Don't know if anyone actually can answer this question but perhaps someone have a qualified guess:

Will this new codec need an upgrade of the NLE:s, for example Premiere Pro CS4 to CS5(?) or will any NLE supporting MPEG2 be able to handle this codec?


Regards,

/Bo

Probably it might(!) Don't honestly know, but at the SuperMeet where Canon did a presentation about this Codec, they made a big thing about how they were working with the NLE developers, showing video clips from people at Adobe and Avid, and then a guy from Apple came out, and they all basically said they were working with Canon...

So while they didn't say "it won't work with your existing NLE" the impression I got was that it required some changes from the NLE developers.

"Will this new codec need an upgrade of the NLE:s"

Don't quote me on this Bo, but i'm pretty sure the Apple guy i met said i'd have to upgrade to FCP 7 at a cost of around £125 - 150. Can't remember the details.

I may well go to the London show tomorrow and if i remember i'll ask about Premiere Pro, but the impression i got is that Final Cut 6 folks - like me - will need to upgrade. But as i said, don't quote me on that.

I think that MPEG2 4.2.2 @50Mb/s is the same codec as Sony's XDCam HD 4.2.2, so if your NLE can manage XDCam HD 4.2.2 I suppose that it should manage MPEG2 4.2.2…
I use a NanoFlash which gives me MPEG2 4.2.2 files and they are recognized by FCPro 7 as XDCamHD 4.2.2.

So, is Canon trying to clearly beat the performance of the EX3 with this model?

I think they will: the spec comes within that which broadcasters (BBC in particular) will accept for HD aqcuisition. The EX3 has to use the NanoFlash lash-up...

I don't think there's much doubt that not only are they TRYING to do it, but that they actually will - at least in terms of codec performance.

But the codec is only one part of what makes up the overall performance of any camera. What was seen as revolutionary about the EX cameras was the front end - 1920x1080 chips, 1/2", true manual lens etc. There's no use putting a first rate recording codec on a camera with a second rate front end, and currently there is no official information out yet about what the Canon front end will be.

The best current speculation is 1/3" chips - and if this does turn out to be so, then *OVERALL* I doubt it will match the EX3. Then again, the initial speculation about the new Canon was only for AVC-HD - maybe there'll be an equally pleasant surprise when the full details come out for the front end.

You can always put a better recorder on a camera with a fully approved front end, you can't put better chips on a camera with a fully approved codec.

Please, oh please, manual controls on the lens. And a great big clear display and eyecup. Broadcast accepted. And under $3,500.

Please don't wake me up, I'm enjoying this dream.

For those of us who aren't necessarily aiming for a BBC-approved, production-level camera, the idea of an under $4000 camera with 4:2:2 and 50 Mbps is still very very exciting - especially with Canon's track record for good glass and a high level of user control.

Pat

But it won't just be the BBC, Nat Geo and Discovery etc want 1/2" or larger sensors. There's no getting away from the fact that larger sensors bring a whole host of benefits including fewer diffraction issues, lower noise, higher sensitivity and greater dynamic range. Maybe Canon will still surprise us with a DSLR with 50Mb/s 4:2:2 and all the aliasing issues sorted out.

Expecting the camera to have 1/2" chips when it's probably going to be under $4,000 is asking for too much in my opinion. I mean it's like expecting the HMC40 to have chips bigger than 1/4" when it not only cost much less than cameras that that has bigger chips, it's also much smaller.

Adding something to an EX series camera in order to have a better codec costs a lot unless you got the money. The chips of the EX series cameras may be bigger and have more pixels than what we may see in this new Canon but I'd say neither is better than the other if you think about it.


I'm still hoping this thing gets 720 60p.

I disagree. Even if they were 1920x1080 (but 1/3"), that front end is likely to be noisier or less sensitive than an equivalent 1/2" front end. The aperture range will be more limited by diffraction, depth of field control will be worse, and for the same aperture, lens blemishes will be more noticeable. All of that is likely to be immediately noticeable on an uncompressed output from each camera.

I don't disagree that the 50Mbs codec is more desirable than 35Mbs, but I doubt it would be possible to spot the differences on first generation raw material in anything like the same way. The 50Mbs codec is good, no doubt about it, but if it was a choice between that, or 1/2" v 1/3" chips, I'd go for the bigger chips and 35Mbs.

Is the $4,000 an officially released figure, or speculation? At a recent show, all the Canon people would confirm was the codec and that it would be solid state. If it will be $4,000, then 1/2" don't seem very likely, but then I see it as being less an EX-killer, more a killer of most other 1/3" cameras on the market. It will certainly give it an edge over such as the JVC HM700, let alone the AVC-HD 1/3" cameras.

1/2 inch full raster chips are easily worth more than a 50mbps 4:2:2 codec alone. It's way harder to break the XDCAM 35 mbps 4:2:0 codec than you think, and until you do, it's hard to spot much difference even with 100 mbps 4:2:2. from my Nanoflash.

I would say for Canon stepping up needs even more importantly to fix the chromatic aberrations from the XH-A1/XL-H1 series, and not let that carry over into this new cam. Sony's EX have automatic lens aberration correction built in. It's reasonable to expect Canon to deliver a new best in class image, but you can't break the laws of physics for size. Unless they give it 1/2 inch chips it can't match the shallow depth of field, and likely can't match the low light either. In my opinion it doesn't need to. It can still deliver great images and value within it's market segment and pricepoint, but it won't be an EX killer.

Totally agree!
But for around the 4-5K price point it is a steel. I doubt it will be as good as the EX1 / 3. I wonder whether there are plans to offer at higher end cam with bigger chips? This definitely looks like the A1 replacement but what about a XLH1 replacement?

I'll be disappointed if it doesn't at least equal the EX cams. even at $4K. If not, I'm not sure many will trade in their older A1's.

I expect Canon will pull something out of their hat for this one, given their recent moves on the 5D, 7D, and now 2Ti. Who saw those coming as quickly as they did?