SONY XDCAM Show in France

[Alain Chaix]

Hello,
I just saw this show this morning and was able to talk with an Engineer who spoke freely.
Here's what I learned, sorry in french, no time to translate it now

En ce qui concerne la XDCAM EX, j'ai retenu que :
- ce n'est pas parcequ'il n'y avait pas de motorisation (pas de bande) que cette appareil serait économe en énergie, l'electronique de la partie carte mémoire était très gourmande. Un peu moins quand même que le PCMCIA des P2.
- la sortie SDI (SD et HD) était bien en 10 bits (rien d'étonnant m'a t'il dit, vu que la norme SDI est sur 10 bits) mais que pour des raisons d'économie d'argent et de consommation électrique sur ce camescope, l'electronique qui gérait ce signal arrondissait ces calculs, d'où un signal réellement sur 8 bits avec 2 bits "vides".
- que de bons capteurs CMOS pouvaient être mieux que de mauvais capteurs CCD. Mais que dans ce cas précis SONY redéfinissait sa politique en matière de capteurs et qu'il reserverait à l'avenir les très bons CCD au broadcast et les CMOS au bas de gamme.
- que les CMOS de par leur nature ne produisaient pas de smear.
- que le bruit qu'ils généraient n'avait pas la même nature electronique et que donc il n'était pas perçu de la même façon et donnait la sensation d'être moindre.
- que les capteurs CCD analysaient une succession d'images pleines et donc offraient de meilleurs résultats d'affichage et de perception une fois l'image gonflée en 35 ou sur des moniteurs LCD.
- que les capteurs CMOS analysaient les images en la balayant (un peu comme les vieux tubes d'analyse) et donc révélaient leur potentiel sur des moniteurs à balayage (TV).
- que les capteurs CMOS du fait de ce mode d'analyse pouvaient créer des images avec des phénomènes de "jitter", c.a.d. des coupures horizontales lors de pano rapides (variations importantes et rapides du cadre dans le temps = le haut de l'image ne correspond plus au bas à la fin de l'analyse)
Le gars a relativisé ce phénomène en me rappelant qu'en 35 les opérateurs sont très prudents dans ce genre de mouvements pour d'autres raisons (faiblesse de la cadence d'images...)

En gros il m'a dit qu'il ne fallait pas s'attendre à des miracles vu le prix, l'encombrement de cette caméra et la recherche d'autonomie. Et encore faute de temps je n'ai pas pu le questionner sur le long GOP et le 4.2.0...

D'après une autre personne, apparemment les données seraient encapsulées en .mp4 et non .mxf pour une question de rapidité et économie d'energie....

[Alex Leith]

My French is exceptionally rusty... but a couple of points of interest...

Am I correct in understanding that the Engineer is implying that Sony's aim is CCDs for high-end cameras and CMOS for low-end cameras...?

And that he is saying that CMOS are better suited to output on scanned (tube) devices, rather than LCDs?

[Steven Thomas]

Well, even using google's english translation, it's almost unreadable.
There is info regarding the 10 bit SDI question.
It's hard to read, but it does give the opinion that it's 10bit with two "empty bits";
therefore really 8bit.

This is conflicting from the last "engineer" that shared this info.
I guess we'll have to wait and see ourselves. Regardless, SDI on a $6.5K cam is
still a good deal.

[Alex Leith]

Oh yes... online translation.

So it would appear to be the Engineers implication, that Sony are using CCDs for high-end gear (because it transfers well to 35mm and looks better on LCDs) and CMOS for lower-end gear. CMOS has no smear, but does have jitter. But good CMOS are better than rubbish CCDs.

Because of jitter we have to be "careful" with camera movements (more like film cam operators)... [does that mean no handheld?]

Also it's power-hungry because of the circuitry (although not as power-hungry as P2).

The SDI is 8bit packed with two empty bits to make 10bit. [you got there first Steven! :-D ].

[Steven Thomas]

I find this info a bit odd.
I realize everyone has their own opinions, but I have NEVER been to a show and have the reps talk negative about what they are promoting.

Was there one positive bit of info in this message?

Alain, who was the engineer you spoke to at the show?

[Alex Leith]

Perhaps he wasn't an engineer for Sony? ;-D

[Alain Chaix]

You have all made a good translation of my post. The engineer (i forgot his name) works for Sony. He worked on the new algorythm which deals with the skin details on HDCAM SR. A very interesting and honnest guy. I was really surprised by his "non commercial" way of mind.
Some positives things anyway about the XDCAM EX : the lens, the workflow, the size of the CMOS, the ergonomy.
To sum up : no miracles : it's a 6000 € camera with some good points and some compromises.

[Jamie Allan]

Whoever he was, he's probably lost his job if anyone from Sony reads this (Which they do) :)

[John Bosco Jr.]

Originally Posted by Jamie Allan

Whoever he was, he's probably lost his job if anyone from Sony reads this (Which they do) :)

Which he should because he is surely not a company man.

I find it odd that Sony would stick to CCDs for their higher end cameras as it has been documented that CCDs are not good sensors for high definition because of the nature of the chips (noise increases drastically as the resolution increases). As far as the film theory goes, 2/3rd inch CMOS sensors do just fine.

[Craig Seeman]

I have a hunch well be seeing more 1/2" CMOS cameras from Sony. Keep in mind these are "mid range" cameras. I'm not sure how quickly we'll see 2/3" F950 or F23 type CMOS cameras but I do think that'll happen in the next couple of years.

Originally Posted by John Bosco Jr.

Which he should because he is surely not a company man.

I find it odd that Sony would stick to CCDs for their higher end cameras as it has been documented that CCDs are not good sensors for high definition because of the nature of the chips (noise increases drastically as the resolution increases). As far as the film theory goes, 2/3rd inch CMOS sensors do just fine.

[Thomas Smet]

CCD's can't be all that bad if HDCAM is still the highend standard and all HDCAM cameras still use CCD's. There is a big difference between low quality CCD's and high quality CCD's. Just because smaller CMOS chips have done some pretty amazing things doesn't mean they are as good as a high quality 2/3" CCD.

While many like to think the EX1 will be a perfect match for the larger XDCAMHD cameras I do ot think it will be a perfect match. After all this is a $6,000.00 camera compared to a over $20,000.00 camera by the time you add a good lens. Some corners have to be cut with a price like that.

I also don't think this SONY guy said anything bad either. He just kept it real and calmed down the hype a little bit. The camera is what it is and I'm sure he knows what it is. People tend to hype up a new camera before it ocmes out and this guy sounds he is just trying to bring us back down to reality. It is a $6,000.00 camera and it acts like a $6,000.00 camera. Sure it is great but I think he is trying to tell us it isn't perfect so just don't expect it to be perfect for $6,000.00.

So why should this guy be fired for speaking the truth. He didn't lie and say the EX1 was a gift from the gods like some people want to think it is. He didn't trash the camera or SONY at all but only kept it real and spoke the truth. The last time I checked a company cannot fire you because you wouldn't lie for them.

[Ali Husain]

sometimes i don't understand the business world. if you knew i was going to lie to you about my product, you'd write off everythign i said. if you knew i'd tell you what was realy good and bad about it, you'd listen. if i make a good enough product then i dont' have to "sell" it to you. if i know my product is bad then i'm a cheat and a liar for tryign to sell it to you. sometimes i dont' understand the business world.

[Ray Bell]

we have a design Engineer that is famous for telling it the way it is....

we try to keep him away from the customer... :-)

not because he trashes the product but because he's technical and likes to discuss all of the dis-advantages of the present design... and he's just telling the way it is...

as a designer its his job to design to the latest hardware constraints....
and as a desinger its his job to communicate what he'd like to see improved for any future design considerations...

or there wouldn't be any forward improvements... but to a consumer it sounds like he's just dishing the product.

as a designer to a designer we always want to make our present design better....

as to CCD vs CMOS...
CCD's require more power, more power translates into heat, heat translates into thermal issues on the CCD that gets translated to the final image, to combat thermal issues takes a bigger camera body and thermal managment... more cost
in the end.... I like CCD for its buttery image.... its just great, but trade offs exist

CMOS requires less power, less thermal issues, actually cheaper to build in the FAB's, better FAB yeilds due to process equipment and no smear.... it has its on issues but most are more managable... the image to me is stark sharp.. but
you get used to it in no time...

[Steven Thomas]

I seriously doubt it's a one for one match for the XDCAM, but from what I'm hearing, it will make a great 'B" cam.
Well, we will know the "true" story soon.