New Sony 1/2" 1080p HDV camera, Sony's 6th HDV camera

Nick Hiltgen · July 14th, 2005, 08:05 AM

Wow, what a long discussion.

I think this camera is probably close to being on par with the 900 and 950 except for imaging size. You CAN pull 4:4:4 out of a 900 Check with SIM video in Toronto they did it, the sampling rate is all there. I question the ability of 950 to record 1080x1920 to tape, but I've questioned that for a long time and would LOVE to have that question answered. However this camera does not include a VTR hook this camera up to a deck and you've got the added expense equal to (or greater then) a 900 hook it up to a computer and you're still editing via an HDV codec.

1080 24p is an accepted broadcast standard, will someone remind me who broadcasts in it?

I think DSE has said it best in his post.

This turnign into such a long debate, and it seems like more of these are occuring, is there any chance of getting that "one low shoulder" forum for dicussion of say the 900 the 950 and the varicam? Chris?

Ken Hodson · July 14th, 2005, 11:36 AM

Nick "However this camera does not include a VTR hook this camera up to a deck and you've got the added expense equal to (or greater then) a 900 hook it up to a computer and you're still editing via an HDV codec. "

Not quite following you Nick. What are you saying?

Nick Hiltgen · July 14th, 2005, 03:26 PM

The camera in the original post, the sony not the JVC

Hmm what I was trying to say is, one of the big differences between this camera and the f900 is that the f900 has a vtr built in. (note: there are a lot of differences other then this as well) I guess I don't really see the appeal of the sony camera, the others, JVC, Panasonic whatever I'll hold my opinion for when i actually get to see them, or when anyone gets to see them.

Laurence Maher · July 23rd, 2005, 05:19 AM

This think looks more like a box camera than a production camera. More for surveillence.

Ken Hodson · July 23rd, 2005, 12:18 PM

You can do production with a box camera. This cam has everything needed for a filmaker, including a range of built in ND filters, and 24p, as well as using standard 1/2" lens. Take any pro HD cam, remove the lens, mattebox, viewfinder, you are left with a box cam. Yes it isn't run and gun, but it is very suitable for production.

Chris Hurd · July 23rd, 2005, 01:44 PM

Absolutely right. This thing could easily be adapted to production work.

July 14th, 2005, 11:36 AM	#32
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	Nick "However this camera does not include a VTR hook this camera up to a deck and you've got the added expense equal to (or greater then) a 900 hook it up to a computer and you're still editing via an HDV codec. " Not quite following you Nick. What are you saying? __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

July 23rd, 2005, 12:18 PM	#35
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	You can do production with a box camera. This cam has everything needed for a filmaker, including a range of built in ND filters, and 24p, as well as using standard 1/2" lens. Take any pro HD cam, remove the lens, mattebox, viewfinder, you are left with a box cam. Yes it isn't run and gun, but it is very suitable for production. __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

July 23rd, 2005, 01:44 PM	#36
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Absolutely right. This thing could easily be adapted to production work. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

July 14th, 2005, 08:05 AM	#31
Nick Hiltgen Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Atlanta GA Posts: 1,427	Wow, what a long discussion. I think this camera is probably close to being on par with the 900 and 950 except for imaging size. You CAN pull 4:4:4 out of a 900 Check with SIM video in Toronto they did it, the sampling rate is all there. I question the ability of 950 to record 1080x1920 to tape, but I've questioned that for a long time and would LOVE to have that question answered. However this camera does not include a VTR hook this camera up to a deck and you've got the added expense equal to (or greater then) a 900 hook it up to a computer and you're still editing via an HDV codec. 1080 24p is an accepted broadcast standard, will someone remind me who broadcasts in it? I think DSE has said it best in his post. This turnign into such a long debate, and it seems like more of these are occuring, is there any chance of getting that "one low shoulder" forum for dicussion of say the 900 the 950 and the varicam? Chris?

July 14th, 2005, 03:26 PM	#33
Nick Hiltgen Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Atlanta GA Posts: 1,427	The camera in the original post, the sony not the JVC Hmm what I was trying to say is, one of the big differences between this camera and the f900 is that the f900 has a vtr built in. (note: there are a lot of differences other then this as well) I guess I don't really see the appeal of the sony camera, the others, JVC, Panasonic whatever I'll hold my opinion for when i actually get to see them, or when anyone gets to see them.

July 23rd, 2005, 05:19 AM	#34
Laurence Maher Join Date: May 2004 Location: denton, texas, usa Posts: 416	This think looks more like a box camera than a production camera. More for surveillence.