No P2 format in the new HDX900?

sonisfear said:
http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?displayTab=O&storeId=11201&catalogId=13051&itemId=97602&catGroupId=14616&modelNo=AJ-HDX900&surfModel=AJ-HDX900

Why didn't Panasonic incorporate the P2 format in there new affordable HDX900?

If P2 is their direction why not make it compatible in all their pro products?
Click to expand...

DVCPRO100 tape, at this point, can hold more information (time-wise), than the P2 cards, and that's what producers want on their shoot. Tape is also cheaper and easy to archive. Also, if you have a camera that big, why not have a tape deck on it?

Greg
 
I can certainly understand the desire for a higher recording capacity, but isn't the tape deck a huge part of the expense that goes into a camera like this? It seems that they could have used P2, and put the camera at a lower price point. Unless, of course, they didn't want the price to drop too close to their other pro. cameras...
 
Agreed, I'm tempted by the HDX900 but I don't really feel like spending all that extra and going with a tape-based workflow. At least it has a firewire port on it so you don't have to buy a deck. I guess the point of the HDX900 is for guys who shoot freelance and need to deliver a tape at the end of the day; that's one element of the P2 workflow that remains more challenging. If you have to work with the footage, P2 slays, but if you're not working with the footage and just handing it off, then you let the tape become someone else's headache. ;)

The HPC2000 looked like it would be intriguing being P2-based, but with no 24p, it loses all its appeal. I'm sure some will find it ideal for what they're doing, but like the Thompson Infinity, when I found out it didn't offer any manner of 24p, that was the end of that. :)
 
Yes I think it should have had both transport and P2 slot.

Its funny how you get addicted to the gear.

I was a dvx100 man then a HD100/fx1 man and now that larger gigs are coming $25,000.00 for an HDX900 doesn't seem that much of a stretch.

You just can't go wrong with any purchase these days it all in the details now.

Do you think that Panny will come out with a portable external P2card system that connects via firewire for cam like this?
 
I am sure once Pana sells enough HVX's to re-coup R&D I am sure they will come out with a 2/3" P2 version with all the bells & whistles. Probably around 2008??
 
TwistedLincoln said:
I can certainly understand the desire for a higher recording capacity, but isn't the tape deck a huge part of the expense that goes into a camera like this? It seems that they could have used P2, and put the camera at a lower price point. Unless, of course, they didn't want the price to drop too close to their other pro. cameras...
Click to expand...

You would think that the tape deck would cost more than P2 slots, but the HPC2000 actually lists for more than the HDX900 ($27,000 vs $26,500). Supposedly the HPC2000 will also support a new AVC-intra codec that uses only half the data rate of DVCProHD, which will allow more record time on the P2 cards.
 
This is disapointing for a number or reasons. For starters, the HDX900 looks great, essentially featuring the high rez abilities of the HVX200 but with 2/3 chips for less noise and better low light performance, sharper images, and the ability to swap out lenses. It seems like it would be a great option for those who can afford more than an HVX200 but can't quite afford a Varicam. The lack of P2 however is frustrating for those who have come to really enjoy tapeless workflow. I really don't see why a P2 drive couldn't have been included along with tape.

It also bugs me as an HVX user. More cameras using P2s means more people buying P2s. More people buying P2s will eventually lead to cheaper prices and perhaps more manufacturers of the cards. I think part of the reason the price is still high is that the HVX200 is the only camera that uses the things.
 
I for one think this is a great decision for Panny. I've been working with the HVX for 3+ months now, and the workflow in Avid is not quite there (see Avid posts for more detail)...I have lamented shooting content on the HVX because it isn't tape. I have to back up and offload to a laptop, take to the desktop of my PC and then you know the workflow for Avid. Definitely still a ways to go.

Yeah it's great to get the images that you do for the cost, but at the end of a drama shoot, or a commercial for that matter, I will gladly take tape and know that everything is there, and will only be lost if someone mis-labels the tape.

PLUS, being able to use my HD-SDI monitors without the crappy component cable the HVX currently uses is great, along with the built in downcoverter. PLUS 2/3 lenses...that is great, especially when doing doc stuff and needing telephoto.
 
Reading the specs in the brochure, it says that it has the 1394 firewire. And that it can use the Firestore 100, for me that makes a nice combo.
 
DavidBeier said:
It also bugs me as an HVX user. More cameras using P2s means more people buying P2s. More people buying P2s will eventually lead to cheaper prices and perhaps more manufacturers of the cards. I think part of the reason the price is still high is that the HVX200 is the only camera that uses the things.
Click to expand...
You hit the nail on the head. The more cameras using P2 the faster the prices drop. I really did think that all the Pani cams from now on would have some form of P2 functionality.
 
Something tells me that panasonic is not pushing P2 as a be all and end all solution to media. I wouldn't be surprised at all if their higher end cameras continue with tape for a while and then move to a different form of solid state media.

I love the idea of solid state media and the ability to just drag and drop on a computer, but something that really scares me about it (and computers in general) is an effective backup strategy. Sure you can do mirrored hard drives and such, but the simple fact is that our storage needs and capabilities have outpaced our archival storage capabilities. If you don't agree, go compare the price of a 250 gig hard drive compared to whatever the current tape backup system would cost (for a drive and enough tapes to backup that 250 gigs). Sony's XDCAM appeals to me for that reason since you get the advantages of "IT" workflow, and at $30 bucks a pop, you can just stick the old disc on a shelf and pop in a new one.

I think it sucks that every company in this industry just HAS to have their own form of media for their cameras - you buy the camera you like and then you have to buy their format for recording, and their decks/drives for storage and editing and you get hooked into that workflow. What's your next camera going to be when you've already got $1000's invested in old media, decks, etc.

With the nature of this game, we all started out with cheap cameras that played DV, VHS, Hi8, whatever depending one when and where you started. Then we started moving up the food chain. Up until recently, for $4k (or more) you got a nice semi professional camera that used DV tapes. Now, for $5-6k you get an arguably nicer camera that uses proprietary media. Right where panasonic wants you. (not to point the finger only at panasonic, all these companies do that same - Panny just managed to do it a bit more so in the sub $10k HD camera range).
 
Barry_Green said:
Sure.
Click to expand...

Well, then that makes it a heck of a lot more interesting!

OOHHH... Can one record to the FS100 as well as to DVCProHD tape at the same time? THAT would be the ultimate in tapeless workflow with a built-in full quality tape backup! All of a sudden, I'm really jazzed about this thing!
 
I'm confused. How is the HDX900 different than a Varicam.

24p HD with ability to shoot 60p. What are you not getting?

Cheers,
Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top