will Scarlet do as well in low light as Red One???

[Petr Dvorak]

... The end result is that you will get much less than half as many good chips for the same cost when you double the chip size.

Well, then what % from price of camera is chip?

 

[Peter Majtan]

That's like asking what % of the car price is the engine? It greatly depends on each individual situation. You have the same engine in different car models and You have different engines in the same car model, go figure... :biggrin:

 

[Petr Dvorak]

yep but it can be roughly around 5% or 50% and than its the big difference

if it is round 5% then 3 times expensive good chip increase final price only by 10%, but with 50% share it's just lethal ... :wink:

 

[Jose Alvarez]

Nice to see you around this parts Barry, but I think your statement "...HVX200A(HPX-170): 2 years of development have now produced a unit with the same size chips that's a half-stop faster and dramatically lower noise than its predecessor..." is a bit premature don't you think? Since this cameras aren't even available yet. I'm sure they will be better than the current HVX200, but "dramatically" is a bit strong a word at this point. Just saying...

Xoce

 

[Christoffer Glans]

sumermedia, isn't he talking about the latest units of the HVX200 having improvments to the sensor compared to the first units shipped?
He isn't comparing Scarlet to HVX200.

 

[Barry Green]

but I think your statement "...HVX200A(HPX-170): 2 years of development have now produced a unit with the same size chips that's a half-stop faster and dramatically lower noise than its predecessor..." is a bit premature don't you think? Since this cameras aren't even available yet.

No, not premature at all, because the HVX200A is available right now. It's already on the market. I've tested the 200A against the 200, and yes it's a half-stop faster and dramatically lower noise (I posted a video showing the noise difference over on DVXUser). Someone else ("twistedlincoln") already received his production unit and posted a video showing the differences in low light too.

So no, nothing premature, I'm basing my statements on having actually used the gear and tested the results, old chips vs. new, 200 vs. 200A.

Now, it'd be perhaps a bit premature to say the same thing for the 170, except that they told me it's the exact same chipset as in the 200A. So, presumably (and admittedly, this is a presumption) the performance of the 170 should be very comparable to what I observed in the 200A.

 

[Barry Green]

sumermedia, isn't he talking about the latest units of the HVX200 having improvments to the sensor compared to the first units shipped?
He isn't comparing Scarlet to HVX200.

Correct -- I was comparing how much of a difference they were able to make between the HVX200A and the original HVX200, over the course of two years. Extrapolating forward, I'm saying that Scarlet will have had around three years since the Red One's sensor was first being used, so it's not out of the realm of possibility that it will also have benefited from similar technological advancements. With Scarlet it's all guesswork on our parts here, but I was using the real-world example of the HVX200A vs. HVX200 to show how much advancement can be done over the course of two years, so that seems to give us hope that Scarlet might do a lot better than just raw number-crunching might lead you to suspect.

 

[Peter Majtan]

yep but it can be roughly around 5% or 50% and than its the big difference

if it is round 5% then 3 times expensive good chip increase final price only by 10%, but with 50% share it's just lethal ... :wink:

Inside SONY it would be about 1~2%, inside RED I believe about 120%...

Just kidding...

 

[oldphart]

yep but it can be roughly around 5% or 50% and than its the big difference

if it is round 5% then 3 times expensive good chip increase final price only by 10%, but with 50% share it's just lethal ... :wink:

Remember that a bigger chip also means a higher power drain and, not least, a much bigger and more expensive lens. Even the step up from 16mm to s-16 makes lenses noticeably bigger and heavier for the same angle of view and f:stop - not to mention a lot more expensive.

 

[Petr Dvorak]

Remember that a bigger chip also means a higher power drain and, not least, a much bigger and more expensive lens. Even the step up from 16mm to s-16 makes lenses noticeably bigger and heavier for the same angle of view and f:stop - not to mention a lot more expensive.

True, but I dont think that set of used Nikon SLR lenses make huge hole in my pocket in exchange for nice final picture without noise and better sensitivity in low light.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Yes, newer production processes can increase a models performance. So, if the Scarlet is based on the 5K Red technology, that might be a good comparison. This alone might account for much more than a stop, and newer technologies can lead to much more than again. I know one technology that can give you usable video in the dark.

I don't like the 2/3rd sensor tied to the narrower lens aperture. Ideally I would want at least 4/3rd sensor with 1:1.8 or less aperture for depth of field. Four-thirds was made as a good compromise.

JVC was famous years ago for producing a consumer 1.2 lens (with zoom) on their consumer 500 series. On the Drake they used super fast lens of less than 1:1.0 on their 2/3rd sensor. The problem with regular sensors with extra wide aperture is that the lens array used to gather light to the sensor pads usually can't take the extreme angle of light coming in properly, and produces image problems. The Drake got around this because the sensor company they used was the only sensor company with the fill-factor technology that did not require a micro-lens.

However, I understand that 4/3rds lens systems are engineered around this to bend the light to come onto the chip more head on. So, a very fast 4/3rds lens might be possible. Jim, how about it?

The only other thing I would like to mention, is 4K instead of 3K. 720p, 1080 and 2K can be made to evenly divide into that (the HD resolutions being windowed slightly).

 

[Wayne Morellini]

For me (having practiced ZEN and IAIDO for couple of decades) Samurai is synonym to being honest, focused, direct (without beating around the bushes)

Ironically, isn't that the exact same way to get your head chopped off, or run through with a sword, by such people?

I understand the Ninjas had there good and bad phases too, over the centuries. What we experience today is not necessarily what has gone before.

highly efficient, perfect in every "move" but above all simple while harvesting endless wisdom...

Sounds a bit like Wing Chun .

 

[Peter Majtan]

Ironically, isn't that the exact same way to get your head chopped off, or run through with a sword, by such people?

Sure, if You are not careful enough... :biggrin:

I understand the Ninjas had there good and bad phases too, over the centuries. What we experience today is not necessarily what has gone before.

Sony too is not completely useless. The BRAVIA displays and SXRD projectors are hard to beat for quality. Also I don't remember when (if ever) I bought a pro-VTR that wasn't SONY...

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Sounds a bit like Wing Chun

You practised that too?