Sony introduces XDCAM HD422 camcorder PMW-500

[Steve Phillipps]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

Nice write-up, Doug.
This camera seems comparable to the new Panny HPX3100.

The 3100 won't do 720 though - that makes a big difference to me. It also doesn't do variable frame rates.
Steve

[Doug Jensen]

MSRP will be $27,000. Aboout $16K cheaper than an F800.
Should be shipping the first half of November.

[Tim Polster]

So this camera is going to be pretty close to the PDW-700 in price. Not as much of a market blow imho.

[Steve Phillipps]

Top-end serious bit of kit though, easily up with the 700, just sxs rather than disc.
Steve

[Tim Polster]

No doubt. I was just hoping from a budget minded perspective that this might be a little more in my reach.

I prefer CCDs and hoped to see a sub $20,000 with VF & 2/3" chips like the PMW-350.

[Boris Barel]

Will the new pool board (SDI/Composite in) be available for the 350/320 also, or is it only for the 500?

[Mike Marriage]

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen

In my opinion, the stock lens and the viewfinder on the 350 aren’t anything I’d ever want to use so it’s a waste of money to even get them “free” with the kit. At least you can outfit the 500 the way you want it.

The 350's stock lens has certain limitations but is incredible for the price. Optically, I find it very comparable to many of the £10K HD lenses out there although it does flare easily. I tend to use HJs as my hire firm only stocks the Canons.

I also really like the 350 VF and can easily shoot sharp and well exposed with it, what don't you like about it? My only gripe is the slightly awkward shape.

Of course the 500 has certain features that are critical to some shooters but if you don't need those, I think the 350 represents very similar PQ at a substantially lower price. I am assuming the 500 performs like a PDW-700 in order to make that statement as I haven't used a 500 yet.

The CMOS chips on the 350 have never failed to impress me but I don't encounter strobes and flashguns very often. I don't see any issues with jello effect from them in normal shooting.

[Doug Jensen]

Mike,

I'm sure the lens on the 350 is just fine optically. But size, weight, zoom speed, zoom sensitivity, focus handling, and general ergonomics are enough to keep me away. That's what I mean when I say that the stock lens is nothing that I would want to use.

Same thing goes for the EX3. I took that lens off my camera the day I got it and never used it again. With my Fujinon 18x5.5 mounted on the the EX3, it felt and perfomed just like every pro camera I've used in the past 20 years. Think about it. 99% of your interaction with a camera during shooting is with the lens, and not the camera itself. Personally, I don't care for a cheap lens no matter how good the images it produces look. And The fact that the images produced by my Fujinon lens look better is just icing on the cake.

Also, I'm sure the viewfinder on the 350 is good enough for the 350, just as the EX3 viewfinder is good enough for that camera too. But when you step up to something with the performance capabilities of the F800/700/500 and higher-end lenses and higher-end jobs, then those viewfinders are not good enough. You're either going to need a good old fashioned B&W CRT viewfinder or spend the really big bucks on a C35W color viewfinder. in my opinion, those are really the only viable options for a camera like this. I'm sure other people will disagree and be perfectly happy with a cheap viewfinder adapted from the 350 and then sing the praises of how great it is. Well, good luck to them and I'm happy I don't have to operate their camera. Everyone's needs, expectations, and budgets are different.

In the case of the EX3, I'd rather have had a few hundred bucks taken off the price and been able to buy the body-only. High-end cameras are always sold body-only so that the owner can pick and choose the options (lens, batteries, tripod plate, viewfinder, shotgun microphone, etc) that work best for him.

[Mike Marriage]

Doug, I'm with you on the feel of the lens, it doesn't feel as good as the high end lenses but I wanted to point out that it does make good images.

VF wise I still don't get what you dislike. I prefer the 350 VF to any BW CRT I've ever used. Maybe it is personal preference. I have only used the C35W once a while ago but would love to see them side by side. I know I can consistently achieve the image I want with the 350 VF, however what I'd like to see next is a VF that displays all data outside the image area. The amount of data I like to have can distract from framing.

I agree that body only is a always a good option to have but Sony seems to offer amazing value with some of its kits.

[Greg Penetrante]

Now that Panny has released the HPX-3100, the PMW-500 has some competition.

I was all about to order the PMW-500 with Color VF and realised that since I don't need overcranking and don't already have SxS cards invested, I can purchase a 3100 with color VF and Fuji ZA 17x7.6 lens for a whole lot less than the PMW500. Wow.

-Greg

[Paul Cronin]

Hi Greg,

Looks like a nice camera. What is the cost I can't seem to find street price?

I looked at this camera but went for the PMW-500 and am very happy with my purchase. I have been Sony all the way and found it hard to switch. Not that the 3100 is not up to my standards I bet is it excellent but I am already in the Sony workflow. I owned a PDW-800 and the 500 offers the same picture quality with less power and SxS which I prefer. Two 64GB SxS is just over 4 hrs of recording.