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

Technical alone isn't enough. Anyone knows ergonomics affects the quality of a shot.

In the case of the rotating handle, it enables shots not possible with standard handgrips... e.g. getting the shot or not. Ergonomics affect how fast you can get a shot versus miss it altogether... better ergonomics can make a shot better and bad ergonomics make a shot worse. The XF305 zoom is a stellar example. It's a technically superior zoom to the EX1 and longer to boot. Yet the ergonomics require flipping a switch to enable the servos versus manual.

Ergonomics in this class of camera are important. They'll make that technically beautiful image better or not or not even exist because you couldn't get the shot. Getting shots you couldn't get otherwise and making shots better are why some of us care about ergonomics and why some of us care about having to fuss with shoe extensions, LCDs you can't close to save battery, peri-scoping shotgun mounts that aren't removable, absent shot transition automation, switches on zoom rockers etc because they affect quality too.

I hear complaining about sore wrists yet nothing about the arm, shoulder and neck strains of day to day camera ops with steadi-cams and the other designs. The wrist issue is handled with exercise like any other profession requiring physical prowess. IMHO the baby has been thrown out with the bathwater.

I've said this before, the EX1R ergonomics had a powerful advantage over competitors that contributed to its competitiveness against HD422 cameras. I feel the PMW-200 changes deliver less advantage. Pity.

With it's fiscal woes, I don't know if Sony even has the wherewithal to build a follow-on to the EX3 but if they do, I hope any PMW-300 reflects a better appreciation of ergonomics.

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

Today I noticed B&H has their price up, as opposed to the previous suggested retail price that they had listed. Their price is $6299, same as the previous normal price for the EX1R, so that is good news.

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

That's very good thinking, but the problem I'd foresee is that of just too many variables, coupled with the problem of noone wanting to do a lot of filming and editing ...... only for the computer to say no! You need to know where you stand BEFORE production starts, even before cameras etc are purchased or hired.

Hence the idea of recommending minimum standards. From a codec point of view, it means that if you get a camera with XDCAM 422 or AVC-Intra 100, you'll meet the recommended criteria, end of story. It's POSSIBLE that something lower may be good enough, but this takes away the uncertainty.

Of course, it won't guarantee good story, lighting, editing etc - but at least you have taken away the technical variable! :-)
That really isn't true. Except at the higher end, (F3, C300 and higher) none of the large sensor cameras has as good resolution as a 3 chip camera with 1920x1080 sensors, and that's true of the GH2 as well. I believe it measures in at about 700lpph, but also has considerable luminance aliasing. (Better than many DSLRs, better even than the AF100 which has the same chip, but not up to the standard in resolving terms of a 3 x 1920x1080 chip camera.)

Alister said "Cameras like the FS100 and GH2 have big sensors with big pixels, that's why they have low noise." I agree with all the basic sentiments in principle here, but it's wrong to include the GH2 here. It has a big sensor, but with a high photosite count - it is, after all, first and foremost a quality stills camera. That means firstly that the indvidual photosite size is still small, and secondly that not all the photosites can be read at video framerates. The evidence is that it only reads 1 in 4, whch is why it's noise/sensitivity is not what the sensor size might lead you to hope for. It roughly works out about the same as an EX.

The up side is a 3 stop differnce in depth of field characteristics.

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

Yes, my mistake. The EX1 and GH2 pixels are roughly the same size, about 3.6 microns. F3 and FS100 are around 10 microns, almost 3x the size.

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

PMW 200 has better EVF compare to EX1 or F3 ?

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

It's the same EVF. The LCD is new and improved.

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

Alistar, wondering if you checked the AWB on the PMW200?

The EX's were appalling, and at certain times a good AWB comes in handy.

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

The discussion between Panasonic executives and the broadcast folks is hysterical. But how can the 1/3" chip based HPX370 outperform the EX3 in low light and noise? The EX3 has 1/2" chips.

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

Hi

Perhaps a little of topic, but will it be possible to edit files from PMW200 in Premiere Pro CS5.5 directly or does it have to be some kind of plugin installed? Or must PPro be upgraded to CS6 to work together with the new codec? As I remember, the Canon XF300 MXF files needed one or two upgrades of Premiere before it worked OK.


Regards,

/Bo

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

Thank you Alister. By the way I read Mr Bloom's review he said EVF is pretty good so I am not sure what's that mean.

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

Frankly, I don't know why so many people moan about the EX1R EVF. It's the same resolution as the Canon C300 EVF and very similar. I find that if I use peaking or the expand function I can focus perfectly accurately with it and once calibrated expose with it. Is it perfect, hell no, It's a small EVF on a small camcorder, but it's not as bad as many make out in my opinion.

I believe it works fine with CS5.5 as it is the same codec as the PMW-500 and other optical disc cameras and these have been supported for some time via the built in media browser. It's certainly directly supported in CS6, that's what I used to edit the review.

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

"But how can the 1/3" chip based HPX370 outperform the EX3 in low light and noise? The EX3 has 1/2" chips."

This question has been raised and I would like the answer to it also.

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

Image processing and noise reduction can mask and mitigate many sensor issues. The HPX370 uses a lot of noise reduction to reduce image noise. Most of the time this is very effective and can clean up the image, but there are almost always trade offs when you start doing heavy noise reduction. The most commonly seen issues are smear and posterization. This can be seen during pans and fast motion as a blurriness to the image and the reproduction of skin tones and subtle textures can take on a plastic, smooth look. It can also manifest itself as a "glazed" look to the image or blockiness and floating pixels and blobs within the image.

Camera sensitivity on it's own is meaningless because a camera manufacturer can simply choose to increase or decrease the gain of the cameras circuits to achieve whatever level of sensitivity that they choose. What really counts is how much noise does the sensor produce with no amplification, because this affects the amount of noise reduction that will be applied.

The EX cameras and PMW-200 use noise reduction as well, as does the Canon XF series. The problem is that the more noise you wish/need to remove/reduce the harder the processing has to work and the greater the artefacts become. At 0db with most of these cameras the noise reduction process goes largely un-noticed, but as you start increasing gain you also multiply noise levels, so the noise reduction circuits have to work harder.

For example: lets say that at 0db Camera A has 2 units of noise, Camera B has 3 units of noise. Only one unit difference so barely noticeable. When you go to +6db gain (6db is double) then now camera A has 4 units of noise compared to B which now has 6. So to give an image that looks similar to camera A the noise reduction circuits in B must work much harder and there will be more artefacts. Go to +18db and the difference is even greater with A now having 16 units of noise while B has 24.

A lot of the standard static camera tests like resolution and dynamic range tell you little about noise reduction and the artefacts that it can produce. Skin tone reproduction and pans can be very revealing however. One of the things I noticed in the PMW-200 is an improvement in skin tone and subtle texture reproduction which I believe is a result of improved image processing.

I can't stress enough that when assessing the image quality of a camera you need to always look at the complete image. It is wrong to focus on any one single factor without considering how that may affect other aspects of the image. Just because you can point a camera at a chart and note that the aperture may be stopped down by half a stop more than another camera does not really tell you anything useful unless you also look at the noise levels and also look at the artefacts that may or may not be present due to noise reduction.

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

Thank you Mr. Chapman

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

Melamine in the animal feed makes the protein content appear higher; electronic image processing and noise reduction makes the video sensor appear more sensitive. In the first case, the protein content is not higher and the food becomes poisonous; in the second case the sensor is not more sensitive and the video may contain unexpected artifacts. The problem in both cases is that optimizing a product to maximize an incomplete set of test results without other constraints always reduces the final product quality.

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

I certainly would not disagree with all that has been stated about the negative effects of noise reduction. However, I would simply like to add this one slight "twist".

I recently did a very un-scientific test between my EX1r and my CX760. (sister to the NXCAM, NX30)
This test was just a very simple "noise only" test at different gain values.

EX1r at 0bd
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4564537/ex1%...%20-%200db.jpg

CX760 at 0db
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4564537/ex1%.../CX760_0db.jpg

As you all know, the EX1r has an excellent configuration of 3 full raster 1/2 inch sensors.
For those that might not know, the CX760 is HEAVILY disadvantaged with its tiny, single, Bayer pattern sensor that is slightly larger than 1/3rd inch. To make the situation even harder on the CX760, its a heavily over sampled sensor that has 6 million pixels on it. (Ouch!...VERY tiny photosites)

At 0db, the competition between the two is literally a joke. I was going to end the test right there but I decided to go further anyway. I started adding higher and higher gain and something shocking started to happen. The little, lowly, crippled CX760 started to catch up. By the time I got to +18db the distance between the two became ALLOT closer.

EX1r at +9db
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4564537/ex1%...0/EX1r_9db.jpg

CX760 at +18db
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4564537/ex1%...CX760_18db.jpg

Now,..allow me to say this. I am NOT saying these cameras are equal. They are not. The EX1r is far superior,...as it should be. It simply has the sensor configuration that DRASTICALLY outguns the little CX760. I KNOW the EX1r is great and I fully understand "why" it looks great. Everything is as it should be.

What shocks me is: "why does such a crippled little, 6 megapixel, Bayer pattern sensor,...look that good?" What is inside that darn thing?

It's like a watching a race between a world class Olympic runner against a one legged man on crutches. Yes, the world class runner wins, but the fact that the man on crutches is not "that" far behind him is quite extraordinary! (can anybody explain this?)

Yes, this "test" is not a true lab one. Yes, it has no motion to challenge the CX760 noise reduction. I do understand that there are allot of factors that this test does not take into account....agreed. (It's just a quick real world test)

I think we can all agree that the CX760 output is something that is amazing, given is heavy sensor configuration disadvantages.

In looking at the new PMW200. I hope that Sony is applying its newest, BEST and most current silicon technology combined with its latest and BEST post processing technology.

I think a simple PMW 200 option that lets the user pick between "low", "med" and "high" noise reduction options would be fantastic. (Lets the shooter decide)

I don't know the answers as to why but I just seem to see a strange imbalance between sensors that do, in fact, perform great and ones that are not "supposed" perform as well as they should based on the numbers.

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

I shoot theatre with my NX5U, SR11, XR500 and CX700 and occasionally an EX3. The EX3 is used for closeups, NX5U mid and the small Sony's as fixed unattended cameras with AE shift at max negative. When the stage goes to full black the CX700 still has acceptable video noise at 21db for a full black screen and responds quickly to lights up again too. Very impressive. For really dark scenes where the EX3 has to go to 9db and the NX5U at 12db the CX700 has less visible noise than either of these cameras. The SR11 and NX5U are close in vintage so noise levels are similar. XR500 was the introduction of the backilluminated sensor and has noticeable better performance. The CX700 is only marginally better than the XR500. Looking at still images is good but not a true test of how visible noise is on a moving image. With gain the EX3 and the NX5U show the sensor artifacts in pan motion not present on the CX700. I keep wanting a NX5U replacement with sensors that are as good as my CX700 and 1920x1080 60P the rest of the camera is great !!!
My comments are for noise levels with large areas of black or dark colour where noise is very evident. Clearly both the NX5U and EX3 produce better overall output but when it gets really dark I would choose the little CX700 for least noisy picture as to the non-techie a clean picture is a better picture !!!

Ron Evans

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

This whole discussion about chip size and noise is highly significant. I like the use of the terms "raw sensitivity" or "native sensitivity" of the chip, as the final appearance of the output signal does indeed depend highly on applied processing. It may be possible to make a signal look superficially quieter - but it will indeed be at the expense of other factors.
The simple answer is that the HPX370 most definately does not outperform the EX3. Panasonic describe the use of a technique called "3d noise reduction" which is understood to mean operating in height and width of the image AND with relation to time. More simply, comparing frame by frame, and assuming some differences to be down to noise and hence able to be averaged out.

That is obviously going to be less satisfactory when there is movement in the image, and it wasn't long before the problems were seen in reality - http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/panasoni...ise-issue.html . The image looks fairly noise free on static scenes - but "noise ghosts" can be seen on moving images.

Panasonic issued a "fix" - which got rid of the noise ghosts...... but allowed the overall noise level up again. At the end of the day 1/2" chips will inevitably have a significant advantage over 1/3", and that's before we even think about depth of field and diffraction issues...... And that's why a camera with 1/2" chips and a fully approved codec at this price point is such a big deal.

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

These cooling vents are worrying me, I have had major issues with massive amounts of dirt and dust on the inside of my cameras due to the conditions I film in so to have a opened vent would only make this worse?

Is this a camera I should avoid or is there some sort of clear sealed plastic cover I would be able to purchase?

The standard rain and dust covers avoid most of the dirt but its the tiny dust particles that still get through on them

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

Three weeks ago Sony let me try a pre-production sample of the PMW-200 for a couple of days and I also noticed the large amount of cooling vents on the camera. In my feedback to Sony that was one of my remarks, but in reply Sony could confirm that the amount and size of vents will be much smaller on the production model soon to be shown.

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

I haven't seen the camera in the flesh, but conceivably all there may be inside the vents are cooling fins? In which case the inners of the camera can still be fully sealed and completely isolated from any dirt/dust that gets in? Just a thought........

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

I am really hoping so, its just seeing them makes me worried if its the right camera to filming outdoors in dirty/dusty conditions.

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

Isn't the usual formula to pipe the heat away from the chips with a peltier device and then cool the hot side of the peltier? I can't believe that they would have any type of airflow going where the sensor is exposed.

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

What better way to test the PMW-200 that to shoot some surfing video? Hurricane Leslie created larger than normal waves off the shores of Rhode Island the first week of September, resulting in some great surfing for this area. This video was shot near Point Judith Lighthouse in Narragansett.

Sony PMW-200 camcorder
XDCAM HD422 50Mbps /24P
720P @ 60fps
Century Optics 1.6 teleconverter
Edited in FCP7

A longer 12 minute version for the surfers will be posted in a couple of days.



VortexMedia.com/

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

Thank you Doug for posting this !!! Looks very good and I like the idea to use the teleconverter for this.

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

What a strange mixture of colours Doug, it looks like they are surfing on mud in some shots, whilst others are looking more appealing.

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

It is a strange mixture of colors to me also. In parts it was very pinkish. Is this straight out of the camera or were some scenes graded?

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

You are correct, the colors were strange. I threw some Magic Bullet looks on the first upload just for the hell of but, but I agree it looked odd.

I have replaced the original with a new version that is straight out of the camera with no grading. So, the differences between shots are now due to being shot on two different days. The first day was overcast and quite dark, the next day was bright sun in late afternoon. I mixed up the order of the shots so it goes back and forth between the two.

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

The footage from the PMW-200 looks pretty damn good to me -
He mentions an aliasing problem, I wonder if this will be an issue. Is there much aliasing on the EX1 / EX1R?

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

Yes, Philip's video is very good, but you do not give the whole picture with your posting. Philip has graded the colours, so it is not a good example for anyone to judge the camera by, although still a good video.

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

I didn't spot any aliasing when I used it and I wouldn't expect there to be any significant aliasing as it uses the same sensors as the EX1R and aliasing and moire are very well controlled on the EX1R/EX3.

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

I don't hear him say that - have you got a time reference into the video?

It's true that any camcorder will likely have *SOME* aliasing - the questions are how much and whether it's coloured or monochrome.

The biggest problem is when it's coloured - and that's been the case with most DSLRs in the past.

A 3 chip camera, with chips of the system resolution (1920x1080) is likely to be as good as it gets - and likely to be better than any single chip camera. The design decision to be made is how to balance aliasing versus absolute sharpness via the characteristics of the lo-pass filter.

Simple answer is that there is likely to be a little, but monochrome and negligible compared to such as DSLRs. Don't see it being an issue.

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

Alister - thanks so much for your YouTube review of the PMW-200. It was very informative. I am eagerly awaiting the arrival of one later this month. Have you posted any picture profiles for this camera yet, or is it close enough to the EX-1 to use the same profiles ? I prefer increased color saturation and sharpness over most standard factory settings.

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

Just to confirm I can use the XQD cards H or S and still keep the 50Mb/s rate?

XQD are half the price of the SxS. Do you need any adaptors when using the XQD cards?

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

Yes you can use XQD cards, both H and S, but you will need a matching XQD to express card adapter (Sony QDA-EX1).

No picture profiles for the PMW-200 yet. Still working on them. I wouldn't increase the detail settings above default. Your not increasing resolution, only edge contrast and excessive sharpening can look very nasty if the viewer also has the sharpening on the TV or monitor set high or you do any post work where you increase contrast.

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

Hi Alister, I sent you an email via your profile message address did you get it by any chance?

Cheers

David

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

In stock at B&H.

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

Good price compared to the UK - Though is there 8% tax on that price?

Edit found it

SubTotal: $6,299.00
Sales Tax: $559.04
Shipping: Free
Order Total: $6,858.04


About $2000 more expensive than the UK price, would be worth a holiday to NYC for that!

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

My PMW-200 is shipping today from Omega Broadcasting in Austin, TX. I would highly recommend them, although I also think B&H is great to work with. Both Omega and B&H are DVInfo.net sponsors, as most of you already know. I'll post more as I get some experience with this camera.

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

Can you post some test footage at full rate? I'd like to see how my laptop handles it with effects and a filters applied.