I have a feeling that .......

Barry_Green said:
The 2/3" HPX500 shows about 2 stops more sensitivity over the 1/3" HVX200, so your numbers are fairly spot on.

But -- this is only relevant *if all other elements stay equal*. As in, equivalent pixel count, and equivalent sensor type (CMOS or CCD) and equivalent sensor scanning method (interlaced or progressive). If Panasonic were to go from the 1/3" HVX to a 1920x1080 1/2" chip, with all other things being equal, you'd see overall sensitivity DROP by at least 1 stop, maybe 2 stops. And if they went to CMOS, you'd see another drop of probably at least another stop. And the only way to overcome that would be to scan interlaced, which means bye-bye variable frame rates. And if they went CMOS, that'd mean "hello wobble."

It's very, very, very difficult to predict how these things would perform based on an incomplete picture of what technology would be used.

I don't see Panasonic going anywhere near 1/2". They jumped straight past that to 2/3" for the HPX500. I'd like to see 'em to stick with CCDs and avoid CMOS until the whole wobble and lousy-sensitivity issues get sorted out. But frankly I don't expect a lot of action on the middle end, I expect 'em to focus their energies on the much-more-lagging low end. They need to get something HD that's less expensive than the HVX200 out there; right now there's a huge gaping hole in the product line at the low end of the price scale. Early 2007 saw 'em revamp the larger cameras, so I'd expect the DVC30/DVC60/DVX lineup is probably where we'll see the next big product revamp. Jan's said the HVX won't change until next year at the earliest, so I really don't see any impending move to 1/2".
Click to expand...



How about a 1/2 inch DVX100 that shoots NTSC only widescreen native to P2 or other memory /hard drive (no tape).

Eliminating the tape drive would save some money and make it more reliable.
1/2 inch chips would make the image better and the possibility to make color better by not sticking to the DV specs. I am sure not all of us need HD all the time, so it would position it below the HVX200 and they can thow in some niceitys, or non-standard things like widescreen setting and scope setting for real film crop look.

:undecided
 
I just dont think a non HD camera is worth the development. Everyone wants HD, and there is no lack of 1/2" DV cameras in the market, and anyway, the DVX is already one of the best DV cameras out there. If anything
I could see them maybe going for a 1/2 AVCHD intra, but that will not be an HVX, it would be a whole different camera. I think the HVX is going to see minimal improvements, just like the DVX did.
After shooting with the 500 I will say that that the improvement is so dramatic that it seems like even more than 2 stops. The 500 has better sensitivity than the 2000, and the reason is exactly what Barry was saying. The 500 uses the same pixel shift technology that the HVX does, which gives you in essence fewer pixels in the chip. The 2000 adds the full pixels, so in the same size 2/3 chip the pixels must be smaller therefore giving them less light sensitivity.
 
Last edited:
Did anyone already hear any conformation about what is mentioned on internet some time ago (unfortunately the link I have on the article is not valid anymore) :


Im Folgenden wollen wir diese vieldiskutierte Kamera ein wenig genauer betrachten und sie auf ihre Leistungsfähigkeit hin abklopfen. Da sich die HVX200 dieses Jahr dem Ende ihres Produkt-Zyklus nähert und der Nachfolger HVX210 bereits in den Startlöchern steht ... mehr dazu weiter unten .., also auch höchste Zeit.


In the same article the following is stated by Panasonic !!!!! :


Auf Anfrage bestätigte Panasonic, dass bei der für Ende des Jahres geplanten HVX 210 eine komplett erneuerte Menue-Führung integriert wird, die besser aus der Perspektivik des Kameramanns bedient werden kann. Eher Geschmackssache oder Gewohnheit ist die Bedienung der Verschlusszeiten.


​
again from same article :

Da wir gerade beim Thema "anschließen" sind: Unbestätigten Gerüchten zur Folge soll die nächste Version der HVX 200, die HVX 210 über einen SDI-Out verfügen. Wer also nicht ohne hochwertiges, unkomprimiertes SDI-Signal leben kann, sollte sich noch bis Ende des Jahres gedulden, dann wissen wir mehr.
 
I read this article... I think it was just bla bla. They didnt respond to any questions in the comments about that topic. The article is already quite old, maybe april?
 
Barry_Green said:
The 2/3" HPX500 shows about 2 stops more sensitivity over the 1/3" HVX200, so your numbers are fairly spot on.

But -- this is only relevant *if all other elements stay equal*. As in, equivalent pixel count, and equivalent sensor type (CMOS or CCD) and equivalent sensor scanning method (interlaced or progressive). If Panasonic were to go from the 1/3" HVX to a 1920x1080 1/2" chip, with all other things being equal, you'd see overall sensitivity DROP by at least 1 stop, maybe 2 stops. And if they went to CMOS, you'd see another drop of probably at least another stop. And the only way to overcome that would be to scan interlaced, which means bye-bye variable frame rates. And if they went CMOS, that'd mean "hello wobble."

It's very, very, very difficult to predict how these things would perform based on an incomplete picture of what technology would be used.

I don't see Panasonic going anywhere near 1/2". They jumped straight past that to 2/3" for the HPX500. I'd like to see 'em to stick with CCDs and avoid CMOS until the whole wobble and lousy-sensitivity issues get sorted out. But frankly I don't expect a lot of action on the middle end, I expect 'em to focus their energies on the much-more-lagging low end. They need to get something HD that's less expensive than the HVX200 out there; right now there's a huge gaping hole in the product line at the low end of the price scale. Early 2007 saw 'em revamp the larger cameras, so I'd expect the DVC30/DVC60/DVX lineup is probably where we'll see the next big product revamp. Jan's said the HVX won't change until next year at the earliest, so I really don't see any impending move to 1/2".
Click to expand...


Barry,

Thanks for pointing out what I failed to say; in order to get the amount of gain, the technology would need to be the same, CCD with the same resolution and the same type of CCD design.

Your comments on the low end are also interesting too. The engineer in me is trying to think what Panasonic could do to create an "HVX-200 Jr." or a low cost version of the HVX-200 with a different model number. Getting rid of the tape drive would save some costs, but going to a single CCD or dual CCD image sensor(s), would put some real limits on the camera...

Bob Diaz
 
I think an HVX-"lite" would probably be based around AVC-HD instead of P2. I don't expect a smaller-than-HVX P2 camera to come out; the low end is probably going to get AVC-HD recording to cheap SD memory cards.

I wonder if they'd entertain putting in a single 2/3" sensor rather than three 1/3" chips? I'm assuming people would accept it, since the Red and the SI-2K are single-sensor designs. A single 2/3" would give shallower DOF potential, but maybe the cost of the glass would make it cost-prohibitive...
 
Sunstream said:
How about an evolution to the HVX that has
2/3 Chip...
Great light Senistivity...
No Tape drive...
Shoulder Mount...
Intercha ngable lenses....
All the things this whole thread asks for...
Oh, yeah it's already out
ITS CALLED THE AG-HPX500
The HVX is AMAZING for a palmcorder, but if you want a PRO camera, get the PRO camera. I have an HVX and I LOVE it, but I shoot more on Full sized shoulder mount cameras with interchangable lenses. The HVX is what it is, and for what it is it is GREAT!!!!
If you want it to be something else, do what the professionals do, and spend the money on the camera that you want it to be. It is here, and I have shot with it. The HVX is not even in the same class, and that is fine, because the price is in a different class. Ive shot with most of the handycam style cameras (ones that you shoot with your hands - not shoulder) and in the "same" category and pricepoint, there are no cameras that are surpassing the HVX.
It is a Great camera, and a superb value.
But it will not soon be something that it is currently not. You could add those features, but there is a balance in there, with cost. The HVX is the Pro-Sumer introductory line, and it will continue to be, and there is nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with your sentiment there.

Generally speaking, why be afraid if another manufacturer does surpass the HVX at the same price point? Personally I want the extra choice if it exists, though I wont be purching prosumer again. But I think the more the bar is raised and the more options that exists everyone is going to benefit.
 
How about a shoulder mount adapter with 2 more XLR inputs (w/level controls) like the XL1? For about $500-700 this would sell.
 
Barry,

Interesting idea, use a single 2/3" CCD. It would cost less than the 3 CCD system, but as you said, the cost of the glass would eat up the savings. Assuming all things being equal on the CCD, a 2/3" 1920x1080p CCD should have about the same light sensitively as a 1/3" 960x540p CCD. Maybe the 2/3" has the advantage, because we wouldn't be dealing with light losses due to splitting the light.

Another possible solution would be to use a 1/2" CCD 1280x1080p (or 1440x1080p) depending on what works best as the media. I figure that $1,800 for two 16GB P2 cards is reasonable when the camera is over $5,000; however it would be a hard sell when the camera is only $2,000.

It would be fun to be able to ask the R&D people in Panasonic about these things, but I know that would not be allowed to give me an answer.



Bob Diaz
 
Here's the link to your article, Cees: Slashcam Artikel

I've read this article before already, but it seems tu me suspicious...

So let's wait for the HVX210 at the end of this year (as Panasonic is supposed to have said)...
 
of all these wish lists, what i want in a HVX200 "2" is a -6 Db gain switch, Pal built in, and a built in image inverter.

thats all i need.

1/2 inchchips would be nice, actually if they made the 1/2" 960x540 3CCD sytem, that they intentionally hobbled by -6db to make it equal sensitivty to the HVX200, but 6db cleaner, would be BIG. then you can just gain up to +6 for HVX200 like noise performance. Though honestly the noise isnt a big deal, its actually very easily eliminated by a few simple camera settings changes and proper lighting.
 
I think this would be a nice update :

1/2" 960x540 3CCD sytem
image inverter
higher resolution LCD/VF
4 potmeters for audio control
remove the tape drive (cost reduction)
HD-SDI output
and maybe a shoulder mount for Barry :-))
 
TimurCivan said:
of all these wish lists, what i want in a HVX200 "2" is a -6 Db gain switch, .......
Click to expand...
It's not as simple as that, you can't just add more and more negative gain and expect noise reduction with the only drawback being less sensitivity. The reason is that the output from the chips themselves has a physical limit that can't be exceeded - no matter how much light or opening up the iris. In an extreme case the effect of too much negative gain would be camera output never getting close to peak white, regardless of input.

Before that happened, likely problems would be much poorer highlight handling etc
.....the noise isnt a big deal, its actually very easily eliminated by a few simple camera settings changes and proper lighting.
Click to expand...
In controlled situations maybe, but for many filming situations (news, some documentarys, nighttime etc) ANY lighting, let alone proper lighting, may not be possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top