The EX1 was released to the market as the HVX's star was still rising.

They're contemporaries.

Still, it would be good to compare the EX1 with the HPX172.

How about comparing EX1 to HPX172 instead of HVX202?
I believe the HPX172 may be a bit less noisy than the 202, but the sensors of the 172 and the 202 still have the exact same resolution so I wouln't expect to see the 172 look any sharper.

At the time this thread was started (a year ago) both the EX and the 202 required a workflow of frequent downloading and backing up, probably in the field, unless you were prepared to spend thousands on memory.

Since then, it's been discovered that EX cameras can use cheap SDHC cards, and that has given the EX a massive workflow advantage over the 202 or the 172 - the cards are cheap enough to treat effectively like tape, without losing any of the solid state advantages. IMO, that change is far more significant than any 202 to 172 improvements, and is why I now believe the EX camera may be practical for me now, in a way the 172 is not.

I believe the HPX172 may be a bit less noisy than the 202, but the sensors of the 172 and the 202 still have the exact same resolution so I wouln't expect to see the 172 look any sharper.

At the time this thread was started (a year ago) both the EX and the 202 required a workflow of frequent downloading and backing up, probably in the field, unless you were prepared to spend thousands on memory.

Since then, it's been discovered that EX cameras can use cheap SDHC cards, and that has given the EX a massive workflow advantage over the 202 or the 172 - the cards are cheap enough to treat effectively like tape, without losing any of the solid state advantages. IMO, that change is far more significant than any 202 to 172 improvements, and is why I now believe the EX camera may be practical for me now, in a way the 172 is not.

Since we're talking recording to SD cards, have you checked the specs on the soon-to-be-released JVC cameras?

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/jvc-pro-hd-acquisition-systems/141123-specs-new-gy-hm100-prohd-camcorder.html

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/jvc-pro-hd-acquisition-systems/141149-new-gy-hm700-camcorder.html

It sure sounds like they're using the EX format, although it doesn't actually say that. Not certain, but I understood the SD cards solution for the EX1 don't allow variable frame rate recording.

I
Since then, it's been discovered that EX cameras can use cheap SDHC cards, and that has given the EX a massive workflow advantage over the 202 or the 172

Not sure I would term it a "massive advantage", I think that the term, "cost advantage" is more apt. In tests I ran for my biggest client, we consistently were getting dropped frames from the EX1 at any frame rate including and faster than 36fps. For those of us who typically shoot a lot of slow motion, SxS cards are superior to SDHC cards by far.

It's a neat hack, but after showing it to my two biggest clients, they both told me, "thanks, but no thanks" and both went out and bought more SxS cards. If you do shoots where your living and your relationship depend on you getting the shot every time, (we do mostly work for all of the studios), P2 and SxS cards seem to easily be worth the money.

OTOH, if a camera was conceived and designed to shoot to SDHC cards as the new JVC and the HMC150, I would have no problem in using it in professional applications. The EX1 thing is definitely a hack (that works well for people who mainly need to shoot hours and hours of footage cheaply), but it is an inconsistent hack.

Dan

In tests I ran for my biggest client, we consistently were getting dropped frames from the EX1 at any frame rate including and faster than 36fps. For those of us who typically shoot a lot of slow motion, SxS cards are superior to SDHC cards by far.
Well yes, there is no dispute that if you want to overcrank, you need an SxS card, there has never been any doubt about that, unless it's for a very small amount frame rate increase. But for the vast majority of people, surely overcrank work is the exception, only a very small percentage of total shooting?

Unless you are doing vast amounts of overcrank shooting, the best workround seems to be shoot to a true SxS card in one slot, then do a card-card transfer to an SDHC card/adaptor in the other slot. Advantage being that it still gets away from the need to have laptops on location - it all happens in camera.
The EX1 thing is definitely a hack (that works well for people who mainly need to shoot hours and hours of footage cheaply), but it is an inconsistent hack.
How is it inconsistent? That implies that it would be unreliable - sometimes work, sometimes not - and all the evidence I've seen is to the contrary. As long as an approved adaptor is used (Kensington or MxR), a Sandisk or Transcend SDHC card, and overcrank isn't tried all the evidence seems to be that it's remarkably reliable and consistent

Not sure I would term it a "massive advantage",

In my book Cheap=Massive!

Anyone know if Sony intended the EX to work off 3rd party cards? Was it some kind of viral marketing scheme? If it wasn't intentional, they sure don't seem too upset about it.

Not sure I would term it a "massive advantage", I think that the term, "cost advantage" is more apt.
"Cost advantage" just implies a money saving, "massive advantage" implies a lot more, true.

And in this case we're not just talking about saving a few pounds on memory, but a complete change of workflow. Ever since the HVX200 came out, there have been seen to be advantages of a tapeless workflow and solid state in principle, but also drawbacks due to the need to download frequently, just to be able to format cards and continue shooting.

Using SDHC in an EX means an end to that. The cards are cheap enough to be their own backup, load into the NLE, and just leave the cards on the shelf until the project is finished. No more need to take laptops on location. No more worry about finger trouble during a download in less than ideal conditions.

They also make it feasible to shoot material, and hand over the card with rushes directly to a client immediately shooting, they keep all the advantages of tape/disc whilst getting the advantages of solid state.

That's why I think "massive advantage" is apt, we're talking not just about cheaper cards, but a change in workflow, and one which makes solid state working viable for many people in a way that P2 (or SxS) doesn't.

I can make out a viable case for getting Panasonics HMC151 (it's cheap) and another good case for the Sony EX cameras, but I can't make a valid one out for a 171, or any P2 camera in this class any more. Whereas with the Panasonic range you either have to buy P2 OR a 151 with SDHC, with an EX you get the choice within one camera - one minute use it SxS for maximum performance, the next with SDHC for maximum economy.

Not sure I would term it a "massive advantage", I think that the term, "cost advantage" is more apt. In tests I ran for my biggest client, we consistently were getting dropped frames from the EX1 at any frame rate including and faster than 36fps. For those of us who typically shoot a lot of slow motion, SxS cards are superior to SDHC cards by far.


Oh it's DEFINITELY a massive advantage. Because quite frankly, I could call the difference between the HPX3000 and the HVX200 a "cost advantage" also. If you're dropping frames it's because you're overcranking, which is clearly not the intended use. Misusing a product does not make it inconsistent or unreliable.

I think all three of those quotes above are Dans, the last two seem to be down to me?

I think all three of those quotes above are Dans, the last two seem to be down to me?

Sorry, botched it.

Right, well, it is an "unofficial" hack, meaning if your EX1 begins performing not up to spec while shooting with SDHC cards, Sony isn't going to help you out. I think that is why both of my biggest clients who own EX1s passed on doing it. If you are on a low budget, it may be a viable option but for higher profile, more demanding clients and projects, both of my clients just said, "eh, that's kind of neat" but then went out and bought loads of new SxS cards.

It is interesting that there are so many new AVCHD camcorders coming out that do shoot to SDHC cards and for a certain number of shooters and clients, AVCHD fills the bill. I am purchasing my first AVCHD camcorder for a travel project in Europe where I will be frantically following a subject all around France with just myself as crew most of the time so smaller, lighter and cheaper overrides me taking my HPX170 and dealing with a laptop and P2 cards so I totally see where you guys are coming from. But for a lot of P2 owners, we already own enough P2 cards to do what we do so the high cost of P2 cards isn't an issue for us.

I guess if I were a beginner with no system or a pro switching systems, I would think long and hard about P2 or SxS, they are both expensive cards and you are right, it does seem that the SDHC option is perhaps going to become a defacto standard in lower end pro gear and definitely it already is in consumer gear.

Dan

Certainly in the past, there was a need for the proprietary solutions to get the needed speed and capacity of P2. However, that need is now gone. And frankly, storage is the largest ongoing factor of camera ownership for owners. Not necessarily for those renting, or those who have clients footing the bills.

You mentioned that your clients went out and bought loads of SxS cards. That's awesome. But when that's your OWN money coming out of your pocket, and you need 2, 8 hour days worth of cards, the game is a bit different. I can't take a laptop into some of the places I shoot, and since I often work alone, there isn't always time to transfer a full day's footage on site if I want to get sleep. With tape this was ok, but it meant some LONG hours when I got back to the editing machine. With the firestore, the drive to drive transfer over firewire was fast enough (and hands off) to make the process trivial. If I was shooting a days worth of 16GB P2, I'd be in trouble.

The SDHC solution means that I can buy 2 days worth of storage for the price of a single SxS card. So my issue is essentially solved. If I need overcrank then I am working with a very different kind of project, and I am not so worried about shooting 6-8 hours of continuous footage.

The future leads us to non-proprietary media, even on the high end. The need simply isn't there any more. The new problem with HD is not how to acquire the footage, but how to archive it all!

Right, well, it is an "unofficial" hack, meaning if your EX1 begins performing not up to spec while shooting with SDHC cards, Sony isn't going to help you out.
But why should the spec of the camera suddenly change? If you mean "it develops a fault" then I just don't see how using SDHC or MxR makes things in any way different or can invalidate any warranties. It's not as if you'd drilled holes in the camera or taken a soldering iron to it. There is absolutely no way any other party could know whether it had previously been used with SxS or an SDHC substitute.

It doesn't even involve "hacking" any software or firmware - just making sure the latest official Sony version is installed!
It is interesting that there are so many new AVCHD camcorders coming out that do shoot to SDHC cards and for a certain number of shooters and clients, AVCHD fills the bill.
And even more interesting to see the JVC announcement of a camera that's SDHC native, comparable price to the HMC150 (?) but with the XDCAM-EX codec. We'll wait and see what it's like for real, but surely that must be very appealing from an ease of editing point of view? Not need any time spent transcoding as AVC-HD effectively does?
I guess if I were a beginner with no system or a pro switching systems, I would think long and hard about P2 or SxS, ........it does seem that the SDHC option is perhaps going to become a defacto standard in lower end pro gear and definitely it already is in consumer gear.
For lower end pro gear, the obvious answer to me is an SxS capable camera, which can be used with EITHER SxS cards OR SDHC cards via an adaptor. Surely it gives you the choice of the best of either world?

Buy an HMC150 and it gives you cheap media - but no option of having facilities like overcranking at a higher data rate. Buy a 171, and you have all the overcrank etc options, and a more edit friendly codec - but you're stuck with very expensive P2 media, HAVE to frequently download, and lose any option of giving your rushes straight to client on a card you can easily charge for.

Get an EX, and you can use either SxS or SDHC as appropiate, AND have the highest spec camera for less than $10,000. If you haven't got P2 legacy issues, it seems a no-brainer.

But why should the spec of the camera suddenly change? If you mean "it develops a fault" then I just don't see how using SDHC or MxR makes things in any way different or can invalidate any warranties.

You misunderstand me, I am not saying the hack will invalidate the warranty, I am just saying if you are using the hack and your camera loses half of the media for some mysterious unexplained reason, when you are trying to troubleshoot it with Sony service, they are going to throw up their hands and say that you were using the camera in an unsupported configuration with an "officially" unsupported adapter and unsupported media. I have owned three Sony broadcast Betacams and have dealt with Sony broadcast service for decades. They can be really picky about stuff like this.

No different than if you are using the frame rate hack on your HVX/HPX170. And since I use SD cards in my Nikon D80, I am also of the opinion that SDHC cards are also built to a much higher acceptable error rates and much lower physical specifications than P2 or SxS cards, which are much closer to Mil-Spec. I wonder if SxS and P2 cards are Mil-spec?

Not saying that the hack will discontinue the warranty, just saying, when you are doing unrepeatable shoots and events, to many of us, we would not take the chance to save the money. I would shoot my own family's events with the hack (I have done that actually), but I wouldn't use the hack for a shoot for Warner Bros. But that's just me. Bottom line, SDHC = much cheaper construction with much higher statistical error rates. P2 and SxS = much more costly but much better construction with zero statistical error rates. Buy what you are willing to take a chance with. It will be interesting to see if there will be HPX3700 level cameras in a few years shooting to little plastic consumer SDHC variant cards. At least CF cards like RED uses seem to be much more robustly constructed than relatively delicate plastic SD cards. I have some metallic cased CF cards that are much like P2 and SxS cards in construction.

Does that new JVC camera actually use the XDCAM EX codec? Or is it some new variation of it that JVC just licenses from Sony, then re-wrote for thir cameras. Can you use the Sony software to manage footage from the JVC.

Dan

I would shoot my own family's events with the hack (I have done that actually), but I wouldn't use the hack for a shoot for Warner Bros. But that's just me.
But the real beauty of the EX camera must be that it gives you the CHOICE. Buy a 171 and you're stuck with P2. Buy a 151 and it's SDHC or nothing, no chance of variable frame rates. Buy an EX and it's up to you, on a day by day basis if needed.
P2 and SxS = much more costly but much better construction with zero statistical error rates. Buy what you are willing to take a chance with.
I think you need to look at the whole system, at every aspect where error may creep in. Physical failures may be one aspect, but I'd suspect that the possibility of human error during downloading must statistically be far greater than errors due to card failure, be they P2, SxS, or SDHC.

So given the choice of P2 or SDHC workflows, where P2 involved on location downloading with a laptop and constantly formatting the original cards, whereas SDHC meant the cards were never formatted, and formed the backup after downloading, the P2 workflow seems intrinsically far less reliable. Not because of the construction of the cards, but because the possibility of human error is far greater.

And I have heard one first hand account of a P2 disaster with a lot of lost material. Nothing due to faulty equipment, it was human error, but it wouldn't have happened with the SDHC workflow.

That's what I like about the SDHC concept - it shouldn't be seen just as a way of saving money by using a cheaper card, rather that it completely changes the workflow, and in my opinion makes it far more reliable overall.
Does that new JVC camera actually use the XDCAM EX codec? Or is it some new variation of it that JVC just licenses from Sony, then re-wrote for thir cameras. Can you use the Sony software to manage footage from the JVC.
Don't know the answer to the last one, and from what's come out so far it appears you get a choice of what to record - choose Quicktime and no need for rewrapping for FCP, let alone transcoding. JVC do state that it will be 35Mbs MPEG2, so any NLE shuld deal with it as easily as XDCAM files, even if there is a difference. I think AVC-HD is good for the consumer world, but this seems a better bet for semi-pro.

And even more interesting to see the JVC announcement of a camera that's SDHC native, comparable price to the HMC150 (?) but with the XDCAM-EX codec. We'll wait and see what it's like for real, but surely that must be very appealing from an ease of editing point of view? Not need any time spent transcoding as AVC-HD effectively does?

For lower end pro gear, the obvious answer to me is an SxS capable camera, which can be used with EITHER SxS cards OR SDHC cards via an adaptor. Surely it gives you the choice of the best of either world?



Well, according to the specs on the new JVC HM-700, it does record to either SxS (using the KA-MR100G adapter) or SDHC cards, no second-party adapter necessary, in a codec that seems to be XDCAM EX (although nothing definite has been officially stated in that regard). But it does record in a high bitrate of 35mps at 1920x1080/60i.

edit - Since the JVC KA-MR100G does record to SxS cards using the XDCAM EX codec, I guess it does mean it can record in EX, correct?

But there are some things you don't see in a still-frame comparison -- like the fact that if you want to play a clip back on the HVX, you have about a 1.5 or 2-second wait. On the EX1, it's 14 seconds. 14 SECONDS.

No it's NOT!
I just shot a short clip on my EX1 (recording to SxS card) and from pressing the replay button to the image appearing was less than ONE second.

Maybe you should get your EX1 serviced - I don't know where you got 14 seconds from.

Barry is referencing going from Record mode to Media mode. Which is not necessary to play back the last clip. But which is necessary to play back anything other than last clip. Frankly, last clip review, and last clip delete are some of the best tools on the EX1 for narrative shooting, and they are very fast. If I am going to take the time to review the past hour's shots, I'm not really concerned about the 14 second changeover.

It takes me about that long to uncap a bottle of water, take a swallow, and cap it back. I have that kind of time. :)

-P

Frankly, last clip review, and last clip delete are some of the best tools on the EX1 for narrative shooting, and they are very fast

I agree 100%.

If I am going to take the time to review the past hour's shots, I'm not really concerned about the 14 second changeover.

I find the Last Clip Review so useful, I very rarely use Media mode - that's why I assumed Barry was referring to Last Clip Review.