It's a bit more complicated then that.
The v1610 camera is using the f2.8 lens and the v642 is using a f2 lens. The 1610 is shooting at a HIGHER frame rate. But and a big but, the 1610 has a sensor pitch of 28 microns and the 642 has a pitch of 10 microns. So the 1610 gathers more light even through a slower lens. One more thing, the f2 lens on the smaller pitch camera is shooting tighter at 200mm than the Sigma at 500mm.
In any case we have been experimenting with oversampling too. But not as much in high speed. The 1610 is capable of blowing though it's 96GB of memory (yes a cap GB) in 4 seconds at 18,500 fps, its top speed at 720 resolution. That would prove problematic to try to continuously save that obviously.
On the Fox Sports NFL A game they are occasionally using a 4k sensor camera (the Sony F65) and zooming in after the play. All the data coming off of the sensor is streaming into a server to do this. It is acquiring at 60fps.
Jeff
Inertia Unlimited
Slashdot Mirror
It's a bit more complicated then that. The v1610 camera is using the f2.8 lens and the v642 is using a f2 lens. The 1610 is shooting at a HIGHER frame rate. But and a big but, the 1610 has a sensor pitch of 28 microns and the 642 has a pitch of 10 microns. So the 1610 gathers more light even through a slower lens. One more thing, the f2 lens on the smaller pitch camera is shooting tighter at 200mm than the Sigma at 500mm. In any case we have been experimenting with oversampling too. But not as much in high speed. The 1610 is capable of blowing though it's 96GB of memory (yes a cap GB) in 4 seconds at 18,500 fps, its top speed at 720 resolution. That would prove problematic to try to continuously save that obviously. On the Fox Sports NFL A game they are occasionally using a 4k sensor camera (the Sony F65) and zooming in after the play. All the data coming off of the sensor is streaming into a server to do this. It is acquiring at 60fps. Jeff Inertia Unlimited