Sony XDCAM 320K VS Canon XF300 at DVinfo.net

Haitham Lawati · March 4th, 2011, 07:05 AM

How do you compare Sony XDCAM 320K Solid-State shoulder mount camcorder with Canon XF300?
If you were given the choice of either selecting Sony XDCAM or Canon XF300 which one would you prefer?

Glen Vandermolen · March 4th, 2011, 07:49 AM

Hmm, this is the first time I've seen these two compared.
I am an XF305 owner, but I'm not biased toward my camera. I bought what was best for me and my budget. I sold an HPX500 to get the Canon, so I was used to shoulder-mount cams.I have never used a 320, but I have used an EX3, which has the same chipset as the 320.

The 320 will have a better shoulder-mount form. It will also be heavier, so that depends on which is more important to you.
Both are full raster 1920x1080 CMOS cams, but the 320 has 1/2" chips. It will be better in low light and have better control over depth of field. Image wise, the 305 (compared to the EX3) is as good, maybe even better.
The fixed lens on the 305 is very good. The 320 can use a variety of lenses, so some will be better than others.
Regarding the codecs, the 305 trumps the 320: 50mbps, 4:2:2 beats 35mbps, 4:2:0 any day. Both can export through an HD/SDI port (if you have the 305), but the 320 will export a true 10-bit signal. The 305 is limited to 8-bit.
The 300/305 is cheaper by about $4,000, and uses cheaper media cards, unless you get the SD adapter for the 320. But then you won't be able to under/overcrank.

So, which is a better cam depends on what your needs are. I could have bought an EX3 - the 320 was a bit out of my price range - but I decided the 305 suited my needs better. However, I did recommend the EX3 to a friend out in California, though. I thought the EX3 would have wider acceptance for a freelancer in LA.

Haitham Lawati · March 4th, 2011, 08:59 AM

Now if Canon has 8-bit signal and Sony has 10-bit, what impact does this technical attribute has on the camera generally and the quality of the image specifically? Is it a big difference that makes Sony much more worth to be chosen?

Steve Kalle · March 6th, 2011, 01:58 AM

Image comparison: the Canon is a bit noisier and not quite as good in low light. Read this review XDCAM-USER.COM Canon XF305 Review with sample footage.

To be honest, the XF305 and PMW320 are very different cameras. A better comparison would be the EX3 and XF305. However, the 320 does use slightly improved processing which makes it slightly more sensitive than the EX3 even though both cameras use identical sensors.

March 4th, 2011, 07:05 AM	#1
Haitham Lawati Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: OMAN Posts: 107	Sony XDCAM 320K VS Canon XF300 How do you compare Sony XDCAM 320K Solid-State shoulder mount camcorder with Canon XF300? If you were given the choice of either selecting Sony XDCAM or Canon XF300 which one would you prefer?

March 4th, 2011, 07:49 AM	#2
Glen Vandermolen Space Hipster Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Jacksonville, FL Posts: 1,596	Re: Sony XDCAM 320K VS Canon XF300 Hmm, this is the first time I've seen these two compared. I am an XF305 owner, but I'm not biased toward my camera. I bought what was best for me and my budget. I sold an HPX500 to get the Canon, so I was used to shoulder-mount cams.I have never used a 320, but I have used an EX3, which has the same chipset as the 320. The 320 will have a better shoulder-mount form. It will also be heavier, so that depends on which is more important to you. Both are full raster 1920x1080 CMOS cams, but the 320 has 1/2" chips. It will be better in low light and have better control over depth of field. Image wise, the 305 (compared to the EX3) is as good, maybe even better. The fixed lens on the 305 is very good. The 320 can use a variety of lenses, so some will be better than others. Regarding the codecs, the 305 trumps the 320: 50mbps, 4:2:2 beats 35mbps, 4:2:0 any day. Both can export through an HD/SDI port (if you have the 305), but the 320 will export a true 10-bit signal. The 305 is limited to 8-bit. The 300/305 is cheaper by about $4,000, and uses cheaper media cards, unless you get the SD adapter for the 320. But then you won't be able to under/overcrank. So, which is a better cam depends on what your needs are. I could have bought an EX3 - the 320 was a bit out of my price range - but I decided the 305 suited my needs better. However, I did recommend the EX3 to a friend out in California, though. I thought the EX3 would have wider acceptance for a freelancer in LA.

March 4th, 2011, 08:59 AM	#3
Haitham Lawati Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: OMAN Posts: 107	Re: Sony XDCAM 320K VS Canon XF300 Now if Canon has 8-bit signal and Sony has 10-bit, what impact does this technical attribute has on the camera generally and the quality of the image specifically? Is it a big difference that makes Sony much more worth to be chosen?

March 6th, 2011, 01:58 AM	#4
Steve Kalle Trustee Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 1,554	Re: Sony XDCAM 320K VS Canon XF300 Image comparison: the Canon is a bit noisier and not quite as good in low light. Read this review XDCAM-USER.COM Canon XF305 Review with sample footage. To be honest, the XF305 and PMW320 are very different cameras. A better comparison would be the EX3 and XF305. However, the 320 does use slightly improved processing which makes it slightly more sensitive than the EX3 even though both cameras use identical sensors.