HVX200 vs. XD CAM HD

As I understand it, HDV seems to be a poor format choice, but still I wonder, if it is as bad as many say, why would Sony & JVC invest so much into it. Sony 1/2"ccd, JVC 2/3"ccd, removable lenses, aimed at the more expensive ENG market.

20 grand plus, for what many are calling a consumer HD format.

I don't get it. DVCPro HD discreet frames vs HDV gop.

This is not a defense of HDV. It's a serious question.

Cheers,
Chris
 
1. All else being equal, as far as I know, MPEG-2 long GoP interframe compression will ALWAYS be shittier than any DCT-based intraframe compression scheme such as DVCPRO/DVCPRO-HD. Think of DVCPRO as a bitstream with ONLY I-frames and NO "in-between" predictive-guessing kind of frames.
Click to expand...

This is completely false.

You should write: MPEG-2 long GOP interframe compression will always be superior to ANY DCT-based intraframe compression stream at the same bit rate.

You could also write: At a fixed bitrate the very worst compression you can acheive is with DCT-based intraframe codec when compared to properly impelmented DCT-based interframe codec.

The issue here is bitrate and bitrate alone. If a long GOP codec has a bitrate that is LOWER than the bitrate of the intraframe codec the comparison becomes subjective and case dependent. In some cases long GOP will look better, in other cases it will not.

-Spiff
 
i have a 1/2´´ BetacamSP. it has a shallower depth of field than my DVX. but i use ND filters in my mattebox almost all the time and am right there with the d-o-f. so that can be cheated. for the extra money (20.000 will be without a decent lens; remember the original lens they included on the UVW100 Cams??? yuck) you can buy a lot of light, enough P2 to get through a day and a firestore. and you won´t have to worry about the MPEG2.
 
Spiff, well said.

And while discussions of formats may be interesting, it won't mean much in terms of real world knowledge without taking into account the camera head. It seems kind of ridiculous to compare a 20K+ camera with a 6K+ camera. These cameras have very little in common and are not being marketed to the same group or aimed at the same purpose.

We may as well discuss which is better, the XLH1 or the Varicam?
 
In my opinion the new Sony 1/2" HD XDCAM camera is not comparable to the HVX200 or the HD100. It's just not an apples to apples comparison. The camera is a full blown shoulder camcorder that will most likely cost 3 times more than the HVX200 P2 bundle, when including a lens. The camera will be more in the Varicam league than HVX200.
 
Mediacre said:
In my opinion the new Sony 1/2" HD XDCAM camera is not comparable to the HVX200 or the HD100. It's just not an apples to apples comparison. The camera is a full blown shoulder camcorder that will most likely cost 3 times more than the HVX200 P2 bundle, when including a lens. The camera will be more in the Varicam league than HVX200.
Click to expand...

You're probably right, once you trick one out and get a deck, you will be definitely be in Varicam territory. However, it is another option, and more options is good.
 
David G. Smith said:
Your probably right, once you trick one out and get a deck, you will be definitely be in Varicam territory. However, it is another option, and more options is good.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say it's anywhere near Varicam territory. In fact, it has several disadvantages to even the HVX. It maxes out at a 35Mbit datarate, it has no variable frame rate option, it records in MPEG-2, long-GOP interframe compression, and it is limited to 4:2:0 color space. The HVX trumps it in all of those areas (and many of those are significant). Now, I'm not saying the HVX is a better camera... obviously its chips are smaller and it's got a fixed lens, but the XDCAM is not a Varicam, either. Plus, if Panasonic announces a P2-based Varicam this year as they've been widely reported to, then it won't even be a contender. Adding P2 to the Varicam would allow the price to drop significantly (because they would eliminate the need for a costly DVCPROHD tape head), and you'd have essentially everything you'd need in one camera. I think the only thing that the XDCAM has going for it is that they were first to the market and they've already made deals with several key broadcasting networks. Other than that, it leaves a lot to be desired.

Oh, and you + are = you're :thumbsup:
 
NBCshooter said:
Also keep in mind that, Jan mentioned a new Panasonic shoulder-mount, 2/3" version of the HVX200 will also be coming next year for $20K+.
Click to expand...


Hey NBC, I did not quote a price, ;-)

Best,

Jan
 
Haakon said:
I wouldn't say it's anywhere near Varicam territory. In fact, it has several disadvantages to even the HVX. It maxes out at a 35Mbit datarate, it has no variable frame rate option, it records in MPEG-2, long-GOP interframe compression, and it is limited to 4:2:0 color space. The HVX trumps it in all of those areas (and many of those are significant). Now, I'm not saying the HVX is a better camera... obviously its chips are smaller and it's got a fixed lens, but the XDCAM is not a Varicam, either. Plus, if Panasonic announces a P2-based Varicam this year as they've been widely reported to, then it won't even be a contender. Adding P2 to the Varicam would allow the price to drop significantly (because they would eliminate the need for a costly DVCPROHD tape head), and you'd have essentially everything you'd need in one camera. I think the only thing that the XDCAM has going for it is that they were first to the market and they've already made deals with several key broadcasting networks. Other than that, it leaves a lot to be desired.

Oh, and you + are = you're :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

I did not mean to imply that HD-XDCAM was in the Varicam territory in quality, I was only refering to price.
 
Comparing camera's is 1 thing. Comparing workflow another:

XDCam advantage: you keep your data/clips/... on the inexpensive disks ( 25$ a piece). You can easily archive.

But, editing the stuff is something else.
Some basic XDCAM info ( SD, not HD): You need a $15K deck to ingest. This deck has a double laser, which gives a read-speed of 144Mbps, so a 25Mbps DV signal is theoretically ingested at 5.5xrealtime. However, no NLE I know of can handle the Sony MXF's natively, and it is very unlikely they ever will( for the experts: Sony uses MXF OP-1A, NLE's like Avid( and panasonic P2) use MXF OP-Atom). In human language, this means transcoding. And thus overhead. A very beefy Avid can ingest at 2.5 or 3x realtime instead of 5.5x

And it gets slower: If you can't afford a $15K deck, there is a cheaper mobile deck. The $7K version is a playback device only, no recording. There is a recordable version announced. Price yet unknown. Or you can use your camera. But, these only have a single laser, so readspeed is 72Mbps max, or 2.5xrealtime. Theoretically. Realworld: a lot slower.

And slower still: This is the SD version, where the NLE transcoding is very slight and easy( MXF flavour to MXF). The HDV variant of XDCam is A LOT harder to transcode. And if you up the bitstream ( to 35Mbps) you lower the realworld ingestspeed yet again. Probably ( guessing here...) below realtime.

Advantage P2: If you stay on the P2, no ingest at all. The P2 cards ARE your media drives( at least in Avid). If you transfer to a HD, it's a consolidation, not a transcodation( ie, simple file copy).

Some P2 bad news: ( there always has to be a snag): If P2 card transfer is a simple copy proces, and a P2-card is rated at 640Mbps, your transfer speed is 25x realtime ( in SD 25Mbps). Theoretically that is, again( if you're still with me). Problem: USB2.0 ( the P2 card reader) is rated at 480Mbps. And that is burst, not stream. Realworld: 10xrealtime for SD.

Still, 10x is better than 2.5x for XDCam. There is no room for improvement for XDCam in transfer speed, but there is for P2, if they dump the USB interface.
 
eLeventy said:
However, no NLE I know of can handle the Sony MXF's natively, and it is very unlikely they ever will
Click to expand...
Sony's own Vegas 6 is supposed to have native support for Sony's "like no other" implementation of MXF.

Realworld: 10xrealtime for SD.

Still, 10x is better than 2.5x for XDCam. There is no room for improvement for XDCam in transfer speed, but there is for P2, if they dump the USB interface.
Click to expand...
Ah, but that's only if you stick to using a port to transfer! Don't forget you can plug the card in directly and transfer at the full bandwidth of the card, 640 megabits, through either the PCMCIA32 Cardbus or through a desktop adapter, or through the 5-slot P2 drive. So you can easily get 25x realtime from P2.

Also, you can probably also hook up to computer through the firewire port instead of the USB2, which would give you 400mbps transfer rates and a good 15x realtime transfer.

Thanks for the examination of the XDCAM workflow!
 
Barry_Green said:
Sony's own Vegas 6 is supposed to have native support for Sony's "like no other" implementation of MXF.
Click to expand...

I've seen the Sony XDcam workflow with Sony's XPRI( Vegas' bigger brother), and I it made me laugh: It's worse in XPRI than in Avid.
For example: With XDCam, you edit using 'proxy's', which can be ingested at realtimex30, and then, you only have to conform the parts you used to HiRes. In Avid, it works like this: ingest a 5 minute clip in Lowres, use only 5 secs of it, and conform only 5 secs. In Xpri, you have to conform the whole 5 minute clip.

You're right about the higher speeds using PCMCIA/firewire/... It shows the potential growth of P2. 144Mbps( XDCam) or 200Mpbs( Infinity) seems quick now, but in 2 years time, you'll be biting your nails in agony!
 
Wow. Certainly everything I needed to know and more. Needless to say, this forum kicks ass.

If I can't edit in Avid, and then do a final pass in Nitris, I doubt I will be looking for the XD CAM as a solution. I really would like a bigger chip, so maybe the HVX's big brother will be the one, but I'll withold judgements until all the variables are accounted for...Possibly use the HVX as a bridge camera ?... :beer:



Cheers.
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
Hey NBC, I did not quote a price, ;-)

Best,

Jan
Click to expand...
Jan's right--she did not mention a price. Darn it all, Jan! Whhhhyyyyyyyy did I interrupt you at RESfest?????? Were you about to tell me at least the the range of possible price points before I blurted out my question? For the record, what I asked Jan was, if it would be a $20K-plus camera, and she nodded, yes.
 
Luis Caffesse said:
It seems kind of ridiculous to compare a 20K+ camera with a 6K+ camera. These cameras have very little in common and are not being marketed to the same group or aimed at the same purpose.

We may as well discuss which is better, the XLH1 or the Varicam?
Click to expand...
Well, I beg to differ. The XLH1 is $9K camera, and a Varicam is a $67K camera WITHOUT a lens. Add an HD lens to the mix and you've got about a ten-fold price difference. It's really not ridiculous to "compare" a $6K camera with a $20K camera. Look, if I decide to buy an HVX200 and two 8GB cards, I end up spending about $10K or a little less, right? If I dump $10K on a camera purchase, I sure as hell won't be buying a $20K camera anytime soon.

Very few of us will be considering a $100K Varicam package to make their independent film, but many of us may consider something around $15K-$20K to gain the advantages of a full-size camera.
 
Mediacre said:
In my opinion the new Sony 1/2" HD XDCAM camera is not comparable to the HVX200 or the HD100. It's just not an apples to apples comparison. The camera is a full blown shoulder camcorder that will most likely cost 3 times more than the HVX200 P2 bundle, when including a lens. The camera will be more in the Varicam league than HVX200.
Click to expand...
I'll make the same argument again. I realize these two products are of different classes. But I AM making a comparison--I am mulling over my purchase decision between these two very cameras. Like I said, if the camera comes out at $20K including glass, that's 1/5th the cost of a Varicam package. Don't you guys get it? I can actually think about spending $15K-$20K on a camera. A $100K Varicam is out of the question.
 
Mediacre said:
It will not include a lens for only 20k. This is Sony we're talking about here, remember?
Click to expand...
Well, it's a very interesting product for Sony. No real information here in this post . . . just thinking out loud. According to Sony's own press release, the PDW-F330 is positioned BETWEEN their HDV and HDCAM product lines. And it looks like it. It has an "in-between" datarate. An "in-between" imager size. And hopefully, an "in-between" price. Isn't it odd that they chose to make it a 1/2" camera (does Sony even make 1/2" cameras anymore?). Plus, it's rumored to have an auto-focus lens? An auto-focus lens on a pro-body, 1/2" camera? Weird. Never seen that before. Also, the product mock-ups have that weird prosumerish half-silvered, two-tone color scheme. Again, very weird for Sony.

I just think that perhaps Sony has rethought their traditional product-market segmenting strategy . . . where they traditionally had $20K-price gaps in their product lines. Remember how much a Sony DSR500WSL cost when it first came out? Like $25K or something, right? And now, they introduce a 24P version (DSR450) for only $15K? Again, unusual for Sony to create such a capable mid-line product at such a reasonable mid-line price. Again, perhaps, Sony is finally learning their lesson from Panasonic, and even JVC. Maybe, just maybe, someone at Sony said . . . "Hey! This 'independent filmmaker' market may be worth creating a mid-line product category for after all."

Panasonic was (and is) hugely successful with their revolutionary DVX100, and Sony knows it--perhaps this is part of their reaction.
 
And by the way . . .

Neither camera is "better" or "worse" than the other. But definitely, one camera is better for some things, and the other camera for other things. My problem is, is that I NEED low light capability and WANT depth-of-field characteristics that only a larger imager/camera can provide. Believe me, when I saw the HVX200 at RESfest, I fell in love with it immediately. I just really need a couple more stops of sensitivity in-camera for all my planned night exteriors and guerrilla-shot locations, or else I'd have to rent an awful lot of HMIs and buy an awful lot of permits, and have to hire a bunch of grip/electrics to rig it all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top