Silicon Imaging SI-2K New Feature Updates at FreshDV

FreshDV @ PVC

Silicon Imaging SI-2K New Feature Updates

Published by Matthew Jeppsen September 7th, 2007 in Cameras, Copyright, Formats, HDTV, Hardware, Lenses, News, Production, Software

While much of the online community salivates over recent RED One announcements, Silicon Imaging’s proven SI-2K digital cinema camera has quietly gotten some very interesting upgrades. For starters, they have a film camera-style optical viewfinder option now, as well as an OLED EVF option (with secondary HDMI tap). There is a new MINI-Rig for handheld/shoulder mount use, and of course the beautiful (and upgradeable) enclosure designed by P+S Technik (shown here in our NAB Expo coverage).

Other new features include the option to frame-accurate synch multiple SI-2K cameras for multi-camera or stereo 3D applications. This feature would also be useful with multiple SI-2K MINI heads for Matrix-like effects and shots. There is also now the option to record CineForm RAW directly to QuickTime format as well as a few other handy user-configurable capabilities (like extended shutter durations).

The SI-2K currently lists for $28,500, the remote MINI head can be had for $17,500. You can obtain the optional new OLED viewfinder for $4000. This fall will see the release of the B4-mount optical viewfinder, with a PL-mount version coming early next year. You can find more info on the SI-2K at www.siliconimaging.com

8 Responses to “Silicon Imaging SI-2K New Feature Updates”

Feed for this Entry

1 Former SI customer Sep 7th, 2007 at 6:23 am

SI probably set a record for the least time it takes a camera to become obsolete.
Offering 2K/2/3″ for 31,000$ (for camera&software package) the same week Red starts shipping 4K/S35 sensor cameras for 17,500$, with such amazing samples? In the digital cinema race, SI has definitely managed to alienate their customer base, raising their prices by 5,000$ since NAB. I expect a surge of potential SI customers switching to Red. I know I will.
2 Matthew Jeppsen Sep 7th, 2007 at 11:28 pm

There are some key advantages to the SI-2K…as always it comes down to user preference and “what are you willing to live with”? For starters, you can actually order a camera from Silicon Imaging. If you need a high quality digital cinema camera now (not possibly in March ‘08…or later…) then the S1-2K is your huckleberry. I don’t say that to knock the Red, but delivery timeframes and limitations are a very practical consideration…there is a long line of people waiting for camera deliveries, and you’d be at the back. Another advantage that some DP’s will prefer is the optical viewfinder option. And the SI-2K remote head compact shooting solution is well-suited to a variety of unique and challenging SFX and environmentally-limited setups.

RED built an amazing camera, to be sure. But it isn’t for everyone, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

-Matt Jeppsen
3 Axel Oct 31st, 2007 at 9:54 pm

I’m def going with RED in lue of Silicon’s price increase. It’s totally unrealistic.
4 1dog Studios -- Shawn Perrin Feb 21st, 2008 at 2:34 am

You are absolutely right Matte. The different cameras offer different options. I don’t think you can shoot 3D with the RED ONE.
Think about it, after you have that nice 1080p plasma screen what would make it really POP, 3D!

Maybe thats just the kid in me. The optical viewfinder is a big plus too. I’ve been waiting for a price on that.
5 greg Aug 1st, 2008 at 9:16 pm

Hmmm… I’m kinda glad I held off from jumping for the RED. I have to admit. I was a very early champion of the RED, touting it’s greatness to anyone who would listen. I still think they have pulled off something amazing. Over time, in my research I’ve started paying more attention to the SI. I think the images it produces are more cinematic-looking. I know that’s undefinable, in a way, but I am going on my gut feeling. The RED does have a sort of digital SLR look about it’s images - reminds me of the images I get from my Nikon D70. The footage I’ve seen from the SI camera look more….organic, for lack of a better descriptor.
6 CR Oct 10th, 2008 at 3:49 am

Greg I agree allthough thats all a matter of taste. What really concerns me is the backfocus issues fof the SI. On wide angles primes the calibration just isnt correct. I understood the lowpass filter infront of the chip is very thick (3 to 4 mm) what results in a shift of the calibration. Light hits this lowpass filter in a angle and the breakingindex will change. To my opinion this is a problem SI should have fixed long time ago…. The choice of using VGA as a output is something I dont get. Since there is video people are bagging to get some kinda standard and till now that didnt work; except we all work with BNC (HD HDSDI) Why in the world did SI choose for VGA??? Using a converter sounds easier than it is because this converter should also be a scaler…
Using the HDMI output is no option; the camera gets very slow and again HDMI is no standard on a filmset. HDMI-connectors are not designed to plug in and out several times a day…
The optical viewfinder is absolutely great! Its a pity it only is available in B4 mount…
What gives me problems over and over again is the fact I cannot choose to have the cameramenu in my LCD monitor while my viewfinder gives a clean image. Even worse.. set-monitors allso display all things I do on the camera-LCD. Commercial clients will be very nervous to see my Focus Assist or the Fullcolor Zebra on their monitor…
Afterall the SI gives a great cinematic image. Its just that the way to get to that image is kinda exhaustive. Especcialy when you dont get a lot of feedback from the manifactures…
7 Tstop Dec 3rd, 2008 at 6:24 am

Hi everyone,
I have just returned from the Lodz where the Camera Image festival is held.
The festival focuses on cinematography.
While there was nothing at the festival presented that would originate on RED, there were the new Guy Ritchie film “Rockenrolla” that originated on Arri D21, and also a film “Slumdog Mumbay” shot on the SI 2K.
Without detail knowledge on either of the camera and simply going on what I saw the SI camera won hands down, I didn’t even know it was not shot on film.
I saw the D21 showreel on a massive monitor, and the images are prestine, maybe too clean, but when blown up on a cinema screen it couldn’t compare to the images from the SI.
The SI was very organic in it’s look with no electronic artefacts, and what I appreciated most that sharpness was present even on wide shot, which is usually the downfall of most of HD or similar formats when blown to big screen.
With all of the above said none of the above cameras can supply the subtle image that a piece of celuloid has been doing over 100year.
8 Jason Rodriguez Dec 5th, 2008 at 1:55 pm

Hi CR,

Just a quick head’s up that we ARE indeed listening to user feedback, but there are some fundamental issues designed into the camera from day 1 that are hard to get around with this current generation of the design:

1) The back-focus issues are indeed there between wide-angle and telephoto lenses, and as you pointed out, they are due to the OLPF being too thick, something that Cinema lenses were not designed for. We are actively investigating new OLPF options in order to reduce this effect, but it’s not something that will be solved overnight. The only short-term solution we can offer though is that you will need two different PL-mounts, one for your wide-angles, and another for your telephotos. These two PL-mounts can be seamlessly swapped with the IMS mount as you change your lenses.

The other option is to use B4-mount lenses rather than PL-mount, as the B4-mount lenses are designed to compensate for having extra glass between the last element of the lens and the sensor.

2) The camera is based on a open x86 platform. While the camera uses a special ruggedized and embedded motherboard, it still is using a standard Intel chipset and GPU which do not offer HD-SDI output options. Many of the effects we run in real-time on the video output such as 3D LUT’s, and the different pixel-shaders for the false-color exposure meter, frame-store overlay effects, etc., all require a GPU for processing . . . they cannot be done on the CPU. Therefore, based on the hardware we have to work with, and the features we wanted to offer our end-users, this was the compromise that had to be made in this generation of the camera design. Suffice to say though we are actively listening to all these comments and looking for ways to fix the issues.

Thanks,

Jason Rodriguez
Silicon Imaging