It sounds like a step forward. I'm definitely interested.

I get the idea that both camcorders can record to tape AND/OR Compact Flash Cards so, if true that "tape is dead," then flash memory lives (although I don't think "tape is dead," and in fact now that Sony says it can put 1080p onto tape it might help keep tape as a viable format.

In fact Sony's info says that with a special unit that recordings can be done on both tape and disk at the same time. So...no problem.

How, though, I wonder, do these new products fit in with the also newly announced (and not yet released) Sony PMW-EX1 ?

So are the drawbacks of HDV: 1) it's GOP and not so precise for editing...is this significant? and 2) it needs to be compressed because it's data rate is not so fast?

"Tape is dead" has been said for a while, and just has not happened yet. I like to think of "tape" as the older partner in a business, experienced, but looking to retirement, and in the process of handing over to his much younger partner. Increasingly, he will spend more time on the golf course, but the business is stronger with both of them than with either of them singly. And all the time, the young "solid state" becomes more capable.

The CF/tape hybrid I see as an excellent step at the moment.
I suspect they are aimed at the lower end of the pro market, the EX a bit higher, and to fit in as a B camera to other HD-XDCAM.
It should be precise for editing, but is likely to need more computing power to handle it, or transcoding for editing ease.

Actually, Heath, I think the CF recorder fits OVER the battery... take a look at this review on a German site (Google translated) -- http://www.google.com/translate?u=ht...&hl=en&ie=UTF8

The editors seem to imply that the CF recorder slips over the battery itself. And I THINK.... if I can decipher the somewhat random translation... they're saying you could set up the tape to record Standard Definition while simultaneously recording High Definition to the CF card, or vice-versa. I could imagine shooting scenarios where that might be useful.

Some nice close ups of the camera there, too.

Also, if you go to the second page of the Sony.biz.net link above, you'll see the NPF970s are listed as an accessory for the Z7.

I really like this compact modular concept. In theory, if Sony continues down this path, you could buy a Z7 now, then maybe in a few years, maybe buy a 1/3" XDCAM recorder back, and reuse your lens and CF recorder. Or you can use the CF recorder as a standalone deck. I see Sony's already talking about a second, wider angle lens for these cameras coming out in June. This strikes me as a much better way to go than screw-on wide angle adaptors.

Looking better and better.

Ignore. I didn't see the move...

a Lenses
 

One of the most interesting things to me is the claim of being able to use the new Sony alpha lenses from the Sony DSLR line, most notably the Sony Alpha 700. That DSLR uses the same EXMOR sensor that is in the EX1.

"Using a special adaptor, users can also attach the α lens series designed for Sony’s consumer digital SLR still cameras."

I am curious how much they will hurt us with the cost of the adapter though.

Yes, I agree, and it's got me wondering if the CF recorder could be used with existing cameras like the DSR450. That would be a cheap way to get into tapeless workflows now, until HD working was needed.

It also gets me wondering if they may do a similar device using SxS?

I wonder if it will have the rotating grip that the XDCam EX does.
I think that's a VERY practical design feature.

Yes, it will. The 2 cameras share a couple of new and cool features. One thing that makes me wonder is why the EX1 (which is positioned a bit higher, after all) doesn't have the higher resolution EVF that the Z7 has.

It would be great if Sony takes this concept one step further and makes the camera head/sensor array and recorder into separate, modular units, like the DXC-D35 DVCAM camera, or the SI Mini. Then you could mix and match lens, sensors, recording codec and media depending on your budget and what the job required.

I know this is a new age and 1/3" chips are the new 2/3" chips and all, but I think $11,000 for a 1/3" chip HDV camera seems expensive.

I wonder why Sony did not build this camera around the 1/2" EX chips?

Then the price might seem more in line.

Maybe it is too close to the XDCAM 335.

I agree. It's the $6000 handheld Z7 that's really interesting to me. I bet Sony sells way more of the Z7 than they do its shoulder-mount brother.

The $10500.00 (Probably $9,000 street) shoulder mount camera has HDSSDI out which commands a premium. Also, that camera is aimed at the JVC 250, (Around the 10-12k street, HDSDI) which is being standardized in several TV stations and some networks like ABC Mr. McKnight said that all of the Scripps TV stations are buying 1/3 inch JVC's for HD. So it actually will be $2,000 cheaper than comparable cameras that are aimed at midmarket TV stations migrating to HD.

I don't doubt you're proabably right, but funnily enough my preference goes with a shoulder mount. Having used a Z1 for the last few years I've been increasingly fed up with the weight, the poor balance and the front heavy feel, the fiddliness of certain controls, menus etc...
the weight issue is further compounded if you add matte boxes, filters, mics, radio receivers etc... the whole lot gets pretty hard to hold steady for any length of time.

cheers
Gareth

Prior to launch? hmmm... sounds big.

check this link
 

Thank your for your reply (and insightful metaphors) David.

The z7 - in my price range - has become more appealing as I think about it.

An adapter that lets you use Sony lens also is very appealing. But does this meanthat Canon and/or Nikon lens could also be used (or do the chips and other features have to be the same?).

I got the idea that this is already being done with the JVC models, using DSLR lens...gosh that could make for some great pics, no?

Can't wait to hear about the hands-on reviews.

Does anyone know how focusing would work with a DSLR lens on this cam? Could it do auto focus? Or how about zoom with a DSLR lens? It seems like the mechanics of a video lens are different from a DLSR lens... if focus would have to manual, it wouldn't be all that bad, but I'm not familiar with Sony's DSLR alpha lenses.

Adam you bring up a good point.

There is no motorized zoom servo on a DSLR lens, so in many ways they are impractical for "video" work.

They would be fine for "film" type work where prime lenses are often used and focal lengths are chosen for specific reasons with zooming being accomplished by camera movement rather than zoom.

They would also need to have the video camera pick up the f-stop from the lens electronically because the DSLR lenses often do not have an aperature ring.

People use photographic lenses with the Redrock Micro and others, all the time.

Heath

Thanks for the responses about the DSLR lens use. This is a great feature, especially since I'm also a photographer with many more lenses than I need. My fisheye lens could be pretty fun, as long as I can remove the shotgun mic so that isn't in view.

Not really. It is aimed at those who will spend $10K and want 1080i. That means CBS and NBC. ABC and ESPN and NASA and Europe all want 50p/60p.

Steve,

I have great respect and I normally 98% of the time agree with you. We're probably both right and wrong. But, I could see a small to midlevel TV station buying the shoulder mount version. (I keep forgetting the Model number).

The flexibility of the camera with1080i, 1080p/24/30 does fit into a lot of categories.

BTW OT:, an affiliate is not obligated to broadcast a networks signal in that same format. For example, KTRK, an ABC affiliate here, also a Disney owned station, uses 1080i cameras and broadcasts 1080/60i even though they're receiving 720p from ABC, which is also owned by Disney. Pretty funny how that works. So they're cross converting the signal. I just learned this recently. Remember the affiliates have the right to local airwaves. So, a group of TV station affiliates say owned by Scripps might have contracts with different networks and in the end could care less what the networks do. After all, it is their money. And of course they save money by standardizing across all of their owned TV stations.


Sorry to go OT again: I know that this is petty:

Also, what part of NASA is going 60p? I work contract for Jacobs Engineering on Engineering and Science Group Contract for NASA here at the Johnson Space Center. And everything I'm aware of is 60i. I pretty sure that includes Langley Research Center, Marshall Space Flight, Stennis Space Center, Cape Canveral, and Ames Research.

I'm not saying you're wrong, that this is new news to me. I certainly don't know everything. But, if you have some info, let me know because I work for a NASA contractor who would need to know. Before we end up in a Disney like scenario.

But, I'm starting to like the concept of this camera. Very flexible indeed.

Steve, Email me if you have response so I don't hijack the thread.


Cheers.

All Scripps TV stations (mostly ABC with one or two NBC affiliates) are going HDV with the HD250 in 720p60 mode.

My friend's station uses a couple of shoulder-mount DVCPRO 50 cameras, along with many more Sony Z1u's and DVX100's.

heath

Yea I saw that you mentioned in apost somewhere else that Scripps was going JVC 250. I have a JVC 100 that I'm about to sell. Either the Z7 or the XDCAM EX to replace it. It was hard working the past year convincing clients that 720p to 1080i looks fine. With these cameras can let my client pick the format.

It seems like with these 2 HDV cameras and the XDCAM EX, cameras are becoming more and more flexible to shoot in in either format, at a wide variety of framerates.

To think, in early 2003, all we had was a couple of hand-held pro DV cameras from Canon, JVC, Panasonic and Sony (with the then-new DVX100 being arguably the best). By September 2003, HDV was announced, based on the JVC HD10, and the rest is history.

I think HDV and 24p have really revolutionized the sub-$10,000 camera market, and now P2/DVCPRO HD.

Heath

the modular CF recorder attaches w/ a simple latch to the back of the camera.

The 970 battery is internal like the XHA1.

Changing batteries requires first removing the CF recorder (which I dropped once, and no one got alarmed...)

My understanding is that if you wanted, the CF module could be attached via a cable off the camera

I too am warming to the S270. I think the $10K price blew my mind for a few days. It's 2X - 3X more than the $3000-$4000 camcorders like the VX1000/VX2000. Which means it may be aimed more at institutions rather than at individuals. I can't afford a $10K camcorder and I suspect many who have bought Sony DV and HDV camcorders can't either.

A TV station making the move to HD that's used to spending $25K will find these VERY cheap. They are not going to buy an ergonomic mess like the Canon. P2 is crazy IMHO. That leaves a choice between JVC and Sony at $10K. Now both offer shoulder-cams that ENG requires.

What's interesting is that -- in HDV -- JVC and Sony do not compete on format. JVC does only 720p50/60 and Sony only 1080i50/60. (Both do 24p.) I think this was an original understanding when they did HDV together.

For the Indy filmmaker, the interchangable lens will be neat. Although I would think they would want the 1920x1080 rez and low-light sensitivity the EX1 offers. However, DV tape is both really cheap and offers really simple workflows. So maybe things balance out.

However, given multitude of claims than HDV doesn't handle fast motion well -- something I have not experienced -- Sony needs to assure buyers that the HDV codec is much improved over the Z1.

These cameras seem like strange hacks to me. Sorry, not meant to be inflammatory, but Sony starts on the right track with the EX1, and then they seem to take a couple of steps back with these cross-breeds.

"Let's give these S270's a professional form factor and removable lenses, but then crippled them with small chips, and smoosh the image through crappy HDV compression. We've got so many models out, the target audience probably won't realize that we're capable of delivering a 1/2" chip, full resolution, and better compression at this price point!"

That is interesting. I didn't knowthat. JVC I guess had an agreement to let HDV2 go to Sony and I guess Canon and kept HDV1 for themselves.

I bought my JVC 100u because the Cineframe on Z1 really did look really crappy to me. I've heard good things about the V1U from guys like yourself so that has built up some confidence in my view of Sony HDV. Now I am really going to sell my HD 100 after nearly 2 years of a very good and sometime very bad experience.

Like most people , until I get some hands-on demos, I'm cannot decide between the Z7 and the EX1.
Cheers.

Well the cams were designed to be HDV cams - they werent designed to be XDCAMs. Sony has a product lineup and these cams were designed to fit into that lineup. Its not a matter of saying "well theyre not as good as the EX1". The EX1 is a different codec, higher price point etc and Sony are trying to give everyone options as to what they buy.

I wouldnt disparage the 1/3in Exmor sensors as "crippling" a camera until you've read/seen their performance. These are the same sensor types as the EX1, just a little smaller. They days of taking the attitude of "if it's not got a 2/3in or 1/2in sensor it must be hopeless" are over. Advances in sensor design, (particularly CMOS sensor design), signal-to-noise ratios, and digital signal processing have meant that sensors of a smaller size can now have amazing performance.
As for anecdotal evidence of this - at least one person who's played with a Z7 says that its the best lowlight performance of any HDV cam he's ever used.

As for the price point, the Z7 (for eg) will i'm sure be available on the street at a price thats low enough to appeal to people who maybe were considering an EX1. Dont treat the MSRP as the real price - it won't be.

just my thoughts.

Well said. It's very likely the EXMOR 1/2-inch are "equal" to the last gen 2/3-in and this new gen 1/3-in EXMOR chips are "equal" to the last gen 1/2-in.

If you so you can't compare by chip size.

According to the Japan site:"Furthermore, the CMOS sensor in column A / D converter and a minimum subject illumination 1.5 lux." (The shutter speed of 1 / 30 second fixed, auto - iris, OTOGEIN time.) That means a sensitivity of 3lux at full gain, wide open, and at 1/60th second. This is a "good enough" for most all applications.

Realistically, it means one can drop gain in half -- to +9dB -- and be about a stop more sensitive than the V1. Maybe more.

Also, it's possible the EXMOR noise canceling technology will allow high gains be used -- perhaps +15dB.

duing my completely non-scientific look, I played with the Z7's gain. (This is on their monitor in a completely uncontroled environment. The room had a slightly less that normal lighting level -- not as dark as to be a strenuous test, nor anywhere near bright enough to be where video is normally shot at. There were video projectors in use -- and the lighting level was perhaps adjusted in deference to them.)

It was tough to tell much difference in the picture at first gain boast (maybe +9, but don't know specifically how the camera was setup) The image was quiet and smooth, without much grain being introduced.

At high gain the picture could be usable -- but my recollection is that the picture had more contrast, and the colors lost saturation. There was noise -- but much less than I'd expect at max gain. But there is a very noticable image difference between high and low gain. But it would be very usable if you really needed it.

Whether or not the chip is as good or better than the EX1's is debatable until we see it, but I had hoped that companies would be trying to move away from HDV (a consumer-grade compromise technology) rather than moving HDV up into "pro" level equipment.

That's why it seems to me that they made a pro-featured, shoulder-mount camera and then saddled it with inferior technology compared to the handheld EX1.

Sony has more camera "lines" than other companies have individual cameras. At some point, there is such a thing as too much choice.

Sony! The One and Only. What is your definition of pro? The EX1 uses MPEG Long GOP. Same as HDV. Sony is very commited to MPEG. What else are they going to do? These are under $10k cameras and a lot of professionals have been using HDV for a few years now. Even TV stations are using them.

BTW, if your definition of "Pro" is 4:2:2, go spend $75 to $100k or wait until NAB when Sony is slated to announce a 4:2:2 XDCAM HD camera. Those cameras won't be under $10k though.

There are many professionals using HDV. So to infer that HDV is for only "consumers" or even looks consumerish is not accurate. In fact, it is sort of insulting dude.

Cheers

No insult intended. We're talking about camera technologies, not each other's mothers. ;-)

We all know the genesis of HDV ... and it wasn't for quality! Just because HDV is insinuating itself into pro workflows doesn't mean that is a "good thing."

The EX1 does stick to long-GOP, MPEG-2, but at least it raises the bit rate by about a third. Coupled with bigger sensors, it should yield a noticeably cleaner image.

PS. I use an HDV camera right now, and I'm glad to have it, but its always kind of sad to compare the live monitored image versus what happens to it after being crushed into HDV.

Then I challenge you to a duel to defend my mother's honor. Just kidding.
I'm just a little sensitive when people use the word "consumer".

No doubt the Ex1 will most likely look better. As I understand it, EX1 (CineAlta branded) was developed and manufactured by a different section within Sony than the HDV offerings. So maybe you have a point.

Me too David. I've reviewed every HDV camcorder from Sony and JVC. I firmly believe HDV suffers from the BELIEFS folks have about it. I've never seen an MPEG blocking artifact in JVC's 720p. And, why would I? The 19Mbps for 720p30 is TWICE the bit-rate offered by ATSC 720p60. And, there are zero artifacts on ESPN or ABC sports. When JVC introduced 720p60 there was much worry that it would show artifacts. It didn't because in the 2 years it took to get the chips to 60Hz, JVC improved the encoder.

The whole HDV artifacts rumors came from the Z1. This was the first HDV camcorder the vast majority of folks ever saw. In fact, safe to say many had no idea HD1 even existed. HD2 was assumed by a Sony biased world to BE HDV.

Unfortunately for Sony, the Z1's encoder was poor. And it's CineFrame terrible. For XDCAM HD and the V1 the coder(s) became far far better. As good as JVC's 720p60 encoder. And, the 25Mbps data-rate offered more bandwidth.

So despite the FACT that the V1 shows no artifacting, the anti-HDV crowd -- believing the anti-long GOP BS put-out by Panasonic -- continued to claim HDV was flawed. Too continue this claim into 2008 is to simply deny the facts. (Likewise the BS about being hard to edit.)

I seriously wonder if there is any real difference in the encoder chip used in the EX1 and the new HDV camcorders. Why would there be? We already see JVC EVERIO switching bit-rates on the same encoder.

Consider this: in HQ mode the EX1 must encode 1.33X more pixels than an HDV camcorder. Simplistically, that means the data-rate needs to increase to 33.33Mbps. Now add in the 1.5Mbps PCM audio and you get => 34.83Mbps. Bottom-line, the actual amount of video compression may be nearly identical between XDCAM EX and HDV.

That's not saying the EX1 won't look better as it has higher rez and uses VBR, but it's not going to be night and day.

For me the issue isn't quality, it's price. I can't image spending another $1,000 (or more) to get a CF box when the same money would buy SxS cards. The S720 simply would become too expensive at $12K -- or more.

The S270 needs to be priced about the same, or a $1000 more, as the DSR-250 which it replaces. Say about $6000 with HDMI and $7000 with HD-SDI. So there's a $3,500 premium that I just don't understand. It can't be in the lens, the chips, or the encoder. A DV transport is dirt cheap. Can Sony really charge $3,500 for a shoulder box?

Or, put another way, for $12K one likely can get an EX1, several cards, plus the coming XDCAM HD VTR. Something isn't right about the pricing.

I agree, but interchangable lenses is the only point I can offer as to why the HDV costs more. That is the one feature missing from the EX1, highlighted by these recent HDV releases.
You make a very good point about the 1.33 bitrate increase. Hopefully people will understand that.

Very informative- i felt extremely nourished after reading this.

With regards to interchangable lens on the new line up, is it that great of a step especially on the z7 ? using a J9 lens on it, i am sure wold make it front heavy...

from looking at it that would seem to be a reasonable assumption --

but read my earlier post about how balanced it felt in my hand and on my wrist.

I was holding it for minutes, not hours -- but nevertheless I was very surprised that I had almost no forward stress on my wrist.

Sony positioned the handhold/wrist strap so as to be in balance with that big lens. The Z7 felt better to me than my XHA1.