What are the options for large sensor cameras with clean output?

SJX

SJX

Veteran
What are the options for large sensor cameras, DSLR or any camera, with a clean uncompressed output and under $3000? Is the D800 the only one?

Sound is not important as I normally use an external audio recorder anyway.

Full frame is ok but last resort as I want to be able to use S35 cine lenses. A FF with a cop feature like the D800 is of course fine.

I'm not interested in the Blackmagic camera for several reasons. One being that it doesn't "exist" yet and I need it now. :)

Thanks!
 
Thanks Barry. The AF100 is indeed a nice camera. But the price, the bigger form factor, the smaller sensor and the 4:2:2 being "only" 8bit makes the D800 somehow a more attractive deal.
It's a pity the GH2 doesn't have a clean uncompressed output though. I like most things about it.

The reason for the clean output is that I want to record with a Hyperdeck Shuttle.
 
I'm aware of that. But it's considerably cheaper, has a larger sensor and the smaller form factor is an advantage for me. So no reason to consider the AF100 for my needs. ;)

But is the D800 the only option with a clean uncompressed output?
 
Under $3000 the only options I can think of are the D800, the soon to arrive BMC and some of those little sensor-in-a-box deals like the Apertus.
 
New_Zealand said:
What about the Canon 5d mkii? I don't have a clue what the bit rate is.
Click to expand...

As Barry noted, the 5D is totally the wrong camera for what I'm looking for. Besides I already have a 7D, which compared to the 5D has a better HDMI output and works fine with S35 lenses, another negative side to the 5D for my applications since it's full frame only.
 
Grug said:
Under $3000 the only options I can think of are the D800, the soon to arrive BMC and some of those little sensor-in-a-box deals like the Apertus.
Click to expand...

I thought the Apertus was a 1/2" sensor? I'm looking for larger sensor. Mainly S35-ish. It's also not finished. :)

I need it now.

Is there anything else?
 
What's the rolling shutter like with the Nikon D800?

For me, a "good" HDMI connection should have a clean image, little rolling shutter, and a wide dynamic range.
 
TheDingo said:
What's the rolling shutter like with the Nikon D800?

For me, a "good" HDMI connection should have a clean image, little rolling shutter, and a wide dynamic range.
Click to expand...

How would HDMI output 'lessen' rolling shutter, since it is the readout of the sensor itself in 'blocks' that induces the 'rolling shutter' effect?

The 'dynamic' range would be better if the HDMI output represented say 10 bits of digitized data... and of course there's more bits of 'signal', rather than more bits of noise... which again is a sensor/digitizer issue.

About the only thing I can agree relative to my understanding of where the HDMI signal originates, is that one does not get the spatial/temporal compression that one gets on the 'other side' of the compression system...

The sensor itself still has fewer cells for Red and Blue, so, while there may be no additional compression, there's still that 'physical' compression.
 
As I understand it, will do exactly ZERO for rolling shutter, might have marginal effect on dynamic range in the sense of giving more post latitude allowing you to shoot flatter.
 
I don't believe The Dingo was implying that the HDMI port would have any effect over the rolling shutter. I think he was just saying that if your camera doesn't have a clean image, or if it has too much rolling shutter effect, or it doesn't have a wide dynamic range, then what's the point of trying to record its HDMI output? A "good" HDMI output could (if I'm interpreting TheDingo's meaning properly) only come from a camera that has a good clean image with little rolling shutter effect and a wide dynamic range. Otherwise, what's the point?
 
Barry_Green said:
I don't believe The Dingo was implying that the HDMI port would have any effect over the rolling shutter. I think he was just saying that if your camera doesn't have a clean image, or if it has too much rolling shutter effect, or it doesn't have a wide dynamic range, then what's the point of trying to record its HDMI output? A "good" HDMI output could (if I'm interpreting TheDingo's meaning properly) only come from a camera that has a good clean image with little rolling shutter effect and a wide dynamic range. Otherwise, what's the point?
Click to expand...

Well there is this saying... 'garbage in, garbage out'... with the addition of 'no matter how good the tunnel may be'...
 
j1clark@ucsd.edu said:
How would HDMI output 'lessen' rolling shutter, since it is the readout of the sensor itself in 'blocks' that induces the 'rolling shutter' effect?
Click to expand...

When I say "good HDMI connection" I mean that the image being generated and transmitted through the HDMI connection has all of these qualities.

Having great HDMI output of a sh*tty image is worthless, which is why I was asking about the Nikon D800 rolling-shutter performance.
 
TheDingo said:
When I say "good HDMI connection" I mean that the image being generated and transmitted through the HDMI connection has all of these qualities.

Having great HDMI output of a sh*tty image is worthless, which is why I was asking about the Nikon D800 rolling-shutter performance.
Click to expand...

While the Wife is in need of upgrading her still camera, and we've thought about the D800, we haven't really gotten to the point of buying, so I've not really looked into the D800 in any real detail. Since she is a 'still' photographer the video capability is secondary... but I'd be interested in 'borrowing' if it is a good quality video capability...
 
as far as ive seen, EVERY CMOS camera (even the big boys) have rolling shutter issues to some degree.
for my uses, all the dynamic range in the world doesnt mean a thing, if streetlights turn to twizzlers when i move my camera : (
 
wgzn said:
As far as ive seen, EVERY CMOS camera (even the big boys) have rolling shutter issues to some degree.
Click to expand...

My impression is that there is still a big difference between rolling shutter when shooting with DSLRs versus dedicated video cameras like the Canon C300 / Sony FS-100/FS-700 / Sony F3. So I'm wondering if any of the new DSLRs ( like the Nikon D800 or Canon 5D MK3 ) have improved on this?
 
They all do have rolling shutters, and as such you can see the rolling shutter effect, but absolutely there's a difference in degree! The Nikon D90's rolling shutter is so slow that it makes it largely unusable for lots of purposes. The 5D Mark II's rolling shutter is also pretty slow. The GH2, in 24p mode, has a bit better; in 720/60p mode it's really quite good. The pro video cameras mentioned above all have shutters that are fast enough that in normal shooting scenarios it's not much of a problem (although, on all of them, it can still be observed when panning quickly and using a telephoto lens).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top