Sony FS-700 II

[Shaun Roemich]

Of course, if FF becomes synonymous with 4k (or greater) resolution, it COULD become positioned as the "evolution" of IMAX or 70mm.

[Cliff Totten]

Originally Posted by Shaun Roemich

You're missing the point - S35 is/was THE standard in motion picture production for a century (give or take) with a very well developed set of tools. The Full Frame advent is an anomaly that exists SOLELY because of the dSLR "revolution" which stemmed from using stills cameras (and lenses) to capture moving pictures.

There are still very few TRUE cinema lenses that fit FF cameras for a reason.

Yes, all the hobbyists and new-to-cinema folks are RAVING about FF but frankly, it isn't being embraced widespread in The Big Industry.

Will FF sell cameras and lenses? Sure. Will it drive a complete revolution of the industry as a whole? Doubt it. In fact, I see it in reverse - when the DX/Crop Sensor dSLRs started appearing, there were VERY few wide lenses for the format. Over the past 10 or so years we have seen an amazing number of rectilinear (or NEAR rectilinear) lenses hit the market, all to the benefit of the S35 dSLR shooter.

Just a matter of perspective. Pardon the pun.

I didn't miss that point and I certainly agree with everything you stated. A long industry tradition and history is behind Super35, no doubt.

However, pixel density and sensor photosite size are becoming more and more important in today and tomorrow's 4k demands. (and eventually 8K in the far off future) The laws of physics and light properties favor larger sensors in some key categories.

When a 4k super35 sensor is compared to a 4K FF sensor in low light and dynamic range, the FF sensor is likely to win. Yes, low light and DR are not everything. Lens options are important too. And, the shallow depth of field that FF produces can be very undesirable too many times. Sometimes you don't want to fight the shallow DoF, other times you want more of it.

Another strength that FF has is that is CAN do Super35 in cropped shooting if you want. There is nothing forcing you to uses the entire sensor!...but the option always exists.

I'm simply saying that the A7s,...more specifically, it's sensor and motherboard can me moved over to a "Pro" camera body, given a full 4K codec with no recording limits and that camera will be a monster seller.

I do believe that if this fictitious future FF Pro Sony camera had a 10bit codec with 10bit SDI out?...wow, we all know that it will seriously affect that sales of any Super35 camera today or even tomorrow for that fact.

With the right sensor pixel count, you can use your Super35 lenses or your FF lenses all you want. I don't see it as a DSLR "fad" anymore and I dont think the FF format is ever going away. Because of it's performance and flexibility, I expect it to gain more and more fans as the years go on. (as more Cine lenses come to market)

I have loved S35 for several years but now I have a new A7s. Woah,...I'm really starting to love that FF sensor even more than Super35 now. It's shocking to see how good the A7s is and I want more of it.

[Alister Chapman]

I disagree, the A7s is a great camera, I have one. But the rolling shutter is not something I would tolerate in a true dedicated video camera. I think it's fine in the A7s, which is a half way house camera useful for some very specific applications and covert or low budget shoots.

For a proper video camera you really want less rolling shutter than the A7s has.

While you can choose between FF and s35 capture you introduce compromises when you do this. If you use the size of the FF sensor to maximise your pixel size, then when you switch to s35, then you may not have enough pixels for 4K (this is the case with the A7s). If you set up the s35 mode so that you have 4K's worth of pixels then the possible sensitivity and DR benefits of having a larger sensor are lost as the pixels will be no bigger than any other s35 camera.

[Matt Sharp]

Originally Posted by Shaun Roemich

You're missing the point - S35 is/was THE standard in motion picture production for a century (give or take) with a very well developed set of tools. The Full Frame advent is an anomaly that exists SOLELY because of the dSLR "revolution" which stemmed from using stills cameras (and lenses) to capture moving pictures.

There are still very few TRUE cinema lenses that fit FF cameras for a reason.

You're forgetting about VistaVision. It's been around since the 50s, shot on standard 35mm film run horizontally instead of vertically through the gate (just like a 35mm SLR). It's still used for special effects shots to get higher resolution than normal (vertical 4perf) 35mm frames. With Hollywood it's all about reducing costs, S35 was good enough so why go with VistaVision when it uses twice as much film?

You're still 99% correct though, but with the new generations of cameras getting better and better for less money (AND without the ongoing cost of film) I can absolutely see the DSLR cinema guys moving to Digital VistaVision Cinema (that has a nice ring to it) and helping to make that the norm.

[Cliff Totten]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

I disagree, the A7s is a great camera, I have one. But the rolling shutter is not something I would tolerate in a true dedicated video camera. I think it's fine in the A7s, which is a half way house camera useful for some very specific applications and covert or low budget shoots.

For a proper video camera you really want less rolling shutter than the A7s has.

While you can choose between FF and s35 capture you introduce compromises when you do this. If you use the size of the FF sensor to maximise your pixel size, then when you switch to s35, then you may not have enough pixels for 4K (this is the case with the A7s). If you set up the s35 mode so that you have 4K's worth of pixels then the possible sensitivity and DR benefits of having a larger sensor are lost as the pixels will be no bigger than any other s35 camera.

That's true Alister, it's a valid point and one that I too have been mulling around in my head. (Pixel density when using S35 crop with FF sensor)

Agreed,..I guess its fair to say that a FF sensor cropped for S35 use is not a true replacement for a real S35 sensor. I would have liked to the A7s sensor with a tad more overall pixels. (maybe 14million?) I would have given up a percentage of low light capability to get a few more photosites in it's Super35 crop. (just a little bit more)

As far as rolling shutter, yes, it's not great on the A7s. I'm OK with it though. I'm big into slow moving pans and I'm not shooting ultra fast moving objects. So far, I have had no issues to date with it.

How can Sony take the A7s sensor and scan it faster? Is it just a matter of doubling up on the processor speed? For a Sony Pro camera, can they add two Bionz-X processors? Or, can they increase the processor clock speed to read that data faster?

Hell, that they can read out every pixel, debayer it and scale it all in real time is pretty damn cool.

I'm wondering how this can be done in future Pro FF models.

Good points indeed.

CT

(I take back what I said about wanting a few more pixels on that A7s...On second thought, I don't want to to give ANY low light back! lol)

[Shaun Roemich]

Originally Posted by Matt Sharp

You're forgetting about VistaVision. It's been around since the 50s, shot on standard 35mm film run horizontally instead of vertically through the gate (just like a 35mm SLR).

A perfect analogy. I HAD heard of VistaVision but it doesn't stick in the brain nearly as well as 70mm and IMAX so my too-many-years, too-many-beers brain must have let that go some years ago.

Thanks for making a perfect point - a great SPECIAL USE solution, much as Alister says as well.

[Shaun Roemich]

Originally Posted by Cliff Totten

How can Sony take the A7s sensor and scan it faster? Is it just a matter of doubling up on the processor speed? For a Sony Pro camera, can they add two Bionz-X processors? Or, can they increase the processor clock speed to read that data faster?

I'm no engineer but I'd imagine heat and power consumption would play in as well. And you may end up in the same sort of situation JVC was in when they paired two chip readouts to get 720P60 out of their GY-HD series of shouldercams. It got worked out but the initial cameras struggled. Plus I don't know if the processors were designed to co-process and interleave to allow that - sort of a genlock required so that the chips would be in sync to alternate readout.

[Alister Chapman]

Yes, scan a sensor faster and heat becomes an issue, or more importantly getting rid of the heat so the sensor doesn't become noisy. This is why most of the 4K pro cameras have fan cooling.

[Jurij Turnsek]

Phillip Bloom posted some new info and some of his speculation: IBC, free talks, Critics and more info on the new Sony XDCAM 4K Super 35mm Camcorder! | Philip Bloom

Apparently Sony confirmed this will NOT be a FS700 replacement.

[James Manford]

Feel sorry for the sellers of FS700's on ebay recently ... they must of sold for atleast 500-1000 less than they should of at pre-owned prices due to people thinking a FS700 replacement is on the way!

[Jack Zhang]

Hmm, wonder if this will be priced just below the F5 if it isn't a FS700 replacement...

[Glen Vandermolen]

Rumor now is around $8,000.

[Shaun Roemich]

Interestingly, Alister "teased" in the comments section that apparently there is something in that leaked photo that no one has noticed yet...

I've been pixel peeping for almost an hour.

I think perhaps I need a life.

Looking forward to hearing the news on the 12th...

[Monday Isa]

Relocating hand grip? Similar to the C-series maybe.