Sumix 2/3" 1920x1080 CMOS

Noah Yuan-Vogel · October 26th, 2007, 01:43 PM

I'm not sure footage is as important as more information about software and workflow. I mean we all know what this altasens is capable of, and with cameras like these, footage doesnt mean much unless you are using the right LUTs and frame decimation settings etc. now if sumix were to post some video with synced audio (more than a minute worth ideally) to prove that they have a solution for making sure video will always sync to audio and for dealing accurately with recorded vs encoded framerates without extra hardware or software, then that would be something worth looking at closely.

I guess you are right about that its totally appropriate for this to partly be a system building forum. I just dont want to get too caught up in it since this is primarily about the sumix camera and there are plenty of other forums discussing hardware that can be used to build a portable dvr box. (plus people have a tendancy to link all kinds of new technology that isnt really relevant and never actually becomes available). I guess i'll just try to be as practical as possible when talking about ways to build a system to run the sumix camera.

Seth Kersey · October 29th, 2007, 09:56 PM

I just noticed that Sumix has a sample image from the 12a2c up on their website... http://www.sumix.com/img/screens/smx-12a2c.png

Hopefully they will post footage. Do they have footage posted from their other cameras? I could not find any.

Jose A. Garcia · October 30th, 2007, 06:30 AM

They posted something captured with their M73 model but it was small and didn't show the actual potential of the camera. I hope they post a 1080p60 clip.

By the way, the image looks really good.

Noah Yuan-Vogel · October 30th, 2007, 09:37 AM

Does it? I mean it kinda looks like the bayer algorithm could use quite a bit of work. I wonder what debayer mode that was taken in. The green channel has a pattern to it, and the other channels arent well interpolated so they seem quite steppy and aliased. Also there is an odd ghosting which is offset about 6 pixels to the right. Also the color channels dont seem to quite line up. All of those specular highlights on the water droplets especially on the red rose are noticeably offset in the blue channel, and if you look closely it looks like there is alternating red/blue banding, particularly noticeable on the white rose.

Other than that, noise level is great, although possibly masked by the patterning from the debayer. And the image could use a saturation boost, but that is trivial to do i suppose, and wouldnt be representative of the raw image. If this is an uncorrected raw image then im impressed, although it looks like it is at least gamma corrected. Seems possible this image is just using a bilinear debayer, although i cant imagine why they wouldnt use only lapacian debayer if they want to show off the camera. if it is their lapacian debayer, it may need some work...

Obviously there is a lot of potential here, but we shall see if sumix is able to unlock that potential enough to make this camera a worthwhile investment for those of us interested in inexpensive digital cinema.

Ben Winter · October 30th, 2007, 09:46 AM

I think if the price is right, what I'm seeing will work for me. If I can sit through a movie made with this thing and not be drawn to the flaws in the aethetics of the image itself, I'll buy it. I just had a conversation with somebody about 92khz 32-bit audio capture and how it was wasted space capturing all that extra data when people don't hear much difference past 48khz 24-bit. I think the same thing might apply here.

It won't cost nearly as much as the SI 2K system, so I don't expect it to look nearly as good--yet it almost does already (to my eyes).

Ian G. Thompson · October 30th, 2007, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben Winter

I.... I just had a conversation with somebody about 92khz 32-bit audio capture and how it was wasted space capturing all that extra data when people don't hear much difference past 48khz 24-bit. I think the same thing might apply here....

Your right....but I think in this scenario, just like in video, the idea is that it's better to oversample, getting as much info as you can, and then downconvert. 92khz 32-bit might be overkill though...I myself just stick with 48khz 24-bit.

Jose A. Garcia · October 30th, 2007, 10:51 AM

Wow Noah!! All that from just an image?? Calm down man!

The only thing I don't like about that image is that the whole scene is a bit dark and yet all highlights are overexposed. I'm looking forward to seeing more images or footage.

And again... What else do you want?? You're getting almost the quality of a SI2K for 2 grand!

Noah Yuan-Vogel · October 30th, 2007, 11:18 AM

:P

Sorry if I sound like a downer, but I'm trying to be realistic. I mean there is a reason we dont just all go out and buy a bunch of altasens sensors from altasens. It is useless to us without having a worthwhile system around it.

I wouldnt worry too much about the poor highlight handling yet, if the gamma isnt corrected correctly and image exposed accordingly, things end up linear. remember raw sensors react linearly to light. in the case of 12bit as this camera is, there are 4096 possible luminance levels, and the whole upper stop of light (top ~10% of the brightness of the scene) is represented by all of the values 2048-4096 (50%-100%). most people arent use to seen raw sensor images uncorrected, so this will look off.

lemme know if ive gotten any of this wrong. But I sure know working with the M73 if you leave the gamma at the uncorrected default value, things look way too high contrast. Youve gotta be able to monitor with the gamma correction or LUT in effect or it gets pretty tough to judge where middle grey is supposed to be.

Daniel Lipats · October 30th, 2007, 11:24 AM

Im pretty impressed, thats great.

There is a pattern or something to it. I hope its not more obvious in a video. If there is a constant fluctuating pattern it would be very noticeable.

Also there is some kind of dark line going across the image just below the flower heads.

Noah Yuan-Vogel · October 30th, 2007, 11:52 AM

I may have already mentioned this, but keep in mind that silicon imaging came out with a similar industrial camera head almost 3 years ago, granted it was $5k (wonder how much it is now). They took that and made the SI2k eventually, but ive never heard of more than one person trying to use the SI-1920HD-RGB for digital cinema even though it is less than 1/3 as expensive as the si2k mini.

The thing about HD on cheap industrial cameras is that $10k on a proven camera is an investment, whereas $2k on an industrial camera that is missing even one essential feature is likely $2k down the drain.

Dont get me wrong though, I'm still hoping sumix will come to this forum and tell us about all the amazing features they are including to make this camera head perfect for digital cinema and completely make all of my concerns irrelevant. I'm even thinking about cancelling my plans to build a new (my 3rd) DIY 35mm adapter since i sure wont need one if my next camera is a sumix altasens. Only time will tell, im just suggesting we not hold our breaths till we get real details.

Jay Burlage · October 30th, 2007, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Lipats

Also there is some kind of dark line going across the image just below the flower heads.

are you looking at it on a trinitron?

Looks quite good to me... I'm also curious if this is raw or not??

Noah - If they allow access to fine tune the settings you could help us all get the most out of the sensor... right?

Daniel Lipats · October 30th, 2007, 01:30 PM

No, im on a 37" lcd

Im not crazy, the line is there :P

http://www.buysmartpc.com/temp2/smx-12a2c-line.jpg

I tried to bring it out a bit so its easier to see.. but its defiantly there.

Jay Burlage · October 30th, 2007, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Lipats

I tried to bring it out a bit so its easier to see.. but its defiantly there.

Ah. I see. good eye...

Daniel Lipats · October 30th, 2007, 01:53 PM

On my b/w version, what is that grain on the areas out of focus? Is that sensor noise?

Farhad Towfiq · October 30th, 2007, 02:29 PM

Thank you all for the feedback you are providing in this forum.
This camera is new and we are just getting use to tuning the sensor's settings for improving images. The debayaring algorithm is really not a limitation. The key is to produce low noise 12 bit raw video and provide accessibility to all features of the sensor. Depending on optics, illumination, etc. the optimal debayering will be different. Although We will keep improving a few default debayaring algorithms, eventually it will be up to you to decide what suits your needs and share what you will find among yourselves. As we will upgrade to newer and better sensors you will also need different algorithms for everything.
This camera has really impressive possibilities built in it that which will be utilized as new firmware software upgrade will become available.

October 29th, 2007, 09:56 PM	#62
Seth Kersey Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 26	Sumix Sample Image I just noticed that Sumix has a sample image from the 12a2c up on their website... http://www.sumix.com/img/screens/smx-12a2c.png Hopefully they will post footage. Do they have footage posted from their other cameras? I could not find any.

October 30th, 2007, 09:46 AM	#65
Ben Winter Trustee Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 1,675 Images: 1	I think if the price is right, what I'm seeing will work for me. If I can sit through a movie made with this thing and not be drawn to the flaws in the aethetics of the image itself, I'll buy it. I just had a conversation with somebody about 92khz 32-bit audio capture and how it was wasted space capturing all that extra data when people don't hear much difference past 48khz 24-bit. I think the same thing might apply here. It won't cost nearly as much as the SI 2K system, so I don't expect it to look nearly as good--yet it almost does already (to my eyes). __________________ BenWinter.com

October 26th, 2007, 01:43 PM	#61
Noah Yuan-Vogel Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: New York City Posts: 613	I'm not sure footage is as important as more information about software and workflow. I mean we all know what this altasens is capable of, and with cameras like these, footage doesnt mean much unless you are using the right LUTs and frame decimation settings etc. now if sumix were to post some video with synced audio (more than a minute worth ideally) to prove that they have a solution for making sure video will always sync to audio and for dealing accurately with recorded vs encoded framerates without extra hardware or software, then that would be something worth looking at closely. I guess you are right about that its totally appropriate for this to partly be a system building forum. I just dont want to get too caught up in it since this is primarily about the sumix camera and there are plenty of other forums discussing hardware that can be used to build a portable dvr box. (plus people have a tendancy to link all kinds of new technology that isnt really relevant and never actually becomes available). I guess i'll just try to be as practical as possible when talking about ways to build a system to run the sumix camera.

October 30th, 2007, 06:30 AM	#63
Jose A. Garcia Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Sevilla (Spain) Posts: 439	They posted something captured with their M73 model but it was small and didn't show the actual potential of the camera. I hope they post a 1080p60 clip. By the way, the image looks really good.

October 30th, 2007, 09:37 AM	#64
Noah Yuan-Vogel Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: New York City Posts: 613	Does it? I mean it kinda looks like the bayer algorithm could use quite a bit of work. I wonder what debayer mode that was taken in. The green channel has a pattern to it, and the other channels arent well interpolated so they seem quite steppy and aliased. Also there is an odd ghosting which is offset about 6 pixels to the right. Also the color channels dont seem to quite line up. All of those specular highlights on the water droplets especially on the red rose are noticeably offset in the blue channel, and if you look closely it looks like there is alternating red/blue banding, particularly noticeable on the white rose. Other than that, noise level is great, although possibly masked by the patterning from the debayer. And the image could use a saturation boost, but that is trivial to do i suppose, and wouldnt be representative of the raw image. If this is an uncorrected raw image then im impressed, although it looks like it is at least gamma corrected. Seems possible this image is just using a bilinear debayer, although i cant imagine why they wouldnt use only lapacian debayer if they want to show off the camera. if it is their lapacian debayer, it may need some work... Obviously there is a lot of potential here, but we shall see if sumix is able to unlock that potential enough to make this camera a worthwhile investment for those of us interested in inexpensive digital cinema.

October 30th, 2007, 10:51 AM	#67
Jose A. Garcia Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Sevilla (Spain) Posts: 439	Wow Noah!! All that from just an image?? Calm down man! The only thing I don't like about that image is that the whole scene is a bit dark and yet all highlights are overexposed. I'm looking forward to seeing more images or footage. And again... What else do you want?? You're getting almost the quality of a SI2K for 2 grand!

October 30th, 2007, 11:18 AM	#68
Noah Yuan-Vogel Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: New York City Posts: 613	:P Sorry if I sound like a downer, but I'm trying to be realistic. I mean there is a reason we dont just all go out and buy a bunch of altasens sensors from altasens. It is useless to us without having a worthwhile system around it. I wouldnt worry too much about the poor highlight handling yet, if the gamma isnt corrected correctly and image exposed accordingly, things end up linear. remember raw sensors react linearly to light. in the case of 12bit as this camera is, there are 4096 possible luminance levels, and the whole upper stop of light (top ~10% of the brightness of the scene) is represented by all of the values 2048-4096 (50%-100%). most people arent use to seen raw sensor images uncorrected, so this will look off. lemme know if ive gotten any of this wrong. But I sure know working with the M73 if you leave the gamma at the uncorrected default value, things look way too high contrast. Youve gotta be able to monitor with the gamma correction or LUT in effect or it gets pretty tough to judge where middle grey is supposed to be.

October 30th, 2007, 11:24 AM	#69
Daniel Lipats Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 260	Im pretty impressed, thats great. There is a pattern or something to it. I hope its not more obvious in a video. If there is a constant fluctuating pattern it would be very noticeable. Also there is some kind of dark line going across the image just below the flower heads.

October 30th, 2007, 11:52 AM	#70
Noah Yuan-Vogel Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: New York City Posts: 613	I may have already mentioned this, but keep in mind that silicon imaging came out with a similar industrial camera head almost 3 years ago, granted it was $5k (wonder how much it is now). They took that and made the SI2k eventually, but ive never heard of more than one person trying to use the SI-1920HD-RGB for digital cinema even though it is less than 1/3 as expensive as the si2k mini. The thing about HD on cheap industrial cameras is that $10k on a proven camera is an investment, whereas $2k on an industrial camera that is missing even one essential feature is likely $2k down the drain. Dont get me wrong though, I'm still hoping sumix will come to this forum and tell us about all the amazing features they are including to make this camera head perfect for digital cinema and completely make all of my concerns irrelevant. I'm even thinking about cancelling my plans to build a new (my 3rd) DIY 35mm adapter since i sure wont need one if my next camera is a sumix altasens. Only time will tell, im just suggesting we not hold our breaths till we get real details.

October 30th, 2007, 01:30 PM	#72
Daniel Lipats Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 260	No, im on a 37" lcd Im not crazy, the line is there :P http://www.buysmartpc.com/temp2/smx-12a2c-line.jpg I tried to bring it out a bit so its easier to see.. but its defiantly there.

October 30th, 2007, 01:53 PM	#74
Daniel Lipats Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 260	On my b/w version, what is that grain on the areas out of focus? Is that sensor noise?

October 30th, 2007, 02:29 PM	#75
Farhad Towfiq Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: California Posts: 63	Thank you all for the feedback you are providing in this forum. This camera is new and we are just getting use to tuning the sensor's settings for improving images. The debayaring algorithm is really not a limitation. The key is to produce low noise 12 bit raw video and provide accessibility to all features of the sensor. Depending on optics, illumination, etc. the optimal debayering will be different. Although We will keep improving a few default debayaring algorithms, eventually it will be up to you to decide what suits your needs and share what you will find among yourselves. As we will upgrade to newer and better sensors you will also need different algorithms for everything. This camera has really impressive possibilities built in it that which will be utilized as new firmware software upgrade will become available.