Panasonic announces UX180 and UX90 pricing & availability

[Barry_Green]

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the AC130A a 3-chip camera?

Yes it is.

This would mean that the total chip area collecting light would be 3x 1/3" or approx. 1".

The math doesn't work that way. A 1" sensor is about 13.2 x 8.8 mm, for about 116 square mm of surface area. A 1/3" chip is about 5.25 x 2.95mm, for about 15.5 mm2 of surface area. So three 1/3" chips give you about 46.5 mm2 of surface area; the 1" sensor still has about 2.5x more surface area. A 1" sensor is about as big as eight 1/3" sensors.

Are the UX180 or HC-X1 3-chip cameras?

All these large-sensor cameras (UX90, UX180, HC-X1, DVX200) are 1-chip cameras.

 

[Benjobe]

The math doesn't work that way. A 1" sensor is about 13.2 x 8.8 mm, for about 116 square mm of surface area. A 1/3" chip is about 5.25 x 2.95mm, for about 15.5 mm2 of surface area. So three 1/3" chips give you about 46.5 mm2 of surface area; the 1" sensor still has about 2.5x more surface area. A 1" sensor is about as big as eight 1/3" sensors... All these large-sensor cameras (UX90, UX180, HC-X1, DVX200) are 1-chip cameras.

Thanks Barry! Knowledgeable & helpful as always!

BTW, if I get the HC-X1 next year then I will be very interested in purchasing your scene files to help match it to my GH4.

Will you create a scene file to match the "Natural" picture profile of the GH4? (that's my go-to for best IQ)

 

[Barry_Green]

I don't have access to an HC-X1. If you get a UX180, you'll get the scene files for free when they're released by Panasonic. And yes, I've tried to work up scene files that attempt to replicate the GH4's Natural, Standard, Portrait, Cine-D, Cine-V, and Scenery profiles.

 

[Stevelunn40]

The hcx1 instructions are now available http://tda.panasonic-europe-service.../tsn3/data/ALL/HCX1E/OI/950870/dvqp1176za.pdf

 

[Nate Haustein]

nate-

thanks for the insight.

helpful.

were you shooting 4k with the ux90?

be well.

rob
smalltalk.productions

I was not, I wanted to (it always looks so nice and sharp!) but I didn't have the time to figure out why the HDMI out wasn't playing nice with my Atomos HDMI-SDI converters. User error I'm sure, but I had a show to switch and no time to spare. I'm hoping to find a place to try out the UX180 or the HC-X1 before the end of the year in order to compare a bit more. The SDI would be handy as would the full-chip 4K.

 

[Phil vG]

Do you mean to say "crop" instead of "downscale"? I take it to mean that if I shoot UHD footage with a 20x zoom and then crop the image to 1080 then the zoom becomes effectively a 40x.

Sometimes I do this with my GH4 footage, but most often I shoot the framing I want and then downscale the UHD footage to a 1080 timeline. This produces a fantastically sharp and vivid 1080 image.

Yes, crop. But it only works out at being equal to 24x (I think), not 40, it would be 25x if you went down to 720p.

This is done on a HC-X1000 ( not X1 ), and only in auto. Only did it for the demo.

1x



20x



20x + Crop



The HC-X1000 is only a 1/2.3" sensor, the new cameras are 1" Sensor, so I'm sure they will do a lot better, maybe even go past 24X

 

[dnavas]

The HC-X1000 is only a 1/2.3" sensor, the new cameras are 1" Sensor, so I'm sure they will do a lot better, maybe even go past 24X

I'd worry more about resolving power (whatever is left after a debayer and the rest of the imaging electronics), plus the chromatic aberration of the lens (which you can definitely see in the HC-X1000 shot at the bottom, and which we've seen in some previous extreme closeups on the UX90 (?) like the one of leaves shot against cloudy sky ... though I forget which of the videos that was in). The larger sensor might help in some cases, though there are also downsides (focus, for example).

I wonder if anyone with a UX180 has done any resolve tests? [Looks around randomly at the scads of people with UX180s in their possession :>]

 

[Barry_Green]

I wonder if anyone with a UX180 has done any resolve tests? [Looks around randomly at the scads of people with UX180s in their possession :>]

I resemble that remark.

Yes, I've tested the UX180 resolution, and yes, it resolves exactly like it should. It's clean, sharp, native 3840 x 2160. Its resolved detail looks as good or better than other native 4K sensor cameras, such as the original Red One. I posted a comparison between the DVX200 and Red One once upon a time, as I'd found an extract that Adam Wilt shot of the DSC Mega Trumpets 4K resolution chart.

What I see in this chart that is most easy to discern is on the 45-degree angle trumpets, it looks like it starts getting mushy around 1300 lp/ph, and totally mushes out at about 1440 lp/ph.


Here's a comparable section of the same chart as shot on the UX180. I left it wider so you could see the 1250 lp/ph leading into the 1500 lp/ph section.

It's not so easy to see the mushing on the UX180. I can definitely see that it's mushing at a tad beyond 1500 lp/ph. So that puts it in the same category as the Red One, which, frankly, it should be, since both cameras are using native-pixel 4K sensors. The UX180's sensor is smaller, but is just as sharp and the glass is excellent too.

The nice thing is that there's no harsh aliasing present, or nasty chroma aliasing. It's nice and clean.

The UX180 is no slouch, it's a legitimate 4K camera. It isn't quite as sharp as the DVX200, which is actually a 5K sensor, but for a native 4K sensor the UX180 is as sharp as any other native 4K sensor camera.

 

[Barry_Green]

And, in case anyone's interested, here's the 1080p Full HD resolution comparison.

The DVX200's FHD is somewhat soft and has some chroma aliasing in it, as we all know.

The UX180's is not like that at all. It's fantastic. Super sharp and clean as a whistle.

I found the AF100's 1080p "okay" but yeah, it was soft. The DVX200 was definitely noticeably sharper, but still not up there with a native 1080p camera, and the chroma moire was an issue. The UX180, on the other hand, is razor sharp, probably as sharp or sharper than any native 1080p camera. The UX180's UHD/4K is excellent, but so is its 1080p. Even if you weren't looking for UHD at this time, it still packs quite a wallop: when you combine the pristine excellent 1080p with the 20x optical zoom with the lossless i.Zoom that extends the range to 30x, and then you add in the 5-axis image stabilizer, the UX180 is one hell of a 1080p camera. And it's got excellent UHD in it for when you're ready for that.

 

[dnavas]

Those are both really nice looking! The aliasing and chroma weirdness is absent on FHD, and it seems like the aliasing is better than the DVX200's UHD fastscan. That's really quite remarkable. A little past 1500 is what you'd hope for on a 4k (bayer) sensor, and that's right where it is.

Ship it!

Thanks Barry.

 

[jamedia.uk]

The UX180 definitely has more power, but for the price the UX90 is a hell of a lot of camera. I was comparing the upgrades from the prior Panasonic $2,000 camera (the AC90A) and it's astonishing how much more camera you get, for the same price. I loved my AC90, but the UX90 takes a wrecking ball to it.

I am looking at the UX90. I have an AC90 and was looking for a second camera. I now think my AC90 will be the B camera to a UX90. Given the different sensors and their characteristics: How easy is ti gong to be to match shots from the two cameras, assuming I am using both at 1080p on 50fps?

 

[philiplipetz]

Wow the 1080 is sweet. What I had hoped for in the DVX200. For multi cam event work (typically four cameras, 12 hours per camera) we prefer HD, too my much data otherwise. Does 1080 have less low light noise than UHD? If so what seems to the sensitivity limit for acceptable event work? Does HD alter DR or chroma? Is any function disabled by shooting in HD?

 

[Bassman2003]

Thanks Barry. I still will use the PX270 and a benchmark to compare future cameras to. What I would like to see is a real world noise/gain needed test between the PX270 and the UX180. It seems that all of the gains of a 1" chip are given up with the slowish lens compared to the PX270's 1.6-1.9 over the first third of the zoom range. Frankly, I do not want a camera that has to have some form a gain engaged most of the time. Color and DR get sacrificed every step away from the native operation of the camera's chip. This has improved over the years but still, the shooting environments do not change. When I has the DVX200 for a day it seemed I needed to be in HIGH SENS mode to keep up with the PX270. Unless I am outside, I am always shooting at or close to wide open sometimes up to 6db of gain. It is just a requirement for an "event" camera.

Constant f2.8 lens with AVC-Ultra P2? Take my $5,500...

 

[delete]

Panasonic HC-X1 Availability and discounted B-Stock AG-UX90 at Texas Media Systems

Panasonic HC-X1 Availability and discounted B-Stock AG-UX90 at Texas Media Systems

Panasonic just received HC-X1 cameras.

Let me know if you need any before i postpone delivery to January.

Panasonic HC-X1 $3199.99

We are also receiving a discounted b-stock AG-UX90 later today and a AG-DVX200 on Monday from Panasonic.

Panasonic AG-UX90 B-STOCK $1895

Panasonic AG-DVX200 B-STOCK $3495

 

[Barry_Green]

I am looking at the UX90. I have an AC90 and was looking for a second camera. I now think my AC90 will be the B camera to a UX90. Given the different sensors and their characteristics: How easy is ti gong to be to match shots from the two cameras, assuming I am using both at 1080p on 50fps?

I haven't tried to match an AC90 to a UX90. I will say that they have different sensors (obviously) and different inherent color tone, as is to be expected from different cameras with different lenses and different sensors. Neither the AC90 nor the UX90 have the adjustability of a DVX200 or UX180, so painting them to match exactly is not going to be nearly as easy as it would be with a DVX200 or UX180. However, it's possible that with some time and experimentation you may be able to get them acceptably close to each other; I just haven't tried.

 

[Barry_Green]

Wow the 1080 is sweet. What I had hoped for in the DVX200.

I think it's because the sensor is an exact 3840 x 2160, so when going to HD they can do a simple four-pixel summation instead of having to do scaling, as was necessary on the DVX200 and is necessary on the UX90. For multi cam event work (typically four cameras, 12 hours per camera) we prefer HD, too my much data otherwise. Does 1080 have less low light noise than UHD?[/quote]
Yes, of course, as the pixels are averaged together it results in about 6dB of total noise reduction.

If so what seems to the sensitivity limit for acceptable event work?

That's entirely subjective. As an objective statement, it appears to be on par with the DVX200 as far as overall noise levels go, although it does have the adjustable noise reduction feature that the DVX200 didn't have when it was launched (it does now have it, due to later firmware updates).

Does HD alter DR or chroma?

Doesn't appear to be.

Is any function disabled by shooting in HD?

Offhand I can't think of any. Generally the camera is more capable when in HD mode, as going to HD enables the 5-axis hybrid stabilizer, and the i.Zoom for extended zoom range, and the 120 fps super-slow motion recording option.

There may be some function or other that I'm not thinking of that's UHD-only, but as I said, right now I can't think of any.

 

[Barry_Green]

I still will use the PX270 and a benchmark to compare future cameras to.

Understood. I'd just hope that you'd recognize that the PX270 still costs a good 50% more than the UX180, and 2.5x as much as a UX90, so it can't be said to be a fair comparison. As a benchmark, sure, if you're saying that you need at least PX270-level performance; I'm just saying that it would be unreasonable to expect a $5,000 camera's performance from a $3,500 camera... but I know you know that. I'm just being pedantic and spelling out terms.

What I would like to see is a real world noise/gain needed test between the PX270 and the UX180.

I don't have access to a PX270 and can't do such a test. When I had access to one at the Panasonic lab I compared the PX270 against the DVX200, and I found that under mild gain they were comparable, but under severe gain (18dB) the DVX200 was way better. Same as what I found with the UX180 vs. the HPX250, under mild gain they're comparable, but the higher the gain goes, the more the UX180's picture held up.

It seems that all of the gains of a 1" chip are given up with the slowish lens compared to the PX270's 1.6-1.9 over the first third of the zoom range.

In terms of sensitivity, it does go a ways towards equalizing it, yes. In terms of sharpness, the UX180 is drastically ahead because it's of course UHD. In terms of DOF, the UX180 is notably shallower than the PX270 -- not drastically so, because the iris does compensate for some of the difference, but as demonstrated in my prior test, there's still a notably more shallow look from the 1" sensor even at its deeper requisite f-stop. So when you say "all of the gains", I can't agree with that -- you're still getting a UHD camcorder, and you're getting shallower DOF, even if the sensitivity difference is more equal than you'd expect due to the chip size difference.

Constant f2.8 lens with AVC-Ultra P2? Take my $5,500...

You can have a constant f/2.8 lens... it'll just be a zoom range of 8.8 to 10mm. I can't imagine we'll ever see a 1" lens with a constant 2.8 and a 15x to 20x zoom range, at any price. No manufacturer would ever build such a thing, because it'd be so grossly overexpensive.

The PX270 has an f/1.6 to f/3.0 ramping lens, IIRC. That's almost 2 full stops of ramping on a 22x lens. The UX180 has a 2.8 to 4.5, that's only 1 1/3 stops of ramping, over a 20x zoom range. Sony's PXW150 is a 1" sensor too, and it has a 2.8 to 4.5 over only a 12x range. Hate to be a bubble-burster, but -- yeah, that bubble's burst. I would expect it would be reasonable to see an AVC-Ultra microP2 version of this type of camera some time in the future, but there's no way in hell or anywhere above it that it would have a fixed 2.8 iris on a 20x zoom, that's just impossible...

If you want to treat the UX180 as a fixed-iris camera, think of it as an f/4. It'll be within about 1/3 of a stop of F/4 throughout almost its entire zoom range.

 

[Camera Expert]

Here's a bunch of random handheld clips I shot in Revere Beach Massachusetts. Would have been way better if it was sunny out during the time I went.

 

[Barry_Green]

One other thing on the comparison of a 1/3" (or smaller) sensor camera vs. the big-sensor camera, that I think is a significant differentiation, is the issue of diffraction.

On a small sensor camera like the PX270, you're really limited to an iris of f/5.6 at the most; if you go any deeper (like f/8 or f/11) the image will get really soft. On a tiny-sensor camera like the AC90, it happens even sooner; the physical iris limit is actually about f/2.8 (although the cleverly-integrated ND filter lets you extend your perceived iris down to f/6.8; it actually holds the physical iris at f/2.8 and progressively adds more ND filter up until you reach a reported f/6.8).

Bigger pixels on a bigger sensor give you bigger range. On the UX180, you have the full range from f/2.8 to f/11.0 without worrying about diffraction at all. The pixels on the UX90 are about half the size of the UX180 so it has a little more of a limit; in HD you can go 2.8 to 11.0 with no issues, but in UHD I'd recommend 2.8 to 8.0... after 8.0 you can see a little bit of diffraction softening creeping in, although, really, it's no big deal and I'd be surprised if most folks noticed any difference between 8.0 and 11.0. But in pixel-peeping I can tell it's there, so I'm pointing it out.

 

[Bassman2003]

Thanks for the insights Barry. I will give up on my pipe dream of a constant f2.8 lens but is there a shot at getting more of the zoom range to stay at f2.8? Ramping is always kind of a pain but when it starts later in the range it gives you more to work with. This was something that really disappointed me with the DVX200. It is like f2.8 is more of a marketing term since it disappears so quickly. I do think the UX180/HC cameras are shaping up to be a great value (as with most all Panasonic cameras).