I have had the Canon A1 XH and was very happy when I saw the news on this camera. The deal breaker is 4:2:0 and I know you have 4:2:2 but only live through SDI . The other is the no tape and I know the cards are cheaper . But if I want to do what i do and shoot a show I would need 3- 32 gig cards.
As long as my networks are happy with the shows i am producing i guess I will stick with the imperfect tape and 4:2:0 format and of course HDV .

Doug

As a business you get the camera that either meets the needs of your client, their workflow or to expand your business.

With the EX1, with many circumstances, having a laptop can work. You can offload one card while the other continues to record. This actually means NO BREAK for a reel change at all even if all you have are 8GB or 16GB cards. It depends on whether you find a laptop an encumbrance.

It also means you've ingested all your footage and if you're doing a long show that'll save you hours. 3 32GB cards must mean you may shoot as much as 300 minutes. That's 5 hours of tape ingest time. This would take well under 1 hour which would occur during the shoot. As I said even two 8GB or 16GB cards and a laptop would get you through the entire day without a break to change tape.

Although the EX1 is 4:2:0 the perceived resolution is much higher than other cameras in its price range. I'm sure it'll key or color correct well although certainly not as well as 4:2:2. The Sony 350/355 is in wide use so it must be holding up well in post workflows. Like any non 4:2:2 codec you can get out of that and into 4:2:2 on capture to prevent further degradation (Apple ProRes for example).

If your client is happy with your current quality and your happy with your workflow (don't need the time savings of solid state) than there's certainly no reason to spend the money for the EX1.

For me, I've avoided HDV because it presents way too many problems for me. XDCAM (35mbps VBR) solid state with 1/2" chips and variable frame rate solves most of those problems for me.

If you are shooting that many hours of video you should measure ingest time vs solid state to laptop vs cost though.

Yes I agrre editing and outputting hdv isn't pretty when you ad effects and such, however the quality is fine . I think the cost of cards are still to high for my taste and yes i have a macbook pro that works great with P2 cards also. I really want to go solid state , however what if my client for Bravo or Discovery asks me for a timecoded tape with burn in or such ? Still not practical for me yet

Doug

I think the higher resolution coming out of the EX1 will handle a bit better than other 4:2:0 formats but not as well as 4:2:2. One should move to a 422 codec anyway for post. Keep in mind EX1 sends out 422 from HD-SDI (live from head great, upconverted from card at least gets you out of 420). One might consider capturing to ProRes. That's for either XDCAM or HDV.

Cards are pricey but I stil think it's a better workflow than ingesting tape.

Timecoded tape with burn in. We'll you can actually put about 25 or 35 minutes of the raw video file on Dual Layer DVD which they can see with the free viewer Sony will distribute. It might not be their workflow of choice but I actually think that's easier than handing the client a tape that required they find a deck.

If you're doing TC Tape with burn ins from camera masters you're dubbing those HDV tapes anyway. You can certainly use the HD-SDI/SDI out of the EX1 to dub to the format of their choice and that shouldn't be any more difficult than dubbing from HDV tape. If you have any kind of facility you can also dub from your hard drive to create burn in dub too. I'm not sure how you think HDV is advantage here.

I always do burn in dubs after capture, which becomes much faster with the capture speed of SxS.

Yes I agrre editing and outputting hdv isn't pretty when you ad effects and such, however the quality is fine . I think the cost of cards are still to high for my taste and yes i have a macbook pro that works great with P2 cards also. I really want to go solid state , however what if my client for Bravo or Discovery asks me for a timecoded tape with burn in or such ? Still not practical for me yet
the EX1 SDI
Doug

Sony Xd cam F350 with disk however the workflow for outputting it still requires a facilty that has HDcam or the sony XD deck to tranfer it. All Iam saying is when I shoot ashow I have a month to do it and its all on location and not in a studio . I will post some clips for you . So how does a non-tape format work for me unless its the 350 series ?

Sincerely
Doug

On location, no studio. How are giving them a Time coded burn in tape now?

These days I usually burn a DVD Video with burn in.
Input into FCP, add time code reader filter, render, burn DVD in iDVD.
or
Input file into Flip4Mac/Episode, use time code filter, burn to any web format the client can read and post online or burn file to disk. Alternative is to burn MPEG2 elementry stream and create a quick DVD in DVDStudio Pro.
How fast this is compared to a real time dub depends on the speed of your CPU. If you have no studio I don't know how you'd dub a time coded tape with burn in. You need a tape deck to go to tape.

Again if you have laptop you can burn the actual files on to dual layer DVD and THEY have a MASTER. Make a 2nd dual layer DVD and YOU have a MASTER too. All this can be faster than real time given ingest and burn speed.

Actually you have a copy on your laptop hard drive (or attached firewire drive) on ingest but backing up to disc might bive you a little bit of "security"

Keep in mind the dual layer DVD you make needs no deck. It's master. The client can play it back on their computer with the Sony Viewer. Your client can be in their office or on a Jet with their laptop and view the actual master footage with the master time code.

With EX1 all you need for location is two SxS cards, Laptop with Dual Layer DVD drive, a bunch of Dual Layer DVDs. Client needs a computer with free Sony Viewer to view.

With HDV you need a bunch of tapes. Send client HDV tapes and you have no backup master. Client must have the correct HDV deck to play those tapes. Import to laptop and you have much longer import times and you're using your camera (unless you bring a deck).

Run out of DL DVD on location and find many stores that carry them. Run out of HDV tapes and find few stores have them and then you may have to worry about switching brands if those issues concern you.

Also keep in mind Sony will have an XDCAM disc burner that can hook to a laptop (USB) for about $2500 by NAB, if you want XDCAM discs. It'll handle the 50GB discs. Blu-ray burner is another option. With XDCAM or Blu-ray client will have to have the ability to play those back though.

I just gave my client as dvd from the timeline of FCP no burn in needed. However I would like to go tapeless someday. Had the firestore FS-C 100 and it performed horribly along with its antquated 32 fat file limitation so your suggestions are great but they cost money .

Thanks again

Doug

Since you mention Firestore. Sony has said that the EX1 will work with their DR60 hard drive out of the firewire port with 25mbps. 60GB should give you about 260 minutes of record time. You're probably dealing with a .m2t file though.

I've heard lots of Firestore horror stories so you don't have to convince me about that being the wrong way to go at all. I just mention the Sony as another option although I'm not inclined to go that route either.

As noted, with EX1 you can give client Dual Layer DVD of master file and not even go through FCP.

Yes money can be and issue. You have laptop though.
Camera $6500-$6999
You'll get 2 8GB cards with that (total 50 or 70 minutes of record time combined).
Want a 16GB card. Poss. $900 list for another 50 or 70 minutes of record time. That price will likely drop though in just a few months.

True you can get 2 HDV cameras in some cases, for that price, but time is money to me and card workflow is blazing fast compared to tape. 8 hours of card data, ingest may be done by the end of the shoot. 8 hours tape. That's a work day of ingest. I'd rather have the choice of another billable day on another job or a day off. Even if all you gain is one extra day a month you've either got 10 vacation days or 10 days on other jobs and that easily makes you more money than the difference between HDV vs EX1 camera price. You can certainly gain more than one day a month so that's a conservative estimate.

I would like to thank Craig for a couple of very informative posts.
Recently I had to buy a camera for a documentary.
I wanted a 355, but due to the sensetivity of the case we had to use a "small" camera.
The EX seemed to be close to perfect, but it didn´t come out in time.
I got a very good price on a XL-H1 so I went with that. I´m quite pleased with the image, but I DON`T like the (impossible) handling of that lens or the fact that clients can´t play back 25f on their decks.
I decided to shoot the documentary interlaced because of that and I´m not too happy about that.
I´m one of the first on the list to receive a EX here in Norway next week if I want to. I´m dying to get it just for the manual operating of the lens.
I´m having a hard time figuring out to go for it or not, as I don´t have a project where I can use it to pay for it.
Another thing that worried me was "the handling material over to clients" bit, but after readin Craigs posts I have finally undserstood a way of dealing with this.

It all suddenly made perfect sense to me.

Thanks.

The deal breaker is 4:2:0...

But it's 4:2:0 for full 1920x1080 resolution, which gives you 518,400 color samples per frame. Compare that to the HVX200 which has that same number of pixels on its sensors and only records 345,600 color samples per frame in the most commonly used modes, and the EX1 seems fine by comparison.

...but time is money to me and card workflow is blazing fast compared to tape. 8 hours of card data, ingest may be done by the end of the shoot. 8 hours tape. That's a work day of ingest. I'd rather have the choice of another billable day on another job or a day off. Even if all you gain is one extra day a month you've either got 10 vacation days or 10 days on other jobs and that easily makes you more money than the difference between HDV vs EX1 camera price. You can certainly gain more than one day a month so that's a conservative estimate.

Tape capture can be done in bulk with only a couple minutes of attention per hour of footage while doing something else productive (like editing on another computer), and at the end of the capture process you also have an archive copy of your source footage on the original tape. With the EX1 you'll have to transfer the video data to your computer, possibly process it to be recognizable by your editing program, and take time to make at least one redundant/archive copy somewhere. I don't see much if any time savings there overall, so the main advantage is getting rapid access to your footage if you have a tight deadline to meet.

But it's 4:2:0 for full 1920x1080 resolution, which gives you 518,400 color samples per frame. Compare that to the HVX200 which has that same number of pixels on its sensors and only records 345,600 color samples per frame in the most commonly used modes, and the EX1 seems fine by comparison.

The HVX 200 does not have the same number of pixels on its sensors. In fact, it has the least number of pixels than any HD camera on the market. You probably should re-check your facts.

With half-inch sensors, there is no doubt that this camera will perform better in areas that the HVX 200 cannot. However, the EX 1 street price is looking like it will come in $1200 to $1500 more than the HVX 200. The HVX has very nice SD options; whereas, the EX 1 has none. In my opinion, I don't think HVX users will be quick to jump to the EX. I do think there is a market for both. Watch out, though, if Panasonic decides to add their AVC-Intra codec and half-inch sensors in an updated HVX 200, and I don't mean the 500.

With half-inch sensors, there is no doubt that this camera will perform better in areas that the HVX 200 cannot. ........... In my opinion, I don't think HVX users will be quick to jump to the EX.
No - I doubt many will get an EX if they already have a HVX200. But there are many people looking to upgrade from older gear, and for them the EX is now likely to be far more attractive than the HVX.

An HVX200 replacement along the lines you suggest is one thing, but I for one am interested to see what other manufacturers do - JVC and Canon being the obvious two.

I really want to go solid state , however what if my client for Bravo or Discovery asks me for a timecoded tape with burn in or such ? Masters submitted for HD broadcast most commonly need to be on HDCAM, and you're facing that restriction no matter what format you're using for acquisition... whether you're solid state, or HDV, etc. So how is this even an issue here.

The HVX 200 ... has the least number of pixels than any HD camera on the market. Makes no difference. The number of pixels on the image sensor is a complete non-issue. Like all other three-chip camcorders, the HVX 200 gets a significant boost in resolution from Pixel Shift. Remember, an image sensor is an analog device... therefore we need to focus instead on what is delivered from the camera's image processor *after* the signal has been converted from analog to digital. There's nothing wrong with the HVX 200 in this regard. If you fixate on the number of pixels on the image sensor, then you're completely missing out on what the camera is actually capable of delivering.

I agree with David Heath and others in that not very many HVX owners will see a need to switch to the Sony EX1. Also, I'm not seeing much of a point to this thread anymore...

Agreed,
There's always trade-offs.
I can't imagine there will be many leaving their HVX200 for the EX.

Not having either, one may sway towards the EX, but the HVX has its plusses too.

Keep in mind it takes roughly 5 minutes to input the file from 50 minutes of video on the EX1.

If you're shooting with a laptop on hand . . . input is done by the end of the shoot.
While inputing files from cards THAT computer can do other things. That same laptop can be burning disc archives too, during the shoot.

Archive is very fast. Nearly 3x going to XDCAM disc and faster than that if you're using 8GB dual layer DVD discs. While you're archiving to disc you can be using THAT computer to do something else.

By the time the camera ships I will need to do virtually NOTHING to have my edit system (FCP) recognize the file. A plugin will handle the .mp4 wrapper. I suspect many other edit systems will offer equally compelling support with help from Sony.

My time AND my computer's time are much better utilized by not having to tie up ANY COMPUTER with hours of tape ingest time in which THAT computer can do nothing else.

THAT computer (and I) can do many other things during the fast ingest and fast archive.

I can actually make duplicate copies of DL DVD or XDCAM discs for redundent archive as fast as or faster than I can ingest tape a single time. All the while the computer (and I) remain free to do other tasks.

Personally I'd never leave tape ingest unattended. Way too many things can go wrong from unobserved time code breaks to system issue that can stall the ingest.

I can actually ingest AND archive from cards faster than a tape ingest and even introduce a redundent archive in that time and still be able to use that computer for other tasks.

Tape capture can be done in bulk with only a couple minutes of attention per hour of footage while doing something else productive (like editing on another computer), and at the end of the capture process you also have an archive copy of your source footage on the original tape. With the EX1 you'll have to transfer the video data to your computer, possibly process it to be recognizable by your editing program, and take time to make at least one redundant/archive copy somewhere. I don't see much if any time savings there overall, so the main advantage is getting rapid access to your footage if you have a tight deadline to meet.

Basically there are very distinct differences between the HVX200 and EX1. It may well depend on what one is using the HVX for.

HVX does DVCPro50 (standard def 4:2:2) to P2.
HVX can record DV (4:1:1) to tape.
HVX can record Standard Def 16:9
HVX recodes DVCPro100 (HD 4:2:2) to P2
P2 is supported by a good part of Pansonic's camera line.
If those are compelling needs the EX1 doesn't offer an alternative.

EX1 offers longer HD record times per GB (by using long GOP currrently at 4:2:0).
EX1 offers faster Xfer from cards than HVX
EX1 offers HD-SDI out (4:2:2)
EX1 offers 1/2" chips at full 1920x1080 (compared to 1/3" 960x540 pixel shifted to a higher rez)
EX1 offers nearly 1000 lines of resolution (compared to 540 or so)
XDCAM is supported by a good portion of Sony's line (although this is the only card based .mp4 camera so far and records 1920x1080 rather than 1440x1080 though)

Yes there's plenty of overlap like over/undercrank but it's the unique features that will drive one to purchase one or the other camera.

In this "transition" period from SD to HD, the HVX has a compelling set of SD features the EX doesn't have. On the other hand the EX has a very compelling set of HD only features (if you're ok with long GOP 4:2:0).

I favor the EX1 but it does NOT mean HVX owners should jump unless they have a compelling reason to.

Hi Craig.
Just a quick question as I´m trying to get my head around the workflow here.

If I was to burn DVD´s after a days shoot and hand it to the direector to bring back to the editor (as I usually do with tapes), will the editor be able to work with this DVD´s as "masters" or do I need to bring the copies of the files on my hard disk to him later using an external hard disk?

Thanks

The data DVDs would be masters.

The client would need Sony's viewer (which would be free download) to everyone. You can probably burn it on to the disc for the client.

The client would need the appropriate plugin for their NLE (workflow may depend on the NLE).

______________________

The above is one reason I think the EX1 (card based XDCAM) is MUCH better than HDV.

Hand a client an HDV tape and they'll have to deal with Sony, Canon, JVC format compatible deck. Each camera has variants NOT COMPATIBLE with the other.

With Sony's viewer the client won't even have to have a deck to view the masters.

If the client has the appropriate NLE plugin they won't have to worry about tape deck ingest issues.

With disc backup. The client has a disc master, you can have a disc master, you can have a hard drive master that you made the disc from. Lots of redundency there, therefore much safer than handing the client an HDV tape.

I feel MUCH SAFER handing a client a disc with master files after the shoot that they can view with a free player than handing them an HDV tape.

For me, the above answers the question of what do you hand a client when you shoot to SxS cards (no tape).

Hi Craig.
Just a quick question as I´m trying to get my head around the workflow here.

If I was to burn DVD´s after a days shoot and hand it to the direector to bring back to the editor (as I usually do with tapes), will the editor be able to work with this DVD´s as "masters" or do I need to bring the copies of the files on my hard disk to him later using an external hard disk?

Thanks

Tape capture can be done in bulk with only a couple minutes of attention per hour of footage while doing something else productive

I think this misses a huge advantage of solid state formats, which is the way they present material in the logging application. Its very easy to get all your logging information in with your transfer, on a take by take basis.

If you do the unattended ingest, you have a mess for the assistant- or for the editor if you don't have an assistant.

Depending on what you are shooting this may or may not be an issue. I mean, if I am inter-cutting two cameras from a live event, then who cares- I am more worried about time code and sync.

On the other hand if I am shooting a project with a high ratio, say 15:1, I need the notes to be in the system so the editor has a concept what the director and DP were up to.

One important aspect of (potentially unattended) ingesting from one 8GB card while recording to another, is that with a card getting full while shooting, the camera will span a take over two cards. Does anyone know wheter this will be taken care of automatically by the supplied software?

Basically there are very distinct differences between the HVX200 and EX1. It may well depend on what one is using the HVX for.

...

In this "transition" period from SD to HD, the HVX has a compelling set of SD features the EX doesn't have. On the other hand the EX has a very compelling set of HD only features (if you're ok with long GOP 4:2:0).

I favor the EX1 but it does NOT mean HVX owners should jump unless they have a compelling reason to.

I've argued this point before here, and I want to say I agree with Craig.

I think the decision comes down to what format your work requires. I have HD clients and indie film... some of you may have strictly SD stuff on the job board.

If you are a transitional production, then the HVX seems to be a must have in this price range. I would buy an HVX200 if I had mostly SD work in my future outlook- because its going to work better for that sort of work.

If you are HD only, or expect to be rather soon, then the EX1 is the must have.

I wouldn't buy an EX1 if I had an HVX200, unless I had a pile of HD only work coming my way. For a lot of HD clients the HVX200 is considered a "non HD camera."

One important aspect of (potentially unattended) ingesting from one 8GB card while recording to another, is that with a card getting full while shooting, the camera will span a take over two cards. Does anyone know wheter this will be taken care of automatically by the supplied software?

Well I know that with P2 the camera will create a new take for you. Almost as if you had pressed the button and started a new take.

That is why when shooting "film style" I use a single card only and treat it as a film mag. I never want a single take split over two cards.

Under these circumstances, if you use free run time code, as opposed to rec run, then it will be obvious that the camera did this, because there will be no time code lapse between the clips. If I actually pressed the button there would always be a break in free run code.

(with rec run TC, all the clips will have contiguous time code.)

I just don't trust an editor down the line, even if it was me, to notice such a subtle point. An editor might just think its a new take with a tail slate- and that could confuse things, especially if there are double slated shots later on.

For events or the like where the entire thing is supposed to be captured in a take... then it won't matter. For ENG work you'll be scrubbing for content regardless of TC, so again it won't matter. I trust you can see the other places it won't be an issue- perhaps better than I.

The data DVDs would be masters.

The client would need Sony's viewer (which would be free download) to everyone. You can probably burn it on to the disc for the client.

The client would need the appropriate plugin for their NLE (workflow may depend on the NLE).


Thanks Again Craig.
As stated before, I just ran into the problem of handeling over HDV tapes to the production house. They couldn´t play them back and that means I have to go there tomorrow with my camera so they can capture the footage. Luckily I have the morning off (or had).

To Alexander:
Even if one is doing lot if SD work one could just burn SD downconvert and burn SD files I suppose. I do not know how long that would take on a laptop though. Just a thought

I would buy an HVX200 if I had mostly SD work in my future outlook- because its going to work better for that sort of work.
It's worth bearing in mind that you can always downconvert to SD and still get a very good SD product - UPCONVERTING is a different matter altogether.......... Same with SD 16:9/4:3, originating 16:9 and deriving 4:3 is far more satisfactory than the opposite because of the interlace effect. Hence, if time permits, there's a lot to be said for always shooting HD and downconverting as required. The HD rushes or master can always then be revisited in the future. (When you find more demand for HD.)

A more valid reason (at least in SD) for not going for the EX is when a client demands a tape in the right format (for them) straight after shooting. In this case, the choice isn't only the HVX, but the Z1, JVC, or Canon cameras. Each of which have their own USPs.

It's worth bearing in mind that you can always downconvert to SD and still get a very good SD product
...
Hence, if time permits, there's a lot to be said for always shooting HD and downconverting as required. The HD rushes or master can always then be revisited in the future. (When you find more demand for HD.)


I don't disagree, and downconversion with cropping to 4:3 if needed is the workflow that I will be following for my SD work.

Less than a quarter of my work is SD, and it makes me less than 10% of my income. I can live with the EX1. The inconveniences of my SD workflow are unimportant compared to the advantages to my HD work.

What I am saying is that if most of your work is SD then the EX1 is not a great camera choice. The HVX is a better choice if you do primarily SD work.

I think the words primarily and most are getting lost here. It doesn't make sense to have to downconvert the majority of what you are shooting.

In regards to shooting material that may be revisited in the future, I believe that in these cases DVCPRO HD at 720p from the HVX200 is good enough. I can tell you from experience that it will look fine intercut with Viper or HDCAM footage and even projected at 2K. I haven't seen it intercut with RED yet, but I see no reason that wouldn't work out.

The HVX is in many ways an inferior camera to the EX1, on the spec sheet and in my opinion, but when you are looking at SD video, and a transition to HD work then it is hard to beat. Until we heard about the EX1 the HVX was the apple of many of our eyes after all.

If the EX1 offered some of the XDCAM SD modes, the equation would be changed quite a bit in this regard. Even more so if it offered XDCAM 4:2:2 recording on SxS.

Well, maybe the EX2.

Until we heard about the EX1 the HVX was the apple of many of our eyes after all.


Many, but not myself. I pulled out of my preorder after we ran various tests.
Don't get me wrong, the HVX200 can produce nice stuff, but plan on lighting well, as you should.

The HVX200 is a bit soft, especially wide and is a bit on the noisy side under low light conditions. The noise was a surprise. I would of thought it would of faired better since its use of pixel shift.

The HVX200's glass and CCD support SD a lot better than HD.
SD using DVCPRO50 looks nice on this cam.
Our rez tests had the HX200 around 550 lines. If the EX comes close to 1000 as were hearing, it should look real sweet.

.
What I am saying is that if most of your work is SD then the EX1 is not a great camera choice. The HVX is a better choice if you do primarily SD work.
.

I disagree with this. Currently all my work is SD. I currently own an SD camera. I do not like the HVX as an HD camera. I want to expand my client base to HD clients as well as move a portion of my current clients to HD.

I have NO reason to by another SD camera with HD features I don't like. I could get an HDV camera with better HD resolution than the HVX (JVC series for example but there are others).

I'd MUCH rather downconvert from the EX1 than buy an HVX and use it as an SD camera. If I wanted a DVCPro50 4:2:2 camera that recorded to cards I'd be interested in the HVX but that's not where my business is going. At DVCPro50 it uses a bit more card capacity than the EX1 in HDHiQ and double the EX1 in 25mbps mode. In addition the P2 transfer times are slower.

My business is going to expand to HD and I want a camera who's HD quality will help persuade my clients to move that way as well as good enough to pursue clients already interested in HD. 1/2" chips, 35mbps, ability to deliver an easy to view disc (over an HDV tape with issues noted in earlier post or trying to figure out what to deliver from a P2 card) all lead me to the EX1 even though my business is currently Standard Def.

HD-DVD players are down to about $250. Blu-Ray is closing in on $400. On the next round of price drops, businesses and consumers who are paying $1000 for HDTVs may start buying players. By some point next year HD delivery will be viable IMHO.

The HVX 200 does not have the same number of pixels on its sensors. In fact, it has the least number of pixels than any HD camera on the market. You probably should re-check your facts.

Yes, that's what I was trying to say: the HVX starts with 518,400 pixels before processing for recording, and the EX1 ends up with 518,400 color samples per frame after processing. So anyone concerned about the EX1 not having 4:2:2 color should compare it to what the alternatives are first.

Hey Joachim. I was in Bergen, Norway in September. Also spent some time in Stord. I took my HD110u and HV10.

Anyway, for me it comes down to higher rez at 4:2:0 or lower rez at 4:2:2. The HVX is a great video tool because it does everything. It doesn't do everything better, but it does everything.

The EX1 doesn't do everything, but it does some things better. I'm looking for the best 1080P for BluRay so I am selling my 3 month old XHA1 and just placed my order for the EX1.

I disagree with this. Currently all my work is SD. I currently own an SD camera. I do not like the HVX as an HD camera. I want to expand my client base to HD clients as well as move a portion of my current clients to HD.

...



Craig,

Your points reveal an inbuilt assumption in my thinking. I am replacing my SD cameras. The EX1 is stopping me from renting HD cams- so its a full replacement for me. The EX1 is a stop gap for me until I can get my grubby paws on a RED.

It seems to me that you have the same goals I do but your clients are a bit behind where mine are on the adoption curve.

My question to you is this: how are you planning on servicing SD clients who don't want HD?

Will you be keeping your current SD cams? Are you going to service them with the EX1 SD workflow?

Why aren't you considering the disc based XDCAMs?

I can actually ingest AND archive from cards faster than a tape ingest and even introduce a redundent archive in that time and still be able to use that computer for other tasks.

Good point. I still don't see tape capture being a big deal unless you have a very large amount of footage to process, but if solid state recording improves your workflow that's obviously a good thing.

For the time being I'm keeping my SD gear. I'll have the option of offering SD, HD downconverted to SD if the client sees/likes the quality improvement, HD if they want to go that route.

I'm one of those who have been hoping for 1/2" chips in a small form factor. XDCAM disc might push my budget too high for some clients. EX1 means the cost to move an SD to HD is within their (and my) range.

I am thinking about HD to SD workflows. I've done local cable spots and delivered with DG/Fast channel. They'll soon be accepting HD delivery.

VNRs will be delivered via Pathfire. They'll soon be accepting HD delivery.

I've been told the broadcasters receiving from the above may be doing the downconvert on their end so I'll be able to deliver HD regardless. It wil depend on the broadaster (cablecaster) though.

With the appearance of HDTVs in corporate conference rooms and/or HD projection it may not be difficult to move those clients to HD delivery.

I even see a large number of lower end clients moving to HD given what I'm seeing. I can offer faster turnaround (and better quality IMHO) with the EX1 than those working in HDV.

Craig,

Your points reveal an inbuilt assumption in my thinking. I am replacing my SD cameras. The EX1 is stopping me from renting HD cams- so its a full replacement for me. The EX1 is a stop gap for me until I can get my grubby paws on a RED.

It seems to me that you have the same goals I do but your clients are a bit behind where mine are on the adoption curve.

My question to you is this: how are you planning on servicing SD clients who don't want HD?

Will you be keeping your current SD cams? Are you going to service them with the EX1 SD workflow?

I've also done a fair number of multi-camera shoots. 3 EX1s (own one rent or hire two additional) seem more cost effective than owning an F355 for example too. EX1 exceeds many of the abilities of the F335.

Why aren't you considering the disc based XDCAMs?

Many, but not myself. I pulled out of my preorder after we ran various tests.
Don't get me wrong, the HVX200 can produce nice stuff, but plan on lighting well, as you should.

The HVX200 is a bit soft, especially wide and is a bit on the noisy side under low light conditions. The noise was a surprise. I would of thought it would of faired better since its use of pixel shift.

The HVX200's glass and CCD support SD a lot better than HD.
SD using DVCPRO50 looks nice on this cam.
Our rez tests had the HX200 around 550 lines. If the EX comes close to 1000 as were hearing, it should look real sweet.

Well, I am certainly not going to argue that the HVX200 is a better camera. It isn't. To wit, I am buying an EX1- well that's the plan at least. I have to test before I order.

I argue that the HVX200 is better suited as a tool for studios whose primary output is SD.

As far as lighting goes, I find the HVX200 noisy under most conditions. Even well lit footage shows noise in black areas- especially if you stretch.

I attribute any softness in HD footage to the HVX's sensors and pixel shift. As an SD camera though its razor sharp.

If you are working in SD and plan on using EX1 footage for SD, then criticizing the HVX200's HD performance isn't useful.

What I am hearing from the objector's is that they plan on transitioning rapidly to HD.

Well then, you aren't disagreeing with me at all. That is where the EX1 shines in the market right now- I see no camera that challenges its specifications near the price.

Of course, like those "disagreeing" with me, I plan on doing almost no SD work going forward.

Yes, that's what I was trying to say: the HVX starts with 518,400 pixels before processing for recording, and the EX1 ends up with 518,400 color samples per frame after processing. So anyone concerned about the EX1 not having 4:2:2 color should compare it to what the alternatives are first.

I've seen this point before, and the compositor in me finds it specious.

If I am pulling a key or doing a grade what I care about is the number of chroma samples relative the number of luma samples. That's why we never state these as raw numbers, but rather as ratios: 4:2:0, 4:2:2, 4:4:4:4 etc. Its the ratio that matters.

Say I am pulling a key... I am interesting in how many color samples lie along the edge of the key region relative to the total length of the key region.

So, looking at what you are saying- its a bad thing. The EX1 will have nearly four times as many pixels in 1080p as the HVX200. It will have the same number of color samples though. This is very bad.

The larger numbers of pixels on the EX will definitely help me out though when I have to scope the project because I can't pull a key.

That said, from a color perspective it isn't THAT bad- its only about as bad as DV at 4:1:1.

Besides... the real selling point there is that I can shoot effects over HD-SDI at 4:2:2, and ostensibly at 10 bit color depth. Since I have yet to shoot an effect that requires 4:2:2 or better color untethered from a monitor etc, I figure what the hell. An ioHD, an external disk and a laptop won't add much to my troubles.

If you are working in SD and plan on using EX1 footage for SD, then criticizing the HVX200's HD performance isn't useful.



Well, to each is own.
I seriously doubt Panasonic's intention was to have the HVX200 known for only its SD performance. After all, their selling campaign was 1080 24P.

I like the idea of recording HD even when the client may want SD. The HD version will be ready for a possible future sale. For me, It does not take that much more time to render SD from the HD master.

It does not take that much more time to render SD from the HD master.

Well, that interests me. Despite having some decent hardware, I still think of rendering out SD video as a painstaking process. Call it scars from starting this business with Premiere on a P2. I forget how far we've come.

What kinds of relative performance are people getting on DVD renders with XDCAM HD versus DV as source footage?

Actually thinking a little more about it, if I am going to SD tape output, there is no hit at all is there? I mean I will be using an ioHD on my laptop... so the hardware will handle all SD downconversion in realtime as I playback from the timeline. Post & archive HD, output SD done. The desktops will get an SDI i/o card too (AJA or BM, I am undecided.), so no issue there either.

Maybe the EX1 for SD workflow won't hurt as much as I've been thinking.

You still have the issues of reframing for 4:3- pan and scan or crop. If its crop all the way then its easy... but if you frame for best use of the 16:9 frame you may have to do a little pan and scan for SD delivery at 4:3

Makes no difference. The number of pixels on the image sensor is a complete non-issue. Like all other three-chip camcorders, the HVX 200 gets a significant boost in resolution from Pixel Shift. Remember, an image sensor is an analog device...

Chris,
I think you misunderstood my reply. I was not being critical of the HVX 200; I was defending it. Kevin Shaw claimed that the HVX 200 had less color information than the EX 1 by alluding that both cameras had the same pixel count. I was only correcting this fallacy.

I continued on to say that in some areas the EX 1 will outshine the HVX 200, and that's a no-brainer because mainly of its sensor size. If you read my comment again, you will also see that I was the one who said that HVX 200 owners would not jump to the EX 1.

Kevin Shaw claimed that the HVX 200 had less color information than the EX 1 by alluding that both cameras had the same pixel count. I was only correcting this fallacy.

Again what I was trying to say is that the EX1 has as much color information after processing as the HVX has before processing, suggesting that the difference between these two cameras isn't much in terms of color detail. But as Chris said there isn't much point in debating this further: let's see what the EX1 can do once it starts shipping and leave it at that.

Good point. I still don't see tape capture being a big deal unless you have a very large amount of footage to process, but if solid state recording improves your workflow that's obviously a good thing.

I don't think it is just the amount of footage, it can also be a timing issue - when you are editing as much material as my company does on a one - four day turnaround from camera to on air, then tape capture is a real problem. Having hard disk capture and now newer solid state formats saves us money because I don't have to hire someone to come in at night and ingest tapes for the next days edit.

I imagine for news organisations these newer formats (XDCAM disk, Hard drive and solid state) are actually money savers as well.

I agree we're not quite up to the last rites on tape yet, but the patient is starting to come down with a bad cold.