Sony 35mm NXcam

Hmmm the 1080p60 is interesting, how are they planning on doing that to avchd? either its a miracle or its gonna be shitty looking.
 
The fact that they're most likely going to charge twice the price of an AF100 for a camera that only shoots 4:2:0 leads me to believe that this is yet another fail on Sony's part.
 
I heard this straight from sonys technical advisor/ rep's mouth. What they do for avchd since its limited by interlaced video. It takes one video and writes it, during transfering to the card, as two 720 videos(of the same video) that get "interlaced" basicaly they interlace the same video so that its an i. but you dont get the interlacing since its interlaced with the video that doesnt have an offset like a real interlaced video. not sure if this made sense
 
lol wut? i was saying the bitrate of avchd isn't fast enough for the 1080p60p to be very good. HVX pumps out 100mbps bitrate for 720p60p...
 
k well theres actualy an other limitation with progressive video that not a lot of people know about
 
aparently avchd needs to be interlaced at 1080 for some reason because of the way its encoded. the work around that sony found was to have two videos that are progressive be put together somehow so that its two fields but not actualy interlaced

 
Hmm interesting. The way video cameras work is wild. HVXs used 3 images (onw of each primary color) at 540p and combine for 1080p, its wild.
 
yah thats generally how 3ccds work. I looked into it and most of them have one sensor for each color individualy and it is added up in recording. its crazy stuff when you get into how each peice works. talking to reps and technical advisors has opened my eyes at how crazy every detail is in a camera.
 
Correct...Most 3CCD cameras do this with pixel shifting.
HVXs case its not 1080p60... its 2k... 2048x1105p60.
Even the SLR sensors and other 2k sensors that are just single chips (like the SI-2k chip) use a similar method. They use a filter that covers 1/4 with blue, 1/4 with red, and 1/2 with green (chips may vary). Each of those are 540p as well.
Just kinda how almost every sensor works.
Common method. I dont understand the whole two picture 1080p60 thing... it just doesnt cut it for me to have 24 mb/s 1080p.
Also a way they are getting around it is the 4:2:0 color spacing. Pretty much crushes the hole thing. Might as well get the 4:2:2 AF100 with 720p for a cheaper price.
Their PMW F3 seems like a wayy better camera to me, although it looks to be around 12 grand for the body from rumors... actually i think i heard 12 gs in Euros or something... more like 17... but that was a rumor.

The camera I am really excited for is the projects that Canon (from rumors) has been working on to stay competitve as well.
The rumor I have been reading about is an APS-C Chip size sensor 12 stops of dynamic range with clean pictures up to ISO 3200. 3 built in ND Filters (THANK GOD!) 1080p60, with 2k and 4k output possible by upgrading hardware in order to capture the RAW images off the sensor (my guess is this is going to be quite a pricey add on, considering the cheapest RAW camera is 17 gs at the moment). 4:2:2 50mb/s MPEG 2.
Rumors are 6-8k, which to me would be WELL worth it and would crush the AF100 and whatever Sony puts out. This thing would also become a direct competitor with RED with the ability to upgrade hardware to capture RAW.
The other absurd rumor is a new 3 chip design that would be 3 full frame sensors (not CCD or CMOS). 20 stops of dynamic range. Crisp clear shots up to ISO 6000. And it would be set up with 2k and 4k RAW obviously.
This puppy would run about 20 gs. I dont think the later is happening anytime soon though.
I guess at the Canon Expo they were showing off 120 mega pixel sensors on the APS-C chips... sooo that would lead me to believe the first will probably happen and will be ridiculous with the RAW capturing add on.
 
I'm calling bullshit. The RED ONE was supposed to be 12-ish, when in reality its about 9. Also, 20 stops of dynamic range? That would look like an HDR image: horrible.

I think all these vein attempts at absurd camera specs are laughable. 4k output? Useless; Avatar was shot in 1080p. Even Canon's 20 something megapixel 5D mkII has resolution so high that Canon L lenses aren't sharp enough to keep up. It's like camera technology has turned into a dick-measuring marketing scheme.

The truth is that we need things like overexposure and underexposure to represent an artistic visual interpretation. Light is relative; if everything was within the dynamic range, there would be no contrast, no vivid presence of absolute black or white. Just visual "evidence." Seeing the individual hairs on a person's face from 20 ft away isn't normal. We need to embrace the fallacies of human perception because it is part of what drives us emotionally, and with these unrealistic visual renditions, we are keeping ourselves at too far a remove. I've never been inspired by 60i footage for this very reason.

Make an hpx170 with an interchangeable lens system, and your consumer camera problems will be solved.
 
nooooooob...bit rate doesn't entirely determine image quality. Some codecs are more proficient than others. 1 mpbs with one codec is not equivalent to 1 mbps with another codec, so this is entirely possible.
 
I was strictly talking about how at 24mbps, avchd, is going to be interesting at 1080p60, i feel like its not gonna be that tight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top