The end of the traditional low end cinema camera company is nigh!

[Wayne Morellini]

Been looking st the latest starlight vision super low light small sensors, and the competition, as well and 20 stop+ wide dynamic range on small sensors. Both of these abilities have been around for a while, but now new fitms are heading down in price. Their are low end sensors capable of forming full color images in star lit conditiins, others in monochrome. You can buy these for drones at cheap prices.

While small sensors have their drawbacks, on the low end an array of 2-4 of these could produce reasonable results in a $1000 compact camera, and offer post and live focus, dof setting, 3D mapping, as well as 12 bit plus conventional 4:2:2 video. So, two of the three or so big things larger sensors offer will be offered by cheap sensors from multiple manufacturers over time. The remaining big thing is a better pixel level image handling and possibly better fill factor and less aberrations, big reason for big budget to stick with big cameras.

While an top quality cinema camera or ENG camera is going to likely offer more certainty of better results, in the short term these sensor array techniques are the future. No need for expensive bulky lenses or equipment. Existing low end technology is already up to consumer grade 8k (unreleased in a end product as of my last knowledge of it).

Tradional low end camera companies have missed the boat in terms of cinema cameras. New competitors in this field could see the end of one or two.

 

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

What would be an example of a "Traditional low end camera company"?

 

[Wayne Morellini]

BM, among others (we can throw that recently defunct one in here too). But I'm not saying BM is under threat, because they are not solely a camera company, and have many other products. They can be a leader in this if they want.

Traditional, as in manufacturing traditional digital cinema camera (more expensive than this) lens mount, limited non manual features. There will remain a market for quality cameras.

 

[Steven Abrams]

You're living in a dream world Wayne.
Stitching small sensors marks the end of low end cinema cameras? Lol.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Sorry to burst your unpleasent bubble Steven, but it does. You merely need to get up on the real science instead of dreaming.

You don't need a Lytro or even this: May I introduce you to the light:

https://www.light.co/camera

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

Things change quicker than some people want. Digital overtook film overnight, but because two revolutions are too much, a lot of photographers (for some reason) don't like the mirrorless revolution. In the same way, a lot of film makers don't like the RED - it's too good, and it's too cheap. It's hard to deal with.

I like the idea of the Light camera. I look forward to reading some in-depth reviews of it.

 

[Visar Sulejmani]

Things change quicker than some people want. Digital overtook film overnight, but because two revolutions are too much, a lot of photographers (for some reason) don't like the mirrorless revolution. In the same way, a lot of film makers don't like the RED - it's too good, and it's too cheap. It's hard to deal with.

I like the idea of the Light camera. I look forward to reading some in-depth reviews of it.

Yes, especially how the videos that come out of it will look like.

 

[Dan Kanes]

One problem with Light camera - too many small aperture lens surfaces ready to collect dirt, scum, oil, scratches, and then ruin computational elements of computational photography.

Don't get me wrong - I love bleeding edge stuff.

There isn't such a thing as a "traditional low end cinema camera company."

that in and of itself is a very new concept.

cinema cameras are typically low volume products - I would say Red has blown the doors off the volume portion of cinema cameras. A C300 isn't a cinema camera for instance - it's a camcorder.

If there is a death at black magic it will be from poor quality control and rushed design - ursa mini 4.6 - for all and intents and purposes a "low end cinema camera" is just built like a POS... See the thread on bmcuser where the guy destroyed his mainboard from dropping it a few inches on its side. No option to repair (hmm reminds me of my RedRocket card which I decided not to upgrade to a rocket X)...

QC and supply chain are very very difficult, at the scale red is building cameras especially (it's a ton, but not as many tons and tons of a commodity product like a MacBook)

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Yes, especially how the videos that come out of it will look like.

Communicated with them on this, then put buying plans away. They were not interested. I think thier system is probably top heavy with processing all those sensors.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Dan, they use far more sensors than needed. I get problems with accidentally putting my finger on the wrong place on my phone, let alone something with a whole surface in future video mode

It is overkill, 9 sensors is good, the military uses it. 4-5 sensors should be adequate to get away from the mishsppened bokereth/focus zone that you get with the two sensor phone systems as they try to emulate a digital stills camera.

I wish the C300 was priced like a video camera.

There has been many traditional digital cinema camera companies, I've seen them. But traditional merely denotes a difference in how low end digital cinema cameras were done with mountable single lens and one 2D sensor, straight compression and little more features (maybe color luts etc) compared to how they can now be done. How can they compete with something that can do 80-90% of everything you can do for 10-20% the price, using consumer tech that you van drop a few feet (not an auto lens cover is a good idea) ? Quality upmarket cameras might give 10-20% more again, and a much more professional working controls snd environment for onset shaping of the image. So most of Red cameras will still be there, and fashion victims will prefer to have a cheaper traditional camera. It is like there was this guy years ago that wanted to do a digital cinema camera with an optical viewfinder instead of a digital one, to judge picture and exposure only by eye like his professionals were used to with film, as a simpler way of doing this.

You can buy many less than $200 cheap cameras you can drop from a few inches many times without wrecking the main board. It is not a matter of price, but of careful design and the money you put into it. Any camera I couldn't drop from a few feet without affecting the nsin board I would not like to survive. Ultimately you would want a camera that would be completely functional and hardly scathed from such drop (the mountable lens though, is another issue). You really want something that survived 30 feet drop, as that might happen in your lifetime if you are an action or documentary person.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I wish the C300 was priced like a video camera.

What is the price of a video camera?

 

[Wayne Morellini]

David, with respect, the situation is such at the moment I'm getting checked out for dementia, and it just happens that the nutritional treatments that have helped me so much over the years turn out to be the same that research shows most slows dementia (hint, similar to those for MS, which my nephew has and I looked up for him, noting how similar various symptoms were, and incidentally, I thought being from the demyelination in Autism spectrum disorder, which I do have). So, I no longer have time for the ussual silly questions, as from the symptoms I'm past mild when off treatment and therefore possibly on a contnuouse slide (current research indicates they can prevent at earlier pre symptomatic stage which they can only now detect with scans). I think I might be out of range. I have an impossibly large portfolio of research and development to get out in a productive way that helps people, before its too late. As I'm 1/10 what I used to be on treatment, I have to get everything (well almost everything) out before I'm 1/100, where I've been before off treatment, and just as dumb as the average professional (not you, I know you ate more respectful) that has some mistaken go at me (and 1/1000 is seriously, seriously bad). Thanks.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Please note, I'm saying companies that are very dependent on camera sales in the low end of the market, for instance, solely. Red obviously caters to a higher end customer.

 

[Jeffery Anderson]

Cinema Camera do have a lot of gadgets that tradition camcorders don't, but the gap is getting smaller for sure.

Sensor tech is a very small part, you have a lot of different departments that depend upon the camera to work... even ENG rigs try to simplify the process, but still there are a lot of different options that required

 

[Wayne Morellini]

I'm having a hard time recognising how this has much to do with things.

The main basic element is the sensor, if it is not good enough, there is no point making the product.

As we are talking primarily about cinema and the multiple sensor configuration and routines can do most all that, and you add equipment to a rig with it, interfaces are cheaper these days, bu usjng cbeaoer parts, interface converters can be used. Pretty much ties up low end cinema camera.

Prosumer, some buttons.and controls, and auto settings routines. Add rig if needed.

Eng, add more controls and firmware. Add rig if needed.

As a camcorder and stills, prosumer firmware and auto routines, csmera routines and simple menue mode.

All these cameras can be in the exact same base camera unit, different grips/rigs can add extra features. But basically you can elegantly design a base unit with most of the functionality included. A lot of things are just different software cheap, and some cheap manual controls/buttons. You can configure menyes to be for different types of users, and different levels of features (like in the old Sanyos, which I suggested for them previously on Sanyo threads (I actually got the idea from the old Geoworks ensemble operating system, a legendary product a lesson in how to do ptoduct in the day) You add extra bits if needed. Think about it in this way, people are talking about the pocket BM replacement as being a camera head you add stuff too, but with this it includes everything you ussually need. You can also sell the same camera to all these groups of users. So even if you sell 10k units you can sell cheaper a more convenient camera for the user. However, because you are selling it as a consumer camera your sales can exceed over 100k, reducing your costs even further. Nothing niave about it. I was planning on doing a low cost, maybe multiple sensor cinema camera, hopefully with an electron multiplying tech sensor, prior to the pre scarlet fixed announcement camcorder talk (then gave it up in false expectation that they would do their camcorder, and we suffered without it).

 

[Wayne Morellini]

I forgot, for a basic unit you have to pick the right consumer tech (or one you can slightly modify), add software and some cheap manual controls (interfaces as well if needed). There are pre-engineered consumer platforms that people build products around. So, we are talking about $200+ on realistic pricing (compression instead of paying uncompressed, can raise the cost a bit).

Over a decade ago I priced, a end retail price of under $500 single lens, probably fullhd. Sort of like a BM pocket without lens or compression, or hard drive (on cheaper tech than BM). But then on a more advanced design even $100 or less cost with 3D lens/sensor stuff and even $200 price. A good menory dump, but I just can't remember details.

 

[David Peterson]

If you have never brought a single camera to market then you likely don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the true total costs to make and sell a camera.

 

[Ash Worth]

A C300 isn't a cinema camera for instance - it's a camcorder.

I've seen plenty of "cinema" from these cameras but thanks for reafirming that some RED owners continue to be douchbags when it comes to this old argument. Seriously thought these days were over. Sigh.

 

[Dan Kanes]

I've seen plenty of "cinema" from these cameras but thanks for reafirming that some RED owners continue to be douchbags when it comes to this old argument. Seriously thought these days were over. Sigh.

Sweet personal attack. Thanks for confirming that you don't know to separate logic from emotion, and for some reason you are feeling compromised emotionally on a personal level. I have no idea why that is, I'm not attacking you.

you also spelled Douchebag incorrectly.

By your logic a GoPro is also a cinema camera, I've seen "cinematic shots" come from it, I've also captured cinematic shots on my iPhone.

Also, know who you're talking to. I use all different kinds of cameras, I was using a C300-Mk2 and got payed handsomely for shooting with it last week. It has Autofocus. It has a hand strap, you hold it up to your face camcorder style if you want.

Camcorder is not a derogatory term, it derives from Camera + Recorder. Is a 5D Mark 2 a cinema camera ?So, in conclusion what makes any camera more or less a traditional cinema camera than any other by your definition? Is an XL-1 a cinema camera or a camcorder ?

 

[Wayne Morellini]

If you have never brought a single camera to market then you likely don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the true total costs to make and sell a camera.

No, you don't have any idea david. See my SIG and the next post.

Guys look at this one, he's basically saying that because I'm saying that it can be priced a bit more than similar consumer consumer cameras at the same quantity and that I have been planning complex product upto 100's of millions of runs, which a lot of the small next to nothing thousand runs (if they are fortunate to get upto a thousand) engineers around here have absolutely no experience in, that he knows what he talking about and I can't be right. How delusional, illogical and ignorant, as usual around this place. Boy I miss hanging out with real engineers.