What I want from NAB 2012.

mee too. and as i've indicated before, i wouldn't mind paying for the right package. but it looks like manufacturers see more profit in turning over cheaper cameras with a short shelf life. is that the only option they have when the tech keeps changing?
 
Danielvilliers said:
What is in real need is a good all rounder. I would prefer a... good enough camera in every aspect than one that is hyper specialised. One example is this latest 4k camera from JVC. It might have very very good resolution, but in the current state of tech I doubt that its going have good low ligth and DR with a 2/3 1/3 sensor size. Everything for me has a threshold where it becomes good enough. A good 2k resolved image, with 12/13 stop DR and very clean 1600 to clean 3200 iso would be ideal. Everything above would be better but not at the expense of the others.
Click to expand...

+1


James0b57 said:
I am . . . in a very good position to be a stingy consumer
Click to expand...

Me too. If I had to shoot something tomorrow, of course I would stop complaining and pick up any of the many cameras, which are 100 times better than what I started with 20 years ago. But I'm taking a break from shooting for a living, working in another field. So, I can afford right now to be the armchair quarterback. I think that for the many here who do have to shoot for a living, we are not saying that current cameras aren't good enough. We're just trying to point out where certain design choices, even within today's technological limits, could sand away some rough edges.

I will say, though, that the last thing I'm waiting on is global shutter. It really is something I'm waiting on before I buy a camera again. Something about the distortion of rolling shutter bugs me worse than less dynamic range, less resolution, etc. Again, if you have to shoot today you can work with it, and most of the time you wouldn't see it. But it does bug me. I should say, I am waiting for it's return, because we used to have it, with CCDs. But at least we don't have vertical streaking anymore.
 
Last edited:
combatentropy said:
If I had to shoot something tomorrow, of course I would stop complaining and pick up any of the many cameras
Click to expand...
That's something I think most of us asking for improvements do everyday.

combatentropy said:
I will say, though, that the last thing I'm waiting on is global shutter. It really is something I'm waiting on before I buy a camera again. Something about the distortion of rolling shutter bugs me worse than less dynamic range, less resolution, etc.
Click to expand...
Some people forget that camera work can be a very personal sort of quest. We are looking for a way of functioning, or an aesthetic payoff. I think global shutter is very important to making the image appear more organic and natural. Most of what we are looking for are within a realistic budget and within technological possibility. No one here is asking for 8K to be adopted as the broadcast standard. Some people may like the idea of it though. But we would like some refinements (motion picture capture is how old now???), some older standards back in our sub $10K products, and expect something more than 8bit 50mbps in the $13K+ segment.

IDK, I have said this a lot on forums, and I just am starting to not care anymore. Every time, I mention some very basic improvements that do not challenge manufacturers, except to use their minds, a band of "working pros" who own or regularly rent $60,000 cameras start their mantra against whinging gear sluts, and totally confusing the matter. Throwing it into a "man up" old school mentality, rather than a "hey, let's share our ideas of progress".
 
Last edited:
From what I read, until now the challenge is that to get global shutter on CMOS they had degradation in DR and low light. For me as I said before I could live with rolling shutter ala alexa/f3/c300 if I get very good DR and low light. I will prefer a good all-rounder that does not have any big flaw because it is very good in one field.
 
I've seen skew in even moderately fast pans by the C300. There will always be some skew in side views of trees, streetlights, and signs when shooting out of the side of a car at highway speed. Even with very fast rolling shutter, there will still be partial frame exposures from flash bulbs and strobes, as well as some odd effects with fast-moving objects like fans, propellors, helicopter blades, or race cars.

If it doesn't bother you, fine. Let's just agree that you would take global shutter if they gave it to you and still had good dynamic range and sensitivity.
 
Last edited:
combatentropy said:
I've seen skew in even moderately fast pans by the C300. Not to mention that camera flashes will have the half-frame effect even with very fast rolling shutter. If it doesn't bother you, fine. Let's just agree that you would take global shutter if they gave it to you and still had good dynamic range and sensitivity.
Click to expand...

Haha! big +1! Not to mention all the ugly motion blur patterns of current digital cameras.

Also, global shutter doesn't have to cause a loss in DR and lowlight, depending on how they implement it. Really.
 
Now the $4000 - $9999 price range is WIDE open for Canon to introduce their CINEMA EOS. Although the C300 should be in that category. Maybe they will take away their LUT and cripple few pro features away from the C300 and shove it in that category.
 
LuckyStudio 13 said:
Now the $4000 - $9999 price range is WIDE open for Canon to introduce their CINEMA EOS. Although the C300 should be in that category. Maybe they will take away their LUT and cripple few pro features away from the C300 and shove it in that category.
Click to expand...

In a year or two maybe.

Canon turns about as fast as a naval battleship.

It won't be anytime soon.
 
a canon competitor to the FS100 is something I'd expect at NAB
maybe something like a mini-C300 with a less pro body but the same sensor and processor (maybe even in a DSLR body without mirror or OVF?)

that seems more likely to me than seeing the 4K cinema EOS priced below the C300
 
Samuel H said:
a canon competitor to the FS100 is something I'd expect at NAB
maybe something like a mini-C300 with a less pro body but the same sensor and processor (maybe even in a DSLR body without mirror or OVF?)

that seems more likely to me than seeing the 4K cinema EOS priced below the C300
Click to expand...

Honestly, I feel like the C300 is Canon's FS100 competitor. Whether it's four times the cost or not, the feature sets are similar.

C300 needs to come WAY down in price, WAY down. Especially after NAB announcements.
 
dustylense said:
But when they make that turn, they hit as hard as a battleship as well.
Click to expand...
That's not historically been true of their camcorder division. Historically they release last-generation technology at a grossly inflated price. The GL1, GL2, XL1, XL2, XLH1, and XHA1 -- none of them hit very hard, none of them were leading-edge, all of them were overpriced and used old technology.

I am optimistic for a C100, but I don't think we'll see it this year.

As for the C300 being Canon's FS100 competitor, I can see why Kholi says that (being it's only 8-bit and isn't feature-for-feature entirely competitive with the F3) but undoubtedly the C300 is intended to compete with the F3, and a forthcoming (someday) C100 would be their competitor to the FS100. Of course, by the time Canon releases a C100 to compete with the FS100, Sony will already be on the FS700 and FS300 and FS900... :thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top