PMW-EX3 for wildlife versus Canon
 

I am a professional wildlife and nature still photographer and workshop leader (Ralph Paonessa Photography Workshops) interested in expanding to video. I've been eyeing the $8K Canon XL-H1 and then the even more affordable Canon XH-A1 (fixed 20X zoom to 650 mm 355 mm film equivalent) which shoot in HDV. I'm also wondering about the Sony PMW-EX3 (I think the fixed zoom on the PMW-EX1 is too short for my needs). I'm wondering how these Sonys and the Canons compare.

One obvious difference is tape versus tapeless; I think I could adapt either way, so this isn't a huge difference for me.

I'm very curious about the differences between XDCAM EX and HDV. I've read that Discovery Channel HD will accept the former but not the latter (except upto 15% of a production). I'm assuming that means XDCAM EX is "higher quality," but I don't know what that means in practice.

I'm also wondering about how these cameras differ. I've read alot about video, but have almost zero experience. From what I've been able to glean, it seems that the PMW-EX3 and XL-H1 are comparable (removable lens, high degree of adjustability, professional sound capabilities, similar price) except:

1. SxS Pro Memory Card vs. tape
2. 1/2" vs. 1/3" sensor
3. CMOS vs. CCD
4. Variable frame rates on Sony that might assist in getting good slow motion??

Any thoughts about these models for wildlife and nature and how they compare?

I should add that my ultimate goals for video are a bit vague (partly because I'm not sure what I could accompoish with what I could afford). I have a particular interest in hummingbirds, penguins, and birds in general. I would love to capture them in motion. Whether I could make a commercial success out of this remains to be seen. I'm assuming that everyone here has gotten rich doing this, though, so I'm sure you can offer guidance.

Also (and maybe more immediately practicable), I have an interest in producing how-to videos, which could be sold as Blu-Ray and/or DVD, and/or offered over the web. I don't know how much capture quality this requires (obviously the least for the web); but I'd like to capture in the highest quality I could afford so that I would have the greatest flexibility down the line using the footage.

So ...

1. How do XDCAM EX and HDV compare?
2. How do the Sony PMW-EX3 (and PMW-EX1) compare to Canon XL-H1 (and XH-A1)?
3. How suitable are these for "wildlife and nature?"

XDCam EX is true square pixel at 1920x1080 while HDV is 1440x1080. XDcam EX a newer generation of compression which REALLY shows a big difference. And XDCam EX has a higher bitrate. The EX1 and EX3 also have SDI output so if you REALLY wanted to capture the data the same way the $150k cameras do, you could. Completely uncompressed, full HD. Or you could capture 1080p 4:2:2, or you could capture 720p at 60fps which would give you lovely slow motion. And you can do it all with pristine audio in camera if you so choose. Footage from the EXx camera on -3db gain has to be seen to be believed. You won't believe the images are coming from a sub $10k camera. It's just stunning. There is a reason that the major HD channels will accept it for 100% acquisition.

This is kind of vague in terms of how they compare, but for my money, they are truly in different leagues. I am admittedly biased. When I had my choice of cameras this year, the Canon was never even in contention.

As wildlife cameras go, the EX series may well be tailor made. Looking at the footage is like watching it through clear plate glass. It's not perfect, but it's as good as anything you'll see from anything under $50k. Or at least that's been my experience. I had my camera hooked up to a big plasma at the office today, looking at some stuff I shoot 3 weeks ago. At night, in existing light in a parking lot. My buddy who does video for a living was just stunned at the images. This camera was as clean in nighttime existing light as my DVX is in full daylight.

If I was shooting high motion sports, I'd probably look for a different camera, but for shooting wildlife, scenics, and so forth, this camera would be on top of my list by a wide margin. Certainly at this price range. Maybe I'll take the camera out soon and shoot some wild life and scenics. I haven't really done that yet.

Here's a comparison I just thought of that has never been mentioned.
With wildlife, you'll always have to be prepared to shoot at a moment's notice.
With the EX-3, leave the power on at all times. When you press record, you'll be recording at that instant. There are no heads to spin up, no tape to cue.

With the Canon's tape based system, the tape transport goes into slack mode if you're in record/pause too long. So when you press record, you'll have to wait at least 5 seconds or maybe longer before the tape cues up, the heads come up to speed, and recording begins. Those precious seconds could be the fine line between either getting the shot or not.

I document nature as well from time to time and have worked with the Canon XH-A1 extensively and currently have migrated to a Sony PMW-EX3. Honestly, the EX3 in full zoom gets too soft for my taste, but the quality is much better (especially if you look close enough). If you zoom in on HDV footage, you see all kinds of compression. With XDCAM compression, there is MUCH less blocking/noise. This can be an issue if you compress to different formats, or blow up for the big screen.

My answer to you is this....although it's an expensive one.

Forget Canon and go with Sony (EX3), only because it will produce better images and yield a better work flow.

Buy the Canon KH-20 lens or go for Canon EOS lenses/adapters for 20x+ power.

If you are on a strict budget like the rest of us, then you may want to go with the XL-H1, as it has a viewfinder that works well (the XH-A1 flip out screen is not worthy for achieving sharp focus and the viewfinder is sub-par.

Could you explain that comment about high motion sports? A lot of the wildlife I'd shoot could be actively moving (e.g. birds flying, penguins running, eleven lords-a-leaping**). I realize there must be limits to capturing fast motion; but I've been told that HDV "breaks up" with a lot of motion. So I'm curious what you're referring to here.

(**It sounds like the camera would be stunning for the partridge in a pear tree, however. Ho ho ho ;)

Action sports often call for quite sharp camera movements. Far different that panning with a bird in flight or similar. The XDCam Codec can be overwhelmed with fast panning and direction changes at high speed. Not as bad as HDV, but not as good as intraframe either. The CMOS sensors will also tend to show skew on some things with fast camera movement. Much less an issue in wildlife, but far more so in sports and action work where the failings are more obvious.

Trying to follow a bird or a lion is VASTLY different than trying to follow a baseball or hockey puck.

I had a Canon A1 before the Sony EX1. Here you have my thoughts:

I prefer the EX1 in EVERY aspect discussed above, except the built-in lens at max zoom, where it goes a little soft, especially at the edges of the picture. The A1 also has 20x zoom and EX1 has 13, so the A1 gives you better magnification.

My solution is to always use f8 when at telephoto.

Another solution is to buy the EX3 and some good lenses for birds, e g 135, 200 and/or 300. And why not a macro lens (like Micro-Nikkor 60). Then you will have the best cam for wildlife, no competition.

[QUOTE=Larry Huntington;974982] or go for Canon EOS lenses/adapters for 20x+ power.
QUOTE]

Larry, is there an adaptor which will allow you to use EOS lenses on the EX3? If there is a link to it would be much appreciated.

Many thanks

I bought the EX3 to use for wildlife. The standard lens doesn't reach far enough for my taste so I bought the Nikon adapter. The adapter is fine (I assume since there is no glass) but I can't get Nikon glass to produce good quality wide open. Look at enclosed image (no cropping). Taken with 300/2.8 ED glass. I have also tried 80-200/2.8 ED and a 135 with the same result. If I close down it gets better but I'm not really happy.

I'm also coming from still image background and one thing to know is that you can just forget about using autofocus. Also I used monopod for sufficient support with stabilized long lenses. Now I'm back to sturdy heavy tripods which makes wildlife shooting less fun and more cumbersome.

Another thing that's bothering me is to how to do both still and video shooting at the same time. Often I want to do both but can only take one, but thats only a mental problem ;-)

One major drawback for me is that I have to go into the menusystem to set whitebalance manually.

I'm also irritated that I have to rewrap(just takes extra time) the native files to mxf format to use in NLE. I don't like the idea of having to buy a new NLE every time I buy a camera. I have Vegas and want to continue using that.

The EX3 is not easy to hike with. I have yet to find a good backpak that fits my desired setup volume wise, not weight.

But once I get some nice footage I'm happy with the quality.

I rented an Canon H1 before I bought the EX3. I liked the handling of the H1 better (the control buttons, like white balance) but it was a nightmare(almost) to focus with (viewfinder). In my opinion the EX3 is way ahead there.

There is no standby on the EX3, so when you are sitting in a hide waiting for wildlife you are eating batteries. If you turn it off to save batteries you have a 15 sec startup and the animal might be gone. If you leave it on, you need to carry a lot of batteries.

These were just a few thoughts from my experience.

It's really amazing to read this stuff.

20 years ago, this footage would be captured on 35mm with sync sound. Try hiking with one of those strapped to your back. As far as stills go, when I shot nature on film (remember film?) I always had to carry a real tripod. Just the nature of the game. I just thanked God I wasn't shooting a Horseman or a Linhof!

How much time does re-wrapping take compared to a telecine? Come on. We have AMAZING tools, but our expectations have grown out of all proportion. Three weekends ago, I shot 2.5 hours of footage. The re-wrap was done in about 1/3 that time. Full 1080p footage, ready to edit before bedtime. Is this really not good enough?

In terms of battery life, I remember wearing a battery belt even for still work. My Nikon F4 ATE batteries. The F3 was nearly as bad. Remember what wedding photogs looked like in the 80s? You were easily known by your battery vest! And yet, here I am able to shoot for hours on the EX1 with a small motorcycle battery tied to an inverter. Or a small sack of standard Sony batteries.

As to the issue of autofocus, the EX cameras have one of the best HD autofocus systems around. Try an HVX sometime. You'll swear it wasn't even working. In fact, it's not even called autofocus, they call it focus assist!

The EX3 isn't perfect. But it's amazing for what it is. And at the price point in today's economy. We are talking about a TRULY professional tool (with some consumer bits) for less than we'd change for a solid job. That's not bad. Considering a few years ago, you'd have been doing the same thing with an F900 or a Varicam, this is worlds better.

Larry, you'll struggle to put EOS lenses onto the EX3 'cos they don't have aperture rings. Nikons mount fine with an adapter though (Les Bosher - Camera Engineer or MTF services).
I think the point about motion in sports does apply to wildlife too, plenty of fast pans and direction changes in my experience, that's the one thing (the ONLY thing) I didn't like about the EX cameras.
Don't worry about tape too much with the Canon as you can get a Flash XDR that'll work wonders with it and record to Compact Flash.
AFAIK Discovery will NOT take EX as full programme acquisition, it's limited to 15% just like HDV, except maybe for low end progs. XDCam 4:2:2 from the PDW700 is the only fully accepted XDCam format AFAIK.
As far as hooking up the camera to a big plasma and it looking great, I know many folks who have done that with the Canon, and it does look superb.
Best feature on the EX cams for me is overcranking to 60fps in 720P, can't overstate how important slomo is for wildlife.
Steve

WRONG!!!! Discovery will take EX and XDCam HD for 100% production at Silver Standard

But this camera wasn't even released until the summer. What were they allowing in March? And have they seriously told everyone who was shooting XDCamHD (1440x1080, 35mbps, 4:2:0) in the early part of the year that their footage was no longer welcome? Considering that XDCam EX is a step up (Full raster, 35mpbs, 4:2:0) I can't see how it would have simply been dismissed.

Wow!

Since Ralph is coming from the same background as me I thought I would share my experience in the context of that.

I don't care what you had to lug around 20 years ago. What is important for me is to have the right tool for the job I'm doing. And right now I have chosen the EX3 but I'm not defending it's weaknesses.

Certainly nothing wrong with that. I too had a still background, but probably not at the level of you guys. Just local newspaper and such.

We all want the right tool for what we are doing. But comparing a semi-professional video camera and a professional still camera, and complaining because the video camera doesn't work like your still camera does, is rather silly. And calling it's operational differences "weaknesses" really doesn't do service to the camera. It would seem far more appropriate to compare the EX3 and it's operation to other video cameras or perhaps even film cameras. And as such one might actually get some useful information from them.

It would be akin to me moving from my EX1 to a D2X and complaining how it won't capture 24, 30, or 60 frames per second and noting that as a "weakness" of the camera.

I don't mean to belittle your comments. That is certainly not my intention. But I just found it unnecessary to call out things like needing a decent tripod or sufficient batteries a "weakness".

I hope this makes sense.

So Steve, is it at "Gold" standard that the PDW700 is accepted and the other XDCam formats are not? I was sure that at one level at least the 700 was OK but not the other XDCams. Certainly BBC will accept PDW700 but not EX as a main camera.
Steve

Thanks for the comments. My primary 35mm lens is 500/4, and I've never been good at hand-holding, even with IS, so I'm used to a big tripod.

I would be editing in Adobe Premiere CS4, and I believe it handles XDCAM EX without rewrapping. (See http://www.adobe.com/products/premie...kflowguide.pdf)

It's good to know that the EX3 has competent autofocus. However, I'd often need a longer lens than the one supplied, and I'm not sure what other lenses can do with the EX3 in terms of AF and autoexposure.

I haven't seen anything on the 700, I know about the EX because we had to confirm it's status for a Disco project we're starting soon.

BTW Bronze at Discovery will give you 100% HDV AND Mastering to HDV!

Good points. I wouldn't even be dreaming of doing this if it had to be done with film. And from what I've read, the ability to edit video on a fast but otherwise mainstream (and affordable) PC is light years ahead of what it was when NLE first appeared. And of course remember what 1000 GB of hard drive storage cost just a few years ago.

I don't know where the PDW700 sits in Discovery's table, but XDCAM HD 4:2:0 and XDCAM EX are both Silver. Silver is allowed for 100% programme acquisition without any restrictions. Gold is HDCAM, HDCAM SR and 35mm film only. I don't know where the 700 will end up but as 100Mb DVCPRO HD is also Silver I would image that the 700 will end up as Silver.

What do Gold, Silver and Bronze mean in this context??

If 100Mb DVCPro is Silver then that's "Planet Earth" firmly in Silver then, mostly Varicam!
Steve

Quite interesting article here In higher definition - The IET
Steve

The aerials were all HDcam though weren't they?

To me the cumbersome white balance setting is an operational weakness. Also the that there is no standby mode. This is by comparing to the Canon H1 which has these functions. So these points that I call weaknesses is when I compare to the other video camera Ralph was asking about. The rewrapping is taking time in the workflow eating up some of the time I'm supposed to get by not using tape. Also I find it to be an oprational weakness that it is down into the menu system to change the recording format. When I need to switch from high quality 1080p to overcranking 720p with glows in freezing weather, using the menu system is the last thing I like to do.

Sony 750s I think, presumably onto SR. Of course there wa plenty of S16 and 35mm in there too. And Varicam is still the default wildlife camera with BBC and others, even though it's only 720. There just isn't anything else out there that's more suited, though I bought a PDW700 thinking that with 1080 chips but also capable of 720/60P it might cover all bases. Only the 50 mbs compression looks a little vulnerable (and maybe 8 bit vs 10 bit processing), but apparently both of these have been deemed perfectly adequate.
Steve

Marten, it's pretty typical these days just to leave the white balance on a fixed value and colour correct/match in post. Also is standby mode neccessary for the EX cameras? On tape cameras this is there to allow quick starts but requires the tape to be spooled up and the tape heads spinning, but it doesn't work like that with solid state.
Steve

How often are you white balancing? When I shoot outdoors, unless I am working in fleeting light, I won't change the balance more than once every hour or two. Indoors it never changes. I don't believe I've ever worked with a video camera that had more than the 2-3 white balance points on a switch the EX1 offers. How do you change the white balance on your still camera?

Standby is terrific to keep the heads on a tape mechanism from wearing out. But it's kind of moot with solid state. My DVX disengages the tape head also and it takes a while to spool back up. But when I shoot it with the firestore, this goes away, and the camera records immediately when I hit record. The EX1 is the same.

This is an NLE issue. It was the same in the early days of HDV. Eventually, more and more NLEs will support the native codec, and this will become a moot point. It's hard to blame the camera because the NLEs won't read the format though.

What are the steps to change from TIFF to RAW or back on a still camera? I know when I shot my friends Nikon we had to use the menu. I've also not seen this as a switch option on any camera I've used. Could you do this on the Canon H1? If so, that's pretty impressive. On the DVX, there was a scene file dial that you could turn, and that always seemed like an awesome idea. The HVX is similar. But there are just so MANY options with the EX1 and similar cameras you'd need a dial with 10 places to get it all. Especially when you consider the S&Q motion options.

Yes I can certainly understand that. But honestly, I don't know many people who'd not only change frame rates mid-stream, but also change footage size. Do you do this often? And would you deliver in 720 or 1080? This is very curious to me. I've shot 1080 to extract 720 when I couldn't frame the way I wanted to, but this seems different.

There is certainly something to be said for having switches and dials and not menus to access many functions, but on a camera the size of the EX1/EX3, you really do run out of real estate. On a shoulder mount camera there is lots more room, and consequently more switches and dials. But then we get back to the "operational weakness" of the camera weighing 20+ pounds!

If you want to have a program with your footage on Discovery, it means something. Otherwise it really isn't that significant as per your original questions in this thread.

BTW. I don't have an EX1 or EX3. But I do have a lowly V1 that shoots only in HDV. I have shot some birds in flight (ducks & white pelicans) without any of the dreaded CMOS/rolling shutter/codec issues that others have mentioned. As a matter of fact, I filmed an airshow of WWII aircraft without any issues. And I have also taped the Blue Angels with the V1 and I have not had any horror stories to tell, either. I would think that the Blue Angels would be fast enough to bring out any shortcomings of CMOS chips, rolling shutters and long GOP codecs, especially with an obviously cheaper camera and lower quality format like the V1.

I would like this function to save batteries. When I sit in a hide for 20 hours in cold weather it is eating batteries. If it could just turn off the lcd and put the sensor in a standby state I think the batteries would last maybe ten times longer and it could fire up in just a few seconds. If I don't remember wrong the H1 also turned off lcd to save batteries.

When I'm shooting outdoors the white balance changes quite often. I find it harder to correct the whitebalance in post than in camera. If my wb is off to much then it can be quite hard to get it right without loosing quality.

Perrone, I understand and respect if you don't find these as weaknesses, but I must have the right to express that I find them to be weaknesses in my use of the camera as wildlife shooter. I just wanted to point them out for Ralph, then it's up to him if he thinks they are a weakness for him.

I can withdraw the complaint about having to rewrap as there seems to be NLE supporting it.

On the EX1 surely when you close the LCD it goes off? On the EX3 the LCD is part of the viewfinder so you can't turn it off or you can't see anything! What batteries are you using? When I tried an EX1 the tiny little batteries it uses lasted about 5 hours! Each one probably weighs a tenth of my batteries that only last 45 minutes.
On the white balance side, it shouldn't be hard to correct, in FCP you just pick a white point and click and it balances, you can even go from a tungsten to daylight extreme and it'll still balance. This is the way it tends to be done in professional wildlife work, leaving the camera on a preset (5600k for example). And of course in film days on Super 16 and 35mm you couldn't set WB at all, you could use colour correction filters but we didn't usually bother, even when using 500T tungsten balanced film in daylight, as you'd lost half a stop or so. It corrected perfectly in grading.
Steve

Marten,

I guess the term "weakness" to me signifies that something is common and customary among peers but missing in the member being discussed. For instance, if we were talking about racing cars and 9 of 10 had outstanding brakes and one had mediocre brakes, then I'd see that as a weakness. However, in this instance, I think you are comparing a apples and oranges (still camera to video camera) and calling some of the things weaknesses.

I can absolutely understand your points. Especially when it comes to having to get to things through menus, and perhaps how a fundamental change in how you operate is required to use this different tool. So I think my disagreement with your is more about semantics than about anything else. I'm sorry if it seemed like I was just being contrary. Again, that is not my intent, and I certainly don't mean on your right to express your opinions. I hope you understand that.

As to the re-wrap issue, I think many NLEs will support it soon. Sony's own editing program requires the re-wrap at this point, and I am confident that will change rather soon.

Has anyone had a chance to compare the Convergent Design XDR results from each of the Canon XL H1s and the EX1 or EX3?

Alan Emery

The original question was EX for wildlife versus Canon. I have and still use both cameras. Overall, at 60i in daylight, the images from both cams can be stunning and are comparable.

The EX doesn't strut until you go 24p, overcrank it or shoot in low light.

In stills when you have a jpg and color correct it to much in post you loose quality in the image compared to capturing it correctly. Thats one reson to use RAW. Is video different?

From my experience I can just say that in cold weather the batterie don't last 5 hours. If I'm doing a project in a remote location with no power supply I need a lot of batteries even if I'm only filming a few minutes. With my still camera, one battery will last for a month when in standby mode and it's always ready to shoot.

It can be. One reason to transcode video files to 10 bit codecs is to give ample room for image manipulation and recalculation of colors. JPG images in stills do not have the bit space for this and thus truncate colors and you lose quality. Video will do the same if you don't use a codec that offers space for it. If I am going to be doing a lot of color grading on something, I'll take it straight to a 10-bit codec (Aja or similar) do my work, then render out to my finished format.


I am not aware of ANY video cameras that do this. Seems like a cool feature, but maybe it's deemed unnecessary in video work.

For a normal day's shoot I use 2 BPU60s usually with power to spare. I keep the supplied battery as back up.

I am a professional nature photographer who also moved to video quite recently.
I have been using the EX3 shooting wildlife for the last 3 months. I mostly use Nikon manual focus ED lenses - 80-200 f2.8, 300 f2.8, 400 f3.5, 500 f4, 600 f5.6.

The results are simply mind-blowing.

Will hopefully post some footage on VIMEO soon.

If you got any questions - please feel free to send me a PM or ask in here.

Cheers,

http://www.oferlevyphotography.com
SYdeny-Australia

So, Ralph............
 

Any thoughts?

Any the wiser?

Any help?

Where to from here?


CS