Codec confusion

[thunderMex]

I was looking at this link http://www.aja.com/products/ki-pro/ for this product that encodes practically any format to Apple ProRes 422. Then I read the following at Apple.com about the new variations on ProRes:

The family now includes ProRes 422 (Proxy), ProRes 422 (LT) and ProRes 4444, in addition to the original ProRes 422 and ProRes 422 (HQ).

Choose ProRes 422 (Proxy) for offline editing or use ProRes 422 (LT) for projects that require reduced file sizes at broadcast quality, such as news, sports, and events. At the other end of the scale, ProRes 4444 is ideal for compositing and digital workflows that require the highest-possible image fidelity

Although I edit with FCP and use an AG-HVX200A in Europe I am confused about the multiplicity of codecs. My assumption is that I want to keep artifacts from crudding up my footage as it goes through the pipeline of production.

To me that means using the same hiqh quality codec from start to finish as much as possible, editing in FCP with the same codec that Panasonic generated when I selected, for instance, 1080/60 for a project, etc, etc.

The camera outputs DVCPRO HD and DVCPRO50.

From there, although I have edited projects in DVCPRO HD I always have to make choices in the final product...online .flv, disk projects, etc....

At some point in making an .mov I get so many choices.

Now AJA promotes this product to transcode all camera output at Apple ProRes 422.

What are people's informed technical opinions who have really analyzed and worked with these issues?

IS the Apple ProRes codec the way to go? Converting early in the project and sticking with it for the duration?

 

[Postmaster]

I would rather look into Cineform, especialy if you are multi generation quality aware.

Frank