Personal computing discussed

Moderators: Dposcorp, SpotTheCat

 
cass
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Topic Author
Posts: 2269
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2003 9:12 am
Contact:

2540P

Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:18 pm

So, I was doing some reading and research trying to figure out why camera manufacturers and media folks aren't producing anything digital with 4:2:2 or 4:4:4, and 1920x1080 or better and 60 frames, when I found out there is some serious hardware out there capable of some really good definition, but good lord, is it expensive, and it requires multitudes of storage.

Red One
12 megapixel
12 bit
4520x2540 active pixels
Raw uncompressed.

That would produce some awesome video with no editing degeneration.
 
mattsteg
Gerbil God
Posts: 15778
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums
Contact:

Sat Dec 15, 2007 4:49 pm

That's actually ridiculously cheap, not "good lord expensive", given the capabilities. Red One certainly has the look of something with the ability to undercut the competition in a huge way and really deliver the goods at a low cost.

Realize that full-functioned still cameras of the same pixel resolution at 9 fps (no idea how the per-pixel quality and sensitivity compares) go for up to almost 1/3 the price of the Red One, which purports to offer that resolution at 60FPS.
...
 
jobodaho
Graphmaster Gerbil
Posts: 1136
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: University of Nebraska Lincoln

Sat Dec 15, 2007 7:13 pm

That's a pretty cool camera, and I like that you can get different lenses for it. I haven't done much (none really) research on video cameras, but I really don't think that I would use one as much as my still.
 
cass
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Topic Author
Posts: 2269
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2003 9:12 am
Contact:

Sat Dec 15, 2007 8:32 pm

mattsteg wrote:
That's actually ridiculously cheap, not "good lord expensive", given the capabilities. Red One certainly has the look of something with the ability to undercut the competition in a huge way and really deliver the goods at a low cost.

Realize that full-functioned still cameras of the same pixel resolution at 9 fps (no idea how the per-pixel quality and sensitivity compares) go for up to almost 1/3 the price of the Red One, which purports to offer that resolution at 60FPS.


I was more or less considering the cost of the system. I figured by the time you bought the camera, some lenses, the handles, mounts, port options, viewfinder or screen, power sources, and some usable storage, you would be in the $120,000 - $200,000 range. Crap I forgot about the $8000 editing system for a MAC only.

Your point is valid though this stuff is getting down in the range of where it can be rented and used. I am glad to see it.
 
mattsteg
Gerbil God
Posts: 15778
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums
Contact:

Sat Dec 15, 2007 8:49 pm

jobodaho wrote:
That's a pretty cool camera, and I like that you can get different lenses for it. I haven't done much (none really) research on video cameras, but I really don't think that I would use one as much as my still.
You could even mount your existing lens collection on it
cass wrote:
I was more or less considering the cost of the system. I figured by the time you bought the camera, some lenses, the handles, mounts, port options, viewfinder or screen, power sources, and some usable storage, you would be in the $120,000 - $200,000 range. Crap I forgot about the $8000 editing system for a MAC only.

Your point is valid though this stuff is getting down in the range of where it can be rented and used. I am glad to see it.
Yeah, the real killer is the support costs. You need insane amounts of storage and a ridiculous amount of computing power. The lenses are pretty similar to those for a good still camera setup - with an adapter you can mount Nikon, Canon, etc. lenses so lens cost is to a large extent a wash although certain characteristics will be better optimized on video-camera lenses (i.e. focus shift while zooming and a stronger emphasis on smooth zooming for example) which is likely why their costs are a bit larger. The system is "expensive" but it also looks to be a pretty substantial bargain.
...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests