Sony PMW350 vs the Sony F800 need advice

Alister Chapman · December 16th, 2009, 07:55 AM

I've struggled with not enough ND in Arizona in particular and on bright summer days in many locations, also anywhere with snow and bright skies. I now carry a couple of screw on ND's in the camera bag all the time.

Simon Denny · December 17th, 2009, 03:30 AM

Well after comparing both the 700 & 800, excluding the PMW 350 for a moment I have decided that the F700 is more suited for what I want to achieve, so at least i have saved a few virtual dollars. Both these cameras are using the same chips, aren't they?

And Sensitivity (2000 lx, 89.9% reflectance) 59.94i: F11 is the same?

When I compare the price of the new F350 vs the 700,800 what a difference.
Anyway cameras will do that.

Cheers

Alister Chapman · December 17th, 2009, 02:53 PM

The PDW-700 and F800 are basically the same cameras. Most of the F800's extras are simply firmware differences. There are a couple of small hardware differences. The CCD's etc are the same so same picture quality and sensitivity. If you are buying on a lease or finance look very closely at the HDVF-C35W colour viewfinder. While it is expensive it only adds 5% to the total cost of the camera over a HDVF-20A mono finder.

Doug Jensen · December 17th, 2009, 03:24 PM

I've got the HDVF-C35W on my F800 and am very happy with it.
After using color LCDs on the the EX3 and EX1 for two years, there was no way I was going back to B&W.

I strive to shoot my footage exactly the way I want it so no grading is necessary, and the 35W gives me total confidence to push the envelope when I'm out shooting and don't have a field monitor. In fact, I don't need a field monitor anymore.

Paul Cronin · December 17th, 2009, 03:47 PM

Note the price of the PMW-350 is out today.
$18,900 with lens
$17,500 without lens

Tom Roper · December 17th, 2009, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Cronin

Note the price of the PMW-350 is out today.
$18,900 with lens
$17,500 without lens

Sweet!!!!

I cannot wait!!! Thanks Paul.

Daniel Epstein · December 17th, 2009, 09:41 PM

Hey Paul, that $17500 and 18900 price makes more sense than the 20,000 22000 price people talked about. It didn't make sense that the PMW-350 was more expensive than the optical disc low end range. Also its competition is most likely Panasonic HPX-300 and HPX-500 cameras which have similar bodies to the 350.

Simon Denny · December 18th, 2009, 01:02 AM

Wow the price on the HDVF-C35W VF is over the top. Add this plus a decent lens is about $85k in Aussie dollars. And this setup is not even top of the range.

But I still want one. he,he,he.

I love the look of the 700, 800 vs the EX series it just has a different feel and I assume this the the CCD here at work.

Alister Chapman · December 18th, 2009, 04:22 AM

In the UK a PDW-700 with HDVF-20A will set you back around £22k and with a C35W your looking at £24k. It adds 5% to the total package price, but is IMHO worth every last penny. If you by a PDW-700/HDVF-20A and then latter decide you want the C35W it will cost you £6k for the new finder. Looking into the C35W is like looking a 9" HD monitor. Having one means that for many jobs you won't need a monitor and that alone makes it worth having.

Simon Denny · December 18th, 2009, 04:59 AM

The body for a 700 is around $49k plus a lens $25 and the VF $10k in Aussie dollars. Maybe it's worth the trip OS to purchase.

Paul Cronin · December 18th, 2009, 06:37 AM

Daniel I don't think the Panasonic HPX-300 and HPX-500 will be much competition for the PMW-350. I have used both those cameras and from my limited use with the 350 and looking at the numbers it is not even close. They are good cameras but not in the same class as the 350. The 350 will compete with the 2700.

Daniel Epstein · December 18th, 2009, 10:51 AM

Paul,
While I may agree with you on the picture quality differences between the Panny 300 and the Sony 350, (not so sure about the 500/350 comparison)as well as Codec preferences. I still think the accountants will be comparing those cameras against each other. You can get two Panny 300's for about the same price as the Sony 350 and that may swing a lot of people regardless of quality and performance of the respective units. As far as comparing the 350 and the 2700 it is going to be interesting to see if Panasonic will try and keep some sort of match trade in offer going longer than the current Dec 31 expiration date because the real list price of the 2700 is double what the Sony 350 is without a lens or viewfinder so it is really a different category. Much easier to compare a 2700 to an XDCAM 800 in terms of price. The Sony 350 may eat into both the 800 and the 2700 as far as market purchases.

Simon Wyndham · December 18th, 2009, 10:56 AM

Quote:

I still think the accountants will be comparing those cameras against each other.

Depends who the accountants are working for. In the UK if they want to ensure broadcast compatibility they would probably go for a 350 with a Nano. The Panny 300, while recording AVC Intra and costing less fails because of its chip size. Even without the new limitations placed on bitrate the Panny 300 can't be used because it is below the minimum 1/2" chip size that the likes of the BBC and Sky will acccept. The Panasonic 500 fails to meet the requirements too because of the resolution of the chips. Likewise the Panasonic 2100 and 2700 fail to meet the specs for the same reason.

A bean counter, while wanting to save money, also knows about risk. And they aren't going to want money spent on equipment that could be sidelined very easily. Depending on what the camera is intended for of course. For private corporate stuff there are different considerations.

Daniel Epstein · December 18th, 2009, 12:03 PM

Simon,
I am talking exactly about small TV stations and corporate people who used to use broadcast gear but have been moving towards smaller and cheaper solutions not blessed by the BBC. Of course I might say that the Beeb and other organizations have set standards which may or may not be necessary based on engineering evaluations not content considerations.
As far as big corporations sanctifying the use of Panasonic 300's I believe NBC Universal was planning to use them heavily in news entertainment gathering. Not sure how far in the process they have gotten with that but I am sure that in their minds quantities of cameras as opposed to quality of cameras was a major concern.
Personally I like the bigger chip solutions but I do see so much blurring of the lines between gear capabilities, cost and distribution that it is not hard to imagine smaller cheaper solutions making a big impact on everyone's choice of equipment.

Paul Cronin · December 18th, 2009, 12:42 PM

Daniel I guess it depends on your clients? My high end guys won't accept even the 1/2" EX line for more then a very small precent of their footage. But the 2/3" full 1080p at Nano bit rates with the 350 well they will accept that for 100% so for me it is a winner.

As Simon says (no pun intended) my clients are iffy even with the 2700 which I was looking at last spring.

So we all go with what works and in my eyes the 350/Nano is a huge winner over all of the cameras on the market in its price range and even some twice the price.

December 16th, 2009, 07:55 AM	#31
Alister Chapman Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Bracknell, Berkshire, UK Posts: 4,957	I've struggled with not enough ND in Arizona in particular and on bright summer days in many locations, also anywhere with snow and bright skies. I now carry a couple of screw on ND's in the camera bag all the time. __________________ Alister Chapman, Film-Maker/Stormchaser http://www.xdcam-user.com/alisters-blog/ My XDCAM site and blog. http://www.hurricane-rig.com

December 17th, 2009, 02:53 PM	#33
Alister Chapman Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Bracknell, Berkshire, UK Posts: 4,957	The PDW-700 and F800 are basically the same cameras. Most of the F800's extras are simply firmware differences. There are a couple of small hardware differences. The CCD's etc are the same so same picture quality and sensitivity. If you are buying on a lease or finance look very closely at the HDVF-C35W colour viewfinder. While it is expensive it only adds 5% to the total cost of the camera over a HDVF-20A mono finder. __________________ Alister Chapman, Film-Maker/Stormchaser http://www.xdcam-user.com/alisters-blog/ My XDCAM site and blog. http://www.hurricane-rig.com

December 17th, 2009, 03:24 PM	#34
Doug Jensen Vortex Media Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 3,442	I've got the HDVF-C35W on my F800 and am very happy with it. After using color LCDs on the the EX3 and EX1 for two years, there was no way I was going back to B&W. I strive to shoot my footage exactly the way I want it so no grading is necessary, and the 35W gives me total confidence to push the envelope when I'm out shooting and don't have a field monitor. In fact, I don't need a field monitor anymore. __________________ Vortex Media http://www.vortexmedia.com/ Sony FS7, F55, and XDCAM training videos, field guides, and other production tools

December 17th, 2009, 03:47 PM	#35
Paul Cronin Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Rhode Island Posts: 4,048	Note the price of the PMW-350 is out today. $18,900 with lens $17,500 without lens __________________ Paul Cronin www.paulcroninstudios.com

December 18th, 2009, 04:22 AM	#39
Alister Chapman Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Bracknell, Berkshire, UK Posts: 4,957	In the UK a PDW-700 with HDVF-20A will set you back around £22k and with a C35W your looking at £24k. It adds 5% to the total package price, but is IMHO worth every last penny. If you by a PDW-700/HDVF-20A and then latter decide you want the C35W it will cost you £6k for the new finder. Looking into the C35W is like looking a 9" HD monitor. Having one means that for many jobs you won't need a monitor and that alone makes it worth having. __________________ Alister Chapman, Film-Maker/Stormchaser http://www.xdcam-user.com/alisters-blog/ My XDCAM site and blog. http://www.hurricane-rig.com

December 17th, 2009, 03:30 AM	#32
Simon Denny Trustee Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 1,409	Well after comparing both the 700 & 800, excluding the PMW 350 for a moment I have decided that the F700 is more suited for what I want to achieve, so at least i have saved a few virtual dollars. Both these cameras are using the same chips, aren't they? And Sensitivity (2000 lx, 89.9% reflectance) 59.94i: F11 is the same? When I compare the price of the new F350 vs the 700,800 what a difference. Anyway cameras will do that. Cheers

December 17th, 2009, 09:41 PM	#37
Daniel Epstein Trustee Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: New York, NY Posts: 1,267	Hey Paul, that $17500 and 18900 price makes more sense than the 20,000 22000 price people talked about. It didn't make sense that the PMW-350 was more expensive than the optical disc low end range. Also its competition is most likely Panasonic HPX-300 and HPX-500 cameras which have similar bodies to the 350.

December 18th, 2009, 01:02 AM	#38
Simon Denny Trustee Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 1,409	Wow the price on the HDVF-C35W VF is over the top. Add this plus a decent lens is about $85k in Aussie dollars. And this setup is not even top of the range. But I still want one. he,he,he. I love the look of the 700, 800 vs the EX series it just has a different feel and I assume this the the CCD here at work.

December 18th, 2009, 04:59 AM	#40
Simon Denny Trustee Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 1,409	The body for a 700 is around $49k plus a lens $25 and the VF $10k in Aussie dollars. Maybe it's worth the trip OS to purchase.

December 18th, 2009, 06:37 AM	#41
Paul Cronin Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Rhode Island Posts: 4,048	Daniel I don't think the Panasonic HPX-300 and HPX-500 will be much competition for the PMW-350. I have used both those cameras and from my limited use with the 350 and looking at the numbers it is not even close. They are good cameras but not in the same class as the 350. The 350 will compete with the 2700. __________________ Paul Cronin www.paulcroninstudios.com

December 18th, 2009, 10:51 AM	#42
Daniel Epstein Trustee Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: New York, NY Posts: 1,267	Paul, While I may agree with you on the picture quality differences between the Panny 300 and the Sony 350, (not so sure about the 500/350 comparison)as well as Codec preferences. I still think the accountants will be comparing those cameras against each other. You can get two Panny 300's for about the same price as the Sony 350 and that may swing a lot of people regardless of quality and performance of the respective units. As far as comparing the 350 and the 2700 it is going to be interesting to see if Panasonic will try and keep some sort of match trade in offer going longer than the current Dec 31 expiration date because the real list price of the 2700 is double what the Sony 350 is without a lens or viewfinder so it is really a different category. Much easier to compare a 2700 to an XDCAM 800 in terms of price. The Sony 350 may eat into both the 800 and the 2700 as far as market purchases.

December 18th, 2009, 12:03 PM	#44
Daniel Epstein Trustee Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: New York, NY Posts: 1,267	Simon, I am talking exactly about small TV stations and corporate people who used to use broadcast gear but have been moving towards smaller and cheaper solutions not blessed by the BBC. Of course I might say that the Beeb and other organizations have set standards which may or may not be necessary based on engineering evaluations not content considerations. As far as big corporations sanctifying the use of Panasonic 300's I believe NBC Universal was planning to use them heavily in news entertainment gathering. Not sure how far in the process they have gotten with that but I am sure that in their minds quantities of cameras as opposed to quality of cameras was a major concern. Personally I like the bigger chip solutions but I do see so much blurring of the lines between gear capabilities, cost and distribution that it is not hard to imagine smaller cheaper solutions making a big impact on everyone's choice of equipment.

December 18th, 2009, 12:42 PM	#45
Paul Cronin Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Rhode Island Posts: 4,048	Daniel I guess it depends on your clients? My high end guys won't accept even the 1/2" EX line for more then a very small precent of their footage. But the 2/3" full 1080p at Nano bit rates with the 350 well they will accept that for 100% so for me it is a winner. As Simon says (no pun intended) my clients are iffy even with the 2700 which I was looking at last spring. So we all go with what works and in my eyes the 350/Nano is a huge winner over all of the cameras on the market in its price range and even some twice the price. __________________ Paul Cronin www.paulcroninstudios.com