Maybe just off topic. Just saw this post on Rob Galbraith site http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=243929&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1 regarding the Canon EOS MKII camera with a 8 Megapixel sensor:
15 fps ... hmmm!!!! if it is believable, consider that this camera doesn't have RAID drives, is designed only for stills work and writes data on CF cards. There is hope that with the proper hardware a HD dream camera is not too far away.

found what may be a great screen for this system once some people get the itX computer made, it's 1024x768 7inches and is touchscreen! I bet that would work well for a monitor/capture pc controller for this project!


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3698&item=4134438908&rd=1

<<<-- Originally posted by Jason Rodriguez : With every 6db you're gaining a stop of dynamic range.

Signal-to-Noise ratio basically deals with the amount of signal versus the amount of noise in the image. Every 6db you have basically doubled the percived intensity of the signal (you're one-stop brighter). So at 58db, you're only getting around 9-10 stops of usable dynamic range, although the last 6db at the bottom is typically all noise, so it's more like 8-9stops. Actually most HD cameras only have a S/N ratio of 54db (which gives them a maximum of around 8-8/12 stops), so 60db isn't bad, although digital still cameras can be up to 72db, which gives you a nice clean 11-12 stops of dynamic range, which is getting very close to film. -->>>

I forget how it goes but doesn't it go something like this:

8-bit (each bit doubles value) = 48db + 6db for totally clear image. But for clear low light images you would add the db of the desired gainup, say 24db, that would be 78db dersired s/n, or for 10 bits, 90db. So the 54db is only for clear images in good light.

Some interesting news:

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/bbs/showthread.php?s=&postid=75642#post75642

Quote:---
Concept HD
Guys,

Go to the HD Forum of Cinematography.com. You will find many arguments there by professional DP's against the use of industrial HD cameras in HD productions. I would urge everyone to wait for our camera announcements. Our cameras will not have these shortcomings.
----

Haven't had time to read the threads mentioned (haven't even read this thread yet) but well and truely worth looking at. I still say that any machine vision company should be able to pull through the goods, if they want.

pics:

dv3productions.com/test_images/test1.jpg
dv3productions.com/test_images/test2.jpg
dv3productions.com/test_images/test3.jpg
dv3productions.com/test_images/test4.jpg
dv3productions.com/test_images/test5.jpg
dv3productions.com/test_images/test6.jpg
test 4 is a raw/color worked split in half file
the rest have been treated from the RAW format

frames may be a bit blurry because i don't have the software workin right

test5 and test6 are the same location same lighting changed the "look" in photoshop

Obin ... very nice! Is that with your GG adapter or without? I assume you got your software working. Can you e-mail or post a raw file (i.e., pre-Bayer) so I can take a look at it ?

I cant save a pre-bayer file but I could send you a 16bit tiff file that has not been touched like the face shot inside

dv3productions.com/test_images/frame2.tif

that is with a cheap cctv lens at 25mm I think better glass will have an effect on the image quality

www.dv3productions.com/test_images/studio_test1.jpg
www.dv3productions.com/test_images/studio_test2.jpg

shot in our cyc wall with one hard light same image with some "filmLOOK" on the 2nd one

Obin, to get raw data (no Bayer algorithm), do a PIXCI Open/close and close the window. Then do PIXCI Open/close, selct camera format and model and choose the monochrome version. You will get one value per pixel. You can tell - when you zoom it way up it looks like a screen door.

Obin,
It would be very interesting to take two pics of the same exact setting, with no motion. Defocussing the lens just a bit. Can you post a tiff sample of that?
This is one of the 'acid' tests for camera noise.
My biggest concern is for noise in lower light settings.
The jpg's you posted look very promising, good work !
-Les

Obin, how far can you underexpose those images to keep the highlights down without inducing too much noise into the image?

Just wondering, especially about the boy with the door in the background. Very nice images, but the highlights seem to clip very harshly, and I'm wondering again if underexposing the image by quite a bit and then lifting it back up in post will still get you a suitable image without too much noise.

BTW, also if these are pure linear files, and you're trying to make them "bright" on the screen so that you can "see" them nicely, then you're not utilizing the full bit-depth of the camera. 10-bits packed into a 16-bit image with padded zero's should look VERY dark, much darker than what you have right now. By making it "brighter", you're sacrificing the room you have in the shadows to increase the brightness of the image, but you end up clipping off when you hit the saturation point of the camera's CMOS. So again, I would think the images should look even darker, especially if they're 10-bit's linearly packed into 16-bit image.

I'm also curious to know how hard you're finding it to capture extensive lengths of video at a time, like a minute or two.

And lastly, the bayer algorithm you're using needs some major improvement, it's totally falling flat on those car shots with the powerlines and the edges on the car-not good. The other images seem to have come out pretty good, but the car shot is horrible. So if anybody is planning on using these cameras for serious work, they're going to have to get a better Bayer demosaic algorithm going.

BTW you might want to check out http://www.dmmd.net/products/products.htm and their Pictura software. Obin, since you have access to a RAW bayer image, you might want to pass it through his bayer demosaic algorithm, like the car shot, and see what it does, if it cleans up the mess of the edges.

Keep us posted, besides the bayer demosaic problems, things are looking pretty good!

guys take a look at this, first image VW-BEETLE is 1300 single cmos camera I shot. 2nd image, varicam is from the Panasonic HD varicam camera.

www.dv3productions.com/test_images/vw_beetle.jpg

www.dv3productions.com/test_images/varicam.jpg


is the varicam worth $98,000 more then the 1300 camera?

(oh ya I shot with a $20 cctv/spy camera lens) ;)

Hey Obin, I'm posting a CC'd version of the TIFF from "Frame2.tif" I was trying to work around the blow-out in the window, trying to make it as smooth as possible. It was quite harsh IMHO. Overall I think it's a very nice "film-ish" look, and yes, I'm quite amazed at the latitude that you can get out of your TIFF file.

I'm still wondering about my previous post though, in how far you can underexpose to get the maximum amount of dynamic range. Do you have a light-meter available to see how many stops you're getting or can get while having a very acceptable image?

http://www.geocities.com/turbochrg/Frame2_CC.jpg

you can underexpose a huge amount, the guy outside,(thats me) was shot with the face almost totaly black and cc back to what it is now

Rob and Rob, take a look at this:

http://www.dmmd.net/products/algorithms.htm

Keep in mind that these are probably captured as 8 bit images since they are 24 bit tiff. That only gives you 256 levels from black to saturated on a pixel. When Obin gets to 10 bit he will be at 1024 levels.

Great shots Obin!

Rob and Rob,
Leadtools has some pretty great tools. As far as I remember, there are no runtime fees so it might be possible to encapsulate their library functions in your own library to make a mostly GPL application.

http://leadtools.com/SDK/Multimedia/Multimedia-Products-n.htm

I bought one of their general image processing libraries once and it came with a sample program that was like a mini-photoshop. Very impressive.

When someone has the time to really commit to this, let me know.

Obin,

The viewfinder in the K3 is a reflex type and the mirrored back surface of the shutter reflects the image onto the light path.

I'd suggest:

a) use the beam splitter, 50/50 should work fine. You'll loose one stop and the image through the viewfinder will be 1/2 as bright. A 25/75 will cost you only 1/2 stop but the image will only be 1/4 as bright as looking through the camera.

b) easier, take a video feed and attach an LCD screen.

Took another look at that image that you talked about (the outdoor shot), and yes, I can see the noise which looks as though the shot's been pushed a bit.

If you don't mind me asking, in the pre-color-corrected version, was the background behind you still blown-out? And were these shots at the full ten bits?

If it was still blown out, even with your face in the blacks, then I'm wondering how many stops of dynamic range you're getting. It's probably seven, maybe eight tops if this is the case, which isn't too bad, but not quite as good as I was expecting, since the Viper with a S/N ratio of 54db is at eight to eight-and-a-half good stops of useable dynamic range.

I guess that's pretty reasonable amount though, considering that the Micron chip is actually a consumer digital camera chip, and those little digital cameras only get around seven-to-eight stops max, rather than the ten to eleven that something like the 10D can get.

thanks for the clips obin . this is looking realy good

Jason the ONLY thing that was blown out was a tiny bit on the truck everything else was underexposed looking from the raw file and the face was in the blacks. I have the 10D and I would say this thing is close to that.....MUCH better then a normal consumer or even professional video camera, all because of 10bit...now I am thinking about using c-mount lenses in the k3 film camera that way I get the FOV that the lens is made for..I could just remove the k3 lens and have a little c-mount sticking out the front...this may work ...I may post some pics of the k3 and ask the group what you guys think

Sorry Obin,

I was just giving my analysis after looking at the file in Photoshop. The whole left side of the image with what appears to be a street and the entire side of the truck is at 255 RGB, which seems clipped to me. The fence is fine, but that's just what I'm seeing after running the eyedropper around the scene in Photoshop.

BTW, if it's not too hard, do you think you could post the RAW file of that outdoor scene with you and the truck? I'd like to see what I can do with it in Combustion if there was as much information there as you're saying.

Thanks.

BTW, the Canon 10D and D60 work off of 12-bit A/D's and have a S/N ratio that's near 70db, so they're much better quality than the Micron chip, actually their specs (but not frame-rate) is very similar to the Altasens 3560, so you may see similar performance as the 10D (which is around 9-10 stops easily) from the Altasens chip. I'm not nocking the Micron, but from the clipping that I'm seeing in your current images, it looks like around 7-8 stops max, which isn't bad, I mean that's where the Cinealta, Viper, etc. are (8-9 stops). The Varicam can supposedly do 11 stops, but I've found that this is pushing the camera to the absolute maximum, and you simply can't safely underexpose that camera without some serious problems with compression artifacts in the shadows when you try to raise them. So even with the Varicam, I think you're getting around 9-stops effective.

Now, the only thing in this estimate is where on the 10-bit scale you're shooting. Are you pushing into the highlights, maximizing the S/N ratio, or are you shooting more into the shadow regions of that range? It seems from the looks of things that you're doing the former, but then I'm not sure how noisey that camera's going to get in the shadows (according to Micron there's only a 45db S/N ratio, which isn't as good as the 54db that the HD cameras have, or the 64-70db that the high-end DSLR's have). I'm not sure if Steve and SI have done some things differently to push that S/N ratio up, but regardless of that, the Micron chip simply isn't what the Canon DSLR chips are, and you can't expect the same performance-but nevertheless you are getting great performance, and having acess to the RAW files probably has a lot to do with that.

BTW, do you know what the approximate ISO of this camera is? Or what is the f-stop rating at 2000lux?

That are some great looking shots Obin! Obin, Rob & Steve: I've
just returned from my little "holiday" and will be looking at all the
camera "stuff" today... some reading up to do (again).

Obin: how do you have the chip set up now? What lens is in front
and how is it connected to your PC? Can you post a picture of the
"camera" with everything connected etc.?

There are a couple of different gain settings to think about. The signal that comes from the pixel site is an analog level. In the Micron chip, there are 4 analog gain amplifiers (R, G1, G2, B) that are multiplexed to match the Bayer pattern. These must be correctly adjusted to get the full swing of analog input voltage to the A/D. Otherwise, you lose dynamic range. The voltage may only go 0- 0.5V when the full scale on the A/D (10 bit range) is 0-1V. XCAP then provide all the digital gain, gamma and stretching tools, but if you stretch too low a signal, you get some stepping in the shading. The only gain you need to worry about in capture is this analog gain (and exposure of course to get the swing).

XCAP can histogram the data across a line you place in the viewing window. I use this when I am adjusting gain and exposure since you can see when you are clipping. I think anyone who does some programming should play with the XCAP tools a bit. There are quite a few clever ones. My favorite is the extraction of a color transformation table (color balance) from an image of a Macbeth target.

<<<-- Originally posted by Obin Olson : I could just remove the k3 lens and have a little c-mount sticking out the front..-->>>

Obin, have you thought about buying a C-mount adapter -- like this one for a Nikon mount -- and then using 35mm SLR lenses?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=116733&is=REG

Rob,
If you don't need wide angle, this is the cheapest route to great optics. I use my Canon FD lenses and some T mount telephotos all the time. The down sides are that they are slow in all but 50mm compared to c mount (try to get a 25mm f1.4 Nikon) and the field of view is narrower because the sensor dimensions are smaller than a 35mm negative.

But, great glass and almost free. The adapter is cheap and you can get used manual lenses all over ebay.

good idea Steve, tell Rob and Rob about the tools in xcap. Jason, if all you could get from this camera was 8bit I don't think it would be that great. Because of 10bit we can push the image around pretty much in Post...I chose this camera on 3 things, price, image quality and bit depth...As far as I know this is the best "bang-for-the-buck" going at this moment.. One of the big things I don't like is it's not 2/3rd inch chip so now the FOV will be very narrow with the 16mm cinema lenses, to deal with this I may re-think my idea and use c-mount lenses somehow in the 16mm camera body.

today i think I will shoot some side-by side tests with the dvx100 and see just what the dynamic range is when you compare it to a professional camera that is made for tv production...maybe even shoot some with our JVC 500 that has 1/2inch chips

it's the FOV I am worried about, I need to shoot wide alot...ideas for this Steve with a 35mm lens?

<<<-- Originally posted by Obin Olson : it's the FOV I am worried about, I need to shoot wide alot... -->>>

Right ... the only solution I can think of would be a ground glass adapter.

... or perhaps an optical reducer of some sort. I think I remember reading about it on one of the GG threads. You don't get the 35mm DOF, but it does focus the image so you get a better FOV on your smaller chip. And presumably it wouldn't lose as much light either.

i think that is what I want an optical reducer.. links to get one Steve?

I will also try and shoot with the gg adaptor today and see how bad the grain is fron the spinning GG

hmmm I found a 4.5mm wideangle c-mount canon lens on ebay...wonder if that would give me a nice wide-angle shot with the 1300 camera

found a link for $799 camera link card

http://www.opsci.com/index.asp?pagetitle=FramgrbrSearch&exten=asp

First, on relay lenses, this looks interesting:
http://www.edmundoptics.com/onlinecatalog/DisplayProduct.cfm?productid=1491

I would suggest someone call edmund for some technical help as see if they do what I think they do - increase/decrease the image size in a fairly short space as an option over ground glass. Image quality and light loss are the two concerns.

Next, Obin, if the lens is at least 1/2" optical format, you will get an image. For a 5 micron pixel all but cheap lenses will be OK. A bit better corner focus with the better lenses.

Last, Richard, we sell the bundle with a 32 bit Epix frame grabber, 2m camera link cable, power supply and cable and XCAP-lite for $500 more than the camera cost. We will have a 64 bit bundle fairly soon, also pretty cheap ( a word that carries much relative meaning - I've bought used cars for less than this).

Hey Steve,

Using XCAP, what is the process that one must go through to go from camera to a useable image sequence, such as 16-bit TIFF? I mean what is XCAP saving to, how is it saving it, if it's not a useable image, what must be done with the "files" it saves in order to make them useable? Is it saving one big binary file, or are there individual file sequences that can be saved for each frame? Do you have to turn the computer on before the camera, "opening/closing" the board, etc., I guess in all this discussion I'm getting a bit confused in what must actually be done in order to get useable RGB images that can then be further processed. Knowledge of what it actually takes would greatly help in trying to sort out this process.

BTW, can XCAP or at least its functions be run from a command prompt in windows?

that sounds great steve

thanks again for all your help . I hope that you can hang in here with all of us starving artists

I held up our 16mm lens to a sheet of paper and held up the c-mount..looks like they are the same size indeed! this is good


dvx100 upsized to 1280 hd...

www.dv3productions.com/test_images/dvx100at1280.jpg

Hey Obin,

Just curious, but that DVX100 shot looks pretty bad. Noisy and overexposed. Could it have been exposed better, or was the background pretty dark and you had to lift the levels to compensate?

I guess I'm having a hard time really evaluating these setups because I have no idea how much range is in these images. What one camera sees is not what another is seeing. You wouldn't happen to have access to a light meter, would you? If so, what stop is your key at, and what stop is the background at? How many stops over are your highlights, and how many stops under are the shadows? What is the maximum range in these scenes? I mean if your highlights are five-six stops over the key, then of course it doesn't matter what you shoot, you're going to clip, even on film. Are we clipping after three stops over? If so that's not so good, unless you can, like the D60/10D, underexpose by up to 2 stops and not even notice the difference in most cases (which would bring you back to five stops over) relative to your noise levels. I hope you don't feel like I'm frustrating your efforts, but It's really hard to visualize just what you're getting if there's no standard. Again, that DVX100 shot looks bad (nasty clipped highlights), I've seen the DVX look much better (I used to own one before selling it). So again, if you have a light meter, or access to a grey card/macbeth chart, and could shoot the cards at normal exposure, 3 or 4 stops over and 3 or 4 stops under, that would help us understand just what the dynamic range of this camera really is. I know this sounds like a lot, and I do want you to know that I'm really excited about your frame grabs that you've been showing here, I'm just trying to understand where they fit in the scheme of things in comparsion to other broadcast cameras I know.

Jason,
You can download XCAP here:
ftp://ftp.epixinc.com/downloads/xcapwi.exe
If you do the install, you will get the full docs in html format. It is meant as a GUI.

You save to a big binary file. Then you do a file save as into other formats with lots of options. If you want to do the Bayer externally, tell it the camera is monochrome.

So XCAP can do bayer conversion internally?

Jason I will try and go to JDC here in town I am sure they have the charts

guys I got some 24p 1280x720 footage today!!!!! I did not have enough time to post online but I will do it when I go to work in the morning...stuff looks VERY good and it's only 8bit! gota upgrade disk drives for 10bit

I'm one of the least technically knowledgeable guys on thes boards and have a couple of questions for you guys. Regarding the Imperx camera that I posted on a couple of weeks ago: I'm presuming this is 4:4:4? Does this mean that if have a black magic design board which can capture this video, will it be able to output at 10bit 4:2:2? I mention this as this is the current FCP 4 max.

Secondly since the interface for the camera link appears to be for PC, how will I go about getting the images into a MAC?

Regarding storage, is a raid necessary? I know it wouldn't be as convenient be I have see 300gb external hard disk drives? which would give about 45min uncompressed storage per drive, if my calculations are correct.

The imperx camera seems to have a c-mount as standard, which I presume means 16mm? They mention an F-mount adaptor. Does this mean I could connect Nikon F-mout stills camera lenses?

Finally, do think it would be better to stay with a PC (premiere pro) NLE or try and get it into FCP 4?

In a nutshell, assume I'm using a low cost black magic design capture board with a destination NLE of adobe premiere pro, what processes, software, file conversion?, etc are necessary to get the image from the camera into the NLE.


Any opinions very welcome.

obin if you want to build a agus35 .I have a link to one I completed . I think all you would need is a step down ring. the agus35 is made with 50mm filter rings, a plcx lens and a $23 dollar piece of ground glass from optosigma I bought the cannon 50mm 1.4 on ebay for $45


www.dvinfo.net/media/mellor

Obin: how do you have the chip set up now? What lens is in front
and how is it connected to your PC? Can you post a picture of the
"camera" with everything connected etc.

Can you also please take a look at this FAQ (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/misc.php?s=&action=bbcode) on how to make your
links working? Thanks.

check it out

C-mount to 35mm slr lens adapters for $65 bucks !!!!!!

Canon
Nikon
Olympus
Minolta
Pentax K
Universal

:)

www.dv3productions.com/test_images/IMG_2432.jpg
www.dv3productions.com/test_images/IMG_2436.jpg
www.dv3productions.com/test_images/IMG_2434.jpg

this is so close it's SICK...I see now that the MAIN issue we have on our hands stopping this from being an EASY to use and EASY to build system is ......yyuuppp.......SOFTWARE.......I wish I was a code writer!!!!!! this thing TOTALY works but we NEED some software! ROB and ROB?? please Rob?? :)

took me 3 hours to teardown that 16mm and mount the 1300 camera inside! I could now use it on a tripod and put a cine mattebox on it etc!

I see no issue with using c mount lenses. C mount is what the bolex uses and this camera is alot like that...also a plus is the cost is VERY low and they don't seem to breath at all unlike a 35mm still camera lens does...I can even use a follow focus on this rig ... plus I love how fast the c-mounts are f1.6!! Try buying a video zoom that fast...who wants a zoom anyway...IMOH zooms are for TV news guys ;)

Hey Obin,

Is that a custom front end on the camera? Also were you able to still use the viewfinder with a through-the-lens setup without losing any light to the sensor?

I killed the whole idea of using a 2-way mirror. I am going with a software solution...using an LCD panel that displays a true or close to true HD signal mounted ontop of the camera for DP to use....this made it so much easer to build plus the lenses screw directly onto the camera this way with NO adaptors...I think it will work out very well once I get someone to write the software for it

It would be easy enough to do a mirror later if this sucks for shooting but I think it's going to work just fine

OR i could get a headset with LCD display for outdoor use...that could be very cool

Jason what do you mean "custom front end"?

Hey Obin,

An idea: It may be a lot easier to focus with the viewfinder, and check composition, especially in sunlight. I would leave the shutter in and would provide some lever to open when shooting and close it to use it.

Mike

too late, this camera has been torn apart. I am stuck as it is but I think it will work fine

found the perfect mainboard for us:

http://www.americanpredator.com/products/industrial_controllers/phoenix_microatx.html

i am checking on price

Obin: Rob and I (heh) are talking to Steve to see what we can
do. Personally I just don't have the finances to buy the stuff from
them. So I need to loan it somehow or get donation in some form
to be able to work on this.

I do also have some concerns in regards to how it all should come
together, but that can easily be resolved.

In regards to that mainboard I would very much like to keep it
all portable and handheld so to speak. Battery operation is
important for myself. I was more thinking along the lines of a
Pentium-M processor for example.

Anyways, we first need to get it all running (software and
connection wise) before deciding on hardware I think.

Rob,

I don't know if you noticed but there were posts on a 7" monitor and the same company had some nice mini computers for car use. 12 V operation, no fan, extremely small.

I think that it may be too much effort to keep it hand held, without wires. By the time we are finished and come up with a reliable solution, or soon afterwards, there may be off the shelf solutions that are better, more reliable and less expensive.

I think that what is important is to focus on the development of a camera that will be excellent and inexpensive.

You need NLE. If you can record on the same computer, you'll save $ on a portable recorder. The NLE computer will have a powerful processor and options that you can take advantage of.

On film production you can trust the viewfinder. It shows you everything. The film with its high lattitude records everything.

On a digital cinama production you work differently. As a rule you need and normally use a large monitor. Before actually shooting the scene you normally go therough the scene on the lerge monitor. Then you can tape while watching the small LCD screen. And you probably have someone watching the monitor at the same tiime, or the other way around.

Your HD system has 1000 line resolution. You need same resolution monitor to check out each scene. Also you check it for blacks, clipping levels, etc.

For ENG work you need a cordless system. But these industrial type cameras will be used for a different purpose. They don't have the easy setup features of ENG cameras.

I'd say, keep it simple. Help the manufacturers develop their cameras. See what is available out there and use it with these cameras, even if it is not a conventional way.

Let's concentrate on making movies and not making cameras. We are better at the movies, the manufacturers at the cameras.

Mike

We should look at the whole picture and make some budgets. How much money are you willing to spend? How much time are you willing to put into this? What will be the benefits? What are the options?

You need to see what is available out there and use it. You have NLEs where you can hook up your camera into. But there are no inexpensive cameras that are good and easy to use.

The industrial cameras hold a great promise. If for nothing else, then for the C-mount and availability of good inexpensive lenses.

The manufacturer nees to make a camera that will have a wide customer base. He will find it in giving the pro customer what he's used to and what is easy to use. You guys understand computers and want such a nonstandard camera. I represent more the mainstream that does not like computers. I want a camera that will plug in and play and I will see on the LCD and the monitor what I am shooting, exactly.

You need to make a budget how much more would it cost to have a camera with built in storage. Is it worth the extra money and the wait? There will probably in couple months be $4k 1080p cameras based on the best CMOS. If you can figure out how to record from it to the NLE, you have a solution.

Nothing is permanent in this field. Your camera will soon be obsolete anyway. Good HD will sooner or later cost the same as todays DV cameras.

I'm not a computer expert. I think that the Aspect HD/Premiere $1K NLE package is something to look into. It uses a very transparrent high quality software based 6:1 real time compression and works with 1440x1080p, 4:2:2, 8 bit material. If we can convert the camera output to that, we have CineAlta quality solution. I can live with that. And it is simple and available now. 6 to 12 months from now, when you develop and perfect your system, the Aspect HD based solution may be avilable as a laptop solution, or there may be many other options. But as I said, I am not a computer expert and maybe you know something that I don't understand. Just trying to put in mu 2 cents.

For the money everyone is going to spend on such a system you
can easily afford a small sized PC with memory / processor to
get all in one system. I personally wan't to be able to mount such
a system on a steadicam for example and not need a full blown
PC attached to it. But hey, if the software and interfaces all get
there it basically does not matter if you use your full blown PC or
built a small one.

I highly doubt by the time we would've built a handheld system
(Obin has already put the camera part in an old 16mm housing
which has room for a small PC) anything affordable will be along.
The problem is not HD or high resolution. You can get an HDV
camera now. Get that and shoot.

The problem is (color) resolution and compression levels. I don't
want 5 GOP MPEG2 as storage running at 4:1:1 and high
compression levels. I do not see any pro-sumer camera coming
out in the next year or so with any of these problems removed,
let me explain why:

1) a lot of companies agreed on HDV which is still tape (DV)
based with an MPEG2 compression scheme. In other words
those companies (see below) have agreed on such a standard
and you can bet they will be using it in newer camera's!

2) a lot of companies do not want to get angry high-end users
and want to be able to sell high-end camera's for $$$. Therefor
there will be no pro-sumer camera that can compete with their
high-end models

3) development time. To get a good reliable piece of equipment to
the market that you can buy in shops usually takes years
(they need to take a lot more into account then we need to do)

4) support systems. There just isn't support out much in the NLE
market for high-end footage. Look at how hard it is today to
edit HDV and how small amount of products our out that can
record in it (1) and edit it (2 - 3). I don't think they want to scare
consumers away or make own NLE software

5) it is a well known fact that companies usually do not put out all
the gems at once. They usually make a good product that does
not feature the latest and greatest so they can sell another
camera in a couple of years again

All this together (and probably you can come up with more reasons)
I highly doubt we will see any 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 uncompressed or
less compressed camera at 10 or 12 bit for the con/pro-sumer.

Canon Inc., Sharp Corporation, Sony Corporation, and Victor
Company of Japan, Limited (JVC) started the whole HDV movement.
The only one that seems missing is Panasonic. So it will be
interesting to see what they are going to do. Other companies
that will support HDV (www.hdv-info.org):

Adobe Systems Incorporated
Ahead Software AG
Apple
Avid Technology, Inc
Canopus Co., Ltd.
CineForm, Inc.
CyberLink Corp.
FOCUS Enhancements, Inc.
Hamamatsu Photonics K.K.
KDDI R&D Laboratories
KEISOKU GIKEN Co.,Ltd.
MAGIX AG
MainConcept AG
Miranda Technologies Inc.
NewSoft Technology Corp
PC DTV Technologies, LLC
Pinnacle Systems, Inc.
Pixela Corp
Sigma Designs, Inc.
Sobey Digital Technology Co., Ltd.
Sony Pictures Digital Networks
Ulead Systems, Inc.

Companies marked with a make NLE's (others in that list
might as well, but these are the ones I know). This tells a lot
from my point of view. There is even a direct-to-disk company
in there (Focus Ehancements) together with a codec builder
(MainConcept) and chip manufacturer (Sigma Designs).

I just wanted to put in my point of view, which is of somebody who wants simple plug and play solutions, even if they are physically larger.

Boxx sells HDV NLEs with Aspect HD that you can use differently. Skip the HDV and you have 4:2:2 system, 1440x1080p, 8 bit, 6:1 highly transparent compression. Or use Aspect HD on a small computer.

Here is info on nice small factor computers:

http://arstechnica.com/news/posts/1086586368.html

Mike

I hear ya mike,

I'm all for plug and play. I do feature filmwork. I'm no programmer. I need something relatively user friendly, even if it is cumbersome, like you. Luckily, in a few months (according to manufacturers) there will be some 1920x1080 24p box-style industrial cameras that can be used with camera link. Some, SDI. The drawback is the storage, but is probably workable with a mini pc and low cost raid. What I'm trying to figure out is, just how do i get my footage into Mac and FCP for editing, as I'm sick of PC non-stable systems.