Sony releases another XDCAM 422 camera, this one with three 1/3" chips:

CVP blog & more Archives Sony 50Mb/s range expands with new PMW-150 camcorder (http://blog.creativevideo.co.uk/2012/09/sony-50mbs-range-expands-with-new-pmw-150-camcorder/)

Sony strengthens its XDCAM HD422 Range adding a High Performance Handheld Camcorder and SxS Field Gear : Press : Sony Professional (http://www.sony.co.uk/pro/press/pr-ibc-xdcam-pmw150?SM=FB1&src=07092012_post_IBCPMW150_)

Surprised there is no mention of the ClearVid pixel arrangement as found in the Z5U or NX5. I do question if it is truly full raster. I'm also guessing that it is a Sony G series lens as found on the NX5.

Surprised there is no mention of the ClearVid pixel arrangement as found in the Z5U or NX5. I do question if it is truly full raster. I'm also guessing that it is a Sony G series lens as found on the NX5.

These are all-new sensors, according to the press releases. And why would you doubt full raster chips? It's been done for years.

Maybe now with the new sensors they have a NX5U upgrade but with AVCHD 2.0 as the top of the AVCHD line before going to SxS and 50 Mbps 422 ? I for one would look forward to that. I like my NX5U but would like improved sensors and the other features of AVCHD 2.0 like 60P

Ron Evans

I question full raster on 1/3'' since previous 3 chip 1/3'' cameras from Sony almost all use the ClearVid pixel arrangement which interpolates pixels. That would not equal full-raster from the sensor.

Sensitivity is slightly behind 1/2'' counterparts (the 200, EX1 and EX3) being 2 stops less sensitive and 1 stop behind the HPX250 with P.A.P. filter TYPE1, which may be direct competition for this camera.

I question full raster on 1/3'' since previous 3 chip 1/3'' cameras from Sony almost all use the ClearVid pixel arrangement which interpolates pixels. That would not equal full-raster from the sensor.

Sensitivity is slightly behind 1/2'' counterparts (the 200, EX1 and EX3) being 2 stops less sensitive and 1 stop behind the HPX250 with P.A.P. filter TYPE1, which may be direct competition for this camera.

The Sony press release does say Exmor rather than Clearvid .

Ron Evans

Okay, now I'm really confused. B&H is listing this camera as the PMW-160, with three 1/3" chips and a 20x Sony lens. The estimated price is $1500 more than the PMW-200, which isn't even out yet and has three 1/2" chips. I see no advantages to the PMW-160 except for the 20x lens, so why the new model and why the high cost ?

Sony also Tweeted PMW-160. Is this another model?

Photo by sonyprousa • Instagram (http://instagram.com/p/PR0fLmTPay/)

I did a bit more looking - it appears that B&H has the wrong model number. There are some references in Japanese to the PMW-160, but everything else in Europe and the Americas shows PMW-150. Maybe a different designation in Japan ? The weight and size stats for the PMW-150 and the PMW-200 are nearly identical : weight (unloaded/loaded) for the 150 is 2.1/2.5 kg, and for the 200 is 2.3/2.7 kg. Size in cm for the 150 is 172x164x326, and for the 200 is 172x164x317. It would seem to me that the 150, although having a longer telephoto Fujinon (not Sony) lens, should be cheaper than the 200. Has B&H got the estimated price wrong too ?

likely PAL vs. NTSC model designation...

The price difference between 150 and 200 in CVP is 1400 GBP which sounds realistic.
In effect the 150 is the Mpeg422 version of the NX5 They share the same lens but on the 150 is stabilized which is great.
In the CVP link it also states that: "its sensors are all-new devices with a native resolution that allows full-HD output without pixel interpolation."
So its not clearvid.
By the way, Ron Evans, a exmor sensor can be clearVid also as is the case of NX5

In UK prices seem to be GBP 4650+tax for PMW-200 and GBP 3995 for the PMW-150.
Haven't seen PMW-160 referred to anywhere.
Suspect cock-up on B&H's part.

50 mbps and 20x zoom? I'm paying attention now.

At least it had ND.

Personaly I'll take a EX1 w/ the same Fuji lens & 1/3" full raster chips if it comes in at a price close to the Panasonic AC160 or JVC HM600.

Sony added link of this camcorder on facebook.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/sony-professional-usa/sony-strengthens-its-xdcam-hd422-range-adding-a-high-performance-handheld-camcor/463969843623705

I question full raster on 1/3'' since previous 3 chip 1/3'' cameras from Sony almost all use the ClearVid pixel arrangement which interpolates pixels. That would not equal full-raster from the sensor.

Sensitivity is slightly behind 1/2'' counterparts (the 200, EX1 and EX3) being 2 stops less sensitive and 1 stop behind the HPX250 with P.A.P. filter TYPE1, which may be direct competition for this camera.
Up to now the 1/3" Sony cameras of this type have been 3x1megapixel - that means the same size photosites as their 1/2" cameras like the EX. Hence similar native sensitivity - it's dependent on photosite size.

They made the choice to keep sensitivity and compromise resolution for a 1/3" sensor. With the HPX250 Panasonic made the other choice - keep full 1920x1080 resolution and compromise (native) sensitivity.

At first sight that's not how it appears - the HPX250 has very aggressive noise reduction by default which makes it appear superficially similar for noise to an EX1. But you don't get anything for nothing - the noise reduction comes at the price of other picture compromises such as "noise ghosts" and subtle detail softening.

As far as this new camera goes, it looks interesting - but isn't it more worthwhile to pay the relatively small extra and get a PMW200?

As far as this new camera goes, it looks interesting - but isn't it more worthwhile to pay the relatively small extra and get a PMW200?

Or, if you miss the rotating grip and the ability to use 3rd party batteries, and are willing to just deal with 4:2:0, get the EX1R.

Moving forward, I have no doubt Sony will make it harder on third party battery manufacturers.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the 100, 150 and 200 lack Component out.

The PMW-160 uses the same 1/3" sensor as the PMW-100, except there are three of them.

The price difference between 150 and 200 in CVP is 1400 GBP which sounds realistic.
In effect the 150 is the Mpeg422 version of the NX5 They share the same lens but on the 150 is stabilized which is great.
In the CVP link it also states that: "its sensors are all-new devices with a native resolution that allows full-HD output without pixel interpolation."
So its not clearvid.
By the way, Ron Evans, a exmor sensor can be clearVid also as is the case of NX5

Yes understood,my NX5U says Exmor printed on its side it also does have image stabilization too both normal and active. So there is no difference to the 150 there. The new sensors and codec are the difference as well as the recording medium. I am waiting for an NX5U upgrade to have AVCHD 2.0 and the touch features ( like focus etc would also need better autofocus to make that work !!!) of the consumer cameras that for me would make a great upgrade to my NX5U. The NX5U has always had a touch screen LCD but for very little functionality as it is only operational in the mode menu.

Ron Evans

Three 1/3-inch Exmor ™ Full HD CMOS Sensors
Equipped with the newly developed three 1/3-inch Exmor Full HD CMOS sensors, the PMW-160 achieves high resolution, high sensitivity, low noise and wide dynamic range. These capabilities are essential for the professional when shooting under extreme lighting conditions*. Each sensor has 2-million effective pixels and achieves full HD 1920x1080 shooting without pixel interpolation.

Full HD, 2 megapixel Exmor sensors from the horses mouth (http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/micro-xdcam/resource.latest.bbsccms-assets-micro-xdcam-latest-xdcampmw160.shtml).

Already sounds like an NX5 upgrade to me, although shooting interlaced video in this day and age makes my stomach knot up.

Though most of us want 1080p60, the only way recording to a broadcast friendly compressed codec I know of is a FS700 or F3 to a Gemini 4:4:4 with the upcoming DNxHD update. (Remember, no HDMI in on the Gemini, so the FS100 won't work without a converter.)

There is no in camera codec that supports broadcast quality 1080p60 at the moment. Panasonic's AVC-Ultra (while not vaporware) still has no word whether it supports 1080p60.

If Sony comes up with a new codec, that's when we might see broadcast 1080p60 become a reality. AVCHD 2.0 is not enough to compress 1080p60 properly. A 28mbps max is not enough.

Full HD, 2 megapixel Exmor sensors from the horses mouth (http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/micro-xdcam/resource.latest.bbsccms-assets-micro-xdcam-latest-xdcampmw160.shtml).

Already sounds like an NX5 upgrade to me, although shooting interlaced video in this day and age makes my stomach knot up.

I expect a true NX5U upgrade will be part of the NX series and will have AVCHD 2.0 with 60P. The main Pro grouping still view 1280x720P60 as the alternative I think. The NX5U has that too of course as do these new cameras.

Ron Evans

Though most of us want 1080p60, the only way recording to a broadcast friendly compressed codec I know of is a FS700 or F3 to a Gemini 4:4:4 with the upcoming DNxHD update. (Remember, no HDMI in on the Gemini, so the FS100 won't work without a converter.)

There is no in camera codec that supports broadcast quality 1080p60 at the moment. Panasonic's AVC-Ultra (while not vaporware) still has no word whether it supports 1080p60.

If Sony comes up with a new codec, that's when we might see broadcast 1080p60 become a reality. AVCHD 2.0 is not enough to compress 1080p60 properly. A 28mbps max is not enough.

For a pro environment and broadcast I will agree but if one is already all AVCHD, as I am, then moving to AVCHD at 28Mbps for 60P is fine. I believe the quality level at 28Mbps is much the same as interlace at 24Mbps because of the way the codec works and looking at the 60P output from my CX700 I will take 60P AVCHD at 28Mbps over the interlace 24Mbps max out of my NX5U. As with the other NX range which now all have AVCHD 2.0 and 60P, Sony has this option for a NX5U upgrade. The new sensors may well give them this opportunity.

Ron Evans

It's Sony's answer to the Canon XF305......

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

That camera looks promising to me. I love the fact that it has one ND position more than the PMW-200. On my EX1 I had situations where just two ND position didn't work perfect for me.

The only negative thing about the 150 is the size. It didn't look much smaller than the 200. So for people who travel often a lighter camera would help at the airport!

However, I'm one of this guys who often need Auto Focus & Iris (when the camera is in an underwater housing without controlls like an light Ewa Marine bag). That's something where the Ex1 had a lot of trouble... maybe smaller chips could help, actualy I close the iris on the Ex1 more to get most in focus then.

Looking forward to see the first reviews of this camera and how it looks compared to the PMW-200 and Ex1.

Well if its like my NX5U it will be longer than the EX1R by about 5". Autofocus on my NX5U I do not trust and you have to be aware that with a 1/3" sensor the sweet spot for iris is about F4. I try and keep my NX5U around the F4 or further open using ND or gain for best results. Maybe with the new sensors they have improved the autofocus but the iris value is physics. If the iris is shut down beyond F8 it becomes very soft I try never to go more than F5.6. You can set both gain limits and iris limits in the menus though and I assume this camera will be no different. Gain above 9db is noisy too compared to my consumer cameras like the CX700 ( in fact in full auto the CX700 is far superior to the NX5U) so I hope the new sensors and electronics have improved this too.

Ron Evans

I just came back from the IBC in Amsterdam last night. There I had the chance to play for a few minutes with the PMW-150 and compare it to the PMW-200 at the Sony booth. There isn't much difference in the size of both cameras, and even if the sensor is smaller at the 150 I could not see that the autofocus works better than at the PMW-200. So also with the smaller sensor you notice when the focus is not 100% working.

For the money the PMW-150 is for sure a good camera, but I had the feeling the lowlight wasn't as good as Sony makes you believe with their marketing. It's good and has a great looking picture, but when I compared it to the PMW-200 with the 1/2" PMW-200 I noticed directly more noise on the PMW-150 in low light.

But that's just my personal opinion after a few minutes of playing with them. I would love to see a review by people like Alister Chapman of that camera. I'm sure if you're filming outside with enough light it'll be a great camera which safes you money and has the pefect codec. This things looks good and a lot of people will be very happy with that camera.

Hello, What are your thoughts on the 200 as compared to the EX-3?
Seem so close and I wonder what the benefits are.

Here's footage from the PMW-100, PMW-150, PMW-200 shot on the Sony booth at IBC.

Sample footage from PMW-100, PMW-150 and PMW-200. IBC 2012 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTPGbjXNn-Y&feature=youtu.be)

Richard,
it's very hard to compare the PMW-200 to an EX3 just from a short try at the IBC (and it's a bit offtopic to the PMW-150 post). However, I had the feeling that the PMW-200 had less noise at 6db+ than what I'm used to from my Ex1 or some Ex3 rentals I used in the past. Other than that it looks like the same camera (Sure it's smaller than Ex3 same Ex1 size).

If the codec is much better is something I can't say, because I didn't record anything to SxS cards. In the past I had just a very few situations where the old XDcamEx codec had some trouble, however this will not happen with more data rate I think. The codec makes our footage more future proof if some TV stations want to broadcast your footage (but content is more important than codecs)
What I don't like is that they didn't have the Ex1rotating grip on the PMW-150 and 200. First I didn't like that thing, but now I'm so used to it and love it. Furthermore I still have the problem that there are no batteries available with Anton Bauer port. It was so perfect to power the Ex1 and my Zylight Z90 with the camcorder battery. I hope there will be a solution for this.

But also the picture profile I use on the Ex1 can be the reason why I think the PMW-200 has not so much noise, if not I would say Sony improved it a bit.
I don't think that I would upgrade to the PMW-200 when I would have an Ex3. Sadly I crashed my Ex1 at an escalator last week so now it looks like that I need an replacement. I've to decide between the similar Sony PMW-200 or the more different Sony FS700 or Canon C100 now. Normaly I wouldn't replace my Ex1 this year, even if it's a pretty old camera now. But I don't have time to wait until NAB show in April to get a new camera end of summer 2013.

Alister,
thank you for posting this IBC footage. This highly compressed youtube clips didn't show that much difference between the cameras like on the large monitors at the Sony booth. But exactly this makes the PMW-150 again a very good camera for this pricepoint. Most things people will produced will be shown online and there the viewers would highly accept a picture form the PMW-150.... even if I personaly thought it's still a little bit noisy (on a bigger screen)

I hear you. Their does seem to be a battle as to which to buy...the 150/160/200 or the 700. I think for me it's becoming more clear. Is my job a run and gun which lends itself to the 200 or if it's the later then the 700 fits that bill. Sadly, I can't afford both and there lies the battle for me.
I need all the jobs I can get and so I'm thinking I'll focus my resources on the run and gun gear and maybe pick up a cheaper dslr for my creative stuff when I want more shallow dof.

I am excited about this camera, I was looking at the PMW-200 but as I film outdoor events I was worried about the heat vents on the 200. However since the PMW-150 has 3*1/3 sensors these don't seem to be needed.

All 3 of the new PMW-100 to 200 range have the same vents on the rear bodies. I've been told that the production cameras should have fewer vents and that the internals are protected from water and dust by internal barriers.

All 3 of the new PMW-100 to 200 range have the same vents on the rear bodies. I've been told that the production cameras should have fewer vents and that the internals are protected from water and dust by internal barriers.

Ahhh I was looking at the PMW-150 from CV ( Sony PMW-150 (PMW150) 3 x 1/3inch CMOS HD Camcorder with 50Mb/s internal recording (http://www.creativevideo.co.uk/index.php?t=product/sony_pmw-150) ) and didnt seen the vents that were on the PMW-200 ( Sony PMW-200 (PMW200) Full HD XDCAM EX 1/2inch CMOS camcorder with 50Mb/s recording (http://www.creativevideo.co.uk/index.php?t=product/sony_pmw-200) )

Here is want happens to my cameras :

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/193281_441511602566023_805783559_o.jpg

And thats filming in these very dusty conditions

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/413489_441900815860435_764744011_o.jpg

Know those conditions well. I used to shoot the WRC for many years. Rain covers and camera gloves were always used along on the dustier events. I'd want a longer lens than the PMW handies for rallies.

Yeah that was from Portugal which is probably the worse for dust! I'm going to need to test the PMW150 and PMW-200 and see what fits right for me. I will just have to enforce some extra dust cover DIY jobbie.

The lens reach doesn't seem to be a problem to me but I haven't used the camera yet; the spec seems of the lens seems okay. The PMW-200 has the fujinon lens and the PMW-150 has the Sony G lens? Of course you will get more reach with the 150 due to the crop factor.

Of course you will get more reach with the 150 due to the crop factor.

Not because of the crop factor but because of the zoom ratio. The 150 is actually wider than the 200 at the wide end. The lenses are made to match the sensor size, so the PMW-200's is a 5.8 - 81.2 mm while the PMW-150 has a 4.1 - 82.0 mm. The PMW-150 lens is just a little wider than the PMW-200, but because it is a 20x a fair bit more telephoto on the long end.

One thing I would check out is the zoom speeds. The 150 may not be quite as controllable as the 200. In addition the round and round servo focus ring of the 150 may not be as easy to use as the proper focus ring on the 200, especially when pulling focus on a fast moving car. I always used a zoom demand to get decent lens control while doing whip pans etc. The PMW-200 lens would be better suited to that as you can use a proper zoom demand via a simple adapter cable.

We used to use 20x zooms with 2x extenders and often used to tune the lenses to get faster zoom speeds.

You have swayed me back to the PMW-200 and I will have to invest in some proper all weather protection for dust and the cold temps of Lapland in January! From your website I see you might be out there the same time as me Jan 20th - 28th

If your going to be in Rovaniemi then we'll be about another 300 miles north of you in Karasjok, Norway. I'm there from Jan 30th to Feb 14th. When it gets below -25c most rain covers will shatter like glass. We got down to -36c last year.

Yeah I will be in and around Rovaniemi, not sure I will have the funds for the PMW-200 by then so it will be a last attempt film with my trusty Z1/MRC1K.

Will have to ask you a couple of questions on PM and not to take this topic off course.

Haven't seen PMW-160 referred to anywhere.
.

So is it a PMW-150 or PMW-160? ....confused

So is it a PMW-150 or PMW-160? ....confused

150 seems to be the PAL model and 160 seems to be the NTSC

Not quite right. The PMW-150 is PAL only, but the PMW-160 does PAL and NTSC.

Not quite right. The PMW-150 is PAL only, but the PMW-160 does PAL and NTSC.

Fair enough. I can't make my mind up between all three models PMW-100, PMW-150 and PMW-200

Not really got the funds for any of them but need to replace my Z1 and can't work out if I'd be happy with PMW-100 as a full time replacement.

PMW-150 price is so close to the PMW-200 but a long way from the 100.

Stuck between rock and hard place.

If you're moving up from the Z1, you'll be very happy with any of the three new cameras. The features , functions, XDCAM workflow, and picture quality are light years ahead of what you are used to.

If you're moving up from the Z1, you'll be very happy with any of the three new cameras. The features , functions, XDCAM workflow, and picture quality are light years ahead of what you are used to.

Yeah I was just reading comments about the PMW-100 where users were saying its not fit to sit in the PMW range and the image quality isn't as good as a second hand EX1 (Wasn't expecting it to be on that level) But it'll be miles better than my Z1.

Then its just the size of the PMW-100 compared to the Z1 and or 150/200.

ND filters would be a little of an issue as well.

I think you would be disappointed with the PMW-100. It's a single sensor camera using essentially what is just one of the sensors from the 150. So resolution etc is quite noticeably lower than the 150/200. No ND filters, not the best of lenses etc. IMHO it's a waste using 50Mb/s XDCAM to record the below par output from the 100. The best codec in the world will never make up for a lesser quality lens and sensor. The 150/200 are in a different league to the 100. An EX1 is a far better camera than the PMW-100.

Not quite right. The PMW-150 is PAL only, but the PMW-160 does PAL and NTSC.

Thanks David and Doug.

Fair enough. I can't make my mind up between all three models PMW-100, PMW-150 and PMW-200


PMW-150 price is so close to the PMW-200 but a long way from the 100.
Personal view. I think the gap between the 150 and the 200 is big - more than you'd think from the price difference. Two big features stand out - difference in chip size (1/2" v 1/3"), and the fact that the PMW200 has the "true manual" lens, in other words the focus has end stops. Consequently, I'd try very hard to find the extra to get the PMW200 over the 150, it's worth it IMO.

I also suspect the PMW200 is likely to have better resale potential than the 150.

The PMW100? Obviously not as good as the PMW200 by a big margin - but we're now at a very different price point. I'd try to go for the 200 if you can afford it, the 100 if you can't.

An EX1 is a far better camera than the PMW-100.

Agree 100%. There's no question about that.