HPX170, viewing P2 on 1080 monitor, is it worth it?

S

Spiral

Active member
Hey 170 curious,

First off, let me say that Panasonic has had OUTSTANDING customer service, along with Snader's in NorCal. Via Pansonic sales managment (Jan, Joe, then Doug,) I have connected with a 170 (on loan.) I was excited when I got the camera, took footage of San Quentin harbor, and brought it home.

Honestly, it looks like my DVX footage. I shot in both 720p and 1080i 24p and 30p at different shutter speeds and apertures, and well...its got the same noise I see with SD and the DVX. I am now viewing this material straight from camera onto my 1080 46" Samsung LCD. Am I doing something wrong here? Does it involve the coring issue? (yes, I have done my homework.)

I am really glad to have had the opportunity to sit with the camera before buying it. In Norcal, we have no place to walk into and simply look at the HPX170 (unfortunately) but I am not willing to throw in the towel yet, hence this is why I am here.

Am I doing something wrong? Missing a setting? Not compressing through an NLE or DVD studio? Help! I want to buy, but now that I see what I am getting, I am thinking of going with a camera that can support 1080P as opposed to 1080i.

Any advice is appreciated...
 
Check the component-out or SDI-out settings, it's possible that they're set to downconvert to 480i instead of passing through the HD signal.
 
Wow, Barry, you're fast! :beer:


I think you have been a Godsent to this site and the video world, thank you for all the valuable input you have given over the years. It truly has helped me (and many here) make many critical decisions after reading your posts....

All accolades aside, I bumped the coring to +2, and yes, the component setting was at 480i. I made the switch and it was only slightly different. There is still noise that I wasn't expecting with an SD to HD upgrade, but then, I am not ruling out user error here. So many factors, including this being a "loaner model" and output to 46" 1080p lcd, could be affecting this.

Still a little jittery on purchasing based on the image, but anything's better than SD right now. I suppose my expectations were a little high.

Thanks again!

Micha
 
Last edited:
Hi DGW,

I wish I could, but the demo model didn't come with any data cables for me to transfer the files, and I only have this camera until Sunday.

I am going to check out another couple of cameras, but I am fairly certain I am going to get the 170. I still consider it a mid-level camera (step up from the DVX) and until I get more client work, I'll have to wait to purchase a camera with a bigger chip. At least I'll be in the P2 work flow.
 
Well, good luck whatever you decide. I was asking because I recently bought the HVX200A and hadn't really noticed any significant noise other than cases where lighting wasn't sufficient. I believe in reading these forums that the 170 is at least as good, and probably better than the 200A in that regard.
 
Assuming you're now monitoring the HD signal (which Barry pointed out) -

If you can't post grabs or footage, you may want to post your scene file settings.
That may help us get a better idea of what you're seeing (and why).
 
wgzn said:
i think the problem here may be that youre judging professional camera footage on a consumer tv.
Click to expand...
Blah. Any consumer HD TV is good enough to differentiate HD from SD. Professional monitors differ mainly in calibration, which in case of plasma and LCD narrows to white/black level, gamma, grayscale and colors. Resolution-wise pro monitors are the same.
 
Blah. Any consumer HD TV is good enough to differentiate HD from SD. Professional monitors differ mainly in calibration, which in case of plasma and LCD narrows to white/black level, gamma, grayscale and colors. Resolution-wise pro monitors are the same.
Click to expand...
i wasnt referring to SD/HD. and there is a lot more to it than the criteria you mention. at least according to the folks here who appear knowledgeable as to whats inside the box...
 
Thanks for your comments!

Even is I had stills, you would still see those images very small on your monitor and they would look great! When you view this footage on a flat screen LCD of 46" or higher, then you start to see what I am talking about.

The salesman told me that all his wedding videographers go with 1080(P) cameras because their clients insist on it (as opposed to the 1080i.) He told me that for distribution, this camera is fine. But when you get into the home theater realm, 1080i starts to become noticeable with big screen LCD's. This has me concerned because this is my client base (although I don't currently do weddings.)

I see noise (as opposed to dead people ;) I'll work with a little more (wiith the scene files,) and post again. If any of you have a large LCD, you might know what I am talking about.
 
The salesman told me that all his wedding videographers go with 1080(P) cameras because their clients insist on it (as opposed to the 1080i.)
Click to expand...

sounds like horseshit to me. 90% of the people i know who do weddings tell me that they deliver mostly in SD anyaway. and most "joe-average-consumer" wouldnt know p from i in the first place. thats why we spent years in this buisiness trying to make video look like film and now they make tvs that make big budget films look like episodes of three's company.

i still stand by the fact that youre judging your output on a large consumer tv. it only goes to reason that 1080 at 46" is going to show a lot more nastiness than 1080 at 17"
and there IS a LOT going on behind the screen technically that separates a pro-quality monitor from big box consumer stuff.
 
"joe-average-consumer" wouldnt know p from i in the first place. "

Yes, this is what I told the salesman. Last year, I couldn't have told you the difference between the two, honestly (been mostly in SD,) much less a consumer. Right on the money there!

"i still stand by the fact that youre judging your output on a large consumer tv. it only goes to reason that 1080 at 46" is going to show a lot more nastiness than 1080 at 17"
and there IS a LOT going on behind the screen technically that separates a pro-quality monitor from big box consumer stuff."

Fair enough. Like I said, I am willing to take the blame here for using a consumer flat screen, but when I get an HD signal over the airwaves (like a newscast) in HD wow, is makes me want to spend 30,000 on one of their fine cameras.

Anyway, the jury is still out. More shooting this weekend.
 
Last edited:
Spiral said:
Even is I had stills, you would still see those images very small on your monitor and they would look great! When you view this footage on a flat screen LCD of 46" or higher, then you start to see what I am talking about.
Click to expand...
No, I don't know what you are talking about. I watch AVCHD video from my HDC-SD1, shot at 13 Mbit/s and it looks great on my 50-inch HD plasma. Not as detailed as in professional TV shows, but notably better than SD.

If any, image on a TV should look better than on a computer, because TVs have various noise-reduction circuits. TVs are designed to cope with crappy signals and to beautify them. A pro monitor shows stuff as is, if it is crap it will show crap.

Spiral said:
The salesman told me that all his wedding videographers go with 1080(P) cameras because their clients insist on it (as opposed to the 1080i.) He told me that for distribution, this camera is fine. But when you get into the home theater realm, 1080i starts to become noticeable with big screen LCD's. This has me concerned because this is my client base (although I don't currently do weddings.)
Click to expand...
In fact, interlaced SD is VERY noticeable on a large plasma/LCD because of low field resolution and interline twitter. To me, it looks like crap. On the other hand, interlaced HD is fine. You can notice some twitter on vertical pans, but nothing major. Progressive SD is fine too, this is DVD quality. Progressive HD is great.

Also, older TVs cannot accept 1080p, they only accept 1080i. So if you shoot 24p or 30p you have to embed it into 60i and pray that the TV is able to handle the pulldown. You cannot feed these TVs with 1080p60. Which brings us to the happy medium: 720p.
 
Thanks for your comments Cranky. I am not trying to "dis" (as it were ) the 170. Panasonic got me back into the biz with the DVX. I love them! Fabulous customer service and great product.

I *know* the noise issue has been addressed very carefully by Barry and others, and thank you to the mfor doing such extensive testing. With respect, no amount of tests can replace what my eye is seeing in the grain of the image. I can even see it in the small in camera LCD.

I can see the only way I am going to show ya'll what I am talking about is to buy a cable, get this transferred, and show you. Can you tell me what kind of cable I need to transfer, since owners manual and cables didn't come in this case?

Again, I know we are all passionate about product, and I stand by Panasonic. I also want folks (who don't have the camera yet) to think carefully about their purchase, and judge the image for themselves. Go into a rental house and look. There is nothing wrong with a smart, informed purchase, nez pa?
 
This conversation is somewhat moot without something objective to look at.
You're basically saying you don't like the image you're getting, and that it's too noisy...
but without frame grabs or footage or scene file settings it's really impossible to have any idea what you're looking at.

If you can at least let us know exactly what settings you're using then perhaps someone here can help you figure out if you're seeing the cleanest image possible out of the camera, or if there is something you can do to make it look more like what you'd hoped.
 
Cranky said:
So it is grain, not low resolution? Check your gain setting.
Click to expand...

....Really, I'm not an idiot or a dilettante. It's not the gain setting. It's noise, plain and simple. Through searching, it looks like I am not an anamaly; that others have noticed this as well.

As my last post indicated. I am working on getting that footage here, with settings. I don't own this camera yet, nor the means to get the footage here. Please stand by...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top