Panasonic's new version of HPX300

[Andrew McCarrick]

OK I want a 1920x1080 CCD camera with 2/3" chips AVC Intra 100 at less than £15k but I know that I aint going to get one so cmos is what we have to accept.

The value of kit was easily written off in the past but as broadcast in the UK is in decline and budgets are just not there for most programming I can not right off kit the way I used to.

The manufacturers need to realise this too as we can not invest £50k into cameras anymore for most production.

The same goes for post prod and the desktop solutions will become more prevalent than the high end bespoke hardware.

A CMOS isn't going to drop the price any. A 2/3" chip is a 2/3" chip, same price. All you might see is 5-10% decrease... simply because a CMOS uses less silicon, but at the cost of pixel size.

CMOS cameras may require fewer components and less power, but they still generally require companion chips to optimize image quality, increasing cost and reducing the advantage they gain from lower power consumption. CCD devices are less complex than CMOS, so they cost less to design. CCD fabrication processes also tend to be more mature and optimized; in general, it will cost less (in both design and fabrication) to yield a CCD than a CMOS imager for a specific high-performance application. However, wafer size can be a dominating influence on device cost; the larger the wafer, the more devices it can yield, and the lower the cost per device.

The CMOS does A to D conversion at the pixel level, and thus doesn't need additional space (additional silicon) to read out the image. But you're compacting the space of the photon collector and the a to d conversion into the place of where you could place a single larger pixel.

 

[Jon S]

The CMOS does A to D conversion at the pixel level, and thus doesn't need additional space (additional silicon) to read out the image. But you're compacting the space of the photon collector and the a to d conversion into the place of where you could place a single larger pixel.

That's not correct, I'm afraid. A CMOS chip usually does A to D conversion on the chip (not all do, Panasonic's Live MOS don't, Canon's CMOS don't), but this does not happen at the pixel level. The only time that's been done is for very, very large pixels for applications like particle accelerators and in research sensors (e.g., those done at Stanford Uni.).

Generally the conversion is done with a few high speed converters on the same silicon as the sensor, or using small, low-speed per-column ADCs. As a result it doesn't affect the sensitivity of the pixels.

You might be getting mixed up with the fact that CMOS has a small number of extra transistors per pixel for other purposes. In a 4T pixel you have a reset transistor, a transfer transistor, a source-follower amplifier transistor and a row select transistor. These reduce the light sensing area somewhat, but microlenses over each pixel do a pretty good job at making up for that.

 

[Andrew McCarrick]

That's not correct, I'm afraid. A CMOS chip usually does A to D conversion on the chip (not all do, Panasonic's Live MOS don't, Canon's CMOS don't), but this does not happen at the pixel level. The only time that's been done is for very, very large pixels for applications like particle accelerators and in research sensors (e.g., those done at Stanford Uni.).

Generally the conversion is done with a few high speed converters on the same silicon as the sensor, or using small, low-speed per-column ADCs. As a result it doesn't affect the sensitivity of the pixels.

You might be getting mixed up with the fact that CMOS has a small number of extra transistors per pixel for other purposes. In a 4T pixel you have a reset transistor, a transfer transistor, a source-follower amplifier transistor and a row select transistor. These reduce the light sensing area somewhat, but microlenses over each pixel do a pretty good job at making up for that.

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Bassman2003]

But then again the 300 was the first gen panasonic cmos product, so you bleeding edge ppl knew wht you guys were getting into with anything first gen.

When did we arrive at the place where buying a product that has been developed and released on the market for professional use has this inherent risk of being left for dead in less than a year?

I know how, but the fact that people accept it like it is the consumer's fault for purchasing is what is killing me.

The camera still works and It's the real world but it does not do anything for brand loyalty as the value of these "investments" is getting to be like or worse than buying brand new cars.


And I agree, unless they can get the skew out of CMOS, it is CCD for me!

 

[zeke]

The OP said he test shot a 370. Are you people saying he is wrong? That this is some sort of 'punked' post or something?

 

[Dino]

When did we arrive at the place where buying a product that has been developed and released on the market for professional use has this inherent risk of being left for dead in less than a year?

I know how, but the fact that people accept it like it is the consumer's fault for purchasing is what is killing me.

The camera still works and It's the real world but it does not do anything for brand loyalty as the value of these "investments" is getting to be like or worse than buying brand new cars.


And I agree, unless they can get the skew out of CMOS, it is CCD for me!

Imagine how those who bought an HPX3700 for $59,950 a year ago or so and saw it on sale for $29,950 w/trade in feel? Or HPX2700 that listed for $39,950, on sale for $19,950 w/trade? These days, if a camera can't pay for itself in a year, it probably shouldn't be purchased.

As a rental house, getting five years or more out of a high-end camera used to be routine. However, I remember when Sony first came out with 2/3" CCD cameras in the late '80's. There was the BVP-5, BVP-50, BVP-7, BVP-70, BVP-70IS in rapid succession. Tube cameras were mature technology, CCD's in their infancy, just as CCD's are mature, CMOS is young now.

The way things are going with sensor technology and codecs, rapid change will be the only constant to rely upon.

 

[Ron777]

... These days, if a camera can't pay for itself in a year, it probably shouldn't be purchased.
.

Your sentiment may be justifiable for those who have an active client base but for all others? Are they to boycott new technology and its inherent built-in obsolescence?

There have been complaints by some in regard to the 300's ability to suppress noise and skew. If Panasonic has recognized that deficiency and has responded with a new camera so soon after the release of the former, as a responsible manufacturer presumably desirous of maintaining their loyal customer base, they should, if technically feasible, provide some form of relief for said base in the form of an upgrade path. There is no doubt that technology will continue to march on and it remains to be seen whether the alleged 370 will actually comes to pass. But if its release is in direct response to the 300 complaints I suspect that some legions of the loyal base will begin to crumble and that's clearly counterproductive for any business plan.

 

[Joe Media]

I would hope Panasonic would do something for the early adopters of this camera. I just bought mine Jan 27th this year. Missed the 2 free P2 cards and now find out there's a replacement to fix for the noise. Don't get me wrong, it's a good camera as is but the noise is very apparent. A fix for this would, in my opinion, would make it a great camera. They know the problems or we wouldn't see a new version so quickly. Not bitching, just hoping we can fix or do something to get this resolved.

 

[ryaninoz]

My 302 has paid for itself but it annoys me that so soon after it was released it has been replaced. I have heard so many people rubbish this camera and I think the reason is it's being bought by camera operators who are not exactly pros because it is cheap. I read on one board someone complaining about noise and after viewing a linked clip it was obvious that the operator had under exposed the shot by several stops. When it was suggested that they look at their zebra settings the response was "what is zebra", if you pick this camera up and shoot with it without knowing how to use a professional camera, without understanding exposure or panning quicker than you would with any progressive frame camera then it will look like rubbish.

I had a play with an ARRI D21 on the weekend and that is an amazing camera, it's CMOS and like the 300 it also exhibits noise when under exposed, ( the d21 is also worth over 100 000 dollars and admittedly much higher end) however the principle is the same, all cameras require skill to bring out the best images and the 300 is no different.

I think though that the negative responses from the peanut gallery have hurt this camera in the industry and now that panasonic appear to be throwing in the towel and upgrading it to me seems to underline every one of the bad things said about the camera. As a cameraman it's become a harder sell to use the 300 so if they are replacing it I think they should look after those of us who bought the 300 by offering us the chance to upgrade our cameras as well. I would be happy to pay for a board or block upgrade if that were possible.

 

[photojournalist]

Good words...

Good words...

My 302 has paid for itself but it annoys me that so soon after it was released it has been replaced. I have heard so many people rubbish this camera and I think the reason is it's being bought by camera operators who are not exactly pros because it is cheap. I read on one board someone complaining about noise and after viewing a linked clip it was obvious that the operator had under exposed the shot by several stops. When it was suggested that they look at their zebra settings the response was "what is zebra", if you pick this camera up and shoot with it without knowing how to use a professional camera, without understanding exposure or panning quicker than you would with any progressive frame camera then it will look like rubbish.

I had a play with an ARRI D21 on the weekend and that is an amazing camera, it's CMOS and like the 300 it also exhibits noise when under exposed, ( the d21 is also worth over 100 000 dollars and admittedly much higher end) however the principle is the same, all cameras require skill to bring out the best images and the 300 is no different.

I think though that the negative responses from the peanut gallery have hurt this camera in the industry and now that panasonic appear to be throwing in the towel and upgrading it to me seems to underline every one of the bad things said about the camera. As a cameraman it's become a harder sell to use the 300 so if they are replacing it I think they should look after those of us who bought the 300 by offering us the chance to upgrade our cameras as well. I would be happy to pay for a board or block upgrade if that were possible.

I agree with you. I see both sides of the coin for a lot of people here. But, take a look at some great pieces (work) to find out it is the person behind the camera. The work I have done have won Emmy's, NPPA awards, and others that I'd like to keep from giving me away. Why? because I get to test out new technology. In a lot of those and others in the business it wasn't the newest camera it was the 300's even the old Sony 505's. One can use the best tool but if you can't storytell or have a creative bone in your body a state-of-the-art camera is not going to do much good.

By the way. some mentioned other cameras for update. Yes there is more but, don't know the exact dates. How it usually works is that you will have a prototype and someone else another and they both differ in some fashion. And, just because I may shoot with one with some specs that may not be the one that goes to production. Panasonic sends us a point rating on each thing about the camera. Example low light, ease of use, layout, etc. And you give it a number on their rating scale. they do this to to the individuals testing the cameras.

As, you may now know the 370 will be a little bit more not much. But, since the 300 was discounted there is a difference. I always felt that the 300 was a 170 in a body of a fuller ENG camera. I hope that the info I'm hearing on the 170 replacement will happen. If so I would purchase one (wish I could get one to keep)

 

[Joe Media]

My 302 has paid for itself but it annoys me that so soon after it was released it has been replaced. I have heard so many people rubbish this camera and I think the reason is it's being bought by camera operators who are not exactly pros because it is cheap. I read on one board someone complaining about noise and after viewing a linked clip it was obvious that the operator had under exposed the shot by several stops. When it was suggested that they look at their zebra settings the response was "what is zebra", if you pick this camera up and shoot with it without knowing how to use a professional camera, without understanding exposure or panning quicker than you would with any progressive frame camera then it will look like rubbish.

We bought one of these as a b-roll camera. What I've experienced with this camera is you have to actually over-expose by about a stop to reduce the noise in the blacks. But it's still noisy. I know there are some people that are shooting on a ENG camera that don't understand how to properly expose. But, even with proper exposure, it's still not clean. Can you honestly say the footage off this camera is up to your level of acceptance? We've been a Panny shop for years owning almost the entire line. I've bought their cameras without even test driving them first, I've got that much trust in the brand. I'm just disappointed with it's performance and my expectations weren't that high.

 

[ryaninoz]

I have shot broadcast documentaries with this camera and have seen images projected in HD on a cinema sized screen and I am very happy with the results. I mostly work in 720p avc intra so maybe that is the key. Having said that it is just terrible in low light and yes underexpose it just a bit or shoot in a low key environment and the noise is obvious.

If Pana release something so soon that addresses these issues then why not get it right the first time ? I really think that early buyers deserve better than this, there definitely should be some way we can upgrade our cameras, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Either way I will still get nice images out of the 300 and for the price I paid ( even though the price dropped by about 3 grand not long after I bought it ) it has paid for itself.

 

[hotchkiss]

But it's still noisy. I know there are some people that are shooting on a ENG camera that don't understand how to properly expose. But, even with proper exposure, it's still not clean. Can you honestly say the footage off this camera is up to your level of acceptance? We've been a Panny shop for years owning almost the entire line. I've bought their cameras without even test driving them first, I've got that much trust in the brand. I'm just disappointed with it's performance and my expectations weren't that high.

Noisy compared to what? A 900, 2700, or even a 500 ? Compared to 2/3 inch cams, or cams that cost substantially more- I expect it to be noisier. Compare it to a 170, 200 and it's an improvement. Yeah, I'd like it to have better noise performance as well, but it was a $9,000.00 camera, ( when I purchased) with a 1/3 chip after all.

That being said, I share ryaninoz's sentiments. If indeed a successor is being announced, I'll be a bit pissed. Yeah, technology improves, but it seems to me that the 370 could have been released in lieu of the 300 initially. This camera was probably in development at the same time as the 300 or very shortly thereafter. This release cycle appears to be a very cynical release cycle.

I purchased my 300 for a specific client, and it's paid itself off as well. However, the potential release of a 370 being released so soon leaves a bitter taste in my mouth towards Panasonic. I'm much more inclined to sit the upgrade game out for awhile and consider other options.

 

[Ron777]

...If Pana release something so soon that addresses these issues then why not get it right the first time ? I really think that early buyers deserve better than this, there definitely should be some way we can upgrade our cameras, but I wouldn't hold my breath...

I agree totally!

Of course we will have to wait and see what the 370 is actually capable of, but assuming it addresses the 300's stated issues and deficiencies, and if Panasonic chooses to ignore its loyal customer base by not offering some form of equitable upgrade path for what may turn out to be an engineering oversight in the case of the 300, I for one will be looking to jump ship and move on to another camp. I might add that I have been waiting 7 months for one, and 4 months for another, whose rebates have still has not arrived, despite they're being approved, and that alone has left me soured on the Panasonic brand.

BTW, I just happened across a fresh post from a reseller on another site indicating that Panasonic has run out of stock on the HPX300 and has cancelled all rebates and P2 card offers associated with its purchase ... are we about to witness the discontinuation of the 300?

 

[jameswmulryan]

I found the 300 to be a vast improvement over my original 200. Much better sensitivity. A true hand held camera, focus, zoom AVCIntra 100. I hardly ever find myself taking the camera out of -3. Not too pleased that I have only had this camera for 5 months and an update is coming. think the 200 to 200A transition took much longer.

 

[Ron777]

I found the 300 to be a vast improvement over my original 200. Much better sensitivity. A true hand held camera, focus, zoom AVCIntra 100. I hardly ever find myself taking the camera out of -3. Not too pleased that I have only had this camera for 5 months and an update is coming. think the 200 to 200A transition took much longer.

I'm sure you meant to say "Shoulder Mount" as opposed to handheld, because it's hardly a hand holdable camera although it might fit that bill under some very special circumstances.

 

[Joe Media]

Noisy compared to what? A 900, 2700, or even a 500 ? Compared to 2/3 inch cams, or cams that cost substantially more- I expect it to be noisier. Compare it to a 170, 200 and it's an improvement. Yeah, I'd like it to have better noise performance as well, but it was a $9,000.00 camera, ( when I purchased) with a 1/3 chip after all.

Noisy even compared to a 200. I had that camera on location last week tethered to a 20" HD JVC monitor through SDI in 1080 (AVCi 100 1080 24pn). Someone on set asked one of my guys why the black dress on the model looked so "dirty". I was shocked to see how much noise was in it. The pedestal was even set to 0. The old 200 would have been cleaner in my opinion. We've been using 200's as b-roll cameras cutting with a Varicam F for years and the footage has intercut beautifully (and clean). I agree, the 300 is not a Varicam. But it's not living up to what I've come to expect from Panasonic even with a 1/3" chip. Again, not trying to bad mouth the brand and will most likely buy the 370 if it addressed the 300's shortcomings. I just wish it was cleaner in the version we bought. If it was, I think it would be a worthy replacement for the 200. Just my 2 cents.

 

[qatarshooter]

i think everyone needs to stop and take a breathe here. has the 370 been announced yet? no. when it is announced how long until availability? 1 month, 6 months, 1 year? has Panasonic ever said that the 300 has seen its last fw update? given that technically this camera is still a rumor I think there is a lot of unjust anger in this thread. ask yourself another question, do you want manafucatures sitting on new tech just to make existing owners happy? panasonic is in the biz to make money. i am sure if the 300 was holding its weight against sony models right now the referesh would be delayed, but it seems its not and pana needs something to shift the spotlight back on to them. thats business folks, deal with it. dont think there isnt any other manufacturer that wouldnt do exactly the same.

 

[mountainmedia]

Guess I'll jump into the fray too. My thoughts are: 1) I've already made enough money with my 300 to pay for itself several times over. 2) Technology ALWAYS marches on - if you don't like that fact, then this isn't the industry for you. Whether a new camera comes out tomorrow or in a year, if the 300 was good enough for you (and your clients) last week, why won't it still be when a "370" comes out? Now I will agree that this can be detrimental to those who have savvy clients (like TV networks) who want the "latest, greatest" camera, but for me - a production company with clients who only care about a good looking image - I'm fine. 3) Would an upgrade path from Panasonic be nice? Absolutely - and I hope they consider doing so since the 300 has been out for only about a year. But I'm not counting on it and - as said before - I can continue to make money with my 300 even with a newer camera becoming available.

As for the noise issues many are seeing - I see some noise as well, but not excessively. Beauty is in the eye, I suppose. I nearly always shoot at -3dB and take care in my exposure (including waveform viewing). Maybe I'm just not picky enough? Same deal with skew. If you know about it and take care to prevent it (even at 1080p24), it's just not an issue for me or my clients (who are VERY picky indeed).

 

[GJinVA]

370 (570?) availability

370 (570?) availability

I found this post because I was trying to find out what the Pre-NAB announcement was going to be on April 5th regarding Pany Cams. I can't say for sure whether it will be changes to the 300 or 500, but I can tell you it will be (at least) one of these models and that there will be some units available for purchase before June. Hope that helps and thanks for all the tantalizing tidbits.