In our article How should we test cameras? we asked what was better: unblinking scientific testing or judging on the perceived quality of the image, and we discussed some of the issues surrounding camera evaluations. But we thought it was only right to get the perspective from the people on the front-end doing the reviews themselves. Here, Phil Rhodes talks about objectivity vs subjectivity.
With the recent news that the new ARRI ALEXA SXT uses the same sensor as its prececessor, we ask whether innovation in cameras is slowing down
NAB, which is without any question the time and place each year when the biggest announcements are made, is only three weeks away. We'll be there in force, bringing you the most important stories. Meanwhile, it's useful to see what others are predicting at the show
Have a close look at this video clip. It’s an advert for a high-end kitchen worktop manufacturer. Watch it in 720p, and look as closely as you can at the camerawork, the clever use of depth of field, the lighting, and particularly the fresh fruit.
And then reflect on the fact that no cameras - or indeed fruit - were involved in the making of this at all.
These days you often find that the most cutting-edge technology is in our smartphones and not our cameras. But the professional and the consumer markets do cross-fertilise, and it benefits us all
There is always a frisson of excitement generated by big chip cameras, but that doesn’t mean they are always the best answer to the job in hand.
Why do people put video from one of the world's top cameras on YouTube with the expectation that we can judge the quality of the material? Just to make it perfectly clear: video on YouTube is highly compressed.
You wouldn’t expect the video business to take lessons in innovation from a company that makes low-cost mixing consoles. But, in the case of the Mackie DL1608, it probably should.