HVX dual NTSC/PAL upgrade, why not?

Emanuel

Emanuel

Cross-Examiner
Jan, if there is a Canon's XL-H1 upgrade ($500) for a dual NTSC/PAL (switch), why not the same Panasonic policy for the HVX200? We - PAL (filmmakers) & NTSC (for rental, etc.) - will pay for that!
 
Yes but DVCPROHD is 1280*1080 in NTSC land and 1440*1080 in PAL land.

So they maybe needs other chips.
 
Man HD confuses the hell outta me at times. So those specs are for DVCPRO-HD for 1080/50i (1440 wide) and 1080/60i (1280 wide). I'm guessing that they would be the same for the progressive versions... which still leaves the Q of different sensros. (answer - put the PAL sensor in and make one camera)

Now if this baby did 1920x1080 then we'd all be cheesy :D...

Cheers, Nathan.
 
I doubt it, if the camera had this option to begin with then they would have announced that. Probably does have something to do with the CCDs. The XLH1 can get away with it because it's using HDV, apparently a format that can switch standards around.
 
Nathan_Rodger said:
Man HD confuses the hell outta me at times. So those specs are for DVCPRO-HD for 1080/50i (1440 wide) and 1080/60i (1280 wide). I'm guessing that they would be the same for the progressive versions... which still leaves the Q of different sensros. (answer - put the PAL sensor in and make one camera)

Now if this baby did 1920x1080 then we'd all be cheesy :D...

Cheers, Nathan.
Click to expand...

First of all Cinealta doesnt have more than 1440*1080. And after wathing those movies on the big screen. Im sure we dont need more resolution then that.

What we do on the other hand need, is all the other stuff that makes a great picture.

Colors, Latitude etc.
 
MovieSwede said:
First of all Cinealta doesnt have more than 1440*1080. And after wathing those movies on the big screen. Im sure we dont need more resolution then that.

What we do on the other hand need, is all the other stuff that makes a great picture.

Colors, Latitude etc.
Click to expand...

I am sorry to disagree with you, but I think we need more than that. Star Wars and Once Upon a Time in Mexico look good, but some parts looked like video to me. It doesn't look like 35mm.

I believe many others have already stated this. Anyway, this is just my opinion.
 
Emanuel said:
Jan, if there is a Canon's XL-H1 upgrade ($500) for a dual NTSC/PAL (switch), why not the same Panasonic policy for the HVX200? We - PAL (filmmakers) & NTSC (for rental, etc.) - will pay for that!
Click to expand...

I have asked this before, and the answer I got was that it would delay the release date of the HVX.
I wouldn't mind to wait and get a single camera that does both.

But I believe there are loads of hungry fellas who want the camera now.

Maybe the HVX200A will have this feature, who knows?

Another alternative would be to release a HD only version of the camera, since they are still working on the DVX100. They should leave the DVX for SD and have another camera for HD only.
The HVX with both SD and HD is a great bonus, but since we have different regions, we end up having different versions of HD, which wasn't what HD was supposed to cause: different formats!
 
araujofh said:
I am sorry to disagree with you, but I think we need more than that. Star Wars and Once Upon a Time in Mexico look good, but some parts looked like video to me. It doesn't look like 35mm.

I believe many others have already stated this. Anyway, this is just my opinion.
Click to expand...


That can depend a bit on the house that did the transfer. For star wars there were several different transfer houses that did the 35mm copy. So a version you saw can be much more worse than the one I saw.

And I have seen several cinalta productions on the big screen and some of them it was impossible for me to se that it wasnt shoot on 35mm.
 
MovieSwede said:
Yes but DVCPROHD is 1280*1080 in NTSC land and 1440*1080 in PAL land.

So they maybe needs other chips.
Click to expand...
The pixel count on the CCD is unrelated to the pixel count of the recorded/digitized frame. It's obviously possible to make a dual-mode 50i/60i/NTSC/PAL CCD, as the Z1 has shown. That doesn't mean that the HVX CCD is capable of doing it, though. If it wasn't designed from the ground up to handle both frequencies, then there's not much else that can be done about it.
 
Thanks for your explanation, Barry! Now, the our only hope is wait(ing) and see for a Panasonic explanation for the non-feature or the upgrade possibility...but we must tell them that's our interest.

According some advices, including Barry, in order to say to who can solve the problem what are our needs, I open a new thread there in their web site forum where they can listen us:

http://panasonic-broadcast.com/inde...B3A&cmd=forum&forum=1&fo_group_id=4&locrepl=1

<PS> Everyone can collaborate...
 
Barry_Green said:
It's obviously possible to make a dual-mode 50i/60i/NTSC/PAL CCD, as the Z1 has shown. That doesn't mean that the HVX CCD is capable of doing it, though. If it wasn't designed from the ground up to handle both frequencies, then there's not much else that can be done about it.
Click to expand...

Thanks for bringing the discussion back in line Barry - I was about to go on a massive tangent. It can be done - but whether it was for the HVX is the query. I mean from a manufacturing standpoint (here I go again) I would think it would be more cost effective for Panasonic, at the point of production, to make one version of a camera with one version of the sensor on one production line. To have two separate production lines, and two separate sets of components would not double costs, but it would be far more expensive than the single. R&D at the outset may however cost more to produce those sensors - so a Cost Benefit Analysis would have been done to see which is more cost efficient. A single production line with a single set of parts means that process improvement and design changes can be implemented easily across the entire production line.

Anyway I'll halt tangent before I go on any more - *laugh*. None of this means that Panny designed it from the ground up to be compatible with both systems. The C.B.A. may well have revealed it was more cost effective to have two separate sensors and production lines... who know!?!

We'll have to wait and see when all is revealed next month.

Cheers, Nathan.
 
You don't need to change any production lines for that. The ccd's can be the same. Both Pal and Ntsc cameras will use the same ccd's. It wouldn't make comercial sense to be otherwise.
The camera already has variable frame rates, including 26P in the NTSC model, which is a lame way to skip the 25P issue. I bet euro probably will get 23P or 22P, just to avoid having 24P. Or maybe, seing this post, they are not going to put any framerate near the 20+ mark, just as a "You wanted everything? Now you get nothing!" standpoint... (as you can see I'm quite upset with this :)
 
Doesn't seem to make much sense on the surface, does it?
Wouldn't it be cheaper for them to manufacture one camera instead of two?

Seems like there must be a good reason why they aren't making a switchable camera.
I can't see the advantage from Panasonic's viewpoint as to why they would choose not to, unless it actually is some sort of engineering issue.

Of course, if it's some sort of engineering issue, what does that say?
Sony and Canon have apparently been able to do it, so it stands to reason that Panasonic should be able to if they wanted to. So what's the advantage to putting out two different models?
 
SPZ said:
I bet euro probably will get 23P or 22P, just to avoid having 24P.
Click to expand...
To avoid...it's the word!...:angry:
Luis Caffesse said:
So what's the advantage to putting out two different models?
Click to expand...
Marketing..my friend...sales (double purchase, for example!)...and other deals - like one only bundle @ "double" price, that is, P2 8Gb included - to some markets (a rumor that we hope real dead...), like...the argentinian announcement?!...
 
Yeah i agree with what you say Emmanuel, and the grey market would be a big problem as well... Not making the camera switchable greatly helps them to control it.
'cause who would want to pay a 20-25% more for the same camera in europe when you could get the same thing in the states without having to buy one of those bundles PLUS all the goodies that our american fellas get (barry's book, future rebates, etc) ...PLUS a nice free weekend in New york? :) I wouldn't
 
Yep exactly - you get the PAL version and you make mark it up something fierce cause the market is classed as being smaller. Here in backwater Australia I can't get a good deal on ANYthing highend.... It ALL needs to come from elsewhere if its to have a saving.

Grey market? Yes definatly an issue - but one that Sony has countered to a point by offering what Apple is currently doing with the Nano's and new lot of Mac's - a global pricing scheme. This means that you can look elsewhere o/s but the normally "cheap" countries are now of a regulated international price. Bad for the locals in HK and the like - but for Apple - great to control pricing, ensure even margin and cut down on cross-polination between regions.

Not offering at least the regional switching option that the two major competitors in this market can offer - may actually harm Panny's sales to a point. I've seen FX1/Z1 footage and its ok.... The Canon looks promising - and I'll be seeing footage from it in a coupla weeks so I'll reserve judgment till then....

This is an option that can boost functionality add value to a shooters repetoire. If a marketing based decision is the reason this is not offered - that is disapointing to say the least. If it is a technical issue - ummm why? Sony and Canon are able to solve this issue - why can't Panasonic?

Anyway - it was my 2c ages ago so I'm up to about 50c by now - :)

Cheers, Nathan.
 
Hey, I've been clamoring for an international version for a while. But just so we're clear on something -- offering 24p and 26p does not mean that they could also offer 25p easily. They're not the same thing.

24p is not, in fact, 24. It's 23.976. 26 is not, in fact, 26. It's 25.974. The US system is based around the 59.94Hz timebase, and all the frame rates are 0.1% slower than their names would indicate.

25 (for PAL) is, however, 25.000.

Every "switchable" camera so far (which means JVC HD100 and Sony Z1, and presumably an upgraded XL-H1) has to be "re-booted" to change between 24p/30p/60i mode and 25p/50i mode. So if they were to implement actual 25p, it'd mean a whole lot more than just adding that one frame rate between 24 and 26. Unless you don't actually want actual 25p, of course; if you'd be happy with 24.975p, they could probably work that). But that wouldn't work with any PAL HD television, and wouldn't be directly downconvertable to PAL SD either.

So if you wanted "real" 25p, that would involve doing whatever the other cams do to "reboot" into the alternate timebase.

I'm not saying this is an "excuse" as to why they didn't do it, but I am saying that there's obviously more to it than just adding another framerate between 24 and 26...
 
Cheers for that Barry - I know I've been harping on about this a little so I just need to calm down a little :). The camera's feature set is awesome as is - and if I was a US/Japan customer I'd be VERY pleased - just us PAL get the poor little cousin treatment a lot. Appreciate your clarification on the frame rates BTW.

Just as an aside, I'd be happy with a re-bootable camera - even to the extent of having to re-load a firmware module via firewire or P2 for each "switch" from NTSC -> PAL and back again. Convenience isn't the main drive here, which I'm sure you'd agree with - just the possibility to be working for different markets with one camera.
We'll see how the cookie crumbles on this one when the camera is actually released!


Anyway - just a big thank you to you, Jarred and all the other forumites for having such an awesome site to refer to! There is so much information and so many resources on here its excellent!

Cheers, Nathan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top