More photos please

Leon Lorenz · January 13th, 2007, 11:09 PM

Hi Jason

What is weight of this camera going to be and will it have the ability to capture a sky full of stars? I've seen this shot a number of times on wide angle and it looks very close to how your eyes see them.

Leon Lorenz
www.wildlifevideos.ca

Ari Presler · January 17th, 2007, 10:38 PM

We expect the weight will be 12~15lbs.

Mathieu Kassovitz · January 18th, 2007, 12:03 PM

It's a lot for a digital camera as such as the goals of this one. It should be lighter for your good own sake, aside the Mini model.

Ari Presler · January 18th, 2007, 12:46 PM

What is the ideal target weight?

What other model camera are you using for the golden benchmark?

Brian Drysdale · January 18th, 2007, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ari Presler

What is the ideal target weight?

What other model camera are you using for the golden benchmark?

I think that around 12lbs max with the battery, but without a lens, should be regarded as a target weight (a bit less if possible). That's roughly the weight of a Sony HDW 750 without a lens.

I Know a loaded Arri 16SR3 weighs around 15 lbs - the Aaton XTR weighs approx 13lb and I suspect the LTR a bit less. However, I feel that people will be comparing the SI more with the later HD cameras than film cameras.

Also, I suppose it does depend what you''re including in your quoted weight. If it includes your monitor, that could cause it to weigh more than a camera with just a V/F. I notice some video camera weight specs include a lens and some don't.

Ari Presler · January 18th, 2007, 02:00 PM

Brian,

Thanks for the quick response. Yes, the quoted 12~15lbs would be from variations of rods, battery and viewfinders, etc..

Is there a weight which is too light?

Brian Drysdale · January 18th, 2007, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ari Presler

Brian,

Thanks for the quick response. Yes, the quoted 12~15lbs would be from variations of rods, battery and viewfinders, etc..

Is there a weight which is too light?

I suspect the JVC HD 100 at around 7 lbs is about the lightest. It has just about enough weight to offer stability when hand holding without needing image stabilizers. However, the balance is extremely important and this camera is even better with the IDX battery fitted.

A weight of around 14lbs with a 16mm zoom fitted would be comparable with a DSR450 with a lens. Although one complaint I've got about the DSR range is that the build quality isn't great. The DSR 450's body weight is just over 8 1/2 lbs and I believe that doesn't include the V/F etc.

In a drama configuration weight is less of an issue.

BTW Being able to use a shoulder strap makes a big difference to carrying these cameras when shooting on your own.

Leon Lorenz · January 18th, 2007, 09:50 PM

Hi Ari

Thank you for your answer on the weight of the camera. How good will the low light gathering be? To put this questain another way, how much better than the 1/3" chip HDV cameras out there now? Thanks.

Leon Lorenz
www.wildlifevideos.ca

Ari Presler · January 19th, 2007, 12:32 AM

Leon,

The low-light sensitivity at video rates will be comparable becuase of the SI-2K 2/3" larger pixels. However, the dynamic range within our image is far superior.

In long exposure modes, slower readouts, the CCD's will have an advantage with their lower dark currents, but you might be better off with a sequece of DSLR images.

You can always get a MINI-MONO for shooting at night. You will get over 1000 lines of resolution!

Leon Lorenz · January 19th, 2007, 05:44 PM

Ari,

Sounds like these are going to be great cameras. Will be watching for feedback once they get into the hands of filmmakers, hope it makes a stunning wildlife camera. Thanks.

Leon Lorenz
www.wildlifevideos.ca

Dean Harrington · January 27th, 2007, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carlos Osterling

I would like to request more photos of the SI-2k. Would love to see other views, panels, LCDs, etc. I have only seen one or two photographs from your website. Also, you suggested that there would be slight changes in the body design. Did this happen? Thanks for your time.

It's now 2007 and I haven't seen any new aspects to the design of the camera? Are there any updates in design and content? I'm sitting here mulling over my next HD camera buy and I'm really interested in the SI-2k but I must confess, the present design (on the SI-2k site) is just too bulky and blocky for my taste!

Chris Lakes · January 28th, 2007, 03:22 AM

Ari, my first impressions of the low light performance of this camera is that it is actually very noiseless in low light conditions! In fact, I find it hard to get noise. Maybe when I hook up with my DP friend, he'll set me straight, but to my eyes this thing is quite different from the noise I used to get from the DVX, and from what SOME people feel is an issue with the HVX.

Maybe I'm not looking hard enough!

Personally, I like the 12 to 15 pound range.

Dean, the SI-2K isn't going to look like the camera in that photo. Though, I have to confess, I'm probably one of the few who wouldn't mind if it did. Well, maybe a little shorter.

John DeLuca · January 31st, 2007, 10:43 AM

Ari-

I would rather wait a few more months and have a better product, so please take your time. I have years and years of experience with raw still photography workflows, so I am very excited about this imaging system for high end corporate media production. The 12-15 pound range is absolutely perfect, because it is the perfect mass/weight for my steadicam.

-John

Ari Presler · February 2nd, 2007, 12:32 AM

Today at the Hollwood Post Alliance, Silicon Imaging officially announced the SI-2K is achieving 11 F-stops (but you already knew that before the rest of Hollywood!).

Here is snippet from Jason's presentation:
"These Macbeth cover 4.8 f-stops throuh 6.5 f-stop range from chart's black-chip noise floor to white chip highlight clip."

I will let Jason share more details from the conference, upon on his return.

Jason Rodriguez · February 2nd, 2007, 01:58 AM

BTW, JFYI, that Macbeth with the EV14 looks grainy because it's been normalized to show where the noise floor lies . . . It's roughly the equivalent of ISO5000 on our camera . . . ISO5000 on any camera is going to be grainy!

February 2nd, 2007, 12:32 AM	#29
Ari Presler Silicon Imaging Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: New York or Hollywood Posts: 214	SI-2K is now 11 Stops Dynamic Range! Today at the Hollwood Post Alliance, Silicon Imaging officially announced the SI-2K is achieving 11 F-stops (but you already knew that before the rest of Hollywood!). Here is snippet from Jason's presentation: "These Macbeth cover 4.8 f-stops throuh 6.5 f-stop range from chart's black-chip noise floor to white chip highlight clip." I will let Jason share more details from the conference, upon on his return. Attached Thumbnails

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

January 13th, 2007, 11:09 PM	#16
Leon Lorenz Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: McBride BC Canada Posts: 100	Hi Jason What is weight of this camera going to be and will it have the ability to capture a sky full of stars? I've seen this shot a number of times on wide angle and it looks very close to how your eyes see them. Leon Lorenz www.wildlifevideos.ca

January 17th, 2007, 10:38 PM	#17
Ari Presler Silicon Imaging Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: New York or Hollywood Posts: 214	We expect the weight will be 12~15lbs.

January 18th, 2007, 12:03 PM	#18
Mathieu Kassovitz Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: paris Posts: 289	It's a lot for a digital camera as such as the goals of this one. It should be lighter for your good own sake, aside the Mini model.

January 18th, 2007, 12:46 PM	#19
Ari Presler Silicon Imaging Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: New York or Hollywood Posts: 214	What is the ideal target weight? What other model camera are you using for the golden benchmark?

January 18th, 2007, 02:00 PM	#21
Ari Presler Silicon Imaging Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: New York or Hollywood Posts: 214	Brian, Thanks for the quick response. Yes, the quoted 12~15lbs would be from variations of rods, battery and viewfinders, etc.. Is there a weight which is too light?

January 18th, 2007, 09:50 PM	#23
Leon Lorenz Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: McBride BC Canada Posts: 100	Hi Ari Thank you for your answer on the weight of the camera. How good will the low light gathering be? To put this questain another way, how much better than the 1/3" chip HDV cameras out there now? Thanks. Leon Lorenz www.wildlifevideos.ca

January 19th, 2007, 12:32 AM	#24
Ari Presler Silicon Imaging Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: New York or Hollywood Posts: 214	Leon, The low-light sensitivity at video rates will be comparable becuase of the SI-2K 2/3" larger pixels. However, the dynamic range within our image is far superior. In long exposure modes, slower readouts, the CCD's will have an advantage with their lower dark currents, but you might be better off with a sequece of DSLR images. You can always get a MINI-MONO for shooting at night. You will get over 1000 lines of resolution!

January 19th, 2007, 05:44 PM	#25
Leon Lorenz Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: McBride BC Canada Posts: 100	Ari, Sounds like these are going to be great cameras. Will be watching for feedback once they get into the hands of filmmakers, hope it makes a stunning wildlife camera. Thanks. Leon Lorenz www.wildlifevideos.ca

January 28th, 2007, 03:22 AM	#27
Chris Lakes Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 33	Ari, my first impressions of the low light performance of this camera is that it is actually very noiseless in low light conditions! In fact, I find it hard to get noise. Maybe when I hook up with my DP friend, he'll set me straight, but to my eyes this thing is quite different from the noise I used to get from the DVX, and from what SOME people feel is an issue with the HVX. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough! Personally, I like the 12 to 15 pound range. Dean, the SI-2K isn't going to look like the camera in that photo. Though, I have to confess, I'm probably one of the few who wouldn't mind if it did. Well, maybe a little shorter.

January 31st, 2007, 10:43 AM	#28
John DeLuca Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Akron, Ohio Posts: 496	Ari- I would rather wait a few more months and have a better product, so please take your time. I have years and years of experience with raw still photography workflows, so I am very excited about this imaging system for high end corporate media production. The 12-15 pound range is absolutely perfect, because it is the perfect mass/weight for my steadicam. -John

February 2nd, 2007, 01:58 AM	#30
Jason Rodriguez Trustee Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 1,095	BTW, JFYI, that Macbeth with the EV14 looks grainy because it's been normalized to show where the noise floor lies . . . It's roughly the equivalent of ISO5000 on our camera . . . ISO5000 on any camera is going to be grainy!