Hvx200 At Ibc - Latest News From The Show

Haakon said:
(the FX1 / Z1 shoots 1440x1080
Click to expand...
The FX1/Z1 have 960x1080 CCDs. They use spatial offset to sample the chips at 1440x1080, and that's what gets recorded. That 1440 gets horizontally upsampled to 1920 on playback.

and the HD100 is also lower, right?)
Click to expand...
The HD100 uses 720p. It has chips that are actually 1280x720.
I've seen it mentioned on here that the HVX chips might even be as low as 960x1080.
Click to expand...
We don't know anything about the chips. I wrote a massive article here a couple of months ago that speculated on how they could use a variety of different chip sizes to generate the images, and went so far as to speculate that they could get valid footage using chips as low as 960x720, but that's in no way designed to say that that's what the chips WILL be, only that I think it's technically possible to create fully-resolved footage with fewer pixels.

I'm not sure what it's called to get 960 pixels to "convert" themselves to 1920, but "uprezzing" sounds like it could be an applicable term. :-P
Click to expand...
I object to the term "uprezzing" because it gives the connotation that there's some bogus upscaling algorithm going on, where the footage would be digitally stretched. I can't imagine them doing something so ridiculous at the base footage level, and I will go out on a limb and speak for them (until they prove me wrong) in saying "that ain't what it's doing." It would most likely employ a sampling technique that uses spatial offset to pull a genuine 1280x1080 image off the chips, thereby delivering "the goods."
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
I am not either of those guys but the anser is that the HVX200 is the same color as all of the professional DVCPRO cameras.
Click to expand...

Jan, good to see you here even on such a busy schedule! Can you tell us about specs, or is it still not announced? CC'd's for example

And Jan, Panasonic really need to do some training to its employees. I have a letter from Panasonic Spain that I really would like you to read.

And how about a definite release date? For Pal and Ntsc, please!!!

How about the weight?

Have you seen Mikko's pictures? DOesn't the camera look black to you? :)
 
SPZ: good to see you here even on such a busy schedule! Can you tell us about specs, or is it still not announced? CC'd's for example

Not sure I can release that info yet. I think I want to get out the Res Chart and see if I can post that first. ;-) Just standing behind one of HVX200s and comparing it with the screen of the SPC700(Ithink) but none the less an SD camera, the picture seems pretty "wow" to me.

SPZ:And Jan, Panasonic really need to do some training to its employees. I have a letter from Panasonic Spain that I really would like you to read.

Is that an email? if so please send it on to me.

SPZ:And how about a definite release date? For Pal and Ntsc, please!!!

For NTSC it is December. PAL I will get a date today.

SPZ:How about the weight?
5.5 Lbs

Have you seen Mikko's pictures? DOesn't the camera look black to you?

Yes but that is the funky lighting in the show. It is the DVCPRO color.

More questions?

Best,

Jan
 
Yawn......!! What a jip!! Hope tomorrow yields better info. How is it that the camera is there in a working model.....its release on the horizon.....yet know one knows *anything* about it's specs. You've got different reps telling different versions of what they *think* it will feature. Hmm....sounds a little fishy to me. Very disorganized and unlike Panasonic. I hope we get some straight answers soon, or else this big event will be blown off as a *BUST*!!

~reservoir~
 
TO MIKKO:

Please go to the Canon booth and verify the existence (or lack thereof) of a black XL2-looking camera with an "HDV" badge on it. There seems to be serious doubt and much debate among internet posters as to whether the pictures Lars showed were legit, or a photoshopped hoax. It would be most helpful if you could go and verify and report back.
 
Barry_Green said:
I wrote a massive article here a couple of months ago that speculated on how they could use a variety of different chip sizes to generate the images, and went so far as to speculate that they could get valid footage using chips as low as 960x720, but that's in no way designed to say that that's what the chips WILL be, only that I think it's technically possible to create fully-resolved footage with fewer pixels.
Click to expand...
I guess that without the proper knowledge or information, I don't quite understand (and my guess is that there are a whole lot of others who don't understand, either) how an image from a chip that only has 960x720 pixels can yield a picture with 1920x1080 pixels "natively" without some kind of manipulation/uprezzing/pixel shifting/magic/whatever you want to call it. :) Maybe a diagram or something would help, I dunno. Anyway, at the end of the day it's the picture that matters and not the numbers, but I was just offering my two cents as two why that term probably gets thrown around a lot more than it should.
 
Simply put, # of pixels on the CCD does not mean # of pixels in the frame. They don't have a direct 1:1 relationship. The Canon XL1, for example, only has 250,000 pixels on its CCD (yet the DV frame has 345,600 pixels in it). The DVX only has 410,000 pixels in it, yet Juan at Reel Stream is getting 1540x780 (or something like that) out of it. Spatial Offset of the CCDs, combined with proper sampling techniques, can deliver much different resolution than the native CCDs do.

Let me put it another way: unless you're recording 4:4:4 color, "native resolution" CCDs are complete overkill. You don't need 1280x720 CCDs to make a 1280x720 frame, especially if you're downsampling the color to 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 anyway. It's just overkill.

Okay, I found the thread... http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showthread.php?t=29300
 
Mikko says he's "on it", so we should hear some reports today.

Actually the show floor is open right now, so there should be some postings before too long...
 
Hi everyone.
Just about to head to the show for the day, (yestdersay was a VERY long day for me, started at the equivilant of 3am so that i coudl make it down for the start of the show!) sounds like I Have a better chance of tracking down Jan today, and I've got a list of more things to check out.
Starting with that thing at Canon actually.. I'll get back to you folks on that.
I'll also be sure to get the full lowdown on the DVX100B
and of course anything i can get on the HVX.

- Mikko.
 
About the pixel shift/spatial offset thing:
my conclusions is that no matter how big they manage to get the pixels on the HVX the thing is the CCD is still 1/3, that is the same size of the one in the DVX and the pixel count is significantly higher so the pixels are gonna be smaller.

That means, in my limited knowledge, that the dynamic range of the HVX is gonna be lower than the one of the DVX, which was about 7 stops.

Am I right?
 
What you say makes sense, but the hope is that the CCD technology has come on enough to allow smaller pixels to have the same (or hopefully better!) sensitivity and dynamic range as the DVX.

The signal processing should have also improved, which should help too.

Low light capability is another factor that would suffer from smaller pixels, but we'll have to wait before we can be sure how well the camera performs on all these fronts.
 
Do you know then if they have applied these supposed improvements to the DVX100B CCD?
That would mean even more latitude on this new camera.

Do we know if the DVX100B has got real 16:9?

If so, it really would be a runner right now...
 
The DVX100B, as I can read on the picture posted here, is still 4:3. I understand why Panasonic do not include real 16:9 in the DVX but I can't understand why they will release an other DVX just right now at the same time as HVX hits the market. The DVX100B will not get an mail in rebate I guess. Than you need an anamorphic adapter and you are just over 4000,-.

The HVX will be an amazing SD camcorder with native 16:9, even as a 4:3 camcorder if you don't want to use HD.
 
The Canon pitures are genuine!

There ISA a Canon HDV camera coming, they will annouce at their Expo next week. More in teh first post of this thread.

- Mikko
 
Yes, I've seen the xl'3'HDV as well, looks like it's magnesium body, very dark grey, like the pd150. As for the rest of it, it looks exactly like the xl2.
I just saw Jan walking around, I'll see if I can ask her some questions. For now, first impressions on the HVX200, it really looks fat. Just the given width of the camera is more fat than I imagined from Jarreds article pictures. There is a speaker on the side, so similar principle as JVChd100, but it doesn't look as smart, more like an airvent.
About the DVX100b, it said in the display that it was in squeeze-mode, so probably no genuine 16x9.
THere doesn't appear to be any aberration in the monitor of the HVX, and on the floor there were some kinoflows so I can imagine those lights flairing into the monitor when Mikko took the pictures. THen again, they display (of course) through the component out, just like JVC and Sony, which is not your actual footage. Despite that, the image looks amazing and yes, it does have similar 'cinegamma' as the dvx100.
 
Jochem, see if you can lead over and zoom in, that may any reveal aberration. Get Mikko to distract the Pany staff by streaking or something. Is the camera just locked off on that one carefully lit scene, because that will always make a camera look good? Could it be spun around at all to test it on any real life scenes?

Don't get kicked out of the show though for disrupting the stand or anything!
 
Hi Jan,

I've dropped a deposit for an HVX and the portable storage drive from one of your dealers in the UK (Mitcorp). I've been selling this camcorder to all my clients and as such would appreciate an honest answer to release dates for the UK. One of my clients (Metropolitan Police) thats New Scotland Yard have aleady confirmed they want to shoot a new road safety campaign sometime in Mid to late November. Will that be feasible?

Many Thanks
 
I'm afraid it isn't gonna be possible, but I'll ask Jan if I can zoom it in. THere were some impressive looking 'mafia' bouncers at the edge of the booth, no joke! And the camera is pretty far out of reach, which is actually kinda lame. I was already planning to hook up a firewire cable to the cam and my powerbook and do a hit and run, but that is for sure out of the question.

I'll see what is possible.
 
jochem said:
I'm afraid it isn't gonna be possible, but I'll ask Jan if I can zoom it in. THere were some impressive looking 'mafia' bouncers at the edge of the booth, no joke! And the camera is pretty far out of reach, which is actually kinda lame. I was already planning to hook up a firewire cable to the cam and my powerbook and do a hit and run, but that is for sure out of the question.

I'll see what is possible.
Click to expand...

Many thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top