"First Look" at the new Panasonic HC-X1000 4K DCI/Ultra HD/Full HD Camcorder.
http://youtu.be/ToFBArqnyZk
http://youtu.be/ToFBArqnyZk
Last edited:
New 4k Panny 4k Camcorder
- Thread starter jazzspot
- Start date
SLavictoire
Well-known member
YES! I want this one so bad!
Mike Harvey
Veteran
Why is a 1/2" sensor off-putting?
Mike Warren
Well-known member
It's a half inch sensor, but it looks like they're only using a 1/3" area, just like the Sony Z100/AX1.
Barry_Green
Moderator
According to the specs on Panasonic's site, it looks like Mike's right. Given the stated focal length of the lens and the stated equivalency to 35mm stills cameras (30.8mm equivalent from a 4.08mm lens) it does seem like it's using basically a 1/3" patch out of the center of a 1/2.3" sensor, exactly like Sony does.
Well, that's disappointing. I imagine it's to be expected, but it's disappointing all the same. It's still an upgrade from the 1/4"-sized sensor of the AC90, and about on par with other 1/3" cameras, but it's not giving the DOF of a 1/2.3" sensor.
Well, that's disappointing. I imagine it's to be expected, but it's disappointing all the same. It's still an upgrade from the 1/4"-sized sensor of the AC90, and about on par with other 1/3" cameras, but it's not giving the DOF of a 1/2.3" sensor.
But don't forget this is UHD capable, it's a 4k camera, and the higher the basic resolution the more issues with smaller sensors start to show.
So not just dof, but diffraction limiting as well, and small photo sites impacting on low light performance. For pro use I'd say 1/3" is barely acceptable for HD, for quad-HD it isn't, not without compromise. (Same applies to the Sony cameras Mike mentions.)
There are ways of fudging the issues (fixed aperture, and moving a variable ND to control exposure), and the end result may well look better than it has a right to - but in no way would I refer to this as a professional standard camera. (Same with the Sony's with this size of chip.)
personally, if I wanted this type of camera, I'd stick with 1080, if 4k was an absolute must, I'd go for something with a larger chip like the GH4.
Nate Haustein
Well-known member
Watched that video through today. Doesn't really look like anything to write home about, and there doest seem to be any decent test footage shot yet, but for reasonably well-lit live events and landscape kinda stuff, I can see the 4K being convenient. And is that a Leica lens I see?! Finally.
fastfinger
Well-known member
These guys have a pre-production version of this cam and they talk about it at the end of this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4K7v3IyuMnE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4K7v3IyuMnE
Mike Warren
Well-known member
That was just awful. I can't imagine the production cameras will be that bad. Looks to me like it's aimed squarely at the home market for people to shoot home movies at 4K to play on their 4K TVs, which is where I see the AX1 as well.
I really do think 1/3" has done it's day with the advent of 4K.
I really do think 1/3" has done it's day with the advent of 4K.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Wow -- gotta say, that's ... pretty irresponsible of them. I've tested one, and I can say from firsthand experience the HC-X1000 camera looks infinitely better than what they're showing. I don't know how they got it to look so bad, but ... there's something seriously, seriously wrong in what they were doing, or that particular camera is defective.
In either case, it seems to me they likely just grabbed it and started shooting, and then complained about it. Which is totally the wrong way to go about working with a preproduction unit.
I mean, first of all, everything looks horribly out of focus. Why? It's a 4K camera, and its 4K is hella sharp, way way sharper than any 1080p camera. I don't know if they shot 4K or 1080p -- if they shot 4K, they must have messed up the downconversion somehow. If they shot 1080p and edited it as 1080p, then ... look, the 1080p out of this camera is sharper than an AC90, it's sharper than an HPX250 or AC160 or EX1. It's extremely sharp. So what did they do? Ignore diffraction and shoot everything at f/11? It looks like it... and if so, that's just severe operator error on their part. You cannot, must not, absolutely NEVER ever let the iris stop down lower than f/4, or the whole shot will be affected by diffraction. I've been preaching the diffraction warnings ever since the first HVX200 came out, and the higher-res and smaller the chip, the more you have to watch out for it. Ideally you'd never let the iris drop below 2.8 on a camera with the pixel density and chip size that this has. And if they DID do everything right, then -- no other explanation possible, there's likely something wrong with that camera. And that happens in preproduction models. You should EXPECT that type of thing to happen with a preproduction model. The lens must have been out of whack somehow, the backfocus must have been off, or the lens was covered in condensation and they just didn't notice it... something was wrong there.
Second, the first complaint the guy lays out at 11:30 in the video is about how the whole camera is operated solely by the touchscreen, and how inconvenient that is, etc. And that just isn't true. You can control it 100% by the menu button and wheel, just like on a broadcast camera. Complaining about a camera because you yourself don't know how to use it, is irresponsible in my opinion. They've just damaged Panasonic's ability to sell their product, through their own ingorance of how the camera operates -- and that's irresponsible.
The complaint at 11:34 is about the histogram, and how you can't move it. Again, you can just drag the histogram wherever you want on the screen. Just hold your finger on it for a second or two, and then drag it. These complaints are due to operator ignorance, not a fault of the product.
As for his complaint at 11:45 about how the focus assist is useless... that just isn't so. I don't know what was wrong with his camera -- and maybe everything wrong with that video was due to there being something wrong with his camera -- but I recall the focus assist being perfectly usable. It's really rather cool -- it shows peaking and magnification, and you can zoom in the level of magnification so you can get exactly what you want. I don't have the camera here anymore so I can't triple-check, but I played with it enough and thought it was just fine. Yet that screen shot they show does verify what he's saying, the face certainly looked awful in that shot, so now I begin to believe that there really was something wrong with his camera. The iris showed f/2.0, so that particular shot wouldn't have been affected by diffraction.
I wish I still had the camera and could show how the footage is supposed to look. All I can say is -- look, think about it, Panasonic isn't going to go releasing a $3,500 professional camcorder that puts splotchy green blobs on people's faces. The whole notion is preposterous. They're not going to release a 4K camera where everything looks out of focus. Yes you'll have to watch for diffraction, but that's standard operating procedure with any HD or 4K camera with a smaller chip.
As for the whole idea of shooting a review on a preproduction camera and then complaining about the camera and the footage -- who does that? If you're working with a preproduction model, you don't complain to the public about it. You complain to the manufacturer, and ask them what went wrong. There is no validity in airing complaints about a preproduction camera, especially complaints that were due to operator error! If someone wants to complain about ergonomics or something like that, that may be valid, but complaining about imaging when it's clearly obvious that no manufacturer on earth would try to release images like that with a straight face -- I just think those guys made a big mistake, and it'll probably be the last time Panasonic lets them try out a preproduction model. Reviewer etiquette 101 says that you don't post images from a preproduction model unless the company clears it, because everything is subject to change up until the unit is packaged in the box and sent out for sale. If THAT unit, a retail over-the-counter model, has problems, then heck yes, complain as much as you want. But until it's released, it's still subject to change, and all complaints and questions and issues should be directed to the company, not to potential end users.
In either case, it seems to me they likely just grabbed it and started shooting, and then complained about it. Which is totally the wrong way to go about working with a preproduction unit.
I mean, first of all, everything looks horribly out of focus. Why? It's a 4K camera, and its 4K is hella sharp, way way sharper than any 1080p camera. I don't know if they shot 4K or 1080p -- if they shot 4K, they must have messed up the downconversion somehow. If they shot 1080p and edited it as 1080p, then ... look, the 1080p out of this camera is sharper than an AC90, it's sharper than an HPX250 or AC160 or EX1. It's extremely sharp. So what did they do? Ignore diffraction and shoot everything at f/11? It looks like it... and if so, that's just severe operator error on their part. You cannot, must not, absolutely NEVER ever let the iris stop down lower than f/4, or the whole shot will be affected by diffraction. I've been preaching the diffraction warnings ever since the first HVX200 came out, and the higher-res and smaller the chip, the more you have to watch out for it. Ideally you'd never let the iris drop below 2.8 on a camera with the pixel density and chip size that this has. And if they DID do everything right, then -- no other explanation possible, there's likely something wrong with that camera. And that happens in preproduction models. You should EXPECT that type of thing to happen with a preproduction model. The lens must have been out of whack somehow, the backfocus must have been off, or the lens was covered in condensation and they just didn't notice it... something was wrong there.
Second, the first complaint the guy lays out at 11:30 in the video is about how the whole camera is operated solely by the touchscreen, and how inconvenient that is, etc. And that just isn't true. You can control it 100% by the menu button and wheel, just like on a broadcast camera. Complaining about a camera because you yourself don't know how to use it, is irresponsible in my opinion. They've just damaged Panasonic's ability to sell their product, through their own ingorance of how the camera operates -- and that's irresponsible.
The complaint at 11:34 is about the histogram, and how you can't move it. Again, you can just drag the histogram wherever you want on the screen. Just hold your finger on it for a second or two, and then drag it. These complaints are due to operator ignorance, not a fault of the product.
As for his complaint at 11:45 about how the focus assist is useless... that just isn't so. I don't know what was wrong with his camera -- and maybe everything wrong with that video was due to there being something wrong with his camera -- but I recall the focus assist being perfectly usable. It's really rather cool -- it shows peaking and magnification, and you can zoom in the level of magnification so you can get exactly what you want. I don't have the camera here anymore so I can't triple-check, but I played with it enough and thought it was just fine. Yet that screen shot they show does verify what he's saying, the face certainly looked awful in that shot, so now I begin to believe that there really was something wrong with his camera. The iris showed f/2.0, so that particular shot wouldn't have been affected by diffraction.
I wish I still had the camera and could show how the footage is supposed to look. All I can say is -- look, think about it, Panasonic isn't going to go releasing a $3,500 professional camcorder that puts splotchy green blobs on people's faces. The whole notion is preposterous. They're not going to release a 4K camera where everything looks out of focus. Yes you'll have to watch for diffraction, but that's standard operating procedure with any HD or 4K camera with a smaller chip.
As for the whole idea of shooting a review on a preproduction camera and then complaining about the camera and the footage -- who does that? If you're working with a preproduction model, you don't complain to the public about it. You complain to the manufacturer, and ask them what went wrong. There is no validity in airing complaints about a preproduction camera, especially complaints that were due to operator error! If someone wants to complain about ergonomics or something like that, that may be valid, but complaining about imaging when it's clearly obvious that no manufacturer on earth would try to release images like that with a straight face -- I just think those guys made a big mistake, and it'll probably be the last time Panasonic lets them try out a preproduction model. Reviewer etiquette 101 says that you don't post images from a preproduction model unless the company clears it, because everything is subject to change up until the unit is packaged in the box and sent out for sale. If THAT unit, a retail over-the-counter model, has problems, then heck yes, complain as much as you want. But until it's released, it's still subject to change, and all complaints and questions and issues should be directed to the company, not to potential end users.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGW3wUsOFNE
The camera was shipped to me as a review unit, though I was told it was pre-production, which is what was said in the video. After the video was published, Panasonic contacted me to let me know the camera was very early pre-production, and not reviewable. We've been looking at pre-release Panasonic cameras for years, always with the understanding that they would be reviewed on our channel. Unfortunately, that was not the case with the X1000.
As far as operation is concerned, Barry's copy must have been further along than mine. The entire video was shot in 4K/30P, at F1.8-4.
Again, it was not our intention mislead anyone, we were under the impression that this was a reviewable camera until after the video was online.
The camera was shipped to me as a review unit, though I was told it was pre-production, which is what was said in the video. After the video was published, Panasonic contacted me to let me know the camera was very early pre-production, and not reviewable. We've been looking at pre-release Panasonic cameras for years, always with the understanding that they would be reviewed on our channel. Unfortunately, that was not the case with the X1000.
As far as operation is concerned, Barry's copy must have been further along than mine. The entire video was shot in 4K/30P, at F1.8-4.
Again, it was not our intention mislead anyone, we were under the impression that this was a reviewable camera until after the video was online.
fastfinger
Well-known member
This was a Panasonic screw up but maybe now Barry could share some of his video... kinda damage control
Also, is this a Pro or consumer camera? My understanding was it was consumer camera with a consumer warrany
Also, is this a Pro or consumer camera? My understanding was it was consumer camera with a consumer warrany
Barry_Green
Moderator
It is from the consumer division and has a consumer warranty. But in terms of build quality and operation and features, it is every bit as "pro" as the lower-end cameras from the professional division (meaning the AC90, AC130, etc). It looks, acts, feels like, operates like, connects like, and basically does everything exactly like the pro cameras. Frankly I don't know why it's not coming from the broadcast division, but who knows -- there's been various reorganizations in their electronics division over the years, maybe this is the new normal, I don't know. But if you're at all familiar with the Panasonic AG-series of camcorders, you would be hard pressed to tell the difference between this new HC-X1000 and those.
Barry_Green
Moderator
I'm not posting footage from a prerelease/preproduction unit without the company's official say-so. The unit I (briefly) had was still early pre-production, and in fact they had me update the firmware the day I shipped it back, so I wasn't even using the latest version of it. As an example, on the unit I was using, if you used the DISP/MODE CHK button, there was a good chance the whole display would freeze up.
As such, it wouldn't be appropriate to post footage from an unfinished product. Besides, most of what I shot was simple evaluation stuff (i.e., charts, zoom range tests, that kind of thing). I wouldn't try to go get beauty footage from an unknown quantity of a preproduction unit, it's just not something that should normally be done.
In the past I have had the opportunity to provide some world's-first footage from an early-stage preproduction unit, but in those scenarios there was usually a technician from the factory accompanying me wherever I went to make sure that the camera was working properly and to be on hand in case anything went haywire.
Maybe things are done differently on the consumer side, I don't know, my dealings have mainly been with units from the broadcast division, but over the many years I've been doing this, there are some just clear-cut rules about what you do and don't do, and one is you don't post footage from a pre-production camera -- UNLESS the company specifically says "this unit's image is 100% final, go ahead and post what you shoot." Because of that, I don't think it would be appropriate to post anything that I shot on the pre-pro unit; I think we should wait until they send me a newer/more-developed unit and they give the all-clear signal.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Just saw the clarification that Jordan posted. Well done, thanks for clarifying things!
Alpha Beta Omega
Veteran
It reminds me of Sonys Z100. Some video looks stunning and others look like rubbish.