That in itself would indicate that it isn't a CMOS issue.

The XDCAM series tried something similar with a Memory Stick addon, but it never caught on. It is still funny though because I remember having arguments with people on various forums who used P2 who told me that proxy files were useless and that they would much rather just use the final footage.

PDA viewing of footage would be useful though in some circumstances. One issue that would need sorting out is meta data linking. For example on the XDCAM discs any changes you make to the proxy metadata can be transferred to the full resolution files the next time that disc is hooked up. Does this new system have that capability?

It depends what you're using them for. In the early XDCAM days I heard Sony describing two main reasons for having them on the discs - getting down to edit more quickly, before the full res files had transferred, and for the breaking news scenario - getting low res pictures on air quickly.

Come solid state, and the first reason tends to go away, and so too the need to record proxies on the main media. But the breaking news argument is still valid, and also the possibility of using them for off line logging/viewing/e-mailing. Here there's a clear advantage in NOT having them on the main media, but on a separate cheap SD card. And that can be far more easily played on a PDA, computer etc than a Memory Stick as the device is far more likely to support SD!

1/3" chip???
 

Why would they take such a lovely camera and put such a small chip in it? Seems a bit late in the game for more 1/3" chip cameras with the current state of things. Lovely codec and all that jazz though.

If a Sandisk Extreme III SDHC card can handle 30 MBps, that's 30 MegaBYTES per second then it could easily handle 100 Mbps, thats 35 MegaBITS per second or 240 Mbps.

You could over crank 60p and then some with a 30 MBps card.

Even a Sandisk Extreme II SDHC 15 MBps card could handle that with a 20% of overhead coming in at 120 Mebabits per second.

I think Sandisk is fibbing a whole bunch and that there sustained write speeds are nothing close to that and they are only burst write speeds. They have a "video" sdhc card and coincidentally the specs are left off for it's write speeds. This link What are SDHC Cards? says the minimum specs for SDHC are:

* Class 2: minimum sustained DTS of 2MB/sec
* Class 4: minimum sustained DTS of 4MB/sec
* Class 6: minimum sustained DTS of 6MB/sec

Basically the class number means how many MB/s. I never knew that until now. It would be cool if they would publish their sustained write speed as well. There is no reason you would need a super expensive raided P2 card if a Sandisk Ultra III can even get half of it's advertised 35 MBps.

If you head over to the EX1 forum and look, you'll see that we have been testing the read and write speeds of the Sandisk, Lexar, Transcend, and other cards regularly for use in our cameras.

I've attached the test for my Sandisk Ultra2 16GB card. Mind you, this is testing through the expresscard adapter.

Wow! Faster than advertised!!

Well I was just about to post back that the 15 MBps on the Ultra II 16 GB does not claim write speed, which I overlooked, and that it probably means read speed and that it really only has to comply with the class 4 rating of 4 MBps write speed which would equal 32 Mbps write speed but your screenshot tells a very different story!

Your screenshot proves that the Sandisk Ultra II is capable of handling full 100 Mbit AVC Intra. Very interesting. I will have to head over to the EX1 forum.

Edit - Although I just noticed it was only a 100 MB block, correct?

It’s obvious that Panasonic wanted to price the HPX-300 close to Sony’s EX3 and I think 1/3” chips were the only way to achieve that goal. If they used bigger chips, they would have gotten some complaints that it cost to much more than the EX3. You cant please everybody and they took a gamble to keep the price low.

There is also a big power difference between the two - the HPX300 consumes nearly 50% more power than the EX3, in spite of the 1/3" v 1/2" chips. Interesting to wonder what the power consumption of a 1/2" HPX300 would have been? There's a great deal to like about the HPX300, but I keep on finding myself thinking "if only it had 1/2" chips and cheaper than P2 memory......."

The power consumption might be the more processor intensive avc intra codec? One advantage of using the larger batteries is light, you'll be able to run better onboard lightning without bulky battery packs as are the case with Ex1/3, but batteries will be a investment that cost some $$ to...

And the memory prices some places between p2 and sxs are so low that they wont interfere with what cam to choose.

I don't follow. If the EX3 uses less juice, it will have more available to power lights. It seems like the reverse of what you're saying.

The Sandisk Ultra series cards are consistently coming in above their spec. Which is why THEY work and most other brands of SDHC cards don't in the EX1/EX3. And why the Sandisk Ultra2 16GB card for $35 that we've been getting is SUCH a steal. I am writing on $35 media what Sony charges me $799 for on SxS. That kind of math is why we're adopting this workflow so happily. Tapeless for $35/hr. LOVE it.

Yes, the test I did was a 100MB block. I don't have my card with me tonight, or I'd test it for you with a larger block size. Do you know what block size you're interested in? The EX1 writes 16GB per hour (or 4MB/s by my math) and it writes out every 5 seconds, so it should be writing an ~20MB file to the card each time.

-P

I think much mo9re likely they thought it would eat too much into Varicam territory. Me, cynical? Never!
Steve

I think what Christian is leaving unsaid is that the HPX300 MUST use expensive pro batteries (unlike the EX3), and as well as supplying the 18watts for the camera these have a lot in hand for accessories like lights.

The normal EX3 battery is much smaller and cheaper, ample for the 13.5watts of the camera, but not a lot more. The option does exist of using an adaptor on the EX3, and pro style batteries, when yes, even more power will be available for such as lights than the HPX300 would allow. At least the EX3 gives the choice.

Should have explained what I meant in more detail, but David is right. And us who do some work in cold weather the larger batteries should give us more time when the temp. drops well beyond zero. Pro battery system is an investment, the school where i study still use almost 10 year old Anton bauer packs without any problems. Still HPX300 at around 11000 USD with batteries and P2 cards ain't to bad...

I know EX1/3 can be used with pro batteries but EX1/3 with more weight isn't actually what I would like to use for long shoots handheld...the ergonomics is already a small disaster.

I'll be the last to defend the ergonomics of the EX3 for hand-held work, but pro batteries can actually help. Although they increase the weight, they can be used to improve the balance with good mounting - shift the C of G backwards.

Not modern li-ion batteries though!

Totally agreed (from this rig right here). Not perfect by any stretch, but vastly improved. Actually I always find the modern shoulder mount cameras from Sony too front heavy. There isn't enough adjustment in the shoulder pad, sorry, shoulder carving board, for thinner people like myself.

What happened to gel shoulder pads anyway?

I'm actually very excited about this camera! South Florida has a lot of Panny users, so I'm hoping someone gets it so I can try it out.

Heath

Brochure
 

I just got back from a shoot in Norway. It was always below -20c and on several days it was -30c. My EX BPU-60 batteries still gave me 2 hours of operation, which is around 50% of normal.

Learn about Panasonic's AG-HPX300

One downside I see from looking at the brochure is that the viewfinder is 0.45 inch!!! That's small! Viewfinders are a real sticking point with a lot of HD cameras (in fact they're all pretty crap, just some verge on the unuseable). This was the worst feature I found on the HPX500 I tried, and not too hot on the Sony F355.
Just trying to remember what the EX3 VF is, as that's reasonably OK.
Steve

Yea the viewfinder is small, however i didnt mind it all that much once i was using it. Its great that panasonic have finally gone to full 16x9 viewfinders/LCD in their HD cameras below the 2000. The new LCD technology is interesting and i did notice a few issues with it, some strange LCD flickering.. was probably a preproduction issue but i'd be interested in what Jan has to say on that issue.

It was also interesting to note that they didnt redesign the thumbnail menu and have just pillerboxed it the 16x9 frames. This was always an issue Jan brought up when people spoke about putting higher res/widescreen LCDs on the hand hand cameras, the fact that the menu was designed around a 4x3 frame.. Im so glad this camera has a widescreen LCD.

Its funny reading on 'the other forum' everyone saying "can we get this LCD on our 200 or 170?.. noone seems to have realised its a 16x9 screen.

Just curious, where in Norway?

I'll guess HPX300 vs EX1 would be about the same in runtime on batteries, hpx more juice and larger bricks...EX1/3 less juice, smaller batteries.

It borders Sweden, Finland and Russia.
norway map - Google Maps

It’s one of those places that I have to visit one day.

Why there are no sensitivity specs for this camera?
All i see is minimum illumination ratings. (Sony provides both numbers for EX*).

Here’s a video of the camera on Vimeo if you haven’t seen it already:
Introducing the Panasonic HPX300 on Vimeo

It also looks like the HPX-300 actually records 10-bit color, which it seems like the EX1/3 does not do.

http://www.videoscope.com/pdf_files/...mats_Guide.pdf

Sony's own documentation states that the EX1/3 quantitizes color to 8 bits upon leaving the sensor.

This would help to explain the higher power requirements of the 300.


P.S. The Panny also has TC in/out and gen lock, which the EX1 [edited] doesn't have.

In the interest of accuracy, the Sony EX3 features both genlock and TC i/o.

Dan

The 300 does indeed record 10-bit color (when using AVC-Intra) , and the EX1/3 do not; the XDCAM-EX recording format is 8-bit.

All of them have 10-bit SDI output.

There is a raging debate in the EX forum over if the EX1/3 supply 10 bits of meaningful color info out of their HD-SDI ports or if they just supply 8 bits of color info padded with two zeros. There seems to be no definitive answer, as of yet.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/sony-xdca...ml#post1018214

My understanding is that EX outputs 10-bit live. When playing back SxS recorded material, it is 8-bit padded.

The 1/3" does a pretty rmarkable job and the lenses for the 1/3" are already out there and less expensive.


It isn't the speed of the memory that's holding the 1080P/60 back it is the codec not doing it at this time. We could record more data on the P2s no problem up to 800Mbps on the 64GB card, the codec board can't produce it at this time for writing.

Best,

Jan

I think the reservations about 1/3" chips are more to do with optics, photography, and the laws of physics than technical quality, in particular depth of field issues and diffraction effects. The latter mean that for HD work a 1/2" lens shouldn't be used stopped down any more than roughly f5.6-8, for a 1/3" lens, you should really stay more open than around f4. Especially for such as news work (where this camera would seem to be targeted) that effective lack of iris range could prove very limiting. Resolution and other factors equal, 1/2" chips will also be inherently more sensitive.

The 300 has a lot of good points, handheld ergonomics being top of the list. But the EX wins in other areas, namely 1/2" chips, and the ability to use SDHC cards via an adaptor. Hardly surprisingly, people are wanting the best of both worlds - basically an HPX300, but with 1/2" chips and SxS. Throw in the 50Mbs XDCAM-HD422 codec and you've got a package with full broadcast approval, but which should still be able to use cheap SDHC cards.

Here's hoping the boys at Sony do something right with the EX5 or EX7?

This camera looks nice but yet again a 1/3" chipper. I wonder if Sony have something around the corner in a 1/2" shouldermount to fit between the EX3 and the F350 camera price range. I hope so as I have a large investment in the SXS cards.

Simon

Rolling Shutter
 

Not sure if anyone posted this yet:

HPX300 EX3 Rolling Shutter Shootout on Vimeo

I would go on record and say that it definitively, definitely DOES supply 10 bits out of the live feed. Look at the footage on a vectorscope and it's very easy to see the difference between the recorded footage played back, and the live feed. You can easily see the 8-bit quantizing going on in the recorded playback footage, vs. the smoother 10-bit live output.

The XLH1 is 8-bit with padding. The EX1/3 output 10 bits live; when playing back footage they take the 8-bit data and pad it with two zeroes to make it 10 bits.

they must do...there is a niche that has to be filled. Also Sony haven't brought out a new camera this week yet, so maybe tomorrow!

No one ever makes the perfect camera and perfectly affordable camera - hasn't happened yet!!! Why would they?!

Ohh but please let Sony NOT announce an EX4, proper shoulder mount, SDHC, 1/2" bundled with a Senny 416 for £8k and a couple of batteries in 2 weeks time, as I need that HPX301 for 4 shoots next week and need to STOP hiring now (well, I said THAT 3 months ago!!!!) ;-)

Call me a Panacynic, but why do they not disclose S/N or max F stop on the HPX301 though? Sony are quite open about both stats on the EX3. Fishy, very fishy...

BD

You mean the EX5? That will for certain happen. Who knows when though. Sony don't do even numbers.

I doubt SDHC, why introduce sxs? And the fact that SDHC drops frames above about 35fps or so, or at least from what i've read on the web.

But a proper shoulder mount Ex would be a direct competition to the other 1/2" size xdcams...