- Posts: 4339
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
- Location: Los Angeles California
devinpickering wrote:John Brawley wrote:
Large sensors are really expensive to do well.
I’m sure once they can be done affordably well, then BMD will be sure to do a LF camera.
Honestly, that's sort of insulting a little bit how you put it there which is unnecessary. But more to my point - what does support for bm raw mean to what I'm talking about exactly? I'm more than well aware of what options are out there, my friend, I'm simply talking about what the possibility of a blackmagic LF camera would be. I'm not here to like, argue about which lens mount I'm thinking about using either. PL would be nice too. But again, I'm not here to just argue for the sake of arguing. I"m just trying to discuss ideas. And again, so what you're saying is that developing the 12K sensor was cheap? and developing a LF sensor would be impossible? why? lol I don't get it but alright. there's plenty of demand, plenty.
It’s fine to talk ideas. You are just making factually incorrect statements like this…
devinpickering wrote:And BM Raw as I originally believed was supposed to be an open format design is only accepted by Nikon, which I hate to say, isn't exactly known for their dedication to cinematography, all respect to Nikon as a photgraphy company.
It’s just totally wrong.
Canon, Panasonic and Sigma all make cameras that work with BRAW.
There’s a big difference between the R&D cost of something and then the per unit cost. You can see this with the 12K camera pricing. It started of as a 10K unit and then got halved once the unit cost of the sensor fab when past their minimum threshold. You don’t know how many units you’re going to sell until you sell (three or four years from now) and a lot of tech can change in that time.
It’s millions of dollars to R&D a sensor from scratch. It’s sent many companies broke trying to do it. It’s a very risky thing to do because it’s not only millions of dollars, but it’s a three year cycle from start to finish. You’re risking millions of dollars for a design you can’t ship until three years from now that may or may not work. You don’t know until you start the R&D phase.
Every single FF sensor out there in all cameras is actually usually at least two sensors stitched or butted together.
https://harvestimaging.com/blog/?p=hkivnhyqbmn&paged=7
This means the quality has to be very high, because you have multiple sensors ALL of which usually have some faults, that have to be programmed out individually and THEN they have to be exactly the same or calibrated to appear to be the same, which is also very difficult. RED hae just gone though this with their recent release. It’s not uncommon to have a very high failure rate right, more than 50% from the fab process.
It’s freaking exponentially harder to do a stiched / butted sensor which you HAVE to do if it’s 135 format. You’re trying to join at least two “good” sensors together (after you’ve thrown half of them away) and then you get even more that fail at this point too because you can still see the seam.
I don’t doubt that BMD will do a 135 format camera. They have probably the very best track record of any company making cameras to bring higher end, higher cost tools to the masses.
Once they can actually do it, I’m sure they will. Making their own sensor means they now have a lot more control. Remember when you see a 135 format camera from BMD, know that they made the decision to do it 3 years before that date.
JB
John Brawley ACS
Cinematographer
Currently - Los Angeles
Cinematographer
Currently - Los Angeles