The New F

[Ned Soltz]

Peter told me last week that there will be 1.5 firmware update, the date of which and content of which he would not discuss.

So while I am totally in the light on the NewF, I am totally in the dark on F3 firmware.

Ned

[Glen Vandermolen]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

That statement makes me chuckle.

Why's that?

[Leonard Levy]

If it is 1920x1080 ( not to mention 4K)at 422 50MBs, isn't still much more compressed than Pro Res 422 at 117 MBs or even LT at over 80? Does this mean its only 8 Bit to the card?

I haven't worked with the Alexa, but isn't that Pro Res right to the SxS card. Sounds like my new Samurai might still have a job?

[Nate Weaver]

Originally Posted by Leonard Levy

I haven't worked with the Alexa, but isn't that Pro Res right to the SxS card. Sounds like my new Samurai might still have a job?

I'd say yes. 8 bit MPEG2, even at 50mbit is not quite like 10 bit ProResHQ.

It's looking though like there are going to be some interesting Sony piggyback recorder options though, especially if they follow some of what they've done on the F65. I've been reading F65 manuals all night, trying not to get my hopes up too much with what that camera does in 1080p modes.

[Leonard Levy]

Yes better than 4:2:0 35, but not a huge difference. If Alexa can record Pro Res why in the world would Sony leave that out? Electronics can't be that complicated if a Samurai costs $1600.

[Mike Marriage]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

I think you might be surprised!

I hope Sony have corresponding lens announcements too - that would be a nice surprise.

In the past they have made some great "kit" lenses at excellent price points. The lens on the PMW350K is optically outstanding for the price and the standard B4 allows you to hire specialist lenses when required.

They have already made a start with the F3 - the 3 primes and the zooms but a compact T2.8 18-85 ish zoom would be great. The prime set is also a little plasticy and needs greater range.

[Andy Shipsides]

Lots of surprises are coming for sure.

[Chris Medico]

Originally Posted by Leonard Levy

Yes better than 4:2:0 35, but not a huge difference. If Alexa can record Pro Res why in the world would Sony leave that out? Electronics can't be that complicated if a Samurai costs $1600.

It isn't an issue with technology. Sony could implement it easily. The challenge is for them to admit any other company invents something worth using. Sony doesn't do that very well. That is why I consider it a low probability you will see a CODEC in any Sony camera that Sony didn't have a hand in developing.

[Ned Soltz]

There are often questions of "good" or "good enough". 50Mbps 4:2:2 MPEG2 answers the C300 directly and brings the internal codec to broadcast specs. Even the PMW-200 has implemented this codec. "Good enough" for anything for which the C300 is "good enough."

Sony licensing ProRes from Apple? Only slightly more chance than Samsung licensing anything from Apple ;)

As Andy said, be prepared for some surprises.

Ned

[Felix Steinhardt]

Originally Posted by Ned Soltz

As Andy said, be prepared for some surprises.
Ned

Get Ready For a Surprise! - Total Recall (4/11) Movie CLIP (1990) HD - YouTube

At 1:30 min
;)

So it sounds like it´s more than one camera coming. And maybe a fixed lens camcorder, too, as Alister hints. Mmmmh, a Mini F23 at the price slightly above the F3 sounds delicious!

[David Heath]

I still keep thinking of the discrepancy between the number of used photosites and the actual number on the FS700 chip. Why? It seems highly likely that one chip was developed with an element of future proofing - use it in a simpler fashion in the FS700, and make fuller use of the capabilities in a future camera. So could that be what we're about to see here?

The only explanation I could previously think of was that it could mean the true shape of the chip was 2.35:1, the FS700 only making use of the 16:9 centre. But as another thought, if the extra photosites were evenly distributed around the core 3840x2160 (and not just to the sides) it would enable film-type viewfinding of outside the active picture area. Very desirable.

I see the 50Mbs codec and 4k to an external recorder as highly likely - but the cryptic comments from those in the know seem to imply more than the obvious.....?

Ah well, we'll know for real soon - but fun to guess and speculate in the meantime!

[Nate Weaver]

Originally Posted by David Heath

I still keep thinking of the discrepancy between the number of used photosites and the actual number on the FS700 chip. Why? It seems highly likely that one chip was developed with an element of future proofing - use it in a simpler fashion in the FS700, and make fuller use of the capabilities in a future camera. So could that be what we're about to see here?

The only explanation I could previously think of was that it could mean the true shape of the chip was 2.35:1, the FS700 only making use of the 16:9 centre. But as another thought, if the extra photosites were evenly distributed around the core 3840x2160 (and not just to the sides) it would enable film-type viewfinding of outside the active picture area. Very desirable.

I see the 50Mbs codec and 4k to an external recorder as highly likely - but the cryptic comments from those in the know seem to imply more than the obvious.....?

Ah well, we'll know for real soon - but fun to guess and speculate in the meantime!

The F65 chip has quite a bit of extra pixels around the outside of active area that they use for on-the-fly black balancing, etc.

I suspect that that might be a new direction for Sony in general.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Nate Weaver

The F65 chip has quite a bit of extra pixels around the outside of active area that they use for on-the-fly black balancing, etc.

Yes, it's quite normal for all chips to have some unused photosites around the edge, the point about the quoted spec for the FS700 chip is that it's far more than would be expected. For example, the following quote is from the C300 specs:

Effective Pixels
Approx. 8.29 megapixels (3840 x 2160)

Total Pixels
Approx. 9.84 megapixels (4206 x 2340)

Now if accept that even if the FS700 only uses 3840x2160 like the C300, a 4k product may use 4096x2304 (9.44 megapixels), and the 9.44:9.84 ratio is roughly what I'd expect with the remainder being for black compensation etc as you say.

So why is the FS700 chip so many more? Why 11.6 megapixel in total instead of about 9.8?

[Jose Rodrigues]

The camera is based around a 11.6MP 'Super-35mm' sensor. The Super 35mm format is 13.3mm x 23.6mm this is very nice....

[Dennis Hingsberg]

.... this might confirm my suspicion of being switchable between FF and S35.