Hi all

I'm pretty happy with the ergonmics of the Z1, but once you kit it out to shoot with say matte box, large capacity battery etc, it is quite heavy. My solution has been to add a Cavision shoulder support, which is a great help...

BUT was wondering if any one had any info on a possible replacement for the Sony DSR 250... ie a Z1 shoulder style? It seems to be a hole in the Sony line up at the moment.

I'm not really interested in the Canon H1 or the JVC HDV cam... and a XDCam although nice is out of my budget and overkill for my needs.

What do people reackon? Am I the only one who would like a reasonably priced shoulder HDV cam...

Cheers
Gareth

Try looking into putting together something that uses rails.

www.zacuto.com has some stuff. Although a bit pricy.

yes its called XDCAM it uses blue ray discs but records in HDV.

XDCAM does not shoot HDV. It shoots MPEG at a higher bitrate, so one might say that DV is the same as DVCProHD. They're both the DV codec after all...

Somebody will probably jump in and say "well, but you can
shoot XDCAM HD at 25mbps, which is the same as HDV."

Which might be true, but the bit rate isn't all there is to a format.

So once again: XDCAM HD is *not* HDV. Hope this helps,

I really hope Sony or someone else is working on a compact shoulder mounted, interchangeble bayonet-mount lens camera. JVC has had this market all to themselves and they've sold over 22,000 HD100 series cameras worldwide! That's about $132 million in sales. If I were a camera company, I'd want piece of that. What do you say Sony?

Somebody will probably jump in and say "well, but you can
shoot XDCAM HD at 25mbps, which is the same as HDV."

Which might be true, but the bit rate isn't all there is to a format.

So once again: XDCAM HD is *not* HDV. Hope this helps,

Exactly, Chris. The only thing that XDCAM HD shares with HDV is a 25mb CBR mid quality setting. Other than that, it's a lot more going into that bit rate than HDV, starting with larger native resolution than some HDV cameras.

The MPEG flavor of XDCAM HD is MP@HL which is Main Profile, High Level.

It also records 4 channels of 16bit PCM audio as opposed to the 320kbs mpeg compressed audio of HDV.

I'm not ragging on HDV, just wanting to point out the differences for everyone reading. This has been a big misconception by many that XDCAM HD is HDV.

-gb-

Hi Guys,

What I was talking about in my original post was a shoulder mount camera in the Z1 price bracket....simply coz a Z1 with mate box etc would sit better on the shoulder and I've bought a shoulder mount to achieve this....

I think here, it is not price but philiosophy that is the order of the day... Does one produce a high end handycam in the Z1 bracket... or a lower end shoulder cam for semi pro market, in the same mind set as the DSR 250. Interchangeable lenses are a plus, but most will no doubt use the stock lens.

The XDCam is 3X the price with out a lens...

I don't expect XDcam features or functions.... but it is frustrating to get to the top of the small 3CCD range and have only handycams that are heavy and lacking in a few inexpensive pro features...when in SD days more was available....

cheers
Gareth

how about the jvc 201. Just got it, and it is stunning. Sure only 720p but stunning picture and such great form factor.

As an XDCAM350, Z1 owner this is the middle ground camera you are talking about. It is the perfect stepping stone without a doubt.

Phil,
Could you lend me 18K so I can get 1? ;-)

I agree that IF Sony came out with a full size Z1 in the mode of the 150/250 I might step up and get it. I really don't need everything the 350/330 has to offer and frankly for the type of work I do AND the amount of time I have left in the business investing 18 to 20 grand right now wouldn't make sense BUT ---IF (a BIG if) Sony DID have a DSRXXX as a full size version of the Z1 at a reasonable price say 6 to 7 thousand I would probably be the first to order it.
I love my 150/250 combo and again for the type of work I do it's perfect for me. (Now if they'd put a 20X lens on it it would be spot on) Oh well we can dream!
Don

How much is the JVC 200 in the US (without the batteries)?

I would be surprised if they bring out a DSR HDV full size camera. The problem with HDV is that no broadcasters accept it for more than 15% of a programme. So there is no point in Sony doing it. XDCAM HD is only just acceptable, at the bottom end of the 100% acquisiton format. So outside of indie projects, corporates etc am not sure where HDV really fits in...perhaps some HD channels have less strict controls, especially in parts of Asia perhaps?

I could be wrong but I cannot see the logic in it, especially as Sony are pushing the XD format so hard!

our good friends at B&H have it listed for $8995 without batteries.

the ABC affiliate here in chicago, which is the only local station at least here in chicago, to broadcast the news in HD (as well as almost all of its programming) just purchased 2 JVC-HD250s and I believe they used them down in Miami for the pre and post game stuff of the superbowl for live broadcast back here in chicago.
I'm not sure that HDV isn't a viable option-but regardless I'm sure the gurus and braintrust at Sony would have already come out with something IF they were going to.
Oh well, I'll stick with what I got until I either retire OR something BIG happens to make me change my mind
Don

the 250s are perfect for live HD studio stuff. They output pure uncompressed 1080i SDI HD...WAYYYY better than what it can record!

Am surprised at the B&H price, Same price as what I paid here. That rarely happens. Is the 201 anton bauer or IDX. You would have to add on about $2000 for a good idx battery charger and 4 7s.

One thing I noticed when opening the box, its like a pro size camera. No mains, no batteries, not even a tripod plate. It's basic!

How much is the JVC 200 in the US (without the batteries)?

I would be surprised if they bring out a DSR HDV full size camera. The problem with HDV is that no broadcasters accept it for more than 15% of a programme. So there is no point in Sony doing it. XDCAM HD is only just acceptable, at the bottom end of the 100% acquisiton format. So outside of indie projects, corporates etc am not sure where HDV really fits in...perhaps some HD channels have less strict controls, especially in parts of Asia perhaps?

I could be wrong but I cannot see the logic in it, especially as Sony are pushing the XD format so hard!


In May of 2007, a major broadcaster air a program that was 100% shot in HDV and delivered in HDCAM

B&H doesn't list a "201" might be the 'English' version though ;-)

My own preference is Anton Bauer as I've been using them for a long time and the dionic 90s which I use anyway are the recommended AB battery for the JVC-HD line-the mounting plate is $180 the Dionic90s are $400 each and a 4 position intellicharger is $1350 so if you go with 4 batteries you're at about $3100 for power. A 2 battery intellicharger is about $500 less (I like my 4 battery charger so I'm biased)
The IDX plate is $330 batteries (the E-7) is $190 and the charger is 2 position at $550 so its $1640 or so for IDX power-the only thing I don't like about the IDX (well 2 things) is 1) they're 71watts vs. AB Dionic 90watts so the ABs give an edge on run time and since the camera pulls 23watts in record thats about an hour-and 2) the AB mount plate is set up for a side plate for a wireless receiver-the IDX isn't. Now that certainly wouldn't be a deal breaker for me but again since I'm a loyal AB fan I guess I would stick with them.
Now having said all of that-I'm not buying one anytime soon (read probably not until the next millenium) so for me it's more of a curiosity thing than anything else.
Oh well,

Don

In May of 2007, a major broadcaster air a program that was 100% shot in HDV and delivered in HDCAM

Here in the UK there are currently no channels will take HDV for more than 15% of the program, in fact 15% is what they say for SD stuff in the HD broadcast, so they seem to classify it the same!!

I was at an HD meeting on Monday for series 2 of a docudrama show that was hugely popular last year. It is co funded by the History Channel HD and the HDV issue came up. The post prodcution company were there and they reiterated the 15% thing as we want to use the sony V1 as a second camera for some of the reconstructions. Even though the images will be heavily treated to look like 8mm it doesn't matter. They are so strict. Everything is checked thoroughly by the HD broadcasters before TX, cant see how they can tell to be honest on something so heavily graded and messed around with!

The JVC 201e is a Europe specific model due to daft tax laws meaning any camera with firewire in is classified as a video recorder and therefore the tax is much higher. The 200 only has DV out.

Here in the UK there are currently no channels will take HDV for more than 15% of the program, in fact 15% is what they say for SD stuff in the HD broadcast, so they seem to classify it the same!!

I didn't HDV was used to deliver HDV programs. The re-compression should be very bad for image quality.

AFAIK you had two options in editing: downsizing to DV or going full HD. Discovery is using it a lot for HD.

Do still UK people have to pay a tax to have a TV? The reason was to pay for public television, but I thought now BBC was just another program maker, and UK TV becoming mostly private. Then there wouldn't be any reason for that tax. Better go for cable-TV then.

Carlos

HDV not for delivering, just for recording. They can tell in the compression. Even when converted to a different format.

We don't pay tax as such, it is called a licence fee. The BBC is still officially state funded even though they make enormous revenue from selling their progs. Unfortunately the BBC is still an enormous inefficient entity so they need all the money they can get.

Whether you have Satellitle or cable or just use your tv to view your dvds you have to pay the licence fee. Whenever you buy a tv your details are forwarded to the licence office (unless you buy one privately of course). Naturally the licence office assume every house has at least one tv, even if that isnt correct. So if there is no licence for your property they assume you have a tv and are being naughty.

One day it will change, but not for many years. In fact it has just got more expensive, the been wanted it to be even higher to help pay for the digital switchover.

Because of the licence fee the Beeb dont show commercials which is lovely, especially if you are used to watching tv in the US! Though now with DVRs I never watch commercials on anything now. I just start watching 15 minutes after it starts and fast forward!

AFAIK you had two options in editing HDV: downsizing to DV or going full HD. Discovery is using it a lot for HD.
Carlos

How are Discovery talking material originally shot in HDV if there is the 15% rule?

Here in the UK there are currently no channels will take HDV for more than 15% of the program, in fact 15% is what they say for SD stuff in the HD broadcast, so they seem to classify it the same!!

I didn't HDV was used to deliver HDV programs. The re-compression should be very bad for image quality.

AFAIK you had two options in editing: downsizing to DV or going full HD. Discovery is using it a lot for HD.

Do still UK people have to pay a tax to have a TV? The reason was to pay for public television, but I thought now BBC was just another program maker, and UK TV becoming mostly private. Then there wouldn't be any reason for that tax. Better go for cable-TV then.

Carlos

How are Discovery talking material originally shot in HDV if there is the 15% rule?

I don't know about that 15% rule. But I do know that a South America big producer is recording stuff for one of their programs in Z1 and sending it to them.

I don't know what Discovery does after that.

In fact I don't see why any production company wouldn't take HDV duly processed to HD.

Guys, let's not turn this into a discussion of taxed television, etc. please. We're already venturing far from the OP, I'd like to keep this thread on focus; it's a good one.

Guys, let's not turn this into a discussion of taxed television, etc. please. We're already venturing far from the OP, I'd like to keep this thread on focus; it's a good one.

Just responding to a question, be rude to ignore! ;-)

I think the discussion as to whether HDV can be accepted worldwide is key to whether Sony will ever bring in a DSR 450 type camera that can shoot HDV. If HDV is not accepted globally for HD acquistion it is highly unlikely they would ever bring out such a camera.

HDV is just as accepted for acquisition as DV has been, and will continue to be. Delivering HDV on an HDV tape will likely not be a commonly accepted method, any more than delivering on a DV tape used to be, and still is not accepted by many facilities. HDCAM is the standard and will be for a while longer, just as Beta in one format or another has been the standard.
It's one thing to read/recite the rules, and another to actually practice and experience the craft.
I'd recommend a study of the HDV spec to fully understand what it is. Even broadcasters are completely flummoxed as to what HDV really is, thanks to very clever marketing, plus some early weak experiences with HDV.
As I'd mentioned in yet another of these somewhat silly discussions; it's all commensurate with your target audience. If you're creating media with the sole purpose of selling to BBC, Discovery, or other high end broadcaster, you're not going to get there on the cheap. Period. If you could, then we'd see no more HDCAM, Varicam, or other high end camcorder, and we'd see the quality of programming take a deep downward turn as a result of the too-affordable HD cams and the folks that can afford them. It's "Pay to play" all the way in the high end, with very few exceptions.

Douglas you are confusing me...

"HDV is as accepted as DV for acquisiton" by whom and for what? I am not talking about delivery, as that would be HDCAM as DIGI is for SD here. As someone who shoots HD for UK Broadcasters I know for a fact that I cannot shoot more than 15% of a programme in HDV it I intend it for HD broadcast. They just will not accept it.

exceptions to the rules being compelling and original content like being eaten by a bear on camera? (i.e grizzly man on discovery)

Budget is as budget does right? If the project is grandiose enough for broadcast... then I'd hope one would plan for HDCAM.

The great thing about the affordability of HDV is that allows people to cut their teeth on HD... If their ability and commitment to the craft has legs... then they will eventually afford to move up to HDCAM.... like you have Phil.

exceptions to the rules being compelling and original content like being eaten by a bear on camera? (i.e grizzly man on discovery)

Budget is as budget does right? If the project is grandiose enough for broadcast... then I'd hope one would plan for HDCAM.

The great thing about the affordability of HDV is that allows people to cut their teeth on HD... If their ability and commitment to the craft has legs... then they will eventually afford to move up to HDCAM.... like you have Phil.

I'm actually just on XDCAM HD. I wish HDV was more accepted. It would make things a hell of a lot easier! But the one good thing about it is it will stop a lot of these self shot docos with awful camerawork going out when HD broadcasts become the norm, they will need to be shot by a cameraman.

DV was originally not accepted as being more than XXX% of the program acquisition as well. That went away once engineers pulled their heads out of the sand about DV. Some broadcasters have the 15% rule, others don't. You can't universally apply it as a hard rule. TLC, TNT, Court TV, Discovery, Food channel, National Geo, ESPN, MTV, MTV2,VH1, CMT, Outdoor Channel, Sundance Channel; all have aired programming and/or segments 100% acquired in HDV, just as they've aired projects 100% acquired in DV.
Either the programming meets spec or it doesn't.
Having been the person that either shot or edited pieces for the aforementioned broadcasters, I'm pretty comfortable not worrying about the 15% "fact" as I am about making the content meet spec, while matching what we shoot with our F700.
As I've also mentioned in another thread, sometimes 1/2 or 2/3 cams simply cannot be used, due to safety of the operator or space restrictions. In these situations, the content may be compelling enough to warrant the entire program being shot in HDV, and has been in more than a few instances.
Either way, your point is made, heard, and understood. I don't happen to agree with it.

My point is not my opinion but what I have been told by HD broadcasters in the UK. As I have said before I want HDV to be accepted by them, currently here, and i stress the here as in the UK it isn't. That's a fact and I can't change it. I am sure it is different in other countries as you have pointed out.

so.... if one would want to have their HDV ( let's say it's from a Z1 to keep it in thread ) footage accepted, they'd need to have it put/converted to HDCAM tape?

I should think so.

I hope things change here in the UK with regards to acqusition as I would to be able to use my Z1 and JVC201 for more stuff.

so.... if one would want to have their HDV ( let's say it's from a Z1 to keep it in thread ) footage accepted, they'd need to have it put/converted to HDCAM tape?

Yes. Broadcasters will (currently) only accept (in most cases) HDCAM, D5, or HDD delivery of HD projects. Our agency only accepts HDCAM, so we use a service bureau to print to HDCAM.

it's to bad they won't accept a disk with a quicktime file.... tapes just seem so fragile to me.

Phil.... is it the smaller formfactor of the z1 and 201 that makes you want to use them more than your f350?

I know I tend to use my canon 1dsII dslr more than my hassleblad as it is just "easier" but a loss in image quality.

It's what Douglas was saying earlier about using different cameras for different situations. I make a lot of docos and as much as I prefer an image from a 2/3rd inch or 1/2 inch chip, especially with regards to DOF it's so much easier to shoot with smaller cameras for a lot of stuff. You can get away with so much more. People are less intimidated by them and you can get away with filming in places that there is no way you could with a big camera.

Just look at the Sony A1, a tiny camera. I shot the HDV demo video on my website with it. If you see the full hi def version it's shocking that a camera that can fit in your coat pocket can deliver amazing images.

Tonight on Channel 4 there is a documentary that I co shot. There is some footage in the opening section that I shot with my A1 and the steadicam Merlin in DVCAM and you would struggle to tell the difference between it and the DSR 450 stuff. Yet the camera weighs less than that camera's battery!

At the end of the day it is who uses the camera that is key. Someone once said to me, in a tongue in cheek way. It's not the wand but the magician who uses it. If HDV does become fully accepted across the board then terrific. Personally I think it should. The first time I plugged in my Z1 to my TV and saw what I shot in the garden I was shocked.

If Sony brought out a DSR 450 replacement that shot HDV then I would be very happy. I just think that Sony have so much invested in XDCAM HD as the natural successor to the DSR series that it seems rather unlikely. That's why the cameras like the JVC 200/250 have the market pretty much all to themselves. I have only had it a few days but I am blown away by it's userfriendliness and picture quality. The 24p pictures are beautifully filmic, even without a DOF adaptor. Of course Canon have their own sort of shoulder mounted camera that also does beautiful pics. I just find it rather badly balanced. Stunning camera in every other respect!

Looks like my wishes are to come true.........
http://www.sonybiz.net/biz/view/ShowContent.action?site=biz_en_EU&contentId=1175002582216&parentFlexibleHub=1175002583339

cheers
Gareth