XDCam vs. EX

J

jimstamos

Active member
Im aware that the xdcam shoots on discs and the new ex on the sxs cards.
do they both shoot mpeg4. is the quality the same?chip size?etc. im looking at both but havent been able to find anyone who really knows these cameras although the ex is fairly new.
anyone shot alot of xdcam?
info appreciated
 
Neither of them shoots MPEG-4, they both shoot MPEG-2.

The quality is not the same, the new XDCAM-EX codec appears to be more robust than the older XDCAM-HD system. Also, XDCAM-EX records a full 1920x1080, whereas the older system was 1440x1080.

Chip size is the same (1/2") but the older cameras use CCDs, the newer one uses CMOS. The newer cam is more sensitive with less noise, but also with the issues that come with all rolling shutter cameras.
 
IMO it sort of resembles the HVX/HPX500 situation in the fact that the f350 is a professional broadcast camera. It is laid out like one, it can make use of some very nice glass, has more connection options, etc.

The EX feels like a plastic toy in comparison. I didn't do side by side controlled tests between the two, but the "professional" lens on the EX didn't feel any better to me then a DVX/HVX while the glass on a f350 can be wonderful in comparison.
 
I don't think it's so hot, based on my sampling. Tons of CA--worse than on my V1U, which has almost unacceptable levels of CA. To me, either I've got a defective lens, or the EX1's lens ain't all that great. Then there is the softness problem at f1.9... I never noticed these problems on a VX2000. I would surely not expect to see them on a camera costing 3X as much.
 
Ya know, it's kind of a silly question to begin with (don't mean to flame you too much), but you're asking to compare a $45,000 camera (F350) to a $7,000 camera (EX1). I'm sure the HVX200 doesn't hold up well agains the 3000 either... They're apples and oranges. What is amazing about the EX1 is the price / performance ratio. It's worth far more than it's $7,000 price tag.
 
basspig said:
I don't think it's so hot, based on my sampling. Tons of CA--worse than on my V1U, which has almost unacceptable levels of CA. To me, either I've got a defective lens, or the EX1's lens ain't all that great. Then there is the softness problem at f1.9... I never noticed these problems on a VX2000. I would surely not expect to see them on a camera costing 3X as much.
Click to expand...

Basspig,

I think you have a defective lens. Try comparing it to another body, even if it's at B&H.

"Tons of CA" just doesn't ring true to my experience.

If you want, let's shoot the same chart and post here as a double check. I really think something must be up with your body - something to do with the ND filters.
 
The problem seems a lot like that vignetting issue--it's only a problem at certain zoom levels. I just did a test render of about a minute of concert video from the EX1 at less than full tele, and it looks clean.

Another clip at or near full tele is so full of CA that the downconverted SD video plainly shows it. Now the little bit of CA I have on the V1Us disappears completely at SD resolution DVD output, so it does seem that the EX1 I have here is far worse.

I saw similar CA on some stills posted by a user on 'that other forum', so I am concerned that if I were to have Sony look at it, they would be able to do nothing about it.

One of my buying decisions was based on the test footage I collected off various internet post links and the utter lack of any detectable CA. I'm beginning to think it is due to the fact that the 'test' samples were shot at zoom ranges and apertures where CA was minimal. Maybe the lens isn't clean over its entire range. But I have been watching some other threads unfolding about this lens issue and it seems mine's not unique.

With my schedule filling up for more concert recordings, it's going to be hard to part with the camera. At the rate things are going, we might have to buy an F23 in the next year. If I can get the Boston Symphony and the New York Philharmonic gigs, we'll definately be in F23 territory.
 
William_Robinette said:
IMO it sort of resembles the HVX/HPX500 situation in the fact that the f350 is a professional broadcast camera. It is laid out like one, it can make use of some very nice glass, has more connection options, etc.

The EX feels like a plastic toy in comparison. I didn't do side by side controlled tests between the two, but the "professional" lens on the EX didn't feel any better to me then a DVX/HVX while the glass on a f350 can be wonderful in comparison.
Click to expand...

Honestly, the EX1 is a lot closer to the F350 than the HVX200 to the HPX500 and it even outperforms the F350 in some respects like sharpness, resolution, noise and light sensitivity.

The lens is surely the best of the under 10K bunch and walks miles around them. Compared to the F350 stock lens it's on pair. Now the F350 can take other lenses and if you were comparing to digi primes fro example I can see where you were coming from but they cost more than the EX1 as will any broadcast HD zoom. Total non sense comparison.
 
basspig said:
I don't think it's so hot, based on my sampling. Tons of CA--worse than on my V1U, which has almost unacceptable levels of CA. To me, either I've got a defective lens, or the EX1's lens ain't all that great. Then there is the softness problem at f1.9... I never noticed these problems on a VX2000. I would surely not expect to see them on a camera costing 3X as much.
Click to expand...

You definitely have a lemon camera. Call your dealer immediately!
 
I've already returned one camera last month because it failed electrically with a service error code. It was a fiasco getting the dealer to replace it. Now I'm past the 15-day exchange period, so most likely, I'll have to go through Sony. Only problem is, there's a high probability that Sony will not be able to fix the problem as others are discovering with multiple trips back to Sony for the same problem. I guess you could say I've gotten two bum cameras in a row.

In a way, I do hope you're correct, but until Sony has identified a fix for the CA and the backfocus with ND on, I'd rather not be chalking up kilobucks per week in camera rentals.
 
Basspig.
If CA is bad as you mention, you're camera has an issue. Maybe it's some how tied to the other issue you're having.
CA was my number one complaint with my JVC HD100 and the EX1 smokes it in this department.

Speaking of which, I performed your test yesterday. As you already know, this same focus problem has been seen by someone else over at the "other" forum.


Basspig.
If CA is bad as you mention, you're camera has an issue. Maybe it's some how tied to the other issue you're having.
CA was my numver one complaint with my JVC HD100 and the EX1 smokes it in this department.

Speaking of which, I performed your test yesterday. As you already know, this same focus problem has been seen by someone else over at the "other" forum.

At full wide, (landscape shot), I zoomed in and focused near infinity. I was at around f4.8. Now, I flipped on ND1 and set the lens to f1.9 and drove the lens wide, it looked good.

I repeated several tests using f1.9, wide shots near infinity focus, with different ND filters, they all looked fine, well, short of exposure. But, no soft focus.

When you describe that nothing is in focus, this is a SURE sign of back focus. The image plane has fallen off of the image sensor.

I've heard of several cameras that have had BF issues. I believe they were replaced.
 
Last edited:
v diff camera. 4 times price of 355, 5 times ex1. Doesnt shoot DVCAM yet, no 24p and overcrank. But still a cracking camera. Look the EX1 is a cheap camera that performs like a full sized pro one. Am shooting a feature doco on two of them out in California at the moment and the footage is quite simply astonishing!
 
basspig said:
I've already returned one camera last month because it failed electrically with a service error code. It was a fiasco getting the dealer to replace it. Now I'm past the 15-day exchange period, so most likely, I'll have to go through Sony. Only problem is, there's a high probability that Sony will not be able to fix the problem as others are discovering with multiple trips back to Sony for the same problem. I guess you could say I've gotten two bum cameras in a row.

When something like this happens to me with Sony, I immediately start looking for a Sony marketing rep to deal with. They are much more sympathetic than the repair guys who simply follow procedure. The marketing people tend to want to make things better for their Sony customers and don't want the bad PR that comes with problems like your lens... Best of luck Mark and don't give up hope.
Click to expand...
 
The trick is to track down a sympathetic Sony marketing rep!

I'm open to suggestions on whom to contact to get this moving. Maybe if Sony send out a loaner camera, this woud be easier to do. When you have a CineAlta camera, word gets around fast and bookings start to happen quickly. I'm afraid to turn down any work, but I may have to if I don't have a camera to meet the job spec.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top