New Sony PMW-150 XDCAM 422

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Jack Zhang

I question full raster on 1/3'' since previous 3 chip 1/3'' cameras from Sony almost all use the ClearVid pixel arrangement which interpolates pixels. That would not equal full-raster from the sensor.

Sensitivity is slightly behind 1/2'' counterparts (the 200, EX1 and EX3) being 2 stops less sensitive and 1 stop behind the HPX250 with P.A.P. filter TYPE1, which may be direct competition for this camera.

Up to now the 1/3" Sony cameras of this type have been 3x1megapixel - that means the same size photosites as their 1/2" cameras like the EX. Hence similar native sensitivity - it's dependent on photosite size.

They made the choice to keep sensitivity and compromise resolution for a 1/3" sensor. With the HPX250 Panasonic made the other choice - keep full 1920x1080 resolution and compromise (native) sensitivity.

At first sight that's not how it appears - the HPX250 has very aggressive noise reduction by default which makes it appear superficially similar for noise to an EX1. But you don't get anything for nothing - the noise reduction comes at the price of other picture compromises such as "noise ghosts" and subtle detail softening.

As far as this new camera goes, it looks interesting - but isn't it more worthwhile to pay the relatively small extra and get a PMW200?

[Jack Zhang]

Originally Posted by David Heath

As far as this new camera goes, it looks interesting - but isn't it more worthwhile to pay the relatively small extra and get a PMW200?

Or, if you miss the rotating grip and the ability to use 3rd party batteries, and are willing to just deal with 4:2:0, get the EX1R.

Moving forward, I have no doubt Sony will make it harder on third party battery manufacturers.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the 100, 150 and 200 lack Component out.

[Doug Jensen]

The PMW-160 uses the same 1/3" sensor as the PMW-100, except there are three of them.

[Ron Evans]

Originally Posted by Emmanuel Plakiotis

The price difference between 150 and 200 in CVP is 1400 GBP which sounds realistic.
In effect the 150 is the Mpeg422 version of the NX5 They share the same lens but on the 150 is stabilized which is great.
In the CVP link it also states that: "its sensors are all-new devices with a native resolution that allows full-HD output without pixel interpolation."
So its not clearvid.
By the way, Ron Evans, a exmor sensor can be clearVid also as is the case of NX5

Yes understood,my NX5U says Exmor printed on its side it also does have image stabilization too both normal and active. So there is no difference to the 150 there. The new sensors and codec are the difference as well as the recording medium. I am waiting for an NX5U upgrade to have AVCHD 2.0 and the touch features ( like focus etc would also need better autofocus to make that work !!!) of the consumer cameras that for me would make a great upgrade to my NX5U. The NX5U has always had a touch screen LCD but for very little functionality as it is only operational in the mode menu.

Ron Evans

[Troy Lamont]

Three 1/3-inch Exmor ™ Full HD CMOS Sensors
Equipped with the newly developed three 1/3-inch Exmor Full HD CMOS sensors, the PMW-160 achieves high resolution, high sensitivity, low noise and wide dynamic range. These capabilities are essential for the professional when shooting under extreme lighting conditions*. Each sensor has 2-million effective pixels and achieves full HD 1920x1080 shooting without pixel interpolation.

Full HD, 2 megapixel Exmor sensors from the horses mouth.

Already sounds like an NX5 upgrade to me, although shooting interlaced video in this day and age makes my stomach knot up.

[Jack Zhang]

Though most of us want 1080p60, the only way recording to a broadcast friendly compressed codec I know of is a FS700 or F3 to a Gemini 4:4:4 with the upcoming DNxHD update. (Remember, no HDMI in on the Gemini, so the FS100 won't work without a converter.)

There is no in camera codec that supports broadcast quality 1080p60 at the moment. Panasonic's AVC-Ultra (while not vaporware) still has no word whether it supports 1080p60.

If Sony comes up with a new codec, that's when we might see broadcast 1080p60 become a reality. AVCHD 2.0 is not enough to compress 1080p60 properly. A 28mbps max is not enough.

[Ron Evans]

Originally Posted by Troy Lamont

Full HD, 2 megapixel Exmor sensors from the horses mouth.

Already sounds like an NX5 upgrade to me, although shooting interlaced video in this day and age makes my stomach knot up.

I expect a true NX5U upgrade will be part of the NX series and will have AVCHD 2.0 with 60P. The main Pro grouping still view 1280x720P60 as the alternative I think. The NX5U has that too of course as do these new cameras.

Ron Evans

[Ron Evans]

Originally Posted by Jack Zhang

Though most of us want 1080p60, the only way recording to a broadcast friendly compressed codec I know of is a FS700 or F3 to a Gemini 4:4:4 with the upcoming DNxHD update. (Remember, no HDMI in on the Gemini, so the FS100 won't work without a converter.)

There is no in camera codec that supports broadcast quality 1080p60 at the moment. Panasonic's AVC-Ultra (while not vaporware) still has no word whether it supports 1080p60.

If Sony comes up with a new codec, that's when we might see broadcast 1080p60 become a reality. AVCHD 2.0 is not enough to compress 1080p60 properly. A 28mbps max is not enough.

For a pro environment and broadcast I will agree but if one is already all AVCHD, as I am, then moving to AVCHD at 28Mbps for 60P is fine. I believe the quality level at 28Mbps is much the same as interlace at 24Mbps because of the way the codec works and looking at the 60P output from my CX700 I will take 60P AVCHD at 28Mbps over the interlace 24Mbps max out of my NX5U. As with the other NX range which now all have AVCHD 2.0 and 60P, Sony has this option for a NX5U upgrade. The new sensors may well give them this opportunity.

Ron Evans

[Jim Martin]

It's Sony's answer to the Canon XF305......

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

[Swen Goebbels]

That camera looks promising to me. I love the fact that it has one ND position more than the PMW-200. On my EX1 I had situations where just two ND position didn't work perfect for me.

The only negative thing about the 150 is the size. It didn't look much smaller than the 200. So for people who travel often a lighter camera would help at the airport!

However, I'm one of this guys who often need Auto Focus & Iris (when the camera is in an underwater housing without controlls like an light Ewa Marine bag). That's something where the Ex1 had a lot of trouble... maybe smaller chips could help, actualy I close the iris on the Ex1 more to get most in focus then.

Looking forward to see the first reviews of this camera and how it looks compared to the PMW-200 and Ex1.

[Ron Evans]

Well if its like my NX5U it will be longer than the EX1R by about 5". Autofocus on my NX5U I do not trust and you have to be aware that with a 1/3" sensor the sweet spot for iris is about F4. I try and keep my NX5U around the F4 or further open using ND or gain for best results. Maybe with the new sensors they have improved the autofocus but the iris value is physics. If the iris is shut down beyond F8 it becomes very soft I try never to go more than F5.6. You can set both gain limits and iris limits in the menus though and I assume this camera will be no different. Gain above 9db is noisy too compared to my consumer cameras like the CX700 ( in fact in full auto the CX700 is far superior to the NX5U) so I hope the new sensors and electronics have improved this too.

Ron Evans

[Swen Goebbels]

I just came back from the IBC in Amsterdam last night. There I had the chance to play for a few minutes with the PMW-150 and compare it to the PMW-200 at the Sony booth. There isn't much difference in the size of both cameras, and even if the sensor is smaller at the 150 I could not see that the autofocus works better than at the PMW-200. So also with the smaller sensor you notice when the focus is not 100% working.

For the money the PMW-150 is for sure a good camera, but I had the feeling the lowlight wasn't as good as Sony makes you believe with their marketing. It's good and has a great looking picture, but when I compared it to the PMW-200 with the 1/2" PMW-200 I noticed directly more noise on the PMW-150 in low light.

But that's just my personal opinion after a few minutes of playing with them. I would love to see a review by people like Alister Chapman of that camera. I'm sure if you're filming outside with enough light it'll be a great camera which safes you money and has the pefect codec. This things looks good and a lot of people will be very happy with that camera.

[Richard Moore]

Hello, What are your thoughts on the 200 as compared to the EX-3?
Seem so close and I wonder what the benefits are.

[Alister Chapman]

Here's footage from the PMW-100, PMW-150, PMW-200 shot on the Sony booth at IBC.

Sample footage from PMW-100, PMW-150 and PMW-200. IBC 2012 - YouTube

[Swen Goebbels]

Richard,
it's very hard to compare the PMW-200 to an EX3 just from a short try at the IBC (and it's a bit offtopic to the PMW-150 post). However, I had the feeling that the PMW-200 had less noise at 6db+ than what I'm used to from my Ex1 or some Ex3 rentals I used in the past. Other than that it looks like the same camera (Sure it's smaller than Ex3 same Ex1 size).

If the codec is much better is something I can't say, because I didn't record anything to SxS cards. In the past I had just a very few situations where the old XDcamEx codec had some trouble, however this will not happen with more data rate I think. The codec makes our footage more future proof if some TV stations want to broadcast your footage (but content is more important than codecs)
What I don't like is that they didn't have the Ex1rotating grip on the PMW-150 and 200. First I didn't like that thing, but now I'm so used to it and love it. Furthermore I still have the problem that there are no batteries available with Anton Bauer port. It was so perfect to power the Ex1 and my Zylight Z90 with the camcorder battery. I hope there will be a solution for this.

But also the picture profile I use on the Ex1 can be the reason why I think the PMW-200 has not so much noise, if not I would say Sony improved it a bit.
I don't think that I would upgrade to the PMW-200 when I would have an Ex3. Sadly I crashed my Ex1 at an escalator last week so now it looks like that I need an replacement. I've to decide between the similar Sony PMW-200 or the more different Sony FS700 or Canon C100 now. Normaly I wouldn't replace my Ex1 this year, even if it's a pretty old camera now. But I don't have time to wait until NAB show in April to get a new camera end of summer 2013.

Alister,
thank you for posting this IBC footage. This highly compressed youtube clips didn't show that much difference between the cameras like on the large monitors at the Sony booth. But exactly this makes the PMW-150 again a very good camera for this pricepoint. Most things people will produced will be shown online and there the viewers would highly accept a picture form the PMW-150.... even if I personaly thought it's still a little bit noisy (on a bigger screen)