Sony new HDV camera

Bryan Harley · March 20th, 2004, 12:30 PM

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...r-03_17_04.htm

Mike Rehmus · March 20th, 2004, 09:26 PM

Folks, it's probably time to move back to the subject or, if you wish, I can split the thread and move this part to another forum.

I'm the guilty party for it moving off-center.

Hans Kuipers · March 21st, 2004, 03:27 AM

Does HDV not require bigger CCD's ??? For instance to get the same good low light performance of the PD170p do they have to increase the size from 1/3" to 1/2" ????? What do you think?

Mike Rehmus · March 21st, 2004, 02:07 PM

The characteristics of the detectors, assuming they are CCDs in both cases, won't change. It is a pure math game . . . So many square units of pixel area vs the number of photons striking it. Each photon discharges the pixel area a little bit. That relationship's inherent in the Silicon from which CCDs are made.

You can pry the top off a memory chip and it will become a 2D light sensor, the CMOS sensor.

So yes, I expect that the HD cameras won't be as sensitive unless they up the size of the CCD.

Ignacio Rodriguez · March 21st, 2004, 03:37 PM

> So yes, I expect that the HD cameras won't be as
> sensitive unless they up the size of the CCD.

I agree. You should expect though smilar low light performance as you currently get from cameras that downsample the CCD image to DV resolution, though. Example: and 'HD' PDX10 could use the same CCD array it uses now since it already has a higher pixel count than it requires for SD. This is probably the case with most video cameras that do 'megapixel' photos, some probably have the ammount of pixels requiered for HD and perhaps even more.

I guess the solution will be to add faster lenses to the cameras. Since with the higher resolution of the format lens quality will be more critical than with SD video, we can probably expect optics to become the most expensive part of HDV cameras.

Jonah Lee Walker · March 22nd, 2004, 11:14 PM

And the JVC HD Camera, while on 1 CCD has an awful 36 LUX rating, so obviously it isn't as light sensative as the equivelent DV camera.

Mathew Evan · March 22nd, 2004, 11:59 PM

I suspect there is a very good chance that this camera will not be very light sensitive. Probably the equivalent of the pdx10.

Ignacio Rodriguez · March 23rd, 2004, 02:52 PM

> I suspect there is a very good chance that this camera
> will not be very light sensitive. Probably
> the equivalent of the pdx10.

Hopefully, it will have 1/30 progressive scan, so even if it has the same sensitivity of the PDX10 you will get better low light perfomance without resolution loss. You can do this on the PDX10 but because the CCD array is interlaced, you get line doubling when going below 1/60.

Also, it might have the same CCD array and still yield better low light images if it has a faster lens. Since it will cost more than twice as much as the PDX10, I will be expecting that.

Hans Kuipers · March 24th, 2004, 12:36 AM

I ust hope Sony will use 1/2" CCD image chips :-))))
I also understand that the current NLE edditing software like Pinnacle liquid blue, Adobe premiere collection, AVID xtreme etc. is not suitable for HDV !!! After one year of making my mind up wwhich cam and NLE software I want to buy (PD170p and adobe premiere) I have to start all over again.

David Gomez · March 24th, 2004, 01:16 AM

Why would someone buy a $5,000.00 camera without XLR connections?

If no XLRs, at least a balanced XLR connection similar to the new DVC30 from Panasonic with an external XLR box as an accessory.

Mike Rehmus · March 24th, 2004, 02:01 PM

I've now split this thread into 3 pieces.

Keep your postings on this part that remains in the Sony Forum to comments directly on the prototype camera.

If you wish to post on the editing aspects, go to the HDV Editing forum.

If you wish to post on the business aspects, please go to

The TOTEM Poll: Totally Off Topic, Everything Media > You know how they pick most B-movies? was: 24p HDV

March 20th, 2004, 12:30 PM	#16
Bryan Harley Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Fresno, CA Posts: 99	http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...r-03_17_04.htm __________________ "Who's scruffy lookin'?" http://www.amfproductions.com

March 20th, 2004, 09:26 PM	#17
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Folks, it's probably time to move back to the subject or, if you wish, I can split the thread and move this part to another forum. I'm the guilty party for it moving off-center. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

March 21st, 2004, 02:07 PM	#19
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	The characteristics of the detectors, assuming they are CCDs in both cases, won't change. It is a pure math game . . . So many square units of pixel area vs the number of photons striking it. Each photon discharges the pixel area a little bit. That relationship's inherent in the Silicon from which CCDs are made. You can pry the top off a memory chip and it will become a 2D light sensor, the CMOS sensor. So yes, I expect that the HD cameras won't be as sensitive unless they up the size of the CCD. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

March 21st, 2004, 03:37 PM	#20
Ignacio Rodriguez Contributor Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Santiago, Chile Posts: 932	> So yes, I expect that the HD cameras won't be as > sensitive unless they up the size of the CCD. I agree. You should expect though smilar low light performance as you currently get from cameras that downsample the CCD image to DV resolution, though. Example: and 'HD' PDX10 could use the same CCD array it uses now since it already has a higher pixel count than it requires for SD. This is probably the case with most video cameras that do 'megapixel' photos, some probably have the ammount of pixels requiered for HD and perhaps even more. I guess the solution will be to add faster lenses to the cameras. Since with the higher resolution of the format lens quality will be more critical than with SD video, we can probably expect optics to become the most expensive part of HDV cameras. __________________ Ignacio Rodríguez in the third world. @micronauta on Twitter. Main hardware: brain, eyes, hands.

March 22nd, 2004, 11:14 PM	#21
Jonah Lee Walker New Boot Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 19	LUX And the JVC HD Camera, while on 1 CCD has an awful 36 LUX rating, so obviously it isn't as light sensative as the equivelent DV camera. __________________ -Jonah Lee

March 21st, 2004, 03:27 AM	#18
Hans Kuipers Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 61	Does HDV not require bigger CCD's ??? For instance to get the same good low light performance of the PD170p do they have to increase the size from 1/3" to 1/2" ????? What do you think?

March 22nd, 2004, 11:59 PM	#22
Mathew Evan Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: United States Posts: 53	I suspect there is a very good chance that this camera will not be very light sensitive. Probably the equivalent of the pdx10.

March 23rd, 2004, 02:52 PM	#23
Ignacio Rodriguez Contributor Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Santiago, Chile Posts: 932	> I suspect there is a very good chance that this camera > will not be very light sensitive. Probably > the equivalent of the pdx10. Hopefully, it will have 1/30 progressive scan, so even if it has the same sensitivity of the PDX10 you will get better low light perfomance without resolution loss. You can do this on the PDX10 but because the CCD array is interlaced, you get line doubling when going below 1/60. Also, it might have the same CCD array and still yield better low light images if it has a faster lens. Since it will cost more than twice as much as the PDX10, I will be expecting that. __________________ Ignacio Rodríguez in the third world. @micronauta on Twitter. Main hardware: brain, eyes, hands.

March 24th, 2004, 12:36 AM	#24
Hans Kuipers Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 61	I ust hope Sony will use 1/2" CCD image chips :-)))) I also understand that the current NLE edditing software like Pinnacle liquid blue, Adobe premiere collection, AVID xtreme etc. is not suitable for HDV !!! After one year of making my mind up wwhich cam and NLE software I want to buy (PD170p and adobe premiere) I have to start all over again.

March 24th, 2004, 01:16 AM	#25
David Gomez Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Atlanta Posts: 50	Why would someone buy a $5,000.00 camera without XLR connections? If no XLRs, at least a balanced XLR connection similar to the new DVC30 from Panasonic with an external XLR box as an accessory.

March 24th, 2004, 02:01 PM	#26
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	I've now split this thread into 3 pieces. Keep your postings on this part that remains in the Sony Forum to comments directly on the prototype camera. If you wish to post on the editing aspects, go to the HDV Editing forum. If you wish to post on the business aspects, please go to The TOTEM Poll: Totally Off Topic, Everything Media > You know how they pick most B-movies? was: 24p HDV __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!