Will Sony put out a low budget CineAlta camera?
- Thread starter shabbatai
- Start date
Anhar_Miah
Veteran
I agree here with Barry's comment I too wanted to point out the same.
I think we should seperate the difference between REAL 24P and fake "24P", so I would say that Z1/FX1 is a Gimmick and cameras like DVX and XL2 and HD100 (up-comming HVX200) etc as real true 24P and by no means a "gimmick".
Form wikipeida:
"A gimmick is a unique or quirky special feature that makes something "stand out" from its contemporaries. Product gimmicks are sometimes considered mere novelties, and not really that relevant to the product's functioning. However, some seemingly trivial gimmicks of the past have evolved into useful, permanent features. "
So what are you alluding to? are you saying that the real 24P of these cameras are not "relevent to the product's functioning" ?
Hmm ..I'll let you be the Judge wether you think these cameras with real 24P to be a gimmick.
P.S
also a gimmick is also refered to as:
In professional wrestling, a gimmick is slang that refers to a wrestler's on-screen personality (source: Wikipedia)
I think we should seperate the difference between REAL 24P and fake "24P", so I would say that Z1/FX1 is a Gimmick and cameras like DVX and XL2 and HD100 (up-comming HVX200) etc as real true 24P and by no means a "gimmick".
Form wikipeida:
"A gimmick is a unique or quirky special feature that makes something "stand out" from its contemporaries. Product gimmicks are sometimes considered mere novelties, and not really that relevant to the product's functioning. However, some seemingly trivial gimmicks of the past have evolved into useful, permanent features. "
So what are you alluding to? are you saying that the real 24P of these cameras are not "relevent to the product's functioning" ?
Hmm ..I'll let you be the Judge wether you think these cameras with real 24P to be a gimmick.
P.S
also a gimmick is also refered to as:
In professional wrestling, a gimmick is slang that refers to a wrestler's on-screen personality (source: Wikipedia)
Barry_Green
Moderator
I'm certain there are people who feel it is a gimmick. But whether people feel it is, and whether it is, are not necessarily the same thing. I offer a few quotes:Simon Wyndham said:
"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us" -- Western Union internal memo, 1876
"Theoretically, television may be feasible, but I consider it an impossibility--a development which we should waste little time dreaming about." -- Lee DeForest, 1926, inventor of the CRT display
"Radio has no future."[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Lord Kelvin, Victorian physicist and President of the Royal Society, c. 1897.[/font]
The point I'm making is -- interlaced video was absolutely, completely, and thoroughly ignored as a moviemaking medium for any purpose other than small documentaries or complete no-budget garage productions. No Hollywood studio made movies on interlaced video. Not on BetaSP, not on DigiBeta, not on HDCAM. It was never a factor.
That is, until George Lucas convinced Sony to develop 24P on the CineAlta. Since that time, 24P HD has become a thoroughly accepted medium for origination, in large-budget theatrical releases as well as well-budgeted dramatic television shows and large-budget television commercials.
It's not a matter of whether someone thinks it's a gimmick or not, it's a matter of just looking at what's happened and realizing that the introduction of 24p was, and is, the single most defining development in the history of using video as a filmmaking tool.
Obviously -- and I agree with that. I do not agree that it's a "gimmick", but I do agree that each shooter is free to place whatever emphasis on it that they wish.
Apples and oranges, in that the DSR450 is 4:1:1 25-megabit DVCAM only, vs. the SPX800's 4:2:2 50-megabit DVCPRO50. The prices I quote are US MSRP; the DSR450 is $18,000 and the SPX800 is $19,500. Obviously P2 cards would be separate, true.
A more direct comparison (tape to tape) would be the SDX900, which carries a US MSRP of $26,750. But then you'd also need a $7,000 tape deck to go with it. The SPX800 is the same camera head, but no need for a deck, so it's $14,000 less than the SPX tape-based solution. Obviously you could spend some of that $14,000 on P2 cards but the overall cost would still be dramatically less.
It is not the same, that's true. But it's extremely close, at least as far as acquisition goes. I think it was Adam Wilt who ranked the formats by quality on a scale of 1-10, and assigned uncompressed SDI as 10.0, DigiBeta as 9.9, and DVCPRO50 as 9.8.
Has there been news about there being an HD XDCAM announcement? I know they were teasing something at NAB but no details at all...
Walter_Graff
Carbonite Member
Only problem with an inexpensive Cinealta style camera is related to chips. Once you get down to 1/3 inch chips, you have a real problem focusing light properly and as a result diffraction limitations in the CCD/lens equation. And what happens is all the magical resolution numbers are lost for a good part of your exposure range. As an article in TV Technology recently stated, the Sony Z1/FX1 for instance can't really make anywhere near 1089i when a lens is stopped down to 5.6 and below which makes it a great camera indoors but man you might need all the ND you can find outdoor to appreciate all the "lines". Wonder what that says about the DVX200 which falls under the same laws of physics. Maybe I shouldn't bring it up?
Barry_Green
Moderator
The DSR400 is an interlaced-only camera. It's a successor to the DSR300. It is in no way in direct competition with the HVX or DVX; totally different market.
As far as diffraction goes, Walter is spot-on with that. The Z1 even includes a menu item you can use to prevent the iris from going too small, to avoid diffraction happening; IIRC the choices for it were f/5.6 or f/8. And yes, light is light -- the HVX will likely have similar issues. The larger the pixels, the less a problem diffraction is. The smaller the pixels, the more it becomes a problem.
High-def on a 1/3" camera is really asking a lot!
ND filters will be your friends, when using a 1/3" HD camera.
As far as diffraction goes, Walter is spot-on with that. The Z1 even includes a menu item you can use to prevent the iris from going too small, to avoid diffraction happening; IIRC the choices for it were f/5.6 or f/8. And yes, light is light -- the HVX will likely have similar issues. The larger the pixels, the less a problem diffraction is. The smaller the pixels, the more it becomes a problem.
High-def on a 1/3" camera is really asking a lot!
ND filters will be your friends, when using a 1/3" HD camera.
SergejIvanovits
Well-known member
What is the most important thing for you in this discution? The number 24 or to be able to shot progressive? Because you can shot 25fps with film and we use to do it.
Anhar_Miah
Veteran
How can relativity be argued ?, last time I checked (1905) The Newtonian notion that time and space where unchangeable where pretty much put to doubt and later some experiments that have since proven Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, then later General Relativity (that included gravity).
Anyhoo don't ya just love physics!
Will Sony make a mini "CiniAlta" probably not, will they answer back to HVX200 and HD100 definatley but probably in some kind of FX2/Z2U type camera
Anhar Hussain Miah (no relation to Saddam)
Anyhoo
don't ya just love physics!Will Sony make a mini "CiniAlta" probably not, will they answer back to HVX200 and HD100 definatley but probably in some kind of FX2/Z2U type camera
Anhar Hussain Miah (no relation to Saddam)
People seem to think 24p is hard to implement. It's 24 Hz folks... how hard is it to count 24 times a second? Not very... especially if you're Sony... because Sony has been putting a lot of time and effort into CMOS of late. It seems to me that when Sony decides to implement 24p, it will be as easy as putting the proper driver and counter next to their CMOS chips. They can already move 1080p24 content through all their circuitry (CF24 requires this), and they can certainly add pull-downs.
It's should be almost trivial for them to implement it. It's just a matter of marketing hype before they do.
-Spiff
It's should be almost trivial for them to implement it. It's just a matter of marketing hype before they do.
-Spiff
Simon Wyndham
Well-known member
Hi Barry,
Quote:
I'm certain there are people who feel it is a gimmick. But whether people feel it is, and whether it is, are not necessarily the same thing. I offer a few quotes:
No need Barry, you are preaching to the choir. I love progressive scan and in fact never shoot anything interlaced these days. The BBC often shoot their documentarie, even some of their current affairs programmes such as Panorama in progressive scan much of the time. So other than news the use of progressive footage over here is very prolific. We're very pro-progressive scan over here
Quote:
Apples and oranges, in that the DSR450 is 4:1:1 25-megabit DVCAM only, vs. the SPX800's 4:2:2 50-megabit DVCPRO50. The prices I quote are US MSRP; the DSR450 is $18,000 and the SPX800 is $19,500. Obviously P2 cards would be separate, true.
Precisely. Although you US guys have some weird pricing! Over here a DSR450 could be had for UKP10k inc VAT (around $17k) including a lens, some batteries, a case etc (http://tinyurl.com/82xam ). But the SPX800 over here would set you back around the UKP18k ($30k) inc VAT just for the body (http://tinyurl.com/cqrqf )!
So in the UK at least the idea of the SPX800 being only 1k more than the 450 does not apply.
Quote:
A more direct comparison (tape to tape) would be the SDX900, which carries a US MSRP of $26,750. But
I don't think it would. The closest in price, at least in the UK, is the SDC905. I think it is fairer to compare the cameras in a similar price range. Although the 905 does DVCpro50, it can only record interlaced. Generally though Panasonic does have better pricing. For example at the same place I linked to for the SPX800, a Varicam can be had for a similar price to the Digibetas only a few years ago.
Quote:
then you'd also need a $7,000 tape deck to go with it. The SPX800 is the same camera head, but no need
Certainly compared to the SDX900 a saving could definitely be made as long as P2 fits your needs.
Quote:
It is not the same, that's true. But it's extremely close, at least as far as acquisition goes. I think it was Adam Wilt who ranked the formats by quality on a scale of 1-10, and assigned uncompressed SDI as 10.0,
Certainly it is very good. It is interesting that most things are compared to DB. A more interesting and direct comparison would be to compare the quality of IMX50 to DVCpro50. Both the same datarate, and both 8-bit formats.
Quote:
Has there been news about there being an HD XDCAM announcement? I know they were teasing something at NAB but no details at all...
From his post over on the XDCAM User Group Site, Mal (the sit owner) seems to think so.
Quote:
I'm certain there are people who feel it is a gimmick. But whether people feel it is, and whether it is, are not necessarily the same thing. I offer a few quotes:
No need Barry, you are preaching to the choir. I love progressive scan and in fact never shoot anything interlaced these days. The BBC often shoot their documentarie, even some of their current affairs programmes such as Panorama in progressive scan much of the time. So other than news the use of progressive footage over here is very prolific. We're very pro-progressive scan over here
Quote:
Apples and oranges, in that the DSR450 is 4:1:1 25-megabit DVCAM only, vs. the SPX800's 4:2:2 50-megabit DVCPRO50. The prices I quote are US MSRP; the DSR450 is $18,000 and the SPX800 is $19,500. Obviously P2 cards would be separate, true.
Precisely. Although you US guys have some weird pricing! Over here a DSR450 could be had for UKP10k inc VAT (around $17k) including a lens, some batteries, a case etc (http://tinyurl.com/82xam ). But the SPX800 over here would set you back around the UKP18k ($30k) inc VAT just for the body (http://tinyurl.com/cqrqf )!
So in the UK at least the idea of the SPX800 being only 1k more than the 450 does not apply.
Quote:
A more direct comparison (tape to tape) would be the SDX900, which carries a US MSRP of $26,750. But
I don't think it would. The closest in price, at least in the UK, is the SDC905. I think it is fairer to compare the cameras in a similar price range. Although the 905 does DVCpro50, it can only record interlaced. Generally though Panasonic does have better pricing. For example at the same place I linked to for the SPX800, a Varicam can be had for a similar price to the Digibetas only a few years ago.
Quote:
then you'd also need a $7,000 tape deck to go with it. The SPX800 is the same camera head, but no need
Certainly compared to the SDX900 a saving could definitely be made as long as P2 fits your needs.
Quote:
It is not the same, that's true. But it's extremely close, at least as far as acquisition goes. I think it was Adam Wilt who ranked the formats by quality on a scale of 1-10, and assigned uncompressed SDI as 10.0,
Certainly it is very good. It is interesting that most things are compared to DB. A more interesting and direct comparison would be to compare the quality of IMX50 to DVCpro50. Both the same datarate, and both 8-bit formats.
Quote:
Has there been news about there being an HD XDCAM announcement? I know they were teasing something at NAB but no details at all...
From his post over on the XDCAM User Group Site, Mal (the sit owner) seems to think so.
Hi everyone
Instead of wondering if sony will answer I would ask myself, why would they create such a camera?
DO NOT forget that sony, panasonic etc are money making company NOT customer pleasing company. They run their businees the way I run mine, a company needs to stay alert and alive and needs to keep the customer happy but not too happy other wise the interest start to fade.
do you really believe that a cinealata is that expensive to build. of course not, espacially for sony. the price is not about the product, it's about the person that buys the product.
take a watch. you can buy a watch that looks the part and works for £5. Now you get the same watch with GUCCI written on it(£1000 at least), same watch same mechanics same life span. only one diferrence, the customer.
Sony or panasonic could give us the perfect camera right now if they wanted, with big CCDs and 24p and everything we're all dreaming about, and then what? we all buy the camera and because we know that there is nothing more we want we loose interest in their forum, their products and they are out of business. the CD has been sleeping in SONY's drawer a good 3 years before they released it. why, because they were making moeny with other things. Today there is a lot of different energy that could run your car, why giving it to the customer when we can still make money on petrol.
So cinealta FD950 is what we would like to have but the price is such that can create sectors in their market share. Lucas has been using F900 for episode 2 and 950 for episode 3, so even if you have large size pocket the same rules apply. George says sony FD900 good but this function is missing! Don't worry George says sony, FD950 is coming up.The lens is not that good says George... Don't worry George, we'll make one for you says panavision. only £150000 the piece. so now you all know panavision, they have been in the industry since the dark age. how on earth can they justify such prices for lenses, it's a bloody machine building the lenses.... well again it's all about what we became. we are addicted to get more, and some people knows how to please so you empty your pocket for them.
I could go on and on but the point is, that those company are making money, that is their purpose, and making money today is about startegy, not pleasing your customer with everything he wants.
the FX1/Z1 is a good camera, I use the CF25 and it's fine, oh yes I wish I could have real 24p but they already give HD so now I just to wait and get the next one and there will surely be something missing but that's the game.
Now I'm bulding my mini35 and hope to get a great image and do what I really wanted to do. Guys do you remember why you're here. because you want to make pictures, so do your best we what you have.
I strongly believe that it's time to step back and realise that big things can be achieved for very little, money won't help you to make picture, it will make you lazy and you will loose you imagination.
Anthony
Instead of wondering if sony will answer I would ask myself, why would they create such a camera?
DO NOT forget that sony, panasonic etc are money making company NOT customer pleasing company. They run their businees the way I run mine, a company needs to stay alert and alive and needs to keep the customer happy but not too happy other wise the interest start to fade.
do you really believe that a cinealata is that expensive to build. of course not, espacially for sony. the price is not about the product, it's about the person that buys the product.
take a watch. you can buy a watch that looks the part and works for £5. Now you get the same watch with GUCCI written on it(£1000 at least), same watch same mechanics same life span. only one diferrence, the customer.
Sony or panasonic could give us the perfect camera right now if they wanted, with big CCDs and 24p and everything we're all dreaming about, and then what? we all buy the camera and because we know that there is nothing more we want we loose interest in their forum, their products and they are out of business. the CD has been sleeping in SONY's drawer a good 3 years before they released it. why, because they were making moeny with other things. Today there is a lot of different energy that could run your car, why giving it to the customer when we can still make money on petrol.
So cinealta FD950 is what we would like to have but the price is such that can create sectors in their market share. Lucas has been using F900 for episode 2 and 950 for episode 3, so even if you have large size pocket the same rules apply. George says sony FD900 good but this function is missing! Don't worry George says sony, FD950 is coming up.The lens is not that good says George... Don't worry George, we'll make one for you says panavision. only £150000 the piece. so now you all know panavision, they have been in the industry since the dark age. how on earth can they justify such prices for lenses, it's a bloody machine building the lenses.... well again it's all about what we became. we are addicted to get more, and some people knows how to please so you empty your pocket for them.
I could go on and on but the point is, that those company are making money, that is their purpose, and making money today is about startegy, not pleasing your customer with everything he wants.
the FX1/Z1 is a good camera, I use the CF25 and it's fine, oh yes I wish I could have real 24p but they already give HD so now I just to wait and get the next one and there will surely be something missing but that's the game.
Now I'm bulding my mini35 and hope to get a great image and do what I really wanted to do. Guys do you remember why you're here. because you want to make pictures, so do your best we what you have.
I strongly believe that it's time to step back and realise that big things can be achieved for very little, money won't help you to make picture, it will make you lazy and you will loose you imagination.
Anthony
From what I've seen of Cineframe25, it looks nice, but for us folks in the US it kinda slows the work flow, because we eventually have to convert it to NTSC at some point. It would be nice if Sony could give us a 24p camera or at the very least improve their Cineframe24 mode.
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
24p a gimmick that can be added in post? (sounds of coffee spitting up all over monitor)
You people are high who think this. What the hells wrong with you? You wanna shoot 60i your entire life? Look; if your doing indie filmmaking then 24p is it.
Period.
If your doing broadcast or weddings then thats your bag; but 24p is a gift. And adding it post? Bah! It just aint got that thing if it aint native. Some people may think it's a gimmick but that don't make it right. Some people thought the Earth was flat too.
You people are high who think this. What the hells wrong with you? You wanna shoot 60i your entire life? Look; if your doing indie filmmaking then 24p is it.
Period.
If your doing broadcast or weddings then thats your bag; but 24p is a gift. And adding it post? Bah! It just aint got that thing if it aint native. Some people may think it's a gimmick but that don't make it right. Some people thought the Earth was flat too.
I was using premiere pro and evaluation of cineform but just I just had a go at edius pro 3, believe me this software is brilliant, missing few functionality like multiple bin but the good thing about it is I get to edit HDV realtime with no accelation card, I even got 3 HD color corrected, all on the same picture playing realtime. I becoming a big fan. all the tools are very professional and easy to use.
also it's the only software that allow you to play different format on the same timeline. you can play Mt2 along side avi or mov or use their HQ compressor witch is as brilliant as the cineform, but no need to pay, it's in the software.
http://www.canopus.com
also you can convert the all timeline to one format and perfom a pulldown. could be helpfull for you US.
Just wondering, if you use a Z1, you could use CF25 which to me looks excellent and then convert that to 24p with you nle.
Anthony
also it's the only software that allow you to play different format on the same timeline. you can play Mt2 along side avi or mov or use their HQ compressor witch is as brilliant as the cineform, but no need to pay, it's in the software.
http://www.canopus.com
also you can convert the all timeline to one format and perfom a pulldown. could be helpfull for you US.
Just wondering, if you use a Z1, you could use CF25 which to me looks excellent and then convert that to 24p with you nle.
Anthony