Canon's new 50Mbps MPEG-2 Full HD (4:2:2) codec

Michael Galvan · February 6th, 2010, 12:00 PM

I don't understand statements like this.

1/3" is used in broadcast all the time.

At NBC, we use 1/3" cameras all the time.

When I worked at CNN, we used 1/3" cameras all the time.

A lot of work I've done for broadcast has been with 1/3" cameras, moreso than the 2/3" cameras.

The technology has been more than accepted at the Network level here in NYC.

Steve Connor · February 6th, 2010, 12:11 PM

Because I work in the UK when 1/3inch is hardly used in broadcast.

This camera will take sales from the EX of course, but in no way is it an EX "killer" with 1/3inch chips.

Robert M Wright · February 6th, 2010, 12:28 PM

1/3" CCD EX killer chips? Sounds a wee bit science fiction like. How are you going to crank progressive, full raster detail out of these magical chips? These EX killers going to be liquid nitrogen cooled?

Michael Galvan · February 6th, 2010, 12:29 PM

Well I agree, I think it's a little premature to call it an "EX killer".

But it certainly could be in the realm of being a better camera than the EX. We don't know if that would be the case until it hits the market and can be tested side by side.

Who knows what kind of advances the chipset may have (and there's still the glass and the codec side of the equation).

Robert M Wright · February 6th, 2010, 01:38 PM

Unless there's been some pretty amazing breakthrough that I am unaware of, full raster (1920x1080) progressive imaging from CCDs is just not very practical for an economical cam. For that, CMOS makes a whale of a lot more sense.

Perrone Ford · February 6th, 2010, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Galvan

Well I agree, I think it's a little premature to call it an "EX killer".

But it certainly could be in the realm of being a better camera than the EX. We don't know if that would be the case until it hits the market and can be tested side by side.

Who knows what kind of advances the chipset may have (and there's still the glass and the codec side of the equation).

How does this even look like a better camera than the EX? That's what I am not seeing. We can talk glass and codec all your want, but there's a pretty darn nice piece of glass on the front of the EX1, and a 10bit 1.5GB pipe sitting right on the back of the camera if I want to get around the codec issues. How are you going to work around that 1/3" sensor?

Perrone Ford · February 6th, 2010, 01:50 PM

What 1/3" full raster HD cameras did you have at CNN and which ones are you using at NBC?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Galvan

I don't understand statements like this.

1/3" is used in broadcast all the time.

At NBC, we use 1/3" cameras all the time.

When I worked at CNN, we used 1/3" cameras all the time.

A lot of work I've done for broadcast has been with 1/3" cameras, moreso than the 2/3" cameras.

The technology has been more than accepted at the Network level here in NYC.

Robert M Wright · February 6th, 2010, 02:07 PM

As far as I know there simply is no such thing as a 1/3" full raster chip camcorder being made by anyone, aside from the HPX300 (CMOS), which is fairly new. NBC did order a bunch of those though, didn't they?

Perrone Ford · February 6th, 2010, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert M Wright

As far as I know there simply is no such thing as a 1/3" full raster chip camcorder being made by anyone, aside from the HPX300 (CMOS), which is fairly new. NBC did order a bunch of those though, didn't they?

Well we KNOW there aren't any (CCD). So what Mr. Galvan is talking about is 1/3" SD cameras... and comparing apples to cantaloupes.

Pete Bauer · February 6th, 2010, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert M Wright

As far as I know there simply is no such thing as a 1/3" full raster chip camcorder being made by anyone, aside from the HPX300 (CMOS), which is fairly new. NBC did order a bunch of those though, didn't they?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

Well we KNOW there aren't any (CCD). So what Mr. Galvan is talking about is 1/3" SD cameras... and comparing apples to cantaloupes.

Guys, when you mix arrogant verbiage with overstatement and/or conjecture about another's intent, it makes YOU look bad, not the person you're insulting. Mr. Galvan said nothing about full raster and of course there ARE 1/3" CCD (not full raster) HD cameras, which makes his first hand reporting about at least certain portions of network broadcasting using these "lesser" cameras of interest, and makes it a reasonable conjecture that a new-technology full raster CCD 1/3" camera might do well in that market.

The sort of swideswiping rudeness that a number of you are routinely employing in your posts (not referring just to this thread) is growing wearisome. The Wranglers are just about ready to go on a round up.

There's more we DON'T know about the upcoming Canon cameras than we DO know. I've said it before and here it is again: Canon usually is the last one to the dance but always arrives in the finest fashion. Whatever market(s) they are targeting with the new camera(s), they know what is required. Heck, with the 5DmII, they even overshot and gained a market they weren't after. We will see in due course...NAB and thereafter.

Jeff Kellam · February 6th, 2010, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

How does this even look like a better camera than the EX? That's what I am not seeing. We can talk glass and codec all your want, but there's a pretty darn nice piece of glass on the front of the EX1, and a 10bit 1.5GB pipe sitting right on the back of the camera if I want to get around the codec issues. How are you going to work around that 1/3" sensor?

I agree with you. This new Canon is not a competitor to the EX-1(R) in any way. There are just lots of excitied Canon fans on this thread. The announcement of the new "Pro" codec itself is misleading IMO. These are prosumer cameras.

The Sony NXcam is probably more of a camera to compare the new Canon XH replacement to.

Perrone Ford · February 6th, 2010, 02:51 PM

Hmmm,

Discussion at hand... Canon HD camera.

Comment made... New Canon camera could be an EX Killer

Counterpoint... 1/3" CCD chips are not going to be an EX killer. This format has been unacceptable for (HD) broadcast.

Comment made... 1/3" is just fine for broadcast at CNN and NBC

Conjecture: Since EX1 is full raster and 1/2" chipped, questioning how a 1/3" non-full raster cam will be an EX1 killer. It's been confirmed in this thread and in other statements that the camera is CCD and not CMOS (or has it). And we apparently know it's 1/3".

So I ask in my most humble and meek manner...

How is a 1/3", likely not full raster CCD camera, an EX killer?

Steve Phillipps · February 6th, 2010, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Kellam

I agree with you. This new Canon is not a competitor to the EX-1(R) in any way. There are just lots of excitied Canon fans on this thread. The announcement of the new "Pro" codec itself is misleading IMO. These are prosumer cameras.

The Sony NXcam is probably more of a camera to compare the new Canon XH replacement to.

Are you saying that the EX1 is not a prosumer camera? I'd always put it in that bracket.
Steve

Perrone Ford · February 6th, 2010, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Phillipps

Are you saying that the EX1 is not a prosumer camera? I'd always put it in that bracket.
Steve

It really rides the line. I consider it prosumer.. but the CineAlta badging really is Sony's pro line. It's not even built in the same place as their prosumer cams. It's built where the pro cams are built. So...

Steve Phillipps · February 6th, 2010, 03:18 PM

Probably about right. Although the Cine Alta thing is a bit odd as for example the F355 has it but the PDW700 doesn't.
Steve

February 6th, 2010, 12:00 PM	#121
Michael Galvan Major Player Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: New York, NY Posts: 775	I don't understand statements like this. 1/3" is used in broadcast all the time. At NBC, we use 1/3" cameras all the time. When I worked at CNN, we used 1/3" cameras all the time. A lot of work I've done for broadcast has been with 1/3" cameras, moreso than the 2/3" cameras. The technology has been more than accepted at the Network level here in NYC. __________________ www.michaelgalvan.com www.screenanthology.com

February 6th, 2010, 12:29 PM	#124
Michael Galvan Major Player Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: New York, NY Posts: 775	Well I agree, I think it's a little premature to call it an "EX killer". But it certainly could be in the realm of being a better camera than the EX. We don't know if that would be the case until it hits the market and can be tested side by side. Who knows what kind of advances the chipset may have (and there's still the glass and the codec side of the equation). __________________ www.michaelgalvan.com www.screenanthology.com

February 6th, 2010, 02:51 PM	#132
Perrone Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Tallahassee, FL Posts: 4,100	Hmmm, Discussion at hand... Canon HD camera. Comment made... New Canon camera could be an EX Killer Counterpoint... 1/3" CCD chips are not going to be an EX killer. This format has been unacceptable for (HD) broadcast. Comment made... 1/3" is just fine for broadcast at CNN and NBC Conjecture: Since EX1 is full raster and 1/2" chipped, questioning how a 1/3" non-full raster cam will be an EX1 killer. It's been confirmed in this thread and in other statements that the camera is CCD and not CMOS (or has it). And we apparently know it's 1/3". So I ask in my most humble and meek manner... How is a 1/3", likely not full raster CCD camera, an EX killer? __________________ DVX100, PMW-EX1, Canon 550D, FigRig, Dell Octocore, Avid MC4/5, MB Looks, RedCineX, Matrox MX02 mini, GTech RAID, Edirol R-4, Senn. G2 Evo, Countryman, Moles and Lowels.

February 6th, 2010, 12:11 PM	#122
Steve Connor Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: UK Posts: 383	Because I work in the UK when 1/3inch is hardly used in broadcast. This camera will take sales from the EX of course, but in no way is it an EX "killer" with 1/3inch chips.

February 6th, 2010, 12:28 PM	#123
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	1/3" CCD EX killer chips? Sounds a wee bit science fiction like. How are you going to crank progressive, full raster detail out of these magical chips? These EX killers going to be liquid nitrogen cooled?

February 6th, 2010, 01:38 PM	#125
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	Unless there's been some pretty amazing breakthrough that I am unaware of, full raster (1920x1080) progressive imaging from CCDs is just not very practical for an economical cam. For that, CMOS makes a whale of a lot more sense.

February 6th, 2010, 02:07 PM	#128
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	As far as I know there simply is no such thing as a 1/3" full raster chip camcorder being made by anyone, aside from the HPX300 (CMOS), which is fairly new. NBC did order a bunch of those though, didn't they?

February 6th, 2010, 03:18 PM	#135
Steve Phillipps Inner Circle Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Wales Posts: 2,130	Probably about right. Although the Cine Alta thing is a bit odd as for example the F355 has it but the PDW700 doesn't. Steve