The news that Canon is coming out with under $10K cameras with a 50Mbps, 4:2:2 codec leaves Sony's $18,900 camera with 35Mbps, 4:2:0 codec looking a bit silly, even though the Sony has 2/3" sensors. This could affect the EX1R/EX3 as well, although the Canon offerings are likely to have 1/3" sensors.

The 50Mbps, 4:2:2 Canon codec could be a giant killer if implemented in a large sensor video camera. It seems that Panasonic's large sensor prosumer camera will be AVCCAM, clearly not at the Canon codec level, so a big opportunity for Canon if they can break their 1/3" habit.

As far as sticking a nanoFlash on Sony XDCAM EX cameras to make up for the codec, I have concerns about non-write-protect capable CF cards.
Shooting Star Video (http://www.ssv.com)

I have not seen prices for the Canon cams yet, but considering that Panasonic already have a 1/3" sensor high bit rate codec, shoulder mount camera many people wouldn't consider this as in the same league or targeted at the same applications as the PMW-350, it's likey to be the same with the Canon's, of course I could however be completely wrong.

As you say the Canon 50Mb/s 4:2:2 codec could well be a giant killer (interesting to see you now think that an 8 bit codec, sub 100Mb/s codec might actually be good)

The clips on a CF card from the NanoFlash are stored as locked files so they cannot be accidentally deleted. Admittedly a card could be formatted in error, but then the write protect tab might not get flicked across in error. That's a pretty minor concern and not one I have an issue with. I have checks and measures in place with all my solid state media to prevent accidental clip deletion. It is possible that the Canon might use CF, we don't know yet.

CF non-write protect? I am shaking in my boots! And to think all this time my Canon 5DMkII files have been unprotected!

Tom,

If you were a rental house you'd be keenly aware of the lack of best practices that clients use when data wrangling. You'd be amazed at what kind of trouble they can and do get themselves into. Not everybody is a smart as you are.

Alister,

I have never said the Sony XDCAM 422 codec wasn't a very good one. Given a choice, 10-bit would be my preference, but that doesn't mean 50Mbps, 4:2:2, 8-bit won't do a very good job.

I agree that Canon are wasting that new codec on a 1/3" camera, just as I am not a huge fan of the HPX300.

Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video (http://www.ssv.com)

The news that Canon is coming out with under $10K cameras with a 50Mbps, 4:2:2 codec leaves Sony's $18,900 camera with 35Mbps, 4:2:0 codec looking a bit silly, even though the Sony has 2/3" sensors. This could affect the EX1R/EX3 as well, although the Canon offerings are likely to have 1/3" sensors.
Jeff, in this thread, I've previously disagreed with you far more than I've agreed. :-) But in respect of your remark above, I'm in full agreement.

I thought before that it was likely we'd see a version with 50Mbs - I don't now see how Sony can not do it.

Tongue in cheek Jeff. Do my SXS cards have write protect? I have no idea. Never needed the feature.

Jeff, in this thread, I've previously disagreed with you far more than I've agreed. :-) But in respect of your remark above, I'm in full agreement.


No worries David, I like you anyway! The 350 I saw briefly at a trade show looked way to detailed and I didn't like the colorimetry, and this was before having to deal with the lower quality codec. I am pretty sure that bringing detail down and going into matrix and multi-matrix would make me happy with the 350, although the 4:2:0, 8-bit codec could let it down compared to the 4:2:2, 10-bit codec I'm used to working with.

I believe Sony will have to rethink their protecting higher end models in light of what their competitors are doing.

"Tongue in cheek Jeff. Do my SXS cards have write protect? I have no idea. Never needed the feature."

Yes, Tom, SxS cards have write-protect, as I would expect professional media to offer. Just last month, a production company client who is also a post house, lost all the data on a 32Gb P2 card due to not write-protecting and writing a folder back onto the P2 card after recording their footage. This was their editor who made the error. These things happen, no matter how much instruction offered on the prep day.

Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video (http://www.ssv.com)

I believe Sony will have to rethink their protecting higher end models in light of what their competitors are doing.
And yes again to that. Don't get me wrong - as far as this thread is concerned I still think that a PMW350 is *OVERALL* the best current choice at this sort of price level, gives the best balance of features from anything on the market at the moment. And using such as a nanoFlash is a way of overcoming the codec issues. But that's not to say the 350 couldn't be improved, and giving it the 50Mbs codec natively is the obvious thing for Sony to do. (I'm sure Convergent Design hope they don't...... :-) )

As far as the Compact Flash/write protect issue goes, then yes, you're quite right when you say "You'd be amazed at what kind of trouble they can and do get themselves into". And yes, write protect ability can only help. (Assuming it gets used.)

But the accidental erasure incident you mention is far from the only incident of it's type I've heard about, and that applies to SxS as well as P2. The reliability of the media themselves isn't in doubt, it normally comes down to human error - often when deliberately formatting a card, but unfortunately the wrong card! In which case the write protect will have been deliberately set "off" anyway.

In those cases, the advantage of CF over P2 is that much more memory can be kept and used for the same cost. Hence much less need to download-format-reuse - you may not need to format any cards until well after the edit is underway. I feel that losing the write protect ability is well worthwhile from an overall reliability point of view, and it also makes it far more feasible to hand media over at the end of a shoot, in a way you can't do with P2.

David,

I think we agree more than disagree--except I value the P2 Varicam look and codec more, at it's trade-in price and assuming the same lens is used on a 2700 and 350. But, until Panasonic does another trade-in special, as they have done through March 31 on the 3700, it's a moot point and therefore would recommend a used HPX2000 w/Intra board or 3000 over the 350/nanoFlash.

Our 2700 goes out with 5)32Gb P2 cards, good for over 6.5 hours in 720/24PN or over 3 hours in 1080/24PN. Most shoots don't require on-set transfer with this kind of capacity. Having said that, I would rather have one of my DIT's or myself do the data transfer to two drives for my client than trust them to do so. Sure, one can hand the client a pile of CF cards, but that just gives them more time to mess up with their un-write-protected media.

The practice of going on a shoot with just two P2 or SxS cards is not a good idea and just creates too much pressure for quick transfers and reformatting. I like having five cards in the camera and shooting without interruption when on a fast moving shoot.

Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video (http://www.ssv.com)

Steve Phillipps could you send me a email your email is blocked?