Forgot your password?

Forgot your Email?

or Create a FREE Account!

Click To Show Advanced Search Options

Sony XDCAM-EX

Discuss everything related to stock video and After Effects projects on RevoStock!
User avatar
Z-Man
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:29 pm

Sony XDCAM-EX

Postby Z-Man » Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:18 pm

Anyone been following this Camera's debut?
Pretty interesting review below.
Aloha,
Zman

http://digitalcontentproducer.com/camer ... index.html

User avatar
postquis design
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:16 pm

Postby postquis design » Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:47 pm

Hello Z-man,

THis is THE camera on the watch list for sure ! It can't get here to the States fast enough. I have been following it since its announcement at NAB.
The big mystery is HOW much under $8K it is going to list for.

The other issue now is waiting for the NLE developers to announce hooks into their programs for Sony's file format.

I have been holding off on getting an HVX-200 waiting to see what kind of pictures this puppy puts out ! :)

Ron
postquis design

User avatar
RevoStock1
RevoStaff
 
Posts: 1552
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 2:31 pm

Postby RevoStock1 » Tue Sep 25, 2007 5:16 pm

Hmmm. Looks very nice....

The lines keep blurring.... and the question of "What is true HD?" will become more prominent.....

Looks very cool.....

Won't it be nice when we can just pop a memory card in and record a few hundred gigs? (or more....)

User avatar
postquis design
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:16 pm

Postby postquis design » Tue Sep 25, 2007 6:29 pm

Hmmmmmmm..... a few hundred gigs on a flash card ?????????

:mrgreen: Yaaaaaaaa Maaaaaaan !

My shooting ratio was ALWAYS waaaaaaaaay toooooo high ! :roll:

But back then the interns carried all those 3/4 U-matics back to the studio....
:D

Soon the PA's will just need room in their shirt pocket.... :shock: if they only knew....... :o

Ron
postquis design

User avatar
Murphymedia
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam

Postby Murphymedia » Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:33 am

so I got the impression that it's not much better than the HVX200. Only has a 1/2 inch chip and a cheaper storaging system.. right?? Everything else is pretty much the same other than it doesn't support under- or overcranking and can not shoot more than 4 different formats.

I like XDCAM quality but it really lacks some grain texture, which makes it really sharp looking. That's fantastic for news items and documentaries.. It's more expensive than the HVX200 and comes out 2 years later.. Sorry I'm just not a big fan of Sony's camera technology ever since I got my hands on the HVX200. And somehow Sony always has to make compatibility really difficult with other manufacturers. Was there any info how it's being implemented into FCP 6??

I only read through the review real quick so tell me if I'm wrong..

Kerry

User avatar
Z-Man
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:29 pm

Postby Z-Man » Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:13 pm

Hi Murphymedia,
The cam does overcrank and undercrank and is indeed competing with the HVX200 which has 1/3 in chips. The XDCAM-EX should be better in low light with the 1/2 in chips and the sensors are true 1920 x 1080, but they are CMOS chips. The US price is still a secret.
here's a link to some more info.
http://www.sony.com.au/objects/PDF/PDWEX1_Brochure.pdf

Have to see how it performs when it comes out,
Aloha,
Zman


Steve Griffiths
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 1:41 am

Postby Steve Griffiths » Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:27 pm

Saw this camera demoed and discussed at it's launch in Sydney this week.
It is a very nice camera. Full raster progressive 1080HD is now the benchmark that must be met by every camera that follows.
Also at the demo were representatives from Apple (FCP), Sony (vegas), Edius and Avid.
All of these companies pledged to have the XDCam codecs supported. Vegas 6 I believe supports it already. Apple announced they would have the new codec support in the next FCP update estimated in November. Avid did not have a firm date and Edius I think was ready to go (now or soon).

I've been using XDCamSD for 3 years and XDCamHD (both disk based) for a year and a half and the workflow is superb. As much as I like the new XDCam EX I'm not so happy about the lack of a cheap record media. I like the disk based media on the bigger XDCam cams... but apart from that for the moment it's top choice for under $10k.

User avatar
postquis design
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:16 pm

Postby postquis design » Sat Oct 20, 2007 2:17 pm

Hey Steve,

Thanks for that feedback. We are waiting anxiously for it here in the States. I hear your concerns for lack of "hard type" recording medium....as well as performance of these new Sony flash cards.

Seeing that street prices are right around $7K here on the East Coast (early quotes we are seeing here) when you factor in an included 8GB card as well as a promotion for another 8GB card from Sony on mail in.... the base price of the camera looks competitive with HVX 200. I haven't seen projected prices for flash cards so would you concur that at $7K with 16 GB of storage (which should give you about 70 minutes as they say) is competitive to HVX 200 along with better low light performance ?
Image


Steve Griffiths
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 1:41 am

Postby Steve Griffiths » Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:14 pm

Not having had a true hands on long term test of the EX the following is based on what I've heard and seen from reliable sources.

The EX low performance is apparently very good - much better than the existing big brother XDCamHD. CMOS in the past often had poor low light performance and suffered particularly from noise.
This camera seems to have solved that issue (though I've not seen this yet).
I can say (having used) the XDCamHD F350 is not a great low light performer even though it is CCD based.

HVX200 = 960x540 1/3inch CCDs
EX = 1920x1090 1/2inchCMOS
Higher resolution is better.
HVX200 = 4:2:2 intraframe compression
EX = 4:2:0 long GOP compression
- 4:2:2 is much better for blue/green screen work... however the higher native resolution from the XDCam format does offset this somewhat.
Intraframe compression is easier to edit but takes more storage space. XDCamEX in the highest quality mode will record approx 3 times more than the same sized P2 card on the Panasonic camera.
What is important to note: a long GOP format is likely to have LESS compression artifacting than an intraframe codec looking at the same scene. Long GOP is very efficient at compressing images without quality loss- you suffer (slightly) later if you choose to edit in a long GOP codec.
EX has less depth of field (which is a good thing) due to the larger chips.

It's all 'swings & roundabouts". These cameras are built to a price - they all have compromises and they are all designed to have artificial limitations built in to 'protect' that manufacturers 'higher margin' broadcast division cameras. Still you would not go wrong with either camera (but I'd go for the EX)

Both cameras will give you pictures undreamed of from a small camera 7 years ago. Buy what you can afford and remember it will be outpaced by a competitive model in a few months anyway.
Personally I'm going to wait and see. I would love to use the (coming) XDCAM F350 replacement which will be a disk based XDCamHD 4:2:2 codec at 50mbits... but it going to be expensive.

User avatar
postquis design
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:16 pm

Postby postquis design » Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:27 pm

Steve,

Thanks for the detailed briefing. Regarding editing in a long GOP codec and your mention of suffering slightly, are you referring to staying native in the Sony codec versus coming out of the EX via its HD-SDI with embedded audio and capturing uncompressed OR to another codec of your choice ?

And I concur on the low light thing..... I'm old school, I wanna see IT first :mrgreen:

thanks
Image


Steve Griffiths
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 1:41 am

Postby Steve Griffiths » Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:44 pm

Suffering is minor <grin>.
In Final Cut Pro (even on an 8 core mac) I get the 'preparing video for display' message briefly on longer timelines. This is caused when you have long gop codecs in a timeline and FCP has to decode the shots when you move things around.
Despite this I still choose to edit in native XDCam codecs but use another codec for graphics/colour grading etc (usually animation lossless and now Apple Prores).

Can't see any good reason for coming in HD-SDI to an editor anymore.
Much better to stay native XDCam with the benefit of the smaller file sizes and only convert to another codec if you need to do a lot of processing. Final Cut Pro automatically renders/converts to Prorez when adding any effects to an XDCam HD timeline.
Once you've imported files from a disk or flash media the first time (way faster than real time) you will NEVER want to digitise ever again.
The workflow benefit of this has to be experienced to be appreciated (main reason not to use HD-SDI).

Also you editing program is likely to be able to convert your native files to the codec of your choice (uncompressed if you like) faster than if you digitised via HD-SDI anyway. FCP can do this on the fly when importing XDCam files.

User avatar
postquis design
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:16 pm

Postby postquis design » Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:43 pm

Steve Griffiths wrote:Once you've imported files from a disk or flash media the first time (way faster than real time) you will NEVER want to digitise ever again.
The workflow benefit of this has to be experienced to be appreciated (main reason not to use HD-SDI).

Also you editing program is likely to be able to convert your native files to the codec of your choice (uncompressed if you like) faster than if you digitised via HD-SDI anyway. FCP can do this on the fly when importing XDCam files.


Steve,

Thanks for clarifying this. I thought there might be a difference in the FCP re-render versus coming out HD-SDI. The XDCam conversion by FCP on the fly is HUGE!

AND YES, I look forward to experiencing the workflow! :D :D
Image


Steve Griffiths
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 1:41 am

Postby Steve Griffiths » Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:41 pm

postquis design wrote:. The XDCam conversion by FCP on the fly is HUGE!

AND YES, I look forward to experiencing the workflow! :D :D


Caveat: on the fly codec conversion will require an Intel Mac. A G5 won't cut it (Though it might still be close to real time???).
Also I know that on the fly works when going to the new Apple prorez codecs but other codecs may add too much processor overhead - I don't know for sure.
Just something you should check.

regards

Steve

User avatar
postquis design
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:16 pm

Postby postquis design » Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:15 pm

Steve,

Thanks for clarifying that....another reason to look with wide eyes on the next rev of the mac pros :shock: :shock: :shock: come'on apple... show us some LOVE !!! :D
Image

User avatar
postquis design
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:16 pm

Postby postquis design » Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:03 pm

Steve,

I've read that some people who have seen the demo of the EX referred to it having some "wobble". Is this referring to the response of the the CMOS chip? and if so, in what lighting conditions?
Image

Next

Return to Video and After Effects

cron