Panasonic AG-HVX200A: should I wait for an update before buying?

[Cyrax9]

Hey everyone, I'm thinking of purchasing a Panasonic AG-HVX200A, but I need some advice here. Basically, I did some research and discovered that the original AG-HVX200 was released in December of 2005, and the updated AG-HVX200A was released in May of 2008. The price of the current AG-HVX200A has also dropped considerably leading me to believe that a product update could be right around the corner. (December '05 - May '08 is about 30 months, and May '08 to October '10 is about 30 months.) My primary question is, should I wait for the update before purchasing this camera?

There are probably a couple of other things I should mention to make sure that I'm purchasing the professional camera that best suits my needs:

• I currently own a Sony DSR-PDX10, and have recorded many things using that camera's DVCAM mode, if I can't playback DVCAM mode tapes on the HVX200A, I can still use the PDX10, but I'd prefer to use the HVX200A when possible
• I want to be able to record in the DVCProHD format; I don't like the compression of HDV and AVCHD
• Two XLR inputs are a must; I believe that the HVX200A has these, but I want to be sure
• My camera needs to integrate seamlessly into my Mac OS X-based workflow
• Just as I want to record in the DVCProHD format, I also want to be able to record onto MiniDV tape when possible; I know this is something I can do for SD footage with the HVX200A
• I want to be able to create a 1:1 back-up of anything that I record onto something like a P2 card; is this possible?
• I currently have several filters for my PDX10, and if possible, would like to use them with my next camera as well
• I really don't want to purchase another Sony camera; I liked the PDX10, but I don't like their current offerings

Having said that, would anyone recommend a different, but comparably priced camera? Remember, I want to shoot my HD footage in DVCProHD or a format of even higher quality, should one exist within my price range. The ability to record a finished video "back" onto the camera using Final Cut's "Print to Tape" option (well tape or P2 flash card,) is a must for me as well. I should also point out that I'd like to avoid disc-based formats like XDCAM entirely if possible.

Are there any pitfalls or caveats with the HVX200A that I should be aware of before spending a few thousand dollars on one? Basically, the PDX10's second XLR input has never been recognized by Adobe Premiere Pro, although Avid, Final Cut, and even iMovie recognize it without a problem. I'm really most concerned about Final Cut, but I'd appreciate any information surrounding glitches in a Premiere Pro-based workflow as well.

What is the maximum recording time on a P2 flash card when shooting in 1080p in DVCProHD mode? Also, what is the largest capacity P2 card that the HVX200A can accept (that's the one I want to know the recording time for,) and how much should I expect to pay per card? (I always save my masters, so this is important to me.)

I'm probably going to buy my next camera from B&H but if someone can recommend a reputable dealer with lower prices, I'm all ears. Of course, I do want to be able to purchase some sort of extended service plan, such as the one offered through B&H, so please keep that in mind if you have any recommendations of dealers that I should look into. (I know this wasn't really a question, but I want to make sure that I'm getting the most for my money. Likewise, I've had to use service plans in the past, so I tend to purchase them for items like ENG/EFP cameras. ) Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love B&H, but I want to make sure that I'm not spending more than I need to on the camera itself.

Finally, I want to thank everyone here for their input. I want this camera to last me several years; my PDX10 will be five years old next month, and it still works almost flawlessly. The only "problem" is that there seems to be an issue with the Firewire connector occasionally not being recognized. I've tried multiple cables to multiple devices, which is how I know it's the camera. If a press against the cable in just the right way, that usually fixes the problem. I'd like to have my PDX10 repaired, but I really need to begin shooting some things in HD, and I'd like to be able to do so with my own camera. Again, any advice is appreciated; thank you all for your time.

[edDV]

So many questions. Many can be answered from the spec sheet or online research. Not sure about DVCAM on the HVX200.

Some general observations.

The HVX only records DV25 to tape. DVCProHD needs expensive P2 cards or an external Firestore hard drive.

You should research the DVCProHD workflow through FCP. FCP will require conversion to a digital intermediate or an uncompressed work flow. Premiere Pro can native edit DVCPro-HD.

The big advantage for the DVCProHD format is full frame recording at various frame rates and some Variscan. Downside is resolution limitations (1440x1080i or 960x720p).

I doubt there will be significant upgrades to the HVX. I'd expect a lower price AVC-Intra to replace it some day.

more later... gotta go

[Cyrax9]

So many questions. Many can be answered from the spec sheet or online research. Not sure about DVCAM on the HVX200.

Some general observations.

The HVX only records DV25 to tape. DVCProHD needs expensive P2 cards or an external Firestore hard drive.

I probably should've mentioned that I'd read over the spec sheet in the past in my previous post; my apologies. Likewise, online research has yielded conflicting information, especially with regards to what can be recorded to DV tape.

Most sources, including Panasonic claim that only DV25 can be recorded to MiniDV tape, which is admittedly fine; I just want to continue to be able to access my current MiniDV library. I'm fully aware that DVCProHD can only be recorded to P2 cards, and that too is fine so long as I can create a 1:1 back-up onto a traditional hard drive so that if my P2 card burns out, I don't lose the footage. If I can store multiple 1:1 back-ups on one large 1TB+ hard drive, that too is perfect. (By multiple back-ups, I mean back-ups from multiple cards.)

I have seen a few sources claim that the HVX200 records DVCProHD to DV tape, but even Panasonic claims that this isn't possible. One of my former professors claims that he's done so, but I have absolutely no idea how. The only thing I can think of is that he recorded to P2 flash and either misspoke or didn't know what was in the camera (both are possible,) at the time, or there's some "hidden" feature that requires modification of the camera in order to record DVCProHD to DV tape. I should point out that for what this camera costs, I don't see myself performing any unauthorized modifications. (Of course, that's supposedly how the DVX100 was able to shoot HD video when connected to a laptop.) I think we can safely say that recording DVCProHD to DV tape with this camera simply isn't possible though, at least not in any practical manner.

I'll also have to look into the Firestore hard drives. I know some external drives for cameras are prone to not actually recording even though the camera claims that they are, is this true of the Firestore drives as well, or are they built to a higher quality standard? (A different professor was experimenting with various brands of hard drives for cameras just when I was graduating and he wound up having one brand that kept saying it was recording and ultimately showed nothing when connected to a computer.)

DVCAM is a big question mark in my research on the HVX200/200A. I know that recording with it is out of the question, but it's really playback that I'm concerned about. I have a large library of footage on DV Tape, and a good portion of it is in DVCAM mode.

You should research the DVCProHD workflow through FCP. FCP will require conversion to a digital intermediate or an uncompressed work flow. Premiere Pro can native edit DVCPro-HD.

The conversion to an uncompressed work flow isn't a problem. I purchased CS5 for Mac recently, but haven't had the chance to install it yet and begin experimenting with the newest version of Premiere Pro, but from what I understand, it can natively edit many camera formats without capturing or rendering, correct? (I believe this was the result of Adobe's GPU acceleration feature, but I could be wrong.)

I honestly expected to have to perform some sort of format conversion from P2 to an intermediate format in FCP, but I'm glad to know that I won't have to in Premiere Pro. I should also mention that when I referenced "problems" in my previous post, I was referring to something like the inability to capture the second audio channel, (known, but undocumented flaw with all versions of Premiere Pro and the PDX10,) or connecting the camera a certain way corrupting the video stored on it. Again, thank you for the information though edDV.

The big advantage for the DVCProHD format is full frame recording at various frame rates and some Variscan. Downside is resolution limitations (1440x1080i or 960x720p).

The full-frame recording is admittedly something that I consider important. I believe that HDV doesn't do full-frame recording while DVCProHD does, correct? The ability to record in various frame rates is also a plus, as there have been times when I could have used it in the past. The resolution limitations are admittedly a significant downside of DVCProHD, but I consider the over-compression employed by HDV, and from what I understand, AVC HD to be more problematic. From what I understand, DVCProHD is designed to be scaled to fit HDTVs properly at their native resolutions once a project is completed. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about this.

I doubt there will be significant upgrades to the HVX. I'd expect a lower price AVC-Intra to replace it some day.


more later... gotta go

Thank you again for your valuable insight; as always, your posts are very informative, and very helpful. I should point out that I was considering any form of update whatsoever that Panasonic may make to the HVX200, and not just radical/significant updates that would cause current HVX200/200A owners to purchase another camera. I'd prefer to hold out for an update to the HVX if Panasonic will be releasing one, but if not, I should probably plan to purchase the HVX200A within the coming months.

edDV I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on AVC-Intra, as I admittedly have read some pretty negative things regarding image compression associated with AVC as a whole. As always, your continued insight is greatly appreciated. Thank you again for your time.

[poisondeathray]

I believe that HDV doesn't do full-frame recording while DVCProHD does, correct?

Neither HDV or DVCProHD are full raster . (frame is resized upon playback to full 1920x1080)

I admittedly have read some pretty negative things regarding image compression associated with AVC as a whole

AVC-Intra 100 is in a whole different league. It's much much better than DVCProHD. The image from AVC-Intra 100 is much sharper, DVCProHD tends to be a lot softer. Every single review unanimously agrees AVCI-100 >> DVCProHD.

AVC is a very large specification and includes from very low quality profiles to even lossless compression methods. Don't "lump" all things into AVC as a whole


Another supplemental source get your questions answered is DVXuser.com . There are Panasonic reps, knowledgable folks and industry insiders like Barry Green (who has written books on various Panasonic camcorders) , hundreds of users who use the HVX200/200A. This is the subforum link:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/forumdisplay.php?f=54

[edDV]

I've used an HVX-200 for about 4 days and was seriously considering buying one. The alternate is the Sony XDCAM-HD PMWEX1(R) which currently has my interest.

The DVCPro-HD format uses four DV codecs in parallel and records full frames at 100Mb/s for 1440x1080i. The MiniDV tape runs 25 Mb/s so can only record DV25. The P2 cards can record 100 Mb/s through parallel flash technology. The Firestore hard disk is the alternative to P2 or you can record both at once. Since P2 cards are so expensive, this camera is limited to short segments unless the Firestore is used. The good thing about P2 is it will plug directly into a PC with PCMCIA port and can be edited directly from flash. Same goes for the Firestore over USB2 but special software is needed on the PC to capture from the Firestore.

I don't consider 1440x1080 a major limitation since the bit rate is so high with no interframe compression. Also DVCProHD records 4:2:2.

The alternate XDCAM-EX format can do 1920x1080 at 35-50 Mb/s (half the DVCProHD rate) but uses MPeg2 with 15 frame GOPS and 4:2:0 color space

AVC-Intra is the new ultra format. It records full frames with h.264 intraframe compression only. It can do 1920x1080i/29.97 4:2:2 or 1920x1080p/23.976 with 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 RGB at 100 Mb/s. It also does 1080i or 720p at 50 Mb/s.

The lower end prosumer formats are HDV, NiPro and AVCCAM. HDV is a 1440x1080i or 1280x720p 25Mb/s version of XDCAM-HD. NiPro and AVCCAM are essemtially the same video format as consumer AVCHD with h.264 intraframe and interframe compression.

[edDV]

You should research the DVCProHD workflow through FCP. FCP will require conversion to a digital intermediate or an uncompressed work flow. Premiere Pro can native edit DVCPro-HD.

The conversion to an uncompressed work flow isn't a problem. I purchased CS5 for Mac recently, but haven't had the chance to install it yet and begin experimenting with the newest version of Premiere Pro, but from what I understand, it can natively edit many camera formats without capturing or rendering, correct? (I believe this was the result of Adobe's GPU acceleration feature, but I could be wrong.)

I honestly expected to have to perform some sort of format conversion from P2 to an intermediate format in FCP, but I'm glad to know that I won't have to in Premiere Pro. I should also mention that when I referenced "problems" in my previous post, I was referring to something like the inability to capture the second audio channel, (known, but undocumented flaw with all versions of Premiere Pro and the PDX10,) or connecting the camera a certain way corrupting the video stored on it. Again, thank you for the information though edDV.

Re: Premiere Pro CS5 native editing. It will take a fast MacPro. GPU acceleration may or may not help. It actually takes more CPU for more compressed formats like XDCAM, HDV and AVCHD. Uncompressed editing requires compatible RAID. P2 or Firestore can be directly edited without capture but most will import the files to internal drives.

You can capture the second audio pair on DVCAM with a second pass. Use the camcorder's mixer. The pro formats transfer all audio channels in one pass.

[edDV]

The full-frame recording is admittedly something that I consider important. I believe that HDV doesn't do full-frame recording while DVCProHD does, correct? The ability to record in various frame rates is also a plus, as there have been times when I could have used it in the past. The resolution limitations are admittedly a significant downside of DVCProHD, but I consider the over-compression employed by HDV, and from what I understand, AVC HD to be more problematic. From what I understand, DVCProHD is designed to be scaled to fit HDTVs properly at their native resolutions once a project is completed. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about this.

DVCProHD and AVC-Intra record HD frame sequences just like DV does at SD resolution. Compression is in frame only. All the other formats mentioned use MPeg 15 frame GOP compression (MPeg2 or h.264). Most editors get around the 15 frame GOP issue by converting to a digital intermediate.

1440x1080i is compatible with all normal distribution. Not a problem. HDCAM is 1440x1080i.

The forums mentioned above will have more info on possible camcorder upgrades.

Have you looked at the AG-HPX170? It has a few new features but lost the DV tape capability. http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?storeId=11201&cata...0&displayTab=F

[pippas]

Detailed discussions about the various format options. Not a single mention about sensor types?

I can see that the various merits - or otherwise - of the different formats, and how they might affect your workflow, but whether the camera you choose has a CCD or CMOS sensor might just as seriously affect your results, depending, of course, on your style of shooting.

If you're not expecting rolling shutter artifacts, I don't care how good your 'format' is, a CMOS sensor can be a real problem!

I'm just a little surprised that expert discussion at this level doesn't even mention rolling shutter issues?

In this position, I'd go for a Panasonic AG HMC150, record as ACVHD to SDHC, and convert to Canopus HQ for post work.
Or possibly an HPX 170, if you're keen on P2.
At least you'd still get CCDs, which seem to be disappearing fast!!

[poisondeathray]

^ No worries - the HVX200/A is CCD

RE: Premiere - On Windows works fine for native editing, I can't say anything about MAC version . (I know FCP folks are used to transcoding everything)

I haven't used HVX200/A myself , but I have edited footage from it (alongside AVC Intra 100 from the same shoot). The footage from HVX200 is very clean , but still noiser and softer than AVC-Intra 100 when comparing from the same shoot. It's tough to do perfect comparisons on the encoding characteristics unless you do simultaneous recordings with a portable recorder (that way the optics of the camera are the same, and you aren't comparing different camera sensors, lenses etc...) . AVC Intra 100 is also 10bit .

I have compared offline encodings from a 4K film source , and AVC-Intra is clearly better . But I would prefer DVCProHD over AVCCAM in most situations, even with the reduced resolution. It's noticable cleaner

[edDV]

Detailed discussions about the various format options. Not a single mention about sensor types?

I can see that the various merits - or otherwise - of the different formats, and how they might affect your workflow, but whether the camera you choose has a CCD or CMOS sensor might just as seriously affect your results, depending, of course, on your style of shooting.

If you're not expecting rolling shutter artifacts, I don't care how good your 'format' is, a CMOS sensor can be a real problem!

I'm just a little surprised that expert discussion at this level doesn't even mention rolling shutter issues?

In this position, I'd go for a Panasonic AG HMC150, record as ACVHD to SDHC, and convert to Canopus HQ for post work.
Or possibly an HPX 170, if you're keen on P2.
At least you'd still get CCDs, which seem to be disappearing fast!!

Most all the camcorders in this class will have 3x 1/3" CCD sensors vs a single 1/6, 1/4, 1/3" CMOS sensor in the consumer models.

At this level, the issues are mostly recording format. 10 bit AVC-Intra is the next level up (over $10K).

Panasonic's DVCProHD is targeted either for production or tapeless workflow TV news. It was the first out and has the widest selection of support equiment. The format is entrenched in the 720p/59.94 TV networks and their local stations (ABC, Disney, ESPN, Fox, etc.).

Sony's XDCAM is the main competition. The original XDCAM-HD format recorded direct to Blu-Ray discs. The XDCAM-EX series use flash media. CBS was first to standardize on XDCAM-HD for network news and local owned stations. NBC uses both but seems to be moving to XDCAM-EX for news and reality.

The AVCHD based formats (Sony's NIPRO and Panasonic's AVCCAM) are targeted to prosumers, wedding videographers, etc. The video format is still consumer AVCHD but the cameras are better. The selling point is cheaper flash media and tapeless work flow. There are no special claims for picture quality. They recommend immediate transfer to a digital intermediate for editing. The main competition is entrenched Canon/Sony/JVC prosumer tape based HDV models. JVC is expected to extend its HDV line into XDCAM-EX.

Currently AVC-Intra is targeted at serious production. Few TV stations can afford them for news. That may change as prices come down.

[Cyrax9]

Neither HDV or DVCProHD are full raster . (frame is resized upon playback to full 1920x1080)

Poisondeathray, thank you for the correction. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the MPEG-2 compression an issue with HDV, or at least more of an issue than DVCProHD's compression, especially when working with tools like Adobe After Effects?

AVC-Intra 100 is in a whole different league. It's much much better than DVCProHD. The image from AVC-Intra 100 is much sharper, DVCProHD tends to be a lot softer. Every single review unanimously agrees AVCI-100 >> DVCProHD.

AVC is a very large specification and includes from very low quality profiles to even lossless compression methods. Don't "lump" all things into AVC as a whole

My mistake; I'm used to seeing consumer-level AVC and had never really looked into the professional-level stuff because the last time I was looking at HD cameras, it still didn't exist. Of course, there's another reason why I hadn't researched it before, but I'll touch on that in a moment. After a quick search, it does look like AVC-Intra is far superior to DVCProHD, but for now, DVCProHD might be a better option. (Again, I'll explain in a moment.)

Another supplemental source get your questions answered is DVXuser.com . There are Panasonic reps, knowledgable folks and industry insiders like Barry Green (who has written books on various Panasonic camcorders) , hundreds of users who use the HVX200/200A. This is the subforum link:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/forumdisplay.php?f=54

I'm actually familiar with Barry Green's work; I almost borrowed his book on the HVX200A from a professor of mine, but decided against it since it was my second senior semester and I wouldn't have had time to read it. (My schedule was a mess because I was a transfer student.) I might even have DVXUser burried in my bookmarks, but I'm bookmarking it again just to be sure. I'll definitely spend some time over there. Thank you for your insight poisondeathray, it's much appreciated, and quite valuable.

I've used an HVX-200 for about 4 days and was seriously considering buying one. The alternate is the Sony XDCAM-HD PMWEX1(R) which currently has my interest.

The DVCPro-HD format uses four DV codecs in parallel and records full frames at 100Mb/s for 1440x1080i. The MiniDV tape runs 25 Mb/s so can only record DV25. The P2 cards can record 100 Mb/s through parallel flash technology. The Firestore hard disk is the alternative to P2 or you can record both at once. Since P2 cards are so expensive, this camera is limited to short segments unless the Firestore is used. The good thing about P2 is it will plug directly into a PC with PCMCIA port and can be edited directly from flash. Same goes for the Firestore over USB2 but special software is needed on the PC to capture from the Firestore.

As always eDV, your knowledge is remarkable, and your research is incredibly helpful. For MiniDV, isn't DV25 the same as DVCPro, and isn't DVCPro superior to DV SP? For SD recording, DVCPro would do what I need it too just fine. DVCAM playback would be quite helpful, but if the deck is incapable of it, I'll just have to look into an alternative method of retrieving footage from my PDX10, including having the Firewire port repaired/replaced. Considering how little usage the drum itself has gotten, my Firewire port should not be failing me. (This is part of the reason that I'm a bit disenfranchised with Sony right now.)

The Firestore looks like it might be my preferred option for recording depending on the size of the drive itself. I know that the 64GB P2 cards cost nearly $900 dollars, and I believe that the HVX200A is capable of taking two cards at once, correct? In theory I could use two of them together if need be or simply swap cards and transfer one onto a hard drive while recording onto the other, correct? I need to look into the price of Firestore drives for long-term shooting, but they seem like the way to go for what I want to do. Unfortunately, the Mac Pro doesn't have the PCMCIA slot required for use with the P2 cards, but the MacBook Pro laptops do, go figure; I personally prefer to copy all of my data before editing anyway, so this really isn't a big deal for me. The ability to record in tandem to P2 and the Firestore is definitely a plus in my book, and I could easily see myself making use of that feature regularly. I'd be curious if the software (Drivers?) for the Firestore is OS X compatible, or if I'd have to transfer the files directly to my hard drive. I have no problem with the transfer mind you, and since I'd be backing up the Firestore onto an external drive for archival anyway, I wouldn't have a problem if it wasn't. The ability to edit directly from the drive really isn't very important to me, because I'm admittedly paranoid about back-ups of my footage, and probably wouldn't use this feature unless I was really in a bind.

I don't consider 1440x1080 a major limitation since the bit rate is so high with no interframe compression. Also DVCProHD records 4:2:2.

That's pretty much my view on the resolution limit; the lack of interframe compression more than compensates for it in my book.

The alternate XDCAM-EX format can do 1920x1080 at 35-50 Mb/s (half the DVCProHD rate) but uses MPeg2 with 15 frame GOPS and 4:2:0 color space

AVC-Intra is the new ultra format. It records full frames with h.264 intraframe compression only. It can do 1920x1080i/29.97 4:2:2 or 1920x1080p/23.976 with 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 RGB at 100 Mb/s. It also does 1080i or 720p at 50 Mb/s.

I'd really like to avoid the XDCAM-EX formats MPEG-2 compression for many of the reasons that I'd like to avoid HDV's MPEG-2 compression. I'd be willing to sacrifice the full resolution of XDCAM for DVCProHD's lack of interframe or MPEG-2 compression. AVC-Intra sounds nice, the ability to record in 4:4:4 RGB is definitely a plus, but I'll get to why I'm admittedly not keen on it just yet.

The lower end prosumer formats are HDV, NiPro and AVCCAM. HDV is a 1440x1080i or 1280x720p 25Mb/s version of XDCAM-HD. NiPro and AVCCAM are essemtially the same video format as consumer AVCHD with h.264 intraframe and interframe compression.

I've had my reservations about HDV for quite some time (I remember it was considered as an alternative to DVCProHD at one point for low-end productions,) I really haven't been happy with AVCHD, so I probably wouldn't be happy with AVCCAM or NiPro if they're very similar.

Have you looked at the AG-HPX170? It has a few new features but lost the DV tape capability. http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?storeId=11201&cata...0&displayTab=F

It's good to hear that AVC-Intra and DVCProHD share some similarities. I'm trying to avoid formats with MPEG-2 compression, so that seems to narrow down my choices. I actually did look at the HPX170 when it was first announced, but as soon as I saw that it lost the DV Tape capability I lost interest in it. If the next upgrade to the HVX200 were to turn it into an "HPX170 with a DV Tape deck," I'd admittedly buy it in a heartbeat. The tape deck is admittedly a sticking point for me, and it's admittedly why I've kept my eye on the HVX200A.

Re: Premiere Pro CS5 native editing. It will take a fast MacPro. GPU acceleration may or may not help. It actually takes more CPU for more compressed formats like XDCAM, HDV and AVCHD. Uncompressed editing requires compatible RAID. P2 or Firestore can be directly edited without capture but most will import the files to internal drives.

If you can see my computer specs, edDV, you can see the Mac Pro that I have. In some instances, it actually outperforms some of the 2010 models. I have RAID capability in my system, including the Mac Pro RAID card for hardware RAID so I should be able to set up a suitable array; at worst I have the ability to connect an eSATA port and set up an external array next to my workstation itself. I generally would import the files as noted above, but in a bind, native editing might be helpful. (See previous statement about being paranoid with back-ups.)

You can capture the second audio pair on DVCAM with a second pass. Use the camcorder's mixer. The pro formats transfer all audio channels in one pass.

I actually tried this, as did both of my professors, and a couple other students and people involved with the TV major. We tried multiple pieces of footage shot on multiple PDX10s, with multiple computers running Premiere Pro. The "experiment" has been duplicated, with each revision to Premiere Pro, up through CS4 at the very least (not sure if the school has CS5 yet or not,) and the end result has always been the same. Premiere Pro simply does not recognize the second XLR input's existence on the PDX10. An interview using two lavs will yield only one person speaking, and that person needs to be on input one. The way we figured out that the problem was with Premiere and not the PDX10 was to load Avid and capture the video from within Avid, which recognized both channels properly. This is purely a quirk with the PDX10 from what I can tell, Premiere Pro has no problem with the PD150 or PD170, which are similar, but not identical to the PDX10. I should note that DV SP mode also had this problem, not just DVCAM. I thought about doing the experiment again on my Mac (it had previously been done under Windows,) but I figured the result would probably be the same. I'll give the two-pass capture method another try though, I just need to find something that I shot with two channels of audio again.

I can see that the various merits - or otherwise - of the different formats, and how they might affect your workflow, but whether the camera you choose has a CCD or CMOS sensor might just as seriously affect your results, depending, of course, on your style of shooting.

I've actually worked with a camera that had a CMOS sensor in it before. There were some things that I preferred with CCDs, and there were others that I preferred with the CMOS sensor. If CMOS sensors improved a bit more, and professional cameras began to offer three of them, I'd consider them provided that the other features that I want would be included as well. The camera that I'm looking at is 3CCD based, which I consider both an advantage and a drawback. Of course, if I had truly unlimited funds, I'd grab one of those old pre-CCD tube-based cameras purely for adding artistic effect to certain footage. (Think of the style of footage that was common in the '70s.)

Most all the camcorders in this class will have 3x 1/3" CCD sensors vs a single 1/6, 1/4, 1/3" CMOS sensor in the consumer models.

Correct; there are a few 3CMOS models available, but most professional cameras still use CCDs. Once CMOS technology improves though, I expect the CCD to go the way of the tube camera. Anything with a single CCD or CMOS sensor is out of the question for me; I expect a CCD or sensor for red, a separate one for green, and a third one for blue. The difference between having one CCD/CMOS sensor and having three is very noticeable, and I insist on having 3CCDs or 3CMOS sensors. Again, I having likes and dislikes about both systems, but I'm used to shooting with a 3CCD camera.

At this level, the issues are mostly recording format. 10 bit AVC-Intra is the next level up (over $10K).

Currently AVC-Intra is targeted at serious production. Few TV stations can afford them for news. That may change as prices come down.

edDV, I'm purposely moving these two lines together, because you've pretty much hit on why I'm not keen on AVC-Intra right now. I'm trying to spend no more than $6K tops on the camera itself, and less expensive is admittedly more appealing. If I were going to spend over $10K on a camera, I'd purchase a RED ONE from Red Digital Cinema. I'm pretty sure that the price has come down somewhat, but I know that the RED ONE was originally $17,500 dollars, and the features of that particular camera are pretty much what it would take to make me drop my usage of tape right now.

If I had purchased an HD camera sooner and/or my PDX10 wasn't acting up, I'd probably continue saving for the RED ONE or its successor. However, at present, it's simply out of my price range, at least for the time being. I absolutely love the RED ONE's quality, but it's just too expensive for me right now, and if I were to purchase such a camera, I'd want to do so correctly. That is, I'd want to purchase a few lenses since the RED ONE is meant to be modular, and meant to have its lenses changed as needed. For now though, it's just more than I can afford. Many primetime TV shows are shot with the RED ONE, and it's probably the type of camera that I'll be looking into sometime in the future. (It also integrates well into FCP's workflow, which is a big selling point for me.) For now though, AVC-Intra, and cameras like the RED ONE, are simply out of my price range.

Panasonic's DVCProHD is targeted either for production or tapeless workflow TV news. It was the first out and has the widest selection of support equiment. The format is entrenched in the 720p/59.94 TV networks and their local stations (ABC, Disney, ESPN, Fox, etc.).

Sony's XDCAM is the main competition. The original XDCAM-HD format recorded direct to Blu-Ray discs. The XDCAM-EX series use flash media. CBS was first to standardize on XDCAM-HD for network news and local owned stations. NBC uses both but seems to be moving to XDCAM-EX for news and reality.

Well said, the HVX200 saw pretty rapid adoption when it was new, and it's large selection of equipment is part of the reason it's the camera I'm considering the most right now. Disney-owned companies such as ABC and ESPN adopted the HVX200, as did News Corp. owned channels such as FOX. The community college that I graduated from before transferring to a four year university ultimately adopted the HVX200 shortly after I left, and that was made in large part because it was what the students were purchasing, and what they wanted to work with. The school had previously used MiniDV based cameras from Sony for ENG/EFP. (They have a fully functional CATV station that continues to be picked up by local cable providers, and it really well respected.)

CBS and NBC both standardized on 1080i broadcasting rather than 720p. I always found it odd that they were using the HVX200 for news gathering given the cost of shooting 1080i footage with that particular camera, especially when they had first begun to do so. NBC seems to be in a transitional phase overall, and a good deal of their primetime dramas are now being shot on the RED ONE. Viacom's content providers also seem to be adopting the RED ONE for scripted TV shows. Saban Brands LLC will be shooting the 18th season of Power Rangers with RED ONE cameras and Mysterium-X lenses for Nickelodeon to air starting in February 2011. (All 700 episodes from all 17 previous seasons from 1993-2009 were shot in 16mm film cameras and mastered onto DigiBeta tapes.) I'd be watching season 18 anyway, but as soon as I found out what was being used to shoot the show, I admittedly had further incentive to watch it. (I absolutely LOVE the RED ONE camera, it's image quality, and it's capabilities.)

The AVCHD based formats (Sony's NIPRO and Panasonic's AVCCAM) are targeted to prosumers, wedding videographers, etc. The video format is still consumer AVCHD but the cameras are better. The selling point is cheaper flash media and tapeless work flow. There are no special claims for picture quality. They recommend immediate transfer to a digital intermediate for editing. The main competition is entrenched Canon/Sony/JVC prosumer tape based HDV models. JVC is expected to extend its HDV line into XDCAM-EX.

Again, interesting information edDV. I fully expected JVC to move beyond HDV, but once Kenwood bought them out, I kind of figured that said move might wind up being delayed. I'm still not really a fan of MPEG-2 based formats for cameras, (home distribution is another story,) but I'm glad to hear that JVC might move beyond HDV.

Thank you all for your input, and all of the useful information. I'll continue to do more research, but I'm really leaning toward the HVX200A or it's successor; if an HVX200B or HVX300 is released with the features from the HPX170 and the HVX200/200A's tape deck, I'd be sold.

Again, thank you all for your time and input. I'm sorry that this was such a long post, but there was admittedly a lot that I wanted to say.

[poisondeathray]

I don't consider 1440x1080 a major limitation since the bit rate is so high with no interframe compression. Also DVCProHD records 4:2:2.

That's pretty much my view on the resolution limit; the lack of interframe compression more than compensates for it in my book.

Actually DVCProHD is 1280x1080 (PAR 1.5) for NTSC 60i , so the horizontal resolution loss is significant (another reason why picture is softer, when testing the codec itself , in absence of optics , sensor, lens etc...).

But the optics for the HVX200 is a point many users have voiced concern over - The way it's CCD's are arranged, the actual resolution (when looking at test charts is less than 600 lines) . There were quite a few EX1 vs. HVX200 green screen tests and footage comparisons in the past , and it seems the greater actual resolution of the EX1 performs much better than the HVX200 despite 4:2:2 vs. 4:2:0. But of course then you have CMOS skew issues with the EX1

I'd really like to avoid the XDCAM-EX formats MPEG-2 compression for many of the reasons that I'd like to avoid HDV's MPEG-2 compression. I'd be willing to sacrifice the full resolution of XDCAM for DVCProHD's lack of interframe or MPEG-2 compression. AVC-Intra sounds nice, the ability to record in 4:4:4 RGB is definitely a plus, but I'll get to why I'm admittedly not keen on it just yet.

Intraframe is great, especially for scenarios that tax compression, but requires higher bitrates to achieve. If you're talking AVCI-100 or DVCProHD, P2 cards are pricey compared to other flash media like SxS cards or SD cards

AVC-Intra 100 when recording to P2 cards is 4:2:2 . The 4:4:4 RGB output requires 2 HD-SDI ports, and a portable recorder or capture card .

The compression itself isn't a problem, when something else is the limiting factor , like the sensors. You should have a look at the various EX1 vs. HVX200 comparison threads on the various sites - I think you'll be surprised

[edDV]

I don't consider 1440x1080 a major limitation since the bit rate is so high with no interframe compression. Also DVCProHD records 4:2:2.

That's pretty much my view on the resolution limit; the lack of interframe compression more than compensates for it in my book.

Actually DVCProHD is 1280x1080 (PAR 1.5) for NTSC 60i , so the horizontal resolution loss is significant (another reason why picture is softer, when testing the codec itself , in absence of optics , sensor, lens etc...).

But the optics for the HVX200 is a point many users have voiced concern over - The way it's CCD's are arranged, the actual resolution (when looking at test charts is less than 600 lines) . There were quite a few EX1 vs. HVX200 green screen tests and footage comparisons in the past , and it seems the greater actual resolution of the EX1 performs much better than the HVX200 despite 4:2:2 vs. 4:2:0. But of course then you have CMOS skew issues with the EX1

You are correct for the DVCPro HD NTSC model.
1280x1080i or 960x720p

The PAL DVCPro HD model is
1440x1080i/25 or 1280x720p/50

The unique features of the DVCPro HD format are:

Frame by frame recording
Variable frame rates (GOP based MPeg can't do slow/fast mo)
4:2:2 chroma resolution vs 4:2:0 for MPeg2 or h.264
720p/59.94 possible (sports or news action)

All of this can be useful for effects editing especially for After Effects which works with frames.

Tradeoff is raw resolution vs XDCAM-EX. Resolution is adequate for the 720p networks and TV stations. (also for 1440x1080i European networks). XDCAM-EX resolution is a better sell for 1920x1080i networks and TV stations.

We have been talking here about the entry prosumer HVX-200 models. The broadcasters are mostly using the larger shoulder mount DVCPro HD camcorder versions with 2/3" sensors and larger glass.

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelList?storeId=11201&catalo...AG-HPX500-EFP*

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?storeId=11201&cata...odel=AG-HPX500

[Cyrax9]

We have been talking here about the entry prosumer HVX-200 models. The broadcasters are mostly using the larger shoulder mount DVCPro HD camcorder versions with 2/3" sensors and larger glass.

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelList?storeId=11201&catalo...AG-HPX500-EFP*

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?storeId=11201&cata...odel=AG-HPX500

edDV, for the time being, (emphasis added,) I'm really looking at cameras at the "prosumer/semi-professional" level for a variety of reasons, with price really being the driving factor. I know for a fact that one of my local NBC affiliates (WCAU in Philadelphia) uses the HVX-200 for the local weather; I happened to be walking past the news truck while the camera operator was breaking down his equipment one night earlier this summer.

Putting price aside for a moment, I also have to think about where I intend to use whatever camera that I purchase. In at least one location, a shoulder-mount camera could be more of a hinderance then a help. (A couple of locations that I shoot at really aren't laid out in a manner that's friendly to larger shoulder-mount cameras.)

I've also been mulling over the idea of purchasing two HVX-200/200As clapboard, which I could then use for multi-camera shoots. The final price of such a purchase would likely be in the $10K realm, although I'd consider purchasing one new and one used HVX-200A in order to cut costs. I know that syncing audio can be tedious and time consuming; I've actually done it without a clapboard, (using a person's hands,) and it took me about two hours to sync the audio and video from the multi-camera shoot. The footage came out fine, and made it to the last draft before the final cut; it was removed because scenes that had tied into it had already been removed and without them, it simply didn't fit into the project that I was working on. (Nothing was wrong with the footage, it just didn't fit into the final version of the film.)

I've really got my eyes on the HVX-200A, but I don't want to purchase one (or two) only to find out that a few months after I've done so, an updated model will be announced or become available. If an HVX-200A with the updated features from the HPX-170 is going to become available at some point, I'd admittedly rather wait to purchase an HD ENG/EFP camera.

Oh and edDV, I'd always wondered why the HVX-200/200A shot in a 1440x1080i resolution, (as opposed to 1920x1080i,) thanks for clarifying that it's the PAL model that shoots in 1440x1080i rather than 1920x1080i. I knew something seemed "odd" about the resolution in question on an NTSC camera.

[pippas]

I don't think it would unreasonable to say that the HVX200A is likely to be the last tape model.
Bearing in mind the length of time it has been available, I would think that it's probably a good idea to get one soon, if you're keen on having a camera with a tape transport.

I sort of get the impression that all the major manufacturers are retaining just one or two tape models, until stocks are exhausted, with no intention of releasing any more.

Certainly true at consumer level, and it seems to be true at prosumer level as well.

[poisondeathray]

RE: replacement model & rumors - definitely check out dvxuser.com . They often get hints of stuff before magazines, publications, press releases.

RE: syncing - check out plural eyes
http://www.singularsoftware.com/pluraleyes.html

RE: resolution - the hvx200 doesn't shoot 1920x1080 because 1) DVCPro HD doesn't support it 2) the camera has 3CCD's but they are only 960x540

What doesn't make sense to me is the difference between 1280x1080 NTSC model vs. 1440x1080 in the PAL model

[edDV]

...
Oh and edDV, I'd always wondered why the HVX-200/200A shot in a 1440x1080i resolution, (as opposed to 1920x1080i,) thanks for clarifying that it's the PAL model that shoots in 1440x1080i rather than 1920x1080i. I knew something seemed "odd" about the resolution in question on an NTSC camera.

Here is a discussion of resolution options for the HVX-200. For interlace it shoots 1280x1080i/29.97. For progressive, this article explains why this camera optimizes at 720p and recommends shooting 1280x1080p/23.976 then resize vertically to 1280x720p/23.976 for editing. For action it is best to shoot 960x720p/59.94 then horizontally upsize to 1280x720p/59.94 for editing.

http://cineform.blogspot.com/2006/08/hvx200-resolution-options.html

This article is targeted at the Cineform digital intermediate codec, but for Mac you would usually edit 1280x720p uncompressed or with the ProRes422 digital intermediate codec. Cineform for Mac is an option.