Is the EX the official HVX200 killer?
 

This camera seems to do a serious beat down on the HVX200, from pricing through chip size through everything. Is that the consensus?

it is mine. As I sold my HVX to get the EX1. But hey, some people love the HVX and it does have that SD flexibility. It is still a superb camera.

But there are loads of threads discussing the pros and cons.

Well, it depends on who you ask.
The HVX200 has proven itself well in making some pro looking stuff.

The EX1 just out of the gate offers a better lens with 1/2" sensors.
The HVX200 is known for using DVCPRO HD 4:2:2 codec.
Some don't like that the Sony is using CMOS sensors. (Red uses CMOS)

The bottom lines is things just keep getting better.
I believe Sony has tossed us one heck of a camera.

I've heard nothing but good things about the EX1 lens and XDCAM 35 mb codec. It's the first camera sub $20K to offer 1920x1080 native sensors.

hv20 has native 1080p as well i believe (1920x1440 cmos which crops to 1920x1080 for video recording), but then again thats a different market.

The HV20 is 1440x1080.
The output is 1440x1080 since 1920x1080 is not an HDV supported format.

It's also WAYYYY more user friendly than the HVX. The menus are so much better, the buttons are nice and the screen is like having laser eye correction compared to the HVX.

I thought the Panasonic Cameras (including the 500) used pixel shifting and electron hocus-pocus on a chip that was 540 pixels...

Andrew, he's refering to the Canon HV20

How's the focus assist on the EX?

I believe the CMOS sensor on the Canon HV20 is a 1/2.7" 2.96 megapixel native 1920x1080 sensor, the output is HDV2 at 1440x1080.

To be fair, the HVX200 is a 3 years old design and technology evolves pretty quickly. I'm sure the Panny response will make it more interesting for those in the market.

Agreed. It will be interesting what Panny will offer as the EX1 competition.
Heck, even if they kept the DVCPRO-100 HD codec, but improved the lens, 1/2" sensors, better signal processing, 4:2:2.
Now this would sell !

Here in europe the HVX is nearly as expensive as the PMW due to the strange pricing politics by Panasonic. They try to charge 50 - 70% more for the cam here then in USA. Additional the EU Version does no 24p, only 25p and the slow motion is also limited to 50p. For just a few EUR more with the Sony PMW I get much better resolution, sensivity and DOF, full manual Fujinon HD Glass, comparable or even better cine - features, SDI and better priced, future proof recording media. I guess the HVX sales here will collapse or the prices will drop dramatically.
In US the HVX might remain an alternative to the PMW as the Price is noticeable lower.

The Canon HV20 is 1920x1080 from the HDMI port...

its 1440x1080 from the firewire port...



And to stay on topic... its obvious Sony was going after the HVX200

Sony did their homework and came up with a pretty nice camera...

Good point. I did not realize they wanted so much for the HVX200 overseas.

you can wait or buy it already .. ;)
But a official announcement of RED concerning the red mini / red pocket cam would be cool. They might rollout a 2/3 compact System.
Panasonic will release a successor, but again 1/3 sensors and not full HD, I am shure.

I thought about waiting for the RED mini specs, but honestly the EX1 is the best thing going in this price range. Also, If the mini specs are not even known now, we're talking over two years before you see the first camera.

I also bet it will be close to 10K.

I am afraight you are right ..
And maybe the small RED will be manual only without any auto features. I guess taking the PMW is a good investment, It´s a political move from Sony to save market shares and to react to the success of the HVX. The cam seems much too good to be a budget sony .. ;)

1920x1080 has been around for a little while in prosumer stuff, the Canon HV20 as well as the Sony V1U both have 1920x1080 CMOS sensors, which is why they do 24P easily. They just record 1440x1080 to tape, but if you record out of the HDMi port you get uncompressed 4:2:2 1920x1080. But these are 1/3" or 1/4" sensors, not 1/2" like the EX.

Anyway the EX looks great, I can't wait to get my hands on one. I definitly think it's going to put a hit in Panasonic's wallet, especially if 3rd parties start making cards for it, that right there would drive the price of cards down and pretty much even out the pricing difference between the Sony and Panasonic.

I just shot with the EX1 this weekend. Oh my... the ergo's alone are very nice (LCD viewfinder setup, lens feel, rotating handle, etc.). IMO, much better than the HVX. And as mentioned earlier, the menu's, button access, viewfinder sharpness.. all so nice to work with.

The EX1 presents a useful alternative to the HVX200 which will have a definite appeal to some but probably not sway those who like the "look" of footage from the Panny camera. If Panasonic wants to strike back they'll need a bigger, better sensor and a more affordable recording solution, perhaps using the AVC-intra codec at a bit rate of up to 50 Mbps. But one good thing about the EX1 which Panasonic will have a hard time touching is that the EX1 footage can play as is on most computers and Blu-ray devices: that's a big practical benefit. The EX1 defines a new niche with no real competition at the moment.

Whichever camera manufacturer wants to "strike back" should introduce a Cineform codec as a on-camera recording option.

Cineform provides free player, so the footage *will* play on any PC that is suitable for mpeg2 playback, I believe.

Pana's DVCPRO HD is Mac-only codec with lower resolution than Cineform. Sony's mpeg2 35Mps still uses 4:2:0 color space and introduces blocky artifacts on fast motion, even at this bitrate - if I read Adam Wilt's review correctly.

Cineform is 4:2:2 1920x1080, with 2x the size of mpeg2 but NO artifacts; and it is now cross-platform.

Cineform lets me edit everything in real time. It is also a wonderful codec for the large-screen *playback*.

I don't relate to Cineform except as a very satisfied customer, and I feel like Cineform has become a new standard. Probably thousands more prosumer equipment users feel the same.

Then why not introduce it as on-camera recording codec choice?

I would honestly forfeit any other format and settle on Cineform only if given a choice. It's just practical.

Do I look like "The End Is Near... Get Cineform!" guy? :)

You got the right !
This is my dream.
This is why I'm interested in Cineform's plans for a portable HDMI recorder.
I really want a portable SDI recorder, but if they accomodate power for an HDLINK, I will be able to use the HDMI version.

Steven, you see, if Sony EX1 had Cineform recording to the SxS card on-camera, you would not need any external recorders.

I know, that's my dream, but not a reality. The Cineform HDMI recorder is supposed to be a reality.
Although, wouldn't it be nice if someone (Sony) designed a cam that would allow you to flash different capture codecs and Cineform was one of them!

Assuming by "bigger" you mean higher resolution -- this is NOT simple to do since:

1) Panasonic claims the virture of using "lower" rez. chips is their larger element size. Increasing CCD resolution without increasing chip size will counter their argument.

2) Panasonic uses the same resolution chips on their much more expensive camcorders. To increase the "HVX300's" resolution to meet or match the EX1 would result in their newer more expensive camcorders offering lower resolution.

3) Increasing chip size to 1/2-in would be an admission that Sony's already gone the right way. Same issue with the use of CMOS.

If 50Mbps AVC-I can be added to ALL P2 camcorders -- this, along with the much larger P2 capacities would help Panasonic a lot. But:

Considering the additional chroma samples in AVC-I -- its 50Mbps can NOT be compared to 50Mbps MPEG-2 4:2:0. AVC-I is more like 35Mbps MPEG-2 4:2:0.

But, what about the claimed 2X greater efficiency of AVC-I? While AVC-I "may" be 2X more efficient than I-frame only MPEG-2 -- is it really 2X more efficient than long GOP MPEG-2? I suspect it is not. Which means 35Mbps long GOP 4:2:0 MPEG-2 and 50Mbps I-frame 4:2:2 AVC-I provide just about the same bit-rate compression. (Of course, AVC-I offers 4:2:2.)

Does anyone know what the AVC-I upgrade consists of? A second, or a different, codec chip? Or, just firmware?

Exactly. As things stand now it doesn't seem likely Panasonic will increase the resolution of their sensors to full HD quality, so they probably won't challenge Sony in that regard. What are the chances of Canon coming up with a 1/2 inch sensor in a camera priced to compete with the EX1?

I hear where you're coming from on this one. The HPX500 did not offer the higher rez sensors. But, I really believe the EX1 is about to change manufactures current upcoming plans. If this camera turns out as good as the specs state, there are going to be a lot of us buying this cam.

I've already heard there are quite a few ditching their other cams for the EX1.
I would not be surprised if next year we see a shoulder mount version of this cam from Sony.
On the other hand, there is one - it's called the F350. :)

My own hunch is that Sony will replace the F330. The EX1 seems much more capable feature to feature compared to the F330 and a shoulder mount version would probably fall into the F330 price point.

What may happen is that such camera will record to both disc and card or they'll drop the disc and the card based camera will be a bit less expensive.

I do suspect that they'll be an newer version of the 350/350 that will record to both disc and card also.

Keep in mind though that the Panasonic HPX500 uses 2/3" CCD sensors at about $14,000 so at that price point the F330 equivalent replacement might not be the clearest choice.

I know the HPX500 is 2/3" and is very clean. I was only refering to its resolution. Sensitivity and noise is only one aspect, although a very important one!

That's a different comparison than the EX1 market niche, but it would be interesting to see how the HPX500 compares in terms of perceivable resolution. According to a post I found here from Jan Livingston the HPX500 has a native resolution of ~620,000 pixels, compared to over 2 million pixels in the EX1. Of course resolution isn't everything, but starting with 3X resolution at the sensor just might make a difference.

I was comparing with a hypothetical shoulder mount equivalent to the EX1. That beast would likely be in the same price range (and market IMHO) of an HPX500.

Yes there would be the question of resolution as chip size and resolution are not one in the same.

Since the definition of HD is very high resolution -- that's got to be the minimum requirement. Especially now with FullHD on BD and HD DVD. And, for those going to 35mm film.

When it comes to ALL other aspects of the image -- over the years most pro vendors meet folks needs or they wouldn't stay in business. I don't think there is any data that proves 2/3-in chips deliver video with less noise than Sony's new 1/2-in XMOR CMOS chips.

IMHO, Sony simply is far ahead in sensor design and can deliver chips that offer both FullHD rez. + very low noise + super sensitivity + zero vertical smear. The question is will they sell them to Canon and/or JVC.

I'd love to see Canon or JVC join the solid-state arena with something similar to the EX using 1/2" sensors, a proper lens, and recording to UDMA compact flash cards in something like the 50Mbps 4:2:2 AVC-I codec that Steve mentioned earlier (35Mbps 4:2:0 already looks great, so having the extra chroma samples in there will simply add even more appeal).

That would be an awfully nice camera... however whilst I'm dreaming I'll just throw out there my thoughts for Red's mini camera: i.e. something akin to a digital Aaton A-Minima - shooting 2K Redcode RAW to compact flash cards, through s16mm or 35mm still glass.

*sigh*

Mark, I understand that Sony has slated another version of EX1-class camera to be released early in 2008, with 2/3 " sensors.

What most people want codec-wise is Sony providing *on-camera* Cineform recording as an option.

Users of EX1, the 2/3" big bother of it I just mentioned, and heck! even V1U would benefit from that immensely.

Alex,

Where did you here about this 2/3 inch EX camera? That's exciting!

Wes

Wesley,

I read about it online, but the official release is here:

http://bssc.sel.sony.com/Broadcastan...m_family.shtml

Quote from it:
Sony will round out the XDCAM family with high-end additions that include two premium products: The PDW-700 camcorder and the PDW-HD1500 deck. They will offer striking quality HD recording at a data rate of up to 50 Mb/s using the MPEG HD422 compression technology. The PDW-700 is equipped with three 2/3-inch type CCDs - a newly developed “Power HAD™ FX” progressive CCD with 1920 x 1080 effective pixels,

This was announced at NAB. It's an CineAlta HDCAM class camcorder. Not an EX1 class unit.

Thanks...
I knew that was to good to be true.
That camera is like $30,000.00

But wouldn't that require hefty storage? Cineform files are big.

Brian, im my experience, Cineform file size is about 2x the mpeg2.

Problem with mpeg2 is that it's really bad. All fast pans (or fast moving objects in the frame) produce blockiness and tearing of the image.

That, and the fact that mpeg2 is 4:2:0 color space vs. Cineform's 4:2:2.

I was hoping that EX1's 35Mps-encoded mpeg2 is better, but Adam Wilt reported basically the same issues.

So the choice is: unusable mpeg2 footage vs. 2x larger but great quality Cineform files.

Since I choose the latter, I have to lug around a custom-built PC that captures uncompressed HD out of Sony V1U (in my case), and encodes it in Cineform on-the-fly.

Instead of the big and heavy PC, I'd really like to have a Cineform recording option on-camera.