Thanks for sharing your thoughts Andrew. Always look forward to your blogs especially ones on the future.
Overall I get the gist that 4k is going to give us better image quality compared to what we can currently get on pro/consumer cameras. However, consider the fact that plenty of big budget films being shot digitally right now and until next year on the Alexa will still be doing so at 2.8k. I know it maybe dated now, but even Hugo in 3D was shot in 1080p. Most DPs who choose the 2.8k Alexa over 4k RED say it was the resulting image quality that made them go with Alexa even after upscaling it for 4k projection.
Help me out here because I'm at a loss as to why if it's not an issue for big budget films then is it a concern for us. Shouldn't we be pushing for a cheaper, reliable, feature filled camera that does it any any decent resolution but gives us amazing image quality? I think we all agree resolution is just one aspect of image quality and how DPs are choosing their cameras in hollywood proves that point. I just hope we're not giving up on pushing camera manufacturers to truly gives us image quality + features, which is not easy to put a marketing term to, as opposed to "4K" that in reality doesn't even mean anything to those with limitless budgets. Thanks in advance to any replies.
Well they already have image quality in spades, so the 4K revolution isn't as important for the Alexa.
We're going to be comparing a consumer 4K camera like the GH4 to the GH3. Much bigger difference, a much bigger leap.
Just wait until you see the 1080p from both cameras, one oversampled from a 4K output and the other pixel binned on the sensor at the earliest stage in the imaging pipeline.
piz got a reaction from Tim McC in Nikon D5300 Review and why DSLRs are dead for video
piz got a reaction from Ernesto Mantaras in Why I am going with 4K and why you should too