Barry_Green
Moderator
Yesterday was an interesting day. I got to go to the Panasonic headquarters in NJ to settle the question of relative skew/wobble/jello between the HPX300 and the EX1. Not only did I get a chance to put both cameras through their paces, but I also had a rather notable audience, including Jan Crittenden (the Product Line Manager for the HPX300 in the USA) and several of the engineers from Japan!
They had built a side-by-side rig for some other shooting purposes; we pressed it into service for the first phase of the test, but I wasn't happy with the idea that a slight parallax error could "skew" the results, so at the end of the test I bolted a Bogen 501 head on top of the HPX300 and mounted the EX1 to that, and got the critical test measurements. With that rig I could ensure that there was no parallax error side-to-side, that each camera was centered horizontally and I balanced them such that one was pointing slightly upwards and one slightly downwards towards the same target.
The target was about 25 feet away, which further eliminates parallax.
I set the cameras as similarly as I could get them, with an emphasis on removing as many variables as possible. Accordingly, I turned detail off both of them, I turned off the lens image stabilizer in the EX1, and I set the field of view to be as identical as I could get it so that the relative image magnification would be the same. The tests were conducted near the telephoto end of the lens; the EX1 was at about 75mm and the HPX300 was set to match its field of view.
I also set the shutter manually, to the same value on both. I used 1/60th for normal-view testing, and 1/1000 for super-crisp to remove motion blur from the tests. I also did one test at 12fps with 1/12 shutter.
I put them through their paces in the following combinations:
1080/60i @ 1/1000
1080/60i @ 1/60
1080/24p @ 1/60
1080/24p @ 1/1000
720/60p @ 1/1000
720/60p @ 1/60
720/24p @ 1/60
720/24p @ 1/1000
720/12p @ 1/12
The test consisted of rapid panning past a Fujinon backfocus chart. The contrast of the white left page against the black-background backfocus chart on the right page made for an excellent, easily-definable and easily-measurable skew angle.
For each test, we sync'd the cameras up with a good old-fashioned hand clap so that in post I could extract identical frames for comparison.
Okay, so -- blather, blather, blather, methodology and settings, blah blah -- what's the results?
Very, very interesting results indeed. Very. In fact, I was surprised and somewhat shocked, and so were the engineers.
So, here's the lowdown: in 60i, and in 60P, at any shutter angle, the EX1 and the HPX300 are within spittin' distance of each other. When there was any sort of noticeable difference, the HPX300 actually had LESS skew, about 27% less on average. This usually showed up in 720/24p and 720/12p.
BUT -- and, as Pee Wee Herman said, "everyone has a big BUT" -- there's one mode where the HPX300 was dramatically more skew-y. And that's 1080/24p. And it wasn't a minor difference, it was a big difference, with the HPX showing an average of 75% more skew. And, since 1080/24p is such a popular mode, this is why people have been reporting that the HPX300 shows more jello than the EX1 or EX3. In all other circumstances the HPX300 should be less skewy and less jello-y, but in 1080/24p mode it's much moreso.
I was surprised at the difference, but so were the engineers. Why would 1080/60i performance be nearly identical, yet 1080/24p performance be so different? Or, for another perhaps more intriguing question, why would the HPX300 show 27% less skew in 720/24p, but 75% more skew in 1080/24p? How could they be so different?
I don't have the answer, but I did get a commitment from the Japanese engineers that they are committed to studying the situation. They saw it, they saw the difference, I gave them copies of the footage to take back with them, and I have all confidence that they will be able to address it. And, it is my understanding that if a firmware update does become available, every HPX300 camera will be eligible for it.
For those who want the pedantic details, a table follows which gives the measured skew difference, in pixels, between the two cameras, in all modes. The skew was calculated by using PhotoShop's "marquee" tool to encircle the edge of the skewed triangle, from start to finish, and having PhotoShop's "info" window report the width of the marquee window.
(keep in mind motion blur and interlacing made it a little harder to measure the 1/60 and 60i frames pixel-perfectly)
(also, the frames were extracted from any old portion of the video, so there's no guarantee that the speed was the same between any two tests, but the speed is guaranteed identical between cameras within each test)
(in the following table, smaller numbers mean less skew; underlined statements are links to the side-by-side pictures)
1080/60i @ 1/1000: EX1 112, HPX300 119; HPX300 shows 6% more skew*
1080/60i @ 1/60: EX1 160, HPX300 146; HPX300 shows 9.5% less skew
1080/24p @ 1/60: EX1 115, HPX300 185; HPX300 shows 62% more skew*
1080/24p @ 1/1000: EX1 59, HPX300 111; HPX300 shows 88% more skew
720/60p @ 1/1000: EX1 144, HPX300 145; same amount of skew
720/60P @ 1/60: EX1 94, HPX300 77; HPX300 shows 19% less skew
720/24p @ 1/60: EX1 39, HPX300 27; HPX300 shows 31% less skew
720/24p @ 1/1000: EX1 93, HPX300 72; HPX300 shows 22% less skew*
720/12p @ 1/12: EX1 38, HPX300 27; HPX300 shows 30% less skew
* = tests conducted with over/under for eliminating any potential parallax error.
They had built a side-by-side rig for some other shooting purposes; we pressed it into service for the first phase of the test, but I wasn't happy with the idea that a slight parallax error could "skew" the results, so at the end of the test I bolted a Bogen 501 head on top of the HPX300 and mounted the EX1 to that, and got the critical test measurements. With that rig I could ensure that there was no parallax error side-to-side, that each camera was centered horizontally and I balanced them such that one was pointing slightly upwards and one slightly downwards towards the same target.
The target was about 25 feet away, which further eliminates parallax.
I set the cameras as similarly as I could get them, with an emphasis on removing as many variables as possible. Accordingly, I turned detail off both of them, I turned off the lens image stabilizer in the EX1, and I set the field of view to be as identical as I could get it so that the relative image magnification would be the same. The tests were conducted near the telephoto end of the lens; the EX1 was at about 75mm and the HPX300 was set to match its field of view.
I also set the shutter manually, to the same value on both. I used 1/60th for normal-view testing, and 1/1000 for super-crisp to remove motion blur from the tests. I also did one test at 12fps with 1/12 shutter.
I put them through their paces in the following combinations:
1080/60i @ 1/1000
1080/60i @ 1/60
1080/24p @ 1/60
1080/24p @ 1/1000
720/60p @ 1/1000
720/60p @ 1/60
720/24p @ 1/60
720/24p @ 1/1000
720/12p @ 1/12
The test consisted of rapid panning past a Fujinon backfocus chart. The contrast of the white left page against the black-background backfocus chart on the right page made for an excellent, easily-definable and easily-measurable skew angle.
For each test, we sync'd the cameras up with a good old-fashioned hand clap so that in post I could extract identical frames for comparison.
Okay, so -- blather, blather, blather, methodology and settings, blah blah -- what's the results?
Very, very interesting results indeed. Very. In fact, I was surprised and somewhat shocked, and so were the engineers.
So, here's the lowdown: in 60i, and in 60P, at any shutter angle, the EX1 and the HPX300 are within spittin' distance of each other. When there was any sort of noticeable difference, the HPX300 actually had LESS skew, about 27% less on average. This usually showed up in 720/24p and 720/12p.
BUT -- and, as Pee Wee Herman said, "everyone has a big BUT" -- there's one mode where the HPX300 was dramatically more skew-y. And that's 1080/24p. And it wasn't a minor difference, it was a big difference, with the HPX showing an average of 75% more skew. And, since 1080/24p is such a popular mode, this is why people have been reporting that the HPX300 shows more jello than the EX1 or EX3. In all other circumstances the HPX300 should be less skewy and less jello-y, but in 1080/24p mode it's much moreso.
I was surprised at the difference, but so were the engineers. Why would 1080/60i performance be nearly identical, yet 1080/24p performance be so different? Or, for another perhaps more intriguing question, why would the HPX300 show 27% less skew in 720/24p, but 75% more skew in 1080/24p? How could they be so different?
I don't have the answer, but I did get a commitment from the Japanese engineers that they are committed to studying the situation. They saw it, they saw the difference, I gave them copies of the footage to take back with them, and I have all confidence that they will be able to address it. And, it is my understanding that if a firmware update does become available, every HPX300 camera will be eligible for it.
For those who want the pedantic details, a table follows which gives the measured skew difference, in pixels, between the two cameras, in all modes. The skew was calculated by using PhotoShop's "marquee" tool to encircle the edge of the skewed triangle, from start to finish, and having PhotoShop's "info" window report the width of the marquee window.
(keep in mind motion blur and interlacing made it a little harder to measure the 1/60 and 60i frames pixel-perfectly)
(also, the frames were extracted from any old portion of the video, so there's no guarantee that the speed was the same between any two tests, but the speed is guaranteed identical between cameras within each test)
(in the following table, smaller numbers mean less skew; underlined statements are links to the side-by-side pictures)
1080/60i @ 1/1000: EX1 112, HPX300 119; HPX300 shows 6% more skew*
1080/60i @ 1/60: EX1 160, HPX300 146; HPX300 shows 9.5% less skew
1080/24p @ 1/60: EX1 115, HPX300 185; HPX300 shows 62% more skew*
1080/24p @ 1/1000: EX1 59, HPX300 111; HPX300 shows 88% more skew
720/60p @ 1/1000: EX1 144, HPX300 145; same amount of skew
720/60P @ 1/60: EX1 94, HPX300 77; HPX300 shows 19% less skew
720/24p @ 1/60: EX1 39, HPX300 27; HPX300 shows 31% less skew
720/24p @ 1/1000: EX1 93, HPX300 72; HPX300 shows 22% less skew*
720/12p @ 1/12: EX1 38, HPX300 27; HPX300 shows 30% less skew
* = tests conducted with over/under for eliminating any potential parallax error.
Last edited: