50 Mbps output.

<p>What is a low cost way to achieve 50 Mbps video output from a camcorder? I know one can buy a new camcorder with this capability. But, I wonder if there are older model camcorders, maybe even tape based,with an output such as HD/SDI that can be used to achieve 50 Mbps recording to a portable dedicated recorder at a lower overall cost (camcorder + recorder price less than newer technology camcorder)?<br>

Or perhaps there are tape or other media based camcorders that natively record at this level? That is, "pre tapeless" technology.<br>

I am thinking of a 3 CCD pro level camcorder with 4:2:2 recording that is a good buy used.</p>

<p>rar</p>

<p>Why do you want 50 Mbps video output? I usually see people asking the question the other way as in "My (video)camera outputs X bitrate, what is the best high bitrate storage device for it?"</p>

<p>In my reading there I have come across the concept of "broadcast quality." One of the specs is 50mbps recording. Maybe the term "output" was the wrong word. For example Sony PMW-100. I am new at this, but apparently HD/SDI and HDMI outputs can give higher quality/resolution, etc. than what is recorded to the memory card or tape.<br>

So, the question is: are there older camcorders with, for example, HD/SDI output that have broadcast quality even though what they record to the in-camera storage media is of lower quality? Is there a lower cost rig (camera + recorder) that records at 50 mbps like the Sony PMW-100?</p>

 

<p>Hi Robert.<br>

I don't think there is a low cost way of achieving 50Mb/s. This figure is only one of the factors that the broadcasters consider when assessing whether a camera is "Broadcast Quality HD" Other things are lens quality, sensor size (small sensors generate more noise) number of pixels and type of codec used. 50Mb/s is chosen as a minimum standard to maintain the picture quality over several stages of post production through to transmission. Most cameras that offer HDSDI output will be high end "Prosumer" or full professional models. There is another solution. Many older cameras offer an analog component output which can give remarkably good results with an appropriate recorder, but I doubt it will be very portable. I can only think of a capture card for a computer.<br>

I think you would be better off with a Sony EX1 unless you really have to get 50Mb.</p>

<p>Thank you for this thoughtful answer.</p>

<p>There are used Panasonic HVX200 and HVX200A video cameras that output a DVCPRO-HD stream. This records at 100 Mbps This is a 4:2:2 color space, much better than consumer amateur video cameras, These cameras can be bought today for less than a grand sometimes.</p>

<p>With a lessor 4:1:1 camera the are blocks of 4 pixels on each horizontal line. The color (chroma) of each four pixels is the same and the brightness is varied on each. A 4.2.2 out has twice the chroma resolution as a 4:1:1 or 4:2:0 scan line. </p>

<p>Getting a P2 based system has its costs plus a steep learning curve. The media has a one time cost that puts off many folks. Compared to an amateur/prosumer AVCHD video camera the media costs 10X more. AVCHD typically writes in the 21 to 28 Mbps rate. A SD 16Gig card is only 25 dollars for a Sony AVCHD camera. A P2 card costs 10X more. A P2 card is a professional system that writes faster due to its raid system. To read a P2 card requires either a data cable to the camera or reading the card with a usb reader of old computer with a card slot for PCMCIA. With P2 you install drivers to read the card and you copy the entire directory structure created by the camera. A P2 usb reader costs 300 dollars. </p>

<p>The Panasonic DVCPRO50 is at 50Mbps with a 4:2:2 color space but is not full HD. It is at 720x480.</p>

<p>If you shoot a video with a P2 camera and the camera makes in the root"<br>

a directory called CONTENTS in the root<br>

and has a text file in root called something likeclip.txt file that has the file name of the last video shot.</p>

<p>Under the CONTENTS directory there is "data" for each video in the directories called AUDIO, CLIP, VIDEO, XML etc<br>

For one video you just shot there is a one *.MXF file in VIDEO and often four *.MXF files in AUDIO<br>

The clip Director has a tiny bitmap of the video's starting image to allow one to help with housekeeping.</p>

<p>The four *.MXF audio files are the four audio tracks. A camera often has two tiny microphones on the camera and two mic jacks for channels 3 and 4.</p>

<p>The P2 system is very powerful and rich but requires a "workflow" sort of like say using "raw" for a wedding still shooter. <br>

You cannot just upload a MXF file to youtube. You will have to convert the file(s) to a more mainstream format!</p>

<p>A Panasonic HVX200 and HVX200A video cameras are used by TV reporters in the last 5 plus years. A used unit can be with issues or a great deal too. These use either the old tape drive or the solid state P2 system.</p>

<p>What is considered "broadcast quality" can be more rigid than just 50Mbps. There are cameras that output this that are not on the approved lists. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>So what is your budget? And what are you delivering the footage too that you need these specs? I work for a broadcaster and while 50mbps is preferred they do take less than that. ie dslr footage which is 20-30mbps 4:2:0. Do you know what these numbers mean in relation to video? If you are just shooting home videos you wont really notice the number difference IMHO. You are going to get a bigger impact out of DSLRs and shallow DOF. Also what is your editing work flow currently. That might determine along with your budget what system you should invest in. </p>

<p>Interest is in green screen and color grading. My reading tells me that 4:2:2 10 bit color is what you want to avoid banding and other post production artifacts.<br>

PMW 100 still looks interesting but the Sony F3 has plummeted in price and a used one can be had for about $1000 more than the PMW 100. When amortized over several years this isn't that bad, especially if you use less expensive lenses such as nikon or canon FD. Looks like F3 would require external recorder to capture the footage at the above mentioned quality.</p>