PMW200 - Sharpness?

[NorBro]

Can someone (who owns the camera) kindly let me know what they think of the sharpness of the PMW200? I like the camera, but from the samples online, it looks like lots of the footage is soft and almost all detail has blended into a muddy image. Heavy compression?

Thanks for your time.

 

[jbklynnyc]

I find it plenty sharp. It's tough to judge online samples without knowing the compression settings used.

 

[KINOKS]

Can someone (who owns the camera) kindly let me know what they think of the sharpness of the PMW200? I like the camera, but from the samples online, it looks like lots of the footage is soft and almost all detail has blended into a muddy image. Heavy compression?

Thanks for your time.

So it isn't just me noticing this? I'm doing some research on an upgrade for my documentary productions and I'm currently looking at the PMW200. But all
the footage I've seen so far really doesn't look as good as I would have expected it to look. And this is not just resolution wise.
But I think that most of the footage was ungraded and was probably shot just for tests. I'm still waiting to see some short films or docus done with the 200. In those instances the picture will be much better taken for. The picture is probably better than the EX1.

 

[jbklynnyc]

So it isn't just me noticing this? I'm doing some research on an upgrade for my documentary productions and I'm currently looking at the PMW200. But all
the footage I've seen so far really doesn't look as good as I would have expected it to look. And this is not just resolution wise.
But I think that most of the footage was ungraded and was probably shot just for tests. I'm still waiting to see some short films or docus done with the 200. In those instances the picture will be much better taken for. The picture is probably better than the EX1.

I think you might have to adjust your expectations. At 100%, you are not really going to see vast differences in sharpness between 1/3 and 1/2" sensor cameras. Even an HVX will respectably stand its ground against the PMW200 from a sharpness perspective.

And compared to an EX1 I would say that the looks are virtually the same, with the PMW having slightly better noise and better options in the grade. I've used an EX1 and I much prefer the PMW200. I also own a Pana GH2 and for most "controlled" situations the GH2 will handily beat out the PMW but those are two cameras for two very different purposes.

The PMW200 is by no means a revolutionary camera. But it's a solid performer and a good, if modest, upgrade from the EX1.

 

[KINOKS]

I think you might have to adjust your expectations. At 100%, you are not really going to see vast differences in sharpness between 1/3 and 1/2" sensor cameras. Even an HVX will respectably stand its ground against the PMW200 from a sharpness perspective.

An HVX200 or an HPX171 (I own one) can resolve app. 650 lines of res whereas the EX1 comes to 1000 or something like that. The difference is really big and when comparing footage between this two cameras the EX1 footage is very noticeably sharper. The EX series is one of the sharpest HD cameras out there. I'm sorry but what you said is wrong

And compared to an EX1 I would say that the looks are virtually the same, with the PMW having slightly better noise and better options in the grade. I've used an EX1 and I much prefer the PMW200....

...The PMW200 is by no means a revolutionary camera. But it's a solid performer and a good, if modest, upgrade from the EX1.

That's what I thought as well. So you're saying that the 200 is basically an improved EX1 right? What about the dynamic range? Alister Chapman reported it has app. 11.5 stops of DR. Do you notice an increase in DR in 200 vs EX1?

I also own a Pana GH2 and for most "controlled" situations the GH2 will handily beat out the PMW but those are two cameras for two very different purposes.

Really? It can't beat it in DR and I really doubt it can beat it in resolution. What do you find to be better in the GH2? I'm really curious...

 

[jbklynnyc]

An HVX200 or an HPX171 (I own one) can resolve app. 650 lines of res whereas the EX1 comes to 1000 or something like that. The difference is really big and when comparing footage between this two cameras the EX1 footage is very noticeably sharper. The EX series is one of the sharpest HD cameras out there. I'm sorry but what you said is wrong

Thanks. I stand corrected. I guess I should have stated it differently! When I use my eyes, and not a resolution chart, and I am looking at a screen, enjoying a story, I will personally have a hard time noticing any sharpness difference between HVX and EX1 that are both well shot. This is in contrast to a comparison with, say, a larger sensor, where the differences will be much more apparent, regardless of the context.

That's what I thought as well. So you're saying that the 200 is basically an improved EX1 right? What about the dynamic range? Alister Chapman reported it has app. 11.5 stops of DR. Do you notice an increase in DR in 200 vs EX1?

In my limited experience so far with the PMW200 I find that it has very slightly wider latitude overall than the EX1. However, I never did any scientific testing. This is a conclusion based on intuition, memory, and scrubbing through my own personal footage.

This much I can say: the differences are minor. If you are looking for a vast leap forward from the EX1, you will not find it in the PMW200. The EX1 was a great camera, and the PMW200 is just an incremental upgrade. If you want an EX1 but value 24-bit audio and a higher bitrate 4:2:2 codec in camera, then get the PMW200. If you achieve your look in camera and shoot non-broadcast events, the difference in footage between an EX1 and PMW200 will not be especially substantial to you.

I have a hacked GH2. The shallower depth of field and better low light performance, at least to my perception, is indeed a leap ahead of footage I can achieve from the PMW200 in controlled situations.

Resolution charts and MTU graphs tell only a very small part of the story. I buy cameras to use. A lot. If the footage is pleasing to you, and you enjoy shooting with it, then it's the right camera to buy.

 

[KINOKS]

Resolution charts and MTU graphs tell only a very small part of the story. I buy cameras to use. A lot. If the footage is pleasing to you, and you enjoy shooting with it, then it's the right camera to buy.

Yes yes, offcourse. But they are an objective absolute measurement. The HPX171 is to grainy and to soft. And it has lot's of other minuses that I'm really hating (the lens, the lcd monitor, no colour temp displayed in Kelvins, etc., etc.). But it's a nice low end docu camera because it's rather small and light (it's less then 2kg)

Anyway, I'm searching for a camera for low end docu work and the 200 popped out. I was especially drawn to it when I saw that it has the hypergammas (didn't know it has 24bit audio!). But you're saying that there really isn't any big improvement in the DR department? What about the highlight handling? Is the rollof better then in the EX1? It should be as the hypergammas are more flat towards the end...

The GH2 is another aesthetic I agree For what do you use the 200?

 

[jbklynnyc]

But you're saying that there really isn't any big improvement in the DR department? What about the highlight handling?

Both seem marginally better to me. Watch where the important highlights hit the knee, shoot with an appropriate hypergamma setting, and you will get as good or better a picture as you can get with a camcorder in the under $8000 range. End of story.

Big improvement? No. It's an incremental update. Don't expect miracles and you will be happy with this camera.

 

[Doug Jensen]

I agree that the PMW-200 is pretty much an incremental upgrade of the EX1. I have both cameras, and they look identical. And why shoudn't they? They have the same lens, the same sensors, and pretty much the same paint menu settings. I defy anyone to tell the difference between the two in a double-blind test. And I challenge anyone who says the 200 is better than the EX1 or EX1R to post some footage that proves it. I've done the testing myself and I know they are pretty much the exact same camera.

The EX1 is an excellent camera and so is the 200. However, with that said, the advantage of the 200 is that it provides 50 Mbps 422 recording with 4 channels of audio. Plus I prefer the ergonomics of the 200. It's A very nice all-around camera. For under $10,000 the only camera that I perfer over a 200 is the EX3 because of the removable lens and better viewfinder.

http://www.vortexmedia.com/DVD_PMW200.html

 

[J Michael]

Alister showed me some of his PMW-200 footage right off his laptop and I thought it looked great and very sharp. It was a scene outdoors in Singapore IIRC, standing between a couple of street cars moving through downtown. If it had a removable lens it would be on my short list. Maybe they'll do an EX-3 upgrade next.

 

[NorBro]

I hear you guys. I think it really depends on the viewer. A few years ago, I thought the DVX100B was sharp. But with my experience growing and using different tools, all of these cameras (HMC150, HVX200, HPX170, EX1, EX3, etc. etc.) look very muddy to me. Don't get me wrong - I do love them and think they are great for what they do, but the resolution is just not there..at least not the kind of image I would like as I get from my DSLRs. We are looking for a more traditional run-and-gun doc-style type cam, and was just wondering about the 200, but the picture looks only slightly better than my 4 year old HMC150...

 

[ex1r777]

@OP:

Here's someone doing a low light comparison between the ex1 and the pmw200: http://vimeo.com/50787342 (starts around 1:15) He claims that he used exactly the same settings on both cameras but if you watch the footage you'll see clear exposure differences between the two. In reality, the 'low light capabilities' of the two cameras are so similar, you can barely see a difference. Unlike what's shown in that video.

This is my favorite camera comparison of all times, 5d mark 2 vs ex1. www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKK0HeuJsTs . It's hilarious. Go watch it.

Why did i post those? Well to show that there are so many people out there that have NO IDEA what they are doing. On purpose or not, it doesn't matter. It's not always the cameras fault that it looks like crap.

This is a screengrab from my ex1r:

Shoot the same thing with a 5d mark iii then lets see how it performed.

You may like 'DSLR looks' more than a ex1/pmw200 etc i can understand that but it doesn't mean these cameras are lacking 'resolution'. Besides, there are quite some sharpness settings in these cameras that will let you tweak your image to your liking. You may make it look super sharp or extremely muddy. Settings are there. We don't exactly know what kind of sharpness settings were used in those videos that you saw online now do we?

 

[jscheib]

I just discovered the PMW-200, never having shot with the EX1 but knowing of it. I'm doing long form doc and also looking for the right camera. I shot my last one on the Panasonic HMC150 and looking at the Panasonic AC130a now. Any of you have experience comparing the PMW-200 to AC130a? Obviously PMW-200 does broadcast 50/4:2:2, which is a huge plus, but what about low light, gain/grain, sharpness, focus retention, handling, etc.? Thanks in advance!

 

[jbklynnyc]

I just discovered the PMW-200, never having shot with the EX1 but knowing of it. I'm doing long form doc and also looking for the right camera. I shot my last one on the Panasonic HMC150 and looking at the Panasonic AC130a now. Any of you have experience comparing the PMW-200 to AC130a? Obviously PMW-200 does broadcast 50/4:2:2, which is a huge plus, but what about low light, gain/grain, sharpness, focus retention, handling, etc.? Thanks in advance!

Handling will be similar, as they are the similar weight and both have three independent lens rings. I tested the HPX250 which is -- and forgive me for simplifying things for comparison's sake -- a higher end version AC130A (but with a much better codec), and the PMW200 performed slightly better than the HPX250 in low light overall. I didn't do any scientific tests, just A-B comparisons by eye.

They're both good cameras. You'll have to consider the cost difference in the cameras and media (SxS cards vs SD cards) and the post workflow. If you have the budget and you are capable of working with XDCAM HD, I'd go with the PMW200 for the codec alone and the ability to have variable frame rates. Aside from lower cost, one thing the AC130A has going for it is a longer lens reach.

 

[Doug Jensen]

Don't overlook the fact that the PMW-200 can be used with XQD cards, so that gives you an inexpensive alternative to SxS cards. XQD cards are faster, more robust, more reliable, and exceed the specifications of SD cards in every way. And XQD cards are approved for every video format and recording mode that the PMW-200 offers.

http://www.vortexmedia.com/DVD_PMW200.html

 

[Lenilenapi]

If you can't see the resolution difference between the HVX200 and any of the EX-1 series cameras you simply need a better monitor. On a good monitor it is night and day. Re the PMW-200 - You cannot judge anything about a camera from web images, you need to compare them in person.

 

[JohnnyD]

I was going to buy a PMV200, but after trying a HPX250, I bought it instead. I've had Sony cameras for 20 years. The large 2/3rd inch chips are great. But, I needed something smaller, and the Panny is sharper and records in 10bit. Even with it's smaller chips, it still is a bit sharper and the 10 bit color is great.

You can't compare the EX's to the older Panny 200 or 170's. Well, you can, but......

 

[lonewolf2koc@hotmail.com]

I just bought up the PMW-200 last week. Not at all thrilled. Good but not outstanding. It's not leap and bound better than the HPX-250. It's primary for 2nd alternative camera angle use or where I can deploy it cheaply w/ out worrying about cam op dropping the cam. The skintone rendition is very similar to the DSC-28 chart which I can paint and lens shade on any higher end 2/3" cam. I also own the Panasonic HPX-250 last year. Sony PMW200 has a bit more metal feel. But overall both camcorders offer strikingly similar feature and functionality. I have yet to fully exploit the three 1/2" EXMOR CMOSes in low light. There are sharpness issues w/ the stock KG lens on the HPX-250. I will shoot more challenging situation on the PMW200 to see how well the 14x Fujinon perform on the PMW-200. It appears that all 1/3-1/2" class of camcorders lack that richness in the picture. Sharpness is not at all a concern. I think it's too sharp. But richness and the ability for the camcorder to resolve all nuances (black to white) is another category. I think the sample footage is downsampled too much. That's probably there's a considerable lost of sharpness when it's not at its native 1080 square pixel resolution. The PMW-200 is quite sharp with factory default settings.

You can do this simple experiment on any 1080p originated footage. Encode it at 1080p native and burn to Blu-Ray. Pretty sharp. Then re-encode from the master file to a 480p SD DVD. You'll see that it's quite soft. I usually have to apply a global sharpness filter to increase it up a bit. Scaled down viewing (common w/ YouTube) is extremely misleading. Most viewers never bothered to click 1080p on the lower right gear icon. YouTube don't want people to hog their precious bandwidth and always go for the lowest quality. Always best to view it at 1:1 to judge resolution on any camcorder.

 

[Alpha Beta Omega]

Having worked with the HVX200 over the years I recently got a used EX3 for low budget stuff. To me the EX3 looks much better than the HVX200 ever did. Codec wise it's worse than the HVX but the image quality spitted out from the cameras sensors and processing looks so much better.

A new PMW200 would to me been the wrong low cost camera to get and the EX3 fitted nicely.

About sharpness. I find that if the detail setting is turned off it looks sharp without any edge halos from artificial sharpness.

This video is just a sample I shot this week and it had detail on and an excess of sharpness in my opinion. Shooting from now on is only with detail off.

 

[harddrive]

I tested the HPX250 which is -- and forgive me for simplifying things for comparison's sake -- a higher end version AC130A (but with a much better codec), and the PMW200 performed slightly better than the HPX250 in low light overall. I didn't do any scientific tests, just A-B comparisons by eye.

As far as low light performance goes, then in the case of the HPX250 which PAP setting did you use? (It's in the "Options Menu".)

It's important because the camera uses electronic noise reduction to produce a cleaner looking image. Unfortunately, it can on occasion make matters worse, especially if you want to do much post manipulation.

From the manual:

TYPE 1
This setting is suitable for image production that reduces noise as far as possible with increased sensitivity by using a 3D adaptation effect.
TYPE 2
This setting suppresses 3D adaptation effects and is suitable for an image production with natural sensitivity and image quality

I suspect you may have been using PAP Type 1? It gives a more noise free image - but what they describe as "3D adaptation effects" can have serious downsides as well as benefits. For most work, it's advised to use Type 2 to get the "natural sensitivity and image quality" - but then it's at the expense of low light performance.

I don't believe the HPX250 gives any worse performance overall than any other comparable 1/3" chipped camera - but it's unrealistic to expect it to be as good as a comparable 1/2" model, and that's in respect of base sensitivity, dof characteristics, and diffraction limiting. There's an interesting (and scientific, it was done for the EBU) comparison between the PMW200 and the PMW150 around. It's interesting because here you have two cameras from the same manufacturer, same basic technology, but with the big difference that the 200 is 1/2" chips, the 150 is 1/3". The reports quantify just how much difference there is between 1/2" and 1/3", and hardly surprisingly, it's quite a lot.

As far as sharpness goes, there's not a lot between them - again, not really surprising as they are both 1920x1080 3 chip cameras, and that should also be true for the HPX250 as well.