Honestly, how many formats can Sony create? This is no where near a professional camera. HDCAM, HDCAMSR, XDCAMHD, and possibly XDCAMEX are professional.
Putting consumer a level codec (AVCHD) in a larger more complex camera does not make it professional. This camera is aimed at the "pro-sumer" videographer market.
Only crappy small time tv stations would allow this footage go to air.
The fact that AVCHD is found primarily in consumer-level devices does not make it a consumer-level codec. At high bit-rates (not typically available on consumer devices) it produces an absolutely stunning HD picture, especially in environments where there is a lot of motion or sudden variance in luminosity. This is particularly important to entrepreneurial vidopgraphers, who are often called upon to shoot a lot of sports, party, and dance scenes.
"entrepreneurial" I guess that's your code for crappy! Ha ha And I guess you'd call 24Mbps a "high bitrate"? Please. Worse then DVCAM. AVCHD 24Mbps as a delivery format, or final finished render might be O.K, but it would look bad captured live.
AVCHD might be fine for corporate videos or home movies, but we won't see this used on any good shows.
Unless they slap a proper sensor and go upwards of 50 Mbps
somewhat disagree. this camera looks very promising and even with its not so great AVCHD format. It's no R3D, but definitely still useable for broadcast. Why I say this? Everything that gets aired still goes through some harsh compression, so at the end of it all, you won't have all the details you would want any way once the consumer views it on a tv station.
yes, this camera won't be used for high end shows as they are probably using digital cinema cameras or film itself to make those, but to use this camera to get b-roll type shots for a news station would be great.
Suggesting that distribution compression and acquisition compression can be similar just shows your intelligence.
24Mbps AVCHD isn't near broadcast acquisition specifications for any major television network in the US, I live in New Zealand and our TV networks wouldn't even allow it.
And news stations need a quick editable format. AVCHD 24Mbps is not i frame. It would be a world of hurt for news.
@Maximus @Maximus But you should know that avchd (mpeg4) is more efective codec so 24mbits of avchd could mean better quality than dvcpro25 dvcpro50 maybe not better qualitty but equal so AVCHD isn't bad compression for broadcast productions. I work In Polsih National TV and i can tell you that many times I worked with miniDV camcorders to produce some film or program and TV accepted it without any doubt. AVCHD isn't good codec still becaue of problem with edditing it.
"I'm looking to grab a new phone using a prepaid service. What's the best prepaid phone service in terms of overall price, phone selection and other bells / whistles. Thanks!"
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Honestly, how many formats can Sony create?
This is no where near a professional camera.
HDCAM, HDCAMSR, XDCAMHD, and possibly XDCAMEX are professional.
Putting consumer a level codec (AVCHD) in a larger more complex camera does not make it professional.
This camera is aimed at the "pro-sumer" videographer market.
Only crappy small time tv stations would allow this footage go to air.
The fact that AVCHD is found primarily in consumer-level devices does not make it a consumer-level codec. At high bit-rates (not typically available on consumer devices) it produces an absolutely stunning HD picture, especially in environments where there is a lot of motion or sudden variance in luminosity. This is particularly important to entrepreneurial vidopgraphers, who are often called upon to shoot a lot of sports, party, and dance scenes.
"entrepreneurial" I guess that's your code for crappy!
Ha ha
And I guess you'd call 24Mbps a "high bitrate"?
Please.
Worse then DVCAM.
AVCHD 24Mbps as a delivery format, or final finished render might be O.K, but it would look bad captured live.
AVCHD might be fine for corporate videos or home movies,
but we won't see this used on any good shows.
Unless they slap a proper sensor and go upwards of 50 Mbps
somewhat disagree. this camera looks very promising and even with its not so great AVCHD format. It's no R3D, but definitely still useable for broadcast. Why I say this? Everything that gets aired still goes through some harsh compression, so at the end of it all, you won't have all the details you would want any way once the consumer views it on a tv station.
yes, this camera won't be used for high end shows as they are probably using digital cinema cameras or film itself to make those, but to use this camera to get b-roll type shots for a news station would be great.
Suggesting that distribution compression and acquisition compression can be similar just shows your intelligence.
24Mbps AVCHD isn't near broadcast acquisition specifications for any major television network in the US,
I live in New Zealand and our TV networks wouldn't even allow it.
And news stations need a quick editable format.
AVCHD 24Mbps is not i frame.
It would be a world of hurt for news.
@Maximus @Maximus
But you should know that avchd (mpeg4) is more efective codec so 24mbits of avchd could mean better quality than dvcpro25 dvcpro50 maybe not better qualitty but equal so AVCHD isn't bad compression for broadcast productions. I work In Polsih National TV and i can tell you that many times I worked with miniDV camcorders to produce some film or program and TV accepted it without any doubt. AVCHD isn't good codec still becaue of problem with edditing it.