XDCAM from Sony

smirkbyfire · March 13, 2004

I just read the advertisement in Millimeter magazine about the XDCAM from sony that uses a 128 GB disk instead of video tape. I was wondering if anyone on this site was involved in testing it out, or might have shot with it yet. I ordered the DVD from the sony website, but first hand testimony is usually better than what the manufacturer wants you to hear. It looks like an awesome system to me, and I can't wait to see the first feature length movie shot with it. If this thing hits big, Sony should get an award or something from the EPA for cutting down the use of so much video tape. Well, looking forward to your comments.

David Harris

SPC US Army

March 13, 2004

The picture is excellent. It uses blue laser optical disc recording. From what I understand, the recording system is capable of recording 72 Mbps, but XDCAM is using only 50. I'm sure that they'll come out with an HD version; probably by NAB 2005. Panasonic is moving away from tape too with flash memory card recording camera (DVCPRO, with 24p, $20K). By NAB 2005 they too will probably have an HD version. Plus we'll probably see new cameras with hard drives recorders at this year's NAB. Tape will be here for a while, but its days (or rather years) are numbered.

Phil Rhodes · March 13, 2004

Hi,

The whole disk/flash memory thing is good, and probably invaluable if you're a newsgathering outfit, but I have reservations about it for general use, at least until the media become a lot cheaper.

A situation which exemplifies my concerns: Sony brought out their DSR-series hard disk recorder, designed to sit on the back of the DSR-500. Great idea and works beautifully, but it takes expensive 2.5" laptop-style hard drives, and the drives aren't supposed to be field-changeable. Apparently as a practical matter you can switch out drive modules, but it's a screwdriver and soldering iron procedure, and voids the warranty. So, Sony are really expecting you to buy this several-thousand-units-of-currency device, or more feasibly two, and switch them around.

To me this is a missed opportunity. It makes the media costs terrifyingly large, as do the flash memory solutions. It would make more sense to me if the device was made as a caddy to take any existing 3.5" hard drive. These drives are very cheap, probably more available than DVCAM tapes (I can buy hard drives ten minutes walk from home; DVCAM tapes aren't available in this one-starbucks town) and provide a vastly lower media cost than having to replace the entire module.

To reiterate, I know that Sony aren't expecting people to buy DSR-DU1 recorders like they buy tapes, but it would still make sense to make a caddy to take any generic hard disk drive. At NAB last year, I believe JVC had something kind of similar to this; essentially a hard-disk firewire recorder designed to mount on the back of any compatible camera. It recorded any one of several standard file formats, and this is something that personally I could make immense and immediate use of. Be interesting to see what else is around in a couple of weeks time.

And for the record, you could just as easily make an SDI hard disk recorder for higher end formats. 270Mb/s works out to around 33MB/sec, which is achievable on an embedded system with a single modern IDE hard disk drive. A 250Gb unit would provide two hours of uncompressed SDI storage, almost four times more than the compressed Digital Betacam format can on a tape that's actually larger than a 3.5" drive! Stack four drives in a RAID, and you can do uncompressed 8-bit hi-def.

As some moron once said, "The future's important, because that's where we're going." Bwaha.

Phil

Mitch Gross · March 13, 2004

I agree that they proprietary drives are way overpriced. Sony is certainly not the only culprit out there--there are half a dozen units that seem to charge quite a bit for their product. The Firestore unit that integrates so well with the JVC camera is the best-priced for all the functionality it includes with the camera, and you can pop the HD out and plug it right into a laptop to start editing. I'm not sure how much additional HD are for the Firestore but they're not insanely expensive, but they are much more than the generics that you can get at the local computer store. So far Panasonic is the only company going towards the cheap generics, with the new cameras that take flash memory cards.

Just be careful walking through the new airport metal detectors with these cards in your pocket. Better make backups on a laptop.

March 13, 2004

Unfortunately the pro divisions of Sony and Matsushita are marketing, not technology, driven, at least at the lower end. Until DV, with each new format the bit rate and the quality improved. Then a bunch of years into DV and they come out with HDV that has lower bit rate than DV. But these two companies are losing their monopoly on recording systems, so we will hopefully soon see some real innovation, even from those two.

Michael Nash · March 13, 2004

The one thing conspicuously missing from all the Sony advertising is specs for the actual CAMERA, including chipset, pixel count, etc. It's as though the market they're aiming for (news) doesn't really care about highest-end production quality, just a "good enough" standard.

From what I saw on the Sony website, I suspect the camera is built upon the same platform as the DSR-500 2/3" chip camera, which produces a very good looking image but by specs is not up to the performance of a broadcast camera. I don't know, I could be wrong. It seems positioned squarely for news and not for production.

Regarding the cost of drives, remember that Sony is primarily interested in getting their gear into the market. If they made their gear TOO compatible with third-party equipment, you wouldn't have to purchase the Sony product. If they made their system too proprietary and closed-ended (as they've done before), then you might not invest in their whole workflow system. But if they make a system that becomes compatible with the rest of the technology world -- as long as you buy ONE expensive piece of Sony gear -- then they've got their hooks in you. You either cough up for the product or miss the boat completely. It's just good business sense on their part (at least in theory).

The thing they keep pushing in all their advertising for this system is how shockproof and reliable the drive system is. They couldn't make that claim with any reliability about third-party drives. I'm not suggesting that other drives couldn't also be reliable, but if Sony put in the R&D to deliver a reliable system then they can justify charging a premium for it.

Michael Nash · March 13, 2004

Regarding the cost of drives, remember that Sony is primarily interested in getting their gear into the market.

OOPS! Sorry, I just re-read the posts and realized you're talking about external hard drives and not the XDCAM optical drive. That's what I get for skimming the thread and not actually reading it... :P

But I guess it still shows that Sony did something useful (and business savvy) in making a reliable "intermediate" drive system -- a proprietary one that performs well in the field, but is still compatible with common computers.

March 13, 2004

XDCAM is good. It is the same quality as their MPG-IMX cameras, or whatever they call them, close to Digital Beta. They also have DV mode; or one model has this mode; I'm not sure.

The main reason to use the hard disc drives is for backup, I believe.