Press Release: HMC150, "the new DVX"

[Barry_Green]

news












FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE



PANASONIC ANNOUNCES ADVANCED PROFESSIONAL AVCHD

AG-HMC150 HANDHELD HD CAMCORDER


SECAUCUS, NJ (February 13, 2008) – Panasonic announces a new addition to its growing professional AVCHD product line that capitalizes on the phenomenal success of its popular DV-based AG-DVX100. The new, affordable AG-HMC150 handheldis scheduled for shipment later this year.

The HMC150 is designed to provide enhanced HD production capabilities for video enthusiasts who desire professional features, extended recording capability and the fast, simple and highly reliable workflow offered by tapeless, solid-state recording. The HMC150 features three native 16:9 progressive 1/3” CCD imagers with an optical image stabilization (O.I.S.) function to ensure stable shooting and a 28mm Leica Dicomar wide-angle zoom lens (35MM equivalent). The HMC150 handheld offers 1080i and 720p recording at 13Mbps, comparable to current HDV compression formats with bit rates of 25Mbps. In addition, an enhanced mode with a higher bit rate is planned to be incorporated into the HMC150 for higher-level use. It supports a full range of HD formats including 1080/60i, 1080/50i, 1080/30p, 1080/25p, 1080/24p native; 720/60p, 720/50p, 720/30p, 720/25p, 720/24p native; and it is 50Hz/59.94Hz switchable.

The advanced handheld utilizes the second-generation long GOP HD standard called AVCHD. Based on MPEG-4 AVC/H.264high profile encoding, AVCHD provides a near doubling of bandwidth efficiency and considerably improved video performance over the older MPEG-2 compression used in HDV formats. Announced by Panasonic and Sony, this industry standard format is now supported by over 30 companies and implemented in numerous camcorders, NLE systems and consumer HD playback devices.

The HMC150 offers professional HD performance with the simplicity of a digital still camera. Since the solid-state handheld records onto SD and SDHC memory cards, professionals can benefit from the reliability and random access of tapeless recording and capitalize on the cost advantages, widespread availability, and growing capacity of standard SD consumer cards. Using the newly announced 32GB SDHC memory card and the camcorder’s 6Mbps recording mode, users can acquire up to 12 hours of HD videoand audio on a single SD card.

Additional features of the HMC150 include professional XLR audio input connections and a wide range of data and signal interfaces including HDMI out, USB2.0, component out (D terminal), composite out and RCA audio out jacks, a 3.5-inch LCD monitor to display thumbnail images for quick viewing and playback, and a Time Code/User Bits menu. The camera also has remote jacks for focus iris and start/stop functions, a pre-record feature that allows the camera to capture footage occurring immediately before real-time recording begins, and a time/date stamp menu option for documentation purposes.

Panasonic’s AVCHD camera line brings the benefits of solid-state recording to budget-conscious professionals. Like digital still photography, recording onto SD/SDHC card offers a fast and simple IT-compatible workflow with ultra-reliable performance and resistance to shock, vibration and extreme temperatures and weather. SD and SDHC memory cards are inexpensive and widely available and can be reused repeatedly. Since AVCHD records video as digital data files, content can be transferred and stored on affordable, high-capacity hard disk drives (HDD) and optical storage media and transferred to future storage media as technology advances.

The HMC150 will be available this fall at a price to be announced.

About Panasonic Broadcast

Panasonic Broadcast & Television Systems Co. is a leading supplier of broadcast and professional video products and systems. Panasonic Broadcast is a unit company of Panasonic Corporation of North America. The company is the North American headquarters of Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. (NYSE: MC) of Japan, and the hub of its U.S. marketing, sales, service and R&D operations. For more information on Panasonic Broadcast products, access the company’s web site at www.panasonic.com/broadcast.




- 30 -

EDITORIAL CONTACTS:

Stacy Moore or Pat Lamb
(201) 392-4458 (518) 692-8150
moorest@panasonic.com patalamb@aol.com

[Jared Meyer]

Holy smokes.....just saw all these press releases. It's like Christmas!! I've got some reading to do. :)

Thanks for posting these Barry!!

[jedbarish]

How do we compare the AVC-HD HMC150 to DVCPRO HD on HVX 200? It would be easier to have SDHC instead P2 Cards to carry around but I wanted to know about the quality in dvcpro hd and avc-hd for indie movie production. Is it good for news instead film production?

[Barry_Green]

AVC-HD is the new format designed to replace HDV. It offers much longer recording times in smaller bandwidth than DVCPRO-HD. DVCPRO-HD is probably still the more professional codec, being intraframe and 4:2:2.

But people have done surprisingly good work with HDV already, and AVC-HD is better in every way than HDV ever was. This sounds like it's the camera I've been waiting for for a couple of years, for people who cut their teeth on the DVX. Now we just have to find out the price...

[PerroneFord]

This sounds like it's the camera I've been waiting for for a couple of years, for people who cut their teeth on the DVX. Now we just have to find out the price...


You said it brother. It may also be the magic bullet for those who wish to shoot underwater. The primary factors there being changing tapes in a wet environment, 1hr recording times, and HDD failure. The ability to change out the recording medium easily, is going to be a boon. It's also quiet since it's solid state, so no Firestore noise.

But why no 1080/60p? Is it REALLY that hard to do?

About the only thing I really would have liked to see is an LCD on top like Some of the Sony models. That is just SO much better for underwater work.

[Barry_Green]

But why no 1080/60p? Is it REALLY that hard to do?
Because it doesn't exist as a video standard. No video camera has 1080/60p, you can't record it or broadcast it in any standard codec or transmission standard.

[vocare]

Because it doesn't exist as a video standard. No video camera has 1080/60p, you can't record it or broadcast it in any standard codec or transmission standard.

cool...will this be the answer to sony camera...

[Barry_Green]

Will the HMC150 be the answer to the Sony EX1? Probably not, because I expect the HMC150 to be about half the price of the EX1. Of course, we don't know pricing yet, but if it's the replacement to the DVX then I expect it'll come in under $4,000, hopefully around $3500.

[Ian Slessor]

I've been hoping Panny (or someone else) would put out a tapeless HD cam and soon.

It would appear Panny has my money. The bastards. :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

Of course I want to see how it shakes out once we get more details but it would be veeery nice if we had, say, 14x zoom (too much to ask for?), 20+ Mbps available, and all the features we love about the DVX/HVX.

Oh, and around $3500 CDN would hit my sweet spot.

Maybe downloadable upgrades for intraframe AVCHD down the road? Like my PS3 upgrading to 2.0 for full-featured Blu-ray movies. Just sayin'.

Colour me excited.

sincerely,


ian

[Zander]

Looking forward to trying it.

[vocare]

http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/news-15511-AG-HMC150,+the+HVX200+little+brother.html

check this out

[Barry_Green]

Hmmm, sounds like they got their press releases crossed. $2500 was the announced price for the HMC70, not the 150. EDIT: Actually, when I read it again, they say "they've introduced a little brother, the HMC150. And, also, an SDHC based camera for $2500." So if you translate it that way they're accurate, but if you're trying to read into it that the 150 is $2500 then I think that's probably wildly optimistic.

[SPZ]

http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/news-15511-AG-HMC150,+the+HVX200+little+brother.html

check this out

$2500? Where did they get that quote? That would be a really good deal, indeed...And put the confusion to rest...

EDIT- Seeing Barry's post, it makes sense they got confused...HOWEVER, this is Akihabara news, so maybe they got the price from a japanese source? (They say their source is Crave, but here's hoping the 2500 is true, for the DVX upgrader that is!)

[vocare]

Hmmm, sounds like they got their press releases crossed. $2500 was the announced price for the HMC70, not the 150. EDIT: Actually, when I read it again, they say "they've introduced a little brother, the HMC150. And, also, an SDHC based camera for $2500." So if you translate it that way they're accurate, but if you're trying to read into it that the 150 is $2500 then I think that's probably wildly optimistic.

this is awesome...

[Nektonic]

Looks like this site will have to change its name to HMCUSER. . . . . . . .

. . . . just kidding of course.

I'm definately looking forward to this one. Looks like the DVX mated with the HVX. I'm glad it looks nice and sleek, unlike that ugly mockup from CES. 720/60p sounds good to me, as well as NO MORE TAPES!!!!

So we should expect this in the fall. I would guess September or October, maybe November at the latest.

Anybody know how many SD card slots will be on this? It would be nice to have 3-4 so that you don't have to swap out a card in the middle of a shot or an event shoot.

[AuditoryVisuals]

At first glance, I thought it was another "shell" for the SD1 or SD9. But this sounds good now. I want to know the bitrate.

Well, I'm guessing it's not the successor to the HVX200, but it's going to co-exist with the HVX line. I hope the HVX350 or something has DVCPRO-HD, AVC-Intra and AVCHD. 100Mb/s, 50Mb/s and 24Mb/s.

[Barry_Green]

Looks like this site will have to change its name to HMCUSER. . . . . . . .
Already registered. :thumbsup:


Anybody know how many SD card slots will be on this? It would be nice to have 3-4 so that you don't have to swap out a card in the middle of a shot or an event shoot.
With the capacity to record 12 hours on a single SD card, I don't know that you'll have to worry about that too much. :)

[Barry_Green]

Well, I'm guessing it's not the successor to the HVX200, but it's going to co-exist with the HVX line.
Jan clarified this in another thread. This is *not* a successor to the HVX, this is a successor to the DVX. It will co-exist with the HVX, it is a "little brother" to the HVX.


I hope the HVX350 or something has DVCPRO-HD, AVC-Intra and AVCHD. 100Mb/s, 50Mb/s and 24Mb/s.
That would be ideal.

[triplej96]

Wow this is great news!

[Jon Neely]

So berry, because this can only shoot in 1080i but shoot 24p with flags I presume, is this still the 1440x1080 like HDV size, or are we looking at a progressive 1080p clips hidden in the interlace footage? Sounds good to me.



Jon

[Kholi]

It's 1080p/24pN and 1080i/24p

Gotta read the entire article some mores. But, we have no idea if that's the same as the Sony EX-1's Full 1080p frame. We really hope so.

Being that it's still 1/3" CCDs, should we expect any difference in resolution? Namely, can it ever compete with the resolution the EX-1 outputs?

[Digigenic]

While all of this was expected since last year (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?p=1108311#post1108311), and aggressively requested many months before that, the mixed emotions and mood swings surrounding its innevitable announcement haven't changed.

The HMC150 simply doesn't generate the same intensity or excitement that most people shared when the DVX or HVX was released.
It's like the HMC150 will be receiving the "middle child" treatment.
But hey, at least it doesn't appear bastardized like the HMC70.

I rarely express sympathy for an inanimate object, but the HMC70 really deserves some pity.
How does a re-housed consumer camera that was initially set to debut under $2 grand end up 6 benji's over and remain underwhelming?
Panasonic must have the answer because it appears they went out of their way to appeal to the market segment that buys out of guilt for uninspired ingenuity and overpriced technical underachievements.
There really is nothing more to say about that camera, the silence that enveloped the thread started on it yesterday (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=125362) is a clear enough indicator.

Assuming Canon continues to play it safe, all eyes are now officially turned to the upcoming Scarlet announcement.

[Barry_Green]

So berry, because this can only shoot in 1080i but shoot 24p with flags I presume, is this still the 1440x1080 like HDV size, or are we looking at a progressive 1080p clips hidden in the interlace footage? Sounds good to me.

Who says it only shoots 1080i? That's not correct. The press release says 1080/24p Native. No interlace, no pulldown, no flags, no anything. Just straight-up 1920x1080 at 24 fps. (actually I'm guessing on that 1920 part, because AVC-HD supports both 1920x1080 and 1440x1080 and we don't know which profile they've chosen, but I have to assume it's 1920...)

[TimurCivan]

The HMC is perfect for thoes that need HD with long record times, and no tapes. Wedding shooter, event documentation, ETC.

I will Certainly buy this camera. it will let me shoot HD dance performances and long form recordings on "cheap" media, like an SD card that the Client can keep.

Infact if it at least matches the HVX200 for resolution, even if its slightly under, it will still be awesome.

[Kholi]

If there's no HVX upgrade announcement and nothing from Canon Camp it's either this or Scarlet.

I'll be happy to give up my HVX in exchange for a Full 1080p frame with less noise. Err, well, as long as there's at least as much HVX resolution.

[Zak Forsman]

i'll wait until NAB (aka Scarlet) to decide on this one.

[vocare]

just another review about the camera...with a lot of nasty comment about the camcorder.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-Aims-for-an-AVCHD-Future-with-AG-HMC150-34499.htm

[TimurCivan]

Wow.

It seems like these guys dont shoot too much.... Or worry too much about gear. I stopped caring what camera i shot on after shooting real film....

But i think this DVX replacement is VERY cool.....

[Kholi]

just another review about the camera...with a lot of nasty comment about the camcorder.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-Aims-for-an-AVCHD-Future-with-AG-HMC150-34499.htm


I wonder if they realize that the image posted was the same one posted months ago? Prototype maybe?

Tsk tsk. Some people just aren't all that bright.

[Isaac_Brody]

I stopped caring what camera i shot on after shooting real film.....

It spoils you. The first time you see your stuff projected, you forget about all that pixel counting. :beer:

About time the DVX had a successor. I just hope it captures color the way the DVX does. Can't wait for NAB. :thumbup:

[ProjX v2.0]

If you look at the zoomed in pic here:
http://images.camcorderinfo.com/images/upload/Image/news/2008/NAB_2008/Panasonic/Panasonic_AG-HMC150_prov_CU.jpg

You can see there is now an additional ND Filter setting (1/16?) and if my eyes aren't deceiving me, is that some sort of covering to protect the audio level dials? I don't know about you guys, but that was one pet peeve of mine about the DVX, always nudging those audio dials and then finding out after it's too late.

[Sprocketboy]

If the price is right... this maybe a good companion for the HVX200. With a firmware update, I'm sure the two cameras can be made to match in visual tonality.

[Kholi]

Honestly the audio dials look like a sticker. It's a Prototype picture. Could be wrong, though.

[vocare]

If you look at the zoomed in pic here:
http://images.camcorderinfo.com/images/upload/Image/news/2008/NAB_2008/Panasonic/Panasonic_AG-HMC150_prov_CU.jpg

You can see there is now an additional ND Filter setting (1/16?) and if my eyes aren't deceiving me, is that some sort of covering to protect the audio level dials? I don't know about you guys, but that was one pet peeve of mine about the DVX, always nudging those audio dials and then finding out after it's too late.

since it does not record to tape...i wonder what they do to the spare compartment.
Just wish there are two slot for sd card.

[Kholi]

since it does not record to tape...i wonder what they do to the spare compartment.
Just wish there are two slot for sd card.

Unit becomes smaller? That's what I would think.

[Nik Manning]

Man they ripped panasonic a new one in the comments of that interview. I have to say that so far I haven't seen any 13Mbps avchd footage that has looked better than hdv from a hv20. I personally think avchd is a consumer format the (sony and pana) cam up with to make video sizes smaller for consumers who don't really notice the quality loss.

Smaller footage = you can put it on a dvd = you can get the datarate small enough to fit on 1 sd card instead of 4(p2).

What if avchd under 18Mbps just isn't as good as hdv? Panasonic needed a consumer format. They pledged anti hdv so they need a hd consumer format. So what if it isn't better at the current datarates it is smaller.

[ProjX v2.0]

anyway you slice it, tapeless > tape

[ProjX v2.0]

Honestly the audio dials look like a sticker.

lmao, I think you are right. That possibility never occurred to me.

[Kaku Ito]

I've been testing with HDC-SD9 with 17mbps recording of 1080/60i and 1080/24p, I think it could look good but with its tiny CCDs, I can't really tell how well it would be with 1/3 CCDs. Many artifacts that shows with SD9 look CCD related, but I've been having drop frame issue for fast panning.

I hope it's going to be improved with AG-HMC150. It would be great for schools and hobbist and as second cam for me.

[Jon Neely]

Who says it only shoots 1080i? That's not correct. The press release says 1080/24p Native. No interlace, no pulldown, no flags, no anything. Just straight-up 1920x1080 at 24 fps. (actually I'm guessing on that 1920 part, because AVC-HD supports both 1920x1080 and 1440x1080 and we don't know which profile they've chosen, but I have to assume it's 1920...)

Thanks Berry, Sounds like EX1 killer to me, I really dont need the 1/2'' sensors anyways(Ill just add more light) sounds good to me HMC fro primary, and the DVX as a good b camera. I am still kinda worried about the noise... thats kinda always there once you buy something with the Panny name on it...


Jon

[Sprocketboy]

I've always had bad luck with sound on under 10K Sony cams. The Pannies hold up in this area. How big is HMC150 in comparison to the HVX or DVX? I suppose its a third smaller because of it doesn't have a tape transport.

[whachusay]

Thanks Berry, Sounds like EX1 killer to me

No offense, but I doubt it will be an EX1 Killer.

[Sprocketboy]

I doubt it too, but for a little less than half the price of the EX1 it wouldn't be bad. Any higher... I'm out.

[kgimedia]

I personally think avchd is a consumer format the (sony and pana) cam up with to make video sizes smaller for consumers who don't really notice the quality loss.



HD is a consumer format.


I was going to stop there but I will qualify. HD was created for consumers not the pros. HD in a marketing term meaning above 719 lines. The main issue is there is not upper limit to HD so Imax is HD, 70mm is HD.

[Zak Forsman]

HD is a consumer format.


I was going to stop there but I will qualify. HD was created for consumers not the pros. HD in a marketing term meaning above 719 lines. The main issue is there is not upper limit to HD so Imax is HD, 70mm is HD.
i don't understand this. HD encompasses a multitude of codecs -- some pro, some less than. the same can be said of SD.

[ecking]

I personally think avchd is a consumer format the (sony and pana) cam up with to make video sizes smaller for consumers who don't really notice the quality loss.

People said the same thing about dv and hdv at a time.

[triplej96]

Is there a release date for this yet? Sorry if it was said some where.

[Nektonic]

Is there a release date for this yet? Sorry if it was said some where.

It just says sometime in the fall. I would guess approx. Sept - early Nov.

[Jon Neely]

Im just saying that for the price, a lot of people that dont want to A:spend more money B:dont care for sxs C:doesnt care for 1/2'' sensorsB: doesnt Cmos with the rolling shutter artifacts... For those people this will fit perfectly.
I still like the EX1, but this cam is making my head turn.

Jon

[Hodges]

awesome stuff. cant wait for nab

[FatBird19]

My requests?
-Uncompressed audio option
-AVC-Intra video codec
-Better glass than the HVX
-Higher resolution than the HVX. (hvx is 540x960...I'd at least like to see the vertical resolution expanded to 720) (ps, are our eyes more sensitive to vertical or horizontal resolution?)
-Keep it in the $2500-3000 price range
-Keep it SDHC only, high speed card compatible

Basically, I don't understand this camera's target market. Who are this camera's customers? The DVX offered what many pro and amateur videographers and filmmakers believed to be the all-around best standard-def camera there is in the prosumer price range; a DVCPRO-50 tape deck would have pushed the costs up too high, so using DVCPRO compression they made the best camera they could getting in all the features they could afford.
Now Panasonic has the opportunity to capture that demographic again, at a highly competitive price. Instead though they're using a video format that only captures images on par with competing HDV cameras using compressed audio. Didn't Panasonic go against the HDV standard for it's quality issues? So instead of putting in some extra costs towards faster processors, encoders, and improved CCDs for the sake of a better recorded image, they're going to create a product that only pleases the expectations of the casual video viewer and not exceed those of the filmmakers and videographers that bought a DVX one camera generation earlier.
Panasonic has the technology to set the camera ahead of the competition--no expensive tape deck limitations, better processor technology, fast flash memory--but they aren't. And for what? To save the customer an extra $500 MSRP off the camera? I think most customers, at least those who loved what the DVX had to offer in it's day, would pay the extra money for a superior and more versatile product that will get use for the next 5-7 years. I still use my old, standard-def DVX on many occasions, and love it.

[Digigenic]

Well.....

It appears Gizmodo have some insiders at Panasonic who are at liberty to divulge the MSRP of the HMC150, otherwise why would they print a $6 grand price tag? (http://gizmodo.com/357336/panasonic-ag+hmc150-shoots-on-sdhc)

I know we're expecting an approximate price tag of $3.5 grand, but how would you respond to an official announcement from Panny with a price tag higher than the HVX? It doesn't make sense to me.

...Although, their decision to increase the price of the HMC70 over it's expected introductory price of below $2000 could be indicative of what may happen with the HMC50.

[Kholi]

Well.....

It appears Gizmodo have some insiders at Panasonic who are at liberty to divulge the MSRP of the HMC150, otherwise why would they print a $6 grand price tag? (http://gizmodo.com/357336/panasonic-ag+hmc150-shoots-on-sdhc)

I know we're expecting an approximate price tag of $3.5 grand, but how would you respond to an official announcement from Panny with a price tag higher than the HVX? It doesn't make sense to me.

...Although, their decision to increase the price of the HMC70 over it's expected introductory price of below $2000 could be indicative of what may happen with the HMC50.


I wouldn't say that's right. Another guy speculated 6k, I think Gizmodo pulled information from there.

If the HMC is anything above 4k I'll be very disheartened and disappointed with Panasonic in general.

[Jared Meyer]

If the HMC is anything above 4k I'll be very disheartened and disappointed with Panasonic in general.

As would I.

Actually I won't give it a thought if it's priced higher than $3500. If that's the case I'll go straight to the HVX or it's replacement.

[Derrick_SA]

If is is replacing the DVX, it can't be more expensive or closely price to the HVX, no businesss is that stupid.

It will probably be around $3000 somewhere.

- Derrick

[David Jimerson]

Man they ripped panasonic a new one in the comments of that interview.

Yeah, well . . . I'm not going to worry too much about rants from a commenter who wonders why there are two microphones on the camera in the pic.

[Camera Expert]

That $6,000 quote comes from people who think that it’s the successor to the HVX200 but its not. It’s the successor of the DVX100B so the price should be similar. My prediction would be anywhere from $3,500 to $4,000.

[joe 1008]

If this camera is the replacement for the DVX its low light capability should be around the same. That is still the strong point of the DVX compared to the HVX!

[David Jimerson]

Not sure I would count on that (though it's possible). The 1/3" HD cams are all slower than the DVX for the same reason, which would probably apply to this one, too.

[a.King]

why does it look funny?

It looks like the viewfinder doesn't even move.

[ecking]

It's a prototype. A fake. A rendering. Nothing moves, none of it's real. That'd be like complaining that a condo rendering doesn't look livable.

[Digigenic]

That $6,000 quote comes from people who think that it’s the successor to the HVX200 but its not. It’s the successor of the DVX100B so the price should be similar. My prediction would be anywhere from $3,500 to $4,000.
Gizmodo didn't mention the HVX.
Gizmodo specifically referenced the DVX: in the article (http://gizmodo.com/357336/panasonic-ag+hmc150-shoots-on-sdhc) that "Panasonic is finally releasing a true HD successor to the popular but aging AG-DVX100."
Following this statement with a $6 grand price tag before identifying the inherited characteristics from the DVX.

As I initially stated, it wouldn't make sense for this to be the price point.

However, guessing by the way in which Panasonic decided to push the price of the HMC70 up from an under $2g camera to $2.5g then maybe we'll see a similarly unexpected price pattern emerge for this camera too.
I know we're all expecting a camera under $4g, but what happens if it actually debuts over $5g?
The dollar has been pretty weak.

[Barry_Green]

My requests?
-Uncompressed audio option
Might happen; AVC-HD does have two options for audio, either AC-3 compressed or PCM uncompressed.


-AVC-Intra video codec
Not gonna happen. The AVC-Intra board alone probably costs as much as this entire camcorder.


-Better glass than the HVX
HVX lens is pretty awesome, way sharper than it needs to be. But this lens is at least different in its zoom range so it might be better, who knows.


-Higher resolution than the HVX. (hvx is 540x960...I'd at least like to see the vertical resolution expanded to 720) (ps, are our eyes more sensitive to vertical or horizontal resolution?)
Yes we're more sensitive to vertical.


-Keep it in the $2500-3000 price range
We'll see about that. I doubt it, I expect it'll be in the $3500 to $4000 range.


-Keep it SDHC only, high speed card compatible
All Panasonic AVC-HD cams record to SDHC, so this should be a given.


Basically, I don't understand this camera's target market. Who are this camera's customers?
People who want to shoot tapeless high-def but want long recording times and cheap media. What's not to understand? On a 32GB card it'll record 12 hours of footage in the economy mode. 12 hours, uninterrupted. And you can buy those cards at Best Buy or Wal-Mart.

It's long-GOP recording for all those who were swayed by HDV, but without the tape (and with a codec that's much more advanced than MPEG-2).

The target market for this cam? Imagine everyone who wanted an HVX but whined about the price and the P2 card cost. Now tell 'em that they can buy this thing for $3500 and that the memory cards cost $20 (or whatever they'll end up costing). And that you can record 5x as much footage per gigabyte. I dunno, I think there's a lot of people out there who would jump at that.

And no, it's not an HVX, we know that, it's a model below. And it probably won't have variable frame rates unless they surprise us with a later announcement. But it's a new high-def DVX that records for hours and hours and hours on (comparatively) cheap commodity off-the-shelf media. For those who were content with HDV, why wouldn't they be thrilled with AVC-HD?

No, it's not an HVX. I bet the HVX (or its successor or whatever) is a better camera than this one in many ways. But this one is obviously aimed squarely at the kind of person that makes up the majority of our DVXUsers.

Of course, that all depends on the price. Jan said it would be priced appropriately for a long-GOP product, and that probably means it'll be quite a bit less expensive than the HVX. Which means it should hit its target market pretty squarely.

[Kholi]

Assuming that we get it for 3500.00, of course. Anything above 4000 and we'll call it an incredibly bad move.

[SPZ]

Assuming that we get it for 3500.00, of course. Anything above 4000 and we'll call it an incredibly bad move.

It will be priced close to the Canon A1, Sony V-1. Jan's post about "economicaly priced" "where long GOP belongs" should put it right on the price point of those cameras.

Since the A1 is going for 3300 USD aprox, if I'm not mistaken, the HMC150 should be near the price range to be competitive.

Curious to see how it performs- specially on fast movement. This could be the camera to prove AVCHD as a viable professional format ( avc-intra is a different codec based on h264.)

[Kholi]

Then now we wait for the image. Fingers crossed!

[shaun1970]

I personally think that this will crash and from what i've read, more people are calling it a piece of junk, I tend to agree. It talks about bitrates and framerates but what about in camera tweakability like the scene files on the DVX and HVX??? I can't see it really being a replacement for the DVX at this stage until more is known.

[SPZ]

I personally think that this will crash and from what i've read, more people are calling it a piece of junk, I tend to agree. It talks about bitrates and framerates but what about in camera tweakability like the scene files on the DVX and HVX??? I can't see it really being a replacement for the DVX at this stage until more is known.

This will crash, just like the Canon Xh-a1 did. Its a heads-on competitor. If its in the A1 price-point, and delivers similar to superior quality- with 1080 25pn recording, and the almost certain patented Cinegamma, as well as new 3ccd chips, I can seriously see "THE" new event/corporate/ "mucho low budget" Independent film HD camera!

EDIT- And I'll follow Barry's line of thinking on this :) I would bet my HVX this thing will have scene file dials or menus :)

With the introduction of this, I believe the DVX will be discontinued... (assuming it does SD...)

[Nik Manning]

My requests?
-Uncompressed audio option
-AVC-Intra video codec
-Better glass than the HVX
-Higher resolution than the HVX. (hvx is 540x960...I'd at least like to see the vertical resolution expanded to 720) (ps, are our eyes more sensitive to vertical or horizontal resolution?)
-Keep it in the $2500-3000 price range
-Keep it SDHC only, high speed card compatible

Basically, I don't understand this camera's target market. Who are this camera's customers? The DVX offered what many pro and amateur videographers and filmmakers believed to be the all-around best standard-def camera there is in the prosumer price range; a DVCPRO-50 tape deck would have pushed the costs up too high, so using DVCPRO compression they made the best camera they could getting in all the features they could afford.
Now Panasonic has the opportunity to capture that demographic again, at a highly competitive price. Instead though they're using a video format that only captures images on par with competing HDV cameras using compressed audio. Didn't Panasonic go against the HDV standard for it's quality issues? So instead of putting in some extra costs towards faster processors, encoders, and improved CCDs for the sake of a better recorded image, they're going to create a product that only pleases the expectations of the casual video viewer and not exceed those of the filmmakers and videographers that bought a DVX one camera generation earlier.
Panasonic has the technology to set the camera ahead of the competition--no expensive tape deck limitations, better processor technology, fast flash memory--but they aren't. And for what? To save the customer an extra $500 MSRP off the camera? I think most customers, at least those who loved what the DVX had to offer in it's day, would pay the extra money for a superior and more versatile product that will get use for the next 5-7 years. I still use my old, standard-def DVX on many occasions, and love it.

Yes Fatbird exactly! Don't bad mouth hdv then come out with hdv lite. Less quality than hdv but less file size.
This might sound crazy but I think Canon has already released the dvx replacement called the XH-A1.

[timbook2]

to me that doesnt look like the camera I would buy in the future. AVCHD ? they must be joking !
AVCHD is MPEG4 !! Will it run in FCP ? or will I have to render before I can edit ?

edit: just saw FCP 601 will accept AVCHD !

I thought AVCHD is a consumer standard.......

Looks like Pana is just doodeling around instead of making a better HVX with bigger chips and more light sensitivity.....

I am not excited.

http://cineform.blogspot.com/2007/04/avchd-support.html

http://fcproducer.com/index.php/andy-coon/2007/04/final-cut-pro-6-forget-something/

[Peabody]

Will I be able to dump video from this new camera into Vegas like I can with my DVX100a, or would I have to learn a new NLE.
Obvious to many tech heads, not for me.
This can record SD too?

[matt s.]

People need to stop jumping to conclusions and wait it out. The cam isnt slated for release until fall. I dont even know how anyone could thinks or know its junk.

[Barry_Green]

Vegas now supports AVC-HD from all manufacturers, so you should have no problem editing the footage directly. But, it remains to be seen if they've somehow limited their implementation (in the first generation they refused to support AVC-HD from any manufacturer other than Sony). They've since rectified that, so it seems likely that this HMC150 would work, but ... frankly, we won't really know until we try it.

[triplej96]

This camera sounds great to me! I can only hope Avid will support it.

[Barry_Green]

Avid is listed on the avchd-info.org site so hopefully that will mean proper support. Can't think of what else it could possibly mean.

[triplej96]

Avid is listed on the avchd-info.org site so hopefully that will mean proper support. Can't think of what else it could possibly mean.

That is great news thanks Barry I didn't see that. I think this cam will do just fine if price around 3,000 no more than 3,500. Like you said if is a step up from DVX and below the HVX. Its for the people(like me) that couldn't afford a HVX and P2 cards. Just really need to save now. I wonder if the cam will have any kind of downconvert thing or is this usally with tape.

:)

[moviemaker999]

Give me latitude!(above 8 stops, EX1 got 10)

[William_Robinette]

Wow, you guys are crazy.

I would feel fine saying, "If your in the building and own an HVX, you may step out now. This doesn't concern you."

Guys -not- and HVX replacement.

Panasonic needed to come out with this. They have a huge gap in their lineup that Canon has been riping open. The DVX needs a HD follow up. This is it. How can you bag on this thing. It is being released under Panasonic's broadcast division right? I would bet my DVX this thing has the little Scene wheel with at least the same image tweaking parameters as the DVX. The AVC-HD bit rates it records at so far have been touted by Barry himself as being just as good as HDV. But wait, they are flash based. No more TAPE! Thank goodness.

Calm down please.

[Kholi]

It's okay Will, they will get it sooner or later.

Although if the image is there I'd happily trade my HVX200 (provided that Scarlet or the HVX replacement aren't due out at the same time. )

[FatBird19]

Wow, you guys are crazy.

I would feel fine saying, "If your in the building and own an HVX, you may step out now. This doesn't concern you."

Guys -not- and HVX replacement.

Panasonic needed to come out with this. They have a huge gap in their lineup that Canon has been riping open. The DVX needs a HD follow up. This is it. How can you bag on this thing. It is being released under Panasonic's broadcast division right? I would bet my DVX this thing has the little Scene wheel with at least the same image tweaking parameters as the DVX. The AVC-HD bit rates it records at so far have been touted by Barry himself as being just as good as HDV. But wait, they are flash based. No more TAPE! Thank goodness.

Calm down please.


Explain how the HVX isn't supposed to be a DVX replacement...

[ugafan]

Explain how the HVX isn't supposed to be a DVX replacement...

the hvx is a step up from the dvx in technology and price. it costs twice as much the dvx and you need to buy expensive p2 cards, which puts it in a different category.

[Nik Manning]

Wow, you guys are crazy.

I would feel fine saying, "If your in the building and own an HVX, you may step out now. This doesn't concern you."

Guys -not- and HVX replacement.

Panasonic needed to come out with this. They have a huge gap in their lineup that Canon has been riping open. The DVX needs a HD follow up. This is it. How can you bag on this thing. It is being released under Panasonic's broadcast division right? I would bet my DVX this thing has the little Scene wheel with at least the same image tweaking parameters as the DVX. The AVC-HD bit rates it records at so far have been touted by Barry himself as being just as good as HDV. But wait, they are flash based. No more TAPE! Thank goodness.

Calm down please.
I don't think barry is saying the 13Mbps AVCHD implementation is just as good as hdv. Numerous camera tests have showed AVCHD is lacking at 13Mbps. So lets get 1 thing clear so far all AVC-HD cameras tested at 13Mbps have been a step down from hdv compared to lets say a HV20.

[ilauzirika]

I don't think barry is saying the 13Mbps AVCHD implementation is just as good as hdv. Numerous camera tests have showed AVCHD is lacking at 13Mbps. So lets get 1 thing clear so far all AVC-HD cameras tested at 13Mbps have been a step down from hdv compared to lets say a HV20.

but its not only the codec, I guess.

[rawfa]

I absolutely adore my Canon Xh-A1, but I must say I'm sick and F**** tired to tapes. I physically hate the whole process. Now it all boils down to the if the new Pana will have at least equal image quality, tweak ability and price to the A1. Also it would be a super plus to have an EX1 type LCD with a flip image. Another thing that will also influence my decision is the fact that I work with cineform aspect Hd which makes editing a living dreams...and that for me counts more than going tapeless (at least now it does).

[rawfa]

I absolutely adore my Canon Xh-A1, but I must say I'm sick and F**** tired to tapes. I physically hate the whole process. Now it all boils down to the if the new Pana will have at least equal image quality, tweak ability and price to the A1. Also it would be a super plus to have an EX1 type LCD with a flip image. Another thing that will also influence my decision is the fact that I work with cineform aspect Hd which makes editing a living dreams...and that for me counts more than going tapeless (at least now it does).


Ok, there'll be another major thing that will also influence my decision: Scarlet :)

[TimurCivan]

to me that doesnt look like the camera I would buy in the future. AVCHD ? they must be joking !
AVCHD is MPEG4 !! Will it run in FCP ? or will I have to render before I can edit ?

edit: just saw FCP 601 will accept AVCHD !

I thought AVCHD is a consumer standard.......

Looks like Pana is just doodeling around instead of making a better HVX with bigger chips and more light sensitivity.....

I am not excited.

http://cineform.blogspot.com/2007/04/avchd-support.html

http://fcproducer.com/index.php/andy-coon/2007/04/final-cut-pro-6-forget-something/


yes precicely, its H264. H264 with good implimentation looks spectacular. I dont understand why people are freaking out?

[TimurCivan]

I don't think barry is saying the 13Mbps AVCHD implementation is just as good as hdv. Numerous camera tests have showed AVCHD is lacking at 13Mbps. So lets get 1 thing clear so far all AVC-HD cameras tested at 13Mbps have been a step down from hdv compared to lets say a HV20.

Yes but what camera?


This is a 3500$~ camera not a crappy 900$ consumer cam.

Look at what canon did with HDV. Why are people freaking about bit rates? are you all engineers? have some faith that they will build a proper DSP.

[rawfa]

Tim is right. Besides, everybody seems to be forgetting how long Pana took to come out with the HVX after all other brands has an HDV camera out. There's a good reason why they take their time making their products and I'm hoping this camera will be no exception.

[William_Robinette]

Yes but what camera?

This is a 3500$~ camera not a crappy 900$ consumer cam.


Exactly. Again it has been said that so far no camera head has done justice to AVC-HD.

And anyone who thought the HVX was purely a DVX upgrade needs to take a closer look at the two side by side.

Not to mention the fact that they are still selling the DVX right along side the HVX.

[Zander]

Explain how the HVX isn't supposed to be a DVX replacement...

Yeah, I was under the impression that the HVX was the big brother to the DVX. I guess Panasonic adopted a kid to stick in-between.

[Barry_Green]

Yes Fatbird exactly! Don't bad mouth hdv then come out with hdv lite. Less quality than hdv but less file size.
Either you are joking, or woefully misinformed. AVC-HD blows HDV into the weeds at comparable file sizes, and can deliver HDV caliber at half the bitrate. It's a far advanced codec. It's the most advanced codec on the market, h.264.

[Barry_Green]

I thought AVCHD is a consumer standard.......
Nowhere is AVC-HD called a "consumer" standard. HDV, on the other hand, was released as a "consumer" standard. Of course, so was DV. The marketplace will dictate whether professionals adopt it or not.

So far there have only been consumer cameras using AVC-HD, but that doesn't mean the format is limited to such.


Looks like Pana is just doodeling around instead of making a better HVX with bigger chips and more light sensitivity.....
This camera is not intended to be an enhancement to the HVX! It's a notch *below* the HVX, for the low-cost crowd.

[Barry_Green]

Will I be able to dump video from this new camera into Vegas like I can with my DVX100a, or would I have to learn a new NLE.
Vegas supports AVC-HD. Initially, being a Sony company, they made it support *only* the Sony flavor of AVC-HD, leaving Canon and Panasonic users out in the cold. But they've updated it since, so it's probable that Vegas will work with this HMC150. We won't know for sure until it comes out.


This can record SD too?
Probably, but not certain until we see final specs. AVC-HD does support Standard Def recording.

[Barry_Green]

Explain how the HVX isn't supposed to be a DVX replacement...
Well, does the fact that they were sold side-by-side for the last two years give any clue?

One is a $5995 camera, the other is a $2995 camera. Not in any way in the same class or league. The HVX is a new model well above the DVX, well well above the DVX.

The HMC150 is an HD replacement for the DVX. It is not in competition with the HVX. It will be sold alongside the HVX, just like the DVX is sold alongside the HVX today.

[Barry_Green]

I don't think barry is saying the 13Mbps AVCHD implementation is just as good as hdv.
A proper implementation of AVC-HD at 13mbps should be every bit as good as HDV.


Numerous camera tests have showed AVCHD is lacking at 13Mbps.
Any credible tests?


So lets get 1 thing clear so far all AVC-HD cameras tested at 13Mbps have been a step down from hdv compared to lets say a HV20.
I'd like to see a credible test that says that. I've seen AVC-HD at 9 megabits that looks to be a direct match to HDV.

It's also possible that someone may be using a great MPEG-2 implementation against a lousy AVC implementation; codec quality does vary. But a good AVC-HD implementation at 13mbps should be better than a good HDV implementation, and AVC-HD at 17 or 20 megabits should blow HDV into the weeds, and AVC-HD at 20 to 24 mbps should match XDCAM-HD or XDCAM-EX quality. (note: as a *format*, not as a camera head, because all the camera heads are or should be treated independently of the format!)

[RokMartian]

Gizmodo didn't mention the HVX.
Gizmodo specifically referenced the DVX: in the article (http://gizmodo.com/357336/panasonic-ag+hmc150-shoots-on-sdhc) that "Panasonic is finally releasing a true HD successor to the popular but aging AG-DVX100."
Following this statement with a $6 grand price tag before identifying the inherited characteristics from the DVX.

As I initially stated, it wouldn't make sense for this to be the price point.

However, guessing by the way in which Panasonic decided to push the price of the HMC70 up from an under $2g camera to $2.5g then maybe we'll see a similarly unexpected price pattern emerge for this camera too.
I know we're all expecting a camera under $4g, but what happens if it actually debuts over $5g?
The dollar has been pretty weak.

One thing to note about the gizmodo article is the last line:
"The HMC150 will be available this fall at a price to be announced."

So it looks like they are just regurgitating the same figure and seems to contradict the first line of the article.

[Nik Manning]

A proper implementation of AVC-HD at 13mbps should be every bit as good as HDV.


Any credible tests?


I'd like to see a credible test that says that. I've seen AVC-HD at 9 megabits that looks to be a direct match to HDV.

It's also possible that someone may be using a great MPEG-2 implementation against a lousy AVC implementation; codec quality does vary. But a good AVC-HD implementation at 13mbps should be better than a good HDV implementation, and AVC-HD at 17 or 20 megabits should blow HDV into the weeds, and AVC-HD at 20 to 24 mbps should match XDCAM-HD or XDCAM-EX quality. (note: as a *format*, not as a camera head, because all the camera heads are or should be treated independently of the format!)

Well all I can say is show me the money. So far there is nothing I have seen that shows 13 megabits or higher has been able to compete with hdv. Maybe in the future AVCHD will get better but doesn't that also mean hdv could get better.
What would qualify as a proper implementation of AVC-HD at 13mbps?

[Barry_Green]

Well all I can say is show me the money. So far there is nothing I have seen that shows 13 megabits or higher has been able to compete with hdv.
So far I haven't seen an AVC-HD camera that I would bother to use at all. I mean, what's there to compare? An HG10, fer cryin' out loud?

Try a simple test: render out a video in MPEG-2, then render out that same video instead to h.264. You'll quickly see that h.264 is far superior at the same bitrate, and for equivalent quality you can cut the file size down to 1/2 or 1/3.

The day there's an HD100 or V1U or HVX or XHA1 that shoots to AVC-HD, that's the day we can evaluate how AVC-HD performs compared to HDV. Until then they're just little consumer pocket-cams and with those, quality is not exactly highest on their priority list.

[ugafan]

i think the real question that should be asked is if we will see the book "panasonic hmc150" by barry green? :)

[Barry_Green]

i think the real question that should be asked is if we will see the book "panasonic hmc150" by barry green? :)

If it looks like it's going to be a big hit then yes. I'll need to see a lot more details first though.

[ecking]

Maybe in the future AVCHD will get better but doesn't that also mean hdv could get better.

At this point HDV can't really get better. The bit rate spec is locked and it's ruled by tape heads, other than improve the camera behind it the format itself doesn't really have anywhere to go.

[mikkowilson]

There's a reason we've been using h.264 for the DVXfests for white a while now.

It kicks ass.

- Mikko

[Grug]

Interesting development. I'm going to wait for firmer details on the camera before passing any judgement.

The mention of a higher level recording format alongside the 13Mbs AVC-HD has my interest. But the native resolution of the sensor are also going to play a big part (the detail that the XHA1 can capture has been a large part of its success).

I just hope that Pannie are putting a half-way decent LCD on this thing (after you've had Sony's EX LCD it's hard to go back).

Consider me intrigued.

[fgjestad]

I do love my DVX100, primarily for two reasons: It's wide angle lens and it's strength in low light. And it is lighter than HVX200.

Do any of you have any guess on how the wide angle would be compared to DVX100 and how sensible it would be to light?

[Bucknfl]

Go Dawgs!

[Barry_Green]

The HMC150 will be way, way, way wider than a DVX. Not only is the stock lens a lot wider (3.9mm vs. 4.5mm) but it's going to be a 16:9 system which means the effective wide angle will be a lot wider still.

[moviemaker999]

I'm pretty sure somewhere in the press release it mentions a d-type component output, I really hope they can put a different connector on there because I have heard many negative things about the d type connection.

[mikkowilson]

moviemaker; I love you sig! :thumbsup: :grin:

- Mikko

[moviemaker999]

so do I

[Craig Ryan]

I could care less about codec numbers; it uses INEXPENSIVE SD CARDS! I've been waiting for a camera like this ever since the HVX came out (guess why? yeah i don't have the green)...if it is indeed released at the same price point of a brand new DVX (3500-4000 when they first came out years ago) then I don't see why anyone has anything to complain about...just look at it like a new DVX that is solid state, but oh look, it has native 16x9 chips AND does HD! No complaints here. Let's just wait and see the footage...

[Craig Ryan]

I forgot to add; the only thing that initially bummed me about this new camera is
The name. DVX just sounds so cool....and rolls off of the tongue nicely...at least with an American accent...HMC...eh. Maybe if I knew what it stood for I'd appreciate it more..but for now I'm going to be annoyed every time I have to say "HMC".

[rawfa]

Is there any information about the LCD size? I've tried to find something out but information is scarce at the moment.

[Ian Slessor]

No.
More.
Tape.

Yay!

OK, that's four but I got excited typing.

ian

[Ian Slessor]

I forgot to add; the only thing that initially bummed me about this new camera is
The name. DVX just sounds so cool....and rolls off of the tongue nicely...at least with an American accent...HMC...eh. Maybe if I knew what it stood for I'd appreciate it more..but for now I'm going to be annoyed every time I have to say "HMC".

Perhaps we need to come up with a "cool" nickname for this new cam.

Let's see...H.M.C.

For some reason I'm thinking M.C. Hammer. Weird.

Call it "The MC."

"The Cam." Simple and elegant.

"Hammer" It IS a tool after all.

Any other suggestions?


ian

[RokMartian]

Perhaps we need to come up with a "cool" nickname for this new cam.

Let's see...H.M.C.

For some reason I'm thinking M.C. Hammer. Weird.

Call it "The MC."

"The Cam." Simple and elegant.

"Hammer" It IS a tool after all.

Any other suggestions?


ian

How 'bout:
Hot
Mofo
Camera

:cool:

[John Godden]

Is there any information about the LCD size? I've tried to find something out but information is scarce at the moment.

According to this studiodaily brief the LCD is 3.5":

http://www.studiodaily.com/studiomonthly/tutorials/howtutorials/feed.rss/9074.html

I sure hope Pani puts some "grunt" into the "enhanced" recording mode spec. :thumbsup:.

JohnG

[rawfa]

According to this studiodaily brief the LCD is 3.5":

http://www.studiodaily.com/studiomonthly/tutorials/howtutorials/feed.rss/9074.html

I sure hope Pani puts some "grunt" into the "enhanced" recording mode spec. :thumbsup:.

JohnG


Sweet. I hope it has the resolution of the EX1's lcd and a flip function. That would be so freaking awesome!

[Barry_Green]

Perhaps we need to come up with a "cool" nickname for this new cam.

Let's see...H.M.C.

For some reason I'm thinking M.C. Hammer. Weird.

Call it "The MC."

"The Cam." Simple and elegant.

"Hammer" It IS a tool after all.

Any other suggestions?


ian
HaMmerCam?

Yeah, "DVX" flows off the tongue, "HMC" doesn't...

[SomewhereinLA]

Anyone knows the size/weight differences between the HVX and the HMC150? They look similar in design but it's difficult to really tell for sure.

[joemiked]

oh yeah it'll rock here in Oakland !!
hammer time!!oh oh uh oh!! get your big pants learn to dance!
hammer time!!

cant touch this!!!
probably wont touch it if its 6000? bux !!!!

[Sean Michael]

M.C. Cammer! :grin:

[joemiked]

its mc hammer versus the drug dealers!!

whoa hammer time
cant touch this!!

[joemiked]

whats so cool about the 80s all the sudden?
hmmmmmmmmm..............
boy band returns? new dance moves?
nice dreams and weird science?
buckaroo returns!!!!?
marky mark and the funky bunch!!

[Craig Ryan]

Yeah I was originally going to poke fun at the "MC" comparison. Guess I didn't need to haha. I could live with "the Hammer" though.

[Nektonic]

Personally I think they should call it the HDX-100, or HDX-150. It still sounds similar to DVX or HVX, but is different enough so that we don't confuse it with the DVX and HVX.

As for the HMC, maybe it means "High-Memory-Capacity" or something like that due to the use of SD cards.

[Craig Ryan]

yep; definitely HDX-150 for the win.

If we do in fact have to wait until fall for this camera, that's kind of a bummer though. :violin: Kinda wish it was available for summer projects.

[ecking]

Just call it the hvx150, that would have made it extremely clear where it was in the product line and put all that hvx replacement stuff to rest.

[Grug]

HVX150 would be good

[William_Robinette]

But Panasonic has a certain way they name their cams. The letters are not just arbitrary.

I think HVX is something like:

H- High Definition
V- DV Deck
X - 24p

So HPX-500

H- High Definition
P- P2 Media
X- 24p

So HMC might mean:

H- High Definition
M- ? (Media designation?)
C- ? (Varicam has a C in the title as well)

Duno, just guessing.

[Jared Meyer]

So HMC might mean:

H- High Definition
M- ? (Media designation?)
C- ? (Varicam has a C in the title as well)

Duno, just guessing.

I was wondering that too. Memory Card? Media Compact?

[William_Robinette]

yeah, but I don't think its an acronym.

[doondoon]

I hope panny puts a high resolution LCD on this camera.

[ilauzirika]

I was wondering that too. Memory Card? Media Compact?

I vote for memory card

[TimurCivan]

Compact flash would be cool.... its pretty fast and stable.

[bikefilms]

just another review about the camera...with a lot of nasty comment about the camcorder.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-Aims-for-an-AVCHD-Future-with-AG-HMC150-34499.htm

Whoa, quite a lot of erratic numbers-slinging going on over there on that thread. I'm glad there are better places (DVXUser) to go for info.

Wish it were AVC-Intra.

-andrew

[bikefilms]

Personally I think they should call it the HDX-100, or HDX-150. It still sounds similar to DVX or HVX...

Yeah, agreed. But what about ordering one from a rental house over the phone?

Alphabet Soup.

Makes me wish cameras were named like bikes; like The Killing Machine, The Destroyer, or The Maneater.

[TimurCivan]

i want a waveform.

[triplej96]

i want a waveform.

A waveform would be great!

[Barry_Green]

Red has a waveform. It's... not as ideal as you'd want, but it's still got one. If they made it a transparent overlay it'd rock. Red also has a bizarre pseudo-waveform called "false color".

Right now I don't bother with it and use the waveform on my BT-LH80.

But I've been nagging Panasonic for a waveform for almost two years now. Let's hope they listened!

[SomewhereinLA]

Red has a waveform. It's... not as ideal as you'd want, but it's still got one. If they made it a transparent overlay it'd rock. Red also has a bizarre pseudo-waveform called "false color".

Right now I don't bother with it and use the waveform on my BT-LH80.

But I've been nagging Panasonic for a waveform for almost two years now. Let's hope they listened!

Sure, sure that would be nice... But we'll know if they really listened when we find out if you can flip the monitor video output so that using a 35mm adaptor get easier.

[William_Robinette]

I like the 4 stage ND filter.

[Kholi]

Me too, Will! I hope that it becomes standard with the rest of the "Prosumer" pana line-ups.

[Rodney V. Smith]

Sure, sure that would be nice... But we'll know if they really listened when we find out if you can flip the monitor video output so that using a 35mm adaptor get easier.

Now THAT is a feature that 35mm adapter guys will find EXTREMELY useful. Lets hope it's in the featureset since we've been asking for it for so very very long...

[Kholi]

That and the video out option for 480 16:9 instead of Squished via component or composite.

Little Sony Cameras have this, why can't we?

[Rodney V. Smith]

right there with you Kholi. that AND the flip monitor would be among my top wishlist items (besides the SD card thing of course)

[jorgecam]

Hi Guys,

I'm new here, I've been reading the posts, and I was sure to buy the HVX200...
Until today...Can anyone help to decide either to wait for the new HMC150, or to get the HVX200, PROS and CONS of each camera? I read the PR for the HMC150...but, I'm still not sure each one to pick...thanks a lot!

[Barry_Green]

Well, no, nobody can give you an authoritative answer as to which to get because the HMC150 isn't on the market yet and we don't know how it performs or what all it can do!

HVX is established, been out a couple of years, workflow is well sorted out, it's being used by networks and tv stations and major filmmakers. But it's also a couple of years old, and its recording media (P2) is much more expensive per minute than AVC-HD would be.

HMC150 is newer, presumably will be in the same basic ballpark as the HVX (since it looks a lot like it, it's obviously aimed to be in the same family) and its main claim to fame is that it uses the new AVC-HD format which means you can get 2x to 5x to 16x as much footage per gigabyte, and those gigabytes will cost a lot less than P2 gigabytes. So the HMC150 is likely to be a significantly less expensive option than the HVX. But it won't (apparently) have the variable frame rates that the HVX does, and we don't know what else it may or may not have.

Biggest "con" against the HMC150 is that it's not likely to hit the store shelves until sometime in the Fall, which could mean October or November. The HVX is available today.

[jorgecam]

Thanks a lot!

I think that things might clearer when we get the full specs of the new camera.
I understand that right now it's really hard to compare...The truth is, I dream about the HVX, but when it comes to budget...I just hope P2 cards get cheaper...

[Jaimebailon]

i dont get it sorry if im being ignorant but why would you want video that is so compressed doesn't dv record at 25 megabits per second and this camera is is around 13 megabits per second i wouldnt see this camera replacing my dvx really i would rather just wait it out and go with the HVX and have a real prosumer camera when it comes down to it most of the things shot on the dvx and the hmc150 will not be seen in a theater MOST. well thats what i think let me know if im wrong or what you guys think about what i said

[Barry_Green]

i dont get it sorry if im being ignorant but why would you want video that is so compressed
Because that lowers the cost.

doesn't dv record at 25 megabits per second and this camera is is around 13 megabits per second
Yes, and HDV is 19 or 25 megabits and HDCAM-SR is 440 megabits and ... unless you're comparing apples to apples, none of that matters.


most of the things shot on the dvx and the hmc150 will not be seen in a theater MOST.
Most of everything that's shot on anything (including 35mm) never gets seen in a theater! That doesn't mean 35mm is anything less than a fantastic format, and several DVX films *have* made it in theaters.

I don't think anyone can say anything authoritative about what this cam will or will not be able to do, six or eight months before it's even released!

[Tzedekh]

I don't think anyone can say anything authoritative about what this cam will or will not be able to do, six or eight months before it's even released!Well, you did imply that its output wouldn't be as good as HDCAM SR. And of course I'm being flippant -- sort of. As long as expectations are realistic (e.g., it's not in the same league as, say, the F23), we may be pleasantly surprised by what the HMC150 can do. For instance, because it's newer than the HVX, it may have an improved (read higher-res and/or lower-noise) CCDs. Or its HDMI port (which the HVX lacks) may be version 1.3 and even support 10-bit 4:2:2 output. Or because it's a (probably) $3,500-$4,000 prosumer model that (given their typical release schedule) Panasonic will probably have to live with for a couple of years, they may have decided to push the as-yet-unannounced top data rate to 20-24 Mbps. Or it might have image-flip capability. This camera is newer than the HVX, so it's only reasonable to expect it to have features the more-expensive HVX doesn't. So let's be patient and save the whining until after it's released.

[Barry_Green]

Exactly! :thumbsup:

[ryan brown]

Barry, and idea on when we'll get any more *significant* info on this cam?

is it safe to assume the next update will be at nab? or is panny prone to give another press release soon after the first?

This is going to be a good year for cams:thumbsup:


*currently saving up for an upgrade of some sort, possibly Scarlet, possibly panasonic, possibly something I can't fathom at the moment*

[Barry_Green]

Well, I'm sure we'll get an update on April 14th, but I don't know if there'll be anything between now and then. If I remember with the HVX release there was the "bridal veil" teaser, and then no official information until the press conference the day before NAB's show floor opened.

[dory_breaux]

i'll wait until NAB (aka Scarlet) to decide on this one.
word

[vidwerk]

Just stumbled across this announcement a few days ago. I must say, I'm very exited about this new camera. This might be the camera for me. I've always wanted an HVX200, but the price with the P2 workflow was a bit out of my ballpark. I hope the quality of the long-GOP will hold up for pro-prosumer results.

vidwerk.

[TimurCivan]

Just stumbled across this announcement a few days ago. I must say, I'm very exited about this new camera. This might be the camera for me. I've always wanted an HVX200, but the price with the P2 workflow was a bit out of my ballpark. I hope the quality of the long-GOP will hold up for pro-prosumer results.

vidwerk.

my god that was such a sensible comment...

this people is what this camera is made for. this guy, which represents a large portion of video shooters.

[Rodney V. Smith]

If it's everything that it should be, it should also be a great solution for producers who are inundated with recent requests for HD from customers (weddings, etc) who actually don't need HD, but just believe that the higher defnition will make their wedding look better... instead of choosing the right videographer.

Sorry, pet peeve of mine.

[Barry_Green]

this people is what this camera is made for. this guy, which represents a large portion of video shooters.
Exactly who it's aimed at.

[Johnnyfive]

I wonder if we'll be able to use our great DVXuser batteries on this camera. I hope so! http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Matthew R. Rodwell]

We just happen to be shooting a feature right around its release, I am excited about the upcoming news on this because it might work out perfect for our production.

[vidwerk]

I wonder if we'll be able to use our great DVXuser batteries on this camera. I hope so! http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/images/icons/icon10.gif

Most likely. I just picked up a brand new PV-DV400 for $100.
Going to use it mainly as a deck. I was glad to see it uses the same batteries as my DVX100A.

vidwerk.

[PixelWrangler]

Will this camera have firewire output? The reason for this question is how will I be able to edit AVCHD once it's transfered to the computer. It seems that it must be converted to an editable format which for now appears to take longer than real time. But if I could import thru Edius I can have realtime Canopus HQ files which is what I'm currently doing now with miniDV tapes.

[Barry_Green]

Will this camera have firewire output?
AVC-HD doesn't support firewire streaming like DV does. It'll probably have a USB port for file transfer, or you could always just pull the SD card out and put it in any SD card reader to transfer files to your computer.


The reason for this question is how will I be able to edit AVCHD once it's transfered to the computer.
Many NLEs support editing native AVC-HD, some require transcoding. EDIUS Neo and Pinnacle and a few others can handle the footage as-is. FCP requires transcoding. Panasonic also provides a tool for transcoding to DVCPRO-HD for realtime editing.


But if I could import thru Edius I can have realtime Canopus HQ files which is what I'm currently doing now with miniDV tapes.
EDIUS doesn't need any transcoding, it can handle the files as-is.

[PixelWrangler]

Thanks Barry - I'd love to just pop the card into the computer to transfer the files and edit. After reading the Canopus forums it still seems that many folks are still having trouble editing AVCHD without transfering to HQ. I just upgraded my computer last summer so I'm not due for a new one anytime soon - but I am due for an upgrade on my cameras which is why I'm looking at the 150. I read that GV is planning to roll out an external HDMI to Firewire converter like their ADVC products but they price it at $999(ouch) I'll just wait for a better work flow for AVCHD before buying a cam, maybe Canopus will have something hardware based by then.

[Daygola814]

Yes! No more fragile 4-pin firewire. Good Riddance!

[filmguy123]

Barry, from this link posted earlier w/negative comments on Panny & P2:

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Panasonic-Aims-for-an-AVCHD-Future-with-AG-HMC150-34499.htm

Could you give your thoughts, input, and "response" to these statements? I'm not sure what truth/inaccuracies/ignorance there is to them. I saw this briefly covered earlier, but I'd like to hear your response and assessment of the following:

(1)
----------------------------
They are still sticking with their dead-as-of-last-year P2 cards. P2 does not have the bandwidth to handle HD. Google it if you don't believe me. Stewart English would not have blundered so. Their HVX200 has to uprez to stumble into their mediocre version of HD (1280x960). Panasonic doesn't have real 1920x1080 chips until you sail way past the 10K mark. So they have to put cheap camera's on the market to save face and make their other cameras look like they still have value. Sony's HDCAM EX is so far beyond anything Panasonic has available, even at the higher end of their cameras, it is pathetic. It is like they have given up and let Sony win. Even the $650 Canon HV20 with its native 1920x1080 CMOS chip out-shoots the HVX200, and will certainly beat this lame has-been-out-of-the-box AG-HMC150.
----------------------------

(2)
----------------------------

What I said about the bandwidth needed for HD is accurate. P2 doesn't have it. Did you know that DVCpro HD is currently being streamed over Firewire? Ask yourself how this is possible. Low bandwidth is the answer. DVCPRO HD is undersampled to 960x720 and 1280x1080, so you would not be dealing with full frame HD. I am referring to full frame HD. The Sony HDCAM EX records full frame 1920x1080 (native chips also) at 35mps. So you have to transcode it into ProRes 422 or Cineform! Big deal. The HDV codec is actually very good. HDV can be cranked up way further than 35mps. (Although not by the Sony). MPEG 2 has long, long legs. It is a technology that has a lot of headroom. And it looks terrific. But you can capture native 1920x1080 right out of your HDMI port on the Canon HV20 because it has a native 1920x1080 chip!
-----------------------------------------

(3)
-----------------------------------------
Well, it doesn't actually "support a full range of HD formats," since there's no true 1080p, and why? 'Cause the obsolete P2 recording media can't record full HD bandwidth. So you're stuck with upscaling. P2 is ridiculous now since it costs WAY more than SD and even SDHC even though its essentially a PCMCIA RAID array of standard SD cards. Umm, what else? Molded immobile eyepiece? 13Mbps bitrate for video capture? C'mon there are consumer cameras which are getting a better bitrate out of the crappy AVHCD codec
-----------------------------------------

(4)

MY OWN QUESTION: Do you think P2 format will stand the test of time, or do you think it will be replaced/dumped in the coming few years? Many of these posts make me wonder...



Thanks Barry! The other negative posts on that board were already addressed by you I believe, but I'd like to hear your say on these! :)

[mikkowilson]

I'm going to respond to this, because it doesn't matter who states the facts. They are still facts.



(1)
----------------------------
They are still sticking with their dead-as-of-last-year P2 cards. P2 does not have the bandwidth to handle HD. Google it if you don't believe me. Stewart English would not have blundered so. Their HVX200 has to uprez to stumble into their mediocre version of HD (1280x960). Panasonic doesn't have real 1920x1080 chips until you sail way past the 10K mark. So they have to put cheap camera's on the market to save face and make their other cameras look like they still have value. Sony's HDCAM EX is so far beyond anything Panasonic has available, even at the higher end of their cameras, it is pathetic. It is like they have given up and let Sony win. Even the $650 Canon HV20 with its native 1920x1080 CMOS chip out-shoots the HVX200, and will certainly beat this lame has-been-out-of-the-box AG-HMC150.
----------------------------



P2 cards are not "dead". There are brand new laptops available from most manufacturers - including Sony's very latest models - with PC Cardbus (P2 compatible) slots. Sony claiming a format is dead that they themselves put in their own laptop is either really stupid engineering on their part, or in fact a lie. Just because development of the Cardbus spec has stopped, does not mean it is discontinued.

P2 has bandwidth to handle HD. Weather the DVCPRO format carries a true native full HD stream is a separate debate, but P2 very much handle HD. Either as DVCPRO-HD, or as AVC-Intra, or as HDV files from a Sony if you so want. It's *just* a memory card format that is optimized for video. And it has ample bandwidth to support a huge verity of HD formats. I have personally offloaded 16GB P2 card that can hold well over 30 minutes of 720/24pN (An internationally accepted HD format) in 7minutes & 15 seconds. I'd say that's plenty bandwidth for HD.

The HVX does not "uprez". It's sensors are arranged in an array that takes the data to be recorded (at the best resolution) directly off the chips in the right place. Sony can boast all the 3 full HD chips they want, but as their color encoding throws away a quarter of their color, it's quite a waste to sample it in the first time. It's much more efficient to only gather the data that will actually be stored. But true enough that the EX1 has a HD-SDI port .. and for that, the 3 full-HD sensors have a valid point - though even then half the color information is disregarded before it ever leaves the camera. Throw away half the data, or increase dynamic range with the right (fewer) number of larger pixels?

The EX1 is hardly "far above" what the HVX200 can do. Fast movement, rolling shutter wobble, inter-frame encoding, low bandwidth storage, are all areas that the EX1 looses to the HVX200 in.
The HVX200 is undeniably superior in the following environments:
SD shooting. DV, both at 25 AND 50mbps.
Jittery, unstable camera mounts. (Handheld) [And that's ignoring the subjective ergonomics]
Situations with fluorescent lighting
Situations with flash / strobe lighting.
Price.
Post production work-flow support.
Processing efficiency.
Compatibility with tape formats.

And if you leave HD-SDI out of the equation.
Then the HVX200 ALSO is superior when shooting:
Chroma key material.
Material to be heavily color corrected.
Moving scenes, especially faster movement.

Those are CLEAR indisputable situations where the HVX200 is superior. There are of course many situations where the EX1 does a better job. - Neither camera is clearly "far beyond [what the other] has available", they have different features, that is all.

These benefits and MORE are available higher up in Panasonic's line. So Sony's statement that the EX1 is better than anything Panasonic has to offer is a blatant lie.

Stating that the HV20 "out shoots" the HVX200 is ridiculous. Sure, it might have more static resolution under good lighting conditions when it's automatic controls are operating optimally. But that would be like saying a go cart "out-drives" a Land-Drover, just because it can go faster on an indoor circuit. - Not exactly an equal comparison.

How do you wish to define "win" (is it even a race? who said it was?) then we could look at the number of tape less production sales in Europe for example ... over 70% are P2 .. that's over ALL systems! That leaves well under the remaining 30% to be shared by Sony, and JVC, and Grass Valley, etc...

ANY comparisons tot he HMC150 are nothing but speculation, as nothing more than an initial press release is known about the camera.



(2)

----------------------------

What I said about the bandwidth needed for HD is accurate. P2 doesn't have it. Did you know that DVCpro HD is currently being streamed over Firewire? Ask yourself how this is possible. Low bandwidth is the answer. DVCPRO HD is undersampled to 960x720 and 1280x1080, so you would not be dealing with full frame HD. I am referring to full frame HD. The Sony HDCAM EX records full frame 1920x1080 (native chips also) at 35mps. So you have to transcode it into ProRes 422 or Cineform! Big deal. The HDV codec is actually very good. HDV can be cranked up way further than 35mps. (Although not by the Sony). MPEG 2 has long, long legs. It is a technology that has a lot of headroom. And it looks terrific. But you can capture native 1920x1080 right out of your HDMI port on the Canon HV20 because it has a native 1920x1080 chip!
-----------------------------------------


The first part of this statement amazes me. How can the 100mbps formats (currently) use on P2 be "lower bandwidth" than the 35mbps format used by the EX1? Come on, seriously.

SO you have to transcode? Big deal? umm, yes it is. You can edit DVCPRO/50/HD directly off the cards, with ZERO transcoding, zero processing, zero quality loss, on a number of computer AND tape based systems. Right now. With no waiting. When time = money, transcoding is a big deal.

NO one has "cranked" HDV any higher than 35mbps. In fact, no one has cranked HDV higher than 25mbps. XDCAM-EX, the 35mbps format, is not HDV, it's a brand new proprietary format; how can anyone be expected to "crank it any higher" than the ONE company that uses it?


"MPEG-2 has long legs"? what does this mean? I fail to find any technical statement here. Lets of headroom? would this be the "headroom" that is leaving it in the dust in practically all development of new formats? Every manufacturer has already implemented MPEG-4 based recording. And every new distribution format is also based on MPEG-4. H.264, Flash Video, Quick Time, Windows Media, Blu-Ray, HD-DVD; ALL support and are developing with MPEG-4.

Note that this does not mean MPEG2 is dead by any means, just that it's foundation isn't being developed any more ... just like PCMCIA/PC Cardbus.

So what if you can capture 1920x1080 with HDMI from your HV20? In certain situations (Controlled conditions, with lots of light, and a tethered recording connection.) this can be a more preferable option. But in no means does that mean anything definitive on the general level. Again, there is no actual technical statement here beyond "it can do this".





- Mikko

[Barry_Green]

What is this, some end-user complaining? This stuff is ridiculous.



They are still sticking with their dead-as-of-last-year P2 cards. P2 does not have the bandwidth to handle HD.
What a stupid statement. P2 is currently scoring about 80% of broadcast HD sales worldwide. 80%! To say it's "dead"? Whoever wrote that doesn't have the slightest clue what they're talking about. Major networks, TV stations, production companies, the BBC, all are going with P2. And P2 records the highest-quality HD format you can possibly get in an HD camcorder, AVC-Intra.

The rest of it reads like typical fanboyism and doesn't even deserve a response. Typical trolling drivel.


What I said about the bandwidth needed for HD is accurate. P2 doesn't have it. Did you know that DVCpro HD is currently being streamed over Firewire? Ask yourself how this is possible. Low bandwidth is the answer.
Okay, is this the same troll who wrote that the EX1 was better in all ways? Yes, so... why is 35 megabits (EX1) enough but 100 megabits (DVCPRO-HD) isn't? Whatever. More mindless drivel. The BBC has perhaps the pickiest technical standards in the world, and they've just standardized all Factual Studios productions on DVCPRO-HD. The second-pickiest organization in the world, Discovery HD, has certified DVCPRO-HD as an unrestricted acquisition and delivery format. Unless that poster knows something that the BBC's technical review department and Discovery HD's technical review departments don't, I think we can safely say that he's flapping his trap with uninformed malarkey.


Well, it doesn't actually "support a full range of HD formats," since there's no true 1080p, and why? 'Cause the obsolete P2 recording media can't record full HD bandwidth.
This is pathetic, uninformed, and stupid. Does he happen to know that P2 could record full HDCAM SR at 440 megabits? Is he now going to try to claim that HDCAM SR wouldn't be full HD bandwidth?


P2 is ridiculous now since it costs WAY more than SD and even SDHC even though its essentially a PCMCIA RAID array of standard SD cards.
It costs exactly the same as SxS cards do. And if it's so "ridiculous" why are the broadcast departments at networks worldwide adopting it at a rate of 4 to 1 more than XDCAM? Perhaps there's more to it than he knows, hmmm?


MY OWN QUESTION: Do you think P2 format will stand the test of time, or do you think it will be replaced/dumped in the coming few years? Many of these posts make me wonder...
P2 is the utterly dominant tapeless format. There are over 600 networks worldwide using it. It's outsold the competition by a factor of 4 to 1. Major networks are buying tens of thousands of these P2 cameras and they will not be replacing them any time soon.

Will P2 last forever? Of course not, no format would. But the notion that 80% of broadcast HD sales are going P2 means that there are major, massive customers who are now depending on Panasonic to continue supplying them with equipment for years to come. So I wouldn't sweat it one bit. And the fact that the exact same P2 media is used to store DV, DVCPRO, and DVCPRO50, and then when high-def was introduced it could store DVCPRO-HD, and now that Panasonic's introduced AVC-Intra the exact same P2 cards can record AVC-Intra50 and AVC-Intra100... that shows a serious commitment to the media and to the format. Panasonic's upgraded the lineup twice, but kept the cards compatible.

[filmguy123]

mikkowilson & Barry - thanks for the excellent responses with INFORMED information :)

1.) Is AVC-Intra a superior format to DVCPRO-HD? Where can I read up on this?

2.) Can P2 record AVC-HD?

3.) What makes P2 better than SDHC cards? Does it have 4x the bandwidth?

Thanks!

[mikkowilson]

1.) Is AVC-Intra a superior format to DVCPRO-HD? Where can I read up on this?

Yes, it uses a newer more flexible codec.
Information here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVC-Intra (Note the links to more useful information downloads at the bottom of the article.)


2.) Can P2 record AVC-HD?
P2 is simply a memory card format. You can put word files, or MP3s, or a PowerPoint presentation on a P2 card if you wish.
At this time there are no cameras that record AVC-HD to P2 cards. But theoretically it's very possible.


3.) What makes P2 better than SDHC cards? Does it have 4x the bandwidth?
Neither is "better" per say.
P2 is better suited to higher bandwidth applications as it does in deed have about 4x the bandwidth of SDHC cards. It is also manufactured to a higher quality.
However SDHC cards are smaller & cheaper.


- Mikko

[filmguy123]

So in DVCPRO-HD frames are scaled, but I see in AVC-Intra 100 they are NOT scaled - is this one of the most significant differences? Why does DVCPRO-HD scale the frames down?

Do you think it's possible we'll see in an HVX successor some combined features, for example:

- Ability to record to P2 or SDHC
- Ability to record DVCPRO-HD, AVC-HD, AVC-Intra

[mikkowilson]

"scaled"?

Different systems use different methods to record different signals with various techniques. Just like how DV isn't either full PAL or full NTSC resolution.

- Mikko

[filmguy123]

"scaled"?


That's what it says on the wikipedia site...

[Sprocketboy]

After Barry's response, it makes me rather proud to own an HVX200. I was a Sony fan in the 1990s, but as of recent, a pro cameraman, buddy of mine, who shoots on big gigs around the world told me Panasonic is the way to go. He turned to them during 2001 and hasn't looked back since. They had one mishap that turned me off - the infamous M2 format, but they more than made up for it.

The HVX is a wonderful Indie camera and a fantastic backup or B-Roll camera on large productions using the Varicam.

Actually, a fellow filmmaker of mine just finished up a movie shot on the Varicam in Guatemala and lots of B-Roll was shot with the HVX. The two intercut seamlessly.

[Barry_Green]

So in DVCPRO-HD frames are scaled, but I see in AVC-Intra 100 they are NOT scaled - is this one of the most significant differences? Why does DVCPRO-HD scale the frames down?
Okay, let's try it this way: what do HDV, HDCAM, DVCPRO-HD, XDCAM, DV, DVCPRO, DVCPRO50, MPEG-IMX, Digital BetaCam, and BetaSX all have in common? They ALL "scale" the video as they record it! If someone's trying to pretend that DVCPRO-HD is the only one that does "prefiltering", well, that's just more deception and misdirection. All of these systems use nonsquare pixels.

Just about every HD video format out there records 1080i as 1440x1080; the only one that varies is 60Hz DVCPRO-HD which uses 1280x1080 (but the PAL version is 1440x1080). Why do they do this? For the same reason they employ DCT compression, and the same reason they use color sampling -- it's a way to trim down the bandwidth to get it to a reasonable recording size. HDCAM uses 3:1:1 color sampling and 1440 pixels wide, DVCPRO-HD uses 1280 pixels wide but it also uses 4:2:2 color sampling. Two tradeoffs that net out with both being excellent recording formats.

AVC-Intra100 and XDCAM-EX and AVC-HD are the only 1920x1080 recording formats out there. AVC-Intra is the highest-quality recording format ever put into a camcorder. XDCAM-EX and AVC-HD are both long-GOP 4:2:0 systems that rely heavily on interframe compression to get the bandwidth down very low. And AVC-HD still retains the option to record in 1440x1080 too; it actually supports both modes. Well, then again, so does XDCAM-EX; in 35mbps mode it's 1920x1080, but in 25mbps mode it's 1440x1080. Well, actually, now that I'm filling in the blanks, so does AVC-Intra: at 50mbps it records 1440x1080, at 100mbps it's 1920x1080. So even though AVC-Intra, XDCAM-EX and AVC-HD are all the newest formats on the market and they all support 1920x1080, isn't it rather interesting to note that every one of them also supports 1440x1080?

As compression schemes have become more efficient, compression software engineers are finding that they don't have to "prefilter" the video from 1920 down to 1440. That is a distinction that has happened over time, and I believe it was only in 2007 that the first 1920-recording cameras came about. So unless someone wants to refer to the F900R as "not real HD", they're going to have to accept that prefiltering is a perfectly legitimate technique that's been used for years and years.


Do you think it's possible we'll see in an HVX successor some combined features, for example:
- Ability to record to P2 or SDHC
- Ability to record DVCPRO-HD, AVC-HD, AVC-Intra
I've been asking for that for years. Will it happen in an HVX successor? Undoubtedly. I was on a panel at Slamdance and I heard Jan say that AVC-Intra would be implemented across their entire product line. But she also said that'd be "in the next 4 to 5 years." (apologies if I'm mis-remembering the statement). So yes, I would wager that at the bare minimum you'll see AVC-Intra in an HVX successor. I just don't know WHICH successor, it may be a couple of generations away! :)

[Barry_Green]

1.) Is AVC-Intra a superior format to DVCPRO-HD? Where can I read up on this?
Yes, AVC-Intra (well, the 100-megabit version!) is superior to DVCPRO-HD and every other camcorder format in existence. The only format that could possibly compare would be HDCAM-SR.

AVC-Intra also comes in a 50-megabit version, which is about the same overall quality as DVCPRO-HD.


2.) Can P2 record AVC-HD?
Well, mixed answer. Yes, a P2 card could certainly record AVC-HD; a P2 card is capable of recording any digital data stream. That's why I said that if you could find a way to route the cable to it, a P2 card could even record HDCAM-SR. But in a more practical answer to the question: as of now, no P2 cameras support AVC-HD. There's no real logical reason I can think of as to why they couldn't, so perhaps we'll see them introduced. However, it seems counterproductive -- the whole point of AVC-HD is to have such small file sizes that it can be practically and comfortably recorded on cheap, commodity media: SD cards, or SDHC cards. So while a P2 card could easily handle it, why would you use a $900 16GB P2 card when you could use a $100 16GB SD card? I mean, it'd work, just seems like overkill.


3.) What makes P2 better than SDHC cards? Does it have 4x the bandwidth? Thanks!
Many things, including a 640mbps data transfer rate, an existing infrastructure of professional broadcast equipment, a RAID controller that buffers and prevents errors when a card is ejected while reading and writing, a die-cast chassis that is rated for some unholy amount of shock resistance... it's an ultra-durable, ultra-fast, ultra-ultra version of a memory card.

SD cards are small and cheap. That's their main draw. They're not "ruggedized" for the perils of production, but they're still a lot more rugged than, say, a spinning hard disk. But the main benefit to the SD cards are that they're much less expensive per gigabyte, and you can buy 'em anywhere -- Wal-Mart, Target, anywhere. That's what makes them so appealing for the lower-cost cameras (like this HMC150).

[filmguy123]

Ah great, I am learning so much. So two simple questions, then:

Once Panny puts AVC-Intra 50 & 100 into all of their cameras, will DVCPRO-HD have any purpose to be put into those new cameras? Or is it likely that DVCPRO-HD will no longer be a recording option at that point, as it will be redundant and inferior? Or would they retain it just for backwards compatibility?


Second, I wasn't 100% clear on your answer as you only addressed AVC Intra: is it likely that an HVX successor will have an option to record AVC-HD to SDHC memory cards? That way, you could buy the more expensive camera, and utilize P2 and AVC-Intra, but also record AVC-HD to SDHC cards to save $$ if needed? Or will SDHC & AVC-HD likely be reserved for the cheaper models? (I hope not! I'd love to have a camera with both options!)

[mikkowilson]

Once Panny puts AVC-Intra 50 & 100 into all of their cameras, will DVCPRO-HD have any purpose to be put into those new cameras? Or is it likely that DVCPRO-HD will no longer be a recording option at that point, as it will be redundant and inferior? Or would they retain it just for backwards compatibility?

Good question. Hard to call that one. There are very few techncial reasons either way here. Backwards compatibility is still a huge features, and with DVCPRO-HD so heavily in use, it will take a while (=years) before it will become obsolete. Dare I say it: I think DVCPRO-HD is becoming the "BetaSP" of HD.



Second, I wasn't 100% clear on your answer as you only addressed AVC Intra: is it likely that an HVX successor will have an option to record AVC-HD to SDHC memory cards? That way, you could buy the more expensive camera, and utilize P2 and AVC-Intra, but also record AVC-HD to SDHC cards to save $$ if needed? Or will SDHC & AVC-HD likely be reserved for the cheaper models? (I hope not! I'd love to have a camera with both options!)

This is basically what the HMC150 (that this thread is about) is. THough it's not a successor to the HVX200, but it does offer the feature you ask for .. at a lower price, with a higher end unit you can still choose if you prefer.
As for a camera with both? Again, good question. Certainly would be handy.

- Mikko

[Noel Evans]

my god that was such a sensible comment...

this people is what this camera is made for. this guy, which represents a large portion of video shooters.

Add me to that list as well. Would love a cam that can do B work in HD and record to cheap media.

[filmguy123]

So, to clarify... please tell me if I state anything here incorrectly:


The problem with a statement like "Even the $650 Canon HV20 with its native 1920x1080 CMOS chip out-shoots the HVX200, and will certainly beat this lame has-been-out-of-the-box AG-HMC150." Is the following:

- CCDs are currently overall better than CMOS, although CMOS may have great future potential

- native 1920x1080 may yield better resolution on the HV20, however, this is countered by being forced to use greater compression to keep the data rate and recording size manageable. What this means is using long-GOP compression vs Intra-Frame, and as a result, the effective resolution in movement or in action may actually be worse than the HVX's I-Frame 1280x1080 resolution (which also uses superior CCDs). Long-GOP also makes editing more difficult and can cause problems since it is not Intra-Frame.

Further, the HMC150 will employ the superior AVC-HD codec, which is a better compression scheme than HDV that looks better at lower bitrates. This why it can shoot 13Mbps rather than 19 or 24 and STILL look better than HDV. Another advantage of this AVC-HD codec (but not necessarily the HMC150) is that this lower bit rate allows bandwidth to be "spent" on other things, such as higher resolution and better color sampling. Overall, AVC-HD will allow much higher quality HD recording due to its superior compression scheme.

The problem is, there have been no *GOOD* AVC-HD cameras out yet to show this. The technology in the codec is superior, but the footage captured has thus far been with cheap consumer cameras, which people compare to prosumer HDV cameras and mistakenly claim HDV to thus be superior.

Yet, AVC-HD it still is a long-GOP based compression, meaning that it will never out-shoot the DVCPRO-HD I-frame compression (except in still image tests or low motion footage, such as interviews). This is because any long-GOP compression scheme will suffer from motion (although long-GOP compression has improved quite a bit over time and can now deal with motion pretty well). However, it can still be problematic. However, when combing long-GOP with CMOS chips, you have additional problems that crop up in motion, strobing lights, etc. CCDs & I-Frame Compression are a better combination. Of course, with I-Frame compression, due to bandwidth limitations, you cannot currently achieve native 1920x1080 resolution, and so scaling must be used. However, scaling is an oft used and very acceptable and legitimate way to achieve HD resolution.

All this is about to change, however, thanks to AVC-Intra. The superior compression in AVC-Intra allows higher quality images to be captured at a lower bitrate, freeing up more bandwidth to be used on resolution or color sampling. AVC-Intra @ 50 Mbps is equivalent to DVCPRO-HD @ 100Mbps. This means, when you pump AVC-Intra up to 100 Mbps, you can now achieve both Intra-Frame recording *AND* native 1920x1080 resolution!





----- Is this all correct? Did I say anything wrong, and/or am I missing any important chunks here?

Thanks I finally feel like I get it!! Woohoo!

[filmguy123]

AND - a few more questions:

1.) AVC-Intra is a more advanced compression technique than DVCPRO-HD. Does this mean that, like AVC-HD, it will require more processing power to edit? Why or why not?

2.) AVC-Intra will allow for native 1920x1080 images, meaning 1920x1080 CCDs. However, this also means more pixels crammed onto a sensor = smaller pixels = decrease in light sensitivity. So, are we likely to see WORSE low-light performance still when AVC-Intra100 1/3 CCDs cameras come out... UNLESS they are first able to make each CCD faster? If implemented into current 2/3rd CCDs, such as the HPX500, does this also mean that the HPX500 would see a decrease in sensitivity? If so, what advances are being made in CCDs to get them faster so that low-light will not suffer when full 1920x1080 native CCDs are introduced?

3.) Are native 1920x1080 sensors the reason that the Sony EX1 had to use 1/2 sensors, in order to maintain decent low light performance? Why did they choose CMOS over CCDs? Are CMOS sensors cheaper?

4.) We know that DVC-PRO HD records 100Mbps [Megabits/sec] (around 12MBps [Megabytes/sec]). However, what is the overall bandwidth capability of P2 (notated in both Megabits and in Megabytes)? I am assuming it is musch faster than SDHC, which is capable of 6MBps (megabytes/sec) sustained or 20MBps (megabytes/sec) maximum data transfer rate?

[mikkowilson]

----- Is this all correct? Did I say anything wrong, and/or am I missing any important chunks here?

Yup, starting to get the right idea. :)



AND - two more questions:

1.) AVC-Intra is a more advanced compression technique than DVCPRO-HD. Does this mean that, like AVC-HD, it will require more processing power to edit? Why or why not?

2.) We know that DVC-PRO HD records 100Mbps [Megabits/sec] (around 12MBps [Megabytes/sec]). However, what is the overall bandwidth capability of P2 (notated in both Megabits and in Megabytes)? I am assuming it is musch faster than SDHC, which is capable of 6MBps (megabytes/sec) sustained or 20MBps (megabytes/sec) maximum data transfer rate?


AVC-Intra probably does require more processing power, yes. But still no where near as much as an inter-frame format that requires images be processed in large groups at a time. With an intra-frame format, the processor can handle each frame on it's own, which is less work.


P2's maximum data-rate is 640Mbps. (80MBps). Certainly not a problem for dealing with 100Mbps DVCPRO-HD streams, even at multitudes of real time.

- Mikko

[Barry_Green]

So, to clarify... please tell me if I state anything here incorrectly:
Your summation is largely accurate. There are minor things I could point out, but for the most part, yes you've got it.



The problem with a statement like "Even the $650 Canon HV20 with its native 1920x1080 CMOS chip out-shoots the HVX200, and will certainly beat this lame has-been-out-of-the-box AG-HMC150." Is the following:
There's many problems with that guy's statement, not the least of which is: the HVX is at least two stops faster than the HV20. The HV20 isn't a native 1920x1080 sensor, it's actually a 3-million-pixel sensor with a Bayer pattern over it. As such, it has extraordinarily tiny pixels and delivers a final ISO rating of about 80, vs. about 320 for the HVX. The de-Bayered performance is about akin to 1920x1080 though. Secondly, the rolling shutter can render footage from the HV20 unusable in several circumstances. And third, there's no way to bypass the interlaced recording system (i.e., there's no "24pA" equivalent) so you're always going to have interlace issues that need to be dealt with, and that means you're getting less compression efficiency.



- CCDs are currently overall better than CMOS, although CMOS may have great future potential
In general, there is no such thing as "overall better", there's only "better for a specific purpose". CMOS has several advantages, including lower cost and lower power consumption; a camera like the Red or the EX1 could not have been done on CCD. But, both of them have rolling shutter issues because of their CMOS origins. Several of us (me, Dalsa, and Sony) all believe that CCD is the better solution for digital cinema applications. But that doesn't mean they're better "overall" than CMOS; there are areas where CMOS does things that CCDs don't.


Another advantage of this AVC-HD codec (but not necessarily the HMC150) is that this lower bit rate allows bandwidth to be "spent" on other things, such as higher resolution and better color sampling. Overall, AVC-HD will allow much higher quality HD recording due to its superior compression scheme.
Yes, except for the bit about better color sampling; AVC-HD is limited by design to 4:2:0. There is no provision for better color sampling in the specification.


which people compare to prosumer HDV cameras and mistakenly claim HDV to thus be superior.
Even Sony, the largest HDV maker on the globe, says AVC-HD is superior to HDV. How any respectable reviewer could claim otherwise is just not comprehendable.


This means, when you pump AVC-Intra up to 100 Mbps, you can now achieve both Intra-Frame recording *AND* native 1920x1080 resolution!
And, Panasonic claims it's visually equivalent to HD-D5, the de-facto Hollywood studio mastering format.

[filmguy123]

Yup, starting to get the right idea. :)

Awesome! "starting to" or "got"? haha, as long as I didn't say anything WRONG or semi-wrong... right??? :)



P2's maximum data-rate is 640Mbps. (80MBps). Certainly not a problem for dealing with 100Mbps DVCPRO-HD streams, even at multitudes of real time.

OK in the meantime, I read here (http://www.broadcastnewsroom.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=268586) that "P2 cards handle a data transfer speed of 1.2gbps per second to SxS 2.5gbps" - 1.2gbps = 1228MBps or 153MBps, about twice as much as you mentioned. Is that 1.2gbps misinformation, or where is that drawn from? If so, does that mean SxS has a much greater bandwidth capability? Isn't this a benefit of SxS?

[Barry_Green]

And yes, AVC-Intra definitely requires a lot more horsepower than DVCPRO-HD did. On EDIUS you can get one stream of AVC-Intra in realtime on a dual-core system; with DVCPRO-HD I've had four streams playing simultaneously on the same laptop.

nVidia and ATI graphics cards have onboard AVC hardware acceleration; I would expect that sooner or later someone'll come out with a hardware hook that'll let somebody's NLE tap into that power and when they do, AVC-HD and AVC-Intra editing will become a lot faster.

[filmguy123]

2.) AVC-Intra will allow for native 1920x1080 images, meaning 1920x1080 CCDs. However, this also means more pixels crammed onto a sensor = smaller pixels = decrease in light sensitivity. So, are we likely to see WORSE low-light performance still when AVC-Intra100 1/3 CCDs cameras come out... UNLESS they are first able to make each CCD faster? If implemented into current 2/3rd CCDs, such as the HPX500, does this also mean that the HPX500 would see a decrease in sensitivity? If so, what advances are being made in CCDs to get them faster so that low-light will not suffer when full 1920x1080 native CCDs are introduced?

3.) Are native 1920x1080 sensors the reason that the Sony EX1 had to use 1/2 sensors, in order to maintain decent low light performance? Why did they choose CMOS over CCDs? Are CMOS sensors cheaper?




Wow, thanks guys you are on the ball! haha. While you were writing I actually modified my post with 2 more questions that I think I modified while you were responding!

[Barry_Green]

"P2 cards handle a data transfer speed of 1.2gbps per second to SxS 2.5gbps" - 1.2gbps = 1228MBps or 153MBps, about twice as much as you mentioned. Is that 1.2gbps misinformation, or where is that drawn from? If so, does that mean SxS has a much greater bandwidth capability? Isn't this a benefit of SxS?
Yet another lie shrouded in truth.

The INTERFACE that P2 uses has a 1.2gbps data transfer rate, and the INTERFACE that SxS uses has 2.5gbps max. However, the underlying memory technology is nowhere close to exploiting that; neither a P2 card nor an SxS card comes anywhere close to that, and in fact an SxS card doesn't come close to maxxing out what a P2 card's interface can handle!

P2 uses Cardbus, with a potential maximum speed of 1.2gbps. But the P2 card system is currently rated at 640mbps maximum transfer rate (or, about half of what the total bus speed can handle). SxS, on the other hand, uses the ExpressCard bus, with a potential maximum speed of 2.5gbps. But SxS cards aren't designed to even nearly approach that, they are spec'd to max out at a claimed 800mbps.

It's like if you took a moped (a motorized bicycle with a maximum allowable legal limit of 27mph) and put it on the freeway. Just because there's a higher speed limit, that doesn't mean the moped can go any faster! It'll go 27mph, even though the speed limit may be 70mph.

So, we've got fanboys out there claiming that SxS is "faster" than P2, even claiming that it's "twice as fast" -- um, no. If you put an 8GB SxS card in a laptop and copy its contents to a hard disk, it takes a little over 4 minutes. Put an 8GB P2 card in that same laptop, copy its contents to that same hard disk, and it'll take a little over 4 minutes.

Here's the hard cold fact: SxS and P2 are exactly the same price, and basically exactly the same speed. And P2 does have room to go faster, if they RAIDed more chips together they could go about 50% faster. SxS may or may not have room to increase, depending on whether they're using a single block of memory or if they're raided.

[Barry_Green]

2.) AVC-Intra will allow for native 1920x1080 images, meaning 1920x1080 CCDs.
You don't have to use 1920x1080 CCDs to get 1920x1080 images. The HPX2100 delivers fantastic images in AVC-Intra and it uses 1280x720 chips. You'd have to use spatial offset to take advantage of this though.


However, this also means more pixels crammed onto a sensor = smaller pixels = decrease in light sensitivity.
Correct.


So, are we likely to see WORSE low-light performance still when AVC-Intra100 1/3 CCDs cameras come out... UNLESS they are first able to make each CCD faster?
Of course.


If implemented into current 2/3rd CCDs, such as the HPX500, does this also mean that the HPX500 would see a decrease in sensitivity?
Of course.


If so, what advances are being made in CCDs to get them faster so that low-light will not suffer when full 1920x1080 native CCDs are introduced?
That's a question for chip engineers. There are several techniques that have been employed; for example, Canon and Sony used interlaced chips in their first-generation HDV cameras because interlaced scanning gives you twice the sensitivity and lower noise; that allowed them to pack more pixels on the chip and get comparable sensitivity. At the expense of losing resolution when going into "faux progressive" mode. Sony's EX1 is employing all sorts of noise reduction wizardry to get decent sensitivity out of its chips; it lets them "gain up" the chips internally without noise showing up because it's been electronically compensated for at the chip level. As technology improves, solutions such as this will present themselves.

In fact, I would bet that the newer Panasonic HMC150, if it indeed uses a "new chip block" as Engadget said, should benefit from some of those advances in technology.


3.) Are native 1920x1080 sensors the reason that the Sony EX1 had to use 1/2 sensors, in order to maintain decent low light performance?
Yes.


Why did they choose CMOS over CCDs? Are CMOS sensors cheaper?
Yes, much cheaper, but also more power-efficient. CCDs draw a lot more power than CMOS does, and power consumption also = heat. Had they used CCDs they would have very short battery life and excessive heat troubles when trying to put CCD chips in a body that small. Going CMOS let them use small lithium-ion batteries and actually get the heat performance down to a manageable level. At the expense of introducing rolling shutter issues. Sony uses CCDs in all their digital cinema cameras, and Juan Martinez of Sony said that CCD is the superior technology for digital cinema applications in big-chip cameras. CMOS was appropriate for a handheld unit specifically because of the size and power issues; he said that if they'd put three 1920x1080 1/2" CCDs in a form factor as small as the EX1, it would have run so hot it would have melted.


However, what is the overall bandwidth capability of P2 (notated in both Megabits and in Megabytes)?
P2 cards are rated at 640mbps, or 80 megabytes per second. There is no published spec for actual read and write speed, only the 80mBps figure is published.

[filmguy123]

I see. Wow, ok. The learning never stops, haha!

Barry, have you thought of combining all of the information even in the last few pages of this thread into an article of some sort that would help sort out all of this stuff? It has been incredibly useful, and is excellent resource that I think many would find helpful. Best of all, most of it is already written!

I've been reading the AVC-Intra FAQ and after reading what you said about processing power needs, I had a thought:

- If P2 is capable of 640Mbps and DVCPRO-HD is only using 100Mbps, why not create the option of DVCPRO-HD200? Basically, allowing for 1920x1080 native images with 4:2:2 and Intra-Frame, without needing the more processor intensive AVC-Intra codec? Sure, it would take more space, but P2 card sizes will be up to 64gb by years end, which would be 30 minutes or DVCPRO-HD200 recording per card. Yes it would take a lot of HDD space, but for some people that may be more desirable than needing more processor power. Why not give the option? Do you think we might see something like this?

- P2 cards - so, we might being seeing a P2-Ultra card someday w/a higher bandwidth? Although, really, what is the point. Even DVCPRO-HD200 would utilize less than 1/3 of the P2 available bandwidth, correct? Really, there's no need for P2 to be any faster, is there?

[filmguy123]

You don't have to use 1920x1080 CCDs to get 1920x1080 images. The HPX2100 delivers fantastic images in AVC-Intra and it uses 1280x720 chips.

I don't understand; how does this work? Or, where can I read up about it?

If that's the case, that you can get TRUE 1920x1080 images using 1280x720 chips, isn't that more desireable, because then the low light sensitivity is better?

[Barry_Green]

- If P2 is capable of 640Mbps and DVCPRO-HD is only using 100Mbps, why not create the option of DVCPRO-HD200? Basically, allowing for 1920x1080 native images with 4:2:2 and Intra-Frame, without needing the more processor intensive AVC-Intra codec?
Because that would involve creating a new standard, new SMPTE certification, and take up twice as much space, cut your recording time in half, and double your archiving needs.

As I understand it, Panasonic went with the new format because they were able to give a substantial boost in quality without taking up more space. Bandwidth limits are a very real issue to broadcasters, and archiving is always a question that gets raised. That's why AVC-Intra50 exists at all; comparable quality at half the storage space. Since they can deliver D5-HD quality in 100 megabits, I don't think there's much appetite for doubling the file sizes.

The main advantage to the high-speed card is offloading and editing; you can edit up to six streams of DVCPRO-HD simultaneously, in real time, straight off the card. That's something you can't do from hard disks. The P2 system's origins were in instant-turnaround news applications, and that was a major design criteria.


- P2 cards - so, we might being seeing a P2-Ultra card someday w/a higher bandwidth?
I hope so. They've been RAIDing four SD cards together and getting 640mbps; I'd like to see them RAID eight cheaper cards together and get faster performance at lower price per gig. But, just because it's logical and obvious, that doesn't mean it'll happen! :)


Although, really, what is the point.
Offload speed.


Really, there's no need for P2 to be any faster, is there?
Need? No. Desire? Obviously. Who doesn't want faster?

[Barry_Green]

I don't understand; how does this work?
Very few people understand; they think that the pixels on the chip = the resolution of the system, and it just ain't so.


Or, where can I read up about it?
It's called Spatial Offset (sometimes referred to as "pixel shift"). The only halfway decent description of the technique is a white paper on Panasonic's HVX200 page, go to "support & resources" and look for "Tech Paper - AG-HVX200's Advanced Progressive CCDs"


If that's the case, that you can get TRUE 1920x1080 images using 1280x720 chips, isn't that more desireable, because then the low light sensitivity is better?
Yes, but as with everything there's a tradeoff. There is no free lunch. Spatial offset works to create up to a 50% increase in resolution (the BBC says 33% is a more realistic figure), at the expense of introducing some chroma noise and high-frequency aliasing.

[filmguy123]

Oh cool! I didn't realize you could edit directly off P2 at such a high data rate. So, you'd need a HDD capable of 80MBps to match that, correct?

However, if editing P2 over firewire, you are limited to Firewire's 480mbps transfer, right? So what do you use to take full advantage of the 640mbps? A cardbus slot directly to your laptop or PC?

[Barry_Green]

Yep.

[filmguy123]

I read the CMOS article. So if sounds like if CMOS would just use a global shutter, it would be superior to CCD since it would exhibit none of those four artifacts, while being cheaper to produce and more energy efficient. So why don't they just use a global shutter? Why doesn't the RED use a global shutter? Isn't that the "Ultimate" solution?

[filmguy123]

And also, isn't a rolling shutter the same as what an actual physical shutter of film camera uses? I read in the HVX book that a film camera using a rotating disc; isn't this the same concept as a rolling shutter? So shouldn't a rolling shutter give more of a film look...? I'm confused.

[Barry_Green]

I read the CMOS article. So if sounds like if CMOS would just use a global shutter, it would be superior to CCD since it would exhibit none of those four artifacts, while being cheaper to produce and more energy efficient. So why don't they just use a global shutter? Why doesn't the RED use a global shutter? Isn't that the "Ultimate" solution?
There is no free lunch. Adding a global shutter would mean a massive price increase, and the additional transistors take up space on the chip so that'll mean less sensitivity (less room for light-sensitive pixels). If you want a global shutter, a CCD makes a lot more sense.

[Barry_Green]

And also, isn't a rolling shutter the same as what an actual physical shutter of film camera uses? I read in the HVX book that a film camera using a rotating disc; isn't this the same concept as a rolling shutter? So shouldn't a rolling shutter give more of a film look...? I'm confused.
Lots of people are. The rolling shutter of a film camera exposes a large wide swath that means the entire frame is exposed simultaneously; the "rolling" effect only happens for a smaller percentage of the time. On a CMOS camera only a thin band is exposed at once.

If you exposed a film camera with a 20-degree shutter, then maybe you'd get similar performance to a rolling-shutter CMOS.

Several people are reporting that film suffers the same artifacts that rolling-shutter CMOS does; I think that's nonsense, we've never seen "jello" or discontinuous lighting causing rolling bands through film footage. I keep meaning to test this; I should put my Konvas up against my Red and shoot some rolling-shutter-inducing stuff to see just how similar or dissimilar they are.

[filmguy123]

So in the HVX when using film cam mode, is it still a global shutter, just notated in film shutter degrees?

[mikkowilson]

yes.


- Mikko

[Barry_Green]

CCD is always global shutter.

[filmguy123]

So for editing AVC-Intra, this is when it would be good to have an 8-core Mac Pro?

As for AVC-Intra, is it a "lossless" codec like DV and DVCPRO-HD, just utilizing better/smarter compression (and thus needing more processing power?)

If you transcode AVC-Intra100 to, say, ProRes 422, will this require a lot more HDD space, BUT, make CPU requirements go back down? Would any quality loss occur here?

[Barry_Green]

I wouldn't recommend anyone go to a Mac for editing, but that's just me. I can edit a stream of AVC-Intra on my laptop right now; EDIUS 4.6 supports AVC-Intra in realtime off a P2 card on a dual-core 2.4GHz laptop.

If you want ultimate mega performance and multiple streams then yes, something like an 8-core system would help. But a Mac won't do anything for you there; the Mac doesn't support native editing, it requires you to transcode to ProRes.

[filmguy123]

Sorry I didn't mean if I should go back, I just meant 8-core. I'm a Mac guy and I use Mac's, that's why I said Mac. Anyway...


As for AVC-Intra, is it a "lossless" codec like DV and DVCPRO-HD, just utilizing better/smarter compression (and thus needing more processing power?)

If you transcode AVC-Intra100 to, say, ProRes 422, will this require a lot more HDD space, BUT, make CPU requirements go back down? Would any quality loss occur here?

... still wondering about those.

[Barry_Green]

No HD codec is "lossless". AVC is much more efficient compression than the others, but there's loss in every camcorder codec out there.

I don't know the bitrate of ProRes, but I'd certainly bet that ProRes files are going to have to be larger than AVC-Intra files, or will lose quality as compared to the originals. Isn't ProRes around 140bmps? If so, that would mean transcoding would cause about a 40% increase in required disk space.

[Kholi]

Wonder if there'll be some negative gain settings in this camera? I'd love some very clean 1080p to work with. =D

[Alex.Mitchell]

No HD codec is "lossless". AVC is much more efficient compression than the others, but there's loss in every camcorder codec out there.

I don't know the bitrate of ProRes, but I'd certainly bet that ProRes files are going to have to be larger than AVC-Intra files, or will lose quality as compared to the originals. Isn't ProRes around 140bmps? If so, that would mean transcoding would cause about a 40% increase in required disk space.

1080 60i/30p & 720 60p = 220Mbps HQ, 147Mbps SQ
1080 24p = 176, 117
720 50P = 184, 122
720 30p = 110, 73
720 24p = 88, 58
486 60i/30p = 63, 42
576 50i/25p = 61, 41

Keep in mind that ProRes is full raster 10-bit 422 in both HQ and SQ modes, if you want it to be. 1440/1280/960 modes are also available in addition to the 1920/1280 modes. While the filesizes may be larger than AVC-Intra, the computational requirements are smaller, so more streams can be edited at once.

[filmguy123]

AH, so - if you transcode to ProRes, the space requirements go up, but the computational requirements go way down? That is a nice option to have.

With those ProRes specs, would you really lose that much quality?


Barry - no HD codec is lossless? I might be confused. Wasn't the standard-def DV codec lossless? Why isn't there a lossless equivalent for HD? Is it just because bandwidth requirements are still too great? I was under the impression that DVCPRO-HD was lossless like DV.

[Tzedekh]

There is no free lunch. Adding a global shutter would mean a massive price increase, and the additional transistors take up space on the chip so that'll mean less sensitivity (less room for light-sensitive pixels).I haven't seen any hard, credible data as to how much more a global-shutter CMOS chip would cost than a comparable rolling-shutter one. As to light sensitivity, one solution is a larger chip. But I would agree that until CMOS sensors have global shutters and light sensitivity and dynamic range comparable (or superior) to those of CCDs, CCDs will be, on balance, more desirable.

[seejay1031]

Wasn't the standard-def DV codec lossless? Why isn't there a lossless equivalent for HD? Is it just because bandwidth requirements are still too great? I was under the impression that DVCPRO-HD was lossless like DV.

No. DV is not lossless.

[William_Robinette]

DVCproHD would be the equivalent for HD compression like DV was for SD. Same with HDcam from sony.

[Barry_Green]

Wasn't the standard-def DV codec lossless?
Most definitely not. What DV provided was lossless transfers from the tpae to the computer, but the actual DV compression is quite lossy. The actual DCT portion is 5:1, but you also have to factor in the quantizing from 10 bits down to 8, and the chroma decimation from 4:4:4 down to 4:1:1, and the total overall compression is more like 8:1.

[TimurCivan]

Most definitely not. What DV provided was lossless transfers from the tpae to the computer, but the actual DV compression is quite lossy. The actual DCT portion is 5:1, but you also have to factor in the quantizing from 10 bits down to 8, and the chroma decimation from 4:4:4 down to 4:1:1, and the total overall compression is more like 8:1.

whats DVCpro's Ratio? 15:1?

[Barry_Green]

Haven't calculated it... it's the same 10 to 8, but less chroma decimation (4:2:2 instead of 4:1:1), but prefiltering... slightly more on the DCT, 6.7:1 vs. 5:1. So, probably a net of around 10:1.

[BobDiaz]

Wow, there were a lot of interesting points made in this thread.

Given that Panasonic has shown aggressive and clever moves in the market, like the HVX-200, the AG-HMC150 appears to be the "little brother" to the HVX-200, so while I can't say for sure, it seems likely that...

The higher bit rate should be a step higher than the 16 Mbps of Sony's HDR-SR12.


The Sony HDR-SR12 is Sony’s highest end high definition hard drive (HDD) camcorder for 2008. It has an incredible capacity of 120GB. That increased storage takes on new importance, however, as Sony has upped video capture to a full 1920 x 1280 at 16Mbps. The HDR-SR12 also sports Sony’s newest images sensor, a 1/3.15-inch CMOS chip with Exmor technology.Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD

To go higher than 16 Mbps would prevent the user from using the Class 2 SDHC (Secure Digital High Capacity) cards, but Class 4 and Class 6 will still work OK for bit rates > 16 Mbps.


Presently there are three classes of Secure Digital High-Capacity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Digital_card#SDHC) cards: Class 2 (2 MB/s or 16 Mbps), Class 4 (4 MB/s or 32 Mbps) and Class 6 (6 MB/s or 48 Mbps). Using low bitrate in card-based camcorders ensures that even a slowest memory card has enough throughput for recording video without skipping frames.Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD

Going to the maximum of 24 Mbps (with MPEG-4 AVC H264) would really be the killer shot to HDV (MPEG-2, 25 Mbps). If my calculations are correct, a 16 GB card at 24 Mbps would hold almost 1.5 hours of material; well maybe only 1.2 hours (CORRECTION: 1.4 hours) when I take into account overhead. Still, this is more than enough time for most users.

Given that AVCHD allows for up to 18 Mbps for DVDs, it would seem logical to be better than that specification in the event another company comes up with a DVD AVCHD camera. (It would be a dumb idea to use a DVD, given that Flash memory would be so much more cost effective and allows longer record times.)
SEE: http://www.avchd-info.org/format/index.html


As its name implies, AVCHD uses an MPEG-4 AVC (H.264) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC) video codec. AVC's better compression (compared to the older MPEG-2 codec, HDV) lets a user record video at the same quality of MPEG-2 but in less space. The audio track can be stored as uncompressed 7.1 linear PCM or compressed AC-3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC-3) 5.1. Subtitle (in 8-bit color) is also supported, several camcorders utilize subtitle feature to keep track of recording date/time. Menu navigation (like DVD menu) is also supported, and it makes AVCHD a more attractive format for consumer users. Still AVC picture can be used for image slide show in AVCHD to provide high quality image presentation with or without background audio. The compressed audio, subtitle streams and video data are encapsulated in an MPEG-2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-2) Transport stream (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_stream#Modifications_of_transport_stream _specification_for_random-access_media_.28M2TS.29) called BDAV (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BDAV&action=edit&redlink=1). This stream format and most of the structure of AVCHD are derived from the Blu-ray Disc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc) BDMV (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BDMV&action=edit&redlink=1) format. Consequently, AVCHD recordings can be played without modification in most set-top Blu-ray Disc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc) players, such as the Sony BDP-S1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BDP-S1), Panasonic DMP-BD10 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panasonic_DMP-BD10), and the PlayStation 3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3).Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD


BD9 / BD5 Blu-ray Disc See also: 3x DVD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD#3x_DVD) BD9 and BD5 are lower capacity variants of the Blu-ray Disc that contain Blu-ray compatible video and audio streams contained on a conventional DVD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD) (650 nm wavelength / red laser) optical disc. Such discs offer the use of the same advanced compression technologies available to Blu-ray discs (including MPEG-4-AVC/H.264, SMPTE-421M/VC-1 and MPEG-2) while utilizing lower cost legacy media. BD9 utilizes a standard 8152MB DVD9 dual-layer disc while BD5 utilizes a standard 4489MB DVD5 single-layer disc.[69] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc#_note-Doom9_BDAuth)
Given that Blu-ray Discs are assumed to have a minimum transfer rate of 30.24 Mbit/s, BD9/BD5 discs must be spun at a high rate of speed, equivalent to a 3× DVD drive speed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD#Speed) or greater.
BD9 and BD5 discs can be authored using home computers for private showing using standard DVD±R recorders. AACS digital rights management is optional.
The BD9 format was originally proposed by Warner Home Video, as a cost-effective alternative to regular Blu-ray Discs.[70] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc#_note-63) It was adopted as part of the BD-ROM basic format, file system and AV specifications.[71] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc#_note-64) BD9 is similar to HD DVD's 3x DVD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD#3x_DVD).See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc#BD9_.2F_BD5_Blu-ray_Disc


The point is that the files can go direct to a low cost DVD (SL or DL) and play in a Blu-ray player. A simple PC or MAC program could generate a menu system for the disk. OK, the SL and DL DVDs won't hold a lot of time at the maximum 24 Mbps data rate, but at least you could play the raw files on your Blu-ray player without an expensive Blu-ray burner.

Another thought on the higher data rate is look at the data rates for the AG-HMC70, 6 Mbps, 9 Mbps, and 13 Mbps. It seems that the rates step from low to high by an increase by about a factor of 1.5 times. Thus, 6 x 1.5 = 9 and 9 x 1.5 = 13.5; or round down to 13 Mbps. If we consider the next step to be 1.5x higher, then 13 x 1.5 = 19.5 Mbps. That could either round down to 19 Mbps or up to 20 Mbps. However, the next setp up does not have to be an increase of 1.5 times; Panasonic can do what they want to with that selection. Going from 13 Mbps to 16 Mbps is only an increase of 1.23 times, not that big a jump.


I think that everyone saying the price has to be under $4,000 is correct. IF it were more, why buy the AG-HVC150, when you could get an HVX-200 for just a bit more. AT the other end, the AG-HMC70 is $2,495; so the price has to be well above that point or Panasonic won't sell any AG-HMC70 cameras.


The final judgment of the camera will have to wait until it comes out and has been field tested, but for now, it sure looks interesting....


Bob Diaz

[John Trent]

I'm going to follow Bob Diaz's great post with what is probably a very stupid question. I was reading about someone importing a 30 sec. AVCHD clip into a 2.4 ghz iMac and it taking 90 sec. - 3X's longer than the time "recorded". Now, if I've got 1.4 hrs on a card how long will it take me to import it to a (comparable Ghz) laptop, so I can wipe the card clean and and continue shooting - surely not 4 1/2 hrs. :)

I'm unfamiliar with memory cards, laptops, Macs and very used to DV so bear with me. Thanks.

[BobDiaz]

As a teacher at a local Junior Collage, I can say that there are no stupid questions.

My guess is that the import is trans-coding at the same time, thus it takes processor power and time to convert from one format to another. (To me it almost sounds like it's going from one form of MPEG-4 to another form of MPEG-4, if it takes that long!)

Now if we are just talking about copying the file, no conversion, I can copy 16 GB reasonably fast on my iMac or my PC. So, to copy and then clean off the card would be quick, BUT to copy while trans-coding, will take a bit of time.

If I copy the file to the MAC or PC, I can always trans-code later on when I have time.


Right now as far as the AG-HMC150, we don't know a whole lot, so almost everything we can say is guessing. There is reason to believe that come the NAB Trade Show, April 14 - 17, Panasonic will tell us a lot more about the camera. Maybe not everything, but at least enough to better understand what it should be able to do...



Bob Diaz

[SPZ]

Probably it was going to Prores or apple intermediate codec. That's what you pay for using Long GOP formats that need to go to a better post codec, or use a non camera native codec for editing.

[manglerBMX]

on panny's website they have a little promo video showing the AG-HMC70 and it shows the card slot, and its only a single slot. does anyone have an intellegent guess as to if the 150 will have more than one slot? i'm really hoping for 2 or more slots, that would be amaaazing.

[Attic6]

Stoked on AG-HMC150, Looks like it was a good decision not to go ex1, rolling shutter is dark ages stuff. Does sony not realise that somebody out side their lab might actually wan to shoot a cop car or some bmxers being photographed...

I can only hope that it lives up to the amazing reputation that my DVX has. If i can shoot hd, edit it and abuse the camera like a dvx then i'll take 2!

Cant wait!!!!!!!

[BobDiaz]

I started to think some more about the HMC150 and jotted down some ideas. Because the list is so long, I'll just post the in parts over the next few days, rather than post a super long message...


Maximum Data Rate:

The only three higher speeds that make any sense are; 16 Mbps, 20 Mbps, and 24 Mbps.

16 Mbps would allow users to use any card without any worry about it being too slow, BUT it just doesn't seem to be that big a gain. I'll say this speed is possible, but I hope Panasonic would go higher than this. 16GB should give about 125 minutes at this rate.

20 Mbps not only does this fit the (roughly) 1.5x step size between each speed (6 Mbps, 9 Mbps, 13 Mbps), but it fits something overheard... (see quote below) 16GB should give about 100 minutes at this rate.


The real wildcard for the camcorder looks like bit rate. Current Panasonic AVCHD implementations max out at 13 megabits per second (Mbps), while Sony's go up to 15Mbps and the specification itself supports up to 24Mbps. The HMC150 will support the 13Mbps rate, plus a higher bandwidth option. Though Panasonic executives wouldn't commit to the actual maximum data rate for the HMC150, an unrelated comment during the conference alluded to achieving bit rates of approximately 20Mbps. It's unknown as to whether a new bit rate might pose software compatibility issues.

Slated to ship this fall, Panasonic has not yet determined the pricing for the HMC150. I'm going to put on my speculator hat and guess it'll go for about $6,000.
SOURCE: http://review.zdnet.com/digital-camcorders/panasonic-ag-hmc150/4505-6500_16-32857507.html

24 Mbps in a VERY competitive market, I can see Panasonic going for the maximum and sticking a knife through HDV's data rate. 16GB should give about 83 minutes at this rate. OK, I have a built in bias and want to see the highest rate possible. SO, I'll really hope that Panasonic puts the highest data rate at the maximum.


NAB is going to be a lot like Christmas...


Bob Diaz

[filmguy123]

It's the quality/efficiency of the compression that matters, not the data rate. The point is to get a lower data rate at better quality. HDV's data rate compared to AVCHD is apples and oranges; 24mbps may be a competitive market with HDV but it has nothing to do with AVCHD.

[BobDiaz]

No question that an improved CODEC is better than an older CODEC. Thus, MPEG-4 does a better job at lower bit rates than MPEG-2. So we can say that with MPEG-4, 13 MBps is roughly equal in quality to MPEG-2's 25 MBps.

This assumes that the quality and efficiency of both CODECs are very good.

In terms of potential compression noise, 20 Mbps MPEG-4 will blow 25 Mbps HDV out of the watter. However, having more bits per second (even with MPEG-4) will help help to reduce invisible compression noise which could show up when doing multi-generation layers or some other effects.

From a Marketing standpoint, saying you have 24 Mbps (MPEG-4) compared to their 25 Mbps (MPEG-2) sounds great. The bit rates are almost the same, and most know that for equal bit rates MPEG-4 is better than MPEG-2.

Now if we are shooting talking heads, it won't matter much, but for fast action,
where everything is changing so quickly, HDV's MPEG-2 can't deal with it as well as MPEG-4 can. When it comes to compression, it helps to have as much headroom as possible. So, 20 Mbps would be very good, but 24 Mbps is even better.


Bob Diaz

[Huy Vu]

Doesn't seem like the znet guy knows what he's talking about in that article. The HVX is DVCPROHD based, not HDV. And a price point of $6000 is ridiculous because then this camera will be more expensive than the HVX!

[filmguy123]

Good points Diaz. Yes, this camera might make me "ok" with editing GOP footage. Or at least shooting on it, and then transcoding to ProRes during capture. I don't mind paying for HDD space, that is cheap; and processor power would be nice to conserve. But P2 cards are flippin' expensive. And if it editing 20mbps+ AVC-HD footage looks visually identical to one's perception (unless under high scrutiny) and composites + motion tracks just dandy... well then, bring on the HMC150!!


Doesn't seem like the znet guy knows what he's talking about in that article. The HVX is DVCPROHD based, not HDV. And a price point of $6000 is ridiculous because then this camera will be more expensive than the HVX!

Yes, true. As I learn more, read up here, listen to Barry, I begin to realize that there are a ton of very confident people who don't know what they are talking about. Even from reputable sites.

[filmguy123]

this camera might make me "ok" with editing GOP footage. Or at least shooting on it, and then transcoding to ProRes during capture. I don't mind paying for HDD space, that is cheap; and processor power would be nice to conserve. But P2 cards are flippin' expensive. And if it editing 20mbps+ AVC-HD footage looks visually identical to one's perception (unless under high scrutiny) and composites + motion tracks just dandy... well then, bring on the HMC150!!


Barry - would you say that is accurate?

[Look 1st]

Doesn't seem like the znet guy knows what he's talking about in that article. The HVX is DVCPROHD based, not HDV. And a price point of $6000 is ridiculous because then this camera will be more expensive than the HVX!

LOL, that and the
"For those of you with AG-DVX200s or other P2 HD-supporting models, the company plans to ship a 64GB version this fall, at an as-yet undetermined price."

[Barry_Green]

Yes, this camera might make me "ok" with editing GOP footage. Or at least shooting on it, and then transcoding to ProRes during capture. I don't mind paying for HDD space, that is cheap; and processor power would be nice to conserve.
I'm no fan of long-GOP, I think anyone who's read anything I've said in the last three years could tell you that! :)

However, a few things are starting to bring me around to the idea that perhaps long-GOP is not "the devil." Advancements and improvements have been substantial; the 35mbps XDCAM-EX codec is pretty solid in progressive mode. I'd still rather have intraframe for many reasons, not the least of which is editing efficiency, but I'm not as concerned that EX footage will "fall apart" the way I could make HDV footage fall apart.

The second thing that's bringing me around is AVC. AVC is really quite good. 6mbps of AVC-HD can look as good as 25 megabits of HDV, if you're talking about shooting a talking head. 13 megabits of AVC-HD about matches 25mbps of AVC-HD for most shooting scenarios. 20 megabits of AVC-HD should give performance comparable to XDCAM-EX. And frankly, that's going to prove "good enough" for many shooters. Not everybody, obviously, but a lot of us.

Editing it is still going to bring the same long-GOP hassles, so if you're comfortable with transcoding to an editing codec (the way HDV guys have endorsed over these last few years) then yeah, what's not to love? But it still needs to be tested and verified. I am cautiously optimistic that the HMC150, at 20 megabits, will absolutely qualify as "the new DVX." But I would like to see it to know for sure!

The key is knowing what product is targeted towards what user, and whether the user will be able to live with the compromises inherent in every product. For the DVX customer, I think cost is a vital consideration. And for that customer, a $20 SD card beats a $900 P2 or SxS card six ways from Sunday. That's very promising. But, again, it's gotta deliver the goods; I mean, the little Aiptek camera is $199 and records 720P to cheap memory cards, but the quality can be awful; it don't matter how cheap it is to record it, if it looks awful! So a quality system recording to cheap memory -- that's what I'm hoping for. That's the right recipe for a DVX successor.

For those who need P2's codecs, reliability, infrastructure, intraframe compression, six-stream editing right off the cards, etc., there's the HVX200. But for the DVX guy looking to upgrade to HD, the prospect of high-def resolution, DVX "mojo", AVC-HD quality (if it's comparable to XDCAM-EX 35mbps, and it should be), all with cheap commodity memory cards... well, that's the camera I've been waiting for for two years now. That's what I hope they deliver!


But P2 cards are flippin' expensive.
Are they? Depends on your perspective. If you're used to paying $60 per HD tape, P2 cards at $900 (and hopefully soon to have a healthy price drop) aren't expensive at all. But if you're used to paying $3 for DV tape, yes a $900 card is expensive. And that really probably helps define whether you're an HVX or HMC customer -- if the P2 card price is prohibitive, then you're probably an HMC150 customer. If what the P2 card brings to the table is worth it to you, you're definitely an HVX200 customer.


And if it editing 20mbps+ AVC-HD footage looks visually identical to one's perception (unless under high scrutiny) and composites + motion tracks just dandy... well then, bring on the HMC150!!
It's still a 4:2:0 codec, so it won't be visually lossless (but that doesn't stop a lot of the HDV or EX1 owners from being happy with what they've got). I say that if someone's happy with HDV, they should be thrilled with AVC-HD. If someone has no tolerance for HDV, they probably won't be swayed by AVC-HD.

[filmguy123]

I'd still rather have intraframe for many reasons, not the least of which is editing efficiency, but I'm not as concerned that EX footage will "fall apart" the way I could make HDV footage fall apart .......... if you're comfortable with transcoding to an editing codec (the way HDV guys have endorsed over these last few years) then yeah, what's not to love?

So Barry; if the cam is roughly equivalent to XDCAM-EX 35mbps codec quality *AND* footage is transcoded to ProRes, I have a few questions I wanted to clarify with you:

- Editing will be just as fast as DVCPRO-HD footage
- Editing will experience none of the long-GOP issues
- Motion tracking, keying, and effects will be just (or very near) as solid as a 4:1:1 DV codec
- The footage will have been captured to camera using long-GOP, so there might be slight traces of artificating, but this will be a minor footage issue, and not an editing issue, thanks to transcoding

So basically, all I would be dealing with is very slight artificating issues in the long-GOP codec that probably won't be a big deal for me... unless... unless what? VERY high end motion tracking? Or VERY high end keying? Will I have strong effects work results and CCing, generally speaking, just about as good as an Intra frame based DVCPRO-HD codec for most work?

[BobDiaz]

To bring in something said from another thread:



Hi Folks,

Have not read all the way through this as I have way too much to do this am. Barry asked me to step in and clarify what this camera is. If you think of AVCHD as the new DV then this camera (the 150) is the new DVX100. It has 24P, it is economically priced, right where long GOP recording should be. But it is a very nice camera and it records to SD cards, just like all AVCHD cameras do.

Is it the replacement for the HVXX200, clearly no. It does not do 24P in DVCPRO HD. It doesn't do variable frame rates, it does not have P2.

Now with that information, is the 150 a great little camera, I think it will be. Is it a filmmakers camera, depends on where you want to use it. Keep in mind it is the new DV camera. Any place that bought a DV camera might like one of these. So wedding guys, schools, other institutions and high school sports. Lawyers, doctors , well you get the picture it is the new DV. Nice little camera,

Hope this helps,

Jan
__________________
Jan Crittenden Livingston
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems
Product Manager,
DVCPRO50/25, AG-DVX100B, AG-HVX200
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=125340&page=3
(Message #88)
Note: I added the bold print in some sections to help point out key things.

My guess is that many of you have read Jan's comments, but for those who didn't, we can see it's NOT the new HVX-200 and is placed below the HVX-200 as far as features. Thus, the price has to be lower too. My gut tells me that Panasonic is going after the market where we find the Canon A1 or the Sony V1U; the cameras priced somewhat below the HVX-200.

I find it interesting that Apple's FCE (Final Cut Express) 4.0 for $200 supports the AVCHD system. It will transcode the AVCHD file, but my personal feeling that transcoding is better than native editing. Spending $200 to have editing software for a $4,000 camera should seem reasonable to those with limited funds.


Bob Diaz

[filmguy123]

It will transcode the AVCHD file, but my personal feeling that transcoding is better than native editing.

Can you rephrase this statement, it sounds like you are saying two contradictory things, and I need some clarification as to what you intended to communicate.

[Barry_Green]

- Editing will be just as fast as DVCPRO-HD footage

I don't know; I don't use FCP. I presume that ProRes is as fast as DVCPRO-HD but I don't know that. I do know that even a base Mac G5 could handle two to three streams of DVCPRO-HD running off its internal hard disk. If that same base Mac G5 can do the same thing with ProRes, then that'd be the answer.

But you do have to factor in the time it takes to convert from AVC-HD to ProRes. That isn't going to be instantaneous!


- Editing will experience none of the long-GOP issues
I think that's the whole point of ProRes, as it's an intraframe-only codec. But again, I'm not a Mac user so someone else will have to answer definitively.


- Motion tracking, keying, and effects will be just (or very near) as solid as a 4:1:1 DV codec
Well, probably. DV is 4:1:1, AVC-HD is 4:2:0. Both systems result in storing only 25% of the total chroma, but they do so in a different pattern. If you're shooting 60i then the 4:1:1 is a more solid choice. In progressive, 4:2:0 is decent, definitely better than in progressive. Once you go to ProRes though, you're editing in a 4:2:2 color space, aren't you? So the original footage will be 4:2:0, but the composition will take place in 4:2:2, which may lead to better end results (if you're rendering out at 4:2:2).


- The footage will have been captured to camera using long-GOP, so there might be slight traces of artificating, but this will be a minor footage issue, and not an editing issue, thanks to transcoding
Well, this is the hope. On HDV, I wouldn't call it "slight traces" or "minor footage issue", I'd call it "anywhere from minor to moderate to catastrophic" depending on the shot we're talking about. With AVC-HD, it *should* be better, especially at 20 to 24 megabits. But nobody's ever produced 20+ megabit AVC-HD; the best we've ever seen is 17 megabits, and even then that was interlaced (and it's much more efficient to encode in progressive than it is to encode in interlaced!) So we don't know, we're still presuming.

After transcoding to an interframe codec, all GOP issues disappear, but the footage will look no better than the original.


So basically, all I would be dealing with is very slight artificating issues in the long-GOP codec that probably won't be a big deal for me... unless... unless what? VERY high end motion tracking? Or VERY high end keying? Will I have strong effects work results and CCing, generally speaking, just about as good as an Intra frame based DVCPRO-HD codec for most work?
You're asking questions that we can't answer yet. In theory it sounds solid, but funny things can happen on the journey from theory to reality.

[Barry_Green]

if the cam is roughly equivalent to XDCAM-EX 35mbps codec quality
Let's be very very clear here: I'm talking only about the recorded format, not the camera head! 1/3" chips on a modern ~$3500 product is not going to deliver the same image as 1/2" chips on a modern ~$6500 product.

Codec to codec, yes, I do think they could be very competitive. Meaning, if you recorded internal on an EX1 to XDCAM-EX 35mbps, and simultaneously you recorded on an external recorder box from the HD-SDI into AVC-HD at 20 megabits, yes I do expect that they would deliver comparable recordings (pending seeing the actual results, of course, but in THEORY they should be about the same!)

But I do not expect the raw camera head to deliver the same image. One product is twice the price of the other, and by all rights it should deliver a better image. In fact, if it *doesn't* deliver a better image, Sony is screwed, so -- don't expect the same image. But the recording format, yes, that should be comparable. SHOULD BE.

[SPZ]

And we still are a month away from NAB. There are still some cards to be pulled by Panasonic... The "New Varicam" should be one, and we are all hoping the "New HVX" to be the other...

Everything, including the HMC 150 highest bitrates and recording modes, should be revealed next month...

And don't forget the "Scarlett"...

[Kholi]

I'm still STILL wonderin' about this "new" CCD thing. How much can 1/3" CCD technology be improved upon?

Could it have been just the word "new" thrown in as a general "the camera is new" thing?

No worries SPZ, at least it's a few weeks less the wait for NAB. =B About a month on the nose and we get to know what's up all around.

[SPZ]

Kholi, lets hope the noise the fellow dvxusers have been making over here on how to improve the HVX results in a good surprise at NAB..

[BobDiaz]

I said, " It will transcode the AVCHD file, but my personal feeling that transcoding is better than native editing."


Can you rephrase this statement, it sounds like you are saying two contradictory things, and I need some clarification as to what you intended to communicate.


Sorry, bad wording there.

With Apple's Final Cut Express:

The AVCHD file is converted (transcoded) into an Apple format for editing.

Yes the conversion takes time, but once done, the editing should be faster than trying to edit in native AVCHD format. (See note below.) Also the Apple format should be able to handle multi-generation effects better than staying in AVCHD.


Note below: When editing in native AVCHD format, almost everything you do requires the file to be uncompressed, modified and re-compressed. The re-compression is what really can slow down the editing process, because it take time to re-compress using software.


Now every time we re-compress a video, additional compression noise is added to the video. Depending on the compression system used, the noise level could be anywhere from minor to major.

In the case of high compression formats, like AVCHD, each re-compression will add a lot more compression noise than say Apple's editing format.



I hope that clears up a few things,

Bob Diaz

[Barry_Green]

Recompression only happens when you export a file, or "render down". Normal timeline editing shouldn't be experiencing recompression.

[steviestefan]

Finally i think am getting what will be fairly good for shooting in and out of Africa, did i really see something like 50Hz/59.94Hz switchable?

[Tzedekh]

I'm still STILL wonderin' about this "new" CCD thing. How much can 1/3" CCD technology be improved upon?Improved designs, materials, and manufacturing could, I suppose, yield a sensor with higher resolution, greater light sensitivity, and lower noise. It all depends on how much Panasonic wants to advance the technology. I doubt that they will put that much effort into a prosumer AVCHD model.

[Barry_Green]

Finally i think am getting what will be fairly good for shooting in and out of Africa, did i really see something like 50Hz/59.94Hz switchable?
Yes, the HMC150 is announced to be NTSC/PAL, 50/59.94 switchable.

[Kholi]

Improved designs, materials, and manufacturing could, I suppose, yield a sensor with higher resolution, greater light sensitivity, and lower noise. It all depends on how much Panasonic wants to advance the technology. I doubt that they will put that much effort into a prosumer AVCHD model.

Canon does it. I remember the hoopla caused by the A1's release because the image was dead on with the H1. The only difference was that the A1 had a fixed lens and that got people goin' "Well crap! I don't even change my lens! I'd rather use an adapter!"

A lot of us referred to Canon as CUT THROAT. But, I was happy that they did such a thing even though I never ended up with an A1.

So, maybe they would/could throw "theorized" new sensors into not only the HMC150 but say an HVX250? You wouldn't hurt either market because they would still BOTH very different machines. Just now when you say the HVX has about 8 stops of Dynamic Range, the noise floor (hypothetical situation involving advanced CCD technology) doesn't stop you at like 5 or 6 stops. =B That'd be nice.

[Alex.Mitchell]

Recompression only happens when you export a file, or "render down". Normal timeline editing shouldn't be experiencing recompression.

If you're cutting long-GOP footage at anything other than an I frame it has to render that entire GOP as I frames, separate them, then recompress into I/P/B frames. At least that's how I understand it's done these days.

[filmguy123]

If you're cutting long-GOP footage at anything other than an I frame it has to render that entire GOP as I frames, separate them, then recompress into I/P/B frames. At least that's how I understand it's done these days.

I do NOT know this, but I doubt it is re-compressing the actual file to a file. I think how it works is, it decompresses on the fly so you can view it, marks the changes in the project file, and then actually re-compresses when you render. Anyone know for sure?

[Digigenic]

Improved designs, materials, and manufacturing could, I suppose, yield a sensor with higher resolution, greater light sensitivity, and lower noise. It all depends on how much Panasonic wants to advance the technology. I doubt that they will put that much effort into a prosumer AVCHD model.
Canon does it. I remember the hoopla caused by the A1's release because the image was dead on with the H1. The only difference was that the A1 had a fixed lens and that got people goin' "Well crap! I don't even change my lens! I'd rather use an adapter!"

A lot of us referred to Canon as CUT THROAT. But, I was happy that they did such a thing even though I never ended up with an A1.

So, maybe they would/could throw "theorized" new sensors into not only the HMC150 but say an HVX250? You wouldn't hurt either market because they would still BOTH very different machines. Just now when you say the HVX has about 8 stops of Dynamic Range, the noise floor (hypothetical situation involving advanced CCD technology) doesn't stop you at like 5 or 6 stops. =B That'd be nice.



Well, in all fairness to Canon, their implementation of those CCDs in the H1, A1, and G1 was pretty much dictated by Sony, even though Canon maintained control of the way the video was processed and output.
But now, in addition to the ongoing "DIGIC" image processing developments, Canon is in fact pursuing the advancement and implementation of their own CMOS technology as evidenced by the HV20/HV30 etc.

As a result, Sony is becoming more aggressive in that department as well. The 1/2" Exmor CMOS chips in the EX-1 is a pretty clear indicator of that.
However, even though Panasonic also has access to in-house sensor development, with Matsushi*a being one of the top semiconductor manufacturers throughout the world, appears rather reluctant to take a leading position in that area, and instead are continuing the use of smaller sized CCDs while attempting to make up for it in other areas.

Panasonic took the same conservative approach with their DSLR system, by using a smaller 4/3 sensor system instead of the larger APS and/or full frame systems used by Canon and Nikon (who's current image sensor fabrication needs are being massaged by Sony).

So, depending on what we see announced by them at NAB, we'll know if Panasnoic's approach and/or perspective continues on the same conservative path in choosing to use only small CCDs, which I think it will, or if they're going to do something different.

[BobDiaz]

To the best of my understanding, when doing a cuts only editing using any MPEG (like MPEG-2 or AVCHD) native editing, the in/out points are just pointers in the files.
Thus you can change the in/out point all over and not worry about re-rendering until the end.

HOWEVER, in the case of a title, color correction, dissolve, or some other effect, somewhere it has to be rendered. Thus if you want to see how it looks or maybe add something else to it, you will need to render it. The part that is rendered is only where the item is performed. So if a title is on 10 seconds of the clip, only 10 seconds has to be rendered and not the whole clip. (At least during the editing process.) In the end, everything needs to be rendered.

Having said that, remember each editing application is different, so it may not be exactly this way for the editing software you use.


Bob Diaz

[filmguy123]

Yeah but when you render to preview an effect, it saves that to a different file, not overwriting the source. that's a non issue.

[Tzedekh]

But now, in addition to the ongoing "DIGIC" image processing developments, Canon is in fact pursuing the advancement and implementation of their own CMOS technology as evidenced by the HV20/HV30 etc.

As a result, Sony is becoming more aggressive in that department as well. The 1/2" Exmor CMOS chips in the EX-1 is a pretty clear indicator of that.
However, even though Panasonic also has access to in-house sensor development, with Matsushi*a being one of the top semiconductor manufacturers throughout the world, appears rather reluctant to take a leading position in that area, and instead are continuing the use of smaller sized CCDs while attempting to make up for it in other areas.The sensor in the HV20/30 and Sony's Exmor chips manifest rolling-shutter artifacts (the former far more than the latter). I hope Panasonic doesn't migrate to CMOS sensors until it develops a design that is matches or exceeds its CCDs (e.g., global shutter, larger size, greater sensitivity and dynamic range).

[BobDiaz]

Yeah but when you render to preview an effect, it saves that to a different file, not overwriting the source. that's a non issue.

After thinking about it, yes, you are right it should work that way. Best to avoid multi-generation de-compression/re-compression losses by always going back to the source file.

So editing in native mode may not be as bad as I first assumed. Other than any time delays for doing MPEG-4 AVC compression.

The justification for transcoding would be; after any delays for transcoding, rendering should be faster (in theory) and multi-layer work would have less multi-generation loss. The price one pays for this is more disk space for the transcoded files, time delays to transcode, and some generation losses due to transcoding.


A Minor Point On The Different Recording Rates:

The 6 Mbps, 9 Mbps, 13 Mbps, and ??? Mbps rates must change depending on the resolution and frame rate.

For example, assume that the highest rate is 20 Mbps. That will be OK for 1080@60i, 1080@30p, and 720@60p; however, drop down to 720@30p or 720@24p and the rate would be lower, just like on the HVX-200.

I'll guess that the camera will use terms like SHQ (Super High Quality), HQ (High Quality), SQ (Standard Quality), and EP (Extended Play) for the different data rates.


Bob Diaz