Jeff,

Thanks for your impressions. To me, your words speak volumes given your affinity to CCD and Panasonic cameras.

I hope that if the 350 is quite successful, Sony might come out with a disc based model with the 4:2:2 recording option. Maybe at a price inbetween the 350 & the 700.

I use Nano Flashes, but it would be really convenient to have the disc workflow and the 4:2:2.

If the CMOS implementation in the 350 does not show skew as much as the lower priced cameras, it would look like the entire market will go CMOS over time.

No obviously not. But that's the key, all else is NOT equal.
Let's wait and see if the 350 takes the NHU by storm and then I'll agree with you that it's unarguably better for wildlife.
Steve

That's not the impression I get, it seems everyone wants to go soild state. Even the SRW9000 HDCam SR has just been given a solid state upgrade path for the future. I quite like the disc system too!
Steve

Actually, the 50mbps & 4:2:2 is what I am after. If they could do that with solid state, then that would be fine as well.

We've talked about this before http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/converge...t-designs.html - if Convergent Designs can do it there's obviously no technical reason why Sony can't, and put it straight into the camera - it's just market strategy.
Steve

Tim,

To be fair, I've owned Sony cameras for decades, four out of our six camera packages are Sony, so I'm not blind to Panasonic only products. My view was very brief, no charts, no recording/playback. I agree that a 2/3" CMOS, 4:2:2, higher bit rate model could be a giant killer, problem is that Sony doesn't want to kill their own giants.

I find the 4 seconds it takes to go from thumbnail playback mode to live camera mode to be too long-albeit better than EX1/EX3. The Panasonic 2/3" cameras go from thumbnail to live camera in a second or less. Going from live camera to thumbnails only takes a couple of seconds with our 2700.

It would be good to know if the production models have addressed the gamma issues Adam Wilt found with the pre-production unit. I'd also like to know what higher-end lens options are ALAC compatible.

The Canon lens that was on the 350 looked very cheap/lots of plastic, had no 2X extender.
As a DP, lenses are very important to me--image quality, build quality, tactile quality, the Fuji and Canon kit lenses just don't impart a professional feel. They are closer to those found for the EX3, including the new Fuji wide angle for the EX3.

I was looking at a rental facilities rates. The 350 rate cards for $750/day, $50 more for the Fuji kit lens, if a nanoFlash is added, that's another $300. The same facility rents a 2700 for $900, Fuji HA22X7.3 for $450 more, a much more desirable lens. So, 350 w/kit lens and nanoFlash is $1100, or exchange the HA22X7.3 and it's $1500 vs. 2700 w/HA22X7.3 for $1350. An HPX3000 with HA22X7.3 is $1450, still less than the 350/nanoFlash/HA22X7.3. Admittedly, this is not how a 350 is likely to be configured, but it makes for a more apples to apples comparison for optics, sensors(3000) and codec.

Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video

Well of course the build quality stock lens is not as good as a full broadcast lens, have you seen what the price is? In terms of PQ though it gets very close to more expensive lenses and of course you could always put a better lens on!

I wouldn't imagine the switch to thumbnail mode time isn't going to be a big factor in most peoples decisions as well.

Sorry Jeff, I did not mean to sound like I was pointing a finger at you.

I addmittedly have an affinity to Panasonic cameras, but I also realize that I have more of an affinity towards manufacturers who are willing to give the end user more value.

I looks to me that Sony has had a shift in their value approach in the past few years, mainly with this EX series. And they are going to get a lot of users. The buyers have to be price first as the shear number of HD camera models and technology changes will put you out of business if you try to keep up.

This thread has a lot of great opinions and information about the upper end of the market, but imho this Sony 350 camera is another shot across the bow, just in the upper segment of the market.

Image quality debates are real, but in the end, these two cameras produce output that is going to look great and be accepted by all of the outlets. But lets face it, price is going to determine a lot of the buying decisions and the first one to the middle of the market is going to win.

It all doesn't matter anyway because we will have to buy 3D cameras next year!

Steve,

The Sony rep. told me that the stock Fuji lens is a $9000 lens and Sony got the price down to $1500 due to volume. This is laughable, of course. A Fuji XA17X7.6BERM with doubler is an amazing value for the money at $8000 and looks and feels like an HA series.

My point was that IF you put a true broadcast lens on a 350 and an outboard recording device capable of a higher bit rate and 4:2:2 color space(although still 8-bit with nanoFlash), the cost to buy or rent is very similar to an HPX2700 trade-in price(I believe Panasonic will do another pricing special on the 2700 prior to NAB like they've done on the 3700) with viewfinder and lens, or a used HPX3000.

Tim,

I do believe the 350 represents a new value leader among 2/3" full raster cameras, no question, just as the EX1 and EX3 have done in a small package 1/2" sensor camera.

I believe Panasonic is going to show a prosumer level, large sensor, AVC CAM camera at NAB that could be seen as a very strong value as well, probably using the GH1 CMOS sensor which is twice the size of a 2/3" sensor. Clearly Sony and Panasonic need to have an answer for Canon 5D, 7D and Scarlett. Of course, Panasonic already has a value priced 3D camera at $21,000.

Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video

The news that Canon is coming out with under $10K cameras with a 50Mbps, 4:2:2 codec leaves Sony's $18,900 camera with 35Mbps, 4:2:0 codec looking a bit silly, even though the Sony has 2/3" sensors. This could affect the EX1R/EX3 as well, although the Canon offerings are likely to have 1/3" sensors.

The 50Mbps, 4:2:2 Canon codec could be a giant killer if implemented in a large sensor video camera. It seems that Panasonic's large sensor prosumer camera will be AVCCAM, clearly not at the Canon codec level, so a big opportunity for Canon if they can break their 1/3" habit.

As far as sticking a nanoFlash on Sony XDCAM EX cameras to make up for the codec, I have concerns about non-write-protect capable CF cards.

NAB is looking to be interesting this year.

Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video

I have not seen prices for the Canon cams yet, but considering that Panasonic already have a 1/3" sensor high bit rate codec, shoulder mount camera many people wouldn't consider this as in the same league or targeted at the same applications as the PMW-350, it's likey to be the same with the Canon's, of course I could however be completely wrong.

As you say the Canon 50Mb/s 4:2:2 codec could well be a giant killer (interesting to see you now think that an 8 bit codec, sub 100Mb/s codec might actually be good)

The clips on a CF card from the NanoFlash are stored as locked files so they cannot be accidentally deleted. Admittedly a card could be formatted in error, but then the write protect tab might not get flicked across in error. That's a pretty minor concern and not one I have an issue with. I have checks and measures in place with all my solid state media to prevent accidental clip deletion. It is possible that the Canon might use CF, we don't know yet.

CF non-write protect? I am shaking in my boots! And to think all this time my Canon 5DMkII files have been unprotected!

Tom,

If you were a rental house you'd be keenly aware of the lack of best practices that clients use when data wrangling. You'd be amazed at what kind of trouble they can and do get themselves into. Not everybody is a smart as you are.

Alister,

I have never said the Sony XDCAM 422 codec wasn't a very good one. Given a choice, 10-bit would be my preference, but that doesn't mean 50Mbps, 4:2:2, 8-bit won't do a very good job.

I agree that Canon are wasting that new codec on a 1/3" camera, just as I am not a huge fan of the HPX300.

Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video

Jeff, in this thread, I've previously disagreed with you far more than I've agreed. :-) But in respect of your remark above, I'm in full agreement.

I thought before that it was likely we'd see a version with 50Mbs - I don't now see how Sony can not do it.

Tongue in cheek Jeff. Do my SXS cards have write protect? I have no idea. Never needed the feature.

No worries David, I like you anyway! The 350 I saw briefly at a trade show looked way to detailed and I didn't like the colorimetry, and this was before having to deal with the lower quality codec. I am pretty sure that bringing detail down and going into matrix and multi-matrix would make me happy with the 350, although the 4:2:0, 8-bit codec could let it down compared to the 4:2:2, 10-bit codec I'm used to working with.

I believe Sony will have to rethink their protecting higher end models in light of what their competitors are doing.

"Tongue in cheek Jeff. Do my SXS cards have write protect? I have no idea. Never needed the feature."

Yes, Tom, SxS cards have write-protect, as I would expect professional media to offer. Just last month, a production company client who is also a post house, lost all the data on a 32Gb P2 card due to not write-protecting and writing a folder back onto the P2 card after recording their footage. This was their editor who made the error. These things happen, no matter how much instruction offered on the prep day.

Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video

And yes again to that. Don't get me wrong - as far as this thread is concerned I still think that a PMW350 is *OVERALL* the best current choice at this sort of price level, gives the best balance of features from anything on the market at the moment. And using such as a nanoFlash is a way of overcoming the codec issues. But that's not to say the 350 couldn't be improved, and giving it the 50Mbs codec natively is the obvious thing for Sony to do. (I'm sure Convergent Design hope they don't...... :-) )

As far as the Compact Flash/write protect issue goes, then yes, you're quite right when you say "You'd be amazed at what kind of trouble they can and do get themselves into". And yes, write protect ability can only help. (Assuming it gets used.)

But the accidental erasure incident you mention is far from the only incident of it's type I've heard about, and that applies to SxS as well as P2. The reliability of the media themselves isn't in doubt, it normally comes down to human error - often when deliberately formatting a card, but unfortunately the wrong card! In which case the write protect will have been deliberately set "off" anyway.

In those cases, the advantage of CF over P2 is that much more memory can be kept and used for the same cost. Hence much less need to download-format-reuse - you may not need to format any cards until well after the edit is underway. I feel that losing the write protect ability is well worthwhile from an overall reliability point of view, and it also makes it far more feasible to hand media over at the end of a shoot, in a way you can't do with P2.

David,

I think we agree more than disagree--except I value the P2 Varicam look and codec more, at it's trade-in price and assuming the same lens is used on a 2700 and 350. But, until Panasonic does another trade-in special, as they have done through March 31 on the 3700, it's a moot point and therefore would recommend a used HPX2000 w/Intra board or 3000 over the 350/nanoFlash.

Our 2700 goes out with 5)32Gb P2 cards, good for over 6.5 hours in 720/24PN or over 3 hours in 1080/24PN. Most shoots don't require on-set transfer with this kind of capacity. Having said that, I would rather have one of my DIT's or myself do the data transfer to two drives for my client than trust them to do so. Sure, one can hand the client a pile of CF cards, but that just gives them more time to mess up with their un-write-protected media.

The practice of going on a shoot with just two P2 or SxS cards is not a good idea and just creates too much pressure for quick transfers and reformatting. I like having five cards in the camera and shooting without interruption when on a fast moving shoot.

Jeff Regan
Shooting Star Video

Steve Phillipps could you send me a email your email is blocked?