No one complained about the Panasonic DVX100(a). It was 24P, stable and easy DV workflow. It was 16:9 when the others weren't. Panasonic delivered what we asked for. I use the past tense because it's shortcoming was only that it was (is) SD.

All we (under $10k budget crowd) needed is the same type of camera in an HD version.

Enter HDV, primarily the Sonys. I bought one. But it is the HD version of a VX1000. No 24P (we begged). And the codec is not nearly as easy to deal with as DV. I am not happy with all the monkey motion necessary to get where I want to go.

I just talked to my buddy who recently shot an indie film with the FX1. It can be done. I asked his workflow. He shot in 50i. Used Gramme's filters to de-interlace and add a "film-like" look. Then conformed to 24P using Cinema Tools. Slowed the audio down 4%. He didn't tell me how much cpu time it took to do all this. I was afraid to ask. A long road traveled to get what comes off the P2 card directly. And the DVC ProHD codec is better and easier to use. That is well documented everywhere on this site.

Sony did not give us the standard def cameras we wanted. And now they are not giving us the HD products we want. I won't guess why. Good news is that Panasonic will. Sony has sold a ton of HDV cameras because we are hungry for HD. And that this was our only real choice to get our feet wet. But Sony shouldn't be surprised when Z1s are on eBay as soon as the Panasonic is released. History repeats itself.

Anyone want my Z1 in two months?

Yes, but probably many others out there are very happy with it- have done tv shows, documentaries and short films in HD. And have a workable and solid workflow in HD-now. Which means immediate business, immediate revenue, immediate results. And good.

The Z1 has proven to be a good and reliable camera. HDV looks good, no doubt about it. And its cheap , costing about 3 dollars per tape (1 hour recording). It doesn't however, have 24P/25P. And no 720P/60.

THose are the points the Hvx have on its favour. Shooting options and a 4:2:2 codec. The leica lens could also be a plus, as well as the cinegamma (this could be done in post, tough). It has a major down point of recording hd only to P2 cards, which limit the capacity to only 16 gb of hd recording at launch. The firestore solution, promissed for March, may very well be delayed if past history of FOcus launches are to be taken into account. Add to that both camera's prices: in order to get the hvx to record hd with the MOBILITY of real life shooting, you need to at least shell out more $2000 dollars than the z1, wich is hd ready and shootable in HD in real life situations right out of the box (you can shooth hvx from a linked laptop. I know that, but this is impratical and a lot more limiting for the camera work...

i would be delighted if there was a sudden influx of lightly-used, cheapie Z1s hitting the market in two months. that'd be dreamy.

not counting on it, though!

Company is Oakley.

Current equipment includes Sony HDCAM, Varicam, Arri SRII, Aaton Aminima, Z1, FX1, DVX100a, Smoke HD system and FCP HD.

I guess my frustration is based on the fact that Sony never seems to give the market what it asks for in this part of the market. How many users voted for 1080i only? Panasonic seems more attentive to what the wish list is. Sony certainly is capable of giving us the perfect camera... they just don't. Maybe they feel the need to protect the high $$$ business?

The Z1 is a great looking camera, has some great features, and IS useful BUT is not what we wanted. It is a "workaround" camera. Need to work around what it is to get to what "we" need. If the Z1/FX1 had 24P, they would have crushed it... even with HDV codec. But they left the door open to Panasonic to come take a big bite of the market (again).

I acknowledge that I use "we" only to reference many of us I have spoken to, but not all of us.

We use our Sony 900 a lot. This isn't a total trashing of Sony. Just the division that determines the under $10k models.

www.oakley.com

Man, I remember my Oakey Iridium interchangeable shades from 1986. I can't even look at pictures of myself wearing them back then without laughing. I went to your website. That company has grown!
By the way, I don't think either of those cameras are for the "simple guy". But if you're getting paid big bucks for corporate stuff, the HVX will provide for MUCH better compositing, logos, titles, ect. in it's colorspace. Tough to impress your customers with bad composites and green screen spillover on your actor.

I agree. Sony is completely ignoring this market. I think the Z1 looks OK out the component but the HDV format is a huge limitation.

It's obvious just from the fact that we have people like Jan in here with us actually answering questions, that Panasonic has a much tighter hand on the pulse of this market. They definitely did with the DVX100/A, and i'm sure they will with the HVX200 as well.

There's really little they(Sony/Canon/JVC) can do to improve the true output data quality of a new camera without dropping the DV(HDV) tape media all together. There's just no way around it, unless maybe they add something like HD-SDI and externally record it(Canon XL-H1). It's a bold move to come out with a new format to handle the extra data, Panny delivers.

Cheers,
Juan

I guess my frustration is based on the fact that Sony never seems to give the market what it asks for in this part of the market. How many users voted for 1080i only?

You did. When you bought it.

I don't want to sound critical, but exactly what are you complaining about? If its the Z1/FX1, well, you knew it didn't shoot the frame rates you wanted. You knew it didn't shoot progressive. And if you took the time to download one of the many available M2T video files off the internet the day after the cam was released in Japan, you'd have also known the difficulty of working with MPEG2 based video.

Now I'm a HUGE progressive video fan - its the reason my first DV cam was the Canon Elura. But even I give Sony credit for bringing a very nice 1080i HD cam to market before anyone else, and at a pretty good price point to boot (well, for the FX1 anyway). Maybe instead of complaining about HDV and/or Sony, perhaps the complaints should be directed at the other manufacturers for being so far behind? Really, it sounds like you bought the Sony because you were desperate to play with the latest affordable HD toys, and only Sony had something available. So instead of waiting you got the one you didn't like. Hey, everyone does that. How many people buy a cool car, knowing that a major update/improvement might only be a year or two away? I guess I just don't see the cause for complaint. No one FORCES us to buy the latest toys :)

By they way, I'm in no way defending Sony. I'm not a big fan. Come on Sony, proprietary accessory shoe? How greedy can one get. And the way they decimated the TRV900. HC1000? Ugh. But people keep buying, so I guess they'll keep building.

Philip Williams
www.philipwilliams.com

Philip,

You are absolutely right. I have no reason to complain about buying the Z1. No one put a gun to my head. I wanted to get my feet wet. And I knew what it was (1080i) before I bought it.

It doesn't change the fact that Sony knew we all wanted 24p and didn't give it. Nor does it change the fact that Panasonic will eat them for lunch beginning in a couple of months. As you imply, I should not be complaining about the Z1 but celebrating the repeat of history where we finally get what we want in the HVX200. Point taken.

Jim

ummm... if I can't record for at least 45mins straight - that Panny is a useless piece of glass & plastic.

Jim, I'm glad you didn't appear to take offense at my post, as none was intended.

On the bright side, your Z1 will probably have a good resale value and pay a good chunk of the HVX. I know that an HVX with extended field recording will be costly and/or a bit inconvenient (Firestores, P2s with storage drives, laptops, etc..) but man, I bet the resulting video will be FANTASTIC.


Philip Williams
www.philipwilliams.com

"ummm... if I can't record for at least 45mins straight - that Panny is a useless piece of glass & plastic."

you may not be able to now, but it will happen and sooner rather than later. With the Firestore coming out, and P2 technology moving as fast as is does, it won't be too long before we'll have the capability for long recording with external firestore device OR high capacity lower priced P2 cards. It won't be in the next 6 months, but it will be be soon.

It's P2 recording times are limitied now, but we'll see those limits rise as newer high capacity cards are developed. And you'll always have the firestore options.

I'd hardly call that a useless piece of crap. I'd say it's more ahead of it's game, and the storage will catch up. Unlike the HDV tapes, which while not limited in storage, limit themselves in bits per second, and those HDV limits are not going to change.

Ok, I agree to some extent, but I think its not so simple as Panasonic gives us what we want and Sony doesnt. I do think Sony is greedy with their endless proprietary accessories/media (why not go with standard formats? make extra money by needlessly making them pay for proprietary discs/memory/accessories? UMD/memorystick/proprietary accessories certainly make compatibility a pain for the consumer).
Anyway, so Panasonic is selling the HD camera with all (or at least a lot of) the stuff we want for $6000. The Sony is HD(V) for under $4000 nowadays. Doesnt seem like such a difference in price, but when you add in $250/GB for P2 (still not sure how that works when flash memory is $70/GB even if P2 contains extra components for RAID), its more like $10000 before you can shoot. Ok so hopefully there will be Direct to Disk options for the Panasonic, but its likely it will still end up being $1000 (since firestores tend to be more expensive than a laptop with the same hard drive that could be used to capture and edit video). Still, most people are used to spending <$5000 on pro-sumer video cameras. And those are the same people used to getting their media for about $5/hour. So which people are going to suddenly decide they want to spend about twice as much on the latest camera+media? I dont expect it to be all that many. I personally find myself trying to find used 3ccd dv cameras for <$1500 so I certainly will not be spending $6000 on a camera.
There are no perfect cameras. The DVX didnt have 16:9 or >SD or highres chroma or something better than tapes. the HVX addresses those problem but at twice the price and possibly a big media problem. I agree it will be the best camera in the price range (assuming the video looks nice nice) but then again it is debatable whether it is even in the same price range.

Personally, I dont seem myself buying the HVX at that price, but if i did buy an HD camera it would be the one I'd want. I'd rather go the homemade HD camera route for now. Now lets see how my $2000 HD camera turns out. Maybe by the time i get fed up with my homemade camera HVX's will be nice and cheap on ebay.

If I can't afford the tiny p2 cards immediately, could I just plug the camera into a dual 2.3 powermac during shooting? Is that possible?

If I can't afford the tiny p2 cards immediately, could I just plug the camera into a dual 2.3 powermac during shooting? Is that possible?

Hi Betsy, I think if you spend some time Searching on this forum and/or the other forum web site dedicated to DVX users, you should find all your answers. This whole P2/Laptop/Firestore Vs. Tape stuff has been beaten to death on both forums I believe. I'd especially recommend you read the posts by Barry Green on the subject.

Philip Williams
www.philipwilliams.com

I've checked in on this particular forum a lot but I don't remember seeing yay or nay on the viability of a PC workaround lately.

Nothing will happen on any of these questions until the cam comes out. In general however, people are already using laptops for direct record in the field. It's cumbersome but it works. Soon, say by Nov/Dec ther will be laptops with 1900X1200 in regular use with the ability to record HD. Firestore is another possibility. So, let's just wait and see.

If you're running a laptop with either Avid Express Pro HD or Apple's Final Cut Pro HD, then yes you could capture directly to the computer (no P2 card necessary). We're also anticipating that Serious Magic may produce a DVCPRO-HD-capable version of DV Rack. Any of those methods would allow you to avoid buying P2 cards (as would using the FireStore HVX-compatible product).

Thanks, Barry, are there very long cords I could buy to keep the noise of the PowerMac (won't have a powerbook) away from the microphones? Do you think it's possible to keep the computer in the next room? Is there a qualitative limit to how long your cord should be (no jokes, please:)?

Firewire cables are supposed to have a maximum length of 4.5 meters (around 15 feet). However, there are companies that make 30' and 75' cables, and with repeaters they've gotten them to over 225 feet. I have a Laird 30' firewire cable, and it's so far proven to be 100% reliable. So yes, with a 75' cable you could easily keep the computer in a separate room.

Two things:

1. I'm excited about the HVX200, as the DVX100a is my favorite DV camera to use, but I love the Z1. Sure it doesn't shoot 24p and there are a couple of hoops to jump through, but out of all the HDV cameras (except the XL H1 which I haven't tried yet), the Z1 is the best in my opinion.

2. I'd like to see DV Rack for Mac one day.

heath

No offense, but is there a reason you resurrected this 4 month dead topic?

I came across it, why do you ask?

Despite the interim, it's still topical. Where we draw the line is on two or three year old threads!

Personally I think Sony did a commendable job of delivering the first affordable HD cameras which were really worth talking about, and will soon have a complete range of rationally priced models from the HC1 to the XDCAM HD series. The HVX200 has some impressive features and will no doubt be widely popular, but sales won't match the Sonys because of both the initial cost and memory/workflow issues. And no matter what else the HVX200 has it's still a hand-held camera with a small sensor and a fixed lens, so it's not necessarily what professionals want in that sense.

Not that it really does much good to discuss this, but I don't see the HVX200 changing things all that much. I look forward to hearing more about it and seeing more sample footage, but to me it's more of a specialty item than a mainstream video camera. Call me when they ship the HVX300, recording H.264 at 25 Mbps to standard off-the-shelf flash memory cards!

:-)

Call me when they ship the HVX300, recording H.264 at 25 Mbps to standard off-the-shelf flash memory cards!
:-)

I hope your not expecting a phone call anytime soon. :)

I agree with the original post: Barring the inability to record DVCPRO-HD to tape and the short record time to P2 cards, the HVX is a near-perfect sub-$10k body. Like I mentioned in another thread, the record times even to 8GB cards may be short, it still beats dealing with 11 minute film loads!

Those of us who have ordered one are on pins and needles waiting for it's arrival however, reading this post is a nice reminder that there are options to the HVX. Not as capable and further away from near-perfect to be sure (at least for my needs) but there are ways to make a Z1, H1 or others "look" like progressive footage. It's just more work and not as elegant a solution.

If the HVX looks to be further out than we're expecting I might even migrate our project "down" to DV and use the DVX-100B. At least it's 16:9 progressive, a DTE solution could easily be used (nNovia or Firestore) and have a fast workflow. I'd rather have that than mess with all the workarounds for HDV.

BUT... the best of all worlds would be to use the HVX, and so we wait.

Anecdotal: At NAB 2004, when Sony was showing nothing more than a mockup Z-1 in a glass case, the party line was that the design wasn't locked yet, and that Sony was informally polling the NAB attenddes as to which features they wanted in the new camera. I came back to that part of the booth on several occasions and spoke to several different people. I always asked what the number one feature request was, and the answer always came back the same: 24p. I can't imagine what happened. Did Sony never get the message? Was the design locked around certain components long before feedback from "us"? Was Sony protecting the CineAlta product line by hobbling the FX/Z-1? Whatever happened, Jim nailed it when he said Sony opened up a huge door in the market that Panasonic is now driving the semi-truck of the HVX200 through.

Also, I'm so very glad this thread was ressurected, as I missed it the first time around. I find it highly amusing and more than a little ironic how people treated Jim Jannard before we all knew who he was, and what he was up to. I, too might have assumed Jim was just a corporate video producer, instead of the crazy maverick behind Red. It's really encouraging that Jim identifies himself so strongly with the "under $10,000 crowd", and titles the post "for the simple guy". That just reinforces my sense that Jim is a real stand-up guy, and down-to-earth, despite the lofty goals of the Red camera.

Whatever Jim does to push the industry forward, sooner or later we'll all benefit from his efforts, and dvinfo is lucky to have him around.

My guess, maybe Sony is trying to protect their F900 line--it's extremely successful for them. I hear people "kicking" the Z1 around, but it's been a wonderful camera for many of us. Of course, I don't usually judge a camera until I use one, so I couldn't say the HVX200 is the best thing yet, because I haven't even seen one in person. Same with the XL H1.

heath

Anecdotal: I always asked what the number one feature request was, and the answer always came back the same: 24p. I can't imagine what happened.

Since we hang out in places like DVinfo where a lot of people are aspiring filmakers, I suspect that may give us a slanted vision of the larger world. My guess is that while 24p might be a "make it or break it" factor for many of us, the market is really very small in terms of the overall camcorder universe. Sony is also positioning the FX1 as a high end consumer camera, and from what I've read it has sold very well. They have also sold a lot of Z1's to ENG types. I'd be very surprised if Panasonic sold nearly as many HVX's since the market for them is pretty narrow.

So it was probably a simple economic decision that developing high res progressive CCD's wasn't worth it for the additional sales it might generate. And anyway, in their mind I'll bet they think they addressed the 24p requests by including the cf24 mode :-)

...not trying to start a whole new war and I love the z1 w/o progressive but if I had an aaton a minima and money was no object , I'd still be shooting film. If someone shoots an indie and they're going film out , they only need to shoot 60i- filmout will give a great 24fps. There was a test of filmout between the pd150 and dvx- no one could tell the difference is how I remember it. The same will hold true for filmout between the z1 and hvx I venture to say. And as long as the delivery is sd dvds' then it doesn't matter - the whole 24p thing 'cause post will look as good . However what is totally cool about the hvx is variable frame rate shooting. Something that , besides the varicam , only film cameras could do. That's what I'm waiting to see . I'd like to know if the rate can be changed midstream, while shooting , for example ? I still shoot 100 ft. rolls in my beaulieu to do some effects that are much better done in a variable rate film camera than in post. In Mexico , getting telecines is difficult . That's why the pany is interesting for me and I consider myself pretty simple - I don't use a car for example but I used to love my Oakleys' before my dogs ate them ( Jim could you work on that - it appears they are quite tasty) Kurth

We're getting off topic, but doing a film-out is very cost prohibitive, which is why many like to shoot 24p natively or have it done in post. Besides, most film festivals prefer HDCAM or some other digital tape or DVD source, because it saves them a lot of money.

Anyway, I love the Z1, the DVX100a and, in the high end dept., the F900.

heath

I don't understand why it's off topic. 24p is being used as the main difference between the z1 and hvx. I think the more important difference is variable frame rates. And even for film projects , most people edit on an nle so whatever delivery format is required is unconnected to the acquistion medium. What's great is the abundance of choices we have vs. what we had 10 years ago in terms of digital media. We had the vx1000 and the vx700 single chip. Then Panasonic followed with some , truthfully , mediocre models. Don't remember the name but it looked like a mini-bazooka. This year we'll probably see some more interesting hd cameras come down the line. The hvx is great and coupled with a 35mm adapter will probably fool some eyes into thinking it was 35mm film. That appears to be the holygrail, however it's just another look-tool. Use whatevers in the toolbox that works. For most of us , the z1 is enough for now. You have to remember that most video cameras in this price range are sold to broadcasters not to hollywood want-to-bees. However in a couple of years , when p2 prices drop and pany is offering rebates , I'll be looking seriously at the hvx , not because of 24p, but because it shoots frames at many different speeds. But by then we'll probably have HD consumer cameras with full frame sensors shooting variable framerates recording to internal hds , that are no bigger than a dslr. That's the (w)holygrail.Kurth

I got off topic talking film out, though they handle the 24p look.

Check out my thoughts on a "film look:"

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=58818

My students have learned shooting in 24p is just one part of the equation. BTW, I think Panny is offering $400 off for an HVX200 and two P2 cards.

heath

BTW, I think Panny is offering $400 off for an HVX200 and two P2 cards.

heath

Where?

Heath Thanks again,

Resurrecting this thread is very good for me,

I have been waiting for the HVX200 for a long time - it is perfect for my workflow (also, I will be using it with a 35mm adaptor)
but I am worried that the lower res/noise may make this a Transitional Camera.
I Know you can get good res and low noise from the HVX.
But
I will probably be getting my HVX a few weeks before Nab when something else wets my appitite (yeah I then wait a few more months)
Honestly
an HVX will run me 7k
and I am tempted to spend less than half that (3k) for an FX1 now
that will let me do the work I need to do for the next 6-9 months.

now I would Love an HVX200,
but
as I am not gonna be gettingg one soon - This is a very relevant thread

Test, test, test. After buying an HD10 before testing, I realized how much of a mistake I'd made. Oh, well...

Here's the link to the rebate:

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?displayTab=O&storeId=11201&catalogId=13051&itemId=93120&catGroupId=14569&modelNo=AG-HVX200&surfModel=AG-HVX200

heath

It might seem like Sony don't listen but I think the problem is Sony doesn't talk enough. I'm certain they realised everyone would have given their right arm to get a 24p HD camera with all the other features of the Z1 at around that price point. As we've seen with the HVX100 that isn't such an easy task, the things been cooking for a long time and it certainly has it's issues. Those issues aren't Panasonics fault either, they're just doing the best they can giving us what we asked for, too bad the laws of physics got in the way of a perfect outcome.
So now Sony has the F350, 24p, multiple frame rates and a complete end to end solution that's already tried and tested. Yes it costs more money although I'd suggest if you factor in all the ancillary costs of the HVX100 the difference might be less than we think. After all what really matters is the total cost of ownership.

I know Sony uses funny proprietary technology that doesn't work for everyone, but I own an FX1 and a new 60" SXRD HDTV and the combination is absolutely amazing! The FX1 hooks up via Firewire (all digital) and the picture quality I'm getting is the same if not better than Discovery HD. Trust me I am very critical of picture quality (color, resolution, artifacts). I'm not sure what type of compression codec is used by the Discovery channel, but there are far less compression artifacts from the FX1's HDV codec. The connection via Firewire is flawless...the television reads the camera instantly. I am more than pleased with my investment in Sony.

i got lost in this pana thread.Just to check out how things are with the pana 200.....
I got myself a Z1 as soon as it wwas available.
ive been shooting corporates and commercials and docs with it for almost a year now. If I would have hesitated to buy the Z1 just to wait for someting newer and better and more sophisticated......come on.
its all about making films. Not about technology. My clients are not interested in the typre of camera I use. They do not do A B comparisons.
Believe me : if I suddenly come to a shoot with a pana hvx 200 without the chrosziel mattebox attached like I have with my Z1 , I think clients would worry about the less impressive looks of the hvx 200.....
Anyway: Looking forward to panasonic 200 content out here.
Yes . I also like progressive. Maybe this year?

I'm not slamming Sony for the XL/Z-1. If you want a 1080i 1/3" camcorder, it's a fine choice. I think that Barry Green's dvxuser.com shootout finally put the nail in the coffin for me, meaning that the cams from Sony, Canon, JVC and Panasonic all put out really good HD. They all put out "real" HD, whatever that means. All of them would be suitable for a wide variety of productions, maybe even for 35mm film-out or network production (I know there's argument about this, but we never thought that DV would be used for film-out or network, and look what's happened).

The problem I have is that Canon (somewhat), JVC and Panasonic have all listened to what the customers want: flexibility. They want the option to shoot in 24p, 30p or 60i. Sony was first to market with a really viable professional camera (I no longer count the first JVC camera - too hobbled to be truly pro). Sony had the opportunity to own the market in this price range, and they blew it.

It's a shame, really, because there are so many good design ideas in the Z-1: the stunning viewfinder, the left-loading tape, higher-bandwidth HDV, controls placed where you expect, etc.

If I had needed, really needed HD earlier last year, I might have bought the Z-1, earned my money back on it, and had no regrets. But if I had to buy a camera right now, it would be the HVX-200 without a doubt, with my eye on April and the nuclear bomb of a camera that might be Red.

IMO Sony scored big time with the FX1/Z1U. At a time that I needed a camera, here came a 3CCD HD system. I downloaded the clips, I tested out workflows, I chose my tools wisely, and when I bought the first FX1 I could get my hands on in Nov. '04, it did exactly what I expected it too.

Was Sony ignoring the market? Consider all the cameras that are out now... none of them are perfect, and they've had a year to go at it! Progressive scanning has proved difficult - look at the SSE on the HD100, frame modes on the XLH1, and softness of the HVX200. Archiving and editing are a pain as well.

The FX1/Z1U has been out for a year, and yet still is directly comparible AND CHEAPER than the lot (save Sony's other offering the amazing HC1/A1U). And show me another camera that has NTSC/PAL switching out of the box.

Sure, I wanted true 24P... but it seems evident that at the time the FX1 was being developed, there were no viable 1/3" 1080p24 chipsets that existed - so Sony did what was reasonable to get a product out the door.

What's next? I don't know. If the successor to the FX1/Z1U doesn't have a proper 24P/F function then I'll be disappointed... but the industry is in a state of flux to HD, and Sony didn't do have bad with their first entry.

-Steve

Sony had the opportunity to own the market in this price range, and they blew it.

On the contrary, I'd say that Sony does own most of the market for affordable HD videography, and there's still nothing to compete with the FX1 at that price over a year after it started shipping. The Z1U is a little harder choice at ~$4500, but you can still get two of them for the cost of one XL-H1 or an HVX200 with some recording storage. The HD100U has a unique niche as a shoulder-mounted HD camera, but I don't get the impression JVC is selling more than a small number of those compared to sales of the Sony cameras.

Personally I've pretty happy with what Sony gave us and continue to be impressed that a $3000 video camera can deliver 700 lines of recorded resolution. Their current models struggle in poor lighting, but a simple 15-30W on-camera light solves that problem for most of my purposes. These are good times for videographers in terms of equipment options.

You did. When you bought it.Not really. That argument would hold if there had been real alternatives when the Z1 was released. Sure, no one put a gun to Jim's head (at least in this case -- I don't know what he does in his off hours), but the JVC HD1 and HD10 are single-chip and virtually useless for 24-fps applications (you can't just drop the "extra" 6 frames). It was more a vote for low-cost HD (which at the time meant HDV and coincidentally 1080i) over high-end HD or SD. Had the HD100 or HVX been available when the Z1 was released, I'm sure the Z1 wouldn't have enjoyed the sales volume that it has.