I have been following the posts on this section of the forum and have noted the relative paucity of posts regarding the PMW 350. I am currently contemplating the purchase of said camera and wonder if the diminutive number off posts is an indication of satisfaction with the camera or simply the limited number of owners?
In addition, I wonder if someone could provide me with the most usable and effective aperture range for the stock lens?
Thank you in advance.

Hi Ron,

I owned a 350 for three months.

The camera is a nice step up from the EX1/3. More sensitive, 2/3" DOF, full B4 lens choices, and great VF, all make for a very nice camera.

Are you asking how many stops the lens has or how many you would use on a shoot to get the best quality picture?

Hello and thank you for your reply and descriptive message.

I am interested in the effective f-stop range, or best shooting range, rather than the actual expanse.

You mentioned that you owned the 350 for 3 mos—why did you dispose of it?

Are there problems with the camera that you would feel comfortable sharing?

Well the effective range of course will vary depending on the light and the final quality you are happy with for your customer. I would say the camera did very well from 6-7 stops. The camera is very nice in low light with minimum noise.

Nothing wrong you should test the camera out at a dealer you will be very pleased. I sold to move to higher quality CCD in the F800 along with a slew of other features that I need.

I think a fair summary would be that if you're happy with CMOS limitations then for the price it'll be an incredible camera. Supplied lens is apparently excellent too (especially when you figure that it's almost free).
Only other limitation is 35mb/s codec - some broadcasters etc may not be happy with that.
If you need CCD and 50 mb/s codec and have the extra £20,000 then get a PDW800, if not the 350 should is pretty much the pick of the bunch at the moment.
Steve

Oh, and if you go for the PDW800 don't foget to allow another £3,500 for a viewfinder! Unless you want a colour one like th 350 has, then it's £6,000!!!
Steve

Thank you both for your responses.
Sure, I too would much prefer a CCD camera, but the pressing issue at the moment is one of economics and I can hardly justify the outlay of another $30,000 at this juncture (B&H price $38,990 plus whatever lens one chooses). Given the type of shooting I do, mostly landscape and scenic, flash banding is not an issue but skew can be. From what I have seen of the 350 from the work of others, skew appears to be minimal at most. Unfortunately, there are no dealers nearby that either stock the 350 or would allow one to go for a test drive and as such I have to rely upon the forums to assist in the decision making process. That said, there appears to be little else available in that price range.

Not tried them side by side, but I'd be happy to bet that if you could get hold of an EX1 the skew on that would be near identical to the PMW350.
The price of the "old style" CCD cameras is now starting to seem quite insane. The price that you quote for a PDW800 is probably about right. The for even a "cheap" HD lens like an HJ18x7.6 would be another $12,000 maybe, another $4,500 for a viewfinder maybe? Puts it at around $55,000. And in fact these type of cameras are actually a LOT cheaper than they used to be.
When the original Varicam came out it was around £60,000, and the Sony F900 around £80,000 I seem to remember.
For those that are OK with CMOS the "bang for buck" is just in a different league to the CCD cams.
Another thing that has made a vast difference is chromatic aberration correction, which is what allows these kit lenses to be more or given away with the cameras - the optics can be kept quite simple (and poor) allowing the elctronics to sort them out in camera (the camera will be set up to work perfectly with the supplied lens).
As others have said, the more the skew gets under control as technology advances the quicker CCD cameras will start to fade away.
Steve

I agree with your assessment, CCD vs CMOS, cost vs value.

I did own an Ex3, which I sold due to its unworkable form factor, but never found skew to be an issue. Sure, I could provoke it but not under normal shooting conditions. But the Panasonic HPX 300 that I replaced it with is a skew-pro and while I can minimize or at times prevent skew by following the ASC guidelines, it isn't always convenient or appropriate for the shooting environment. Seems that I am currently left with only one option in the shoulder mount category and that's the 350. For the difference in price, the upcoming 320 makes little sense to me.

Sorry Ron I was with a client. Steve's advice is great.

If you want a 2/3" camera under $30K with a lens the 350 is the best choice. The F800 is a big step up and I needed the camera to please a few clients and it is better with fast motion which I shoot a lot.

Ron if you liked the EX3 the 350 is a great next step and with the kit lens you will be set to go for a very low 2/3" price.

Your pricing on the F800 is accurate. You could get a ZA17x lens for $11K which is very nice and with my test as good as a HA in picture quality. I did not have good luck with my Canon HJ test. The viewfinder at $4.5ik will be black and white. But it sounds like you are happy with CMOS and that is great, saves you a tons of money.

No rental house in Miami carrying the 350? I suggest you rent for a few days or a week and see if it fits your needs. That is what really matters. Very hard to buy based on forum input.

Or, if you liked the HPX300 except for skew you could check out the HPX370 - apparently it has less skew than the EX3, plus is as good in low light.
Steve

Paul, thank you for your reply. As for CMOS, I agree that it has its limitations but it does present an affordable entry point.

And, Steve, I really do not have any interest in another 1/3" chipped camera and furthermore, I am somewhat soured on Panasonic at the moment but thank you for the thought.

Happy to help Ron,

I think you would be happy with the 350 but you should rent. You can deal with Abel Cine Tech in NYC Abel Cine Tech (http://www.abelcine.com/store/home.php) who I think are first class people and the only ones I deal with on big purchases or there is a rental house in Miami that I know nothing about. I will send you their link.

Hi Paul:

I'm about 60miles from Miami,making a rental a tad impractical, but I will be checking the camera out tomorrow at a different and closer venue and will probably make the purchase.
However, if the issues relating to CMOS are no worse than those witnessed with my EX3 I do not anticipate a problem. And, after all, what else is there in a full raster, 2/3" chip, shoulder mount camera in this price range? Nothing, I suspect. So, there really is no choice and nothing to compare it to ... it's either the 350 or pony up another 30K for the PDW 800, lens and VF and I don't see that happening anytime in the foreseeable future. But thanks again for your thoughts, they were most appreciated.

Glad to help Ron,

Nice you will have a chance to see, hold, and shoot with the camera tomorrow.

Only other limitation is 35mb/s codec - some broadcasters etc may not be happy with that.
If you need CCD and 50 mb/s codec and have the extra £20,000 then get a PDW800, if not the 350 should is pretty much the pick of the bunch at the moment.
I agree with that. I wish the PMW350 had the 50Mbs codec as standard - but if essential there's always the nanoFlash option. In that case - are CCDs really worth an extra £18,000? :-)

Of course, if you want solid-state, that's another thing in the 350s favour, let alone things like much lower power consumption. Some actively want disc recording, to avoid field downloading, but solid-state is gaining ground quickly.

Hi Paul,
I hear that the F800 is power hungry.
In comparison:
How many hours can you operate a PMW 350 & the F800 on a fully charged battery with the viewfinder powered on?

Ah yes the F800 is power hungry. When I was using the 350 I had two 130wh batteries and always had about 1/2 of one left at the end of a 8-10 hr day. The F800 takes three full 130wh batteries in the same time. So the F800 takes about twice the watt hours in the same time.

David if they put 422 50mbps in the 350 I think it would be flying off the shelf.

I don't agree about SxS over optical disk. Optical disk are great shoot and you are archived. I also still have my EX1 and only use the Nano clips which are great. But archive is a lot more work.

Paul, you have the advantage because you've actually owened both cameras, but I'm surprised there isn't even bigger difference between them. I would have expected the ratio to be at least 3:1
If the F800 is only twice as power hungry as the 350, I think that's pretty good.

Paul, I have one last question and since you have owned the 350 you may have the answer.
In preparation for tomorrow's test drive, where there will be no opportunity for A/B testing, I have been scouring the net for reviews and user opinions in re the PMW 350. One poster in particular seemed to imply that skew was a bigger issue for the PMW 350 than for the EX1/3. It was my understanding that it was no greater but I would appreciate your experience.

David if they put 422 50mbps in the 350 I think it would be flying off the shelf.


And how many $35,000 PDW800s would they sell then? Not many! Have we discovered the reason why they've not included 50 mb/s or is it just not technically possible (this is a rhetorical question!)
Same goes for Pann HPX300 not having 1/2"+ chips. We have a half-camera from each company!
Steve

Doug that has been what my notes say so far on battery power but I left out one very important detail. I always shot the 350 powering the Nano off the D-Tap so your 3:1 is most likely more accurate.

Ron I have not shot with the EX3 only my EX1 and I would say the skew is about the same on the 350. I am shutting down for the night so good luck on your testing tomorrow I hope you enjoy your time with the 350.

Steve I disagree. I shot the 350 with the nano and at 50-100mbps 422 and still went for the F800. The CCD is better and you know that having shot with both EX and F800. They would sell more 350's at 422 50Mbps but the Nano gives it the nice upgrade. There are also a ton of other features that make the F800 worth the extra money IF YOUR CLIENTS know the difference. Just like glass you can buy a long lens for $2k and some clients will be happy but others will demand high quality glass. Nice that there is a tool that fits all of our needs.

With everything on and recording, the PMW-350 draws 17W vs. 40W for the PDW-700/F800. CCDs are power hungry, the disc mecanism only uses around 6W while recording. A PDW-F800 with the PMW-350's CMOS chip would most likely only be around 22W. Could be an interesting alternative...

T.

I feel there is not much to loose for Sony to add 50mbps record capability to the PMW-350. It may steal a few 700/F800 sales but I think most buyers of those cameras want the CCD and disc recording capability anyway. It would be great if this feature would be offered in some form or firmware/software upgrade.

Thierry.

Steve I disagree. I shot the 350 with the nano and at 50-100mbps 422 and still went for the F800.

I get the feeling you'd be in a huge minority though Paul. It'd be different if the prices were similar, or even on the same planet, but they're miles apart. Here in the UK from one main dealer: PDW350 with lens £13,500, PDW800 £26,500 + colour viewfinder £5,500 + cheapish lens £7,000 for total of £39,000!
Steve

Agree Steve for most it does not matter. But I shoot fast motion and it makes all the difference. Tomorrow we will shoot 6 hrs (three tanks) from the helicopter which I do often. When I did this with the 350 it does not give me the same results as the F800. When flying at 20' doing a fly over at 100kts the cameras are being pushing to the limit and for me I need the CCD and the price difference is paid back very quickly.

The higher bit rate of the Nano and 422 helped but it does not make up for the CMOS problem with this type of extreme shooting. One of the many reasons I stated the following.
"Nice that there is a tool that fits all of our needs."

Just to throw in my two cents.

I think it needs to be said that the differences between the F800 and the PMW-350 go well beyond just comparing bit rates, sensor type, and power consumption. There are huge differences between the cameras when you start adding up all the dozens of features and functions the F800 has that the 350 does not. For example, proxy files, custom user menus, custom gamma curves, 1080P overcranking, 4 channels of 24 bit uncompressed audio, user assign functions (not the same as assign buttons), dual SDI output, more paint settings, All files, User files, custom user box, Planning Metadata, custom iris window, custom warning lights, optical CC filters, 30 second cache, cuts-only editing in the camera, digital extender, image invert, superior viewfinder, stronger/heavier body, and much more. But the number one advantage is the simplified workflow and archiving of optical discs vs. SxS cards. That alone saves me dozens of hours every single month.

Time is money and my time is valuable. So for me, the F800 will actually cost me less than a 350 over the course of its lifetime when you look at the time I'd waste wrangling data. All the extra benefits of an F800 vs. a 350 are just a bonus.

Doug, I'd say that for most people none of those things are a big issue, or rather a big enough issue to be worth spending all that extra cash. Not by a long shot.

Big note on "1080P overcranking" - that's not the whole truth as you will know. It's overcranking at 1920x540, so in actual fact it gives almost exactly the same resolution as the overcranking on the 350 (ie 1280x720).

I too liked the disc workflow, but we all know that more people want solid state than anything else now.

My guess would be that if you put 50mb/s on the 350 the market share vs the PDW800 would be 90%-10% in favour of the 350. Just a guess of course, but I do think it would hit it that hard.

Steve

They are both excellent cameras. The PDW-F800 is almost certainly a better camera than the PMW-350, but the difference is very small. Once you fully embrace the Solid State workflow and have a sound backup system in place it is very easy and very fast. I find working with optical disc to be very slow in comparison. How spoilt we have become, now I'm moaning about the speed of the workflow, which only 5 years ago was soooo much faster than anything I had ever used before.

Value for money, bang for the buck, the PMW-350 is astonishing, the overall package is very very good and there is little that it can't do. But if the budget demands (and can afford) the best you can get then the F800 would be the more appropriate choice.

Stuck in the US with only a 56k data modem, in a hotel with no internet, Grrrrr, it's like having a hand cut off!

Alister, it was good to see you at NAB again. I was wondering if you had found a backdoor way of getting home. You've got to got find a good restaurrant that has free wifi and just kick back. Good luck.

Do you honestly prefer SxS cards to optical? I use both, and I sure prefer the simplicity of optical. The transfer is a little slower, but that's also due to the 50 Mbps vs. 35 Mbps file sizes. Ultimately optical saves me tons of time. Maybe Sony will actually come out with the SxS adapter for the F800/700 they talked about a couple of years ago and you'll have the best of both worlds. I for one, will not be buying it.

In addition, I wonder if someone could provide me with the most usable and effective aperture range for the stock lens?


The sweet spot of the lens is f/2.4-f4.0, usable range is f/1.9-f/8.0.

The cam does include All files, cache recording, custom iris window, image invert, 4 ch 16 bit audio.

The sweet spot of the lens is f/2.4-f4.0, usable range is f/1.9-f/8.0.

The cam does include All files, cache recording, custom iris window, image invert, 4 ch 16 bit audio.

Thank you, Tom, that is exactly what I was asking (usable F stop range) but perhaps in less than adequate terms.

Just came back from the nearest, yet distant vendor with a brand new PMW 350. I assume that it will take some time to get it setup, as you have indicated, but I look forward to some great shooting.
Thank you again,
Ron

Ron you went for it, good for you I think you made a smart move. Have fun with the camera and let us see some clips at times. You live in a great spot for shooting. This past Jan I shot at Sanibel for the first time, wow what amazing bird life in the winter. Besides the fantastic sunsets.

Enjoy your new purchase.

I also think it's probably the best choice, hope it works out for you. Be good to hear how you get on and whether there is anything lacking from the features that you really miss besides CCDs.
Steve

I would be happy to provide a follow-up once I've had chance to give it a go-around.

I wonder, has anyone used Sony's new SDHC adaptor and if so, is there a reccommedation for particular SDHC cards?

Please ignore this post, in re SDHC, as I see that it has already been addressed elsewhere on the forum.

Thank you in advance,
Ron

I own both cameras, PDW-F800 and PMW-350, and as much as I like the SxS workflow, I still think that managing solid state media in a mid to long term for a large organization can be really problematic. That is where the XD disc comes to play with the best of both worlds. File based media with the convenience of tap elike archiving. I do a fair amount of documentary filming for Nat Geo in rugged, remote locations and for this, I have no hesitation to take the F800. Also, in term of image quality, I find the F800 latitude to be quite superior ot the PMW-350. I love the PMW-350 for news gathering though...

Best,

I agree with you Thierry, I've said it many times that I like the disc workflow too. It wasn't my personal preferences that I was alluding to, it was how the majority of users and manufacturers seem to be going - SxS, P2, even JVC now.

Cheers,
Steve

I would like to mount my Rode NTG-3 shotgun on the 350's front microphone mount. The supplied Sony mic is a stereo 5 pin that mates with the connector on the camera's body but I wonder if I would be doing any harm to the internal circuitry by using a 3 to 5 pin converter thereby allowing the using of the mono NTG-3?
Thank you in advance.
Ron

Ron I have the same NTG-3 shot gun and used the 3-5 pin XLR cable and the mic worked great no harm. Also on my F800 they supply a 3-5 pin cable and I use the same mic. The 5 pin is for a stereo mic if you ever want to upgrade.

Thanks Paul. I have a short cable converter and will give it a try.