Last year, I went to NAB for the first time. After a couple of years of watching my social media contacts having a much better time than me I decided I would join them. It was a great trip and it was great to meet everyone. If there was a disappointment for me, it was that NAB2011 was more notable for the cameras that were not released than it was for those that were.

This year, I was not able to make the show so Murphy’s Law has kicked and we have loads of new large sensor cameras making their NAB debut. Many of these are not brand new at NAB but there is a distinct flavour to the latest announcements. There is no doubt that the early buzz was all around 4K. This prompted a veritable twitter frenzy about whether you needed 4K. I have covered this ground before in so I will move on to the cameras themselves.

First up is Canon. Despite recently having given us the C300 and the 5D Mk3, Canon still had some new toys to tempt us with.

The more expected of these two is the Canon 1DC as Canon teased it at the C300 launch. Unlike the C300 this is a proper convergence device. As a stills camera it has the same spec as the 1DX which means it is a full frame, professional grade DSLR. As a video camera it has some significant upgrades over the 1DX. The most significant and its ticket to the NAB in-crowd is a 4K capability. This is recorded to the CF card in good ole MJPEG at 24p. This is an odd choice and I am guessing that what we are really getting is an image sequence rather than a movie file. Its more like the stills shooting being sped up to 24fps rather than the movie resolution being doubled. It is also the first Canon DSLR with a clean full HD resolution video out (8bit 4:2:2). HD recording has the same codec options and speeds as the 1DX/5D3 but adds 1080p50/60. Canon has also added Canon Log Gamma. UK pricing is a slightly speculative £10,000 inc VAT which would make it twice the cost of the (now very delayed) 1DX. There is no doubt that it is the king of DSLR convergence as it out features everything in a DSLR shell. No lesser man than Shane Hurlbut did the demo shoot for NAB and the twitter consensus was it looked great on the big screen. Personally, I am just wondering who it is for. By 4K standards it is not particularly expensive but unless you need 4K you can have a couple of D4s or four D800s with only a small drop in feature set. More significantly, you can also have the much more shooter friendly C300. If you do want 4K, it is significant that the recording is onboard. With cameras like the FS700 we don’t know when 4K recording will come or how much it will be. The 1DC is 4K out of the box but you have just that one way of getting it. Its also worth noting that the eurotweeters were unhappy about the lack of 25p. You lose many of the current advantages of 4K if you can’t downscale to HD easily.

Canon’s second camera is a big brother for the C300 - the C500. Back on their shared birthday, the RED crowd mocked the C300 for being “only HD” and lacking RAW or high 1080p frame rates. The C500 is here to kick sand back in the face of RED for only twice as much money as the C300. OK, maybe that loses some of the impact. Since its launch, the C300 has built a enthusiastic following. Its picture quality and ease of use have given it a kind of baby Alexa reputation. The C500 takes the same sensor but significantly beefs up the picture processing to give 4K out and is the first implementation of Canons own RAW format. Speed has also been enhanced to up to 120fps. I know that Canon has been working with Codex on a recorder. Codex is the Rolls Royce option for external recorders (the worked with Arri too) with all that implies. This is the first major manufacturer to venture into RED Epic territory, although technically its probably more of a baby Sony F65. Its taken years for the industry to be get up to speed on RED’s RAW workflow. How will Canon fare?

RED haven’t produced a new camera for NAB, the Scarlet is making its NAB debut but the real news is about a new sensor called RED Dragon. This is the fulfillment of REDs main theme for NAB2011. Its not a new camera but a new sensor which is inline with RED’s commitment to modularity and upgradability. Resolution is up to an unprecedented 6K. This may seem excessive given the debate about 4K but logically some of the advantages 4K acquisition has for HD delivery pass on up the line once you hit 4K delivery. Of more immediate use is improved low light performance and dynamic range (without HDRX). The cost for an Epic is expected to be around £4000 which is not exactly cheap but is a lot less than, say, trading in your C300 to get a C500. Availability can be REDs achilles heel and the upgrade process won’t kick off till October. Scarlet owner have an upgrade path too but they will have to wait longer which will give them more time to save. Scarlet will be dearer because you effectively have to swap in Epic parts to get to Dragon. Note that this is not the long awaited Monstro chip. It is a touch bigger than the Epic but it is not yet full frame.

Sony’s only new large format camera is the FS700 I talked about recently. The F65 was at NAB2011 last year if only in concept form. Am I still enthusiastic about this camera now its in the context of all its piers? I think the answer to that is yes. It still represents what passes for value for money in the pro video market. The upgrades from the FS100 are worthwhile and, in the case of the high speed, innovative. It’s not upgradeable in the RED sense but the 4K 12bit RAW out shows some potential. I just can’t think of many projects you might want to shoot that you couldn’t with the FS700. I think Sony predicted the FS700 launch would get lost in the noise at NAB and launching before was a smart move.

Canon may have thought that launching 2 cameras would guarantee them the show buzz and for about 24 hours they were right. Then the Aliens landed!

Video processing specialist turned software guys Blackmagic Design lived up to their name and made Canon’s buzz disappear and reappear at their own stand. Blackmagic’s last trick was to make the cost of getting hold of the feature film class grading software Resolve they acquired first shrink from $100,000 first to $1000 and then disappear entirely. OK, that is a slight over-simplification but it shows they know have to think outside-the-box and drive value. Blackmagic debuted some Thunderbolt connected SSD recorders last year at an attractive price. This year they decided that as they do processing, recording and software all they really needed to do was find I nice sensor and they could make a camera - so they did. What they have come up with is the most blue sky thinking camera I have seen. Its a camera designed to be as filmic as possible. It is not a convergence device, its not going to replace your 5D in that regard. It has a Johnny Ive-like singularity of purpose. They knew their customers wanted a camera with excellent grading capability and wide dynamic range (13 stops). This meant shooting RAW. Rather than go proprietory as the majors have they used the open CinemaDNG format. It shoots at 2.5k and 12bit which gives scope for cropping but you can also shoot HD in ProRes (Apple) or DNxHD (Avid) formats. As befits the makers of Resolve, your Colourist will love you for shooting on this. To cope with all this data the camera has an integrated SSD slot. Again this is just a standard 2.5” SATA drive you can buy down at PC World. To get the data into your NLE or Resolve you can just pop the drive in an enclosure or use the integrated Thunderbolt port. This can also be used to connect your laptop to use the Ultrascope monitoring package that is bundled along with a full copy of Resolve (over £1000 value). For more traditional forms of monitoring and audio there is SDI out and 1/4 jacks. To top it off is a high res touch screen monitor with an iOS-like interface that should make the designers of the major’s menu interfaces hide in shame. So here we have a piece of gear with a hat full of ground-breaking tech and it costs £2300. No really, I meant to type that. OK then, don’t believe me - google it yourself. When everyone picked themselves off the floor and hit the twitters there was a huge buzz. This was shortly followed by the kill joys and fanboys chiming in.

So where do I stand. A week ago I was happy to imagine buying an FS700 (currently my camera budget is imaginary). Now, here is a camera which I can buy three of for the same number of (imaginary) pounds stirling. As I said earlier, the Blackmagic is a very focused device which will get you as close to film as you can for £2k. The sensor is slightly less than MFT size, close to Super 16mm film. This means a 2x crop. As it uses EF or ZF 35mm lenses this means a struggle to find good wide angles and a increased depth of field. Its also no speed merchant, frame rates span 24 to 30fps. Its OK in low light but not exceptional. It has a native ISO of 800 but early indications are it goes up to 1600ASA. It does not take stills. In fact it is almost the polar opposite of my 5D Mk II. The FS700 is much more of a workhorse. If you are not shooting a movie the AVCHD codec is perfectly adequate. You have all the niceties of built in ND, XLR, decent AF, peaking, zebras etc and a long shooting time. If you want to pimp up the image by recording externally (8bit 4:2:2) you can, but bear in thats going to cost you about a third of the cost of the Blackmagic on top of the base price. Expect much more than that to enable that 4K RAW option. I expect a new breed of 4K recorder to appear but the current ones cost more than the Blackmagic on their own. So, in summary, if you are working professionally on a mix of jobs and you want something that blends Sony EX3 convenience and versatility with a DSLR aesthetic then the FS700 still has the best feature set for the money. If you were waiting for REDs 3k for 3k Scarlet and feel disenfranchised by how things turned out then Blackmagic has delivered it for you. Just don’t sell that 5D MkII you bought while you waited just yet because it fills in a few gaps in the feature set. If you just want carry round one device to shoot stills or video to a high level of quality then a DSLR like the D800 or a compact interchangeable like the GH2 or NEX7 would be a better bet.

I think the Blackmagic is the first camera worthy of the woefully overused term “game changer” since the Canon and Vincent LaForet shocked us with Reverie. You can pick holes in its feature set but the real revolution is that Blackmagic set out to design a set of features in and the costs out. They have not skimped on the technology, much of it is a step forward at any price. Then they have decided on a price that presumably makes them some money. They have not chosen to position it in a range or in a market and it came out at 2 grand. If your allegiance is to another brand, how will it make you feel the next time you cough up 3 grand for a piece of firmware or £15 per Gb for proprietary media.

Every so often my twitter stream will burst into life about 4K and the 4K Jets and the HD Sharks will get ready to rumble. It may be a new 4k product announcement or a post on Red User which will act as the catalyst. It seems far more polarising than say, 3D, as an issue.

I think there are a lot of aspects to this battle for hearts and minds - worth a little reflection I think. If we look at acquisition then there just a couple of systems capable of 4k (or more acquisition). Of these RED is the poster boy for 4K as Sony's F65 is only just starting to appear.

F65 Prototype at NAB

Now most people would agree that more resolution is better (possibly not older actresses). I saw a demo on the Sony stand at NAB2011 and it was deeply impressive despite the screen being huge and the audience being unrealistically close. It is also true that it gives you more flexibility in post for reframing and cropping. It certainly true that throwing resolution away usually works better than adding resolution. Major motion pictures shot on film (though not all) tend to be mastered at 4K and many cinemas are equipping with 4K digital projectors. RED claims this makes them the future-proof option. 30 years in IT leads me to believe that future-proof is a myth - perhaps future-resistant is more accurate.

The challenge at the moment on the acquisition and production side is the maths. 4K has four times more area roughly then 1080p. That means 4x the data - all other things being equal. That data is going to be present in your entire pipeline if you are going to master in 4K. This has obvious implications in storing, movement and computation required in post. This will increase costs and increase time. Over time, improving technology will reduce this but it has significant implications now.

Currently, 4K equipped cinemas are the only place the public is likely 4K footage natively. Will this change in the near future? There are signs that the consumer electronic industry is going to put its faith in 4k as the next big thing after 3D. CES this year had a smattering of 4K models. CE Manufacturers always need a next big thing, its essential to their business model to persuade you that the consumer durable they sold you 2 years ago is no longer sufficient. Interest in 3D is waning, they need a new flag to wave.

Toshiba 55" 4K TV

I happen to have a 3D set bought recently and a 3D projector waiting for an install. Am I a 3D evangelist? Not really, I was really making the move to 1080p and 3D was just a bonus. Its not that I don't like 3D, I enjoy the experience when its done well, but there is hardly anything to watch. I have 2 sources of material: Sky and Blu-ray. Sky has one channel which is about 70% repeated material (my impression, I am not sad enough to measure it) and a few blu-rays. Even cinema releases which were 3D don't seem guaranteed to get a blu-ray disk. If they do its normally dearer list price and less likely to be discounted.

What have I got plugged into my setup. I have a Blu-ray player (1080p), PS/3 (720p/1080p), SkyHD (720p/1080i) and AppleTV (720p). My amp is theoretically capable of handling and upscaling to 4k but compatibility is always in doubt till some standards emerge. The signal path is via HDMI1.4 which can do 4k24p. I do expect to see a jump in quality in my new 1080p projector over the old 720p one slightly offset by a bigger screen size. However, I see no real difference in percieved resolution at my 3.5m viewing distance between my new 47" 1080p LED LG TV and my old 1024 x 720 Pioneer 42" plasma. The step up in resolution to 4k is more marked than that between 1080 and 720 but I am not convinced it will be obvious at TV panel size. How big do you have to go before you notice 4k. In the world of AV consumerism there is the much feared WAF. This is not a technical term but stands for wife acceptance factor. Flat screen TV has faired well in WAF because the resulting sets maybe larger but they have taken up less space. Get over 50" though and the sets are starting to draw to much attention to themselves and the WAF plummets relegating them to dedicated media rooms and bachelor pads. This is probably less of an issue in the US where homes are typically more spacious, but any new format has got to succeed globally.

I am the kind of early adopter guy who would buy 4K so what would it mean to me and how would I get it? I think we can rule out broadcast. In the UK, only the death of analgue has freed up enough space for a few HD over-air channels. Sky too tends to worry about how many channels not the quality or we would not still be on 1080i. Download services could distribute a file but how long are you prepared to wait. In metropolitan areas it may be OK but I am limited to 5mbps out here in the sticks. A single 4K movie not compressed to mush would probably exceed the typical UK monthly download limit for most punters. So we are looking at some kind of disk or device to deliver the movie. Blu-ray could do it but most current players arent going to be able to cope. Even the ubiquitous and future-tolerant PS/3 is probably going to fail as its missing HDMI1.4. If blu-ray can be stretched to fit (and in this I include at the pressing facilities) it just might gain a foothold with a slow burn dual play approach similar to 3D. The disruption level is similar in that case.

I can't see a brand new physical format succeeding now. DVD had the full weight of the industry behind it and its take off was slow in the UK taking a few years to hit critical mass and oust VHS. Most of us early adopters have a drawer full of Region 1 disk we played on hacked DVD players. We bought them so we had a decent choice back in the day and now we cant trade them in against blu-rays. Blu-ray had a more troubled birth as it was fighting not just against DVD but HDDVD too. It won the format war in the end but even after all this time it still has a smaller section in HMV than DVD. Look round the rest of the store and you see racks of CDs. CD is 30 years old and no higher definition format has come close to unseating it as a retail format. The threat to CDs comes from a variety of formats that are worse - an interesting lesson for video. Even HMVs future is far from assured - condemning video sources to online or a small selection at supermarkets.

So winding right back to where we started with acquisition, how important is 4K? If you are filming big budget features then it seems to make sense to feed the growing number of 4k projectors. Not that I have seen any issues with Alexa films at my 4k equipped multiplex. For lesser budget features then its a finely balanced decision. What is going to provide the most production value up on the screen? Any skimping you do on other crafts to feed that 4k pipeline are only going to be more visible in your end product. For TV, Indie Films and Commericals I think its a long time before most of the 4k benefits start paying back with time being so critical.