invalid2 Offline Image Upload: Off
|
p.1 #19 · New Patent Brings Movie Mode to DSLRs | |
dirb9 wrote:
Since DSLRs don't have to advance film, there isn't any reason why they can't shoot at higher frame rates.
invalid2 wrote:
Data throughput is a simple reason, if ignoring that, maybe heat, storage, and power could all limit the effective speed.
If you get a system that deal with all of those problems, you might have something that looks like the red one camera. It sometimes has issues with fast movement because it uses a rolling shutter (rather than a global shutter).
Tentacle wrote:
1920x1080 full HD means 2 Mpixel per image. Now do 30 frames per second. The 1D(s) Mk II series could do about the same pixels-per-second throughput. So that's not the bottleneck.
Storage? Full HD will do up to 24 Mbps, compressed output at highest quality, which means just under 3 megabyte per second. With the biggest Pretec CF card of 48 GB (Samsung announced a CF card of 60 GB) you're looking at more than 4 hours of recording time.
... Now, moving to Quad HDTV (3840×2160 or 2160p at 8.3 Mpixel per frame) would be a challenge for dSLR and CF storage. For that we'd need HD storage.
Sorry for not stating more clearly that I was listing limitations for a ~10MP, 30+fps camera - and expecting that the same limitations would hold for 21MP at similar frame rates.
If you want raw output (like with a dslr), you would need 10MP*12bpp*30fps=540MB/s (which would run to 1.8TB in an hour). Now if you can compress the data, you can get a lower bitrate, but then you need to make sure you can compress it fast enough. To pick a real world example, the "redcode raw" codec can run at 4k resolution up to 30fps with a compressed data rate of about 27.5MB/s (ref, CineForm ref). It is not able to handle faster frame rates at that resolution (I do not know why).
If you want to consider just HD resolutions, eg 1080p - please do look at SDI data rates (ref).
Edited on Feb 19, 2008 at 11:04 PM
|