Sony prototype cinema camera shown at NAB

[Brian Drysdale]

It's very much a matter of the right tool for the job you're doing. If the DSLR camera fits within how you shoot films and the requirements of your clients that's the tool for you. However, if you can't work with the limitations of the DSLR perhaps a more motion centred camera would be the correct tool.

This is a decision that needs to be taken for each production.

Hopefully these new cameras won't have these limitations. Although, I suspect there will be some trade offs going on.

[Mike Calla]

The "right tool" unfortunately is a luxury most people cannot afford.

In reality the right tool for the job is the tool you have - or have a budget for - or even the time for.

Not so long ago all they had was 35/16/8mm film cameras, lenses, and different stock and they shot almost EVERYTHING and ANYTHING!

Right now, I'm shooting a commercial, a talk show/round table discussion (a la IFC’s Dinner For Five), a documentary on my city's neighborhoods and a music video.

I understand, I can't shoot everything - I can't shoot bullets going through apples! Seriously, I understand the limitations of the DLSRs and I’ll be upfront with clients about problems we might run into.

But lets be honest, those problems are few and far between and usually shot specific.

[Emmanuel Plakiotis]

May I also add that the total cost of Mike Calla's configuration is probably triple the price of the 7D - still though less than the expected price of Panasonic 4/3 camcorder. I own a 7D and frankly besides its size is a pain to use and when you add all the peripherals to make it functional is not light anymore or compact.
I would have opt for a more suitable camera, if the price doesn't hurt very much. My main concern with 7D is the lack of proper HD out.

[Brian Drysdale]

Static shots tend not to a problem for the DSLRs, it's when you have faster motion that you seem to have problems. Shooting action you could have more than just a few shots giving problems from artefacts.

For higher budget stuff people commonly rent anyway. Budgets do impose restrictions, that has always been the case, even with the film cameras.

[Mike Calla]

Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale

Static shots tend not to a problem for the DSLRs, it's when you have faster motion that you seem to have problems. Shooting action you could have more than just a few shots giving problems from artefacts.

For higher budget stuff people commonly rent anyway. Budgets do impose restrictions, that has always been the case, even with the film cameras.

Originally Posted by Emmanuel Plakiotis

May I also add that the total cost of Mike Calla's configuration is probably triple the price of the 7D

Emmanuel, off the top of my head (and yahoo’s currency converter:)
- 520$ for the recorder
- 120$ for the light meter
- 150$ for the plural eyes
- 200$ish for rails, follow focus, and shoulder mount (plus my own DIY time)
- 150$ for the Lilliput
and 1140
- 210$ for CF cards
- 80$ for 4 non-canon batteries
- 600$ for lenses (beautiful, old, hard stop lenses from my camera market).
(everything else i'd own with any camera)

that's about 2000 plus 1800 for the camera, and might I add, all of these costs could very well be for any camera! And btw the whole rig is no bigger than a Sony HVR Z5U...you don't need a monster rig. btw My first pro HD cam was the Sony HVR-A1. Cost me almost this much. Great little camera, paid for itself over and over again but lets be honest, it’s nowhere close to being a fair fight.

Brian, yes fast motion can be a problem. I've shot people in the park doing wushu (martial arts in Chinese) and have noticed nothing that jumps out at me during playback. But on pause, yes you’re right, there are artifacts but near zilch to make me question, let alone give up on the 7D. I mentioned in my previous post that I’m shooting a music video. The drummer was a wild man and the guitarist had a frantic strumming style (and antics:) and the 7D was more than fine (but also 1x – 10x shutter speed? Maybe a higher shutter helped this out?)

I didn’t want to get in to a “this is better than that” post, but I can’t keep buying everything new. For me, I hit my spent-all-I-need-to-spend-point on this camera to get the quality I wanted all these years.

And I’ll say it (sorry Charles P.),

“GAME CHANGER”

Sure if your background is Hollywood films, or even high end video, then a DSLR might not be a big deal, but I was shooting HDV before this (shudder!) with its noise (shudder), drop outs (shudder), infinite, almost uncontrollable DOF (shudder), mp3 audio (shudder), horrible dynamic range (shudder), and although the colour was pretty good, in comparison to the 7D - SHUDDER!!!

[Erik Phairas]

That's great, I'm glad you love your DSLR. More power to you. If this new (sony) camera costs an arm and a leg I might get one (dslr) too just for the low light stuff. But if I can get this new sony camera for around the same as my EX3 and it doesn't have any serious trade offs (if it does they would built in more than likely knowing sony) I want it. It could be a direct replacement for the ex. Or not, we shall see.

Also if it uses the f35 chip, it would (more than likely) have none of the image downsides of the 7d.

[Brian Drysdale]

I can't see the new camera having the F35 chip, but perhaps a variation on the design or a faster refresh rate than found on their Alpha camera sensors.

Although, perhaps they may use the lower grade F35 chips - those not good enough for use in the high end cameras...

It's the panning which seems to tend to show up worst in the DSLRs.

[Andy Shipsides]

The F35 and SRW9000PL have single RGB striped pattern CCD sensors. This camera will have a single Bayer pattern CMOS sensor. Really that's about all that is known at this time.

[Erik Phairas]

A bayer chip? That means it was probably pulled from a dsrl right? Maybe the camera will be cheaper than a EX3.

[Don Miller]

Originally Posted by Sean Seah

Looks like the big boys are battling it out. Will Canon have a chance to do a 4/3" finally?

Since 4/3 was designed to compete with Canon and Nikon, it's very unlikely these two companies would adopt that size. Both these companies have APS-C size sensors which are close to film 35mm. These chips also have a more appropriate aspect ratio than 4/3.

Some people won't find enough DOF control with 4/3, especially on the wide end.

[Dale Guthormsen]

This is an amazing thread!!!

What a good read!!!!


personally, I would rather see full 60 P in the cameras without having to spend 30 to 50 grand!!!

I still think video is video and film is film.

Dale Guthormsen

Ps I can really appreciate Mkle's comments, andf I do not even use a dslr yet!

Now if I win the LOTTO MAX???!!! where would I go????

[David Dwyer]

I do like the look of this camera and if its a year ago all the better as I will be looking for a new camera then. Any ideas of cost? 5k/10k or more?

[Erik Phairas]

The canon T2i with a lens is less money than my consumer Sony Sr11. It has basically a super 35mm sized sensor, almost certainly very close to the same size as the sensor of the new Sony cam.

I still want to wait though. What I am hoping for is that magic "low res" 35mm chip. 1920ish chip that is super35 sized. Do they even have bayer CMOS chips like that?

[Don Miller]

The first Canon-made DSLR, the 30D, was 3mb APS-C (close to super 35mm). A 2mb chip like that made today would be super light sensitive. Sony is certainly capable of making a chip like that, but 4/3 is more likely.

[Don Miller]

Originally Posted by Erik Phairas

A bayer chip? That means it was probably pulled from a dsrl right? Maybe the camera will be cheaper than a EX3.

Not pulled from a dslr. Purpose-made chips with fewer and larger photo sensors.