Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sony claims to be releasing world's smallest full HD video camera

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sony claims to be releasing world's smallest full HD video camera



    Can they really make optics and an imager actually capable of showing 1000 lines of resolution at the price point and form factor?

    I hope we start seeing some resolution testing of these tiny HD cameras so we can get to the bottom of this. If by chance testing show extinction of resolution test at 600 or 700 lines, as I think they may, then users would be better off setting these cameras to a 720p mode if available and have less compressed and easier edited on the NLE video files.
    - Mark

    Core 2 Duo E6400 o/c 3.2GHz - Asus P5B Deluxe - 2048MB Corsair Twinx 6400C4 - ATI AIW X1900 - Seagate 7200.10 SATA 320GB primary - Western Digital SE16 SATA 320GB secondary - Samsung SATA Lightscribe DVD/CDRW- Midiland 4100 Speakers - Presonus Firepod - Dell FP2001 20" LCD - Windows XP Home

  • #2
    There have been several discoveries in the last 2 years that would allow for even smaller HD optics at a reasonable cost and with good light sensitivity, so the answer to that one is a big yes.

    There also recent discoveries would allow for tiny but low distortion/high transparency lenses.

    Bottom line is things have been moving so fast on both the sensor and optics fronts that before long a quality HD camera will fit in your tie clasp....or less. There is even talk of megapixel artificial retina's.

    A plus for Sony (gawd, I hate saying that ) is their improving Hole-Accumulation Diode tech whose purpose is to reduce dark current noise on the CCD.
    Last edited by Dr Mordrid; 3 April 2008, 22:17.
    Dr. Mordrid
    ----------------------------
    An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.

    I carry a gun because I can't throw a rock 1,250 fps

    Comment


    • #3
      And who can hold the darn thing still? Zillions of family videos with the shakes guaranteed!
      Brian (the devil incarnate)

      Comment


      • #4
        With enough spare pixels and image stabilization....

        Then there's always tripods, but that negates the whole mini-cam dynamic
        Dr. Mordrid
        ----------------------------
        An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.

        I carry a gun because I can't throw a rock 1,250 fps

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Dr Mordrid View Post
          Then there's always tripods, but that negates the whole mini-cam dynamic
          Agreed, but it probably does not have a tripod bush, anyway, because there's no room!

          I still prefer my clunky old mini-DV I bought 12 years ago: it weighs almost a kg and it's big enough to hold with buttons that fit fingers, not a knitting needle. I can hold that steady for wide-angle to middle-range shots but I prefer a tripod anyway. I think my entry to the recent Ulead competition was the only one that didn't have the shakes. (http://www.bnellis.com/files/myvillage.htm)

          Image stabilisation doesn't work miracles, either, whether it be in the camera (optical/electronic) or in the NLE. (http://www.bnellis.com/msp8.1/Shakers.wmv)
          Brian (the devil incarnate)

          Comment


          • #6
            Oh come on...we all know that Hollywierd loves to put the Steadycam in the hands of a cameraman with Cerebral Palsy under the influence of Starbucks...it gives us "interesting effects"...
            Hey, Donny! We got us a German who wants to die for his country... Oblige him. - Lt. Aldo Raine

            Comment


            • #7
              I'm thinking of buying a camcorder of sorts just before my trip over there in August.

              What am I going to be buying?

              Edit: Or even buy it when I get there if that saves some $$ and isn't inconvenient or problematic with the warranty.
              FT.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Dr Mordrid View Post
                With enough spare pixels and image stabilization....

                I'm with Brian on this one. Got the Sony CX7 not long ago and it's no problem shooting at wide, but go to tele and........ it's like assuming the hand/arm position without holding anything and trying not to shake it....


                ..
                Diplomacy, it's a way of saying “nice doggie”, until you find a rock!

                Comment


                • #9
                  I had some long talks recently with the Panasonic engineers regarding optics and imagers. It is their strong opinion that building 1/3" imager optics that can actually resolve 1080p would be very expensive. They were talking about between $5000 and $10000 for a standard zoom lens. This is the reason that while the HVX200 uses 1/3" imagers for sensitivity reasons, the native resolution is 960x540 bi-axially shifted 1/2 pixel for an effective resolution about 40% greater than native. The green channel is shifted from the red and blue. They also informed me that to this day producing a 1080p native imager is quite difficult. Getting all 2.2 million photosites operating, with the same sensitiviy, black level offset, ...not easy. Then there is the problem of yields.

                  I am a big "technology will solve these problems and bring prices down" type of person but as I stated in the original post I would love to see come resolution charts when these cameras are tested. The only camera that I've seen mentioned having been tested for resolution is the Sony EX1 which uses 3-1/2" CMOS sensors. I think it was Videomaker that said it topped their resolution charts so it is at least capable of resolving 800 lines. The EX1 uses an array that is shifted 45 degrees so that vertical resolution is 1080 while horizontal is 960 but due to the clever arrangement interpolation can provide 1920. It will be interesting to see if better testing of resolution will reveal varience (or how much) between vertical and horizontal resolution of these cameras which use different methods to obtain the final pixel count. And I also wonder how the "rolling shutter" of the CMOS based EX1 will handle tricky light sources like strobe lights other flickering sources? That has always been a drawback of the rolling shutter used on "affordable" CMOS imagers.

                  For example, most consumer imagers might actually contain 1080p resolution but they are Bayer pattern sensors so only luma information can actually be extracted from the imager. Chroma must be calculated. Of course this is how it's done in digital cameras as well to good result but if you look at the resolution testing of dSLR's then you will see that the advertised resolution of the camera is no where near the actual tested resolving power. This is due to the Bayer sensor and possibly the optics. But as Doc pointed out newer (and many older) prime lenses are quite sharp even close to wide open.

                  If we look at test results from the Nikon D60 with a 3872x2592 imager, absolute resolution according to dpreview is 2200x1800 or around 65% of the resolution of the Bayer pattern imager. And this is for luma, I would expect chroma to be much worse due to Bayer filtering of color information.

                  So what's my point? I thought a discussion of the imager technology and optics might be a worthwhile exchange of ideas. There are quite a few variables in stating an imager is "1080p" Is it 1080p like the Panavision Genesis? That sensor will do 1080p no problem. In fact it has three times that horizontal resolution with photosites for R, G, and B. And double the vertical resolution so that two RGB pixel units are one effective pixel (pixel binning) so that you get 1 additional stop of sensitivity. This camera with a good lens I'm sure will "get" just about every one of those 1920x1080 pixels. Same with good 35mm film scans, we all know there is more than 2.2Mp in well shot 35mm film. So 1080p at the high end is easily attained by the best technology available to pros. But how about at the lower end of the pro spectrum? Or the consumer realm? I know the Red Digital camera can do 1080p easily for about $25k with lens. And it looks like for $6.7k the Sony EX1 will get pretty darn close. But how about these consumer cams with inexpensive optics and Bayer pattern imagers? I don't know but I think it will be interesting to see some testing and what the designers come up with in coming years and months. I suspect that once the big guys (JVC, Panasonic, Sony, Canon) all reach 1080p with their video cameras in the consumer area there will be a battle to see who has the best or "true" 1080p image. This is a good thing for the consumer I think. In the digital still camera field the "race" for manufacturers isn't so much about image quality (IMO) but more about who has the most pixels.

                  I think in many way we are lucky video will be capped at 1080p (for a while hopefully!) so that manufacturers can refine imagers, optics, and software/hardware so we can actually "get" every one of those 2.2 million pixels.

                  It's going to be very interesting to see how the consumer video cameras evolve now that there is a pretty good variety of cameras to choose from. Once they all say "1080p" on the box how will the manufacturers differentiate themselves? Logic would dictate they will do it as they did it with DV by going after image quality. I hope that is the case and we start seeing really great image quality at really great prices.
                  - Mark

                  Core 2 Duo E6400 o/c 3.2GHz - Asus P5B Deluxe - 2048MB Corsair Twinx 6400C4 - ATI AIW X1900 - Seagate 7200.10 SATA 320GB primary - Western Digital SE16 SATA 320GB secondary - Samsung SATA Lightscribe DVD/CDRW- Midiland 4100 Speakers - Presonus Firepod - Dell FP2001 20" LCD - Windows XP Home

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Fat Tone View Post
                    I'm thinking of buying a camcorder of sorts just before my trip over there in August.

                    What am I going to be buying?

                    Edit: Or even buy it when I get there if that saves some $$ and isn't inconvenient or problematic with the warranty.

                    I am in the same situation and I don't know what it will be. I do know that it will be natively progressive and have an imager at least 1/3" in size. And the progressive format it outputs must be able to be "decoded" by my NLE so I can actually edit the progressive footage. Many consumers cams like the Canons do 24PsF which IS 24p coming off the imager, then stored in 2:3:3:2 pulldown for legacy reasons, then the NLE is supposed to recognize this cadence and reverse it. Basically throwing away the dirty frame in each group of 5 frames, leaving perfect 24p. If you read around though from users you will see this is easier said than done.
                    - Mark

                    Core 2 Duo E6400 o/c 3.2GHz - Asus P5B Deluxe - 2048MB Corsair Twinx 6400C4 - ATI AIW X1900 - Seagate 7200.10 SATA 320GB primary - Western Digital SE16 SATA 320GB secondary - Samsung SATA Lightscribe DVD/CDRW- Midiland 4100 Speakers - Presonus Firepod - Dell FP2001 20" LCD - Windows XP Home

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X