Does anyone know if Panasonic has any plans to, or is even considering, manufacturing an HDV camcorder?

Personally, I would like to see a 720p, HDV offering, from one of the majors, that has 3 1/3" CCDS (1/2" would be awfully sweet), AF and OIS, along with a reasonably robust set of controls, at a price under 5k. I'd like shoulder mounted, but handheld would be okay.

Somewhere on the internet there's a white paper, from Panasonic, where the explicit tell you why the developed DVCpro HD and not to choose HDV. They're not in the HDV consortium either, so I don't think that's gonna happen..

Does anyone know if Panasonic has any plans to, or is even considering, manufacturing an HDV camcorder?

Personally, I would like to see a 720p, HDV offering, from one of the majors, that has 3 1/3" CCDS (1/2" would be awfully sweet), AF and OIS, along with a reasonably robust set of controls, at a price under 5k. I'd like shoulder mounted, but handheld would be okay.

As Vincent said, it looks like Panasonic has no interest in HDV. IMO, I think HDV is a stepping stone technology... It will improve as solid state and hard disk options improve over time and we will see data rates increase as the market moves away from using MiniDV tape. XDCAM is essentially HDV on steroids and uses 3.5" BluRay discs with a single laser for 33Mbps data streams. Plans for 72Mbps and 144Mbps XDCAM cameras and media are already on the table.

As for the camera you would like to see, you basically just described the JVC HD100. Have you taken one for a test drive? Nice camera and under $5K... I only have four complaints about the HD100

1: The stock lens isn't real good, but they're supposedly going to start shipping an updated version with a better lens.

2: It only uses a 19Mbps data rate instead of the full 25Mbps rate that could be placed on a MiniDV tape. Why!!!!???

3: Only offers 60p in SD resolution.

4: The split-CCD arrangement is noticeable in some situations and shooting environments and can be a factor that plays a role in planning your shoot. I wouldn't want to deal with it as a possible factor while doing run-'n-gun or live event work.

Of the current crop of low priced HD cameras, the HD100 produces the softest and least detailed images, but has much better color and range than the Canon or Sony cameras. ...But that's just my opinion.

And I crapped in this thread and it now belongs in the JVC forum, I guess...

The HD100U looks like a real attractive camera (especially at the price point).

My biggest concern with the HD100U would be the lack of AF and OIS for run and gun (AF and OIS can be awfully useful for that). Some people like being limited to only having manual focus available to them and feel shoulder mounting offers good enough stability, but I look at AF as an additional tool (which is an option!) that can be quite useful when the situation calls for it, and, at HD resolutions, even shoulder mounted without OIS seems like it would be a little to shaky at times, particularly when zoomed, to me.

Quick note: I don't really care if a camera has constant AF abilities or not, per se. I sure wouldn't want mandatory auto focus! Auto push (focus) is what I really want. I want that extra tool available.

On the consumer side, they might someday offer HDV if HDV catches on with consumers.

On the professional side, they have said that they will never offer a pro HDV camera. They do not consider HDV a pro format and their professional division will not offer it. DVCPRO-HD is their first-stage HD format on the professional side; they've shown pics of a forthcoming P2 camera that would use HD-D5, and who knows from there -- H.264 maybe? JPEG2000?

But no, there will not be tape-based MPEG-2 HDV coming from Panasonic's professional division.

Panasonic has said they will offer an MPEG-2 camcorder. Which means anything from a 18Mbps to 160Mbps data rate.

It was planned for NAB 2005 but then they switched to DVCPRO HD because they had such an investment in creating a DVCPRO infrastructure.

My guess they'll do MPEG-2 only when they can do 4:2:2 -- which means about 70Mbps to 100Mbps. It will enter the market as a Varicam.

At the consumer level they'll do HDV but it won't be called HDV because it will be written to SD. They showed a mockup at NAB 2004. Said it would arrive in 2006.

...they'll do HDV but it won't be called HDV because it will be written to SD. They showed a mockup at NAB 2004.Just to clarify for some folks, by SD, Steve refers to Secure Digital flash memory card, not Standard Definition. It won't be called HDV because Panasonic is not a member of the HDV consortium (and probably never will be). Also, the HDV consortium has deemed that any product carrying the HDV format logo must feature an HDV tape transport, so we'll never see a tapeless HDV camcorder. Instead, we'll see tapeless camcorders that are "similar to HDV" under the name of some other format. The mockup Steve refers to is the proposed MPEG-2 "ray gun" camcorder with a folding pistol grip similar to 1970's era Super 8mm movie cameras. It was also shown at InterBEE 2004 in Japan and some people mistakenly thought it was the then-unseen but anticipated HVX200.

I think in these moments, Sony is the king in the prosumer HDV cameras and I think sony go so far for its own interest with the hc1, quality-price, the solution: Hc3 A1? FX1 ... instead HC1 A1 FX1

In the HDV consortium, Panasonic has no involvement, just JVC, Sony, Canon and Sharp:

www.hdv-info.org

heath

What I would like to see is a portable device (hard drive or minidv HD deck) writing in hdv.
It would make hvx more versatile and "user friendly"
Don't take me wrong I love the P2 and DVCPRO-HD idea, but what if you shoot four interviews in one day, and your budget is (always)tight.
In my opinion, Panasonic has limited the range of the users without the option to expend.

Albert Rudnicki
Director
www.ahproductions.com
www.yayofilms.com

In my opinion, Panasonic has limited the range of the users without the option to expend.

I don't know about that... It's a wide open market for anyone wanting to create a compact HDV deck with component and SDI inputs. JVC and Sony already have compact HDV decks... The Sony deck is small, but not all that portable and expensive ($3700). The JVC is about as portable as it gets and runs off batteries. Although, I don't believe it records - just playback. Perhaps we'll see updated models and options at NAB. But currently, the Sony deck could probably be picked up on eBay for a resonable price and you could connect the component out of the HVX to the deck and record HDV during an interview. Although, for the price and in terms of video quality, I think it makes more sense to record directly to a notebook computer.

What about a hard drive with an hdv codec and SDI in.
That could be a cost effective solution?

Albert Rudnicki

What about a hard drive with an hdv codec and SDI in.
That could be a cost effective solution?

Albert Rudnicki

Perhaps... I bet it would cost about the same as the upcoming FireStore unit.

Just curious though... What is the lure of HDV over DVCPROHD? I'm not really sure why so many people are upset that the HVX is not an HDV camcorder. I can see where bitrate is lower and overall storage and archival solutions are more simple with HDV. However, it doesn't handle intense motion as well and all the color and whatnot claims aside, HDV is currently limited to 1080i60 and 720p30. It doesn't have the elegance of the DVCPRO implementation on the HVX that allows 720p24n or full 720p60, etc..

What is the lure of HDV over DVCPROHD?

$2 tapes vs $2000 P2 cards?

Also, frankly, I'm not convinced that DVCPRO HD is a particularly good codec: certainly if I convert HDV to DVCPRO HD and then back to 25Mbps MPEG-2 the final output is noticeably worse than the original footage. If I do the same with Avid's DNxHD codec there's no significant difference: admittedly, though, it is 185Mbps rather than 100Mbps.

$2 tapes vs $2000 P2 cards?

Bad comparison... P2 doesn't work like tape. DV tape is used by most people as a shoot and archive solution. You shoot to tape, you capture your footage, you have an archival master that can be stored... On to the next tape.

P2 is a transport medium, just like a memory card in a digital still camera. It's true that P2 cards are a tough nut to swallow for many people, but for a good many others it will actually save money over time. I fall into that latter group. By the end of this next week, I will have 2x4GB cards and 2x8GB cards with a total of $4400 invested in P2. On its own, that is 74 minutes of 720p DVCPROHD recording before I have to dump any of those cards. My workflow is already based on large RAIDs and a fiber SAN complete with a tape archival system. For me to jump in with the P2 cards does cost up front, but considering my current DV tape usage on my DVX units factored with DVM63MQ tapes that no longer need to buy, the lack of tape will pay for those P2 cards in about 14 months. In the end it's not going to save me more than a few $$, but the convenience factor alone and not having to capture all my footage at painfully slow real-time, is going to be huge.

Also, frankly, I'm not convinced that DVCPRO HD is a particularly good codec: certainly if I convert HDV to DVCPRO HD and then back to 25Mbps MPEG-2 the final output is noticeably worse than the original footage. If I do the same with Avid's DNxHD codec there's no significant difference: admittedly, though, it is 185Mbps rather than 100Mbps.

Why you would want to convert HDV to anything other than DNxHD or a lossless format is beyond me. Converting to DVCPROHD and back is going to kill your footage, it's the way the two different codecs work and you're just asking for trouble.

DVCPRO is a very good codec in itself, you just have to know how to work with it. Considering how long it has been available and how many networks/broadcasters incorporate it into their workflow, it can't be all that bad. :) I still have to wait for my P2 cards to show up in the next few days before I can really get my hands on experience. Of the raw MXF files and native clips for this camera that I have assembled, the footage is great and is showing to be greatly superior for compositing and colorkeying. I primarily do animation and combine with live elements... This camera (for me) makes a lot more sense than a long GOP MPEG2 (HDV) solution.

To each their own... But I think a lot of people are more scared of P2 than they should be and a lot of people just don't understand how a proper P2 workflow should be implemented. I also think there's a lot of DVX users out there trying to buy the HVX200 and in reality, the HVX is just not a good fit for their level of production. You should seriously have a comprehensive backup strategy and large-volume data system at least in the planning and budgeting stages before considering the HVX200. IMO, people buying it on a whim and planning to just back up P2 cards to DVD-R on the fly might want to rethink what it is they're trying to accomplish.

I base everything on what I see--25 mbps Sony looks GREAT, and I'll tell you what I think of 100 mbps Panasonic in about a week.

heath

What about a hard drive with an hdv codec and SDI in.
That could be a cost effective solution?

Albert Rudnicki

Essentially, you can get the same result by connecting an HDV camcorder to a laptop with DV Rack, via firewire. That really is low cost.

Actually, best way is to buy a Miranda and a RAID and do it that way, skip the HDV codec and go straight HD. Component for the Z1, HD/SD SDI for the H1.

heath

However, it doesn't handle intense motion as well and all the color and whatnot claims aside, HDV is currently limited to 1080i60 and 720p30. It doesn't have the elegance of the DVCPRO implementation on the HVX that allows 720p24n or full 720p60, etc..

There are several problems with these statements. First, 24n is no different than 24p. Read the HVX200 manual for more.

Second, HDV can be 720p60, all that's required is a low-power 60Hz MPEG-2 encoder. (A 60Hz encoder must run 2X faster than and gets very hot because it consumes sooo much power.) The JVC cameras can record 60p.

Big problem with the myth about motion. LONG GOP at 25Mbps doesn't handle motion well. That's Sony and Canon. SHORT GOP (JVC) handles motion perfectly.

Moreover, 720/24p HDV uses about 25% LESS compression than 24p DVCPRO HD. Talking about compression and motion is not a wise marketing move by Panasonic because the message is valid only against Sony and Canon. (And, is something Canon buyers need to take seriously.)

This is why Sony has XDCAM HD at 35Mbps.

Steve -

Have you looked at the difference in compression/quality performance between 720/24p and 720/30p on the JVCs?

It's been a little question in the back of my mind for a while now; would going to 24p get any noticeable (even minor) quality improvement, since you would actually have a higher bitrate per frame? (I sure haven't tested, nor would I be able to at this point, with only an HD10U.)

There are several problems with these statements. First, 24n is no different than 24p. Read the HVX200 manual for more.

Yes, I know that 24pn is the same as 24p. What I was getting at (and I know I didn't make it clear) is that the HVX records 24p within a native 24fps stream, that way only using up the bandwidth needed for the 24 frames/sec instead of forcing the the user to take their 24p over 30p. Not that it really makes a valid argument of any sort - Canon rcords null frame markers for 24F mode so even though the NLE must pull down the 24p footage, there is no extra (other than a few bytes) stored on the tape for the discard frames. It's a convenience issue or an issue of having options because 24p is there if you want it native, or over 30p or over 60p. None of the other cameras in this price range offer that right now.

Second, HDV can be 720p60, all that's required is a low-power 60Hz MPEG-2 encoder. (A 60Hz encoder must run 2X faster than and gets very hot because it consumes sooo much power.) The JVC cameras can record 60p.

Or should we say that HDV *COULD* be 720p60. However, it is not... 720p60 is currently not a standard format within the HDV spec (unless that's been revised into the spec within the last few months). Other than the HVX200, the only other currently available 60p capable camcorder in the sub $10K price range (that I'm aware of) is the JVC HD100, but it doesn't shoot 720p60, only 480p60.

Big problem with the myth about motion. LONG GOP at 25Mbps doesn't handle motion well. That's Sony and Canon. SHORT GOP (JVC) handles motion perfectly.

Not to pick nits, but I did make my motion comment in relation to long GOP HDV.

Moreover, 720/24p HDV uses about 25% LESS compression than 24p DVCPRO HD. Talking about compression and motion is not a wise marketing move by Panasonic because the message is valid only against Sony and Canon. (And, is something Canon buyers need to take seriously.)

And judging by Panasonics marketing tactics, I would think their primary focus is competing with Sony. As it should be... Sony is selling HDV camcorders like crazy. I have an HVR-A1 myself -- sweet little unit. And combined with the Ikelite underwater housing, it's a powerful tool. With current pricing and rebates you could pick up an A1, underwater housing, UV filter and wide angle lens for about $3K.

This is why Sony has XDCAM HD at 35Mbps.

Yep.

I believe Jeff is quite correct that 720/60p is not a format that is part of the HDV spec. Neither is 720/24p nor 1080/60p either. The HDV spec contains a subset of ATSC formats, essentially.

For me to jump in with the P2 cards does cost up front, but considering my current DV tape usage on my DVX units factored with DVM63MQ tapes that no longer need to buy, the lack of tape will pay for those P2 cards in about 14 months.

I'll be interested to hear if you still feel that way 14 months from now, after you've had some experience transferring and backing up hundreds of gigabytes of master data onto various forms of storage costing more per hour of video than a typical miniDV tape. Also, have you timed how long it takes just to do the initial copy of your P2 files to some other storage media? I copied some P2 data to my laptop tonight and it took almost four minutes for four minutes of video, or nearly as long as it would take to capture from an HDV tape. Of course that's dependent on your transfer setup, but it looks to me like moving P2 data around may be at least as time consuming as working from tape -- depending on how you do it and how organized you are. For small amounts of video this may not be a problem, but for those of us who shoot a lot of footage I'm not seeing the P2 format offering a significant workflow advantage.

I'm more impressed with the HVX200 now that I've had a chance to test-drive one, but for me the workflow isn't looking very promising yet. In a few years when solid-state memory is bigger and cheaper than it is today and we have more options for recording HD in highly compressed formats, then something like the HVX200 may make more sense. For those who can make it work for them today, enjoy having so many recording options and the other nice features this camera has to offer.

There's pretty much no way that you can get much faster than real-time for copying 100mbps material to a single, mainstream hard drive (7200rpm). That's in the realm of the limits of the drive's sustained thruput speed.

Or should we say that HDV *COULD* be 720p60. However, it is not... 720p60 is currently not a standard format within the HDV spec (unless that's been revised into the spec within the last few months).

Quote from the original July 4, 2003 JVC Press Release:

"The HDV format complies with both the 720 scanning lines (progressive)/1280 horizontal pixels 720p format (60p, 30p, 50p, 25p), and the 1080 scanning lines (interlace)/1440 horizontal pixels 1080i format (60i, 50i). This ensures the recording and playback of high-resolution video for the high-definition era."

I just plugged "hdv specification" into Google quick, and it appears 720/60p is one of the formats in the spec. I'm not sure exactly why I thought 30fps was the highest 720p framerate in the HDV spec, but it was something I thought I "knew."

"It's not what you don't know that hurts you. It's what you do know that ain't so."

My workflow is already based on large RAIDs and a fiber SAN complete with a tape archival system.

Good for you. Most people using a $6k Handycam won't have that kind of system set up, and $2 DV tapes are a much cheaper alternative.

Why you would want to convert HDV to anything other than DNxHD or a lossless format is beyond me.

Uh, to see whether it's any good at compressing HD images. If it can't sustain the image quality of HDV across one generation of compression, then IMHO it's not a terribly good HD codec.

But I think a lot of people are more scared of P2 than they should be

I think most people just see it as a huge step backwards from the convenience of being able to shoot an hour of footage onto a $2 tape which is its own backup. Just look at how much _extra_ hardware you need in order to make P2 workable.

There's pretty much no way that you can get much faster than real-time for copying 100mbps material to a single, mainstream hard drive (7200rpm). That's in the realm of the limits of the drive's sustained thruput speed.

Yeah, which means that those with single-drive workstations and most notebook computers are stuck in the real-time doldrums. ...Many notebooks won't even handle the 12.5MB/sec (100Mbps) needed for real-time.

I can ingest on my edit system at a sustained 3.7GB/sec... So I'm limited by the speedof the Cardbus PCMCIA and P2 interfaces. ...Gotta love fiber channel. ;-)

Just look at how much _extra_ hardware you need in order to make P2 workable.

This was a huge point of my post. And why I said that this camera isn't right for everyone. But at the same time, a lot of the extra hardware isn't all that extreme... It's pretty straight forward to implement a 4 drive storage system in a RAID3 config and doesn't cost all that much. When working with HD video, such a drive array is almost necessary (especially if there's any work with mutliple streams or compositing work). While DV tape is nice and convenient and cheap, I'm also puzzled about something else that people complain about with P2 media... Backups. Yes, we need a way to archive our video and the work we do with it... But shooting/storing 720p24 with the HVX requires less than double the amount of storage and archival space of regular DV, yet people can't seem to get their head around various backup solutions... Do people not make backups of their work or am I just about the only one?

I guess you could say that I'm rather perplexed with the typical arguments against P2. Most of the obstacles cited as reasons to not invest into P2 right now are obstacles that have been present with DV ever since it was introduced, although 720p24n presents them on a 37.5% larger scale. If you're currently using a production model that takes a shoot to DV tape, capture to NLE system, stick the DV tape on the shelf; followed by edit on the NLE and build your production without proper backups, then this camera is not for you. The only advantage DV tape has over P2 is that you automatically have a pretty reliable archive of your shoot right from the start. Other than that, storage requirements and backup requirements are proportionately less for DVCPROHD-100 today than these same requirements were for miniDV when it arrived. And archival of original DVCPROHD footage isn't a big deal... Just use DVD-R if you must or by a 320GB LTO or AIT tape system. 16GB spanned across 4 DVD-R will cost you about $1.80 and a bit of time. If you have a competent workstation that can ingest your P2s fast enough, you should be able to log your footage and archive to DVD faster than waiting for a realtime transfer. Ideally, you would ingest to redundant RAID and have automated tape backups and then just swap the tape every day or two or however often it's full or whatnot. A competent RAID solution with a decent tape drive and a box of tapes should cost you less than the bare HVX200 camcorder by quite a bit.

The only real shortcoming of P2 right now vs. DV tape is record time. This is a temporary situation and intermediary solutions are due over the next few months via the FireStore and Cineporter.

...I know everyone won't agree with me, but just because a camera package may fit into a sub-$10K price range, doesn't mean it will always drop right into a sub-$10K production environment. There are plenty of work-arounds to incorporate a camera like this into a given workflow. But in some situations it just won't work. If you think it won't work for you, even after considering possible work-arounds or workflow changes, then it's probably not the right camera for you. So, what is it about the HDV crowd that keeps recycling the same complaints over DVCPRO and P2? If the camera and pricing don't work, move on... There are other options. If you're still here and still complaining, what is it that you're really complaining about? I know for many, they're DVX users that want to progress with the next evolution of their camera, but find that it doesn't fit their workflow and budget. Then there's also variable frame rate envy from the HDV crowd I've noticed...

I just plugged "hdv specification" into Google quick, and it appears 720/60p is one of the formats in the spec. I'm not sure exactly why I thought 30fps was the highest 720p framerate in the HDV spec, but it was something I thought I "knew."

"It's not what you don't know that hurts you. It's what you do know that ain't so."

Hmmm.... I tried that and came up with a few references to 720p60 too. I guess that's a good sign. HDV.ORG doesn't have any mention of it though (that I can find), but maybe they're just outdated - poorly maintained/designed site as it is. Now I have to wonder... We know what 720p30 @ 19 & 25 Mbps looks like... But what happens when we go to 720p60 crunched into the same data rate? Is that a good idea?

I'll be interested to hear if you still feel that way 14 months from now, after you've had some experience transferring and backing up hundreds of gigabytes of master data onto various forms of storage costing more per hour of video than a typical miniDV tape.

I already deal with HD resolution workflows and footage where I must do automated backup to tape as it is. Even though I save my DV tapes and don't re-use them, I still host my master footageon my tape backups. Video is only about 20% of my workflow... I do mostly animation and all that is originated on the systems. So if I keep my video acquisition primarily at 720p24, I'm only talking about a 40% increase to my video archival requirements. Which means that my entire archival storage load will increase by about 8%... I've already figured a 20% increase overall to be on the safe side. In comparison to shooting a few hundred DV tapes each year, P2 will save me money. I predict in the next 18 months it will pay for my current investment plus save another $200 to $300. Now, I will admit that I will probably buy a couple 16GB cards when they arrive... Not that it matters. I'll have my 4GB and 8GB cards this week (4GB within the next hour or so when the UPS guy shows up). And I can start shooting HD with it and getting the camera figured out (just been playing in DV mode so far). I have a project starting with the HVX next week and it will pay for the entire HVX package, P2 cards, new tripod, etc... If the HVX works out for me, I'll sell my DVX100A and buy another HVX.

Also, have you timed how long it takes just to do the initial copy of your P2 files to some other storage media? I copied some P2 data to my laptop tonight and it took almost four minutes for four minutes of video, or nearly as long as it would take to capture from an HDV tape. Of course that's

Panasonic claims 640Mbps rates with the 8GB P2 cards. They're based on 133X SD chips and those would theoretically offer that rate. I bet real-world numbers are about 520Mbps though. The Cardbus PCMCIA interface can handle a maximum 1052Mbps. My SAN can sustain 3.7GB/s - yes, gigabytes per second. I should only be limited by the P2 card and PCMCIA interfaces and/or USB2/Firewire depending on how I choose to offload my video at the time. My method of choice will be direct insertion of the P2 cards into a PCMCIA slot on a workstation (I just added a PCI to PCMCIA adapter last week).

I of course will have to deal with real-time offloads in the filed as I will have to swap cards out to P4 notebook if I record beyond my P2 capacity.

I'm more impressed with the HVX200 now that I've had a chance to test-drive one, but for me the workflow isn't looking very promising yet. In a few years when solid-state memory is bigger and cheaper than it is today and we have more options for recording HD in highly compressed formats, then something like the HVX200 may make more sense. For those who can make it work for them today, enjoy having so many recording options and the other nice features this camera has to offer.

I think this is the reality that many will face with this camera. Until 32 and 64 GB P2 cards are available at the price of current 8GB (even 4GB) P2 cards, many won't find this a viable platform.

I know my situation isn't the normal... I just get tired of all the P2 doomsayers exclaiming, "ah, it sucks." "you can't do that" and whatever else they like to rant about on a daily basis. I guess my whole point is that there are workflows that can handle the HVX200... Mine practically encourages and needs a camera like the HVX200. But I think many people need to just quit complaining, move on and buy an HD100. The HD100 is a super slick camera at a kiler < $5K price point. I almost bought one because I didn't know how soon my HVX would arrive. I may still buy one as a companion camera if I don't have the incoming projects to justify another $10K for a second HVX. ...Which is where a lot of people seem to run themselves into trouble. The HVX200 is *NOT* a $5600 camera... It's a $10K camera by the time you buy the P2 cards, P2 store and/or whetever else you need to adapt it to your workflow.

What Panasonic is trying to accomplish with the HVX, is no small feat. I hope they can manage to make tapeless acquisition affordable and workable with this camera (they need to make those cards bigger and hammer the prices down hard!). If they succeed, it will be one of the significant advancements in the history of videography. Tapeless acquisition is the future, and it may be here sooner, rather than later, thanks to the efforts Panasonic is making in bringing this camera to the marketplace. It's a bold step, and they deserve credit for taking the risk. I hope the HVX and P2 turns out to be a huge success, but even if it doesn't, Panasonic has pushed the edge of the envelope, and videography will benefit from that.

What Panasonic is trying to accomplish with the HVX, is no small feat. I hope they can manage to make tapeless acquisition affordable and workable with this camera (they need to make those cards bigger and hammer the prices down hard!). If they succeed, it will be one of the significant advancements in the history of videography. Tapeless acquisition is the future, and it may be here sooner, rather than later, thanks to the efforts Panasonic is making in bringing this camera to the marketplace. It's a bold step, and they deserve credit for taking the risk. I hope the HVX and P2 turns out to be a huge success, but even if it doesn't, Panasonic has pushed the edge of the envelope, and videography will benefit from that.

Seeing what we've seen with digital still - you would think that is the case.. but I 've lost whole sticks of photos on these. Sometimes they are recoverable with the right program, but there always seems to be some loss. in the years I've shot digital video, I can't remember any significant lost footage.---except with accidental tape overs.. I think it is too early to call that expe5riment a winner.

But what happens when we go to 720p60 crunched into the same data rate? Is that a good idea?

Simply put, it will have the same artifacts as does 1080i HDV. UNLESS:

1) They use dual heads like DVCPRO50 prodecks and write 40Mbps to tape. Likely only would be done with a camcorder that use full sized DV cassettes.

2) They only allow 720p60 to hard disk like the HVX200 uses P2. One has to wonder if there will be an NAB surprise with a Focus drive recording 720p60 from an HD100B or HD200. Focus delaying their deck to April makes no sense unless something at NAB is coming from JVC.

The HVX200 is *NOT* a $5600 camera... It's a $10K camera by the time you buy the P2 cards, P2 store and/or whetever else you need to adapt it to your workflow.

The real key is if a BR burner can record RT from a P2 card. It seems the only REAL missing item is a field-based RT back-up system for under $5K.

A Pana ToughBook with a BR burner would be cool. But, I think BR is limited to about 50Mbps. This would be RT for 24n and 25n, but not 60p or 60i.

Correct me if I'm wrong about these numbers.

The HVX200 is *NOT* a $5600 camera... It's a $10K camera by the time you buy the P2 cards, P2 store and/or whetever else you need to adapt it to your workflow.Said another way... the HVX200 is a $5600 standard definition camcorder. It's a $10K high definition camcorder.

I believe Jeff is quite correct that 720/60p is not a format that is part of the HDV spec.
720/60P *is* part of the HDV specification, and was from the beginning. There hasn't been a 720/60P HDV camcorder yet, but it is part of the format. And yes, it's also at 19mbps.

Neither is 720/24p nor 1080/60p either.
That is correct. JVC implemented 24P by actually making it 60P (using repeat flags) so its 24P mode is actually HDV-compliant 720/60P. It's 24P with 2:3 pulldown inserted via repeat-frame flags to round out the sequence to 60P. Because of this, that's why the original HD1 and HD10 and CU1(?) deck can transport JVC footage -- it isn't a new format, it's wedged into the existing specification quite cleverly.

Canon stepped outside the HDV specification to create their own format, 1080/24F and 1080/30F. HDV has no provision for 1080 progressive recording. That's why Canon 24F and 30F won't play on HDV-compliant decks; the HDV spec would need to be extended to include 1080p recording. I don't know if there's been any formal revision to the spec to include Canon's variant.

Said another way... the HVX200 is a $5600 standard definition camcorder. It's a $10K high definition camcorder.
Or, said another way as the XLH1 was presented: the HVX200 is a $5600 high-def camera head. Add recording media of your choice.

Canon stepped outside the HDV specification to create their own format, 1080/24F and 1080/30F. HDV has no provision for 1080 progressive recording. That's why Canon 24F and 30F won't play on HDV-compliant decks.

JVC's use of 2:3 and Repeat Flags is not part of the HDV spec, but is part of the MPEG-2 decoder spec. That's why it works with HDTVs with fireWire inputs.

I would think Sony's MPEG-2 decoder would have to decode any MPEG-2 compatible stream. So, after Canon's 24F, 25F, and 30F is created -- how is it inserted into the 1080i60 data stream that makes it NOT compatible with MPEG-2 decoders?

Will the Sony play Canon's 1080i60?

Even if the Sony MPEG-2 decoder will not decode 24F/25F/30F-- wil like the first generation JVC products at least send the data-out via i.LINK?

HDV is sort of like DV magazine. It started with a specific meaning and now it simply means Digital Video. :)

So, after Canon's 24F, 25F, and 30F is created -- how is it inserted into the 1080i60 data stream that makes it NOT compatible with MPEG-2 decoders?
Well, that's the thing -- it isn't inserted into a 60i data stream. The Canon data doesn't get decoded and inserted into a 60i data stream. It stays as what it is. Which is 24 frames encoded progressively (from a 24F source) or 30 encoded frames encoded progressively (from a 30F source). Nothing to do with fields.

Now, the Canon will internally convert that into 60i for output on its analog ports, but that's a frame-rate-conversion feature that the Canon supplies (sort of like cross-converting 720p to 1080i on the JVC). But the Canon 24F is not stored in a 3:2 pulldown system within a 60i data stream. That's why it's incompatible with Sony equipment. It's actually a 24-frame progressive encoding. And 30F is encoded as 30 progressive frames, which is not the same as 60i. 30P can be carried within a 60i wrapper, but that appears to be not the way Canon has chosen to implement their formats.


Will the Sony play Canon's 1080i60?
Yes. 60i is 60i, and the 60i variants are the one place where they're compatible. And Sony transports its CF30 within a 60i wrapper, and its CF24 within a 3:2 pulldown 60i wrapper, so the Canon can play both of those back. But the Canon doesn't do it that way, so the Sony can't play it back.

Even if the Sony MPEG-2 decoder will not decode 24F/25F/30F-- wil like the first generation JVC products at least send the data-out via i.LINK?
Didn't try that, but I don't think so. The Sony won't send JVC data down the firewire, even though it can decode and display it. I don't believe it will send the 30F or 24F out the firewire, but I will admit that's an extrapolated guess and I'd be glad to be proven wrong on that.

In comparison to shooting a few hundred DV tapes each year, P2 will save me money.

Okay, I'd genuinely like to know how you figure that to be the case. Let's say you shoot 100 hours of footage on the HVX200 in 720/24pn format, which by my calculations would result in at least 1800 GB of data. Since there won't be any master tape to save for backup purposes, this means you'll need to make two permanent copies of this for reliability purposes, for a total of 3600 GB of storage. If you archive on DLT tapes which cost ~36 cents/GB, that's $1300 in archiving costs not including the price of the DLT tape drive. If you archive on inexpensive hard drives costing about the same amount per GB, the price is the same $1300 with no drive mechanism cost. If you archive to DVDs, that's a total of about 800 discs at a cost of at least $200-400, plus the time required to set up and burn 800 DVDs. If we figure it takes just two minutes of your time to make each DVD that's almost 27 hours total, so if your time is worth $50/hour that's $1350 plus ~$300 for the discs for a total of $1650.

Now compare the above to shooting DV or HDV on miniDV tapes costing $3-5/hour for the master copy, or roughly $400 total for 100 hours of footage -- but let's call it $600 for 100 hours since most of us don't shoot every tape all the say to full. Once the data is on the computer it'll be about 1125 GB worth, so saving one copy on hard drives at 36 cents/GB will cost a little over $400. So my total cost for keeping all my DV/HDV tapes plus one copy of the data on hard drives is around $1000 or so, compared to $1300+ using the minimum realistic data rate of the HVX200 camera. Shoot at full 100 Mbps quality on the HVX200 and your archiving cost jumps to at least $3250 for 100 hours of footage, or roughly $750 on 2,000 DVDs. (At which point just the cost of the blank DVDs is almost as much as archiving DV or HDV footage.)

I agree that we should all either move on or focus on this issue from a constructive point of view. I would be happy to hear of a cost-effective way to work with the HVX200, but so far I'm not seeing it. And the current capacity limitation of P2 cards is a deal-breaker for any long-form projects, so anyone doing event work with the HVX200 will be buying DTE recorders and working from those. Like I said before, I think the HVX200 is intriguing now that I've played with one, but for my purposes it's a camera which is at least 2-3 years ahead of its time in practical terms. By then there will probably be many other options to choose from, like recording high-quality MPEG4 video on standard flash memory cards which are cheap enough to store permanently. I'm happy for anyone who can make good use of the HVX200 today, but that won't be the case for most of us.

Okay, I'd genuinely like to know how you figure that to be the case.

Based on your numbers, which seem pretty accurate for the scenario you briefly describe, you're correct in that there is no money savings. But I already have an established workflow that the HVX200 fits into like a glove and it will save *ME* money. I already have redundant backups, having yet another backup copy on DV tape is rather pointless to me -- I already have the master on the SAN (which is in itself redundant) while I work on my project. I have daily backups, which are rotated, and bi-weekly backups which are archived. The video I shoot and incorporate into my projects (or even video-only projects) all account for about 20% of my workflow. Moving to 720p24n from DV will cause my video requirements to swell by 40% as it takes 40% more bandwidth. In reality, it's going to take less than that because I already have a HD workflow with my animation and I've just been incorporating up-res'd SD. But I'll stick with the 40% growth on approximately 20% of my data volume, or what works out to 8% growth of my total storage and archive requirements. I already have a SAN that is only running at a bit over half capacity and my tape volumes are split in a way that I can grow nearly 33% in data and archive volume before I have to increase the size and frequency of my backups. My investment is already in place, my system is operational and has been working as a full production environment for nearly 2 years now. The HVX200 will cut my miniDV tape purchases by $1400 to $1800 year without incurring new, additional cost, which I know won't happen that way... Becuase I already plan to buy 16GB P2 cards before this year is over and probably sell my 4GB cards. In fact, I think I may sell the 4GB cards as soon as I can pick up another pair of 8GB.

I agree that we should all either move on or focus on this issue from a constructive point of view. I would be happy to hear of a cost-effective way to work with the HVX200, but so far I'm not seeing it. And the current capacity limitation of P2 cards is a deal-breaker for any long-form projects, so anyone doing event work with the HVX200 will be buying DTE recorders and working from those. Like I said before, I think the HVX200 is intriguing now that I've played with one, but for my purposes it's a camera which is at least 2-3 years ahead of its time in practical terms. By then there will probably be many other options to choose from, like recording high-quality MPEG4 video on standard flash memory cards which are cheap enough to store permanently. I'm happy for anyone who can make good use of the HVX200 today, but that won't be the case for most of us.

I'm in complete agreement with you. I guess that my whole point is that there are a significant number of people who can make use of the HVX today. And as I was saying before, I'm not sure why so many people want the HVX200 to be another HDV camcorder. HDV doesn't fit my projects very well... And I know I'm not the only one out there who feels this way. I've tried working on a good bunch of HD100 footage and I've rented an XLH1. The HDV codec. Now that I've had my P2 cards for 2 full days and have acquired nearly 10 hours worth of my own footage, I can say that the HVX200 is exactly what *I* have been needing for my workflow.... YMMV. But I know many out there will welcome it as I have. And many who won't. Like you mentioned, long form and live event coverage is pretty much unthinkable at this point until other recording solutions become available. Even on my end... I'm going to try shooting an amature hockey game this weekend (just for fun/practice) and I'll be borrowing a Powerbook to do it as I want to shoot the whole thing start to finish in 720p60. Should be interesting.

Jeff: it sounds like what you're saying is that P2 may save you a few bucks in the short run because you've already paid for your initial archiving capacity and will cease purchase of miniDV tapes. As an observation, you could purchase a Firestore drive for DV/HDV cameras and achieve the same basic result in those formats, so there's no inherent cost savings for you in using the HVX200. Just wanted to make sure other people are clear on that.

I suspect we'll be hearing more about solid state recording options in the coming years, and today's HVX200 users can enjoy being pioneers of that. But you might want to keep a few miniDV tapes handy in case you run out of storage capacity in the field and need to keep shooting.

CompUSA ran a 2 day sale on 200GB Seagate HDDs, about a week ago, for 30 bucks after rebate (that's 15 cents a gig). Those kinds of prices almost start making me think seriously about using hard drives for archiving. Get a USB enclosure that's easy to pop IDE drives in and out of, and use those cheap drives like they were (humongous) floppy disks almost.

Jeff: it sounds like what you're saying is that P2 may save you a few bucks in the short run because you've already paid for your initial archiving capacity and will cease purchase of miniDV tapes. As an observation, you could purchase a Firestore drive for DV/HDV cameras and achieve the same basic result in those formats, so there's no inherent cost savings for you in using the HVX200. Just wanted to make sure other people are clear on that.

That's correct. My investment and hardware is/was already in place because of what I already do. The HVX200 will allow me to quit buying miniDV tape, and it may save me a few $$ in the end. But the overall convenience factor (other than long-form recording, obviously) is a huge improvement over capturing DV tape. IMO, the cost of P2 cards justify themselves right there in the amount of time spent capturing. I can read data off my 4GB P2 cards at a sustained 580Mbps... In other words, I can dump my 4GB P2 cards to my SAN and clear the card in about a minute. I'm expecting the 8GB cards to be a bit faster (although they may not be), but still the fact I can copy 21 minutes of 720pn24 from the P2 onto my drives for archive/edit in 2 minutes or less is huge.

I suspect we'll be hearing more about solid state recording options in the coming years, and today's HVX200 users can enjoy being pioneers of that. But you might want to keep a few miniDV tapes handy in case you run out of storage capacity in the field and need to keep shooting.

Oh, I plan on that. :) Silly me, I keep a DV tape in the HVX200 just in case. I won't have to buy DV tapes for a while, I still have about 250 Panny DVM63MQ in a large box here. Besides, I'm using a Sony HVR-A1 for my underwater work. :) Considering the A1 + UW housing combo is cheaper than the housing alone for my HVX. By switching to the HVX as my main camera, that's another 250~300 tapes I don't have to buy this year.

the fact I can copy 21 minutes of 720pn24 from the P2 onto my drives for archive/edit in 2 minutes or less is huge.

Jeff: have you tested that yet to confirm you do get transfer speeds like that? Just wondering. Also, any reason why you didn't bother to buy a DTE drive for your DV cameras to save on tape costs?

Jeff - Forgive me if I missed it somewhere in your posts, but I would like to ask what your tape cost is, per gigabyte, with the tape system that you currently use for backup.

I won't try and predict what Panasonic will do, but if I remember my history properly I wouldn't want to be one of the 'never ever' posters here either --

Seems to me when DV hit the scene, Panasonic was a 'no way' -- no way to DV tape (ME) no way to no linear audio tracks, and no way to Firewire. Over time, and watching both the consumer DV market grow and the prosumer one get dominated by Sony ... Panasonic changed its tune. Firewire appeared on devices, VTRs accepted ME tape, and ultimately DVCPro was relegated to a niche market as DV became a dominant format.

Do I like the HVX? Yes. Am I ready for the P2 workflow? Yes. Do I wish that the HVX had the ability to record and play HDV if so requested ... Yes again. Will this feature seem even more desirable once Panasonic joins the consumer HD market (at this point, they offer nothing -- and a visit to my local Best Buy finds consumer HDV is the 'growth market') ... Yes yet again.

Panasonic has a best in field prosumer HD camcorder, IMHO. But the field is a tough one, and prosumer is a small market. HDV looks likely to be the next consumer DV -- which means we'll still be buying tapes for years to come.

Add HDV as an option to the HVX -- what has Panny got to lose?

Cheers,
GB

Jeff: have you tested that yet to confirm you do get transfer speeds like that? Just wondering. Also, any reason why you didn't bother to buy a DTE drive for your DV cameras to save on tape costs?

Yes, I have tested the transfer rates from P2 to my system. Reading directly from a PCMCIA slot on an AMD 2.4GHz dual-core workstation to our fiber-connected SAN. The limiting factor is the P2 card itself as the 4GB cards can only sustain about 520 to 570 Mbps (between 65 and 70 MB/sec usually). Pretty quick overall - Panasonic claims 640Mbps, but I've heard people reporting 4GB cards that are slower (perhaps older units using slower SD chips?). AFAIK, the 8GB cards all use 133X SD chips, which running the numbers, would yield the 640Mbps claim that Panasonic makes about P2 speed. The maximum speed limit of the 32bit Cardbus PCMCIA standard is 1052Mbps. I received my 8GB cards yesterday, but haven't had a chance to test them out.

For many people, the limiting factor will be the firewire or USB2 interface if they use the camera as the reader or a device like Panasonic's P2 Drive. For raw speed, the best is a PCMCIA interface connected directly to the PCI bus in a desktop workstation. I have the one from Spec-Comm ($80). The only drawback is that cards are inserted on the rear of the computer, but the system I have installed this in is a SFF 9"x10"x13" box and it now sits sideways on my desk. The speed of the storage system a person is copying too will also be a limiting factor.

I don't use DTE drives for DV because so far I haven't seen any that I have liked. Firestore has never impressed me, especially for the price and hopefully their offering for the HVX will be a huge advance over their previous products. But having a single 2.5" HDD to work with, it's not going to be a speed demon, it's only going to let me copy the video from it to my SAN at real-time or slightly better. For in-studio situations, I would capture direct to a workstation that has a direct connection to the LAN/SAN.

So far, DTE drives haven't been truly Direct To Edit. Sure, I can plug one in and start editing, but not before I make a master archive of the video. And the drives thus far have been little faster than capturing off tape. Tape was/is an established workflow, but IMO, it's time to move on.