Other thing that no one seems to have picked up. It looks like the only video output is HD-SDI, so if want to hookup an external monitor it's going to have to have a HD-SDI input which means not cheap. Not that I'm complaining, for the quality this camera looks set to deliver I couldn't see much point in doing otherwise.

I hope that there will be a component analog option similar as the Z1U or V1U. My HD field monitor accepts only component video ($2500) and it would be expensive (again) to have to get a different field monitor. I can understand why Sony would do this, I just hope the don't (I guess I can always pick up a HD-SDI to component convertor...)

Todd

I'm sure XDCAM disks are good long-term archival options for edited masters, but at $30 per hour-long XDCAM disk vs. $3 per hour-long DV/HDV tape, it's less attractive for long-form documentary, for example.

It will be a while before flash memory is affordable enough to serve as permanent storage for most of us, but that's okay. HVX200 users have gotten by with P2 cards which cost as much as $150 per minute of recording time, so if SxS cards are ~$100-200 per hour initially that will be acceptable.

One good thing about XDCAM HD footage is that is should (in theory) be playable from Blu-ray discs, meaning you could use those for long-term archiving and playback. This would make XDCAM HD the highest-quality video format which can be stored and played in its native form on widely available consumer players, making it a good solution for something like library or museum exhibits. Has anyone tried putting XDCAM HD footage on a Blu-ray disc yet?

It will be a while before flash memory is affordable enough to serve as permanent storage for most of us, but that's okay. HVX200 users have gotten by with P2 cards which cost as much as $150 per minute of recording time, so if SxS cards are ~$100-200 per hour initially that will be acceptable.

Well, that's the key, obviously (and probably my main objection to the HVX200). How much will SxS cards cost? The fact that Sony is developing the format with SanDisk is a good sign, since it means that it won't be a completely proprietary format -- hopefully, some competition between manufacturers will help keep prices down. I'm seeing standard forms of flash memory selling for about $10 a gigabyte, so maybe $160-200 for a 16gb SxS card is in the realm of possibility.

I like the consumer Blu-Ray idea.

It would be really sweet, though, if it were possible to backup directly to a portable hard disk or RAID+1 array through the camera's onboard firewire port, without a computer. A couple of 500gb SATA hard drives in removable trays and a standalone firewire SATA RAID+1 storage device might be just the ticket until flash and Blu-Ray come down enough in price to be practical.

It would be really sweet, though, if it were possible to backup directly to a portable hard disk or RAID+1 array through the camera's onboard firewire port, without a computer. A couple of 500gb SATA hard drives in removable trays and a standalone firewire SATA RAID+1 storage device might be just the ticket until flash and Blu-Ray come down enough in price to be practical.

Brian, that's totally contradictory to the idea of XDCAM. It's file based and one has to start thinking more along the lines of how you work with pictures from a digital still camera. Of course you can back up to a hard drive, but there's no need to do the RAID thing because you simply drag and drop. When used correctly, XDCAM is a very efficient system in terms of long term data storage. If you use the Professional Discs (based on blu-ray), the archival life is estimated to be 50 years. And that is what Sony's philosophy is WRT the XDCAM HD EX. You write to flash, and archive to Professional Disc. At roughly $25/disc street price, it makes a very affordable long term archival system.

-gb-

It would be really sweet, though, if it were possible to backup directly to a portable hard disk or RAID+1 array through the camera's onboard firewire port, without a computer.

Given that any decent portable media device is likely to cost as much as a cheap laptop, why not use the latter? Pay $500 or so for the laptop and attach a bus-powered USB2 drive with 160 GB capacity and you're ready to go for at least 10 hours of XDCAM HD footage. If the laptop doesn't come with an ExpressCard slot, there will probably be external SxS card readers available for a few bucks.

Even if the cards are around the same price as a P2 card (which I do not think will happen) We have to remember that with this camera we will always be able to do almost 3x or more the amount of recording time compared to a P2 based system.

35mbits compared to 100 mbits means almost 3x the amount of footage.
25mbits compared to 100 mbits equals 4x the amount of footage.

These means for X amount of recording time the P2 system will always cost at least 3x more.

right now P2 suffers from the fact that it is very very hard to shoot long form projects since the recording time is so low. With the XDCAM Ex camera we at least are able to record for about the same amount of time as a mini DV tape or maybe even more. Swapping cards every hour is not as bad as swapping cards every 16 minutes.

I know I for one would be ok if the cards started out at the same price as P2 cards because I know I will get 3x the amount of recording time for that same price. I of course would be happier if they were cheaper. Even if they are not cheaper however we are already getting so much more recording time then what P2 could ever do.

35mbits compared to 100 mbits means almost 3x the amount of footage.

To be fair, the HVX200 has many recording options with varying bit rates, and many folks appear to be using 720p/24n at ~40 Mbps. So the HVX200 will also soon be getting a boost in recording capacity to as much as two hours on two 16GB P2 cards in a commonly used recording mode.

The problem with P2 is that the memory cards use a specialized, low-volume design which can't compete with other flash memory options in terms of price. Since the SxS cards appear to be based on more standardized technology (just in a different form factor), they should be substantially cheaper than P2 and hence more practical for long-form recording. The apparent matching move from Panasonic will be to record AVC-Intra footage at bit rates similar to XDCAM HD on standard flash memory cards. Next year should be exciting for those who want tapeless recording but don't care for P2.

Bob, I don't think the focus ring has any gears, though.


You're right, my bad!

Still this is one almost disruptive camera. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but you couldn't even buy a SD camera with 1/2" chips and glass at this price point, ever. Where does this leave the Z1 and V1 cameras?

OK, this EX looks to come in at double the price (Under $8K was what I was told) but I'd reckon a lot of us who were going to spring $4K for a V1/Z1 will be mighty tempted to save some pennies and buy this camera instead. Those 1/2" chips have got to offer very significant advantages over 1/3". Shallower DOF is one, lower noise is another and perhaps the most important. Less noise makes for more bandwidth for the mpeg-2 encoder to expend on real image data.

The other thing that gets me drooling is the variable frame rates, 720p50 sounds pretty sweet but this would seem to imply there'll only be one variant of the camera, no R50 and R60 version.

I suspect there's more going on with Sony than just this one camera. With some bravado I asked the price of the new XDCAM 4:2:2 2/3" beast and was told "around $40K". Now that's a big wad of cash for most of us but that was very close to what I was quoted for a F350 six months ago down here. Add to that their new minimalist XDCAM drive and XDCAM has suddenly become way more affordable. And there's even more, likely. A Sony Canada rep told me there were serious plans to market an internal SATA XDCAM drive at an even lower price, that gets rid of the USB2 speed limitation and makes the XDCAM disk a possible viable general purpose storage medium.

Now I know for most of us $30K is as unaffordable as $40K but these price drops, if they are real, do have a more significant impact in the rental market. Many of the smaller rental companies just cannot afford to carry cameras beyond a certain price point. Drop the price of a camera by a sizeable margin and the knock on effect in the rental market can lead to a significant improvement in affordability for those renting.

Still this is one almost disruptive camera. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but you couldn't even buy a SD camera with 1/2" chips and glass at this price point, ever.

Also, with every other format I can remember, Sony has always made a very careful distinction between "Prosumer/Consumer" and "Professional/Broadcast" formats. (Think Betacam vs. BETA-SP, DV vs. DVCAM, HDV vs. HDCAM, etc.)

This camera has the potential to shatter that line, since it looks to be priced for the prosumer market, yet uses the identical format as their professional and broadcast cameras. Until now, I've often heard that broadcast engineers try to discourage the use of prosumer formats like DV or HDV. Given that the broadcast industry, however, is increasingly turning to XDCAM (see http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=92196), it's going to be a lot tougher for them to turn down XDCAM footage from one of these cams.

I think you're right, Bob. This could really shake things up.

You write to flash, and archive to Professional Disc. At roughly $25/disc street price, it makes a very affordable long term archival system.

-gb-

Oh yeah, I understand the value of archiving to XDCAM disks. But, as a self-financed, independent documentary filmmaker, I'm going to have to think long and hard about spending $1100 to archive 44 hours of original footage onto XDCAM disk vs. the $132 it costs me to keep it on DV tape. That's almost an order of magnitude difference in archival costs.

And don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking the camera or the format. I'm just looking for the cheapest, most reliable archival method that will fit in my budget. Hard drives seem to be the only option right now in my price range. I've had too many single hard drives fail to be comfortable trusting irreplaceable footage to that alone. That's why I'm thinking about RAID +1 or cloning duplicate HDs as an alternative to XDCAM disks for large volumes of material.

And I sure hope Kevin's right about USB or Firewire SxS readers becoming available. That would save springing for a new laptop with ExpressCard slots!

Oh yeah, I understand the value of archiving to XDCAM disks. But, as a self-financed, independent documentary filmmaker, I'm going to have to think long and hard about spending $1100 to archive 44 hours of original footage onto XDCAM disk vs. the $132 it costs me to keep it on DV tape. That's almost an order of magnitude difference in archival costs.


Brian, the alternative would be to get a couple of 500 GB HD's @ $ 120 (current price) and store them. On a 500 GB you can store around 38 hours in DV quality and around 27 hours in HQ XDCAM-HD. The problem is longevity. Pro disks are far more secure than tape or HD's.

Where does this leave the Z1 and V1 cameras?

At twice the price it leaves sub-$4K HD cameras a healthy niche for anyone who doesn't need the next step up. For those who want something better but don't have big budgets, one XDCAM EX plus one Z1U could be a functional compromise, so still some Z1U sales there.

In any case, this definitely shakes things up by offering something better than other low-cost HD cameras at a relatively manageable price.

Being new to the XDCAM technology, I've been wondering: why does the EX camera need such a bulky body? I mean - not having a tape or disc mechanism - it could basically consist of the lens and battery, with the chassis just big enough to accept two SxS ExpressCards... Can anyone shed some light on what the fat, boxy rear part of it must have room for, apart from those tiny PCB's?
Well as other people indicated, the size is very similar to the Z1u. Besides housing the memory cards and other electronics, another reason that I think the rear end couldn’t get smaller is because of the ½” imagers.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but you couldn't even buy a SD camera with 1/2" chips and glass at this price point, ever.

I applaud your sentiment, but actually, the JVC GY-DV500 was initially available, with 14X removable servo-zoom Fujinon lens, DV format, 3 1/2" CCDs, for around $5K.

Still this is one almost disruptive camera. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but you couldn't even buy a SD camera with 1/2" chips and glass at this price point, ever.


I applaud your sentiment, but actually, the JVC GY-DV500 was initially available, with 14X removable servo-zoom Fujinon lens, DV format, 3 1/2" CCDs, for around $5K.

impressive but technically DV format is not SD

Anything that is considered 576 lines of vertical resolution (PAL) and below, including NTSC (480 lines of vertical resolution) is SD, standard definition.

heath

The problem is longevity. Pro disks are far more secure than tape or HD's.

Right. That's exactly why I want a RAID +1: to help protect against drive failure.

technically DV format is not SDIncorrect. Technically DV format is in fact nothing more, nothing less than SD. Hope this helps,

haha thats right it is all SD but i meant the quality of Betacam SP is considered better than DV, correct?

No. If you shoot DV/DVCAM and Betacam SP with the same camera, under most all conditions you'll like the look of the DV better. In the early days of DV, before there were 2/3" chip DV cameras, people were always comparing cameras like the PD150 to things like the BVW600, and of course the Betacam camera looked better. But when you compare apples to apples, DV usually wins.

I've been reading a lot of great reviews and comments on how superior the XDCAM HD is to HDV, but have this question: both being long-GOP MPEG-2, how does the XDCAM HD at 25Mbps differ from HDV? All other things equal, should there be a difference in quality (theoretically speaking, as we don't have exactly the same cameras with same lens, chips etc. that would be capable of both formats).

The fact that the XDCAM HD cameras are 1/2" chip cameras would make a difference even if all other things were equal. The way to check it out would be to shoot something with the F350 at the lower data rate, then at the 35mbs rate and compare the two shots and see what the difference is. Maybe somebody with the 350 would do that.

The fact that the XDCAM HD cameras are 1/2" chip cameras would make a difference even if all other things were equal. The way to check it out would be to shoot something with the F350 at the lower data rate, then at the 35mbs rate and compare the two shots and see what the difference is. Maybe somebody with the 350 would do that.

Another way to look at it and possibly see how this relates to the different encoding schemes is to try the following:

1. Encode a DVD @ 5 Mbps CBR
2. Encode a DVD @ 5 Mbps VBR
3. Encode a DVD @ 7 Mbps VBR

HDV is CBR, XDCAM-HD is VBR, so 1 is comparable to HDV (25 Mbps), 2 is comparable to XDCAM-HD (25Mbps) and 3 is comparable to XDCAM-HD (35 Mbps).

This approach would leave all other factors out of the equation, including the different chip size.

I've been reading a lot of great reviews and comments on how superior the XDCAM HD is to HDV, but have this question: both being long-GOP MPEG-2, how does the XDCAM HD at 25Mbps differ from HDV? All other things equal, should there be a difference in quality (theoretically speaking, as we don't have exactly the same cameras with same lens, chips etc. that would be capable of both formats).

As I understand it, the main difference between XDCAM at 25 Mbps and HDV at 25 Mbps is that the video is stored slightly differently, but it's essentially the same quality. Also, XDCAM uses uncompressed (PCM) audio while HDV uses MP3 audio at about 1/4 the data rate.

But what's the point of asking? If you had an XDCAM HD camera would you run it at the HDV data rate? Why not get the full benefit of the format by using 35 Mbps?

Well in theory the 25 mbit mode is pretty much the same as HDV but we have to take into consideration that a high end camera may use a much better encoder chip.

Hardware encoder chips are like software encoders where some will do much better then others will. Uusally at higher bitrates it doesn't really matter but when the bitrates get lower a better quality encoder will make a huge difference.

This isn't a perfect science of course, but to me HDV seems like what a DVD would look like with a bitrate of 5.8 mbits/s. Some DVD encoders can look very good at 5.8 mbits/s while some start to drop in quality.

It is safe to assume that a HDV camera costing only $3,000 may not have the best encoder chip in the world while a camera that costs around $20,000.00 will have a much higher quality encoder chip.

35mbits/s to me is pretty close to what a DVD around 8 mbits/s would look like or pretty darn close to perfect.

It is the same reason why a 18 mbits/s HD broadcast can look very good. Some very high quality tens of thousands of dollar encoders are used to make sure the encoding is done well. That same 18mbits/s from a consumer grade encoder chip wouldn't look nearly as good.

Here's a more detailed answer to this question, from http://www.tapeonline.com/faq/xdcam-faq.aspx (I think this same material is also on the Sony web site):

"Q: Does 25 Mbps XDCAM HD recording use the same compression as HDV 1080i recording?

A: Yes. While XDCAM HD recording at 18 and 35 Mbps uses variable bitrate technology, the 25 Mbps alternative uses a fixed bitrate for compatibility with HDV 1080i editors and recorders. Basically the only difference is that HDV editors use Transport Stream (TS) and XDCAM HD uses Elementary Stream (ES). When the PDW-F70 recorder and the PDW-F30 player are fitted with the optional PDBK-102 MPEG Transport Stream (TS) card, these decks can be connected directly to HDV 1080i recorders, camcorders and compatible NLEs, via the i.LINK® HDV interface.*"

I'm even more certain Sony would make a mistake of spoiling the almost perfect XDCAM workflow potential for the EX users, if they didn't make it possible to load off from the camera to the U1 directly (via USB, using camera software - without the need for a computer). With this capability, the lack of the Professional Disc in the camera would not create any problems, while allowing for the small and compact form factor. Once written to the U1 even in field, the video would get safely archived, and could than be worked upon in exactly the same, smart and efficient way the XDCAM can be by default. I hope Sony is listening - it's not too late!
Today I was tasked to videotape 4 groups of people using a client’s camera and instead of putting the footage onto tape, he told me to put it on DVDs using the VRD-MC3. It’s basically the quickest way to give each group a DVD of the practice presentations.

Is has a 2.5” LCD screen, fire wire input, analog inputs and memory card slots. Sony has already revealed that the successor of this will be AVCHD compatible so that you can put your HD files on standard DVDs without a computer.
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start?ProductSKU=VRDMC3
I was very impressed using the VRD-MC3. A Blu-Ray version of this with SxS card slots would make the perfect companion to the XDCAM-EX. Since Sony is reading that their are a lot of people that would be interested in something like this, I’m sure they wont disappoint.

how does the XDCAM HD at 25Mbps differ from HDV?

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned that the audio on XDCAM HD is uncompressed.

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned that the audio on XDCAM HD is uncompressed.

But alas not 4 channel on the EX?

But alas not 4 channel on the EX?

Nobody knows. I don't see why not though. All it would take is for it to record two stereo pairs input via a mixer, just like its bigger brother.

I think the 1/2" chips and manual lens on this camera show the sort of level of user that Sony are aiming at. So I would expect the functions on it to be less dumbed down than most cameras of this sort of form factor.

I got to see the EX briefly yesterday and had a very intriguing chat with a Sony guy who hinted there is a LOT more to be announced with this camera, especially in terms of price, lens and chip set. I was very impressed with the look and feel of it - all will be revealed at IBC apparently.

...all will be revealed at IBC apparently.

I can't wait that long... ;-D

I got to see the EX briefly yesterday and had a very intriguing chat with a Sony guy who hinted there is a LOT more to be announced with this camera, especially in terms of price, lens and chip set. I was very impressed with the look and feel of it - all will be revealed at IBC apparently.

Steve, can you tell us how much bigger and heavier than the Z1 the EX really is?

I wasn't allowed to handle it but it looked a little bigger but not much.

"I got to see the EX briefly yesterday and had a very intriguing chat with a Sony guy who hinted there is a LOT more to be announced with this camera, especially in terms of price, lens and chip set. I was very impressed with the look and feel of it - all will be revealed at IBC apparently."

I've heard similiar hints and suggestions. I think Simon knows!! But he probably can't tell us. O well, I can wait. If this camera is what it sounds like......let's just say it will probably be the one to convince me to upgrade from the world of SD. I'm excited to see what they announce in September.......

I'd be very surprised if Simon knows knows!

I got to pick it up at the Sony conference and it reminded me of the HVX in size and dimensions, and weighed about the same as the Z1.

heath

Well, from what I understand the DVD on how to use the EX is going to be released in September and Simon is one of the people shooting for the DVD. And I think they are using the EX to shoot all of the material for the DVD....that's ONE of the reasons I think he may have some info on what the final camera will look like:
(see here)
http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=159

Well, from what I understand the DVD on how to use the EX is going to be released in September and Simon is one of the people shooting for the DVD. And I think they are using the EX to shoot all of the material for the DVD....that's ONE of the reasons I think he may have some info on what the final camera will look like:
(see here)
http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=159

I’ve read that earlier today and if you click on the link after “more info can be found at” you’ll read this: “Using three 1/2" pickup devices with a native resolution of 1440x1080 (subject to change)” I think Sony’s main goal is to have 1920X1080 imagers with much better lowlight capabilities than the PD170 but they’ll stick with 1440X1080 if it’s not good enough.


It’s true that this camcorder will obviously have a bit rate of around 35mbps in one of the modes but the only surprise that it may have that worth any news is announcing that it’s also going to use the nearly developed 50mbps codec. I also think the Ferrari F355 I mean Sony F355 might use the 50mbps codec as well even though Sony may deny it. Anything’s possible until these cameras are released.

Connected to "DVD guide to the Sony XDCAM EX" site, there is a pretty good "Ten reasons why the XDCAM EX makes sense"

my favorite is #2

"The cost of the SxS Express Cards are much cheaper than other solid-state options and they can be bought over the counter in high street stores. ExpressCard is not a Sony invention, it is the PCMCIA industry standard that has replaced the older PCMCIA PC card. This is likely to ensure that prices will come down even faster in the future."

http://www.xdcamex.co.uk/aboutex.php

It now appears Sony has decided on CCD's and not on CMOS chips. The one thing still unclear, at least possibly until the IBC in September, is whether these CCD's will use a Bayer RGB filter or a more efficient CMY filter, which would drastically improve low light capabilities and provide a better signal to noise ratio. This year's IBC will be interesting......

Is the XDCAM HD 24/25/30p written as PsF, or full discrete frames?

I believe it's PsF.

The one thing still unclear, at least possibly until the IBC in September, is whether these CCD's will use a Bayer RGB filter or a more efficient CMY filter, which .........
A couple of posts up, the spec is given as “Using three 1/2" pickup devices with a native resolution of 1440x1080 (subject to change)” , so I don't think it will be either Bayer or CMY filtering - these only apply to single chip sensors.

Is this camera coming out in November???

I wonder if this new cam can use any brand/after-market express card, or if it has to use the Sony SxS card?

All the Sony literature has said it will use any off-the-shelf card. Something new: It's not proprietary. That's reason enough to buy it.

I didn't see a reference here, but does this shoot HDV in 4.1.1?

Is this a Long GOP cam?

I believe it's either 4:2:0 or 4:2:2. NTSC DV is 4:1:1.

heath

does this shoot HDV in 4.1.1?Since it's not a tape-based camcorder, by definition it's not shooting HDV.

HDV is a tape-based format. Don't confuse it with XDCAM EX or other formats just because they have similar data rates.