p@mast3rs wrote on 11/10/2004, 12:58 PM
Definitely looks awesome and at $4900. Much better than the $7k that some were prediciting.

Its definitely an exciting time to be in video.
Tom Pauncz wrote on 11/10/2004, 1:04 PM
And support in Vegas: Vegas Support

Grazie wrote on 11/10/2004, 1:29 PM
( removed & edited by Grazie . . )

Thanks Liam - what do I know anyway?!? It did look very similar to the link I saw . .

farss wrote on 11/10/2004, 2:37 PM
The press release doesn't specifically state if 24fps is progressive or interlaced, I cannot imagine they'd be offering 48i but ya never know.
As for the Cineform deal, well it's good value for the money and I'll sure buy it but it comes nowhere near what I'm after. We're lead to believe this is the professional division of Sony, since when was 4:2:0 'professional', when are we going to hear about a 4:4:4 edit and grading solution for HDV?
And YES I know what that'll cost, I'd love to give Sony our money but so far all they keep on saying is "Do you know what that'll cost?", at least others seem keen to talk about this and offer a solution.
JJKizak wrote on 11/10/2004, 2:53 PM
Geees, and I payed $500.00 for the Cineform codec.

Spot|DSE wrote on 11/10/2004, 2:58 PM
If you want to know more about/see more images of the camera
farss wrote on 11/10/2004, 3:08 PM
If I'm reading what was said correctly this camera doesn't shoot progressive scan in any mode? Does that mean even in 720p it's a fiddle?
OdieInAz wrote on 11/10/2004, 3:16 PM
"The HVR-Z1U HDV 1080 camcorder can record HDV, DVCAM and DV images at 60i, 50i, 30, 25 or 24 frames per second..."

The wording seems imply that 24, 24, or 30 are somehow different from 50i or 60i by lack of either "i" or "'p". Maybe they mean both?
busterkeaton wrote on 11/10/2004, 3:19 PM
"When asked about 24p, Ott described the Cinematone and the Cineframe modes, each with their own advantages. The 'magic' found in the camera takes care of any cinema cadence 'looks' that 24p fans might demand, yet maintains outstanding resolution that has not been seen before from a small CCD camcorder. As the Sony camera records interlaced images, Sony calls its solutions 24, 25 or 30 frames (24F/25F/30F). "
farss wrote on 11/10/2004, 3:27 PM
That's the bit that got my attention!
I know I'm going to sound like a winger and no I don't care a rats about 24p, but I do care about 720/25p as that's the most popular delivery format around here, seems the government forgot to mandate just what HiDef is so it's been interpreted to mean Anything Higher in Definition than SD!

If what I'm reading is correct this raises a few interesting questions and perhaps the need for some more expensive gear. Should we rely on the cameras de-interlacing algorithms or buy a rather expensive HiDef de-interlacing box with motion compensation?
Spot|DSE wrote on 11/10/2004, 3:47 PM
Since I have a TREMENDOUS amount of respect for you, first read my post on the DMN. I don't wanna start a word war with folks who haven't seen the cam. What the paper says and what your eyes see are the same thing, but perception/relearning buzz phrases is the order of the day, I suspect. On everyone's part.

is where you'll find it.
There is NO WAY a 1/3 chip cam is gonna get this good SHOOTING in a P mode. The technology and resampling that this cam can do is simply astounding.
wcoxe1 wrote on 11/10/2004, 4:03 PM
And how does THIS fit in? Spot, which way is the industry going?

"Picked this up on a "rumor" site:

Matsushita, the parent company of JVC, Quasar, Technics and Panasonic has signed a MOU (Memorandum Of Understanding) with Sony and Canon about four weeks ago to develop High Definition-DVD Pro-sumer HD-DVD camcorders approximating the size and the weight of today's PV400 with a NEW BLU-RAY disk which will now have a capacity of 8GB up to 50GB will be incorporated. This disk will come in a new compact size for all three companies to put in a mini-HD cam. The highest resolutions of HD will be possible as well as the new standard for Digital Audio of 8cm. The first three models are expected with-in only 6 months. The first will incorporate BLU-RAY @ 15GB which is sufficient for High Definition of just over 1 hour duration. The quality of the BLU-RAY disk will "surpass" that of current DVD's. The prices for this new format will be LESS than current Pro-sumer HD-DV.

The run-on sentences and bad grammar are as I found, copied, and pasted it. It COULD have been clearer.

Interesting, in any case!"
Spot|DSE wrote on 11/10/2004, 4:11 PM
I guess I don't understand your question. Blu-Ray is the distribution method Sony is pointing towards, along with several other companies, for HD delivery. You can deliver MPEG2, Windows Media HD, Quicktime HD, Real HD, etc all on a Blu-Ray disk. So, your posted rumor, which isn't a rumor, it's real, (and somewhat old news) is that other manufacturers are jumping on the Sony bandwagon. There will be camcorders using Blu-Ray to shoot/store, (never capture again) and there will be delivery mechanisms to deliver professional, semi-professional, and home video.
wcoxe1 wrote on 11/10/2004, 4:20 PM
I suppose I should ask, which will be the better "New" thing in a year. The tape versions, such as the one that started this thread, or the Blu-Ray versions, which seem destined to come out in about 6 months?

From what I can glean, the two technologies will both be presented in Pro-sumer and other formats.

Should everyone who is so excited about the tape version be waiting 6 months to see the Blu-Ray version of about the same thing?

WILL it be about the same thing?

Shoot/Store, never capture seems a VERY good thing. Will this be the preferred technology, replacing tape as we now know it?
Spot|DSE wrote on 11/10/2004, 4:47 PM one can comment on what's up in a year, but it's gonna be a while before Blu-Ray mechanisms are common on pro-sumer cams. On home cams, maybe in 18 months (pure speculation) but the more robust drives for heavier cams? Don't expect that for a while.
Stonefield wrote on 11/10/2004, 4:51 PM
So what kind of computer hardware is going to be required to edit this PRO HDV format ? CPU's, Ram , etc ?
Spot|DSE wrote on 11/10/2004, 5:07 PM
2.6 CPU or faster, 1 gig of ram or more. HDV is 25Mbps just like DV is. And if you use the Aspect codec, it edits just like DV.
busterkeaton wrote on 11/10/2004, 5:18 PM
Is Sony going to do a big HDV whitepaper?
tnw2933 wrote on 11/10/2004, 5:31 PM

According to the press release we can purchase ConnectHD now from the Sony Digital Media web site, but I don't see it offered anywhere on the web site. Since this is just what Ihave been waiting for, I am thrilled to see its release and I am just wondering how and where to purchase it.

Spot|DSE wrote on 11/10/2004, 5:31 PM
One can only assume. In case they don't...
Spot|DSE wrote on 11/10/2004, 5:32 PM
THAT, I don't know. Remember, I don't work for Sony, I just happened to have been fortunate enough to be part of the press event launching this cam in the US and Hawaii.
Laurence wrote on 11/10/2004, 6:34 PM
I tried to order it today but couldn't. They told me that there would be links posted in a couple of days for ordering it.
farss wrote on 11/10/2004, 7:11 PM
please, I'm not for a minute questioning your judgement and having read the DMN article I'm more than willing to take your word for it, no questions there, OK.. Certainly I'm not one to add grist to any rumour mill but a few things .
Firstly your comment about the difficulty of scanning such a CCD block in progressive scan. I agree absolutely with what you're saying, makes perfect sense to me with my limitied knowledge of how all this technology works but put simply, progressive scan means you have to read twice the number of CCD elements in half the time or else give the CCDs half the time to react which brings the noise level up. The only way around that is bigger CCD elements which impacts on the design of the optics and the price of the unit goes thru the roof.
Don't know if I've quite got it right but close enough for me to get pretty annoyed at those who like to say "Sony/Panasonic/JVC/Cannon didn't give us what we want because of ....", insert some half brained conspiracy theory to taste, I'm sure you've read enough of those posts too.

That's not my point at all and maybe I hadn't put it very well. I've just come back from a hands on with our first HDV camera and I love the thing, we like it so much we've ordered 4 of the pro version so our commitment level is very high. I'm pleased to report that even if you're not in the least bit interested in HDV this camera shoots native 16:9 SD! Truly awesome!. We've also bought the WA adaptor for the camera and it's quite a decent effort. Anyone want to buy some cheap PD150s?

Anyway getting back to the progressive scan issue. Firstly what is said by Sony on the DMN article is rock solid good info, except their previous spin on this was that they couldn't trust consummers to shoot progressive scan, that's what I was bugged about! Which ever spin doctor dreamed that line up need to be given his marching orders.

Can I also squash another point, maybe I'm wrong but Sony seem to have fixed an issue with this camera, the manual focus now tracks the autofocus setting, didn't really have time to check this out 100% maybe somebody else whose got one can confirm this.
Another thing good with this camera, the thing will focus almost down to macro! Probably a bigger issue is you can focus so damn close the camera blocking the light on the subject is more of an issue.

So SPOT, here's what I'm about and maybe you've already gleaned this. I want to be able to have people use this camera to shoot HD for broadcast. That means, what you and I think of it really doesn't amount to much. How many years after the launch of DV25 did it take before any of the networks would put the stuff to air?
Here's how it goes down here, our national broadcaster tried the JVC camera, did extensive tests with the thing and the answer was, they will not broadcast anything shot with one, that's it, blanket policy decision, they will not buy your footage. Call them whatever names you like and I'll add a few more of my own, still doesn't let you make a sale.
So OK, Sony have a better camera on offer, I'm convinced, the people I work for are convinced. Now comes the hard part, selling our convictions to those that are going to pay for content. I'm pretty certain in 5 years time, we'll see the same thing happen with HDV as we saw happen with DV25, those who snubbed it initially ended up shooting it themselves and end up agreeing to ingest it.

But in the interim we're looking to take that footage and present it in the best possible light, not only do I hope it'll make us some money (why else would we do it) but we also provide an opportunity for independant film makers in this country. If that means we've got to spend a lot of money, that's cool, so long as we get a return on our investment.

Sorry to ramble on here, let me get to the specifics.
As I said before I'm not interested in film, cadence, look or gamma. I'm interested in cutting footage from this camera with true HDCAM and having it look as close as possible, hopefully so close almost no one will know the difference. If that means doing de-interlacing in a $100K black box then that's fine, we just have to plug the numbers into our business plan. And what muddies the water a bit for me is the DMN article seems to focus on how good the 'film look' aspect is, that's fine if that's your thing but it's not what I'm after. I don't have a problem if that's what the client wants but what about those who just want true 720p at fast shutter speeds?


farss wrote on 11/10/2004, 7:15 PM
OK, I can wait, my first paying HDV shoot isn't until next week or should I play it safe and stick to DV?