1080p digital video camera for under 6k

[erdega79]

Originally Posted by thunderhawk

Unless you use better compression :lol:

Yes, but compression is evil . I mean this will be used by professionals mostly and they want uncompressed original files to work with.

[gigashadowwolf]

Originally Posted by erdega79

Yes, but compression is evil . I mean this will be used by professionals mostly and they want uncompressed original files to work with.

I happen to be a professional director/editor and I have to say even professionals rarely work in uncompressed. I am doing it for the first time now actually for standard def and a 60 minute clip is 14 Gb. The most common compression for professional use is DV (what the camera's typically record on). Digital projection in theaters is usually 2k or 4k but is compressed. They have been doing this since before blu-ray by using several discs which is still much much cheaper than several film prints like before.

To answer the questions about Analog film VS. Digital Video Film is still by far the preferred medium by most professionals. 35 mm surpasses even the best digital cameras currently not to mention 75mm (IMAX). Also an analog camera is good nearly indefinitely. Once you buy the camera the majority of improvements that improve quality are done either to the film itself or the lenses. The Camera doesn't need to be re bought.

As far as availably of video cameras that shoot better than 1080p, professionally the Genesis (Apocalypto, Superman Returns), Arriflex D-20 and Viper cameras are the most popular but are also very, very expensive. Last year the Red One came out, it records at 4 k (4096×2304) and available for $17,000 dollars. However that does not include lenses, hard drives, batteries, mounts, eyepiece, LCD display, cables, etc. so it comes out to about $25,000 for the minimum workable camera. The data is 220 Mbits/second thats about 2 giga-bytes a minute. Two new Red cameras come out next year one that captures 5k and one that captures 3k (much cheaper).

[Chevypower]

Wow, nice thread mine. 3 yrs old, that's gotta be a record. I have to express time and time again, film is not analog! It is optical. Betacam SP is an analog format (electronic, but not digital). I haven't seen DV used much in professional use, but I have seen DVCAM, which I guess is the same compression but different tape speed, and of course DigiBeta. I am happy with the XDCAM EX quality and workflow. I think it really is the best thing out there for the money, and it's so efficient.

[Bobby Henderson]

of course, it's double the bandwidth and storage of 24/30.However that shouldn't be problem for long , it's mainly that there is no approved standard and no inputs and outputs that support that standard

Broadcast HD material, whether it is sent over the air, by satellite or cable, is already very lossy compressed. And that's just 1080i/60 and 720p/60 material.

Doing 1080p/60 will at least double the existing level of data compression. At some point the increasing severity of compression softens/blurs out image detail and completely defeats the purpose of HD.

The 720p movies Apple offers for download have really severe levels of compression. Many critics have complained the extreme level of data compression blurs out so much detail that the resulting image looks hardly any better at all than a regular 480p DVD. With all the blocking, color banding and other issues going on the results can even look worse.

I think the best anyone can hope for in broadcast standards anytime soon is for 1080i/60 to be replaced with 1080p/30 (and possibly 1080p/24 for movies). But there's no easy way to do that. Just about all television stations and networks have hardware set up only for 60Hz operation. Lots of existing HDTV sets are only capable of 60Hz operation as well. Some fancy, backward compatible workarounds would have to be developed to allow that 60Hz only equipment to still see the picture while passing on a 30fps or 24fps progressive image to HDTV monitors with better capabilities.

FWIW, I don't think there's much in the way at all of material that would fit 1080p/60 specification. Movies are 24fps, not 60. Lots of sports programs are broadcast at 60fps, but shot only in 720p resolution. 1080p/60 operation in broadcast just isn't every necessary now.

[The_Snowman]

Originally Posted by Chevypower

Wow, nice thread mine. 3 yrs old, that's gotta be a record. I have to express time and time again, film is not analog! It is optical.

And to think that, since then, you can nearly change the title from under 6k to under $600

[Deciazulado]

Now for 6K you get the 1080 x 1920p Sony EX1 with variable speeds, time lapse and goodies

[quexos]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

Now for 6K you get the 1080 x 1920p Sony EX1 with variable speeds, time lapse and goodies

6K ??? you can get a 1080 camera for barely more than 1K and it seems already expensive. You must be a millionaire to consider 6K a normal price for a camera.
It certainly is too much for me

[Chevypower]

Quexos, the EX1 is a professional camcorder that is being bought up by TV stations and videographers. The quality gives a $100k HDCAM a run for it's money.... I consider the EX1 to be a bargain too.... it's not to be compared with consumer HD cameras.