Have to buy asap, DSR450, XDCAM 350 or 330?
 

After hoping I could get by with my z1 and cine adaptor it just isn't up to what I need to do for a series I am shooting for channel 4.

I am going to come up with this problem again and again. So I have decided I need to buy a full size pro camera.

They always use DSRs but I think buying a DSR450 now would be daft. Sure its a great camera and 2/3rd inch but with lots of progs being made in HD now surely the way to go is the XDCAM HD line.

Please correct me if I am wrong but the 330 compared to the 350 main points. No sdi. no xlr audio out, 4x3 viewfinder and variable frame rate...any others?

Thanks for your help!

p.s. wide angles are way too expensive right now, would a century optics wangle converter be a good stop gap?

also is the 19x canon lens any good?? If anyone has a link specific to the 330 review that would be great!

You'll save a bundle on the F330 over the F350 but if you need HD monitoring on a field a lot and want a good viewfinder, spend the money on the F350. As far as lenses, I don't think getting a wide angle adaptor is a wise decision. They are cumbersome to use, hard to focus with and probably less than adequate for HD pictures. In the US, you can buy the Fujinon 3.3x13 for around $13,000. That is an excellent lens. For HD standard lense, I like the Fujinon 5.5x18, it has a nice width (equivalent to 7.5mm on a 2/3") and is priced pretty reasonabily.

Thierry.

has anyone used the bundled lens, is it usable? how much extra is the better viewfinder?

Hi Phil

You are quite right, DSR450 seems pretty pointless considering F330 is same price and HD and shoots to the super sexy XDCAM HD Professional Disc format; that's just the tip of the iceberg.

F330 standard lens is most certainly usable and is far far superior to what you are used to built into the Z1. F350 dosn't come with a lens though. However, a standard def Canon 19x lens will again be superior to what you are used to by a long margin.

If you go for F330 and decide to buy the better native widescreen viewfinder it will cost you about an extra £1200, plus you will be stuck with the lesser one as most people won't want to take it in part ex, or if they do it will only be for £150 or so to go into their hire/loan stock. I would not recommend buying F330 with better viewfinder as for a little more you might as well just get the F350 with that viewfinder to start with. Plus you get the other benifits of Over/Undercranking, HD/SDI out, 5-pin XLR audio out connector on front, 2 BNC timecode I/O connectors. And Black in colour if you prefer this to the silver/grey of the F330.

I would go for XDCAM over DVCAM if I was making my own programmes (as I do). However if you are working as a freelancer in the UK shooting for broadcasters the XDCAM market is very limited at the moment, while the DVCAM market is huge. I'm sure this will change over time as more and more start to see the benefits of file based workflows. Whatever you get you really need the 2" VF. As for field monitoring, well it depends on how much you want to spend on a monitor. There are plenty of cheap HD LCD TV's that could pass for a monitor, but these only have component inputs. In that scenario a F330 may be better. The beauty of the F350 is that you can take it to any HD edit suite (or Digibeta) and use the HDSDi/SDi to export your footage, even if they have not got XDCAM HD compatible plug-ins or software.

I wouldn't buy the lens that comes in the F330 package. It dosn't have a proper focus ring as it uses a servo focus system like the Z1. Focus is everything with HD, if something is even the tiniest bit out of focus it sticks out like a sore thumb. I believe if you budget is tight you should get the Canon 19x6.7 that is being offered by some dealers for around £1000 (or buy mine second hand) over the package lens. Then in the future when you start to shoot more HD upgrade to a HD lens.

One point is that Discovery HD do stipulate that if you are going to use XDCAM HD you MUST use an HD lens. Sometimes it's very difficult to tell if a HD lens is or is not being used, but then on other shots it becomes more obvious.

The 5 Pin front XLR is a stereo audio in for the front mic. The 5 pin XLR out is on the rear on the F350.

I've recently spent 4 months shooting a wildlife programme in various locations and used a 19" lcd TV made by Samsung with Component inputs; cost £225. Not as good as a Grade A monitor of course, but it doesn't cost £20,000 so you wouldn't expect it to be as good. However, I find it perfectly okay for focus, exposure, colour, white balance etc.

Alister is right, F330 has component outputs so a cheaper all-round option. F350 has HD/SDI, which means a very expensive field monitor.

As for DVCAM being more common in the UK over XDCAM, you can always shoot in DVCAM mode with an F330 to disc, then convert it to a DVCAM tape. This also has the advantage of better quality audio as the XDCAM models record to 16-bit, unlike DVCAM tape models like DSR450, which record in 12-bit.

The DSR450 is 16 bit unless in 4 channel mode then it's 12 bit as with all DVCAM products. There is NO audio advantage to be had by shooting on XDCAM and then outputting to DVCAM tape as you will be back to 2 channel 16bit 48Khz sampling or 4 channel 12 bit 32Khz sampling. You only get the 4 channel/16bit audio advantage if working directly with the XDCAM MXF files with an NLE that supports them.

Yes you could shoot on XDCAM and then dump to tape, but if you've shot 2 or 3 hours of rushes the last thing you want at the end of every shoot is to have to dump it all off. It would be fine for occasional jobs but if you are hired by a broadcaster they will normally want you to just hand over the tapes at the end of the days shoot. You may also find yourself having to supply a news truck or news pool that can only accept tape.

I am not knocking XDCAM in any way. All I'm trying to say is that if your market wants DVCAM/Betacam/Digibeta then be very careful about choosing XDCAM if it is your only camera. The right tool for the job etc. In a year or two's time things may be reversed and XDCAM may be the dominant format, who can tell. But until then if you are a UK based freelancer you need to consider what will bring the best return for your investment. The camera you like the most or the camera in most demand.

Alsiter, Phil needs HD here so DVCAM is out of the question.

As for the audio, DVCAM is 12-bit audio, even in 2-channel mode. But you are right, dumping back to DVCAM tape will revert the 16-bit to 12-bit anyway.

The DSR450 would force you to use 12 bit/32khz audio if recording 4 channels. The XDCAM can record 4 channels at the full 16 bit/48khz resolution. But yes, if you then delivered by dubbing to DVCAM tape using 4 channels, the audio would suffer a downsampling hit (I think you meant back to 12/32 in your post). But you still might benefit from capturing a higher resolution audio at the source before downsampling at delivery.

If the client is editing with an NLE, they should be able to accept delivery via an external fw drive with the files unwrapped and ready to edit, maintaining the full audio fidelity on all 4 channels.

-gb-

Thanks for all the info guys.

I bought the 330 in the end. I tried the lens in the k package...oh my god, why?!?! Did Sony at any point let a camera try the lens out?!?! The optics are fine, it's sharp, infinity ring is crap, but that is not the realy problem. It's the ZOOM!!! There is no manual backfocus on this lens, it is permanently set to auto, so whenever you crash in, or even just do a zoom, the focus completely goes then adjusts itself. TOTALLY useless. Unless you are going for some wacky effect!

I bought the HD lens on the strength of the strength of Alister. Discovery HD factor is a big concern.

I have a dvcam deck, so yes, for clients at the end of the day it''s a drag, but I generally work in blocks, from one series to another. So the one off days are limited. Also, the series I am currently shooting for Channel 4 is being produced and edited at Mentorn, they get charged quite a lot in house for machine time so it's great that I can just plug the firewire into the edit suite and dump the stuff over. Sure SDI would be nice too, although it would mean dumping stuff over real time. For the money the 330 was the best, especially as I needed 5k for the lens.

it's such a lovely camera, I absolutely cannot wait to start shooting on it.

Congratulations on the purchase of F330 Phil; you'll love it. I'm not far behind you.

I am curious as to why Simon Wyndham thinks the 330 is more for corporate and the 350 for broadcast work. I see no reason other than the sdi out that the 330 is different to a digitbeta or dsr 450 in it's features, it has all of them and more, am I wrong?

Even if you have 330 and need HD-SDI, u can still buy AJA compact converters to connect from HD-component to your HD-SDI machines. The AJAs costs about $750 USD as i recall...

The lens has an auto flange back adjustment routine. See 'Adjusting the Flange Focal Length' topic in the owner's manual. There is a button on the lens that you push after setting up on a well lit Siemen's chart which is included with the camera.

A good read of the owner's manual is recommended as this is a very complex camera.

-gb-

I would go along with Simon in so much as the F330 features tend to be more suited to corporate work. For example the component outputs allow the use of low cost non broadcast LCD's. Not many corporates make use of slow mo and the perception is that corporate budgets are smaller than broadcast (these days though it's often the reverse) so a cheaper camera may make you more profitable. If you were working for a broadcaster and need to integrate into multi-camera shoots then the F350's HDSDi would be an advantage as well as TC in and TC out at the same time to allow loop through. So I can see Simons point.

At the end of the day you must choose the features that suit you and your application. Everyones needs will be different. As there is no picture quality difference between the two it's actually a tough choice as I have often wished for component out on my F350, but then I have made good use of the HDSDi.

Anyway Phil, welcome to the growing XDCAM HD club. I'm sure you won't be dissapointed. Before you start shooting for real I strongly recommend you play around with the different gammas as it's my opinon that the out of the box gamma 1 dosn't do the camera any favours. My preferd gamma is gamma 3.

Basically I think Simon is referring to the main differences i.e:

HD/SDI out, BNC timecode I/O, Overcrank mode = Broadcast
Component out, cheaper price = Corporate

But don't take that as one can't be used for the other because they can; simple as that.

Thanks Alister (and Nigel!)

I am rarely going to do multi camera work so I think I made the right choice (and used the savings to buy the 20x hd lens)

By the way Nigel, you can use the XD as a standard DV device for NLE systems that dont have XD compatibility in them (of course only for SD not ND)

My reasons were pretty much exactly as Alister described. No need to spend money on features that won't be needed, especially in the low level corporate/industrial sector.

Alister, have you tried the STD gamma with the new firmware? I notice that the default knee point has now been lowered to 85%.

Simon,

How easy is to update the firmware?

So Phil, did you get your lens issue taken care of yet?

-gb-

lens issue? you mean what i described with the stock k autofocus lens?

I didnt buy that one, I went with the 20x canon HD lens.

I mentioned wide angle adaptors before, I used to have one for my Beta SX, it was v good quality, but not zoom through.

All I need is something I can just have in my bag when I need to shoot something a little wider, spur of the moment stuff. I can't afford a proper HD wide angle and will hire in for each specific job. But as my current project is SD, and a lot will still be SD for a while. I would consider a 1/2 SD wide angle but I am still keen for just having a wangle adaptor just in my bag...can anyone recommend any for the 82mm filter thread of my lens?

Am sure Century do one, as I have hired a fish eye from them before that was 82mm bayonet.

Oh, ok Phil. From your post above I thought you were complaining about the back focus issue and then going on to say that you bought the lens on Alister's recommendation. Didn't realize you were talking about two different lenses at that point.

Anyway, the K lens has an auto FB routine as I described so you weren't getting a fair representation of that lens if it wasn't set properly.

Looks like you're all set then. If you need to do the firmware update, review the related thread here in the XDCAM forum. One of the posts has a Word document file attached and the instructions are exactly correct.

Not at all difficult to do.

-gb-

We used a Century Optics .8 WA on my lens at a recent shoot. It attached over the end of the lens using three thumb screws. To prevent damage to the finish on the lens, we wrapped it with gaffer's tape several times which also helped enlarge the diameter so that we didn't have to turn the screws so far to get it on and off. This was an SD adapter and performed quite well.

Just FYI,

-gb-

Thanks Greg,

Which lens did you mount it on and do you by any chance know which model adaptor it was? I am also assuming I don't want an adaptor for IF lenses?

The info about the back focus not being set on the stock lens if very interesting. I have emailed the company who demonstrated it and told them they hadn't set it up properly. I made the right choice buying the "proper" canon HD lens, an extra 2.5 k but worth it for all the proper controls, proper macro, proper focus!

Simon: Gamma 1 is better with the new firmware. The lowered knee gives a better highlight roll-off, but I still much prefer all of the cine gammas. Looks like the knee on cine 3 has benn pulled down a little as well.

I have used my Optex 0.7/0.5 W.A adapter on my Canon 20x6.4. You use Macro to focus this lens and it is a very big lump of glass. It's excellent for SD, but at 0.5 it is rather too soft for HD especially at the edges. At 0.7 it's useable for the odd wide shot.

would either of these be a good bet?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._W_A_Lens.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

Also, if I decide to get an sd 1/2" W angle, what is the mount called for the f330 that i need to search for?

Phil,

I'm using a 82mm Red Eye on my F350 with Fuji 18X5.5 BERM, works fine but no zoom through. However with some practice you can zoom a bit and refocus using the macro focus ring.

Studiodaily.com just had a article on it.
http://www.studiodaily.com/studiomon...ssue/7289.html

cheers

Morton

Thanks Morton,

Is there any loss in sharpness at all?

1/2" lenses come in the Sony variety and the Panasonic/JVC variety. The ones marked as Pana/JVC will NOT work on the Sonys.

I have a Canon broadcast series 1/2" lens made for the DSR-300s, and it's superb. As 1/2" lenses go it's pretty rare (not many people wanted to spend $15k on a lens for a $11k camera).

If you can find one, a H9ax3.8 IRS or KRS is highly recommended from me. (what I have).

Nate's lens
 

I basically A/B'd Nate's 9x3.8 lens with my rather pricey HD Fuji, which is the 13x3.3 and if there much real difference, I couldn't see it under the circumstances. Of course the Fuji goes a bit wider, has somewhat more zoom range, has a bigger piece of glass in the front so it should gather a bit more light, and has all those digi features like variable zoom range and speed etc. but I'm positive the extra $$$$$$ I spent will NOT result in comensurately better imaging.

Tip

Tip, that's basically what I found when I initially compared my Canon SD 19x6.7 against my Canon HD 20x6.4. There really isn't much difference. Having said that and having used the HD lens more I find that it does produce a better image. The HD lens produces a cleaner image with less CA and haze. It is also more consistent. You only really see the difference on a 32" or bigger monitor.

I have an sd canon, 12x4.8 (same as th yj 12x6.5 for 2/3), I haven't done any fancy charts but it looks really good, all my contacts have been gobsmacked at the overall quality of the camera and lens s/h cost was £1250 ( a good deal) new about £3000 I believe

Andy

Andy that is a good deal. I have decided to buy the 2/3" convertor so when I do buy a wide angle it would be compatible with more than just my 330. I am worried that if I spend a fortune on nice glass that if I decide to change cameras one day to a 2/3" I will be stuffed!!!

Andy that is a good deal.

I have decided to buy the 2/3" convertor so when I do buy a wide angle it would be compatible with more than just my 330. I am worried that if I spend a fortune on nice glass then if I decide to change cameras one day to a 2/3" I will be stuffed!!! I have also bought the redeye .7x non zoom through as an affordable stop gap. I have one for my z1 and it is great. Especially as I can screw it onto my canon and still use my matte box which is 82mm max.

When I need a good quality bit of wide angle glass I will be able to hire readily available 2/3" lenses, the 1/2" I have found seem to be hard to find for hire. Certainly in the two main hire places I use.

I did some test comparing 2/3" lenses against 1/2" lenses and I would NOT recommend using 2/3" lenses unless you have no choice. The 2/3 SD lenses I tested were soft even when shooting SD compared to 1/2" SD lenses. This is probably down to the fact that the photo sites on a half inch imager are much smaller than on a 2/3 CCD. There is also increased CA as the light path lengths through the optical blocks are different. The glass element in the adapter helps but can't compensate for the fact that the Red and Blue path lengths are different. Even the top end Canon 2/3" HD lenses I tested struggled to match my much cheaper Canon KH20 1/2" HD lens. If you're only going to shoot SD then you would be OK with 2/3" HD lenses. The bottom line is that 2/3 inch lenses are not designed to work with such small photo sites and the differnet path lengths, as a result performance can be dissapointing.

really? I've ordered it now! Do you know anywhere that hires 1/2 hd lenses in London?

Is there any way to improve the sharpness of the LCD screen, or is the resolution just too low. Compared to the Z1 LCD it's quite soft, also the z1 lcd lets you display peaking which is nice...

Can anyone recommend any softie/windjammer for the sony stereo front mic?

Phil,

Your results may vary but my very own tests with using 2/3" lenses (canon broadcast grade) tell me that they can actually work pretty well.... See it at www.telecamfilms.com/xdcam.html .

The LCD screen on the F330/350 looks better when the camera is set NTSC frame rates. I am a bit puzzled by this , but I am assuming that this has to do with the signal and rescaling processing. straight lines and architectural elements show a lot more jaggies on the LCD when the camera is in PAL mode.

For camera mic windsock, I'll recommend two models from Rycote.

- Camera mounted softie: longer hair, very good for high wind environment
- Smoothie Windshield: very short hair, excellent sound quality and good wind protection in most situation. (I do prefer that one...)

Both models are availalbe in LH (large Hole) 5cm length and fit perfectly on a F330/F350 mic.

Thierry.

are there any menu settings for the lcd? cant seem to find any. Also dumb question, and am sure it is in the manual but where can i change the audio rate from 32 to 48?

The camera always records 48 kHz. There is no setting to change it.