Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Speaking of heat. I have been told by several people that sensor heat significantly affects its noise output. An overheating sensor will have more noise than a cool one.

Can anybody confirm this?

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

It may be that it feels hotter because of the plastic body and vents system that means heat exits the camera at specific areas, one of which is around the handle and hand grip. The EX cameras must use the alloy body as a heat sink so the heat may be distributed evenly. I used the PMW-200 for a few days in Singapore where it was around 36c and very humid without any issues.

There's getting to be too much speculation on this thread for me. I'll continue to answer questions about my experiences with the camera but it's not good to speculate too much about other stuff.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Is the PMW-200 body plastic or alloy?

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Plastic with an inner metal frame that can be seen through the cooling vents.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Viewed from an EX1R perspective:

Plus:
Beter codec & beter servozoom

Minus:
-Handgrip (a downgrade: making it like the EX1R's doesn't hurt any broadcast market: looks like they forgot it)
-The powerinput inside the batterycompartment (now you can't switch from Sony to cablebattery without powering down anymore. It makes some batteries useless. From an engineering point of view there must be a reason for it, but to me it seems like bad usability & silly engineering. Like said before: it seems to be about creating waste instead of providing durable solutions.
The motive seems to make no-Sony batteries more expensive to produce.
Saying batteries don't last very long anyway is a rather poor argument.

I'm curious about any improvements in noise or rolling shutter.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Moving away from speculation, to what a buyer like me would want, but adding one last speculative thought: I assume that an EX-3 replacement can't be all that far behind. Maybe next spring.

Now as to my future requirements, having chosen not to buy an EX-3 last year. I state the following as much for Sony's sake (I assume they are reading this thread), as a discussion point, as I bought the XF305 last year after nearly buying the EX-3. (I upgraded from a HMC150, a nice low cost camera).

Interchangeable lenses would be a big plus, especially if the low light capability is substantially better. While I like my HDSLR's for low light, I love using a fully equipped camcorder in the field and I'm not going to spend $15k for a CS300 nor the $5k(approx) FS100, who's build quality has been called into question by a number of pro shooters. This EX-1 replacement does not look like a shoulder rest camera, regardless of the PR from Sony (none of these cameras are shoulder mount IMHO, as for that you need an add on device). I haven't worked with the EX-3 as shoulder rest, I ended up buying an XF305 instead and I routinely shoot it off my shoulder without add ons), and wouldn't consider changing for a form factor like this. However, if the low light of a newly designed EX-3 gave me back 1 stop or more, and shoulder rest, along with interchangeable lenses, then I would be tempted next buying cycle.

I have loved a lot about the XF305, and haven't regretted the decision, *except in very low light* (about 5% of my shooting) and for creative uses of additional lenses. For that I switch to a 7D, which is no match for the 4:2:2 color space. If the next EX-3 (or this PMW-200) has an extra stop or two, that would be huge in my world.

I also worry about the resolution of this LCD. With the 305 I have abandoned my VF, and it appears that this won't have the resolution I've been used to lately. I would clearly need to compare the LCD of any future camera against Canon's ones.

Another nit is the discussion on the WA. I find that the Canon zoom is plenty long for most things, and Sony increasing the zoom range on the high end for reducing it on the WA is just not a good idea IMHO. I shoot far more WA than full zoom, and I even ended up buying a Schneider Century add on for both my 305 and 105s. They are essential, though fiddly. I suppose if I end up changing I'd have to buy one for the Sony, and they probably assume that. But I would much rather have the wide than longer. I know a lot of you wildlife guys like longer, but don't you buy a separate lens for that?

As for battery life, while I have an Anton Bauer for my kit, I only use it on my 7D. I find the higher capacity batteries from Canon hold up a long time. Two or three of them are about the same size as the AB. I rarely end up needing the Bauer, but would not mind changing horses to Sony if it had the ability to mount a Bauer on the back, like the EX3. Would give better shoulder balance too. For future purchases, I'd give this much more weight in the buying decision.

Hope this helps. I'm not a Sony guy at present, but when buying, I'm not wedded to any brand. They are all just tools to me.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Sony have not changed the focal length of the lens. It's the same as the EX1, f = 5.8 mm to 81.2 mm (equivalent to 31.4 mm to 439 mm on 35 mm lens) f1.9 lens.The same 0.85 zoom through adapter as for the EX1 fits the PMW-200. The XF305 is the equivalent to 29.3mm at the wide end so 7% wider, not a big difference.

You can add external batteries and external power, just not when there is a battery in the battery compartment. As it's a 12v camera an AB or V-lock battery could be used with some form of external mounting but without the need to reduce the voltage to 7.2v as required by many handycams.

The main LCD is higher resolution than on the EX1, it is now 852 (x3 RGB) x480 and has an incredibly wide viewing angle, so fewer issues with blacks not being black etc. The resolution is the same as the XF305 and C300 LCD. The rear EVF is the same as the EX1 and very slightly lower resolution than the XF305 EVF.

The difference in image quality between the XF305 and 7D has very little to do with colour space. The 7D is lower resolution, suffers form all kinds of image artefacts due to pixel skipping, and has a inferior encoding. the color space is the very least of the differences. Most people cannot tell the difference between 420 and 422 color space without pixel peeping.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

The NX70 was build rain- and dustproof (without the XLR-unit). It would have been extremely lovely if Sony would have introduced that to other handheld camcorders as well. The PD-150, PD-170, Z1, EX1 and EX1R have (in line) been the standard workhorses for camjo's, news correspondents, travelling TV-crews and documentary filmmakers around the world. Sony presents this PMW-200 as the successor to these camcorders. They seem to have introduced 422 color sampling and 50 Mbps especially for broadcast purposes. Why didn't they take the chance to finally get rid of the irritating rain- and dustcovers? After releasing the NX70 they skipped this protection already on the NX30, PMW-100 and now this new PMW-200. WHy? Does it not seem to work as proposed on the NX70? Too expensive? At least in my opinion it would be excellent to have this rain- and dust-proof design on more professional camcorders, expecially for this PMW-200 regarding to the market it is intended for! A fail? Or was the NX70 a fail and will we never see rain- and dustproof professional handheld camcorders again?

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

This would make a ideal camera for me but I'm guessing the PMW200 has some heat issues and thus why can't fully seal it?

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Alister wrote":Sony have not changed the focal length of the lens. It's the same as the EX1, f = 5.8 mm to 81.2 mm (equivalent to 31.4 mm to 439 mm on 35 mm lens) f1.9 lens.The same 0.85 zoom through adapter as for the EX1 fits the PMW-200. The XF305 is the equivalent to 29.3mm at the wide end so 7% wider, not a big difference... The resolution is the same as the XF305 and C300 LCD. The rear EVF is the same as the EX1 and very slightly lower resolution than the XF305 EVF."

Thanks for clearing that up Alister.

I understand, perhaps I wasn't being clear. The difference in quality is dramatic, for all the reasons you mention. It just seems it in a simplistic way to be the difference in color space, when that's just one of many issues. I agree that all these issues exist with the 7D, despite the much larger sensor and the huge following for their 'look'.

As an aside, I was just hired by an agency to do some work and they wanted the footage shot on the 7D not the XF305. Funny eh? I think it was simply an issue of workflow for them and since it was only for the web, they didn't care. Oh well.

I agree that it would be great to get an environmentally sealed unit, as in the Pacific NW I encounter lots of rain days, and usually fall back to my 7D for those shoots.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

I completely agree that rain and dust proofing is highly desirable. It would be great for my storm chasing trips. My guess is that cost is the main reason for not having it (oops, sorry speculating again) :-)

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

So they can do it within reasonable costs at a camcorder that's 1/3rd of the price of this PMW-200 but not on this one? Seems pretty strange to me.... I mean, if there is one type of cam to have it very useful it should be this PMW-200. A missed chance in my opinion. To me it also seems very unlogical they sealed the NX70 but didn't it with any released pro camcorder since than. Was there probably something wrong with the weather sealing in the NX70 design? Did you take a NX70 on one of your stormchasing trips Alister? If yes, how was it?

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

And I believe that for that level of proofing you can't use external ports etc, just the basic camera which has to be "sealed down". That may be far less acceptable for the sort of use the PMW200 is likely to be put to than the NX70. Equally, the heat issues may make it more difficult for the PMW200.

There's been a lot of attention to detail in this thread. Interesting and valid though it may be, at the end of the day if you are required to buy a camera, and have about £5000 to do it, the choice now boils down in practice to three - the PMW200, XF305, HPX250 - or not buy anything.

Ergonomically, all three are not good. None of them match a good shouldermount, and whilst there may be differences and personal likes and dislikes, I wouldn't put any of them as a clear winner.

Codec wise, both the XF305 and the HPX250 had the advantage (on paper, if not very visible) over the EX1 of that magical "broadcast suitable" tag. With the PMW200 that lead has disappeared. Codec wise, they are all considered fully approved.

The main difference now is chip size. And here the PMW200 is the out and out winner. It puts it a stop ahead in terms of raw sensitivity, depth of field control, and diffraction limited aperture range. That's huge.

For various reasons I'm only too happy to agree that the PMW200 may not be perfect, and some details may have been done better, but the key point is that it's the best of the bunch. At some point you have to stop agonising over details and just put your money down - or do without a camera. At this price point, the PMW200 is simply the best available.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Didn't take a NX70 storm chasing because it doesn't meet broadcast specs and my clients are generally high end broadcasters, commercials producers or other high end users that insist on footage meeting certain minimum criteria and the NX70 just doesn't cut it. In addition a lot of storm chasing takes place in poor light and small chip cameras really struggle. For $150 I can get a good quality tailored rain cover for almost any camera so that's what I do. For storm chasing and my other natural extremes I use a range of cameras from PDW700s to EX1's and this year the F3 with S-log, but always with a NanoFlash running at least 50Mb/s, normally more or with the F3 a Samurai at ProRes HQ or uncompressed on a Gemini.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Alister, any chance of making available a short .mxf clip from the camera to play around with on my NLE system?

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

I use my EX1R in studio, domestically and on international travel near and far; on sticks and run and gun. It's a remarkable camera reflecting marvelous innovative design worthy of the designation: Venerable. In contrast, I think the PMW-200 is a stripped down follow-on product principally tuned for a narrow set of requirements for a shrinking broadcast segment.

The functional shoe/LCD of the EX1R was compromised for matte boxes and presumably other lens attached rigs.
The shot transition feature is gone.
The improved EX1R rotating grip is gone.
The advantages of a 12v powered camera to power other professional 12v accessories replaced with an environmentally negative one that doesn't power accessories... ergo no advantage.
Shotgun mount is now even more obtrusive.
All of that and maybe more was sacrificed for a power hungry heat generating dust collecting HD422 image pipeline.

Shooters not needing HD422-50 are better off with the EX1R while they last. The Panasonic HPX-255 at a $1000 lower price (WITH a microphone), built-in AVCIntra frame 422-100MB and 50MB codecs, 28mm wide end and 4 position ND filter in a 5.5 lb package (apparently without the ventilation ports) indicates a manufacturer that IMHO better understands it's customers.

The technical minutia of the superiority of 1/2" chips with apparently miniscule to no noise improvement is entirely uninteresting in the face of the stripping down. The menu item to map a mono audio source to both channels of the headphone is nifty tho.

Sony Professional USA gets a nod for a Facebook "Like" on the criticism and forwarding it to the product group.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Maybe. But Canon and Panasonic have previously made a big play about the advantages of "full broadcast codec", the PMW200 now puts the three equivalent in this respect. And you haven't really answered the point I put - we know you don't think the codec improvement is worth other changes against the EX1, but leaving that aside which would you go for in a straight race between the PMW200, XF305 and HPX250?
But don't forget the HPX255 price is without memory. To equip it with enough for (say) 3 hours recording adds quite a bit due to the P2 factor, and greatly narrows the gap between it and a PMW200 or XF305 equipped to the same recording time. Package price (with memory) of the three is very similar.

And on the debit side the HPX250 is 1/3" chips, and (unlike the X305), only servo for iris and focus. I expect true manual at this sort of price. It seems as though the 250 was primarily designed as an AVCCAM model, and a P2 version derived from it. It may be the one to get as B camera to a 2/3" P2 camera, but I'd go for the Canon or Sony otherwise.
It's not just "technical minutia" though, it's a stop sensitivity advantage, and a stop better depth of field control. They make a big practical difference to any operator.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

I felt I did address the question: HPX-255.

Panasonic can make a camera with a better feature set and offer 422-100MB built-in on the occasion you need it. And as you point out, there's an upward compatibility with higher end cameras in the Panasonic line.

I enjoy the advantages of the 1/2" chips on the EX1R but would look elsewhere for 422-50MB. The HPX-255 is $1000 less expensive which pays for 64GB of P2 with change enough for a second battery. The PMW-200 doesn't come with memory and at B&H, SXS is the same price as P2.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

The HPX-255 has a lot of vents.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Don't know where you got that information but the HPX-255 is manual focus, zoom and iris. The base prices between PMW-200 and HPX-255 are at least $700 different (depending on street price of the Sony) and memory equivalent.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

But that is only enough for a hours continuous shooting. Three hours is a far more realistic figure if you want to avoid downloading in the field, which wipes out any price advantage the HPX250 may have in body only cost.
Whilst SxS and P2 may be similar in cost per GB, the bitrate difference means that per minute the figures stack up strongly in favour of XDCAM and SxS. For a given recording time, you need half the number of GB for SxS as the 250 does for P2. So for two hours that would be one SxS 64GB card ($650) versus two P2 64GB (2x$730=$1460). Hence my previous figures - with memory for three hours recording, the HPX250 is MORE expensive than the PMW200.

And for that extra cost you only get 1/3" chips and a servo lens. Sorry Les, I disagree with you, I'll maintain the PMW200 is currently the clear winner.
You can switch to manual control, but there is no direct coupling between the focus/iris rings and the mechanism - it's via servos. Hence a far less precise feel, a slight variable lag, and (worst of all) no end stops. It's fundamentally the same as they use in the AVCCAM model, and similar to what Sony use in NXCAM. It's what I'd expect in cameras in that price range, not what I'd expect for cameras in the range above.

Have you ever tried one? It may be usable - but nowhere near the standard of a pro, manual lens, and that includes the lenses of the EX, PMW200 and XF305.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

422-50MB on an HPX-255 is the same amount of footage as 422-50MB on a PMW-200. You are right tho, on the HPX-255, you can record twice the data rate whenever you want without an external recorder as you need on a PMW-200 but can't power off the camera battery.

It isn't about picking a chipset spec winner as you are known to do here. Video production is much more than IQ minutia and pixel peeping. As the old adage goes, audio is half the video. Then there's story telling, lighting and script. Your talking about a fraction of a fraction in the end..... then there's Alister's statement about people can't tell the difference between 420 and 422 without peeping.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Errr, the HPX255 doesn't record 422-50MB! It's a Panasonic camera, and hence records AVC-Intra - most certainly NOT XDCAM 422 50Mbs!!

Yes, it can record in a 50Mbs mode (AVC-Intra 50) - but then it's 4:2:0, luminance subsampled, and most definately not considered as fully broadcast approved. To get that tag, it needs to be in the AVC-Intra 100 mode - hence 100Mbs. Hence twice the number of GB for the same run time.

I'll be the first to agree that story telling, lighting and script may be more significant that absolute technical factors, but it's an irrelevant argument. Production factors and technical quality are separate matters. You seem to be implying they are mutually exclusive? Surely that's not true? High technical quality doesn't preclude high production values, and vice versa. What's wrong with best possible story telling etc together with best possible technical quality?

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

These cameras all produce great images. The differences are small thus a fraction of a fraction of the whole. 422-100 built-in of the Panasonic sounds interesting. Don't care about memory costs. That's a fraction too.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

The difference between 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 is much greater when shooting interlaced than progressive. Even with progressive, the difference is definitely noticeable for chroma key.

Current HD broadcast standards are like insisting on low salt, low fat, fully organic home cooked dinners and then eating fast food for lunch. Strict requirements on dinner only give the cook difficulty in preparing the meals while lunch has already spoiled the diet. What is the point of 4:2:2 versus 4:2:0, 1920x1080 versus 1440x1080 and 50 mbps versus 35 mbps when actual HD broadcast is typically less than 10 mbps mpeg4?

While the PMW-200 likely improves on the EX1R in many ways, it is also likely that main purpose of the camera is to increase Sony's profit. If the PMW-200 sells for x% more and can be manufactured for y% less, then replacing the EX1R with the PMW-200 has many benefits. A new camera is much better than raising the price of the existing EX1R by x+y%.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

I think it is called future proofing, who knows what technology is around the corner - 4k broadcasting maybe?

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

NHK is already doing experimental UHDV (8K60P) broadcasts from London.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Most of the production companies that I deal with find the difference in low and poor light performance between the XF305 and EX1 more than just a slight or insignificant difference. So much so that some still choose to use an EX1 with a NanoFlash because it can deliver useable images where the 305 cannot. That difference is almost entirely down to pixel size. Bigger sensors make a considerable difference. That's why EBY R118 specifies the half inch minimum, unless the camera can be proven through additional tests to be acceptable. It's also why for Tier 1 the minimum is 2/3". I think we have all seen how really big pixels as in the super 35mm sized sensors can produce some incredible looking images. Sensor and pixel size matters.

4K mainstream broadcasting is still some years away, NHK are not planning on broadcasting 4K until 2020 and the working life of a camera these days is rarely more than 2 or 3 years. When HD was introduced most countries were also switching from uncompressed analog to compressed digital broadcasting. This freed up the bandwidth necessary for HD transmission. To go to 4K broadcasts will need a even more bandwidth or new compression schemes. We still haven't really taken full advantage of HD, often it's so compressed that it's little better than SD and only a small percentage of channels broadcast in HD. There are advantages to be had by shooting 4K such as future proofing material and the ability to crop into the frame, but often the workflow becomes slower as processing and storage requirements become onerous.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

always
you'll be surprised, but 4K material is editable on i7 laptop, and i am not talking about Sager, not the best solution, but i did couple on site edits with my over the counter Vaio, and today storage media prices are very affordable; in my case i don't even worry about future proofing, but the picture is so good, it'd just amazes me every time i look at the footage after the shot,
as for pmw 200 - if Sony would make new, 2/3" 240 fps capable camera, i would be the first in line to get one, but as it is, to me it's just an EX with a few upgrades, buying today of course there is no question which one to get, but i don't see enough reasons to upgrade from EX1r, at least for me

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

What format was the 4K material?

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

In a word, the point is concatenation.

The dictionary lists the meaning as "To connect or link in a series or chain".

In this context it refers to the problems associated with repeated compressing and decompressing video streams, and the way errors can build up along the broadcast chain, which may involve many stages. Something like 10Mbs H264 can indeed cause problems, but for very good economic reasons it's highly desirable to keep broadcast bitrates low. Even more importantly, for terrestial transmission the spectrum is limited.

It can be (just) enough - but a lot depends on the source the final encoder is fed with. If pristine, the results should be acceptable at home. If artifacts or especially aliasing exist from further up the chain, they are likely to get magnified by the final (and lowest bitrate) encoder.

That's why it's not enough to look at images and make a simple "looks good enough to me" judgement, not in the broadcast world, anyway. The pictures may look OK in themselves - but have characteristics which may upset broadcast encoders.

In the context of this thread, that's why XDCAM 422 50Mbs is important.
Very true. And for broadcast work that these cameras are likely to do (news, sport, reality etc) they are more likely to be used in 1080i/25 mode than 1080p/25. The latter may be preferred for drama etc - but that's far more likely to be done with at least 2/3" cameras.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

How much better does the lens zoom in and out compared to the EX1R? I understand the zoom servo has been improved on the PMW-200. My EX1R does not do particularly well and sticks at least once when I'm wide and slowly zooming in. Faster zooms don't stick. Zooming out it does better but can still stick on occasion.
Thanks to everyone for all the helpful information.
Dan

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

This camera appears to be taking too much of a beating.

I would take 50Mbps 422 over a rotating hand grip anytime, and if Alistair says its balanced and comfortable then its true. The top flip out LCD is not as convienient as the bottom one on the EX1's but I got used to it with my Z5 and even though it was annoying with radio mic/video light, after a while I got used to it. But as now i will be knowing I'm getting an even better image than my EX1R and not having that horrible pasty face look, all the 200's minute flaws will fade away.

Alistair did you check the IRE range for faces with the 200? Do you still need to underexpose to 60ish IRE or does it now handle faces at 70IRE without any murky skin tone?

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

The Nano gives you 4:2:2 50MB and higher without the downgrade doesn't it? Albeit it's an extra box but it can at least be powered by the camera battery.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

They could have done a lot more but I would be thrilled with just an EX1R with the addition of:
1. new modern sensor comparable to a cropped FS100 sensor.
2. timecode/genlock


They added the gunlock but I can't seem to find out much about the sensor. PLEASE tell me that 4+ years later they aren't re-using the same old noisy low resolution sensor that is getting destroyed by GH2s etc?

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

It is an interesting topic what picture characteristics most affect low bitrate broadcast and delivery. From my subjective experience noise, grain, motion and resolution upset things the most. The preference for larger sensor size is not just a desire to exclude the little guys, but an attempt to reduce the noise at the source. However, just as it's possible to create low noise images from small sensor cameras, it's also possible to create noisy images from large sensor cameras. While minimum camera requirements can increase quality, the more noticeable effect of such requirements is to create marketing opportunities for expensive gear. What the industry really needs is widely available software that can perform a detailed analysis of a particular video master to determine whether it has suitable characteristics for delivery over current satellite, cable, terrestrial broadcast and fibre optic networks.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

They are using the same sensors as the EX1, but with new signal processing. There are very good reasons for this:

If you took an FS100 sensor and cropped just the middle 1/2" the resolution would fall short of what is needed for SD, let alone HD.

Pixel size is the primary thing that determines the signal to noise ratio of the camera. Cameras like the FS100 and GH2 have big sensors with big pixels, that's why they have low noise. That's why 1/3" cameras don't do as well as half inch and half inch doesn't do as well as 2/3" and so on. It's down to the laws of physics. Over the last few years any noise and sensitivity improvements in sensors have been tiny, what we have seen with the large sensor cameras is simply the function of bigger pixels on a bigger sensor. Modern sensors like the ones in the EX have QE's approaching 70% where 70% of the photons of light falling on the sensor are converted to electrons. If you want a bigger output (and thus better ratio of signal to noise) then you use bigger pixels so that you capture more photons and as a result get more electrons. To do that without sacrificing resolution you need a bigger surface area and thus a bigger sensor.

To expect a significant improvement in sensitivity and noise performance when the sensor size and layout is not changing is not realistic as there have not been any changes to the laws of physics or core sensor technologies.

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

r3d, 4K, 7:1, Vegas Pro, but of course MXFs from EX are much faster to edit on the same machine:)

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

Does the new signal processing on the EX1 sensors address the issues of more noise at higher data rates discussed here? That would be an improvement over a Nano correct?
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/converge...ml#post1557890

Re: Sony PMW-200 Brings HD 4:2:2 Workflow to XDCAM Camcorder Line
 

The improvement when Sony used the newer "R" sensors on the consumer cameras was really significant. I have an older SR11 newer XR500 then CX700 which is now similar to the present family CJ760/NX30 etc and a NX5U. The NX5U and SR11 are clearly closer in noise level etc but the CX700 is very much better than all the others. I understand that a similar improvement may not be true for a 1/2" chip but I am certain there would be an improvement. I keep waiting for a new replacement for the NX5U with better sensors and 60P recording, I am happy with the rest of its features. Sometimes shoot multicam with all these and an EX3 and the CX700 easily matches or exceeds the EX3 for noise as an example for low light stage shows when gain is needed.

As another question does the PMW-200 have an IR filter to stop black clothes looking brown a problem with the EX1/3 .

Ron Evans