Question about slo-mo and sensor size
 

I'm really tempted by the super slo-mo functions of the FS700. Too bad the sensor is so large (not great for tele-shooting). I'm curious if anyone can explain why Sony would put 1080p 120 fps into a camera with a 35mm-type sensor, and not into one with a smaller sensor. It seems intuitively obvious that it would be easier to collect the information quickly from a small sensor, getting it ready for the next frame, than to have to get everything off a large sensor and do it 120 times every second.

Re: Question about slo-mo and sensor size
 

Doubt we'll ever know the reason for it. Could just be some feature-rationing scheme from the marketing dept. It might increase the cost of the camera to a point where Sony thinks they won't sell as many as they need to, so they opt to leave it out. With new cameras appearing nearly every week, you'd think somebody would take a gamble and make a small chipper, interchangeable lens, shoulder mounted camera with 120fps in HD quality. A lot of otherwise great cameras don't even do 1080/60p. JVC put out the GY-HM70, but reviews of the image quality indicate the high speed (300fps) is low quality. No interchangeable lens, but only $1,500.

Mark

Re: Question about slo-mo and sensor size
 

There are lot of small sensor fixed lens 720/120p cameras out there from Panasonic, to include the LX7, the ZS30 and the 1/2.3" sensor FZ200 with its constant f2.8 24x zoom - a camera that costs just over $400 right now.


Here's what it can do at 120fps (please watch at 720p):






That said, as far as I know, there are no small sensor 1080/120p cameras downmarket from the FS700.

I have my eye on an open box $6120 FS700 over on Amazon for that very reason :)

Re: Question about slo-mo and sensor size
 

Bill you won't regret the FS700 ... do it !

I have a FS100 and i'm already craving the FS700. And having seen one sell for a similar price in the UK, i'm a bit annoyed I didn't snap it up first!

Re: Question about slo-mo and sensor size
 

Does it? Why? The number of pixels in, say, and 1080p HD frame, is independent of sensor size. If you are unloading 2.07 Mpixels worth of data off the sensor, how would sensor size make this more or less difficult?

As to why high frame rates with large sensors, it probably comes down to cinematic effects with cinematic sized sensors. Small sensor cameras are often aimed at ENG markets, which have little need for slow-mo. The non-ENG small sensor cams seem to be mostly aimed at the general market, which is more price sensitive. They must have concluded that this market won't support (that is, pay for) slow-mo. But the cinematic market will. So, that's where they offer the feature. Makes sense to me, but I'm not claiming it's intuitively obvious.