Live from the Panasonic Press Conference at NAB 2008

Do we know anything about AVCHDs handling of different frame rates? Since it's not a "streaming" format, does it encode any pulldown, or is, for example, 24p @ 21Mbps less compressed than 30p @ 21Mbps?
 
Armstrongfilms said:
Ok.....my 1st post here, after owning a DVX (a model bought 2 weeks after release), then an HVX (bought within a month of release), i CANNOT believe that panasonic is still messing around with 1/3" ccd's.....and to have SO many options in a camera lineup to choose from with 1/3" imagers seems idiotic and may be a shot in the foot. at the very LEAST they could offer removable lenses in the 1/3" lineup, then there would finally be something to talk about. new codecs and small improvements to a 1/3" sensor are just not exciting until they quit pixel shifting with offset chips and cheating the bitrates. if this is all the hype this year at NAB08 i dont even have a reason to visit their booth. i would opt for 2/3" hpx500 over ANY of the new prosumer cameras. and do NOT kid yourselves folks, if the sensor is less than 1/2" you are prosumer, not professional.....the entire term was branded from the original 3ccd canons and sony's, which.....10 years ago.....were 1/4 and 1/3" ccds........time for them to get rid of them by putting them in 4 cameras priced from 3k-6k

my 2c
Click to expand...

uhh em. It's not the size of the chip, but how you ...."

Personally, I would have liked to see a 1/2 inch chip as well, and of course a 16x lens. Apparently, Panasonic doesn't appreciate my profound wisdom.

Oh well.

As for whether my camera says "professional" or "tremendous hack" on the side of it- I could care less. That's what white gaffers tape and a black sharpie are for. Sometimes I even write "Varicam" on the side of ye 'ole HVX.

I wonder how "Arriflex" would look.... ? ;-)

I suspect that 1/3 inch chips in this genre of cameras will go away eventually, but not until they can squeeze a bit more profit out of them. Hopefully that's sooner, rather than later. I suspect that Sony's implementation of 1/2 inch chips will put a little heat under Panasonic. This dynamic seems to be mirroring sensor sizes and camera development in the still camera world.

As for me, I'm gonna try and avoid purchasing another 1/3 inch chip camera this year, and wait for 2009's announcements. If these new and improved HVX-200A chips are really all that, then maybe I'll change my tune. Of course, the HPX 500 is another option.

In the mean time I've got a DVX100A to clear from the inventory.
 
hotchkiss, it's my understanding that a 1/2" CCD can't be produced in this market, the only reason the ex1 had it is because of the lower power requirements of CMOS and even then the thing has two giant heat vents on it's side. A 1/2 CCD in that form factor would cook, which is why the hpx500 was reduced in price to kind of meet in the middle.

Maybe Barry could shed more light on this but that's my understanding of it.
 
hotchkiss said:
I suspect that 1/3 inch chips in this genre of cameras will go away eventually
Click to expand...
Really? If they do, it'll only be to something smaller.

I suspect that Sony's implementation of 1/2 inch chips will put a little heat under Panasonic.
Click to expand...
Why? Sony's been doing 1/2" for at least a decade; the DSR300 was 1/2", the DSR400 was 1/2", the PDW-F330 was 1/2", and the F350 was 1/2". Nothing new here.

Panasonic's done 1/2" before, but they don't think it's a professional size. They think (if I'm conveying the attitude properly) that 2/3" is the professional size, and if you want a pro camera, you want 2/3". And 1/3" is for small portable cameras. 1/2" was a halfway ground that JVC experimented with and abandoned, and Panasonic experimented with and abandoned.
 
Last edited:
ecking said:
hotchkiss, it's my understanding that a 1/2" CCD can't be produced in this market, the only reason the ex1 had it is because of the lower power requirements of CMOS and even then the thing has two giant heat vents on it's side. A 1/2 CCD in that form factor would cook, which is why the hpx500 was reduced in price to kind of meet in the middle.

Maybe Barry could shed more light on this but that's my understanding of it.
Click to expand...
A 1/2" HD CCD? Probably couldn't be done at full 1920x1080, no -- at least, not progressive. The only way to get 1920x1080 @ progressive was to go CMOS, which is why Sony went CMOS.

There's an interesting quote by Juan Martinez of Sony in an article he did explaining why one would choose CMOS or CCD. He basically said that if you want the best quality for digital cinema applications, you want CCD (which is why the new F35 and F23 are CCD). But if you're making a small handheld camera, CMOS is their preferred choice.

Sounds silly, but basically I don't think Sony could have made the EX1 if it wasn't CMOS. Juan said in a later post somewhere that if they'd made the EX1 with CCD "it would have burned up." So if you want that many pixels on that size of a chip, you have to go CMOS, where the lower power requirements keep the heat buildup under control.

You could probably make a 1280x720 CCD in 1/2", but you couldn't get a 1920x1080 1/2" in CCD using today's technology.

Bigger cinema cameras can use CCD because they're not concerned about power requirements and can deal with the associated heat issues. But a little handheld camera needs long battery life and a way to dissipate the heat.
 
Barry_Green said:
You could probably make a 1280x720 CCD in 1/2", but you couldn't get a 1920x1080 1/2" in CCD using today's technology.
Click to expand...

Isn't that exactly what the HVX200a and the HPX170 will have? The sensors are quotet to have 1,1 million pixel which indicates a pixel distribution of 1280x720. On the HVX200a the angle of view has changed, the lens being the same as on the HVX200. You, Barry, were the one assuming that it is so due to a slightly bigger sensor. So, wouldn´t that be kind of a 1/3"+ sensor? Why doesn´t Pana try to make a point with that? A BIGGER, a 1/3"+ sensor? That would be the announcement that sells...
 
Last edited:
I just wanted to take a time out to thank Barry for both the information he posted here, and the time he took with people on the floor in the Panny booth. By the time we got to him at about 3 o'clock on Monday, I am sure that he had answered the questions we had a couple of hundred times. But he was, as always, informative, gracious and encouraging.

As for the CMOS/CCD-1/2",1/3",2/3" inch discussion, Barry taught me a long time ago that there is no "best" in an objective sense. It's all about your application and needs. Even at 1/3' CCDs, the HVX is a kick-ass camera, doing things we could not have dreamed about few years ago. Increasing the low-light performance is a godsend, and while I can always use extra res, I'll take overall image quality and clients who drop their jaws over numbers on a spec sheet anyday.

Now the question is...am I ready to go completely tapeless, since they have a sub-10K P2 cam that will do that.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top