PMW-500 50 Mbs 4:2:2 is a PMW-EX5 50 Mbs 4:2:2 The Next Step.

[Daniel Goyette]

Now we have PMW-320 , PMW-350 , PMW-500 for XDCAM EX Shoulder-Mount who give a 3 steps way for the XDCAM EX market and it give finally the 50 Mbs 4:2:2 in the Shoulder-Mount style.

But in the HandHeld we still limited to 35 Mbs 4:2:0 with the PMW-EX1R and the PMW-EX3 and even if these HandHeld camcorders are exellent i still think a 50 Mbs 4:2:2 HandHeld is needed.

I understand a HandHeld XDCAM EX camcorders at 50 Mbs 4:2:2 will be more expensive because of more quality in Optics Lenses and maybe a CCD instead of CMOS as sensors and lower batteries record duration.

My Workflow rely on HandHeld and this is a missing link for me but i request your opinion here , i have ask Sony for XDCAM EX at 50 Mbs 4:2:2 and got reply could be done if a market ask for , and we get PMW-500.

I will send another request to Sony but asking for an HandHeld 50 Mbs 4:2:2 XDCAM EX and put a link to this post so maybe if enough peoples join in it may make is way to the top at Sony Corporation.

[Steve Phillipps]

I don't think you'd have CCDs, it'd be CMOS. And there's no reason the optics would need to be any better either. I think the only stumbling block might be that it might stop some people buying the more expensive cameras, so losing Sony some money.
But I think you're right, it might well happen, especially with Canon leading the way with a small 50 mb/s camera.
Steve

[Doug Jensen]

Daniel,

If 4:2:2 and 50Mbps in a hand-held is important to you, then you might want to take a look at the Canon XF305 and/or XF300. I've been shooting with a XF305 since the end of June and it's a nice camera.

There are a few downsides to the camera (primarily the 1/3" chips) but overall it is a winner and very comparable to an EX1R. It basically records the exact same XDCAM422 codec as the F800/700/500 and will fit in easily with your XDCAM workflow.

[Gabe Strong]

Doug,

Of course you are right about the Canon. I think one thing some people are interested in, is a camera that
combines that advantages of the EX-1R and the Canon XF 300 series. In other words, a EX-1R
that records 50Mbps 4:2:2 or a Canon XF 305 that has 1/2 chips. Of course, us consumers always
want more and are never satisfied :-)

However, it wouldn't surprise me if it happens before too long. The tech is always getting better,
and if the price was right, I'd certainly buy one. Of course with the announcement of two new small
recorders at IBC, there are now 2 more options joining the nano to get exactly this out of an EX-1.
Which is one reason I like the EX series so much. You can always add on an external recorder
to record a better codec (the Ki Pro mini is even 10 bit I think). However, you cannot change the
size of the chips in the camera once you buy one. So to the original poster, if you need a 50Mbps 4:2:2
codec and want the 1/2 chips right now, you can get an EX-1R and add an external recording solution.

[Daniel Goyette]

I got a brief reply from somebody at Sony a few hours after having made my request by e-mail including a link to this post thread so i will resume the reply and cant say the person name working at Sony.

PMW-500 XDCAM EX is see as an addition to the actual XDCAM HD Line-Up in fact a complement to it so users can use XDCAM HD in Optical Disc or Memory Card types of media , Its XDCAM HD on SxS Cards.

My contact at Sony said the Form Factor limit in the actual technological state the possibility of putting a Better Imager who will require More Power from Actual Battery limiting negatively the duration.

Also the increase datarate will increase the transfert time and decrease the recording time and this is see as having negative impact with limited increase picture quality , Sony has no plan for 50 Mbs 4:2:2 HandHeld.

I feel my request still make sense even if Sony seem to see it otherwise , what do you think about the reply is Sony serious about Form Factor limitation , Battery Power , Sensor Size , Transfer Speed , ect.

Do you think they will ignore our request or are just getting tired of us asking for the best in a smaller package and refusing to buy in the traditional Shoulder-Mount form factor expensive or not.

Thank-you guys hope you are not bug by my questions on the future we want for XDCAM EX as much as i ask about why it is possible or not and if you will feedback Sony on your side if possible ....

[Mike Marriage]

I put it to Sony that by not including it, at least as an option, they are just allowing money to flow to Convergent Designs instead of them. The Nanoflash is also a hassle to strap onto the camera.

So, whilst we're at it, let's see some expansion cards to take the PMW350 & 500 to 100MBps please Sony.

I don't think the EX1/3 have expansion slots (is that the correct name) do they?

[Steve Phillipps]

Originally Posted by Gabe Strong

The tech is always getting better,

It's never been about the tech, it's always been marketing strategy and still is.
The ability to put the 50 mb/s codec in the EX cameras would be so easy, the Nano and now the Canon have shown this, they just don't want to make them too good at this pricepoint. But they are being made to look a bit silly now with people simply bypassing their whole in-camera recording!
Steve

[Simon Wyndham]

Something will have to change in the near future. Cameras like the 500 are amazing pieces of technology, but gear isn't lasting as long anymore. Not like it used to. Yet the prices are staying the same despite often having to upgrade for features that should have been on cameras to begin with.

Take the 50fps 1080p capability of the Panasonic AF100. That will change things now. Nobody will want a camera that needs to go to 720p for off speed recording in that same camera price range again. The fact that the AF100 also has simultaneous HD-SDI and HDMI output means that Sony are really going to need to push the boat out for the next EX replacement.

I'm not sure if 50Mb/s is on the cards, but it should be. A camera with large chips (or chip) like the AF100, but in a body like the JVC 700 with at least a 50Mb/s codec would pretty much do all duties needed. But I think that things will become messier before they become better. I don't think even the manufacturers know where things are heading, or indeed where they should head, because the quality at the lower end is becoming so high.

Maybe the differential in tiers will come with SR style codecs, or Red RAW style codecs being commonplace on mid to high end cameras, and perhaps much higher overcranking abilities (like 200fps) to help keep those market segments going. The low end will then become 50Mb/s 4:2:2, basic 60fps overcrank abilities at 1080p (and perhaps 60p at 1080 later on).

A bread and butter camera shouldn't cost £25k and up any more.

[Tim Polster]

I agree, something has to change as they just flat out will not get people paying $25-$35 for a camera with a fear of it being surpassed in a year or two.

The veil is off. We in the community have see stellar video images from $6,000 and under pieces of gear. I just don't have the shear respect for the top of the line anymore because it is all so muddy right now and so many people on the client end just can not see the difference. Or even have Blu-ray yet.

Yes something has to change. I still don't understand why interchangeable lens cameras need to cost double the price of their sister fixed lens models. EX-1 - PMW-320. With the same chipset just a larger body, why is the price twice as much? Why not a fixed lens larger camera body then?

[Daniel Goyette]

I agree with the fact the Camcorders are keep at artificial hight price but as long as users accept to pay it why would they change the price structure .... unless users start to use cheaper options if available.

But my biggest frustration is not about the price but the fact they allways tell you bigger is better and that is the reasons why it is not possible to do it in smaller form factor.

Everything around us get is size shrink: Television Screen , Cell Phone , Media Player , Computer and more , all thing around us evolve to get better in smaller package exept in Pro Camcorders.

Sony and others should do research to get better in the small form factor but because of marketing perception only Shoulder-Mount get the support but this is not the fault of Sony only guys.

Many of us where seeing HandHeld as Prosumers toys not so long ago and a 2 year ago a Post-Production House tell me they dont accept below 50 Mbs 4:2:2 to avoid to get flood by the average Prosumers Crowd in rude words.

Back to my point guys , XDCAM EX 50 Mbs 4:2:2 is possible to do in HandHeld by Sony so i dont request an impossible product at all , Sony said we listen as their new Mantra ... so let them ear our request.

[Tim Polster]

Well the market as I percieve it can be divided into two categories, Large broadcast and everybody else. The large broadcast customers are or have been the bulk of the camera maker's business. The markups are very high and the broadcasters pay it because they need the ultra reliability and also the service. Well the service fleets from Sony & Panasonic are being diminished year by year. They are expensive to run. The entire industry is getting the life sucked out of it in many ways.

So I guess what I am saying is I think you will get what you want but it might take some time for the natural progression to take place. I think there is a shift to cater more to the "other" non-broadcast customers because they are growing in numbers.

About small cameras. I think the EX-1 and the new Canon XF-305 are pretty amazing cameras for their price. In many ways you already have products that fit the bill. The EX-1 will not get 50mbps 4:2:2 until the more expensive cameras get it. I don't know if the PMW-350 or 320 can be upgraded or if a new model needs to be created. If you add a Nanoflash the EX-1 is that camera and probably not that far off what Sony would sell the EX-(2) for.

Although small form factors are more difficult due to the bain of the electronics industry, heat. The smaller spaces just make it more difficult to perform a lot of processing and not overheat. CMOS has helped this but this fact does keep high quality cameras larger.

Patience. The camera makers have actually been quite nimble since the HD era started. Moreso than in the past. They know the entire story but they have to keep their business objectives in mind.

[David Issko]

Originally Posted by Mike Marriage

The Nanoflash is also a hassle to strap onto the camera.

Sorry Mike, but I totally disagree with you. I had my Nano mounted on my EX3 very easily and now on the back of my PMW-350. Very easy to mount & remove. Many mounting solutions available.

The only downside is that I have to physically move around the back of my 350 to see the NF screen, sometimes that can be an issue.

[Mike Marriage]

Originally Posted by David Issko

Sorry Mike, but I totally disagree with you. I had my Nano mounted on my EX3 very easily and now on the back of my PMW-350. Very easy to mount & remove. Many mounting solutions available.

The only downside is that I have to physically move around the back of my 350 to see the NF screen, sometimes that can be an issue.

So it does present some hassle then. It is one extra thing to get knocked, unplugged, draw power etc.

My point was I would rather buy an internal card for the 350, which wouldn't hinder the ergonomics at all. Sony are loosing money as sales of such items are instead going to Convergent Designs.

[David Issko]

Mike,

Sony have their (growing) camera structure and obviously they are sticking to it, contrary to our opinions & wish lists. Convergent Design saw a niche, a gap and they jumped in and filled it.

No, it is not a hassle at all having my NF mounted on the back of my 350. I'm rather proud of the combo and the dual record facility is great.

Best wishes

[Simon Wyndham]

In some respects I'd like to see recording separate from the camera. Like buying a battery system, have an industry standard clip on mount on the back. I know that to some this might be a pain as it is an additional cost, but like batteries the system could be moved from camera to camera. And lets face it, a lot of people are getting used to doing this anyway with their NanoFlash systems. So you'd have the up front cost of a recording device once. And if the quality and bitrate is high enough it should last a fair few years and through multiple cameras.

Even if this doesn't happen, the cat is now out of the bag now that Canon have put 50Mb/s on their cameras. I see the lower bitrates as a legacy of the past when tape could only cope with a certain rate. These days with storage being so cheap and cards being so fast, there isn't an excuse not to have 50Mb/s as a minimum spec. Even more so given a lot of the broadcasters requirements for HD.