Erik not sure were you get your information but SxS solid state records 50Mb/s 4:2:2 on EX camera, I did it yesterday on my PMW-500. Also ARRI use SxS.

Steve I agree 10bit 422 is the way to go. Would not be surprised if CD did not come out a new Nano 2. I have a Ki Pro Mini on order and will compare the two once it arrives. My Nano is a hard working unit on my EX1.

agree ...
 

Convergent Design is clearly enjoying the drive in recording devises. They've got the experience and I think as others do that they will come out with at least a 10 bit 4.2.2 Nano ... I would hope they are looking at ways to do 4.4.4 as well.

Convergent Designs clearly make a excellent product and stand behind it all the way. If they build a 10bit recorder I am in, and there would be a lot of 8bit Nano's on the market.

I do not own a RED. I have done RED post though. I own an EX1.

Depending on the finish, Both come into Avid exactly the same and the path is exactly the same. RED workflow is often more complex because people are often doing offline/online for film purposes. The workflow for taking XDCam to filmout would be similarly complex, but few do it, so you don't hear about it.

Time in production is certainly different as the RED has a much longer setup time than an XDCam camera. It may also require a DIT on set when is an additional expense.

If taking an F3 to filmout, I can't see how it would be faster. If shooting for broadcast, I surely can't see how I would post them any differently.

RED comes into Avid via AMA. Just like XDCam, 5D/7D, or P2 footage. Mt editing machine is 2.5 years old now and copes just fine without any transcodes for HD finish. For 2K/4K finish, yes it's an offline/online process..

Perrone all of these also work just fine with my Mac Pro, FC system which is 3 years old.

I didn't say it was impossible for SxS to record 50mbs 4:2:2. Until the 500 they only allowed 50mbs on cameras that had the optical drive. I was unaware the 500 was SxS only. Strange.

It's not the deBayering that means no true 444, but rather the relation between output resolution and chip resolution. As David says, a Bayer chip CAN give 444 - as long there are at least 4x as many photosites as output pixels. (And with Red etc, there are more than enough for 444 1080)

It's not that you can't get 1080 444 from any Bayer chip - rather that you can't truly get it from this one. It shouldn't really be seen as bad, since it keeps the photosite area fairly large which brings other benefits. (And 444 recording will make the most of what it does do.)

Suitable for wildlife filming?
 

Does anyone know if the F3 will be 100% content approved by broadcasters like the BBC and National Geographic as is out of the box? As a wildlife filmmaker, being able to shoot clean video in very low light will be great, however, for fast moving wildlife subjects, I need deep depth of field most of the time to stay in focus. Is there a good high power zoom lens that will work with this sensor for wildlife filming?

Thanks,

Leon Lorenz
Canadian Wildlife Productions: Grizzly Bears, Bighorm Sheep in Alberta & BC Rockies DVD Videos

Power zoom? On PL mount? Or are you talking about the Sony native mount? Deep DOF and S35 sensor are opposites. Stay with 2/3"

This is why I am hoping to see the 2/3" scarlet. For wildlife, sports, etc. Shallow DOF has it's place, but sometimes you just CAN'T chase the focus.

Yes, also with the higher frame rates, the 2/3" Scarlet makes more sense for wildlife. A video zoom with a PL adapter sounds like it would do the job with that camera.

I suspect you'd a Nanoflash or other external recorder for those HD broadcasters.

At a recent event, I believe they said that a 15x servo lens was on the way, though not sure about timescale. It's for such reasons that the F3 has a built in grip/rocker, to give direct control. I think the mount is likely to be the F3 native, not via PL.

As far as f stop/sensitivity goes, then bear in mind the F3 is supposed to be considerably more sensitive than an EX, likely about 2 stops, all else equal. Hence, if an EX needs f2, expect the F3 to need about f4. So for parity, the F3 zoom lens doesn't need to have the same stop as one for an EX, and isn't likely to in practice for size/cost weight issues.

To take full advantage of the sensitiivity in low light, you'd then have to go to a fast prime.

Red's AMA performance is the worse of the bunch. And if you want to get Red out of AMA, you have to transcode.

They are all taking guesses on the price of the Epic Light (formerly Scarlet S35) and the general opinion seems to be priced around the same as the F3. What I find interesting about that is it means RED only has the 2/3s Scarlet to compete with the S35 NXcam.

If the NXcam has 4:2:2 output through SDI or HDMI that would give Sony the advantage in this price range right? Assuming of course the 2/3s Scarlet would be in the same price range of the S35 NXcam.

Sony only have an advantage if the S35 sensor is more important than other factors. The 2/3" Scarlet has other advantageous elements to its specification, so it's more a matter of choice. Certainly, they'll need the HD SDI to match up to the AF100.