Robert, I agree but the average user does not need RED, uncompressed, etc. etc. etc. Wayne, the cameras you listed are HIGHLY compressed or unknown. Pocket RED will likely not be here until 2009 and has ZERO specs, just a "it is in the works."

I am sorry but H.264, MPEG, etc. are not the future of professional high-end acquisition. As it did with audio, the move will be toward less compression and there is not likely a sub $10K solution in the near future.

The misconception in the pro-sumer world (where I do most my work) is that it is about resolution when comparing cameras. What is being evidenced and what is on the horizon, is that camera companies are going to define their consumer/prosumer/pro lines by the compression schemes.

Lastly, the move in general in sensors is to single chip CMOS, the way Hydra works it MUST have 3 CCD to work with. Given the user-base, the HVX is the smartest camera to implement Hydra in.



ash =o)

Wow, I dont get where this thread is going... RED? Other cameras? Uhh.... this is a $3500 mod to your camera that will add the option of UNCOMPRESSED 4:4:4 2K footage from your sub $5000 camera!!!! Have you guys ever seen uncompressed video? There is nothing currently or even on the horizon that will deliver what the Hydra can for less than 3 times the price. I mean, pick up a used HVX for $4K, mod it and have a $7500 camera that shoots uncompressed 2K to your existing laptop.

If you have seen what the DVX can do with this mod (I agree with Barry, it was a kitchy add-on for THAT camera) then I dont know how you could keep from being pumped about what it can do for the HVX. I promise you will start to see footage that looks like it was shot on cameras that cost 10X the price...


ash =o)
You've hit the nail on the head! Get a used camera modify it and use it to good effect with an adaptor!

Hydra can probably easily be adapted to the HPX500 as well. Then you'd have uncompressed 2K res @ 14 bits from a 2/3" imager.

How many practical shooting circumstances are there where we'll NEED uncompressed 2K at 14 bits? Probably not that many; for television production the world is becoming an HD world and it's going to stay HD for decades; I mean anyone who thinks that the TV stations (who just shelled out hundreds of thousands of dollars to upgrade to HD) are looking to upgrade again any time soon, well, I'd say they don't know TV station managers very well!

Again, we have to see it to know what the practical value of it is. I think Hydra's inexpensive enough that it almost becomes a "why not" type of purchase, especially for anyone who's doing any keying. And if he adapts it to the HPX500, it's the first accessory I'd get for an HPX500.

Dean, your remark sparked another idea that proves the validity of Hydra. Look at the dynamic and robust 35mm adapter market! There are guys lined up around the block to spend $1500 to $5000 (matte box, follow focus, M2/Brevis/SGpro) adapting their pro-sumer cameras to get a 35mm look. The latest camera to catch fire with adapters is the sub-$1000 Canon HV20. Juan needs a good marketing dept to help spread the word that compression, dynamic range, etc. are as important factors as DOF, etc.



ash =o)

Robert, I agree but the average user does not need RED, uncompressed, etc. etc. etc. Wayne, the cameras you listed are HIGHLY compressed or unknown. Pocket RED will likely not be here until 2009 and has ZERO specs, just a "it is in the works."

I am sorry but H.264, MPEG, etc. are not the future of professional high-end acquisition. As it did with audio, the move will be toward less compression and there is not likely a sub $10K solution in the near future.

I prefer the pixel shifted Hydra like stuff for the economy and benefits of bigger sensor pads, and have had an history of advocation for pixel-shift on the low end (but, unfortunately, companies are not playing on the low end, including Foveon).

The cameras I list are highly known (as in what they promise as an minimum) except for the Red, which was reportedly supposed to be revealed within moths of the revelation (now delayed). And what they promise is low end professional Eng performance, which will be good enough for many people. At 25mb/s HDV 1080i is starved, at 35mb/s min XDCAM HD combined with low noise, and progressive, it has moved up an notch. At 50mb/s+ h264 Intra (incidentally, which the television work flow industry in moving towards, even in visually lossless, and true lossless 4:4:4) we are expected at similar quality to 100Mb/s, let alone if they go to the 100mb/s mode, which would be within reach of the visually lossless range. Even on the min likely specs it looks good enough, even for me. Even 24mb/s 720p AVCHD would be tempting. For an price I prefer products that are likely to be easy to service, and not to be orphaned. At an cheap enough price it becomes an "why not".

Anybody see anything on the AVCHD Pro-line shoulder mount, or HVX200 replacement?

Let me clarify further... I am not talking ENG, I dont see why that segment would need 2k or uncompressed. Looks like we are not talking apples to apples here. I am talking commercial work, studio work and narrative work, all things that uncompressed and 2K will benefit. It does not help in the doc and ENG world. I just dont see most people in these other fields wanting a MORE compressed format. I dont see XDCAMs exploding in these markets. For every music video and short film shot on an XDCAM, there is probably 100 shot on an HVX.

Still, the bottom line, is that a Hydra HVX will provide an image with a resolution, a color space and a dynamic range that no camera remotely in the same price range can reproduce.



ash =o)

I don't know what you are talking about now. I've got all my Apples in the right basket. I was saying that the new cameras offer significant performance increase, low end Eng quality, over HDV. That an number of people may prefer that quality and an certain level of product certainly, warranty and support. I don't think that many tens of thousands customers are going to abandon going with known brands to go with the Andromeda/hydra just because it has clearly superior quality. There is also the subject of HDMI/component recording. Sure the cheap hardware recorders are still expensive compared to Hydra conversion, but an Intensity recording solution is cheap, and could be made to fit into an case the size of an CD drive. I suspect that Reel is exactly geared towards the expected number, thousands of conversions per year. I would hope they can find an cheaper product that can do tens of thousands per year. I think the hydra solution is much cheaper than an Intensity solution in quantity.

Looks like they are talking about $8K for the Sony, but that doesn't means it won't turn out to be less than $6K.

Everyone started disccusing, but the fact is, that juan did exactly what noha or that guy said that he never answers emails and that.. i mean, i didnt see any comment after we all asked him, the price, and the date...

he didnt even responded to the guy that badtalked him... man.. was he right???

Juan doesn't spend a lot of time promoting -- he spends it working. He did exactly what he said he was going to do with the Andromeda, even when people said it was "impossible". And he'll do exactly what he says he'll do with the Hydra.

He appears to prefer to let the product do the talking. Last I heard, Hydra will be out before the end of the year.