#1  
Old 10-20-2004, 03:35 PM
SoCalShooter SoCalShooter is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 85
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
SoCalShooter
Post

I hear that a 24p capable (to compete w/ Panasonics DVX-100) PD-190 HD DVCam is on the way from Sony. Anyone know anything about this? Any time table for introduction? Would it be a mistake to invest in a few PD-170s now if the 90 is on the way soon, or is the 90 still a ways off?
__________________
Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one.<br>A. J. Liebling
  #2  
Old 10-20-2004, 11:58 PM
quicklad's Avatar
quicklad quicklad is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 375
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
quicklad
Post

A pro version of the hdv format camera from sony is supposed to be out Q1 of 2005. Yes - it would be a mistake to "invest" in a few pd-170's right now - unless you have a gig thar will pay for them quickly.

Eric
__________________
Old gaffers don't die, they just lose their grip...

http://www.quicklad.com
  #3  
Old 10-21-2004, 01:34 AM
Run&Gun Run&Gun is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,985
Thanks: 1
Thanked 23 Times in 19 Posts
Run&Gun is an unknown quantity at this point
Post

My understanding is that the current "pro-sumer" version currently coming out will record both HDV and standard DV, and because of the compression technique, you use the same mini-dv tapes and get the same recording time and you can even go back and forth between HD and SD on the same tape and the camera will detect it on the fly during playback and adjust. If Sony's smart the same will apply to the "Professional" version coming out early next year. Now if only they would make a broadcast "bigboy" camcorder that would do HD and SD...

[ October 21, 2004, 01:35 AM: Message edited by: Run&Gun ]
__________________
"Making video look good isn't a luxury, it's a must. That's our job, that's what we do for a living." Originally posted by Chicago Dog
  #4  
Old 10-21-2004, 07:07 AM
dinosaur dinosaur is offline
Member
Dino Martin
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 982
Thanks: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 2 Posts
dinosaur
Post

About a week ago I played with a demo version of the so called HDV "PD190" (that's not Sony's official name for it). It was the pro version, NOT the consumer "FX1" version that's due out next month. They added XLR audio jacks to the pro version that are located in the same general area as the DVX 100. The iris wheel is now one smooth wheel turn vs. the click stops of the previous PD cameras.

I was very surprised by the excellent HD picture quality, it was very rich and robust even when I played back tape that I shot on a 45" HD screen. Digital artifacts, "crawling" and "jaggies" were not evident. The lens is of considerably better quality than the PD 170.

Since this is a 1080i format, Sony avoided having a feature that needs to "24p reboot" the camera by creating a simulated "filmlook" 3:2 pulldown. It looks very similar to the filmic Panasonic DVX 24p effect. With the flick of a switch near the record button it can record in SD miniDV format too.

The construction of the camera is a much beefier metal than the DVX100A. It doesn't have that "plastic toy" feel that the Panasonic DVX has. The 16:9 LCD viewfinder is fairly good too.

While it does not make the same high quality HD picture that a Varicam or F900 does, or have their menu functionality, it blows the socks off many other SD ENG cameras I've seen to date.

This camera will certainly turn the DV market on its ear. A significant bang for the buck.

[ October 21, 2004, 07:41 AM: Message edited by: dinosaur ]
  #5  
Old 10-21-2004, 11:30 AM
<whizz bang>
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Gabe,

Check it out at:

http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer...FX1/index.html

But, if you have the beauty of HD, do you really want a crap lens?????

(and yes, I know CNN's answer already.......)
  #6  
Old 10-21-2004, 09:24 PM
quicklad's Avatar
quicklad quicklad is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 375
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
quicklad
Post

Dinosaur - so the pro version does NOT have 24p - but a filmic "look"?...ummm...is it me or what the f#$k is Sony thinking?

Every one who calls me for a "dinky"cam job now wants the DVX-100a - FOR THE 24P.

Dino- do you think the film look of the Sony is competition for the 24p of the DVX-100a?

A lot of producers who want the 24p - and use the DVX-100a to get it - don't even realize that Panasonic has the 900 - for real 2/3" chip 24p. I'm saying they look for buzzwords....not actual quality.

If Sony can't say "Yes - it has 24p" I think they will not regain that market. Or are they leaving it to us to try and convince our 24p wanting clients that the "film look" is just as good as 24p...?

Eric
__________________
Old gaffers don't die, they just lose their grip...

http://www.quicklad.com
  #7  
Old 10-21-2004, 09:54 PM
dinosaur dinosaur is offline
Member
Dino Martin
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 982
Thanks: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 2 Posts
dinosaur
Post

Don't worry, the same producers who bought into the DVX100's 24p gimmick will quickly see that Sony's HDV "filmlook" is much the same. It will become gadget du jour very fast once word gets out that Sony is back in the game with an HD Handycam. Yes, the SDX 900 does 24p better than the DVX100, but then again I've got to say that the Sony "PD 190" HDV in 1080i filmlook mode looked subjectively better than the SDX 900 24p that I saw recently.

Yes, I own a DVX100A too, and I get many calls just for its 24p feature, but unfortunately, I think Sony has just jumped way ahead in the small camera market with the intro of this new camera.

[ October 21, 2004, 09:58 PM: Message edited by: dinosaur ]
  #8  
Old 10-22-2004, 03:54 PM
quicklad's Avatar
quicklad quicklad is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 375
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
quicklad
Post

From Dino - "I've got to say that the Sony "PD 190" HDV in 1080i filmlook mode looked subjectively better than the SDX 900 24p that I saw recently."

Wow - I was going to get the camera before - but this makes it even a lot more interesting.

Thanks for the info and input. Can I ask where were you able to get your hands on the camera?

cheers,
E
__________________
Old gaffers don't die, they just lose their grip...

http://www.quicklad.com
  #9  
Old 10-22-2004, 11:09 PM
2000lux's Avatar
2000lux 2000lux is offline
Member
Brian Henderson
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 410
Thanks: 1
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
2000lux is on a distinguished road
Post

Sounds lovely. When are they going to put decent lenses on these things? That's really the only thing that kept me from joining the digital revolution when they first came out. The awful viewfinders and the even worse lenses!
__________________
"A bad day in television is still better than any good day in a cubicle."

-Me
  #10  
Old 10-23-2004, 02:32 AM
<Miss Daisy DV>
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
"I've got to say that the Sony "PD 190" HDV in 1080i filmlook mode looked subjectively better than the SDX 900 24p that I saw recently."

Wow - I was going to get the camera before - but this makes it even a lot more interesting.
Wow, this is unbelievable. Some people want the push for HD so bad that they are willing to compromise the real potential of broadcast quality HD. They rather opt for toy camera heads and formats. If this format is so clean than why did CBS opt for IMX on XDCAM instead of adapting HDV? The main reason CBS is keeping hard news in SD is because of bandwidth issues. Bob & Frank both already explained this. The reason CBS opted for XDCAM is because the format is on disk instead of tape. Guess what? HDV is half the bandwidth of IMX and Sony can easily put HDV on XDCAM all while allowing twice the recording time of IMX.

HDV is a low end, the lowest end HD format. HDV is not suitable for high end broadcast work or post production work. HDV is not a robust enough format for the big boys to play with. I was working at a remote with a Sony sponsored truck and they had a HDV camera over there. I can tell you while it looked very clean playing back first generation talking head shots, it looked far from perfect when you know what to look for. Things you obviously don't know about. The HDV codec, just like SD DVD depends very much on the picture complexity. As long as you have faces in your pictures or homogenous backgrounds the HDV picture is nice and sharp. Take a shot in a forest or tape a wide angle outdoor shot in a surrounding with a lot of details and if the digital artifacts, and jaggies still won't be evident to you than I suggest a new pair of glasses. Take those forest shots, edit them and now you should notice 20 percent more unnatural artifacts in the picture.

I guess that's why Bob & Frank are making decisions at CBS and you're not. I have worked with the SDX900 in 24p. While the resolution of that camera is less than HDV I could not spot any of the artificial junk that I seen with HDV. Do me a favor and take your HDV camera into the forest and than compare the pictures to the 900. Don't look at just the resolution, look for the very unnatural junk in the pictures. CBS could of told Sony to put HDV on XDCAM and it can easily be done since it's only half the bandwidth of IMX, yet CBS decided to go with IMX. Gee I wonder why?

I was told that Sony is working on a higher bandwidth version of long gop HDV, something like a 120 Mbit/s. So far XDCAM is fast enough to enable transfer speeds of up to 72 Mbps per pickup (144 Mbps with two pickups). You need some extra bandwidth for the cache and metadata but with the two pick ups at 144 Mbps that is enough for HDV at 120Mbps with 24Mbps reserved for the cashe and metadata.

Gee, even my fourteen year old daughter knows what to look for in a picture.
  #11  
Old 10-23-2004, 09:10 AM
dinosaur dinosaur is offline
Member
Dino Martin
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 982
Thanks: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 2 Posts
dinosaur
Post

On no, here we go again. As soon as someone posts a opinion he rushes in to say the sky is falling. That post reads just like someone we all know wrote it.

Do not put words in my mouth. I never said that Sony's Pro HDV was a superior camera to the XDCam or even the Varicam or F900. In fact, I still think the Varicam & F900 are as good as they come. I merely stated my opinion after ACTUALLY SHOOTING A REAL TEST WITH THE Sony HDV CAMERA (not just fiddling around with it for a few hours) that I was quite impressed with it and that it would be a better tool than the DVX100A or PD170.

Although it may be true of the JVC 1 chip HDV camera, WE did not see any of the digital atifacts that you speak so loudly of on this camera. We put it through some fairly tough tests in the field, not in a carefully lit demo studio. Including looking at editied clips. We were the ones actually testing it, not reading about it on some spec sheet. It was my perception, and others, that it did look better than the SDX900 in 24p mode.

To turn a blind eye to this new camera would be to live in denial that this camera will gain a significant toe hold in the low budget HD & DV production market. It WILL fill a significant niche. Its here, and not going away quickly. Its already is causing quite a buzz in that end of the business.

Regardless of what you may think, the production world does not revolve around CBS's and other news ops decision to use XDCam in its ENG operations. What's good for CBS News isn't necessarily the holy grail for the rest of us. One of the main reasons that CBS went with XDCam at this time was C-O-$-T at about $25K per unit vs HDCam or Varicam at $80K+ per unit.

I see it as just another useful tool in my overall kit at a reasonable cost. As much as it will pain you to hear this "Daisy" or "I", we just completed shooting a significant portion of a prime time show for NBC Universal Productions using my DVX100A in 24p at full rate. Why?, because the director and producer asked us to. We also shot a show that airs every week on ABC-TV with the DVX100A. We work to fulfill the producers real needs, not the pipe dreams of the cameraman.

Next week I will be shooting for another client on an F900 and following that its back to my Betacam SP. Its all about running an adaptable sucessful, viable & profitable business while keeping our varied broadcast clients happy. If that means well have to invest in a $5K HDV camera, so be it. That 's not such a big investment to recoup for the quality that you get from it. Plainly if you don't like what people are shooting with HDV. then don't use it. I on the other hand, along with using other cameras, see it as an opportunity to make some very good money with it.

PS: Sony only has one working demo of the pro version of its HDV camera in N. America right now & only about half a dozen people have been given the opportunity to field test it. I pretty much know who all of them are.

[ October 23, 2004, 12:50 PM: Message edited by: dinosaur ]
  #12  
Old 10-23-2004, 01:49 PM
quicklad's Avatar
quicklad quicklad is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 375
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
quicklad
Post

Puhleeease..."Daisy"

I am interested in this camera for two reasons.

1) I'll make money with it because I will get CALLS TO WORK with it.

and

2) I can buy it at $6-8k without tapping my home equity (again)

No where, no how has anyone mentioned or compared ANY tech specs, and no one has compared HDV to real HD.

You may be exactly right - good for you- here's a gold star.

I am not trying to 'sell' this camera to my clients in place of HD.

I am only interested in whether or not the Sony HDV will compare and compete favorably against the XL-2 and the DVX-100a. From what Dino says it sounds like it will.


ergo - I'm gettin' one.

And you can bitch all you want while I take care of my clients needs and wants AND put my girls through college.

Eric
__________________
Old gaffers don't die, they just lose their grip...

http://www.quicklad.com
  #13  
Old 10-24-2004, 02:29 PM
<karnac the magnificint>
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by dinosaur:
On no, here we go again. As soon as someone posts a opinion he rushes in to say the sky is falling. That post reads just like someone we all know wrote it.
Oh let me guess - let me guess - let me guess! I know who you mean!!!!!!!!!!! EYE-VANE!!!!!!!
  #14  
Old 10-24-2004, 03:15 PM
Shaky & Blue Shaky & Blue is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 1,922
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Shaky & Blue
Post

Ivan, you should have just put your name on it. We all know it's you.
__________________
Gone.
  #15  
Old 10-27-2004, 01:14 AM
Deaf and Blind's Avatar
Deaf and Blind Deaf and Blind is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 793
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Deaf and Blind
Post

Having seen footage from one of these HDV cams edited in to finished product the pictures are exceptional for the size of camera.
Rumour is the front end will be heading to a proper sized camera with a reasonable price tag attached, but still recording on DV tapes.
__________________
Here's one I prepaired earlier...
  #16  
Old 10-27-2004, 03:19 PM
Tippster's Avatar
Tippster Tippster is offline
The Fly on the Wall
Tipp McClure
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,923
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Tippster is on a distinguished road
Post

You know, you've got to be pretty ignorant to tell Dinosaur that he's wrong when he says one camera "looked subjectively better" (emphasis=mine) than another. That's like telling Robert Frost that one poem is better than another. In YOUR opinion, maybe, but that does NOT make it law.

[ October 27, 2004, 03:19 PM: Message edited by: Tippster ]
__________________
I am bored. I am FILLED wiz boredom."
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 1996-2009 b-roll.net

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:38 AM.