Who Likes the XDCAM EX?

yea but thats part in prcel of sony's marketing strategies. They have always been eager to show off "the numbers". Its that whole "Full HD" nonesense they have been pushing in their HD TV lines, it actually caught on with other manufacturers too.

IT was thier way of saying 1080 is better than 720. Though Since 108060p is unavialable, 720 60p is still the only good option for "video" look HD. they are REALLLY into semantics.

1080-24p is SUPERIOR to 720-24p. But 720-60p for full frame rate playback IS better than 1080i for the reality look. IT compresses better, and just plain looks better. I think the "Full hd" terminology is just rediculous. Each format benefits a certain use. I hate interlacing and i will NEVER use 1080i. But if i need Video look, i will shoot 720p60p.

Also.... Just for the record, I am Totally happy with the HVX200's 1080p. ITs sharp for any use i have. No Client has ever complained.
 
TimurCivan said:
yea but thats part in prcel of sony's marketing strategies. They have always been eager to show off "the numbers". Its that whole "Full HD" nonesense they have been pushing in their HD TV lines, it actually caught on with other manufacturers too.

IT was thier way of saying 1080 is better than 720. Though Since 108060p is unavialable, 720 60p is still the only good option for "video" look HD. they are REALLLY into semantics.

1080-24p is SUPERIOR to 720-24p. But 720-60p for full frame rate playback IS better than 1080i for the reality look. IT compresses better, and just plain looks better. I think the "Full hd" terminology is just rediculous. Each format benefits a certain use. I hate interlacing and i will NEVER use 1080i. But if i need Video look, i will shoot 720p60p.
Click to expand...

Agreed...but the wrinkle here is the actual spec quoting (for the entry-level HD segment) of very relevant data such as horizontal resolution, S/N ratio and sensitivity. I haven't really seen that for inexpensive HD cameras thus far.

I fully agree about 720 60p being inherently superior for video look...although HDTV's are getting so good at deinterlacing that both formats look effectivley the same. I know my very inexpensive Vizio 1080p LCD does a phenomenal job of making 1080i look like progressive source. It shouldn't look as good as it does...for HD video look.

Eventually all the cameras will be native progressive but the reality is that 1080i is an entrenched standard that isn't necessarily bad for video look even with today's progressive-native panels.

I'm with ya on the "Full HD" marketing garbage too.
 
Sony specs always look good. Shame their pictures so often don't.


Yes, the EX-1 does wobble. How badly has not yet been tested, but I can confirm that it does wobble, based on tripod tests I performed at IBC.

- Mikko
 
mikkowilson said:
Sony specs always look good. Shame their pictures so often don't.


Yes, the EX-1 does wobble. How badly has not yet been tested, but I can confirm that it does wobble, based on tripod tests I performed at IBC.

- Mikko
Click to expand...

Rats....that sucks.

That alone would definately keep me from buying it.
 
Ok to the original post:
- yes it bothers me a lot to be left without SD recording. I sometimes work with and/or for TV networks that need the material. and they need it with a certain realtime timecode. and they usually need to take it home after the shoot. it took me months and months of persuasion to be able to give the P2 content, and they all had to get used to the P2 workflow when working with me etc etc. Some use FCP some use AVID some use Liquid/FAST. But now we are there and it works. They are mostly used to work tapebased which makes sense and to be allowed to deliver in P2 is actually a privilege for me. but all this is in SD. The EX would force me to rent a camera definitely for these gigs. No way would they start converting and I don´t want to force anyone into a new workflow yet again. The funny thing is they are used to XDCam (SD), but the EX uses a new XDCam, many NLE´s will not supply support soon ( I know Liquid/FAST won´t, probably AVID and Apple are slow also usually). So yes, to be in a new XDCam format in HD only is a dealbreaker for me.
- the wobble is an issue that comes on top of the HDV GOP and 4:2:0 "problems". Sure many HDV images are awesome and GOP is not often a problem and 4:2:0 vs 4:2:2 is overrated (especially on this board), BUT the fact is there are issues.
And once you have a client who wants some extreme colours or you have to explain why the image of the lake is not perfect you wish you had a single-frame compression.
Especially the SONY HDV GOP recording is rather weak. I do a lot of sports and when a guy brought me his "oh so awsome FX1" it took me seconds to show him compression artifacts (shooting moving cars very close so the whole image was a constant movement; it didn´t look as perfect as his tripod-sunset shots from Bali).
How XDcam 35mbs will hold its own in 1080p will be seen. But I have to admit on Canon cams I yet have to see a problem with the GOP-compression.

The fact is the HVX is a great cam and even if the 1/2 inch CMOS is extremely interesting and probably quite a bit higher res than the HVX is, it for now has too many questions and a too high introduction price to be bought by ME. This is my subjective view, of course. If I had the money sure I would buy it , use it and sell it if it wouldn´t fit my work.
But as an investment in my (and my family´s) future I rather spend these extra thousands in light, an adapter with lenses, tripod head and whatnot that makes more of an impact to the image than the 1/2 inch CMOS.
 
Hmm.
Sounds like you better not buy the EX1.

Sorry, but the XDCAM has been dissected quite a bit. MPEG artifacts are not an issue. In fact, XDCAM HD has been approved by Discovery HD as a full 100% acquisition format (i35Mbps high quality mode). This is due to their extensive testing that did NOT show MPEG issues.

I do agree with MPEG artifacts seen on the FX1 and even the HD100, which I own.
It's not until you have busy high detail motion that the codec "may" not be able to handle it. This has not been seen as a problem with the XDCAM codec, especially in HQ mode.
The image coming off this thing is going to be jaw dropping. I've heard it fairs REAL well in the CA department too.. I can not say this for many sub 10K cams!
 
Great, thanks for clarification. Good to hear the XDCam codecs are better than the HDV by SONY.
On the contrary to some folks here at DVXuser I do not hope that this cam has a flaw. If it works as advertised it will be an enormous step forward for us small production houses. Just like the VX1000 was once and the DVX100 was later it is a leap forward with the 1/2`` chip.
I only stated my personal experience or what I heard from people whose judgement I trust.
If I was in the US where HD is far more in the heads of producers and clients I would be well tempted, but in Europe the networks are quite a few steps behind and simply don´t ask or even take HD material.
But in a year, when all bugs (if there are any) are ironed out, the workflow is set and the price is a bit lower I will probably look at SONY again....unless Panasonic couterstrikes soon with a new invention (but I honestly doubt that).
 
Panasonics next strike is the HPX500. The EX doesnt offer the same things that the HPX does. 2/3" Low noise, Amazing light sensitivity.....

The EX nicely fills the Gap, theory/philosophy wise.
 
The hpx500 is around 22k with a canon lens and around $20k with a fujinon lens. That does not include the AB batteries and charger , which will set you back another $1500.

Mounting a 35mm adapter to the HPX500's 2/3" Eng lens is another big issue by itself.

If you are willing to spend > 20k and wanted the 35mm look, The Red one with Briger mount and Nikon lenses are probably the best way to go.
 
I received my EX1 today (serial number...3)!!

Love it.

I shot a scene with a colleague who had an HPX 2100 and the ex1 was noticeably sharper!
 
Philip Bloom - Great to hear. We are all very envious of you. Post-up a few clips somewhere if you can. Even if you have to dumb them down to 720p. Especially if you can put up comparison clips between the EX1 and other cameras.

Dxmetal said:
If you are willing to spend > 20k and wanted the 35mm look, The Red one with Briger mount and Nikon lenses are probably the best way to go.
Click to expand...

Considering it's still an MOS camera, and ordering one now means you'd get it who knows when, I'd instead buy a Vision Research Phantom camera if I were going to pony up serious money.
 
The EX1 is going to change this sub $8K USD market.
Full 1920x1080 raster sensors and 1/2" will be the selling point for these cameras.
Let's face it, we've all fought with 1/3" HD cams and settled for their less than adequate sensitivity.

I'm hearing the glass on the EX1 is excellent for a camera of this cost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top