HD-SDI recorders information
- Thread starter USLatin
- Start date
PerroneFord
Deals in Lead
GuyB
Well-known member
Check out the FlashXDR and NanoFlash from
http://www.convergent-design.com/
I am pretty sure the FlashXDR has been released now and the nano is comming soon.
http://www.convergent-design.com/
I am pretty sure the FlashXDR has been released now and the nano is comming soon.
The prices are still out of my budget at the moment. However, here's what I was wondering. The HD-SDI out of the EX1 is 4:2:2 and the built-in recording to the SxS is 4:2:0. I believed (but not exactly clear) that this is because it has something to do with the codec that Sony uses to record the images to the SxS card, correct? And one of the reasons why something like the Flash XDR or nano is able to record at 4:2:2 is because they have a better codec to record the images. Am I right so far? If that is true, is that mean Sony (a world renowned electronics manufacture) actually have a more crappy codec than some other third party manufactures? And if this lack of quality is based on software and not hardware, is it possible for Sony to provide a better codec to record at 4:2:2? Again, I'm not exactly clear why. Any explanation is much appreciated.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Well, yes, Sony is using a lower-quality implementation of the codec in SxS than the Flash XDR. But here's the funny part: IT'S THE SAME CODEC! Convergent Designs is actually using the same Sony codec chip that the EX1 uses; they buy the codec board from Sony. Sony just chose to limit the EX1 to 35mbps 4:2:0 long-GOP. They most likely didn't have to, they just chose to. The same codec chip is capable of 100mbps 4:2:2 long-GOP or 160mbps 4:2:2 intra-frame, and the SxS media should be plenty fast enough to record either data stream.
So while none of us are Sony engineers and cannot speak definitively, it seems there's not really any good reason for the 35mbps 4:2:0 limitation, since the hardware's already there. They just limited it. It may have been for marketing purposes, so that they could claim to get more minutes of recording time per gigabyte, etc. Or to avoid embarrassing their more-expensive XDCAM-HD lineup (4:2:0 35mbps to optical disc). Or to avoid stealing the thunder from their $30,000 4:2:2 50mbps optical-disc cameras. Who knows?
But for whatever reason, yes, using an outboard product you can record superior quality footage to a NanoFlash or XDR than you can to the onboard SxS or hard disk recorders that Sony provides for use with the EX1/EX3.
So while none of us are Sony engineers and cannot speak definitively, it seems there's not really any good reason for the 35mbps 4:2:0 limitation, since the hardware's already there. They just limited it. It may have been for marketing purposes, so that they could claim to get more minutes of recording time per gigabyte, etc. Or to avoid embarrassing their more-expensive XDCAM-HD lineup (4:2:0 35mbps to optical disc). Or to avoid stealing the thunder from their $30,000 4:2:2 50mbps optical-disc cameras. Who knows?
But for whatever reason, yes, using an outboard product you can record superior quality footage to a NanoFlash or XDR than you can to the onboard SxS or hard disk recorders that Sony provides for use with the EX1/EX3.
Last edited:
Barry_Green
Moderator
Oh, and back on topic for this thread, here's another HD-SDI recorder just introduced:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?p=1457310#post1457310
Panasonic HPG20. It's a 10-bit, HD-SDI in/out, full-raster 1920x1080, AVC-Intra "deck" that records to P2 cards. It supports AVC-Intra 100, AVC-Intra 50, and DVCPRO-HD. Firewire in/out, SDI in/out, HD-SDI in/out, 50/60Hz switchable, up-conversion, down-conversion, etc. Basically does what a $235,000 HD-D5 deck would do for you, except at a tiny fraction of the cost and to solid state. Works with any SDI or HD-SDI camera.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?p=1457310#post1457310
Panasonic HPG20. It's a 10-bit, HD-SDI in/out, full-raster 1920x1080, AVC-Intra "deck" that records to P2 cards. It supports AVC-Intra 100, AVC-Intra 50, and DVCPRO-HD. Firewire in/out, SDI in/out, HD-SDI in/out, 50/60Hz switchable, up-conversion, down-conversion, etc. Basically does what a $235,000 HD-D5 deck would do for you, except at a tiny fraction of the cost and to solid state. Works with any SDI or HD-SDI camera.
Last edited:
Buck Forester
Well-known member
I think it's pretty obvious Sony chose to limit the EX1 codex for the reasons you mentioned, Barry, which is to keep this camera in a lower segment to protect their higher end cameras. I think all companies do this (maybe excepting RED). But now that we have Obama, maybe these companies will "spread the specs" to all their camera lines! 
Keeeding. For me personally, if Panasonic had higher resolution right off the chips I would have gone with them. I've been reading a lot of spec requirements from high-def broadcast companies and many of them have a minimum requirement of 1/2" chips, so dumping higher bit rates onto 1/3" chips still doesn't cut it for me, unfortunately. Shoot.
Keeeding. For me personally, if Panasonic had higher resolution right off the chips I would have gone with them. I've been reading a lot of spec requirements from high-def broadcast companies and many of them have a minimum requirement of 1/2" chips, so dumping higher bit rates onto 1/3" chips still doesn't cut it for me, unfortunately. Shoot.Buck, which companies? Could you give us a little list off the top of your head?
I assumed we all agreed on the reasons for the 4:2:0 limit that Barry pointed out. However it is always so nice when he posts them, always clearly and most often with so much added info and detail. :thumbsup:
Prices anyone?
I assumed we all agreed on the reasons for the 4:2:0 limit that Barry pointed out. However it is always so nice when he posts them, always clearly and most often with so much added info and detail. :thumbsup:
Prices anyone?
PerroneFord
Deals in Lead
Ok Lor, I'll try to help you out. And we will use competing products from Sony and Panasonic as the subjects for our explanation.
Since they are direct competitors, we'll use the HPX170 from Panasonic and the EX1 from Sony.
Both cameras shoot a maximum of 1920x1080 resolution. Sony chose to use more expensive 1/2" CMOS chips while Panasonic chose cheaper 1/3" CCD chips. Both have their negatives and their positives. Some see the CMOS choice as "crappy" as you put it, and others see the 1/3" chips as crappy.
The codec that Panasonic chose to implement records 4:2:2 color but with a maximum resolution of 1280x1080. The codec that Sony chose to use records 4:2:0 color but at full 1920x1080. Panasonc could have chosen a codec that recorded 1920x1080 but did not. Sony could have chosen a codec that did not use long GOP and 4:2:0 color sampling, but they did. And both likely did it for the same reasons. Money.
The P2 cards that Panasonc uses costs roughly the same as the SxS cards that Sony uses at the same storage size. So at best resolution for both cameras a 16GB card for the Sony records 58 minutes of 1080p footage. The Panasonic records 16 minutes of footage. At current pricing, the Panasonic camera requires four cards to shoot an hour (58 minutes) of footage at ~$850 each. The Sony requires one. Had Sony chosen to follow Panasonic's path, they could have implemented a 100Mb/s 4:2:2 codec, and would face the same high cost of media per hour recorded.
Four P2 cards is about $3400. This is about the price of a Nanoflash unit. When adding the nanoflash to both cameras, both can now record 1920x1080p, 4:2:2 images. The Sony will still be sharper, the Panasonic will have less artifacting from the CMOS issues. Both cameras will still clock in under $10k.
It's about choices. Sony didn't make a "crappy" choice and neither did Panasonic. They offer two competing cameras, with different ideas. And it's up to us to choose the best tool for how we want to work.
PerroneFord
Deals in Lead
I don't mean to suggest that he said the choice of CMOS was crappy, only that he had use the word crappy to describe Sony's choices...
Buck Forester
Well-known member
US Latin, pretty much all of them. That's obviously why you have consumer choices, prosumer choices, and professional choices. This is the case for pretty much any industry. Take the entire range of 'still' cameras from the mfgs, they all have different features for different price points, the more you pay, the more features you get. Of course they could all dump all their best features in one unit at a very attractive price, but that would be killing their higher 'profitable' lines. It's not just video cameras, it's pretty much everything everywhere. Music, monitors, studios, stereos, cameras, video, cars, jets, computers, amps, software (insert 1000+ other products). They purposely hold back features to entice a choice to the next line. That's why RED is so poular, they seem to be dumping amazing specs into products that are a fraction of what the competition charges for the same specs.
Maybe I'm missing your point, I'm not sure. I apologize if I am. It seems to go without saying. I'm agreeing with Barry that is primarily to protect product line, which is obvious and certainly not unique to Sony.
Oh... well, I see your point, but reading some of your other posts and looking at your sig I think you might have been hurt from people's apprehension to the Sony CMOS. I just wanted to say, as I am sure you well know, that it is not about the camera, but about the reel instead. :thumbsup:
Keep posting about it though, don't want to discourage that! I want to learn how to get the most out of this baby which interests me more and more each post I read.
I think I am about ready to advice the fishing show to get EX1's over HPX's. I only see the panning being an issue that would have a direct effect on the project, but I think I can edit around that easily for them. I have a couple of ideas that might even USE it as a VFX! We'll see how that comes out. Also I think fast pans are only one move out of several dozen moves that a camera Op has available. Once you get enough hours on one of these puppies you will be able to work around that and know the proper speed... Also it becomes much less apparent with less vertical lines, etc...
Let me give you a hug man... lol (but don't be gettin' no ideas!)
:thumbsup:
Keep posting about it though, don't want to discourage that! I want to learn how to get the most out of this baby which interests me more and more each post I read.
I think I am about ready to advice the fishing show to get EX1's over HPX's. I only see the panning being an issue that would have a direct effect on the project, but I think I can edit around that easily for them. I have a couple of ideas that might even USE it as a VFX!
We'll see how that comes out. Also I think fast pans are only one move out of several dozen moves that a camera Op has available. Once you get enough hours on one of these puppies you will be able to work around that and know the proper speed... Also it becomes much less apparent with less vertical lines, etc... Let me give you a hug man... lol (but don't be gettin' no ideas!)
:thumbsup:
You answered my question. :thumbup:
Mike Schell
Active member
Hi Barry-
Just one minor note of clarification. The nanoFlash / Flash XDR does use the same CODEC as the EX1/3, but we have two CODEC chips instead of one. Turns out you need two CODECs for 4:2:2 processing. I am fairly certain that one CODEC processes the luminance and a second processes the chrominance data (in 4:2:2 mode).
So you actually have three quality benefits using XDR / nano:
1) 4:2:2 vs 4:2:0 color
2) 3X higher bit rate: 100 vs 35 Mbps
3) Twice as much processing power doing the compression (2 CODEC chips instead of just one)
Mike Schell
Convergent Design
Perrone, you know what else? If you used an SGpro or SGblade with the old GG you would get that nice organic feel to it and it becomes extremely hard to argue against it in any way... especially when you get the 4:2:2 for CC... just thought I'd add that... cause I am wondering if I should switch myself. The only thing possibly holding me back and steering me to a 170 is the color which I still prefer ina significant way... BUT I haven't been able to try to tweak some RAW 4:2:0 footage yet... and I have a feeling that we'd be able to get it to match... then with these recorders I'd also be able to count on being able to match shots in post as well as I can now...
...man... what a camera...
and to make things THAT much more complicated Scarlet specs get anounced in 8 days!
Good problems to have and good times to be shooting your own projects! :beer:
...man... what a camera...
and to make things THAT much more complicated Scarlet specs get anounced in 8 days!
Good problems to have and good times to be shooting your own projects! :beer: