Will EX-1 be leaps and bounds better than HVX? [Archive] - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking

insanityfw

11-07-2007, 09:09 PM

________________
BTW - "irregardless" is not a word. "regardless" is what you were shooting for. while were here just as a side note, neither is "supposebly" or "heighth"

Man, one of my pet peeves is people that feel righteous enough to correct the spelling and grammar of people that they don't even know. If the grammar and spelling is so bad you don't understand what's being said; that's an issue. However, if you understand what's being said then shut the hell up or go spend your time on a spelling and grammar forum.

We're living in a world of fast-paced forum posting, which is a pretty casual deal and prone to many mistakes. This isn't like writing a thesis.

I'll stop now before I get heated up.

SPZ

11-08-2007, 12:09 AM

I just got my HVX last week. Then I read about the EX1 and I must say, on paper it looks good. But somehow I don't see it as being leaps and bounds better than the HVX or Canon for that matter. But certainly after spending this kind of cash, one would hope that one made the right decision and won't agonize over it night after night. Or would he....? Yeah, I probably will.

Haven't seen the EX in real world situations, but making an educated guess (looking at the specs of camera. codec, lens, etc.)
I would say:

Straight out of the camera, recorded to XDCAM EX format- No, it won't be leaps and bounds better.

Recorded to the upcoming Convergent Design Flash recorder (100mbps+ mpeg2 intra at 4:2:2) trough HD-SDI- Probably yes.

6500$ plus convergent designs recorder ($5000)= $11500 for full HD 4:2:2 at 160mbs mpeg2- This on paper blows the HVX out of the water.

EDIT- Hey, guys, take it easy :)

gunleik

11-08-2007, 12:46 AM

What is the point of development if things doesn't develop?

The HVX is a mean beast, but initially I couldn't figure why Panny left good things out, particularily HD-SDI.

I still hate that!
But it has made business sense.

If one - just for a sec - stops looking at the HVX as the ultimate 16mm replacement cam, but more like the ultimate PD-150/170 killer for eng, then the picture seems... less muddy -;)

This is the market where thousands, not hundreds of cameras are sold.
And you defenitely do not want an HD-SDI tap for that quickie 5 on the streets interview...

The EX addresses that same market, with even better specs, for that market...
And this is the way they make money.

So, if panny doesn't come up with a HVX-250, next round goes to Sony.

Then you have more disruptive tchnologies and companies out there...

Just my 2c

Gunleik

harddrive

11-08-2007, 02:43 AM

I think the key is "on paper" it looks good, but like you said probably not "leaps and bounds better" than the HVX.
Well, I recently had the opportunity to see both in close proximity at a trade show, so my thoughts are a little bit more than "on paper".

I'm sorry, Morpheus_23 - my conclusions were that on the face of it, in certain key areas it really is "leaps and bounds better". Most notably sensitivity and the manual lens.

Long GOP? Well, I-frame may have advantages on paper, but it comes at a price. Long GOP, and the bitrate savings it brings, is at last making solid state working viable for a lot more people than P2 and DVCProHD currently can. From what I've seen, the advantages of the lower S/N of the EX and it's manual lens far outweigh the long-GOP/I-frame issue. If long-GOP issues really were that crucial to me, I wouldn't be looking at any camera with 1/3" chips.

I may not instantly trade an HVX in just to get an EX, but faced with getting one or the other at the moment, it would have to be the EX.

Morpheus_23

11-08-2007, 05:50 AM

I'm sorry, Morpheus_23 - my conclusions were that on the face of it, in certain key areas it really is "leaps and bounds better". Most notably sensitivity and the manual lens.

No need to be sorry. I can return my HVX and exchange for the EX. I just won't have anything in the interim. I'm still tossing it around.

harddrive

11-08-2007, 06:44 AM

No need to be sorry. I can return my HVX and exchange for the EX. I just won't have anything in the interim. I'm still tossing it around.
In which case my strong advice would be to go back, take the HVX with you, and run them up side by side, with the ability to see the outputs on a good monitor.

In particular, point them both somewhere not very well lit, ideally so you are forced to use gain. Then make up your mind.

And please do report back! :)

David S.

11-08-2007, 09:33 AM

Man, one of my pet peeves is people that feel righteous enough to correct the spelling and grammar of people that they don't even know.

I'll stop now before I get heated up.

Why I understand your "heated up" feeling, I welcome these observations. We are professionals here, and communicating issues of importance, especially to clients and on a troubleshooting board has to be done clearly.

I might be in the minority, but not all clients are the same. So it's always better to go with the highest possible denominator -- at least for me and I suspect others.

But it's your business, public presentation, and call.

Stevet

11-08-2007, 03:30 PM

This may be a tough decision for many, especially on a DVXUSER forum, but technology has been impoving over the last couple years.

The HVX200 is capable of producing some nice stuff. Just take a look around on this forum for all the nice stuff shot on the HVX200

Wer'e hearing from several current sources that the EX1's effective ASA is 800. This is real sensitive for a small HD camera. As hardrive mentioned, this should be decent in low light. This asset along with a camera capable of delivering fullo raster 1920x1080P and its resolving ability of 1000 lines, is going to be one heck of a camera.

Also, I'm also hearing that the SDI is capable of TRUE 10 bit. If this is the case, this benefit will open the doors to many of the "on the fence" buyers.
Also, the 1/2 sensors should allow a bit tighter control of DOF.

Having said this....
I doubt many HVX200 users will be selling their cam to buy the EX.
The HVX200 offers a lot. When used under controlled lighting, the HVX200 can produce some nice stuff.

puredrifting

11-08-2007, 03:43 PM

Wow, if that's true, 800 ASA, that is a big deal. I will reserve judgement on the EX-1 until I can shoot with one.

I would hate to have to switch systems though. What is the FCS2 support for the format(s) that this camera shoots?

Dan

Alex.Mitchell

11-08-2007, 03:43 PM

You know, I'd be really psyched about the EX if it didn't have a rolling shutter. Wobbly footage is balls on toast. I like everything else, but the wobbly footage makes it a no go for me.

P.S. If you do the math, the 1/2" chips in XDCAM cameras only have a slightly larger surface area than Super 8, so the DoF characteristics should be roughly equivalent. Check out some S8 DoF tables if you wanna get an idea of what your footage will look like.

puredrifting

11-08-2007, 03:51 PM

Alex, is that confirmed? Someone has definitively stated that the EX-1 has the rolling shutter? Where did you verify that?

Dan

Alex.Mitchell

11-08-2007, 04:01 PM

Yeah, Mikko Wilson reported on it a while ago when he saw the camera at IBC. He said it was only slight, but wobble is still wobble.

puredrifting

11-08-2007, 04:49 PM

Oh I agree. I have seen the rolling shutter issue with the HV-20, it's not pretty. Okay, I am siding with you, I don't care how good the rest of the camera is, that is a limitation I can't deal with.

I was shooting helicopters flying around last week, I am heading to Florida to shoot boats and people in the water acting with lots of movement, can't deal with issue like that.

Thanks for the heads-up.

Dan

Stevet

11-08-2007, 05:05 PM

True, he said it was slight, but he a also mentioned it wasn't really apparent.

Alister looked for this and said it was not apparent in normal playback.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=755516&postcount=46

Also, let's not forget that the RED uses a rolling shutter.
I'm not hearing many bailing on the RED for this.
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=4678

harddrive

11-08-2007, 05:35 PM

Oh I agree. I have seen the rolling shutter issue with the HV-20, it's not pretty. Okay, I am siding with you, I don't care how good the rest of the camera is, that is a limitation I can't deal with.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. There are rolling shutters and rolling shutters. Don't judge all by the performance of one.

Hardly surprisingly, cheaper cameras show bad artifacts due to it, more expensive ones far less so. I believe the issue is due to data transfer rates, cheap=slow=takes a whole frame to read a frame. (Not good.) Expensive=fast=frame read out quickly and problem greatly reduced.

puredrifting

11-08-2007, 06:11 PM

I think I need more education on rolling shutters and CMOS drawbacks and advantages. Isn't the main thing with CMOS the elimination of halos and trails when the imager overloads? The results I have seen (yep, only on the cheapo HV-20) were distorted bent straight lines on rapid pans and camera movement.

Just as I have experienced nasty pixillation on rapid pans and movment on various HDV products but many say they can't see any artifacting. I guess we all see different things just as in the HVX. Some see nasty digital noise, some see 500 ASA S-16 film grain, it's all in the eye of the beholder.

I would still be interested in testing the EX-1 when it becomes available. I think an EX-1 vs. HVX shootout would be a great article. Perhaps I just don't understand enough about the EX-1 to make an intelligent evaluation at this point?

Dan

Christopher Barry

11-08-2007, 08:38 PM

Anders Holck provides a good visual representation here (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=34857&postcount=53) of the difference in function between rolling shutter and mirror shutter on a film camera. The HVX, when using shutter angle, is supposed to be similar to a film camera, as I understand the function. I am not sure if the HVX does what it does, digitally, or by some physical/optical method, whilst the HVX's CCD takes a snap shot of all the pixels at the one time. I understand the Dalsa 4K camera employs a physical shutter in front of the CCD.

I wonder if repositioning and turning a CMOS chip 90 degree counter-clockwise would improve rolling shutting issues, whilst not eliminating them completely? :D

Elton

11-08-2007, 10:19 PM

Isn't the main thing with CMOS the elimination of halos and trails when the imager overloads?J

The absensce of vertical smear is a big improvement, particularly compared to the nasty smear that can happen with pretty much all of the CCD-based sub$10K HD cameras.

harddrive

11-09-2007, 02:19 AM

The results I have seen (yep, only on the cheapo HV-20) were distorted bent straight lines on rapid pans and camera movement.

..........., it's all in the eye of the beholder.
Imagine going to order a beefburger. What do you think you are going to get served up?

The basic description tells you roughly what to expect, but (in my experience) what gets served up out of the freezer in a cheap cafe is a very, very different product to what an expensive restaurant may serve.

Same with much video technology. All rolling shutters are not equal. Don't judge expensive ones (eg Red) by your experiences with cheap ones.

puredrifting

11-09-2007, 08:04 AM

interelectronix

11-09-2007, 09:25 AM

I understand your thoughts Morpheus_23 I bought my HVX 2 weeks ago.

my 10 reasons for the HVX:

1. it is relyable and solid build because it is quite long in the market. I have had too many early adopters trouble in my past. and there is always a drawback in the first rev. I know this for sure we are doing hardware development for quite a while.
2. strong forum with a lot of posts. anything I want to know I get in a couple of hours.
3. a lot of support material Bootcamp DVD´s from Barry , Workflow from Noah. etc.
4. I never bought a CMOS cam before and was a bit afraid of. perhaps this is weird.
5. NLE support from the first day on. I use FCP 6
6. I don´t need SDI out
7. DVCPRO is a codec you can cut extremly fast even on not so high end hardware.
8. 4:2:2 color
9. I will shoot in 720/24pn the codec size advange is not a so big deal to me
10. the 1700 Euro difference between the HVX and the EX1 I will buy a pretty good lighting kit

my conclusion after the 2 weeks:

The EX1 ist a amazing cam - without a doubt.

But I would not trade my HVX in for the EX1. the HVX is a beast but if you know how to tweak (tame) all those settings you get amazing pictures out of it.

Morpheus_23

11-09-2007, 12:55 PM

Thanks for the comments and much appreciated input. I have decided to keep the HVX. I really like the features on the HVX that aren't on other cams. And the overall quality of the HD is very good.

Stevet

11-09-2007, 05:21 PM

Yes,
well, you really can't go wrong with the HVX200. There's great resources here that can offer a lot of info on getting the best out of the HVX200.

BTW, the RED is really stirring things up. This is one heck of a camera and will only improve.

Barry_Green

11-09-2007, 05:29 PM

So far, I have heard nothing but positives about Red. Frankly, I didn't even know that the Red had a rolling shutter. Must all CMOS cameras use a rolling shutter, is that how they work or could a CMOS based camera use the same kind of shutter that a single CCD camera uses?

D

No, CMOS could incorporate a global shutter if the manufacturer wanted to design the unit that way. But it's a more expensive option, and CMOS is all about cheaper manufacturing, so nobody makes a global shutter, they're all rolling.

THoff

11-09-2007, 06:22 PM

By all accounts, the RED also has a rolling shutter. If it is possible to create a non-rolling CMOS shutter, I would have thought that they would have opted for that option.

harddrive

11-09-2007, 07:06 PM

By all accounts, the RED also has a rolling shutter. If it is possible to create a non-rolling CMOS shutter, I would have thought that they would have opted for that option.
No doubt they would have done if all rolling shutters gave the same problems. But a better one doesn't, so why spend money changing something that is giving a good result?

Stevet

11-09-2007, 07:55 PM

There are benefits, smear is one of them.
Barry's own examples show this:

CMOS
http://dvxuser.com/jason/CMOS-CCD/CMOS-smear.JPG

CCD
http://dvxuser.com/jason/CMOS-CCD/CCD-smear.JPG

Once again, like hardrive has stressed, all rolling shutters are not equal.

harddrive

11-10-2007, 03:15 AM

Once again, like hardrive has stressed, all rolling shutters are not equal.
As, for that matter, neither are all CCDs!!

The smear shown there is nowhere near as bad as shown by early chips, even on the early pro CCD cameras. Some things shouldn't be generalised about, and whilst rolling shutters can be bad news, that's not true in general.

MikeGunter

11-10-2007, 08:00 AM

Hi all,

The EX should rock and sock. I'm waiting for some objective reviews and likely will be for another few weeks.

I don't think there's anything that is must have that makes me jump ship from the HVX. Geez, it's more than this cowboy can handle anyway.

Andrew Brinkhaus

11-10-2007, 08:46 AM

For everyone out there unfamiliar with this new camera from Sony, check out this review by Nigel Cooper.

http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=171

David S.

11-10-2007, 09:39 AM

Some have questioned the objectivity of that review

The guy is wearing a Sony shirt.

MikeGunter

11-10-2007, 10:41 AM

Some have questioned the objectivity of that review

The guy is wearing a Sony shirt.

:laugh:

That doesn't take too much thinking, huh?

It only makes sense that any "news" that comes out prior to January or February isn't really "news", but really releases - and there's a big difference between the two.

I think the thing can be a great camera in a world of great cameras. But I would like to see it with an objective eye.

Tzedekh

11-10-2007, 10:52 AM

No, CMOS could incorporate a global shutter if the manufacturer wanted to design the unit that way. But it's a more expensive option, and CMOS is all about cheaper manufacturing, so nobody makes a global shutter, they're all rolling.Also, from what I've read, global shutters require additional circuitry, making global-shutter CMOS chips significantly larger than rolling-shutter ones for any given pixel count.

Andrew Brinkhaus

11-10-2007, 11:11 AM

I didn't say anything about the review being biased or not, it is simply a review of some of the features of the camera, an easy way to check out some of the features and functions.

Some have questioned the objectivity of that review

The guy is wearing a Sony shirt.

David S.

11-10-2007, 01:28 PM

Andrew:

I've done dozens of product reviews. If it a review, then it has to be objective in my view.

That means objective. Otherwise, it is an advertisement.

But that is my view.

When the reviewer states:

"I just want to point out at this stage that the following information is not designed to ruffle any feathers or upset anyone, it is simply the truth and I am a firm believer in giving DVuser readers the brutal facts so they can draw their own conclusions; no glossy re-hashed press-release reviews or articles here. If the following information upsets any current P2 owners/users, for this I apologise, I'm simply putting across the facts."

I think those "FACTS" are his "OPINIONS."

Barry_Green

11-10-2007, 02:14 PM

Read the manual last night. Sony's own manual has a section on CMOS issues, and they point out that yes you're going to experience the partial exposure and skew/wobble effects. They also list another one, white flecks in the video. They say "these are not defects".

So take that however you want, but this optimism that the EX1 won't exhibit rolling shutter artifacts seems unwarranted when their own manual tells you it will.

tmnt

11-10-2007, 02:16 PM

The cam looks very interesting, can't wait to see some footage. Some of the design seems a bit haphazard though, like the xlr placement and how far the onboard mic come over the lense (see Nigel Cooper's review for pics).

I think this will be a great (lowlight) wedding/doco camera.

jjb

11-10-2007, 02:21 PM

I've just found a German review trying to compare the Sony PMW-EX1 (pre-series - problems with auto iris) with the HVX200. Unfortunately it's in German. Content in a nutshell: DOF, wide angle, lowlight, color rendering.

http://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test/Erste-Shots-mit-der-Vorserie--Sony-PMW-EX1.html

LuckyStudio 13

11-10-2007, 03:27 PM

In all fairness, Sony also warned about Flickering and Aliasing, which are common problems in CCD sensor camera too on the same page.

If anyone wanted to refer the manual, its on page 116.

quote from manual

"White flecks:
...fine white flecks may be generated on screen in rare cases, caused by cosmic rays, etc.....

: when operating at high environmental temp
: when you have raised the master gain (sensitivity)
: When operating in Slow shutter mode
"

Read the manual last night. Sony's own manual has a section on CMOS issues, and they point out that yes you're going to experience the partial exposure and skew/wobble effects. They also list another one, white flecks in the video. They say "these are not defects".

So take that however you want, but this optimism that the EX1 won't exhibit rolling shutter artifacts seems unwarranted when their own manual tells you it will.

harddrive

11-11-2007, 04:34 AM

"White flecks:
...fine white flecks may be generated on screen in rare cases, caused by cosmic rays, etc....."
So what are we saying? That this might not be the ideal camera to take on interplanetary expeditions? S*&t! I'd better start looking all over again.

MikeGunter

11-11-2007, 07:08 AM

So what are we saying? That this might not be the ideal camera to take on interplanetary expeditions? S*&t! I'd better start looking all over again.

Hi,

I'd hate to have anything that the company gave a disclaimer upfront that blamed on cosmic rays:grin:.

mikkowilson

11-11-2007, 07:43 AM

You guys might want to research cosmic rays a little more. Here's a clue: It's not just an "outer space" thing.

- Mikko

MikeGunter

11-11-2007, 08:26 AM

You guys might want to research cosmic rays a little more. Here's a clue: It's not just an "outer space" thing.

- Mikko

My point is I don't think I can control 'em.

At least I don't think there is a cosmic defector shield at the Wal-mart that's going to protect the camera.

(Although there was a guy with some tinfoil on his head in the parking lot that was talking about it.)

I haven't a clue how bad the problem is, or if it is even a thing to worry about - it might be like a one a one in a million thing that Sony was being really big in owning up to (yeah, right), but when a major company puts the disclaimer up front as a warning, that doesn't seem, well, promising.

If cosmic rays are about, what else is up?

Stevet

11-11-2007, 08:58 AM

Let's face it, if someone wants to dig deep into ALL of these cams, I'm sure they can find faults. This is even true with RED. It really depends on how often these faults can be viewed. If faults are only viewed during .001% of the time, IMO they are probably not an issue.
The bottom line is.... Does the footage and camera capabilities serve your needs?

I'm hearing the EX1 has decent sensitivity and produces clean footage.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=773529&postcount=31

Again, as I mentioned before, the EX1 is no reason someone should bail on the HVX200. The HVX200 has quite the feature list and produces some real nice stuff.
Does the HVX200 have its faults, yes it does. I know this goes without saying, it's really a matter of what faults you can live with, and what faults you can not.

David S.

11-11-2007, 11:15 AM

I'd don't dispute that all cams have strengths and weaknesses. However, I do not believe the provided review is entirely objective.

Stevet

11-11-2007, 11:46 AM

Well, your entiled to your beliefs.

David, were you refering to Nigel Cooper's review or what Jody Eldred mentioned on my link above?
I guess it's possible, but based on his credetials, I doubt it.
It's not like his only income is from one source. Jody has a lot of creditials
that stem from all major television networks, including an Emmy award and DGA nomination.

Eldred has worked on ABC News "Nightline" series, "The Iraq War: Fox 2/5". He has shot and directed hundreds of documentaries and news stories around the world for ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, the BBC, and National Geographic, including programs such as 20/20, PrimeTime Live, Good Morning America, Dateline NBC, 48 Hours, Frontline, Oprah, and The Tonight Show. His work also includes high definition and video shoots for CBS' "JAG", "NCIS", and NBC's "Medium".

I work with another videographer who has the RED coming next month.
He feels the same way as I do when it comes to manufactures. We could care less who produces the gear as long as YOU are happy with it's abilites and performance.

You are right though, just as in the HVX200 rollout, there's a lot of speculation, but one nevers knows for sure until they get THEIR own hands on one.

Since we've ordered two (for now), I guess I'm going out on the limb this time.

MikeGunter

11-11-2007, 12:16 PM

Hi Steve,

It's quite possible that the mysterious "white flecks" are also known as "grain".:Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

What I was getting at and still maintain is that any early reports written prior to say January/February are likely written by people who are at the very least 'friendly' to Sony, regardless of how well honored or bestowed they are. In fact, Sony would like to seek the more honored or bestowed of them out to put the cameras in their hands. Some, if not all, have outright vested interests.

What's tough is that even the trades have a stake in what they print, too. A bad review puts their advertising dollars at risk.

The EX1 looks great. But I'm certainly going to let others beta test it.

Stevet

11-11-2007, 01:14 PM

The EX1 looks great. But I'm certainly going to let others beta test it.

Hmmm.
That's true with EVERY thing ever sold and marketed.

Well, believe me, I'm not basing my opinion on one persons review last spring. :happy:

Also, I sure remember the immense hype and preorder sells for the HVX200.
It's all marketing. Some may buy, some may not, and some may buy unseen such as the HVX200 and every other camera.
I had access to an HVX200 to test and dropped out of the preorder list. Who knows, If I don't like the EX1, it's off to Ebay it goes!
LOL
At 6500. I'm willing to find out, especially since it offers 4:2:2 10bit via SDI.

Barry_Green

11-11-2007, 01:35 PM

I know this goes without saying, it's really a matter of what faults you can live with, and what faults you can not.
That's all I've been trying to say. Can you live with the wobble and partial exposure effects? or not? For some uses it'll be fine, for others it'll be problematic. Just go into it with your eyes open. The wobble is there, the rolling shutter is there. It's been confirmed by firsthand reports, it's been mentioned in their manual, yet people still want to believe that it won't have those issues.

If you think the rolling-shutter issues are not going to be a problem, then by all means go forward full-steam-ahead. If the type of things you shoot will be compromised or ruined by a rolling shutter, well, better you find out now before a) sinking a lot of money into a system that won't work for you, and (worse) b) having footage ruined.

Just know what you're getting into.

Stevet

11-11-2007, 01:46 PM

Well, It's back to not all rolling shutters are created equal, just like everything else.

If it's so bad, help me understand why RED went with it? I'm sure it was not the cost.
Having said that, there were many who frowned upon hearing the RED has the rolling shutter.

Everything has its limitations. I guess it's the old "pick your poison". Many of those who frowned on
the Red's shutter, also placed an order. I guess they choose their poison. LOL

I'm not a fan of CCD smear. I recall the HVX200 faired OK with smear, better than the HD100, that's for sure.

Barry_Green

11-11-2007, 02:33 PM

Red went with a rolling shutter probably for the same reason everyone else does -- cost. These are all low-cost options. I mean, the Red level of performance has been available elsewhere, but never anywhere near the price level. The EX1's performance matches the performance of their existing 1/2" products, but what's the difference with the EX1? it's 1/4 the price. And the HV20 -- would anyone seriously even pay attention to it if it was $3,000? Of course not. It garners attention because it's under $1,000.

With that said, Red had worse rolling-shutter issues early on. They addressed it and fixed it as they could. Some still remains -- Jim has said that there is still some skew in the image. Enough to matter to people? We'll see. Maybe they've overcome it to the point where it's not an issue for most people?

In any case, the EX1 is due on the market in a week or two. Soon enough we'll see how much of an issue it really is (or isn't). But there's some there, that's already been confirmed.

Stevet

11-11-2007, 02:43 PM

In any case, the EX1 is due on the market in a week or two. Soon enough we'll see how much of an issue it really is (or isn't). But there's some there, that's already been confirmed.

Agreed.
If it's bad, expect to see a couple on ebay! LOL
Well, from early reports, it should not be an issue.
I'll know in two weeks and will be looking for it.

Barry_Green

11-11-2007, 03:19 PM

Aren't you the same Steven Thomas who noticed the rolling shutter flicker over on DVInfo though? I was looking through that thread and it looks like they're already seeing the artifacts. Rolling shutter with fluorescents causes flickering and pulsing bands, and there was mention of the pan showing three distinct bands which is a classic rolling shutter artifact -- look at the vertical scrolling horizontal stripes in my rolling shutter article's fluorescent footage and you can see how that banding happens and how it's due to a rolling shutter.

Stevet

11-11-2007, 03:31 PM

That's it, I'm cancelling my order! Just kidding.
I see the flickering. Don't forget this was from someone who picked the camera up at the display without actually making any correct settings to alleviate flickering under those fluorescent lights. Also, one out of those three clips shows no flicker. The user must of been jacking around it.

I've had flickering issues in the past with video under certain lighting.
How it displays itself different due to a different shutter is one, but flickering does not look good, no matter how it manifests itself.
In fact shooting some recent footage under PARs and moving heads with MSD lights, I battled flickering issues. We were using the HD100,
which has a global shutter.

Justyn

11-11-2007, 05:25 PM

So there's high praise, but how much is it going to cost? Will FCP handle it?

harddrive

11-11-2007, 05:36 PM

..............this optimism that the EX1 won't exhibit rolling shutter artifacts seems unwarranted when their own manual tells you it will.
I don't think I'm hearing anyone saying that there will be NO artifacts, just that they won't be anything like as significant as in bottom end products.

As far as fluorescent flicker goes, there are many causes for that - incorrect shutter speed for one. A post on the internet showing flicker does not by itself indicate a poorly performing rolling shutter. The EX I looked at was in fluorescent lighting, and there was certainly nothing like that evident there.

Barry_Green

11-11-2007, 06:41 PM

Depends on the refresh rate of the fluos, of course. Older office fluos are slow and nasty; proper modern electronic ballasts will reduce or eliminate any issue.

Huy Vu

11-11-2007, 07:02 PM

I'm more concerned about the post production workflow than I am with artifacts at this point. So far exactly which NLE will be supporting the 35mbps mode on the EX? How will I be editing the stuff I got off the express card? I know that Adobe has taken a "wait and see" attitude toward this camera, which is bad because I use Premiere, but has FCP or Vegas announced support for it yet?

THoff

11-11-2007, 07:09 PM

I would think Sony would work had to have Vegas support out ASAP.

I know Edius has been shown editing EX-1 footage. I believe that V4.6 (which is currently being tested) will include this support.

Barry_Green

11-11-2007, 07:14 PM

Most new formats take a while before the editors are up to speed. I would expect Vegas to support it on launch day.

I believe you can use the conversion tool to work in FCP now, can't you?

Stevet

11-11-2007, 08:18 PM

The new browser 1.1 now supports exporting EX1 MXF files and should work with VEGAS 8.

Steve Shovlar

11-12-2007, 03:11 AM

Too much " I am in the Panasonic camp and will dis anything Sony produce" on here to get a fair balance on the EX1. Mind you it is the DVX forum so not suprising!

Barry you are very well respected on here, and rightly so as most take what you say as gospel. 99% of the time it's spot on, but reading through the threads about the EX1 every one of your posts comes across as trying to dismiss it as rubbish. Is it your job to get everyone to have doubts about the EX1 and not order it?

Half inch chips, brilliant low light images ( from what has been shown so far online) an excellent lens, full 1080 x 1920, progressive, and 4:2:2 SDI out. Add to that Sony build and it's going to sell like hotcakes.

I am not in any camp and am proud of it. If Panasonic brings out a Sony killer I will buy it.I own a HVX200 and am reasonably happy with it. Poor low light grainy image capablities are a continuous problem for me though and if the Sony allieviates that I will buy one at the start of the next tax year (where in the UK new tax laws for 2008 allow you to lay all 100% of the price of the camera back against tax for that year) It is slightly narrow minded to be in one camp and not the other.

The only worry is needing 32 Gb cards and support in FCP (which should be sorted by then)

Be happy no matter what company brings out a camera if it is better than the opposition. It's all good for us.

Noel Evans

11-12-2007, 05:36 AM

Too much " I am in the Panasonic camp and will dis anything Sony produce" on here to get a fair balance on the EX1.

Well I think thats to be expected and fairly resonable and I am not being snide here. Its just that I can see why someone who invests their hard earned $ in X may not want Y to be better. (For the record I dont personally own a HVX - my personal 1/3 inch ccd cam is a Canon XH A1 though 2/3 inch Ive switched from Sony and gone HPX).

But to me it certainly looks like the EX is going to be a great little cam.

Barry_Green

11-12-2007, 06:06 AM

amguy

11-12-2007, 06:54 AM

Buy whatever you want. Just know what you're getting. That's all I've said.

Look at the poopstorm that erupted over the HV20's wobble issue... people got all bent out of shape over that. The EX1 also wobbles -- will people be upset? Will we see pages and pages of complaints about it here and elsewhere? probably. Wouldn't you want to know about it before you sunk $7,000 into it? If you go into a transaction like that with proper information, you're much better able to make the decision over whether this product is right for you.

Look, every camera goes through four phases:

1) it's announced, and people think it's the greatest thing in the history of the universe, and the hype builds and builds

Then, a month later,

2) they get it, and discover (horror of horrors!) that it has a FLAW. Something awful. With the HVX it was the dreaded "noise", with the Canons it was the unbearable chromatic aberrations, with the JVC it was the apocalyptic Split Screen Effect, and with the HV20 it was the unforgivable "wobble". People scream, they start threads, they threaten class action lawsuits.

Then, two months later:
3) the hysteria settles down and people get to work and start turning out good work with all these products. They learn that yes there's a flaw in everything, there's always a compromise, and nothing's perfect. They work around it.

Then, phase 4 kicks in:
4) "Did you see the footage Macgregor shot on that camera? Amazing!"

I'm pointing out the already-identifiable flaws due to CMOS sensors and user reports. If you don't want to hear about that, and want to stay warmly snuggled up in phase 1, fine -- stay that way. But the sooner we get past this and onto phase 3, the better off everyone will be.

Barry isn't anymore biased than anyone else. Nigel is wearing a Sony T-shirt, Barry sells HVX books and DVD's.

These folks are what helps the rest of us "cipher" the data into something we can apply to ourselves. They love the "camp" they are in and feel compelled thru both debate and product testing to prove that the equipment they believe in and have invested in is top notch.

Don't expect one or the other to be unbiased. It isn't possible. That's like a dad saying he is unbiased about his son's success. Bologne. Barry is biased. Nigel is biased. Their biases may change based on their next selection of equipment, but they are biased none the less. But then again... so are the rest of us.

There is always one newly released camera that knocks our socks off. Myabe it is the hype, the images, the price, whatever. When we latch on to it, the bias is created. We will defend it because if I like it, you have to like it, or you are attacking my knowledge, understanding or something personal.

I am thankful for passionate debate, and commitment to choice. I think we need more of it.

For guys and gals who aren't in quite so deep, we need to be able to take the opinions and data that each "camp" provides and use it to help us make informed decisions.

Barry will find the flaw in products that are not HVX. Like it or not, what he notices as issues with the XDCAM-EX are probably going to be issues. Go to a non DVX site, one that is more "pro-Sony", and you will read about the noise, P2 issues, etc., with the HVX line that are highlighted by those that are devoted to a Sony product.

That's reality. I like it. I won't put down someone for being passionately committed to "educating" me. I will, however, recognize and respect the position they are coming from.

Great thread.

Stevet

11-12-2007, 07:28 AM

Barry isn't anymore biased than anyone else. Nigel is wearing a Sony T-shirt, Barry sells HVX books and DVD's.

Well put.

Once again, it's all about picking your poison.
IMHO, the almost never seen rolling shutter issue is FAR less an issue than low light sensiitivty and noise. This shouts out video more than anything.

The EX1 is going to offer crystal clean 1080P. I'm also looking forward to 1080 30P.

David S.

11-12-2007, 10:04 AM

The EX1 is going to offer crystal clean 1080P. I'm also looking forward to 1080 30P.

Steve:

I believe that is what everybody is saying. It is "going to OFFER."

Whether it will indeed PRODUCE is what Barry and others are responding to.

Get the cam, do the tests and report back.

The HVX200 when through the same "fleshing out" process.

Remember, among other things, the "Texas Shootout?"

Stevet

11-12-2007, 10:23 AM

Texas shootout. I remember to well...

I'll leave it at that......

David Jimerson

11-12-2007, 11:51 AM

Just curious . . .

Why is Barry the only one who's ever accused of bias around here with such tiresome regularity?

We have people who post all the time and regularly tout the products of certain companies, but it's only Barry who gets the tag.

People use what they like. Certain companies seem to do better at things which people find important, and so they tend to like the products put out by those companies . . . not because they like the companies themselves, necessarily, but because that company tends to do the thing they like better than the others.

Sony cameras give fantastic images, if you like that flavor of image. The same can be said for Panasonic and Canon and JVC.

So, of course, people who like a particular "feel" to an image are going to gravitate toward the company which makes the cameras which produce that feel.

And, getting under the hood, there are many ways to implement the creation and storage of those images, which all have advantages and disadvantages. Again, people gravitate toward the processes which make most sense for them. And if it's coupled with the image they like the most, then they're really, really happy.

There's really nothing more sinister than that going on. And everyone does it.

You can be "brand agnostic" and STILL end up using primarily the products of a single brand, if they're the ones who happen to give you what you want on a consistent basis.

Like I said, everyone does it to some degree. And there are those who are actually very brand-loyal and vocal about it. But Barry really seems to be the only one who gets called a "shill," or worse. And it's not just here, it's in a lot of places.

Not sure why that is.

Morpheus_23

11-12-2007, 12:26 PM

Too much " I am in the Panasonic camp and will dis anything Sony produce" on here to get a fair balance on the EX1. Mind you it is the DVX forum so not suprising!

Be happy no matter what company brings out a camera if it is better than the opposition. It's all good for us.

First, that's not how this thread started. With me, every camera has a chance of giving me the features and picture quality I'm looking for. And I'm picky. And few have suceeded. I've cycled through many of them. So I'm not in any camp.

I chose the HVX again because, as I've said before, it does evrything. It may not do them all better but it does everything. And I don't believe that the EX1 will be "significantly" better in image quality if at all. The features of the EX1 does not make it a HVX killer, or a XHA1 killer for that matter. However, many believe the EX1 to be exactly that and that's fine.

Second, I'm glad that Barry took time to read this thread and shed light on issues that will impact many in a week or so when the EX1 and it's wobble are delivered.

Stevet

11-12-2007, 01:08 PM

I would definately say the EX1 will not be an HVX200 killer, that's for sure.

But, let's face it, things only get better. They got better when the HVX200 camera was released, as I'm sure Panny's replacement will be a step up from that.

It just happens, Sony waited it out and is releasing quite the package. Some may agree, some may not. There's a good chance most will disagree on this forum. :)

taormina

11-12-2007, 01:21 PM

I agree that questioning Barry's objectivity is getting old, and I say that not as a mindless psycophant but as someone who respects Barry's vast knowledge of all things HD.

Stevet

11-12-2007, 01:27 PM

I believe everyone knows that Barry is VERY educated in this department. I just happen to believe there's more that one company that can make cameras.

David Jimerson

11-12-2007, 01:34 PM

And so does Barry. I guess it never ends.

David S.

11-12-2007, 01:57 PM

Barry is treasure to the profession and this board and others. I respect his opinion.

But as an advocate and sometimes a reviewer, it appropriate to question anybody's objectivity. We all have built in biases, and reviewers struggle with that issue.

That's the nature of the beast, and I don't believe that Barry thinks otherwise.

Questioning objectivity isn't the same as questioning integrity. On that count, I believe Mr. Green is among the best for integrity and professionalism.

David Jimerson

11-12-2007, 02:06 PM

That's totally fair. But the line between questioning objectivity and questioning integrity gets crossed an awful lot.

Barry_Green

11-12-2007, 03:23 PM

amguy's post is great, as are many of them. I've said many times that yes I'm biased -- I'm biased towards what I like. We all are.

Is there more than one company that makes cameras? Obviously. I bought a JVC HD100, I placed an order for an XHA1 (but Pete at Abel changed it to a loaner/review version instead), and I bought an HV20. And prior to the DVX coming out I used nothing but Sony equipment exclusively (DSR300, DSR500, PD150, VX2000, TRV7, etc).

I think the only way to get past this perception is to produce training DVDs on every one of these camcorders. And I may do just that.

For the record, as I've said before, I expect the Sony to have the sharpest/best LCD ever offered on a camcorder and I expect its video to be noticeably crisper and sharper than the HVX, with less noise. Attendant with that I expect that it'll have all the rolling shutter issues that the V1U and HV20 have, and that its XDCAM-EX compression will show motion artifacting somewhere between HDV and XDCAM-HD. Also, the pre-production promises of cheaper memory cards were a lie, and the promises of using generic memory cards were a lie. It's SxS-only, and those cost identically to P2. There. That's what the EX1 *is*, regardless of what was promised or what people have built it up in their minds to be. Learn what it is and what it does, not what people say it does, and then decide intelligently whether it serves your purposes.

Barry_Green

11-12-2007, 03:26 PM

Too much " I am in the Panasonic camp and will dis anything Sony produce" on here to get a fair balance on the EX1.
Gotta love this -- did anyone notice the thread title here? :)

Be happy no matter what company brings out a camera if it is better than the opposition. It's all good for us.
I've said that for years. That's exactly what we want.

Steve Shovlar

11-12-2007, 03:33 PM

Whooaa. First of all I apologise to Barry. Never meant to question his integrity at all. In fact I didn't know that this had come up before from others.

As I said in my original post, I don't expect the EX1 to get a fair trial here, so perhaps I shouldn't have made the post anyway.

I always read Barrys posts because they make a lot of sense and are educational, but I also noticed the bias on this occassion and mentioned it. Nothing malicious meant in it.

I am sure if the EX1 lives up to the hype Barry will be the first one to say so. ;)

Barry_Green

11-12-2007, 03:37 PM

And the next one to buy one, too.

I'll probably buy one anyway to do a DVD on it. :)

No prob, Steve!

Stevet

11-12-2007, 03:43 PM

Look 1st

11-12-2007, 04:29 PM

But, this is the rollout for Sony and their SxS cards.
I certainly don't recall Panny offering 16GB P2 cards for $899.00 during their initial rollout with the HVX200. In fact, I also don't recall them offering 2 8GB P2 free with the camera. Sony's throwing one 8GB in the box and another 8GB via mail.

Let me preface this by saying that I HATE the way Panasonic has handled the P2 rollout.

However....

To say you dont recall Panasonic offering XYZ.. is beyond absurd. Pany was first to roll out the "Solid State Media" aka P2 - they DID offer a Free Cards as an incentive and the economics has brought the price of the media WAY down.
So SONY can make these offers in hopes to *catch up * to Panasonic and P2.
Panasonic screwed up their roll-out of P2 and all SONY had to do was watch and not make the same mistake... I doubt Panny would make that same mistake twice.
Again I think the early rollout of P2 stank in some areas, but it clearly paved the way for the next generation of solid state cameras.

Stevet

11-12-2007, 04:31 PM

Look 1st, how much was the 16GB P2 card during the HVX200 rollout?

Look 1st

11-12-2007, 04:33 PM

Look 1st, how much was the 16GB P2 card during the HVX200 rollout?

How much were SxS cards during HVX rollout...

Jason Ramsey

11-12-2007, 04:35 PM

There wasn't a 16 gig card out yet. They had like 2's and 4's at the time. 8's followed shortly after, and then it was a while before the 16's. 16's have been out since earlier this year, and the 32's are due (in some quantity) any day now. And, Sony would be on that same pace and price point as Panny is. They are just joining the game a bit later than Panny. But, are coming in at the same price point in cost/gig.

And the first p2 cards were over 2 grand

harddrive

11-12-2007, 05:21 PM

Also, the pre-production promises of cheaper memory cards were a lie, and the promises of using generic memory cards were a lie. It's SxS-only, and those cost identically to P2. There. That's what the EX1 *is*, ...........
To be fair to Sony, I don't think they actually said very much about how much the cards would be prelaunch - though wild optimism started to abound - and the same about generic memory cards. In fact, that hasn't been 100% nailed one way or the other yet, has it? I'd understood one early user reported some success, another didn't, so maybe it will be found to work with some generic cards, not others.

I've also just looked at pricing, and a main dealer here now quotes £575 for P2, £517 for SxS 16GB cards (inc tax). Not identical, although not the difference that had been hoped for.

But....... I don't want to defend Sony too much here. My own feeling is that the EX would have been better suited by using Compact Flash, and SxS has been developed more for the high end future. And why not higher bitrate codecs? Or ideally a choice? Convergent Design have proved with the XDR that 50 and 100Mbs to cheap CF is OK, why not just do that internally within the EX?

mikkowilson

11-12-2007, 05:37 PM

To be fair to Sony, I don't think they actually said very much about how much the cards would be prelaunch - though wild optimism started to abound - and the same about generic memory cards. In fact, that hasn't been 100% nailed one way or the other yet, has it?

Yes, both the card prices, and the SxS compatibility mentioned by Barry Green are fact as officially told by Sony representatives at the IBC trade show back in September.

I (and others too) personally spent a long time, both testing the camera hands on, and interviewing multiple Sony representatives - both sales people, and actual engineers who where present. I also tested recording to generic media myself to be sure.

Of course the street prices will vary as always, but Sony's announced MSRPs for SxS cards match Panasonic's MSRPs for P2 almost exactly.
And no, the EX1 will NOT record to generic media. Period.

- Mikko

doondoon

11-12-2007, 06:43 PM

Man, one of my pet peeves is people that feel righteous enough to correct the spelling and grammar of people that they don't even know. If the grammar and spelling is so bad you don't understand what's being said; that's an issue. However, if you understand what's being said then shut the hell up or go spend your time on a spelling and grammar forum.

We're living in a world of fast-paced forum posting, which is a pretty casual deal and prone to many mistakes. This isn't like writing a thesis.

I'll stop now before I get heated up.

WORD.

taormina

11-12-2007, 07:50 PM

:violent5:WORD.

That was an incomplete sentence.:laugh::tongue:

rc444

11-12-2007, 08:44 PM

MikeGunter

11-12-2007, 08:59 PM

The EX-1 is heaps better than the HVX, well on paper at least.

Hi,

Ink has a tendency to be persuasive. New technology's lure certainly tugs at me.

The only distinction that I was underlining in the long thread was the lack of objective reporting. Sony isn't going to put the camera in unfriendly hands. Whoever has one now is clearly going to have nice things to say about it.

My guess is that it is a nice camera. It reads well. In a few weeks we'll see if those who buy it think it shoots well.

mikkowilson

11-13-2007, 12:26 AM

The EX-1 is heaps better than the HVX, well on paper at least.

The EX-1 has a bigger lens, it shoots 1920 x 1080, whereas the DVX uses 960x540 to achieve 720p, plus the EX-1 features a fully manual moving lens. HVX does have 4:2:2 colour to it's advantage, though. It's still a great camera though.

The thing about video cameras is that they are like computers. I could buy a camera tomorrow that shoots 3000p, and then six months later, something different replaces it. It's almost an impossible rabbit to chase. The best that you can do is focus on storytelling. As long as it's a 3CCD HD camera, you should be okay.

You statement about always waiting for the "latest & greatest" is 100% true.

Though I presume you are refering to the HVX, not the DVX.

"on paper" the DVCPRO has a better recorded picture (due to bandwdith) by a factor of 3 over XDCAM, or 4 over HDV) - and in color resolution, it clearly is too. (Why put in 2 full resolution chips and then throw away ½ the signal right off the bat during color compression anyway?). So even there the line isn't that clear cut.

Oh, and if it's a 3CCD camera you want; then you will be highly dissapointed by the EX1.

- Mikko

Barry_Green

11-13-2007, 01:21 AM

To be fair to Sony, I don't think they actually said very much about how much the cards would be prelaunch
Well, yes they did, and they said they'd be half the price of P2. Jiri Vrozina says he has the boss of Sony Australia (I believe) on video claiming that a 16GB card would cost $400, in a statement made at SMPTE Australia.

and the same about generic memory cards. In fact, that hasn't been 100% nailed one way or the other yet, has it? I'd understood one early user reported some success, another didn't, so maybe it will be found to work with some generic cards, not others.
The manual makes it quite clear that it only works with SxS cards. And the SxS cards require a software driver before a computer can recognize them. Generic cards don't. So if I was to bet, I'd bet a hundred dollars cash money that the system will only work with SxS.

Barry_Green

11-13-2007, 01:23 AM

Look 1st, how much was the 16GB P2 card during the HVX200 rollout?
The 16GB cards have never been priced higher than $900.

rc444

11-13-2007, 02:22 AM

When you say (Why put in 2 full resolution chips and then throw away ½ the signal right off the bat during color compression anyway?), which camera do you mean?

mikkowilson

11-13-2007, 02:45 AM

harddrive

11-13-2007, 04:07 AM

The EX1.

It uses lots of small pixels to create a 4:4:4 image, ........... Seems like a lot of wasted tightly crammed (small) pixels to me.
I suspect one answer might be oversampled originals then tend to look very, very good at the output resolution, for a similar reason that even on a final VHS, it's pretty easy to tell the difference between a master on 35mm film and one on a cheaper camera - even though both are far better than the VHS itself.

Doing it this way also means a straightforward approach to processing, which can likely transform into low noise figures etc. Pixel shifting has a theoretical advantage in that it allows bigger pixels (=more light collection) and an output with greater luminance than chrominance resolution. So yes, perhaps better suited in theory if you intend recording at less than 4:4:4 anyway. But it also involves more processing, hence noise etc, which may well counteract the potential benefits.

mikkowilson

11-13-2007, 04:50 AM

Yeah, it's a very fine line both ways ... keep in mind that the biggest culpit for noise is too small pixels that as a recult don't have enough sensitity to give out a clean signal.

Again, it's a limitation of camera and overall sensor size. It's the age old balance between resolution and dynamic range & sensitivity.

That's one of the reasons/benefits of the EX1 having 1/2" sensors as opposed to 1/3" on the competition like the HVX .. they have more surface area to play with to allow them to fit all those extra pixels into without loosing huge amounts of sensitivy over 1/3" cameras.

And that's all part of not just the technical, but marketing side of the features: Sony can proudly (and quite correctly) advertise that their new camera has both larger chips AND more pixels! The fact that the larger chips are a necessity for the greater pixel count just happens to be a convenient technical restriction. :)

Of course there are other variables in there too, like sensor technology and depelopment. (CMOS performs differently to CCD, and todays chips wil outperform the ships from 5 years ago..) And that's why it's really hard to compare cameras on paper (or web page), and why the final definative results only become evident in use in the field. And even they vary for each shooter, time, place...

- Mikko

Stevet

11-13-2007, 05:06 AM

harddrive

11-13-2007, 05:08 AM

The fact that the larger chips are a necessity for the greater pixel count just happens to be a convenient technical restriction. :)I don't see the bigger chips as a technical restriction, quite the opposite. Bigger chips normally means better all round for quality, and is a big reason why 2/3" cameras are generally preferred to 1/3"; DOF being another big reason.

Problem has been bigger chips normally means bigger lenses, bigger batteries, etc etc, and bigger normally means much heavier and more expensive. THE big rabbit that Sony have pulled out of the hat is having those 1/2" chips in a package size and price normally the preserve of 1/3", and the significance of that can't be underestimated.

Second big innovation is keeping a fixed lens (for size, cost, etc reasons) but making it truly manual! Why has the past choice either been fixed servo or manual interchangeable?

Those two aspects alone put all the other pros and cons in the shade for me.

amguy

11-13-2007, 05:18 AM

The EX1.

It uses lots of small pixels to create a 4:4:4 image, but then the highest format you can get out of the camera for recording is 4:2:2 (and that only over HD-SDI), which has only 50% of the color information intact. Seems like a lot of wasted tightly crammed (small) pixels to me.

- Mikko

Now I'm not the brightest bulb on the tree, but... I believe one of the greatest challenges for manufacturers right now is compression. I think most of the newer cameras have 4:4:4 at the head, but the stream would be so large, the average user would not have the equipment to edit it.

Add to that the fact that broadcast bandwidth is still an issue, and it is even more complicated.

In the broadcast world this is an "inexpensive" camera. Sony, like many other manufacturers has to choose where to compromise, that will have the least affect on the intended user group they are targeting.

Much discussion about long GOP vs. Intraframe vs. wavelet, and what is best. Myself, and a whole host of other people, try to "dumb down" the function of compression in order to get our minds around it. The truth is that there is a lot more going on with the "new" implementations of long GOP, than the original. Due mostly to the on-board processing right at the chipset. I don't fully understand it, but it is "better".

I am not certain, but I believe colorspace is affected by compression. Or that colorspace has an effect on the size of the stream?

Thomson/Grass Valley has their new Infinity Series camera. Go take a look at it and tell me if you see anything similar to the EX. Granted it is a different beast in a different price point, but CMOS chips, albeit 2/3", flash recording, etc. There are at least 3 different compression options. Why? Compromise. Each different scheme affects the output in some way.

Panasonic paved the way with P2. When they released the HVX200 it was for a specific group. It doesn't have HD-SDI. Why not? It uses "smaller" chips to create the 720p image. How come? Compromise for price point. It has mulitple ways to capture/output video. Why? Not everyone can handle, or wants the highest 100mbps stream for editing, nor does every single project demand the highest level of quality. Sometimes light and quick is better.

So as long as we examine the "low end" of the spectrum, we will always be picking out and examing manufacturer compromise, and how we will work with it.

At least that is what I have come to realize, differing opinions may vary. :thumbup:

Morpheus_23

11-13-2007, 05:30 AM

The EX-1 is heaps better than the HVX, well on paper at least.
[/qoute]

Some will believe this to be true.

[quote=rc444;1097872]The EX-1 has a bigger lens, it shoots 1920 x 1080, whereas the DVX uses 960x540 to achieve 720p, plus the EX-1 features a fully manual moving lens.
[/qoute]

Is this what makes the EX1 "heaps" better? If your buying based on resolution as the only criteria for your decision, then the EX1 is your choice. But if you are using a feature list from each camera (all cameras), at least for me, the EX1 still has some limiting factors.

[quote=rc444;1097872]The thing about video cameras is that they are like computers. I could buy a camera tomorrow that shoots 3000p, and then six months later, something different replaces it. It's almost an impossible rabbit to chase. The best that you can do is focus on storytelling. As long as it's a 3CCD HD camera, you should be okay.

I agree. No doubt I will end up with the EX1 in addition to the HVX.

Barry_Green

11-13-2007, 05:39 AM

As long as it's a 3CCD HD camera, you should be okay.
Any of the 3-CCD HD cameras can deliver fine results, but they're certainly not necessary to be "okay" -- a 3-CCD standard-def camera's films have won the best cinematography award at Sundance three times (PD150 and DVX) and have been nominated for Oscars for Best Documentary twice (DVX 2006 & 2007).

You don't need HD. And you don't need three chips; the SI-2K and the Red and the HV20 owners would all argue against needing those.

Buy (or rent) something that does the job, but don't get too hung up on the gear because it is *not* what's going to make or break your project.

With that said, "better is better" and we all always want better. And as someone said earlier, there is no global "better". There's only "better for a specific purpose."

Okay, so let me try saying it a different way so I can avoid the whole "it's not the camera, it's the person behind the camera" platitude. Let's say it like this: If you think a better camera is going to be what makes your project better, stop right now. Because it won't. It's like what I used to say a couple of years ago when people would ask "should I shoot on film or video" -- the very fact that you'd be asking the question answers itself: shoot video. When you're ready for film, when the project will benefit from film, etc., you'll know it and you won't even have to ask. Until then, save your money.

mikkowilson

11-13-2007, 06:19 AM

Oh plesase....
LOL

Please what? :)

I don't see the bigger chips as a technical restriction, quite the opposite. Bigger chips normally means better all round for quality, and is a big reason why 2/3" cameras are generally preferred to 1/3"; DOF being another big reason.

Problem has been bigger chips normally means bigger lenses, bigger batteries, etc etc, and bigger normally means much heavier and more expensive. THE big rabbit that Sony have pulled out of the hat is having those 1/2" chips in a package size and price normally the preserve of 1/3", and the significance of that can't be underestimated.

I never said that it was a bad thing - quite the contrary, I'll take a larger sensor over a smaller one any day (with all other thigns beeing equal).

I was just commenting how clever Sony was with beeing able to build a product that's also marketable beacuse of the way it's made.
Perhaps "technical requirement" is a better term than "restriction" for larger chips when you increase pixel count.

3 Full HD sensors is a huge (also marketable) featrure of this camera.
1/2" sensors is also an equally huge feature.
A fully manual proper Fujinon Lens also also a big feaure.

My point is the convinience of the fact that these all depend on each other to actually work succesfully.

Oh, one more side note, regarding your rabbit: As the feaures increase, so to the requirements, even with this camera. For example the EX1 requires 12v batteries (not 7.2) - meaning that it has a whole new battery type.
Also that nice lens also now has a brand new type of lens control port that is as of yet unsupported by anyway (even Sony themselves couldn't tell me the exaclt plan for it!) - so no more low cost LANC (or tradiational professional either for that matter!) on this camera.
As the move forwards, they do have to replace technology that has been around for years, and that does mean some increses in costs across the board too.

It's a new class of camera, it changes pretty much everything about these cameras. With both it's benefits and problems too.

- Mikko

harddrive

11-13-2007, 06:38 AM

Much discussion about long GOP vs. Intraframe vs. wavelet, and what is best.
The obvious answer is wavelet, but things are never simple. (And to date I believe wavelet codecs all are I-frame.) You may ask why everybody doesn't use it then? It tends to require a lot of grunt for processing, which in turn can mean higher power etc etc. The big plus point is that when it gets challenged it gets soft, when most other codecs get challenged they get blocky. That's also very good in a broadcast chain, and cascaded compression.

And what is meant by best? Is it quality for a given bitrate, consistency, or ease of editing? You tend to have to trade one off for another, so which do you consider the best compromise? Because no matter how all the manufacturers squeal that theirs is the best compromise, they all are a trade off.
I am not certain, but I believe colorspace is affected by compression. Or that colorspace has an effect on the size of the stream?
Colourspace throws colour information away, making use of the physiology of the eye - more sensitive to luminance detail than colour. Exactly as with all analogue systems. That reduces the stream size, so *for a given desired output stream size* reduces the level of compression then required.
Thomson/Grass Valley has their new Infinity Series camera. Go take a look at it and tell me if you see anything similar to the EX. Granted it is a different beast in a different price point, but CMOS chips, albeit 2/3", flash recording, etc. There are at least 3 different compression options. Why? Compromise. Each different scheme affects the output in some way.
Infinity has been through a big redesign as they decided to use CMOS instead of CCDs. It's taken a year, but first reports now are very impressive, and apparently it is starting to ship.

Most interesting aspects to me are the choice of media and the (wavelet) JPEG2000 recording option. It's like the EX with 3x1920x1080 chips, but is a full size shouldermount. Unlike the EX it offers a choice of recording options - SD/HD, and different codecs, which is something I don't like about the EX. Some users may want to go tapeless before going HD - Infinity allows that. And the codec choice means integrating it into any larger system is easier than if they'd said "JPEG2000, take it or leave it". But two cameras at different prices aimed at different markets.

amguy

11-13-2007, 07:31 AM

So based on information in this thread, can the original question be answered?

Are these 2 cameras similar enough to compare?

Both record to flash.
Is that where the similarities end?

2 different codecs.
1 has tape, the other doesn't
1 is CCD, the other CMOS
1 is 4:2:2 color space, the other 4:2:0
1 is SD/HD, the other only HD
1 has HD-SDI, the other doesn't
1 is 1/3" sensors, the other 1/2"
1 is 13x zoom, the other is 14x
1 is .14 lux min, the other is 3 lux min.
1 has 3.5" LCD w/ 900K res, the other 3.5" w/ less res

I think there is a huge difference in these cameras. I also believe that although the EX1 has the Cinealta badge, it is going to be better suited or geared toward broadcast. The Long GOP just might limit it's wide adoption by Indie filmmakers, because from what I understand, the Long GOP will "break" easier.

Indie filmmakers do a lot more in post to footage than ENG does. ENG is fast, quick turn, get it out. Clear, crisp, "leave the color alone" kind of shooting.

Filmmakers tend to add color effects and other enhancements to achieve the look they are going for.

I think, perhaps, that the DVX will continue to outpace everything else as a dual role camera. Maybe the EX1 would have greater limitations in a "film" style of shooting. Maybe we'll learn something new.

One thing for sure. About another week until people begin to get their new EX1's. It will certainly be fun to see what people turn out initially.

Tzedekh

11-13-2007, 09:14 AM

Let's say it like this: If you think a better camera is going to be what makes your project better, stop right now. Because it won't. It's like what I used to say a couple of years ago when people would ask "should I shoot on film or video" -- the very fact that you'd be asking the question answers itself: shoot video. When you're ready for film, when the project will benefit from film, etc., you'll know it and you won't even have to ask. Until then, save your money.Actually, you just said a better camera can make your project better. Or let's put it this way: if the script, the acting, and the direction are good and the DP competent, and the project doesn't call for a Super8 or home-video aesthetic (a la Oliver Stone), higher-quality origination generally improves the end product and the chances of getting a distribution deal. But you're right: higher definition and greater dynamic range won't save an otherwise poorly made film and may only magnify its shortcomings. In other words, make sure the cart and the horse are in the right order.

harddrive

11-13-2007, 01:58 PM

The Long GOP just might limit it's wide adoption by Indie filmmakers, because from what I understand, the Long GOP will "break" easier.
Then again, it does have the option of HD-SDI out. 10 bit, true 1920x1080 resolution, 4:2:2 uncompressed, able to be recorded to whatever is desired. I'm not so keen on tethered recording options, but Indie filmmakers seem much less bothered by that.

mikkowilson

11-13-2007, 03:12 PM

... as long as they arn't wanting to shoot offspeed, then that too is a very viable option. The HD-SDI output is another high end feature.

- Mikko

karapetkov

11-13-2007, 06:25 PM

Oh, my head hurts... too much noisy rolling wobble ...

Maybe I should just focus on polishing my script. I've read more tutorials on that. :)

I liked the "choose your poison" thing. There will always be something better and there will always be defects and flaws... and let's not forget that sometimes defects can be turned into effects...

A good story doesn't become obsolete so quickly and sometimes they're timeless [I don't pretend to have one though].

And maybe it's best to leave the companies chase each other in improving their pixels and rolling shutters.

"Somebody has to die"... so I choose my poison... she's a brunette :).

P.S. "Somebody always does"...

moviemaker999

11-13-2007, 08:04 PM

Heres one thing that I don't understand about the Ex1 and sony. It seems that in the demo videos of the sony ex1, sony is constantly showing that the SxS cards kick P2. Now the sony cards are like 100mbs and Im not sure what p2 is (something close). Why wouldn't they give you a higher quality compression option if the SxS cards are so much better. Why limit it to 35mbs HQ if tthey can reach 100mbs. I understand that the express cards are the future,but they are making way too big a deal about this. The difference is marginal. I just wish that being free of xdcam disks they would offer a higher quality recording option, even if it would mean less recording time. I guess they are just keeping it for the ex2. And by the way I own a dvx and have stayed out of the Hd world and I think the ex might be my next camera.

harddrive

11-14-2007, 03:28 AM

It seems that in the demo videos of the sony ex1, sony is constantly showing that the SxS cards kick P2. Now the sony cards are like 100mbs and Im not sure what p2 is (something close). Why wouldn't they give you a higher quality compression option if the SxS cards are so much better. Why limit it to 35mbs HQ if tthey can reach 100mbs.
Don't confuse BITS with BYTES. SxS is capable of a quoted 100M*BYTES*s which is 800 M*bits*s, the comparable figures for P2 are 80MBs (640Mbs) - so in practice they are very comparable.

But as to the question you posed, then yes indeed, exactly what I said in the last paragraph here - http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1097685&postcount=90 . My own suspicion is that they didn't want to do anything that would cause a headache as far as marketing XDCAM disc cameras is concerned.

As far as P2 v SxS is concerned, then speaking as someone with no investment in either system to date, all the technical pros do seem to be with SxS. When I heard this put directly to a Panasonic rep at a seminar, he didn't dispute it, but did point out in P2s favour that it was an established product, was available then, whereas SxS was still 6 months away at the time. True enough, but it does raise longer term question marks: SxS has the edge in max speed (about 20%), price (about 10-15% street price), but most importantly is based on current technology and is natively supported in most modern laptops. The question is whether commercial considerations permit Panasonic to use it in future.

Barry_Green

11-14-2007, 06:01 AM

all the technical pros do seem to be with SxS.
Really? Read the manual -- they say that if you eject a card while it's being written to, or read from, or if the power goes out while a card is being accessed, you can lose *everything* on that card. Sorry, that's just profoundly unacceptable. At least with the P2 cards, the worst you'll ever lose is two seconds.

mikkowilson

11-14-2007, 02:29 PM

[...]if the power goes out while a card is being accessed, you can lose *everything* on that card.

Ouch...

- Mikko

Stevet

11-14-2007, 05:01 PM

Ejecting the memory is not a smart thing during sessions, but it could accidently happen.
Well, for that matter, accidently dropping the camera could also happen.
Fortunately, I have not had this happen, but have heard stories from others.

Noel Evans

11-14-2007, 07:15 PM

Really? Read the manual -- they say that if you eject a card while it's being written to, or read from, or if the power goes out while a card is being accessed, you can lose *everything* on that card. Sorry, that's just profoundly unacceptable. At least with the P2 cards, the worst you'll ever lose is two seconds.

I agree with you Barry its a big RISK and probably should have been addressed, though for me this would hardly be a deal killer if I was considering this cam insofar as - this has never happened to me recording to p2. One thing Panasonic did right on the HVX and HPX was cover the p2 cards to ensure they couldnt accidently be popped out whilst shooting - Sony seems to employ something similar.

What worries me is the phenomenon of rolling shutter wobble. Ive seen it on a HV20 myself and some footage posted here. Can these companies physically employ a better or improved system to remove it? Sorry I am just not fully understanding it. I mean what is the likelyhood that it may effect someone while usint the cam for proffessional purposes?

Then Im on the next question. I saw mention that RED was rolling shutter, can then RED be effected by the same thing? And going back, have they employed a better system to prevent it? My point is RED (and maybe this is best suited to another thread ) is going to be used on higher $ productions where a rolling shutter wobble event could cost much more to reshoot. Surely its been addressed here by Sony and RED right?

Stevet

11-14-2007, 07:29 PM

ncje,
You could venture over to reduser.net and find out about the RED.
As far as the EX1 is concerned, at the end of this month we will be putting it through the paces.

Noel Evans

11-14-2007, 11:13 PM

I did sir and found a thread that had been locked and since then there has been no discussion. So I am still very curious. Of course I dont want to get the rumour mill working over time. It would be nice to know some cold hard facts though.

Barry_Green

11-15-2007, 02:02 AM

What worries me is the phenomenon of rolling shutter wobble. Ive seen it on a HV20 myself and some footage posted here. Can these companies physically employ a better or improved system to remove it?
Yes, if they went with a global shutter, but nobody does. Thomson actually tries to control it by running at double the frame rate (so internally it's running at 120fps when they're recording 60p, apparently). At least, that's what the guy at the Thomson booth said.

I tested the Thomson Infinity for rolling shutter, and yes it happens, although milder than I've seen on any other system. The Red seems to exhibit rolling shutter to about the same degree as the Infinity.

Sorry I am just not fully understanding it. I mean what is the likelyhood that it may effect someone while usint the cam for proffessional purposes?
It happens in many circumstances and it'll happen in professional circumstances as well as amateur. There's really not anything you can do about it -- it's endemic to the sensor design. I've seen evidence of it in the Red, the V1U, the Infinity, and the HV20. I have no doubt whatsoever that it will affect any rolling-shutter camcorder.

It's not just wobble, it's the partial exposure thing too. Sooner or later someone's going to shoot a food commercial where they want to employ strobe lighting to make crystal-clear water droplets in poured drinks, for example, and they're going to find out that such a shot is simply impossible on any rolling-shutter system. Someone else is going to shoot a lightning storm and find their footage is unusable. Someone else is going to shoot footage under older office fluorescents and find that their footage is full of pulsing flickering lines. Someone else may run into a problem with pulsing/flickering with an HMI light (or any other discontinuous light source). And on and on.

Either the companies will ditch rolling shutter and go with global, or we as shooters will have to learn all sorts of new rules to the video game.

Then Im on the next question. I saw mention that RED was rolling shutter, can the RED be effected by the same thing?
Of course. It definitely has a rolling shutter, and can be affected by rolling shutter artifacts. I've seen some.

going back, have they employed a better system to prevent it?
From my understanding they have taken steps to minimize the effect, they pushed it as far as they can and it has definitely helped, but they can't eliminate it.

My point is RED (and maybe this is best suited to another thread ) is going to be used on higher $ productions where a rolling shutter wobble event could cost much more to reshoot. Surely its been addressed here by Sony and RED right?
It can't be. It's endemic to the sensor technology. If it uses CMOS and it has a rolling shutter, it's going to exhibit rolling shutter artifacts. Thomson and Red have taken steps to minimize it, but it still happens. I don't know the degree that Sony may have taken to minimize it; I was supposed to see one today but Sony bailed out on the DMF exhibition here in Sydney.

Rolling shutter can cause problems with compositing and match-moving; the guy who makes Syntheyes recommends everyone stay away from rolling-shutter camcorders. Many of the early Red buyers are apparently VFX artists who want/need their own camera, so it'll be most interesting to see how those guys get along. If anyone's gotten it under control it's likely Red, because they know who their product is aimed at and how their product is going to be used. I know they say it's much better since the "Crossing The Line" days.

Lenilenapi

11-15-2007, 11:42 AM

insanityfw

11-15-2007, 12:06 PM

You know until now Barry, I've never even thought about the rolling shutter effect in relation to Crossing The Line, but that might explain the weirdness that was happening on the white lettering on the tail of the plane during the dogfight.

When I brought it up on REDuse,r after seeing it at NAB, I got stiffed a bit by saying that I saw something weird during that part of the scene. Some just figured I was crazy and got angry at the mention of it. Even RED people got offensive. Almost turned me off the camera just because of the inability to admit that it was possible.

That said, it will be interesting to see if Rolling Shutter is much of a limitation in Red productions. Things sure are looking good in that camp lately.

Anyway, I've been hearing a lot about rolling shutter for some time and never put two and two together until reading your always informative posts.

thanks,

Jason

Barry_Green

11-15-2007, 04:33 PM

Barry,
I may get a chance to compare the HVX to an EX-1 next week . Can you suggest practical tests to look for some of the possible problems you've mentioned with EX-1.

i.e what kind of test might show up wobble, partial exposure, etc.
I guess we could look for a room with older flourescents somewhere for one.

- Lenny Levy

Easiest way to test if it exists at all is to put the cam in a slower frame rate (like 24p) and just pan back and forth rapidly past vertical objects. Put the cam on a tripod and swing it back and forth, if vertical objects remain vertical at all speeds then they've tamed the beast. If they lean diagonally, then you've confirmed that the issue exists. May not have confirmed the degree to which it exists yet (that depends on how far it leans and how fast you had to move to get it to lean) but at least you know it's there. On the Infinity, even though they've optimized for it, I could get objects leaning and wobbling if I pushed it to a pretty good pace. Not saying that's a practical shooting scenario, of course, but it's a way to see if they've solved the issue or not.

Another thing to do is to lock them both down on tripods, with monitors, side by side, then tap the tripod handle to introduce a little bit of bounce. The CCD or a global-shutter camera should respond normally with a bit of bump in the video, the rolling-shutter cam will stretch and wobble during such an excercise.

If you can take it handheld, just walk around on wide angle with both, then split-screen the footage. Rolling shutter footage will look like Norbert's.

Take 'em in a reasonably low-lit room, and set off a flash or two. The rolling shutter cam should show big dark bars in it.

Under older fluos, especially flickering fluos, you'll see pulsing in the CCD/global shutter cam, but in the rolling shutter you may see black flickering lines, or banding (it'll look a lot like shooting a computer monitor without clearscan or syncro scan).

If you can get it under strobelights (a disco or dance event, perhaps a wedding) or a place where there's lots of flashbulbs going off (a boxing match, a red carpet premiere event, etc) or big changes in brightness (shooting a rainstorm with lightning strikes) then that should be a rough test of how it can handle some real-world scenarios that people are likely to put it in.

The worst would probably be to mount it to a car or a mountain bike, especially a mountain bike. Rapid vibration should expose the worst of any extant rolling shutter issues. Try it with and without OIS, and with normal or super-high shutter speeds. Higher shutter speeds don't bring out more rolling shutter effects, the effect is always the same, but a higher shutter speed lets you see it more clearly because it removes the blur that might otherwise mask it some. (which, I guess, means that yes a higher shutter makes the effect worse, but not really -- the amount of wobble or lean is the same at slower or higher shutter speeds, it's just that the slower shutter speeds introduce motion blur that masks some of the obviousness of how much wobble or lean is actually there.)

Stevet

11-15-2007, 07:12 PM

Barry,
I guess we could look for a room with older flourescents somewhere for one.

- Lenny Levy

LOL,
While your at it turn down the lights and try that comparison.

Lenilenapi

11-15-2007, 09:34 PM

Thanks once again Barry,

One of these days I need to buy you a drink.
Let me know if you get up to Marin anytime soon.
Scotch or Margaritas - whatever you like.

Stevet,
I think we know what the low light comparison will be already.

By teh way - Barry

Ona completely different topic. A number of times I have wanted to post images on this site and when I go to the "member upload center" it says I don't have priviliges for that. is that normal? Do I need to have some other website to post pictures that pertain to issues here.

- Lenny levy

taormina

11-15-2007, 10:05 PM

Steve - go peddle your wares somewhere else. If the EX is good, I'll buy one. Or five. I just don't care too much for a dogmatic defense of a camera that isn't released. Let it speak for itself.

Stevet

11-16-2007, 06:05 AM

Let it speak for itself.

That's been my point. I absolutely amazed how "other" cameras get trashed on even though they have not been released. You are right though, this is an HVX forum section on this forum, but the thread, which I did not start, cleary states the topic.

David Jimerson

11-16-2007, 09:29 AM

It's a good point -- this thread doesn't belong in the HVX News section. Moving now.

Morpheus_23

11-16-2007, 04:57 PM

That's been my point. I absolutely amazed how "other" cameras get trashed on even though they have not been released. You are right though, this is an HVX forum section on this forum, but the thread, which I did not start, cleary states the topic.

As a camera user about to buy a Sony EX1 or HVX, my question and comments were posed to, but not limited to, HVX users that had more experience with the HVX than me. Since the EX1 isn't released and no one has one, the assumption was that on paper it appeared the EX1 had some attributes that were better than the HVX, but not leaps and bounds better. ANd from a feature standpoint the HVX still seemed to be the better choice.

It was not meant to be a EX1 discussion. It was a disussion comparing a well entrenched HVX and a not yet released, looks good on paper camera.

I believe it was in the proper place.

Morpheus_23

11-16-2007, 05:01 PM

It's a good point -- this thread doesn't belong in the HVX News section. Moving now.

I respectfully disagree.

LuckyStudio 13

11-16-2007, 05:53 PM

Morpheus, assuming you dont have $$$$ projects now, just wait until you see real world user reviews of the EX, and then you can make educated comparison with the HVX.

Morpheus_23

11-16-2007, 06:48 PM

Definately. I'm on the list to get one when they come out.

RichardVClark

11-16-2007, 07:19 PM

People who adopt technology early always get burnt!!!

That is why I have an EX on the way:2vrolijk_08:

Morpheus_23

11-17-2007, 07:53 AM

People who adopt technology early always get burnt!!!

That would explain those 3rd degree burns I have.

boo

11-18-2007, 08:38 AM

it's great having manufacturers coming out w/ newer(hopefully better) cameras. can't wait to see what panny comes up w/ in it's next update...hvx200a...hvx250?

to add fuel to the fire, here's a quote from a doug jensen article w/ first hand experience w/ the ex-1:

"P2 was built on outdated technology before the cameras even came out on the market, but there wasn’t a viable alternative at the time. Today, P2 is really showing its age and it’s only going to fall further behind. SxS cards, on the other hand, offer tremendous performance improvements."

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/newsLetter/Sony-PVW-EX1.jsp

Look 1st

11-18-2007, 09:42 AM

"P2 was built on outdated technology before the cameras even came out on the market, but there wasn’t a viable alternative at the time. Today, P2 is really showing its age and it’s only going to fall further behind. SxS cards, on the other hand, offer tremendous performance improvements.

Panasonic would only need to made a P2 "adapter" card to take advantage of, lets say, an SxS card or something similar to end that argument.. call it a P3 card ..lol
That way it stays backwards and forward compatible.
Load your SxS card into the adapter, insert into camera like a normal P2 card, shoot, remove SxS from adapter, then take advantage of the higher bandwidth of the SxS card to transfer/offload footage.

May be a pipe dream, but the future is wide open, and I doubt Panasonic is about to kill off P2, leaving tons of users stranded.

Barry_Green

11-18-2007, 10:36 PM

Noel Evans

11-19-2007, 01:42 AM

Noel Evans

11-19-2007, 01:47 AM

People who adopt technology early always get burnt!!!
That is why I have an EX on the way:2vrolijk_08:

Excellent, make sure you get the images up soon. I was one of (maybe the first?) OWNER of an XH A1 on this board and no burns at all.

Kdawg

11-19-2007, 04:09 AM

"P2 was built on outdated technology before the cameras even came out on the market, but there wasn’t a viable alternative at the time. Today, P2 is really showing its age and it’s only going to fall further behind. SxS cards, on the other hand, offer tremendous performance improvements."

HEHE I have had some door to door salesmen drop more intelligent lines than that. All credibility goes out the window after that statement. Red lights need to flash in your head in reguards to sony kick backs. Check the marketplace, I have posted some ocean front property in Arizona. A great deal!

Morpheus_23

11-19-2007, 06:36 AM

LuckyStudio 13

11-19-2007, 08:49 AM

I am not here to spread the fire, but that statement made have its own truth and merit.

E.g.

I hope FCS users take good care of your G4 powerbook because none of the new Apple Intel Mac offers any pcmcia slot nor do I think Apple is going to go backwards and offer pcmcia slot to their future laptop.

If you were to go with a Dell Laptop, their XPS line and Vostros line dont have pcmcia slot at all.

There is only 2 models out of 6 of their latitude D830 that have a pcmcia slot. The latitude is more of a business laptop then a "creative" laptop.

There is only 1 model of their precision (workstation) laptop that has a pcmcia slot, and that is the mid model.

If you want 256meg dedicated gpu with pcmcia, your ONLY 2 choices are the latitude D830 or the precision M4300. None of the dedicated 512meg dedicated GPU has a pcmcia slot.

Yes, you can use an adapter ...etc, but that is not the point of the argument. In that case, I can use an "add on adapter" to get full res HD-SDI out of the EX at 4:2:2 UNCOMPRESSED.

I am sure this is also the trend for the other laptop manufacturers.

Anyways, personally, I think a CF card tech is the way to go. It has been in the industry for so long and still going on strong. With the RED ONE using CF, and most probably, the mini RED will also be using CF, the only reason not to use cheaper open standard CF is for profitability reasons (although surprisingly Sony uses CF on one of their newer hdv cam).

Barry_S

11-19-2007, 09:00 AM

...
Yes, you can use an adapter ...etc, but that is not the point of the argument. In that case, I can use an "add on adapter" to get full res HD-SDI out of the EX at 4:2:2 UNCOMPRESSED.

C'mon, it's absurd to compare a $135 PCMCIA to ExpressCard adapter to a $3000 HD-SDI laptop "adapter". The reality is that the card form factor is a minor inconvenience. For a desktop workstation, both cards will need some kind of adapter if you don't want to transfer with the camera. Those statements about P2 are plain marketing disinformation.

David Jimerson

11-19-2007, 12:03 PM

I also have the feeling that whatever add-ons or compromises you need in order to edit the EX footage in NLEs which currently don't support the format will be called a "minor inconvenience" or something similar. Which I'm sure it is, more or less, but then, so is a PCMCIA/Express adapter.

puredrifting

11-19-2007, 12:26 PM

Other than the too stiff cable on the Duel adapter, I kind of like it, it's actually quicker to use than the slot with the release button on my PowerBook.

Dan

LuckyStudio 13

11-19-2007, 03:06 PM

You got to shake that feeling off :Drogar-Happy(DBG): This is the workflow for XDCAM EX with Final cut studio (with the new update {link above}). It is just like P2, native editing.

http://www.apple.com/support/releasenotes/en/Final_Cut_Pro_6.0_rn/

"Working with XDCAM EX Footage

Once you ingest your XDCAM EX footage to QuickTime media files on your scratch disk, you can simply choose the XDCAM EX Easy Setup that corresponds to your footage and edit as you would with any other native format in Final Cut Pro.

Rendering and conforming XDCAM EX media works in the same way as HDV and XDCAM HD rendering and conforming."

PCMCIA is fading into the sunset. Express Card is the new dawn.

I also have the feeling that whatever add-ons or compromises you need in order to edit the EX footage in NLEs which currently don't support the format will be called a "minor inconvenience" or something similar. Which I'm sure it is, more or less, but then, so is a PCMCIA/Express adapter.

David Jimerson

11-19-2007, 03:14 PM

Read what I posted again. There's much more out there than FCS2.

LuckyStudio 13

11-19-2007, 03:40 PM

It wont surprise me in the very near future, all the popular NLEs will eventually support native XDCAM EX editing. One thing for sure (a concrete fact), the computer industry wont be going back to pcmcia. Even the governing body of pcmcia is stating the fact of express card being more superior and being the replacement for pcmcia.

Barry_Green

11-19-2007, 03:45 PM

Sure, computers are going forward with ExpressCard, and they'll stick with it until whatever replaces ExpressCard comes along.

But what does that have to do with us?

LuckyStudio 13

11-19-2007, 04:03 PM

Barry,
We were commenting on the quotation below. The guy was simply commenting that pcmcia is aging and it is going away, while express slots are newer and has better specs than pcmcia. It was unfortunately was taken way out of context in the earlier discussion.

"B&H: How would you compare the XDCAM SxS PRO memory cards to the Panasonic P2 technology?

P2 was built on outdated technology before the cameras even came out on the market, but there wasn’t a viable alternative at the time. Today, P2 is really showing its age and it’s only going to fall further behind. SxS cards, on the other hand, offer tremendous performance improvements."

Barry_S

11-19-2007, 04:07 PM

Dx-- you seem oddly preoccupied with the PCMCIA standard. Other than the need for an adapter, how do see P2 being held back? I don't really see *any* issue with P2 other than the adapter, which seems pretty trivial. If anything, I'd give P2 points for being more widely adopted and proven in the field. It's likely that SxS will prove to be equally reliable, but functionally, both cards are speced to do the job.

The only people taking things out of context are the ones making and supporting this misinformation about P2. I was at Sony's EX1 presentation and they wrongly claimed that the underlying technology behind P2 was obsolete--when in reality--the only issue is whether the card will plug directly into a laptop without an adapter.

Barry_Green

11-19-2007, 04:18 PM

DX, I'm talking specifically about that, yes. When taken *in context* that statement is misleading marketing hyperbole that has nothing to do with us (the video industry). To claim that P2 is "falling behind" when in actuality it's currently capturing 80% of broadcast sales is just ridiculous, preposterous posturing.

Whether PCMCIA continues in notebook computers is of little relevance. Convenience, yes, but not relevance. Is there any PCMCIA slot in any Mac desktop? Any Windows desktop? No, of course not, yet it matters not at all; a PCI->PCMCIA adapter is $75, and an ExpressCard->PCMCIA adapter is $69.

Look, let's put it this way: has there ever been a computer where you could just directly put your DV tape in? No, you always needed an adapter, and that adapter was called a "deck" and it cost $4,000. Did that stop DV?

Has there ever been a computer where you could directly put your XDCAM disc in it? Of course not, you needed an adapter, and that adapter was also called a "deck" and it was $10,000 to $20,000. Now they're introducing a newer, $3,000 adapter, a non-deck computer disc reader.

Has there ever been a computer where you could directly put a P2/PCMCIA card in? Why, yes there has -- basically every laptop made up until the Macbook Pro, in fact. What a great convenience, you don't need an adapter. And something like 80% of the laptops on the market still offer that slot.

But if it goes away, so what? We'll be back to needing an adapter. Except the adapter doesn't cost $3,000 to $20,000. It costs $69, from Addonics. Or $119, from Duel.

The flavor of tomorrow is ExpressCard for direct laptop computer insertion, sure. But do any desktops come with ExpressCard slots? No? So, what does that mean -- is the EX1 paralyzed? You see how silly that line of thinking is? You just use an appropriate adapter. I believe Sony sells a USB adapter for something like $400. And someday in the future when ExpressCard is obsoleted, you'll need such adapters to work with the cards at that time. So? Big deal.

The point is: whether it's PCMCIA or ExpressCard has little to no bearing on video professionals at all. Even if ExpressCard takes over entirely and completely obsoletes PCMCIA in laptop computers, so what? You can always use a $75 PCI->PCMCIA adapter for your desktop, or a $69 ExpressCard->PCMCIA adapter for your laptop. Or use the P2 Gear, P2 Store, or P2 Drive. Or just use your camera -- it's a desktop PCMCIA reader for free.

Furthermore, card capacities are growing to the point where field offloading is becoming less of an issue entirely. The SxS already provides for 45 minutes per card, 90 minutes per load. An HPX500 with 32GB cards has a 120-minute load, or 300 minutes in 720/24pN. That's enough to get through just about any shoot day without ever needing to offload. And capacities will keep growing, and speed will keep increasing. Six months from now the 64GB cards will be out, giving you 10 hours in one "load". Who would ever need to offload to a laptop in the field when they've got 10 hours continuous shooting time?

And if they do need to offload, well, they might just need a $69 adapter.

It's a non-issue.

LuckyStudio 13

11-19-2007, 04:20 PM

Not preoccupied, just read back my original thread http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1103296&postcount=145

Anyways, IMHO we are only 1 cam generation away from the mini red. By that time, we all will be using 35mm nikon or cine lenses and CF cards anyways.

Barry_Green

11-19-2007, 04:25 PM

but functionally, both cards are speced to do the job.

Not entirely. P2 is spec'd to survive being ejected while being written to, or to survive the power being shut off when being written to, with a maximum potential impact of losing only the last two seconds. Sony claims that if those events happen to an SxS card, all data on the card may be destroyed. All 45 minutes could disappear.

Barry_S

11-19-2007, 04:35 PM

Not entirely. P2 is spec'd to survive being ejected while being written to, or to survive the power being shut off when being written to, with a maximum potential impact of losing only the last two seconds. Sony claims that if those events happen to an SxS card, all data on the card may be destroyed. All 45 minutes could disappear.

Interesting and definitely worth testing.

Stevet

11-19-2007, 05:15 PM

David Jimerson

11-19-2007, 05:41 PM

Barry_Green

11-19-2007, 08:29 PM

And with Fuji signing on to make P2 cards now... sounds like any blather about "drying up" or "falling behind" will just be that -- blather. :)

puredrifting

11-19-2007, 08:53 PM

Barry:

Where did this bombshell come from? Do you have a link to a press release or website that elaborates on this?

Dan

Stevet

11-19-2007, 08:53 PM

The point is, the adapter issue is a very minor inconvenience, just like current NLE support for XDCAM EX is.

Man, that sounds all to familiar.

Barry_Green

11-19-2007, 09:04 PM

Barry:

Where did this bombshell come from? Do you have a link to a press release or website that elaborates on this?

Dan
Found a press release on the Panasonic Japanese website. Posted the link in HVX News. Every once in a while I go rooting around on those sites, they have all the good press releases and they post 'em a day earlier because of the time zone issues... :)

David Jimerson

11-19-2007, 09:10 PM

Man, that sounds all to familiar.

Meaning what?

Stevet

11-20-2007, 08:48 AM

Sorry David. I just happen to remember the support across NLEs when the HVX200 came out.

Barry_Green

11-20-2007, 01:38 PM

Every new system struggles with NLE acceptance when first introduced. FCP and Avid didn't support HDV for about six or seven months, and HD100 owners have been waiting about 2.5 YEARS for Avid to support 24P HDV. The HVX had FCP and Avid support from day one; I expect the EX1 will have FCP and Vegas support on day one. But it may take time for the other editors to come around, it always does.

Noel Evans

11-21-2007, 07:00 AM

So from the footage I have seen so far, theres only one thing I could say.. looks at the very least like the lens is much better.

Stevet

11-21-2007, 09:50 AM

I'm hearing there is some skew from the rolling shutter when fast panning the camera side to side, not like the H20, but some. The same guy said he shot moving cars and said there was no issue. I have no plans on rapidly panning my camera. Even If I did it for an effect, with all the motion blur, this would not be the issue. I'm concerned about the footage I use 99.9% of the time.

If this is a concern, you guys might want tp hold onto your HVX200.
You can pound on that thing and it will always look the same frame by frame.
Assuming you like what you see. I have seen excellent looking HVX stuff, that's for sure, and I have seen horrible HVX stuff. Though, I believe this goes without saying for just about any camera.

Barry_Green

11-21-2007, 01:30 PM

Stevet

11-21-2007, 03:00 PM

LOL...
I knew as soon as I had clicked send that there would be this response.
The thing is, I'm just reporting what someone else found. They did not try all circumstances and just mentioned what they saw.

Well,
As of yet, we don't have our cameras, if they turn out to be sh*t, we won't buy.
I have the feeling Sony did their homework to minimize these artifacts. We'll know REAL soon.

Unix

11-21-2007, 06:40 PM

no 1080p :(

Barry_S

11-21-2007, 07:00 PM

no 1080p :(

Most certainly 1080p @ 23.98p, 25p, and 29.97p.

Noel Evans

11-22-2007, 04:25 AM

Skew when panning is the least of the rolling shutter artifacts. What you should be testing for is wobble during vibration (handheld walking shots, car mounted shots, airplane/helicopter shots, mountain bike shots, etc) or situations where maybe you're tripod-mounted and get hit with a momentary bump (the sunset shot was a classic one for that).

Or the exposure incidents, such as flashing lights, strobelights, flashbulbs, press conferences, red carpet premieres, sports events like boxing matches where the flashbulbs will have an impact on the scene...

Those are the real-world scenarios where a rolling shutter could completely screw you. A little leaning on a fast pan is nothing to even be concerned about.

Ok so I got to play with the EX today at Interbee here in Japan. I really gave the cam a pretty thorough workout much to the shagrin of the Sony guy standing there.

Heres what I saw: (n.b. I recorded a number of clips and then reviewed them on playback on a broadcast monitor - I shot them all at 1/60 24p with varying NDs engaged adjusting the fstop)

1/ The image this camera puts out is beautifully crisp. Not like an oversharpened shot, nothing like that at all. Just prefectly crystal. The image truly is a thing of beauty.

2/ 24p... well ts 24p and looks exactly how it should.

3/ The lens used is great. I could see no discernable CA at all (remembering I had a limited FOV to shoot in that was set up by Sony). The focus adjustment felt smooth and responsive as you would expect I guess.

4/ I went nuts with the pan control - back and forth and all over the place, vibrating it etc. When I played it back on the monitor from MY eye I could not see ANY disconcerting rolling shutter issues.

5/ This is were the Sony guy got a little upset. I set my digital camera to continually shoot with flash on a sign fairly well straight in front of the cam at about 1-2 meters away. All the while I was shooting. And this is where I saw the rolling shutter problem.

My flash was hitting the sign front on and illuminating it fully. When reviewing the footage, the sign was half illuminated, quarter illuminated, then just a small section at the top of the frame.

6/ Personally I loved the menus and how they operated. Small thing but I thought it worked well. Sadly I forgot to see much as far as how adjustable colors etc were.

Have I missed something? Well maybe but ask away.

My conclusion.

This cameras form factor is amazing for what it can do. The image is beautiful - really. I liked the controls and how it was laid out - a bit fidly but its a small cam. Id say this is a GOAL for Sony - BUT, that rolling shutter, I am not convinced d - but I would wait to see more real world shooting and what turns up. Certainly I can say 100% that flashing of any kind is an issue.

Elton

11-22-2007, 07:06 AM

Thanks for the detailed report, ncje. Very helpful.

Sounds like flashes and strobes will be the big bugaboo. Good to know, however.

mico

11-22-2007, 08:45 AM

Ok so I got to play with the EX today at Interbee here in Japan. I really gave the cam a pretty thorough workout much to the shagrin of the Sony guy standing there.

5/ This is were the Sony guy got a little upset. I set my digital camera to continually shoot with flash on a sign fairly well straight in front of the cam at about 1-2 meters away. All the while I was shooting. And this is where I saw the rolling shutter problem.

My flash was hitting the sign front on and illuminating it fully. When reviewing the footage, the sign was half illuminated, quarter illuminated, then just a small section at the top of the frame.

Regarding number 5 on your list . In the film world the same thing would happen if the shutter was not synced to the strobe, since you can't sync the flash to this unit adjusting the shutter angle might help this. So someone needs to test varying shutter angles and see what they get.

And if anyone has the time could you test these things.

1)A vignette issue that so far one person has. Point at white wall and slowly going through the zoom range with OIS off.

2) Hand held in car on very bumpy road ( or any heavy vibration environment) . The same test pointed at trees or a series of vertical objects.

3) with an almost full SXS card - eject card while recording and also turning power off while recording with almost full card and see if you lose the footage on the card.

4) Appreciate any comments about editing the footage in FCP

5) Any comments on how the footage handles any color correction would also be appreciated.

Thanks

Stevet

11-22-2007, 09:04 AM

Ncje, thanks for the review!

I hope you were mistaken when you said you set the shutter to 1/60 with the cam at 24P?

Also, mico brought up the question I had about adjusting the shutter angle for the strobe.

Noel Evans

11-22-2007, 09:42 AM

Ncje, thanks for the review!

I hope you were mistaken when you said you set the shutter to 1/60 with the cam at 24P?

No sir.

ed 209

11-22-2007, 11:26 AM

5/ This is were the Sony guy got a little upset. I set my digital camera to continually shoot with flash on a sign fairly well straight in front of the cam at about 1-2 meters away. All the while I was shooting. And this is where I saw the rolling shutter problem.

My flash was hitting the sign front on and illuminating it fully. When reviewing the footage, the sign was half illuminated, quarter illuminated, then just a small section at the top of the frame.

Thanks for the report. Was the partial exposure only evident when you went through the footage frame by frame or could you see it as it was played back in real time?

Noel Evans

11-22-2007, 04:09 PM

Thanks for the report. Was the partial exposure only evident when you went through the footage frame by frame or could you see it as it was played back in real time?

Ed in real time.

Lenilenapi

11-23-2007, 12:46 AM

How is the zoom servo on this thing? Have they improved on the lousy servos that plague all the rest of these cameras. Can it truly feather a zoom like a Professional 2/3" chip camera can?

Noel Evans

11-23-2007, 02:15 AM

Another thing I didnt check - some must almost have the cams by now so I imagine they can tell us.

Stevet

11-23-2007, 06:45 AM

How is the zoom servo on this thing? Have they improved on the lousy servos that plague all the rest of these cameras. Can it truly feather a zoom like a Professional 2/3" chip camera can?

Chris did not go into detail, but did say he liked it.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=779610&postcount=5

Elton

11-23-2007, 01:26 PM

Chris and I will be testing the camera this afternoon! :) (SDI greenscreen baby!)

I'll post my impressions of the camera and should have some footage to share this weekend.

mikkowilson

11-23-2007, 01:36 PM

Hey, while it's plugged into SDI, try setting it to an off-speed mode and let us know if the output still works?

- Mikko

Elton

11-23-2007, 01:40 PM

Will do. Hope it does have off-speed monitoring but I'm not counting on it.

mikkowilson

11-23-2007, 01:41 PM

Yeah, it would be great to get a tested confirmation either way on a production unit. Thanks.

- Mikko

sinai

11-23-2007, 02:16 PM

http://www.uemedia.net/CPC/cinematographer/articles/article_16647.shtml

Elton

11-23-2007, 08:24 PM

insanityfw

11-23-2007, 08:38 PM

Wow, Elton. I have to say I really like these shots. Shows great promise. Plenty of crisp information to manipulate.

I've said it before, but I can't wait to strap a promist, etc. on this thing and see what kind of looks can be had.

Keep 'em coming. They are greatly appreciated.

J.

Mark Williams

11-23-2007, 08:47 PM

Any chance at looking at some high motion stuff. I do a lot of nature and sports subjects. Do you think really fast moving river / kayak scenes will break the codec at 35 VBR ?

Stevet

11-23-2007, 11:32 PM

Thank you Elton.
These images look a lot less electronic
There's plenty of detail, but it does not have the hard edges. I like it.

sinai

11-23-2007, 11:59 PM

elton how was the impression on the handheld work , is it really so badly balanced ?
when will fcp come up with the right stuff for workflow so far you can t log the ex material into fcp...
anyways we were about to order two hvx 200 s just now . the order is on ice now can t wait till my dealer here got there first ex`s . eventhou i m ready to order from what i know already ...

Elton

11-24-2007, 12:57 AM

Chris came down to my house for a few hours and we tried to do as much as we could.

It's really a phenomenal camera, and there's so much to explore, but our main focus was to do some HD-SDI chroma key tests, and then shoot whatever else we could.

Basic impressions:

--Lens is absolutely wonderful. Very nice, professional feel to it. Easy to do slow creep zooms with smooth stops. Full manual mode is a thing of beauty too.

--LCD is in an entirely different league. Really puts the competition to shame. Very high resolution for 3.5" and it was a breeze to focus with. Also very readable in bright conditions.

I found that I didn't necessarily need peaking or image expansion to discern focus. The colored peaking display is really nice too.

--Sturdy build. Nothing cheap feeling.

--SxS slots are well covered. Yes, I'm sure you could pop one out while recording if you were totally clueless, but I suppose there's a risk of losing data on "accident" nontheless. Users will have to be extra careful that no one ejects a card while it's being written to.

--GREAT interface. Easily the most intuitive and elegant that I've seen thus far in affordable HD cams.

--Excellent image tweakability. (color matrix, gamma, knee, etc)

--Superb sensitivity: It's obviously brighter and less noisy in lowlight than any other camera in its class. ASA 800 rating is probably accurate.

--1/2" DOF is definitely an improvement. I didn't notice any lens ramping in manual mode with longer focal lenths. It seems like you can keep F1.9 all the way to 14x.

Cons:

--VF isn't nearly as detailed as the LCD.

I'm sure there might be a few other signfigant drawbacks, but I haven't spent enough time with the camera to find them.

I didn't test for rolling shutter or codec artifacts this time. I did a few quick pans and didn't notice skew, but that's all I've checked for thus far.

Elton

11-24-2007, 01:16 AM

elton how was the impression on the handheld work , is it really so badly balanced ?

I think it's fine for a handycam form factor. The rotating grip is really helpful too.

when will fcp come up with the right stuff for workflow so far you can t log the ex material into fcp...

Don't know but I'm sure it'll be solved fairly soon. Chris uses the standard XDCAM software to import from the cards currently.

anyways we were about to order two hvx 200 s just now . the order is on ice now can t wait till my dealer here got there first ex`s . eventhou i m ready to order from what i know already ...

I'd suggest playing with both cameras before you buy. The EX1 can do a lot of the same things but it's a different beast.

Christopher Barry

11-24-2007, 01:36 AM

Elton, great info and images, thank you.

Can you confirm if the HD-SDI output is true 10-bit or is it truncated 8-bit in a 10-bit stream?

sinai

11-24-2007, 01:52 AM

http://www.camcorder-test.com/camcorder-what-i-cmp-u-cmd-i-view-u-mode-i-docompare-u-sortby-i-preis-u-id-i-42-y-9-u-name-i-Panasonic%20AG-HVX200-u-bname-i-Sony%20PMD-EX1-u-cm2-i-vergleich.html

Elton

11-24-2007, 02:33 AM

Any chance at looking at some high motion stuff. I do a lot of nature and sports subjects. Do you think really fast moving river / kayak scenes will break the codec at 35 VBR ?

At some point I'm going to do a codec torture test when I have more time with the cam.

HQ 35 VBR mode will more than likely hold up in stressful scenes.

sinai

11-24-2007, 04:07 AM

one last thing is there an us and an euro version of the cam ?
guess not ?

Steve Shovlar

11-24-2007, 05:23 AM

Like most Sony cams they are NTSC and PAL switchable. I think this is the same.

Noel Evans

11-24-2007, 05:57 AM

--GREAT interface. Easily the most intuitive and elegant that I've seen thus far in affordable HD cams.

Agree with you on many of your points but the above was one that I KNEW YOU would agree with me on.

Elton

11-24-2007, 10:29 AM

Agree with you on many of your points but the above was one that I KNEW YOU would agree with me on.

Yeah, I think the interface is one the most impressive features. It's just nice looking and easy to scroll through.

Elton

11-24-2007, 10:31 AM

Can you confirm if the HD-SDI output is true 10-bit or is it truncated 8-bit in a 10-bit stream?

I've recorded the raw SDI on similar shots (sky at dusk, etc) to both 10 and 8 bit codecs and have had a hard time seeing a difference. My non-scientific sneaking suspicion is that it's probably truncated.

Stevet

11-24-2007, 10:47 AM

I hear you..
I imagine the largest difference would be looking at gradients on the big screen.

Christopher Barry

11-24-2007, 01:43 PM

I've recorded the raw SDI on similar shots (sky at dusk, etc) to both 10 and 8 bit codecs and have had a hard time seeing a difference. My non-scientific sneaking suspicion is that it's probably truncated.

Thanks Elton. To further analyse the sky footage, perhaps try an adaptation of this CineForm test (http://www.cineform.com/products/FAQ.htm#ProspectHD3) (enlarged image (http://www.cineform.com/technology/Demo10bitVS8bit.jpg)), and see if the banding issue becomes more pronounced?

Edit: This may not be the right test.

Pepeds

11-24-2007, 02:27 PM

Here are a few grabs from today. Had very little time to play with the camera but tested low light (phenomenal) and some chroma key shots.

Everything was shot out-of-the-box "broadcast flat". No gamma adjustments at all. Plenty to play with in CC however.

A few grabs:

http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/10380/1195873361.jpg
http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/10380/1195873400.jpg
http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/10380/1195874590.jpg
http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/10380/1195873314.jpg
Am I the only one that think this screenshots look... well... I don't know how to say it, please nobody feel offended... they look cheap!... I tried to do improve them in photoshop, but there is sooo much color noise... I like the dynamic range it shows on the baby picture, but the overall image reminds me of my very cheap still-photo HP camera... I was hoping to buy my PMW-EX1 very soon, but now this worries me... can somebody please tell me that the noise is only from the JPG compression?, maybe you used a lot of gain???... can you imagine to make a chroma key with as much noise as the image dog against blue???... (and it is definitely not a 4:2:0 issue)... why do they look as if they have the texture of a dithered .gif image???

I am truly shocked... was I expecting too much?... I'm dying here!... please help!!!...

(okay, granted it is a little bit exagerated, but it really worries me to think that this is the quality to expect)

When will we finally see some moving footage???

Lenilenapi

11-24-2007, 02:43 PM

Hey here's a few more questions:.

Can you switch between two different zebra levels like you can on the Panasonics.?That's a great feature.

Also will the viewfinder read out footage markings like they do on a Panasonic?

Elton

11-24-2007, 02:49 PM

Pepeds,

No, you're not imagining things.

I was expecting better from the SDI output. What I'm finding so far is that there's something going on in the image processing that's sort of "smudging" fine detail. It's reminiscent of the V1's "oil paint" effect, but much more subtle.

I wasn't actually operating the camera during these shots. My guess is that AGC might've been engaged accidentally and there might be some auto noise reduction processing going on.

Honestly, Canon's SDI output is much better, but I'm not sure if something on the EX1 was engaged that shouldn't have been.

I'll do more testing soon, but as of right now it's bordering on unacceptable to me.

Stevet

11-24-2007, 06:21 PM

Elton, I do see what your saying. Maybe you and Chris can get together and devote more time on checking the SDI. Chris did mention in his DOF thread that he was playing around with some settings.
I guess the best way would be to capture both to XDCAM 35mb and from SDI. Bring them is and compare frame-by-frame.

Once thing I do like about from some of the stuff I'm seeing is it doesn't seem to have that gritty look that I see a lot with video from cheaper cams.

Actually, I noticed Chris's last shot http://www.thevideodepartment.net/EX1/16005806.tif (which should of been XDCAM codec - since he does not own SDI capture equipment) looks a bit softer than the previous stuff he posted. Hmmm.. I wonder if some important settings have changed.

He mentioned he was 8' from the talent who was about 8' from the back wall.

Noel Evans

11-24-2007, 08:56 PM

Just want to add my 2c. None of these grabs are looking anywhere near as clean and crisp as the stuff I was viewing via the SDI out to monitor.

Stevet

11-24-2007, 09:11 PM

I was wondering the same thing. Nigel's reviewed said he first hooked it up SDI out to HDLINK into a 46” Sony Bravia native 1920x1080 HD television. He said the image quality produced this way was just superb.

Tonight over at dvinfo, Chris mentioned he was going to do a factory reset before doing more testing.

Pepeds

11-24-2007, 09:57 PM

Well, let's hope it is a problem with the SDI capture settings or codec... any chance to see a screenshot from an actual 35mbps recording???

Elton

11-25-2007, 01:08 AM

It turns out that Chris had the detail setting turned off, so that's probably the culprit.

On page 72 in the user's manual there are some interesting image tweaks that can be played with. There's probably a sweet spot to be found with the custom settings.

Stevet

11-25-2007, 07:19 AM

Thanks Elton. I guess that explains what we are seeing. When I first saw these frame grabs, I mentioned they had a lot of image detail, but they did not have that electronic signature. Which is a good thing.

When I get the camera next week (fingers crossed), I'll have to do some experimenting. I also plan on buying HDLINK.

Stevet

11-25-2007, 09:25 AM

Actually, I'm more worried about the vignetting on some cameras. I sure hope this is not a problem on all EX1 cams!
If so, I find it hard to believe it was missed in all their design, qual , and field tests!

http://www.sonyhdvinfo.com/showthread.php?t=11627&page=2

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=108433

I'm going to be pissed if I have to return this cam for this issue, not to mention my other cam operators.
I'm praying it will not have this issue, but I've only seen results of three cams and I believe two have the issue... not good!
Not to mention Walt saw it on his pre-production model. That tells me they probably knew about it and released them anyways.
Well, they're in for a big surprise when they get them ALL back!

Elton

11-25-2007, 11:27 AM

I think there's some fairly aggressive on-chip NR circuitry in the EX1. I'm sure it's part of the sensitivity gain, but it may be messing with fine detail. Hope to meet up with Chris again this week and really do some tweaking with the settings.

We shot a little bit of stuff at an outdoor mall last night. Christmas lights everywhere, but still fairly lowlight.

Really amazing to shoot full overcrank 720 60 at 0 dB and still have decent exposure in the available light. Also, lack of CCD smear on bright pinpoint lights was amazing.

Lastly, I ran around with the camera and gave it some good bumps while recording 60p. In extreme jolts I could see a little rolling shutter wobble, but it was mild.

Steven--I saw no vignetting anywhere with Chris' camera.

Elton

11-25-2007, 11:34 AM

Here's something I couldn't have dreamed of doing with the H1, A1, HVX etc without seeing neat little laser beams up and down the frame while pointing at this lamp. (I was really close to it)

http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/10380/1196015564.jpg

Stevet

11-25-2007, 11:45 AM

Thanks Elton,
Actually looking at the "Detail" section in the manual, it has a parameter called "Crispening" which may be just what your looking for.
I'm glad to hear Chris's cam does not have a vignetting problem!

Wow, tha image is a surprise!
Thanks for the tests.
Please post more grabs!
I'd like to see a nice looking DOF shot of a person/s shot at about 8' away, but framed wide enough to show as much image as possible and still offer a tighter DOF.

I think there's some fairly aggressive on-chip NR circuitry in the EX1. I'm sure it's part of the sensitivity gain, but it may be messing with fine detail. Hope to meet up with Chris again this week and really do some tweaking with the settings.

We shot a little bit of stuff at an outdoor mall last night. Christmas lights everywhere, but still fairly lowlight.

Really amazing to shoot full overcrank 720 60 at 0 dB and still have decent exposure in the available light. Also, lack of CCD smear on bright pinpoint lights was amazing.

Lastly, I ran around with the camera and gave it some good bumps while recording 60p. In extreme jolts I could see a little rolling shutter wobble, but it was mild.

Steven--I saw no vignetting anywhere with Chris' camera.

Elton

11-25-2007, 11:55 AM

Yes, "Crispening" is exactly what I want to zero in on.

Did shoot a few DOF shots, (nice bokeh) but Chris has the footage.

Stevet

11-25-2007, 11:58 AM

Elton, I take you guys turned on the "Detail' setting last night?

Have you had another chance to compare XDCAM 35mb to SDI out again?

Also, has your thoughts on the camera changed at all?

mikkowilson

11-25-2007, 12:35 PM

http://www.dvxuser6.com/uploaded/10380/1196015564.jpg

Nice grab. Shame about all that CA though, I'd have hoped for less with the larger chips.

- Mikko

Stevet

11-25-2007, 12:45 PM

CA there for sure, but I'm not surprised under those over expose conditions.
Any other cam less than 10K would of been twice as bad for CA.

Little CA is one of the great things about this camera.

Stevet

11-25-2007, 12:48 PM

For those interested. I'm not sure how long these will last, but Andreas put up some vignetting tests for his cam.
http://ex.bolanski.com/

No issues seen in these tests. That's good news. Well, it's been said that you can see a very slight (I mean slight) amount near the wide end.
Also, I'm blown away how clean the low light wall shots look.
This camera has VERY low noise!

Elton

11-25-2007, 01:17 PM

Yes, camera was turned on back to default settings. I don't know what that actually means in terms of detail, but the 720 that I saw looked very crisp.

I did see some of Chris' XDCAM footage that was recorded at the same time as SDI and oddly enough...looked a little better. It could've been his monitor compared to mine, but it's like I saw less smudging in the XDCAM HQ stuff than the raw SDI.

I know, it makes no sense, but hopefully we'll do some further tests to really see what's what.

Chris likes to shoot with all detail settings off, and in theory that would give you the most flexibility in post, but even with the higher resolution of the EX1 I'm not convinced that it is the ideal way to shoot with the camera. Disclaimer: I like crispy details...not overly sharpened mind you, but good delineation of fine detail like hair, etc. Shooting with detail totally off robs the EX of much of that extra HD pop, IMO.

Personally, the juries still out in my mind. I want to dive into the settings and see what can be done.

Elton

11-25-2007, 01:51 PM

btw Mikko, Chris tested off speed with component output and it worked at all frame rates. I believe SDI and component are simultaneously active.

Elton

11-25-2007, 01:52 PM

Nice grab. Shame about all that CA though, I'd have hoped for less with the larger chips.

- Mikko

I'm pretty sure I was wide open at F1.9 too. That probably had some impact on CA.

mikkowilson

11-25-2007, 01:53 PM

btw Mikko, Chris tested off speed with component output and it worked at all frame rates. I believe SDI and component are simultaneously active.

That's great to hear.

I'd love to hear about the downconverted Composite output at off-speed too. (Steadicam and Jib guys know why this is critical)

- Mikko

Stevet

11-25-2007, 02:30 PM

Barlow,
So the jury is still out if the SDI looks better than the internal processing XDCAM codec?
I hear you, it does not make sense.....
This is the signal in digital form before it goes to the XDCAM codec.
I wonder if there's something else going on here.
Also, all who have seen the SDI out, including ncje has said the SDI out is tack sharp.
Well, today I won an HDLINK on ebay for $315 (new), I'll have to check it out next week. I don't have an HDMI capture card, but do own a monitor (Dell 2405) that's
capable of 1920x1080 via DVI.
Also, I have a 50" pioneer plasma with HDMI. I should be able to at least compare while monitoring.
I'm real interested in Cineform's new HDMI portable recorder they plan on building next year.

Stevet

11-25-2007, 03:15 PM

From the still frame capture comparison (HVX200, EX1, G1, Z1), the EX1 surely had less electronic sharpening than the others and offfered higher detail.

I'm not sure what's going on here; although, I'm really looking forward to running a lot of tests to determine the "ideal" settings for this camera.

Barry_Green

11-25-2007, 11:46 PM

Sony has a very different way of processing detail, coring, and noise than anybody else. We first noticed this at the 6-way shootout, and it then led to the "oil paint" issue. They're quite aggressive with active noise reduction and you lose detail as you gain up, which is a clue as to what they're doing but I haven't tried to figure out yet what it means.

But I'm not surprised you guys are a little puzzled by it, as it's different than what anyone else does.

Stevet

11-26-2007, 07:34 AM

They're quite aggressive with active noise reduction and you lose detail as you gain up, which is a clue as to what they're doing but I haven't tried to figure out yet what it means.

But I'm not surprised you guys are a little puzzled by it, as it's different than what anyone else does.

If this is what some call loosing detail, I'll stay with this oil paint set any day! LOL

http://members.cox.net/vx2000/HVX200_EX1.bmp

I'm not buying any of that.

Elton

11-26-2007, 09:51 AM

Stevet,

I think the problem was in turning the detail off. Many exterior shots, even at -3 dB, looked like they had roughly the same amount of detail loss as the higher gain shots.

That EX1 grab from the cam comparison was probably shot with factory default detail settings and there's obviously very little noise, so I think something's amiss in noise department when detail's off . Hope to test a little more this week.

Stevet

11-26-2007, 09:59 AM

Elton, I agree with you on this.
I have yet to see one of these cameras not loose some of their "perceived" detail with it turned off.
My HD100 and the HVX200 with detail off looked soft.
I usually left the HD100 on minimum setting. This offered just enough.
The HVX200 with it set to its lowest amount was real soft.

The real question is how do all of these sub 10K cams compare without any added "artificial" detail.

I would of expected the EX1 to appear softer with it's detail setting set to off.
Now, that's the best test regarding detail. Just looking at the red car image, or for that matter the entire
test image the red car came from, the EX1 has less artifical enhancement than all compared, but still
has the most natural clean look while offering the most detail!

http://members.cox.net/vx2000/HVX200_EX1_Bottle.bmp
HVX200 on Left; EX1 on right

Something to remind themselves as they look at this bottle image is that it was a small crop from a 1080P image. That gives you an idea of actual "detail" regardless of any sharpening effects.

Barry_Green

11-26-2007, 10:50 AM

If this is what some call loosing detail, I'll stay with this oil paint set any day! LOL
Thanks for that informative, productive post.

Now go back and read what I said please. As you gain up, the noise reduction circuitry gets aggressive and you lose detail in the shot. How it performs compared to something else is irrelevant to the question of how the noise performance circuitry works. The oil paint effect comes into play strongly on a V1 when you gain up, anything past 6dB really shows it. Elton said the EX1 was exhibiting a bit of that same effect. I was just trying to explain how/why that comes about.

Stevet

11-26-2007, 10:59 AM

Sorry Barry.
My bad.

But, unless I see images at several gains that actually show a direct comparison between competative cameras and how it affects the detail, I'm not going on someones speculation. I'm not going on all of the Sony cams use the same design with the gain/noise reduction. If it looks like your right, believe me, I'll be the first to agree!

I did not hear any complaints from Brian's (Redrock Micro) write up regarding using the EX1 with the M2. In fact he spoke highly of gaining up as high as 12dB.
I realize his writing was focused on levels and noise, but there was nothing on picture quality suffering from 12dB (which I would probably rarely use ever)

Yes, I do realize gain is a relative adjustment to each camera's "stated" 0dB. Based on the EX1's sensitivity, it may need less gain to acheive a one-for-one level of perceived brightness with another comparison camera.

Elton

11-26-2007, 11:37 AM

The nice thing about the EX1 is there will be very few times where you will want to gain up.

Like I said, something in the way things were rendered felt amiss, and I think it's a strange processing that's happening when detail is off.

Stevet

11-26-2007, 11:57 AM

I hear you Barlow.
It's possible that some of the "needed" processing is disabled with the detail set to off. I'll have to experiment.

Stevet

11-26-2007, 02:26 PM

The cameras are rolling out!

I just heard my camera was sent today two-day fed-X!

puredrifting

11-26-2007, 04:01 PM

Stevet:

Let us know your first impressions. What would be really cool would be for you to take some digital snaps as you unbox it, inquiring minds will want to know exactly what it comes with.

Nothing as fun as unboxing new cameras although unwrapping the Letus Extreme was right up there.

Good luck with it, seems like it will be quite a nice piece of gear.

Dan

Stevet

11-26-2007, 04:21 PM

Thanks Dan.
I'll do so.
Letus Extreme.... sweet lens man!

Stevet

11-26-2007, 07:47 PM

It must be nice to be rich!
No wonder it's hard to get these cameras!
LOL

http://www.bolanski.com/ex/ex8.jpg

Purc

11-27-2007, 10:37 AM

Hello there. Got a question about the EX1. I want to know how long the distance is in centimeters between the end of the camera (including the battery) and the screw where you can attach a tripod on it .

Here is a picture what i mean
http://luitjes.purc.nl/EX1_spiderbrace.jpg
(original image by dvuser)

Could someone with a ruler and a ex1 ;), check that for me? That would be very nice. Why i ask this? Well, i modified a spiderbrace so that the camera that i have now is more on my shoulder to minimize the balast on my arms (im not that strong ;) ). But i dont know if it will fit with the EX1.

Thnx in advanced.

Neil Rowe

11-28-2007, 11:17 PM

Any of the 3-CCD HD cameras can deliver fine results, but they're certainly not necessary to be "okay" -- a 3-CCD standard-def camera's films have won the best cinematography award at Sundance three times (PD150 and DVX) and have been nominated for Oscars for Best Documentary twice (DVX 2006 & 2007).

You don't need HD. And you don't need three chips; the SI-2K and the Red and the HV20 owners would all argue against needing those.

Buy (or rent) something that does the job, but don't get too hung up on the gear because it is *not* what's going to make or break your project.

With that said, "better is better" and we all always want better. And as someone said earlier, there is no global "better". There's only "better for a specific purpose."

Okay, so let me try saying it a different way so I can avoid the whole "it's not the camera, it's the person behind the camera" platitude. Let's say it like this: If you think a better camera is going to be what makes your project better, stop right now. Because it won't. It's like what I used to say a couple of years ago when people would ask "should I shoot on film or video" -- the very fact that you'd be asking the question answers itself: shoot video. When you're ready for film, when the project will benefit from film, etc., you'll know it and you won't even have to ask. Until then, save your money.

..so wait a minute. your saying that the increased naitive sharpness and slightly longer zoom range amongst other different changes of this new sony cam over my current HD cam isnt going to magically transform my feature into an instant sundance winner? .. dangit all .. there goes my entire business plan for becoming a successful filmmaker.

I'll just applaud you in advance for whenever you do your non-partisan review of the camera Barry. Its absolutely important for people to know what tool will meet thier personal needs. I just wish that they would realise that they are "PERSONAL" needs, and that nobody outside of people in the biz on the viewing end cares what tools were used to produce the work. ...since it was shot on a so and so or cut on a whatever.. its somehow redeemed as a truely viable piece of entertainment whether it sucks or not? Ive seen at least 3 films in the theatre that were shot almost entirely on a PD150 or the like. ive seen 0 from the HVX. one thing in common from all the films that made it to the theatre from lesser quality cams is that the people producing the films werent obsessing over the cameras inferiority to other offerings at the time.. they obsessed over the film, because thats really all that matters. this new cam looks to be another nice tool in the bucket. but thats where it ends. its just another tool. .. better than .. worse than. whatever. the proof is in the finished pudding, not in the ingredients.