Adam Langdon wrote:Wayne Steven wrote:Can you directly deny what the the few things the mystery poster over at cinema 5D said?
That's not how truth works. Rumors are just that. You don't have to prove the information is incorrect and if you can't prove it, it doesn't make it true.
I can start any rumor i want about BMD and if i'm vague or specific it doesn't make it valid.
Adam, it's a bit more complex than that.
If somebody states it as true, nothing you say except proof really disproves it. Doctors and skeptics fall into the self validating delusionary trap of denying the only evidence they have at times, stopping the build up of the evidence chain, and is bad. You have only the quality of evidence you have, and you try to increase that quality. If somebody who knows some simple facts like these, can state it as specifically false, it increases the quality of evidence that it is not true in a simple way, and we can move on. But, avoiding to deny it makes it look more credible.
You know that John said was more specific in a vague way, but not a denial.
And from such a credible source. This is the same specs that were leaked and rumoured before the 12K was announced. We're back on that again...
Does John know the source? Rumours are often about not knowing the source, including ones from really good sources.
What spec before NAB is John referring too? Not much spec was given, a fullframe lower resolution edition, and smaller cameras with the tech coming. A smaller camera could be ?? A full frame ?? lower resolution could be ?? Inevitably all these things are probably going be planned to be coming, some year, it is just debatable if the smaller ones will use this tech instead of Sony or something. So, it's not even worth denying as far as the rumour goes, but short term, this year, that is worth denying, even by saying "one decade it could happen" or "forget it" or "not soon" without even saying "not this year" specifically. The way certain people are saying things, I imagine the rumour might even be true. But we'll worth discussing, as I am excited about the prospect of full frame and smaller cameras, but I am 100% unexcited about the native ISO being 800. Which pretty much makes me think this isn't just Sony or Samsung tech (as has been out our there. If that was so, I would expect 17 stops from Samsung sensor tech at this size pixel cell, and iso in tens of thousands for Sony tech). As it's talking about iso 800, that might be improved Fairchild line, or one of the many sensor makers beneath them. With Samsung or Fairchild, why not dual simultaneous gain? I hope the 14 stops latitude is for very clean at 12k at physical sensor pad surface, and it hits it out of the ball park at lower res, and using the different colours on the filter.
But, getting real, I didn't expect this to match the native latitude performance of the Panosonic 8k organic sensor, or maybe any other non resolution based performance.
But let's imagine. Using noise reduction of downscaling to 4k or 2k, can we get 3200+ iso,even 6400 iso. I'd prefer ISO in the 10,000 or 20,000+ iso performance ability myself.
Can we actually not only get, but eat our cake too? I don't mind so much if I shoot 12k, but have to shoot 4k in a dark night scene, the audience's eyesight resolution drops with light value too. Put an auto mode that seamlessly drops the resolution automatically in dark scenes to 4k and 2k options, fine with me.
Can you imagine, if the 12k people see complaining about actually saves the day in low light and high latitude at low resolution. Smoking!! As Jim C used to say.