My 150 recordings when viewed on a full screen are soft and lacking in sharpness!

[eric geurts lakin]

The footage from my 150 looks excellent if I look at it on a small preview screen, for example, on my video editor. But if I view it on a full screen, then the image (especially with the lens at full wide-angle) is incredibly soft looking, lacking in sharpness, and infact more like a really good standard definition recording! If I want the image to look like what I see with my eyes (my eyesight is normal) then It seems that the only way to achieve this is to zoom in. Then the recording appears to be much sharper and less soft. Is this the so-called Panny mojo" effect, and is this normal for the 150? Do others experience the same problem? or is my camera at fault?

 

[pulpfiction007]

This is probably the #1 complaint with the 150 since it doesn't use full raster chips like an HMC40 or HPX370. Many users sharpen in post with their NLE. Also...every zoom lens will have a sweet spot and it's usually not wide angle with max aperture...have you tried stopping the iris down a bit when you're shooting with a wide angle? I only say this because when you zoom in the iris automatically stops down some and you're probably seeing it's natural sweet spot. Just an idea...I could be wrong!

 

[TomBoisseau]

I am still somewhat new to the HMC150, but I agree that in general it is a somewhat "soft" looking camera. That being said, I'd look very carefully at your scene settings. Clearly (no pun intended) CineD looks just awfull, as others here have attested. It's so bad in my opinion that I can't think of ANY time I would want to use it (others please correct me if I'm wrong).

Also, check the "Detail Coring". Personally I like to bump it up just a few numbers because it seems to help hide the "noise". HOWEVER, that comes with a price because it also seems to soften the picture a bit.

Overall I am happy wit the HMC150. It is a good comprimise between price, functionallity, and picture quality. Noteworthy is the fact that it still looks FAR better than ANY of the HD programming that I receive from my Dish Netwok receiver. Of course their compression must be extreamly high. I sincerely doubt that any channel is broadcasted at 24mb/s.

Tom

 

[TheDingo]

Is your focus good with every shot ? ( i.e. Are you using the Focus-Assist button when you focus ? )

Yes, the HMC-150 is not a full raster camera, but properly stabilized and focused, you should be get good results.

 

[eric geurts lakin]

This is probably the #1 complaint with the 150 since it doesn't use full raster chips like an HMC40 or HPX370. Many users sharpen in post with their NLE. Also...every zoom lens will have a sweet spot and it's usually not wide angle with max aperture...have you tried stopping the iris down a bit when you're shooting with a wide angle? I only say this because when you zoom in the iris automatically stops down some and you're probably seeing it's natural sweet spot. Just an idea...I could be wrong!

There was nothing in the sales brochures etc about the 150 not using full raster chips and that was very disappointing to discover after having purchased the camera. If I had known that, then I probably would not have bought the 150. I have noticed that if I stop down and zoom in a bit, then the quality improves , infact the more I zoom-in, the better it is!

 

[eric geurts lakin]

Is your focus good with every shot ? ( i.e. Are you using the Focus-Assist button when you focus ? )

Yes, the HMC-150 is not a full raster camera, but properly stabilized and focused, you should be get good results.

Yes I usually zoom right in then use the focus assist button to nail it, but sometimes if I want to get a wide shot of say a "garden" or a "crowd of people" I tend to use the auto-focus. So maybe that is the problem.

 

[eric geurts lakin]

I am still somewhat new to the HMC150, but I agree that in general it is a somewhat "soft" looking camera. That being said, I'd look very carefully at your scene settings. Clearly (no pun intended) CineD looks just awfull, as others here have attested. It's so bad in my opinion that I can't think of ANY time I would want to use it (others please correct me if I'm wrong).

Also, check the "Detail Coring". Personally I like to bump it up just a few numbers because it seems to help hide the "noise". HOWEVER, that comes with a price because it also seems to soften the picture a bit.

Overall I am happy wit the HMC150. It is a good comprimise between price, functionallity, and picture quality. Noteworthy is the fact that it still looks FAR better than ANY of the HD programming that I receive from my Dish Netwok receiver. Of course their compression must be extreamly high. I sincerely doubt that any channel is broadcasted at 24mb/s.

Tom

Interesting that you should say that, because I do infact (light permitting) use the cine-D a lot (detail setting at +3 and coring at 0) I like the way it handles in "high contrast" scenes, especially skin-tones and snow scenes. When I try the other gammas the skin tones/snow scenes have too much contrast for my liking (setting the knee to low helps a bit)
If you or anyone else for that matter can recommend a setting for filming people in "high contrast" situations (skin tones/snow scenes in particular) I'd certainly like to hear about it.

 

[SPrimeau]

There was nothing in the sales brochures etc about the 150 not using full raster chips and that was very disappointing to discover after having purchased the camera. If I had known that, then I probably would not have bought the 150. I have noticed that if I stop down and zoom in a bit, then the quality improves , infact the more I zoom-in, the better it is!

Your issue, yes it's an ISSUE, is a back focus issue.

I had this problem with my HMC 150 after having it serviced by Panasonic Canada. I even sent them twice the camera to adjust the back focus without full success.

When the camera was full zoomed out with iris wide open, it was soft. If I stopped down the iris or zoomed in, it improved the sharpness.

My problem have been solved when I made the back focus adjusted by a local Panasonic dealer. (Inter-Cité video here in Montreal)

And when the camera is under warranty, with Panasonic dealers, it will be free.


I also had this issue with my DVX100. But at the long end. I probably knocked the lens, this is why the back focus was off. Same solution as above!

 

[eric geurts lakin]

Your issue, yes it's an ISSUE, is a back focus issue.

I had this problem with my HMC 150 after having it serviced by Panasonic Canada. I even sent them twice the camera to adjust the back focus without full success.

When the camera was full zoomed out with iris wide open, it was soft. If I stopped down the iris or zoomed in, it improved the sharpness.

My problem have been solved when I made the back focus adjusted by a local Panasonic dealer. (Inter-Cité video here in Montreal)

And when the camera is under warranty, with Panasonic dealers, it will be free.


I also had this issue with my DVX100. But at the long end. I probably knocked the lens, this is why the back focus was off. Same solution as above!

Ahh...I see...So maybe thats the problem! I shall certainly have to look into this then. Thanks for that!

 

[Denwa]

I am still somewhat new to the HMC150, but I agree that in general it is a somewhat "soft" looking camera. That being said, I'd look very carefully at your scene settings. Clearly (no pun intended) CineD looks just awfull, as others here have attested. It's so bad in my opinion that I can't think of ANY time I would want to use it (others please correct me if I'm wrong).

Also, check the "Detail Coring". Personally I like to bump it up just a few numbers because it seems to help hide the "noise". HOWEVER, that comes with a price because it also seems to soften the picture a bit.

Overall I am happy wit the HMC150. It is a good comprimise between price, functionallity, and picture quality. Noteworthy is the fact that it still looks FAR better than ANY of the HD programming that I receive from my Dish Netwok receiver. Of course their compression must be extreamly high. I sincerely doubt that any channel is broadcasted at 24mb/s.

Tom

I use cine-D all the time. If you adjust your scene file settings the pictures are quite nice. Film is actually softer than most people think. And I have my detail tuned down to -3 and my coring up to +3. A lot of post people prefer adding any detail in post. Adjust your settings then adjust for noise by reducing master ped till it is minimized using the WFM method.

Keep in mind that cine-d is supposed to be "flat" and is usually used for footage heading to a post suite for CC, etc. Also, with cine-d or cine-v expose about a stop down form the "normal".

Ahh...I see...So maybe thats the problem! I shall certainly have to look into this then. Thanks for that!

Test your back focus my getting a a high contrast image (test chart for this would be best) and zooming in, set focus, record, zoom out without touching focus and record. If the zoomed out footage is blurry, then it's your back focus. Best to do this with a open f-stop if possible. The bigger pro cams with removable lens's have a back focus adjustment, unfortunately, the small cams do not. The AF100 does though. Not sure about other brands but it's usually on the bigger expensive cams with removable lens's.

There's actually some interesting tricks you can do by purposely mis-adjusting your back focus. I kinda miss that ability.

EDIT: Meant to say "open" f-stop.

 

[eric geurts lakin]

I use cine-D all the time. If you adjust your scene file settings the pictures are quite nice. Film is actually softer than most people think. And I have my detail tuned down to -3 and my coring up to +3. A lot of post people prefer adding any detail in post. Adjust your settings then adjust for noise by reducing master ped till it is minimized using the WFM method.

Keep in mind that cine-d is supposed to be "flat" and is usually used for footage heading to a post suite for CC, etc. Also, with cine-d or cine-v expose about a stop down form the "normal".




Test your back focus my getting a a high contrast image (test chart for this would be best) and zooming in, set focus, record, zoom out without touching focus and record. If the zoomed out footage is blurry, then it's your back focus. Best to do this with a medium f-stop if possible. The bigger pro cams with removable lens's have a back focus adjustment, unfortunately, the small cams do not. The AF100 does though. Not sure about other brands but it's usually on the bigger expensive cams with removable lens's.

There's actually some interesting tricks you can do by purposely mis-adjusting your back focus. I kinda miss that ability.

Yes I like to use the cine-d most of the time. I tend to have my detail at +3 and coring at 0 with auto iris at 0 and master ped at -2. But I shall try out your recommendations and try adding detail in post.
But I must confess that I have no idea how to go about "reducing master ped till it is minimized using the WFM" I'm sure that its quite simple, but I dont have a clue how to go about that!
Thank you for your advice about testing the back focus. I'll see if I can give that a go.

 

[Denwa]

Yes I like to use the cine-d most of the time. I tend to have my detail at +3 and coring at 0 with auto iris at 0 and master ped at -2. But I shall try out your recommendations and try adding detail in post.
But I must confess that I have no idea how to go about "reducing master ped till it is minimized using the WFM" I'm sure that its quite simple, but I dont have a clue how to go about that!
Thank you for your advice about testing the back focus. I'll see if I can give that a go.

Make any detail adjustments first, then, close your iris fully. Starting at 0 master ped, Turn on your waveform monitor. See the black line on the bottom (casue it's all black)? You will see some noise too. ABB (black balance the cam), the noise will drop some but you will likely still see noise. Lower your master ped a unit at a time till the line looks it's most solid.

 

[eric geurts lakin]

Make any detail adjustments first, then, close your iris fully. Starting at 0 master ped, Turn on your waveform monitor. See the black line on the bottom (casue it's all black)? You will see some noise too. ABB (black balance the cam), the noise will drop some but you will likely still see noise. Lower your master ped a unit at a time till the line looks it's most solid.

Thank you for that Denwa, I shall certainly give it a go.

 

[TomBoisseau]

Yes I like to use the cine-d most of the time. I tend to have my detail at +3 and coring at 0 with auto iris at 0 and master ped at -2. But I shall try out your recommendations and try adding detail in post.
But I must confess that I have no idea how to go about "reducing master ped till it is minimized using the WFM" I'm sure that its quite simple, but I dont have a clue how to go about that!
Thank you for your advice about testing the back focus. I'll see if I can give that a go.

Well, I'm actually somewhat pleased to see my statement about CineD challenged. I suppose I'll need to reconsider. That being said, I still thought I had greater noise when using CineD than I did say with nearly any of the other scene files. Perhaps it was due to the lighting conditions, although there were two dfferent situations that I observed.

1. Exteriors on a wide shot. The darker areas under the overhang of a front porch appeared quite noisy to me.

2. Interiors under moderate level florescent lighting. Much of the picture looked noisy to me.

It should be noted that this was observed using a 55" monitor. Certainly on a smaller monitor it would have been considerably less noticable.

One final clarification. When I speak of not using CineD I am specifically refering to not using scene file #6, CineD. I'm not sure if we were all talking about the same thing.

Tom

 

[eric geurts lakin]

Well, I'm actually somewhat pleased to see my statement about CineD challenged. I suppose I'll need to reconsider. That being said, I still thought I had greater noise when using CineD than I did say with nearly any of the other scene files. Perhaps it was due to the lighting conditions, although there were two dfferent situations that I observed.

1. Exteriors on a wide shot. The darker areas under the overhang of a front porch appeared quite noisy to me.

2. Interiors under moderate level florescent lighting. Much of the picture looked noisy to me.

It should be noted that this was observed using a 55" monitor. Certainly on a smaller monitor it would have been considerably less noticable.

One final clarification. When I speak of not using CineD I am specifically refering to not using scene file #6, CineD. I'm not sure if we were all talking about the same thing.

Tom

I have experienced noise with the cine-D gamma quite a lot, infact I tend to only use it now when its very sunny, or when theres snow... with the auto iris at 0 (not at -9 as on scene file 6) and even then I still get noise in the shadow areas! I have now began to use cine-V instead (also with the auto iris at 0)
I find that cine-D gives flesh tones a "pink" tint to the brighter exposed parts. Cine-V with flesh tones looks more natural (as my eyes see it) and produces more life-like colours to me.

 

[eric geurts lakin]

I have experienced noise with the cine-D gamma quite a lot, infact I tend to only use it now when its very sunny, or when theres snow... with the auto iris at 0 (not at -9 as on scene file 6) and even then I still get noise in the shadow areas! I have now began to use cine-V instead (also with the auto iris at 0)
I find that cine-D gives flesh tones a "pink" tint to the brighter exposed parts. Cine-V with flesh tones looks more natural (as my eyes see it) and produces more life-like colours to me.

Oh... and I forgot to mention on my above quote, that on my old (3 years) monitor the cine-v is very noisy indeed, but on my new monitor the noise is much less.

 

[sewolla]

I think the issue of softness in the image is more having to do with how the camera is used than with anything else, really. I use my pair of HMC150's to shoot a lot of concerts and scholastic events in rather challenging lighting. I am almost always on a tripod or crane. I am very careful with focus, and use a Marshall 7" LCD to help with focus and framing.

I often play raw footage right off the card into my Panasonic 50" plasma (GT25), to see what tha cam is really capturing. It's very good, very sharp. My only other HD cam that I can compare it to is a Canon XHA1, and the HMC150 is easly as sharp as that cam.

A lot of it has to do with what you view it on. I have a client who used to view our productions on a 32" Sony TV made in the mid 80's. She said my color was always off. The problem was with her set being on its last legs. She got a new HDTV and that solved the problem.

 

[eric geurts lakin]

I think the issue of softness in the image is more having to do with how the camera is used than with anything else, really. I use my pair of HMC150's to shoot a lot of concerts and scholastic events in rather challenging lighting. I am almost always on a tripod or crane. I am very careful with focus, and use a Marshall 7" LCD to help with focus and framing.

I often play raw footage right off the card into my Panasonic 50" plasma (GT25), to see what tha cam is really capturing. It's very good, very sharp. My only other HD cam that I can compare it to is a Canon XHA1, and the HMC150 is easly as sharp as that cam.

A lot of it has to do with what you view it on. I have a client who used to view our productions on a 32" Sony TV made in the mid 80's. She said my color was always off. The problem was with her set being on its last legs. She got a new HDTV and that solved the problem.

The local cinema where I live has just gone digital. This means that they can simply plug a computer, or a blu-ray player etc, into their new apparatus and play video on the big screen! So I shall see how the 150's footage looks like when I've got various test samples to try out.
In the meantime, I'll consider getting hold of a Marshall 7" LCD and see if I can upgrade to a better monitor or tv.
Thank you for that Sewolla.

 

[SPrimeau]

Did you bring the cam to your Panasonic local authorized dealer as I suggested you?

The test for the back focus should be done with iris wide open. If you close it down, you're helping to diminish the softness.

I know that a good adjustment to the back focus (when there is a problem with it) is really improving the image.

For how long you have your camera? As I said, if it's under warranty, it will be free of charge with official Panasonic dealers.

I had this problem with 2 Panasonic cameras. And you look to have the same issue.

 

[eric geurts lakin]

Did you bring the cam to your Panasonic local authorized dealer as I suggested you?

The test for the back focus should be done with iris wide open. If you close it down, you're helping to diminish the softness.

I know that a good adjustment to the back focus (when there is a problem with it) is really improving the image.

For how long you have your camera? As I said, if it's under warranty, it will be free of charge with official Panasonic dealers.

I had this problem with 2 Panasonic cameras. And you look to have the same issue.

I live in Norway, but it seems that the nearest authorised dealer is in Sweden! (absolutely miles away) So I'll have to think about this as I have several projects this summer and I need the camera at hand.
The camera was actually bought from Sweden, and the warranty appears to have run out now. You mentioned that the test for the back focus should be done with iris wide open. Is it possible to do this ones-self? and how?