For 4K cameras, price is A thing, but not THE thing

I'm back from NAB, where the overriding theme this year was 4K everything--cameras, monitors, editors, special effects, routers, switchers, etc. Perhaps the biggest battle was in cameras, where AJA Video entered the market for the first time and Blackmagic Design and Sony announced new 4K cameras. (JVC also announced its first 4K digital cinematography cameras, but gave no prices or availability dates.) 4K cameras have been a "thing" ever since the RED One, but $10,000 was the least that you could spend to buy one (Canon's 1D C) until Blackmagic shipped its 4K Production Camera late last year, priced at $2,995.

The floodgates have now opened:

• Panasonic's GH4: $1,699, or $3,299 bundled with its SDI/XLR interface dock
• Sony's A7S: $2,499.99, will ship in July
• Blackmagic's 4K Production Camera: $2,995
• Blackmagic's URSA EF: $5,995
• AJA's Cion: $8,995

None of these cameras cost more than a fraction of the price of an ARRI Alexa ($80,000+) or Amira ($40,000-$52,000 depending on enabled features,) RED EPIC-M Dragon ($50,000+), or Sony F55 ($29,000+) or F65 ($65,000+). You'd think that ARRI, RED and Sony would be shaking in their boots, but they're not. There are two reasons why the companies that make high-end cameras aren't necessarily threatened by the new inexpensive models:

1. There are many elements that determine whether or not a specific camera is appropriate for an application, and
2. You get what you pay for.

Here are some (but far from all) of the elements of camera design that influence how the camera performs and what it's good (or not good) for:

• Imager size
• Imager resolution
• Color space (e.g., YUV or xvYCC)
• Color sampling (e.g., 4:2:0, 4:2:2 or 4:4:4)
• Bit depth (8-bit vs. 10-bit)
• Video output resolution (DCI 4K (4096 x 2160), UHD (3840 x 2160), 1080, 720)
• Video compression formats (e.g., AVCHD, H.264, ProRes, DNxHD, XAVC, XAVC S, AVC-Intra, AVC-Ultra)
• RAW storage and/or output
• Frame rates supported at specified resolution (e.g., 24, 25, 29.97, 30, 59.94, 60 or 120)
• Dynamic range in stops
• Native ISO speed
• Sensitivity (maximum usable ISO speed, NOT the camera's rated top ISO speed)
• Lens mount(s)
• Lens control (manual, automatic or limited automatic)
• Image stabilization (digital or optical, in the camera body or in the lens, or no stabilization)
• Viewfinder, display screen, both or none
• User interface design (e.g., touchscreen(s), menus, dedicated buttons and knobs)
• Storage capacity
• Storage media
• Internal or external storage
• Video interface(s) (HDMI or HD-SDI, with different HDMI versions and, for HD-SDI, maximum speeds)
• Audio connector(s)
• Balanced or unbalanced audio in
• Phantom power availability
• Run time on battery
• Removable or permanent battery
• External power voltage and connector
• Camera shape
• Camera weight
• Ruggedness
• Manufacturer and design maturity (how much experience does the manufacturer have in designing cameras, and how long has the manufacturer been making this particular camera)

There's an enormous number of elements to consider, and some elements work much better for certain applications than others. In some cases, buyers have a wealth of cameras to choose from, while in other cases, there may only be a handful that can do what they need.

Rather than salivating when you hear about a new low-priced camera with attractive features, ask yourself these questions:

1. What am I going to use it for?
2. What trade-offs am I willing to accept (for example, are you willing to live with less sensitivity in order to get a higher-quality compression format?)
3. How often will I use the camera (do you know that you'll be using it over and over on new projects, or do you have one project in mind and you don't know when you'll have the next one?)
4. How much can I afford to pay?

Answering the first two questions will allow you to compile a list of cameras that meet your needs. Answering the final two questions will tell you whether you should buy or rent the camera that you can afford. In some cases, you may decide to buy a less-expensive camera and use your remaining budget to buy lenses or mounting equipment. In other cases, you could rent a camera and use the savings elsewhere on your production, or rent a camera that you can't afford to buy that's superior to other choices for your application. In short, you should answer the four questions first, rather than starting with the price of the camera and instead hoping that it will meet your needs.

It's tough out here for a camera (maker)

Over the last seven years, we've seen a number of companies jump into the professional cinema camera market. Some have had an easier time of it than others. Red launched its first camera, the Red One, at NAB 2006, and a small number shipped to customers more than a year later. Red announced its Scarlet camera in late 2008 but didn't ship a much different (and more expensive) Scarlet model until about three years later. Canon's first cinema camera, the EOS 300, shipped in January 2012, and the EOS 100 and 500 followed in the fall of 2012. Blackmagic Design launched its Cinema Camera at NAB 2012 but didn't start shipping in quantity for almost a year; Blackmagic's Pocket Cinema Camera was announced at NAB 2013 and started shipping small quantities in August 2013. Its 4K Production Camera, also announced at NAB 2013, has only just recently begun shipping in small quantities. Finally, there's the Digital Bolex D16, which started as a Kickstarter project in April, 2012 and started shipping to early supporters at the end of 2013.

Of Red, Canon, Blackmagic Design and Digital Bolex, only Canon shipped its cameras close to when they said they'd ship. All four companies shipped cameras with problems, but Canon's were minor. By comparison, Red spent two years debugging the firmware in its Red One and subsequent cameras, and Blackmagic's cameras are missing essential features, such as audio meters, an indicator of how much storage is available and the ability to format storage in the camera, that should have been there when they shipped. Digital Bolex's D16 shipped late, but so far, it seems to be working reasonably well.

It's interesting, but not surprising, that Canon was the only company that shipped its cinema cameras on time and with relatively few bugs. After all, Canon shipped its first camera in 1936, its first camcorder in 1981, and its first digital DSLR in 1995. They knew how to make or integrate everything needed for a Cinema Camera when they launched the EOS 300 in 2012. (Some of you may be wondering why I didn't mention Arri and its Alexa cameras, but the story is much the same as Canon: Arri launched its first film camera in 1924, and its first digital camera, the Arriflex D-20, in 2005.) Red and Digital Bolex, on the other hand, were founded specifically to make cinema cameras, while Blackmagic Design made an extensive line of video hardware and software before gearing up to make cameras.

My point, which I admit it's taken a long time to get to, is that it's hard to make a good cinema camera. You can't simply go through parts catalogs and find all the pieces you need to build a camera; in some cases, you can't even depend on a parts manufacturer to build the parts you need to your specifications. Blackmagic ran into problems with CMOS imagers on both its original Cinema Camera and 4K Production Camera. Both Blackmagic and Red ran into integration problems--getting all the parts to work together as designed--and both struggled with firmware needed to implement promised features. Blackmagic's cameras use too much power--third-party tests show that its 4K Production Camera can burn through its internal battery in 20 minutes.

I'm not saying that any of these companies shouldn't have entered the cinema camera market; Red changed users' expectations for price and imaging quality, and Blackmagic pushed prices far below where they'd been for comparable cameras from competitors. However, they (and their customers) have learned how hard it is to build a good cinema camera. Given what's happened since 2006, I'd say that other than lenses, cinema cameras are the hardest broadcast or cinema products to design and build.

As we prepare for NAB 2014, we're likely to see a new round of camera introductions. When a company with no previous camera design or manufacturing experience announces a new cinema camera, my recommendation is to not be one of the first customers in line with a preorder. To be safe, you should add at least a year to the company's announced release date, and probably a year after that for the camera's firmware to be stabilized and for all key features to be implemented. The frustration you save will be your own.

More thoughts on the new Canon and Red cameras

Now that the dust has cleared a bit from Thursday's announcements by Canon and Red, I've had some time to consider the new cameras, and the compromises that both companies made when developing them.

First, the Canon C300. Physically, it's a gorgeous camera--it reminds me of classic 16mm film camera designs. What I'm less impressed with are some of the compromises in the Canon design. For example, the C300 has automatic nothing--no autofocus, auto-aperture, or white balance. The lack of automatic controls may be good for teaching cinematography, just as when learning how to drive, it's better to start by learning how to use a manual transmission. However, in the real world, cinematographers often use autofocus, especially for documentaries and sports. And why no auto white balance, when just about every other digital cinema camera has it? Another big "miss" is the lack of a dual-link HD-SDI output and no 4:4:4 mode. Yet another questionable decision is support for 60 fps only at 720p resolution, together with a sensor that, while it's technically 4K, only outputs 1920 x 1080. The result is a weird mix: Many features of the C300 are oriented toward movie use, while the output of the camera screams "broadcast" and the C300 is missing some key broadcast features.

The reason why the C300 turned out this way can be found in an interview that Larry Thorpe, Canon U.S.A.'s Senior Director, Professional Engineering and Solutions, Imaging Technologies and Communications Group, gave to Digital Photography Review. According to the interview, the C300 was a "fast-track" project inside Canon--two years from inception to product release. In order to meet the tight schedule, Canon couldn't develop new electronics for the C300, so it adapted the processor and electronics from the XF 305 camcorder for the C300. The XF 305 is a very nice camcorder, but it's not a digital cinema camera, and it's most certainly not a $20,000 camera. Most of the missing features in the C300 are due to using the XF 305's electronics.

From what Thorpe said in the interview, it's clear that the C300 is a placeholder for a broader, more functional line of digital cinema cameras coming from Canon. A few years from now, we'll probably look back at the C300 and wonder why anyone bought it, given how powerful the Canon models will be by then. For now, however, the C300 is a strange bundle--a great design, undermined by inadequate electronics.

The new Red Scarlet-X is different--it's plenty powerful enough, but it's not a Scarlet. It uses the same imager as the EPIC, except it uses it at a lower resolution and can thus utilize imagers that failed quality testing for the EPIC. It uses all the same accessories and software as the EPIC. It's the same form-factor as the EPIC. As Philip Bloom points out, it's not the Scarlet that Red's been talking about for three years, the one that was supposed to be light and cheap but still high-resolution. Perhaps the Scarlet-X should have been called the EPIC Light, and Red should have scrapped the Scarlet name. It's a niggling point--Red is going to sell lots of Scarlet-Xs--but the Scarlet-X doesn't fit into the niche that Red created for the Scarlet. Instead, it's an entry-level EPIC--perfect as a B camera to the EPIC, but not competitive in any way with the Panasonic AF101 or the Sony FS100. Speaking of which, the Canon and Red announcements have made the FS100 and AF101 look even more appealing.

A preview of some things to look for at NAB

I don't expect anything revolutionary at NAB this year, except for a lot of 3D, but the cost of HD capture and post-production keeps going down, so there will be lots to see. Here are a few things to look out for, in no particular order:

• Adobe will be launching Creative Suite 5 on the opening day of NAB. It's already previewing some interesting new Photoshop and Premiere Pro features, including the ability to natively edit AVCHD footage without first converting it into another format.
• Sony will be showing its new NXCAM camcorders, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it show prototypes of its new AVCHD-compatible DSLRs.
• Panasonic will be showing its new $20,000 3D camcorder, which should be getting close to shipment.
• Canon will be showing a camcorder with its new MPEG-2 Full HD codec, most likely along with its line of videos DSLRs.
• ARRI will be showing its new Alexa (A-EV/A-OV) digital cinematography cameras, starting at 50,000 Euros.
• RED will be hosting an offsite event (registration required) at the Tropicana Hotel on April 14th where it'll be showing the current state of Scarlet and EPIC.
• Lowel and Videssence will be showing their first LED lights. The advantages of LEDs over other forms of lighting (no flicker, almost infinite color control, virtually no heat and much lower power consumption) are obvious. Just about everyone in the video lighting business is now offering LED products.
• DSLRs will be another big theme of the show. Many companies will be showing add-ons for making them more usable for video applications (think Redrock Micro, Zacuto, Chrosziel and many others).
• No hints yet on any big new announcements from Avid (which will be exhibiting at NAB) or Apple (which won't be.)

If you're going, be sure to pre-plan your booth visits and organize your time, because the Las Vegas Convention Center is huge and it takes time to get around the city. (The RED event, for example, is at the Tropicana, which is across from McCarran International Airport at the far south end of the Strip. Allow plenty of time to get there from the Convention Center.) Use the monorail as much as you can to avoid cab lines. If you're focused, you can see the show in a full day, but if you plan to attend sessions or off-site exhibits, allow yourself more time.

The Next Generation of Red

Red,NAB,Red One,Scarlet,Sony,Panasonic,Canon,Apple,Final Cut Studio

In some previous blog entries, I discussed the new products announced by Red at NAB. Scarlet, the "3K for under $3,000" camcorder announced for shipment next year, takes Red into an entirely new market segment, one in which the Japanese consumer electronic vendors (primarily Sony, Panasonic and Canon) have long played.

The current Red One lists for $17,500, but by the time lenses and accessories have been added, the cost can easily double (or more). At that price, there's enough margin for video system integrators to make money, and the systems are expensive enough for rental houses to have a steady market.

However, at $3,000 plus accessories, the Scarlet will clearly be a prosumer product that should sell in quantities many times that of the Red One. From interviews with Red executives at NAB, it seems clear that they see a market much bigger than that served by the mail-order video resellers such as B&H.

At the show, Red executives talked about the company's close relationship with Apple. It seems to me entirely possible that Scarlet, in a package closely integrated with Final Cut Studio, could be sold in Apple's stores, possibly even exclusively. This would give Red street-level access to consumers and media creation professionals around the world, without having to vet a sales channel store by store.

There have been rumors about Apple purchasing Red, but as I've written about previously, I think that Apple's hardware-agnostic approach to professional audio and video (as opposed to its hardware-centric approach to everything else) has worked in its favor vs. Avid. By buying Red, it could alienate its largest hardware partners, but by simply reselling a Red-branded Scarlet in its stores, it would remain agnostic, yet share the spotlight with the company that is fast becoming the Apple of video cameras.

Please keep in mind that this is speculation on my part; I have no inside information. However, I've felt for a long time that the design of camcorders needs a major overhaul in order to make them more usable, and that Apple is ideally suited to design and build such a next-generation product. A reselling partnership with Red could be the first step to such a product.

Real vs. Vapor

I had a chance to spend time at Sony and Red on the NAB show floor today, along with a return visit to Panasonic. Here are a few thoughts on what I saw:

• Red: If the Red booth had been a conference room in a hotel, the Fire Marshall would have closed it down. Attendees were packed in like sardines. The Red One is definitely real; there were several being demonstrated, and many satisfied customers were in attendance. On the other hand, the Scarlet, Epic and Red Ray were vapor; each product was in a glass case, and none of them was functional in the least.
  
  
• Sony: Unlike previous NABs, Sony came with a full suite of real (or nearly real) cameras. In my opinion, the PMW-EX3, which will ship this summer, is the real deal. It adds several features to the EX1, the most important of which is interchangeable lenses (which perhaps means not as much as it might, since Sony is introducing its own proprietary lens mount, although an adapter will allow some 2/3" lenses to be used with the 1/2" EX3.) The other huge thing that Sony has addressed is ergonomics; the EX1 was widely reported to be highly uncomfortable to hold for any length of time. The EX3 is designed to be very easily shoulder-mounted. There were several operational EX3s in the booth, configured for handheld, studio and cinematography applications.
  
  
• Panasonic: The company's hot new announcement, the AVCHD HMC150, was a non-functioning mockup made to look like it was operating. (A product manager explained that "...it isn't shipping for six months," to explain why it looked like it was working when it wasn't.) I asked him about the relative performance problems to date with AVCHD vs. HDV--it's been widely reported that while under ideal conditions, the two formats look very similar, but when things get suboptimal, such as low lighting and motion, HDV still looks better. The product manager challenged my statement, and asked me to "find the artifacts" in a perfectly lit video with little motion. I told him that I couldn't find any, but I didn't expect to.
  

He then whipped out a chip with what he told me were many samples of AVCHD footage that would disprove my contention. The first (and only) clip that he showed me was of a backyard barbeque, again with lots of light and, for the most part, little motion. He told me how wonderful the footage looked, ignoring the motion artifacts visible when the camera moved. However, when I asked him if he had any low-light footage, he took his chip out and put it away, telling me that "low light is a problem with the camera, not the compression." I rest my case.

Now, I have no doubt that Panasonic will eventually deliver the camera (let's not forget that the first P2 prototypes shown at NAB were made of balsa wood, but they delivered cameras in time for the next year's show.) However, I'll still take a strong "show-me" position on AVCHD. I'd love it to be as good as (or preferably better than) HDV, but I'll believe it when I see it.

Live from NAB (Part 1)

I'm blogging from the show floor at NAB (the North Hall, to be precise.) It's too early for me to make any generalizations about announcements at the show, but the sound and fury is coming thick and fast in the camcorder world:

• Panasonic announced five new camcorders: Two top-end Varicam models (including one that uses P2 flash storage exclusively), an update of the prosumer HVX200, a higher-end HPX170 model and the HMC150, a prosumer AVCHD camcorder that should (at least in theory, based on its compression bitrate) match or exceed HDV quality.
  
• Sony announced US availability of the PDW-700, a XDCAM HD (optical disc) model, along with a preanouncement of the PMW-EX3, the next model in the highly-regarded XDCAM EX (flash-based, using the SxS format) family. The EX3 will feature interchangeable lenses, addressing perhaps the biggest drawback of the EX1. (The EX3 also looks as though it will be better balanced in the hand than the EX1, addressing the other major complaint.)
  
• Red fired off a couple of preannouncements: Scarlet, a 3K handheld camcorder expected to be priced under $3K, and Epic, a next-generation 5K camcorder expected to be priced in the $40K range. At this point, both products are scheduled for release in "early 2009," with features, specifications and prices highly likely to change.