View Full Version : specs HVX
Cees Mutsaers
10-11-2005, 04:39 AM
Jan C.-L. do we get the specs before the cam is on the market or only when we unpack the cam and read the manual. I have the feeling that from now and untill the unit is on the market there will be no fundamental changes anymore.
So why does Panasonic not share the specs with us already now. We already know that the resolution of the ccd is lower (fortunately) than the competion so we will not be in a shock. Only freaks who love high pixel count will be disappointed but those people are not potential buyers anyway !!!!
Jan_Crittenden
10-11-2005, 04:43 AM
Actually You do not know anything about the CCDs. The only thing you know is the picture that it is making. And that is the way it will be for a while. Not sure when or if it will be a published spec. Since it is is immaterial to the task, it is an analog device. If it were CMOS, it would be different, but since it is a CCD, then it doesn't matter. As long as the resolution and performance comes out of the camera, that is the most important part. Its like I said the other day, it isn't the pixel count that counts, its how you make the pixels count.
Best,
Jan
Robert_Niemann
10-11-2005, 05:28 AM
In my opinion Jan's statement gives us a hint, that the pixel count of the CCDs is not "very high". Maybe it is even less than at the JVC GY-HD100. My guess: 960 x 720 pixels. But of course Jan is right: It is the pictures, that matters. The people, who think, that you can get the Academie Award only by using the camera with the highest pixel amount, are wrong. And maybe CCDs with "only" 960 x 720 are also a good choice, because then the CCDs have not to be read out in a splitted way like at the HD100. So no risk of a split screen?
Jan_Crittenden
10-11-2005, 05:38 AM
In my opinion Jan's statement gives us a hint, that the pixel count of the CCDs is not "very high". Maybe it is even less than at the JVC GY-HD100. My guess: 960 x 720 pixels.
Hi Robert, My answer does not give you any such thing. My answer is that too much weight is given to such stuff and the more people pester me about it the more stubborn I become about the need for education. If I said, then no education would be asked for, yeah I know that people are asking for specs and and not education, but as long as I continue to see posts that say "if it is not at least this spec, I am not buying it," then I will continue to be stubborn, as it is an analog signal.
And your numbers are incorrect. Sorry, ;-)
Best,
Jan
Robert_Niemann
10-11-2005, 05:42 AM
Jan, I would be very interested of hearing, how the engineers at Panasonic care about the possibility of colour aberration, dead pixels, smear and split screen regarding the HVX200.
Jan_Crittenden
10-11-2005, 06:08 AM
Hi,
Color aberrations have been minimised as much as is possible. Dead pixels are a no no. and Smear, well you can make the camera smearbut that is because it is an Interline Transfer Chip set, but you have to give it the right conditions. Hey the Canon doesn't have a split screen and it has higher density than the JVC, so what does that mean. The HVX200 will not have a split screen either as I just think that that is not something that people are looking at when they are shooting and it sn't something that they should find in their footge when they get back to the edit suite.
Best,
jan
1280x1080?? :evil:
You already stated that it doesn't use 1280x720 or 960x720 CCDs...
1280x1080?? :evil:
You already stated that it doesn't use 1280x720 or 960x720 CCDs...
My guess is 16 pixels horizontal and 9 pixels vertical... The reason it can produce all those fabulous images Jan has been showing is MAGIC. :)
I certainly don't care what the CCD pixel count is. The pictures tell me everything I need to know.
Kevin
Robert_Niemann
10-11-2005, 08:58 AM
Oh, Jan, it is so good to know, that You and the Panasonic engineers just take care about everything. So the waiting for the HVX200 is getting much easier for me. About the missing split screen at the Canon XL H1: I think, it is missing, because the CCDs are read out in an interlaced way. So there have to been read out only 777.600 pixels at once (1440 x 540), and technically that does not seem to be a problem, while at the HD100 they are 921.600, and that seems to be too much for one time.
Cees Mutsaers
10-11-2005, 10:19 AM
But from a "I am curious" technical point of view a lot of forum members still want to know the pixel count even more if the image it generates is great :-)))
Cees Mutsaers
10-11-2005, 10:22 AM
Jan actually if you read the start of the thread carefully I even did not ask for the pixcel count. There is more to a spec than just the pixel count.
But from a "I am curious" technical point of view a lot of forum members still want to know the pixel count even more if the image it generates is great :-)))
Exactly. :thumbsup:
Like I have said before, it won't affect my buying decision.
Tzedekh
10-11-2005, 10:37 AM
About the missing split screen at the Canon XL H1: I think, it is missing, because the CCDs are read out . . . only 777.600 pixels at once (1440 x 540), and technically that does not seem to be a problem, while at the HD100 they are 921.600, and that seems to be too much for one time.
Doesn't the HD10's CCD have nearly as many pixels as the HD100's? Has anyone checked it for the split-screen effect?
Tzedekh
10-11-2005, 10:54 AM
1280x1080?? :evil:
You already stated that it doesn't use 1280x720 or 960x720 CCDs...
At the very most, Jan's statement could be interpreted to mean that the CCD isn't 960 x 720, but she didn't say it wasn't 1,280 x 720. The chip could have a high count or a lower count. It could have, like the JVC HD10's CCD, some oddball count. If it had, say, 976 x 728, of which only 960 x 720 were active, it would have an effective 960 x 760 count without being a 960 x 720 chip. Jan has also said that the chip would use spatial offset (a.k.a. pixel shift), but that too means very little. It could be extreme, or it could be very mild. Jan has stated more than once that some offset is necessary to eliminate the gaps between pixels. Jan, please correct me if I'm misquoting you here.
Robert_Niemann
10-11-2005, 11:05 AM
Doesn't the HD10's CCD have nearly as many pixels as the HD100's?An interesting argument indeed. So why is there no split screen?
Spiff_2
10-11-2005, 11:19 AM
But Jan... what about the Joel Schumaker fans? You know - those people who shoot everything under red green and blue neon lights?! They'll be most worried about resolution loss due to chroma upsampling via pixel shift. And you know how much we all want more films like Joel's.
-Spiff
Robert_Niemann
10-11-2005, 11:33 AM
Can you say, that the pixel shift technology is something to limit the smear effect? Just a thought.
Jan, will you be at the Paris' show ? (Satis - 10/18 - 10/20)
The HVX200 must be exposed.
I find normal to know the technical specs even if the image quality is the most important.
Jan, as good and informative as she is, is still a Panasonic representative, and I believe that, based on my PR and marketing experience, she is not saying the numbers because frankly they are not impressive. If they where, it would've been in the brochure updates, the web press releases, magazines, etc. Just look at Canon, sony and jvc marketing. Probably the no release of the numbers has to do with the fact Panasonic doesn't want the camera to be compared in numbers to the HDV cameras, keeping the "superior and in a different league" image...
Just my two cents :) No hard feelings Jan. Really appreciate the support, care and interest you are giving to us costumers... And I'm waiting for the pal model just because of your excelent support!
At the very most, Jan's statement could be interpreted to mean that the CCD isn't 960 x 720, but she didn't say it wasn't 1,280 x 720. The chip could have a high count or a lower count.
She wrote that my guess of 1280x720 was wrong in this post (http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showthread.php?t=33999)
Yeah, I agree, it could be some oddball size, but I'm only talking effective pixels.
Tzedekh
10-11-2005, 12:30 PM
Yeah, I agree, it could be some oddball size, but I'm only talking effective pixels.And that is my point. Jan apparently doesn't wish to be specific, probably because she doesn't want to tell us the CCD res specs by eliminating possible specs (OK, so maybe 1,920 x 1,080 effective pixels is definitely out).
Barry_Green
10-11-2005, 01:08 PM
Doesn't the HD10's CCD have nearly as many pixels as the HD100's? Has anyone checked it for the split-screen effect?
The HD10's CCD is probably the same as the HD100's. Nobody ever reported there being a split-screen issue with the HD1 or HD10. However, keep in mind that the HD1 and HD10 run at 30fps only; the HD100 internally operates at 60fps, so it's being asked to deliver twice the performance. That may be where the split comes from; according to JVC it is due to a heat issue when trying to extract that much info from a 1/3" chip. Also, the HD1/HD10 were single-CCD models, the HD100 is a three-CCD running at twice the speed, so theoretically it's being asked to handle six times as much info...
fiercecurry
10-11-2005, 01:13 PM
Actually You do not know anything about the CCDs. The only thing you know is the picture that it is making. And that is the way it will be for a while. Not sure when or if it will be a published spec. Since it is is immaterial to the task, it is an analog device. If it were CMOS, it would be different, but since it is a CCD, then it doesn't matter. As long as the resolution and performance comes out of the camera, that is the most important part. Its like I said the other day, it isn't the pixel count that counts, its how you make the pixels count.
Best,
Jan
Thats used car salesman talk. Dont bother looking under the hood, it works fine....trust me! You'll love it.
LOL.
I find this endlessly amusing. Hey guys, my dads camcorder can beat up your dads camcorder.
All these cameras pump up talking points. Notice Canon doesn't draw much attention to the codec? Notice most of the footage reportedly being shown was recorded to a DVCPRO HD deck or straight out of the SDI? Notice that a ton of very educated folks on this board have repeatedly broke down in graphic detail all the parameters as to what constitutes an image, and that on all of these, after a certain pixel count, it's just to brag about your "unit" size.
I am leery of folks pumping up one spec and squelching others that are intregal to the overall image.
Stevet
10-11-2005, 02:13 PM
What's the point of this thread?
As far as CCD resolution, I don't care how they are doing it, If it looks good, that's all I care about.
Jarred and Barry say the 1080i looks dang good:
Quote from recent article from Jarred and Barry:
" And the detail was incredible -- even though this was 1080i footage we were watching, it looked remarkably sharp and detailed. It didn't look like HDV, that's for sure: it really looked like footage coming from a higher class of camera."
As far as Jan, she works for Panasonic. If Panasonic wants to keep their technical
information secretive until it's released, so be it....
Steve
What's the point of this thread?
As far as CCD resolution, I don't care how they are doing it, If it looks good, that's all
This is a camera enthusiast forum. It seems pretty natural to me that some people here would be interested in the decisions Pany have made to achieve the supposed amazing results.
It's like being a car enthusiast and saying "Nay, I don't want to see the engine or know how big it is, as long as I know that I goes fast."
How the CCDs/engine performs makes you buy the camera/car, but an enthusiast will also be interested in how the performance is achieved.
If you aren't interested, that's cool, but you probably won't want to bother reading this thread :)
Zig_Zigman
10-11-2005, 03:19 PM
And you guys thought I was silly for bringing this up *L* we just want to *know*, man...
Frankly, I'm just happy to be skipping the whole HDV experience.
Stevet
10-11-2005, 05:52 PM
This is a camera enthusiast forum. It seems pretty natural to me that some people here would be interested in the decisions Pany have made to achieve the supposed amazing results.
Agreed! I hear ya man. That's why I'm here, to learn about the HVX200 and other cameras. It was not my intention to imply this thought. I was refering to the ongoing inquiring over the CCD resolution when it was clearly stated by Jan (several times) she was not able to offer this at this time.
Like the rest, I want the best picture quality and resolution possible.
Also, like many who have mentioned here, CCD resolution is only one aspect of
final picture quality.
Steve
Mediacre
10-11-2005, 06:32 PM
Actually You do not know anything about the CCDs. The only thing you know is the picture that it is making. And that is the way it will be for a while. Not sure when or if it will be a published spec.
Did I understand it right, that Panasonic may actually hide the CCD's specs?
The specs will either be released or found out no matter what. I understand wanting to know what they are, most of us do. The issue is that if it is lower than the highest native to DVCPRO HD, this damn board will be flooded with FUD and stupid ass threads.
I kind of like how this board has a pretty low count of crap threads. My guess is that they will release specs with footage to counter people spazzing out about how whatever configuration they chose "is vastly inferior" and "no way this camera can have a good picture".
So either chill until they voluntarily release the info, or keep working away at Jan, I'm sure she's right on the verge of cracking.
redindian
10-11-2005, 07:27 PM
maybe we can break it open and COUNT it ...lol
:)
Jan_Crittenden
10-11-2005, 08:05 PM
Thats used car salesman talk. Dont bother looking under the hood, it works fine....trust me! You'll love it.
LOL.
Actually, it isn't "used Car Saleperson" talk, because if it were, I wouldn't show you the picture it makes.
:-)
Jan
PS. I have a friend in the Used car business and I would never buy a used car from a dealer of used cars.
if it's just the same chips as used in the HVX-prototypes, I'm happy.
And if there's a nice integrated cap for the objective - I'm twice happy (that hasn't been answered yet - am I wrong?)
Happy for vari-fps, happy for P2, happy for 100Mbps, happy for 4:2:2, happy for multiple format, happy for FS, happy for 4:3-screen, free of specs on picture, happy for 6000USD, happy for noiseless rec, happy for NL-rec, happy for BD-drives arriving in time!
And finally happy to be living in THIS generation of affordable cinematography for any creative dude! - Thanks Robert Rodriguez - you give hope - Thanks Panasonic - you give the equipment!
rgdfilms
10-11-2005, 09:13 PM
Im happy for chocolate milk. I hope this camera produces some good chocolate milk !
insanityfw
10-11-2005, 11:04 PM
I know it's been hinted at, but who the hell actually cares about the pixel count. I know that in geek-speak pixel-count should matter, but from a writer/director/other-things perspective I just want to see how it looks. ?How does it make me feel? Does it distract from the story
I come from a film world and never thought that I would "turn to the dark side" and shoot video, but I bought a DVX, which will underperform the HVX for sure and found that I could run out myself and still get good looking images without too much fuss. I could burn some great overhead hallogen lights in my house and shoot off footage that looks almost as good as days of planning to shoot 16mm with a DP and full crew. How much more will the DVX and the HVX do in the hands of a great crew at the servitude of a great script and actors. Now, before everybody get's crazy I know that video has limitations, but it has changed the way we are able to go about story telling. 90% of the time the DVX will look as good as 16mm under the same circumstances, so how much better the hope for the HVX, but it still comes down to talent and story.
I've seen the work of a couple people on this site and I'm confident without "looking under the hood" that if you give the right story to some of these people, under the right direction that a revolution will begin, just like it did with the cheap, but wonderful little DVX.
So, you all go count pixels and such and I'll be out shooting features...on video.
Best,
J.
Cees Mutsaers
10-12-2005, 10:24 AM
but I hyave the feeling from her remark that even after the HVX is on the market Panasonic will not reveal the physical CCD resolution
What's the point of this thread?
As far as CCD resolution, I don't care how they are doing it, If it looks good, that's all I care about.
Jarred and Barry say the 1080i looks dang good:
Quote from recent article from Jarred and Barry:
" And the detail was incredible -- even though this was 1080i footage we were watching, it looked remarkably sharp and detailed. It didn't look like HDV, that's for sure: it really looked like footage coming from a higher class of camera."
As far as Jan, she works for Panasonic. If Panasonic wants to keep their technical
information secretive until it's released, so be it....
Steve
Cees Mutsaers
10-12-2005, 10:35 AM
Please members for the last time read carefully the start of this thread. I was not asking for pixelcount. Jan just give us the complete spec WITHOUT the pixel count :kiss:
Jan C.-L. do we get the specs before the cam is on the market or only when we unpack the cam and read the manual. I have the feeling that from now and untill the unit is on the market there will be no fundamental changes anymore.
So why does Panasonic not share the specs with us already now. We already know that the resolution of the ccd is lower (fortunately) than the competion so we will not be in a shock. Only freaks who love high pixel count will be disappointed but those people are not potential buyers anyway !!!!
Jan_Crittenden
10-12-2005, 10:45 AM
Please members for the last time read carefully the start of this thread. I was not asking for pixelcount. Jan just give us the complete spec WITHOUT the pixel count :kiss:
Which specs do you want to know? That might seem lame but from here it seems as though most of the specs are known. That is why I jumped to the conclusion that I did. Ask the question and I will answer.
Best,
jan
Please members for the last time read carefully the start of this thread. I was not asking for pixelcount. Jan just give us the complete spec WITHOUT the pixel count :kiss:
What specs do you want to know, there maybe people around that know them...?
I would like to know if the 1080x1920 24fps images are a NATIVE resolution or an upscale in-camera. that is all.
DVCPROHD will record the 1080i (and the 24p footage) at 1280x1080, so there will definitely be some upscaling... but then again, unless you go up to HDCAM SR at least, so does every other current HD format. (Although most use 1440x1080).
Well, what specs do we want to know... :
I asked several times for the objective cap (not only me...) - whether integrated or not -isn't that a spec too?
And from the actual variable framerates we have 8 confirmed out of 12... but this is very recent and so probably still all we know. 4fps would be nice, to have a big range...
...but the unexpected intervall rec we got is even much nicer!!
Never a word about the material.... same as DVX100 I guess.... so all other specs seem to be said to me.
Well, what specs do we want to know... :
I asked several times for the objective cap (not only me...) - whether integrated or not -isn't that a spec too?
Do you mean a lens cap built into the hood that can open and close? Jan has said it is a gimick and won't be included. A damn useful gimick though IMO!!!
Mediacre
10-12-2005, 08:31 PM
I would like to know if the 1080x1920 24fps images are a NATIVE resolution or an upscale in-camera. that is all.
I think that's exactly what Panasonic doesn't want we to know. So people (with quite some degree of reason) can't say something along the lines of, "well, if the HVX200 is upscaling 960x720 to 1920x1080 in camera, I can upscale 1280x720 too with software".
stephenvv
10-13-2005, 12:21 AM
I think that's exactly what Panasonic doesn't want we to know. So people (with quite some degree of reason) can't say something along the lines of, "well, if the HVX200 is upscaling 960x720 to 1920x1080 in camera, I can upscale 1280x720 too with software".
Jan has pointed out many times that CCD's are analog devices, so not really a valid question. The only number that matters is how many line it resolves on a rez chart in progressive modes.
To me, looks are everything - not the camera, I could care less what the camera looks like - but the image, image is everything. If the image resolves HD, who cares how many pixels the CCD are? I'm more worried about latitude, artifacts (re JVC SSE), smear, gamma curves, lens performance, noise in shadows.
Res is way overrated. I just got a Panny AE900U projector & DVX footage uprezzed from 480i DVD to 720p looks amazingly good on a 92" screen. As long as the HVX improves it ( and I suspect 100 Mb/s data just might :cheesy: ), let's rock and roll.
Cees Mutsaers
10-13-2005, 01:00 AM
In addition to the good questions CICI asked I would like to know whether the autofocus in progressive mode works the same way as in interlaced mode. So to be more specific is it in progressive mode just focus assist where you get only an approximate automatic focus and you have to focus manual to get optimum focus or do you get fast autofocus (preferable with no hunting) to the optimum focus like the Sony Z1 does which is a an interlaced cam.
Does the HVX come with a remote controll, if so what can it do?
Again all 12 framerates at 720P?
Well, what specs do we want to know... :
I asked several times for the objective cap (not only me...) - whether integrated or not -isn't that a spec too?
And from the actual variable framerates we have 8 confirmed out of 12... but this is very recent and so probably still all we know. 4fps would be nice, to have a big range...
...but the unexpected intervall rec we got is even much nicer!!
Never a word about the material.... same as DVX100 I guess.... so all other specs seem to be said to me.
Barry_Green
10-13-2005, 01:42 AM
In addition to the good questions CICI asked I would like to know whether the autofocus in progressive mode works the same way as in interlaced mode. So to be more specific is it in progressive mode just focus assist where you get only an approximate automatic focus and you have to focus manual to get optimum focus or do you get fast autofocus (preferable with no hunting) to the optimum focus like the Sony Z1 does which is a an interlaced cam.
Depends on the frame rate you're shooting at. If you're shooting 60p, the autofocus will presumably be every bit as fast and responsive as the Z1 is in 60i (or the HVX is in 60i).
But if you change the frame rate to 12 fps, no the autofocus won't be nearly as responsive. It can't possibly be. With the CCD running slower, the autofocus system receives updates slower. The slower the frame rate, the slower the performance of the autofocus system.
Does the HVX come with a remote controll, if so what can it do?
It probably doesn't come with one, but VariZoom and others will make remote controllers for it. The remote functions are zoom, iris, focus, and record start/stop. It's backward-compatible with DVX zoom & rec start-stop controllers, and the focus/iris jack is compatible with the DVX's, so any remote that works with the DVX would also work with the HVX. If there's any other remote capability, they didn't tell us about it...
Again all 12 framerates at 720P?
We got 8 or 9 confirmed, I don't think we've been told how many more there may be, or which ones they may be. I don't know that a total of 12 framerates is even confirmed...
Jan_Crittenden
10-13-2005, 03:43 AM
Cees Mutsaers: In addition to the good questions CICI asked
It does not have a lens cap that is included on the lens hood.
The material is an magnesium-aluminum diecast.
>I would like to know whether the autofocus in progressive mode works the same way as in interlaced mode. So to be more specific is it in progressive mode just focus assist where you get only an approximate automatic focus and you have to focus manual to get optimum focus or do you get fast autofocus (preferable with no hunting) to the optimum focus like the Sony Z1 does which is a an interlaced cam.
The autofocussing is not finished on the camera I have, but I would answer the question just like Barry has as the focussing function on the DVX at least has the frame rate as the lead on the focussing sample.
>Does the HVX come with a remote controll, if so what can it do?
Good question, have not see the remote control as yet.
>Again all 12 framerates at 720P?
Actually it may be 10 or 12 and I don't have the final yet. They are still working on it.
We will have a full brochure that is available in aobut a month or so and all of these things will be locked down.
Best,
Jan
stevesnj
10-13-2005, 07:31 AM
Off topic...Barry will there be a book from you on the HVX? This camera is going to be the first camera I buy so a nice guide on proper use would be helpful.
:thumbsup:
resolution DOES matter in a BIG way, without it your images are SOFT, the larger the screen the softer they are, everything falls below resolution, I am NOT saying that resolution is the end-all be-all it's not. but it's first, if we have it, then we can talk dynamic range etc.
and at this point Pana is afraid to say what it is, why? because it's less then they would want you to know i bet. no fear, reel-stream.com will "unlock" this camera if they can, and it will be game over.
long live raw images.
A note to Panasonic. I am a working professional. I want un-compressed out. I hate the "video look" without shallow DOF it's "VIDEO" and no, don't tell me to go buy a VariCam, make a HD 35mm sized sensor camera and I will buy. Create a high quality built in 35mm GG unit and I will BUY. don't give me "video" spend some money and time on this and it will sell. Canon sells a $900 camera with a APS sized sensor, bigger market? yes that is why it's $900, make your camera $20,000 and it will sell. like hotcakes. Just do it.
Barry_Green
10-13-2005, 09:57 AM
Off topic...Barry will there be a book from you on the HVX?
Most definitely!
Barry_Green
10-13-2005, 09:59 AM
resolution DOES matter in a BIG way, without it your images are SOFT, the larger the screen the softer they are, everything falls below resolution, I am NOT saying that resolution is the end-all be-all it's not. but it's first, if we have it, then we can talk dynamic range etc.
Of course resolution counts -- but Obin, you're the guy using a DVX with its 770x492 chips to deliver 1540x984 razor-sharp video, right? Surely, based on your Andromeda experience, you'd agree that they could deliver a very sharp, very nice 1920x1080 image with chips that were as small as 960x540, as long as they sampled them the same way the Andromeda is sampling the DVX's chips, right?
MovieSwede
10-13-2005, 10:02 AM
OBIN
If you dont have the money to buy a varicam (or rent) why do you think you can afford shooting uncompressed HD?
The storage cost will be enormous.
And also. The DVCPROHD codec let you shoot with 1280*1080 in res. No need to make higher res chips. Even the varicam doesnt shoot with higher res then that.
stephenvv
10-13-2005, 10:07 AM
resolution DOES matter in a BIG way, without it your images are SOFT, the larger the screen the softer they are, everything falls below resolution, I am NOT saying that resolution is the end-all be-all it's not. but it's first, if we have it, then we can talk dynamic range etc.
First, resolution comes from many factors, the CCDs only being one of them. And anyway, I don't agree that it's "first". "First" on this cam is the fact that it's DVCProHD, "second" is that it shoots various progressive modes. Progressive is a much bigger deal on the CCD than pixel count. "Third" is P2. "Fourth" is variable frame rates. "Fifth" is 24fps. "Sixth" is native 16:9 (oh the lines of rez I lose in squeeze mode).
and at this point Pana is afraid to say what it is, why? because it's less then they would want you to know i bet. no fear, reel-stream.com will "unlock" this camera if they can, and it will be game over.
long live raw images.
It's more like "short live raw images" since you have to drag a computer and drives around leaving yourself on short leash. If Juan had developed on camera system or at least a firestore like device. Cool. But it's really like the HD-SDI on the XL H1. Useful for a tiny fraction of buyers, bordering on gimmick until someone has easily portable way to record the raw stream.
A note to Panasonic. I am a working professional. I want un-compressed out. I hate the "video look" without shallow DOF it's "VIDEO "
Shallow DOF does not equal "video". Shallow DOF is a technique in photography in al mediums. It's very trendy and plenty of great 35mm films have been done using deep focus (Citizen Kane where the DOF limitations of 35mm cams and lenses caused Toland grief). Citizen Kane does not scream "Video Look" :grin:
Create a high quality built in 35mm GG unit and I will BUY. don't give me "video" spend some money and time on this and it will sell. Canon sells a $900 camera with a APS sized sensor, bigger market? yes that is why it's $900, make your camera $20,000 and it will sell. like hotcakes. Just do it.
???
Please don't do that, Panasonic. Not everyone is obessed with shallow DOF at the expense of latitude, softness, weight, size and most of all cost. Sure, I would love a 35mm sensor, 15 stops of latitude and interchangeable lenses including a set of primes for $20k, but that would be in the "camera porn fantasy" :embarasse
The only $20k cams that sell like hotcakes are those bought by ENG, event and church videographers. They do not want 35mm CG and it would be a showstopper feature.
The "give me shallow DOF or give me death" market is much smaller, most can't afford $20k anyway.
I personally like the Red Rock Micro approach and I might get one for the HVX - it's affordable (no hassles of renting for us non LA.NY folks), the models seem to work okay and it gives me the option for the time when I want a softer, shallow focus image. But it stays an option, not stuck on the camera.
Jim Arthurs
10-13-2005, 10:20 AM
A note to Panasonic. I am a working professional. I want un-compressed out. I hate the "video look" without shallow DOF it's "VIDEO" and no, don't tell me to go buy a VariCam, make a HD 35mm sized sensor camera and I will buy. Create a high quality built in 35mm GG unit and I will BUY. don't give me "video" spend some money and time on this and it will sell. Canon sells a $900 camera with a APS sized sensor, bigger market? yes that is why it's $900, make your camera $20,000 and it will sell. like hotcakes. Just do it.
Obin, why not save judgement until you actually have footage from the HVX to look at?
What you're asking for, feature-wise, isn't going to happen within the next few years, and I think you know it. You don't have to buy the HVX, the Z1, the JVC, or anything else that is substandard to your needs, so why waste your energy here?
...If your goal is story telling, then save all your energy and effort and money and simply RENT something that will make you happy from a technical point of view, and tell your story.
Regards,
Jim Arthurs
redindian
10-13-2005, 10:56 AM
Most definitely!
Hope panny gives you an advance HVX so that u can write the book and release it when HVX comes out....!!
Padmapriya
10-13-2005, 11:15 AM
Most definitely!
Yes we would like to have the book with the unit if possible....keep it up Barry
I'm not sure, whether I understand obin or not (I'm not english native) but there IS a 35mm native videocamera: from ARRI
DPwannaB
10-13-2005, 01:22 PM
A note to Panasonic. I am a working professional. I want un-compressed out. I hate the "video look" without shallow DOF it's "VIDEO" and no, don't tell me to go buy a VariCam, make a HD 35mm sized sensor camera and I will buy. Create a high quality built in 35mm GG unit and I will BUY. don't give me "video" spend some money and time on this and it will sell. Canon sells a $900 camera with a APS sized sensor, bigger market? yes that is why it's $900, make your camera $20,000 and it will sell. like hotcakes. Just do it.
To my knowledge Panavision has a camera named the Genesis that uses a 35mm sensor, I don't think it's 20k though, lol :thumbsup:
Tzedekh
10-13-2005, 01:34 PM
. . . they could deliver a very sharp, very nice 1920x1080 image with chips that were as small as 960x540 . . .
Geez, Barry, please bear in mind the weight your comments carry around here. I know this is a hypothetical resolution, but we don't want someone to go off half-cocked and start the rumor "Barry Green says the chip res could be as low as 960 x 540."
whatever, I guess my standards are higher then some, and no I can't buy an arri d-20 it's not forsale, I can't buy a Panavision, also not for public sale.
Every single "real" and "professional" I have shown the reel-stream output with the letus35 has been amazed, from Directors to VFX guys..
Barry, yes that is way I say "long live raw" as Juan and gang are the only people on planet earth I know that are doing what some say "can't be done"
How hard is it to supply a cheap lens on this camera that comes off? not hard at all.
How hard to by pass DSP, compression. not hard at all. Even Canon has HD-SDI now.
Canon a "Prosumer" video equipment CO.
HD-SDI out.
but then again, most people shoot weddings, tv news, doc's, home movies
and resolution is not important?:
http://genq.boo.jp/kawasemi/upfiles/05021702.jpg
esperman
10-13-2005, 03:01 PM
well......this is an interesting read.
obin, your needs are simple....shoot film. If you can't handle film, then do the next best thing...go CineAlt. Those are for sale. If you can't handle CineAlt go .....get the idea?
This is a freakin 5K camera...and if it works as good as we all think (here in this forum i mean)
thats a hell of a deal.
Besides...I'm getting tired of reading posts by people crying that they want all the benefits and resolution of film....but have 100 bucks to spend on a video camera.
Mediacre
10-13-2005, 03:28 PM
Obin, just buy a Viper with a Pro35. You are asking too much for 20,000.
Party_Pooper
10-13-2005, 06:08 PM
I think that obin has shown us some impressive looking stuff with the reel-stream mod and 35 adapters, and it's hard not to listen to what he has to say.
it's probably not very difficult to manufacture a camara that has a built in reel-stream type mod or perhaps some type of implementation of a 35mm adapter... I'm not an engineer, but if the reel-stream guys can mod an existing system, I don't see why it would be so hard to build it like that in the first place.
maybe its just a matter of time- like how it took so long for a 24p dv camera to come to the market. since the dvx was introduced, 24p is pretty standard on competing cameras. if panasonic never introduced the dvx, we might all still be shooting 60i.
stephenvv
10-13-2005, 06:11 PM
whatever, I guess my standards are higher then some, and no I can't buy an arri d-20 it's not forsale, I can't buy a Panavision, also not for public sale.
Every single "real" and "professional" I have shown the reel-stream output with the letus35 has been amazed, from Directors to VFX guys..
Obin, the Andromeda/Scupltor is not even for sale yet and no idea if and when that will actually happen. Plus, you have to haul around a computer to shoot with it. That single issue does not seem to bother you - but it's a problem for 99% of camera buyers.
stephenvv
10-13-2005, 06:12 PM
Barry, yes that is way I say "long live raw" as Juan and gang are the only people on planet earth I know that are doing what some say "can't be done"
the question is not "if it can be done" but is "should it be done".
stephenvv
10-13-2005, 06:16 PM
How hard is it to supply a cheap lens on this camera that comes off? not hard at all.
How hard to by pass DSP, compression. not hard at all. Even Canon has HD-SDI now.
Canon a "Prosumer" video equipment CO.
HD-SDI out.
but then again, most people shoot weddings, tv news, doc's, home movies
Cheap lens that comes off - that would be the HD100. :grin:
The fixed lens allows us to get a high quality lens at a lower price. Given the price of HD lenses, that's a good thing. If you want more, you need to pay more.
Sure the XL H1 has HD-SDI out but only studio shoots with very expensive computer gear can use it.
Bottom line is that no portable recording system for RAW uncompressed data exists. Until it does and cost around what P2 does, it not's gonna happen.
stephenvv
10-13-2005, 06:20 PM
I'm not an engineer, but if the reel-stream guys can mod an existing system, I don't see why it would be so hard to build it like that in the first place.
That's a completely illogical statement. If it were not hard to build, it would have been done. Juan still does not have the reel-stream system fully working as sellable product and no other RAW/Uncompressed systems can record outside of studio. There is no portable recording medium for it and probably won't be for a few years unless one of the new techs gets to market fast.
You can get uncompressed output (analog) out of the HVX or uncompressed digital out of the H1 but who's actually going to use it for anything but studio green-screen work?
I fail to see how this is valid complaint on the HVX .
Jan_Crittenden
10-13-2005, 07:10 PM
Party_Pooper:I think that obin has shown us some impressive looking stuff with the reel-stream mod and 35 adapters, and it's hard not to listen to what he has to say.
And what they have done is totally capable with the Standard Definition chip set we put in there in the first place, unless i missed where they replaced the chipset with something entirely different.
>it's probably not very difficult to manufacture a camara that has a built in reel-stream type mod or perhaps some type of implementation of a 35mm adapter... I'm not an engineer, but if the reel-stream guys can mod an existing system, I don't see why it would be so hard to build it like that in the first place.
If it was so easy then it would have been done by now.
>maybe its just a matter of time- like how it took so long for a 24p dv camera to come to the market. since the dvx was introduced, 24p is pretty standard on competing cameras. if panasonic never introduced the dvx, we might all still be shooting 60i.
Actually there is only one other camera that does it and that is the largely more expensive XL-2.
Best,
jan
Party_Pooper
10-13-2005, 08:23 PM
24p: H1, xl2, HD100, hvx- while these may not all be competitors to the dvx, these are the cams that filmmakers will consider... all im saying is that since the introduction of the dvx, most filmmakers will not consider a camera that does not have 24p. since we've seen that low cost 35mm adapters are out there and the reel-stream mod is possible it, many filmmakers want this too. but I guess its not possible because "it would have been done by now", so I suppose I stand corrected.
I like my dvx and the state of video technology compared to previous years, but I'll still look to go as far as possible. all i know is that I do have to go out of my way to get the image that IS POSSIBLE- in mods and 35mm adapters. Maybe a few years down the line we won't have to do this anymore- I don't have to use a fake "24p" filter anymore in post like I did several years ago. before the dvx did people go "24p? not possible!"?
I would pay $40,000 for a camera that met with what I want, RAW, 1080p24fps aps or 35mm sensor size. does this end the "Conversation" or should I say bickering we are having here?
but it seems that only the Russians can stand up and say "yes" to what I want...unless you want to pay $200,000 for a D-20 Arricam, Viper etc
Even Arri and Viper don't get it, if you use a visually lossless compression like CineFOrm even RAW can be compressed to around 20-30MB/sec!!!!!
it's like hello people, anyone want to make the ULTIMATE digital cine cam or not?
I guess not...that is why I keep plugging away at my own 1080p 24fps raw camera project..
I would hope that Jan can tell us "yes this is using an HD chipset" can that be said Jan? if so then yes I will buy one, and yes I will send it off to reel-stream.com for the raw output conversion. thing is I get the feeling this can't even be said! so what does this mean? is the HVX a copy of how the reel-stream guys get HD???!!?
So Jan, (now that I see you ARE reading this thread) does the HVX have a chipset that is in anyway TRUE or NATIVE HD resolution at all? I think this will answer all my questions.
thisiswells
10-14-2005, 07:14 AM
it's like hello people, anyone want to make the ULTIMATE digital cine cam or not? ... Even Arri and Viper don't get it
Is anyone else growing tired of this? :undecided
tired? then don't read it! You have "ignore" on here, that is how I deal with people like myself, well the one's I feel the way YOU feel about me anyway...
This IS Wells, it ALMOST feels like you want to stay with VIDEO, and not push the format into "cine"
I would be fine with that, but I have seen the light with my Canon 1ds camera, it's 11MP and I shit you not, it beats the heck outa film. and cost $7grand to boot. but it's worth it!
jsut as $40,000 is worth spening on a real "cine" camera
BTW This is wells, if you want I will go back over to dvinfo, people on that board enjoy what I am allways talking about and showing. is that what you want?
MovieSwede
10-14-2005, 07:29 AM
I think the Dalsa would be the cam you are looking for. But it aint in the 40.000$ segment.
Its the combination of 24FPS and High Picture quality that is the problem. A photo camera just have to take 1 picture every 1 to 5 seconds. Then it no problem taking a 11MP picture. But develop a sensor with 11MP(or even 2) and 24FPS. Thats gonna cost.
thisiswells
10-14-2005, 10:00 AM
This IS Wells, it ALMOST feels like you want to stay with VIDEO, and not push the format into "cine"
Wrong. I'm just not interested in borrowing to pay for a $200K digital camera. That is what they cost, Obin. To get the camera you want, today, that is what you will have to pay. Or, settle for a Drake system. Or, a Reel Stream DVX. But, please, don't paraphrase what I say to mean something different. It's just not polite.
jsut as $40,000 is worth spening on a real "cine" camera
I personally wish I could have a Bentley. I would definitely have one if they sold for $40K, but, evidently, it isn't possible to build a handmade automobile for so little. So, here I am, stuck in an Acura. And, guess what, I am okay with that.
BTW This is wells, if you want I will go back over to dvinfo, people on that board enjoy what I am allways talking about and showing. is that what you want?
You can do whatever you like. This is a forum that, to a limited degree, tolerates members expressing their opinions for the actions of another member, so long as it is non-confrontational and does not personally insult the other member.
As a DVXuser reader, I don't appreciate having to wade through four spam messages in a row on a thread I am trying to learn from, each conveying essentially the same thought. The first post could have been edited, if necessary. Instead, you have, in a loud noise, disrupted this thread (along with all others in recent memory) with fanatical remarks about the unsuitability of DVCPro50 and DVCProHD for professional work. And, that you deserve a Bentley for the price of a Scion.
I also don't think it was right the way you went into another members' thread yesterday during congratulatory dialogue about the spec car commercials that member had made to demonstrate what could be done with a DVX and a little creativity (which landed him a high profile gig), leaving the comment, "....and you got the job?" where you proceeded to spam post a link to your website in promotion of your own car commercials.
If that type of behavior is permitted on DVinfo, well, then I'm surprised.
Hope this clears things up.
Brian Wells
Jeskid
10-14-2005, 10:16 AM
All I have to say guys is:
*28 Day's Later*
-Shot on a Cannon XL1
I don't care what it can or can't do relative things much more expensive than it (or not out yet), the HDX is a huge leap for filmmaking and I for one can't wait for it to come out.
Sincere thanks to all for teaching me about the technology - I am indebted to ya!
Jeskid
stephenvv
10-14-2005, 10:31 AM
Brian:
Nice response. Well put.
Mediacre
10-14-2005, 11:20 AM
T
BTW This is wells, if you want I will go back over to dvinfo, people on that board enjoy what I am allways talking about and showing. is that what you want?
Who this Obin guy think he is? Scott Billups? :huh:
Alex Leith
10-14-2005, 03:01 PM
All I have to say guys is:
*28 Day's Later*
-Shot on a Cannon XL1
Yeah! And it looked like DV too!
Barry_Green
10-14-2005, 03:03 PM
I would hope that Jan can tell us "yes this is using an HD chipset" can that be said Jan?
Jan has already said that it is an HD chipset.
So Jan, (now that I see you ARE reading this thread) does the HVX have a chipset that is in anyway TRUE or NATIVE HD resolution at all?
Okay, let's be clear here: are you making your purchase decision based on whether the chips are "true or native HD resolution", or whether the FOOTAGE is "true or native HD resolution"?
Because if it's the chips, I don't understand why you're happy with the Andromeda. The Andromeda appears to be delivering native HD resolution in the footage, regardless of the chip size. Is that good enough for what you want? Or not?
Alex Leith
10-14-2005, 03:21 PM
So Jan, (now that I see you ARE reading this thread) does the HVX have a chipset that is in anyway TRUE or NATIVE HD resolution at all? I think this will answer all my questions.
Er... am I missing something? Jan has repeatedly (patiently) said that the CCDs are analogue devices that don't record pixel for pixel directly onto the recording format. The signal they produce go through a various stages of digitization and processing before they get onto the pixels of the medium.
We know that the CCDs are good for recording HD, 'cause people have seen footage at ResFest. So why do people keep asking if the CCDs are native HD resolution?
I haven't created a spreadsheet to keep track of this, but I get the vibe that those that are pressing pretty hard for stats, specifically CCD resolution, have a negative stance toward this camera in general anyway.
Me thinks they're fishing for an angle to slam it.
What they have so far:
P2 is expensive
The form factor is amateur
It doesn't shoot HDV (this one kills me)
It doesn'tshoot HD to tape
The lens isn't removeable
Have I missed anything that we have heard 4 million times? Watch this board explode with negativity once specs are released...no matter what they are.
fiercecurry
10-14-2005, 03:39 PM
I agree, I think we should give this camera a break....its not out yet!!
Once its finally released and people have actually used and tested it, post away.
Until than its just masturbation.
harddrive
10-14-2005, 04:58 PM
I haven't created a spreadsheet to keep track of this, but I get the vibe that those that are pressing pretty hard for stats, specifically CCD resolution, have a negative stance toward this camera in general anyway.
Me thinks they're fishing for an angle to slam it.
What they have so far:
P2 is expensive
The form factor is amateur
It doesn't shoot HDV (this one kills me)
It doesn'tshoot HD to tape
The lens isn't removeable
From someone I assume is in favour of the camera, I can only say that is a pretty damning list! At least to someone whose interest is actual real life use of the camera for general production. With all those negatives, why do you think I should buy one?
Two of your list are not important in isolation - the expense of P2, and the lack of recording to tape for HD. Taken together they damn the camera - it has no practical method of recording HD! Pretty significant.
We're assured that DVCProHD tape decks are prohibitively expensive, and it's because of that that HDV has been suggested as a solution. DVCProHD may have theoretical advantages, but if you can viably record HDV, and you can't DVCProHD, I know which seems the better option! Braw - if the thought of HDV kills you, the thought of a camera which can't viably record by itself at all certainly kills me!
Panasonic seem to want to have their cake and eat it. If it was felt necessary to include a deck at all, then why does it not matter that HD is to P2 only? In that case surely a P2 only camera would be smaller, lighter, cheaper etc etc? Especially since P2 recording time for SD is longer than for HD? It increasingly seems that the camera is not what they would have designed given total free rein, rather the best that could be brought together with a limited number of options. For companies not wedded to P2 there ARE other options - http://www.thomsongrassvalley.com/products/infinity/camcorder/ - for starters! Look at that range of format options, and the possibility of direct to Compact Flash recording. Now we're starting to talk.
I came onto this board with an open mind recently as a Firestore user, following a link from another thread regarding that's possible use with an HVX. The general gist there was that little point could be seen - why buy a P2 camera and then get a Firestore? I was amazed to find here how seriously the idea is being taken, and am increasingly feeling it's a sign that deep down there is a realisation that as sold the camera is barely viable for most productions for HD use at all (at least for a few years), and talk of the Firestore is desperation.
After a demo showing a scenario which could have been hand crafted to show off the merits of P2, (which it does have, along with problems of it's own) I've bought up workflow issues with Panasonic reps at shows in the past, and each time it's ended up with being offered a "solution" that just leaves me saying "but that's more hassle than tape!" No further argument is offered, and I've then moved on. If anyone from Panasonic wishes to comment in this forum, then please do - though I'm not expecting an answer. I've failed to be given a satisfactory one in the past, and believe that's simply because there is not one.
Alex Leith
10-14-2005, 05:28 PM
I think P2 has its merits. The greatest challenge for those of us sitting down the lower price end of the market it the price.
I do like the look of the Infinity, and the idea of recording onto Iomega RevPro is fantastic! From my point of view I would have loved Panasonic to have ditched the miniDV tape drive for a less expensive than P2 system. Jan says the miniDV drive is there for those who are making the transition from SD to HD. I think those who aren't ready should stick with their DVXs.
That said, if I were in Panansonic's shoes, from a marketing point of view I'd be nervous to loose the tape drive competely. A DV mechanism is inexpensive and it opens the camera to a considerably wider potential market. More people would be put off without any sort of tape drive, than would be put off by only being able to record HD onto P2 cards (I guess).
Anyway, it's designed now, so no amount of wanting it to have a slot loading drive that records Super 3D HD onto inexpensive ice-cream tub lids is going to change it. :grin:
wabbit
10-14-2005, 05:50 PM
Then buy one of those other solutions. Some get it, some don't. Some are impressed with HDV, some are not. Some would prefer P2 even if a cheap DVCPRO HD tape deck were available, some don't.
If you are one of the ones who want HDV, this is not your camera, so move on. Why continually attack that which is not going to work for you as if that means it won't work for anyone? You have choices, move on. The reasons for Panasonic's decisions have been openingly discussed. If you don't like it, move on.
I don't see the point in discussing that which can not be changed. When the camera comes out, find flaws with it's performance as you wish, it won't be perfect but $10,000 won't buy you perfection. For that matter neither will $100,000.
Sure you have right to complain until your fingers fall off and your voice becomes horse but why? What point does it serve? Are you thinking it will cause Panasonic to dump P2? Adopt HDV in the HVX? It won't. Are you trying to legitimize HDV because you are concerned it will quickly become a professional joke when a realitively cheap professional format comes out? It might, but complaining about it won't change that either.
There is no doubt P2 is not for everyone so choose a system that works for you. Do you need everyone to have the same camera as you to feel better about your purchase? They won't, no matter what choice you make.
P2 is expensive right now and prohibitive for some, but to others it is not. It will fall perfect into our workflow and budget. It's what we have been dreaming about for years and we are thrilled it will soon be available.
We get it, we see the downsides of P2, it is something we feel will work for us. We see the downsides of HDV, it doesn't work for us, we have a choice, we have moved on.
How many different ways does it need to be stated. It appeals to us, not you. So what? If you like strawberry ice cream or Honda Civics, am I required to like them for your choice to be ok?
Who knows, maybe P2 will have too much data loss to not make it a successful format. I don't know and neither do you. Let's wait and find out.
The HVX is pretty much set in stone now. If you want to keep complaining about that which you don't know the details about and can do nothing to change, go for it. But seriously, why are you bothering?
Cheers!
wabbit
10-14-2005, 05:54 PM
LOL, I guess Braw beat me to my point...nevermind, ignore my above thread. :grin:
harddrive
10-14-2005, 06:39 PM
You obviously don't like it, so why do you hang out in a forum thread that's all about it? Do you want those that like the prospect of the camera to change their minds because of your written words? Why?
I came here for information. On other forums everybody's written words count as just debate even when in disagreement, as long as cogently argued. I didn't realise that here it was necessary to just make complimentary platitudes, and gloss over obvious flaws in logic.
That's your opinion (on recording HD), but I as well as many others on this board would vehemently disagree with that statement. You have laptop, P2, and Firestore before the camera is released. More will crop up..
Walking around doing actuality filming with a laptop isn't very practical, is it? P2 doesn't allow me to record much without vast expense. I use a Firestore regularly for SD, and it is not 100% reliable - sometimes it fails to capture a clip, but I can always go back to the tape copy when that is a problem. The thought of buying a camera, not being able to viably use either of it's inbuilt recording mechanisms, and having to spend extra money on a third party solution that I know to be less than 100% reliable....... well......
You look at this camera wrong. It isn't like the JVC and the Canon, though it's priced in their range. It's a mini Varicam with some compromises for the sake of cost.
It takes more than DVCProHD recording to make a Varicam. I suggest you compare (say) the output of a F900 dubbed to HDV, and the output of a 1/3" prosumer camera recorded to DVCProHD or HDCAM. I suspect you will find the high quality is associated with the camera front end in the main, far less with the recording medium. The codec and bitrates used in HDV are actually better than broadcast HD.
The Firestore is pimped to HDV and DV cameras as well. It's an alternative to tape. It has been around before P2. What is the point of this? ........and........Go get a HD100 or XL H1, but the second I catch you using the Firestore or SDI out I'm going to call you on being a hypocrite. You had better use the HDV in camera or you will have just negated every single point you just made.
You obviously haven't even bothered to read my post at all carefully, even the bits you quote. You actually quoted me saying "I came onto this board with an open mind recently as a Firestore user, following a link from another thread regarding that's possible use with an HVX." I regularly DO use a Firestore, but the point is that operationally the Firestore is very useful in our operation, but the perception of all of us is that is only true AS LONG AS USED AS WELL AS TAPE. I would not use one by itself, it's not an alternative to tape, but with tape it provides an ideal combination. The FS for rapid download to an edit, the tape as a backup in case of glitches, and a longer term archive. In HD that sweetness would also be true with a HD100 or an XL H1, but not a P2 camera with a tape drive that's useless in HD.
I am going to have to call you on the open minded part of your comments. You have decided this camera sucks for you and offers more problems than solutions. So why are you bringing any of this up? After talking to reps about it, there's little to no way any of us who know as much if not less than you do about it are going to sway you.
Why am I bringing any of this up? It was to have hopefully had a reasoned discussion and debate (it's not too late) and if any well thought out counter arguments were made, I may even have changed my mind. So far that doesn't seem to have been the case.
harddrive
10-14-2005, 07:20 PM
If you are one of the ones who want HDV, this is not your camera, so move on. Why continually attack that which is not going to work for you as if that means it won't work for anyone? You have choices, move on. ...........
Sure you have right to complain until your fingers fall off and your voice becomes horse but why? What point does it serve? Are you thinking it will cause Panasonic to dump P2? Adopt HDV in the HVX? It won't. Are you trying to legitimize HDV because you are concerned it will quickly become a professional joke when a realitively cheap professional format comes out? It might, but complaining about it won't change that either.
..............But seriously, why are you bothering?
Continually attacking? Responding to a post detailing a list of drawbacks with the camera? Then responding to a reply which doesn't attempt to deal with the issues I raise, but whose tone is just "how dare you dislike this camera"? Would you not say your last post shows one "continually attacking", again without really answering the points I raised? You're determined to find no fault with the camera, get angry with anyone who does, though are not able to really directly and satisfactorily answer the points raised. I can only say that your last post smacked of "methinks thou doth protesteth too much". But seriously, if it's not possible to have a rational discussion, I can't be bothered.
harddrive
10-14-2005, 07:37 PM
There certainly isn't any mandate around here. Just an irritated user that is sick of hearing 12,001 people fly through bitching about the same thing. If it doesn't work for you then that's that.
So what's the point? If you're looking for factual information, it's all over this board. If you don't like what you see, why argue about it?
I came here fresh, I didn't know you already had had 12,001 people already saying the same thing, raising the same points. But in that case, are you trying to tell me that I and the other 12,000 are all totally wrong? Surely, surely it must occur to you that there really must be a problem? As for why bother, if 12,001 of us have actually bothered to come here, look around, ask our naive and (to you) very irritating questions, get shouted at, and fly through, then hopefully someone at Panasonic who is a little more pragmatic may actually take notice.
And even if the HVX200 spec is set in stone, the 12,001 of us (12,002 by now?) may, just possibly, have had a beneficial effect on whatever comes next. Isn't that worth a little effort?
wabbit
10-14-2005, 07:57 PM
The point is and always will be there are no answers to the limitations. They are what they are. That is the point. No need to attack anything. Each choice comes with compremises. Make the one that appeals to you. The point is why are you pointing out the limitations that have been covered over and over again.
The point to be made is not what are the problems some people have with the camera but why at this point are people still complaining about them. There appears to be no simple reason. For example, you seem to understand enough about the HVX and P2 to decided if it's right for you. What is the point of saying, "I don't like this" and "I don't like that". It is what it is. Like or don't, it's up to you. Stating your redundant concerns seems like typing exercise.
When the camera does come out I am sure their will be additional limitation, problems, weaknesses, whatever. At that point people will all share their discoveries with this group and others. They will be discuss, debated. Solutions or workarounds will be found for some, others might be address in future models. People considering a purchase will have to factor those issues into their buying decision. But until we have something new to learn about the camera, why rehash old issues that have been beaten into ground?
Way back when HDV was first hitting the market, I, like many others, voiced my concerns with it as a format. I hoped that it would not become a professional trend in lew of the big 3 working towards something less compressed. HDV has clearly caught on with some and since Panasonic is working on an alternative for people that don't like HDV what is the problem?
I, personally, am just trying to find a motivation for beating this dead horse. Can I ask you that?
Best
tomtv
10-14-2005, 10:19 PM
all of this leads me to ask this quesiton: "who's hiding the perfect camera without any flaws or drawbacks and meets the needs of every shooter in the world"? another question too: "Are the few who have gone off on some diatribe so void of work or things to experiment on with what they have that they need to spend this much finger pounding to to make a point or argue"?
Where is this thread leading to....? :( where is the discussion about new specs? Are all discussions in this forum about HVX200 condemmned to end in the same big argue each time? Nobody HAS TO buy this revolutionary product. Why do I say revolutionary? - well, because of it's specs.... and THAT'S why this thread has been opened. To share specs that have NOT YET been shared a lot or at all.... We could ask Jan directly for specs that have not yet been treat in this forum.... but if I were her, I would not read all this argue just to find maybe 1 question about a new spec for the HVX, hidden behind the million of words that are completely off this thread. Poor Cees Mutsaers: you had a good idea for a good thread and it is beeing spoiled for countless pages... Trying to reanimate this clinic-dead thread, I ask for some specs, seldom discussed here: what user-data can be recorded on the SD card?
harddrive
10-15-2005, 07:41 AM
Trust me Jan is active on this board and hears everything we say. You just have to be reasonable about what to expect.
I am, very reasonable. Like being given a simple redirection or answer to my first post rather than pages of personal ranting against me - your last post is far more reasoned, and impresses me far more, braw. I think the idea of HDV on the tape deck is very reasonable - the hardware is already there - and HDV to P2 in addition to DVCProHD is also reasonable. If you want the extra quality, and have the memory to record it, go with DVCProHD - if it won't fit, go with HDV. Vastly better than nothing?
Jan_Crittenden
10-15-2005, 07:52 AM
I think the idea of HDV on the tape deck is very reasonable - the hardware is already there - and HDV to P2 in addition to DVCProHD is also reasonable. If you want the extra quality, and have the memory to record it, go with DVCProHD - if it won't fit, go with HDV. Vastly better than nothing?
There are a number of reasons that HDV is not on the camera. 1. we are not a member of that cosortium. 2. If it did and someone were to look at the recording and were to comment about a problem that they saw with the picture, which is common in HDV, and then asked which camera, they may make the mistaken conclusion that that is what DVCPRO HD looks like. This could not and would not be allowed to ever happen. If you want HDV there are cameras that do it, if you want DVCPRO HD then this is your camera.
There are lots of features on the HVX that are there because of customer ideas, members of this board can say, hey that was my suggestion, but this is one that just didn't make and I think never will.
Best,
jan
Jan_Crittenden
10-15-2005, 07:54 AM
I ask for some specs, seldom discussed here: what user-data can be recorded on the SD card?
Okay I will join in trying to get this back on track. Cici, what kind of user data? You mean in the meta data?
Please clarify,
Jan
ok, then I just say:
I only know that the SD card is used for recording datas in case another user changes some settings on the camera or in case I have to work with another HVX and want my personal data on that cam without changing the users settings.
So I don't know anything about what can be saved on that card and what not, and I'm even not sure if I got the point of what for using this card...
fiercecurry
10-15-2005, 02:27 PM
So the HVX will have an SD card slot?
What this means, hopefully, is that you will
be able to save and upload your scene files or gamma settings like the SDX. Perhaps even download the ones for the SDX available off the Panaonic website. I asked about this in another post and no one replied.
Jan, is this true?
I like the idea of "able to save and upload your scene files or gamma settings like the SDX" on an HDX SD card. It doesn't seem far fetched that SDX and HDX capabilities can't be inter-exchanged on some levels.
Barry_Green
10-15-2005, 04:55 PM
The HVX does have a slot for an SD memory card. It sure would have been nice of us to remember to ask what it's for, but I'm afraid we didn't.
Presumably it will allow for saving/interchanging scene file settings. There's not much likelihood that scene files would be interchangeable from the big cameras, as they have more extensive menu control settings. Would be very nice though!
Jan_Crittenden
10-15-2005, 07:19 PM
The HVX does have a slot for an SD memory card. It sure would have been nice of us to remember to ask what it's for, but I'm afraid we didn't. Presumably it will allow for saving/interchanging scene file settings. There's not much likelihood that scene files would be interchangeable from the big cameras, as they have more extensive menu control settings. Would be very nice though!
Hi Barry,
I thought we talked about this, but unfortunately I blur 4 weeks into one fun evening with you and Jarred, pizza and quesadillas, ;-). The scene files can be transfered to the HVX , this is the "way it looks files." These are .txt and can be emailed and downloaded and all the cool stuff that we do with the SDX. I have the same guy retained for the scene file downloads to match the SDx downloads and then we also have you, the "main man" a creative force unto yourself. I can hardly wait to see what you do with this little baby. The scene file data is the gammas, the color the detail, and more to be dicovered in a week or two.
All the best,
Jan
Could the Whitebalance -parameters I set in manual WB be saved on the SD card?
I need a perfect set white-balance in case I can't control it on the coming underwater-housing. It's very difficult to get a white-balance with a very-strong green reference and to record this data on SD would save me to torture the cam's manual white-balance eacht time with strong green reference... and the conditions of the man. WB even with reference change each time, depending on daytime - so in the dark, I can't make a man. WB with green reference as any (yellowish) lamp would spoil the green... The SD card could be the guarant for my personal "standard-WB"
fiercecurry
10-15-2005, 08:43 PM
Jan,
youre saying these will be available for download off the Panasonic site in a week or two?