Rai & Markus' "Drake" HD camera

Jeremie Galan · September 26th, 2005, 04:24 AM

Ok, lets presume that Drake is dead ( too bad ), well what are the other alternatives ?
The russian one ?
and ?

for under 20 000 $

Wayne Morellini · September 26th, 2005, 08:14 PM

Sumix for under $3K (hopefully) which is playing dead from what I can tell, everytime I prod them I get no response.

Levan Bakhia · September 26th, 2005, 10:34 PM

Wayne, I can't agree about the market. I don't see too many competetion in the market. If you only mean the price range, yes, there are many cameras under $20000, but they are no close to the quality of either DRAKE had or the Russian camera has. Well, at least I don't know of any, even for $50000. Yes, you can say that Drake had less quality in some aspects, but it was very filmlike, and if you are an artist, and you shoot something that must look beautyfull, the HD studio cameras are not going to do any good for you. I don't even see Cinealta or Varicam being an alternative. Maybe only Viper is good, but still, even Viper has video like look. I now am sure that only CMOS and only Single chip is capable of achieving the film look, and it will deveope in future rather than 3CCD. Because the prizm is ruining the picture, I don't know why. So at this moment, the only camera I know that is alternative to DRAKE is this russian one. And Sumix or SI cameras, are not complete systems.

Yeh, but russian camera on the other hand is not so cheap. The camera is 18K and you need flash recorder, with 5 minute capture time it costs 3K, and you need at least 2 of them. Plust to that it uses film lenses, not c-mount, which are more expensive, but I found good lenses, ELITE, they are of a very good quality, I would say one of the best, and they primes cost 5K, so the camera itself is 24K and you need lenses, more expensive ones than drake would use.

Noah Yuan-Vogel · September 27th, 2005, 12:19 PM

Theres always those of us pursuing our own projects. DIY HD <$2000? Maybe.

Wayne Morellini · September 28th, 2005, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noah Yuan-Vogel

Theres always those of us pursuing our own projects. DIY HD <$2000? Maybe.

So tell em about those, I am "most" interested.

Wayne Morellini · September 28th, 2005, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levan Bakhia

Wayne, I can't agree about the market. I don't see too many competetion in the market. If you only mean the price range, yes, there are many cameras under $20000, but they are no close to the quality of either DRAKE had or the Russian camera has.

There is a new cheap Viper, there maybe upto 5 different sub $20K and $10K camera projects I have heard of. Quality, I expect most will FF, Micron ,or Altasens quality, which many will like. Incomplete or complete, to a certain extent it doesn't matter if you know what you are doing. Some high speed ones also dropped by in the threads. The problem is we don't see much of them, but they are out there attempting to break through.

Micron have released new models with increased quality and reduced costs, even there new mobile phone versions are probably good enough. They maybe worth a look at, particularly for the low end.

Noah Yuan-Vogel · September 29th, 2005, 12:21 AM

wayne,
I'll go into more detail if have some success. Most people dont seem that interested in the cheaper options like I am, and people havent been very interested in my project when i posted in the past. So I will wait to give details when/if I have more to show. I'm still only in the dump-money-i-dont-have-into-camera-parts and try-to-start-coding-an-interface-without-all-the-equipment-yet phases. You know how it goes.

It's kind of sad how much the DIY HD talk has died down in these forums. I could sure go for some more.

Michael Maier · September 29th, 2005, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noah Yuan-Vogel

It's kind of sad how much the DIY HD talk has died down in these forums. I could sure go for some more.

I think part of the reason for that, is the new affordable HD cameras coming to market.

Frank Schoerner · September 29th, 2005, 02:45 AM

I got some new infos about DRAKE and also the russian camera.

The russian camera ist not was Levan said. The sensor is not a 35mm size sensor and not a 1" size, it is just a 2/3". In fact it is the same sensor size like DRAKE use. Yes, it is possible to use cine lenses, but then there is only a "zoom effect" and not the same dof or fov. High speed works only in very low resolution. 14bit in the future is only when the manufactor will produced those sensor. All together, it seems they use the altasens sensor.

I had also a long call with the DRAKE team. They have 3 working cameras. A 720p 8Bit, a 720p 12Bit booth with 2/3" IBIS and, thats new, a 1080p 12Bit with 2/3" altasens. There is one big movie finish, shoot with the 8Bit drake and works on a second big movie, shoot with the 720p 12Bit, gos on. They can also mount all cine lenses (with adapters), but they said there is no reason, because they got mutch more dof and fov with high speed cmount lenses.

But they will sell this cameras only after received all patend rights.

But yes, it also looks like the team split off.

Bill Porter · September 29th, 2005, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Schoerner

Yes, it is possible to use cine lenses, but then there is only a "zoom effect" and not the same dof or fov.

Actually the DOF will be the same, but, as you say, not the FOV due to the zoom effect. The zoom just means you are taking the image and cropping out portion from the center of it. Same image, same DOF, just cropped as if it were zoomed in. It is not a real zoom.

Wayne Morellini · September 29th, 2005, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noah Yuan-Vogel

wayne,
I'll go into more detail if have some success. Most people dont seem that interested in the cheaper options like I am, and people havent been very interested in my project when i posted in the past. So I will wait to give details when/if I have more to show. I'm still only in the dump-money-i-dont-have-into-camera-parts and try-to-start-coding-an-interface-without-all-the-equipment-yet phases. You know how it goes.

It's kind of sad how much the DIY HD talk has died down in these forums. I could sure go for some more.

Well I'm interested. The reason I think people are uninterested is because things have gone on for so long without product (except for the separate commercial Drake product that, unfortunately, people can't buy yet, and patents can take so long to finalise, what are they doing, the US allows production with patent pending). Also certain people have taken the initative but been unable to deliver, unfortunately, and they have been commercial initiatives and the focus then concentrated on them, leaving people like you with no interest or support.

I asked some time ago about the cheapest camera for IBIS, Micron (I mean there must be something out there this side of $500) but nobody seemed interested, and the cheapest project option just seems to go up.

I have seen security cameras for a cheap price (with less than 0.1 lux) that might be an option pixel shifted on a 3 chip prism to make 720p (look at the Imperex thread, Nick Hockings is looking at making his own HD three chip and has found a source for prisms). I actually saw a camera and monitor for sale at around $76 US, and I was surprised at the quality of the monitor, but I am sure the camera was doing pretty good to, it makes me wonder, exactly how expensive do you have to go when cheap SD product that can be pixel shifted for HD, is this good. Quiet frankly, all Panasonic has to do is make a 4:4:4 gs-120 with a new pixel-shifted Mini-DV HD mode (I've done the calculations, quiet reasonable compression). I have thought of making a prism in times pass using liquid optical grade oil or water in the prism. I have also considered firewire cameras (the normal ones you use on your PC),programming digital cameras to do it, and lately a guy started up a new thread claiming to have discovered Mini DV cameras with still modes that output the current image displayed between snaps. But realistically I have more stuff than most people could shake a stick at mounting up here, and am unlikely to get to do it. If you want to communicate with me directly about it your welcome to, just let me know.

If you want cheap there was an article I posted on the home made cinema camera technical thread that mentions cheap cmos images with complete DSP circuits and USB output (and Micron has just released advanced version of theirs).

Wayne Morellini · September 29th, 2005, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Schoerner

But yes, it also looks like the team split off.

I am sorry for the separate reply Frank, but who split off, I have been unable to raise Rai for quiet a while?

Thanks

Wayne.

Levan Bakhia · September 29th, 2005, 10:42 AM

@FRANK

Where is that info about russian camera from? It is definetely no 2/3, it is 1inch, and I never said it was 35mm. And it uses cine lenses, actually I myself saw Arri lense on the camera, and pictures that I posted linkes to are taken with the ARRI lense. It has great DOF, and yes it does crop, because the sensor is not enough, actually what it does is that you have to recount the lense size, like for example when you what 50mm lense, you need to use 40mm lense and it will be like 50mm on 35mm film. High speed version, is not standard option, and they make one for me, I pay additional 40K for high speed option, but the standard HD camera cost 18K.

Now about DRAKE, it is great if drake is still alive, but I don't know why they don't respond. It is for sure that they split off. Whom did you contact? I really want to contact them.

Frank Schoerner · September 29th, 2005, 03:11 PM

@Levan, what do you mean? 1inch ? Is this the optical sensor area size? I have a russian friend, he have more details, so i am shure it is the chip size. And there are no information on the web size regarding the exact optical area size in mm x mm. But this is a very importend detail. Also the exact bayer pixels size and resolution. And what will be the real resolution at what high speed ? All in progressiv mode. If you have details, please let us know.
But the pictures i saw shows no great dof and i can see debayer colors errors. All this show me, it must be a sensor like the altasens 356x.

In two weeks i will meet the Drake team. Than i hope, i see Drake and i will know more details.

Noah Yuan-Vogel · September 30th, 2005, 11:56 PM

wayne

I'm not totally sure think 3chip is the direction to go in for homemade cameras, but for those trying it, im impressed. I mean pixel shifting low res sensors leaves you at about the same color information as bayer only now you have it split into 3 channels that have to be reconstructed (granted bayer is no walk in the park either but i think most camera APIs or software packages will handle it without you having to do too much work) and you're limited to lenses f1.6 or more (occasionally f1.4) intended for prisms. f1.0 and faster lenses help out when it comes to low light and shallow dof, the drake guys had a good point with that. I tend avoid having to work on the sensor/optics level, positioning prisms/sensors and building precision housings and building camera interfaces from scratch are things i wouldnt try on my own. the gs series 3chip cameras tend to have quite a bit of chromatic abberation in high-res pixel shifted still photo mode, so imagine how hard it must be to avoid such abberations when pixel shifting on your own.

I'm glad there are still some people working on projects, although i admit im a little amazed anyone who has the money for $20,000 cameras would go with a "homemade" product, but then i dont necessarily think i have a great understanding of the high-end camcorder market. Not that Drake looked that homemade... the new russian camera though...

michael

yeah that may be true, but im not sure id call them affordable. maybe "more affordable than previous way-overpriced HD camcorders" is a better term. how affordable is $6000+ if you can make a more flexible version for half the price? There is still hope for DIY HD. Who wants to shoot on $250/gb media when there is $0.50/gb media? and i cant imagine aquisition with 20x GOP compression on an old codec is for everyone either.

September 26th, 2005, 04:24 AM	#316
Jeremie Galan New Boot Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 11	Ok, lets presume that Drake is dead ( too bad ), well what are the other alternatives ? The russian one ? and ? for under 20 000 $

September 26th, 2005, 08:14 PM	#317
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	Sumix for under $3K (hopefully) which is playing dead from what I can tell, everytime I prod them I get no response.

September 26th, 2005, 10:34 PM	#318
Levan Bakhia Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 230	Wayne, I can't agree about the market. I don't see too many competetion in the market. If you only mean the price range, yes, there are many cameras under $20000, but they are no close to the quality of either DRAKE had or the Russian camera has. Well, at least I don't know of any, even for $50000. Yes, you can say that Drake had less quality in some aspects, but it was very filmlike, and if you are an artist, and you shoot something that must look beautyfull, the HD studio cameras are not going to do any good for you. I don't even see Cinealta or Varicam being an alternative. Maybe only Viper is good, but still, even Viper has video like look. I now am sure that only CMOS and only Single chip is capable of achieving the film look, and it will deveope in future rather than 3CCD. Because the prizm is ruining the picture, I don't know why. So at this moment, the only camera I know that is alternative to DRAKE is this russian one. And Sumix or SI cameras, are not complete systems. Yeh, but russian camera on the other hand is not so cheap. The camera is 18K and you need flash recorder, with 5 minute capture time it costs 3K, and you need at least 2 of them. Plust to that it uses film lenses, not c-mount, which are more expensive, but I found good lenses, ELITE, they are of a very good quality, I would say one of the best, and they primes cost 5K, so the camera itself is 24K and you need lenses, more expensive ones than drake would use.

September 27th, 2005, 12:19 PM	#319
Noah Yuan-Vogel Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: New York City Posts: 613	Theres always those of us pursuing our own projects. DIY HD <$2000? Maybe.

September 29th, 2005, 12:21 AM	#322
Noah Yuan-Vogel Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: New York City Posts: 613	wayne, I'll go into more detail if have some success. Most people dont seem that interested in the cheaper options like I am, and people havent been very interested in my project when i posted in the past. So I will wait to give details when/if I have more to show. I'm still only in the dump-money-i-dont-have-into-camera-parts and try-to-start-coding-an-interface-without-all-the-equipment-yet phases. You know how it goes. It's kind of sad how much the DIY HD talk has died down in these forums. I could sure go for some more.

September 29th, 2005, 02:45 AM	#324
Frank Schoerner New Boot Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 15	I got some new infos about DRAKE and also the russian camera. The russian camera ist not was Levan said. The sensor is not a 35mm size sensor and not a 1" size, it is just a 2/3". In fact it is the same sensor size like DRAKE use. Yes, it is possible to use cine lenses, but then there is only a "zoom effect" and not the same dof or fov. High speed works only in very low resolution. 14bit in the future is only when the manufactor will produced those sensor. All together, it seems they use the altasens sensor. I had also a long call with the DRAKE team. They have 3 working cameras. A 720p 8Bit, a 720p 12Bit booth with 2/3" IBIS and, thats new, a 1080p 12Bit with 2/3" altasens. There is one big movie finish, shoot with the 8Bit drake and works on a second big movie, shoot with the 720p 12Bit, gos on. They can also mount all cine lenses (with adapters), but they said there is no reason, because they got mutch more dof and fov with high speed cmount lenses. But they will sell this cameras only after received all patend rights. But yes, it also looks like the team split off.

September 29th, 2005, 10:42 AM	#328
Levan Bakhia Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 230	@FRANK Where is that info about russian camera from? It is definetely no 2/3, it is 1inch, and I never said it was 35mm. And it uses cine lenses, actually I myself saw Arri lense on the camera, and pictures that I posted linkes to are taken with the ARRI lense. It has great DOF, and yes it does crop, because the sensor is not enough, actually what it does is that you have to recount the lense size, like for example when you what 50mm lense, you need to use 40mm lense and it will be like 50mm on 35mm film. High speed version, is not standard option, and they make one for me, I pay additional 40K for high speed option, but the standard HD camera cost 18K. Now about DRAKE, it is great if drake is still alive, but I don't know why they don't respond. It is for sure that they split off. Whom did you contact? I really want to contact them.

September 29th, 2005, 03:11 PM	#329
Frank Schoerner New Boot Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 15	@Levan, what do you mean? 1inch ? Is this the optical sensor area size? I have a russian friend, he have more details, so i am shure it is the chip size. And there are no information on the web size regarding the exact optical area size in mm x mm. But this is a very importend detail. Also the exact bayer pixels size and resolution. And what will be the real resolution at what high speed ? All in progressiv mode. If you have details, please let us know. But the pictures i saw shows no great dof and i can see debayer colors errors. All this show me, it must be a sensor like the altasens 356x. In two weeks i will meet the Drake team. Than i hope, i see Drake and i will know more details.

September 30th, 2005, 11:56 PM	#330
Noah Yuan-Vogel Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: New York City Posts: 613	wayne I'm not totally sure think 3chip is the direction to go in for homemade cameras, but for those trying it, im impressed. I mean pixel shifting low res sensors leaves you at about the same color information as bayer only now you have it split into 3 channels that have to be reconstructed (granted bayer is no walk in the park either but i think most camera APIs or software packages will handle it without you having to do too much work) and you're limited to lenses f1.6 or more (occasionally f1.4) intended for prisms. f1.0 and faster lenses help out when it comes to low light and shallow dof, the drake guys had a good point with that. I tend avoid having to work on the sensor/optics level, positioning prisms/sensors and building precision housings and building camera interfaces from scratch are things i wouldnt try on my own. the gs series 3chip cameras tend to have quite a bit of chromatic abberation in high-res pixel shifted still photo mode, so imagine how hard it must be to avoid such abberations when pixel shifting on your own. I'm glad there are still some people working on projects, although i admit im a little amazed anyone who has the money for $20,000 cameras would go with a "homemade" product, but then i dont necessarily think i have a great understanding of the high-end camcorder market. Not that Drake looked that homemade... the new russian camera though... michael yeah that may be true, but im not sure id call them affordable. maybe "more affordable than previous way-overpriced HD camcorders" is a better term. how affordable is $6000+ if you can make a more flexible version for half the price? There is still hope for DIY HD. Who wants to shoot on $250/gb media when there is $0.50/gb media? and i cant imagine aquisition with 20x GOP compression on an old codec is for everyone either.