rolling shutter hxp300?

[xmephestox]

1/3 cmos chips, gonna have rolling shutter issues. anybody do a test on it to see how bad it really is? better than the EX cameras, same? or worse?

[zacuto]

Check out this video: http://vimeo.com/3367266
(http://vimeo.com/3367266)

-Steve Weiss

[markyf]

The 300 looks twice as bad to me. The PR people will be here in two seconds to make excuses for this... "no one would ever use a camera like this and it's up to the user to make it look good". I would love to see someone shoot some realistic scenes to see how it would hold up.

[BXL]

Ouch!... thanks but no...

[baquajim]

Yeah, that looks really bad, but I would like to see a "normal" pan and tilt.

For someone who isn't shooting Bourne style, the camera still may be an acceptable tool for them, but it looks like the action crowd may have to skip this one.

The next generation Red offerings are supposed to reduce the skew down to film standards, hopefully others will follow suit.

[markyf]

I can't imagine who's going to pay $10,000 for this. Are we moving backwards? If I just want to lock someone off and take pretty pictures I think I'd opt for a DSLR.

[DSWMEDIA]

wow. looks terrible, like a DSLR.


:(

I had high hopes for this camera.

[alexdias]

Both look pretty bad to me.
The test is, of course, exaggerated but it's fact that all CMOS cameras have this problem (RED included).
At the same time there's a lot of skilled professionals dealing well with the situation and producing excellent material.
Unfortunately I had bad experiences with it which I wasn't able to compensated in a satisfying way.

[David Saraceno]

What shooting environment did you experience that was bad?

I'd certainly would be interested in any anecdotal info you have.

thanks

[alexdias]

Nothing out of normal or too exciting.
Once it was in a concert and when the strobe light kicked in I was done for it, this was with a EX1.

Different job, doing some simple b-roll of a business I've crossed the street to shoot from the other sidewalk for a car or a bus to naturally wipe the business sign for me. Bad! This was with a EX3.
At the same job I was asked to shoot from a moving car and that footage never made it to the cut.

It could be my lack of knowledge but every time I shot with a CMOS camera I felt limited in a bad and unnecessary way.

[Carlos Corral]

Hmmm, that was a lot worse than I originally thought it would be. Makes consider the HPX170 or JVC HM700 and sticking with CCD chips. I happen to do a lot of events and sport with a lot of motion so this wouldn't be very good to experience in the field.

[13th Judas]

WOW i have included this cam on my NOT TO BUY LIST .

[n8ture]

Funny, I've included it on my MUST BUY LIST. :)

[MikeDPLD]

"Funny, I've included it on my MUST BUY LIST."

Kevin, how do you plan to get around the long-lens-CMOS-rolling shutter issue?
How'd you avoid it on your recent trip?
I've shot in Africa with an old SD Sony 2/3" chip camera. Nice and crisp with no issues.
A long telephoto is a must for wildlife stuff...
I want to buy this camera, but I need your encouragement and support!
Want AVC-I 100 but must avoid(as much as possible)CMOS issues...
Thanks,
Mike Favazza

[Kenn Christenson]

Anybody know if the camera, used in the rolling shutter test, was actually a production model? Could explain some things, if it wasn't.

[Barry_Green]

There's no such thing as a production model yet; they won't start shipping for another month. So it is, by definition, a preproduction unit. I don't know whether that will change anything or not.

A simple scientific test should answer all these questions; if I had access to a 300 and an EX1 I could probably sort this out in 10 minutes flat. I hope someone who has access to both can do a scientific comparison, like what Jim Arthurs did between the Red One and EX1, as obviously this is a point of curiosity for an awful lot of people.

[joeher133]

I have to agree on the not to buy list. I own the HVX-200 and I was looking forward to an affordable (under 10k/w lens) shoulder mount p2 HD camera but I can not believe that Panasonic would release this full featured camera with such a flaw. I am advising someone right now on what camera to get and could not honestly recommend the 300 or the Ex1 or Ex3 after seeing this. I will also keep waiting before I upgrade from the HVX.

[DSWMEDIA]

Remember guys, the RED camera has had many firmware updates, improving it's readout speed and reducing the effects of rolling shutter as a result.


So the question is,

Can we see a firmware update to the HPX300 in the future if the issue is so bad on the production models?

[David Saraceno]

Funny, I've included it on my MUST BUY LIST. :)

I think I've read everything that is printed and viewed every video currently available about this cam, and the jellovision/rolling shutter issue.

The vimeo example was startling to say the least.

I respect Barry Green's view and experience here, and I see this observation by Kevin.

I've looked at Phil Bloom's video review and the Zacuto interview with the Panny representative. Interestly, shot with a HVX200. Didn't care much for the "saddle for every ass" comment, but anyway.

But there are serious questions here, so any trite responses ain't gonna to cut it. This isn't directed towards anyone on either side of this issue.

But Kevin and Barry:

1. If this cam is on your list, then is it because your video environment doesn't engender shooting situations that produce this anomaly?

2. What are the shooting environments to absolutely avoid? What can be done to attenuate the effect in those environments?

We shoot talking heads and action sports including collegiate and professional skating, basketball, football where people are running, jumping, and moving. (not the talking heads).

Are we going to face issues with rolling shutter? If we are, can someone who has actually shot with a preproduction cam or with an EX3 or Red give us some objective observations and assistance?

thanks

[Barry_Green]

As for me, I'm on the fence about it. I don't like any rolling shutter artifacts, at all. But, on the other hand, it's noticeably cleaner, smoother, and sharper than anything else; it's got EX1 sharpness with Panasonic color & gamma. It is a very tempting little minx!

My normal shooting style nowadays is dramatic narrative and training DVDs. So yes, I could probably use it with the least amount of rolling shutter worries. We do a lot of greenscreen stuff, and the 10-bit full-raster 4:2:2 is utterly delicious for greenscreen. In that case, I expect that the 300 will do nothing but make our footage more fantastic, both through its cleaner imagery, and through its sharper imaging, and (thirdly) through the better post codec which offers 4x as many shades of colors and is also full-raster with a full 960x1080 of chroma information. So for my normal uses a 300 seems like it'd be an excellent upgrade with no real downside.

If my primary shooting circumstances were telephoto tracking shots, matchmoving 3-D effects, music video work with strobelights, stunt work with car shots/helicopters, or red carpet or press conference coverage, then no, I wouldn't have the 300 or EX1 or EX3 on my list.

So I'm in-between. I originally thought that this wasn't the camera for me, and then I looked at the footage on an HD monitor and thought "good heavens, this is awesome! Maybe, could I live with the rubbery footage if it were to happen?" I've always been completely anti-rolling-shutter whenever possible. I had a Red, and sold it. I never wanted an EX1/EX3. The HPX300 tempts me with its AVC-Intra and instantaneous workflow. I will say this: if I did go for a 300, there's no way I'd get rid of my 170. In Africa when we wanted to do tracking shots I strapped the 170 down on the cinesaddle and got perfect beautiful tracking shots. Yes it's a little softer - so what? No rubber, no jello, no artifacts of any type, just excellent beautiful footage.

As for shooting environments to absolutely avoid: zooming in full and trying to do "Cops" would be a huge no-no. On wide-angle, sure, that's probably going to be fine, but at full tele there's no way. Zoomed in car shots, or mounting it to a mountain bike and juddering/jarring down a mountain, those are probably big no-nos. Shooting under strobelights would be an exercise in frustration, I'd recommend against even trying it. Using a rolling-shutter camera as a helmet-mounted parachute jumping cam would probably be pretty bad too.

To counter the rolling shutter effects of skew & wobble, the only things you can do are to slow down the relative motion of the subject. Zoom out. Pan slower. Don't put yourself in a position where you're following a race car around a track at full telephoto, or the background is going to be seriously angled and that's just the way that is. Sorry but it really is a case of "Doctor, it hurts when I do this" followed by "Well, then stop doing that."

To counter the rolling/scrolling waves/lines caused by HMI or fluos, you can pretty much get rid of them by sync'ing the shutter speed to the line frequency. That means 1/60 for 60i/60p, and you can use 1/40 for 24p or 30p. You can't use 180 degrees or you'll get fluttering lines and scrolling orange bands in the footage. This is the same on every CMOS camcorder, whether HPX300 or EX1 or EX3 or Red or Infinity or V7U or V1U or what have you.

You can't do a thing about the partial flash exposure. That's just gonna happen. You can either try to fix it in post by putting a white overlay over the partial flash frame, or, if there's a lot of flash frames, you can just ignore it. People seem to be doing that on "E!" and such, and the audiences seem willing to accept it. I'd *hate* to have my source footage compromised like that, but some people obviously don't care and if the audiences don't care, well, that becomes your choice.

As for talking heads, the HPX300 will be exquisitely brilliant for that.

As for action sports - it depends on the camera movement, not the subject movement. It's very, very unlikely that someone's going to run through the frame fast enough to cause skew! Instead, it's going to be how you pan with or follow the shot that might cause the skew. If it's wide angle you shouldn't have any issues. If you're fully zoomed in, well... that's where I'd start to get concerned.

Where rolling shutter really starts to make itself flat-out objectionable is when the camera motion reverses itself; that's when things go rubbery and where the skew becomes impossible to miss. Pan back and forth like that Zacuto video and yeah, people are going to have a problem with it. So if you're doing smooth sweeping following shots (like Kevin did of the zebras in Africa) then you shouldn't have any problem (and we didn't). But if you're trying to do a "24"-style handheld show, and you're bouncing the camera around, and you've zoomed in... I think that's a perfect storm for rolling shutter to ruin a shot.

Keep in mind that the HPX300 has a lot more telephoto than the HPX170. How zoomed-in do you normally shoot on the 170? Because that maxxes out at 51mm, but the HPX300 goes to 77mm, so it's like having a 1.5x teleconverter on your 170. If you're normally shooting the 170 at 5 to 20mm, I don't expect you'll have any trouble with the 300. But if you want to zoom the 300 in to 60-77mm, you'd better have a great tripod with some good fluid dampening in it, or you can expect some rubbery jello in your footage. Same with an EX3 or EX1 or Red; match the field of view and you should have comparable jello in the shots.

[Shipsides]

Remember guys, the RED camera has had many firmware updates, improving it's readout speed and reducing the effects of rolling shutter as a result.


So the question is,

Can we see a firmware update to the HPX300 in the future if the issue is so bad on the production models?

What's to say that Panasonic won't release a firmware upgrade to improve the shutter situation? I think a show like NAB would be a great place to release such a thing. ;-)

Like you said, the RED has had some major shutter improvements. I think Panasonic can do it too.

[n8ture]

For me it's simple. Go to my site at http://www.silverphoenixllc.com/Sample_Films.html and watch the films. Is there anything there that would really be a huge issue with the 300?

I pretty much shoot my 170 with the zoom maxed. I always want more reach. The 300 gives me this right off the bat. Plus if I need more, I can rent a bigger lens. I used the Canon in Africa and was able to get far closer to subjects than I could with the 170.

So for me, much sharper image, greater reach makes it a no brainer for me. I'm not doing whip pans with it, I'm not on the red carpet with flashes going off left and right.

Africa was the worst shooting situation I was ever in yet I still pulled off some ok footage. I would love to take the camera to Yellowstone and see what I could do in a good shooting situation.

Plus, this was a pre-production camera I used. They may not change a thing but I'd venture that they probably will tweak it before they ship. Even if they don't it still will work for me.

Did I have wobble and jiggle in Africa? You bet. Every time I'd try to adjust the bowl to level the camera I felt like Bill Cosby would appear and we'd be doing the jello dance together. But once I was able to get on the subject I could move the camera the limited amount I could trying to shoot out of a window and it looked ok to me.

So for the nature and wildlife stuff I do I like the 300. If I was covering sports I'd probably wait to see if they address some things.

[puredrifting]

Not sure why everyone is all unaware of this issue, any of us who have been using the EX1/EX3 or the past year went through all of this rolling shutter issue a year ago. It is a compromise and it does mean the camera is limited in certain situations. People care more about pure resolution at an amazing price than about having a camera that is not usable in every shooting situation, no different than the EX1/EX3.

I am with Barry, as soon as I can afford it, I will buy a 300 but I will definitely be keeping my 170 as well. It is good to have both choices. I shoot a large amount of interviews and tabletop where the rolling shutter artifacts are a non-issue. If I did shoot mostly sports, news, action footage, I wouldn't buy the 300. For all of you complaining, hey, Panasonic gave you what you wanted the only way possible, with a CMOS imager set and a rolling shutter for well under $10k street. What more do you want? If you have to avoid rolling shutter artifacts, that rules out all but the higher dollar or really lower dollar Pannys. Oh well, at least we have choices. It really is true, you can only please just a couple of people part of the time. If they would have made this camera with a lower res CCD, people would have had a cow also over the pixel shifting.

The 300 looks to be an amazing piece of gear for an amazing price, I am looking forward to it.

Dan

[SPZ]

I think the question here is also if the HPX300 performs worse thant the EX3/1 for rolling shutter issues. This can make a difference between usable and unusable. The limited time I had with the EX1, I tried to do 24 esque shots following a subject walking in 25p and seemed fine. Because of the bigger chips, I didn't need to zoom in much with the stock lens to get the DOF I normaly like in these shots when I use my HVX200. With 1/3CCD's, I'd probably need a bigger zoom to get the same shot. This could mean more wobble, for example.

I have a qustion for the experts: If I get a relay, like the 1/2 Letus relay, and add a 35mm adapter, and add Telephoto lens, this would probably get me less wobbly footage than adding an adapter trough the stock lens, correct? Maybe the new relays and 35mm combos help in minimizing the Wobble issues? (Since its not using any zoom from a lens. Does this makes sense?)

[zacuto]

I'm going to bow to Barry on this one. I think he should do a scientific test between the two cameras. I'm removing my test because he thinks I should have been more scientific about it. I agree, I only had the camera for a few hours and really just panned and tilted the two cameras without really knowing how to setup the two cameras to make it apples to apples. I can see his point. So Barry, let's see the test. Steve

[Barry_Green]

I have a qustion for the experts: If I get a relay, like the 1/2 Letus relay, and add a 35mm adapter, and add Telephoto lens, this would probably get me less wobbly footage than adding an adapter trough the stock lens, correct? Maybe the new relays and 35mm combos help in minimizing the Wobble issues? (Since its not using any zoom from a lens. Does this makes sense?)
I can't see how that would make any difference. The issue is the relative motion of the image, not how the lens arrives at that magnification. It's not the lens elements that are causing the issue, it's the amount of motion in the subject. The more magnified the image is (meaning the more telephoto you use) the more exaggerated the wobble will be (and everything else, of course; it's very difficult to hold a camera steady at full telephoto, for example; that same situation serves to magnify the wobble issues).

[Barry_Green]

I'm going to bow to Barry on this one. I think he should do a scientific test between the two cameras. I'm removing my test because he thinks I should have been more scientific about it. I agree, I only had the camera for a few hours and really just panned and tilted the two cameras without really knowing how to setup the two cameras to make it apples to apples. I can see his point. So Barry, let's see the test. Steve
I'd love to, but as of right now I don't have access to either camera! :shocked:

Steve, your efforts are very much appreciated, both with your video reviews and your attempts to satisfy the ravenous appetite for information here. If you still have access to the cameras and could do something, that'd be fantastic. If not, hopefully someone else will step up and make it happen. Regardless of what the results are, I think it's obvious that the audience here is very interested in this issue and, dare i say it, I would think Panasonic would be most interested too. There's still a month to go before the 300 ships, which might be plenty enough time for them to adjust things before the camera goes into production (if it turns out to be necessary), so the more information they can have to work with, the better the final product might end up being.

Thanks for all you do for the DVXUser community.

[SPZ]

Thanks Barry! That makes sense about the wooble. I always tought the "chip" was somehow processing and comunicating with the lens in order to see "closer", and it was that processing and speed required that made the rolling shutter happen. I was thinking that adding a relay, the "chip", or Cmos wouldn't need to work extra at all, and it was merelly doing the same as if it was in wide (which seems like the situation you get less wobble). And the lenses would do the magnification. Which means that I was totally clueless of how these things work! So basically in full wide the wobble amount is the same as in close up, its just the fact that in tele you are seeing more detailed portions of the same image, making those imperfections and the rolling shutter struggling more apparent...

As for the comparison, I must thank Steve for the hassle of putting these videos. And like Barry said, the camera is in Pre-production, so there's still time for tweaking. If you have the access, Steve, please do the tests VS the EX3. From what we see here, its alarming that the 300 seems more woobly than the EX3. Other users with limited access had the same impression- so, at least, lets try to make Panasonic tune the camera at least to EX3 /EX1 Rolling shutter/wobble tolerance...

[puredrifting]

Jello is jello. To me, any amount in the shot is unacceptable so what's the difference if the HPX300 has more or less than the EX1/3? You are going to shoot your masterpiece and live with some jellocam versus a lot of jellocam? Moot point. That's like talking about throwing up. What's the difference whether you throw up a little or a lot?

Hey, I worked in Jello, the best cure for an upset stomach, into the same paragraph as throwing up!

Dan

[alexdias]

Barry, as usual can be incredibly eloquent, informative and opinionated. It's a pleasure to read him.

As for me, unfortunately I have a need for a flexible camera.
If I knew for sure what kind of situations I'll face it when I'm out shooting it would be great and I could select a camera accordingly. But that's rare for me.
I'm a documentarian, so my job is the essence of the unexpected.

The HPX300, other than the CMOS issues, is sooo good it hurts.
The quality of codec, the size, weight, price, and so forth... Everything is absolutely great.

But I'm concerned to go out with a camera that will not respond to my needs when I can't ask for a second take.

[kevinM]

Jello is jello. You are going to shoot your masterpiece and live with some jellocam versus a lot of jellocam? Moot point. That's like talking about throwing up. What's the difference whether you throw up a little or a lot?


I love it. That should be the quote of the year!

[Big Brother]

I saw & used HPX300 at a local Panasonic office & found that

-Very light weight & well balanced
-Crisp LCD & VF
-Rubbery feeling when i was panning swiftly L/R or vice versa
-Rolling shutter issue was eminent as i used a still camera flash in fast burst mode, the frames were partially to fully exposed with white burst
-ONE THING I COULDNT TEST - How would this camer react to strobe light one like in DIcs or live shows & events, firework ... We shoot live events so its a major concern for us out here. We have been able to stomach the look of partially exposed frames of flahses, also we wont be shooting very fast pans/titls so skew etc should be an issue to us. BUT lights with fast movements as mentioned above ??? ANY experience on this camcorder or any other CMOS camera.

Thx

bigBRO

[SPZ]

Jello is jello. To me, any amount in the shot is unacceptable so what's the difference if the HPX300 has more or less than the EX1/3? You are going to shoot your masterpiece and live with some jellocam versus a lot of jellocam? Moot point. That's like talking about throwing up. What's the difference whether you throw up a little or a lot?

Hey, I worked in Jello, the best cure for an upset stomach, into the same paragraph as throwing up!

Dan

Dan, you said it right: "To me, any amount in the shot is unnaceptable". To me, however, what I saw (briefly, that's true) seemed acceptable, at least for the EX1 (not talking about partial exposure and strobes). So what I'm asking is simply for the HPX300 to perform in the same level as the EX's. Here's probably were the chip size matters: if both camera perform similarly in therms of rolling shutter, the size of the chip, which means a shalower DOF with a wider camera setting, could help the issue in dramatic shooting situations. Also, and please bear with me, I'm a non technical person just trying to understand the logic of things here- maybe the biger chip size means less concentrated pixels, and with that, less noticeable rolling shutter?

[Jan_Crittenden]

Hi,

First, Steve said he took the clip down because he was not scientific about it.
Second, in real life shooting I can't think of a time when you would swish the camera back and forth rapidly.
Third if CMOS was unacceptable and couldn't produce acceptable results then Sony, Canon, Red, Phantom Grass Valley, and I know I am missing another manufacturer here, these guys could not sell cameras. I showed this camera to the FCP group in Arizon last night and showed tracking footage as well as pans of Central Park and it all looked great.

We will redo the test with scientific all things equal and show that these cameras are the same with the rolling shutter, but I am traveling for the next week so it will be a week or two. I wil even ask Barry to come in a do it as someone might suspect that I would skew the footage. (that was a joke)

Can you make acceptable images with the camera, most definitely.

Best,

Jan

[SPZ]

Jan, thanks. Its important to clear this doubt. Now Barry, please do the test with the same zoom factor, and one with the EX at full tele and the equivalent on the HPX- we know the HPX can do more Tele. Also, it would be nice to have a test of performance in strobe lighting.

[Barry_Green]

But I'm concerned to go out with a camera that will not respond to my needs when I can't ask for a second take.
That's been my point about rolling shutter all along, and why I'm not a fan of the technology.

[Barry_Green]

-ONE THING I COULDNT TEST - How would this camer react to strobe light one like in DIcs or live shows & events, firework ... We shoot live events so its a major concern for us out here. We have been able to stomach the look of partially exposed frames of flahses, also we wont be shooting very fast pans/titls so skew etc should be an issue to us. BUT lights with fast movements as mentioned above ??? ANY experience on this camcorder or any other CMOS camera.
Not sure I understand the question - DIcs?

For fireworks and strobes, it kind of depends on the frequency and duration of the flash. Flash photography is particularly troublesome because the flash will start and end in less than the duration of a full frame; that means that you'll only see part of the frame brightly exposed *and the very next frame will be fully dark*. So the partial flash is very visible. But if you had a strobe that was illuminated for 1/30th of a second, or 1/10th of a second, etc., then there would be multiple frames of fully-exposed brightness, which would probably go a long way towards masking the first and last frames' jarring impact.

But if you're talking about strobes that last for less than a frame, and go off frequently, then yeah, I don't think a rolling shutter CMOS camera is going to work well for that at all.

Can you point to an example of the kind of footage you'd be planning on shooting?

[Barry_Green]

Here's probably were the chip size matters: if both camera perform similarly in therms of rolling shutter, the size of the chip, which means a shalower DOF with a wider camera setting, could help the issue in dramatic shooting situations.
Nope. Doesn't work that way. Look at the HV20, the original "wobblecam", it has a 1/2" chip and more noticeable jello/wobble than the EX1, also with a 1/2" chip, and more than the HPX300 with its 1/3" chip. It's not the size of the chip that matters. According to Red, and it certainly makes sense, it's all about the speed of the read/reset timing. Red has sped up their read/reset and has been able to tame the jello/skew as compared to the original Red prototypes. I think Jim Arthurs did a test that showed the Red (at that time) and the EX1 were pretty much identical in skew/jello. It seems reasonable to ask Panasonic to deliver something at the least comparable with those two. I thought, when using it, that it felt about the same.


maybe the biger chip size means less concentrated pixels, and with that, less noticeable rolling shutter?
Bigger chip size at equivalent pixel count (EX1/3 vs. HPX300) does indeed mean less concentrated pixels. I doubt that particular element has an effect on the rolling shutter wobble/skew though.

[Barry_Green]

Jan, thanks. Its important to clear this doubt. Now Barry, please do the test with the same zoom factor, and one with the EX at full tele and the equivalent on the HPX- we know the HPX can do more Tele. Also, it would be nice to have a test of performance in strobe lighting.

I'd be glad to do all that. Any test I perform would be designed to eliminate as many variables as possible. It would be done with equal frame rate, equal shutter speed, equivalent field of view, identical motion, etc. Multiple frame rates would be tested, multiple shutter speeds would be tested, multiple focal lengths would be tested. I'd like to get ahold of a strobe like Jim Arthurs used, that would be excellent.

[mico]

Nope. Doesn't work that way. Look at the HV20, the original "wobblecam", it has a 1/2" chip and more noticeable jello/wobble than the EX1, also with a 1/2" chip, and more than the HPX300 with its 1/3" chip. It's not the size of the chip that matters. According to Red, and it certainly makes sense, it's all about the speed of the read/reset timing. Red has sped up their read/reset and has been able to tame the jello/skew as compared to the original Red prototypes. I think Jim Arthurs did a test that showed the Red (at that time) and the EX1 were pretty much identical in skew/jello. It seems reasonable to ask Panasonic to deliver something at the least comparable with those two. I thought, when using it, that it felt about the same.


Bigger chip size at equivalent pixel count (EX1/3 vs. HPX300) does indeed mean less concentrated pixels. I doubt that particular element has an effect on the rolling shutter wobble/skew though.

The HV20 has a 1/2.7" size chip.

[Big Brother]

Not sure I understand the question - DIcs?



Can you point to an example of the kind of footage you'd be planning on shooting?

well, Barry i meant something like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDvn1-nVy28&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Y2J8lQUki0&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8lq-4UDFHg

We shoot lots of events where we have to shoot DJ setups where folks swing around in Scanners, laser lights, strobes etc, Photograpers Flashes, etc.

So i was wondering how would HVX300 react to such lighting, i have tried to surf for footage of such shows shot on EX! or 3 but nothing much could be seen around.

Moreover what ever I shot was shot in AVCintra as 1080i50 log & captured into FCP using Prores HQ 1080i50 codec and rendered out the quick time thru the same setting but the resultant video mov file was very strobic/juddery as if i had something in 24p mode, i hope i have used the right settings.

bigBRO

[Big Brother]

I also tried downloading & instaling the demo version of Caliberated S/w's AVCintra MXF import for FCP...unexpectedly whenever i import clips (event under 30secs) FCP crashes.

Any ideas..whats wrong.Kevin uses the same s/w may be has highlights on it.

[Barry_Green]

So i was wondering how would HVX300 react to such lighting, i have tried to surf for footage of such shows shot on EX! or 3 but nothing much could be seen around.
Yeah, I think that's not gonna work. I'd probably go for CCD in those cases. However, be aware that CCD can have a potential artifact too, which is the big vertical smear that sometimes happens when shooting a bright light.

I can't say CMOS will definitely choke in those circumstances, but if I had to make a recommendation I'd recommend a low-smear CCD to be sure.

[joeher133]

But I'm concerned to go out with a camera that will not respond to my needs when I can't ask for a second take.


This is my nominee for quote of the year.

[David Saraceno]

I showed this camera to the FCP group in Arizon last night and showed tracking footage as well as pans of Central Park and it all looked great.

Where do we see these pans?

That's the problem for many of us.

The Zacuto/Vimeo test is down.

If you have footage of pans of Central Park, can we upload it somewhere and see it.

best

[David Saraceno]

I'd be glad to do all that. Any test I perform would be designed to eliminate as many variables as possible. It would be done with equal frame rate, equal shutter speed, equivalent field of view, identical motion, etc. Multiple frame rates would be tested, multiple shutter speeds would be tested, multiple focal lengths would be tested. I'd like to get ahold of a strobe like Jim Arthurs used, that would be excellent.

Barry:

could also shoot some footage of a collegiate basketball game.

heck you live in North Carolina.

Can be that difficult with Duke, North Carolina, Wake Forest and NC State.

please

:)

[philip bloom]

I have the HPX 301 this weekend. I will try all different sorts of shooting to see how she behaves...

If anyone has any really nice Panasonic scene files to get the best out of this camera would really appreciate it!

Phil

[David Saraceno]

Thanks Phil.

Do you have any sunny skies over there?

[philip bloom]

Thanks Phil.

Do you have any sunny skies over there?

what's a sunny sky? ;-)

Actually today was gorgeous, hope for the same tomorrow. Will do some fast moving city shots, beautiful landscapes and some night time shots. Will try and cram as much as I can into a day before I have to give her back! I will be shooting AVCi 100 and have 2 32gb cards, so that should be enough!

[BrownDogg]

i'm working with the hpx500 right now. how does the 300 look in comparison?????

X

[philip bloom]

i'm working with the hpx500 right now. how does the 300 look in comparison?????

X

never used the 500, am sure many can answer on here...

[Big Brother]

i hope someone shoots soon scenes like Strobe lights, DJ Lights scanners, fireworks etc. for all of our evaluation.

Can any FCP user help me with codec for editing & rendering out MOV files of HPX300's AVCintra100 footage. I have shot on about 15mins of footage using the stock lens & also the fujinon TH13x3.5 lens !

i wanted to showcase the same for all your viewing but i cant do as the rendered output is bad...strobic...juddery !

[philip bloom]

i hope someone shoots soon scenes like Strobe lights, DJ Lights scanners, fireworks etc. for all of our evaluation.

Can any FCP user help me with codec for editing & rendering out MOV files of HPX300's AVCintra100 footage. I have shot on about 15mins of footage using the stock lens & also the fujinon TH13x4.5 lens !

i wanted to showcase the same for your viewing but i cant do as the rendered output is bad...strobic...juddery !

When you bring it in under log and transfer are you importing it as pro res or pro res HQ?

You should just export the pro res as a movie file and it should be fine, it was for me...can you do a screen grab of your sequence settings and email them to me at philip@philipbloom.co.uk?

[baquajim]

I have the HPX 301 this weekend. I will try all different sorts of shooting to see how she behaves...

If anyone has any really nice Panasonic scene files to get the best out of this camera would really appreciate it!

Phil

I am not sure if it has the same function the HVX-200 did, the spot meter, where you can zero out the master pedestal by keeping the lens cap on and lowering it. Anyways, if you can make sure that it is at 0 IRE, that would be awesome. I think on the HVX-200, it was usually -4 or -5??

Also, if you can do some low light shooting and "normal" pan and tilts that you would scene in a dramatic (non-action) film.

Is there a way you can upload the raw MXF files for us to share?

And if you can create world peace that would be great too. Seriously, your reviews and tests are always appreciated.

[philip bloom]

I am not sure if it has the same function the HVX-200 did, the spot meter, where you can zero out the master pedestal by keeping the lens cap on and lowering it. Anyways, if you can make sure that it is at 0 IRE, that would be awesome. I think on the HVX-200, it was usually -4 or -5??

Also, if you can do some low light shooting and "normal" pan and tilts that you would scene in a dramatic (non-action) film.

Is there a way you can upload the raw MXF files for us to share?

And if you can create world peace that would be great too. Seriously, your reviews and tests are always appreciated.

world peace is easy! uploading mxf harder! those are BIG files, if anyone can host them would be most appreciate. Is there a good location to download scene files? Been out of the panny loop for 2 years!

[Tim Naylor]

Hi,

Third if CMOS was unacceptable and couldn't produce acceptable results then Sony, Canon, Red, Phantom Grass Valley, and I know I am missing another manufacturer here, these guys could not sell cameras.

Can you make acceptable images with the camera, most definitely.

Best,

Jan

Given the choice, most any DP would pick CCD. I own an HVX and a RED. 99 % of the time rolling shutter on the RED is not an issue. I think many camera people notice the artifacts more than an audience will feel it. I've done vehicle work and loads of hand held with the RED and skew, jello or whatever hasn't been a problem. Flash, explosions and sirens are a serious problem though. This precludes alot of COP drama which is a staple in entertainment. Law and Order passed on RED for this reason. It's a Genesis show.

Sure the heavies can sell CMOS but don't kid yourself thinking that we love it. It's the only choice for certain cameras that have other feature sets we love. But if we could get the equivalent in CCD we would.

What is the rationale for making the HPX 300 a CMOS camera? What are the advantages if any? Telling me Sony, RED, and Phantom use it is not a reason. Once upon a time, car makers used fake hood scoops too.

Does the CMOS allow us to get this for 10G instead of 15G? Eitherway, that rolling shutter does have me on the fence. CCD I'd place an order now.

[Tim Naylor]

i hope someone shoots soon scenes like Strobe lights, DJ Lights scanners, fireworks etc. for all of our evaluation.

Can any FCP user help me with codec for editing & rendering out MOV files of HPX300's AVCintra100 footage. I have shot on about 15mins of footage using the stock lens & also the fujinon TH13x3.5 lens !

i wanted to showcase the same for all your viewing but i cant do as the rendered output is bad...strobic...juddery !


Why bother? It will suck under those conditions. Have yet to see any rolling shutter that doesn't give the split exposure under strobe. This won't be any different.

[Paul Kramm.net]

Given the choice, most any DP would pick CCD. I own an HVX and a RED. 99 % of the time rolling shutter on the RED is not an issue. I think many camera people notice the artifacts more than an audience will feel it. I've done vehicle work and loads of hand held with the RED and skew, jello or whatever hasn't been a problem. Flash, explosions and sirens are a serious problem though. This precludes alot of COP drama which is a staple in entertainment. Law and Order passed on RED for this reason. It's a Genesis show.

Sure the heavies can sell CMOS but don't kid yourself thinking that we love it. It's the only choice for certain cameras that have other feature sets we love. But if we could get the equivalent in CCD we would.

What is the rationale for making the HPX 300 a CMOS camera? What are the advantages if any? Telling me Sony, RED, and Phantom use it is not a reason. Once upon a time, car makers used fake hood scoops too.




Does the CMOS allow us to get this for 10G instead of 15G? Eitherway, that rolling shutter does have me on the fence. CCD I'd place an order now.

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i'm with you all the way
Paul

[Big Brother]

i hope someone get a chance to shoot flickering lights like strobes, scanners etc used by Disc Jockeys...i have set my eyes on this camera as its best for my budget provided it gives me satisfactory results in the stated condition (as above). i still haven't been able to get desired render thru PROres HQ setting. I wish i had shot in DVCpro HD for direct access in FCP !

Wonder how soon.

[Jan_Crittenden]

Where do we see these pans?

I will be giving them to Barry on Monday and he can figure out how to show it.



The Zacuto/Vimeo test is down.

The interview is still up but the test wasn't a test and appropriately was taken down as it lead folks to believe something that was not true.


If you have footage of pans of Central Park, can we upload it somewhere and see it.

Barry will let you see it when he gets it loaded somewhere. But we have tracking shots of bicylists, runners horse buggies and skaters along with some fancy fast camera action follwoing the frisbee game. Also have some short clips taken with the camera on a steadicam flyer, operater goes up and down stairs runs down the hall and just tracks myself and the Account Manager from Tiffen, Sandi Stern.

One caveat on the Central Park footage is that it was shot with a version 1 camera and edited in Pro-Res. We are now at Version 3 and by delivery we will be at Version 4. There are a couple of small areas that have a bit of noise and we haven't been able to pinpoint where that came from or why that particular shot had it but a similar shot didn't so, please do not jump on the noise in some of these shots, camera doesn't look like that even today at version 3. But I think when you see the footage you will see that you can indeed move the camera, it all doesn't have to be a lock-down.

In the mean-time, have a great weekend.

Best regards.

[David Saraceno]

Thanks Jan.

I appreciate your response.

When will you have a demo available for Bill in Seattle?

[Barry_Green]

Sure the heavies can sell CMOS but don't kid yourself thinking that we love it. It's the only choice for certain cameras that have other feature sets we love. But if we could get the equivalent in CCD we would.
1,000% agreed.



What is the rationale for making the HPX 300 a CMOS camera? What are the advantages if any?
You cannot get 1920x1080 sensors in 1/3" CCD. It's not possible. And you doubly triply could not get them as progressive. CMOS is the only way you could do it.

Without CMOS, the 300 doesn't make any sense. The 300 differs from the 500 in that it has 1920x1080 sensors, which take full advantage of AVC-Intra. If you take out the 1920x1080 sensors, why bother having AVC-Intra? And if you take those two things out, why not just get the 500?

The 300 exists as a full-raster sensor recording to AVC-Intra. There are only two ways to do that: 2/3" with CCD, or CMOS. They already have a 2/3" CCD full-raster sensor camera (the HPX3000) so that left the CMOS option.

The EX1 and EX3 could not have been done as CCD, it's not possible. Neither could the 300 have been done as CCD.

[xmephestox]

I think CCD has pretty much hit the wall. To get you what you want out of it you won't be able to keep the price point low. i think the grand goal is CMOS with global shutter, and then it's pretty much perfect. but keeping that affordable is a long ways off, Phantom HD uses global shutter and full frame CMOS chips, but that's y the thing costs several human souls to buy...

after reading all this it's always back to what you use it for. 300 is the competition for the EX series, and i think it's a very comporable product to put out. benefits and cost ratio, as Barry said, sharp as an ex1, aesthetic of the panny mojo, and all the bells and whistles. sacrifice, cmos rolling shutter.

[Barry_Green]

CCD hasn't hit the wall, it's still far and away the overwhelmingly dominant choice for big chips. Every 2/3" camera from Sony and Panasonic, and almost every 2/3" camera from Ikegami and Hitachi and Thomson, are all CCD. CMOS usage is rare in 2/3" cameras.

But it's the small chips where the compromises get made and where you have to make your choice. When you want to extract the maximum resolution out of a small chip, CMOS can do that. It's very difficult to get a CCD in a small size that has a ton of pixels and performs well in terms of sensitivity and low light. CMOS is opening up some doors, but there's no free lunch; with the increased res you get the wobble and skew and flash issues. You can avoid all those issues by going CCD but you get a lower-res image in return.

[philip bloom]

without a doubt the 300 suffers from rolling shutter issues. I was filming with it today and to it took less to provoke it than my EX3. Whether this be less apparent in the production model I haven't a clue...you just have to know what will bring it on and adjust your shooting style to compensate for this.

I was very impressed by the low light capabilities and the noise issues I had before are now gone with detail turned down to -7. Still sharp as a tack though.

[philip bloom]

You can avoid all those issues by going CCD but you get a lower-res image in return.

unless you go for a larger chip size then you get the best of both worlds...look at the pdw 700. 2/3" full HD CCD and great in low light....but this is in another price bracket altogether.

For the price, the 300/301 has had to make compromises. I think the decisions were right. It's a terrific camera as long as you know how to use it.

[Jan_Crittenden]

Thanks Jan.
When will you have a demo available for Bill in Seattle?

Bill has one, and has probably been out training his dealers with it.

Best,

Jan

[SimonMW]

Yeah, I think that's not gonna work. I'd probably go for CCD in those cases. However, be aware that CCD can have a potential artifact too, which is the big vertical smear that sometimes happens when shooting a bright light.

It is about knowing the limitations and working within them. Pretty much all low cost HD cameras will be CMOS before long. Knowing how to shoot moving subjects in a way that the roling shutter can't interfere will be as normal as making sure people don't wear clothing with fine patterns for interviews.

Not ideal I know, but the fact is that we don't have the technology yet to make full 1920x1080 10-bit recording CCD or global shutter CMOS cameras for under 10k. it is an issue though because the demands of clients and users is outstripping technological capability. In termso of the entire production workflow everything is way out of whack as we say in some parts of England.

[philip bloom]

absolutely. It's something have been saying ever since I got an EX1. Now with Panasonic going down this route people are starting to understand more.

[mrbrycel]

Barry,

What is the smallest size CCD that it is possible to fit 1920x1080 pixels on?

The Panavision Genesis's CCD's are equal to a 35mm movie film frame right? I read that the CCD is 5760x2160, but that the final output is still only 1920x1080.

[alexdias]

Phil and Simon,

Working with the limitations of the equipment is part of our jobs and unavoidable.
But if some known limitations eventually compromise your creativity/language you have to look somewhere.

Yesterday I watched on a big screen "Lost in Translation" which made a big impression on me some years ago, and since we've been discussing this issue it made me think.

Lance Acord the DP did an incredible job with very little.
The film is mostly shot handheld and there're a fair amount of reasonably fast pans, lateral moving shots form a car and even some running handheld shots. Philip, some shots reminded me of your own work in Tokyo. But, as most you us know, it's a very poetic and sensitive film.
Anyway, I was wondering if these scenes could have been shot with a rolling shutter camera?
I have some experience shooting with the RED One, a bit more with the EXs and on my evaluation the issues would have been too noticeable.

I'll certainly test the 300 as soon as I can.
I look forward to try to adapt my skills and intuition to this new piece of gear, and if that doesn't work I'll have to put up with some known older limitations like pixel shift, fixed lens, DVCPRO HD, etc...

[studio1972]

Pretty much all low cost HD cameras will be CMOS before long.

I hope not. The fact that Panasonic recently released the HMC150 seems to fly in the face of this as well. There are lots of people who would prefer lower resolution CCDs to higher resolution CMOS based cameras.

[philip bloom]

Phil and Simon,


Lance Acord the DP did an incredible job with very little.
The film is mostly shot handheld and there're a fair amount of reasonably fast pans, lateral moving shots form a car and even some running handheld shots. Philip, some shots reminded me of your own work in Tokyo. But, as most you us know, it's a very poetic and sensitive film.
Anyway, I was wondering if these scenes could have been shot with a rolling shutter camera?

Possibly, I have done some running/ handheld work with the ex1. here are two examples... http://www.vimeo.com/774232 http://www.vimeo.com/1137200

There is no substitute for a global shutter, of course every DP wants one, but with every budget getting constricted and people wanting to use cheaper cameras it is something we will have to come to terms with. The Scarlet will have the same issues and that camera will be massive!

[alexdias]

Good examples Phil, it proves your point.
Hopefully the Scarlet will hold some good surprises for all of us, the designs have been improving substantially.

Thanks,

Alex.

[Lumiere]

Do you guys think Panasonic can fix this jello or skew thing with a firmware later on?As i remember R1 also have jello on the first versions and they mostlly fix it with 13.(not sure) firmware update..

[alexdias]

They improved the rolling shutter artifacts substantially with firmware upgrades on the RED One but I don't know how far they can go. Last time I used one, a few builds ago, it was much better than the one before, but still present.

The R1 (weight included, specially on a full accessorized piece) behaves more like a film camera, which eventually makes it less susceptible to these issues. At least when I've worked with one that was my impression. The rolling shutter issues that I had with the RED came with fasting objects passing in front of a fairly long lens (85mm), and they were very noticeable.

In the other hand the EXs definitely behave like a prosumer HD Camcorder (which they are), hence the better flexibility and more susceptibility to these problems. With lens adaptors they are bit less maneuverable.

The 300, I expect, sits on the middle like a good old broadcast camera, and that's GOOD thing.

If there was a "magic bullet" to this problem I'm sure Panasonic will release the camera issue free.

I'm looking forward to see and test the production models.

[Buck Forester]

Wow, that's some awesome footage! Well shot. I'm sure this camera will fill a solid niche for Panasonic, I hope they do well with it.

[mico]

Wow, that's some awesome footage! Well shot. I'm sure this camera will fill a solid niche for Panasonic, I hope they do well with it.

Philips movies were shot with the Sony EX camera and it looks great. I can see no issue with the rolling shutter with those run and gun shots. As has been said before you can't see it if you're not looking for it.

[philip bloom]

here is some, mostly static footage, shot at weekend on the 300. it's a lovely image. Do download the 1080p version it looks way better than the flash

http://philipbloom.co.uk/films/35mm-films/a-sunday-in-kent-shot-on-panasonic-hpx301e/

[MrBill]

Very Nice!

[Kenn Christenson]

I know you can't totally eliminate rolling shutter artifacts - I just hope Panasonic can reduce them to Red or Sony levels. Sure is an excellent camera, otherwise, and will definitely pick one up, if the artifacts can be reduced.

[alexdias]

Kenn,

In my experience the level of rolling shutter artifacts between the RED and EXs are quite different.
We'll see where the 300 stands.

[David Saraceno]

How are these quite different?

[Barry_Green]

What is the smallest size CCD that it is possible to fit 1920x1080 pixels on?
The limit as I understand it is about 1.5 million pixels for interlaced, and about .7 million for progressive, at 60hz, when talking about 1/3".

For 1/2", you can get 1440x1080 in progressive.

In 2/3" you can get the full 1920x1080 in progressive.


The Panavision Genesis's CCD's are equal to a 35mm movie film frame right?
In size, yes.


I read that the CCD is 5760x2160, but that the final output is still only 1920x1080.
That's correct. It uses an RGB Stripe pattern (not a Bayer pattern) to deliver color at 1920x1080.

You have to remember, sensors are monochrome! If you had a 1920x1080 sensor, you could get 1920x1080 in black and white but that's it. That's why cameras use three chips; one for red and one for green and one for blue, so that they can see in color.

The Bayer pattern is a way to get a single sensor to see color, but you'll never get the sensor's stated resolution out of it, in color. Meaning, if you have a 4k sensor with a Bayer pattern, about the best you'll get out of it is 3k worth of resolved detail in color. Red's tests show that the 4K Red One resolves about 3.2K of detail.

So the RGB Stripe is a different type of sensor designed to deliver color resolution. Instead of a mosaic'd Bayer pattern color filter, it has vertical stripes of red/green/blue. It's designed to deliver a 1920x1080 full-color image. So it uses 1920*3 pixels wide (5760), and each column of pixels is striped red or green or blue with a color filter over the pixel column. While they could have made it 5760 x 1080, they chose to use double the vertical resolution as well so that it could fully resolve 1080 pixels worth of detail (in sampling theory you need to sample at twice the frequency to be assured of capturing all the desired detail, so it's sampling at 3x horizontal and 2x vertical, and the demosaic of combining the 3 horizontal separate-colored pixels into one composite pixel, and that gives them enough samples to create an accurate and ideal 1920x1080 image. You can't use spatial offset (or "pixel shift") with a single sensor, so no res gains are possible from that technique, you only get the res that the raw sensor pixels can deliver, and then you lose some of that in the demosaic or de-stripe process. (in other words, three chips can deliver more resolution than the stated pixel count of each chip; a single sensor can never deliver resolution equal to the stated pixel count of the chip).

RGB Stripe is a way of making a 4:4:4 image, but obviously it takes a whole lot of pixels to do it. Red uses a Bayer pattern and gets a higher-resolution image from the same number of pixels, but at the expense of total chroma resolution (Red's sensor can't deliver 4:4:4 color on its 3.2K image, it's more like 3:2:2). But at least Red can deliver a 3.2K image, which the Genesis' RGB Stripe can't. And while it sounds like 3 chips can deliver better results than one, (and they can), you have to understand that a single chip is the only possible design that a Red One or a Genesis could have been made with. The goal was to use film lenses, and you can't do that with a 3-chip prism design, only a single sensor could work.

[alexdias]

David, I find the RED much less susceptible to issues when panning, both had problems with fast object passing in front of lens.
It's a hard thing to measure and my observations were NOT scientific. This is merely an impression.
I haven't been a big fan of CMOS cameras, maybe the 300 will change that.

[David Saraceno]

Thank you.

BTW, grew up in Cupertino.

[zeke]

At the end of the clip, the vertical pillar warped a bit, but not too bad. Looking forward to seeing what the production version will do.

[alexdias]

Thank you.

BTW, grew up in Cupertino.

Apple's HQ :-)

I'm in Oakland.

[thefilmaddict]

I do look forward to further testing. If it has the resolution of the EX1, Panasonic film gammas and it's a bigger camera that balances on your shoulder, it sounds like a winner!

Rolling shutter issues are pretty rare unless you are doing crazy camera moves or if you are shooting with lots of flashes going off (IMHO).

The price is also very good.

[Cees Mutsaers]

Is there "ueberhaupt" a possibility to give the HPX301 a firmware update ????
Via the USB input???

To be honest in both video's (HPX301 and EX1) I could not see a single artifact but maybe I am not critical enough ???

[philip bloom]

there are rolling shutter issues with the pre production camera, but I am confident they will be improved upon when released. So confident that I have placed an order for one.

There are many clients that I work for who use P2 and it's a great addition to my arsenal, not a replacement for my EX3, just a very worthy addition...coupled with a letus 1/3" relay it will be killer.

[zeke]

I was impressed with the lack of noise in your test. Thanks for doing it.
It would be cool to see a test with the JVC PL lens adaptor too.

Joe C.

[Barry_Green]

Is there "ueberhaupt" a possibility to give the HPX301 a firmware update ????
Of course. All the Panasonic broadcast cams are capable of firmware updates.


Via the USB input???
Don't know. The 200, 170, and 500 can be updated via downloading firmware onto an SD memory card. The 150 apparently gets updated via the USB port.

[Chuckf]

I used the EX-1 to shoot football games last fall, between the fast motion and the horizontal lines from the stands, it was noticeable and annoying. Amazing images otherwise.

[philip bloom]

yeah not ideal for sports

[CovenantPictures]

If there is a huge problem, I anticipate a firmware update improving read speed.

[Justyn]

Man... Love the DOF on your shot Phil. Would be nice to not have to bother with an adapter.

I'm just wondering how the camera handles. Been so long since I used a shoulder mounted camera... certainly advantages and disadvantages with them..


is there a MSRP? Does it come with P2 cards and or anything else?... I'm also wondering if this might be a good studio rig type of package... kind of like the EX3.

[puredrifting]

Hi Justyn:

All of that is spread all over the site:

1. MSRP - U.S. $10,700.00 including lens and viewfinder. Does not include case, tripod plate, batteries, charger, AC adapter or microphone.

2. Does not come with any P2 cards, at least so far

3. Panasonic has said that they will release a true studio package for this camera as well

Dan

[David Saraceno]

MSRP = $10700

Lowest Advertised: About $8300.00

No p2 cards.

No battery

No microphone

No tripod adapter

[Justyn]

so around 10-12 K for a fully working package? and will there be an updated P2store type device or harddisk recorder? The original p2store was very reliable but not as functional with the need for more media space.

[puredrifting]

And don't forget, if you have some POS tripod for your existing camera, the HPX300 will weigh in around 14-20 lbs depending on lens used, batteries, accessories, filters, matte box, rod and rails mount. Based upon what is available, you would probably want to budget at least $2,000.00 for a low end tripod that can handle this camera and really around $4,000.00 to $6,000.00 to do it in style with a Sachtler, O'Connor or Miller.

Dan

[Barry_Green]

and will there be an updated P2store type device or harddisk recorder?
No, and no.

Well, yes, but no.

There won't be an updated P2 Store, and there will never be a hard disk recorder. AVC-Intra doesn't stream out the firewire port so you can't ever have a firestore-type device.

But, yes, there's both an updated P2 Store and an external recorder, the P2 Portable (HPG20). It's an SDI recorder that does AVC-Intra. But it records it to P2 cards, so it's not going to be an alternative recording media. But it does control hard disks and let you offload to terabyte drives or larger, so it totally overcomes the limitations of the P2 Store.

[Justyn]

Very cool. Are you going to be buying one Barry? I know the rolling shutter thing might be a deal breaker for some.. and it certainly wouldn't be ideal for my sports stuff and whatnot, but I might be most interested in terms of it's more filmlike DOF due to the lens and such. I really am not a fan of the 35mm adapters and would love to bypass that whole expense and workflow... So I think that not having to have to get that 35mm set-up is like putting 2k towards this cam.

[Kenn Christenson]

This camera has exactly the same DOF as the HVX200. Both are 1/3" chips. You'll get shallower DOF with the longer lens, but you'll have to be further back from your subject, to get it. To get the 35mm DOF, you'll still need to get one of those adapters.

[Elton]

Don't forget that to get that shallower look, you are increasing the potential for noticeable-to-even obnoxious skew. This is the curse of small chip rolling shutter CMOS. All of them have this issue at long focal lengths.

[Barry_Green]

Very cool. Are you going to be buying one Barry?
Not sure, although I'm thinking much more about it now that we've narrowed down the jello reasons. For the kinds of things I do, that wouldn't really be any manner of problem; most of what we're doing nowadays is greenscreen on a tripod, and a 300 would extremely exceedingly excel at that. But then again, my current 170 is doing just fine with that task, so -- do I really need to upgrade? Still debating...


but I might be most interested in terms of it's more filmlike DOF due to the lens and such.
It has the same DOF as your HMC150, at least until you zoom past 51mm; the range from 51mm to 77mm is going to give you slightly shallower DOF. Where the DOF should really shine is if/when someone comes up with a 1/3" relay lens for an adapter like my Letus Ultimate; that would be a pretty nifty combination.


I really am not a fan of the 35mm adapters and would love to bypass that whole expense and workflow... So I think that not having to have to get that 35mm set-up is like putting 2k towards this cam.
No, because the DOF is the same. If you want the shallow DOF look, you need a large imaging area, which you get by either buying a bigger-chip camera (like the D90 or EOS 5D Mk II or GH1) or by using an adapter.

[Barry_Green]

This is the curse of small chip rolling shutter CMOS. All of them have this issue at long focal lengths.
It's the curse of *all* rolling shutter CMOS. It's certainly not limited to small-chip cameras. The Infinity has 2/3" chips and it does the same skewing. The Red One has a Super35-sized chip and it does the skew. It all has to do with the relative magnification on the lens, not the size of the chip. So far chip size seems unrelated to the amount of jello; the D90 and EOS 5D have *way* bigger chips than the EX1 or HPX300, yet they do jello a thousand times worse than the EX1 or HPX300.

[Justyn]

Indeed.... thanks for the clarification. They have made a very promising camera. A good ENG style shooter...

[Justyn]

And don't forget, if you have some POS tripod for your existing camera, the HPX300 will weigh in around 14-20 lbs depending on lens used, batteries, accessories, filters, matte box, rod and rails mount. Based upon what is available, you would probably want to budget at least $2,000.00 for a low end tripod that can handle this camera and really around $4,000.00 to $6,000.00 to do it in style with a Sachtler, O'Connor or Miller.

Dan


Got the tripod already... Either way... I think this would also yield a higher rental rate and maybe a different type of production work...

[puredrifting]

One of the most common mistakes I see over and over again in this business are people who buy gear in the hopes of renting it to pay for it. Big mistake. Unless you have a signed contract and a deposit, it is nothing but wishful thinking. I made this mistake 20 years ago when I first started out and learned from it. Pros sell themselves, not their gear. If people are hiring me for my gear, I am a rental company. I don't want to be a rental company, I want people to hire me for my eye, knowledge and ability. I can shoot a project on anything they want from Mini DV to 35mm. I try to avoid jobs where people are hiring me because I have "X" camera because there are a million other people in LA with the same camera who are younger, live in their parents basement rent free and don't have two mortgages, private school for their kids to pay and a wife who thinks that money should be poured from her purse like water from an Evian bottle ;-) It's a business and many a business has been sunk by the "buy it and the work will come because we have it" syndrome. While the Orlando market is different than LA, it can't be that different.

Have a conversation with the few thousand RED One owners who thought the same way and have had to take a bath in dumping their RED One packages that they went out on a financial limb for. The RED One rental market is totally oversaturated. With some careful wrangling, you can shoot with a RED One in LA cheaper than many pay for an HVX200 and a Letus from one of the rental houses. People are desparate, the rental rates dropped like a rock and now that many have experienced the RED post workflow, the camera, while still capable of great images, has quietly lost the overhyped factor that it had for the first year.

If I was shooting a one off TV project film style, I would rent an HPX2700 or 3700 easily over the RED.

The HPX300 is not an expensive piece of gear for a pro, but it is not the right tool for every type of shooting. I will only buy one if I can keep my 170 because I shoot movie premiers, handheld long lens on television and movie sets, etc. The 300 is perfect for interviews, tabletop and many other situations I shoot so I would love one for those shoots but for other types of shoots I do, tracking high speed subjects on long lens, CMOS with a rolling shutter is not the right tool.

Good luck,

Dan

[Elton]

It's the curse of *all* rolling shutter CMOS. It's certainly not limited to small-chip cameras. The Infinity has 2/3" chips and it does the same skewing. The Red One has a Super35-sized chip and it does the skew. It all has to do with the relative magnification on the lens, not the size of the chip. So far chip size seems unrelated to the amount of jello; the D90 and EOS 5D have *way* bigger chips than the EX1 or HPX300, yet they do jello a thousand times worse than the EX1 or HPX300.

You're absolutely correct, but I'm a bit misunderstood here. What I meant (or maybe more accurately *implied*) is that anyone wanting to get a dramatic shallow DOF look with a 1/3" rolling shutter CMOS camera is especially asking for skew issues because it requires extreme amounts of telephoto to get better selective focus...and that's with a more optically compressed look too.

Of course it all depends on the amount of lens magnification and the relative movement in the scene, but there's a big difference in getting the look you want for things like interviews, drama, etc with a much bigger chip because you don't need as much telephoto. I

[shapna]

Does anyone knows if the "Skew Factor" improved in the 1080p 24p for the HPX 300 ?( i´m 2 days away to order it)

[Big Brother]

Rolling SHUTTER :

i had tried & tested the HPX300 in my limited ways & means during an exhibition. All I couldnt try & wanted to try out the camera as to how will rolling shutter play a spoilt sport when we shoot under Disco Lights (Dis scanners laser lights etc ) used by Disc Jockeys at various events/weddings etc.

For any idea as to what type of lighting issue I am talking about pls check out the link
mentioned under a VIMEO video.

JAN i hope you have some views....:Drogar-Mark-07(DBG)

http://www.vimeo.com/3773454

[fdriscoll]

Does anyone knows if the "Skew Factor" improved in the 1080p 24p for the HPX 300 ?( i´m 2 days away to order it)


We received our first shipment of 300s yesterday and the "Skew factor" is still there.

[Kenn Christenson]

We received our first shipment of 300s yesterday and the "Skew factor" is still there.

That's unfortunate. Just ordered mine. Hope there's a firmware fix coming, soon, to at least get the cam where Red is, in the appearance of skew.

[puredrifting]

Just so everyone knows, the HPX300 will always have the skew, there is no magic fix. The camera uses CMOS and a rolling shutter. What the hope is is that Panasonic sometime introduces a firmware update that increases the scanning rate of the shutter, that would reduce some of the skewing in 1080 24p in particular.

As Barry's test proved, the HPX300 already has considerably less skewing that the Sony EX1 and EX3 when shooting in 720 24p but considerably more when shooting 1080 24p. As of today, live with it. Nobody knows when or even IF this fix will ever happen. You should buy this camera with your eyes open, it is not wise to spend this kind of money EXPECTING that the fix will happen. It may or it may not and nobody knows the extent to which the expected fix will improve things.

Caveat emptor.

Dan

[Kenn Christenson]

I lived with Red's skew. It wasn't too bad. And, no doubt, I'll live with the skew from the HPX300. Can't really beat it for the price. It's not often that I need to get a shot, at extreme telephoto, where I'm quickly panning side to side, shooting a lamp post.

Just hoping to hear if improvements are in the works, or not.

[Barry_Green]

Every rolling shutter camera has issues with skew, wobble, and partial exposure. And they always will have.

The 300 does as well or better than the EX1/EX3 in terms of skew performance in all modes EXCEPT 1080/24p, where it is currently quite a bit more skewy/rubbery. Panasonic engineers are well aware of the issue. They are committed to studying it. There may or may not be a firmware update forthcoming. I would say that Dan's advice is, as always, practical and prudent. If you're shooting 1080/60i, 720/24p, 720/60p, etc., then the 300 is one of the least skewy cameras on the market. If you're shooting 1080/24p, then there's lots of skew and it may never get fixed. It may, but it may not. So, caveat emptor.

[Barry_Green]

Just hoping to hear if improvements are in the works, or not.
They are committed to studying the issue. If it's possible to fix it, I have every confidence that they will, and that they would make any such fix retroactive to all purchasers. However, that is not any sort of official stated Panasonic policy or anything, that's just based on me talking with those folks and knowing how seriously they take things such as this.

So - they're looking at it. They're working on it. But no updates have been given as to whether there's anything they can do about it or not.

[LuckyStudio 13]

If anyone is going to put their utmost effort to combat rolling shutter on cmos cam, its going to be RED.

[combatentropy]

Every rolling shutter camera has issues with skew, wobble, and partial exposure. And they always will have.

There are CMOS sensors with global shutters. Anyone know why camera makers are not using them?

[Barry_Green]

Because they cost more and they're a more complex chip to manufacture, and the additional transistors take up light-sensitive space on the surface of the chip so a global shutter is, as of right now as far as I know, going to mean a slower/less sensitive chip.

[michaelhauer@gmail.com]

Barry u said that it only has more skew than the ex1/3 in 1080 24p. Correct me if i'm wrong but isn't that mode the whole point of the camera? Otherwise couldn't u just use a 170?

[Barry_Green]

Is 1080/24p "the whole point" of it? Of course not; this is a news/eng/production camera that can be used in live studios, genlocked together for multicamera production, being used by NBC for field production and news reporting, etc. 1080/24p may appeal to the folks on DVXUser as the "main point" but in the overall production world in general, no way; there's plenty of work being done in 720/60p and 1080/60i.

With that said, 1080/24p was definitely my main interest in it, and I'm sure it's a key point of interest for those aiming at filmmaking.

(and, I do use a 170!) :thumbsup:

[Jan_Crittenden]

And frankly I have not yet seen any video shot at 1080/24P that wasn't under some compromised sceanrio, like Barry and Kevin's shoot in Africa and having to shoot out of the flatbed of a truck, to see how bad it is when you have control over the situation. We know what it looks like when whipping it across a chart, but how close to real world is that. Soon we will have real people using it for real stuff and we will see how it really looks. The cameras have started to ship.

In the meantime, the engineers are continuing to study the situation.

Best,

Jan

[combatentropy]

I will never buy a video camera with a rolling shutter.

[puredrifting]

I will never buy a video camera with a rolling shutter.

Write a bigger check then to buy large CCDs.

I am cradling the HPX300 right now as I learn the menus, this is an amazing camera for the money. I am heading out to do some initial shooting this afternoon. I have the 170 and I use the EX1 and EX3 quite a bit, this is a whole other level of coolness.

I promised myself I wouldn't even consider buying one because I have the 170 and am making plenty of money with it but once you use this camera, that all flew out the window because this camera is so sweet. I am sure Barry felt the same thing when he took it to Africa. This is like a digital, smaller lighter version of my BVWD600 I had back in the day. I mostly shoot interview and tabletop, occasional narrative stuff. I also shoot almost exclusively 720 24pN because of P2 run times and the amount of cards I can afford. I also own the Aja Kona 3 which I have been using to deliver 1080 24P D5 and HDCAM SR to the studios for years from my 720 24p originated material. Does it pass QC? Yes. Do the clients at Paramount, Fox, Disney and Warner Bros. love the look? Yes. I've also been living with the EX1 for a year so I know I can deal with rolling shutter artifacts.

So for me and my needs, this is a perfect camera for most situations. For the rare occasion where i need to whip the camera around on long lens, shoot around flashing lights and strobes, that would be what the 170 is for.

This is a LOT of camera for under $10k. Absolutely amazing that technology has evolved to this.

More soon, I'm headed out to shoot.

Dan

[Jim Carswell]

Dan,
Please be sure to post a link to some of the video you are shooting today.
Thanks,
Jim

[Kenn Christenson]

This is a LOT of camera for under $10k. Absolutely amazing that technology has evolved to this.


THIS is why I plunked my money down. True, you wouldn't want to shoot any of the "Bourne" films with it, but I shoot a lot of 30P and off speed stuff - and have been looking for a camera like this for a while. Don't think I'll have any regrets

[Jackson Miller]

It is a bit disappointing (actually very disappointing), that the 1080/24p mode is so bad, considering that the main appeal of this camera is to the Panasonic users who want more resolution. Also, I find it hard to believe (may be wrong though), that Panasonic did not know about the problem, and they certainly were denying it, saying "all CMOS rolling shutter cameras have the same problem". Yes, BUT it is not to the same degree and I don't think this is something Panasonic can ignore.

I looked through the thread but could not find Barry's test. What page is it on?

I really want this camera but the appeal to me would probably be in that 180/24p mode. Can a simple firmware update fix this? Any time estimates Jan?

BIG QUESTION: Can one shoot in 720 modes on AVC-intra? How does this look? Would it blow normal HPX170's 720p out of the water? Would it be comparable to it and other cameras 1080 modes? How would it compare to 1080p comming out of an HPX500?

Thanks guys.

[Robert Sanders]

Even with the skew in 1080/24 I'm still considering this as a worthy replacement for my XLH1 and I'm a narrative filmmaker. The skew, in my opinion, will be a potential issue 1-2% of the time (flash bulbs, lightning strikes, whip pans).

I am hoping Panasonic's engineers are successful at finding a fix that can be done via firmware.

[Jan_Crittenden]

Yes, BUT it is not to the same degree and I don't think this is something Panasonic can ignore.

Where in this thread does it say that we are ignoring it? I think I have specifically said we are studying the issue.


I looked through the thread but could not find Barry's test. What page is it on?

Why not look down the page to find the Skew-Off. Keep in mind that is not a test trying to get the best out of the camera but rather wildly moving the camera back and forth against a chart.


I really want this camera but the appeal to me would probably be in that 180/24p mode. Can a simple firmware update fix this? Any time estimates Jan?

As I mentioned before, the engineers are studying it. Do not have a time frame, and am looking to see some footage that is actually working to get the 1080P without the compromises of working in the flatbed of a truck and a 21X 2/3" lens which has a 1.8X factor to it.


BIG QUESTION: Can one shoot in 720 modes on AVC-intra? How does this look? Would it blow normal HPX170's 720p out of the water?

Yes it does do 720P in Intra and yes there is more resolution in this camera than in the HPX170.



Would it be comparable to it and other cameras 1080 modes? How would it compare to 1080p comming out of an HPX500?

Haven't done that comparison, but one of the things I would say it is hard to quantify the 2/3" chip look vs. the 1/3."

Cameras are shipping now and there should be more field reports soon.

Best,

Jan

[combatentropy]

Write a bigger check then to buy large CCDs.

The latest 2/3" CCD from Kodak is $425 (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/digital-cinema-general-discussion/129759-ikonoskop-cam-dii-ibc2008-2.html#17). It is 1920 x 1080, can take up to 64 frames per second, has 10 f-stops of dynamic range. This is the sensor Ikonoskop is using. Leica and Hasselblad are also using Kodak CCDs (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092401kodak_ccd.asp) (though not this particular one).

My point is, I bet it costs Kodak less than $425 to make each one. And so I also bet that it costs Panasonic, or any othe major company, less than that to make a 2/3" CCD.

Rolling shutters, to me, are a regression. We had global shutters for decades. I will not add to my mental list of things to keep track of (exposure, focus, angle, is there something distracting in the background, etc.) yet more stuff (are there camera flashes? am I panning too quickly?). We should be moving forward not backward.

[Big Brother]

Rolling shutters, to me, are a regression. We had global shutters for decades. I will not add to my mental list of things to keep track of (exposure, focus, angle, is there something distracting in the background, etc.) yet more stuff (are there camera flashes? am I panning too quickly?). We should be moving forward not backward.

i too second your thought ... how much more do we have to think beyong nice framing & timing the best shots.

As for thr RAW truth about these companies extorting money thru their products seems like crazy to me too but cant help but waste our hard earned money since the companies who make low cost CCD dont make HD camcorders. this has been going on since 80's since the inception of videos...cant help much but eat the bake of these companies. as it is the pricing are so high & then to further enhance that are the global recession clubbed with high exchange rates.

The major share of the Nth % of the profit goes to the future R&D on making future upgrades so but still the extortion saga goes on for ever. As of now we dont know much ahead of HD Video ... lets see in few years we see some other recording media camcorders etc rendering the past investment miniscule :(

[Barry_Green]

BIG QUESTION: Can one shoot in 720 modes on AVC-intra?
Yes, in variable frame rates, in AVC-I 50 and AVC-I 100.


How does this look?
Didn't try AVC-I 50, but shot some AVC-I 100. Lots of our Africa footage was 720/60p AVC-I 100.


Would it blow normal HPX170's 720p out of the water?
In AVC-I 100? Yes. It's sharper, cleaner, crisper, better in all ways.


Would it be comparable to it and other cameras 1080 modes?
Don't know. Haven't compared them. For the most part good 720p is easily a match for good 1080i, but not for good 1080p.


How would it compare to 1080p comming out of an HPX500?
Don't know. 2/3" is going to have shallower DOF and more dynamic range, the CMOS has a different texture to the footage... they'll probably be of comparable sharpness, but then there's 2/3" DOF vs. 10-bit vs. CCD vs. CMOS, so ... I don't think there's any easy answer to that question.

[David Saraceno]

I thought we were discussing rolling shutter issues here.

How did it move to extortion, and multinational corporate greed?

There must be something in the water. :)

As an aside, why do so many people here complain about prices?

If you don't want the product because you see it as too expensive, then just don't buy it.

Or buy something that you see as a value.

But like clockwork, it comes around -- p2 prices are extortion.

Panasonic (or Sony or JVC or Canon) are making too much money or have too high of a profit margin.

MSRP on the HPX300 is $10700 USD. How many expect to pay that much.

We paid $7800 for a 200 with an 8 GB p2 card three years ago.

I would bet you could come close to that price right now for a 300. Batteries and mic will cost more -- but close.

[walnutcrunch]

I like things as cheap as possible too, but as a 500 owner I can tell you there is a lot of support that goes along with that price you pay. We had a small problem with our 500. We thought it was the 500, but then again we thought it could be the canon lens. Both of those manufacturers stepped up. Canon sent us a 25k loaner lens while we sent them our cheapy 7k lens. Panasonic gave us a loaner body to use while we sent them our 500.

Two engineers at head office gave our camera a thorough going over, and even brought the canon guys to their shop to try and isolate the problem. While the engineers were messing with our camera, they upgraded a few things and even asked the engineers in Japan if they could modify our camera's internals to help protect the camera from the extreme conditions we shoot in.

The problem was determined, our camera was returned, and I don't know what they did but it looks better than it ever did. Of course it might look better because Panasonic also released a new batch of settings files. We started using one of those settings and it kicks the butt of our homebrew settings.

So while the camera is expensive, there is a big team out there to support you.

I've been told on the HD cameras like the 500 and up, there is a standing order for a one day turn around on service.

[de selby]

I was a little back and forth on this camera at first but now I think it may just what I need. Here's the thing: I like wide angle, deep focus scenes (I shoot narrative) so 1/3" chips are fine, even preferred. Full raster 10bit 1080p would be great leap forward, as I'm coming from an HVX200 (sans "A"). How would the rolling shutter (in 1080/24p) perform in wide angle scenes with a static camera? Actors no more than moving walking speed. Am I wrong in thinking the rolling shutter will have little if any consequences in these types of set-ups? Of course my best bet would be to go to a dealer and see if they let me play with one ...

[ksteiger]

All I know is I am eagerly awaiting the $500 camera using Kodak's amazing chip that Combatentropy is apparently about to start manufacturing. And if it doesn't have amazing depth of field capability, 8 channels of PCM audio and a free 64 GB stick of digital recording media, I will be P.O.'d.:beer:

[Bassman2003]

The latest 2/3" CCD from Kodak is $425 (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/digital-cinema-general-discussion/129759-ikonoskop-cam-dii-ibc2008-2.html#17). It is 1920 x 1080, can take up to 64 frames per second, has 10 f-stops of dynamic range. This is the sensor Ikonoskop is using. Leica and Hasselblad are also using Kodak CCDs (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092401kodak_ccd.asp) (though not this particular one).

My point is, I bet it costs Kodak less than $425 to make each one. And so I also bet that it costs Panasonic, or any othe major company, less than that to make a 2/3" CCD.


I don't think still & video CCDs would be a direct comparison.

Still imagers are on for short periods of time, even when they say it can do so many frames per second. Usually they are limited to certain shooting times.

The heat dissipation is what makes non-stop chip design so difficult.

This goes for computer processors as well. Intel could make a very fast processor really cheap. You could fry eggs on your comuter, but it would be fast & cheap.

At this point in time, we have seen a lot of development and cameras have really evolved. I think if it were that cheap we would have seen it by now. Actually we are seeing it but in CMOS chips because they run cooler.

[combatentropy]

All I know is I am eagerly awaiting the $500 camera using Kodak's amazing chip that Combatentropy is apparently about to start manufacturing. And if it doesn't have amazing depth of field capability, 8 channels of PCM audio and a free 64 GB stick of digital recording media, I will be P.O.'d.:beer:

People continue to misread my post. I said I would rather have CCDs. puredrifting said, expect to pay more --- more than a $10,000 camcorder!

I do not think Panasonic should sell a 3-CCD 2/3" camcorder for $500 or even $1,500.

I do think someone could sell a camcorder I have in mind for about $5,000. And Ikonoskop and RED have announced cameras for about that price that are about what I am looking for. They are not quite right (RED's Scarlet still will be too big and heavy when kitted out, Ikonoskop has impractically priced media cards for me. Something like an Ikonoskop that records to SDXC would fit the bill nicely)

[Jan_Crittenden]

I do think someone could sell a camcorder I have in mind for about $5,000.

Today, that is not possible.

Best,

Jan

[Buck Forester]

Today, that is not possible.

Best,

Jan


Of course it's possibe. It just wouldn't be even remotely profitable. :)

[Jan_Crittenden]

Do you have any idea what the cost is of a 1920 X1080 sensor that outputs 60 frames?

You need to work for a manufacturer for a while. If we even had a chip set, then there is the rest. Everyone thinks that R & D is inexpensive. For perspective, the DVX100B chipset cost $5,000,000 to develop. This is not an inexpensive business to develop product for, we as do all manufacturers work hard. We do try to listen and try to deliver where we can.

Best,

Jan

[DavidNJ]

3 sensors from the GH-1 would each capture 60 frames a second (actually at 4k) and would use a prism to avoid Bayer artifacts. Down scaling to 720p or 1080p wouldn't be any harder then down scaling 1080p to 720p...possibly easier. The prism would increase low light sensitivity.

Three GH-1s are less than on HVX200, even at EOL.

[combatentropy]

Okay, guys, what am I missing?

Here's are two camcorder recipes:

- 2/3" 1920x1080 Bayer CCD
- AVCHD to SDHC
- HMC150 body
- $2,500

This is the least that I want. Even better would be:

- 4/3" Bayer CCD
- AVC Intra to SDXC
- interchangeable lenses
- with 10x lens, an HMC150 body
- $5,000

None of these ingredients are new. Yes, I believe R & D is expensive. How much is a good engineer? $100,000 a year, at least? I would guess it takes a dozen for a year or two to put together a camcorder from scratch. That's 12 * 100,000 * 2 = 2.5 million. Plus marketing, logistics . . . I can totally believe it cost 5 mil. I don't doubt it for a second!

But either one you could sell 10,000 of them, wouldn't you? At $5,000 apiece, you gross $50 million.

Not only that, but there is not a single new technology in either of my above camcorders. You are already recouping R & D for these technologies in other camcorders and even still cameras.

So what am I missing?


Panasonic, I will give you this. You are the best of the bunch. You have introduced features in camcorders more aggressively than Sony and Canon. Your build quality is solid. The color and tones of the DVX100 and others are beautiful. The size, shape, and weight of the HMC150 sounds like it is perfect.

[Big Brother]

Today, that is not possible.

Best,

Jan

Well on lighter note, I am in a way happy for these cameras to be expensive as i have an edge over competition since most of them still work with PD150/170 type cameras as they are not able to jack up their affordability. kudos to the companies to make products for the privilege few.

Ok it was a joke so no leg pulling on it :)

[Christian m]

None of these ingredients are new. Yes, I believe R & D is expensive. How much is a good engineer? $100,000 a year, at least? I would guess it takes a dozen for a year or two to put together a camcorder from scratch. That's 12 * 100,000 * 2 = 2.5 million. Plus marketing, logistics . . . I can totally believe it cost 5 mil. I don't doubt it for a second!
If Japan has about the same living standards as Norway you probably are going to pay a lot for good engineers, if most RD are undertaken in Japan then. I might be wrong, but about 100,000$ are about average for the engineers in private sector up here in the cold north, the best heads often end up in the offshore business where they top out way beyond that...even in the times the world economics are in today good engineers are expensive.

A "hidden" cost for many are the support network the large manufactures have, RED and others that make the impression that you can have 4k at a budget are lacking that. It will be quite interesting to see if RED got the logistics to handle the price level they are aiming for with scarlet...it should sell loads. If a xdcam or p2 cam breaks down it will be possible to repair it relatively fast and get it back into making money relatively fast, with RED you ship the dam thing back to the US....

[Jan_Crittenden]

Creating a new camera is very expensive. Creating a new chip set alone costs about $5 mill. And it takes about 2 1/2 years to get a camera from concept to reality. At least that is what it has taken with the HPX300.

The cost of a 2/3" full raster CCD with the prism assembly, that is appropriate for video, starts around $10,000 and I might be low.

Best,

Jan

[dcloud]

any handheld camcorder (based on the hpx300) being considered? Thatd be a good option.

I really dont see a cheap ccd based camera like combat entropy is saying.

[Erik Olson]

I'll preface my post by saying that we regularly use VariCam, 2000, 500, 200 series Panasonic cameras in our productions - and that I (and my clients) love the Panasonic color and cadence.

I really didn't intend to get into the fray on this, but the 300 skew / warp issue is far more pronounced than anyone is talking about. I've been in the room with a Panasonic rep (who shant be named unless Panasonic does so) and we went through many framerates to try and find ones that performed better or worse. All of this was conducted on a BTLH1760 monitor - where smear won't manifest.

pN rates (1080 / 720) were unusable except in static shots, and everything else exhibited the skew issue to a great extent. Not just a little, but to a degree where we opted out of purchasing the unit.

You can test this for yourselves on demonstration cameras or the one you've already purchased. Point the camera, at any focal length (longer is more pronounced, of course), at any framerate other than 1080/60i (AVC or DVCProHD) at a doorway and pan from it to another point in the room, as if following a character in or out. You will see the skewing is a prominent effect, with doorways, switchplates and anything else perpendicular in your frame effectively becoming a parallelogram.

The rolling shutter on the 300 manifests during pans at all frame rates except 1080/60i, where it is diminished by over 50%.

It is far more pronounced in 24fps than the Z7U 3 CMOS cameras we're using for TLC, which are strange little cameras with strange connections, but they seem to have defeated the skewing issues somehow.

If you have trouble with my statements, conduct the test with a 300 pointed at a doorway and post your results here. Just follow some action - not a "whip-pan", but normal follow for talent or panning.

That's what you should be able to do with a camera. And this ongoing suggestion of "just shoot around" the skew effect is a laughable one at best for real world production.

e

[Big Brother]

BTW how much can the cost jack up if we get a 1/3" CCD in-place of 1/3" CMOS on HPX300 !

Hope Jan give us an idea ... may its workable for future ... 1/3" full raster AVC Camcorder WOAH ! All rolling issues tumble down ... :)

[Erik Olson]

I think you have that already in the spatially offset LCD HPX500. As close as they've come anyway. Save for nifty features like the dual HDSDI outputs and HD viewfinder.

I still think the 2-slot P2 location on the 300 is also odd. No assistant can get there during shooting, and it's more important than ever with only two slots. The dumb side of the camera or the rear makes more sense to me. But so does four slots.

The rep asked me what I thought about this thing, and I told him it was nothing less than a "silver-bullet camera" - except for the rolling shutter issues. I really hope Panasonic can sort it (at least to the level of a Z7U), because we'd own a couple if they did.

e

[David Saraceno]

I really didn't intend to get into the fray on this, but the 300 skew / warp issue is far more pronounced than anyone is talking about. I've been in the room with a Panasonic rep (who shant be named unless Panasonic does so) and we went through many framerates to try and find ones that performed better or worse. All of this was conducted on a BTLH1760 monitor - where smear won't manifest.

pN rates (1080 / 720) were unusable except in static shots, and everything else exhibited the skew issue to a great extent. Not just a little, but to a degree where we opted out of purchasing the unit.





6. Rolling shutter artifacts. Ah, yes, the $64,000 question. Well, what I observe seems to concur with Barry's skew test. The skewing is really not too noticeable in 720 24pN AVC Intra 100 or 50. It is pretty noticeable on 1080 24pN AVC Intra 100. I have not had a chance to shoot any 1080 60i or 1080 30p yet. I would normally shoot in 720 anyway most of the time but I do understand that most of you have 1080 24pN on the brain. I would agree, less skewing in 720 than the Sonys and more in 1080 24pN. Hopefully Panasonic's engineering wizards can improve the 1080. The clip I posted is a mixture of mostly 720 24pN AVC 100 mixed with some AVC 50 shots and a couple of 1080 24pN AVC 100 shots. If there is enough interest, I will post another version next week that identifies which clip was which, but for now, you have to guess.

Dan


Okay, how do we reconcile these two posts?

Is there a straight answer in here somewhere?

best

[puredrifting]

My answer is based upon my observations and the footage I have shot so far. You will notice that my footage is real world subjects in the real world, not test charts and doorways. I don't shoot doorways for a living, I guess it all depends on if you do.

Yes, the skew is there, it is just a matter of how noticeable it is to you and your audience. The skew is always there on the EX1 and EX3 as well and I have seen plenty of successful programming shot with those cameras. My notes are in my post, yes, there is more skewing at 1080 24pN, less skewing at 720 24pN. As far as if that is acceptable to you, here is my straight answer. Use your eyes. Rent or borrow one and go out and shoot like I am doing. I can post all of the footage in the world but that doesn't really matter because everyone is going to have their own take and opinion on this.

For me, right now, I could be very happy with this camera because I mostly shoot 720 24pN in the HPX170 world and I find the amount of skewing in 720 24pN totally acceptable for my clients, I seriously doubt if any of them would ever even notice it. As a matter of fact, this would be an improvement for my clients who own the EX1, this camera has less skew at 720, of that I am sure. Everyone seems obsessed with 1080 24pN, which is fine, even though my personal opinion is that we could do a double blind test with the same monitor and 90% of people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 720 24pN and 1080 24pN from a resolution standpoint, but that is just my personal view. 1080 is really most important for those of us lucky enough to have our work projected on the big screen but for most consumer televisions, 720 origination looks about the same or even slightly better than 1080. In other words, 1080 has always been overrated for many usages and for many viewers. Many of us just can't accept that something with a smaller number could be as good or even better than something with a larger number.

Dan

[Big Brother]

In other words, 1080 has always been overrated for many usages and for many viewers. Many of us just can't accept that something with a smaller number could be as good or even better than something with a larger number.

Dan

On what finding is the logic based. Pl enlighten my soul. :Drogar-Love(DBG):

[David Saraceno]

We just don't see much if any difference between 720/24p and 1080/24p with our HPX170.

No charts, or anything like that -- just viewing it.

[Buck Forester]

Do you have any idea what the cost is of a 1920 X1080 sensor that outputs 60 frames?

You need to work for a manufacturer for a while. If we even had a chip set, then there is the rest. Everyone thinks that R & D is inexpensive. For perspective, the DVX100B chipset cost $5,000,000 to develop. This is not an inexpensive business to develop product for, we as do all manufacturers work hard. We do try to listen and try to deliver where we can.

Best,

Jan

Jan... Jan... Jan! I was only keeeeeding! You are one SERIOUS person! I was actually agreeing wid yew, but in a goofy way. Of course you can make a 3 2/3" CCD camera and sell it for $5,000, you could sell them for $1 if you wanted, but neither would be even remotely profitable. Man, when I have to explain my own silliness, ha!

[puredrifting]

On what finding is the logic based. Pl enlighten my soul. :Drogar-Love(DBG):

Adam Wilt for one. He knows more about video, resolution and HD than you and I put together probably http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/how_important_is_resolution/

I have also had this discussion with several video engineers whose opinions I respect.

And then there is my own usage. I deliver programming to all kinds of entities, from small shows for corporate clients that will be seen as web clips all of the way to broadcast clients and all of the studios. I was the DP on a 90 minute broadcast doc for TCM called, "The Dawn of Sound: How Movies Learned to Talk", I have delivered several A&E Biographies and have delivered hundreds of projects to all of the major studios.

1080 is overrated for most users, not all, but most. Sure, if you are shooting Planet Earth, 1080 is nice, although, oh yeah, most of Planet Earth was photographed in 720 on the Varicam. Hmm... Well, most of the networks require 1080 delivery, don't they? Well, um except for these little outfits called ABC and FOX, sure. ABC and Fox, yes, they like 720.

Video and film people (and I am one in case you were wondering) tend to think that bigger is always better. A 103" Plasma must be better than that measly 42" plasma you have, my native 1080 camera must be better than that 720 camera you are shooting with, etc. I simply disagree. The only place I have seen a noticeable difference where 1080 is a definite practical (not theoretical) advantage is large screen projection, either digital or film. Then it matters. But for broadcast, delivery to the studios and the work that I do, 1080 is fine but so is 720. Even when I have to deliver 1080 masters, usually most of the source material sitting on my timeline is 720. The Aja Kona 3 does a beautiful real time uprez that all of the QC and studios have been happy with for going on three years.

Dan

[DavidNJ]

Resolution, resolution...:) I prefer this write-up: http://www.jts2004.org/english/proceedings/Galt.html#presentation or this set of videos: http://media.panavision.com/ScreeningRoom/Screening_Room/Demystifying_Part1.html

[puredrifting]

Wow, Ph.D. level dissertation of resolution. Nice. Most of it a bit above my head but very interesting nonetheless.

Thanks,

Dan

[Erik Olson]

Keep in mind that I'm not trolling around here, I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Panasonic advocate - especially as it relates to AVC-Intra and DVCProHD. That's why I was invited to a sneak three weeks ago. I don't shoot doorframes for a living either, but I get PureDrifting's point about what matters in real-world shooting.

We were in a room at a flagship dealer's showroom without charts or the benefit of any testing equipment. Just us, a nice new monitor and the HPX300. So, I did what I would do when shooting reality and narrative film. Pan from a door with a subject as they entered the room. Not some crazy, trumped up ambush technique - just a steady, smooth pan both from the shoulder and from a Vinten tripod. Do it for yourself, I'm not selling anything here. Just reporting what we saw. The rep was just as surprised as the engineers Barry talked about in his test at Panasonic. He wasn't happy, and neither was I. I was there to buy one.

I've had discussions with other photographers who use Panasonic to a great extent and they have had the same reaction to the 300 out of 1080/60i mode. With the Panasonic rep, we did test 720/24pN, 720/30p, 1080/60i, 1080/24pN, 1080/30p and the skew manifested in all of them, but as Barry Green discovered [separately], not so much in 1080/60i. Which he has explained made good sense.

I think this will be fixed to the extent that CMOS can be "fixed" and that this whole thread will be a good bit of history except for those trying to debunk the old rumors of rolling-shutter on the 300. It might not be this week, but I'd put my money on them figuring it out in good time. 1080/24pN is too good and important a feature-set to simply blow-off by telling people to not use it.

e

[Jan_Crittenden]

1080/24pN is too good and important a feature-set to simply blow-off by telling people to not use it.

And again I ask where in this thread does it show or say that I have or Panaosnic has blown people's opinions off.

Thanks,

jan

[Erik Olson]

I pretty clearly indicated that I didn't think Panasonic would [blow it off].

e

[Jan_Crittenden]

Hi Eric,

Well you did and you didn't. Point is that we are studying the issue.

Best,

jan

[Erik Olson]

Okay, I'm not the enemy. You do what you do and I'll continue advocating for Panasonic at every turn.

e

[Kenn Christenson]

Are there any indications this is a "fixable" issue? With the understanding that the artifacts created by the CMOS sensors can not be fully eliminated.

[Erik Olson]

Jan, I tried to PM you with a letter I sent to a History Channel producer just tonight prior to logging-in to DVXUser. Your PM box might be too full!

Anyway, she has a nervous and new Avid editor not experienced in P2 and was asking about doing our next project in HDV.

I put myself in front of her and offered to help talk the newbie through import and file structure and to sing the praises of P2HD (AVC-Intra and DVCProHD) over long-GOP formats.

It is more indicative of what I'm about. I often call it like I see it and perhaps have become too accustomed to having you around here to filter our observations up to Panasonic.

No harm intended and I remain a fan of yours and the products you represent so well.

Yours,

e

Erik A Olson
erik@expeditionfilmpartners.com

[David Saraceno]

Are there any indications this is a "fixable" issue? With the understanding that the artifacts created by the CMOS sensors can not be fully eliminated.

I have a distinct feeling that it can be attenuated but not necessarily eliminated completely.

What I hope further is that whatever occurs can be implemented via firmware, and hopeful still that we can get some direction relatively soon on what is feasible and how it is implemented if feasible.

[DavidNJ]

I put myself in front of her and offered to help talk the newbie through import and file structure and to sing the praises of P2HD (AVC-Intra and DVCProHD) over long-GOP formats.

Erik, there is nothing wrong with temporal compression anymore than their is with spacial (DCT) or chroma compression (subsampling). Still, AVC Intra is the only high bandwidth H.264 out there ttbomk.

Actually, its 720p24 mode, at 40Mb/s is probably its weakest suit. The HMC150 does H.264 at 25Mb/s with temporal compression (long GOP) and is probably fair close (10-bits and 4:2:2 not with standing). However, 80Mb/s at 1080p24 should be outstanding.

The politics around this seem to be getting charged. On one hand there are relative insiders with access to the camera who what to say what there saw. On the other, there is Panasonic with a great new camera trying to avoid a negative buzz.

In the end I think both groups will be happy. By all accounts it has a feature set and build quality that will make it a new standard in that price class. That in turn is creating pressure inside Panasonic to figure out what when wrong and fix it. The sensors are small (in the sense of photo site count, not physical) size at 2Mp. If you scan them fast enough...should the skew go down? Hopefully it is a simple firmware clock fix, either an oversight or a workaround for a problem for which another, better alternative exists.

[Kenn Christenson]

I hated to do it, but I decided to hold off and cancel my order for this camera until all the dust settles around the amount of skew present in 1080. (And YES, I know skew will always be a factor with the current generation of CMOS chips.)

[DavidNJ]

I would imagine you would be safe. The odds are it will be a firmware fix. If it requires a hardware change, it would be under warranty and Panasonic goodwill.

In the meantime, it is the best pro camera out the door on your shoulder for under $12k (with 2 16GB P2s). Everything less expensive has a lot more plastic. The only exception IMHO is if you were going to go through the Canon hassle to get its fantastic production quality.

[Kenn Christenson]

The only exception IMHO is if you were going to go through the Canon hassle to get its fantastic production quality.

No thanks. I dealt with cumbersome post with the Red and have no wish to go back to that. Plus, variable frame rate is a key feature for me.

I was an early adopter of P2 and love the workflow. The HPX300 is definitely still high on my list and I look forward to jumping in when it's all worked out.

[Cees Mutsaers]

So what is the status at the moment? Did you buy the HPX300 and if so does it fulfill your requirements ??



No thanks. I dealt with cumbersome post with the Red and have no wish to go back to that. Plus, variable frame rate is a key feature for me.

I was an early adopter of P2 and love the workflow. The HPX300 is definitely still high on my list and I look forward to jumping in when it's all worked out.