Hdx900

[freedom]

I'm taking a second look at the HDX900. Found out that several clients will accept this camera.

Can this camera be used to replace the SDX900? What I mean is... if the client wants the SDX, could I shoot with this camera and they would easily be able to injest the footage into a system geared for the SDX? I'm not up on various DVCPro decks and tapes. I know the camera records at the DVCProHD 100 format but will edit bays set up for DVCPro 50 be able to downconvert this format?

[dinosaur]

I just finished a 10 day shoot with this camera last Sunday. It is strictly HD 720p, 1080i or 1080p. Its native 720 and up rezes to 1080. Even though it is a DVCPro 100 @ 100mbs recording format it records on a different (smaller)cassette and different tape speed than Varicam, which Panasonic calls "EX". Your clients will need the new 1400 deck or a properly adjusted 1200 deck to playback EX tapes. It does not record in DVCPro 50 SD a la SDX900

I found it to be a "Varicam Lite" in many respects. It does not have variable frame rates (undercrank/overcrank) only preset 24/25p, 30p & 50/60i. The matrix and gamma menus are not nearly as deep as Varicam & HD XDCam. So it can't be tweaked very finely. I found the out of the box the factory scene files to be very flat. There are not many 2nd party scene files written for this camera yet. It does have a built in HD>SD down converter that allows you to monitor in SDI/SD or 480i SD out of the rear video BNC out, but it does not do 4:3. When shooting in 60i/1080 the camera seemed a little starved for light. About a stop & a half less that what I'm accustomed to. Although the +3 & +6 db gains were pretty quiet. It was also a little power hungry and ran a little warmer than the Varicam.

Strangely, the camera mic connector is a 5 pin stereo XLR. Which no other camera currently uses. I don't see the point since the camera mic is assignable to Ch1-L or Ch2-R anyway. Panasonic's on camera shotgun mics are not very good. We used another brand mono mic with a XLR3 to XLR5 jumper cable.

The smaller cassettes were a nice feature. You can stick a lot of them in your pockets when you're on the run.

For the price, its a nice camera. Its still yet another tape format and not file based. The uprez to 1080i looked fairly good on an Apple Cinema display. I still prefer many of the newer features of the HD XDCam ie frame accumulation, slo-mo and its easily programmable time lapse. I think HDX will have limited market penetration. IF you have some clients that can churn enough days to recoup its cost the HDX900 might be worth it.

[freedom]

I do understand that it doesn't do DVCPro 50 but I was thinking that the more clients I can service with this camera, the better. I have a new client that wants the Sdx900. If I can offer this camera as an easy replacement, I'm further ahead. But the new Sdx client needs to be able to injest the footage I provide from this camera. Sounds like there is only two decks that can play the Hdx footage and one needs mods to work. I'd have to check with them first to see if they can do this...

[Hiding Under Here]

dino, where the hell have you been?

[Canonman]

Strangely, the camera mic connector is a 5 pin stereo XLR. Which no other camera currently uses. I don't see the point since the camera mic is assignable to Ch1-L or Ch2-R anyway. Panasonic's on camera shotgun mics are not very good. We used another brand mono mic with a XLR3 to XLR5 jumper cable.

Actually Dino, the XDCAM HD also uses a 5 pin XLR for the stereo camera mic (it can be switched to mono). Audio out on the back is also 5 pin XLR.

Just FYI,

cm

[dinosaur]

Actually Dino, the XDCAM HD also uses a 5 pin XLR for the stereo camera mic (it can be switched to mono). I didn't realize that. Although, I still don't see the point of it. I never paid attention to it on the XD, because Sony short shotgun mics were always superior to the Panasonic shotguns. An expensive stereo camera mounted shotgun mic is a little overkill. I knew about the XLR5 audio out, that's pretty much becoming standard.

dino, where the hell have you been? Working & family.

[Matt Box]

I posted this already in another thread but will drop it in here too. I just worked with this camera and thought it was great, but it drained my batteries faster than any rig Ive used. I'm talking about the AB hytron bricks here, I changed the battery settings a few times on the shoot to see if it would help but no dice. Are the rest of you getting these results or was it just me?

[No half-days]

The 900s power consumption is supposed to be around 36W. That's about 10 more than a Sony D600, or probably any other Betacam. Add on a sungun, or on board LCD monitor, and you're going to use batteries quickly. HD cameras in general appear to be power hungry. I just switched to lithium ion batteries when I bought my HDX900.

Randy
www.aysvideo.com

[Star Video]

Right on, Lithium Ions are much better. Definitely the way to go.

I own IDX v-lock Lithiums and they rock. Also, I have the "Batteries4Broadcast" brand 3-stud gold mount lithiums to replace my aging Anton Bauer Propac-14's. A wise investment.

[SimonW]

Li-ion batteries have their downside. I had a long conversation with the guys at AB and they told me that it was best to have a mixture. Say, 2 Dionics and 2 Hytrons.

The trouble with Li-ions is that they don't cope well with big power spikes (such as that from XDCAM). The other issue that they have is that they have roughly a 2-3 year lifespan even if you don't use them. And that factors in even with new batteries. If your brand new Li-ion battery has been sitting on a dealers shelf for a year, then that is a years less life you'll get out of that battery!

The other trouble with them is the amount of electronics that are needed in them to keep them safe. The battery will only output as much power as the least capable cell in the pack.

[Tv Shooter]

Try this for your HDX 900:
http://www.switronix.com/xp190i.htm
I shoot all day on one battery with this one,including a Frezzi light.
I've been using their batteries for 3 years now,with no signs of them dropping off.They come in AB and V mount,plus the people there are very cool.
If you are at NAB,check out their booth.

[Hiding Under Here]

Dionics have real issues regarding how quickly they die. In the begining, Dionics were sold as batteries that would produce the same amount of power for 500 FULL charging cycles. So if you used half the battery's power once and charged it up, then used it half way again, that would be the equivalent of one charging cycle.

However, that information seems to be erroneous based on Anton Bauer's current instructions on Dionics. AB is saying that the batteries have a life of between 18 and 30 months. Now, admittedly, Dionics were sold with the disclosure that they were warrantied for only one year. And that should have given buyers pause. However, the 500 complete cycle charging information should NOT have been disseminated by their sales outlets. An 18 to 30 month battery life trumps a 500 charging cycle life for almost any active photographer. Dionic buyers are finding that their batteries are expiring long before they charge them 500 times. After spending so much money investing in a Dionic system -- mine set me back about $3500 -- throwing more money at the problem is frustrating. Traditional AB buyers now find themselves having to buy heavier Hytrons faster than they'd imagined. Or, like me, they are open to anything new that is superior on the market.

[dinosaur]

We're starting to see these on the street. http://new.comer.cn/product_v.asp?id=713 w/digital charger http://new.comer.cn/product.asp?pro%5Ftype=116 at very resonable prices.
Again, you don't get the service and support that you get from A/B.
Buy these by contacting Jerry Gonzales at Lone Wolf Productions
jerry@lwptv.com 305.284.0405. Jerry is saying that these are better than the Beillen brand and I've been using the Beillen brand LiIon 160s for about a year w/no problems.

[Stoney]

Dionics have real issues regarding how quickly they die. -- mine set me back about $3500 -- throwing more money at the problem is frustrating. Traditional AB buyers now find themselves having to buy heavier Hytrons faster than they'd imagined. Or, like me, they are open to anything new that is superior on the market.

That is why I went the Beillen route. I just bought another two batt (190w/h) kit with charger from Lone Wolf on Ebay... $650. Pretty damn good price. Even if they die in 3 years it is better than $3500 A/B's that die in three years. And, I have had no issues using Li-Ions on my DVW790wsp or on the XDHD F350. They have been great, inexpensive, light, and reliable... for under $1k.

[Cameradude]

Dinosaur, I saw that you said, "...clients will need the new 1400 deck or a properly adjusted 1200 deck...". Is there an adjustment that can be made to the 1200 decks to play the smaller tapes?

[dayrate]

A little off-topic, but just a little. You asked about clients using this camera instead of the SDX-900. I bought the HDX about 3 months ago. I've only used it a few times for a client that actually wanted HD. Most of the time I've been using it as a 3rd camera or as a 24p camera for a major client. I checked with them before the purchase to see if they would / could down convert the HD footage.

To see how it looks, watch 48 HOURS tonight (10pm ET/ 9pm Central) . The Act One (1st segment) is mostly HDX-900. I haven't seen tonights show yet, but the one caveat is that they down convert, ingest, edit, then spit it out on SX as far as I know .... ugh.

I haven't spent much time with the XD cam on anything yet, but I do like the HDX-900.

[PHX Shooter]

Seeing as how this camera is the flavor of the month, I was curious what lens is preferred. Without going to a full wide angle lens, what lens is good all around, particularily with run & gun interviews?
Also, anybody have concerns with low light situations? I'm doing a lot of work in hotels and shoot in ballrooms (with and without additional lighting) and lobbies with mixed indoor lighting and sunlight from windows.
Finally, how do you think this camera would work for documentaries bound for film festivals, PBS, cable networks (Discovery, TLC etc.) and DVD?

[Run&Gun]

I haven't shot with this camera personaly yet, but according to the specs, it's not very good in low-light, only F 10, which is a what a D-600 or 400A was ten+ years ago. Granted it's a 14 bit camera, which will allow for cleaner processing so you can bump the gain up some with less undesired results, but who wants to introduce any unnecesary degradation into their HD images unless it's absolutly necesary? There have already been times where I've had to go +6 and +9 on my VariCam, and I just cringed... I don't want to go higher than 0dB. ;)

[Canonman]

Yup, as folks transition to HD cameras, they are finding the sensitivity to be less. It's simply a matter of cramming more pixels into a given size of real-estate. But as R&G says, you can put up with a little bit of gain. With newer cameras, adding a little gain is not the image killer it used to be, due to newer better DSPs and noise processing algorithms. That being said, I try to keep the F350 at -3 whenever possible.

cm

[Hiding Under Here]

Just for some clarification -- the Sony BVW D600 is an f8 camera (at 2000 lux) not an f10. The BVW400 was an f5.6 rated camera. I think the 400A was f8, but I am not sure. The Ikegami DV7 DVCam and the Panasonic SDX900s are both f11 rated cameras.

So earlier Betacams were f5.6, the last versions were f8, and newer SD digital cameras are f11. That's the progression.

What are the current HD models rated at/ the 350? The HDX900?

I shot with the 350 this past weekend -- again. It's a very good camera.

[Ed_Scott]

The Varicam is an f12 camera @ 2000 Lux

[Run&Gun]

HUH, you are right, I pulled out the brochure I had on the 600 and it was an f8. For some reason I was thinking that when they came out with the widescreen version, it was more sensitive. Never shot with a 400 just the 400A, and I remembered it being about the same(as a 600) as far as sensitivity.

Ed, the VariCam is f12, but I believe that measurment is based on shooting at 24fps w/180 degree shutter. At 60fps(which is 99% of what I shoot) it's less. ;) But I'm still able to shoot at -3dB a lot, I think I only had to go to 0 and +6dB twice this weekend.

[Ed_Scott]

Ed, the VariCam is f12, but I believe that measurment is based on shooting at 24fps w/180 degree shutter. At 60fps(which is 99% of what I shoot) it's less. ;) But I'm still able to shoot at -3dB a lot, I think I only had to go to 0 and +6dB twice this weekend.

I think you are right! But at any rate, the camera sucks up light and always wants more!

It's interesting that you are shooting at 60fps most of the time. I'm the exact opposite. Seems 99% of my shoots are 24p - go figure!

[Run&Gun]

It's interesting that you are shooting at 60fps most of the time. I'm the exact opposite. Seems 99% of my shoots are 24p - go figure!

I've had the camera almost 3 months now, and have only shot 24 ONCE, and then it was only about 5 minutes worth of b-roll. I'd like to do more 24, but the client wants 60. Hell, let's face it 60 frame HD "video" still looks damn good. And it's much easier to focus...:cool:

[Stoney]

Just got it. Very exciting. I am doing a three week shoot with it and I will report back when I am done. I think it is awesome for the price. Client spazzed a little when they realized they needed to find a deck for it (1400) but they realize the value of this format.

[Matt Box]

Cool, where they taking you?

[Run&Gun]

There are several HDX-900's popping up in town, now. One friend just got one about a week ago, and I want to do a side-by-side with my VariCam and see how close you can get them to matching, if you ever had to do a two-cam and mix a Vari and HDX. Has anyone done a real side-by-side comparison, yet? It seems like I remember a post about someone doing a quick down and dirty, but are there any real test comparo's out there?

[Hiding Under Here]

Run&Gun, don't take this the wrong way. If it's not obvious by now, I am a contentious person and I like debates for the sake of debating.

I would be kind of interested to see if the HDX900 looks as good as a Varicam but, in the end, I don't think it matters at all. As long as the HDX900 puts out a fine image (and I have to think that it does) and as long as that image qualifies as "high definition" based on lines of resolution, then, as Homer Simpson would say, "close enough".

Maybe the image differential matters if a producer is thinking of mixing Varicams and HDX900s on a shoot. If that's not the case, then I cannot imagine someone balking at using an HDX900 for reasons of quality.

I don't know if anyone here reads Mark Shubin in Videography Magazine. I think that periodical is just one big justification for why HD video is important to Hollywood. However Shubin (maybe it's Schubin) is the only reason to read Videography Magazine. He had an article in there a couple of months back showing just how absurd and relative the concept of HD really is by tracing the concept of HD back to video's earliest days of 30 lines of resolution. The next step up -- 230 lines? -- was the HD of it's time, and all subsequent improvements rendered each other obsolete and "standard". Shubin's point was that HD, as we know it now, will only be HD until something better comes along. And when an improvement is made, today's HD becomes tomorrow's SD. So, as we wring our hands (not that you're wringing R&G, but all of us collectively certainly are) we are merely hair splitting. Or maybe the manufacturers are splitting hairs, creating market segmentation and "adding value" to work-flow strata we never knew we needed, or never would have missed had it never been brought to our attention.

As a television photographer, the HDX900 is good enough for me. And I have never seen the output of an HDX900. I have seen (and often use) the Varicam and it's a wonderful camera. But what makes it that? Panasonic's engineering? Or the HD picture it produces? A bit of both I would suspect. HD looks better because, well, it should look better. The Varicam should look better than the HDX900 because it costs more. And if it doesn't look better, well how dumb is it of Panasonic to make that blunder? Sure I know it doesn't do as many things as the Varicam does. But if the Varicam is a V-8, the HDX900 should be a V-6. The funny thing about today's V-6's is that they are better than yesteryear's V-8s. I can live with the fact that I am now a V-6 level driver. I just wish there was a less bumpy road to drive on so I could buy one car and stick with it.

[powervideo]

Nicely put post. It's hard enough trying to guess between well-shot HDV inserts and "proper HD" sometimes, so trying to "see the difference between a HDX900 and a Varicam is almost certainly non-nonsensical.

Now if you compare a HDX900 with the new upcoming "V6" 1920x1080 HPX3000, then THAT is a comparison that may make a difference. Or it may not. ;)

Peter

[powervideo]

Following on from that post, who would be the US Panasonic dealer most likely to have demo units of HDX900's for sale after NAB?

Cheers,
Peter

[dhart]

To stir the pot a little more (and I know this is way off topic) I used the Canon XL H1 camera recently. It was a documentary cut on FCP HD. The pictures were absolutely stunning. This on a camera that costs under $10 K including lens. I would propose to you that with all the different "HD formats" there really is not "HD standard" (at least not like SD NTSC). A another side note, rumors abound that Apple is releasing FCP 6 (FCP on steroids) along with a Blu-Ray DVD recorder @ NAB 2007. Looks like we will finally be able to deliver a HD product to the non-broadcast market.

[Ed_Scott]

Shubin's point was that HD, as we know it now, will only be HD until something better comes along.

There is already 1440p on the horizon, with 2160p following close behind.

I own the Varicam, and shot with the HDX900 a few weeks back. After looking at the HDX image in the HD monitor, I would be hard pressed to say it did not look as nice as the Varicam.

[Ken]

I used a Varicam on Monday. I love that camera!

[Run&Gun]

I've seen some of the new episodes of American Chopper(on Discover HD) since they switched to the HDX-900 from the VariCam, and they look fine, or at least as good as possible considering the conditions that they are shot under. Definetly not a show that "showcases" HD's beauty, but it still looks fine.

HUH, no offense taken. ;)

Also, someone mentioned HDV inserts, well, maybe under perfect, well-lit, controlled situations, but these cams can't perform as well as a "real" HD camera under the same adverse conditions, at least not all of them. I had a Sony A1(HDV) a few weeks ago(I was just passing it along to a client, not actually using it myself for the shoot) and before I gave it to the client, I hooked it up and it was NOISY. An HD format does not an HD camera make... or something like that. Technically, it may have been HD, but the picture quality was definetly not.

[Hiding Under Here]

I was thinking that, for the most part, when someone says they want a Varicam these days, it is highly likely that the HDX900 would fill the bill. They say Varicam the way that people used to say Beta SP -- it's a format, or a tape, or a deck in the edit suite they are referring to, not really the camera itself. And as long as you can provide a camera -- HDX900 or Varicam -- that will produce a tape that can be digitized in their on-line edit suite, that's all that matters.

There will be exceptions to that. But increasingly I think the Varicam format is evolving to encompass the HDX900. No one wants to say DVCPro100, so they say Varicam instead. In the same way, few people specified "you have to have a 400A or a D600" -- saying "we're shooting Beta SP" sufficed to describe the need.

[powervideo]

It's like when client's come into my Premiere Pro SDI suite and say, "Wow. Nice Avid."

Peter

[freedom]

I have a shoot next month and the client asked for Varicam. I asked if i could sustitute the HDX900. There's no offspeed shots, so it should make little or no matter. The scheduler got back to me and said no to the HDX. She couldn't tell me why but I'll be talking more to her and plan on pressing why. It could just be they don't have a deck that can handle the new tape size.

[Run&Gun]

It could just be they don't have a deck that can handle the new tape size.

I know the 1400 handles both tape sizes and tape speeds, and I was thinking that the 1200 does, too. Is there anybody using the "full size studio decks"? I think some of those are the one's that can't handle the EX tape speed used in the 900.

The 900 and VariCam definetly aren't as easily as interchanged as a Betacam is, if someone tried to slide a 900 by in place of a VariCam, you could get screwed when the client gets a different tape than they were expecting and can't play it. Or they show up with a box of tape stock for the shoot and oops, they won't fit! I guess what I'm trying to say is, don't try to pass one of as the other. From all accounts, the 900 makes beautiful images, but don't sell yourself to the client as having a camera that you don't. With some exceptions, it's gonna probably be the whole "You have to have a 600" all over again, when another camera would probably suffice, but this time there's no way to lie, the tape will tell the tale.