Thanks for that Greg. Yes I too have been spoiled, on a smaller scale, with the FU-1000 on my XL2. In my attempt to move up to HD, viewfinder resolution and accuracy might be a difference maker.

The FU-1000 option on the XL2 was such a smart business decision, I can't understand why it wasn't implemented on more prosumer type cameras. I know an HD version of the FU-1000 wouldn't come cheap, but I also know they'd at least have one customer right here regardless.

For the record, I have used the HVX200 and thought the resolution was unacceptable. Focusing with a 1/2" format is going to be even more difficult, so I'm hoping Sony has thought that through.

Here's to hoping someone at Sony is reading this post.

If Sony were to change the design to look like this protoype (bellow), I'd buy one in a heart beat. Should they decide to stick to the current design, I'd have to think about purchasing one. Yes, I'm a bit shallow when it comes to camera looks.

Looks like the battery would hit you right in the teeth...

Frankly, I much prefer the way the DCR-VX1000 hides the battery inside.

I'm really hoping that they put the camera on a diet before they release it. The FX-1/Z1U/AH1 are already bigger than I want to be using for a handheld camera.

The V1U/PD170/VX2100 are just about right. Anything larger really should be designed as a shoulder mount unit.

I think one thing people are overlooking about this camera is how it's truly groundbreaking in getting 1/2" chips inside it. This means the shallower depth of field that everyone is after by putting add-on adapters on it. This is a BIG deal and I'm glad someone (though surprised it's SONY) is doing something about what the market obviously wants.

It looks like a great camera and will definitely give the H1 a run for it's money, but for now, the H1 is out and doing pretty darn well on my shoots, while this one is an unnamed prototype.

Kevin

Going from 1/3" to 1/2" will indeed decrease dof, which is nice for the added possibilities, but it won't be that dramatic of a change. We're still far from 35mm film dof. But as mentioned before, if implemented well, this chip should give much better low light performances, which will certainly hit a home run amongst the wedding / event videography crowd. That IMO would be the main advantage of going 1/2".

On the DOF subject. I wasn't able to find the f-stop rating of the suggested fix lens anywhere. If it starts at F2.0 down to F4 the tele end, we haven't won much.
Anyone has more information on this?

Still exited!

tom

not to restate the obvious, but 35mm dof isn't the end-all be-all holy grail of imaging. These days, shallow DOF has become synonymous with high production value, but its hardly the only way to shoot. The marginal decrease in DOF over 1/3" chips IS useful to the codec in terms of reduced detail on "background" objects, the the difference is not extremely dramatic to the eye. Less bandwidth devoted to out of focus details means more of the codec's bandwidth can go towards capturing what you actually want.

Whats more important about the move to larger chips is the size and spacing of the imaging elements, and their ability to stay cool. heat=noise with chips, so the larger the chip, the easier it is to keep cool. Lower noise means better low-light performance, which is useful to more than just wedding/event shooters. The true holy grail of film production has been the quest for faster lenses, and faster (while still fine-grained) stocks, to allow shooting in more natural lighting situations. Kubrick's ULTRA fast lens for Barry Lindon wasn't about 1" deep DOF, it was about using practical candles AS the illumination without supplemental sources. The shift from 1/3" to 1/2" isn't huge, but all supporting technologies involved in these new cameras are improving, meaning that with each successive generation, we're getting tools that allow us to tell our stories more naturally. More sensitivity and faster lens, along with an industry standard storage protocol? Sounds like a winner to me. I'm excited to see how it looks on the market, this camera could potentially fulfill the needs of a LOT of productions. Hopefully SONY will sidestep the DOF and resolution hype and concentrate on the more important points in video/hd dreamworld - color response, dynamic range, low-light performance, lens performance (both interface and imaging).

what is the colorspace for XDCAM ? 4:2:0 ?? or 4:2:2

If this guy is 4:2:2 it will rock !

Thomas, looking at the picture here you can see a F1.9 marking near the iris ring. Whether or not this will stay the same on the final production unit nobody knows, but since it's a fully manual lense with manual iris control, I'd assume it will at least keep that value throughout the focal range.

BTW, there weren't any markings on the NAB prototype if I go by Chris Hurd's pics in this thread, so they might not have yet settled on something definitive on that front.

There seem to be two versions of the camera floating around. The prototype shown at the press conference, and the one I had in my hands for about 10 minutes. Although I don't remember exact values, I did look to make sure that all three... zoom, focus, and iris had proper markings on the lens. The unit I had also had the integral lens cover with an open/close lever on the back of the lens hood. When I look at Chris' pictures from the press conference, I see no such lever.

-gb-

I concur, 4:2:2 would be rockin'.

One of the Sony VPs at NAB said all the specs on this camera will be coming out in July.

He led me to believe that a few details (mainly price) of the camera hadn't been completely worked out yet.

Sony seem to be aiming the camera as a PD170 for Discovery, since they now accept XDCAM HD at 35 Mb/s. The 1/2" CCD should improve sensitivity.

Having been shooting with a Z1 today, looking at the picture of the proposed new camera, Sony seems to have avoided covering it in loads of useless buttons that get accidentally pushed.

A decent viewfinder would be good as well, the Z1 is terrible. It's only when you go make to shooting with a high end camera do realise how truly awful these prosumer viewfinders are. With HD the focus becomes a lot more critical and these LCDs tell you nothing unless you've got time to use the zoom in feature. Although, the JVC is the best of the bunch in this regard with its rather neat focus assist.

I must admit that I tend to dig the Z1 into my shoulder á la Canon and use the LCD screen like a V/F when handholding for a sustained interview shots. With mics etc fitted all these cameras (except the JVC and I know someone who added weight to the back end of the Canon H1 so it balanced on their shoulder) get very front heavy and the increasing camera weight isn't helping.

Also, if you want to use manual controls, the camera has to be supported when shooting hand held, usually it's a matter of hitting the auto-focus button on fast moving docs, otherwise you get camera wobble.

Theodore, I've read so many things left and right on this new cam that I don't know anymore which info comes from where, but I'm pretty sure I read it would be 4:2:0 (take it as speculation as I don't remember where I've seen this), meaning the same format and bitrates available in the older XDCAM HD cams. The fact it is said to shoot 18mb / 25mb / 35mb kind of confirms this.

It would not make sense to provide this camera as a 4:2:2 model, considering they just released a new high end XDCAM HD 4:2:2 recording at 50mbps VBR. Therefore you can probably assume it'll be 4:2:0 (which has been said to hold color info exceptionally well for such a low chromatic resolution).