DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/)
-   -   Sony announces the XDCAM EX (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/91594-sony-announces-xdcam-ex.html)

Harm Millaard April 23rd, 2007 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Standing (Post 665929)
Oh yeah, I understand the value of archiving to XDCAM disks. But, as a self-financed, independent documentary filmmaker, I'm going to have to think long and hard about spending $1100 to archive 44 hours of original footage onto XDCAM disk vs. the $132 it costs me to keep it on DV tape. That's almost an order of magnitude difference in archival costs.

Brian, the alternative would be to get a couple of 500 GB HD's @ $ 120 (current price) and store them. On a 500 GB you can store around 38 hours in DV quality and around 27 hours in HQ XDCAM-HD. The problem is longevity. Pro disks are far more secure than tape or HD's.

Kevin Shaw April 23rd, 2007 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Grant (Post 665893)
Where does this leave the Z1 and V1 cameras?

At twice the price it leaves sub-$4K HD cameras a healthy niche for anyone who doesn't need the next step up. For those who want something better but don't have big budgets, one XDCAM EX plus one Z1U could be a functional compromise, so still some Z1U sales there.

In any case, this definitely shakes things up by offering something better than other low-cost HD cameras at a relatively manageable price.

Paulo Teixeira April 23rd, 2007 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki (Post 665527)
Being new to the XDCAM technology, I've been wondering: why does the EX camera need such a bulky body? I mean - not having a tape or disc mechanism - it could basically consist of the lens and battery, with the chassis just big enough to accept two SxS ExpressCards... Can anyone shed some light on what the fat, boxy rear part of it must have room for, apart from those tiny PCB's?

Well as other people indicated, the size is very similar to the Z1u. Besides housing the memory cards and other electronics, another reason that I think the rear end couldn’t get smaller is because of the ˝” imagers.

Doug Graham April 24th, 2007 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Grant (Post 665893)
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but you couldn't even buy a SD camera with 1/2" chips and glass at this price point, ever.

I applaud your sentiment, but actually, the JVC GY-DV500 was initially available, with 14X removable servo-zoom Fujinon lens, DV format, 3 1/2" CCDs, for around $5K.

Mark Morikawa April 24th, 2007 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Grant (Post 665893)
Still this is one almost disruptive camera. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but you couldn't even buy a SD camera with 1/2" chips and glass at this price point, ever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Graham (Post 666332)
I applaud your sentiment, but actually, the JVC GY-DV500 was initially available, with 14X removable servo-zoom Fujinon lens, DV format, 3 1/2" CCDs, for around $5K.

impressive but technically DV format is not SD

Heath McKnight April 24th, 2007 01:32 PM

Anything that is considered 576 lines of vertical resolution (PAL) and below, including NTSC (480 lines of vertical resolution) is SD, standard definition.

heath

Brian Standing April 24th, 2007 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harm Millaard (Post 665966)
The problem is longevity. Pro disks are far more secure than tape or HD's.

Right. That's exactly why I want a RAID +1: to help protect against drive failure.

Chris Hurd April 24th, 2007 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Morikawa (Post 666578)
technically DV format is not SD

Incorrect. Technically DV format is in fact nothing more, nothing less than SD. Hope this helps,

Mark Morikawa April 24th, 2007 06:23 PM

haha thats right it is all SD but i meant the quality of Betacam SP is considered better than DV, correct?

Bill Pryor April 24th, 2007 07:19 PM

No. If you shoot DV/DVCAM and Betacam SP with the same camera, under most all conditions you'll like the look of the DV better. In the early days of DV, before there were 2/3" chip DV cameras, people were always comparing cameras like the PD150 to things like the BVW600, and of course the Betacam camera looked better. But when you compare apples to apples, DV usually wins.

Piotr Wozniacki April 25th, 2007 09:27 AM

differences between HDV and XDCAM HD@25Mbps
 
I've been reading a lot of great reviews and comments on how superior the XDCAM HD is to HDV, but have this question: both being long-GOP MPEG-2, how does the XDCAM HD at 25Mbps differ from HDV? All other things equal, should there be a difference in quality (theoretically speaking, as we don't have exactly the same cameras with same lens, chips etc. that would be capable of both formats).

Bill Pryor April 25th, 2007 09:33 AM

The fact that the XDCAM HD cameras are 1/2" chip cameras would make a difference even if all other things were equal. The way to check it out would be to shoot something with the F350 at the lower data rate, then at the 35mbs rate and compare the two shots and see what the difference is. Maybe somebody with the 350 would do that.

Harm Millaard April 25th, 2007 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Pryor (Post 667164)
The fact that the XDCAM HD cameras are 1/2" chip cameras would make a difference even if all other things were equal. The way to check it out would be to shoot something with the F350 at the lower data rate, then at the 35mbs rate and compare the two shots and see what the difference is. Maybe somebody with the 350 would do that.

Another way to look at it and possibly see how this relates to the different encoding schemes is to try the following:

1. Encode a DVD @ 5 Mbps CBR
2. Encode a DVD @ 5 Mbps VBR
3. Encode a DVD @ 7 Mbps VBR

HDV is CBR, XDCAM-HD is VBR, so 1 is comparable to HDV (25 Mbps), 2 is comparable to XDCAM-HD (25Mbps) and 3 is comparable to XDCAM-HD (35 Mbps).

This approach would leave all other factors out of the equation, including the different chip size.

Kevin Shaw April 25th, 2007 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki (Post 667160)
I've been reading a lot of great reviews and comments on how superior the XDCAM HD is to HDV, but have this question: both being long-GOP MPEG-2, how does the XDCAM HD at 25Mbps differ from HDV? All other things equal, should there be a difference in quality (theoretically speaking, as we don't have exactly the same cameras with same lens, chips etc. that would be capable of both formats).

As I understand it, the main difference between XDCAM at 25 Mbps and HDV at 25 Mbps is that the video is stored slightly differently, but it's essentially the same quality. Also, XDCAM uses uncompressed (PCM) audio while HDV uses MP3 audio at about 1/4 the data rate.

But what's the point of asking? If you had an XDCAM HD camera would you run it at the HDV data rate? Why not get the full benefit of the format by using 35 Mbps?

Thomas Smet April 25th, 2007 09:49 AM

Well in theory the 25 mbit mode is pretty much the same as HDV but we have to take into consideration that a high end camera may use a much better encoder chip.

Hardware encoder chips are like software encoders where some will do much better then others will. Uusally at higher bitrates it doesn't really matter but when the bitrates get lower a better quality encoder will make a huge difference.

This isn't a perfect science of course, but to me HDV seems like what a DVD would look like with a bitrate of 5.8 mbits/s. Some DVD encoders can look very good at 5.8 mbits/s while some start to drop in quality.

It is safe to assume that a HDV camera costing only $3,000 may not have the best encoder chip in the world while a camera that costs around $20,000.00 will have a much higher quality encoder chip.

35mbits/s to me is pretty close to what a DVD around 8 mbits/s would look like or pretty darn close to perfect.

It is the same reason why a 18 mbits/s HD broadcast can look very good. Some very high quality tens of thousands of dollar encoders are used to make sure the encoding is done well. That same 18mbits/s from a consumer grade encoder chip wouldn't look nearly as good.

Kevin Shaw April 25th, 2007 10:05 AM

Here's a more detailed answer to this question, from http://www.tapeonline.com/faq/xdcam-faq.aspx (I think this same material is also on the Sony web site):

"Q: Does 25 Mbps XDCAM HD recording use the same compression as HDV 1080i recording?

A: Yes. While XDCAM HD recording at 18 and 35 Mbps uses variable bitrate technology, the 25 Mbps alternative uses a fixed bitrate for compatibility with HDV 1080i editors and recorders. Basically the only difference is that HDV editors use Transport Stream (TS) and XDCAM HD uses Elementary Stream (ES). When the PDW-F70 recorder and the PDW-F30 player are fitted with the optional PDBK-102 MPEG Transport Stream (TS) card, these decks can be connected directly to HDV 1080i recorders, camcorders and compatible NLEs, via the i.LINK® HDV interface.*"

Paulo Teixeira May 2nd, 2007 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki (Post 664962)
I'm even more certain Sony would make a mistake of spoiling the almost perfect XDCAM workflow potential for the EX users, if they didn't make it possible to load off from the camera to the U1 directly (via USB, using camera software - without the need for a computer). With this capability, the lack of the Professional Disc in the camera would not create any problems, while allowing for the small and compact form factor. Once written to the U1 even in field, the video would get safely archived, and could than be worked upon in exactly the same, smart and efficient way the XDCAM can be by default. I hope Sony is listening - it's not too late!

Today I was tasked to videotape 4 groups of people using a client’s camera and instead of putting the footage onto tape, he told me to put it on DVDs using the VRD-MC3. It’s basically the quickest way to give each group a DVD of the practice presentations.

Is has a 2.5” LCD screen, fire wire input, analog inputs and memory card slots. Sony has already revealed that the successor of this will be AVCHD compatible so that you can put your HD files on standard DVDs without a computer.
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTE...ductSKU=VRDMC3
I was very impressed using the VRD-MC3. A Blu-Ray version of this with SxS card slots would make the perfect companion to the XDCAM-EX. Since Sony is reading that their are a lot of people that would be interested in something like this, I’m sure they wont disappoint.

Simon Wyndham May 3rd, 2007 02:10 AM

Quote:

how does the XDCAM HD at 25Mbps differ from HDV?
I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned that the audio on XDCAM HD is uncompressed.

Alex Leith May 5th, 2007 03:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simon Wyndham (Post 671853)
I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned that the audio on XDCAM HD is uncompressed.

But alas not 4 channel on the EX?

Simon Wyndham May 5th, 2007 03:31 AM

Quote:

But alas not 4 channel on the EX?
Nobody knows. I don't see why not though. All it would take is for it to record two stereo pairs input via a mixer, just like its bigger brother.

I think the 1/2" chips and manual lens on this camera show the sort of level of user that Sony are aiming at. So I would expect the functions on it to be less dumbed down than most cameras of this sort of form factor.

Steve Connor May 5th, 2007 07:24 AM

I got to see the EX briefly yesterday and had a very intriguing chat with a Sony guy who hinted there is a LOT more to be announced with this camera, especially in terms of price, lens and chip set. I was very impressed with the look and feel of it - all will be revealed at IBC apparently.

Alex Leith May 5th, 2007 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Connor (Post 673224)
...all will be revealed at IBC apparently.

I can't wait that long... ;-D

Piotr Wozniacki May 5th, 2007 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Connor (Post 673224)
I got to see the EX briefly yesterday and had a very intriguing chat with a Sony guy who hinted there is a LOT more to be announced with this camera, especially in terms of price, lens and chip set. I was very impressed with the look and feel of it - all will be revealed at IBC apparently.

Steve, can you tell us how much bigger and heavier than the Z1 the EX really is?

Steve Connor May 5th, 2007 08:12 AM

I wasn't allowed to handle it but it looked a little bigger but not much.

Gabe Strong May 5th, 2007 01:21 PM

"I got to see the EX briefly yesterday and had a very intriguing chat with a Sony guy who hinted there is a LOT more to be announced with this camera, especially in terms of price, lens and chip set. I was very impressed with the look and feel of it - all will be revealed at IBC apparently."

I've heard similiar hints and suggestions. I think Simon knows!! But he probably can't tell us. O well, I can wait. If this camera is what it sounds like......let's just say it will probably be the one to convince me to upgrade from the world of SD. I'm excited to see what they announce in September.......

Steve Connor May 5th, 2007 01:40 PM

I'd be very surprised if Simon knows knows!

Heath McKnight May 5th, 2007 06:42 PM

I got to pick it up at the Sony conference and it reminded me of the HVX in size and dimensions, and weighed about the same as the Z1.

heath

Gabe Strong May 5th, 2007 07:16 PM

Well, from what I understand the DVD on how to use the EX is going to be released in September and Simon is one of the people shooting for the DVD. And I think they are using the EX to shoot all of the material for the DVD....that's ONE of the reasons I think he may have some info on what the final camera will look like:
(see here)
http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=159

Paulo Teixeira May 5th, 2007 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe Strong (Post 673475)
Well, from what I understand the DVD on how to use the EX is going to be released in September and Simon is one of the people shooting for the DVD. And I think they are using the EX to shoot all of the material for the DVD....that's ONE of the reasons I think he may have some info on what the final camera will look like:
(see here)
http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=159

I’ve read that earlier today and if you click on the link after “more info can be found at” you’ll read this: “Using three 1/2" pickup devices with a native resolution of 1440x1080 (subject to change)” I think Sony’s main goal is to have 1920X1080 imagers with much better lowlight capabilities than the PD170 but they’ll stick with 1440X1080 if it’s not good enough.


It’s true that this camcorder will obviously have a bit rate of around 35mbps in one of the modes but the only surprise that it may have that worth any news is announcing that it’s also going to use the nearly developed 50mbps codec. I also think the Ferrari F355 I mean Sony F355 might use the 50mbps codec as well even though Sony may deny it. Anything’s possible until these cameras are released.

Theodore McNeil May 5th, 2007 08:50 PM

Connected to "DVD guide to the Sony XDCAM EX" site, there is a pretty good "Ten reasons why the XDCAM EX makes sense"

my favorite is #2

"The cost of the SxS Express Cards are much cheaper than other solid-state options and they can be bought over the counter in high street stores. ExpressCard is not a Sony invention, it is the PCMCIA industry standard that has replaced the older PCMCIA PC card. This is likely to ensure that prices will come down even faster in the future."

http://www.xdcamex.co.uk/aboutex.php

Harm Millaard May 6th, 2007 08:49 AM

It now appears Sony has decided on CCD's and not on CMOS chips. The one thing still unclear, at least possibly until the IBC in September, is whether these CCD's will use a Bayer RGB filter or a more efficient CMY filter, which would drastically improve low light capabilities and provide a better signal to noise ratio. This year's IBC will be interesting......

Piotr Wozniacki May 7th, 2007 02:37 AM

Is the XDCAM HD 24/25/30p written as PsF, or full discrete frames?

Alex Leith May 7th, 2007 03:08 AM

I believe it's PsF.

David Heath May 7th, 2007 03:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harm Millaard (Post 673608)
The one thing still unclear, at least possibly until the IBC in September, is whether these CCD's will use a Bayer RGB filter or a more efficient CMY filter, which .........

A couple of posts up, the spec is given as “Using three 1/2" pickup devices with a native resolution of 1440x1080 (subject to change)” , so I don't think it will be either Bayer or CMY filtering - these only apply to single chip sensors.

Aidan Wynne May 7th, 2007 06:17 AM

Is this camera coming out in November???

Geoff Murrin May 7th, 2007 03:59 PM

I wonder if this new cam can use any brand/after-market express card, or if it has to use the Sony SxS card?

Bill Pryor May 7th, 2007 05:10 PM

All the Sony literature has said it will use any off-the-shelf card. Something new: It's not proprietary. That's reason enough to buy it.

David Saraceno May 9th, 2007 09:29 AM

I didn't see a reference here, but does this shoot HDV in 4.1.1?

Is this a Long GOP cam?

Heath McKnight May 9th, 2007 09:52 AM

I believe it's either 4:2:0 or 4:2:2. NTSC DV is 4:1:1.

heath

Chris Hurd May 9th, 2007 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Saraceno (Post 675552)
does this shoot HDV in 4.1.1?

Since it's not a tape-based camcorder, by definition it's not shooting HDV.

HDV is a tape-based format. Don't confuse it with XDCAM EX or other formats just because they have similar data rates.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:53 PM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network