1080p cameras when?

BrianStanding wrote on 3/27/2006, 6:58 AM
It seems to me that HD is still an emerging technology, and most of the offerings we have seen from the big camera manufacturers are halfway technologies. 720p, 1080i, Cineframe, etc. all fall short of where it looks like this is all headed: 1080p
(see thread: http://www.sonymediasoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=448318)

So, I'm curious about the collective wisdom of this forum. How long do you think it will take Sony, Canon, Panasonic or JVC to offer a sub-$10,000 1080p-native camera?

Comments

Spot|DSE wrote on 3/27/2006, 7:11 AM
A long time. Heat is a huge issue. With CMOS, this is definitely a possibility, but the sheer amount of data to be processed is significant, not to mention the storage. Look at how Panasonic alone is doing their vertical and horizontal pixel shift to get 1080p24. And that's an all but useless image, IMO. Imagine that with 36 more full frames, off of a 540 x 960 chip.
I'd expect at least 5 more years in the lower price category until you might hear an announcement, and probably 3 years in sub 50k price category. And that might not even be a decent image either.
And for broadcasters to ship 60p? A long, long time. 60PsF, maybe... But that won't prevent BD or HD-DVD from shipping with 60p.
BrianStanding wrote on 3/27/2006, 1:37 PM
Hmmmm... disappointing... no disrespect, Doug, but I sincerely hope you're wrong. So, what are people going to be watching on all these 1080p displays they're buying?

Over on the DVInfo forum, there's all this talk about Red Digital Cinema, and other high-end, "affordable" HD+ resolution cameras for independent film at variable frame-rates, including 30P and 24P. I would hope that that kind of talk would not only suggest that the technology is possible, but if folks like that are successful at introducing something to raise the bar, it will put pressure on other manufacturers to produce a 1080p cam for the proles.

Maybe I'm underestimating the technical challenges in producing a 1080p image.
Coursedesign wrote on 3/27/2006, 1:51 PM
So, what are people going to be watching on all these 1080p displays they're buying?

Moments ago, all displays available in the stores were 720x displays. Now they're 1080x displays, with a visibly higher resolution.

The "p" in this case comes from the display technology. LCD, DLP, plasma, etc. are by nature progressive displays, so to use them you have to feed them a progressive signal, created by deinterlacing if necessary.

1080p is available in the production stage before it comes to broadcasting (OTA, cable, satellite) which carries its own transmission standards issues.

It will come soon enough to the home, in the meantime just enjoy the GOOD content (when available) in 1080i deinterlaced to show on a 1080p screen.

Good story telling survived 480 lines of black&white, with changing colors, signal clobbered by incompetent analog cable guys, and much more... :O)
Patryk Rebisz wrote on 3/27/2006, 2:00 PM
Resolution alone is only a small fraction. Panasoic's Varicam is "only" 720p but theimage is superb. Panasonic's HVX200 is also 720p and the image is nothing to rave about.
BrianStanding wrote on 3/27/2006, 2:03 PM
"Good story telling survived 480 lines of black&white, with changing colors, signal clobbered by incompetent analog cable guys, and much more... "

Which is exactly why I'm clinging desperately to Standard Definition as tightly as I can! I'm not very keen on spending money I don't currently have to replace my trusty PD-150 until I'm reasonably sure whatever I replace it with will actually serve me for a while. When I do make the jump, I hope to make it to the format people are actually going to be watching, which looks to me like it will (someday) be 1080p. Of course, if that's 10 years away before it's feasible, I'll have to reconsider.

Either that, or maybe I'll just go get a Super 16mm film camera. They're pretty cheap on E-bay these days. ;-)
Spot|DSE wrote on 3/27/2006, 2:32 PM
Brian, you mentioned 5K camcorders. RED isn't 5k...not by triple.
Second, converting 1080i/60 on a low cost camcorder to 60p makes for a nice image if you have the right tools. Best image? No, but very nice nonetheless. We've been experimenting a lot with upscaling/downscaling in a variety of tools as part of a project for a hardware vendor. 1080p is VERY difficult to record, and it's not going to happen inexpensively on a 1/3 CCD. As Patryk pointed out, the HVX tried to go there, and that image simply....well...:-) It ain't what it was advertised as, and leave it at that. If it was easy to do, it would be announced already. Kudos to Panasonic for trying to do it via DSP, but it didn't quite get there. Since you're looking at ViperStream for this...it's a far, far cry from 5k in cost.
For the time being, the only 1080p60 content you're going to see will be either film originated, or very high end dig like the Viperstream, or a disk-based system taking the 4:2:2 from the JVC, which is entirely possible. Just not for 5K.
that said, a 16mm cam won't give you much more. Only the negative is higher res, I'd believe. Loss in scanning, you're not going to be *that* much further ahead than what you can do with well-lit HD. And for 16mm, the cost is quite high. You'd be better off doing 35mm. (talk to Simon at Digital Film Group...he's got some great advice)
farss wrote on 3/27/2006, 2:54 PM
DSE is so right and I'd go further, even if Red brings in what he's talking about at $50K that's very, very cheap and that's without glass.
Just a half decent HD viewfinder will not leave you much change out of $5K, glass doesn't seem to have gone down much in cost in the last 50 years, so I cannot think of any reason why it would suddenly start to get cheaper, it's a painstaking process making optics for 35mm film or HD video cameras, it's way, way more demanding than optics for still cameras.

Put it this way, buy a Z1 today and by the time you can afford a 60p camera with good glass the receipt for the Z1 will be very faded.
This isn't a technology problem, it's a limits of physics, the 1/3" CCDs in your PD150 are barely adequate for SD, just look at how much better 2/3" SD cameras perform and the cost ratio, over 10 times the price. Now extrapolate that to HD. See even 2/3" CCDs for HD is really, really pushing it, even the F950 is far from a perfect camera and it cannot record the full signal to tape, only BIG HD arrays over dual fibre.
If you think there'll be some miraculous breakthrough I wouldn't be holding my breath, the limits of physics are very real, just ask Intel.

Bob.
BrianStanding wrote on 3/27/2006, 3:55 PM
Lots to think about. Thanks guys, for an enlightening discussion. I'm probably still going to stick in the SD world for a while... let's see what the Z2u, HVX-300, XL-H2 or the GY HD101 have to offer.
Coursedesign wrote on 3/27/2006, 4:09 PM
Just a half decent HD viewfinder will not leave you much change out of $5K

..and a wholly decent HD viewfinder runs $18,000...

But then it really IS good. Native pixel HD resolution, good color, and can focus easily on a non-descript white wall...
Jay Gladwell wrote on 3/28/2006, 7:19 AM

Brian, I'm with you, and we'll just leave it at that.


Quryous wrote on 3/28/2006, 7:22 AM
Brian, I agree. The Z1 was a good first effort. It inspires me to wait for the Z2.
No hurry. As soon as Sony wants my money they will bring it out.