XDCAM HD Footage

[Simon Wyndham]

I don't think it is possible to judge so much on apparent picture quality. There will be a big difference between the 330/350 and 750. However that is only the partial story.

What will not be immediately apparent from the demo you saw is how much more latitude the XDCAM HD has over the Z1, or how much more adjustability the picture has via the menus, depth of field characteristics, more robustness during camera movement due to the higher bitrate, uncompressed audio etc, etc. So it isn't quite as black and white as it may seem at first.

Its the same with my 510. Sometimes I'll see pictures taken from the newer handycams and think that actually they aren't that bad. Its only on examination that I see the defects in the lower spec camera that eventually have an effect on the whole production chain. High frequency detail, detail enhancement characteristics, latitude etc.

On top of this there is the convenience for the cameraman in actual use. The manual lens alone on the HD XDCAM makes the camera instantly easier and more controllable in use than the Z1 etc.

There's a lot to consider.

My dillemma is whether to wait for the 2/3" version. I think I probably will (and will aim to upgrade to a high def 2/3" lens this year), but I would imagine that it would be at least £22k UKP just for the body or more. And it isn't clear if there will also be two tiers for that version either. Perhaps Sony will say something at NAB. The XDCAM HD 1/2" version had a mock up available for viewing at last years show, and the previous SD version of XDCAM had mockups at NAB the year before release. So if Sony are releasing a 2/3" version next year it would seem consistant that they would do the same at this years show. Here's hoping!

[Scott Webster]

Originally Posted by Simon Wyndham

I don't think it is possible to judge so much on apparent picture quality. There will be a big difference between the 330/350 and 750. However that is only the partial story.

What will not be immediately apparent from the demo you saw is how much more latitude the XDCAM HD has over the Z1, or how much more adjustability the picture has via the menus, depth of field characteristics, more robustness during camera movement due to the higher bitrate, uncompressed audio etc, etc. So it isn't quite as black and white as it may seem at first.

Its the same with my 510. Sometimes I'll see pictures taken from the newer handycams and think that actually they aren't that bad. Its only on examination that I see the defects in the lower spec camera that eventually have an effect on the whole production chain. High frequency detail, detail enhancement characteristics, latitude etc.

On top of this there is the convenience for the cameraman in actual use. The manual lens alone on the HD XDCAM makes the camera instantly easier and more controllable in use than the Z1 etc.

There's a lot to consider.

My dillemma is whether to wait for the 2/3" version. I think I probably will (and will aim to upgrade to a high def 2/3" lens this year), but I would imagine that it would be at least £22k UKP just for the body or more. And it isn't clear if there will also be two tiers for that version either. Perhaps Sony will say something at NAB. The XDCAM HD 1/2" version had a mock up available for viewing at last years show, and the previous SD version of XDCAM had mockups at NAB the year before release. So if Sony are releasing a 2/3" version next year it would seem consistant that they would do the same at this years show. Here's hoping!

Couldn't agree more on your comments Simon. Your dillemma is what a lot of us face.

Any owner operator running a 2/3" camera will be reluctant to climb into a 1/2" system because it will mean investing in 1/2" glass.They also have the choice of the DSR450, 510 or 530 if upgrading 2/3" and have no requirement for HD.

The O/O's I know are putting there investment into HD lenses which they can utilise with their existing SD rigs.

As a rental company the 1/2" system is a pain as well. A total 350 camera system including lenses and deck is up there with the cost of a Varicam or HDW750 body which can work with our inventory of 2/3" HD lenses. And with a shelf life of 18 months until a 2/3" version arrives, thats a small window to earn back the investment.

Also, have Sony signaled the arrival of a 2/3" HDV tape camera with the release of the new large tape format capable HDV decks? Is the DSR450 the last of the DVCAM line development?

Or does it mean a HDV camera based on the DSR250? or a 1/2" HDV tape camera?

Or simply, they made the new HDV decks so the could take large DVCAM tapes? :)

[Michael Devlin]

I also would second Simon's comments. The 1/2" will have greater performance than is evident in a simple viewing, and the 2/3" will be even better. When I tested our HDC-X300 (same 1/2" ccd as PDW-F350) it consistently had at least 2 stops more lattitude than the Canon XL H1. Vertical smear was also much better.

The Canon SD lens that Sony has been demoing with the PDW-F330 and F350 definitely limits performance. That is the same lens included in the HDC-X300K package. I switched to the Fujinon 1/2" HD lens and saw a great improvement in resolution and overall performance.

I am trying to work a deal with the local Fujinon dealer to borrow a 2/3" HD lense with the adapter for the PDW-F350. I will test it on my F350 when it arrives. If possible I would like to use 2/3" lenses on the F350 (Sony is pushing that capability with the adapters, which actually come from Canon and Fuji I believe). I am concerned that the 2/3" inch lenses have a larger Circle of Confusion (and therefore lower resolution), since 2/3" CCD's have larger pixels. I will let you know once I have been able to test this. If the 2/3" lens resolution is close to the 1/2" lens I will use the 2/3" lenses.

[Ian Richards]

yep thats a review I would love to hear about. Like eveyone else caught in this dilema wondering which way to jump. I read somewhere that the 2/3" XDCAM HD will also provide 50MB/s and 4:2:2 colour. But how far away is it and at what cost. Infinity where you are you, has anyone got any news?

Cheers Ian

[Michael Devlin]

Sony has announced availability of the 2/3" XDCAM HD for June 2007. I have no data on what pricing will be for the 2/3", but I would guess it will be more than the PDW-F330/350 but less than the HDW-730/750. Just a guess.

I hope to have thoroughly tested our F350 before NAB (assuming Sony really delivers it by the end of the month) so that I know all the right questions to ask and requests to make when I am at NAB. Usally Sony is pretty receptive and understands the issues.

[Simon Wyndham]

Creative Video have the new XDCAM HD's on their website http://www.creativevideo.co.uk

Judging by the prices I would reckon around £25-£30k for the 2/3" model now. I just saw that Gearhouse Broadcast are selling the HDW730 for £25k including an HJ17 lens!

[Scott Webster]

Originally Posted by Simon Wyndham

Creative Video have the new XDCAM HD's on their website http://www.creativevideo.co.uk

Judging by the prices I would reckon around £25-£30k for the 2/3" model now. I just saw that Gearhouse Broadcast are selling the HDW730 for £25k including an HJ17 lens!

Wow we can't (in NZ) even get a DVW970 body for that!
Is that pricing a reflection of the demand for the HDW750 with it's 25p ability over the 50i/60i of the HDW730?

Still that is a very good buy if you don't require progressive.

[Bob Thompson]

I saw some footage taken on a XDcam HD and transfered to 35mm film, it looked very good.

I didn't ask any further info about the camera as I was taken back by footage from the Panavision Genisis camera - they screened split screen shots of the PV Genisis and a regular 35mm panavision camera, I could not see any difference. The super 35 ccd in the Genisis is BIG

[Joe Carney]

Andy, thanks, but in the future it's better to do a short synopsis then supply the link. Pasting an entire post from another site usually isn't done around here out of courtesy.
Plus, it's way off topic even if informative.

[Greg Boston]

Originally Posted by Joe Carney

Andy, thanks, but in the future it's better to do a short synopsis then supply the link. Pasting an entire post from another site usually isn't done around here out of courtesy.
Plus, it's way off topic even if informative.

Worse than that, it's an all out copyright infringement. You can not legally quote content from other locations without their permission. As Joe stated, it's better to paraphrase and then link to the content.

For those who are wondering what Joe and I are referring to, there was a long quote posted from another forum by Andy earlier in this thread. The posts have been removed from public view for now and may be paraphrased and reposted later, time permitting.

regards,
-gb-