What Are P.A.P. Filters?

[dxl]

is there a video showing the difference between PAP1 and PAP2 under good light and low light?

[rzr219]

is there a video showing the difference between PAP1 and PAP2 under good light and low light?

I do remember seeing something but I couldn't find it. I use PAP1 now almost always unless I am shooting outdoors in bright light and handheld. Otherwise PAP1 lets me keep the f stop very low for a sharp picture. Here is what Barrys book gives spec wise (p215). PAP2 is close to ISO 320 and PAP2 is 640 ISO , so its almost 2xs as sensitive (Progressive Advanced Processing so its not just bumping up the ISO). Its a great tool to have with the push of a button without adding gain noise to your picture. Try it and you will see.

[Jim Simon]

the camera needs to power down and back up in order to switch between the two PAP modes.

Damn.

[KINOKS]

I was wondering about the argument of a 10 bit codec in a camera with a small chip set such as the HPX250. Those extra 2 bits as I understand it only encode the grain that much better and thus making the 10 bit codec rather unnecessary. Barry; do you think that it pays of to use the PAP 1 setting, as it removes the noise and thus making the 10 bit codec more effective?

[Stringer]

Funny that Panasonic has deliberately cloaked the PAP-1 feature behind a hidden menu. It's almost like they are saying "don't try it until you really know the camera well."

I hope it doesn't cause any PAP-smearing to the image (sorry, couldn't help it)

[mcgeedigital]

I was wondering about the argument of a 10 bit codec in a camera with a small chip set such as the HPX250. Those extra 2 bits as I understand it only encode the grain that much better and thus making the 10 bit codec rather unnecessary. Barry; do you think that it pays of to use the PAP 1 setting, as it removes the noise and thus making the 10 bit codec more effective?

Your math is wrong.

8 bit = 256 levels of gray.
10bit = 1024 levels of gray.

Big difference.

[timbook2]

I had some noise issues in PAP1 on a bright outside shoot where I forgot to turn to PAP2. ND filter was maxed and iris was somewhere around 6. I got a LOT of noise in dark moving areas and thought the cam had a technical fault. One has to exrecise these setting switches to be able to fully take control of the 250 when one has to be fast and get the best shot.

[digitalgecko]

I was shooting PAP1 in a dark auditorium yesterday with +6 db. The footage looked quite good for what it was. No noise. Very happy with the 250.

[n8ture]

I had some noise issues in PAP1 on a bright outside shoot where I forgot to turn to PAP2. ND filter was maxed and iris was somewhere around 6. I got a LOT of noise in dark moving areas and thought the cam had a technical fault. One has to exrecise these setting switches to be able to fully take control of the 250 when one has to be fast and get the best shot.

That's not necessarily PAP1. I was shooting the annular solar eclipse with pretty much the same settings. ND all the way, fast shutter speed and closed down the iris. Lots of noise in the dark areas. Backed off the ND one and opened up the iris some and noise was gone.
PAP was set to default.

[KINOKS]

Your math is wrong.

8 bit = 256 levels of gray.
10bit = 1024 levels of gray.

Big difference.

I know how much shades of grey an 8 bit or 10 bit picture has. It wasn't what I was referring to. There is an argument that a 10bit codec doesn't really pay of in a small chip camcorder. As I understand it all that extra headroom is more or less wasted on encoding the grain in the picture that much better than an 8 bit codec does. In a camera like the HPX250 an 8bit 100Mbit coedc would probably be better then a 10bit 100Mbit codec. This could be tested with an externall recorder or something...

Small chip camcorders have lots of grain compared to bigger chip camcorders.

A 10 bit codec should have a much wider bandwidth than only 100 Mbits.

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/archive/.../t-466803.html

So seeing as the PAP 1 eliminates much of the noise via temporal filtering it would be logical that the 10 bit codec would be utilised better. But the question is
does the PAP1 degrade the picture in terms of fine detail that much more than PAP 2 that it again negates the use of 10bit. Hope I was clear...