New Sony Blue Ray HD cam in 2006 at DVinfo.net

Laurence Maher · November 7th, 2005, 06:13 AM

Check out:

http://www.broadcastnewsroom.com/art...e.jsp?id=34949

Says that Sony's making a Blue Ray HD cam in 2006 with three 1/2 inch chips that does 1080i and 24p.

Downside is that is that the data rate seems to be pretty low and that the camera will cost around 20k. But who knows, maybe they'll surprise us. At least their trying . . . well, kind of.

Chris Hurd · November 7th, 2005, 06:51 AM

You're referencing a month-old article which has been discussed here before, but I just wanted to point out that you should never get concerned about non-issues such as "a low data rate." Remember, the proof is in the quality of the image. All that counts is what you see on the screen. Compression is better than it ever has been, and higher compression ratios are not a bad thing. Just look at H.264 sometime... 8mbps and it looks great projected on a big screen. The quality that you see with your own eyes is all that matters; numbers and ratios are all but meaningless in this business anymore.

Kevin Shaw · November 7th, 2005, 07:07 AM

Thanks Chris, well said. It's also worth noting that this may be the most affordable 1080i camera with anything larger than a 1/3" sensor, so it could be significant in that regard. But with a likely price tag of over $20K that's getting out of the range of many of us, and will face competition from upcoming JVC HDV cameras.

Emanuel Costa · November 7th, 2005, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

you should never get concerned about non-issues such as "a low data rate." Remember, the proof is in the quality of the image. All that counts is what you see on the screen. Compression is better than it ever has been, and higher compression ratios are not a bad thing. Just look at H.264 sometime... 8mbps and it looks great projected on a big screen. The quality that you see with your own eyes is all that matters; numbers and ratios are all but meaningless in this business anymore.

I'm newbie by here as member but not as reader. I like your speech, Chris. I already know that you are a XL-H1 enthusiastic - frankly, I'm not! Very videoish... But in your guess, what will it be better? This Sony offer (higher compression but 1/2") or HVX (100 megabits, 1/3" but also 1/4 its price or even less expensive), as far as film look is concerned and for the big screen?

Chris Hurd · November 7th, 2005, 07:55 AM

Hi Emanuel,

I would not say that I am "XL H1 enthusiastic" -- I understand it and I have been around it a little. I don't think there have been enough video clips made available yet to determine exactly how it looks. To answer your question, if I were shooting "for the big screen and a film look," I would probably hire an experienced D.P. and consult with that person regarding a camera choice. In my own opinion, I think any of the new HD camcorders plus the P+S Technik Mini35 and some rented motion picture lenses is the way to go. I've always believed that the film look starts with the glass (and the lighting). But we have an entire forum dedicated to this already, with plenty of discussions devoted to various methods for achieving a film look with digital video.

Emanuel Costa · November 7th, 2005, 09:46 PM

Congrats for your website/work! (it's very useful and as I said before I speak as your regular reader as always). And in the first time that I need a direct enlightenment of a dvinfo.net member (David Newman), I'm achieving it. So...

Quote:

I've always believed that the film look starts with the glass (and the lighting).

I agree 100% with you. I'm thinking for an option between HVX (my doubt is 24p/60i or 25p/50i as you can follow @ http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...340#post380340) and Guerilla35 plus 35mm still lenses... What do you think?

Thanks in advance!

<PS> Unfortunately, as method of (my) work or budget and for a question of principle as also you can follow I must be my own DP (of course, "with a little help from my friends") and make the right decision(s) in a basis of a/some purchase(s) and not @ rental service(s).

Chris Hurd · November 7th, 2005, 11:08 PM

Actually if you are careful and thorough in your pre-production work -- after all it is the single most important step in filmmaking -- then renting can be far more cost-effective, more prudent, and a much better use of money than buying. With the Mini35 even if you do buy it rather than rent it, its value will be held quite well and you can sell it afterwards for nearly what you paid for it.

November 7th, 2005, 06:13 AM	#1
Laurence Maher Join Date: May 2004 Location: denton, texas, usa Posts: 416	New Sony Blue Ray HD cam in 2006 Check out: http://www.broadcastnewsroom.com/art...e.jsp?id=34949 Says that Sony's making a Blue Ray HD cam in 2006 with three 1/2 inch chips that does 1080i and 24p. Downside is that is that the data rate seems to be pretty low and that the camera will cost around 20k. But who knows, maybe they'll surprise us. At least their trying . . . well, kind of.

November 7th, 2005, 06:51 AM	#2
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	You're referencing a month-old article which has been discussed here before, but I just wanted to point out that you should never get concerned about non-issues such as "a low data rate." Remember, the proof is in the quality of the image. All that counts is what you see on the screen. Compression is better than it ever has been, and higher compression ratios are not a bad thing. Just look at H.264 sometime... 8mbps and it looks great projected on a big screen. The quality that you see with your own eyes is all that matters; numbers and ratios are all but meaningless in this business anymore. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

November 7th, 2005, 07:55 AM	#5
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Hi Emanuel, I would not say that I am "XL H1 enthusiastic" -- I understand it and I have been around it a little. I don't think there have been enough video clips made available yet to determine exactly how it looks. To answer your question, if I were shooting "for the big screen and a film look," I would probably hire an experienced D.P. and consult with that person regarding a camera choice. In my own opinion, I think any of the new HD camcorders plus the P+S Technik Mini35 and some rented motion picture lenses is the way to go. I've always believed that the film look starts with the glass (and the lighting). But we have an entire forum dedicated to this already, with plenty of discussions devoted to various methods for achieving a film look with digital video. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

November 7th, 2005, 11:08 PM	#7
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Actually if you are careful and thorough in your pre-production work -- after all it is the single most important step in filmmaking -- then renting can be far more cost-effective, more prudent, and a much better use of money than buying. With the Mini35 even if you do buy it rather than rent it, its value will be held quite well and you can sell it afterwards for nearly what you paid for it. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

November 7th, 2005, 07:07 AM	#3
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	Thanks Chris, well said. It's also worth noting that this may be the most affordable 1080i camera with anything larger than a 1/3" sensor, so it could be significant in that regard. But with a likely price tag of over $20K that's getting out of the range of many of us, and will face competition from upcoming JVC HDV cameras.