Daniel I don't think the Panasonic HPX-300 and HPX-500 will be much competition for the PMW-350. I have used both those cameras and from my limited use with the 350 and looking at the numbers it is not even close. They are good cameras but not in the same class as the 350. The 350 will compete with the 2700.

Paul,
While I may agree with you on the picture quality differences between the Panny 300 and the Sony 350, (not so sure about the 500/350 comparison)as well as Codec preferences. I still think the accountants will be comparing those cameras against each other. You can get two Panny 300's for about the same price as the Sony 350 and that may swing a lot of people regardless of quality and performance of the respective units. As far as comparing the 350 and the 2700 it is going to be interesting to see if Panasonic will try and keep some sort of match trade in offer going longer than the current Dec 31 expiration date because the real list price of the 2700 is double what the Sony 350 is without a lens or viewfinder so it is really a different category. Much easier to compare a 2700 to an XDCAM 800 in terms of price. The Sony 350 may eat into both the 800 and the 2700 as far as market purchases.

Depends who the accountants are working for. In the UK if they want to ensure broadcast compatibility they would probably go for a 350 with a Nano. The Panny 300, while recording AVC Intra and costing less fails because of its chip size. Even without the new limitations placed on bitrate the Panny 300 can't be used because it is below the minimum 1/2" chip size that the likes of the BBC and Sky will acccept. The Panasonic 500 fails to meet the requirements too because of the resolution of the chips. Likewise the Panasonic 2100 and 2700 fail to meet the specs for the same reason.

A bean counter, while wanting to save money, also knows about risk. And they aren't going to want money spent on equipment that could be sidelined very easily. Depending on what the camera is intended for of course. For private corporate stuff there are different considerations.

Simon,
I am talking exactly about small TV stations and corporate people who used to use broadcast gear but have been moving towards smaller and cheaper solutions not blessed by the BBC. Of course I might say that the Beeb and other organizations have set standards which may or may not be necessary based on engineering evaluations not content considerations.
As far as big corporations sanctifying the use of Panasonic 300's I believe NBC Universal was planning to use them heavily in news entertainment gathering. Not sure how far in the process they have gotten with that but I am sure that in their minds quantities of cameras as opposed to quality of cameras was a major concern.
Personally I like the bigger chip solutions but I do see so much blurring of the lines between gear capabilities, cost and distribution that it is not hard to imagine smaller cheaper solutions making a big impact on everyone's choice of equipment.

Daniel I guess it depends on your clients? My high end guys won't accept even the 1/2" EX line for more then a very small precent of their footage. But the 2/3" full 1080p at Nano bit rates with the 350 well they will accept that for 100% so for me it is a winner.

As Simon says (no pun intended) my clients are iffy even with the 2700 which I was looking at last spring.

So we all go with what works and in my eyes the 350/Nano is a huge winner over all of the cameras on the market in its price range and even some twice the price.

Hi Paul,
Will your high end guys accept the new PMW350 with the Nano?

Yes Simon as a matter of fact I have signed up two new jobs since ordering the camera. Both clients in the past have liked my work but wanted a full raster 1080p 2/3" camera. They kept saying buy a F900. But now with the Nano and 350 they say yes. So as I said it depends on your client base. Must keep them happy.

I have been looking to buy 2/3" for over a year and finally the right camera has come along thanks to Sony and Convergent Design.

Shame Sony didn't quite go the whole way themselves! I bet Convergent Design cracked open the champagne when the 350 was announced!

It depends how you do the comparison. Last I looked, the 301 was about 60% of the cost of the 350 - but those prices are for body and basic lens only. To make working packages, you need at the very least batteries and media, before we even think about tripods and sound equipment.

Since P2 media is more expensive than SxS (about 4x as much on a per minute basis), a given amount of recording media will cost significantly more for a 301 than a 350. And since the power consumption of a 301 is significantly higher than a 350, you may need to spend more on batteries for a 301.

So compare packages rather than basic units and the price difference is much less great, even more so in percentage terms. You may get two Panny 301 bodies and lenses for not that much more than a single 350 - but not two working 301 packages compared like for like with a 350.

And for professional use the 350 is a far better camera. The differences may not be so obvious in simple pixel counting resolution ways, but the 350 is several stops more sensitive in low light, and the 2/3" chip v 1/3" gives far more flexibility in lens options.

Another thing the bean counters will need to consider is that at this point in time many broadcasters are gearing up with HD cameras but using them to shoot SD. In this case they will be able to use existing 2/3" lenses on the 350's saving further money.
I got confirmation of the price of my 350 yesterday and was shocked. Now I do have a very good relationship with my dealer, so he cuts me a good deal, but even so it's £2K less than I was expecting to pay for a 350K.

Alister I agree nice price and more good news. I am picking up my 350 next week.

If you have any PP setting that you are willing to share let me know. I will start testing the camera over the holidays. I am sure I will receive a few looks from my wife but she really does understand.

Now in a hurry to choose the right tripod set up.

The 2700 is not failing anything, it's the choice camera for all big natural history projects for BBC and Discovery at present. Don't know what sort of budgets you guys are working on but the ones that the 2700 are being used on are £1 million plus per 1 hour episode, so if the 2700 isn't good enough for you then you must be working on something pretty damn special!
Steve

Steve, no need to jump in with both feet. I was referring to the new edict that the Beeb and others are implementing that dictates native 1920x1080 cameras, 1/2" minimum chip size, and 50Mb/s minimum datarate. The 2700 fails on the first count because it is natively a 720p camera.

The 2700 might be okay at the moment, but 720 native cameras are gradually going to be falling out of favour with those sorts of stipulations being bandied about. This isn't about whether the 2700 is 'good enough' for me personally. I'm just going on the EBU recommendations that the BBC and Sky seem to be bent on implementing as a requirement. No need to shoot the messenger! I didn't say I agreed with it!!

I realise that Simon, I wasn't on the attack! It's worth noting though that as with the old Varicam the 2700 is on an exceptions list, allowing its use whereas other 720 cameras might be banned. The projects the 2700 are being used on are for delivery several years down the line too and for international sale so they are obviously happy that they are going to be fine.
Steve

Steve the 2700 is a great camera and has shot some of the best productions I have viewed. I was close to buying when they had their great deal going this year. But switching from XDCAM to Panasonic is expensive. As for my client who said it was iffy that does not mean he has the best knowledge base. But it does mean he helps pay my bills and I need to keep them happy.

Natural History is only a very small part of the world of HD TV, while the BBC NHU's programmes are certainly of very high quality they are not the be all and end all of HD TV. Natural History employs a very small number people and uses only a small proportion of all the HD cameras in the world. Just because the NHU have chosen to continue to use their existing cameras doesn't mean that these are the only cameras that are any good.

While the overall budgets for many of these programmes may run into millions, the rates the crews get paid are rarely particularly high. The programmes cost so much because of the amount of time it can take to get even the briefest of sequences. Because of this any savings that can be made, say through the use of in house kit are welcomed. As I understand it the BBC NHU cannot afford to stop using the cameras they already own, that's why they are allowed to continue to use 720P despite the BBC's general requirement for 1080. If budget was not an issue then surely they would be using SRW9000's or HPX3700's at 1080P. The reality is that even with these mega budget programmes the cost of the equipment is a major factor and when you have a fleet of cameras that you were given for almost nothing then the impetus is to continue to use them as long as you can. This doesn't mean they are technically the best cameras to be using. Clearly they do a good job, but how much longer can they continue to use 720P?

All the more reason to use EX3s then surely, they'd save a fortune. A lot of these NHU productions are not using the same gear that they've had for ages, the old tape Varicams, they're buying lots of new 2700s.
Of course budget is an issue, and that's why they're not getting fleets of SRW9000s presumably, but if all was equal between the EX3/PMW350 and the 2700 then surely they'd go for the former as they'd save a fortune (ie a standard or wide lens for the 2700 will cost more than double what the EX3 with lens costs).
Steve

Steve,

Do you have any information on what NHU backup/archiving strategy is when filming with the 2700s? With my previous experiences, I feel solid state media acquisition involves extra work and a certain level of risk to loose files especially when looking at extensive projects with multiple shooters and locations.

Thierry.

Steve I think the 350 over the EX3 will offer a better picture and more lens options for big productions where the right glass matters.

Thierry I feel the same the solid state archive scares me with DVD's and hard drives. This is the reason there is a new big box next to me with a U1 and Optical disk. Agree it is a extra step but offers delivery with proxies and meta data along with very long safe shelf life.

So, do you just backup your EX material as 420 MXF files on prodiscs? That is how you end up with proxies right?

T.

Thierry here is the method.

I shoot with the Nano and if the bit rate is higher then the Optical Disk XDCAM 422 50Mbps I drop it on a Final Cut timeline and then render out and use clip browser to Optical disk.

And if I shoot at the 50Mbps I copy to the Optical disk with clip browser.

Both methods I am told will give proxies and meta data. Andy at Abel figured this out last month. We discussed it in detail at the release of the PMW-350 at Abel on Dec 3rd in NYC. I know there is a thread here that will get active on once I start the process over the next few days.

So you need:
Convergent Design Nano or XDR
Final Cut Pro if you are not shooting at XDCAM 422 50Mbps bit rate
Sony PDW-U1
Optical Disk
Sony Clip Browser

The PMW-350 and EX1R both have the 1440x1080 35Mb/s mode that the original PDW-F3** cameras use, so with them you can write the files directly to Optical Disc without the need for any hardware other than the camera, computer and a U1.

If your rendering out from FCP you simply go directly to the optical disc at 50Mb/s, no need to use clip browser. 50Mb/s NanoFlash MXF's can be dragged and dropped directly on to a connected XDCAM HD422 camera or U1, no need to use clip browser. If your writing to a deck or camera the Proxies are generated by the deck/camera and it's very fast. If your using a U1 the U1 drivers build the proxies and this takes a little longer.

We had a demo of the P2 Wrangler (I posted a link to it on DVInfo). It's a really nice machine and reasonably inexpensive, great device for field backup. For back at base they're going RAID drive and LTO tape.
Steve

P2 Wrangler 1 Beyond, Inc. - The 1 Beyond Tapeless Workflow Solutions
Steve

The NextoDi NVS2500 will backup P2 as well as SxS if all you need is a backup device.

The P2 Wrangler looks like a nice unit, but why not just use a laptop? The Panasonic ToughBooks would probably work well for the NHU.

Alister, there's a lot more to the Wrangler, it really is a nicely thought out bit of kit. You can put SxS slots on it as well I believe.
The best bits about it are that it's fast as there are no leads, the cards just slot straight in, it's simple, you don't need to press a button even, just stick the card in and it dumps to the drives. The drives themselves are good too, removable cartridges, the card writes to both simultaeneously, and you then remove them and can keep 1 on location and ship the other back to base. They have encryption keys in them too so the data can't be broken into. There was a whole bunch of us from the NHU and the company doing the big Discovery prog and we were all really impressed.
Steve

Shotput on a laptop will do most of that, auto backup to multiple destinations and format etc, the only thing it dosn't do is encrypt. Choose the right laptop and you can have an express card or possibly still get PCMCIA.

Have you seen the NextoDI NVS2500? Not saying it is a replacement for the P2 Wrangler but you can plug in external drives to it for multiple copies or for copying from it, to a hard drive without a computer. It will playback clips for verification purposes and in the future will make it possible to copy from P2 or SxS to CF or SD cards. It's very robust with rubber buffers on the ends and small enough to fit in a jacket pocket.

CF cards now you have my interest. Alister when is the CF version coming out?

I believe the Wrangler will do CF too, you configure it when you buy it with whatever slots you want (I think!)
The guy talked about the write speed being as fast as it possibly could be from P2, ie no firewire cables etc slowing it down. Also flags damaged clips, has big HD screen, battery powered. It looked really nice. Maybe the BBC and others there were not happy with laptops - don't know why.
Steve

I need to correct a mistake in the above post and give proper credit where credit is due.

Dennis Dillon is the person who had the idea to develop the Convergent Design/Sony Optical disk. Dennis brought the idea to Convergent Design and then went to Sony for the proper file structure approval for use at Convergent Design.

Dennis spoke at the Abel December release of the PMW-350. There was a discussion lead by Dennis where this was discussed in detail. At that point I changed my archive method from Raid 1 drives and DL-DVD to Sony Optical Disk. Thanks Dennis you were supposes to save me money now that I look at the U1 and box of disk I wonder errrrr.

Seriously a great method and Dennis disserves kudos for a job well done, along with Sony for being open with their code to CD, and CD as always for getting it done.

Andy at Abel was the beta tester and has done a great job spreading the word and helping people solve there archiving problems.

My apologies Dennis for the mistake

Don't know when write to CF will be available.

Dennis made that workflow happen.. I just wrote up a how-to guide. Convergent is doing an incredible job with the nanoFlash.

Got the first 350s today. Testing the lens now and it is pretty great for a less the $2k.

Paul your camera is shipping today! Just in time for Christmas.

Andy look forward to your lens testing results. Early in the New Year I will be renting a few to test and will look as always for your advice.

Excited about the arrive of the camera and rest of kit coming with the camera. Charles did a great job putting together a stellar package.

Thanks for making it fun and easy. The team at Abel Cine Tech are first rate.

Happy Holidays to all.

That thing is really a beast. I am really looking for a simple and rugged solution that bypasses the computer all together so the Nexto or Sony PXU-MS240 field units are much more attractive.

Thierry.

Thierry,
While this thing is computer based one of its strong features is that you don't need to operate it like a computer. You don't boot up and launch the programme for instance. All you do is turn it on and insert the P2 card and you don't even need to press a button, it just writes to the 2 drives simultaneously at the fastest speed you can get and verifies them, flags any errors etc. and tells you when its done. It'll also play back HD files on the built in screen. They are also doing one for in helicopters that'll do uncompressed I think.
We were all really impressed with this machine, and at about £7k or whatever it was it seemed like a good buy for serious field use.
Steve

Also need Calibrated {Q} XD decode if no FCP
 

Paul, you also need an XDCAM codec installed if you don't have FCP installed.

The calibrated {q} XD Decode codecs from Calibrated Software work fine and are approx $80 so cheaper than FCP!!

Dave

Correct Dave I should not take it for granted that people have FCS.