HMC40 - First Look

[sewolla]

In terms of "resolution" and the chips these cams use....it seems that pixel shift has a positive effect on picture quality that perhaps some don't take into account when reviewing specs.

For example, note that while the Canon has higher rez chips, its picture is somehow, not as sharp as the HMC's, at least when the HMC is shot in 1080/60i. I own both and the HMC's IQ is the better. That is why I just acquired a second HMC, not a second Canon, as good as that cam is.

Canon has other advantages perhaps (20X lens, presets, etc), but not sharpness or overall IQ....so there is more to it than chip resolution.

The HMC150 is a very solid cam, in IQ, handling, etc....the HMC40 may be a bit sharper, and is a cool cam to boot. Go with the one that best suits your shooting style. Frankly I'd say it would be real hard to make a bad decision here. They're both great cams.

 

[BobDiaz]

We have to work within the limits of the current technology. Currently this is the choices Panasonic faces and all camera makers face with 1/3" image sensors:

(1) Use the 960h x 540v CCD image sensors with pixel offset. Plus side: Best low light performance. Minus side: Least sharpest image.

(2) Use 1280h x 720v CCD image sensors with pixel offset. Plus side: Sharper image & Native 1280 x 720 resolution. Minus side: Excessive heat makes 60p & 60i modes impossible (30p and 24p possible) and low light performance takes a 1 stop hit.

(3) Use 1280v x 720h CMOS image sensors with pixel offset. Plus side: Sharp image, Native 1280 x 720 possible, and 60p modes possible. Minus side: CMOS rolling shutter issues with whip pans & camera flashes and additional reduction in low light performance.

(4) Use 1920h x 1080v CMOS image sensors. Sharpest image and all modes possible. Minus side: CMOS rolling shutter issues and worst low light performance.


There was a massive debate in late 2005 & early 2006 over the choice Panasonic made with the 200, but in the end we see that it was the right choice considering the sales of the 200, 200a, 170 and 150.


It's interesting to see that Panasonic has gone the other direction with the HMC-40 video camera. My best guess is that the 960 x 540 CCDs with pixel offset may not have worked out too well or missed the type of market they were after.

The camera does break a lot of new ground here and I can't think of any other Professional cameras that are close in price to the HMC-40. The Sony FX-7 is the closest match I can think of within the $2,000 street price range.



Bob Diaz

 

[Cranky]

Use 1280h x 720v CCD image sensors with pixel offset. Plus side: Sharper image & Native 1280 x 720 resolution. Minus side: Excessive heat makes 60p & 60i modes impossible (30p and 24p possible) and low light performance takes a 1 stop hit.

JVC uses 1280 x 720 CCD, the HD200 and the HD250 shoot native 60p. Um, actually this CCD is scanned one half a time, which can cause uneven exposure of the left and right parts of the frame. JVC have said that it tightened production standards and QC, and supposedly this is the thing of the past. Still, JVC suggest to warm the camera up for about 5 minutes before the shoot.

The camera does break a lot of new ground here and I can't think of any other Professional cameras that are close in price to the HMC-40. The Sony FX-7 is the closest match I can think of within the $2,000 street price range.

It is halfway between the FX7 and the V1, offering XLR connector, progressive recording and extended image controls. the FX7 is not a pro camera, it is an "advanced amateur" camera. ;-)

 

[studio1972]

Well said. Don't you think, though, if the 150 had higher res that it would end the need to look at any other cameras in this price range?

The Sony Z5 has better resolution and similar low light performance, but the trade off is that you have CMOS chips which have some drawbacks. I guess there's nothing to stop Panasonic putting the HPX300 sensors into a HMC150 body for a similar effect, but personally I prefer CCDs.

I'm actually quite happy with the current resolution as I mainly shoot 720p which the HMC excells at. Most HDTVs are only 720p resolution anyway.

 

[BobDiaz]

JVC uses 1280 x 720 CCD, the HD200 and the HD250 shoot native 60p. Um, actually this CCD is scanned one half a time, which can cause uneven exposure of the left and right parts of the frame. JVC have said that it tightened production standards and QC, and supposedly this is the thing of the past. Still, JVC suggest to warm the camera up for about 5 minutes before the shoot.


It is halfway between the FX7 and the V1, offering XLR connector, progressive recording and extended image controls. the FX7 is not a pro camera, it is an "advanced amateur" camera. ;-)

I was suggesting the way to avoid the SSE (Split Screen Effect) that we first saw on the JVC HD100u. This is another trade-off here, because JVC did get 7020/60p from the chips, but had to split the chip in two, which caused the SSE problem.

I'm sure they have made progress in reducing the problem, BUT the fact that they say, "to warm the camera up for about 5 minutes before the shoot", says that the problem has not fully gone away. That bit of advice was exactly what they told the HD100u users. :shocked:

Please don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to trash JVC; it's just that splitting the chip in two solves one problem and creates the potential for another problem. Again, this is another engineering trade-off one must make.



Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I'm just not finding anything in the Professional Lines that comes close to the price of the HMC40. Even if we add $300 for the XLR adapter and another $200 for a wide angle adapter, the price is still around $2,500 (street). I believe the closest models in the Pro Line are about $3,500 (street).



Bob Diaz

 

[Cranky]

There was a guy on eBay who was selling the V1U for $2,600, NIB. He had quite a few good ratings. Judging by the ratings and by the speed of his sales, people did indeed buy cameras from him. I was thinking about it, but then what if this were scam? Or an overseas no-warranty model? Also, it is tape based, and the base camcorder does not have a mic, very strange and inconvenient, considering that the FX7 has a pretty decent built-in mic.

The HVR-A1 is old and interlaced only, and Canon still haven't filled the void between the HV and the XH-A1. Where is an HD version of the GL-2? Canon says it is the A1. Right.

This is exactly what I myself was saying half a year ago, when the projected price of the HMC40 was $3,200: drop the price to $2K and it will have no rivals.

P.S. The FX1000 costs about $3K, but no XLR, and no true progressive. A nice sensor though.

 

[Barry_Green]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I'm just not finding anything in the Professional Lines that comes close to the price of the HMC40.

In Sony's lineup, the least-expensive product from the broadcast lineup is the HVR-A1U, MSRP $2750. The HVR-V1U is MSRP $4230. Both are tape-based HDV products.

From JVC, the least-expensive model is the HM100U, which looks like a direct competitor. Its MSRP is $3995. It's a tapeless product recording MPEG-2 at 19 to 35 megabits.

From Canon, the least-expensive model in their professional lineup is the XHA1, a tape-based camcorder with an MSRP of $3999.

So no, nothing comes anywhere near the HMC40's $2195 MSRP. The only one that's anywhere near the same price class is the Sony A1U, and it's still 25% more.

 

[rich_r]

Original post: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1759185&postcount=167

This question of mine got lost in the discussion about sensors. The HPX300 has more skew in 1080/24p than in any of its other modes. Does the same hold true for the HMC40?

 

[wesler]

I got to thinking a bit more about the equivalent ISOs for the different gain settings on the HMC40. As I said in a past posting:



If we look at the HMC-150, here are the numbers:
+0dB = ISO 500
+6dB = ISO 1000
+12dB = ISO 2000
+18dB = ISO 4000

In addition the HMC-150 has an F1.6 lens and the HMC-40 has an F1.8 lens.

(1.8 x 1.8) / (1.6 x 1.6) = about 1.27 times more light on the image sensor at maximum opening.

Ignoring the issue of image sensor noise, if one pushes both cameras to the maximum limits, the HMC-150 (+18db gain) is still 1 and 1/3 stops faster than the HMC-40 (+34dB gain). Even at +12dB gain the HMC-150 is 1/3 a stop faster than the HMC-40 at +34dB gain.


Bob Diaz

Bob, could you make the same comparison between hmc150 and sony ex1?

 

[Cranky]

A nice video, though shot in good light:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTkfJuqhcmc&hd=1

Also some longish ads from Panasonic France:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UU6hAGFN1vM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmLDCCAFPyY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-Voik6it0A

 

[BobDiaz]

...

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.)

So Barry, were you ever going to tell us which was which? :smile:


Bob Diaz

 

[BobDiaz]

Bob, could you make the same comparison between hmc150 and sony ex1?

As I recall, in 1080i mode the ISO was 800, BUT in progressive the ISO was 400.

EX-1 Progressive:
+0dB = ISO 400
+6dB = ISO 800
+12dB = ISO 1600
+18dB = ISO 3200

EX-1 Interlaced:
+0dB = ISO 800
+6dB = ISO 1600
+12dB = ISO 3200
+18dB = ISO 6400


Notice the for every +6db gain added the number doubles.


Bob Diaz

 

[Barry_Green]

Top/left (the whitest one) is the HMC40. Middle is EX1. Bottom/right is HPX300.

The HMC40 was shot using my new Chroma DuMonde Billups chart, this thing is the bomb diggity of charts, but it's black with white lines so I had to invert it. The others were shot using an Ambi-Combi chart.

 

[David Saraceno]

Top/left (the whitest one) is the HMC40. Middle is EX1. Bottom/right is HPX300.

The HMC40 was shot using my new Chroma DuMonde Billups chart, this thing is the bomb diggity of charts, but it's black with white lines so I had to invert it. The others were shot using an Ambi-Combi chart.

Your conclusions??????

 

[Barry_Green]

From that chart? Pretty much equal in terms of sharpness, if there's enough light. But I've got to do some a/b monitor tests and dig through the settings before pronouncing final conclusions on the little HMC40. Preliminary is that I'm very pleasantly surprised with how good this little cam is.

 

[David Saraceno]

One issue we have had is how to produce steady hand held shots with such a light camera.

What we shot at a university football game in bright sunlight last Saturday was impressive, but getting solid shots handheld was another story even with OIS on.

We might try a monopod, or a very light tripod, but anyone who has additional thoughts and suggestions would be appreciated.

It is so light that a DSLR rig might even work.

 

[rich_r]

One issue we have had is how to produce steady hand held shots with such a light camera.
...
It is so light that a DSLR rig might even work.

I am considering the Dynamic Motion Video CB105 shoulder rig. It's cheap and looks pretty interesting.

 

[wesler]

As I recall, in 1080i mode the ISO was 800, BUT in progressive the ISO was 400.

EX-1 Progressive:
+0dB = ISO 400
+6dB = ISO 800
+12dB = ISO 1600
+18dB = ISO 3200

EX-1 Interlaced:
+0dB = ISO 800
+6dB = ISO 1600
+12dB = ISO 3200
+18dB = ISO 6400


Notice the for every +6db gain added the number doubles.


Bob Diaz

thanks bob, but you didnt mentioned if hmc150 and hmc40 ISO was at interlaced or progressive...

 

[wesler]

Guys, what dou you think about using hmc40 as "b" cam in my events(HMC150)? Will i have a huge change between cameras shots? If i use some lights with hmc40, can i
compensate the diference in low light conditions? How much light should i use to do a similar shooting? Thanks you all!

 

[BobDiaz]

thanks bob, but you didnt mentioned if hmc150 and hmc40 ISO was at interlaced or progressive...

The Sony EX-1 is the odd ball here, maybe because the scan lines are combined for interlaced.... I have no idea why it's that way...

In the case of the HMC40 and the HMC150, the ISO is the same for both progressive and Interlaced.


Bob Diaz