This is valid to a point. Each manufacturer processes the RGB image differently. Depending on the manufacturer and with enough processing power you can make any deficient imager look good. I always find 2/3rds cameras do look better than 1/2 inch CCD HD cameras. The larger imager is generally quieter has better dynamic range and has a faster ISO due to the larger pixels. I will tell you I have shot with the Sony 355 1/2 inch XDCAM HD and the F900R. The 355 has a bit less dynamic range and sensitivity BUT due to price point the processing in the 355 and the 900R are not the same. If Sony wanted too they could make both imagers look the same in every aspect except DOF. But I would suppose the cost to better process the 355's imager would be more involved and make the camera cost prohibitive for it's price point compared to a F900R. Of course the two respective imagers might be 180 degrees apart in their makeup and design. Also another
issue is glass. The smaller 1/2inch imager needs glass that is better corrected in all aspects compared to a 2/3rds imager. The smaller the imager you start with the more obvious the errors when projected compared to a 2/3rds imager side by side.
If a 24 Megapixel and a 12 Megapixel imager are both physically the same size odds are the 24 Megapixel sensor in it's native "engineering bench" state will be a slower ISO due to the smaller pixel size. However with proprietary processing and noise reduction algorithms the 24 Megapixel sensor can certainly be pushed to the same ISO as the 12 Megapixel sensor probably with noise issues only in the higher ISO's but then again maybe not. There are no black and white certainties in the sensor game. You just can't make assumptions based on specs and imager size alone. There is too much voodoo going on behind the imaging sensor.
Regarding the video tests linked to earlier; the test that shows the rolling shutter problem is the "train test". When the train passes by the rolling shutter artifact is blantantly obvious. A CCD imager won't do that. That's why all proffesional HD cameras are still CCD based. In the Alan Gordon test I can tell the cars are stretching as they exit the frame. If I where to shoot handheld footage with rapid pans or simply follow fast moving objects the rolling shutter artifact becomes a big issue for me. You also get into ugly blanking issues if strobes are in the scene. I'm sure there are people who could careless but then I'm not one of them.
Also to clear up a little mis-information the RED sensor's dimensions are Super-35 just like the Panavision Genesis, Sony F35 and the Arri D-21. RED simply underscans it's sensor to create the lower resolutions the same what Nikon is doing. Hence in RED if you are not shooting 4K you are not using the full sensor and your motion picture 35mm lens's perspective is magnified as resolution drops.
Sorry for the bloviating,
TMcD
------------------------------------
Search the offical complete Avid-L archives at:
http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
Avid L2, Where the Answers are.Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Avid-L2/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Avid-L2/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:Avid-L2-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:Avid-L2-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Avid-L2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
No comments:
Post a Comment