robotsound
Well-known member
That makes perfect sense. Thanks for the clarification.
Will there ever be RAW codec for Canon HDSRLs
- Thread starter tackyattack
- Start date
That makes perfect sense. Thanks for the clarification.
The trouble is someone can read what you wrote and repeat it - so if it's written down it must be true right? I really don't believe anything I read about new cameras unless it comes from the manufacturer (pre-release) or some one who actually has a pre-release model in their hand and can show it. Usually those people are under strict NDAs so that doesn't happen too often!
Danielvilliers
Veteran
I disagree completely on this point. Dslr video is at infancy and many of the manufacturers don't have any pro video line to protect. As calculated before even the entry level dslr is displacing an awful lot of raw data from the sensor to the card. In two dslr generations (about 5 years) I am sure that you will get from 1080p to 4k raw data at 24 fps. It might not be a true video codec etc, perhaps just a set of images with compression. These won' t have the functionality and ergonomic of a true video camera, but they will output some fabulous imagery. The sony base Nikon d7000 and Pentax K5 are already at 14 stops of dynamic range and very good low light quality for 16 S35 (aps) size sensor. Many will find that it is just enough for there needs as we have seen in the Dslr video craze since the launch of the 5d mark2. In fact movie cameras have just been boxes with everything manual and not a lot of functionality compared to video camera.
Again I say, how many on this forum would have guess 3 years ago that you could have a true hd camera with a sensor nearly the size of S35 for less than $ 1000 and that would hold in the palm of your hand as the GH2!!! Competition in the DSLR market is making the technology advance very fast. The next low end Canon (lower than 550D) will get the same 18 megapixel sensor than the 7d, 60d and 550D. Who would have thought that a $ 500 entry level camera would be 18 megapixel, more so who are the users of a $ 500 camera who needs that much. It becomes a bit absurd because the lens at this price level won' t even resolve that much, but it is just relentless competition. It will be these camera which will bring raw video to the video prosumer market very fast. The big Japanese companies won't be able hold up to this force as they have done with the af-100 and Sony s35 Nexcam, that are position to compete with the Dslr market.
Last edited:
DSLR's currently shoot short bursts of 4-8 fps raw. The video encoding begins by throwing out 90% of that raw frame data, then it compresses what is left to Mpeg 4. They have a very long way to go both in terms of processing power and sensor speed to get to 24fps raw. You are looking at moving continuously more than six times the maximum data rate they can do now. It isn't that easy. No doubt the video codecs and compression schemes will improve, but I don't see raw motion in the picture at the low end for a lot of reasons.
1. Filmmaking is a minor secondary market for still cameras. Most people that use them for video at all shoot home movies. They don't care about raw motion and would not want to deal with the massive amounts of data and work flow involved. This is the major reason it won't happen.
2. Cost. You don't get 6 times the processing power for free.
3. Processing power multiplies power consumption and increases heat loads. It won't fit within the DSLR form factor. The changes that would make these cameras practical raw motion picture cameras require a change in form factor, increase in size and weight and increases in price that would take them out of their primary target markets. They are what they are.
1. Filmmaking is a minor secondary market for still cameras. Most people that use them for video at all shoot home movies. They don't care about raw motion and would not want to deal with the massive amounts of data and work flow involved. This is the major reason it won't happen.
2. Cost. You don't get 6 times the processing power for free.
3. Processing power multiplies power consumption and increases heat loads. It won't fit within the DSLR form factor. The changes that would make these cameras practical raw motion picture cameras require a change in form factor, increase in size and weight and increases in price that would take them out of their primary target markets. They are what they are.
As much as you hope and twist it. DSLRs at current market prices will not get raw. Well who knows about in 10-15 years but not anytime soon.
And lets say you actually could get a DSLR that shot RAW right now, today to an external recorder for $1000 - you need to apply LUT technology to monitor via broadcast monitors. You need 10-15K to record it. You'll need a high end edit suite to deal with the workflow. So where are we in terms of $, I forget.
Oh right and by the way after all that expense, Ive lost all portabilty due to being tethered ah damn need to upgrade all my support gear as well.
Enjoy DSLRs for what they give you right now today, because more features cost more $ down the line.
Go shoot something.
And lets say you actually could get a DSLR that shot RAW right now, today to an external recorder for $1000 - you need to apply LUT technology to monitor via broadcast monitors. You need 10-15K to record it. You'll need a high end edit suite to deal with the workflow. So where are we in terms of $, I forget.
Oh right and by the way after all that expense, Ive lost all portabilty due to being tethered ah damn need to upgrade all my support gear as well.
Enjoy DSLRs for what they give you right now today, because more features cost more $ down the line.
Go shoot something.
double quote myself to make a point, as made above also by Razz16 and Noel who I could agree with more. It's not like they can't possible shoot 24fps raw but dealing with the infrastructure is another story.
Just enjoy the darn thing. I do. It's like in the 60 and 70's when independent filmmakers just shot 16 because it was good enough to do a great story on. Looked a bit different and rough but still was a nice medium. I feel that way about DSLR.
Spartacus
Veteran
For people lurking around here since the advent of the almighty DVX, all this discussions about ultimate resolutions and RAW output from rediculosly cheap HDSLRs are like a filet eating battle between two western-world obese children broadcasted on ethiopan national televison during a famine period.
And I´m not whining about the good´ol days here, but all these films NOT BEING MADE with all this video goodness we have at our hands RIGHT NOW, are not because of a lack of SENSOR RESOLUTION or RAW VIDEO OUTPUT.
Get a life.
And I´m not whining about the good´ol days here, but all these films NOT BEING MADE with all this video goodness we have at our hands RIGHT NOW, are not because of a lack of SENSOR RESOLUTION or RAW VIDEO OUTPUT.
Get a life.
Hehe.
I'm sure that sounded good when you shouted it into the bathroom mirror but it doesn't mean that much to me. Not a totally spurious thread after all we've been put up to thinking this way by all the hot air spouted by Red.
Better go and wipe the spray of spittle off your bathroom mirror. ;-)
Better go and wipe the spray of spittle off your bathroom mirror. ;-)
Danielvilliers
Veteran
I just bought a six core 3.2 ghz amd processor and upgraded my ram to 8 GB and I plan to buy a nvidia geforce 560 to run CS5. Let me compare what I had 6 years ago. A mono Athlon processor at 2.4 ghz with 1 gig of ram and I forgot about the graphic card. I would say that my new configuration will be about 8 to 10 times faster (mainly application using multi core like video) than it was six years ago. My config is what I would call for an advance user, a bit better than the general user but nothing highend to todays standard. So I guess the configuration I will be using in 5 to 6 years as I am predicting 2 dslr generation will be at least 5 to 10 times better. The last thing I forgot is about harddisk space, it was 120 gig and now I have 1.5 Terra, more than ten times. In the space of less than 1 year I paid the same amount for a doubling of capacity from 500 giga to 1 terabyte.
Again I am not saying that we will have full resolution raw output, but we could find 2k raw in the Dslr in 5+ years. Look here http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?237584-HDMI-Capture-Problem-SOLVED-AviSynth-RULES! what could be a revolution from a $ 900 camera. I say could because there are still some tweaking (thank you mr Panasonic for complicating the thing). I guess if there was no Af-100 the less than $ 1000 gh2 plastic camera would have outputted clean 422 uncompressed signal.
Again I am not saying that we will have full resolution raw output, but we could find 2k raw in the Dslr in 5+ years. Look here http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?237584-HDMI-Capture-Problem-SOLVED-AviSynth-RULES! what could be a revolution from a $ 900 camera. I say could because there are still some tweaking (thank you mr Panasonic for complicating the thing). I guess if there was no Af-100 the less than $ 1000 gh2 plastic camera would have outputted clean 422 uncompressed signal.