Evolutionary Changes to HMC40??

D

Denniscasey

Well-known member
I have been "shopping" for HD camcorder for about two months now and HMC40 is my top choice so far. I wonder if "newer" production models have evolved to include new features or other updates even though model number (AG-HMC40) stays the same---has anyone seen any such indications?

I wonder because I keep checking places like B&H and lately I see the Edius software is no longer listed as included, price has come down slightly to $1589 and it seems like some features listed have changed--for instance I don't remember earlier features listing ability to downconvert HD to SD. However, I did not keep hard copies of older descriptions and at time I was reading features downconverting HD to SD in camera just did not catch my attention.
 
Edius is not as good as Vegas or Premiere, Is the same camera from one year ago, No you can not get a file in standard definition , you can see it on a monitor with standard definition but will not get a standard definition file.
The HMC80 can record in standard.
The price is fantastic, I bought this camera one year ago for $ 400 more.
Panasonic is getting ready for the landing of the Canon XA 10
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/749467-REG/Canon_4922B002_XA10_HD_Professional_Camcorder.html.
I prefer the Panasonic, but take a look to the Canon it is a new concept.
 
Thank you Felipe. I am learning many things as I begin move from tape based standard definition Sony VX2000 to file based high definition. Regarding HD to SD downconversion--the combination of my "newness" to HD and marketing hyperbole used by all advertising led to my misunderstanding. Here is what B&H said in their latest description (taken I am sure directly from some Panasonic document):" The AG-HMC40 is equipped with both component (Mini D4) video outputs and AV output (AV multi terminals), allowing HD images to be down-converted and output as SD images while they are being recorded or played. At the same time, a 16:9 or 4:3 aspect ratio can be selected for side crop, letterbox, or squeeze images. Audio output (AV multi terminals 2 channels) enables a wide variety of applications, such as viewing on an external monitor or SD dubbing." I had not noticed that before so was wondering if Panasonic updated newer versions of HMC40--in which case I would want to buy latest "version" of HMC40.

However, to help me with my understanding, you can "only" record 1080 or 720 HD video in HMC40 (which of course HD video is why you buy the HMC40) and these various 1080 and 720 formats are all that is output to computer or editing software via USB port or output from camera to HD TV via HDMI terminal on HMC40. However, if one only has access to a standard def TV the HD video recorded by HMC40 is downconverted by some chip in HMC40 to SD video and output via HMC40's component or AV terminals for viewing on SD TV.

Additionally, and this is just my curiosity, I currently use Liquid editing software with a breakout box that provides for AV and component cable input to Liquid so I guess I could use these outputs from HMC40 to load the HD video recorded by HMC40 onto Liquid in some standard def format to do standard def editing? Don't know why I would even want to do that, just a curiosity. Actually I now also have Avid Media Composer so once I learn how to use that I would in reality download HMC40 HD and if needed convert to standard def within the Media Composer editor.

I mentioned Edius since not providing it now could be one more reason (besides fact that HMC40 is facing more competition) price of HMC40 is coming down--it did seem Edius was included to also help with transcoding HMC40 unique type of AVCHD codec. As I have mentioned in previous posts the most daunting subject to me at this point is/are the different codecs and within codec type the different varieties used by various camera manufacturers and the implication this has to various editors. For instance, Panasonic seems to use its own variety of AVCHD vs Sony or Canon "version" of AVCHD. Newer versions of Vegas and Premiere that you mention seem much easier to use AVCHD input vs Media Composer which is more limited in codecs it natively can use and it requires various types of transcoding to use the Panasonic form of AVCHD.

I have read about the new Canon XA10HD and it does have some good features (one is XLR input seems included in $1999 price vs add on required for HMC40)--I wonder how the 1/3 inch CMOS sensor it uses would compare to the three 1/4 CMOS sensors in HMC40 on basis of low light capture and color accuracy? Regards, Dennis
 
The HMC40 model of today is exactly the same HMC40 model as of a year ago. It is highly unlikely that Panasonic will introduce an HMC40a model in the near future.

You may also want to consider the HMC80 camera, while a bit bigger, it does offer an SD mode and an improved viewfinder (higher resolution).


Bob Diaz
 
Denniscasey said:
Thank you Felipe.
Click to expand...
720 Is more than you imagine, After extensive testing , I noticed that 720 30 p is the best format for down scaling to DVD, Also I noticed that Edius as well as Premiere produce a lot of aliasing when you down scale to DVD, Sony Vegas is the best editing software for this purpose, besides is a fantastic in any other respect.
About the Canon, I personally like better the traditional build of my HMC40, and produces a fantastic video. However check reviews on that new model from Canon
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/News/Canon-Unveils-New-Professional-Camcorder-the-XA10.htm
 
Denniscasey said:
Here is what B&H said in their latest description (taken I am sure directly from some Panasonic document):" The AG-HMC40 is equipped with both component (Mini D4) video outputs and AV output (AV multi terminals), allowing HD images to be down-converted and output as SD images while they are being recorded or played. At the same time, a 16:9 or 4:3 aspect ratio can be selected for side crop, letterbox, or squeeze images. Audio output (AV multi terminals 2 channels) enables a wide variety of applications, such as viewing on an external monitor or SD dubbing."
Click to expand...
Composite output is SD only, so the camera has to do SOMETHING to output recorded HD through composite. This is a non-feature.

What some consumer camcorders can do is they can take HD video already recorded on built-in memory and downconvert it into SD video and record it onto a memory card. AFAIK, the HMC40 cannot do that.

The HMC40 also lacks in these areas:

* it cannot record SD video (the consumer Sonys record MPEG-2 copliant with DVD-Video, while the HMC80 records DV)
* it cannot record simultaneously on two cards or relay from one card to another because it has only one card slot
* it cannot record FullHD, that is 1080p at either 50 or 60 fps progressive, which consumer Panasonics and Sonys can do
* its wide angle is about 40 mm, while the comparable consumer Panasonics have 35 mm lens, and the new Sony CX-700V has 26 mm lens.
* In bad light it will most likely lose to the new Canons, which have lower resolution
* its LCD is only 200K pixels, not enough for HD focusing, but focus assist helps a bit. The new consumer Canons and Sonys have 900K pixel screens.

I hope that Panasonic updates the HMC40 with the latest lens and codec from its consumer lineup, but even as is the HMC40 is still probably the best value on the market. The XA10 is priced at $2,000 and it is too small to be comfortable to use and some of its button placement is downright awkward. The XF100 is great but it is $3,000 and is not available yet. The HM100 is worse in low light than the HMC40 and its image stabilizer is borderline nonexistent. Recently I sold my HM100 and bought a used HMC40 on eBay for less than $1300 including XLR adapter. I think this was a great deal but you can routinely find one without adapter for about $1,200. For this price nothing comes close, and because there is no tape you should not care much about hours, heads, drum, rollers, pulleys and all this mechanical stuff. Tapeless is good.

Denniscasey said:
As I have mentioned in previous posts the most daunting subject to me at this point is/are the different codecs and within codec type the different varieties used by various camera manufacturers and the implication this has to various editors. For instance, Panasonic seems to use its own variety of AVCHD vs Sony or Canon "version" of AVCHD.
Click to expand...
If one does a full and proper implementation, there are no different versions. There is just one AVC/H.264 spec for video, AC3/PCM spec for audio and a transport stream for holding it all together. A properly written editor (like Sony Vegas) would not care for minute differences in various flavors, while an editor written to camera manufacturers' specs may require constant updates.

Felipe Henao said:
720 Is more than you imagine, After extensive testing , I noticed that 720 30 p is the best format for down scaling to DVD
Click to expand...
DVD-Video is by spec interlaced-only, so handling progressive video requires extra steps from an encoder like setting progressive flags, and from a player like checking the flags and/or detecting the cadence. Many U.S.-spec'd DVD players cannot handle 30p properly. They will show the video but you may lose half of the vertical resolution and you have already lost half of the temporal resolution. In this regard 24p is much safer because it is almost universally supported.
 
Drill Bit said:
DVD-Video is by spec interlaced-only, so handling progressive video requires extra steps from an encoder like setting progressive flags, and from a player like checking the flags and/or detecting the cadence. Many U.S.-spec'd DVD players cannot handle 30p properly. They will show the video but you may lose half of the vertical resolution and you have already lost half of the temporal resolution. In this regard 24p is much safer because it is almost universally supported.
Click to expand...

That is probably where Vegas does its job, You shoot progressive and in Vegas when you render 29.97 MPG DVD Field order None ( Progressive ),
Then you create your VOB files in DVD architect of course interlaced, and the results are way better than Premiere.
This in Standard definition DVD. In HD Vegas is as good as Premiere without any problem,
 
Felipe Henao said:
That is probably where Vegas does its job, You shoot progressive and in Vegas when you render 29.97 MPG DVD Field order None ( Progressive ). Then you create your VOB files in DVD architect of course interlaced
Click to expand...
So you have an extra encoding pass on your video, which you can avoid by encoding directly into 60i in Vegas. Similarly, if you encode into 24p in Vegas, DVD Architect will re-encode into 60i with pulldown, but if you encode into 24p-with-pulldown, DVD Architect will not re-encode.

My point was that DVD players do not know outright that your DVD disc contains 30p content, all they know is that it is 60i. Some players care to analyze footage, others do not. In the best case you will get 480p, in the worst case you will get something more like 240p. 2-2 pulldown is not universally supported in 60 Hz players, especially in older models.

If you want film-like footage then 24p will be more consistent across the players.

On another note, I do not see a point in 720p30 as an acquisition format. I can shoot 720p60 and then either keep it as 720p60 for HD or downscale as 480i60 for SD or I can drop every other frame and get 30p for the Web. 60p also allows me to have slo-mo for free in 30p projects. Users of 50 Hz models are even in better situation as they can get 50p, 50i and 25p from a single 50p source and they do not have to decide between 24p and 30p like we do.
 
Drill Bit said:
So you have an extra encoding pass on your video
Click to expand...
The point is this, contrary to a lot of people I don't like 24 p, I like 30p and 60 p.
If I shoot 720, 30 p, and render 29.97 progressive, I'm not re-encoding I'm rendering progressive from a progressive file.
DVD architect will re-encode to 60i.
720, 60 P is great if you do HD Blu-ray, or FLV for internet rendering and want great information in all the movement, or want some slow action, but in real life the 720, 30P produces a better DVD than 60 p rendered to 29.97. Why don't you try this in practice, and do it with Premiere and Vegas to see the difference.
The DVD I've done work well in old an new players, in South and North America, 60 Hz
 
Last edited:
Felipe Henao said:
If I shoot 720, 30 p, and render 29.97 progressive, I'm not re-encoding I'm rendering progressive from a progressive file. DVD architect will re-encode to 60i.
Click to expand...
Rendering is re-encoding from the original format. Then DVD Architect re-encodes it again. If you render to 60i in Vegas, DVD Architect will not re-encode it.
Felipe Henao said:
720, 60 P is great if you do HD Blu-ray, or FLV for internet rendering and want great information in all the movement, or want some slow action, but in real life the 720, 30P produces a better DVD than 60 p rendered to 29.97. Why don't you try this in practice, and do it with Premiere and Vegas to see the difference.
Click to expand...
I use Vegas myself and I tried both ways and I see no difference. Vegas simply drops every other frame and I get clean 30p output. But if I wanted to, I still have an option to create 60p or 60i or create 50% slo-mo for a 30p project. I have more options and greater flexibility with 60p. Granted, it is only 720 lines on the HMC40, not 1080. If you want 1080 lines you need to shoot 1080p30. Or you can buy a consumer Panasonic camcorder and shoot 1080p60 and have it all.
Felipe Henao said:
The DVD I've done work well in old an new players, in South and North America, 60 Hz
Click to expand...
I am not saying they will not work. I just said that some players may present it field by field instead of combining both fields into one full frame. For example, my OPPO 970HD cannot correctly handle 2:2 pulldown.
 
Last edited:
Gentlemen, very educational and helpful to follow your comments and thanks to all for sharing time and knowledge.

Bob, as a ham radio operator you may relate to me characterizing my technology update from VX2000 "world" to HD world as akin to moving from vacuum tubes (or deForrest valves) to transistor and then to integrated circuits. As someone on another forum says "Never trust a radio unless it glows in the dark."
 
Drill Bit said:
Rendering is re-encoding from the original format.
Click to expand...
But you will be rendering a progressive file as an interlaced file which will affect the original information on a higher level .
So the step to make the progressive file an interlaced file will happen in Vegas or Architect, any way.
What are your arguments to say that is better if this happens in Vegas than in Architect ?

Drill Bit said:
I just said that some players may present it field by field instead of combining both fields into one full frame. For example, my OPPO 970HD cannot correctly handle 2:2 pulldown.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that some DVD players show as progressive ? I thought they were all interlaced, and I thought you said at the beginning that you shot
24 p for DVD.
I'm not trying to discuss for fun , just that will be interesting if you tell us why, the interlaced conversion will be more efficient in Vegas than in Architect.
 
Last edited:
Denniscasey said:
Gentlemen, very educational and helpful to follow your comments and thanks to all for sharing time and knowledge.

Bob, as a ham radio operator you may relate to me characterizing my technology update from VX2000 "world" to HD world as akin to moving from vacuum tubes (or deForrest valves) to transistor and then to integrated circuits. As someone on another forum says "Never trust a radio unless it glows in the dark."
Click to expand...

I love HD more than any thing , but 85% of the planet included USA is still in DVD, I REALLY WHISH 85% OF THE PLANET WILL BE IN BLU-RAY
 
Last edited:
I find it better to shoot 60p for the same reasons as mentioned above. With 60p I then have the choice of making either a 30p DVD or a 60i DVD. I can also create a 30p for the web or 60p for Blu-ray. It really is the most flexible format you can shoot with. Well except for 24p of course.

Actually I have always considered 1280x720p 50p to be the ultimate video format. 25p or 50i DVD's, 25p web video at any resolution, 50p Blu-ray and 24p is even possible with a slight timing shift.

Pal users are so lucky.

I have even converted 720p 60p from my HMC-40 to 1440x1080i 60i to match a HDV project and the HMC-40 footage still looked sharper then all the HDV 1080i based footage. 1280x720p 60p converts beautifully to 1080i or even 1080p footage. 720p converted to 1080p still looks sharper then many "1080" cameras out there (Canon DSLR's)
 
60i = 60 half frames = closer to 30P
60 p is more flexible but less appropriate for DVD
However it does work well
 
Last edited:
60i is not like 30p at all. As Drill Bit said, 60i is like a low-res 60p. There are as many motion samples as 60p, but each sample is half vertical resolution.
 
I never said 60 i is like 30 p because 30 p is progressive , I said is closer to 30 p than 60p, since 60i is 29.97 interlaced
60 half frames interlaced is 29.97 interlaced ,
Could you please read well before to answer MODERATOR ?
Drill Bit I never contradict my self I'm just very clever, you can learn that some times to loose is to win, because you learn.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I can read it very well. In fact, I did. Now perhaps you could give me the benefit of the doubt and read what I wrote?

60i is closer to 60p than it is to 30p. Look at 1080/60i footage, 1080/30p footage, and 720/60p footage, and you too will agree -- 1080/60i looks just like 720/60p as far as how the footage "looks". It looks nothing whatsoever like 30p.

"29.97 interlaced" is a misnomer that causes more confusion than anything else. It is not 29.97 anything. It is 59.94 interlaced fields. There is no such thing as a "Frame" in interlaced video, and 60i is not "29.97 frames" no matter what the NLEs call it. It's 59.94 fields.

It is better to think about 60i as 540/60p than it is to think of it as 1080/29.97i.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top