Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Still and Video convergence  (Read 22862 times)
Mike W
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


« Reply #20 on: August 29, 2008, 03:31:17 PM »
ReplyReply

True.

I hope this is bait thrown out into the pond by Nikons marketing boys.

Give us film-like video (with focusing, lage sensor and decent lens-choice), make us see we kinda like it and then come out with a film-still hybrid to rival the RED cinema system.

It would be a bold but good move, I think. It makes sense for a still camera maker to extend into the motion capture field.
Logged
RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604


« Reply #21 on: August 29, 2008, 04:28:23 PM »
ReplyReply

So the Nikon is not a professional Sony 3CCD 1/2" 1080P HD cam, but the look of the video images are better, IMO, because of the much larger sensor size, and the lenses available, even despite the fact that it records in (compressed?) AVI format (this will probably change in future DSLRs).  I'm talking about the *potential* that DSLRs have for producing videos.  We're not there yet, but:

For fun, I can see myself shooting a long or short film with this thing, or a future Full-Frame 5DII that records in 1080P.  I'd discard the sound recorded by the camera and use another source/other equipment for sound, do some professional editing, and you've got yourself a pretty nice looking film... or should we call it "video"...

For the amateurs, yes, it's good for shooting shaky videos with terrible sound, but look at what you can achieve with a hybrid DSLR with video mode if you take some time and effort, and have the skills to create something like I described above.

I think/hope Michael is right.  This is how it's going to be in just a few months.
Logged
Nick Rains
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 704



WWW
« Reply #22 on: August 30, 2008, 02:55:05 AM »
ReplyReply

I have a colleague here in Brisbane who shoots weddings with a DV 'strapped' to his Canon. He films his whole shoot from his own POV and then edits it all together for a video/stills hybrid. His clients love it, and thus it makes him money. A still camera that could do both at the same time would be quite useful.
Logged

Nick Rains
Australian Photographer
Leica Akademie Instructor
www.nickrains.com
Mike W
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


« Reply #23 on: August 30, 2008, 03:37:59 PM »
ReplyReply

RED is stepping up to the DSLR plate with their upcoming Monstro sensor which they will implement in "another camera aimed squarely at the DSLR market".

This is getting to be an interesting ballgame. Especially if Nikon and/or Canon would thrown down the gauntlet by making a similar motion capture device. I applaud the coming of a hybrid still/motion camera. It will be an interesting tool.

The next months/years should get mighty interesting.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5182


« Reply #24 on: August 30, 2008, 07:31:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
RED is stepping up to the DSLR plate with their upcoming Monstro sensor
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=218331\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
What do we know about Monstro, or even the 5K Mysterium X sensor of the upcoming Red Epic?

As far as I can tell, both will be in Super 35mm cine format like the Red One which is 13.7x24.4mm. So about the same area as a Canon EF-S sensor but a "wider" shape. (I hope people are not misreading "35mm" as meaning the 24x36mm of still cameras; Red clearly talks of the cine format "Super 35mm" for the coming Epic as well as the current One.)
Logged
Mike W
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


« Reply #25 on: August 31, 2008, 04:47:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What do we know about Monstro, or even the 5K Mysterium X sensor of the upcoming Red Epic?

As far as I can tell, both will be in Super 35mm cine format like the Red One which is 13.7x24.4mm. So about the same area as a Canon EF-S sensor but a "wider" shape. (I hope people are not misreading "35mm" as meaning the 24x36mm of still cameras; Red clearly talks of the cine format "Super 35mm" for the coming Epic as well as the current One.)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=218374\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, details are sketchy at best. I hope it will be a full frame 35mm dsrl (or greater) but the most fascinating thing is that still camera makers are going into video and vica versa.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5182


« Reply #26 on: September 01, 2008, 05:08:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Well, details are sketchy at best. I hope it will be a full frame 35mm dsrl
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=218564\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
On sensor size the details are not the slightest bit sketchy. RED talks consistently about Super 35mm format, which is a flavor of cine-camera 35mm, which always means about 24mm frame width, historically because film goes through a cine-camera vertically.

You have to leave the still camera meaning of 35mm format behind when you read about cine-cameras!
Logged
Yoram from Berlin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 101



WWW
« Reply #27 on: September 02, 2008, 02:59:22 AM »
ReplyReply

I just got back from Burning Man, where a lot of stuff happens that shouldn't get back to the normal world unfiltered, lest people who don't understand see someone "in action."

Recently a lot more people have brought cameras, and just as many have been uploading to Flickr, YouTube, and other sharing sites.

As of this year, video cameras had to be registered with the "media people" but SLRs were still ok provided you were only shooting for yourself and not commercially.

It is hard to bring a camera to a lot of events these days as it is - my fear is that the inclusion of video will lead to the exclusion of (big) cameras from even more places and events - whether it is Burning Man or something less controversial and innocuous.

...but of course, it's not just SLRs... a lot of P&S cameras are ramping up their quality, too...
« Last Edit: September 02, 2008, 03:01:01 AM by Iron Flatline » Logged

Mike W
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


« Reply #28 on: September 02, 2008, 05:38:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
On sensor size the details are not the slightest bit sketchy. RED talks consistently about Super 35mm format, which is a flavor of cine-camera 35mm, which always means about 24mm frame width, historically because film goes through a cine-camera vertically.

You have to leave the still camera meaning of 35mm format behind when you read about cine-cameras!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=218768\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I know the difference between Super 35mm and 35mm in stills. I'm just thinking that it wouldn't be interesting for RED to put their widescreen S35 sensor in a still camera.
If they are smart they will make a 2:3 ratio 35mm cam or larger.

These are the guys that should bring MF down to a reasonable price like they did with the RED system in film equipment.

I don't think it will be a S35 system, just because they will make film cameras this way with this upcoming sensor tech.

Plus, how the hell would they compete with in a market filled with aps-c sensors? It would be stupid, just do something different than everyone else and its a guaranteed bang.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2008, 03:37:14 PM by Mike W » Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5182


« Reply #29 on: September 03, 2008, 10:31:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm just thinking that it wouldn't be interesting for RED to put their widescreen S35 sensor in a still camera.
If they are smart they will make a 2:3 ratio 35mm cam or larger.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=218869\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I am confused by what you meant by "full frame 35mm" in your previous post, and by what you mean by "a 2:3 ratio 35mm cam or larger" above, because in between you talk of "their widescreen S35 sensor".

To get his straight: RED's talk of "S35" is shorthand for Super 35mm, about 13.7x24.4mm; not what anyone means by "full frame 35mm" around here. There is absolutely no hint of RED making sensors larger than are useful for its cine-cameras and the cine-35mm format lenses on which they rely. For one thing, RED offers only a few lenses, relying mostly on the large selection of cine-camera lenses out there from other makers, and those are all for cine-35mm formats, not 24x36mm still camera format. (And no, relying on Canon or Nikon SLR lenses is not a viable approach for cine-camera.)


Is that Super 35mm of 13.7x24.4mm, or a 3:2 shaped variant, the format you want in a RED DSLR?
Logged
Mike W
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


« Reply #30 on: September 04, 2008, 05:35:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I am confused by what you meant by "full frame 35mm" in your previous post, and by what you mean by "a 2:3 ratio 35mm cam or larger" above, because in between you talk of "their widescreen S35 sensor".

To get his straight: RED's talk of "S35" is shorthand for Super 35mm, about 13.7x24.4mm; not what anyone means by "full frame 35mm" around here. There is absolutely no hint of RED making sensors larger than are useful for its cine-cameras and the cine-35mm format lenses on which they rely. For one thing, RED offers only a few lenses, relying mostly on the large selection of cine-camera lenses out there from other makers, and those are all for cine-35mm formats, not 24x36mm still camera format. (And no, relying on Canon or Nikon SLR lenses is not a viable approach for cine-camera.)
Is that Super 35mm of 13.7x24.4mm, or a 3:2 shaped variant, the format you want in a RED DSLR?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=219185\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Dear JBL,

We are on the same page: I know perfectly well that the Red camera's (excl. the scarlet) use full frame super 35m format sensors: 13.7x24.4mm.

My point regarding the RED DSRL is that if RED wants to sell people their DSRL they are stepping into an already crowded market. I think pro photographers prefer the 3:4 aspect ratio of medium format over the 3:2 aspect ratio of full frame still camera's (being 24x36mm).
I also think a lot of them prefer a 24x36mm sensor over a cropped sensor (close to super 35mm in dimensions).

So my point is; if RED wants to sell these people still cameras they need to do more than give us  a sub-24x36mm sensor that they offer in their cinema systems. And it needs to be at least a 3:2 aspect ratio to be marketable to pro photographers.

Personally I hope they will bring a medium format camera to the market; something with a high pixel count (22mpx-40mpx), capable of high ISO (it' a cmos, no biggie then) and a modular system like the RED cine offering. They could really shake things up in this market segment.

Of course they need to get lenses....and this will be a dealmaker or breaker for their DSLR offerings, I think.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5182


« Reply #31 on: September 04, 2008, 02:58:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So my point is; if RED wants to sell these people still cameras they need to do more than give us a sub-24x36mm sensor that they offer in their cinema systems ...
Personally I hope they will bring a medium format camera to the market;
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=219386\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Given that the mainstream roughly "APS-C" format sensors outsell 24x36mm by about 20 to 1,  and that RED already has a sensor of roughly that size, and that 24x36 in turns outsells larger formats by a huge margin, I would say exactly the opposite: the most profitable market for RED is a DLSR using its Super 35mm format sensor in a camera that also does very nice video on the side.

If anything it is the 24x36mm and MF markets that are getting too crowded: there are almost as many brands in 24x36mm (three lens-mount systems and three sensor makers) and DMF (three lens and body systems sharing two sensor makers) as there are in the smaller DSLR formats (five systems and five sensor makers, or six of each counting Sigma/Foveon) but these larger format systems and sensors are chasing far, far fewer customers and far smaller total revenues.
« Last Edit: September 05, 2008, 03:40:36 PM by BJL » Logged
Atlasman
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18



WWW
« Reply #32 on: September 19, 2008, 02:58:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Even in landscape or fine art, a few minutes of that spectacular scene would look great on my HD set to share, or to sell.  Turn a dial, push a button.  You got it.

It definitely opens possibilities in expanding our product.
Logged
trainzman
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 27


« Reply #33 on: September 22, 2008, 08:03:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Good for wedding photographers you say. Hmm, how is that going to work?

Say you're at a wedding, carefully composing and taking single images. An interesting action sequence appears to be about to happen so you start doing video. Spectacular single images present themselves, do you press the shutter to capture them, interrupting the video or pull them off the video later?

If stills from the 21megapixel FF sensor will be as good as single shots, why other than memory space would you not shot only video and extract stills as you need them from the data stream? If not, the photographer / videographer  is going to be one busy fellow, switching back and forth. Sure hope he doesn't miss any decisive moments.

And as has been mentioned elsewhere, also very busy after during post production. Editing all that raw data into something watchable will not be done as fast as they were made.

Does anyone have any numbers as to the ratio of making vs editing time for stills as compared to video images?
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #34 on: September 23, 2008, 05:28:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If stills from the 21megapixel FF sensor will be as good as single shots, why other than memory space would you not shot only video and extract stills as you need them from the data stream?
For the same reason you have  a stills photographer on a film set. Film/video is shot at a low shutter speed so individual frames tend to be unsharp compared to a stills camera that can shoot at higher shutter speeds.

Quote
Does anyone have any numbers as to the ratio of making vs editing time for stills as compared to video images?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=223449\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
A chap I often work with can edit and output video at a phenomenal rate. You just have to look at how quickly news can be edited and output to see that video can be dealt with rapidly.
Stills can be done quickly or very time consumingly depending on the amount of post processing work needed. Moving images are no different in that respect. So it would be very hard to give hard and fast times taken to do either.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2008, 05:30:42 PM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
trainzman
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 27


« Reply #35 on: September 23, 2008, 06:38:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
For the same reason you have  a stills photographer on a film set. Film/video is shot at a low shutter speed so individual frames tend to be unsharp compared to a stills camera that can shoot at higher shutter speeds.

...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=223742\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
On a traditional film/video camera perhaps but this beast (5DMkII), which shots video at 30 frames per second is capable of taking a still frame in 1/8000 of a second. Could the individual video frames not be taken at a higher speed but spaced out so only a total of 30 are recorded in one second? Perhaps I don't understand the technical aspect of this video recording.  
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad