Sony 35mm NXcam

I really want to know more about this.

Hmmm the 1080p60 is interesting, how are they planning on doing that to avchd? either its a miracle or its gonna be shitty looking.

no handle? psshht, amateur camera at best maybe

The fact that they're most likely going to charge twice the price of an AF100 for a camera that only shoots 4:2:0 leads me to believe that this is yet another fail on Sony's part.

I heard this straight from sonys technical advisor/ rep's mouth. What they do for avchd since its limited by interlaced video. It takes one video and writes it, during transfering to the card, as two 720 videos(of the same video) that get "interlaced" basicaly they interlace the same video so that its an i. but you dont get the interlacing since its interlaced with the video that doesnt have an offset like a real interlaced video. not sure if this made sense

thing doesnt even have a wide angle and look how small it is.

POS.

lol wut? i was saying the bitrate of avchd isn't fast enough for the 1080p60p to be very good. HVX pumps out 100mbps bitrate for 720p60p...

k well theres actualy an other limitation with progressive video that not a lot of people know about

Wait what, im confused.

aparently avchd needs to be interlaced at 1080 for some reason because of the way its encoded. the work around that sony found was to have two videos that are progressive be put together somehow so that its two fields but not actualy interlaced

Hmm interesting. The way video cameras work is wild. HVXs used 3 images (onw of each primary color) at 540p and combine for 1080p, its wild.

yah thats generally how 3ccds work. I looked into it and most of them have one sensor for each color individualy and it is added up in recording. its crazy stuff when you get into how each peice works. talking to reps and technical advisors has opened my eyes at how crazy every detail is in a camera.

Correct...Most 3CCD cameras do this with pixel shifting.

I'm calling bullshit. The RED ONE was supposed to be 12-ish, when in reality its about 9. Also, 20 stops of dynamic range? That would look like an HDR image: horrible.

I think all these vein attempts at absurd camera specs are laughable. 4k output? Useless; Avatar was shot in 1080p. Even Canon's 20 something megapixel 5D mkII has resolution so high that Canon L lenses aren't sharp enough to keep up. It's like camera technology has turned into a dick-measuring marketing scheme.

The truth is that we need things like overexposure and underexposure to represent an artistic visual interpretation. Light is relative; if everything was within the dynamic range, there would be no contrast, no vivid presence of absolute black or white. Just visual "evidence." Seeing the individual hairs on a person's face from 20 ft away isn't normal. We need to embrace the fallacies of human perception because it is part of what drives us emotionally, and with these unrealistic visual renditions, we are keeping ourselves at too far a remove. I've never been inspired by 60i footage for this very reason.

Make an hpx170 with an interchangeable lens system, and your consumer camera problems will be solved.

nooooooob...bit rate doesn't entirely determine image quality. Some codecs are more proficient than others. 1 mpbs with one codec is not equivalent to 1 mbps with another codec, so this is entirely possible.

I was strictly talking about how at 24mbps, avchd, is going to be interesting at 1080p60, i feel like its not gonna be that tight.

I'll take one, nikon mount please.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/10/sonys-affordable-pmw-f3-super-35mm-camcorder-announced-still/