(Page 1 of 1 pages for this article )

Filed under: *VIDEO* •Editing •Hardware •NAB 09 •Post Production •

Matrox announces MXO2 Mini

At NAB 2009, Matrox announced its new MXO2 Mini, the second spinoff based upon the MXO2, and the third in the MXO2 family. The MXO2 Mini is the smallest and least expensive in the family, and the first one to be cross-platform. (The MXO2 and MXO2 Rack are Mac-only, at least for now.) If you are familiar with the MXO2, subtract XLR balanced audio and SD and HD-SDI, add multi-platform support, and you basically have an MXO2 Mini that starts at US$449 (₤338 in the UK, or €382 in other parts of Europe). If you would also like the new MAX option (which accelerates H.264 encoding when you are ready to deliver to AppleTV, Blu-ray, iPhone/iPod, WDTV, or the web), then the price is US$849 (₤644 in the UK, or €758 in other parts of Europe).

The MXO2 Mini’s rear panel

Marketed for a laptop or a tower

Like the first MXO2, the MXO2 Mini is marketed either for a laptop or for a tower. The first MXO2 comes prepared for both the ExpressCard/34 for laptops and the PCIe for tower computers (in that case, a MacPro). In the case of the new MXO2 Mini, the user must choose among those two connections, although the other will be available for sale as an option, for those who would like the flexibility of using it with both types of computers.

Some limitations with current laptops

Unlike the US$3495 IoHD from AJA, none of the MXO2 family products to date has an onboard ProRes422(HQ) hardware encoder. That’s part of the reason why the MXO2 products cost so much less than an IoHD. This isn’t really an issue when using MXO2 family products with a fast tower computer like a MacPro, since they have enough power to encode ProRes422(HQ) at HD resolutions and framerates in real time. However, this currently causes some limitations if you are expecting to be able to capture HD material directly to ProRes422(HQ) at a framerate higher than 720p23.976. In order to go beyond that, Matrox says that the computer must have at least two Dual-Core processors, or a Quad-Core at least 2.4 GHz. (At “press time”, the fastest MacBookPro laptops have a single Core 2 Duo processor.)

Of course, with a less-powered machine, Matrox says you can capture directly to the DV100 códec (aka “DVCPRO-HD”), but as many ProVideo Coalition readers know, the DV100 códec is not desirable for editing, since it is visibly lossy in multi-generations, and also subsamples. This is not an issue if you already shot your video using a camera códec and are planning to do native or hybrid editing. It is an issue if you were planning to record HD “live” to ProRes422(HQ), or if you were planning to capture an HDV tape recording directly to ProRes422(HQ) in order to do pure i-frame editing, as explained in my article about those situations.

Advantages of the lack of ProRes422(HQ) hardware códec

Although there are disadvantages of not having ProRes422(HQ) as an onboard hardware códec (specifically for today’s laptops) as explained above, the advantages are that the device works with other platforms and other applications, including Adobe’s CS4.

Blue-only function for monitor calibration

Like other MXO2 family members, the MXO2 offers a blue-only function to assist calibrating HDMI monitors which don’t have that function onboard. It also offers 1:1 pixel mapping with monitors that support it.

Onboard 10-bit hardware scaling

With a Mac, the MXO2 Mini offers real time up, down, and cross-conversion on capture and output, which is very desirable, although previously unknown with hardware at this price point. When I receive a review unit, I will report on the quality of this scaling, especially when cross-conversion from a 1080i/p source capturing to 720p, which is the most desired feature among my colleagues and clients. On Windows, the first release supports down conversion on output. Additional features will be made available in subsequent software releases at no charge.

(Page 1 of 1 pages for this article )

So Alan…  I’m wondering if you have taken one of these for a spin?  I’m close to buying one, but I’m wondering which will serve better as a budget monitor - a LCD computer monitor like the HP LP2475W or a consummer LCD television like the Sony KDL32XBR9?

Any help appreciated.

thanks,

Russ Johnson

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  07/18  at  10:22 AM

---

Hello Russ,

I have not yet had one in my hands. Matrox is supposed to send one any day now.
Make sure you can get 1:1 (pixel-by-pixel) monitoring, 709 color space, and a matte (non-reflective) display).

Allan Tépper
http://www.AllanTépper.com

Posted by Allan Tépper  on  07/18  at  12:30 PM

---

Hi Alan,

Thanks for your response - it immediately forces some of the issues I will have to accept, being hopelessly bound to a below $1000 budget (nix the HP Dreamcolor).  None of the monitors’ specs I’m looking at even mention rec. 709; some mention NTCS as a reference.  I know I’m not going to get “professional” accuracy, but I’m hoping to do “good enough to make a difference.”  90% of what I do won’t be broadcast bound, if it is, I’ll be going to a properly equipped facility.  I can borrow a Panasonic BT-LH1760W in a jam.

With that being said, I still want to do the best I can with the choices at hand and I want to learn color correction.  I’m considering the following monitors.

- Dell 2807wp.  1:1 pixel mapping, specs don’t mention rec. 709 but claim a 102%-110% NTSC color gamut.  On the downside, it has a substantial input lag.  Reviewed here: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_2408wfp.htm

- Hewlett Packard LP2475w.  H-IPS panel, 1:1 pixel mapping, very good black point while maintaining shadow detail, 92% NTSC color gamut.  Reviewed here: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/hp_lp2475w.htm

- Sony KDL-32S5100.  This is a new 32” Bravia TV and is the smallest TV I can find with 1080P resolution.  Sony’s specs don’t mention rec. 709, but lists NTSC color as follows: Color Range (u’v’):  90% of NTSC, Color Range (xy):  72% of NTSC.  I don’t know how to interpret that.

I didn’t think I’d be buying a consumer TV, but I’m starting to drift toward the Sony.  It is full raster with the ability to view material without scaling and at least I’d be seeing what my material looks like on a TV screen.  It also has a ‘game mode’ that you can turn on to bypass a lot of the picture processing to cut down on input lag.  I figure this might allow a more true indication of what I’m doing.

I might be at the point of “lowered the bar so far it doesn’t make a difference,” but if someone pointed a gun at your head and asked you to grade a program with one of these connected to the MXO2 mini, which would you choose?  I’m assuming you’re a guy that has a great zest for life.

Thanks,

Russ Johnson

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  07/21  at  10:35 AM

---

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below: