There is also a bug in the debayer on the color 1280x720 video sample smx-11m5c(8)-milk-color.zip. The green resolution is half of what is should be horizontally. A bilinear debayer on the raw video looks fine (on the left).

http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/5954/milkbayer2wm2.jpg

John, Thank you for pointing out the problem. This is a serious bug that passed by our testers.
About Fixed pattern noise and other artifacts like aliasing, I agree that they are not acceptable specially in moving images as artifacts may move with different speed or even in the opposite direction as it is possible with aliasing. Artifact due to lossy compression and decompression are just awful. The fixed pattern noise as they can be predicted can be removed given we can collect enough samples. Correlated noise in principal can be reduced and made random, the same is true for some convolution artifacts like shifted images if there is a sharp main lobe. In any case a clean sensor is the best. But a low noise and high dynamic range sensor with removable artifacts and enhanceable RGB will be more desirable than an artifact clean sensor with more random noise.

This new GIGe camera has appealed to the innergeek within me. I'd love to find out a bit more about this camera and in general. I hope this is the right thread to ask!

Farhad i assume you work for sumix? Perhaps you can advise me on:

are there heat problems with the casing? (there doesn't seem to be ventilation and i thought sensors get quite hot)

Would a laptop work as a capture station, what are the real minimum specs? (there's a wealth of small form factors PCs and ultra portables out there).

What is the data rate down that GigE?

Why don't more people use cmount lenses? What's the problem with them!? (because there seems to be some great product out there). Are the focus ranges too short for filmmaking (i know the lenses are physically small)? Are the lenses good because they're only just 2/3rds, have a short flange depth and are simple? (i've seen f0.95 primes around). For example the SI 2K camera is all PL mount, is that just to conform to the industry or are their optical issues to think about. (im thinking about the problems leica had with using their lenses on digital because of the microlenses and short depth)

What are the realistic time scales for these being readily available? (especially with the new altasens sensor - the one in the SI 2K)?

Is the RAW data from the head standardised, so if a new head came along the software would be the same?

What are the real issues in pulling something together that works in the field?

cheers
paul

While Farhad answers, I will add some info on lenses.

C mount is just a mount. It keeps the lens at a distance from the sensor, just like any other mount. If you use a C-mount to PL of F-mount adapter, the system is identical to using a PL mount directly. There is nothing in the light path, you just add some metal to move the lens further away and a mechanical system to properly attach the new lens. The sensor might be smaller than the format of the lens, but that has nothing to do with the mount.

C-Mount lenses come in many flavours. Cine lenses, tv lenses, security lenses and high quality machine vision lenses. The cine and machine vision type are usually sharp enough with low distortion. The cine lenses are softer than good machine vision primes though, especially at large apertures. The tv lens category is very sd in resolution and usually comes with lots of distortion, I mean LOTS of barrel distortion. The security/cctv lenses are usually junk and this is the usual c-mount lens type.

The cost difference has to do with features and manufacturing requirements. A $300 lens that has a motor version can cost $2000, a zoom has to cost 5x or 20x in order to keep a little of the prime performance. The basic c-mount megapixel prime is quite good. The mechanics do not help for pulling focus or any focus addons because the barrel is quite small in diameter (3 to 5cm) and there is no room to add anything or even position your fingers really. You can use these lenses and their optical performance is excellent because they are modern designs, but the manual handling is problematic. You can expect a good megapixel c-mount prime to outperform a $30,000 zoom lens or any bundled zoom lens. The design is simple and it's a prime so it's easy to get right and the market is quite large and competitive. You will not get 5pixels of chromatic abberations with a machine vision prime. Zoom lenses is not something that is normally required in machine vision, so there are not many of those. There is a large selection of very high quality macro lenses if you find that interesting.

You can always find a normal cheap (non megapixel) c-mount or even c-mount zoom that performs quite well, but chances are small.

Old cheap c-mount cine lenses can look great, but don't expect much sharpness or multicoating or anything like that. You might like the look though and the better manual control.

The reasonable choice is selected c-mount megapixel primes if the shot can take it, or PL mount lenses with an adapter. The professional choice is PL mount lenses. If the pixels are large and you don't need wide angle, you can use f-mount lenses with an adapter and a large crop factor depending on the sensor size. You can also use a DOF adapter.

John,

Thank you for your information (i've also found your other thread very interesting).

There seems to be some very nice schneider c mount lenses, $1500 range, going as low as f0.95 in some cases (17mm f0.95!). And as you say all the way down to a few hundred bucks. It's difficult to tell sometimes whether manufacturers specify the focal length for a particular sensor size or for 35mm..

Physically they are small, some seem to have little handles on the barrels to help with access. Do you happen to know how much travel the focus rings have? On most modern SLR the travel length is tiny because it's all autofocus where as cine lenses are much longer.

The confusion i have though is that they are so small compared to other lenses. I mean i have a 10-22 canon for the APS-S sized sensor and it strikes me as much larger than the cmount for 2/3 or 1in sensors. I just wonder if there's some optical math here im missing!

Are machine vision primes in c mount an undiscovered(ish) treasure for cinematography?

cheers
paul

The SI supports c-mount . . . it actually has a universal mount system, i.e., it can take a variety of mounts from C to PL to F, etc. without having to recalibrate the mount when you exchange them.

Jason,

Are you aware of anyone actually using c mount in production though? I'd imagine most would be using PL...

cheers
paul

Paul,

In c-mount, never buy anything expensive without seeing a sample and a photo of the lens with dimensions. Manufacturers rarely document the optical performance or the distortion and things like bokeh have to be seen.

The aps sensor is much larger than the 1" sensor so it needs a lot more glass and diameter to get a good result even at a smaller aperture. it's also a zoom.

If you check our samples on the other thread, all come from an 80 euro 1" prime (non megapixel) on a 2/3" sensor. There are much better lenses in machine vision. You can use them, it's just not very practical.

In most sensors and with most lenses f1 will not be very sharp. The practical limit is about f1.2. Cine lenses are not sharp wide open also.

The focal lenght doesn't change with sensor size because it's a true focal lenght. You will never see equivalent in 35mm terms in these lenses. To calculate the crop factor (the equivalent focal lenght factor) compared to 35mm still film just calculate 36/(horizontal size of sensor in mm). For super16mm it's about 12mm/(horizontal size) and so on. If you sensor is 6mm wide, it will give you half (6mm/12mm) the coverage compared to the same lens on super16mm or 1/6 the coverage compared to 35full frame still photography (36mm/6mm). For 50mm equivalent in full frame 35mm, you will need a 50/6=about 8mm with a 6mm wide sensor.

EDIT: The focus on the c-mount 2/3" and 1" primes I have seen is about 180 degrees turn and the iris is 90 degrees. They come with 8 aperture blades or more. They look much better than the typical 4 blade prosumer camera and sometimes the 6blade apertures on the professional zoom lenses.

John,

Some good advice, thanks. And good news on the focus range, 180 isn't so bad. As you say it's been quite difficult to find image samples of various lenses.

I am aware that the focal length doesn't change just the field of view, im just using the wrong terminology here. About the widest i've found for 2/3rds is around is around 4.8mm (pentax) which would have the same fov as 24mm on 35. But nothing below that so far, at least on cmount.

It's an interesting idea, my only concern being that the resolution, once debayered, is obviously 'less' than 2k. Now is the colour depth and fidelity worth it compared to a 3-cmos EX1 with recorder off the HD-SDI output.

That is something i can't really tell yet. From you're project i guess the colour fidelity is paramount and i can see where you're coming from, but how does the CCD perform vs this Altasens CMOS (I believe you're using CCD?). Time will tell but there has been some stunning work from the SI cameras. How much of that is down to SIs tweaking and customising i don't know.

cheers
paul

If a sensor is 2/3" it's usually 9.6mm wide. This means the crop factor is 36mm/9.6=3.75. The 4.8 will be a 18mm equivalent in full frame or something like a 11mm on a crop factor Canon SLR. For 24mm equivalent you just need a 6.4mm.

The normal in 2/3" is a little more than 12mm.

Debayer gives you 80%. But do you know of any cameras that give more? A 1080p is usually 500 to 900 lines. You should worry more about pixel quality and lens quality and contrast, not resolution in lines. Those things are immediately obvious in all scenes, not only in test charts and some wide angle stopped down shots.

The samples of our project are all with UNCORRECTED sensors:) We haven't implemented colorimetry yet.

CMOS has some disadvantages, but the most important is camera motion. Limit it and it will do the job. We are only using ccd. CCD has smear but in good sensors it's not limiting as in small cameras. It will not appear in night shots from normal street lights etc.

Btw, we are not against CMOS. I actually contacted Farhad today on adding this camera to our line if it covers the requirements. It's a popular chip and perhaps we can make it look really good. But we want to differ in that we describe what's good or bad for each sensor technology to the customer so that he will make an informed decision. It's smear and extra cost vs motion problems and lower cost. A CCD camera head costs 5000 euro for a good resolution. An equivalent CMOS camera is much more affordable. This allows a cheaper retail price for our product but the customer has to know the differences.

paul, i picked up a schneider c-mount 17mm f0.95 lens like the one you mentioned. got it on ebay for under $20, and it is quite sharp even wide open but its a very small lens and it has just been gathering dust for a while. i recall there being something weird about the aperture though. i think it was like 3-blade or something, creating triangular bokeh. i can double check if thats what it was though, i havent used it in a while.

make that $1+$10 shipping. a pretty incredible deal. guess there arent that many people looking for c-mount lenses on ebay (yet).

Noah, Sadly ebay in the UK doesn't have quite the same range! There's a cool looking Super Teagea 1.98mm for £1000! I'd love to see some imagery from that lens, perhaps stopped down it will be very nice?

John, as for the CMOS motion problems im well aware. But having said that none of the SI footage exhibits anything that i would consider an issue. And some of the examples (the one for film out from elite studios) are very shaky.

cheers
paul

So what are the short comings of this camera? What is the catch?

Sumix camera in its actual incarnation isn't quite usable outside of industrial applications.It is not flexible enough.
Maybe they change that in a not so near future, but I fear it is not a tech issue but "a way of doing things".

That was the biggest advantage of SI.The understood that they needed to change things a little from what they were doing and... VOILA, they got it.

Sumix camera in its actual incarnation isn't quite usable outside of industrial applications.It is not flexible enough.
Maybe they change that in a not so near future, but I fear it is not a tech issue but "a way of doing things".

That was the biggest advantage of SI.The understood that they needed to change things a little from what they were doing and... VOILA, they got it.

Yeah but for a price much, much, much, (did I say much?), much higher. So I don't think it even compares. My feelings are that unless I had the specific need for a 2/3" camera, I would rather buy a RED which is actually cheaper (body vs body).

Juan,

The catch is that SMX-12A2C does not have standard manual control. Everything must be controlled from PC side using a custom software (yet.) This camera is designed to give the total control of the sensor to the user. The only limitation is that at 1080p 60 fps GigaE bandwidth does not allow all 12 bits. You must choose a table look up to transfer 8 bits to PC at 60fps. So far compression is totally lossless. We are working on a compression with some acceptable loss that can allow 12 bits at 60 fps also. Camera has rich API with memory that provides capability for skipping frames (this is a software feature being released soon.) One of our customers needed LDVS output of the sensor so they can use their own interface they decided to buy our camera and use our API to control the sensor.
This camera is as flexible as it comes, except for little GigaE bandwidth limitation. The price is low only because we decided to set it so. Our business model is to let the resale value to be above our price so our risk of inventory and production will be low.

Farhad,

Do you have any more images or video from the head yet? And what sort of timelines are you running on with shipment and software updates?

many thanks
paul

Paul,

We prefer that our customers making share images and video witch each other. It is also possible that we place one camera to be controlled remotely, so people can take turn in changing adjustments and experimenting. I discuss it with our support people.
We are shipping cameras now, but there is a 1-5 weeks lead time.

Hi all,

I've been away for some time, but I'm here again.

I don't see what's the real problem with this camera. I mean, if you can set a constant framerate and shoot lossless video to the computer without frame drops, then all you need is the best possible debayer algorithm you can find. I mean, you need a computer with the SI2K Mini as well and all the new setups with the Canon HV20 need computers to capture too.

So far the only difference I can find between the Sumix and the SI2kMini is resolution (1080p vs 2K) and specific film software and codecs. It may be a bit harder to use, but you're saving more than $10,000 to get a very close image quality and motion feeling.

My question is: Is there a real problem to use this camera for film purposes?

I've got another question. I'm planning on filming many vfx shots so rolling shutter is my main concern mainly because of the camera matching software. Is it very noticeable? Could you provide us with a quick 1-2 seconds panning shot so we can see it ourselves?

Thanks.

Paul,

We prefer that our customers making share images and video witch each other. It is also possible that we place one camera to be controlled remotely, so people can take turn in changing adjustments and experimenting. I discuss it with our support people.
We are shipping cameras now, but there is a 1-5 weeks lead time.

Is anyone here using one? Or are there some communities elsewhere with people already experimenting?

The head sounds great but without images or raw data it's difficult to justify buying one 'blind' just to have a look.

Is the API available online anywhere? Or any whitepapers or technical documents?

many thanks!
paul

Paul,

We prefer that our customers making share images and video witch each other. It is also possible that we place one camera to be controlled remotely, so people can take turn in changing adjustments and experimenting. I discuss it with our support people.
We are shipping cameras now, but there is a 1-5 weeks lead time.

Is anyone here using one? Or are there some communities elsewhere with people already experimenting?

The head sounds great but without images or raw data it's difficult to justify buying one 'blind' just to have a look.

Is the API available online anywhere? Or any whitepapers or technical documents?

many thanks!
paul

Im eager to get my hands on this camera, but before I commit to buy I want to see more examples. Right now ($2,000?) feels like a shot in the dark. Im concerned about the ERS, noise, and sensitivity. Im very impressed with the HV20. From my experience with it, its sensitivity rivals CCD and the ERS... Well it hides it so well I honestly cant even tell its there. However, I have learned that not all CMOS chips are alike. Its difficult to really get a good idea of how the cameras perform in practice based only on technical data.

If Sumix or a customer could provide any more videos, or images demonstrating sensitivity or pan movements it would certainly give me more confidence to buy. Would be pleased to see any more at all.

Anybody is tested combination of
1) SMX-12A2C ($2500) http://sumix.com/products/cameras/smx-12a2m/index.html
2) StreamPix 4 ($ price unknown) http://norpix.com/products/multicamera.php
3) NEO4K ($999) http://cineform.com/products/NeoHD.htm

It is possible to perfectly sync 4 SMX-12A2C camera heads by using StreamPix4 ?

Anybody is tested combination of
1) SMX-12A2C ($2500) http://sumix.com/products/cameras/smx-12a2m/index.html
2) StreamPix 4 ($ price unknown) http://norpix.com/products/multicamera.php
3) NEO4K ($999) http://cineform.com/products/NeoHD.htm

It is possible to perfectly sync 4 SMX-12A2C camera heads by using StreamPix4 ?

I assume you're looking at streampix for cineform RAW encoding? I would think you'd be hard pushed to encode 4 simultaneous streams of cineform RAW unless you had a very high spec PC. (I think in the cineform forum David mentioned a core duo for one). You'd also be looking at 4 x 12MB/s recording rate, that would be 4 separate streams though not just a single 48MB/s.

Also im not sure norpix has updated or had a chance to update streampix to work with that sumix head.

But in theory it should work if you have the hardware to do it.

cheers
paul

Paul:

Why Am I saying the actual version of the camera is not quite usable?

Because:

API is not available online. Nor any whitepapers or technical documents.
The internal compresion is "something" only they know how it works and how much processing intensive it is.

Quoting Farhad:

"The catch is that SMX-12A2C does not have standard manual control. Everything must be controlled from PC side using a custom software (yet.) This camera is designed to give the total control of the sensor to the user."

How can a user have full sensor control when it is really hard to get to know how to decompress the compressed stream (when aplicable), there is no ducumentation, and the "user" cannot even write its own drivers, and need to wait an undefined time, to get a different version of a closed one?

"The only limitation is that at 1080p 60 fps GigaE bandwidth does not allow all 12 bits. You must choose a table look up to transfer 8 bits to PC at 60fps."

So again, the "total control" doesn't mean you can load "custon LUTs" or even get 10 bits from the camera, instead of the fixed 8 (linear/log?) or 12 bit linear.

So total control again means, "you can have your car in any color, as long as it is black"


"One of our customers needed LDVS output of the sensor so they can use their own interface they decided to buy our camera and use our API to control the sensor."

Yes, this is quite positive.Are they shooting high quality stuff for entertainment imaging purposes?

"This camera is as flexible as it comes, except for little GigaE bandwidth limitation. The price is low only because we decided to set it so. Our business model is to let the resale value to be above our price so our risk of inventory and production will be low."

Of coursethat it is as flexible as it comes, but it seems to me that it comes short.

Maybe after the years I really became mad, but still think SI has a clearer vision of what needs to be done.A vision Andrey and Sumix are still lacking.

PS: If someone here really believes this camera in its actual version (I repeat this because it could be easilly changed in future revisions) is as flexible as Farhad says, please let me know it.

Juan, just a couple of points:

- Farhad says it's not possible to get 12 bit from the camera at 60fps which is something the SI2K can't do either. You can have full 12bit color in 24, 25 and 30fps. I don't see the problem with that.

- Again, the SI2K mini doesn't have full manual controls either. It does have a more cinema targeted interface though. The only problem I see is that with the Sumix you have to learn how to use its interface for cinema purposes which means some features will probably be totally useless (I mean, they have nothing to do with cinema shooting), but also I'm sure it has everything we need.

So yes, I do believe the Sumix can be used for cinema shooting.

Juan, just a couple of points:

- Farhad says it's not possible to get 12 bit from the camera at 60fps which is something the SI2K can't do either. You can have full 12bit color in 24, 25 and 30fps. I don't see the problem with that.

- Again, the SI2K mini doesn't have full manual controls either. It does have a more cinema targeted interface though. The only problem I see is that with the Sumix you have to learn how to use its interface for cinema purposes which means some features will probably be totally useless (I mean, they have nothing to do with cinema shooting), but also I'm sure it has everything we need.

So yes, I do believe the Sumix can be used for cinema shooting.


Are there any issues with GigE and bandwidth limitations? 30 fps @ 1920x1080 @ 12 bit is 88.98MB/sec which seems pretty close to the limit for GigE (which is 1000mbit/s?)

I do remember Sumix saying something about compression at the head though, unless packing 12 bits is the compression they mean?

cheers
paul

They say lossless realtime compression, so I guess real numbers will be lower than those 88,98Mb/sec and easier to deliver for the GigE interface.

there's something about the clips i just didnt like, did anyone else notice RGB noise

Jose, are you able to tell us how much CPU power do you need for decompressing the compressed stream from the head in Realtime and recompressing it again with "something"?

Mabe just recoding it uncompressed would be easier.

Does anybody know what kind of algorithm are they using in their hardware compression?

Wouldn't it be much better to have a 10 bit log LUT inside the camera head instead of the 12 bit linear?

Lots of questions I think...

Roshdi, what clip are you speaking of?

Juan, I don't own the camera yet. You mean doing it with any of the clips they've got online?

Roshdi,

Our IR filter is severely cutting the blue component. Altasen sensor is sensitive to shorter blue wavelength comparing to other sensors like Micron. Recently we found out that the IR filters (Hot mirror) that we ordered to Schott for this camera are made not exactly according to our specs. We are ordering new filters and send replacement to our customers.

No compression is needed for 30fps 1080p 12bit.
Compression can be turned on or off with our application program or by API. presently it works only at 8 bit (that is after selecting a table look up) and it is needed if you wish to shoot at 60 fps 1080p (8bit)
Compression now is only a linear prediction coding scheme with a limited 1.7 times compression ratio. We provide decompressing formula and example code to our customers. Later we will put more details on our website.
We are working on some fancy new compression that will allow 12 bit (firmware not ready yet.)

Juan,

We are dedicated to supporting our customers with them using our cameras. Anything not posted on our website can be provided if it is needed and is not against our obligations to sensor manufacturer. We are still supporting our original camera SMX-110 with Zoran sensor. For our Altasens camera we need to get individual permission from Altasen to provide information in data-sheet of sensor to specific customer. I hope they will allow us to post a gleanings of the data-sheet on our website.

10 bit table look up will be added later.

This camera is designed to be flexible and simple. everything that can be done on the PC side must be done on the PC side. Other interesting features like continuous changing of frame rate, frame by frame, is done on camera side.

are there heat problems with the casing? (there doesn't seem to be ventilation and i thought sensors get quite hot)

Paul, So far we have not seen any problem with heath. Camera is very stable indoor or in below freeze outside. Howerver, the body gets warm.
There is a heath sinking design that transfers the heath from sensor board to the Aluminum alloy solid case.

Would a laptop work as a capture station, what are the real minimum specs? (there's a wealth of small form factors PCs and ultra portables out there).

Some laptops are excellent and some do not allow full bandwidth of GigaE. We had good results with IBM, and Gateway. I think any newer laptop will be ok.

What is the data rate down that GigE?

We are using 92% GigaE


What are the realistic time scales for these being readily available? (especially with the new altasens sensor - the one in the SI 2K)?

We are making 80 more with the same Altasens 3562. There is no advantage of going to 4562. Later we consider Aatachrome 2/3" and perhaps new Sony sensors.

Is the RAW data from the head standardised, so if a new head came along the software would be the same?

Almost. Some features will be different from sensor to sensor, all else will be identical.

What are the real issues in pulling something together that works in the field?

we are too busy with making camera heads. we give you tools and support to do the integration for something that works in the field. This is not our expertise yet.

cheers
paul[/QUOTE]

>We are making 80 more with the same Altasens 3562. There is no
>advantage of going to 4562. Later we consider Aatachrome 2/3"
>and perhaps new Sony sensors.

Farhad,

Im following your progress with increasing interest.

Can i ask which sony sensors do you mean?

You mention a LUT being available later on, does this mean you can update the cameras firmware once in use? I assume there's an FGPA in there and perhaps you have a method for updating the code?

Still waiting for images and movies.... :)

cheers
paul

Paul,

The Sony sensor is IMX021.

A LUT that can be set by user for 12 bits to 8 bits is already available. I mentioned that later we will add LUT for 12 to 10 bits. This we will do by interpolating, so 10 bits LUT will take the same memory as 8 bit version. User can only specify the LUT by 256 points, either 10 bits or 8 bits.

Yes, FPGA and programmer controllers are used inside the cameras and firmware is updated automatically with new camera drivers.

We just got some new IR filters. It will take some time before we post new sample videos. Altasens has extra ordinary color distinction. Using a correct filter makes all the difference. both blue and red are much enhanced.

Farhad

I'm so glad to read that, Farhad. We've got everything ready. You'll receive my order within the next few days. Just can't wait to test the camera!

>The Sony sensor is IMX021.

You mean the APS-C sensor? Is this for machine vision (because it looks to be limited to 12fps)?

Although it would be very interesting if, by binning, this rate could be increased to have lower, more sensitive HD resolution. An APS-C size sensor in one of these things would open up the lens choices enormously.

Of course i'll take an HD 2/3rds for the time being once i know it all works :)

cheers
paul

Paul,

Yes, better focus on what we can sell now. Other sensors will be available. We make sure upgrades to new sensors will be a painless as possible.

I'm so glad to read that, Farhad. We've got everything ready. You'll receive my order within the next few days. Just can't wait to test the camera!

And don't hesitate to post sample images and videos here :)

Jose,

Did you ever acquire the single board computer that was being discussed in your older thread and will you be testing the Sumix on it? Or will you be testing on a standard desktop or laptop?

I look forward to seeing some sample videos from your testing!

For now I'll test it using my laptop. In a couple of months I'll buy a Mini-ITX based computer and a couple of HDDs so I can have an independent camera.

I've got news... Not about the camera, sorry, but I just received my new Computar 2/3" C-Mount zoom. I have to say I'm quite impressed with it. I haven't been able to test it yet, since I don't have the camera, but it looks fantastic.

It's a 12,5-75mm F1.2 zoom and those are 35mm equivalents, so they're real measures for 2/3" sensors. It looks even more solid than many of my canon EOS lenses, lol. Kinda like the feel of an old FD lens but brand new.

To those of you who question the option of using C-Mount machine vision lenses for film shooting, I have to say this lens has removed all possible doubts from my mind. The usual complaints about these kind of C-Mount lenses are small diameter and fixed positions when adjusting the iris (in most lenses you may notice a little "click" when going from one position to another). In this lens, the three rings are very smooth. And I mean VERY. On the other hand people complain about c-mount diameters because they are too small to control the focus. This lens is closer to 35mm in terms of size, so focusing is not a hard task. In fact I was really impressed with the size. Having used the lens from my first Micron demo board, I expected this one to be much smaller and definitely not this heavy. This' going to look fantastic with a followfocus and a mattebox.

As soon as I get the camera, I'll post more things about the lens.

I've been testing a number of lenses on a camera here to try and understand real world results. I've got 16mm lenses, EF-cmount adaptor and a 25mm f1.4 fujinon machine vision lens.

Bottom line is im impressed with the fujinon, good feeling, 180 degrees of focus, nice image - bit soft on the edges but on a 2/3rds you probably wouldn't see that (im using a 1" sensor). This is compared to an old T2 cooke 25mm, switar f.16 10mm and various canon lenses (10-22mm works nicely for example)

I would love to see some images from that computar, it's on my hit list too. Would like to see how soft at f1.2 vs f4 for example.

My feeling is that the glass in these lines probably isn't *that* different to fujinons digital cinema offerings. I mean there's probably 20x the price difference and certainly not 20 times a better image

cheers
paul

I will be getting the SMX-12A2C camera this week. Our production team is meeting up this Saturday which will be a great opportunity to test the camera.

We have a short film project coming up in the next 3-4 weeks and if ready, I plan to use the SMX-12A2C. I will start putting together an interface and writing software for it on Sunday.