New PMW-350, EX1R camcorders and SxS media announced

Simon Wyndham · October 22nd, 2009, 03:41 AM

Quote:

The 350 has less noise than F900R and PDW-700

Less!? I think Sony have finally figured out how to go less than nothing!

Damian Heffernan · October 22nd, 2009, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

I don't know if SDHC adapters will work with the new cams. I see no reason why they won't, but why now go that route when you have a tested and approved option via the new sony memory stick adapter?

because memory sticks still cost more than SD. The fast one's a fair bit more.

Damian Heffernan · October 22nd, 2009, 04:02 AM

Ex1r priced in Japan - 714,000 yen available december.

http://www.fujiya-avic.co.jp/proshop/xdcamex.html

the current model ex1 is going for 610,000 yen with 2 X 8GB and 1 X 16GB SxS cards.

translated:
Sale schedule in December
EX1 equipped with 1/2 types three CMOS in a compact body that exceed the imagination evolves further.

Standard price \714,000 including tax

SONY MEAD-MS01
MEAD-MS01
Sale schedule in January
Memory Stick adaptor
It is possible to collect to Memory Stick PRO-HG duo HX by using this adaptor.

Standard price \14,700 including tax

Alister Chapman · October 22nd, 2009, 04:42 AM

I was one of the people that originally discovered that it was possible to use SDHC via an adapter with the EX3 and then EX1. Initially this excited me, but I soon discovered that it simply was not as robust as using SxS, for many reasons. The new Sony adapter eliminates many of the issues as it has better handshaking to prevent recording before the previous file has been closed. (you will need a firmware update to be able to use the Sony adapter).

So while SDHC is cheaper you have to consider what value you give your material and how reliable you need your workflow to be. Sony have now presented EX users with option that is guaranteed to work and built to Sony's high standards.

Greg Boston · October 22nd, 2009, 04:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Phillipps

Add an HD lens to the HPX500 and you're getting close to the 350 kit price too.
Steve

Good point to consider, Steve. And if you take the lens out of the PMW-350, you get the body/vf/mic for $18.5K which is closer in price to the HPX500, but with additional native resolution.

-gb-

Douglas Call · October 22nd, 2009, 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thierry Humeau

As good as the HPX-500 looks on paper, its CCD is really limited to 720HD resolution and the DVCPro HD P2 file system is quite outdated. It's a slower, noiser and heavier camera but I agree, for 10K, it is not too bad of a deal.

the Panasonic literature clearly states that it Records in DVCPRO HD 1080/60i, 50i, 30p, 25p and 24p; in 720/60p, 50p, 30p, 25p, and 24p; and in DVCPRO50, DVCPRO and DV. I guess they just had a mis-print.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thierry Humeau

DVCPro HD P2 file system is quite outdated. It's a slower, noiser and heavier camera but I agree, for 10K, it is not too bad of a deal.

I think that many people still favor the P2 system. The unit also weighs about the same as the sony @ 8.2 lbs for camera or 12 lbs with lens & IDX battery. It also shoots at 100Mbs. which I guess is sufficient for some of the nature TV channels etc.

Greg Boston · October 22nd, 2009, 05:28 AM

Douglas,

With all due respect, the HPX500 only has 960x540 sensor resolution which they pixel shift in both directions to derive a pseudo 1080 output file. When placed side by side with a camera that records higher native resolution, the visual difference is obvious. This is what Thierry was referring to.

-gb-

Alister Chapman · October 22nd, 2009, 05:42 AM

The HPX-500 might record a DVCPRO HD 1080 file (1280x1080 @ 60i/30P 1440x1080 at 50i/25P), but the front end is using SD CCD's with pixel offsetting to get a 1280x720 image. Up-rezzing 720 to 1080 dosn't make it a 1080 camcorder in my book.

The DVCPRO codec is an old codec by todays standards and is somewhat dated. It isn't full raster in any of it's various flavors and it is not as efficient as Mpeg2. You also need to consider the fact that a 35Mbps codec needs a third of the recording media of a 100Mbps codec. 35Mbps data can be read from the storage medium 3 times faster than 100Mbps. This low bandwidth requirement also makes editing from USB drives easier.

Lance Librandi · October 22nd, 2009, 05:55 AM

Hi Alister,
You did said "Didn't check for IR, but Sony did state that the optical filters have improved IR cutoff.?". I was going to purchase my second EX3 but decided not to proceed unit Sony found a fix with the IR issue. Would you be in a position to find out and lets us know what Sony have done to improved the IR cutoff or is it still an issue but to a lesser degree.
Many Thanks

Alister Chapman · October 22nd, 2009, 06:29 AM

As far as I know there are no changes to the EX3 and I assume that must also include the filters. So for an EX3 you would want the new Tiffen T1 IR.

Barry J. Anwender · October 22nd, 2009, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lance Librandi

Hi Alister,
You did said "Didn't check for IR, but Sony did state that the optical filters have improved IR cutoff.?". I was going to purchase my second EX3 but decided not to proceed unit Sony found a fix with the IR issue. Would you be in a position to find out and lets us know what Sony have done to improved the IR cutoff or is it still an issue but to a lesser degree.
Many Thanks

If Sony has indeed resolved the IR cutoff problem on the EX1R, it would be very prudent for them to offer this improvement as an upgrade for the EX1 & EX3 via a trip to service depot. The camera still has to go to a Sony service depot for firmware upgrades--the old filters on the front end optics could be swapped out for the newer ones. I would much prefer this solution rather than having to purchase/add-on an external IR cut filter.

Tom Hardwick · October 22nd, 2009, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry J. Anwender

I would much prefer this solution rather than having to purchase/add-on an external IR cut filter.

I can't tell you how much I agree with this statement.

Alister Chapman · October 22nd, 2009, 10:27 AM

I will try and get hold of the camera again to do further tests, but the picture quality really, really impressed me. I think we really are approaching the limits of what you can get from a 1920x1080 camera.

Mike Marriage · October 22nd, 2009, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

I can't tell you how much I agree with this statement.

I've got the screw on for the EX3 and it is no problem at all. Protects the front element of the lens too! Would surely be cheaper and easier than getting the camera altered.

Having said that, I still hope they have fixed the issue with the 350!

Andrew Stone · October 22nd, 2009, 11:43 AM

The PMW-350 by Alister's account and the spec sheet looks fantastic. If it hasn't been noted here yet, the 4 channel audio is full 48 kHz at 16bit. This is significant as other solutions in this price range have hobbled 4 channel audio. Being able to move up to the 2/3" ENG environment with an affordable lens within $20K is very compelling in my eyes.

For those of you using nanoFlash... has it hit the point of being completely ready in a production environment? Using a NanoFlash with the 350 pretty much has you set for most HD production submission requirements.

October 22nd, 2009, 04:02 AM	#93
Damian Heffernan Major Player Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: c Australia Posts: 234	ex1 now on Japanese website with price Ex1r priced in Japan - 714,000 yen available december. http://www.fujiya-avic.co.jp/proshop/xdcamex.html the current model ex1 is going for 610,000 yen with 2 X 8GB and 1 X 16GB SxS cards. translated: Sale schedule in December EX1 equipped with 1/2 types three CMOS in a compact body that exceed the imagination evolves further. Standard price \714,000 including tax SONY MEAD-MS01 MEAD-MS01 Sale schedule in January Memory Stick adaptor It is possible to collect to Memory Stick PRO-HG duo HX by using this adaptor. Standard price \14,700 including tax

October 22nd, 2009, 04:42 AM	#94
Alister Chapman Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Bracknell, Berkshire, UK Posts: 4,957	I was one of the people that originally discovered that it was possible to use SDHC via an adapter with the EX3 and then EX1. Initially this excited me, but I soon discovered that it simply was not as robust as using SxS, for many reasons. The new Sony adapter eliminates many of the issues as it has better handshaking to prevent recording before the previous file has been closed. (you will need a firmware update to be able to use the Sony adapter). So while SDHC is cheaper you have to consider what value you give your material and how reliable you need your workflow to be. Sony have now presented EX users with option that is guaranteed to work and built to Sony's high standards. __________________ Alister Chapman, Film-Maker/Stormchaser http://www.xdcam-user.com/alisters-blog/ My XDCAM site and blog. http://www.hurricane-rig.com

October 22nd, 2009, 05:42 AM	#98
Alister Chapman Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Bracknell, Berkshire, UK Posts: 4,957	The HPX-500 might record a DVCPRO HD 1080 file (1280x1080 @ 60i/30P 1440x1080 at 50i/25P), but the front end is using SD CCD's with pixel offsetting to get a 1280x720 image. Up-rezzing 720 to 1080 dosn't make it a 1080 camcorder in my book. The DVCPRO codec is an old codec by todays standards and is somewhat dated. It isn't full raster in any of it's various flavors and it is not as efficient as Mpeg2. You also need to consider the fact that a 35Mbps codec needs a third of the recording media of a 100Mbps codec. 35Mbps data can be read from the storage medium 3 times faster than 100Mbps. This low bandwidth requirement also makes editing from USB drives easier. __________________ Alister Chapman, Film-Maker/Stormchaser http://www.xdcam-user.com/alisters-blog/ My XDCAM site and blog. http://www.hurricane-rig.com

October 22nd, 2009, 06:29 AM	#100
Alister Chapman Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Bracknell, Berkshire, UK Posts: 4,957	As far as I know there are no changes to the EX3 and I assume that must also include the filters. So for an EX3 you would want the new Tiffen T1 IR. __________________ Alister Chapman, Film-Maker/Stormchaser http://www.xdcam-user.com/alisters-blog/ My XDCAM site and blog. http://www.hurricane-rig.com

October 22nd, 2009, 10:27 AM	#103
Alister Chapman Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Bracknell, Berkshire, UK Posts: 4,957	I will try and get hold of the camera again to do further tests, but the picture quality really, really impressed me. I think we really are approaching the limits of what you can get from a 1920x1080 camera. __________________ Alister Chapman, Film-Maker/Stormchaser http://www.xdcam-user.com/alisters-blog/ My XDCAM site and blog. http://www.hurricane-rig.com

October 22nd, 2009, 05:28 AM	#97
Greg Boston Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: DFW area, TX Posts: 6,117 Images: 1	Douglas, With all due respect, the HPX500 only has 960x540 sensor resolution which they pixel shift in both directions to derive a pseudo 1080 output file. When placed side by side with a camera that records higher native resolution, the visual difference is obvious. This is what Thierry was referring to. -gb-

October 22nd, 2009, 05:55 AM	#99
Lance Librandi Major Player Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: South Australia Posts: 374	Hi Alister, You did said "Didn't check for IR, but Sony did state that the optical filters have improved IR cutoff.?". I was going to purchase my second EX3 but decided not to proceed unit Sony found a fix with the IR issue. Would you be in a position to find out and lets us know what Sony have done to improved the IR cutoff or is it still an issue but to a lesser degree. Many Thanks

October 22nd, 2009, 11:43 AM	#105
Andrew Stone Major Player Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 975	The PMW-350 by Alister's account and the spec sheet looks fantastic. If it hasn't been noted here yet, the 4 channel audio is full 48 kHz at 16bit. This is significant as other solutions in this price range have hobbled 4 channel audio. Being able to move up to the 2/3" ENG environment with an affordable lens within $20K is very compelling in my eyes. For those of you using nanoFlash... has it hit the point of being completely ready in a production environment? Using a NanoFlash with the 350 pretty much has you set for most HD production submission requirements.