Barry_Green
Moderator
Yes, all testing at zero dB.
HMC40 - First Look
- Thread starter Barry_Green
- Start date
bradywurtz
Active member
Are you saying the HMC-40 will shoot in 24pn? i've only been able to see the option for 24p (23.97) and not 24pn (24)
where do you find the option to allow you to shoot in 24pn instead of 24p?
Barry_Green
Moderator
24pN means no pulldown is used ("native" mode).
It does not shoot at 24.000 fps. The standard for video cameras is 23.976.
It does not shoot at 24.000 fps. The standard for video cameras is 23.976.
This camera is very interesting because of it's price point. I have been looking at the HM100 from JVC, mainly because I like a higher res image that the 150 and 170 don't seem to have. But, the JVC is simply overpriced, in my opinion. This HMC-40 sounds equal to the JVC in features and quality, but it has a 3 year warranty and costs $1500 less, minus the XLR kit. That's still $1200 less plus the warranty. Only advantage I can see to the HM100 is the ccd's instead of 3mos, which gives it slightly better low light performance. I think these cameras are poised to compete, but I think Panasonic was wise to drop the price from the initially planned $3k range to $2k. They will win the battle on that alone, native .mov files notwithstanding.
Where did you find specs for this advantage to the HM100 for wide angle? I am only finding specs for the HM100: Fujinon 10x Lens, 3.7-37mm (39-390mm 35mm Equivalent)
F/1.8
and for the HMC-40:
LensLeica Dicomar 12x Zoom
4-48mm f/1.8-2.8 (35mm Equivalence 40.8-490mm)
43mm Filter Diameter
Video 35mm Equivalent (Video): 40.8-490mm (16:9)
Still Equivalent (Still Image): 41.3-496mm (3:2)
40.8-490mm (16:9), 45.0-540mm (4:3)
Here (registration may be required) and here (download issue 5/2009) you find that an horizontal angle of 62 ° (look for "62 Grad") is measured for the GY-HM100.
Here(download issue 6/2009) you see that 50 ° is measured for the AG-HMC 41 E.
Why JVC is writing only 39 mm? I guess because they are very conservative and give the 35 mm conversion on the diagonal base. Panasonic is doing it horizontally. See here and here.
I should double check the situation with my GY-HM100, GZ-HD7 and HDC-SD300. (The HDC-SD300 has an angle of 45 ° only, see issue 3/2009 of videoaktiv.)
Last edited:
I just checked it. The wide angle of HM100 is 38 - 39 mm (35 mm horizontally equivalence) due to my comparison of HM100, HD7 and SD300. Which might not be 100% correct but shows that the wide angle is app. 5% better than that of HMC40.
Don't know how the German magazines mean the 62°.
BobDiaz
The Professor
On the zoom control for the HMC-40, the operation is VERY smooth and I found it easy to select the speed I wanted. The pressure to zoom speed was just right.
However, I was disappointed with the JVC HM-100u's zoom control. The range in pressure to go from slow zoom to fast zoom was just too narrow to me. Not impossible to work with, but it just seemed harder to control.
Selection of a video camera is a personal choice and what may be important to one is not as important to another. In terms of my own personal viewpoint, the Panasonic HMC-40 is very good considering the price. If one is going to spend more, $3,500, you can get either the JVC HM-100u or the Panasonic HMC-150, and I feel that the Panasonic HMC-150 is the better choice.
Bob Diaz
Barry_Green
Moderator
Updated post #5 with a comparative res chart extraction, comparing the $1995 HMC40 against the $6,000 EX1 and the $8,000 HPX300.
Thanks. I looked at the HM100 at B+H in NY last week, and it had a noticeably narrower wide angle than other cams such as 170, z5U, etc. I'm going to look into your links above.
BobDiaz
The Professor
Okay, seeing as the new crop of cameras are pushing the limits of my older charts, and there's more to come (the 7D and the GH1 need proper testing), I've had to add a couple of big-bucks charts to my arsenal. I recently picked up just about the best test chart there is, the DSC Labs Chroma Du Monde "Billups VF/X". It is the stuff. I also got a 4K res chart, the MegaTrumpets 12, a chart they designed specifically to handle 4K cameras like the Red One.
Now, we all know that the 1/2" EX1 should be sharper than the 1/3" HPX300, and the 1/3" HPX300 should be sharper than the 1/4" HMC40, right? But that's the fun thing about testing -- you get to find out where things *really* lie.
So the question is: Que es mas macho?
Here's a combined shot -- look it through and see if you think the little HMC40 can stay in the ring with the big boys when it comes to resolved detail (and, yes, these shots are from different charts, but they're all DSC charts so they should be equally applicable even though not shot at the same time off the same chart.)
Barry,
Which image belongs to which camera?
Bob Diaz
Barry_Green
Moderator
Ha! That's the point! :evil:
So -- yeah, guess. Which is which? And while you're guessing, realize that you're having to guess, because the little $1995 unit is rendering an image that's about as sharp as the $6,000 1/2" camera and the $8,000 1/3" camera... kinda awesome, isn't it?
So -- yeah, guess. Which is which? And while you're guessing, realize that you're having to guess, because the little $1995 unit is rendering an image that's about as sharp as the $6,000 1/2" camera and the $8,000 1/3" camera... kinda awesome, isn't it?
Bernie Hipos
Well-known member
Wow! That's good news. I am really considering in getting this camera for weddings. Thanks for that Barry.
Barry_Green
Moderator
For outdoor weddings it'd be fantastic. For indoors, plan on some lights!
Since I am expecting white halos, attributable to Panasonics, I think it is the whitest one because white background hides the halos, and other patches do not exhibit them.
I do not feel that having a $2K camera being comparable to a $10K camera resolution-wise is a big deal anymore. Everyone knows that there is more to a professional camera than just a lens and a sensor. After all, the HMC40 has the lens and the sensor taken from a consumer camera, maybe a bit higher grade.
The Canon HF20/200 has 1/4-inch sensor and resolves about 900 lines (according to CCInfo), very close to the EX. It sucks in low light, though.
The Canon HV20/30/40 has a larger sensor, 1/2.7-inch, larger than the HPX300 has. Judging simply by sensor size, I am surprised why the HPX300 has smaller sensor than a $800 consumer cam.
I do not feel that having a $2K camera being comparable to a $10K camera resolution-wise is a big deal anymore. Everyone knows that there is more to a professional camera than just a lens and a sensor. After all, the HMC40 has the lens and the sensor taken from a consumer camera, maybe a bit higher grade.
The Canon HF20/200 has 1/4-inch sensor and resolves about 900 lines (according to CCInfo), very close to the EX. It sucks in low light, though.
The Canon HV20/30/40 has a larger sensor, 1/2.7-inch, larger than the HPX300 has. Judging simply by sensor size, I am surprised why the HPX300 has smaller sensor than a $800 consumer cam.
I think its interesting to see how close they are, but sharpness is not the only important perameter. That said, all the footage I saw at WEVA was quite impressive, and that included some lower-light reception scenes. Sorry I don't have the footage to reference. Yes they were not as good as say the 150, but real life exampes showed it was not all that bad.
I really wish this cam had come out a month sooner, could not wait so I ended up getting a Canon HFS10. Nice cam but way behind the HMC40 in functionality.
I just picked up a second HMC150, maybe after I get that cam paid off from new jobs it was bought to handle, I will look at selling tyhe Canon and getting the HMC40.
I really wish this cam had come out a month sooner, could not wait so I ended up getting a Canon HFS10. Nice cam but way behind the HMC40 in functionality.
I just picked up a second HMC150, maybe after I get that cam paid off from new jobs it was bought to handle, I will look at selling tyhe Canon and getting the HMC40.
BobDiaz
The Professor
I took all the video files I could find, plus the files I shot at DV Expo and played them back on my 37" 720p HDTV. The bottom line is that not only is the image sharp, but it looks VERY good to me. The colors are rich, the image has good dynamic range, and the contrast of the image is reasonable. Unlike the early HVX-200, increasing the gain past +6dB does not produce an excessive amount of image noise.
There's a simple way to see whether the camera will meet one's needs in terms of lighting, just take a light meter set to one of the ISOs below and set the shutter speed for 1/30 of a second. If the F-Stop on the light meter is above F1.8, the camera will work in that lighting and that gain setting. If the F-Stop is below F1.8, you'll have to chose a higher gain setting. Here are the different ISOs for the different gain settings:
+0dB = ISO 64
+6dB = ISO 128
+12dB = ISO 256
+18dB = ISO 512
+24dB = ISO 1024
+34dB = ISO 3200 (VERY bad image sensor noise at this setting)
Bob Diaz
There's a simple way to see whether the camera will meet one's needs in terms of lighting, just take a light meter set to one of the ISOs below and set the shutter speed for 1/30 of a second. If the F-Stop on the light meter is above F1.8, the camera will work in that lighting and that gain setting. If the F-Stop is below F1.8, you'll have to chose a higher gain setting. Here are the different ISOs for the different gain settings:
+0dB = ISO 64
+6dB = ISO 128
+12dB = ISO 256
+18dB = ISO 512
+24dB = ISO 1024
+34dB = ISO 3200 (VERY bad image sensor noise at this setting)
Bob Diaz
studio1972
Well-known member
The HPX300 has 3 x 1/3 sensors, one for each colour. Totally different to the Canon. In fact, the canon shoulder mount cameras also have 3 x 1/3" sensors, so I guess Canon themselves consider this a far superior design than a single 1/2.7" sensor.
Not certain I understand what you saying. One is a single CMOS and the other is a 3MOS I believe.
OTOH, we shot some colorful, outdoors, sunny footage using a HMC40 and a HPX170 at 720/24p in both cams.
The HMC40 was, in our view, sharper than the 170.
That surprised us.