Panasonic release professional camcorder with CMOS sensor.

Huy Vu said:
AVC-Intra is indeed impressive, but it'll remain to be seen whether the camera itself can do the codec justice. The codec is full raster, but will there actually be that many pixel on the chip, which is still smaller than the EX3? My thinking is that there won't be since Panasonic has never been about the resolution. My guess is that resolution wise the EX series will remain the champ, and low light performance might be a toss up.
Click to expand...


Go take a read on Barry's article, he has put in a little comparison as well. And yes the chip set and the codec are a nice match. Interstingly enough, Kevin sent me a DVCPRO HD version of the same footage once he got home as he did not have anything that would record and MXF file in AVC-Intra. Barry send me footage in AVC-Intra, There is more to see in the AVC-Intra.

The Chip set on the HPX300 is 1920 X 1080 and all of them are available for image gathering.

Best,

Jan
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
Go take a read on Barry's article, he has put in a little comparison as well. And yes the chip set and the codec are a nice match. Interstingly enough, Kevin sent me a DVCPRO HD version of the same footage once he got home as he did not have anything that would record and MXF file in AVC-Intra. Barry send me footage in AVC-Intra, There is more to see in the AVC-Intra.

The Chip set on the HPX300 is 1920 X 1080 and all of them are available for image gathering.

Best,

Jan
Click to expand...

That sounds great, but having all of them on a 1/3 sized sensor seems like it will take a big hit in low light, being that each pixel has to be that much smaller to fit 1/3 sensors.
 
Green Hornet said:
That sounds great, but having all of them on a 1/3 sized sensor seems like it will take a big hit in low light, being that each pixel has to be that much smaller to fit 1/3 sensors.
Click to expand...

As I said, take a look at Barry's article, it isn't as different as one would think. It has similar sensitivity to the HPX170 but it has almost 4 X the number of pixels. CMOS changes some rules. And read what Barry has said about comparing the 170 to the EX1, or the HPX300 to the EX1. It is in the article.

Best,

Jan
 
Too much camera for my needs....
I'd be happy with 3 pixel shifting 1/3 chips with a superior fixed lens

I do find the CMOS 1920 x 1080 on 1/3 chips interesting however and I would like to see how well that works out with that many pixels in play.

With CMOS being cheaper could this be the future of all digital cameras DSLR and video?
 
Last edited:
Jan_Crittenden said:
As I said, take a look at Barry's article, it isn't as different as one would think. It has similar sensitivity to the HPX170 but it has almost 4 X the number of pixels. CMOS changes some rules. And read what Barry has said about comparing the 170 to the EX1, or the HPX300 to the EX1. It is in the article.

Best,

Jan
Click to expand...


Okay, so I checked it out.
The camera seems to have noticably more RESOLUTION than the 150, 200 and 170 cameras. I would have liked that kind of RESOLUTION in the 150, 170 and 200 cameras, and then, for me, they would be perfect.

In this not so perfect world, the HMC150 makes the most sense, for me.


The HPX300 offers the resolution that I think we all have wanted.

Things I didn't like:

1) The anton battery, I believe it cost around $400 for spares.

2) P2 - If it comes with none, the cost of them raises the price greatly.
If you throw in two 8 gigs, that would be a good starter package to get you shooting..

3) The lens mount over long period seems like it could break easily..time wil tell.

4) The 10k price is good, but you the actual cost to get shooting (more batteries, and P2 cards will put you much higher)

5) You can get a 2/3rds camera for $5 grand more

6) If it's just about resolution, you can get an EX1 for $4k less, and shoot to SDHC cards (via an adapter) so no further costs.

7) The EX1 and EX3 are likely to be lighter (not sure though)

8) Other cameras don't need the heavy batteries and expensive batteries. (although most use anton batteries I know), maybe make that as an option, not an only solution, like the EX1 is.

9) It's now CMOS, so how is it in low light with photographers flashes around ( events, pagents, news, the audience I think you are after with shoulder mount)

10) I think the 500 would be my choice if I were looking for an over 10k priced shoulder mount camera. If I were looking for something between 6k and 10k,
I would not feel great about it, but would likely get the EX1
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top