Sony PMW-320K/L

[Dan Brockett]

Stepping back from the details of this announcement, I think that it is validation of the quote from Panasonic brass last week. The era of the $30k to $50k pro camera, other than digital Cinema cameras, is almost over and the new sweet spot seems to be $10 to $15k. Makes sense but it is pretty amazing to see these cameras actually hitting the market. Now if the networks will just loosen up from requiring everything to be shot on 2/3" cameras, we would be somewhere.

Dan

[Andrew Stone]

2/3" chips will be the next thing to navigate down into this price range. There is too much competition bearing down for this not to happen. Fear not Dan.

[Paul Cronin]

Dan I have to respectfully disagree with you.

I think it is great the cameras that are coming to the market. Sony’s new 320, and /350 which is a great camera, Canon DSLR, Panasonic 4/3” , Sony 4/3", are all great advancements and I am sure I missed a few more. But 2/3” CCD is the standard for the networks and for some it is still film, and will be for at least a few more years. The picture quality with CCD still beats out CMOS in many ways. Will this change YES, but it is not there yet. So I think it is very important that networks don’t lower their quality requirements just because new cameras are on the market. And it only makes sense that Panasonic brass made that announcement prior to their new camera being released, it really all comes down to the dollar.

As I said we all know it will happen but I really hope the networks don’t lower there standards more then they already have, especially since the great HDTV’s we now use to watch our favorite shows on are going to only keep getting better.

Not interested in getting in a debate here I just had to respond since we tend to get carried away with all the marketing.

[Tom Roper]

I don't think it's just getting carried away with the marketing. CMOS has already made it's way to the high end Red, ARRI. It remains to be seen if CCDs will continue to be used by Sony, Panasonic, although JVC I believe still does for now. The trend is certainly moving away from them in favor of lighter weight, cooler running, less power hungry designs, with better sensitivity. Yesterday's final round broadcast of the Masters Golf Tournament on CBS from Augusta Georgia was beautiful, and they were using some kitted EX3's in the fleet.

[Paul Cronin]

We all have different needs.

[Tom Roper]

I would prefer CCD over CMOS in a lighweight package less power hungry with all things being equal, but things are not equal. CCD is all but dead and the era of the $30-50k pro cam (non-cinema) does seem almost over.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

The era of the $30k to $50k pro camera, other than digital Cinema cameras, is almost over and the new sweet spot seems to be $10 to $15k. Makes sense but it is pretty amazing to see these cameras actually hitting the market. Now if the networks will just loosen up from requiring everything to be shot on 2/3" cameras, we would be somewhere.

I appreciate you're talking from an American perspective, but the latest guidelines from European broadcasters now specify 1/2" as the minimum for unqualified use. So from a chip etc point of view, the PMW320 is fine - but why couldn't it record to the 50Mbs codec?

What this means is that a basic $10-15k camera, fully meeting minimum spec (in Europe) is perfectly feasible - it's just that no manufacturer is currently making it. (No doubt to the delight of Convergent Design.) That's not to say it will completely displace the more expensive (and 2/3") cameras, but that's more to do with lens options. A real extreme wide angle HD lens of good quality is likely to cost a lot more than $10k by itself.

[Dan Brockett]

They are not including the 50MBPs codec because of Sony's famous, soon-to-be completely outdated and irrelevant marketing segmentation ploy. Sony always wants to have a million cameras and formats on the market at any given time, I guess they call it "hedging their bets", although it is encouraging that the XDCAM EX format and SxS didn't yet go the way of the Dodo like some predicted it would after the EX1 and EX3 were introduced.

It will be interesting to see how broadcasters and networks respond to this new market segmentation. What about the new Panasonic 4/3 camera? That obviously will fulfill broadcasters requirements for imager size but what about the AVCHD codec? I think it will be very interesting to see what broadcasters will require in the next year or so, the market is evolving at a breakneck speed.

Dan

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

It will be interesting to see how broadcasters and networks respond to this new market segmentation. What about the new Panasonic 4/3 camera? That obviously will fulfill broadcasters requirements for imager size but what about the AVCHD codec?

The (European) spec doesn't simply say "everything 1/2" and above OK, everything below not", they also have to meet other criteria such as 1920x1080 photosites for 3 chip designs. It all gets a lot more difficult for single chip cameras. (I'm glad I don't have the job of deciding what is acceptable and what's not!) How well this newly announced Panasonic 4/3 front end will be seen can only await actual testing - we'll see.

Similarly, the full spec currently specifies the recording codec should be full 1920x1080 raster, 4:2:2, and 50Mbs minimum for inter-frame. So no - AVC-HD will not be acceptable. Exactly the same as with the EX 35Mbs codec - if you want to use an EX or this new Panasonic 4/3 camera and fully meet broadcast spec, you'll need an external recorder.

One can only wish that Sony would put their 50Mbs XDCAM codec in their cameras, and Panasonic put AVC-Intra 100 in theirs. The bitrate of the latter may be too much for SD cards, but why not use Compact Flash? The nanoFlash proves CF in even a fairly cheap form has absolutely no problem with a 100Mbs bitrate.

[George Griswold]

Clients are confused enough... this will make spec'ing jobs all but impossible. Thanks for nothing Sony.

[Alister Chapman]

Just a correction about the sensor. It is the EX3 sensor.

There was a little bit of confusion as some of the spec sheets give the impression that the 320 is more sensitive, but that is due to the faster lens, not a sensor upgrade.

[Tim Polster]

If it is the EX3 sensor, that makes it a bit tougher sell for Sony.

The EX3's price is at $8,300 so the 320 basically being the same camera means from a consumer's mind its price should not be far away from the EX3. Especially with the same sensor in the $6,000 EX-1.

Also, Panasonic is jumping up and down how the new HPX-370 outperforms the other guy's 1/2" chip model. New sensors with a bit of a boost would have silenced that standoff.

It would seem there would be no improvement in the skew behavior given the same sensors, but that is still possible. Overall, it looks like price is going to be quite important for this camera.

[Heath McKnight]

I never thought I'd see Sony do a 2/3" HD camera with interchangeable lenses under $60,000! This is terrific news. Hot dog, indeed! And that includes the PMW-350.

Heath

[Andrew Stone]

At this point bringing 50 mBit down into the prosumer mainstream would gut Sony's pro line sales. They are already pushing the envelope as is evidenced by the comments on this forum.

I am wondering if this time period will mark the true beginning of the commoditization of pro video gear. It is conceivable now that what we consider all the qualities of "broadcast quality" video will be available for $15,000 within a year or so. That being: 10 bit, 4:2:2, +50 mBit, full HD raster imager, 2/3" imager. All possible at the present rate of feature creep. +120 frames overcrank and ramping slowmo are things that are probably off in the distance.

Just musing.

[Tom Roper]

When you get into the shoulder mount class, the costs start adding up quickly, batteries, chargers, viewfinders, lenses, nanoflash, and you give up a few things as well, like image stabilization. Just my opinion but I don't see the point, if not to go the full step to 2/3 inch. You could buy an EX3 and EX1R for about the price of adding an image stabilizer alone to a shoulder cam, which is probably only available to 2/3 inch models anyway.

For me, I would pass on the HPX370 and the PMW-320. To be fair, neither was around when I bought the PMW-350, but it was all about the 2/3 inch format for me. The kit lens on the PMW-350 is pretty useless when zoomed from the shoulder to more than 50%, needs a sturdy tripod.