Canon to Surprise us at NAB?

[extide]

There was just a rumor stating that the 5DIV would be video oriented and better at video than the 1DXII. If this was true then it could potentially be announced there...

Yeah, I was thinking this exact same thing.

 

[gsealy]

I can see 8K only for limited situations such as feature films or documentaries. 4K at 60FPS gobbles up storage like nobody's business. 8K would require a big budget to process the raw files, which is the only sensible thing to record; and forget about CFast 2. You need external storage. And forget about 8K delivery over satellite and the like. They can't even do real 4K. It's fun to talk about though.

 

[ranplett]

I heard from my Canon rep that surprise is an understatement, and that it will be a MAJOR upgrade to the CS100, calling it the CS100Xr.

 

[RunAndGun]

Are there any 8K projection systems? (where is this 8K footage screened)

What about real time editing/transcoding of 4K?

I don't know about commercially available 8K projectors/monitors, but I went to an 8K demo from NHK at NAB '14. It may have been stitched/multiple projectors or a true 8K projector, I don't know and don't remember if they said.

 

[RunAndGun]

Are there any 8K projection systems? (where is this 8K footage screened)

What about real time editing/transcoding of 4K?

The answer is No, but plans are laid, several years ago, in fact, work began.

Utube has 8K video, which is more of a stunt. Two years ago, LG demonstrated a 8K TV. Displays are on the way, as soon as there is 8K content, they will arrive.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/forget-4k-lgs-98-inch-8k-tv-window-future-weve-waiting/

It takes many years to develop a practical new system. Some broadcasters like NHK have said are going to 8K and are pushing hard. All the big companies are working on 8K. NHK has plans to test 8K Satellite broadcasts of the 2016 Olympics, and to use full scale 8K capture and broadcast of the 2020 Olympics in Japan. That seems questionable, or at least, I question that many individuals will have 8K capability, more likely, special theatres will be equipped to watch the Olympics in 8K via satellite or cable over prototype equipment.

Sony, Canon, Red, Arri, etc are certainly wanting to be chosen as the company to capture the 8K Video. The display is R&D, its being shown for PR purposes, but it also lets you know that 8K is coming, but not next week.

Of course, anyone can make a 8K output Video camera, but true broadcast quality 8K is a much more difficult thing.

I'd be surprised to see much in the way of 8K in 2020, but, at my age, I'd be happy just to still be posting here.

Sony could rightfully argue the F65 is 8K but outputs 4K, Red have both 6K and 8K cameras in the Weapon and Arri Alexa 65 is 6.5K. These cameras all have different size sensors the F65 being Super 35 (as is the Canon 8K camera), Red being approx. Vistavision (36x24mm) and the Alexa 65 being more like Hasselblad in sensor size (they use converted Fujinon / Hasselblad lenses). As such they all have different depth of field characteristics with the Alexa 65 having the shallowest apparent DOF.
To my knowledge no 8K projector exists and most cinemas still have 2K projectors. The average multiplex has a screen with a 56ft diagonal that means to truly see 4K you must sit in the front three rows, for 8K you would sit in no mans land between the front row & the screen. For 8K TV the screen would need to grow larger for the same viewing distance as 4K (UHD) so practically 8K is only useful for over-sampling and larger color space.

NHK had an F65 set-up at their "booth" for real time demonstration and Sony actually used to label it 8K on their literature, but have removed that label.

 

[roxics]

We don't need 8K displays. 8K cameras, yes, but not displays. Why does everyone think that just because we'll have the cameras we need the displays as well?

You always want a higher capture resolution than your display resolution if you can. Gives you more room to work, crop and crunch down those pixels into something nice and tight and sharp. Especially with bayer pattern sensors.

 

[privatebydesign]

Sony could rightfully argue the F65 is 8K but outputs 4K,

No they couldn't which is why they stopped even mentioning 8k in the specs.

8K is 33.2MP, the F65 is 20MP. What Sony did was say they could interpolate that 20MP up to 33MP, but anybody can do that with anything! It is like saying the 5D MkIII has a 50MP output, it captures at 23MP but we interpolate up to 50MP, utter bullshit.

We don't need 8K displays. 8K cameras, yes, but not displays. Why does everyone think that just because we'll have the cameras we need the displays as well?

You always want a higher capture resolution than your display resolution if you can. Gives you more room to work, crop and crunch down those pixels into something nice and tight and sharp. Especially with bayer pattern sensors.

Yes but four times the resolution? That is like making yourself shoot with a FF camera to only ever crop to M4/3 sized output, or only ever using 1/4 your ff image, total waste of time and resources and 8K time and resources are substantial, there is already a lot of industry pushback on the relevance of even 4K, yes it is the buzzword, but people who actually work the images and have to work to production budgets are not seeing the advantages. 5K or 6K is fine for very high quality stabilized or down sampled 4K.

 

[roxics]

We don't need 8K displays. 8K cameras, yes, but not displays. Why does everyone think that just because we'll have the cameras we need the displays as well?

You always want a higher capture resolution than your display resolution if you can. Gives you more room to work, crop and crunch down those pixels into something nice and tight and sharp. Especially with bayer pattern sensors.

Yes but four times the resolution? That is like making yourself shoot with a FF camera to only ever crop to M4/3 sized output, or only ever using 1/4 your ff image, total waste of time and resources and 8K time and resources are substantial, there is already a lot of industry pushback on the relevance of even 4K, yes it is the buzzword, but people who actually work the images and have to work to production budgets are not seeing the advantages. 5K or 6K is fine for very high quality stabilized or down sampled 4K.

I don't disagree with you. My point was, just because you have 8K cameras doesn't mean you need 8K displays to go with them. I agree that 8K is probably overkill to begin with for most situations. Especially once you factor in motion blur from typical 24/25fps frame rates and handheld work that seems to be all the rage these days. Plus anything that isn't tack sharp focus to begin with.

 

[Bennymiata]

Maybe the new 5d4 will have 8k video.

 

[Jft1469]

While I would like to see the 5d in 4K, I'm surprised that there is never mention of firmware upgrades enabling 4K. I'm pretty sure the 7d Mark II has the internal specs to handle 4K in the right wrapper.

 

[jeffa4444]

We don't need 8K displays. 8K cameras, yes, but not displays. Why does everyone think that just because we'll have the cameras we need the displays as well?

You always want a higher capture resolution than your display resolution if you can. Gives you more room to work, crop and crunch down those pixels into something nice and tight and sharp. Especially with bayer pattern sensors.

Yes but four times the resolution? That is like making yourself shoot with a FF camera to only ever crop to M4/3 sized output, or only ever using 1/4 your ff image, total waste of time and resources and 8K time and resources are substantial, there is already a lot of industry pushback on the relevance of even 4K, yes it is the buzzword, but people who actually work the images and have to work to production budgets are not seeing the advantages. 5K or 6K is fine for very high quality stabilized or down sampled 4K.

I don't disagree with you. My point was, just because you have 8K cameras doesn't mean you need 8K displays to go with them. I agree that 8K is probably overkill to begin with for most situations. Especially once you factor in motion blur from typical 24/25fps frame rates and handheld work that seems to be all the rage these days. Plus anything that isn't tack sharp focus to begin with.

The arguement is somewhat distorted by the K race. No film is going to use an 8K super 35 sensor if it can get an 8K Vistavision sensor its not simply about resolution its about apparent depth of field, whether it looks filmic or not, choice of lenses (which also impart a look) is one of the biggest factors DOPs look at and discuss with directors.
8K will almost certainly be used primarily for over-sampling to 4K. 4K itself has streched bandwidth limitations leading to V-Nova creating "Perseus" a compression codec to cram move data into a smaller pipe and its these types of codec that will be required for 8K to truly get off the ground commercially.

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2015/04/new-compression-method-brings-4k-video-streams-to-slower-broadband.html

 

[Peer]

How about a 1DC2 with 10-bit, zebras/peaking, and with 24 fps live-view burst mode -- i.e. 6k video.

-- peer

 

[roxics]

We don't need 8K displays. 8K cameras, yes, but not displays. Why does everyone think that just because we'll have the cameras we need the displays as well?

You always want a higher capture resolution than your display resolution if you can. Gives you more room to work, crop and crunch down those pixels into something nice and tight and sharp. Especially with bayer pattern sensors.

Yes but four times the resolution? That is like making yourself shoot with a FF camera to only ever crop to M4/3 sized output, or only ever using 1/4 your ff image, total waste of time and resources and 8K time and resources are substantial, there is already a lot of industry pushback on the relevance of even 4K, yes it is the buzzword, but people who actually work the images and have to work to production budgets are not seeing the advantages. 5K or 6K is fine for very high quality stabilized or down sampled 4K.

I don't disagree with you. My point was, just because you have 8K cameras doesn't mean you need 8K displays to go with them. I agree that 8K is probably overkill to begin with for most situations. Especially once you factor in motion blur from typical 24/25fps frame rates and handheld work that seems to be all the rage these days. Plus anything that isn't tack sharp focus to begin with.

The arguement is somewhat distorted by the K race. No film is going to use an 8K super 35 sensor if it can get an 8K Vistavision sensor its not simply about resolution its about apparent depth of field, whether it looks filmic or not, choice of lenses (which also impart a look) is one of the biggest factors DOPs look at and discuss with directors.

With the exception of a few films shooting scenes in IMAX or 70mm, most DPs want super35mm, not vistavision. Extreme shallow depth of field is not usually a good thing in cinema and makes the focus pullers job a nightmare. Filmic is more than just DOF, plenty of films were shot in super16mm and look very filmic.

But you're right about one thing 8K super35 is probably not something most would aspire to. 8K is already seen as overkill by a lot of DPs. Just look at how many films (costing hundreds of millions of dollars) are shot on the Alexa, which is 3.2k or less depending on whether you are shooting opengate or not. Yet its lower resolution than even older RED cameras at 4K or 4.5K hasn't stopped it from becoming the gold standard of digital cinema.

 

[bloodmark]

Hopefully it's an XC20. Given how critical of the XC10 most folks have been, maybe they've felt the pressure to release a newer version, with a few tweaks. But if they do, what would those tweaks be? It seems like the biggest complaints about the XC10 are the fixed lens and lack of a viewfinder. Wouldn't an interchangeable lens version of the XC10, with a viewfinder added, just be essentially the C100 with a smaller sensor? Personally I like the XC10 as it is, but would be interested to see what a next generation version would be.

 

[mistaspeedy]

They could let it record 10 bit video. All of their dedicated video cameras should be able to do this, and the next versions of whatever they release should really support this. Maybe they could let it use Canon Log 2 as well.
These are small tweaks that could be easily implemented in my opinion.