Sony unveils the EX3 successor: PMW-300

[Alister Chapman]

No one is suggesting that this is designed to compete against the many large sensor cameras on the market. This is aimed at those that don't want shallow DoF. Those that need a camera that is easy to work with in run and gun as well as small multi camera shoots such as conferences or low cost studios. The EX3 was an incredibly successful camera, especially in emerging markets as it is a great all round camera. It's been used for everything from low budget corporate to high end BBC natural history. The PMW-300 will bring the EX3 up to date adding improved image quality including real 10 bit recording and output (something many of the large sensor cameras don't offer), better ergonomics and wifi streaming options. At the same time it retains the ability to use 1/2" and 2/3" Parfocal servo zoom lenses for normal applications or DSLR lenses for telephoto work such as natural history.
Much as I love using my F3 with it's interchangeable lens mount that allows me to use a B4 zoom, DSLR lenses or PL glass, there are still times where a 1/2" or 2/3" camera would be more appropriate and the PMW-300 is very attractive as it looks to offer good image quality and flexibility at a great price.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Al Bergstein

I have to tell you, I rarely shoot with the xf305 as the C100 is really a spectacular camera compared to a small sensor model. I didn't believe I could get as good a picture out of the 4:2:0 as the XF305 4:2:2 but I have to say it's damn close.

Help me understand what I am missing. I frankly might have gotten more worked up over a real successor to the Panasonic AF100/100A. ..........I'm not really interested in going back to a DSLR now that there are real large format sensor options in a camcorder. This PMW300 doesn't seem like one.

At the risk of repeating what Alister says, the PMW300 is aimed at a completely different market to the C100/AF100 et al. What may be seen as advantages of a camera like the C100 to one person may be seen as it's disadvantages to someone else - and vice versa.

For some types of work, shallow depth of field may be seen as desirable - for other types of work, it's a pain. For some types of work a long servo zoom is essential - try getting one that's affordable for such as a C100. And so on.

Obviously you're in the group who finds a large sensor format best suits your needs. Fine. The PMW300 isn't targeted at you. But there's another group who have very different needs, and that's who this camera is targeted at.

Whether it would be worth exchanging an XF305 that you've already got is up for debate. But if you need a new camera, and it's a choice of an XF305 or a PMW300, I'd go for the PMW300 any day due to the 1/2" chips, codec upgradability, form factor etc etc.

[Al Bergstein]

Yes, I'm really only posting because I am the type of customer I'm sure that Sony would love to have, as a small independent who does own a professional level camcorder like the PMW-300. I would agree that if I were going to consider replacing the xf305 today, and wanted the form factor of a camcorder I would be seriously considering the PMW-300 because of the larger sensor. But I guess my point was that I can shoot both an xf305 or a C100 any day that I shoot, and I find that I can get a pretty good DOF (shallow that is) with the C100 by using my NDs properly along with the choice of lenses. I'll not belabour the point further, I agree with the thread that it's a great update from Sony, especially for those who work with camcorders all the time. I do use my 305 when shooting performances and lectures style shooting, where a true zoom is useful. Don't you find it wild to hear people say that using a true parfocal zoom is so "70s" in it's look?

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Al Bergstein

Yes, I'm really only posting because I am the type of customer I'm sure that Sony would love to have, as a small independent who does own a professional level camcorder like the PMW-300. .......... I find that I can get a pretty good DOF (shallow that is) with the C100 by using my NDs properly along with the choice of lenses.

But Sony's offering to try to appeal to such as yourself is the FS700, isn't it? Or go a bit more upmarket to the F5?

I don't dispute that you may have valid reasons for deciding a larger format camera is better for your particular needs, but in that case why even post about the PMW300? It's intended for people with different requirements and needs to you, and it's them who find it of interest.

Up to now it's been a choice of 1/2" chips OR a fully approved codec in this class of camera. With the PMW200 and PMW300 you can have your cake and eat it.

[Dom Stevenson]

Reading these comments i'm reminded of a situation i found myself in 2 years ago. I was helping out a guy editing a doco he'd made about rappers in London. Most of the rushes were shot on the EX3, but some bits had a Canon 550d capturing the footage alongside the main camera.

The difference between the two cameras was night and day. Frankly, the EX3 looked like a 50p camcorder out of a box of Cornflakes next to the Canon. I got some colleagues to come and have a look too. All marvelled at the images the 550d produced, and commented how 3rd rate the Sony camera (costing vastly more) looked alongside it.

Don't get me wrong, i'm sure Sony have produced another superb piece of kit, but i will be astonished if this camera can match a 2 year old 550d.

Having said that, i've no doubt the Sony is a more useful all round tool, which of course is what it's intended to do.

[Matt Davis]

OTOH, when I got my 550D, then FS100, my two EX1Rs laid unused for ages. Then (around Olympics time) they came out of retirement, clients started asking for them again. Since then, they're used on all the run and gun jobs - great workflow, easy to shoot with, pictures that won't embarrass you. The Canon look is 'very Super16' and doesn't suit everything. It also sucks at chromakey and complex WB.

The EX1R? It's the camera you jump in the back of a taxi with when the producer says 'follow them!', or when you're diving into a job where nobody knows what's happening next. You can even get away with being an overenthusiastic amateur when you're shooting low key B-Roll (dodgy situations? Been there).

Because of what I shoot, I'm better served by owning a PMW-300 and an FS700 rather than a single F5, so let's celebrate what the 300 does best.

But my EX1Rs are still shooting well, so I'll have to wait....

[Gary Nattrass]

Looks like another good camera for broadcast and will compliment the 400 as B-cameras very nicely.

Just need some some more work to justify changing from P2 to the sony platform.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Dom Stevenson

Most of the rushes were shot on the EX3, but some bits had a Canon 550d capturing the footage alongside the main camera.

The difference between the two cameras was night and day. Frankly, the EX3 looked like a 50p camcorder out of a box of Cornflakes next to the Canon.

As an owner of a PMW320 and a Canon 550D I have to say I find that hard to believe, and it's not my experience.

For what it costs, I'm very pleased with the 550D, and frankly the quality is on a level that is hard to believe for the price. But compared side by side (and when DOF etc is not an issue) it's just not up to the PMW320, which is basically the same front end as the EX3. Not in basic image quality, though if you like shallow dof, then obviously it will give that. The 550D is much softer, and aliasing can be easily visible on moving edges, just for starters. I've even seen it alias quite badly on underwater footage, and that takes some doing owing to the softening effect of the water. (Or rather, everything suspended in the water. :-) )

I'm not doubting what you saw, but wonder if it was down to some factor not intrinsic to the camera.....?

Not viewing on full 1920x1080 screen?
Poor line up of EX3?
Errr, 550D just had a better cameraman than the EX3....?

[Jack Zhang]

Originally Posted by Matt Davis

OTOH, when I got my 550D, then FS100, my two EX1Rs laid unused for ages. Then (around Olympics time) they came out of retirement, clients started asking for them again. Since then, they're used on all the run and gun jobs - great workflow, easy to shoot with, pictures that won't embarrass you. The Canon look is 'very Super16' and doesn't suit everything. It also sucks at chromakey and complex WB.

The EX1R? It's the camera you jump in the back of a taxi with when the producer says 'follow them!', or when you're diving into a job where nobody knows what's happening next. You can even get away with being an overenthusiastic amateur when you're shooting low key B-Roll (dodgy situations? Been there).

Because of what I shoot, I'm better served by owning a PMW-300 and an FS700 rather than a single F5, so let's celebrate what the 300 does best.

But my EX1Rs are still shooting well, so I'll have to wait....

Couldn't agree more, EX1Rs are perfect run-and-gun cameras. I'm gonna be waiting for the XAVC variants to be coming out with improved sensors before I even consider selling my EX1R.

[Alister Chapman]

I have to agree with David.

I have a couple of 550D's. I got the first one following all the hype. Used it for a few shoots and then relegated it to the role of time-lapse camera (for which it is excellent). I find the 550D very soft, full of aliasing and moire and with terrible skew and jello. I guess at times the aliasing and dodgy edges make it look sharp. It does do shallow DoF well, which is just as well as it's only by having the majority of the frame out of focus that you hide all the problems. I only rarely use the 550D now, my pocket sized NEX5 is better but even that only gets used as a C camera or for shooting on holiday or where I shouldn't be shooting.

On a TV sized full HD monitor the 550D just looks soft and crude compared to an EX.

One thing I do see at the workshops I run is that those using large sensor cameras have to think much harder about their shots due to the critical focus issues. DSLR shooters in particular often have to work very hard due to the less than optimum viewfinder outputs. Because they are concentrating on their shots, they tend to be framed well and nicely composed. Meanwhile the EX (or similar) shooters can be lazy, focus is easy and they just "spray paint" shoot with the camera with little thought for composition just because getting an image is so easy. If the EX shooters took the same care to craft each shot their results would be so much better.

[Alister Chapman]

At the height of the DSLR craze we hired Philip Bloom to shoot some beauty shots to go in an air show video we were producing. He had free range to do what he wanted for 2 days. At the end of the two days we had enough footage for about 2 or 3 mins of the final 2 hour cut. Yes it looked good and was a nice contrast to the normal air show footage. But thank goodness we didn't try to cover the whole show that way, the final video would have only been 10 mins long.

[Buba Kastorski]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

thank goodness we didn't try to cover the whole show that way, the final video would have only been 10 mins long.

Hey Alister,
this is probably got nothing to do with the camera, ah?

[Alister Chapman]

Not the individual camera but the style of shooting with very shallow DoF. There is a place for big sensors as well as small sensors.

[Galen Rath]

Just viewed "Ride the Divide" which was shot with an EX1 and an older tape-based Sony as backup. Looked super. These cameras are alive and well.

[Jack Zhang]

Might have been overlooked in our discussion, but the DC IN is outside the battery compartment again! Hot swapping BP-Us with the AC Adapter in or hot swapping V-Lock or Anton Bauer by means of a BP-U installed is possible again!

And unlike the EX1, EX3, and 200, there looks to be one extra ND slot. Less reaching for the shutter to open the iris up for certain interviews now!