NBC chooses P2

[zijital]

Also, anyone else wonder what "a wide range" means?

'HPX500 shouldermount camcorders and HPX170 handheld cameras have also been approved for use in “a wide range” of Discovery productions.'

Lip stick cameras have been used in a wide range of Discovery productions, but that doesn't mean the Discovery will let those be the main "A" camera on a prime time show.

 

[Matt Gottshalk]

Also, anyone else wonder what "a wide range" means?

'HPX500 shouldermount camcorders and HPX170 handheld cameras have also been approved for use in “a wide range” of Discovery productions.'

Lip stick cameras have been used in a wide range of Discovery productions, but that doesn't mean the Discovery will let those be the main "A" camera on a prime time show.

The HPX-500 is cleared for Silver Level acquisition by the Discovery Channel.

 

[puredrifting]

P2 ain't dead, but it is way to early to know which one will win out, or if both will co-exist together.

Based upon Sony's video format track record, the actual question is, how long before they orphan the SxS format? Sony does it constantly. Look down my list below. Sixteen formats in about ten years? Kind of a joke. Sony doesn't introduce new cameras and decks at each NAB, they introduce new formats every NAB.

Sony's record in video formats over the past decade (and I have probably forgotten some of them besides these!)

Beta SP (actually invented in the 80s but was still very strong before digital video)
Mini DV
DVCAM
Micro MV
Digital Betacam
Betacam SX
MPEG IMX
Blu Ray
D1 (Came out in the 90s)
D2 (Came out a few years later in the 90s)
HDV
HDCAM
HDCAM SR
XDCAM
XDCAM HD
XDCAM EX (SxS)

Dan

 

[Matt Gottshalk]

What would be GREAT news for P2, is if something like Dateline, or CNN, or whatever that uses mostly freelances stated they were going 100% P2. That is the tough market to crack, but I haven't seen many freelancers wanting to hand off $4,000 worth of cards at the end of the day to a producer they met 10 hours ago.

Well AS a freelancer, I DON'T "hand off $4,000 worth of cards at the end of the day to a producer they met 10 hours ago."

He hands me a USB-2 drive, I offload via a P2 gear while packing up, he walks with the drive.

I do this every week, and don't see what the problem is. It works.

 

[Barry_Green]

Beta SP (actually invented in the 80s but was still very strong before digital video)
Mini DV
DVCAM
Micro MV
Digital Betacam
Betacam SX
MPEG IMX
Blu Ray
D1 (Came out in the 90s)
D2 (Came out a few years later in the 90s)
HDV
HDCAM
HDCAM SR
XDCAM
XDCAM HD
XDCAM EX (SxS)

I can think of a few you missed, including 8mm, Hi-8, and Digital 8 in the past, and DVD camcorders, and today's XDCAM MPEG-422 and AVCHD.

 

[zijital]

Well AS a freelancer, I DON'T "hand off $4,000 worth of cards at the end of the day to a producer they met 10 hours ago."

He hands me a USB-2 drive, I offload via a P2 gear while packing up, he walks with the drive.

I do this every week, and don't see what the problem is. It works.

If it works, it works.

This industry is changing fast and it is changing slow. Producers should know how a $100 USB drive can be a part of a wonderful workflow. But I have worked for people that HAD to have a tape over-nighted to New York. If I had P2, I couldn't work for them.

More producers (and managers) need to learn the new workflows, it'll make life easier for everyone. But I still hear a lot of hesitation from freelancers to go P2, most will have a DVCPro HD & XDCAM HD camera, just because handing off a $40 tape / disc works for them best.

The bottom line is when it works for you, then it works.

...Sixteen formats in about ten years? Kind of a joke. Sony doesn't introduce new cameras and decks at each NAB, they introduce new formats every NAB. ...

Beta SP...

Dan, Sony has some really easy targets when it comes to failed formats. But if you're going to knock Sony, don't ever start off with Betacam SP.

Betacam SP is the Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, AND Babe Ruth of video formats. Networks are still paying full rates for freelancers to shoot Betacam SP. There will never be any future video format that will come close to Betacam SP. (HDTVs, ipods, computers, etc... will prevent any ONE format from reigning king of video.) Sony can flop for the next decade and still get a free pass because they made Betacam SP.

If you want to insult Sony, bring up MiniDisc vs CD, or Memory Stick vs SD. Those will T.K.O. Sony in 2 sec.

 

[puredrifting]

Dan, Sony has some really easy targets when it comes to failed formats. But if you're going to knock Sony, don't ever start off with Betacam SP.

Betacam SP is the Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, AND Babe Ruth of video formats. Networks are still paying full rates for freelancers to shoot Betacam SP. There will never be any future video format that will come close to Betacam SP. (HDTVs, ipods, computers, etc... will prevent any ONE format from reigning king of video.) Sony can flop for the next decade and still get a free pass because they made Betacam SP.

If you want to insult Sony, bring up MiniDisc vs CD, or Memory Stick vs SD. Those will T.K.O. Sony in 2 sec.

Hi:

No, not insulting them, just more stating that Sony always has been and probably always will be format happy. It seems to be part of their marketing strategy to introduce, then orphan formats.

Beta SP? Heck I still have a PVW2800 hitting here in my rack and I owned a BVWD600, I loved Beta SP. For what it was at the time, before digital became so entrenched, it was heaven to shoot and edit. I came from before that from Sony 3/4"SP (Yay! VO 9850 and VO 9800 cuts only!) and before that 1" type C. I was never into Quad, tht pre-dates me, but I have been doing this business for a while.

Mini Disc? Yes, I still have two MZR-37P recorders and still use them for taping interviews for transcriptions when I write and interview people. Yeah, MD was more like an offshoot from Japan, where it was hugely popular. Never really got a foothold over here though.

Memory stick? Ughh, they are still pushing that loser. SDHC won the war quite a while ago. Someday they will get a clue.

Seriously, that is one of the factors that held me back from the EX1, worrying about XDCAM EX becoming orphaned quickly.

D

 

[puredrifting]

I can think of a few you missed, including 8mm, Hi-8, and Digital 8 in the past, and DVD camcorders, and today's XDCAM MPEG-422 and AVCHD.

Good grief, how could I have forgotten the dropout prone, ridiculous format that was Hi-8? I seem to recall spending a week underwater, making a diving promotional video for a resort in Belize on Hi-8. Oh the dropouts, the dropouts. A fundamentally flawed format from day one.

Regular 8 did pretty well as a consumer format, when I was a video manager at Circuit City in the 80s, we sold boatloads of Sony 8 camcorders.

Digital 8 was the ridiculous answer to Mini DV. Nobody cared and it was a massive flop.

Wow, XDCAM 422? Is that the new 50MBps Sony format of the week? I have never even heard of it? Is it long GOP? When will they learn that long GOP is a disaster?

Thanks for reminding me of these turkeys ;-)

The list grows and grows.

Dan

 

[Barry_Green]

Wow, XDCAM 422? Is that the new 50MBps Sony format of the week? I have never even heard of it? Is it long GOP?

XDCAM MPEG422 is the new format that is used by their latest optical disc camera, the PDW700. It's a 50-megabit version with 4:2:2 color sampling, and yes of course it's long-GOP. And, of course, it uses new proprietary media.

When will they learn that long GOP is a disaster?

Probably not until the last light gets shut off and the last door is locked and Sony Broadcast goes out of business.

But, until then, things are happening over at Sony-land; looks like they've decided to turn things over to Howard Stringer entirely and they're completely revamping the PS3 division...

 

[mainstreetprod]

I can think of a few you missed, including 8mm, Hi-8, and Digital 8 in the past, and DVD camcorders, and today's XDCAM MPEG-422 and AVCHD.

...And if we're going to talk consumer formats, we can't leave out Betamax and
Super Beta!

 

[PerroneFord]

Seriously, that is one of the factors that held me back from the EX1, worrying about XDCAM EX becoming orphaned quickly.

D

Well, honestly, with no decks to worry about anymore, it's a lot less of a problem than it has been in the past. And I've managed to steer clear of most of Sony's debacles in the past, though I did have a hi-8 camera.

I have no doubt that XDCamEX will be short lived, but since it can be written to commodity media and read pretty easily by many NLEs with a simple re-wrap, it won't be as big a Charlie Foxtrot as some of the others stuff.

As for long GOP, it get's the job done at a price point. All these cams do. At least the EX1 let's you bypass it. Most cams don't allow a bypass for their compromies.

 

[Carlos Corral]

Hmmm, I don't seem to understand something. If Long GOP is such a disaster, then why is it still around? With the new wave of cameras coming out, it seems that Panasonic seems to be the only ones who are trying to improve their codecs (DVCProHD --> AVC-Intra).

Why have Sony, JVC, and Canon stayed with Long GOP? Does it sell better or something? Cheaper Media? Am I missing something?

 

[puredrifting]

Hmmm, I don't seem to understand something. If Long GOP is such a disaster, then why is it still around? With the new wave of cameras coming out, it seems that Panasonic seems to be the only ones who are trying to improve their codecs (DVCProHD --> AVC-Intra).

Why have Sony, JVC, and Canon stayed with Long GOP? Does it sell better or something? Cheaper Media? Am I missing something?

It is still around as an engineering legacy from Sony. Long GOP was always pushed by Sony and Sony was (might still be) the 800lb Gorilla in professional video. Sony also was the main proponent behind interlaced video before Panasonic showed the world that you can shoot better looking progressive images on a $3,500.00 camcorder like the DVX100. Up until just a few years ago, the only Sony HD camcorder of any kind that could even shoot progressive images with the F900. You can see the evolution in the Z1U which was an interlaced camera that shot pseudo, horrible fake progressive. Then they finally got a clue and put real progressive imagers into their low line camcorders.

Sony may make more money and be larger than Panasonic, but Panasonic's strategy in pro video has proven over the past few years to be ultimately more attuned to the wants of their buyers. Sony kind of makes whatever they want, sometimes it is good and people buy it. Panasonic, for the most part, seems to be giving more of their buyers exactly what they have asked for, the DVX100, HVX200, 170, 150 and 300, in particular prove this point, they are each answers and evolutionary builds of products that have exact features and feature sets that we have asked for. People wanted an EX1 resolution with the Panasonic look. Voila, the HPX300, which ups the ante with ergonomics, lens, AVC Intra, etc. for not a whole more than the EX1 and around the same street as the EX3. Brilliant move, I cannot understand why so many people are surprised by the CMOS limitations? Not as sure in the higher line cameras, there is a lot of complaining about the 2700, 3000, 3700 line that people grumble because the 2700 is not a 1920 x 1080 native sensor and the 3000/3700 essentially cannot do VFR above 30 fps. But that range is out of most of our range here, other than as an occasional rental.

The reason Canon and others have been using it is all tied back to the HDV Consortium. If you buy into backing a format, it used to be a long term commitment, like Mini DV was. Nowdays, Sony introduces new formats it seems almost weekly so they have abandoned that but if you talk to the engineers at NAB, they have been preaching MPEG 2 Long GOP since the late 90s. It was the corporate strategy to differentiate Sony from their competitors. Perhaps they thought that Moore's Law was going to make computers more capable of processing and handling Long GOP formats? All I know is that anyone who is halfway technical, when you look at how long GOP formats function, the benfit is more compression and lower data rates, increasing run times on solid state media. That makes sense and you can see the benefits in cameras like the EX1, that is why a lot of people buy the EX1 over the HPX170, "because I get more run time on my expensive media, man".

With HDV, I always hated that format because a simple tape dropout could result in seconds of lost signal, not a frame or two of lost signal. Of course, we don't really get dropouts with solid state media but Long GOP is still a huge drag on your CPU and the signal is much less robust than an intraframe codec like DVC Pro HD or AVC Intra.

XDCAM EX works, the camera looks excellent and it is a viable format, but as a codec, it was basically instantly outdated by the HPX300's AVC Intra implementation at well under $10k street. Panasonic's strategy is to take their top of the line codec and eventually put it into the lower line pro products, just as they put the Varicam's DVC Pro HD codec into the HVX200. Smart move. I don't think people realize yet just how advanced and "smart" of a codec AVC Intra is.

 

[PerroneFord]

That makes sense and you can see the benefits in cameras like the EX1, that is why a lot of people buy the EX1 over the HPX170, "because I get more run time on my expensive media, man".

I know where you're going, but this is a bit of a simplification. People, myself included, are not limited by media costs on the EX1 any more. And to be sure, there are people lining up to buy EX1s and EX3s. Frankly, the image looks good. VERY, very good. Of course, CMOS artifacts notwithstanding.

XDCAM EX works, the camera looks excellent and it is a viable format, but as a codec, it was basically instantly outdated by the HPX300's AVC Intra implementation at well under $10k street. Panasonic's strategy is to take their top of the line codec and eventually put it into the lower line pro products, just as they put the Varicam's DVC Pro HD codec into the HVX200. Smart move. I don't think people realize yet just how advanced and "smart" of a codec AVC Intra is.

Honestly, Panasonic has traditionally compromised the sensors, and given great codecs. Sony has given us the sensors, and compromised the codecs. You choose your poison.

The EXx cameras compromised the codecs, but put an SDI spigot on so people could bypass the codec with a solid 10bit uncompressed image to do with what they pleased. Great move. There's just no getting around the sensors though, no matter how good the codec is.

The HPX300 raises the bar a bit because it's got the sensors AND a better codec, though it will remain to be seen if people in this market space really want a large cam or prefer the handycam layout. I think if Panny had come out with a tiered approach, basically targeting the HPX300 at the EX3 and something in a handycam format against the EX1, things would have been more interesting. Let it write AVC-Intra to SDHC and it would have been a smal dunk. In fact, if they had done that last summer, I wouldn't own an EX1.

 

[puredrifting]

Frankly, the image looks good. VERY, very good. Of course, CMOS artifacts notwithstanding.

Agreed, I did a shoot today with the EX1, it does have a great image, especially for interviews. It is weird to constantly go back and forth between cameras. On Monday and Tuesday of next week, I am doing a two camera shoot with dual HPX170s. Talk about two different looking pictures, when I shoot with the 170, I miss the sharpness of the EX1. But the shoot next week is true run and gun handheld and the 170 will be the right tool I think.

Honestly, Panasonic has traditionally compromised the sensors, and given great codecs. Sony has given us the sensors, and compromised the codecs. You choose your poison.

In the low end, I would agree. In higher end, I always kind of liked the 900 and 950, they have great sensors and the HDCAM codec is pretty great.

The EXx cameras compromised the codecs, but put an SDI spigot on so people could bypass the codec with a solid 10bit uncompressed image to do with what they pleased. Great move. There's just no getting around the sensors though, no matter how good the codec is.

How many times have you shot using the SDI output to record? How many people do you know who have actually shot using the SDI output to record? I personally think that SDI is something that everyone thinks that they must have but I would be willing to bet that fewer than 1% of owners have ever actually used it to record. It is handy for monitors but not a necessity. I think component analog looks fine on an 8" field monitor. SDI looks better but so what.

I lump SDI in with removable lenses on sub $10k camcorders. Everyone thinks that they MUST have a removable lens and now with the new relays, etc. it is a cool feature but prior to the 35mm adapter mania, I think Canon had surveys that showed less than 2% on the XL1/2/XL-H1 ever used anything but the stock lens.

I think the 300 being a real shoulder mount traditional design makes it much more likely that people WILL use other lenses with it, I know I will, especially if some of the really nice wide angles are available in 1/3" mount. I wouldn't buy them, they would cost two to three times the price of the camera, but at probably $300.00 to $400.00 per day to rent, it becomes an appealing alternative for certain shoots I do.

The HPX300 raises the bar a bit because it's got the sensors AND a better codec, though it will remain to be seen if people in this market space really want a large cam or prefer the handycam layout. I think if Panny had come out with a tiered approach, basically targeting the HPX300 at the EX3 and something in a handycam format against the EX1, things would have been more interesting. Let it write AVC-Intra to SDHC and it would have been a smal dunk. In fact, if they had done that last summer, I wouldn't own an EX1.

I am right there with you, that's why I am not buying a 300 right off (besides the fact that I cannot afford one yet). I fly to NYC and Philadelphia for shoots a few times a year, an occasional shoot in London, etc. Would I rather fly with the 170 or the 300? No question about it, I would never want to drag a larger camera like that around unless I had a PA to help. Because it's not just the camera. It's the fact that in most cases, you would want to detach the lens, meaning time lost setting back focus. It means dragging around big, heavy batteries and charger, bigger, heavier tripod, ughh. My back is aching just thinking about it.

Now for at home, around LA, I would be so thrilled to drag it around but for travel, would definitely need to keep the 170.

That would be interesting to shoot AVC Intra to SDHC cards but is there enough bandwidth on SDHC to even do that?

Dan

 

[PerroneFord]

I think the bandwidth is there to shoot AVC-Intra to SDHC. Especially on the Class 6 cards. So it's viable.

As for shooting with the SDI port, I know at least one person who dies, and quite honestly, I will at some point because the insert into our live caption encoder is SDI and I'lll have to feed it. I do think as SDI recorders drop into the price range of Firestores, we'll see demand and use increase.

 

[Carlos Corral]

I think the bandwidth is there to shoot AVC-Intra to SDHC. Especially on the Class 6 cards. So it's viable.

Maybe I should wait another year until the HPX170a or HMC150a come out with the AVC-Intra Codec :beer:

 

[puredrifting]

Maybe I should wait another year until the HPX170a or HMC150a come out with the AVC-Intra Codec :beer:

If they do, they would be CMOS w rolling shutter.

D

 

[puredrifting]

Carlos:

In conjunction with what I posted above, here is a link to a twenty two page white paper on why Sony believes that long GOP MPEG 2 is better than AVC Intra. http://pro.sony.com/bbsccms/assets/...ns/MPEG-2_Long_GoP_vs_AVC_Comp-Strategies.pdf

I don't buy it at all, users have already proven that AVC Intra uses about the same bandwidth and resources in an editing computer as DVC Pro HD. Amazing achievement.

Dan

 

[Barry_Green]

Same bandwidth, yes, but more horsepower is necessary than with DVCPRO-HD.