Panasonic goes CMOS

That is interesting. I wonder why they chose 3-Cmos sensors rather than just a single chip. Maybe it's a cheaper upgrade since they already have all this prism block technology and lenses designed for 3ccd cameras.
 
Nice! Could potentially be HV20/HV30 killers, especially because of the size and focus ring, but we've got to wait and see.
 
And what the heck? Histogram? Manual ring on the front of the lens for zoom, focus, and everything else? Not too shabby. Safe to assume at this point that it shoots 24P since it's AVC-HD spec?
 
The article doesn't mention the maximum bit rate for HQ recording, or the capabilities for progressive shooting.

Also, does anyone know the size of the chips?
 
Seems pretty clear that CMOS is the future for higher than HD resolutions while keeping the cameras affordable. CCD is great but still damned expensive to hit large enough chips to capture the ever increasing resolutions we shoot at. Same thing is happening in the digital SLR world as well.

Noah
 
Great news, hope it shoots 24P and has a decent bitrate. The HF10 has a maximum bitrate of 17Mbs, which looks great. Wonder if Panasonic will eke out a little more and shoot for 20-22Mbs. That would be awesome.
 
Gotta have 24p, man. Coupled with the Manual controls this sucker really might be what Jack says: Canon HV20/HF10 killer.

Although I wonder what this 3MOS business is about and how it compares. Someone message Kaku Ito, the unit drops in July in japan. We should know PLENTY as soon as he grabs one.
 
NoahK said:
Seems pretty clear that CMOS is the future for higher than HD resolutions while keeping the cameras affordable. CCD is great but still damned expensive to hit large enough chips to capture the ever increasing resolutions we shoot at. Same thing is happening in the digital SLR world as well.

Noah
Click to expand...

Given the flexibility of CMOS over CCD in terms of scan rates, the lower power requirements, the single voltage power supply, and the fact that the important things like the A/D converter can be included on the same chip, CMOS has a big advantage of CCD. Now, if it wasn't for the $%^$ rolling shutter problem with CMOS...

Sony has come up with a CMOS chip that use Parallel Column A/D Converters, the IMX017CQE, this image sensor is a 1/1.8" and 6 MP. It uses 2,916 Ramp A/D converters, all working in parallel. Now a Ramp A/D Converter is the SLOWEST A/D (and simplest) converter of them all, but running in parallel helps to overcome the slow speed.

Sadly, at HD resolutions, the chip is limited to 60p and 10 bit resolution. If you wanted 12 bit resolution, the chip would need to slow down to 15p. Clearly not acceptable for the professional market.

However, IF Sony generates a second generation chip that uses Successive Approximation A/D rather than a Ramp Converter A/D, the rolling shutter would take LESS THAN 1/6,000 of a second, rather than 1/60 of a second. This would reduce the impact of the rolling shutter so much, that it would be hard to justify going with CCD.

I've in the process of writing a paper (posting) for DVXUSER that goes into detail about how this would all work, but I'm not ready to post anything yet. Don't get me wrong, CCD is a good technology, but IF Sony does produce this improvement, the professional market will shift to CMOS.


Bob Diaz
 
Maybe Sony should develop such a chip for the consumer market first? 60p and 10 bit is good enough for some of us.
 
Not surprised to see it in the low-end consumer devices. I'll be surprised if Panasonic would put CMOS in a broadcast camera though.
 
BobDiaz said:
I've in the process of writing a paper (posting) for DVXUSER that goes into detail about how this would all work, but I'm not ready to post anything yet. Don't get me wrong, CCD is a good technology, but IF Sony does produce this improvement, the professional market will shift to CMOS.


Bob Diaz
Click to expand...


Sounds very interesting indeed, please do notify us and post your paper, I would very much like to read it.

On the issue of rolling shutter, as was demonstrated in the paper that Barry posted in the cafe the other day (the 1560 fps array camera), they managed to eliminate the distoration fairly effectively, and I think this kind of post processing can be done in camera, its fairly simple when you think about it, take each scan line and pixel shift across at a constant ratio!

Anhar,
 
Anhar Miah said:
take each scan line and pixel shift across at a constant ratio!
Click to expand...
Won't work though. Might on a static object while you're panning, but what if something is going the other way? I mean, let's say you're panning to the right, and a car drives through the frame from the right to the left. Your in-camera compensation might straighten out the background, but it'd double-skew the car...
 
BobDiaz said:
... Now, if it wasn't for the $%^$ rolling shutter problem with CMOS...
Click to expand...

One of my new cameras is CMOS and I have never seen this EVER.

That's like saying a certain car design is unstable. Then showing the design is indeed unstable when the car goes faster than 550mph. Totally irrelevant to almost anyone using that car design because outside of an extreme situation, it won't ever be travelling that fast.

So show me what you've personally shot with a current CMOS sensored camera where this was any kind of an issue.
 
I really don't understand this "it doesn't exist" thing. It's like if I went around saying "I think the danger of rattlesnakes is overblown. I've never, EVER been bitten by a rattlesnake."

Does that mean that snakes don't bite, and that if you get bit by a rattlesnake, that it's nothing to worry about?

Snakes bite. So stay away from 'em. Rolling shutters cause complications with flashes, strobes, HMIs, fluorescents, panning, tilting, vibration, and match-moving/compositing. The degree of complication is dependent on the particular camera (red and EX1 being less compromised than HV20, which is better than a cell-phone camera). But it's there. Know what you're doing, what circumstances to avoid, and you can minimize the problems (like, don't go turning over rocks in the desert with your bare hands or sticking your hands in small caves and outcroppings, and that'll help avoid snakebite too).

With the dozens (nee, hundreds?) of rolling shutter clips that have been posted, how does anyone say "it doesn't exist?" Mind-boggling.
 
Barry, show me where I said CMOS rolling shutter "doesn't exist". Don't put words in my mouth.

Its why I used the car example. I also prefaced the issue with I'm not having any issues with this at all. Which is true. How does that translate to you as doesn't exist is beyond me? I don't have any issues with syncing my cameras to eliminate roll from a crt based television either. Just because I know what to do doesn't translate into "it doesn't exist". If I thought somethine didn't exist, I would have said exactly that.


People keep presenting "rolling shutter" as though its an insurmountable issue and its not. There's a large area between manufacturing and knowledge on the part of the operator which let's us work outside of extreme circumstances. Otherwise, nobody would be using the technology for higher quality capture.
 
craigbowman said:
Barry, show me where I said CMOS rolling shutter "doesn't exist". Don't put words in my mouth.
Click to expand...
Not meant to be words in your mouth; this comes on top of another debate raging in another thread, so your post was just the tipping point. Should have clarified, sorry 'bout that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top