Hpx300 rumors

[typo]

Ooooh, okay, now things are getting a little interesting... check out this link from a CEATAC blog on the official Panasonic Japan web site.
http://ex-blog.panasonic.co.jp/exhibition/en/2008/10/ceatec08_640.html

In there it says that their 3MOS is based on CMOS, but it's sort of a hybrid CCD/CMOS? Not sure exactly what it's saying, but what it says is:


That's all promising. A 1920x1080 1/3" chip would certainly raise eyebrows for sensitivity and noise concerns, but if they've addressed those specifically, then...

Well, bah. It's all still just speculation.

I visited the link, and as I understood it, it's a CMOS with a larger fill factor, so the surface area of every photosite is larger than usual with CMOS (which has circuits in the way). I guess that they've moved the circuitry underneath the photosite.

But the readout is still the same, I guess.

Somebody from Panasonic sent me a PM, would like me to introduce myself. If I wanted to do that, would have done it publically.

About this info, since there is still no release from Panasonic, it's still a rumor, no matter how did I and the rest of the people got it. I believe we have a right to feed our curiosity and fantasize about what could be...

 

[ChipG]

Somebody from Panasonic sent me a PM, would like me to introduce myself. If I wanted to do that, would have done it publically.

Don't do it...

Mystery is more fun.

 

[ullanta]

Then again, I would expect an event shooter would be more likely to be drawn to SDHC AVC-HD instead... I would expect Intra would be more appealing to news & professional production.

Hey!

 

[Sumfun]

Then again, I would expect an event shooter would be more likely to be drawn to SDHC AVC-HD instead... full-res, full-raster, 24mbps, and cheapo memory recording. I would expect Intra would be more appealing to news & professional production.

How about AVC-HD at 35 or 50mbps with 4:2:2 color, recording to SDHC or CF? Now that would be interesting.

 

[Blackout]

I would prefer a smaller camera instead of something larger.
Smaller and less expensive media, with full raster. for now, that is all I want.

It's like VCR's..yeah my grandfather had one that was 20 pounds, now the last one was about 2 pounds, and since then replaced by a dvd or bluray... Smaller lighter, and better.

I can see shoulder mounts having removable lenses, but small cameras are better served as having one lens to do closeup and very wide shots.

I would love to buy another panasonic camera, but the way it looks, they need to play catch up quick.

With the Canon 5d mark II still camera that can shoot full 35mm frame video,
I am sure that technology will dump into the video cameras real soon.

Scarlet will be here soon,

EX1 is her now...

Panasonic? Yeah the HMC150 is really good in the $3,000 segment, but what about
between $3,000 to $6,000...they got nothin'

Seriously when I look at the footage that is coming off of the Canon 5d Mark II, I want to slap myself for buying a HVX200a which looks massively blurry in comparison - but the only thing that stops me is that the 5d still has wavy cmos issues... but Panasonic needs to step up with the resolution.

 

[Jarek Zabczynski]

Doesn't the 5D only do 30p?

 

[alexdias]

I looked at some footage (30p I believe) form the Canon 5D Mark II on a very decent LCD monitor and it blew my mind. Very beautiful, organic and sharp. The owner is a photographer with no interest in video so far.
I despised CMOS rolling shutter issues, it simply doesn't work for me. I'm a cameraman and my tools need to fit my real needs, if I can't move my camera at a certain speed or if my subject is moving fast and I unable to follow it; it's not good enough, but the images produced but that camera really impressed me.

 

[David Saraceno]

Perhaps a good interview camera?

 

[alexdias]

Certainly a good interview camera as far as image goes.
Sound, is another issue, like I've said the image is quite impressive but my friend has no idea nor interest on going much further with that; he shot some footage to test the video part of the camera and I was invited to take a look. It's very good, but I don't know if it's viable as a video camera yet.
Probably so with workarounds.

 

[LuckyStudio 13]

Sometimes I couldnt help but be disgusted by Panasonic decision to use a 960 x 540 pixel CCD into hvx200,hvx200a, hpx170 and hpx500 and then calling it a HD camera. That chip native resolution does NOT even meet the 720p specification.

 

[Barry_Green]

The chip specification has little to do with it. This is old, very old, very tired ground that we're treading here, but forget counting pixels and look at the actual footage.

 

[mrbrycel]

Sometimes I couldnt help but be disgusted by Panasonic decision to use a 960 x 540 pixel CCD into hvx200,hvx200a, hpx170 and hpx500 and then calling it a HD camera. That chip native resolution does NOT even meet the 720p specification.

lol, disgusted? thats a pretty strong word to describe how you feel about a CCD.

Why complain about the most amazing and revolutionary handheld camera ever made. Try the EX1, and I'm sure you'll have much more to complain about.

 

[Blackout]

Tired old ground or not I think what everyone is saying is that the issues with the HVX200, 200a, and the 170 being soft are real and becoming more apparent as sharper and and more richly detailed cameras are becoming common. This will trickle down soon and eventually layman people and clients will not be happy with the soft images of the HVX when they are exposed to constant increases in detail from other sources all aound.

Also, to say the chip specification has nothing to do with it is false. I keep hearing this argument that because the HVX takes it's 1920 x 1080 scan from an analog image, that the chips don't matter,but it takes this scan from a mix of what the chips produce, so they obviously do matter - otherwise we could have 3 1 pixel chips in there.

We can talk about geen pixel shift and analog scanning all we want, the truth of the matter is the HVX barely makes it past 500 lines on a real world resolution chart when it's in 1080p mode.. so it is NOT picking up a lot of detail... shift or no shift, and you say "well look at the image it produces and don't count pixels," and I say I do, and the image lacks detail.

Again, I am not bashing the HVX - I really like it for everything else it does and I use it because I am dealing with the softer image for now - because the increase in resolution I get on the EX1 comes with too many cmos issues for me to deal with at the current time, but I WANT that detail on the HVX, I am not happy with the HVXs softness I am just dealing with it. I think most everyone feels this way. We want a HVX200a/HPX170 image motion depth and color characteristics but improved up to full 1920 x 1080 resolution and detail. We are seeing that resolution on tons of other cameras and liking it but we want the filmic quality the panny cameras provide and no this quality is not from the softness, this is what is being called for in the next Panny camera. Will they step up? I hope so. I'm sure someone very soon is going to figure out some algorithm to fix the cmos issues and when that comes I will have to abandon the Panasonic ship if they don't have a new camera out that really delivers a 1920 x 1080p image.

Out of curiosity what does the EX1/EX3 get from an actual resolution chart? I didn't have time to check when I did my tests because I didn't have the EX1 for that long.

 

[puredrifting]

I don't know Blackout, I just watched the Vimeo clips that you posted in the other thread and I defy anyone to look at that HVX clip and tell me that the HVX is soft. If that is soft, than give me more softness like that! The shots aren't as sharp as the EX1 clips, but are infinitely more pleasing to my eye, they have so much more "soul" and not just because of the subject matter.

Dan

 

[John Caballero]

It baffles me when people talk about the "softness" of the HVX. I presume it comes from peole that don't have a clue of what they are doing. It may be a vision problem, I don't know. But the images from the Panasonic cameras are excellent.

 

[xmephestox]

i think barry is right, why be such a stickler for pixel shifting, how many exist in the image etc. if you it looks good and you're happy with what you get, what else matters? that's y there are so many cameras out there competing. you'll have all the options you want. you want something that caters to ur needs, you're going to pay accordingly. where do you think that extra 1000+ dollars is going when ur buying an ex1? and i wouldn't go by vimeo clips to judge how sharp an image is. it is HD footage but with the amount of compression you put on it, it will always look softer then the full res source.

 

[Barry_Green]

Here's all I meant by that - are you a camera engineer? Do you actually have the skillset to interpret how the 960x540 imagers work? If not, how can you make any such statements? FORGET how they work, because frankly very few people can even understand how they work. Look at the footage. Decide what looks good to you. If you've decided the HVX footage (not the numbers, but the footage) doesn't work for you, then move on. Fine. No prob.

People who get caught up counting pixels end up thinking that the Canon XHA1 must be three TIMES sharper, because it has three times as many pixels. Yet when you compare them side by side, as I did, you find out that they're all in the same basic ballpark.

Do you see THREE TIMES as many pixels between these shots?
Pic 1
Pic 2

If you do, then great, go ahead and indict the 960x540. If, however, you see a basically comparable shot, then let's not go blaming technology that very few of us can even understand. That's all I'm saying. Yes, the EX1 is notably sharper than an HVX200, that's not in dispute. It had better be, with chips that are 50% bigger and four times as densely packed. But that doesn't mean that the spatial offset hasn't worked and that the HVX somehow doesn't deliver a nice image because it definitely does.

 

[LuckyStudio 13]

All I am saying is, The hvx and hpx 170 + hpx 500 would look so much more better if they upgraded the CCD. I am just wishing Panasonic will evolve its product a little more often like Sony with their XDCAM EX series and RED with their Red One, Scarlet and Epic.

The hvx is on its 2nd generation, hpx500 was introduced not too long ago and Hpx170 was introduced this year and yet there are no advancement on the CCD as well as the LCD. DVX100 series is now on its 3rd generation and it is still a 4:3 CCD. Come on Panasonic, you could do better.

The Panasonic camera has that good cinematic look or 'mojo', why not improve it with better CCD ? Why stifle it with 960 x 540 sensor ?

 

[Barry_Green]

All I am saying is, The hvx and hpx 170 + hpx 500 would look so much more better if they upgraded the CCD.

To what?

If you want a CCD, that's about all that technology can provide right now. You can't have a sharper, progressive-scan chip in CCD, at that size. They're at the limit of what the technology can do.

The only way to get sharper would be to a) sacrifice progressive scan, like Sony and Canon did, or b) go to CMOS. Which, according to this thread, it sounds like they might do.

So it wouldn't be "upgrading their CCD", it'd be shifting over to CMOS - and that will likely bring with it all that CMOS involves, including rolling shutter artifacts.

There's no free lunch.

I am just wishing Panasonic will evolve its product a little more often like Sony with their XDCAM EX series and RED with their Red One, Scarlet and Epic.

Well, sounds like you want them to go CMOS, as all those other products you mentioned are CMOS. And, according to "typo", that's what this rumored HPX300 is. So you should be happy.

The hvx is on its 2nd generation, hpx500 was introduced not too long ago and Hpx170 was introduced this year and yet there are no advancement on the CCD as well as the LCD.

There's a huge advancement in terms of noise performance, and smear. In terms of sharpness, it doesn't exist - you can't get better than what they've done without some significant sacrifice. Or abandoning CCD and going to CMOS.

And the HPX500 was introduced about a year and a half ago.

The Panasonic camera has that good cinematic look or 'mojo', why not improve it with better CCD ? Why stifle it with 960 x 540 sensor ?

Because you cannot do better than 960x540x60p on one single 1/3" chip. You can put on more pixels if you go interlaced, but then you'd give up 60p progressive scan (and variable frame rates, etc). And without variable frame rates or 720/60p, it wouldn't be an HVX, would it?

You could get more res if you glued two smaller chips together like JVC did, but then you'd have the split screen effect like JVC has.

Basically they've pushed CCD about as far as it's gonna go. If you want more pixels you need a bigger chip size; they're squeezing about as much out of 1/3" as you're gonna get. Or, you can go to a MOS-type chip, which typo says that this reported HPX300 would be (whatever it means that it's "3MOS").

Intel can't make a 100-gigahertz Pentium chip, and nobody can make a 1920x1080 1/3" progressive-scan CCD. Doesn't exist, as far as I know.

So if typo is correct and there's a 1920x1080 3MOS Panasonic coming, it sounds like everything you'd want - panasonic "mojo" with EX1-class resolution. Right?

 

[Justyn]

The Red camera has its own issues and gripes so that's a hard one to say that they got it right.. It's been an ongoing evolution on that side. Sony might upgrade their stuff because they've produced some real stinkers..


As stated on numerous posts.. there's more to this and to everything in general than the sharpness of the cam. If it mattered so blatantly then people would only be buying sony cams or the A1. But they AREN"T... The HVX kicked everythings but for 2 solid years... and the Sony had made up some ground, but now it's just a contender and not a king. Personally after shooting 20 minutes of footage with it..> Which did look sharp and great in low light.. but MAN ALIVE it SUCKS... SUCKS... SUCKS to handheld and the layout is wonky to say the least. I'd grow to friggin hate it.. just like I did with my XL1.

If this is a Panny thread with people digging what's going on.. whatever conjecture or whatever why is there a constant pissing down from Sony people. Does this happen on the EX1 threads where Panny people coming in and saying stuff.. I doubt it.. To me, you pick something go with it and be happy. The Sony people seem to spend more time bitching about the panny ones thatn shooting with it or applauding the laurels of that camera...


I say that Panny has a niche and a lot of us like it. Now if you like an EX1 that's friggin' fantastic, but why not show some footage that just knocks our socks off instead of pulling up charts and stats and jargon... Jeeze... don't worry be happy and I'm glad that somone likes those cameras, cause they are sharp.. but who wants to lug around a badly formed brick... The EX3 I'm sure is even worse... Some people might have the luxory to never hand to do handheld stuff, but that' s not my universe...