Panasonic announces aj-hpx3100 p2 hd camcorder

Also, list price of 2700 here is £20k, the 3000 is £25k. I know loads of people who'd buy a 3000 instead of a 2700 if it also allowed 720/60P. That way you can do most stuff 1080, then switch to 720 just for slomo.
Steve
 
steve phillipps said:
I just told you, the Sony PDW700 does it.

Obviously 1080/60P is a technical problem, it's twice the data rate.

Steve
Click to expand...

Yes, I read that. A camcorder from a different manufacturer does it. So what? If you look at the Panasonic line of 2/3" camcorders, it's quite obvious that the Panasonic CCDs will not do 1080/60p.
 
Otis Grapsas said:
A 1920x1080p 30p CCD is not capable of 1280x720 60p. That's CCD reality.
Click to expand...

No, it's not, that's why I said it. There is no reason why Panny can't do it.

Obviously 1080/60P is a different matter, I never said it'd do that, it's twice the data rate. 1080/30P and 720/60P = same data rate (more or less). It can do it.

Steve
 
steve phillipps said:
Also, list price of 2700 here is £20k, the 3000 is £25k. I know loads of people who'd buy a 3000 instead of a 2700 if it also allowed 720/60P. That way you can do most stuff 1080, then switch to 720 just for slomo.
Steve
Click to expand...

Yes, but that's not possible on 1920x1080 Panasonic sensors today. The other models do it because their sensors can do 60p at full scan.

1920x1080/30p to 1280x720/60p is very easy. The datarates are practically the same so processing/codec/media will be no problem.

If Panasonic had 1080p/60 capable modes in these interaframe formats (processing + codec + media), some of their 960x540 and 1280x720 camcorders would probably have slow motion 1080p. HPX500, HPX2700 etc. This could be another limitation.
 
steve phillipps said:
No, it's not, that's why I said it. There is no reason why Panny can't do it.

Obviously 1080/60P is a different matter, I never said it'd do that, it's twice the data rate. 1080/30P and 720/60P = same data rate (more or less). It can do it.

Steve
Click to expand...

So, sensor readout limitations might be the only problem for 720/60p on a system capable of 1080/30p.
 
steve phillipps said:
I just told you, the Sony PDW700 does it.
Click to expand...
It has the mode, yes, but does it actually deliver 720p? I thought I read or heard in an early review that it was rejected by some 720p networks because its 720p only had 540 lines. Which would make a lot of sense, since it's a 1080i chipset.

Googled and couldn't find the reference, or anybody who's shot a 720p res chart.

There was much complaining about the original 3000 not offering 720p mode, and the explanation I was given is pretty much what Otis is saying -- the chipset is capable of 1080/60i when scanned in interlaced mode, and 1080/30p when scanned in progressive. So 720/60p (at a true 720p res) wouldn't be possible at any faster than 30fps.

I would be very, very interested to see if an HDW700 or 800's 720p mode delivers more than 540 lines of res.
 
Barry_Green said:
I would be very, very interested to see if an HDW700 or 800's 720p mode delivers more than 540 lines of res.
Click to expand...

The PDW700 does do full 720P, it's the PDW800 that does 1920 x 540, seems like it basically does a de-interlace in camera. The PDW350 does is the same way giving 1440 x 540.
Steve
 
Barry_Green said:
The CMOS cameras can, yes -- but is there any 2/3" CCD model that delivers 1920x1080x60p?
Click to expand...

I meant the Panasonic cameras with lower resolution. CMOS is far easier due to AD converter and readout design. Panasonic even have a small consumer 60p 1080p CMOS camcorder I think.

60i would explain it for the affordable Sonys. I believe the Panasonic 2/3" are true progressive so their 60i could be a split 30p frame and not true 60i sampling. If there is nothing sampled 60 times a second, the 60p modes make no sense. If they were interlaced they could do an artifacted 1920x540/60"p" readout with jumping lines which could be processed further and possibly work for 720/60p but it wouldn't be very professional of Panasonic to advertise such a feature as true professional 60p. That would be like the progressive modes in the 1/3" CCD Sony and Panasonic.

The Thomson Viper does not do slow motion either. It's a very common feature for high resolution CCDs but people are still surprised when they realise it:)

The Kodak 2/3" CCD I use does slow motion but it's using 4 readouts, it ends up being (2x2) four 960x540/50p sensors in the configuration, a very complex design, demanding in calibration and high in power. All this to get high frame rates without increasing the bandwidth of the analog electronics too much .I use 2 outputs for normal frame rates in the prototype.
 
steve phillipps said:
The PDW700 does do full 720P, it's the PDW800 that does 1920 x 540, seems like it basically does a de-interlace in camera. The PDW350 does is the same way giving 1440 x 540.
Steve
Click to expand...

It must be the other way around. PDW700 must use the interlaced readout. They do mention 720/60p in the specs.

The PDW-F800 uses the same chips with the HDC-1500 which can do progressive and there is no mention of 720p or slow motion in the specs.

EDIT/CORRECTION: Found it. 1P to 2x frame rate in 1080p (48p for 24p mode etc), only available in 35mbit/sec mpeg2 (not 50mbit 4:2:2).
 
Last edited:
steve phillipps said:
The PDW700 does do full 720P, it's the PDW800 that does 1920 x 540, seems like it basically does a de-interlace in camera. The PDW350 does is the same way giving 1440 x 540.
Steve
Click to expand...

Barry is probably right. The PDW700 is not a Cinealta anymore, they don't even list 1080/24p, there was an $4,500 option at some point for enabling it but all links are dead now. Perhaps they thought it was too much to offer 24p 2/3" progressive CCD at this price. I bet this is the one with the fake 720/60p mode. They do mention progressive sensors but some progressive sensors can also be read interlaced. The PDW-F800 is more expensive, a Cinealta and with HMC-1500 chips, I doubt it would be inferior. I would expect anything from Sony though. 24p software option haha:)
 
Otis Grapsas said:
The PDW-F800 uses the same chips with the HDC-1500 which can do progressive and there is no mention of 720p or slow motion in the specs.
Click to expand...

AFAIK the PDW800 and PDW700 use the same chip.
I used to own the 700, it did full 1280x720 either 50P or 60P and the picture quality was very good. Main problem was you had to swap discs each time you changed from 1080 to 720 as you can't have both on the same disc.
PDW800 reverts to the procedure started with the PDW350, ie full horizontal but half vertical resolution, giving more or less the same pixel count as 720 (ie 1920x540 = 1 million, 1280x720 = 1 million).

Steve
 
steve phillipps said:
AFAIK the PDW800 and PDW700 use the same chip.
I used to own the 700, it did full 1280x720 either 50P or 60P and the picture quality was very good. Main problem was you had to swap discs each time you changed from 1080 to 720 as you can't have both on the same disc.
PDW800 reverts to the procedure started with the PDW350, ie full horizontal but half vertical resolution, giving more or less the same pixel count as 720 (ie 1920x540 = 1 million, 1280x720 = 1 million).

Steve
Click to expand...

That would mean that they actually made the 37,000 euro camcorder with the more expensive 1080/60p CCDs inferior in order to protect more expensive models (studio camera heads, digital cinema cameras etc)!
 
Otis Grapsas said:
That would mean that they actually made the 37,000 euro camcorder with the more expensive 1080/60p CCDs inferior in order to protect more expensive models (studio camera heads, digital cinema cameras etc)!
Click to expand...

Not quite sure what you mean by that, but the situation is this: both the 700 and 800 have the same chips, the same as the HDC1500 and therefore capable of 1080/60P. But the processing within them can't keep up with full 1080/60P, it can only manage half that - ie either 1920 x 1080 30P, 1280 x 720 60P or 1920 x 540 60P.

Steve
 
steve phillipps said:
Not quite sure what you mean by that, but the situation is this: both the 700 and 800 have the same chips, the same as the HDC1500 and therefore capable of 1080/60P. But the processing within them can't keep up with full 1080/60P, it can only manage half that - ie either 1920 x 1080 30P, 1280 x 720 60P or 1920 x 540 60P.

Steve
Click to expand...

Interesting.
 
Does someone has any experience with the high-end Panasonic cameras(HPX2700, HPX3000,etc) and can comment how they compare to other 2/3" cameras like Sony F900, SOny F23,etc?
 
Slightly difficult to compare the HPX2700 with the others as it's only 720 chips. I used to own one and use them for most of my work, which is wildlife, and we use it because we need the slow motion.
The 3000 and 3700 will stack up well against the Sony F900 etc., they have very similar spec, except the Pannys have the AVC Intra codec which gives 10 bit vs HDCam's 8 bit, and alsoo 422 vs 311 for HDCam.
The BBC tech who tested the HPX3000 early on loved it http://thebrownings.name/WHP034/pdf/WHP034-ADD27_rev1_Panasonic_HPX3000.pdf
Steve
 
I do location sound for a LOT of free-lance crews that come through Arkansas (working with a PBS Crew from Boston this week) and the camera of choice is still the HDX900. When I mention I have an HPX300, they all say they won't go P2 because of the nanoFlash and how it is keeping their 900s from becoming obsolete. They also mention $80 CF cards versus $$$ P2 cards.

It will be interesting to see the pricing on this new camera and how well it sells.

David
 
steve phillipps said:
The 3000 and 3700 will stack up well against the Sony F900 etc., they have very similar spec, except the Pannys have the AVC Intra codec which gives 10 bit vs HDCam's 8 bit, and alsoo 422 vs 311 for HDCam.
The BBC tech who tested the HPX3000 early on loved it http://thebrownings.name/WHP034/pdf/WHP034-ADD27_rev1_Panasonic_HPX3000.pdf
Steve
Click to expand...

Then why aren't the 3000 and 3700 more used in film production? There are tons of movies shot on Sony F900 cameras, but not to many on Panasonic.
 
Am I missing something here? No one is asking the OBVIOUS question here:

What does 2/3 '' type mean? That it's like a 2/3'' CCD camera..but not really a 2/3'' camera?

I don't think the size of the CCD is really 2/3'' or they wouldn't put "type" on the brochure and info.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top