Thread title edited.

Now that the cat is out of the bag, I can say that it has a few other goodies. It's got one heck of a high res view finder. Has image flip capability for those using DOF adapters, over/under crank, etc.

There will be more info coming along, I am going from memory of the powerpoint I saw a month or so back.

-gb-

I have been hanging on to my FX1 hoping that something like this would appear as the image from my XR500 and even the SR11 is very good. With the HMC150 gaining popularity Sony needed to come out with some competing product. The obvious starting point was the Z5 and upgrade the recording section. Can't wait to see if I can afford it!!!! Though they will miss the boat if its too different from the HMC150.

Ron Evans

greg-

interval recording (time lapse)?

thanks in advance

be well

rob

*wonders how it will do in low light*

Sony need a better AVC variant codec or a EX compatible version of MPEG HD422 on SxS to really grab attention. Just going 24mbps AVCHD is IMHO not enough for a significant quality increase.

I'm not thrilled with the fact that it takes Memory Stick and not SDHC but I guess Sony has to go with their own format.

Makes me wonder if Canon will go the same route when they replace their pro HDV line.

hmm, i think Sony's AVCHD codec looks really good (i've seen it on the Sony HDR-XR520, it belongs to a friend of mine.) very sharp, can't say much about the color since the XR520 is a single chip.

I'm hoping this would look better with their 3 chip Exmor technology, although the 24mbps is inadequate imo. I hoped it'd at least be 35mbps. Guess there's always room for improvement!

First the EX1R, now the NXCAM, what next? :)

I am not so exited about this cam. First of all AVCHD- not so great for any fast motion (better then HDV, but much worst then XDCAM), almost impossible to edit without transcoding, specially in FCP. Second- a 1/3" chip? Third is use of proprietary of Memory Stick. I think it will not be any different from HMC-150. IMO something between EX1 and HMC-150 (XDCAM codec) with a price range 3.5K would be a market killer.

1/3rd-inch chips are just about the only way you can get a 20x lens at a reasonable price point. Larger chips equals bigger glass equals much more expensive. There has to be a trade-off somewhere, this is why the EX1 / EX1R with half-inch chips has only a 14x lens for $6,300. To get a long 20x lens under the $4K-$5K price point (assuming it's going to be at or below that amount) then 1/3rd-inch is the only way to do it.

Half-inch (or bigger) chips with 20x glass, that would be a much larger price tag and camera.

As far as Memory Stick is concerned, honestly who couldn't see that coming from Sony on an AVCHD camcorder.

This looks like a hit to me. Sony is filling out their line with so many competent models, the buyer has so many choices. You can't make a bad one, but we've reached the point where you need to be careful that you get the features that are most important to you.

Appealing to me about this cam, as an EX1 user which can be unwieldly, this cam is suited for longer hand holding times, longer zooms, a strong codec, more cost effective solid state media.

Fully agreed, Tom... if you ask me, this (along with other NXCAM models to follow) is what will replace their HDV lineup.

The standard def option is a nice addition.

The Sony Z5 costs around $4,100 at B&H and I wouldn't be surprised if the street price for this NXCAM will be more than that.

At least their are some incentives over choosing the Sony such as the 20x lens and the fact that it'll be sharper. It may even be as sharp as the EX1 since the Panasonic HMC40 is already shockingly close. I'm talking if your shooting in places that has plenty of lighting by the way. The HMC150 does have it's own advantages such as price and lack of CMOS negatives. The more choices the better. Still, I wonder if Panasonic will announce an HMC150 replacement by January.

Canon may be making a ton of money selling the 7D and 5D Mark II but they still need to make a tape-less Professional camcorder or they will continue to miss out in that market. I hope we see something soon.

NXCAM: YouTube - NXCAM1

NXCAM Prototyp PDF: http://www.sony.co.uk/biz/pdf/Genera...site=biz_en_GB

If PVC's assertion that the lens and the sensor are identical to the Z5, I think its better to get a nanoflash or Kipro, instead of upgrading to the new camcorder.

Sony doesn't want to realize, that the control, once used to have in the market, is gone forever. The strategy of crippling the cheaper cameras, in order to protect the more expensive ones, isn't working anymore. They should realize it and implement High bitrate 422 codec through their range or they will give the capturing market to other players. They still have an edge on the front edge of the camera but they are far behind on the recording section. Their only line of defense is that the smaller players don't have market penetration or brand name to compete at the moment. Internet and time wil change that eventually.

More or less the same applies to Panasonic.

I read this news with relief and disappointment. Relief that my Sony EX3 and brand new Canon 7D are still the best tools for me in what I need right now/the immediate future. I'll be keeping my lovely new 7D! Disappointment that it's a AVCHD camcorder.

I've read that some of you think Sony's implementation of their 24Mbps AVCHD codec is good/better than HDV (which looks like a dying horse now, or so it seems) but I think they missed a trick. JVC have implemented the superb XDCAM EX codec in small form factor camcorder (with the added benefit of a widely used memory format) so why not Sony! As has already been stated, it just looks like Sony trying to segment the market into tiny little product niches. Sure, choice is good but we want the Rolls Royce at a Skoda price now (or insert car brands of your choice!).

NXCAM teaser: YouTube - NXCAM teaserSonylogoH 264720x405 :-(

HERE ARE SOME PICS OF THE CAM AT InterBEE 09
 

HERE ARE SOME PICS OF THE CAM AT InterBEE 09

[InterBEE 09] Sony to release new AVCHD Camcorder, the NXCAM : Akihabara News .com

The touch screen looks to be the same as on the XR500/520 which is really nice. Hope it also has the other touch screen features like "spot focus" etc that are on all the other Sony consumer cams. The "spot focus " feature is something I use all the time on the XR500 and SR11. It is a pity that they didn't put the "R" sensors on it though as I saw a real difference between the SR11 and the XR500. The Active stabilizer is also something that is on the XR500 and also works well compared to the stabilizer on the SR11. Both are much better than the FX1 stabilizer. It is really close to what I was looking for as a 3 chip version of the XR500 plus. My simple dream had been the XR500 bits in a Z5 body!!! Real close.
They have the opportunity to leave off the SD/HDi interface as well as the flash memory interface to make a FX version as well as upgrade to the EX codec for an upscaled pro version. Then an upgrade them all to the "R" sensor!!!!!!

Ron Evans

Where are you getting the fast motion information? Have you seen Barry Green's latest AVC vs. XDCAM article? It would suggest the exact opposite of what you state here.

The idea that AVCHD can't handle fast motion is indeed a myth.

here is a link to the very thoughtful barry green article about avchd:

XDCAM-EX vs. AVCCAM

the nxcam release date appears to be early 2010.

any guesses on pricing?

over or under $4500?

i'm really looking forward to more specific tech specs.

chris-do u now open a new nxcam section/thread or attach the conversations under ex1/3 excam?

be well

rob

But the new camera reportedly offers true 10-bit 4:2:2 output to an external recorder, which I don't think the Z5U has. That's one of the more interesting features for high-end applications: let's say the NXCAM is ~$4500 and you add the top KiPro unit for $1400 - now you have an excellent recording setup for about the price of an EX1 (just with a smaller sensor).

Well it's not XDCAM, and it will need its own forum (eventually its own category as other models arrive), but perhaps I should re-name our Sony XDCAM category to something like "professional tapeless" and put it in there.

Edit: on second thought, I'm reluctant to use the term "tapeless." It's fast becoming an antiquated word, like "wireless." I'll probably just re-name the category to Sony XDCAM / NXCAM Camera Systems, like we did for Panasonic P2HD / AVCCAM.

Haha, doesn't surprise me at all that sony went with Pro Duo cards.

...And I don't know why I keep expecting Sony to freak people out with 1/2 inch chips in something cheaper than the EX1...doesn't look like that will happen any time soon, but I guess we shall see with the next models coming into the NX line.

Once again: for long-lens cameras, bigger chips = bigger glass, = more expensive.

Therefore "1/2 inch chips in something cheaper than the EX1" is an unrealistic expectation.

From the released information, there are two features that I like. One is the 1920 x 1080 recording. Even when rendering a DVD, this gives more pan and zoom range when editing compared to 1440 x 1080 HDV without the image going soft.

The other is the ability to record 4:2:2 via the HD SDI port to an external recorder. 4:2:2 allows better color editing depth. It is also more green screen friendly.

Other that that, it looks like a Z5 reimagined.

First look at the new NXCAM via Sony virtual trade show
 

Sony USA has asked me to pass along to y'all that senior product manager Juan Martinez will be presenting an eight-minute overview of the new NXCAM tomorrow (Thursday 19 Nov.) during their online virtual trade show event. There's still time to register, attendance is free, and you don't have to leave your house or office. I did this last year and thought it was great; definitely well worth the time.

Sony's "The New Economics of HD" Online Expo

Featuring: Virtual Convention Center with Staffed Product Booths, Technology Demos, Networking Lounge and Group Chats, Product Tutorials, Resources - Downloadable Articles, White Papers, Presentations and More

Thursday, November 19, 2009
10:00 AM EST - 7:00 PM EST

Link: Sony's "The New Economics of HD" Online Expo | Home

The real missed trick is not just missing out 35Mbs XDCAM, but not putting BOTH that and the AVC-HD codecs into the same camera. For some, AVC-HD may be just what's needed, for others it would be good to have the same codec as the EX.

And many people do seem to be overlooking that image quality is normally far more down to the front end than the codec. Sony seem to have adopted Panasonics marketing in the sense they are making a big deal of "1920x1080 RECORDING". The implication is 1920x1080 resolution, and the only way to get that on a 3 chip camera is with 2 megapixel chips.

If the chips are 1 megapixel, that is what limits resolution. You could upscale it to 4k, and it won't be anny sharper.

But that's a marketing criticism. By and large I think this camera will sell well, and I also think that 1 megapixel is a sensible resolution for 1/3" chips. Go higher and lose sensitivity, go lower and it's a bit too soft. And if you really do want 2 megapixel res - get an EX.

The obvious comparison is going to be with Panasonics HMC150, and from what we're hearing this NXCAM seems to soundly trump it in almost every way - the big question will obviously be price.

Are you saying the sensor block is a native 960 x 1080? I don't like it when they market that as 1920 x 1080 recording either, but it is probably a concession to preserve low light gathering.

It's more complicated than that, hence my deliberate use of "1 megapixel", not dimensions.

It can be thought of as 960x1080 - but just as accurately as 1920x540! Either way, it's 1 megapixel.

Confused? It took me a long time to work it out, but the best way to visualise it is as a tiled floor, half white tiles, half black tiles, with the corner to corners lying horizontally and vertically. And a white-black-white-black pattern.

If you wanted to count tiles, the easiest way is to count the number of black tiles, then the number of white and add together. (In fact, there should be the same number of each colour, so count one and double it.)

So, let's assume that along the length of this bathroom there are 960 black tiles in a row, corner to corner, and 540 black tiles corner to corner along the width. Hence 0.5 million black tiles. So then 0.5 million white tiles also, 1 million tiles altogether.

But how would you describe them in an a x b manner? Especially when the pixels on the chip are not black and white, but all the same?

The big advantage of this arrangement (for cameras, not bathrooms!) is that it is one megapixel, but symmetrical horizontally/vertically, and gives the same resolution along both axes, which any arrangement such as a conventional 960x540 wouldn't. It is also very easy to process in a 1920x1080 processor - but the actual output resolution won't be 1920x1080, more like 1440x710.

I'm not being critical of this camera or it's sensor - I think it's absolutely the right approach for a 1/3" chipped camera, a sensible compromise between sensitivity and resolution. But don't think that by recording the HD-SDI output to an external device you'll get a 1920x1080 picture to rival the EX.

Just because a camera records a 1920x1080 raster doesn't mean the front end can produce that resolution, and that's even more true of the HMC151 with only 0.5 megapixel chips.

"Are you saying the sensor block is a native 960 x 1080? I don't like it when they market that as 1920 x 1080 recording either, but it is probably a concession to preserve low light gathering."

If you mean actual sensors sites on the die then its more like 960x1080 diamonds set on a diagonal pattern( 1,036,800). These sensor sites are twice the size of the effective pixels. The DSP uses all the sensor information to create the 1920x1080 effective pixels from each of the 3 chips. I can't find the info now but if you do a search its around somewhere. DSP's are used to create the effective pixels however many "real" sensor sites there are on the chip(s).

Ron Evans

Heath's explanation is good. I also like to think of the arrangement as 1920 columns and 1080 rows in the same way by reversing the process a little. Take 1920x1080 square pixels array now overlay , on a diagonal, the tiles, twice the size of the square pixels the 1920x1080 would give. So each of the big tiles will have a small square pixel in the center. For every group of 4 adjacent titles, there will be the equivalent of one new square pixel between them. Made from the surplus area left over from the small square pixel in the center of each of these titles. Effectively the DSP uses this information to create these extra pixels and level off the outputs from ALL pixels. None of the rows or columns has a full sensor in all of the 1920x1080 positions. They are all created.

Ron Evans

As linked in the article above, I have tested XDCAM EX against AVCHD, and am now certain that 21mbps of AVCHD is actually superior to XDCAM EX. If Sony has implemented AVCHD well in this new camera, it should be every bit a match for XDCAM EX, but with file sizes a good 30% smaller.

Agreed. I would like to add that there is an exception to that which occurs when you scale the f-number with sensor size. Normally, of course, f-number is kept the same across various sensor sizes, and that allows larger sensors to have more control over DOF, better low light performance, etc. But it's also possible to scale the f-number with sensor size, so that lenses for larger sensors have slower f-numbers. That causes the DOF and low light performance to be equal with smaller sensors, so there is no advantage in those areas, but it allows the lens weight to remain about the same, rather than getting exponentially heavier.

For example, compare the 300mm f/2 lens on Nikon FX (FF35), which has the same angle of view as 200mm f/2 on Nikon APS-C (~S35):

• Nikon 200mm f/2 - 6.4 pounds
• Nikon 300mm f/2 - 16.6 pounds
• Nikon 300mm f/2.8 - 6.3 pounds

Then consider that you only need 300mm f/3 to get the same DOF, diffraction, and light gathering power as the 200mm f/2 on ASP-C. The 300 f/2.8 has the same weight!

Here's another example, again with Nikon (because their crop factor of 1.5X just happens to align very closely with their lens selection):

• Nikon 400mm f/2.8 on DX (similar to S35) - 10.2 pounds
• Nikon 600mm f/4 on FF35 - 11.2 pounds

Here we see it is 10% heavier, but not significantly. (The difference may be due in part to the fact that the 600mm only needs to be f/4.2, not f/4.0, to get the same DOF, light, diffraction, etc.)

The reason why I'm comparing these expensive superteles is because they have similar optical performance (almost diffraction limited at full aperture). When you compare other focal lengths, it is very hard to find a lens in one format (e.g. APS-C) that has the same design (just scaled up) for another format (e.g. FF).

It's true, of course, that larger-format lenses *tend* to be heavier, but that's because they tend to have the same f-number. But they don't need to have the same f-number in order to get the same results:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eo...eeper-dof.html

Yes Barry, I read that and it certainly sounds very promising (NXCAM 1/3 inch versus XDCAM EX full-raster 1/2 inch advantage excluded). I commend you on your scientific approach to that and all the other stuff by you that I've read recently on here and elsewhere. I think (and I'm very sure I'm not alone) that my conception that AVCHD was not ready for the prime time is now very definitely outdated - certainly both Panasonic, and now Sony, certainly think AVCHD is now ready anyway!

OK Canon, the ball's definitely in your court now - what you got cooking in the Pro Camcorder area for announcement and release Spring 2010????

What makes 1/3 inch disappointing is that Sony's own Cybershot DSC-HX1 has a larger sensor combined with a 20x zoom - and at a substantially lower price point.

DSC-HX1 | Cyber-shot® Digital Camera HX1 | Sony | Sony Style USA

Sorry Bill, I just can't accept that as a valid comparison... it's not a professional video
camera; it's a still photo cam with a video mode, not at all the same thing by a long shot.