PDA

View Full Version : PRE PRODUCTION HPX300 Hands On 'review'



Joe Lawry
02-12-2009, 04:47 PM
Just managed to be in the right place at the right time when Rick Haywood the Broadcast manager of Panasonic NZ walked into my local dealer with a PREPRODUCTION HPX300.

First thoughts, slightly smaller than a 500, but not by much, sits nicely on the shoulder, slightly back heavy but not by much.

Build quality is the same as the 500, not amazing but still suitable for the price range the product is in.

The Viewfinder is interesting.. the new technology in there does some strange things when you are shooting over exposed footage (we were testing the CAC at the time) and you see 3 flickers of OSD all slightly skewed apart from each other each in RGB.. we weren't sure if this was something to do with the fact it was still a preproduction model.

The LCD is amazing, i'd directly compare it to the LCD on the Z7/Z5 sony camera, not quite as good as the EX LCD but a billion times better than the 170/200's LCD - YAY

All the controls were where they should have been, just like a broadcast camera.

The kit lens was alright, nice and wide and the reach was good, however it did feel slightly cheap in certain places.. the iris dial was the main thing i noticed. Just seemed plasticy.

The variable zoom trigger was good, it had a quick jump in and you could also push and pull very slowly. There is no adjustment on the speed though, so no constant speed.

The lens did some pretty sharp however, it took stopping down past F9.6 to see any noticeable softness in the lens.

We had the camera hooked up to a 24" panny HD LCD via HDSDI and the pictures looked great. I unfortunately didnt have any cards with me otherwise would have shot some stuff.

The CAC function is great, and we tested it throughly pushing it to the extreme. We setup a fluro light with a louver on it to give us some edging to study. Shooting straight into the light with CAC on and the lens open there was still a bit of CA going on... but that was a pretty extreme test. Will definitely see if i can do some real world testing when a production unit arrives - next month i've been told.

All in all a great camera.. BUT, and unfortunately there is a great big but. The 3MOS chips left more to be desired.. not res wide.. the camera was very sharp.. but in regards to CMOS skewing..

I pointed the camera at some vertical bars and shit.. there was some bad skewing going on.. Worse than the EX cameras unfortunately.

I also noticed that there was a bit of general wobble when shooting off the shoulder on the long end of the lens. A real shame.

Let me know if you have any questions, about the camera.. im sure i can answer some, but this is all i could think of for now.

and once again this was a PRE PRODUCTION MODEL ONLY.

AwakenedFilms
02-12-2009, 06:06 PM
So its true then...?


Jason

SPZ
02-12-2009, 06:49 PM
Joe, thanks for your time on posting this. I have a couple of questions for you :) :

1- Low light- How was it compared to the HVX200/HPX170?

2- Signal to noise? Are you an HVX/HPX170 user? How does it fare?

3- Weight? Is it as heavy as the HPX500?

4- Difficult one: Have you used a 5d Mark II? Can you compare both cameras in the SKEW department? Only the skew, not DOF, low light, manual functions. This we all know :)

5- When is it becoming available in New Zealand?

Thanks again!

Joe Lawry
02-12-2009, 07:16 PM
SPZ,

I can only answer a few of your questions, as i only had a play for half an hour and most of it was spent on general image quality in good light.

Signal to noise, i have an original HVX which as we all know, has a few noise issues. The 300 seemed pretty good however, everything we pointed it at was well lit.

Weight wise it was nice, definitely ligher than a 500, but still a nice bit of weight on your shoulder. It felt very comfortable.

I havent used a MKII sorry, but from what i saw.. it was as bad as the HV20 footage i have seen.... so bad, worse than my EX1.

I've been told they were will have their first stock sometime next month, so i'd say it'll be available late March.

Sorry i cant be any more helpful, the visit was mainly to show the store the product,, and i just happened to be there.

The camera will now be in Australia, not sure where it was flying too, but i was told it was being put on a plane at 1pm which was about 3 hours ago.

SPZ
02-12-2009, 07:56 PM
No problem, that was quite helpfull enough!

I'll probably check out the camera sometime in the future. Its not a surprise for me that Sony is more advanced in the Cmos department vs Panasonic. They invested much in the technology- bought plants, etc. Panasonic went a different route, and are playing catch up. Canon, on the other hand, should be technologically on par, if not ahead of Sony in Cmos technology. Probably the true contender will come from Canon...

What I find interesting is that Panasonic is Pioneering technology on Still Photo cameras, and are to announce a video capable Cam from their Still Camera division, a product they are confident enough to separate from the G1, their first mini 4/3 camera. I just don't understand why this technology and platform is not available to us:

Imagine a Mini 4/3, AVC INTRA, HPX170/HVX200 sized camcorder for 6000...This would be trully revolutionary, and a real Scarlet contender....

Lez
02-13-2009, 11:11 AM
So you saw what I believe to be probably one of the first PAL units???

Don't think it will come anywhere near Canberra... probably will end up a Lemac's...

Cheers

Joe Lawry
02-13-2009, 12:55 PM
Yea it was pal, what i completely forgot to check was to see if it was switchable..

i saw a preproduction HPX172 as soon as it arrived on our shores.. and at that stage, it was switchable..

Jan_Crittenden
02-13-2009, 03:35 PM
All in all a great camera.. BUT, and unfortunately there is a great big but. The 3MOS chips left more to be desired.. not res wide.. the camera was very sharp.. but in regards to CMOS skewing..

I pointed the camera at some vertical bars and shi*.. there was some bad skewing going on.. Worse than the EX cameras unfortunately.

I also noticed that there was a bit of general wobble when shooting off the shoulder on the long end of the lens. A real shame.



Hi Joe,

Unless you had an EX1 next to it to compare the skew and wobble, I think you need reconsider your statement. I have found in my investigation that the two cameras are very similar on this issue. It really depend more on how you get used to shooting with the camera, if youexpect it to respond like a CCD, well there is the first mistake. You really need to adjust the shooting style in my opinion. With a shorter lens the wobble/skew would be less. In looking at the footage that Barry Green came back from Africa with, with most shot with an even longer lens 21X, it can be worked with.

Best,

Jan

Joe Lawry
02-13-2009, 06:48 PM
Im sorry jan, you are right, i didnt have an ex1 right next to me.

Am definitely keen to test out a production model when they arrive, and if i get the chance i will put it up against my EX1.

I was on the long end of the 17x lens so everything was rather exaggerated, i will do the same test with my EX1 zoomed right in and see how it compares with what i remember.

I did whip side to side on the wide end of the lens and i didnt see any noticeable skew.

I wasnt expecting the chips to perform like a CCD, from shooting on the EX1 for the last 2 months i've learnt to deal with the CMOS issues and im sure people will have no issues with the camera if they know how to use CMOS chips.

ddp
02-13-2009, 07:42 PM
Never question Panasonic.

Joe Lawry
02-13-2009, 07:55 PM
Right, so i just went and did a test with my EX1.

Threw it into 1080 50i - the same setting we were playing with the HPX300 in.

Turned the OIS off. Cause of course.. the hpx doesnt have it.

Zoomed right in on a bunch of vertical bars.. and went wild.

Wow, i guess what i just learnt was the fact that shooting progressive masks skew.. because at 1080i on the EX1 there was a hell of a lot of skew going on. Not not as much as i saw with the HPX300, however it was very close.. and the bars i had been shooting were about the same distance away.

Now the only thing i can think that would alter this test was the focal length of the lens.. a 14x compared to a 17x.. and that would definitely make a difference in skew exaggeration.

Still, need to get the cameras side by side and test it..

Jan_Crittenden
02-14-2009, 04:00 AM
And remember that the long end o f the 17X is longer than that of the EX1. But I have watched to footage than Kevin and Barry brought back and anybody that comes into our booth at NAB will see it as well, they were working on the long end of a 21X 2/3" lens. So the take away on this is learning how to control the tool you have been given so that you can get the shot you are supposed to get. Filmmakers have been doing this all of their professional lives. There is just one more tool in the tool belt now.

All the best,

Jan

Barry_Green
02-14-2009, 11:26 AM
The amount of skew is directly proportional to the image magnification, because the skew is all determined by relative movement. So the longer you zoom in, the more skew you'll see. I've seen people post examples from the EX1 that say "what skew, what wobble, there's no problem" and of course their footage is shot at full wide angle. Well, yeah, at full wide angle the relative motion of any object on the screen is pretty minimal. But if you zoom in to max telephoto you'll see all sorts of rubbery skew no matter how slightly you move the camera.

The HPX300 at full telephoto will show more skew than the EX1 at full telephoto, because the HPX300's telephoto is significantly more telephoto than the EX1's. The EX1 is a 14:1 zoom, the HPX300 is a 17:1, and the HPX300's using a 1/3" chip which means that even though the focal length difference is about the same (77mm vs. 81mm) the image magnification on the HPX300 is quite a bit more due to the smaller chip size. Which means you get more telephoto reach, but you also get more skew. The two go hand in hand.

Put an EX1 and an HPX300 at the same field of view, and you should see the same skew/wobble on both.

Lumiere
02-14-2009, 02:21 PM
Finally B&H announced hpx 300 at 8,495.00$

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/604725-REG/Panasonic_AG_HPX300_1_3_CMOS_P2_HD.html

MrBill
02-14-2009, 04:40 PM
nice price--will want to see at NAB.

Aussies eat your hearts out :)

Barry where is your footage posted?

Lumiere
02-14-2009, 04:47 PM
very nice though,but don't think will be any lower then this..

Joe Lawry
02-14-2009, 06:26 PM
Very nice price... shame its going to cost a bit more outside of the usa due to the exchange rates. I've been quoted 20,000 NZD, which is around 10,500 USD.

Noel Evans
02-14-2009, 07:00 PM
Very nice price... shame its going to cost a bit more outside of the usa due to the exchange rates. I've been quoted 20,000 NZD, which is around 10,500 USD.

Youre even worse off than here in AUS. About $13000 just on the exchange on BH's price. Or 15k at the price NZ you were quoted. No doubt thats about where it will sit here as well.

puredrifting
02-14-2009, 07:10 PM
Wow, $8,495.00!! I was thinking $8,995.00. It is looking a little bit tempting to sell the 170 and go for it. But jeez, I still need a little, small, light camera for a lot of shooting. I really need both. Oh well, maybe if I need a tax write off by December.

Dang, that is a smoking good deal. Richard Andrewski showed me this site so you can get two really long run batteries in AB mount and the charger for around $1,000.00. And these suckers would have a lot longer run time than the AB Dionic 90s, these are 150 WH batteries too http://www.batteries4broadcast.com/combo_order_gm.htm

My DV-6SB doesn't break a sweat with a 14lb (according to Barry) load so perhaps I can swing it by the end of the year. Having shot with the EX1, I agree with Jan and Barry, you do see the skew and it is up to you to use the camera in sitautions where you have control over not having to shoot the skew and other rolling shutter artifact situations. Plus I would still have the 170 in tow to handle situations like Red Carpet premiers with lots of flashes going off, etc.

Hmm...

Dan

Joe Lawry
02-14-2009, 07:36 PM
Youre even worse off than here in AUS. About $13000 just on the exchange on BH's price. Or 15k at the price NZ you were quoted. No doubt thats about where it will sit here as well.

Gotta love it. Not.

its great for the second hand market... i could get ALOT for my original HVX down here as a kit due to the current price of the 202/172 - Which are both currently retailing at just under $10,000 NZD... its insane.

Barry_Green
02-14-2009, 07:39 PM
But $10,000 NZD = $5200 USD, so it's about the same as over here in terms of currency-adjusted pricing...

Noel Evans
02-15-2009, 01:50 AM
Youre right of course Barry, but not so long ago its wasnt much more than the USD price. Aussie actually went over USD like 1.02 USD for $1 AUD, so now of course we are biting it hard as all prices are up around 30-40%.

As I said in another thread because of dollar - in real terms I would get about 40% less on the global market, but here in Aus I can resale just about everything I own for the price I paid. Not like Im going to though, you would have to stab me 10 times and cute me in to small pieces to get the 500 out of my hands. Actually presently I could sell my camera and still afford 2 300s even at the steep price. My lens would cover one and camera body the other (when you factor in I already have all the support equipment needed for this format). Interesting thought, but as I said cold dead hands. As I have said millions of times in the past, I was prepared to forgo HD in favour of 2/3 inch chips, but I got a better deal in the end. 500 shoots superb 720 and with VFR and with those lovely chips. So of course many of my posts reflect this.

Lumiere
02-15-2009, 02:59 AM
I think the most expensive hpx 300 will be in here(Turkey). I swear it will not be less then 12.000$ + %18 tax.(:(

ImpossibleBishop
02-15-2009, 10:19 AM
So the take away on this is learning how to control the tool you have been given so that you can get the shot you are supposed to get. Filmmakers have been doing this all of their professional lives. There is just one more tool in the tool belt now.


I'm sorry but come on Jan. The idea that the problems associated with rolling shutter on the cmos sensor should be associated with "learning how to control the tool you have been given" is insulting. That would be like Canon saying that backfocus issues on the original xl1 were simply a limitation that had to be compensated for.

I understand that full raster HD is something to drool over, but I personally would have been much happier with lower pixel count and a ccd global shutter. This so called new tool is a great option if you plan on always shooting wide on a tripod doing sitdown interviews in tugnsten light. Especially if you admit the fact that the skewing is just as bad as the EX1 / EX3. Having shot with the cameras, I saw the limitations with the chip set. The fact is if the camera moves too fast (which takes out crazy handheld), A flash goes off (sorry WEVA), or heaven forbid a live gun flash (SFX programs love CMOS), this camera is not a tool that I could use.

Maybe thats the true limitation of the camera. Honestly, why should we settle for a camera with higher native res that simply cannot live up to the name and quality that I have seen throughout the panasonic line. I am simply tired of this idea that resolution is the end-all be-all descision when buying a camera.

Yes AVC-Intra is a great codec. But Skew and Wobble at a high bitrate is still Skew and Wobble.

Listen, If i gave the best neurosurgeon a Butter knife and told him to take out a tumor, chances are that it's not going to end well.

Please stop trying to pin the problem of rolling shutter on the operator. It is something that can be avoided, but for me the limitations of CMOS outweigh any benefit to be found in AVC-Intra at full raster.

n8ture
02-15-2009, 10:31 AM
I panned with a running zebra at full zoom and it looked good to me.

LuckyStudio 13
02-15-2009, 10:43 AM
Please stop trying to pin the problem of rolling shutter on the operator. It is something that can be avoided, but for me the limitations of CMOS outweigh any benefit to be found in AVC-Intra at full raster.

Yes it can be avoided, its called the avcintra board for the hpx2000 or the hpx2700 for 720p or the hpx3700 for 1080p shooting.

To me, If one can live with the limitation of a rolling shutter cmos camera, one be better served with just buying a low cost $3000 camera (e.g. Canon A1) or the $6000 EX1 now and wait till the cmos Red Scarlet to hit the market in 1 - 2 years. With the hpx300, you will have to invest in pro batt + charger and p2 card. Whereby you can get away with cheap sd card and express card adapter for the EX.

In 1 to 2 years time, a fully functional 2/3" cmos, 3k resolution, fixed 8x lens, 10 bit RAW Scarlet has an MSRP of only $3750. Imagine the resale/market value of the hpx300, EX3, EX1 then. Yes, if you are an independent shooter/cam owner, this matter applies to you. However, if you are constantly renting and pimping out your gear and you can make your money back , then it is a whole other story. Get the hpx300 and start making your money NOW.

Regardless, any cmos camera IMHO has only a 1-2 year shelf life until the Scarlet comes out and torches everythiing away. When this happens, at least your CCD camera will still stand tall without any of the CMOS undesirable weaknesses. Just my 2 cents. Take it for whatever it's worth.

ImpossibleBishop
02-15-2009, 10:44 AM
The zebras looked good im sure. But the background?
You were panning with the zebras. If you weren't im sure it would have looked alot different.

ImpossibleBishop
02-15-2009, 10:48 AM
Yes it can be avoided, its called the avcintra board for the hpx2000 or the hpx2700 for 720p or the hpx3700 for 1080p shooting.
...
...at least your CCD camera will still stand tall without any of the CMOS undesirable weaknesses. Just my 2 cents. Take it for whatever it's worth.

Exactly.

Lez
02-15-2009, 11:07 AM
I still reckon it will all come down to price point - $8.5k US is a fantastic price...

If Panasonic does not absorb some of the exchange rates here in Oz and NZ etc...

They will just sit on the shelf... we all want one but in these economic times it's all about the $$$...

Clients who expect a shoulder mount full ENG style camera are being serviced by people you already own a such a camera...

Clients that are happy with results coming from the 200/170 etc are not expecting you to turn up with a new ENG camera... they're already happy...

So it's just us wanting a new toy that we expect will deliver better pictures than what we're already capturing... at a reasonable price...

Perception of value is half the price...

Cheers
LeZ

LuckyStudio 13
02-15-2009, 11:13 AM
To be honest, I think Panasonic would be better off by not producing the hpx300 at all, instead they could have just offered an AVC-Intra Codec Board upgrade for the 2/3" CCD hpx-500.

shapna
02-15-2009, 11:16 AM
hello every one im from argentina and im very new at this. I was wandering what camera could i buy for my film proyects and to make mone for a living. my mother offerd me for the first time only to buy me my first camera. i have a budget of 12k US dollars.

What should i buy thanks everyone.

alpi69
02-15-2009, 11:39 AM
hello every one im from argentina and im very new at this. I was wandering what camera could i buy for my film proyects and to make mone for a living. my mother offerd me for the first time only to buy me my first camera. i have a budget of 12k US dollars.

What should i buy thanks everyone.

great post :D
only one answer: Panasonic 170

shapna
02-15-2009, 11:47 AM
mmnnhh does the 170 have really better improvements than the 200?? cause for what i read it doesnt change too much.

Shipsides
02-15-2009, 11:48 AM
To me, If one can live with the limitation of a rolling shutter cmos camera, one be better served with just buying a low cost $3000 camera (e.g. Canon A1) or the $6000 EX1 now and wait till the cmos Red Scarlet to hit the market in 1 - 2 years. With the hpx300, you will have to invest in pro batt + charger and p2 card. Whereby you can get away with cheap sd card and express card adapter for the EX.

I think there is always going to be a bigger better camera out there. Let's face it the camera market is becoming like the PC market.. in 2 years your camera won't be top of the line anymore - no matter what camera you have. When the Scarlet finally comes around then maybe you'll want that.. or maybe you'll want to wait 2 more years for the Maroon with twice the resolution at half the price. The point is if you need a camera now, then buy the camera that works for you now.

At less then $10k the HPX300 delivers a great image and comes with a lens. It's a shoulder mount camera that shoots to a great format. If you think you have a project that needs that then buy it, or you think you can make money as a freelance shooter with it then buy it. If you are in the business of buying these things just for the pure technical joy then... I wish I was you.

Noel Evans
02-15-2009, 01:03 PM
To me, If one can live with the limitation of a rolling shutter cmos camera, one be better served with just buying a low cost $3000 camera (e.g. Canon A1) or the $6000 EX1 now and wait till the cmos Red Scarlet to hit the market in 1 - 2 years. With the hpx300, you will have to invest in pro batt + charger and p2 card. Whereby you can get away with cheap sd card and express card adapter for the EX.

In 1 to 2 years time, a fully functional 2/3" cmos, 3k resolution, fixed 8x lens, 10 bit RAW Scarlet has an MSRP of only $3750. Imagine the resale/market value of the hpx300, EX3, EX1 then.

Well I cant say I agree. Firstly due to the fact that for $3750 you will not have an operational Scarlet.

Then, look at the ergonomics of the 300, its a shoulder mount cam, ENG, sports, events etc. No one will shoot those with a scarlet. Also its a ready to go cam, battery on - check, p2 in -check. There is nothing else. Also its a dual purpose cam, go ahead and shoot those things I mention, then go ahead and shoot that narrative stuff in the middle.

My point is the 300 is an Orange, sure a new apple might take some interest but it still isnt an orange.

The EX v 300 argument is one people will need to decipher for themselves. But Id rather shoot full raster to AVCIntra on 1/3". Well Id rather shoot full raster to AVCIntra to 1/2", but thats not an option.

ImpossibleBishop
02-15-2009, 02:05 PM
Then, look at the ergonomics of the 300, its a shoulder mount cam, ENG, sports, events etc. No one will shoot those with a scarlet.

No one should shoot any of these with the 300 either. Lets see...

on the shoulder, so maybe some shaking after a while from fatigue = Skew and Wobble

ENG? ok maybe for interviews...

Sports? Too much movement... will skew if you go too far on the telephoto...

Events? Anybody taking a photo? Cuz you just lost your shot. Any time a high speed flash goes off, you have a strange banding effect talked about in The DVXuser Article about cmos.

Oh and I hope you weren't planning on shooting with available light that are flourescents... might not go so well...

Noel Evans
02-15-2009, 02:22 PM
No one should shoot any of these with the 300 either. Lets see...

on the shoulder, so maybe some shaking after a while from fatigue = Skew and Wobble

ENG? ok maybe for interviews...

Sports? Too much movement... will skew if you go too far on the telephoto...

Events? Anybody taking a photo? Cuz you just lost your shot. Any time a high speed flash goes off, you have a strange banding effect talked about in The DVXuser Article about cmos.

Oh and I hope you weren't planning on shooting with available light that are flourescents... might not go so well...

Valid points. Ill hold judgement til we see what comes out the back end.

Jan_Crittenden
02-15-2009, 03:08 PM
I'm sorry but come on Jan. The idea that the problems associated with rolling shutter on the cmos sensor should be associated with "learning how to control the tool you have been given" is insulting. That would be like Canon saying that backfocus issues on the original xl1 were simply a limitation that had to be compensated for.


So you are saying that you don't have to figure out how to control any tool you are using? This isn't a design flaw as the back-focus issue was, this is the nature of the imager. Big difference. You either need to figure out how to work with it or suffer the consequences of not. Mayn of the folks that shoot on the EX1 have figured it out and the folks that buy this camera will too.


Maybe thats the true limitation of the camera. Honestly, why should we settle for a camera with higher native res that simply cannot live up to the name and quality that I have seen throughout the panasonic line. I am simply tired of this idea that resolution is the end-all be-all descision when buying a camera.

And it is what I have said all along, resolution isn't everything but there is a part of the market that feels that they want more resolution. Believe me, when they asked if I wanted the CMOS, I said no, I would reather battle the resolution issue with lower resolution CCDS. I was out-voted. That said, you can make some very nice pictutres with this camera, read the stuff that Barry and Kevin are saying. Did they find issues with CMOS, yes, but I would be that this is the first time that Kevin has shot with a CMOS and for Barry, well he has but never at these zoom lengths and never with an I-fram codec, which makes some difference, but not with the rolling shutter. The rolling shutter is the rolling shutter.


Yes AVC-Intra is a great codec. But Skew and Wobble at a high bitrate is still Skew and Wobble.

It is more controllable than you think, but I do understand your concerns, they are mine as well.



Please stop trying to pin the problem of rolling shutter on the operator. It is something that can be avoided, but for me the limitations of CMOS outweigh any benefit to be found in AVC-Intra at full raster.

If you took what I said as it being the problem with the operator, think again. No it is a limitation of the tool. Just like you can't shoot a picket fence with a film camera at a perpendicular angle. If you want to use film you need to find another way to to shoot the picket fence. It is the nature of the CMOS imager to be what it is, learn to work with it or don't go there. We have plenty of CCD cameras to choose from.

Best,

Jan

SPZ
02-16-2009, 01:10 AM
Not to be a nuissance, since I've posted too much these past days with the excitement of the announcement, but I think that, at least now, its not the time to immediately jump for a new tool.

When I went for the HVX200 (original) I researched a heck of a lot, debated here with Barry and the others, and sometimes the reasoning and debate was heated- never on personal insult level, mind you, but in a way where everyone's personal's P.O.V., convictions and perspectives where challenged.

I really liked Jan's honesty and frankness on this last post. It really says a lot about her approach to the community. Thanks for being here with us, Jan- no ass kissing, here- that's just not in my nature.

I was one of the first here- Hong-Kong and Macau- to purchase the HVX200. I was praticaly a pioneer, helping out with the fellows from Pana HK with workflow and exchanging opinions- they even used a demo of low light footage I shot (that I posted here a looong time ago) on their showroom, so I've always been friendly and have all but good things to say about Panasonic's costumer support and equipment.

Back then (2004?) the HVX was the best camera on the price range. Resolution isn't, and wasn't everything, and the awards documentaries, TVC's shorts, and feature films shot with this little cam prove it . Let me tell this not only as an independent filmmaker, but as someone that shoots also for television. Television, even High Def TV broadcast, is merely 1080i- heck the majority of the broadcast world- CNN, BBC, etc still broadcast SD. The HVX resolution is more than enough for most applications. In my opinion, Pixel shifting just worked. The image is excelent and, due to the excelent codec, color wise, it smoked the competition.The hvx camera introduced me to the tapeless world. It was a good school, and now its seamless to me- everyone is playing catchup to Panasonic in this department.

Now, however, we are in different times. The HPX300 plays very similar to what the HVX200 did on the "Democratization of HD", back in 2004 with the introduction of the DVCPRO HD at the price range of DV. They try to do the same with the introduction of D5/ HDCAM SR - ok, I exagerate a bit here- equivalent codec (AVCINTRA) at the HDV price range. It sounds like a match winning combination, but there's something, IMO, that Panasonic neglected here: top codecs have also been democratized with the introduction of recorders like the FLash XDR. While its still a great deal to get a Flash XDR quality codec in camera, the truth is, this can be achievable with competing cameras that have inferior codecs, but better attributes, like the XDCAM EX3 with its 1/2 chips- add the XDR recorder and you can have very close to AVCINTRA quality footage from the cameras 10bit HD-SDI out, but with the added plus of native 1/2 chips. Some will argue that this adds to the overall price of the system. Certainly. But Chip size, wich translates to dinamic range, low light performance as well as shallower DOF and, of course, media Price (CF cards vs P2) are very important elements for a purchase, also.

Basically, what this means, at least to me, is that, back then, at the time of the HVX200 introduction, even with the debates of the macroblocking, non native HD chips, pixel shift, etc, the HVX200, with its tapeless workflow, variable frame rates, cinegamma, DVCPRO HD and 1080p/720p switchability made it heads and shoulders above the competition. The HPX300, however, is not as clear a winner- at least on paper. Competitors copied every single winning element of Panasonics approach, from the frame rates, the tapeless workflow, even the cinegamma (with questionable results here, however).

There's something I really would like to see now- that's Canon's answer. The 5d mark 2 is now being "cracked" by people trying to get 25p and manual controls. I believe this should be easily achievable. This will make the small, cheap DSLR a true filmmaking tool. What will they follow up with on the Video department? Also, what about Nikon? Will they capitalize on a market that has practicaly helped the ressurrection of their old SLR lenses? And, of course, how about the Scarlet? 2009 will present the introduction of many new and interesting products, I'm sure. I'm perfectly fine with my CCD "Low rez "HVX200 non "a" untill I see everyone show their "hand"this year, either at NAB, or in August (Canon's usual press conference).

However, I'll definitely have a look at the HPX300. I have all but praise to say about Panasonic cameras: they are the best I've ever used, and my international TVC's were all shot with them. I hope to be pleasantly surprised by this, and I'll be sure to stretch it to see if it suits my needs or not. The TVC's I shoot are of Motorsports and, sometimes, even fireworks. Also, I live in a Neon and flourescent light rich city- anyone who has been around HK and macau know what I'm talking about- so CMOS scares me. If this is the future, I sincerely hope that Panasonic took these shooting conditions into consideration while designing this cam...

Jan_Crittenden
02-16-2009, 03:44 AM
I really liked Jan's honesty and frankness on this last post. It really says a lot about her approach to the community. Thanks for being here with us, Jan- no ass kissing, here- that's just not in my nature.

None taken. ;-)


It sounds like a match winning combination, but there's something, IMO, that Panasonic neglected here: top codecs have also been democratized with the introduction of recorders like the FLash XDR.

The codec in the Flash is an old MPEG2 codec and if you inadvertaently lose power during record you have a huge problem on you hands, actually it isn't a huge problem it is just a loss of footage. With P2 the rcording is closed every 2 seconds so that if you lose power the most you will lose is t 2 second. YOu would have to have the camera or P2 Portable repair the clip, but you would still have most of what you recorded.



While its still a great deal to get a Flash XDR quality codec in camera, the truth is, this can be achievable with competing cameras that have inferior codecs, but better attributes, like the XDCAM EX3 with its 1/2 chips- add the XDR recorder and you can have very close to AVCINTRA quality footage from the cameras 10bit HD-SDI out,

You could get very close to the HPX300 by adding an AG-HPG20 and P2 cads to the kit, that would make the EX1/3 a very similar product, just not in form factlr but quality factor yes.



Basically, what this means, at least to me, is that, back then, at the time of the HVX200 introduction, even with the debates of the macroblocking, non native HD chips, pixel shift, etc, the HVX200, with its tapeless workflow, variable frame rates, cinegamma, DVCPRO HD and 1080p/720p switchability made it heads and shoulders above the competition. The HPX300, however, is not as clear a winner- at least on paper. Competitors copied every single winning element of Panasonics approach, from the frame rates, the tapeless workflow, even the cinegamma (with questionable results here, however).

But you have not even held the camera, or "played" with it. It is a clear winner. Will it outperform the other guys camera, it comes very close in virtually every area that you mentioned, and then it has the form factor and lots of other funtionality that the other guy does not have. And while they do have a tapless workfolw, I do not feel that it has the flexibility of P2, the only codec they can record on the SxS is XDCAM EX. On P2< I can do DV , DVCPRO, DVCPRO50, DVCPRO HD, AVC-Intra. And all of those formats are in this camera. The camera is more than a one-trick pony.



There's something I really would like to see now- that's Canon's answer. The 5d mark 2 is now being "cracked" by people trying to get 25p and manual controls. I believe this should be easily achievable.

But it too is a CMOS imager and for a run and gun shoot camera, it has all sorts of challanges. The only response that I would expect from Canon is from the group that makes the XL-H1.


However, I'll definitely have a look at the HPX300. I have all but praise to say about Panasonic cameras: they are the best I've ever used, and my international TVC's were all shot with them. I hope to be pleasantly surprised by this, and I'll be sure to stretch it to see if it suits my needs or not. The TVC's I shoot are of Motorsports and, sometimes, even fireworks. Also, I live in a Neon and flourescent light rich city- anyone who has been around HK and macau know what I'm talking about- so CMOS scares me. If this is the future, I sincerely hope that Panasonic took these shooting conditions into consideration while designing this cam...

I undestand that CMOS scares you. I haven't found all of the cirumstances that it raises its hand to let you know that it is a CMOS and it will take customers talking about it and using it to really find them all. Please post anything you find.

Best,

Jan

Jan_Crittenden
02-16-2009, 04:02 AM
No one should shoot any of these with the 300 either. Lets see...
on the shoulder, so maybe some shaking after a while from fatigue = Skew and Wobble

So we can say the same for the EX1/3 series of cameras as well and those would actually be even more difficult to hold still because you don't have the same ergonomic features of the HPX300.


ENG? ok maybe for interviews...

It woud be perfect for this.



Sports? Too much movement... will skew if you go too far on the telephoto...

Depends, if you are down on the field at the scrimmage line, I don't see a problem, the inital footage that the EX1 showed was a scrimmage line. the only problem that raised its head in that footage was the long GOP throwing away back ground detail only to come back when the camera stopped moving. You have to remember that the camera that this HPX300 is competing with is also a CMOS imager. Now if you were up at the nosebleed section of the arena, yeah the CMOS would work against you. But most of those cameras are mounted cameras or big cameras with 40X lenses, that isn't where this camera is proposed to fit.



Events? Anybody taking a photo? Cuz you just lost your shot. Any time a high speed flash goes off, you have a strange banding effect talked about in The DVXuser Article about cmos.

This is true, and yet more and more I see this sort of footage. I was watching a biography of Jennifer Aniston the other night and there was a scene on a red carpet and sure enough there was the partial exposures that plague the CMOS imager. Did it keep the show from using the shot, I guess not, because there it was and I saw it.


Oh and I hope you weren't planning on shooting with available light that are flourescents... might not go so well...

Well in my lab I have flourescents and tungsten, so far so good. JUst keep in mind that anything you say about CMOS has already been said and acknowledged. The only thing left to find out is how this camera performs(I think it will stand up to the competition) with a different and imporved set of codecs.

Best,

Jan

Barry_Green
02-16-2009, 05:31 AM
I'm sorry but come on Jan. The idea that the problems associated with rolling shutter on the cmos sensor should be associated with "learning how to control the tool you have been given" is insulting.
And yet it's the way it is. I got crucified on the internet for pointing out the rolling shutter problems, yet they're there and CMOS isn't going away. The tone of my articles has always been "these are the issues, and you'd better learn about them and how to deal with 'em, because more and more CMOS cameras are coming and they ALL have the same issues."

So what else can you expect her to say? The market clamors for more res, so Panasonic delivers it, and now she says "you'd better learn how to deal with it because it's got the same issues as everyone else does." What else could be said?


but I personally would have been much happier with lower pixel count and a ccd global shutter.
Which is why the HPX500 is on the market. Not only is it a lower pixel count and CCD global shutter, but it's also 2/3".

At least Panasonic gives you the choice. You want super-densely-packed 1920x1080 pixels? You can have the HPX300. You want CCD? You can have the 500. The 300 includes the lens, but other than that they're about the same price, so pick your preference.


Especially if you admit the fact that the skewing is just as bad as the EX1 / EX3.
They are the same.


The fact is if the camera moves too fast (which takes out crazy handheld), A flash goes off (sorry WEVA), or heaven forbid a live gun flash (SFX programs love CMOS), this camera is not a tool that I could use.
Agreed, those are areas where CMOS causes complications. Whether with a Red, an EX1/EX3, an Infinity, or an HPX300. Forewarned is forearmed.

[quote]Honestly, why should we settle for a camera with higher native res that simply cannot live up to the name and quality that I have seen throughout the panasonic line. I am simply tired of this idea that resolution is the end-all be-all descision when buying a camera.
I think it was Jim Brennan who offered a great quote, let me see if I can find it...

... found it.

Resolution is like the penis. It's what makes ignorant people think they have something important. But it also affects decisions, sometimes adversely.

It's only part of the picture, and often not the most important part.


Point being - only CMOS can offer the combination of resolution and smaller chip size. Only CMOS can deliver this kind of resolution at this price point. So if someone wants/needs that resolution, they're going to have to go CMOS, and they'd better learn what that means. There is no free lunch, there are tradeoffs in all engineering decisions. If you go CMOS, you're going to be dealing with wobble, skew, and partial exposure, and there's *nothing* that can be done about that. It can be improved a little by speeding up the read/reset time of the chip, but it will still be there.

If you don't want to deal with that, you have to go CCD instead. Going CCD gives up those issues, but it also means lower res at the smaller chip size.

So, like I've been saying for years, pick your compromise. Or, compromise with money - pay the price and get a 2/3" full-raster CCD chip. Those are the choices available in the market.


Please stop trying to pin the problem of rolling shutter on the operator. It is something that can be avoided, but for me the limitations of CMOS outweigh any benefit to be found in AVC-Intra at full raster.
Your statement is contradictory at the core. You say "stop trying to pin the problem of rolling shutter on the operator" (which, of course, is accurate; the problem is in the way the chip works) but then you follow up with "It is something that can be avoided" (presumably by an informed operator, yes?)

So the original point stands: if you don't know how a rolling shutter can affect your footage, you can get yourself into trouble with it. If you know how it works, you'll know when it's the right choice (or the wrong choice) for any particular job.

SPZ
02-16-2009, 05:34 AM
Will try it out. Hopefully I can find a way to use it in a night situation- Shooting HK and Macau, without shooting it at night, is like shooting In Tokyo in the morning- nice, but not its better side!

I'll post my findings here!

EDIT- Just read your post, Barry, my question is: is this what we really wanted? Are HVX200- HPX 500 unhappy? .Why not an updated Camera with a Z7 form factor (which includes interchangeable lenses) with an improved CCD, even if its not full HD? why not use HPX500 CCD's on a smaller cam? A trully killer EX3 beater? Is resolution what everyone wanted? I recall I filled in a survey from panasonic asking what did we wanted improved on the HVX200. Well, I, at least, didn't put "full HD" as my main request!

Anyway, like Jan said, I haven't tried it out yet. Will see how it works out for me. One thing is for sure- my main bread and butter is filming the Macau Grand Prix. I sincerely hope the camera is up to the task of filming racing- or I'm screwed! :)

Barry_Green
02-16-2009, 05:38 AM
To be honest, I think Panasonic would be better off by not producing the hpx300 at all, instead they could have just offered an AVC-Intra Codec Board upgrade for the 2/3" CCD hpx-500.
You do realize that NBC, CNBC, and Telemundo have all pre-bought "a large quantity" of the HPX300 before it's even been released, right? I'm sure Panasonic is doing just fine by producing the 300. :thumbsup:

puredrifting
02-16-2009, 07:39 AM
Sergio:

I am on a dozen video boards all over the Internet, having native resolution is ALL most uninformed users care about, they all see that as almost the only reason why the EX/EX3 are supposedly such great cameras. I have rarely seen anyone post about how they love the codec, ergonomics, etc. on the Sonys. Panasonic was very smart to give these users what they think they want, although I think them naive by being fixated purely on resolution. The bottom line is "the look" but whatever, if that's what they want, that's what the market will give them.

If you shoot the GP with lots of panning on long lenses, this is not the camera for you. I have been shooting with the EX1 for almost a year now and it is the worse sports camera ever made (if you are not on a wide lens and close in to the action). I have shot two baseball games with the EX1 and the skewing rendered the footage unusable.

I produced and shot a documentary on Drifting a few years ago and I feel that a CMOS camera is the absolute worse choice you can make for shooting any kind of motorsports because by default, you will be on a long lens and will be constantly panning, the two ingredients that are terrible with CMOS imagers in any camera.

Dan

Joe Lawry
02-16-2009, 11:46 AM
One thing is for sure- my main bread and butter is filming the Macau Grand Prix. I sincerely hope the camera is up to the task of filming racing- or I'm screwed! :)

God i'd love to see some HVX footage from Macau, every year (for the past 3 years) i get a 4:3 Beta SP Line Cut of the race to cut a general story out of for a motorsport show in NZ.. its painful.. this year at least my links and IVs all came in on XD Disc so i had at least IMX50 to work with..

Joe *drifting off topic because its his thread* Lawry.

MrBill
02-16-2009, 01:23 PM
Lately, my bread and butter has been corporate industrials. Having come from editing and branching off into Shooting/Directing, most of the work I'm presently doing is talking heads, combined with archival footage

I'm thinking the new 300 will be the perfect upgrade from the 200 and look forward to seeing it at NAB.

Cees Mutsaers
02-16-2009, 02:23 PM
This is the mail I got from Panasonic Broadcast Europe on the price for the HPX301


Dear Sir,
Thank you very much for your inquiry. The HPX301 will cost 7.850,00 + VAT.
There are no batteries included and it will be available in the end of march.
Regards
Alexander Sommer

Barry_Green
02-16-2009, 02:28 PM
That would presumably be the MSRP, and the "street price" would be even less.

Cees Mutsaers
02-16-2009, 02:53 PM
Yesteday I read the sticky somewhere on this board about the rolling shutter issues (skew, wobble, etc) and to be honest it makes me scared to jump in because I want a to buy a camera which can be used in as many circumstances as possible. So is there a chance that there will be a an upgrade of the HPX500 (keeping 2/3" CCD's full HD) with AVC-I, same improved LCD, colour HD EVF of the HPX300 and all the software improvements the HPX170 already got? Of course the price will be higher than the HPX300 ( and it wil be competitions for the higher end Pana cams) but you can pick the lens you want and you will not have the CMOS related issues.:beer:

Actually I want to see some footage of the HPX300 where I can see how severe the CMOS relates issues in fact are !

David Saraceno
02-16-2009, 03:25 PM
The best bang for the buck with p2 is the 170.

The best bang for the buck for AVCHD is the 150.

I love the AVCIntra capabilities and optics of the 300, but for what we shoot, the rolling shutter is to big of a factor for us to gauge properly in our business. Wish it were otherwise.

For others with different requirements it appears to be a great cam and excellent value.

But you have to match your business with your tools.

puredrifting
02-16-2009, 03:28 PM
Yesteday I read the sticky somewhere on this board about the rolling shutter issues (skew, wobble, etc) and to be honest it makes me scared to jump in because I want a to buy a camera which can be used in as many circumstances as possible. So is there a chance that there will be a an upgrade of the HPX500 (keeping 2/3" CCD's full HD) with AVC-I, same improved LCD, colour HD EVF of the HPX300 and all the software improvements the HPX170 already got? Of course the price will be higher than the HPX300 ( and it wil be competitions for the higher end Pana cams) but you can pick the lens you want and you will not have the CMOS related issues.:beer:

Actually I want to see some footage of the HPX300 where I can see how severe the CMOS relates issues in fact are !


Definitely try before you buy Cees!

Dan

SPZ
02-16-2009, 05:19 PM
God i'd love to see some HVX footage from Macau, every year (for the past 3 years) i get a 4:3 Beta SP Line Cut of the race to cut a general story out of for a motorsport show in NZ.. its painful.. this year at least my links and IVs all came in on XD Disc so i had at least IMX50 to work with..

Joe *drifting off topic because its his thread* Lawry.

Joe, if you have facebook, add me (its Sergio Perez, on Macau Network). I have some footage on my facebook page shot with the HVX of the event. You can also check out macautourism main site on the Videos section for the Macau GP Promotion 30 sec TVC- its done of about 80% HVX footage and 20% Beta SP (I hear you about the 4:3- the local broadcaster doesn't do the event justice).

Back on topic- Dan, I get you. imagine this cam without the Cmos but with CCD's- instant winner. Heck, maybe if it had the new JVC's CCD's (the 700) it would be enough!

Barry_Green
02-16-2009, 05:27 PM
Back on topic- Dan, I get you. imagine this cam without the Cmos but with CCD's- instant winner. Heck, maybe if it had the new JVC's CCD's (the 700) it would be enough!
JVC's new CCD is a 960x540 spatial-offset chip. Basically the same thing as the 170/200A have.

This new cam would not be "the 300" without the CMOS (and all the good and bad that comes with it). If it was a 960x540 CCD, it'd just be the HPX500 all over again, and we already have that...

SPZ
02-16-2009, 05:31 PM
JVC's new CCD is a 960x540 spatial-offset chip. Basically the same thing as the 170/200A have.

This new cam would not be "the 300" without the CMOS (and all the good and bad that comes with it). If it was a 960x540 CCD, it'd just be the HPX500 all over again, and we already have that...

Really? Are you sure? Wasn't the old JVC 1280x720 native 1/3 CCD's (HD100)? Wouldn't it make sense to use these and spacial offset them? Or did they change and use Panasonic tech?

Barry_Green
02-16-2009, 05:39 PM
The old JVC was, apparently, two CCD chips side by side. Hence the split screen.

The new design would be free of split screen, but won't have as many pixels (which, again, with spatial offset, isn't that big of a deal, a spatial offset 960x540 does a great job of 720p). But it won't be competitive with a 1920x1080 chipset when doing 1080p.

JVC has been using 960x540 with both horizontal and vertical offset in their consumer cameras, and this is how their website describes the 700:

The GY-HM700 utilizes three precisely aligned 1/3-inch progressive scan full HD CCDs—one each for red, green and blue primary color. JVC engineers have developed a unique 1/3-inch optical block with Diagonal Offset and a patented exclusive Adaptive Pixel Correlation Technique that produces resolution comparable to cameras with larger image sensors.

So I can't be 110% sure that it's 960x540 with H/V spatial offset, but I would say I'm 95% sure. Add to that the fact that they don't quote a number for sensor pixels in the specifications, and yeah, I'm pretty sure that they're 960x540 H/V. Wouldn't surprise me in the least if they're the actual same chipset as in the 170/200A.

Kholi
02-16-2009, 05:53 PM
Really? Are you sure? Wasn't the old JVC 1280x720 native 1/3 CCD's (HD100)? Wouldn't it make sense to use these and spacial offset them? Or did they change and use Panasonic tech?

I still think the HD250 produced really great footages.

LuckyStudio 13
02-16-2009, 07:02 PM
You do realize that NBC, CNBC, and Telemundo have all pre-bought "a large quantity" of the HPX300 before it's even been released, right? I'm sure Panasonic is doing just fine by producing the 300. :thumbsup:

So the decision maker/s decided to use a CMOS chip rolling shutter plagued camera to get capture of press conferences, red carpet events, crime scenes, police take downs, fast action sports ...etc where there are tons of strobes light, camera flashes and fast panning requirements ???? I hope that decision maker is very high up in the organization chart or have a backup career plan.

Shame on Panasonic for pushing the absolute wrong tool for the job to those tv stations.

Kholi
02-16-2009, 07:09 PM
I have to ask: does anyone outside of the realm of videography, low/no budget filmmaking or web forums even TRULY care about rolling shutter? We analyze a lot here (I do it of course) that most people won't care about in the real world..

The human eye/average human will forgive a lot of what we think we can't. There's already been so many feature films that are plagued with the same things we complain about, I got over CMOS issues a while ago. CCD is still better, IMO, but you take what you can get!

Go P2!!!

LuckyStudio 13
02-16-2009, 07:33 PM
Wobbles are avoidable with careful planning and some suspension for the camera. Skews are also not the final nail in the coffin, panning speed can be controlled. Partial Exposure of a rolling shutter sensor is fatal.

http://freshdv.dreamhosters.com/mjeppsen/video/ex1_strobe_cmos_rolling_shutter_artifact.mov

http://vimeo.com/2132665

Now imagine this footage on the theater with its giant size screen. A brief shoot of flash is a different story vs a continuous firing of flashes like in the catwalk or news conference.

Last Aug I worked for a big budget film (1.2mil) shooting on 2x Red. The editor was shocked with the contamination of the blue channel and also the partial exposure coming from the strobes light of the police car and ambulance. No body has yet reported on how the hpx300 deals with IR contamination that also plaque CMOS sensor.

There is no doubt that the world is moving towards CMOS sensor, but we are still at the first generation of CMOS sensor. If anybody would have the will and technology to fight rolling shutter on a CMOS sensor, it is going to be RED. I hope all the Scarlet will have a super fast read/reset rate in order to offset the undesirable effects of a rolling shutter cmos chip.

puredrifting
02-16-2009, 08:11 PM
Kholi:

How does imager scan rate relate to frame rate? Are they the same? I am just wondering is there a way to expose the imager through the electronic shutter at 24 times per second while having the shutter scan the imager at a much, much higher rate. This is my naivite showing on exactly how a CMOS imager is scanned. Any ideas?

It does seem logical that if there is a way to increase the rate that the imager is scanned, it would minimize or even eliminate all of these side effects.

Dan

Kholi
02-16-2009, 11:04 PM
Oh you're asking the WRONG Gearwhore, Dan. I barely understand it myself and don't pretend to, either. I get all of my info from the same places you do and just try to get my hands on stuff to know what it translates too in the real world.

That's a Barry_G Question!!!

Jan_Crittenden
02-17-2009, 04:27 AM
Shame on Panasonic for pushing the absolute wrong tool for the job to those tv stations.

You know, a statement like this is insulting. The world id full of little trade-offs and no one forces anyone to buy anything. It is a free market. The fact that you think that we forced the TV stations to buy this camera really shows how naive you are. Please.

LuckyStudio 13
02-17-2009, 05:48 AM
You know, a statement like this is insulting. The world id full of little trade-offs and no one forces anyone to buy anything. It is a free market. The fact that you think that we forced the TV stations to buy this camera really shows how naive you are. Please.

I am so sorry if my comment was out of line. If I operate a business a news station business (covering events), the last thing that I want is a cmos rolling shutter camera. But then again, what do I know. Only that I used to own and shoot with a rolling shutter cmos cam and I was so glad that I was able to get rid of that commitment and went with a Panasonic CCD cam.

Not to mention, that a business that can pre purchased a bunch of cameras without thoroughly testing a single production model. I am sure they all got a very good rate from Panasonic but again, what do I know, my rationale as a small fish just doesnt make sense for a big business I guess. :huh:

Jan_Crittenden
02-17-2009, 06:06 AM
Not to mention, that a business that can pre purchased a bunch of cameras without thoroughly testing a single production model. I am sure they all got a very good rate from Panasonic but again, what do I know, my rationale as a small fish just doesnt make sense for a big business I guess. :huh:


Frankly they have seen the camera, it is not always about what makes sense to the small business operator. It takes very little testing to check out the wobble jello and partial expose, I had that test done within the first 15 minutes of having the camera, and most of that time waqs trying to hunt down a CF card for the little Nikon I had at work. No tom-foolery in the presetation of this camera to anyone. All eyes wide open and informed in the decision making process. And yes they got a good price but keep in mind they would have gotten a good price on any camera, this one just happened to meet more of the criteria than the other cameras in consideration.

In case you haven't noticed there are lots of happy EX1/3 owners out there. And you know I see the partial exposure stuff more and more often. I saw a bio of Jennifer Aniston the other night and there on the red carpet walk was the partial exposures. Now if I had had that in my footage I think I might have tried something in post to resolve it, but they didn't. Hey if I could have gotter a full raster CCD in this camera I would have, but that just isn't possible, so it has a CMOS.

There was a price point to meet and I think we did a good job of making the HPX300 as feature rich as possible so that many different target customers will be attracted to it.

Best,

Jan

LuckyStudio 13
02-17-2009, 12:10 PM
I think, upon the discovery of "rolling shutter" phenomenon, I am sure the TV stations will reduce the use of such camera on the field and instead will only pull the camera out on more controlled environment such as in the studio or sit down interviews. I know there are tons of happy rolling shutter CMOS users out there, but I think due to the weakness of the camera sensor design, it is most suitable for controlled environment shooting such as narrative film. I have owned a CMOS rolling shutter cam in the past, call me old skool but you guys can pry away my hpx170 only from my cold dead hands.

MrBill
02-17-2009, 04:40 PM
Here it is--good work Jan!

NBCU Going with Panasonic P2

TVNEWSDAY, Feb 11 2009, 3:27 PM ET


NBC Universal has "standardized" on the Panasonic P2 camcorder format for the NBC O&Os, CNBC and Telemundo, according to Panasonic executives at a New York press conference today. The purchase includes a variety of camcorders, including the AG-HPX-300, which is a new unit aimed at the hard-pressed TV station market.





The camera, with one-third inch, 2.2 megapixel, HD 3MOS progressive imagers, lists for $10,000, including a Fujinon lens, and is expected to be widely available starting next month.


"That price range is pretty sweet for stations," said Joe Facchini, Panasonic director of product marketing.
Panasonic execs said that the buy likely will also include other low-cost Panasonic P2 cameras, the AG-HPX-170 and the AG-HVX-200 as well as the high-end AJ-HPX-2000.
Facchini called the AG-HPX-300 "the new benchmark" for $10,000 cameras. "It's a real camera," he said, "it's not a modified consumer camera."
The AG-HPX-300 can shoot in various HD formats, including 1080i/p and 720p as well as SD; can accept a full range of lenses; and can be configured for studio use.
"Anything you want to shoot with this camera, you can shoot with this camera," Facchini added. "This is what the station market has been looking for," he said. "The days of the $30,000 or $40,000 news camera are way behind us."
According to Jan Crittenden, the product manager for the AG-HPX-300, the camera is meant to compete with mid-priced cameras from Sony (XDCam EX3) and JVC (HD250). "In form function alone this feels like a real camera because it rests on your shoulder," Crittenden said, and added that configured for studio use with cable, remote, monitor and power supply, the camera will list for around $23,000.
Panasonic would not reveal the financial terms of the NBC deal.

Cees Mutsaers
02-18-2009, 12:52 PM
Special offer till the end of March :

Dear Mr. Mutsaers,

We are authorised Panasonic Dealer so any request that comes to Panasonic gets transmitted to us or other Dealers.
We offer the HPX301 including 2 32 GB Cards for 9.950,00 + VAT. This offer is valid till the end of March. I think that the Camcorder will be available in the Netherlands at the same time as in Germany! You can apply our Newsletter that will keep you updated on feature Events and News concerning the HPX301. Please visit www.avtplus.de (http://www.avtplus.de/) for more Information.

Regards

Alexander Sommer
Vertrieb




This is the mail I got from Panasonic Broadcast Europe on the price for the HPX301


Dear Sir,
Thank you very much for your inquiry. The HPX301 will cost 7.850,00 + VAT.
There are no batteries included and it will be available in the end of march.
Regards
Alexander Sommer

The Sarlacc
02-18-2009, 03:16 PM
Abel Burbank got one today at 1:30 for showing, sadly I had to leave before that time.

DSWMEDIA
02-19-2009, 09:37 AM
Abel in burbank?

I'm so there. I'm right next door in northridge.

Joe Walker
02-19-2009, 01:54 PM
I think, upon the discovery of "rolling shutter" phenomenon, I am sure the TV stations will reduce the use of such camera on the field and instead will only pull the camera out on more controlled environment such as in the studio or sit down interviews.

Having worked for a TV News station for 8 years I can tell you that wobble, skew, smear, grain, dead pixels, low resolution, dropouts, bad lighting, horrific framing, and operator incompetence mean nothing to the guys upstairs so long as the photographer "got the shot." You would be amazed at what is approved for air. I don't think wobble, skew, or half frame exposure would ever deter these guys.

I joined a company in the past year that does high end commercial work shooting on the RED One on a near daily basis. If the HPX300 handles wobble and skew like the RED does, then I have no worries about it whatsoever! Unless you're entire project consists of shooting at a high shutter speed with "Bourne" style hand-held photography mostly relegated to whip pans coupled with insane amounts of strobe lights, you'll probably be okay.

Just my .02!

alpi69
02-19-2009, 02:35 PM
Having worked for a TV News station for 8 years I can tell you that wobble, skew, smear, grain, dead pixels, low resolution, dropouts, bad lighting, horrific framing, and operator incompetence mean nothing to the guys upstairs so long as the photographer "got the shot." You would be amazed at what is approved for air. I don't think wobble, skew, or half frame exposure would ever deter these guys.

I joined a company in the past year that does high end commercial work shooting on the RED One on a near daily basis. If the HPX300 handles wobble and skew like the RED does, then I have no worries about it whatsoever! Unless you're entire project consists of shooting at a high shutter speed with "Bourne" style hand-held photography mostly relegated to whip pans coupled with insane amounts of strobe lights, you'll probably be okay.

Just my .02!

Well I disagree. I have been on a major TV production and when they saw a dead-pixel on the HD footage from a whole day helicopter, they sent the guys out again to re-shoot. A whole day in a helicopter shooting nature......once again.....pricey.

Yes, there is this hype about reality shows and quick-fast TV making. But if you make a serious production you very much worry. The director wont care HOW you get the image, but he will want a certain image. And thats not only film and drama, but also in documentaries and well done events.

Joe Walker
02-19-2009, 02:38 PM
Totally agreed, I was referring to TV "News" however...

Rick Haywood
02-19-2009, 07:01 PM
Very nice price... shame its going to cost a bit more outside of the usa due to the exchange rates. I've been quoted 20,000 NZD, which is around 10,500 USD.

Hi Joe,

I think you may remember that I said that the camera will come in around $20,000 - not quite a quote. Basically I had taken the U.S. list price and doubled it (roughly). We have not set the final price but be prepared to be pleasantly surprised - I always prefer to start high and pull a rabbit out of the hat.

Joe Lawry
02-20-2009, 01:35 AM
Sorry Rick, quoted was the wrong word to use. I should have also noted that that price 'around' 20k was most likely a list price. Not a street price.

LuckyStudio 13
02-21-2009, 08:25 AM
Having worked for a TV News station for 8 years I can tell you that wobble, skew, smear, grain, dead pixels, low resolution, dropouts, bad lighting, horrific framing, and operator incompetence mean nothing to the guys upstairs so long as the photographer "got the shot."

If a salesperson is pushing a rolling shutter CMOS cam to me under the same business requirement (on the field/event reporting), him and the company he represents will be off my Rolodex forever. Go and see the clip on CMOS partial exposure effects again and then tell yourself CMOS Rolling Shutter cam is a suitable tool for live/event on the field TV station reporting. Panasonic can say w/e they want, I do know that a lot of business executives have NOT a SINGLE CLUE about cam technology.

Barry_Green
02-21-2009, 09:17 AM
Most business execs have not a single clue about camera technology. That's why I put up that article a couple of years ago, to try to spell out for people that these new CMOS cameras change things and they don't behave like the last several decades of CCD cameras do.

The info is out there; it's now incumbent on shooters to learn how CMOS changes things for them. For some it won't change anything about what they do. For others it might be a dealbreaker.

I would think any responsible salesperson would feel an obligation to steer the customer towards the product most suitable for their needs. But then it becomes incumbent on the customer to state what their needs are.

LuckyStudio 13
02-21-2009, 09:23 AM
Barry, I think with this new camera, you are now obligated to write a Barry Green Guide to the Panasonic Hpx 500 and Hpx 300 !!! Yay !!!! :) Although you might have to have a new section on Sensor Technology: CMOS & CCD. :D

Barry_Green
02-21-2009, 09:25 AM
Roger that. :thumbsup:

Paul Kramm.net
02-21-2009, 02:45 PM
i think ill wait to see what will happen to the HPX500 after NAB....
Like an HPX505??? (new 2/3 CCDs, New VF, New LCD)..........maybe???!!....:thumbup:

Noel Evans
02-21-2009, 08:48 PM
But then it becomes incumbent on the customer to state what their needs are.

heh good luck. According to some threads - I want a camera that can shoot wildlife, my brother on his bmx, tvcm, weddings, snowboarding, fairies in the clouds, oh yeah and I want to shoot my first feature this year as well.

:P

philip bloom
02-24-2009, 01:10 PM
how did you find the noise in the image? I tested one today and was a little concerned at some of noise in my shots...The detail may have been dialed up as I didn't check as had to hand back the camera after a couple of hours and didn't get to see noise till i got home and uploaded the clips...

v nice cam though

LuckyStudio 13
02-24-2009, 01:21 PM
heh good luck. According to some threads - I want a camera that can shoot wildlife, my brother on his bmx, tvcm, weddings, snowboarding, fairies in the clouds, oh yeah and I want to shoot my first feature this year as well.

:P

I agreed with Noel. You got to define your style of shooting and choose a camera and other tool to support and accentuate your work.

Jan_Crittenden
02-24-2009, 01:42 PM
how did you find the noise in the image? I tested one today and was a little concerned at some of noise in my shots...The detail may have been dialed up as I didn't check as had to hand back the camera after a couple of hours and didn't get to see noise till i got home and uploaded the clips...

v nice cam though

One of the first things we did was change the factory settings on Pedestle from +15 to 0. Dropped the noise like a rock.

For whatever reason the factory was shipping the cameras with the pedestle pumped.

Best,

Jan

Barry_Green
02-24-2009, 01:54 PM
Yeah, I totally don't understand why the default scene file settings are shipped with a boosted-up master pedestal. I would say to set it at zero at the maximum, and I shot with it at -12 to -20 in Africa and liked the look much better.

That's the first thing I'd recommend to any HPX300 user, is to go through and drop the master pedestal down. I don't know what they were thinking when they raised it.

timbook2
02-24-2009, 01:56 PM
I have to ask: does anyone outside of the realm of videography, low/no budget filmmaking or web forums even TRULY care about rolling shutter? We analyze a lot here (I do it of course) that most people won't care about in the real world..

The human eye/average human will forgive a lot of what we think we can't. There's already been so many feature films that are plagued with the same things we complain about, I got over CMOS issues a while ago. CCD is still better, IMO, but you take what you can get!

Go P2!!!

I like that :thumbup: it brings back the "content over rolling shutter " value discussion, in this case I agree: content rules, BUT the footage of the concert with the stropbe lights, really is hard to watch....In the end I am sure, the rolling shutter will be part of life just as mp3 has won over 192 KHz 24 bit audio. Is it good ? probably not but we will have to wait for some clever solution to make CMOS become the universal standard for ALL situations.

surfeast
02-25-2009, 04:23 AM
Was interested in these for sports applications but smear etc is a concern. I shyed away from Sony due to it being MPEG 2 Based. How will these handle fast action sports from any early tests ? Moving the Tripod quickly and capturing action is what we will be doing....
Thanks

Barry_Green
02-25-2009, 05:42 AM
Depends on how far telephoto you'll be zoomed in. Motion artifacts from the codec are a non-issue on the 300; it uses intraframe-only compression so it won't have any of the MPEG-based concerns of the HDV/XDCAM series. But the rolling shutter is the rolling shutter. If you want to be fully zoomed in and panning fast, this is probably not the camera for you. But if you're talking about full wide angle, it would be fine.

CinemaElectronika
02-25-2009, 07:22 AM
Depends on how far telephoto you'll be zoomed in... if you're talking about full wide angle, it would be fine.

That's music for my ears!

Thank you, Barry.

H;)

Jim Carswell
02-25-2009, 08:55 AM
Does shooting interlaced or progressive impact the amount of rolling shutter issues? Is one better than the other at masking the impact of RS?
Jim