Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Is this Sony's coming 35mm format video-cam?  (Read 3908 times)
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5138


« on: April 13, 2010, 09:54:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Michael mentions Sony's talk at NAB 2010 of a "35mm format" video camera, coming before NAB 2011.

Is that different from this newly announced model, the SRW-9000PL

That is "35mm" in the way that motion picture people mean it: Super 35mm, about 25x14mm, not 36x24mm. And it takes PL mount cine-lenses, is expected in the fall, and will cost about $125,000. That is far cheaper than Sony's current 35mm format professional video camera, the CineAlta F35.

I cannot see much market for a dedicated professional video-camera or digital cine-camera that is not usable with industry standard options like PL lenses. RED thinks otherwise though ...
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 4874



« Reply #1 on: April 14, 2010, 04:44:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Nope. Completely different camera.

The one I'm referring to is based on their Alpha 35mm sensor and lens mount. It's still at least 10 months away.

Michael
Logged
BJNY
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1112


« Reply #2 on: April 14, 2010, 06:23:45 AM »
ReplyReply

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wu_68icPe28

http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/13/sony-to...camera-to-fend/
« Last Edit: April 14, 2010, 07:16:48 AM by BJNY » Logged

Guillermo
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5138


« Reply #3 on: April 14, 2010, 09:36:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: michael
Nope. Completely different camera.

The one I'm referring to is based on their Alpha 35mm sensor and lens mount. It's still at least 10 months away.
I see now that it is not the SRW-9000PL (also not coming till the Fall) but instead the intro. of this unnamed prototype in that video probably came after other discussion of "35mm" product news from Sony, as it starts with:
"The next stop on Sony's digital 35mm roadmap will be a smaller, more affordable camcorder. This entry level 35mm model ..."
Presumably meaning smaller and more affordable than the Sony CineAlta 35F (over $200,000) or the just announced SRW-9000PL ($125,000). Those other "35mm" products all use the modern standard motion 35mm format of Super 35mm, with frame width about 25mm, and PL mount, and I do not see or hear anything in the video about changing to a larger 36mm wide format, of changing to Alpha mount, which which would make existing PL mount cine-camera lenses unusable. Also, the prototype looks to be equipped with a PL mount cine-lens (an ARRI?).


I think that we need to clarify the different usage of "35mm" in the motion and still camera areas, which started out as a motion picture format of 24x18mm, and for motion cameras has not got significantly larger, beyond adding about 1mm of width not needed by a soundtrack or frame numbers.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2010, 09:37:41 AM by BJL » Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7487


WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 14, 2010, 10:55:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,


My guess, it's 35 like 135. While settle for less?

Best regards
Erik



Quote from: BJL
I see now that it is not the SRW-9000PL (also not coming till the Fall) but instead the intro. of this unnamed prototype in that video probably came after other discussion of "35mm" product news from Sony, as it starts with:
"The next stop on Sony's digital 35mm roadmap will be a smaller, more affordable camcorder. This entry level 35mm model ..."
Presumably meaning smaller and more affordable than the Sony CineAlta 35F (over $200,000) or the just announced SRW-9000PL ($125,000). Those other "35mm" products all use the modern standard motion 35mm format of Super 35mm, with frame width about 25mm, and PL mount, and I do not see or hear anything in the video about changing to a larger 36mm wide format, of changing to Alpha mount, which which would make existing PL mount cine-camera lenses unusable. Also, the prototype looks to be equipped with a PL mount cine-lens (an ARRI?).


I think that we need to clarify the different usage of "35mm" in the motion and still camera areas, which started out as a motion picture format of 24x18mm, and for motion cameras has not got significantly larger, beyond adding about 1mm of width not needed by a soundtrack or frame numbers.
Logged

BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5138


« Reply #5 on: April 14, 2010, 12:51:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ErikKaffehr
My guess, it's 35 like 135.
I suppose it is indeed "135", except that "135" refers to a type of film with rolls about 35mm wide, emulsion width about 24mm or a bit more, as used in both still and movie films. And 35mm movie cameras and projectors move the film vertically through the camera and so use a frame width of about 24mm. (25mm for the newer Super 35mm version.)

Quote
While settle for less?
If you mean "why settle for smaller than the 36x24mm of STILL camera 35mm usage":
maybe because there is a huge investment in cine-camera lenses designed for the current dominant 35mm movie camera formats like Super 35mm, such as PL mount lenses, and these would not be usable with that larger format.

Do some people imagine that the professional motion picture and television industry is ready to ditch all those cine-camera lenses in favor of using still camera lenses from Canon, Nikon and so on that are not designed for the cine-camera realities of precise manual focus pulling, avoidance of focus breathing, and so on?


Is this more of he endless delusion that the main trend of technological progress is towards larger, heavier, more expensive options, which in reality do have there place, but usually as a small and often shrinking share of the total market. 70mm movies did not displace 35mm did they?
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7487


WWW
« Reply #6 on: April 14, 2010, 08:31:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

The issue with lenses is a good point. On the other hand I would guess that the flange distance of the present Alpha-mount would preclude the use of existing cine lenses anyway. Sony is said to work on a short flange alpha mount (like micro four thirds), so fitting cine lenses may be possible.

On the other hand, it seems that having full frame is what makes the Canon 5D popular as a movie camera.

It would be quite possible to have options like full frame or cropped frame. Another option would be full frame with cropped readout, the Alpha 900 can do that, so it can be used with APS-C lenses.

We have to wait and see

Best regards
Erik


Quote from: BJL
I suppose it is indeed "135", except that "135" refers to a type of film with rolls about 35mm wide, emulsion width about 24mm or a bit more, as used in both still and movie films. And 35mm movie cameras and projectors move the film vertically through the camera and so use a frame width of about 24mm. (25mm for the newer Super 35mm version.)


If you mean "why settle for smaller than the 36x24mm of STILL camera 35mm usage":
maybe because there is a huge investment in cine-camera lenses designed for the current dominant 35mm movie camera formats like Super 35mm, such as PL mount lenses, and these would not be usable with that larger format.

Do some people imagine that the professional motion picture and television industry is ready to ditch all those cine-camera lenses in favor of using still camera lenses from Canon, Nikon and so on that are not designed for the cine-camera realities of precise manual focus pulling, avoidance of focus breathing, and so on?


Is this more of he endless delusion that the main trend of technological progress is towards larger, heavier, more expensive options, which in reality do have there place, but usually as a small and often shrinking share of the total market. 70mm movies did not displace 35mm did they?
« Last Edit: April 14, 2010, 11:23:16 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5138


« Reply #7 on: April 15, 2010, 08:21:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ErikKaffehr
The issue with lenses is a good point. On the other hand I would guess that the flange distance of the present Alpha-mount would preclude the use of existing cine lenses anyway. Sony is said to work on a short flange alpha mount (like micro four thirds), so fitting cine lenses may be possible.
Yes, using that shorter lens mount of the forthcoming "Sony EVIL camera" would make far more sense. That would then lead to using a sensor in roughly APS-C format (close to cine-35mm format) for which that mount is designed, like the forthcoming EXMOR HD APS-C sensor or Sony's professional video Super 35mm CCD. Using a 36x24mm sensor would still make little sense, as most cine-camera lenses are designed for smaller image circle needs, so vignetting problems would be rife.

Quote from: ErikKaffehr
On the other hand, it seems that having full frame is what makes the Canon 5D popular as a movie camera.
Popular for adding movie options to a still camera, and for being far less expensive than any dedicated video camera with a sensor larger than about 2/3" format, but no DSLR comes close to matching the ergonomics and usability of a camera designed for motion photography, and with a sensor adapted to video meeds through appropriate AA filters and such. So far, putting a sensor of any given size into a professional motion picture camera body pushes the price up vastly higher than a still camera of similar sensor size. Canon's new high end 1/3" format camcorders cost over $6,000, Sony's 2/3" SRW-9000 costs $105,000 and its new Super 35mm PL-mount model SRW-9000PL will be about $125,000.

Clearly, high quality camcorder pricing is affected by a lot more than sensor fab. costs!


P. S. I just checked and PL mount has a fairly large flange to focal plane distance of 52mm (to allow big spinning mirrors?) So in that respect, PL lenses could be adapted for use on a 35mm still camera lens mount. The APS-C "HDSLR" cameras are good candidates, matching the image circle well too.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2010, 08:27:51 AM by BJL » Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad