Matthew R. Rodwell
Well-known member
We just happen to be shooting a feature right around its release, I am excited about the upcoming news on this because it might work out perfect for our production.
Press Release: HMC150, "the new DVX"
- Thread starter Barry_Green
- Start date
vidwerk
Active member
Most likely. I just picked up a brand new PV-DV400 for $100.
Going to use it mainly as a deck. I was glad to see it uses the same batteries as my DVX100A.
vidwerk.
PixelWrangler
Well-known member
Will this camera have firewire output? The reason for this question is how will I be able to edit AVCHD once it's transfered to the computer. It seems that it must be converted to an editable format which for now appears to take longer than real time. But if I could import thru Edius I can have realtime Canopus HQ files which is what I'm currently doing now with miniDV tapes.
Barry_Green
Moderator
AVC-HD doesn't support firewire streaming like DV does. It'll probably have a USB port for file transfer, or you could always just pull the SD card out and put it in any SD card reader to transfer files to your computer.
Many NLEs support editing native AVC-HD, some require transcoding. EDIUS Neo and Pinnacle and a few others can handle the footage as-is. FCP requires transcoding. Panasonic also provides a tool for transcoding to DVCPRO-HD for realtime editing.
EDIUS doesn't need any transcoding, it can handle the files as-is.
PixelWrangler
Well-known member
Thanks Barry - I'd love to just pop the card into the computer to transfer the files and edit. After reading the Canopus forums it still seems that many folks are still having trouble editing AVCHD without transfering to HQ. I just upgraded my computer last summer so I'm not due for a new one anytime soon - but I am due for an upgrade on my cameras which is why I'm looking at the 150. I read that GV is planning to roll out an external HDMI to Firewire converter like their ADVC products but they price it at $999(ouch) I'll just wait for a better work flow for AVCHD before buying a cam, maybe Canopus will have something hardware based by then.
Daygola814
Well-known member
Yes! No more fragile 4-pin firewire. Good Riddance!
filmguy123
Veteran
Barry, from this link posted earlier w/negative comments on Panny & P2:
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-Aims-for-an-AVCHD-Future-with-AG-HMC150-34499.htm
Could you give your thoughts, input, and "response" to these statements? I'm not sure what truth/inaccuracies/ignorance there is to them. I saw this briefly covered earlier, but I'd like to hear your response and assessment of the following:
(1)
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]----------------------------[/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]They are still sticking with their dead-as-of-last-year P2 cards. P2 does not have the bandwidth to handle HD. Google it if you don't believe me. Stewart English would not have blundered so. Their HVX200 has to uprez to stumble into their mediocre version of HD (1280x960). Panasonic doesn't have real 1920x1080 chips until you sail way past the 10K mark. So they have to put cheap camera's on the market to save face and make their other cameras look like they still have value. Sony's HDCAM EX is so far beyond anything Panasonic has available, even at the higher end of their cameras, it is pathetic. It is like they have given up and let Sony win. Even the $650 Canon HV20 with its native 1920x1080 CMOS chip out-shoots the HVX200, and will certainly beat this lame has-been-out-of-the-box AG-HMC150.
----------------------------
(2)
[/FONT][FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]----------------------------
[/FONT][FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]What I said about the bandwidth needed for HD is accurate. P2 doesn't have it. Did you know that DVCpro HD is currently being streamed over Firewire? Ask yourself how this is possible. Low bandwidth is the answer. DVCPRO HD is undersampled to 960x720 and 1280x1080, so you would not be dealing with full frame HD. I am referring to full frame HD. The Sony HDCAM EX records full frame 1920x1080 (native chips also) at 35mps. So you have to transcode it into ProRes 422 or Cineform! Big deal. The HDV codec is actually very good. HDV can be cranked up way further than 35mps. (Although not by the Sony). MPEG 2 has long, long legs. It is a technology that has a lot of headroom. And it looks terrific. But you can capture native 1920x1080 right out of your HDMI port on the Canon HV20 because it has a native 1920x1080 chip! [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]-----------------------------------------
(3)
[/FONT] [FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]-----------------------------------------[/FONT]
Well, it doesn't actually "support a full range of HD formats," since there's no true 1080p, and why? 'Cause the obsolete P2 recording media can't record full HD bandwidth. So you're stuck with upscaling. P2 is ridiculous now since it costs WAY more than SD and even SDHC even though its essentially a PCMCIA RAID array of standard SD cards. Umm, what else? Molded immobile eyepiece? 13Mbps bitrate for video capture? C'mon there are consumer cameras which are getting a better bitrate out of the crappy AVHCD codec
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]-----------------------------------------
(4)
MY OWN QUESTION: Do you think P2 format will stand the test of time, or do you think it will be replaced/dumped in the coming few years? Many of these posts make me wonder...
[/FONT][FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica] Thanks Barry! The other negative posts on that board were already addressed by you I believe, but I'd like to hear your say on these!
[/FONT]
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-Aims-for-an-AVCHD-Future-with-AG-HMC150-34499.htm
Could you give your thoughts, input, and "response" to these statements? I'm not sure what truth/inaccuracies/ignorance there is to them. I saw this briefly covered earlier, but I'd like to hear your response and assessment of the following:
(1)
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]----------------------------[/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]They are still sticking with their dead-as-of-last-year P2 cards. P2 does not have the bandwidth to handle HD. Google it if you don't believe me. Stewart English would not have blundered so. Their HVX200 has to uprez to stumble into their mediocre version of HD (1280x960). Panasonic doesn't have real 1920x1080 chips until you sail way past the 10K mark. So they have to put cheap camera's on the market to save face and make their other cameras look like they still have value. Sony's HDCAM EX is so far beyond anything Panasonic has available, even at the higher end of their cameras, it is pathetic. It is like they have given up and let Sony win. Even the $650 Canon HV20 with its native 1920x1080 CMOS chip out-shoots the HVX200, and will certainly beat this lame has-been-out-of-the-box AG-HMC150.
----------------------------
(2)
[/FONT][FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]----------------------------
[/FONT][FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]What I said about the bandwidth needed for HD is accurate. P2 doesn't have it. Did you know that DVCpro HD is currently being streamed over Firewire? Ask yourself how this is possible. Low bandwidth is the answer. DVCPRO HD is undersampled to 960x720 and 1280x1080, so you would not be dealing with full frame HD. I am referring to full frame HD. The Sony HDCAM EX records full frame 1920x1080 (native chips also) at 35mps. So you have to transcode it into ProRes 422 or Cineform! Big deal. The HDV codec is actually very good. HDV can be cranked up way further than 35mps. (Although not by the Sony). MPEG 2 has long, long legs. It is a technology that has a lot of headroom. And it looks terrific. But you can capture native 1920x1080 right out of your HDMI port on the Canon HV20 because it has a native 1920x1080 chip! [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]-----------------------------------------
(3)
[/FONT] [FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]-----------------------------------------[/FONT]
Well, it doesn't actually "support a full range of HD formats," since there's no true 1080p, and why? 'Cause the obsolete P2 recording media can't record full HD bandwidth. So you're stuck with upscaling. P2 is ridiculous now since it costs WAY more than SD and even SDHC even though its essentially a PCMCIA RAID array of standard SD cards. Umm, what else? Molded immobile eyepiece? 13Mbps bitrate for video capture? C'mon there are consumer cameras which are getting a better bitrate out of the crappy AVHCD codec
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]-----------------------------------------
(4)
MY OWN QUESTION: Do you think P2 format will stand the test of time, or do you think it will be replaced/dumped in the coming few years? Many of these posts make me wonder...
[/FONT][FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica] Thanks Barry! The other negative posts on that board were already addressed by you I believe, but I'd like to hear your say on these!
[/FONT]
Last edited:
mikkowilson
Steadi-Guru
I'm going to respond to this, because it doesn't matter who states the facts. They are still facts.
P2 cards are not "dead". There are brand new laptops available from most manufacturers - including Sony's very latest models - with PC Cardbus (P2 compatible) slots. Sony claiming a format is dead that they themselves put in their own laptop is either really stupid engineering on their part, or in fact a lie. Just because development of the Cardbus spec has stopped, does not mean it is discontinued.
P2 has bandwidth to handle HD. Weather the DVCPRO format carries a true native full HD stream is a separate debate, but P2 very much handle HD. Either as DVCPRO-HD, or as AVC-Intra, or as HDV files from a Sony if you so want. It's *just* a memory card format that is optimized for video. And it has ample bandwidth to support a huge verity of HD formats. I have personally offloaded 16GB P2 card that can hold well over 30 minutes of 720/24pN (An internationally accepted HD format) in 7minutes & 15 seconds. I'd say that's plenty bandwidth for HD.
The HVX does not "uprez". It's sensors are arranged in an array that takes the data to be recorded (at the best resolution) directly off the chips in the right place. Sony can boast all the 3 full HD chips they want, but as their color encoding throws away a quarter of their color, it's quite a waste to sample it in the first time. It's much more efficient to only gather the data that will actually be stored. But true enough that the EX1 has a HD-SDI port .. and for that, the 3 full-HD sensors have a valid point - though even then half the color information is disregarded before it ever leaves the camera. Throw away half the data, or increase dynamic range with the right (fewer) number of larger pixels?
The EX1 is hardly "far above" what the HVX200 can do. Fast movement, rolling shutter wobble, inter-frame encoding, low bandwidth storage, are all areas that the EX1 looses to the HVX200 in.
The HVX200 is undeniably superior in the following environments:
SD shooting. DV, both at 25 AND 50mbps.
Jittery, unstable camera mounts. (Handheld) [And that's ignoring the subjective ergonomics]
Situations with fluorescent lighting
Situations with flash / strobe lighting.
Price.
Post production work-flow support.
Processing efficiency.
Compatibility with tape formats.
And if you leave HD-SDI out of the equation.
Then the HVX200 ALSO is superior when shooting:
Chroma key material.
Material to be heavily color corrected.
Moving scenes, especially faster movement.
Those are CLEAR indisputable situations where the HVX200 is superior. There are of course many situations where the EX1 does a better job. - Neither camera is clearly "far beyond [what the other] has available", they have different features, that is all.
These benefits and MORE are available higher up in Panasonic's line. So Sony's statement that the EX1 is better than anything Panasonic has to offer is a blatant lie.
Stating that the HV20 "out shoots" the HVX200 is ridiculous. Sure, it might have more static resolution under good lighting conditions when it's automatic controls are operating optimally. But that would be like saying a go cart "out-drives" a Land-Drover, just because it can go faster on an indoor circuit. - Not exactly an equal comparison.
How do you wish to define "win" (is it even a race? who said it was?) then we could look at the number of tape less production sales in Europe for example ... over 70% are P2 .. that's over ALL systems! That leaves well under the remaining 30% to be shared by Sony, and JVC, and Grass Valley, etc...
ANY comparisons tot he HMC150 are nothing but speculation, as nothing more than an initial press release is known about the camera.
The first part of this statement amazes me. How can the 100mbps formats (currently) use on P2 be "lower bandwidth" than the 35mbps format used by the EX1? Come on, seriously.
SO you have to transcode? Big deal? umm, yes it is. You can edit DVCPRO/50/HD directly off the cards, with ZERO transcoding, zero processing, zero quality loss, on a number of computer AND tape based systems. Right now. With no waiting. When time = money, transcoding is a big deal.
NO one has "cranked" HDV any higher than 35mbps. In fact, no one has cranked HDV higher than 25mbps. XDCAM-EX, the 35mbps format, is not HDV, it's a brand new proprietary format; how can anyone be expected to "crank it any higher" than the ONE company that uses it?
"MPEG-2 has long legs"? what does this mean? I fail to find any technical statement here. Lets of headroom? would this be the "headroom" that is leaving it in the dust in practically all development of new formats? Every manufacturer has already implemented MPEG-4 based recording. And every new distribution format is also based on MPEG-4. H.264, Flash Video, Quick Time, Windows Media, Blu-Ray, HD-DVD; ALL support and are developing with MPEG-4.
Note that this does not mean MPEG2 is dead by any means, just that it's foundation isn't being developed any more ... just like PCMCIA/PC Cardbus.
So what if you can capture 1920x1080 with HDMI from your HV20? In certain situations (Controlled conditions, with lots of light, and a tethered recording connection.) this can be a more preferable option. But in no means does that mean anything definitive on the general level. Again, there is no actual technical statement here beyond "it can do this".
- Mikko
P2 cards are not "dead". There are brand new laptops available from most manufacturers - including Sony's very latest models - with PC Cardbus (P2 compatible) slots. Sony claiming a format is dead that they themselves put in their own laptop is either really stupid engineering on their part, or in fact a lie. Just because development of the Cardbus spec has stopped, does not mean it is discontinued.
P2 has bandwidth to handle HD. Weather the DVCPRO format carries a true native full HD stream is a separate debate, but P2 very much handle HD. Either as DVCPRO-HD, or as AVC-Intra, or as HDV files from a Sony if you so want. It's *just* a memory card format that is optimized for video. And it has ample bandwidth to support a huge verity of HD formats. I have personally offloaded 16GB P2 card that can hold well over 30 minutes of 720/24pN (An internationally accepted HD format) in 7minutes & 15 seconds. I'd say that's plenty bandwidth for HD.
The HVX does not "uprez". It's sensors are arranged in an array that takes the data to be recorded (at the best resolution) directly off the chips in the right place. Sony can boast all the 3 full HD chips they want, but as their color encoding throws away a quarter of their color, it's quite a waste to sample it in the first time. It's much more efficient to only gather the data that will actually be stored. But true enough that the EX1 has a HD-SDI port .. and for that, the 3 full-HD sensors have a valid point - though even then half the color information is disregarded before it ever leaves the camera. Throw away half the data, or increase dynamic range with the right (fewer) number of larger pixels?
The EX1 is hardly "far above" what the HVX200 can do. Fast movement, rolling shutter wobble, inter-frame encoding, low bandwidth storage, are all areas that the EX1 looses to the HVX200 in.
The HVX200 is undeniably superior in the following environments:
SD shooting. DV, both at 25 AND 50mbps.
Jittery, unstable camera mounts. (Handheld) [And that's ignoring the subjective ergonomics]
Situations with fluorescent lighting
Situations with flash / strobe lighting.
Price.
Post production work-flow support.
Processing efficiency.
Compatibility with tape formats.
And if you leave HD-SDI out of the equation.
Then the HVX200 ALSO is superior when shooting:
Chroma key material.
Material to be heavily color corrected.
Moving scenes, especially faster movement.
Those are CLEAR indisputable situations where the HVX200 is superior. There are of course many situations where the EX1 does a better job. - Neither camera is clearly "far beyond [what the other] has available", they have different features, that is all.
These benefits and MORE are available higher up in Panasonic's line. So Sony's statement that the EX1 is better than anything Panasonic has to offer is a blatant lie.
Stating that the HV20 "out shoots" the HVX200 is ridiculous. Sure, it might have more static resolution under good lighting conditions when it's automatic controls are operating optimally. But that would be like saying a go cart "out-drives" a Land-Drover, just because it can go faster on an indoor circuit. - Not exactly an equal comparison.
How do you wish to define "win" (is it even a race? who said it was?) then we could look at the number of tape less production sales in Europe for example ... over 70% are P2 .. that's over ALL systems! That leaves well under the remaining 30% to be shared by Sony, and JVC, and Grass Valley, etc...
ANY comparisons tot he HMC150 are nothing but speculation, as nothing more than an initial press release is known about the camera.
The first part of this statement amazes me. How can the 100mbps formats (currently) use on P2 be "lower bandwidth" than the 35mbps format used by the EX1? Come on, seriously.
SO you have to transcode? Big deal? umm, yes it is. You can edit DVCPRO/50/HD directly off the cards, with ZERO transcoding, zero processing, zero quality loss, on a number of computer AND tape based systems. Right now. With no waiting. When time = money, transcoding is a big deal.
NO one has "cranked" HDV any higher than 35mbps. In fact, no one has cranked HDV higher than 25mbps. XDCAM-EX, the 35mbps format, is not HDV, it's a brand new proprietary format; how can anyone be expected to "crank it any higher" than the ONE company that uses it?
"MPEG-2 has long legs"? what does this mean? I fail to find any technical statement here. Lets of headroom? would this be the "headroom" that is leaving it in the dust in practically all development of new formats? Every manufacturer has already implemented MPEG-4 based recording. And every new distribution format is also based on MPEG-4. H.264, Flash Video, Quick Time, Windows Media, Blu-Ray, HD-DVD; ALL support and are developing with MPEG-4.
Note that this does not mean MPEG2 is dead by any means, just that it's foundation isn't being developed any more ... just like PCMCIA/PC Cardbus.
So what if you can capture 1920x1080 with HDMI from your HV20? In certain situations (Controlled conditions, with lots of light, and a tethered recording connection.) this can be a more preferable option. But in no means does that mean anything definitive on the general level. Again, there is no actual technical statement here beyond "it can do this".
- Mikko
Barry_Green
Moderator
What is this, some end-user complaining? This stuff is ridiculous.
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]The rest of it reads like typical fanboyism and doesn't even deserve a response. Typical trolling drivel.[/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]
P2 is the utterly dominant tapeless format. There are over 600 networks worldwide using it. It's outsold the competition by a factor of 4 to 1. Major networks are buying tens of thousands of these P2 cameras and they will not be replacing them any time soon.
Will P2 last forever? Of course not, no format would. But the notion that 80% of broadcast HD sales are going P2 means that there are major, massive customers who are now depending on Panasonic to continue supplying them with equipment for years to come. So I wouldn't sweat it one bit. And the fact that the exact same P2 media is used to store DV, DVCPRO, and DVCPRO50, and then when high-def was introduced it could store DVCPRO-HD, and now that Panasonic's introduced AVC-Intra the exact same P2 cards can record AVC-Intra50 and AVC-Intra100... that shows a serious commitment to the media and to the format. Panasonic's upgraded the lineup twice, but kept the cards compatible.
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]What a stupid statement. P2 is currently scoring about 80% of broadcast HD sales worldwide. 80%! To say it's "dead"? Whoever wrote that doesn't have the slightest clue what they're talking about. Major networks, TV stations, production companies, the BBC, all are going with P2. And P2 records the highest-quality HD format you can possibly get in an HD camcorder, AVC-Intra. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]The rest of it reads like typical fanboyism and doesn't even deserve a response. Typical trolling drivel.[/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]Okay, is this the same troll who wrote that the EX1 was better in all ways? Yes, so... why is 35 megabits (EX1) enough but 100 megabits (DVCPRO-HD) isn't? Whatever. More mindless drivel. The BBC has perhaps the pickiest technical standards in the world, and they've just standardized all Factual Studios productions on DVCPRO-HD. The second-pickiest organization in the world, Discovery HD, has certified DVCPRO-HD as an unrestricted acquisition and delivery format. Unless that poster knows something that the BBC's technical review department and Discovery HD's technical review departments don't, I think we can safely say that he's flapping his trap with uninformed malarkey.[/FONT]
This is pathetic, uninformed, and stupid. Does he happen to know that P2 could record full HDCAM SR at 440 megabits? Is he now going to try to claim that HDCAM SR wouldn't be full HD bandwidth?
It costs exactly the same as SxS cards do. And if it's so "ridiculous" why are the broadcast departments at networks worldwide adopting it at a rate of 4 to 1 more than XDCAM? Perhaps there's more to it than he knows, hmmm?
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]
[/FONT]
P2 is the utterly dominant tapeless format. There are over 600 networks worldwide using it. It's outsold the competition by a factor of 4 to 1. Major networks are buying tens of thousands of these P2 cameras and they will not be replacing them any time soon.
Will P2 last forever? Of course not, no format would. But the notion that 80% of broadcast HD sales are going P2 means that there are major, massive customers who are now depending on Panasonic to continue supplying them with equipment for years to come. So I wouldn't sweat it one bit. And the fact that the exact same P2 media is used to store DV, DVCPRO, and DVCPRO50, and then when high-def was introduced it could store DVCPRO-HD, and now that Panasonic's introduced AVC-Intra the exact same P2 cards can record AVC-Intra50 and AVC-Intra100... that shows a serious commitment to the media and to the format. Panasonic's upgraded the lineup twice, but kept the cards compatible.
Last edited:
filmguy123
Veteran
mikkowilson & Barry - thanks for the excellent responses with INFORMED information
1.) Is AVC-Intra a superior format to DVCPRO-HD? Where can I read up on this?
2.) Can P2 record AVC-HD?
3.) What makes P2 better than SDHC cards? Does it have 4x the bandwidth?
Thanks!
1.) Is AVC-Intra a superior format to DVCPRO-HD? Where can I read up on this?
2.) Can P2 record AVC-HD?
3.) What makes P2 better than SDHC cards? Does it have 4x the bandwidth?
Thanks!
mikkowilson
Steadi-Guru
Yes, it uses a newer more flexible codec.
Information here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVC-Intra (Note the links to more useful information downloads at the bottom of the article.)
P2 is simply a memory card format. You can put word files, or MP3s, or a PowerPoint presentation on a P2 card if you wish.
At this time there are no cameras that record AVC-HD to P2 cards. But theoretically it's very possible.
Neither is "better" per say.
P2 is better suited to higher bandwidth applications as it does in deed have about 4x the bandwidth of SDHC cards. It is also manufactured to a higher quality.
However SDHC cards are smaller & cheaper.
- Mikko
filmguy123
Veteran
So in DVCPRO-HD frames are scaled, but I see in AVC-Intra 100 they are NOT scaled - is this one of the most significant differences? Why does DVCPRO-HD scale the frames down?
Do you think it's possible we'll see in an HVX successor some combined features, for example:
- Ability to record to P2 or SDHC
- Ability to record DVCPRO-HD, AVC-HD, AVC-Intra
Do you think it's possible we'll see in an HVX successor some combined features, for example:
- Ability to record to P2 or SDHC
- Ability to record DVCPRO-HD, AVC-HD, AVC-Intra
Last edited:
mikkowilson
Steadi-Guru
"scaled"?
Different systems use different methods to record different signals with various techniques. Just like how DV isn't either full PAL or full NTSC resolution.
- Mikko
Different systems use different methods to record different signals with various techniques. Just like how DV isn't either full PAL or full NTSC resolution.
- Mikko
filmguy123
Veteran
Sprocketboy
Well-known member
After Barry's response, it makes me rather proud to own an HVX200. I was a Sony fan in the 1990s, but as of recent, a pro cameraman, buddy of mine, who shoots on big gigs around the world told me Panasonic is the way to go. He turned to them during 2001 and hasn't looked back since. They had one mishap that turned me off - the infamous M2 format, but they more than made up for it.
The HVX is a wonderful Indie camera and a fantastic backup or B-Roll camera on large productions using the Varicam.
Actually, a fellow filmmaker of mine just finished up a movie shot on the Varicam in Guatemala and lots of B-Roll was shot with the HVX. The two intercut seamlessly.
The HVX is a wonderful Indie camera and a fantastic backup or B-Roll camera on large productions using the Varicam.
Actually, a fellow filmmaker of mine just finished up a movie shot on the Varicam in Guatemala and lots of B-Roll was shot with the HVX. The two intercut seamlessly.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Okay, let's try it this way: what do HDV, HDCAM, DVCPRO-HD, XDCAM, DV, DVCPRO, DVCPRO50, MPEG-IMX, Digital BetaCam, and BetaSX all have in common? They ALL "scale" the video as they record it! If someone's trying to pretend that DVCPRO-HD is the only one that does "prefiltering", well, that's just more deception and misdirection. All of these systems use nonsquare pixels.
Just about every HD video format out there records 1080i as 1440x1080; the only one that varies is 60Hz DVCPRO-HD which uses 1280x1080 (but the PAL version is 1440x1080). Why do they do this? For the same reason they employ DCT compression, and the same reason they use color sampling -- it's a way to trim down the bandwidth to get it to a reasonable recording size. HDCAM uses 3:1:1 color sampling and 1440 pixels wide, DVCPRO-HD uses 1280 pixels wide but it also uses 4:2:2 color sampling. Two tradeoffs that net out with both being excellent recording formats.
AVC-Intra100 and XDCAM-EX and AVC-HD are the only 1920x1080 recording formats out there. AVC-Intra is the highest-quality recording format ever put into a camcorder. XDCAM-EX and AVC-HD are both long-GOP 4:2:0 systems that rely heavily on interframe compression to get the bandwidth down very low. And AVC-HD still retains the option to record in 1440x1080 too; it actually supports both modes. Well, then again, so does XDCAM-EX; in 35mbps mode it's 1920x1080, but in 25mbps mode it's 1440x1080. Well, actually, now that I'm filling in the blanks, so does AVC-Intra: at 50mbps it records 1440x1080, at 100mbps it's 1920x1080. So even though AVC-Intra, XDCAM-EX and AVC-HD are all the newest formats on the market and they all support 1920x1080, isn't it rather interesting to note that every one of them also supports 1440x1080?
As compression schemes have become more efficient, compression software engineers are finding that they don't have to "prefilter" the video from 1920 down to 1440. That is a distinction that has happened over time, and I believe it was only in 2007 that the first 1920-recording cameras came about. So unless someone wants to refer to the F900R as "not real HD", they're going to have to accept that prefiltering is a perfectly legitimate technique that's been used for years and years.
I've been asking for that for years. Will it happen in an HVX successor? Undoubtedly. I was on a panel at Slamdance and I heard Jan say that AVC-Intra would be implemented across their entire product line. But she also said that'd be "in the next 4 to 5 years." (apologies if I'm mis-remembering the statement). So yes, I would wager that at the bare minimum you'll see AVC-Intra in an HVX successor. I just don't know WHICH successor, it may be a couple of generations away!
Last edited:
Barry_Green
Moderator
Yes, AVC-Intra (well, the 100-megabit version!) is superior to DVCPRO-HD and every other camcorder format in existence. The only format that could possibly compare would be HDCAM-SR.
AVC-Intra also comes in a 50-megabit version, which is about the same overall quality as DVCPRO-HD.
Well, mixed answer. Yes, a P2 card could certainly record AVC-HD; a P2 card is capable of recording any digital data stream. That's why I said that if you could find a way to route the cable to it, a P2 card could even record HDCAM-SR. But in a more practical answer to the question: as of now, no P2 cameras support AVC-HD. There's no real logical reason I can think of as to why they couldn't, so perhaps we'll see them introduced. However, it seems counterproductive -- the whole point of AVC-HD is to have such small file sizes that it can be practically and comfortably recorded on cheap, commodity media: SD cards, or SDHC cards. So while a P2 card could easily handle it, why would you use a $900 16GB P2 card when you could use a $100 16GB SD card? I mean, it'd work, just seems like overkill.
Many things, including a 640mbps data transfer rate, an existing infrastructure of professional broadcast equipment, a RAID controller that buffers and prevents errors when a card is ejected while reading and writing, a die-cast chassis that is rated for some unholy amount of shock resistance... it's an ultra-durable, ultra-fast, ultra-ultra version of a memory card.
SD cards are small and cheap. That's their main draw. They're not "ruggedized" for the perils of production, but they're still a lot more rugged than, say, a spinning hard disk. But the main benefit to the SD cards are that they're much less expensive per gigabyte, and you can buy 'em anywhere -- Wal-Mart, Target, anywhere. That's what makes them so appealing for the lower-cost cameras (like this HMC150).
filmguy123
Veteran
Ah great, I am learning so much. So two simple questions, then:
Once Panny puts AVC-Intra 50 & 100 into all of their cameras, will DVCPRO-HD have any purpose to be put into those new cameras? Or is it likely that DVCPRO-HD will no longer be a recording option at that point, as it will be redundant and inferior? Or would they retain it just for backwards compatibility?
Second, I wasn't 100% clear on your answer as you only addressed AVC Intra: is it likely that an HVX successor will have an option to record AVC-HD to SDHC memory cards? That way, you could buy the more expensive camera, and utilize P2 and AVC-Intra, but also record AVC-HD to SDHC cards to save $$ if needed? Or will SDHC & AVC-HD likely be reserved for the cheaper models? (I hope not! I'd love to have a camera with both options!)
Once Panny puts AVC-Intra 50 & 100 into all of their cameras, will DVCPRO-HD have any purpose to be put into those new cameras? Or is it likely that DVCPRO-HD will no longer be a recording option at that point, as it will be redundant and inferior? Or would they retain it just for backwards compatibility?
Second, I wasn't 100% clear on your answer as you only addressed AVC Intra: is it likely that an HVX successor will have an option to record AVC-HD to SDHC memory cards? That way, you could buy the more expensive camera, and utilize P2 and AVC-Intra, but also record AVC-HD to SDHC cards to save $$ if needed? Or will SDHC & AVC-HD likely be reserved for the cheaper models? (I hope not! I'd love to have a camera with both options!)
mikkowilson
Steadi-Guru
Good question. Hard to call that one. There are very few techncial reasons either way here. Backwards compatibility is still a huge features, and with DVCPRO-HD so heavily in use, it will take a while (=years) before it will become obsolete. Dare I say it: I think DVCPRO-HD is becoming the "BetaSP" of HD.
This is basically what the HMC150 (that this thread is about) is. THough it's not a successor to the HVX200, but it does offer the feature you ask for .. at a lower price, with a higher end unit you can still choose if you prefer.
As for a camera with both? Again, good question. Certainly would be handy.
- Mikko
Add me to that list as well. Would love a cam that can do B work in HD and record to cheap media.