HVX vs. PMW-EX1

[mico]

Talk is cheap! Post your stuff!

You know whats cheaper than talk. People that say post your stuff thinking they're going to see the true quality of images from a certain cam from a compressed upload rather than doing the right thing and test these cams for yourself.

Anyway heres the footage so you can look for issues. NHRA qualifying, right at the start gate where the Nitro cars rattle your bones. These are just random images I selected for movement. The only stabilizers I used were my hands and a monopod for these. No post processing of any kind was done, only AvCHD to prores for FCP then to mp4 for vimeo.

http://www.vimeo.com/1215218

 

[David Saraceno]

You know whats cheaper than talk. People that say post your stuff thinking they're going to see the true quality of images from a certain cam from a compressed upload rather than doing the right thing and test these cams for yourself.

Hey. I bought the cam, and tested it

And I returned that cam and paid a restocking fee.

So who's on first?

 

[RDykmans]

Mico, I downloaded the larger version and while you could see a little skew (going frame by frame) on some of the pans before it blurred out nicely, I sure didn't find it objectionable. If anything that may have added to the overall sense of acceleration. Thanks for posting that up.

 

[mico]

Mico, I downloaded the larger version and while you could see a little skew (going frame by frame) on some of the pans before it blurred out nicely, I sure didn't find it objectionable. If anything that may have added to the overall sense of acceleration. Thanks for posting that up.

Exactly. You and I see it the same.

 

[Buck Forester]

Psssst... Jan, any thoughts about Panasonic's consumer division going CMOS, despite what their more knowledgeable (I'm assuming anyway) broadcast division says? Just curious, if you choose not to answer, that's okay. This is not a 'baiting' question, more just a curiosity, given your stance on CMOS and knowing the attributes of CMOS would more likely be noticeable with the shooting style of consumers.

I'm just wondering if you saw my earlier question or not. Don't worry, this'll be my last time asking it here... I'm not trying to pester you about it, just wondering if you saw the question. Gracias mi amigas!

 

[Jan_Crittenden]

Psssst... Jan, any thoughts about Panasonic's consumer division going CMOS, despite what their more knowledgeable (I'm assuming anyway) broadcast division says? Just curious, if you choose not to answer, that's okay. This is not a 'baiting' question, more just a curiosity, given your stance on CMOS and knowing the attributes of CMOS would more likely be noticeable with the shooting style of consumers.

No problem in asking, it is the CONSUMER division and not a division that has customers expecting to bill for the video that they produce. Consumers are not as picky as production people and their clients, so no I see that as a natural progression over there. We may well end up with it in the broadcast division as well, but before that happens I hope that they can at least address the worst of the issues.

Hope that answers your question, Buck,

Jan

 

[Buck Forester]

Super mucho gracias, Jan! My oft-inept brain doesn't necessarily follow the logic that consumers are okay with rolling shutter issues because they're not getting paid for it, but that's just gonna hafta do. It's all bueno. Thanks again! - El Bucko

 

[Kholi]

Super mucho gracias, Jan! My oft-inept brain doesn't necessarily follow the logic that consumers are okay with rolling shutter issues because they're not getting paid for it, but that's just gonna hafta do. It's all bueno. Thanks again! - El Bucko

It's a 1000.00 dollar camera. How much work will someone with a 1000.00 be making with that camera versus someone with a 6k setup, then 10k, then 20k?

 

[Buck Forester]

Kholi, I understand what you're saying, but I don't think you're understanding what I'm asking.

My point is if Panasonic doesn't think very highly of CMOS chips and they have serious limitations when it comes to rolling shutter, don't they 'care' about their consumer level customers too? I don't get the "well, they're not selling the footage so it can look wobbly and skewy". Why subject them to rolling shutter issues? Consumers are more likely to induce rolling shutter effects than pros because of how they handle the cameras. Panasonic already makes fine 3-CCD chip cameras in this price range, even cheaper ones... why then all of a sudden put chips in their cameras that will go jelly-up?

If Aunt Shirley spends $1,000 on a 3-chip CMOS camera, Shirley she'll care about her footage even if she doesn't intend to sell it? My question was about consistency in caring about customers, that's all.

It's just marketing and corporate politics and all that, as Barry said. At least that's the best answer I can think of.

 

[SPZ]

We may well end up with it in the broadcast division as well, but before that happens I hope that they can at least address the worst of the issues.

Hope that answers your question, Buck,

Jan

So, Jan, Panasonic Broadcast can go Cmos even though these issues are not addressed? Don't you have anything to say about this in the development process?

Is it THAT expensive to go for a 1/2 CCD 1280x720 chip or a 1440x1080, or a foveon HD approach vs going Cmos?

 

[David Saraceno]

This is an interesting discussion until we got to the whole consumer CMOS portion, at least to me.

Consumers have less discriminating tastes and usually a lower budget.

I think Jan has explained the reasoning. Panasonic is in the market to make money.

CMOS for $1k cameras is a money maker - otherwise Panasonic wouldn't offer it.

At least that's one view.

 

[Buck Forester]

This is an interesting discussion until we got to the whole consumer CMOS portion, at least to me.

Consumers have less discriminating tastes and usually a lower budget.

I guess everyone finds different interest in things. I just found it 'interesting' that Panny is putting CMOS in $1,200 cams and asked Jan about it since she's no fan of CMOS. This whole thread was pretty much "Panny is good and CMOS isn't" and then they are on track for CMOS themselves.

We saw some pretty bad stuff on that cam just panning the backyard when we had one.

It was a $150.00 restocking fee lesson.

And you make another 'interesting' point. At least to me anyway. You bought a CMOS camera that was HALF the price of this new Panny one and you disliked it so much you sent it back. Trust me, you must, if a 'consumer' is spending $1,200 on a 3-chip CMOS camera (over twice the going rate for what you had), yes, they will have less discriminating tastes but they won't be completely stupid. "Wow, look at grandma jiggle", "hey cool, the bridge is leaning at a 45 degree angle and the cars aren't even falling off, woo hoo!".

CMOS for $1k cameras is a money maker - otherwise Panasonic wouldn't offer it.

Bingo. It was just curious the discrepancies between Jan (works for Panny) lambasting CMOS chips whenever they are put into movement, and then seeing the same company (yes, different division) enthusiastically brag/promote/market about the amazing quality of their latest CMOS cameras. Seemed odd. That's all. No big deal. Case closed.