I will shoot some side-by-sides in 60i, 30p and 24p with the Z1u (in 60i, CF30 and 50i/CF25) and compare the noise. I'm now curious.

heath

Alex,

Why is the noise signature so important? (I'm a noob)

Thanks

Noise in an image is never a good thing. Chip size and the number of pixels have a lot to do with that. A small chip (1/4 inch or 1/3 inch, for example) that is HD means they're packing over a million pixels onto a smaller chip. This increases the signal-to-noise ratio.

I'll see if Graeme Nattress will comment further on this.

heath

Thanks Heath

How is the 1/2" F350/330 with noise?

To over-simplify things, all things being equal, the smaller the pixel, the noisier it has and the less dynamic range it has. You can get around this in two ways - build bigger pixels, or you can build better pixels. Pixels tend to get better year on year, but they also tend to get smaller....

Becuase when a pixel gets full, it clips, the size of the pixel in what charge it can hold determines the largest amount of light it can take. On the other hand, noise limits the smallest amount of light it can accurately record. Together, hand in hand, size of pixel and noise control dynamic range.

Graeme

Thanks as always, Graeme!

heath

And the way the analog signal from the CCD or CMOS is converted and processed by the camera; the various different techniques employed by the camera manufacturers to reduce the apparent noise in the image; and the video codec used in the recording; all influence the way the noise is displayed (the "noise signature").

Some cameras display the noise in dark areas. Some display noise over the entire image. Some display the noise as a fine grain. Some display the noise as blocks.

Of course what equates to an "attractive" noise signature is pretty much subjective. Personally I prefer something that looks more grainy but organic ("film-like"), than too clean but blocky ("electronic"). Again these are my subjective terms, and reflect my preference, but not necessarily anyone elses.

On the general scale of things the F330/350 are fairly noisy cameras in the shadows, but the gently granular quality of the noise combined with the 35mbit XDCAM HD codec looks really nice (in my opinion). I guess only time will tell whether the XDCAM EX will look more like the F330/350 or the V1...

Does anyone know if this camera will record proxies like the 330/350?

Can someone post a summary of what we know about the XDCAM EX camera?

3 x 1/2 " Sensors (CMOS?)
XDCAM format, 35 Mb/s (or is there a chance that this will offer 4:2:2 at 50 Mb/s?)
14x Fujinon lens
SxS (ExpressCard) flash memory storage - 2 cards
Price - under $8K
Launch date?

Thanks
Tom

I don't remember seeing a 14x Fujinon lens. The lens isn't interchangable, it's fixed. Might be a Zeiss...

heath

Thanks Heath. There was a post or two in this thread saying that the fixed lens was manufactured by Fujinon. See http://www.tapelessrev.com/xdcamnab2007.html

Tom

Here are some photos Chris Hurd took:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=91612

Nothing on the lens indicating who made it.

heath

It's definitely a Fujinon lens on the XDCAM EX, Heath. 'Saw it with my own eyes', as they say.

-gb-

I figured you did--when I was at the Sony NAB event, I didn't think to ask about the Fujinon, or look, for that matter!

heath

It is certainly a Fujinon lens, designed specifically for the EX.