you talking about that empty RED box?

btw Kholi you can get a 1DMKIV for 5 grand http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/656378-REG/Canon_3822B002_EOS_1D_Mark_IV.html
A D3s is about 200 more

 

[Michael Olsen]

Kind of makes me wonder...if you sold a 4K RAW camera ready to shoot (batteries, lenses, etc.) for $5000, how many would you really sell? Certainly thousands, certainly tens of thousands (RED ONE is just past 7000 now)...how many hundreds of thousands?

How many hundreds of thousands of 1DsMkIV are sold?

Must do research...

 

[shaocaholica]

Kind of makes me wonder...if you sold a 4K RAW camera ready to shoot (batteries, lenses, etc.) for $5000

You could sell even more if you dropped the price:happy:

 

[Ryan Farnes]

How are 1/2 stop ISO adjustments that bad of a pill to swallow?

Here are the ISO settings missing that the 7D has:

125, 160, 250, 320, 500, 640, 1000, 1250, 2500, 4000, 5000

I don't care about the high end as much, but having the ability to set 125, 160 and particularly 250, 320, 500 and 640 to finesse exposure is nice. Maybe I've been spoiled by the 7D?

 

[philiplipetz]

It's $17500 for a a small company producing relatively small quantities. If Nikon were to bring oversampling to the D4 it would cost around $5000. It remains to be seen if Nikon has woken up to the fact that a significant amount of pro bodies would find a new market with filmmakers, the fact that they put full manual control on the D3s and they have video enabled DSLRs from Canon to compete with suggests they may be listening. A few months ago I noticed a patent application for a raw video codec, I can't remember if it was made by Nikon or Canon.

Nikonrumors talked about a Nikon effort to produce a RAW video codec.

 

[J Davis]

Its not 1/2 stop ISO thats missing, its 1/3rd stop increments

 

[Kholi]

How is it far fetched?

Well, it's far-fetched because you popped a number out that doesn't sound very plausible for a product that exists in a few different forms, just from other companies. And, none of them cost as little as you're factually quoting. Theoretically, if one understood how much processing power it takes to kick out compressed yet-near-to-raw Data (it's HARDER than kicking out TRUE RAW footage) at a constant twenty-four or more frames a second for an extended period of time, then that same person will probably understand that the process literally needs a computer somewhere in the equation.

It no longer becomes simple LIVE VIEW technology or Sensor technology, you are creating a portable computational machine derived for the purposes of compressing data to fit on whatever media manufacturers may choose.

The only fathomable way Five-thousand dollars for a RAW imaging system with a S35/APS-C sensor DEDICATED for video could come into play would be what REEL-STREAM tried to do: add a raw video tap that by-passes the compression altogether, to which you feed to a Computer specifically employed to compress or store the video passed through whatever fiber, analog or digital feed chosen. Or, someone just wanted to put their own company out of business.

So, yes, it's very far-fetched... sounds more like Wishful Thinking.

That's what Nikon and Canon are selling their pro bodies for, those are the bodies they put their latest tech into. It stands to reason it will be introduced into the new pro bodies and they won't be increasing the price of the bodies.

No matter how much Canon or Nikon spins the tacked-on Video Mode, it is still primarily a Still Image acquisition device. The 7D, with two processors in a small body, can't even exceed eight (8) RAW frames a second. It's a still camera, the price of components is set accordingly.

The closest thing that represents what you are envisioning in existence right now is RED. Since you enjoy calling Scarlet fictional, then compare it to what RED is right now: 23,000 for a Mysterium-X Sensor based camera. That's how much money it takes to get a new one that's on par with Sony's F35, which costs ten times that amount.

Fictional product? Are you talking about that empty RED box?

No, not at all. I'm talking about the Nikon product you stated, factually, that could be had for Five-Thousand dollars. RED exists, Scarlet does not.

btw Kholi you can get a 1DMKIV for 5 grand http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/656378-REG/Canon_3822B002_EOS_1D_Mark_IV.html
A D3s is about 200 more

In excess means that sometimes it will cost more, depending on where you purchase. I'm glad to see that B&H has the 1DMKiV for Five-Thousand Dollars...

 

[shaocaholica]

Well, it's far-fetched because you popped a number out that doesn't sound very plausible for a product that exists in a few different forms, just from other companies.

Ok then, hypothetically speaking, if Canon or Sony or Nikon with their respective R&D talent and manufacturing capabilities were to design and make a Scarlet S35 class camera for mass market, how much would it cost? Would it cost less than RED pricing? If so how much?

 

[Barry_Green]

Just consider the hundreds of thousands of bodies Nikon and Canon sell opposed to the 4000 red have sold. The Japanese companies have huge R&D budgets so if they want to produce a body with oversampling and a raw codec they can.

Perhaps, although they are not immune to the laws of physics or basic economic principles.

But consider this: Canon sells hundreds of thousands of bodies, yes. And Red has sold about 7,000. Had Canon or Nikon made the Red One, do you think they'd have sold more than 7,000? The potential customer base for such a product is only so large, after all.

Unless you're thinking that a Canon "One" would cost only $1500, of course... in which case, boy, that's comedy -- now Red, the "rebellion", the "bringing cinema to the masses" company, would at that point be painted as the company that's grossly overcharging customers! Oh, how fickle the consumer is.

So, getting back on track -- yes, Canon and Nikon could engineer a sensor that would do what you ask. But it won't be free, and it won't do a thing for their stills business, so the only reason they'd even consider doing it is if they felt it could increase sales. And if Red, with a truly revolutionary product, has only moved 7,000 units... just how big is this market, really?

And the answer is: not very.

And then you have to ask -- okay, but there's thousands, if not tens of thousands, of DSLRs being sold to filmmakers. To which I say yes, there are -- and how many of them are dissatisfied with today's current product offerings? To judge by how frequently I get scalped around here for suggesting that DSLRs are anything but actually divine holy gifts from above, I'd say -- there's not that many who are all that dissatisfied.

And then, consider they are (by some reports) going to be offering the same video quality at half the price...

So what would be the incentive for them to design and engineer that bigger/better sensor? For the ten thousand of us worldwide who'd pay more to get it? That's what the Scarlet S35 is for...

 

[Kholi]

Ok then, hypothetically speaking, if Canon or Sony or Nikon with their respective R&D talent and manufacturing capabilities were to design and make a Scarlet S35 class camera for mass market, how much would it cost? Would it cost less than RED pricing? If so how much?

Couldn't say. But, I don't think they would price it lower just because RED prices Scarlet S35 low. It's Canon Branded, they could sell it for 10K and get plenty of professionals to buy based on their Name alone. Nikon and Sony the same. I know if I had a massive world renowned corporation I would'nt undersell my own brand.

RED still has a ton to prove, even with their progress, that's no secret.

Question is, would YOU pay 10K for it? >=P Hehehe

 

[Barry_Green]

Ok then, hypothetically speaking, if Canon or Sony or Nikon with their respective R&D talent and manufacturing capabilities were to design and make a Scarlet S35 class camera for mass market, how much would it cost? Would it cost less than RED pricing? If so how much?

Well, how can any of us know?

Wasn't Red brought into existence to bring camera prices DOWN?!?! Would we then argue that a $7500 Scarlet would cost $15,000 if it came from Canon? Canon charges $8,999 for a 1/3" XLH1s, after all. Red says they will soon be offering a 2/3" Scarlet for ostensibly half that price.