rolling shutter hxp300?

Tim Naylor said:
Sure the heavies can sell CMOS but don't kid yourself thinking that we love it. It's the only choice for certain cameras that have other feature sets we love. But if we could get the equivalent in CCD we would.
Click to expand...
1,000% agreed.


What is the rationale for making the HPX 300 a CMOS camera? What are the advantages if any?
Click to expand...
You cannot get 1920x1080 sensors in 1/3" CCD. It's not possible. And you doubly triply could not get them as progressive. CMOS is the only way you could do it.

Without CMOS, the 300 doesn't make any sense. The 300 differs from the 500 in that it has 1920x1080 sensors, which take full advantage of AVC-Intra. If you take out the 1920x1080 sensors, why bother having AVC-Intra? And if you take those two things out, why not just get the 500?

The 300 exists as a full-raster sensor recording to AVC-Intra. There are only two ways to do that: 2/3" with CCD, or CMOS. They already have a 2/3" CCD full-raster sensor camera (the HPX3000) so that left the CMOS option.

The EX1 and EX3 could not have been done as CCD, it's not possible. Neither could the 300 have been done as CCD.
 
I think CCD has pretty much hit the wall. To get you what you want out of it you won't be able to keep the price point low. i think the grand goal is CMOS with global shutter, and then it's pretty much perfect. but keeping that affordable is a long ways off, Phantom HD uses global shutter and full frame CMOS chips, but that's y the thing costs several human souls to buy...

after reading all this it's always back to what you use it for. 300 is the competition for the EX series, and i think it's a very comporable product to put out. benefits and cost ratio, as Barry said, sharp as an ex1, aesthetic of the panny mojo, and all the bells and whistles. sacrifice, cmos rolling shutter.
 
CCD hasn't hit the wall, it's still far and away the overwhelmingly dominant choice for big chips. Every 2/3" camera from Sony and Panasonic, and almost every 2/3" camera from Ikegami and Hitachi and Thomson, are all CCD. CMOS usage is rare in 2/3" cameras.

But it's the small chips where the compromises get made and where you have to make your choice. When you want to extract the maximum resolution out of a small chip, CMOS can do that. It's very difficult to get a CCD in a small size that has a ton of pixels and performs well in terms of sensitivity and low light. CMOS is opening up some doors, but there's no free lunch; with the increased res you get the wobble and skew and flash issues. You can avoid all those issues by going CCD but you get a lower-res image in return.
 
without a doubt the 300 suffers from rolling shutter issues. I was filming with it today and to it took less to provoke it than my EX3. Whether this be less apparent in the production model I haven't a clue...you just have to know what will bring it on and adjust your shooting style to compensate for this.

I was very impressed by the low light capabilities and the noise issues I had before are now gone with detail turned down to -7. Still sharp as a tack though.
 
Barry_Green said:
You can avoid all those issues by going CCD but you get a lower-res image in return.
Click to expand...

unless you go for a larger chip size then you get the best of both worlds...look at the pdw 700. 2/3" full HD CCD and great in low light....but this is in another price bracket altogether.

For the price, the 300/301 has had to make compromises. I think the decisions were right. It's a terrific camera as long as you know how to use it.
 
Yeah, I think that's not gonna work. I'd probably go for CCD in those cases. However, be aware that CCD can have a potential artifact too, which is the big vertical smear that sometimes happens when shooting a bright light.
Click to expand...

It is about knowing the limitations and working within them. Pretty much all low cost HD cameras will be CMOS before long. Knowing how to shoot moving subjects in a way that the roling shutter can't interfere will be as normal as making sure people don't wear clothing with fine patterns for interviews.

Not ideal I know, but the fact is that we don't have the technology yet to make full 1920x1080 10-bit recording CCD or global shutter CMOS cameras for under 10k. it is an issue though because the demands of clients and users is outstripping technological capability. In termso of the entire production workflow everything is way out of whack as we say in some parts of England.
 
absolutely. It's something have been saying ever since I got an EX1. Now with Panasonic going down this route people are starting to understand more.
 
Barry,

What is the smallest size CCD that it is possible to fit 1920x1080 pixels on?

The Panavision Genesis's CCD's are equal to a 35mm movie film frame right? I read that the CCD is 5760x2160, but that the final output is still only 1920x1080.
 
Phil and Simon,

Working with the limitations of the equipment is part of our jobs and unavoidable.
But if some known limitations eventually compromise your creativity/language you have to look somewhere.

Yesterday I watched on a big screen "Lost in Translation" which made a big impression on me some years ago, and since we've been discussing this issue it made me think.

Lance Acord the DP did an incredible job with very little.
The film is mostly shot handheld and there're a fair amount of reasonably fast pans, lateral moving shots form a car and even some running handheld shots. Philip, some shots reminded me of your own work in Tokyo. But, as most you us know, it's a very poetic and sensitive film.
Anyway, I was wondering if these scenes could have been shot with a rolling shutter camera?
I have some experience shooting with the RED One, a bit more with the EXs and on my evaluation the issues would have been too noticeable.

I'll certainly test the 300 as soon as I can.
I look forward to try to adapt my skills and intuition to this new piece of gear, and if that doesn't work I'll have to put up with some known older limitations like pixel shift, fixed lens, DVCPRO HD, etc...
 
Last edited:
SimonMW said:
Pretty much all low cost HD cameras will be CMOS before long.
Click to expand...

I hope not. The fact that Panasonic recently released the HMC150 seems to fly in the face of this as well. There are lots of people who would prefer lower resolution CCDs to higher resolution CMOS based cameras.
 
alexdias said:
Phil and Simon,


Lance Acord the DP did an incredible job with very little.
The film is mostly shot handheld and there're a fair amount of reasonably fast pans, lateral moving shots form a car and even some running handheld shots. Philip, some shots reminded me of your own work in Tokyo. But, as most you us know, it's a very poetic and sensitive film.
Anyway, I was wondering if these scenes could have been shot with a rolling shutter camera?
Click to expand...

Possibly, I have done some running/ handheld work with the ex1. here are two examples... http://www.vimeo.com/774232 http://www.vimeo.com/1137200

There is no substitute for a global shutter, of course every DP wants one, but with every budget getting constricted and people wanting to use cheaper cameras it is something we will have to come to terms with. The Scarlet will have the same issues and that camera will be massive!
 
Good examples Phil, it proves your point.
Hopefully the Scarlet will hold some good surprises for all of us, the designs have been improving substantially.

Thanks,

Alex.
 
Do you guys think Panasonic can fix this jello or skew thing with a firmware later on?As i remember R1 also have jello on the first versions and they mostlly fix it with 13.(not sure) firmware update..
 
They improved the rolling shutter artifacts substantially with firmware upgrades on the RED One but I don't know how far they can go. Last time I used one, a few builds ago, it was much better than the one before, but still present.

The R1 (weight included, specially on a full accessorized piece) behaves more like a film camera, which eventually makes it less susceptible to these issues. At least when I've worked with one that was my impression. The rolling shutter issues that I had with the RED came with fasting objects passing in front of a fairly long lens (85mm), and they were very noticeable.

In the other hand the EXs definitely behave like a prosumer HD Camcorder (which they are), hence the better flexibility and more susceptibility to these problems. With lens adaptors they are bit less maneuverable.

The 300, I expect, sits on the middle like a good old broadcast camera, and that's GOOD thing.

If there was a "magic bullet" to this problem I'm sure Panasonic will release the camera issue free.

I'm looking forward to see and test the production models.
 
Wow, that's some awesome footage! Well shot. I'm sure this camera will fill a solid niche for Panasonic, I hope they do well with it.
 
Buck Forester said:
Wow, that's some awesome footage! Well shot. I'm sure this camera will fill a solid niche for Panasonic, I hope they do well with it.
Click to expand...

Philips movies were shot with the Sony EX camera and it looks great. I can see no issue with the rolling shutter with those run and gun shots. As has been said before you can't see it if you're not looking for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top