rolling shutter hxp300?

DSWMEDIA said:
Remember guys, the RED camera has had many firmware updates, improving it's readout speed and reducing the effects of rolling shutter as a result.


So the question is,

Can we see a firmware update to the HPX300 in the future if the issue is so bad on the production models?
Click to expand...

What's to say that Panasonic won't release a firmware upgrade to improve the shutter situation? I think a show like NAB would be a great place to release such a thing. ;-)

Like you said, the RED has had some major shutter improvements. I think Panasonic can do it too.
 
For me it's simple. Go to my site at http://www.silverphoenixllc.com/Sample_Films.html and watch the films. Is there anything there that would really be a huge issue with the 300?

I pretty much shoot my 170 with the zoom maxed. I always want more reach. The 300 gives me this right off the bat. Plus if I need more, I can rent a bigger lens. I used the Canon in Africa and was able to get far closer to subjects than I could with the 170.

So for me, much sharper image, greater reach makes it a no brainer for me. I'm not doing whip pans with it, I'm not on the red carpet with flashes going off left and right.

Africa was the worst shooting situation I was ever in yet I still pulled off some ok footage. I would love to take the camera to Yellowstone and see what I could do in a good shooting situation.

Plus, this was a pre-production camera I used. They may not change a thing but I'd venture that they probably will tweak it before they ship. Even if they don't it still will work for me.

Did I have wobble and jiggle in Africa? You bet. Every time I'd try to adjust the bowl to level the camera I felt like Bill Cosby would appear and we'd be doing the jello dance together. But once I was able to get on the subject I could move the camera the limited amount I could trying to shoot out of a window and it looked ok to me.

So for the nature and wildlife stuff I do I like the 300. If I was covering sports I'd probably wait to see if they address some things.
 
Not sure why everyone is all unaware of this issue, any of us who have been using the EX1/EX3 or the past year went through all of this rolling shutter issue a year ago. It is a compromise and it does mean the camera is limited in certain situations. People care more about pure resolution at an amazing price than about having a camera that is not usable in every shooting situation, no different than the EX1/EX3.

I am with Barry, as soon as I can afford it, I will buy a 300 but I will definitely be keeping my 170 as well. It is good to have both choices. I shoot a large amount of interviews and tabletop where the rolling shutter artifacts are a non-issue. If I did shoot mostly sports, news, action footage, I wouldn't buy the 300. For all of you complaining, hey, Panasonic gave you what you wanted the only way possible, with a CMOS imager set and a rolling shutter for well under $10k street. What more do you want? If you have to avoid rolling shutter artifacts, that rules out all but the higher dollar or really lower dollar Pannys. Oh well, at least we have choices. It really is true, you can only please just a couple of people part of the time. If they would have made this camera with a lower res CCD, people would have had a cow also over the pixel shifting.

The 300 looks to be an amazing piece of gear for an amazing price, I am looking forward to it.

Dan
 
I think the question here is also if the HPX300 performs worse thant the EX3/1 for rolling shutter issues. This can make a difference between usable and unusable. The limited time I had with the EX1, I tried to do 24 esque shots following a subject walking in 25p and seemed fine. Because of the bigger chips, I didn't need to zoom in much with the stock lens to get the DOF I normaly like in these shots when I use my HVX200. With 1/3CCD's, I'd probably need a bigger zoom to get the same shot. This could mean more wobble, for example.

I have a qustion for the experts: If I get a relay, like the 1/2 Letus relay, and add a 35mm adapter, and add Telephoto lens, this would probably get me less wobbly footage than adding an adapter trough the stock lens, correct? Maybe the new relays and 35mm combos help in minimizing the Wobble issues? (Since its not using any zoom from a lens. Does this makes sense?)
 
I'm going to bow to Barry on this one. I think he should do a scientific test between the two cameras. I'm removing my test because he thinks I should have been more scientific about it. I agree, I only had the camera for a few hours and really just panned and tilted the two cameras without really knowing how to setup the two cameras to make it apples to apples. I can see his point. So Barry, let's see the test. Steve
 
SPZ said:
I have a qustion for the experts: If I get a relay, like the 1/2 Letus relay, and add a 35mm adapter, and add Telephoto lens, this would probably get me less wobbly footage than adding an adapter trough the stock lens, correct? Maybe the new relays and 35mm combos help in minimizing the Wobble issues? (Since its not using any zoom from a lens. Does this makes sense?)
Click to expand...
I can't see how that would make any difference. The issue is the relative motion of the image, not how the lens arrives at that magnification. It's not the lens elements that are causing the issue, it's the amount of motion in the subject. The more magnified the image is (meaning the more telephoto you use) the more exaggerated the wobble will be (and everything else, of course; it's very difficult to hold a camera steady at full telephoto, for example; that same situation serves to magnify the wobble issues).
 
zacuto said:
I'm going to bow to Barry on this one. I think he should do a scientific test between the two cameras. I'm removing my test because he thinks I should have been more scientific about it. I agree, I only had the camera for a few hours and really just panned and tilted the two cameras without really knowing how to setup the two cameras to make it apples to apples. I can see his point. So Barry, let's see the test. Steve
Click to expand...
I'd love to, but as of right now I don't have access to either camera! :shocked:

Steve, your efforts are very much appreciated, both with your video reviews and your attempts to satisfy the ravenous appetite for information here. If you still have access to the cameras and could do something, that'd be fantastic. If not, hopefully someone else will step up and make it happen. Regardless of what the results are, I think it's obvious that the audience here is very interested in this issue and, dare i say it, I would think Panasonic would be most interested too. There's still a month to go before the 300 ships, which might be plenty enough time for them to adjust things before the camera goes into production (if it turns out to be necessary), so the more information they can have to work with, the better the final product might end up being.

Thanks for all you do for the DVXUser community.
 
Thanks Barry! That makes sense about the wooble. I always tought the "chip" was somehow processing and comunicating with the lens in order to see "closer", and it was that processing and speed required that made the rolling shutter happen. I was thinking that adding a relay, the "chip", or Cmos wouldn't need to work extra at all, and it was merelly doing the same as if it was in wide (which seems like the situation you get less wobble). And the lenses would do the magnification. Which means that I was totally clueless of how these things work! So basically in full wide the wobble amount is the same as in close up, its just the fact that in tele you are seeing more detailed portions of the same image, making those imperfections and the rolling shutter struggling more apparent...

As for the comparison, I must thank Steve for the hassle of putting these videos. And like Barry said, the camera is in Pre-production, so there's still time for tweaking. If you have the access, Steve, please do the tests VS the EX3. From what we see here, its alarming that the 300 seems more woobly than the EX3. Other users with limited access had the same impression- so, at least, lets try to make Panasonic tune the camera at least to EX3 /EX1 Rolling shutter/wobble tolerance...
 
Jello is jello. To me, any amount in the shot is unacceptable so what's the difference if the HPX300 has more or less than the EX1/3? You are going to shoot your masterpiece and live with some jellocam versus a lot of jellocam? Moot point. That's like talking about throwing up. What's the difference whether you throw up a little or a lot?

Hey, I worked in Jello, the best cure for an upset stomach, into the same paragraph as throwing up!

Dan
 
Last edited:
Barry, as usual can be incredibly eloquent, informative and opinionated. It's a pleasure to read him.

As for me, unfortunately I have a need for a flexible camera.
If I knew for sure what kind of situations I'll face it when I'm out shooting it would be great and I could select a camera accordingly. But that's rare for me.
I'm a documentarian, so my job is the essence of the unexpected.

The HPX300, other than the CMOS issues, is sooo good it hurts.
The quality of codec, the size, weight, price, and so forth... Everything is absolutely great.

But I'm concerned to go out with a camera that will not respond to my needs when I can't ask for a second take.
 
puredrifting said:
Jello is jello. You are going to shoot your masterpiece and live with some jellocam versus a lot of jellocam? Moot point. That's like talking about throwing up. What's the difference whether you throw up a little or a lot?
Click to expand...

I love it. That should be the quote of the year!
 
I saw & used HPX300 at a local Panasonic office & found that

-Very light weight & well balanced
-Crisp LCD & VF
-Rubbery feeling when i was panning swiftly L/R or vice versa
-Rolling shutter issue was eminent as i used a still camera flash in fast burst mode, the frames were partially to fully exposed with white burst
-ONE THING I COULDNT TEST - How would this camer react to strobe light one like in DIcs or live shows & events, firework ... We shoot live events so its a major concern for us out here. We have been able to stomach the look of partially exposed frames of flahses, also we wont be shooting very fast pans/titls so skew etc should be an issue to us. BUT lights with fast movements as mentioned above ??? ANY experience on this camcorder or any other CMOS camera.

Thx

bigBRO
 
puredrifting said:
Jello is jello. To me, any amount in the shot is unacceptable so what's the difference if the HPX300 has more or less than the EX1/3? You are going to shoot your masterpiece and live with some jellocam versus a lot of jellocam? Moot point. That's like talking about throwing up. What's the difference whether you throw up a little or a lot?

Hey, I worked in Jello, the best cure for an upset stomach, into the same paragraph as throwing up!

Dan
Click to expand...

Dan, you said it right: "To me, any amount in the shot is unnaceptable". To me, however, what I saw (briefly, that's true) seemed acceptable, at least for the EX1 (not talking about partial exposure and strobes). So what I'm asking is simply for the HPX300 to perform in the same level as the EX's. Here's probably were the chip size matters: if both camera perform similarly in therms of rolling shutter, the size of the chip, which means a shalower DOF with a wider camera setting, could help the issue in dramatic shooting situations. Also, and please bear with me, I'm a non technical person just trying to understand the logic of things here- maybe the biger chip size means less concentrated pixels, and with that, less noticeable rolling shutter?
 
Hi,

First, Steve said he took the clip down because he was not scientific about it.
Second, in real life shooting I can't think of a time when you would swish the camera back and forth rapidly.
Third if CMOS was unacceptable and couldn't produce acceptable results then Sony, Canon, Red, Phantom Grass Valley, and I know I am missing another manufacturer here, these guys could not sell cameras. I showed this camera to the FCP group in Arizon last night and showed tracking footage as well as pans of Central Park and it all looked great.

We will redo the test with scientific all things equal and show that these cameras are the same with the rolling shutter, but I am traveling for the next week so it will be a week or two. I wil even ask Barry to come in a do it as someone might suspect that I would skew the footage. (that was a joke)

Can you make acceptable images with the camera, most definitely.

Best,

Jan
 
Jan, thanks. Its important to clear this doubt. Now Barry, please do the test with the same zoom factor, and one with the EX at full tele and the equivalent on the HPX- we know the HPX can do more Tele. Also, it would be nice to have a test of performance in strobe lighting.
 
Big Brother said:
-ONE THING I COULDNT TEST - How would this camer react to strobe light one like in DIcs or live shows & events, firework ... We shoot live events so its a major concern for us out here. We have been able to stomach the look of partially exposed frames of flahses, also we wont be shooting very fast pans/titls so skew etc should be an issue to us. BUT lights with fast movements as mentioned above ??? ANY experience on this camcorder or any other CMOS camera.
Click to expand...
Not sure I understand the question - DIcs?

For fireworks and strobes, it kind of depends on the frequency and duration of the flash. Flash photography is particularly troublesome because the flash will start and end in less than the duration of a full frame; that means that you'll only see part of the frame brightly exposed *and the very next frame will be fully dark*. So the partial flash is very visible. But if you had a strobe that was illuminated for 1/30th of a second, or 1/10th of a second, etc., then there would be multiple frames of fully-exposed brightness, which would probably go a long way towards masking the first and last frames' jarring impact.

But if you're talking about strobes that last for less than a frame, and go off frequently, then yeah, I don't think a rolling shutter CMOS camera is going to work well for that at all.

Can you point to an example of the kind of footage you'd be planning on shooting?
 
SPZ said:
Here's probably were the chip size matters: if both camera perform similarly in therms of rolling shutter, the size of the chip, which means a shalower DOF with a wider camera setting, could help the issue in dramatic shooting situations.
Click to expand...
Nope. Doesn't work that way. Look at the HV20, the original "wobblecam", it has a 1/2" chip and more noticeable jello/wobble than the EX1, also with a 1/2" chip, and more than the HPX300 with its 1/3" chip. It's not the size of the chip that matters. According to Red, and it certainly makes sense, it's all about the speed of the read/reset timing. Red has sped up their read/reset and has been able to tame the jello/skew as compared to the original Red prototypes. I think Jim Arthurs did a test that showed the Red (at that time) and the EX1 were pretty much identical in skew/jello. It seems reasonable to ask Panasonic to deliver something at the least comparable with those two. I thought, when using it, that it felt about the same.

maybe the biger chip size means less concentrated pixels, and with that, less noticeable rolling shutter?
Click to expand...
Bigger chip size at equivalent pixel count (EX1/3 vs. HPX300) does indeed mean less concentrated pixels. I doubt that particular element has an effect on the rolling shutter wobble/skew though.
 
SPZ said:
Jan, thanks. Its important to clear this doubt. Now Barry, please do the test with the same zoom factor, and one with the EX at full tele and the equivalent on the HPX- we know the HPX can do more Tele. Also, it would be nice to have a test of performance in strobe lighting.
Click to expand...

I'd be glad to do all that. Any test I perform would be designed to eliminate as many variables as possible. It would be done with equal frame rate, equal shutter speed, equivalent field of view, identical motion, etc. Multiple frame rates would be tested, multiple shutter speeds would be tested, multiple focal lengths would be tested. I'd like to get ahold of a strobe like Jim Arthurs used, that would be excellent.
 
Barry_Green said:
Nope. Doesn't work that way. Look at the HV20, the original "wobblecam", it has a 1/2" chip and more noticeable jello/wobble than the EX1, also with a 1/2" chip, and more than the HPX300 with its 1/3" chip. It's not the size of the chip that matters. According to Red, and it certainly makes sense, it's all about the speed of the read/reset timing. Red has sped up their read/reset and has been able to tame the jello/skew as compared to the original Red prototypes. I think Jim Arthurs did a test that showed the Red (at that time) and the EX1 were pretty much identical in skew/jello. It seems reasonable to ask Panasonic to deliver something at the least comparable with those two. I thought, when using it, that it felt about the same.


Bigger chip size at equivalent pixel count (EX1/3 vs. HPX300) does indeed mean less concentrated pixels. I doubt that particular element has an effect on the rolling shutter wobble/skew though.
Click to expand...

The HV20 has a 1/2.7" size chip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top