|
|
Posted by Richard Crowley on 06/30/06 16:23
> "Mr. Tapeguy" wrote ...
> Okay, a while back there was a thread on mini dv tape and
> everyone was googling info on coercivity and retentivity yadda
> yadda yadda. I wanted to offer the latest information we have
> from Panasonic.
> I am not posting this information as the absolute Biblical stance
> on brands of tape. It is offered only for comparison and evaluation
> along with other available information. To some of you it is "sales
> hype" and I would myself characterize it as marketing or promotional
> information from Panasonic.
> So take it with a grain of salt and evaluate it as you see fit.
< "promotional information" snipped>
> +1.2dB Higher Signal Output vs. Sony DVCAM
OK, good. Here is a hard, numeric comparison. But absent the
reference of the overall RF signal level from the playback head/
preamp, how can we tell whether 1.2dB is even significant?
< "promotional information" snipped>
> Significantly Extended Head Life (5x > vs. Sony)
This seems like the most impressive of all the real comparison
factoids. If it is true, it seems remarkable that they aren't cleaning
up the market? Is this a profound marketing failure? Is there
some other negative factor with using Panny tape that seems to
keep us addicted on Sony?
> Less Dropouts: Up to 30% Fewer Dropouts with AMQ vs.
> Sony DVCAM
It would be nice to know how they determined this? Was it for the
first record/playback pass, or the 15th? What was the *average*
difference in dropout rate? (I'm always suspicious of "up to"
because I know that is what I resort to myself when I can't come
up with compelling data. :-)
> All mini & Standard AMQ DV / HDV / DVCAM Cassettes
> are Normal 7.0m Total Thickness
Not clear if this is supposed to be some claim of advantage, or
statement of compatibility?
> Sales & Greater Profit Opportunity Selling into DV, HDV,
> & DVCAM Markets
That one speaks for itself.
> DV / HDV / DVCAM Recording/Playback Times Listed
> on Cassette and per Reference Chart
Well, actually not (and not for Sony, either). We must assume
that the model number is the running time in minutes. We must
also have some external meta-knowledge of whether the time
is calculated at the DV speed or the DVCAM speed.
ProTape's own online photo reference reveals that there is no
explicit reference to the recording/playback time...
http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/protape_1903_1388421
(this is the URL referenced by http://www.pro-tape.com 's page
http://protape.stores.yahoo.net/pana-ay-dv276amq.html)
> AY-DV276AMQ: Industry's Longest Digital Video Recording
> Time: > 4.6 Hours
A 184-minute DVCAM length from *any* vendor will run 276
minutes at DV speed. Perhaps the "Industry's Longest" claim
only refers to the labeling?
< "promotional information" snipped>
> Magnetic Energy/Signal Output Complements Pro
> DV/HDV/DVCAM Hardware Specifications
Absent more details this potentially contradicts the "+1.2dB Higher
Signal Output" claim above?
Even if we had equivalent "promotional information" from Sony,
et.al. we wouldn't know if the experiments were done in a way
that would make the data directly comparable. This is why 3rd
party, independent comparisons are valuable (Consumer Reports,
industry publications, independent test labs, etc.)
[Back to original message]
|