[Luis Caffesse]

[Barry Green] “Well, that’s true, but perhaps misleading. You can output the 720/24p on the component outputs, but it will be carried within a 60p stream. Same with 720/30p. So yes, the analog outputs are only outputting 720/60p, but it’s not like you can’t put film-looking footage on the analog outputs, because you can; it just gets transported within a 60p data stream.”

Oh, okay.
Thanks for the clarification Barry.
I wasn’t trying to mislead, I actually didn’t know that it would carry the 24 or 30p signal within a 60P stream.

Well, that makes it a bit more usefull than I originally thought.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[Jan Crittenden Livingston] “Not sure where Tom got his info, but he is indeed incorrect. Firewire is available in 25M, 50M, and 100M. And the only HD output is Analog Component. “

Thanks for the clarification Jan.
There seems to be a lot of bad information floating around, which is what makes your participation here so great. There nothing quite like getting an answer straight from the source.

By the way, as far as the component output is concerned, will that output be active in all shooting modes? I know that on JVC’s camera, for example, the component outputs will only output 720P60, no other frame rates, and no SD output. Are the specs solid enough at this stage for you to be able to give us some more detail as to what we can expect from the component output on the HVX200 (Color space, Compression, SD & HD)?

Thanks again.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[Emery] “The new info i got out of it is that it will indeed record any frame rate between 4 and 60, and that it uses the same pull down as the DVX for 24p when recording to P2 (not sure why they dont record just the frames needed) “

Damn, I missed it.

I was under the impression that the frame rates for 720 weren’t set in stone yet, though I know Jan was pushing for the same variable frame rates as the varicam (everything from 4 to 60).

As far as the pulldown on the 24P, everything up until now said that it will indeed perform a pulldown when shooting 24P in 1080P mode, but that in 720P it would only record the frames needed.

Are you certain she wasn’t specifically discussing the 1080P mode?

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[toke lahti] “And SDI?
Another mistake?”

I’m not sure on that one, he didn’t mention anything about it in the DVXuser discussion.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[toke lahti] “”Panasonic officials said, “Only standard definition can be transferred via the firewire port, because of bandwidth limitations.” “

This was discussed a bit over at DVXUser.com, and the writer of the Tomshardware article actually posted himself to say that it was a misunderstanding and he was waiting for their webmaster to fix the error.

The HVX200 will definitely stream SD and HD out of the firewire port.
Whether or not we can record that directly to ANY harddrive has yet to be confirmed, but if we can’t there will probably be some 3rd party solution (i.e. Firestore, etc).

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[toke lahti] “Hdd: $.5/GB
Dvd: $.1/GB”

I guess I should have been clearer.
My point was that when dealing with High Definition footage back, where you will have much more than 4.7GB of backup, a HDD makes more sense due not only to the hard cost per GB, but the ease of use and time taken to back up the files. In post, time is money. The time taken to backup all those files to individual DVD-R discs outweighs the .4/GB difference in hard costs.

That was my thought anyhow.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[David] Please, be a bit more rational. Don’t try to compare with tape in terms of cost/min because it’s not logical.

David, you’re absolutetly right, we can’t really compare P2 on a 1:1 basis with tape, it’s just not a straight or fair comparison. We need to learn to think of P2 as a new form of aquisition, much in the way we think of flash cards for digital still cameras.

Do you store your personal pictures in flash memory? And in HDD? No, you at the end stores in optical media (probably DVD) due to $/MB.

Again, you’re absolutely right, no one should plan on using P2 cards for storage, that’s not what they are designed for. As you said, it comes down to the cost of $/MB, which is why I recommeded earlier archiving footage onto Hard Drives. While you’re right that hard drives are not the best choice for photos (where you are concerned with MB of data) they make much more sense for high definition footage (where you are talking about GB of data). If you compare the prices of $/GB, hard drives are the most cost effective solution (even when compared to tape).

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[toke lahti] “If you can record 100Mbps, then you can.
There no magic here and no codecs to record.
Tape does not not with what codec its data will be used.

Tape may not, but the record heads do, which is where track pitch comes into play.
The codec does matter, each codec has it’s own specification for how it is written to tape. If you want to change the specs, then you are changing the codec.
So again, you may be right about recording 100mb/s to dv tape, it may be possible, but now you have to write a codec that can support that (because DVCProHD cannot do it).

No one is implying that this is “magic.”
But the tape and datarate is only part of the equation.
Codec specifications do matter, and you can’t just ignore them.

But you guys seem to totally miss my point.

I think this topic has been gone over in minute detail.
Please don’t mistake disagreement with misunderstanding.
I understand what you are saying, and I concede that you may be right about the ability to write 100mb/s to DV tape. It’s the conclusions you seem to be drawing from that that I disagree with.

You take for granted that HD camera can cost $6k now, when 5 years ago it was $100k. And camera can be 5 times smaller. But somehow you can’t believe that tape mechanism that has costed $20k for the last 5 years can cost only $1k. It’s all about manufacturing volumes of mass market.

It’s not all about manufacturing volumes of mass market, it’s about new technologies which allow for the removal of expensive components. The only reason an HD camera can cost $6K now instead of $100K is due to the fact that the tape transport is removed from the equation and replaced with inexpensive solid state card slots. The camera is 5 times smaller because once the large tape transport is out of the design, the electronics can be put into a unibody fixed lens camera design (which has already been used for a previous model, and can simply be modified to fit the new camera’s electronics).

There has been no ‘breakthrough’ in tape mechanisms akin to the move to solid state recording. There is no cheaper way to manufacture record heads, or the mechanisms of the transport itself. You could manufacture all the tape transports you want, but the price will only go down to a certain point. Unless there is some advancement in the recording technology used in tape transports, the price will not drop significantly.

Why aren’t you screaming that HD ccd’s cost $20k per set and that’s why it’s totally impossible that hvx has HD ccd’s?

Probably because that isn’t true.
Obviously the CCDs in the HVX don’t cost $20K per set.
You comparisson doesn’t hold because it’s not based on anything factual.
CCD technology has advanced by leaps and bounds over the past 10 years, aided also by the digital still camera advancements. Again, I would ask that you point out the major advancements in tape transport technology, or in record head technology.

If you don’t get it, I give up.

Again, I ‘get it,’ I just simply don’t agree with your position.
That’s all.

‘Nuff said about this subject.”

That’s something we can both agree on.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[toke lahti] “What is my mistake here?
When you are reading/writing 25Mbps signal at quadruple speed you are reading/writing 100Mbps. “

While that may be true I think Jeremiah’s point is that the signal you are writing in that case is still a DV25 signal. So, while that may be interesting it would not really be a solution for the HVX200 for numerous reasons.

First off DVCPro is a different animal.
DVCPro uses Metal Particle tape, not the sam metal evaporated tape that DV and DVCam use.

DVCPro uses a wider track pitch than both DV and DVCam (18microns vs. 15 & 10 respectively).

DVCPro runs faster than both DV and DVCam (almost twice as fast as DV in fact), so to quadruple the speed of DVCPro (as is done on the VariCam) would mean an equivalent of about 7 times faster than DV, not 4times.

DV runs at 18.81mm/s
DVCPro runs at 33.82mm/s
DVCProHD runs at 135.28mm/s

As has been said here before, DV tape DOES NOT have the strength to run fast enough to record a DVCProHD signal. Again, maybe you’re right about being able to record 100mb/s to DV tape, but there is more to a codec than the datarate (i.e. track pitch, tape speed, etc). Just because you can push 100mb/s through, doesn’t mean you can record a DVCProHD signal.

Secondly, and much more importantly, while all the tech details I just listed may be true… it’s all a moot point. As has been mentioned several times, a DVCProHD tape transport would cost much more than the $6000 the HVX200 will sell for.

As I have mentioned before, the only reason low cost DVCProHD will be possible is because tape has been taken out of the equation. As cheap as tape may seem, you pay for it up front both in the tape transport on the camera, and in the deck you have to buy to digitize your footage.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas

[Luis Caffesse]

[mattso] If the intention is to sell cameras that a person can use in a scripted shooting environment, where 15 minutes of footage CAN constitute a day’s work, then perhaps this camera is appropriate. But ‘scripted’ implies a ‘budget’ and this begs the question, why would a professional use a camera like this in a scripted environment, when one could use Varicam, SDX900, or even Sony’s HD stuff.

“Scripted” does not always equal ‘budget.’
And, even if it does imply some sort of budget, it doesn not always imply “large budget.” So, this camera does fit in to many people’s needs, myself included. I do a lot of shooting, and a lot of it is scripted work (commercial, broadcast, and corporate work mainly, as well as my own projects).

I’ve shot on every DVCPro format, and everytime I do I need to go out and rent. For many of my clients, the added advantages of the VariCam are not a factor, some only need slowmotion for a certain product shot, etc. For some, the only reason we go with DVCPro50 is to pull a better matte than we can with DVCPro or DV. So, it’s not always an issue of camera form factor, lens, or even chip size. Sometimes just shooting to a different codec can make the difference. I haven’t purchased a camera in years due to the fact that I’ve been shooting on so many different ones, it just didn’t make sense. But, the HVX200 will allow me to shoot on all 3 formats, and it should cover the bulk of the jobs I do. Yes, there will still be times where I will need to rent, but for the majority of jobs the HVX should do just fine.

And if one is not a professional, with a budget, why not use the much less expensive DVX100a. Or an XL2… Unless you’re going to show your film on the BIG SCREEN, and how many people actually do..?.. why HD at all? Why 24p, for that matter, unless you’re making a film print.

Some clients like the look of 24P, some prefer the look of 30P.
When working in as a freelancer, as I do, having options for my clients makes it much easier to give them what they want (i.e. makes it easier to get the job). And, owning my own gear lowers my overhead, and increases my profit margin.

Many people prefer to shoot on HD in order to ‘future proof’ their work.
I’ve shot a number of local commercials in HD, even though the local stations are broadcasting in SD.

Why would anyone spend this kind of money on a unibody dv camera?

Well, first off it’s a unibody HD camera.
And secondly, I would point out that the price difference between the HVX and the Sony Z1 (which you say you’ll choose instead) is less than $50.
So apparently spending this kind of money on a unibody camera isn’t as ridiculous as you thought it was.

It is wholly useless as a news gathering HD camera, or as a documentary camera – for people like me, who shoot a lot of BTS footage, and are commonly rolling 2 hours of tape in a day’s shooting – and then go cut the stuff we shoot – this is a completely useless format.

For people like you, it might not be the right choice.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, P2 is not a magic bullet.
This isn’t supposed to be the answer to all questions, and it would be ridiculous to think that it should be the ‘perfect’ camera for any shooting situation. Much like I wouldn’t shoot anything relying on fast motion in HDV, I wouldn’t shoot anything that relied on long takes on P2.

Everything has it’s benefits and drawbacks.
It’s just a matter of weighing those and choosing what works for you.
But there is no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak. I personally don’t see HDV or XDCam (for example) being a solution for my projects, but I’m not going to say it’s a ‘useless format.’ Obviously many have found a use for it.

8 minuted of HD on a chip…
How lame can this possibly be? Hotswapable, Yeah, like that’s the least bit practical – have any of these guys ever tapes a concert, or a wedding or a news conference? bumping a camera every 8 minutes to get you cards in and out… that dog don’t bark!

Again, it will work for some, but not for others.
Perhaps it will work for you when the cards get larger?
Either way, again it’s not a ‘catch all’ format, nor should we expect it to be. I could say the same thing about the GOP structure and high compression of HDV, because for me it renders the format useless. But like I said, for many people those things are not an issue.

The P2 camera is not replacing every other camera on the market.
There are plenty of other options out there. Looks at what they all have to offer, and choose the one that fits your needs the best.
I think many will find that the HVX fits their needs, as it does mine.

Second BIGGEST ISSUE:
No Masters.
No camera masters.
Unless you want to buy a zillion p2 cards at a zillion dollars a piece, you are going to have buy an HD deck and HD tape stock to make actual tangible masters. And don’t tell me Hard Drives are practical for this. If you could see my tape storage, you’d laugh… imagine 673 lacie harddrives in your closet…. or send one off to a client who needs the footage for another project, (EPK’s etc…) they’d look at you like you’re insane.

I see no problem with hard drives, but that’s just me.
Hard drive storage is cheaper than DVCProHD storage, price it out and you’ll see.

As far as sending footage to clients, that’s not something I’ve actually ever had to do. But I suppose if you did, a client might be pleased to know they won’t have to waste any time logging or capturing a tape, and can drop the footage directly into the edit system.

This camera just doesn’t know what it wants to be. is it a very expensive DV camera with the ability to be over and under cranked, and a completely impractical HD capacity? If so, who’s buying? Wealthy prosumers?
Or is it a professional camera, for filmmakers on a budget who make a lot of theatrically released films, and who only shoot a few minutes of tape at a time? And if so, how many of those kinds of buyer are there?

I think we’ll be suprised as to how many of these buyers there are.
There are plenty of people out there, like me, who have been waiting for a camera that has these sorts of options. You see a camera that doesn’t know what it wants to be, but I see a camera that offers me the option to shoot virtually any format I need at whichever framerate I need. It’s all about options.

I’m sorry for being the loud mouth neigh-sayer here, but let’s talk about the elephant in the room…

No problem, I welcome any healthy discussion about the pros and cons of this format, and the camera itself.

I’ll stick with my DVX100a and Sony BetaSP packages for now, and probably buy the Sony HDV camera.

Again, you’re talking about a unibody camera that only costs $50 less than the HVX. So I guess the pricing is about right for a unibody camera, and not as out of whack as you thought at first.

Unless panasonic gets build a bigger tape mechanism into this thing and provide a responsible ammount of HD storage… or at least dvcpro50….

This has already been mentioned, but the use of P2 is the entire reason that this camera can be priced as low as it is. The tape transport alone in the VariCam costs more than twice the cost of this camera. There is no way to put a DVCPro50 or DVCProHD tape transport into the HVX and keep the price anywhere near $6000. So, what you view as drawbacks of P2 are things that are unavoidable in order to have DVCPro50 and DVCProHD at an affordable price.

And don’t give me that ‘the future is solid-state’ argument. I invented that argument! (shades of John Kerry) Don’t sell me the future until you understand the needs of the present. Panasonic clearly is having some problems in that regard.

Again, perhaps they are not giving you a solution that fits your present needs, but they are answering the needs of many people like myself. We all don’t shoot the same sorts of project, and we all don’t need the same sorts of things from our cameras. To some long record times matter, to others they don’t. This isn’t the answer to every single shooting scenario.
To say that Panasonic is having problems understanding the needs of the present is a bit outlandish. Apparently they do understand your present needs to some extent, seeing as you plan to hold onto your DVX for the time being.

DAmnn! And I was really loving that slo-mo thing… “

It is nice, isn’t it?
I can’t wait to see it in action.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas