Expensive CCDs are totally bogus, Dude!

John Brinks · December 11th, 2008, 11:14 PM

Oh, by the way... the last time i went to NAB i got to play with a super tricked out ARRI 35mm, with the biggest lens i have come across... and it was the sweetest thing i have ever seen... their was no question of build quality!!!

Dave Blackhurst · December 12th, 2008, 02:27 AM

There are a LOT of factors, and one thing to consider is that to print a book that you could create on a low end desktop today would have taken a printing press the size of a room maybe a decade or two ago, and at one time was simply impossible... simply because the technology didn't exist... then you realize that anyone can "publish" on the web with little effort, and that's even more amazing!

Technology/computing horsepower is altering one industry after another, and video is the latest thing to see the "change". Publishing, photography, computer graphics, video - think about it for a moment, and you'll see how much each of these areas has changed massively in a relatively short period of time.

Part of that change is the motive of profit for the producer and user of any technology - if people don't go to watch movies, do you think they'd make them? Same with TV. Why are traditional media companies struggling... when was the last time you went "offline" for... a map... directions... a review... etc...? Times are changing, we live in the "technology revolution", same as the "industrial revolution" of old... Unless you're a luddite or Amish, your life is quite a bit different than it was 10 years ago.

What's happening right now, and it's huge, is that HD is revolutionizing the capabilities at lower price points, that are probably not much different from dad's old 8mm. It wasn't THAT long ago that a "TV" was something with about 10-20" of roundish screen in glorious B&W. I'll bet most of you are watching your output on something a bit larger and more vibrant.

Sensor technology for still cams has progressed rapidly (and taking 30fps vs. 2-3fps is a HUGE technical challenge). Give it time, and demand for better and better quality will bring better "toys".

Maybe we'll see a 1/2" sensor with nice front glass in something similar to the TRV900 with good manual control someday, or maybe not.

Maybe next generation CMOS will "fix" the low light and RS or whatever... in a 1/4" sensor that bends the laws of physics.

Maybe we'll be displaying our output on a 10 foot screen we simply roll up in a tube and can take anywhere sometime soon too.

Technology progresses, but the price points don't change much - early adopters pay more for the latest greatest "toys" (Let's compare a TRV900 @ around $2500 to a HC1 @ $2K anyone? Compare to HV20 @ $500 - which was the "better" deal/camera?).

Personally I just wish that there were some cameras in the wasteland between "consumer" sub $1K, and "pro-sumer" which seems to start in at around $3500... I can't for the life of me figure out why the huge gap, when an "in between" camera is such an obvious offering, and could practically be done "off the shelf" to meet a demand that is well represented here, and I'd think would sell like hotcakes if it were available. I don't want a "big" camera, I just want more control and the best image possible in something a bit more practical to carry around.

As a practical matter, the image quality I get with "this years model" consumer cam is leaps ahead of anything I could have bought at "almost" any price 10 years ago, so I guess I can't really complain, still we can dream, right!?

Matthew Nayman · December 17th, 2008, 09:50 AM

i think it's also important to consider what the average consumer needs.

A larger sensor means more critical focus, and shallower DOF. For your average wedding videographer, this means more work and possibly poorer results. The 1/3" sensor strikes a nice balance of deep DOF, high resolution, decent lowlight and low price-point.

It's also interesting to note the points folks have been kaing about getting from the 97th to the 98th percentile. We see this all the time in the automotive world. You take a car like the Bugatti Veyron 16.4, which costs well over $2,000,000, simply to move from that 230mph class (like $350,000 ferarries and lambos) to the 250mph class (like the SSC Aero and Ascari A1)

Those last few MPH require tripling the BHP

December 11th, 2008, 11:14 PM	#31
John Brinks Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Phoenix Az Posts: 69	Oh, by the way... the last time i went to NAB i got to play with a super tricked out ARRI 35mm, with the biggest lens i have come across... and it was the sweetest thing i have ever seen... their was no question of build quality!!!

December 12th, 2008, 02:27 AM	#32
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	There are a LOT of factors, and one thing to consider is that to print a book that you could create on a low end desktop today would have taken a printing press the size of a room maybe a decade or two ago, and at one time was simply impossible... simply because the technology didn't exist... then you realize that anyone can "publish" on the web with little effort, and that's even more amazing! Technology/computing horsepower is altering one industry after another, and video is the latest thing to see the "change". Publishing, photography, computer graphics, video - think about it for a moment, and you'll see how much each of these areas has changed massively in a relatively short period of time. Part of that change is the motive of profit for the producer and user of any technology - if people don't go to watch movies, do you think they'd make them? Same with TV. Why are traditional media companies struggling... when was the last time you went "offline" for... a map... directions... a review... etc...? Times are changing, we live in the "technology revolution", same as the "industrial revolution" of old... Unless you're a luddite or Amish, your life is quite a bit different than it was 10 years ago. What's happening right now, and it's huge, is that HD is revolutionizing the capabilities at lower price points, that are probably not much different from dad's old 8mm. It wasn't THAT long ago that a "TV" was something with about 10-20" of roundish screen in glorious B&W. I'll bet most of you are watching your output on something a bit larger and more vibrant. Sensor technology for still cams has progressed rapidly (and taking 30fps vs. 2-3fps is a HUGE technical challenge). Give it time, and demand for better and better quality will bring better "toys". Maybe we'll see a 1/2" sensor with nice front glass in something similar to the TRV900 with good manual control someday, or maybe not. Maybe next generation CMOS will "fix" the low light and RS or whatever... in a 1/4" sensor that bends the laws of physics. Maybe we'll be displaying our output on a 10 foot screen we simply roll up in a tube and can take anywhere sometime soon too. Technology progresses, but the price points don't change much - early adopters pay more for the latest greatest "toys" (Let's compare a TRV900 @ around $2500 to a HC1 @ $2K anyone? Compare to HV20 @ $500 - which was the "better" deal/camera?). Personally I just wish that there were some cameras in the wasteland between "consumer" sub $1K, and "pro-sumer" which seems to start in at around $3500... I can't for the life of me figure out why the huge gap, when an "in between" camera is such an obvious offering, and could practically be done "off the shelf" to meet a demand that is well represented here, and I'd think would sell like hotcakes if it were available. I don't want a "big" camera, I just want more control and the best image possible in something a bit more practical to carry around. As a practical matter, the image quality I get with "this years model" consumer cam is leaps ahead of anything I could have bought at "almost" any price 10 years ago, so I guess I can't really complain, still we can dream, right!?

December 17th, 2008, 09:50 AM	#33
Matthew Nayman Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Toronto Posts: 917	i think it's also important to consider what the average consumer needs. A larger sensor means more critical focus, and shallower DOF. For your average wedding videographer, this means more work and possibly poorer results. The 1/3" sensor strikes a nice balance of deep DOF, high resolution, decent lowlight and low price-point. It's also interesting to note the points folks have been kaing about getting from the 97th to the 98th percentile. We see this all the time in the automotive world. You take a car like the Bugatti Veyron 16.4, which costs well over $2,000,000, simply to move from that 230mph class (like $350,000 ferarries and lambos) to the 250mph class (like the SSC Aero and Ascari A1) Those last few MPH require tripling the BHP