Hypothetical Question - Firmware upgrade EXx
 

I'm curious about the user base here on DVi and how you would respond to this scenario.

If Sony released a new firmware this summer that upgraded the EX1/EX3 to optionally record 100mbps 4:2:2 intra-frame, *BUT* it disabled the use of SDHC type solutions, would you do the upgrade?

Simple question, but a head-scratcher for many people I'd bet.

I would love the ability to record 4:2:2 at 100Mbps and would gladly sacrifice the use of SD cards to get it. I do prefer SxS over SDHC, so much faster. But then I've got 10 16Gb SxS cards and a load of 8Gb cards so I'm fortunate enough to have plenty of storage already.

My guess is that the next full size cameras from Sony will be SxS as I think that they have pretty much reached the limit of what can be reliably done with optical discs. I think the new full size JVC camera will be SxS as well. As the demand for SxS increases the price of the cards should steadily drop.

I would also love to upgrade to 4:2:2/100Mbps because I only use the SxS cards. To bad that this is only a Hypothetical Question. Think Sony could earn a lot of money for an update like this! But I think this will not happen very soon, because they have to protect their High-End market.

It is impossible since 4:2:2 encoding would require an extra hardware chip and is not enabled by software.

Uhh, that's why it's a hypothetical question...

Alister your comment is interesting, because this is exactly the path that Panasonic has chosen, and many users there are clamoring for recording in SD cards like EX1/EX3 users can. I'm truly wondering if it's a "Grass is greener" scenario.

My guess, is that the pro shooters here would gladly do the upgrade, while the home/hobbyist shooters would probably not. It breaks much the same on the P2 debate. You guys get to charge enough for your gigs to purchase SxS or can build that into the job spec. Most of us can't.

I also agree with you that the next group of fill size cameras will go SxS, but that is going to lead to some onerous problems, like backups and archiving, just as the P2 folks are dealing with. The SPD gives you the immediate backup/archive much as tape did. Not so with the SxS card.

In terms of price drops, the P2 folks have been hoping for that for years. Hasn't happened. I see nothing on the horizon that tells me that Sony won't follow suit and simply charge what the market will bear.

Given Ned's information either Sony would have to couple that with an expensive hardware upgrade or simply include it in the next EX series.

I firmly believe Sony will NOT disable the use of SDHC. They pulled out of third party card certification, that does not mean they will block the "market" especially since JVC is allowing the use of SDHC in the HM100 and I believe the HM700.

I certainly do think Sony may enable some additional features that will require SxS to utilize though.

I certainly DO think it is possible that new EX cameras going forward will have 50mbps 4:2:2 recording (I won't speculate on 100mbps) though.

I also DO believe Sony will be adding additional features to the current EX cameras through firmware upgrades though.

With Sony's alliance with JVC (you did see that didn't you?) and JVC now using the EX codec and making SDHC cameras that use the codec, Sony WILL NOT AT ALL block SDHC use on current cameras.

SxS will have advantages (overcranking and higher speed transfers) and other advantages may be enabled in firmware.

Also note that SxS is Sony AND Sandisk and while SxS has limited growth given it's reusable not archivable, Sandisk stands to gain significantly with SDHC as freelance shooters now have something that costs in the same range as an XDCAM Disc, that one can hand to a client after a shoot. SDCH will become like "tape stock" in which volume sales are possible you KNOW Sandisk (the "other" S in SxS) is going to like that.

Currently it's only Sandisk and Transcend (so it seems) that can work in EX cameras reliably (and Sandisk is already there with 32GB cards) and with JVC using the codec and SDHC, I wouldn't be surprised if Sandisk pushes the technology further.

Think this through. There's reasons why, unlike the Betamax days, Sony has made alliance with Sandisk and with JVC. The aren't going to hobble their own investment in these alliances.

_________

Let's put this another way if the above is too confusing.
Sony is in alliance with Sandisk who makes SDHC and other flash media.
Sony is in alliance with JVC who now uses EX codec and SDHC.

In the new Betamax VHS war, Sony is really in a codec battle with MPEG2 Long GOP (from 19mbps JVC uses, 25mbps HDV, 35mbps EX, 50mbps XDCAM), vs AVCHD and AVCIntra. The "war" is no longer about media (SxS, XDCAM Disc vs P2) it's about CODECS. Sony has the media partner in Sandisk and has another camera company JVC using Sony's Long GOP codec through EX. It'll be interesting to see where Canon falls in all this at NAB.

BTW I suspect all this may be why Sony chose an .MP4 instead of .MXF for the EX codec. Note JVC HM100 and HM700 BOTH record to .MOV and "a generic version" (I'm not sure what that is yet though). I really think they went with MP4 as the "universal" allowing users/NLEs to then convert to MXF or MOV or use the MP4 if they like.

In other words, Sony "ain't gonna hobble nothin'" that might cause you to buy a Panasonic AVC camera using SDHC because the media is less expensive than SxS. Sony's going to want Sandisk to make SDHC to specs that will handle EX codec.

My favorite "game" as a kid was "connect the dots."

Craig, that was an interesting post, but I am not after "what Sony might do" here. All I am asking, is in the hypothetical scenario I listed, what would YOU do?

Put another way, does it mean more to you to have inexpensive SDHC recording, or intraframe recording?

Okay, I'll be the new kid on the playground. The one that doesn't fully understand what the bigger, cooler kids are talking about. Can someone please explain what this shooting ability (4:2:2/100Mbps) would do for me?

Thanks for any info.

:)

Primarily 2 things:

1. It would alleviate some of the problems with the current codec breaking up on high motion subjects, or with more rapid camera movement. This is of significant concern to those taking footage to broadcast, or producing narrative work with steadicam, dolly, or jib/crane work. For locked off shots on a tripod, it's not too much of a concern.

2. For those wishing to do VFX of greenscreen work, the increased color fidelity allows much cleaner work. Edges are smoother, color is better.

The penalty of course, is larger file sizes, and it's more demanding on the editing machine.

I would upgrade when I have the client paying a budget with a targeted delivery that would need 100mbps 4:2:2 and not before. That's assuming the firmware offered not other benefits.

But I do think the hypothetical fails on two key points. As Ned points out 4:2:2 can't happen with current hardware. As I point out blocking the use of SDHC serves no productive business or marketing purpose.

Might I ask what the purpose of the question is since neither change is likely to occur and may not even be possible.

Given the above points, I don't even think Sony would find the results useful even anecdotally (and people at Sony do look in here from what I know).

The point to the post was to try to gauge a bit of what kind of userbase we are seeing here in the EX forum. Many of the users here seem to fall to the pro side of the house and less amateur. Probably makes sense since the cameras tend to fall outside the price range of new(er) shooters, and seem to be finding a home as B-Cams to bigger hardware, or A-Cams on smaller crews, or when more mobility is needed.

Panasonic recently did a fluff piece talking about the benefits of AVC-Intra on their big cams (compared to HDCAM) and AVCHD compared to HDV. I was a bit curious if users here would make the leap to an AVC-Intra like codec given the chance, but knowing that the SDHC would have to be left behind.

I am much like you. I would make the leap if I had a paying client who needed it, but the SDHC solution for me is hugely enabling. And my current clients are thrilled with both the costs and the footage.

Peronne I think you have answered your own question very well. I would not want to loose SDHC recording as it fits the bill for most things a client wants. Personally for 100mbits recording I would buy a Convergent Design Nanoflash and have the best of all worlds.

Thanks for that Perrone. Appreciated.

Perrone, thanks for that explanation. It actually put your hypothetical and my comments together for an interesting insight to "the market."

A key point to keep in mind is the XDCAM is already a pro format. Moving a variant of it into the sub $10,000 market was consider a surprise by some and certainly a bold step in the market.

XDCAM is quite common in ENG use and I don't doubt in corporate market as well. F3xx series cameras certainly exemplify that. Now the PDW-700 with 50mbps 4:2:2 (still long GOP, not Intra) targets the higher end market. Apparently Sony's promise of 24p in that camera is not coming from the News (ENG) market. In fact, in the last year or so with EX1, EX3, PDW-700 one might say Sony's development is "jet engines with afterburners ablaze"

I believe Discovery has given XDCAM "Silver" status so that would mean it's already reasonably far up the chain for use in the "broadcast doc" arena.

To put Perrone's thoughts in context we have to consider that Sony has to be thinking about what replaces HDCAM. Certainly a 100mbps 4:2:2 Intra codec might be in that ballpark.

With the new Panasonic Varicam supporting AVCIntra100 and 50 on P2, I can't help but think Sony is going to fire a salvo in that direction too. Some kind of new Sony F950 variant maybe? More changes to the PDW-700?

It's with some irony that it was JVC's HM100 announced that started to connect all the dots for me in the codec war. Perrone's hypothetical question regarding 100mbps 4:2:2 Intra looks at the other end of the spectrum.

There are other puzzle pieces I'm still trying to figure out.
SDHC becomes the low/mid level media possibly replacing XDCAM disc and certainly used in AVC cameras. Sony's high end card is SxS and Panasonic P2. Convergent Design does show how more standard flash cards can be used though so who knows if that'll tie in.

Does Sony compete with AVCHD on the consumer end? Does Sony (and JVC) use both their 25mbps and maybe JVC's 19mbps for that? But HDV could be fading given that JVC now has a $4000 list (so obviously less expensive street) camera that uses 35mbps EX codec. We may start to see Sony replacing the V and Z series cameras with 35mbps EX cameras given JVCs move.

It's pretty hard to break 35mbps VBR (but not impossible). There are certainly news/ENG crews who can shoot sports with that codec.
I'm finding that 35mbps 4:2:0 when shooting progressive holds up well. 4:2:0 certainly shows weakness with interlace though.
Certainly there are reasons to improve on both though.
Sony already has 50mbps 4:2:2 which solves that aspect of green screen and compositing.

For broadcast narrative you might be in the F900, F950, F23, F35 range on the Sony side of things. You're talking HDCAM and HDCAM SR and up in that bunch, not XDCAM. I certainly think Sony's working on a replacement for HDCAM as per my previous post. The resultant codec is not something you're likely to find in EX series.

Right now I think 50mbps 4:2:2 long GOP might work its way into models below the 700 though. As Ned points out, even that's a new encoder chip.

I have followed this discussion with interest. A lot of worthwhile views are presented, but the one thing missing, especially in these times, is the question of will it bring extra revenues or profit? Sure, we all agree that going from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2 is great, decreasing compression is great, but the bottom line is will it generate extra revenues?

Currently the price per minute recording time at HQ with SxS is around $ 16, with SDHC it is around $ 1. If you choose to go for triple the data rate you triple the cost per minute recording time.

This is all acceptable for short shots, like commercials, but for event people there is no benefit, so I think it very much depends on what kind of market you are in, whether you can justify the extra investment in media to get a better margin on your projects. I don't think there is a clear answer to that, it just depends on the type of business you are in.

For me, and I have to admit I like to be at the technology frontier, I don't put a high priority on it at the moment. I better get some more assignments first and with people postponing decisions, well...

It depends on your target.

In my local market, the local stations have generally been DVCam/DVCPro with the occasional BetaSP. As they migrate to HD, the question comes as to what they outfit everyone with. The DVCPro folks have generally gone the DVCProHD/P2 route. I am seeing those in Shoulder mount and HVX. The Sony folks have been something of a mixed bag.

Imagine if they could have a Sony 4:2:2 full raster cam at $10k to replace the $25k cameras they have now. How many do you think they'd buy?

Or look at the independent production house trying to do work for HD broadcast. Instead of dealing with the limitations of being saddled with 4:2:0, they could shoot full raster 4:2:2 and rightly submit footage for the upper echelon of HD broadcast without worry.

To me, it's a game of follow the leader. Panasonic has already put intraframe in the Sub 10k market with the HVX/HPX though it's not full raster. Sony has brought full raster and 1/2" imaging, but with long GOP. Sony could be the first to offer both. The HARD part is done. They already have the cameras built. They also have a suitable recording medium in SxS. A modication to their currently shipping lineup could trump this market for very little investment. No more saying, "Yes, but 4:2:0 is good enough at full raster." or "We qualify at silver level, but not gold." They could put the issue to bed.

Two sub-$10k handycams with full raster intra and a line of Sub $30k Shoulder Mounts that hold 5 SxS cards could be just the ticket.

Yes, event shooters would likely have issues, but none that we haven't seen with tape based formats for years, or that the P2 guys haven't had to deal with. Offboard recording with the likes of the Convergent bring real value to event shooters. That's why I went with the Focus Store early. The Nanoflash will cost just a bit more than my Firestore HD did, and have features WELL beyond. Charge each client an extra $100 and you'll pay it off in a year.

News/ENG market is an odd bird in its decision making process.
The P2 purchase decisions were probably made before the EX series cameras began to establish itself. At the time keeping DVCPro compatibility was probably critical to workflow also. I can't see P2/DVCProHD lasting at all. Current news economics are decidedly against it. I think that's why Panasonic is moving to AVCIntra. P2 is expensive and 100mbps(HD) makes for very short records on those P2 cards. Field recording is further hampered by PCMCIA vs Express card on newer laptops (although that's not an issue for local news).

4:2:0 vs 4:2:2 may not be a big issue either in News/ENG. Compositing and color correction are not a big part of the news workflow (but can be in the Documentary workflow).

I really don't think Long GOP vs Intra is critical for news either these days. I think this battle will be between 50mbps 4:2:2 Long GOP (PDW-700 for example) vs 50mbps AVCIntra. That's only for circumstances where that level is needed. Certainly 35mbps 4:2:0, especially with the offload speed of SxS as it replaces XDCAM Disc, is going to be a BIG plus. EX1 and EX3 show to be good news cameras and that's also why I think Sony will have a shoulder mount EX5 at NAB. With JVC on board too (for those who agonize CMOS vs CCD) the EX codec will have a full range of support for ENG work. SDHC, while slower transfer, offers archival source media in an incredibly space efficient size. This has to put Panasonic in a difficult place for future sales with P2 and DVCProHD. They have to offer SDHC with AVCIntra at 50mbps (or less?).

Sony's whole series of moves is to make EX codec something ubiquitous among both News and Freelancers who shoot news (and SDHC allows the media hand off now). This is the bridge Sony is building with Sandisk and JVC. This is also why you WILL NOT see Sony blocking SDHC. It's KEY for the freelance shooter market.

In my opinion Intra vs GOP I don't think is critical in this market.

Intra and 4:2:2 can be critical in the HDCAM market though. I don't think we've seen Sony's move in this area vs Panasonic's AVCIntra 50 and 100mbps. I think that'll also happen at NAB as Sony finally counters the Varicam. I think something is going to happen for Sony in the F900/950 range. I don't see the "puzzle piece" yet, just the logic. This is where Perrone's hypothetical 50mbps 4:2:2 Intra might happen. This may be SxS market (although SDHC is not out of the question for sure).

Event shooters? I don't see a complaint here at all. Not only is there EX 35mbps there's now JVC with EX 35mbps with CCD if they don't like the CMOS flash issue. Pack a camera with two 32GB cards and nearly 4 hours of record time. That's an event shooter's dream.

Codecs aren't an either/or so I don't get your point for event shooters and "issues." Sony/JVC will offer 19mbps CBR, 25mbps CBR codecs as well as 35mbps VBR. It's not like Sony's going to drop the lower data rates for 50mbps. It's not like event shooters have a critical need for 4:2:2 over 4:2:0.

I think Sony is looking to cover the entire range and allied with Sandisk and JVC to ensure media and camera diversity supporting a codec to cover all the markets. Let's see what replaces HDCAM.

Panasonic has AVCIntra and the Varicam (etc) as the HDCAM competitor. So this is Sony's next immediate move least they cede that market.

Again Sony's alliances with Sandisk and JVC are pivotal and why it all spells a codec war. It's why JVC was a key puzzle piece in revealing this (codec must be supported by multiple camera manufacturers). It also explains MP4 as a "root" to go to either MXF, MOV or can be used as MP4. It also explains why Sony opened the door to SDHC (codec war can't be won with expensive proprietary media).

Good stuff Craig. I wasn't trying to point the 100mbps codec at ENG. More at Docu guys or those prodicing for DiscoHD/BBC/etc. Taking an EX3 instead of an F900 into some places might be most welcome. I am thinking of Taxi to the Darkside and the decision to take the HVX instead of the Varicam in some places.

NAB should be VERY interesting. Especially seeing if Canon jumps into this fray. I can't see them jumping into P2, So will it be SxS, SDHC, CF? And surely they don't want to go the codec route on their own, so where do they go...

For me, Mr Corporate, no. SDHC + 1/2" chip is just perfect price/performance. My clients would not see the difference of 4:2:2, and my chromakeying with 4:2:0 + DVmatte Pro (which enhances the edge matte with luma info) is 'good enough'.

The only thing I'd switch for would be rolling record, but that's a hardware RAM thing rather than recording technology. (sigh)

Hmmm........

Let's see. Is spending thousands of dollars in blood money payments to Sony for their SxS cards presumably made of precious metals worth giving up 100 Mbps 4:2:2 intra-frame recording?

Let me sleep on it in my $16,000 Alberto Frias bed and I'll get back to you:

Snug As A Bug In The Most Expensive Bed Ever. - The Modern Materialist

John

I would love to see a 4:2:2 50mbps update, but the Ex1 gives me still great results as long as I'm not doing any misstakes.

Hmm, do most of us really need 4:2:2 50mbps or 100mbps ? Doubtless I don't reall need it in 99% of our shots.

However, it will give ma a better feeling. I have seen this when I shot a sequence in the snow with many trees in the background. During a pan, I realized that for just this sequence 35Mbs was not enough. It didn't really look bad, but it was not a perfect result when I was sitting 10 centimeter in front of the TV, complaining about compression.

So I think this is more a psychologic problem. I thought if I had a 4:2:2 with 100mbs, or an other highest available system on the market (like RED), maybe this sequence would look better. But I just fool myself with this, because I was so stupid to do a (useless) pan with those many details in the background?

The same argument is allways to work future proof. I would feel better to do stock footage with 5k@120fps 4:4:4 cam, because maybe in 20 years this will be the new IPod standart. Stuff like that is the reaon why I allways will shot on the highest available standart I can afford.

However, I know that I'm like that and for me it sounds better to spent my money for a 4:2:2 100mbps update than to pay a psychiatrist to fix my real problems. lol. Or the bed John wrote about.... so as long as this bed hasn't the size 4:2:2 (yd) I don't see this as sign to buy it.