Here's the Official Press release from Panasonic.

Panasonic USA Pressroom (http://www2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/prModelDetail?storeId=11301&catalogId=13251&itemId=329735&modelNo=Content02112009034732256&surfModel=Content02112009034732256)

$10k+ for a 1/3" camera seems dated.

RED's announcements and the new DV-SLRs have changed expectations.

Too late.

Panasonic needed to do this a year or two ago. Now there are so many options it's hard to sift through all the camera choices anymore.

CMOS is a huge offset for me, since this would still be impossible to matchmove accurately due to the Rolling Shutter.

I don’t know about you guys, but a $10,700 camera that records to AVC Intra at 100MBPS seams extremely impressive. I just wish it was as small as Sony’s EX3 and JVC’s HM700 but then again all that horsepower might not have fit.

Here’s a couple of videos:
Abel Cine Tech - Video: A First Look at Panasonic's HPX300 (http://www.abelcine.com/articles/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=318&Itemid=34)

$10k+ for a 1/3" camera seems dated.

RED's announcements and the new DV-SLRs have changed expectations.
RED's announcements are more roadmaps, Pana and JVC can deliver their in a few months...

HPX300 looks impressive, the only catch is still the use of 1/3" chips, but again...price must be kept down for both lens and chip.
http://www.panasonic-broadcast.com/cms_downloads/en/products/AG-HPX301E_Brochure.pdf

Cameras usually gets released for much less than the announced price so it’s better to wait until we get prices from places like B&H, etc.

Interesting that this camera costs the same as the HPX-500.

It will be interesting to see the 1/3" full raster vs. 2/3" pixel shift in terms of image quality.

I will always want the larger chips, but they are pricing them like they are equal.

But I agree, Do we need another 1/3" chip camera?

This camera a year ago would have made much more of a splash.

Do we know if that $10,700 includes a lens?

There's quite a lot of good things with this camera, and full marks to Panasonic for the 3 2.2MP chips and shouldermount. I'm also pretty amazed to see true pro features such as proxy abilities to SD card, and integrated radio mic support on a camera in this price range, to say nothing of a few other features.

Personally, I'd like to roll this and an EX3 into one - keep the 1/2" chips and SxS/SDHC media of the EX3, but form factor and other features of this. Either way, it looks as if 2.2MP chips are here to stay.

Interesting that this camera costs the same as the HPX-500.

I can't find any HPX500 with lens that will be under $10k, $18-19k is what HPx500 go for from BHP.

I'll guess around $9k as street price, and i'm suspecting "bundles" either from pana or dealers with two 32gb P2 cards will be about $10k.

Do we know if that $10,700 includes a lens?Yes, indeed it does include a 17x Fuji HD lens. Frankly I agree with Paulo; the price is amazingly low for an SDI-equipped camera with AVC Intra. And yes it should be clearly understood that this price is far below that of an HPX500 with lens.

Good correction. Sorry.

I did not realize the 17x lens was part of the package.

But, I think for this camera to really have 'whooped up' on the Sony it would need 1/2" chips and offer the option of SD card recording like the HMC-150.

Now that the M&R solution is in use, the EX-1 for $6,000 is a lot better value than the HPX-300 at $9,000 given they are both CMOS and the memory price comparisons are pretty far apart.

Does SDHC have the through-put to record AVC-I?

I was all set to sell my original HVX and upgrade to this camera.. but the 1/3" chips have just killed it. Im keeping my hvx.

Still, a lovely camera though, its a shame its going to cost a stupid amount of money down here with current exchange rates. I'd rather invest more and go 2/3".

Does SDHC have the through-put to record AVC-I?
Probably only at 50Mbs. Compact Flash would have been nice though - the XDR proves even fairly cheap CF can record 100Mbs video. The camera has a lot of very nice things about it, if it had had 1/2" chips and CF recording it would have made it about as perfect as could be hoped for at this sort of price.

I don't know but Sandisk has SDHC cards with advertised 30MBps read & writes.

The HMC-150 can record 24Mbps using class 4 cards so maybe 50Mbps intra might not be that far away?

I don't know but Sandisk has SDHC cards with advertised 30MBps read & writes.

The HMC-150 can record 24Mbps using class 4 cards so maybe 50Mbps intra might not be that far away?

Good correction. Sorry.

I did not realize the 17x lens was part of the package.

But, I think for this camera to really have 'whooped up' on the Sony it would need 1/2" chips and offer the option of SD card recording like the HMC-150.

Now that the M&R solution is in use, the EX-1 for $6,000 is a lot better value than the HPX-300 at $9,000 given they are both CMOS and the memory price comparisons are pretty far apart.

Tim I really think your underestimating the avc intra codec, it really does not compare to xdcam ex at all. I'm the last person ON EARTH to stand up for p2 cards and their prices but even I have to admit that what the 300 is recording is more than what an sd card can handle, the raid of a p2 card is needed.

The 1/3" chip may sound small but ultimately you've got to give it up for image quality and with a codec like that is should be extremely good, and the post options should be more flexible than anything else at the price point.

Good correction. Sorry.

I did not realize the 17x lens was part of the package.

But, I think for this camera to really have 'whooped up' on the Sony it would need 1/2" chips and offer the option of SD card recording like the HMC-150.

Now that the M&R solution is in use, the EX-1 for $6,000 is a lot better value than the HPX-300 at $9,000 given they are both CMOS and the memory price comparisons are pretty far apart.

Why are you comparing the ex1 to the hpx300? They aren't in same market, comapre it to the ex3 which is like 8400.

........but even I have to admit that what the 300 is recording is more than what an sd card can handle, the raid of a p2 card is needed.
Not really - in an EX, and even having to use the USB bus, SDHC cards will make up to about 40fps overcrank, maybe a bit more. That's about 35x 40/24 - or about 60Mbs, so should be enough for AVC-Intra50.

And that's with the adaptor, and the EX USB bus. With a direct connection, the cards will certainly manage more.

Even if it still wasn't enough, CF cards would easily be OK to record AVC-Intra100, and fairly cheap ones at that (ExtremeIII). The XDR proves you don't need P2 raids to record 100Mbs video, just fairly cheap CF, even if SDHC isn't yet up to it.

What I do look forward to is an EXx with the 50Mbs codec, which has the same unqualified approval from the EBU that AVC-Intra100 does. That should definitely be capable of being recorded to SDHC, especially if it's possible to get an adaptor by then which uses the PCIExpress bus.

When I did a round SDHC testing with a client's EX1 a few months ago, we consistently saw dropped frames at 36fps with four different brands of cards.

There is no contest between AVCIntra and XDCAM EX as far as codecs. AVCIntra is leagues better as any HPX2700/3000/3700 owner can verify.

I am predicting street of $8.995.00. I agree, wish that they could have implemented 1/2" CMOS sensors as Sony did, but overall, this camera looks to smoke the EX3. Ergonomics, codec, features. The only advantage I see with the EX3 is the SDHC hack, if your workflow can put up with the limit on frame rates when using it. Or if you like the images the Sony shoots better, of course. When Barry Green said, "this camera combines the sharpness of the EX1/EX3 with the color, look and feel of the other Panasonic P2 cameras", that sounded very exciting to me.

Dan

The only hands-on review I've read of the camera seems to indicate that the skew and jellovision is noticeably worse than the EXx series. AVC-Intra is a nice codec, and the camera seems to have a lot of the right stuff, but unfortunately, it seems Panasonic hasn't quite got the CMOS thing down yet.

And that is a shame.

Evan,

I guess I am coming from the poit of view that a lot of this stuff is only specs.

IMHO, the difference between normal shooting conditions of all of the codecs mentioned are going to be small especially after a run thru color correction.

I just did a shoot with an HPX-500 with Flash XDR, HMC-150 and an HVX-200.

The end result after post is that they are very close and non video people would never be able to tell the difference.

Now one area that is very obvious to me is the DOF of the HPX-500. Its images just look better to me because of the chip size.

Couple of other things.

It would be convenient to only compare the EX-3 to the HPX-300, but the only difference is the ability to add longer lenses.

Under 14x on the lens and the EX-1 & 3 are the same camera, same image. So yes, the EX-1 for $6,000 has a 1/2" chip full resolution image.

AVC-Intra is a 10bit codec. Not all NLEs can edit in 10bit. I use Edius which is 8bit. So while I think AVC-Intra is the best codec out there, the 10bit advertising really does not help me as the files will be transcoded to 8bit upon entry to my NLE.

I own Panasonic cameras, I am just not smitten with this offering.

The real cost of this camera is going to be over $10,000 when you factor in P2 pricing.

That is a lot for a 1/3" chip camera with any codec.

I am predicting street of $8.995.00. I agree, wish that they could have implemented 1/2" CMOS sensors as Sony did, but overall, this camera looks to smoke the EX3. Ergonomics, codec, features. The only advantage I see with the EX3 is the SDHC hack, if your workflow can put up with the limit on frame rates when using it.
We're seeing pre-order adverts around £7,500 on the street in the UK, plus the cost of pro style batteries if you don't already have them. (In spite of 1/3" chips it's power hungry v the EX3 - 18 watts v 13.5!) That means in very round figures that with no memory it's about 50% more than an EX3, twice as much as an EX1 - and then you have to buy P2, not SDHC.

I was about to get an EX3, then heard about this, and whilst there is a lot to commend about the HPX300, the more I hear the more I think I'll stick with getting an EX3. Lens, for example. The EX3 supplied lens is significantly wider at the wide end than what comes with the HPX300. The EX3 should be just about OK - but I think I'd need a wider lens with the HPX300.

I do like the HPX300 ergonomics, radio mic integration and things like the ability to record proxies to SD cards, but really don't think I want to pay a lot more, only to give up 1/2" chips for 1/3" and have to use expensive memory. I don't see any problem with framerates using MxR - just have one 8GB true SxS card for off speed shooting and dub the clips in camera to SDHC. Even if I did a lot of off speed, SxS is still a lot cheaper per minute than P2.

The only hands-on review I've read of the camera seems to indicate that the skew and jellovision is noticeably worse than the EXx series. AVC-Intra is a nice codec, and the camera seems to have a lot of the right stuff, but unfortunately, it seems Panasonic hasn't quite got the CMOS thing down yet.

And that is a shame.

The thing i stressed in that review was the fact it was a preproduction model,

Im about to go back to my office and have a play with my EX1 fully zoomed in, i played with the HPX300 yesterday and i can still remember how much skew there was. I'll plug it into my BTLH80 monitor and view it on that as well as the EX1's LCD.

We were playing with the camera in AVC-I 100 1080 50i so i'll make sure the camera is set to that. The only issue i can see with my test is the fact the ex1 only has 14x lens compared to the HPX300s 17x.

Right, so i just went and did a test with my EX1.

Threw it into 1080 50i - the same setting we were playing with the HPX300 in.

Turned the OIS off. Cause of course.. the hpx doesnt have it.

Zoomed right in on a bunch of vertical bars.. and went wild.

Wow, i guess what i just learnt was the fact that shooting progressive masks skew.. because at 1080i on the EX1 there was a hell of a lot of skew going on. Not not as much as i saw with the HPX300, however it was very close.. and the bars i had been shooting were about the same distance away.

Now the only thing i can think that would alter this test was the focal length of the lens.. a 14x compared to a 17x.. and that would definitely make a difference in skew exaggeration.

Still, need to get the cameras side by side and test it..

The only issue i can see with my test is the fact the ex1 only has 14x lens compared to the HPX300s 17x.

Now the only thing i can think that would alter this test was the focal length of the lens.. a 14x compared to a 17x.. and that would definitely make a difference in skew exaggeration.
It's not just the zoom range that differs, but the absolute figures. The HPX300 is 4.5mm at the wide end, the EX1 (&3) are 5.8mm. In terms of angle of view, thiese figures equate to 9mm and 8.2mm on a 2/3" camera, the EX is noticeably wider.

I'd rather have this better wide angle capability, and accept the 14x over the 17x, but it does mean that the telephoto reach will be even less than just a 17x/14x comparison would have you believe.

Check out the b&H price:
Panasonic | 1/3" CMOS P2 HD CAMCORDER | AG-HPX300 | B&H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/604725-REG/Panasonic_AG_HPX300_1_3_CMOS_P2_HD.html)

Anyone know if the HD-SDI tap is 10-bit?
Also, I just want to confirm, rolling shutter shouldn't be an issue with this camera right?
-C

Anyone know if the HD-SDI tap is 10-bit?
Also, I just want to confirm, rolling shutter shouldn't be an issue with this camera right?
-C

Yes it has a 10-bit HD-SDI output, actually it has 2. The sensor has the same read out as other CMOS cameras... so it does have a rolling shutter and all the other artifacts that go along with it.

Andy

I'm also pretty amazed to see true pro features such as proxy abilities to SD card

Not sure of the point of this. Proxies are very useful on slower media like XDCAM disc, but for solid state it is rather redundant.

Enough of the skew issue already. Unless you are in a press scrum on a dark evening most of your shooting life it isn't an issue. I've shot hundreds of hours of footage and it has never been an issue with my EX3. And that's with fast moving footage such as WRC class rally cars etc.

Not sure of the point of this. Proxies are very useful on slower media like XDCAM disc, but for solid state it is rather redundant.
The theory is that the P2 media and files on a shoot can go one route, the SDHC cards with proxies another and be used for production logging etc purposes. That could even include e-mailing them back to a base on the other side of the world. Obviously it's possible to form compressed files from SxS originals, but it's another step and probably take several times real time, let alone the time to send them.

The other possibility I've heard is that for such as breaking news, the proxies can be very quickly linked back, even over a fairly slow link, and put on air quickly, the full res material following as and when.

Like a lot of features on a lot of cameras, they are something that some users with some requirements will see as very useful, others will never use them.

vThe theory is that the P2 media and files on a shoot can go one route, the SDHC cards with proxies another and be used for production logging etc purposes.

Yeah, I can see how that would work. Shame though that the processing can't create the proxies on import. Perhaps with more GPGPU processing in computers this might be possible, thus saving what on P2 is valuable space.

The proxies could be quickly loaded on a laptop in the field, which can be used to edit an EDL. The key point is that you don't have to waste any time encoding the proxies before you start editing. Sure, they'll copy to the hard drive/raid a bit quicker than the full-sized files, but it's the "edit now" feature that shines.

The proxies could be quickly loaded on a laptop in the field, which can be used to edit an EDL.

Want to know something funny?

For a long while I bemoaned the lack of proxy files with P2 because I was used to working with them with XDCAM disc based systems. They had a lot of uses for speeding up workflow and for providing downloadable content for clients via FTP. A lot of the P2 guys told me how they wouldn't have much use for them.

Now that I am using the EX I have less use for the proxies. For clip reference over FTP they would still be useful, but for the most part I am not missing them too much.

Enough of the skew issue already. Unless you are in a press scrum on a dark evening most of your shooting life it isn't an issue. I've shot hundreds of hours of footage and it has never been an issue with my EX3. And that's with fast moving footage such as WRC class rally cars etc.

Still not convinced Simon, I've an EX3 here and I shot some tests of birds flying on the estuary and most notably on quick tilts (ie when they plunged to land on the sand) there was still an issue with the image jittering. Whether it's rolling shutter skew or not I don't know, all I know is that I don't see it with an Arri or a Digibeta, Varicam or Sony HDW750 or PDW700.

Steve

Can you post up some examples Steve?

Quite often i find that when you are looking for the effect it can be there, but most times it isn't noticeable.

Video is often a compromise and stuff that we notice simply isn't by most normal people watching. I take it you are down by the Severn a lot? We'll have to hook up and compare notes, I've been down there a lot myself recently. I am surprised you noticed it on a tilt rather than a pan. I'm also slightly confused by the word 'jittering' which doesn't seem to fit the mold of a CMOS rolling shutter issue.

Which model of monitor is this being viewed on? And how is it being output?

My local test patch is the Conwy Estuary actually, up north.
Viewed it on HDTV via component out and also on laptop in FCP.
One of the companies I do work for has got an EX3 and I said I might be able to use it instead of the big cameras when I need to go a long long way and need a lighter kit. Mostly I think the EX3 is amazing (even the VF is useable), but I just can't get over this issue. It's hard to describe, all I know is I see it straight away when I'm used to viewing footage from Varicam et al and never noticed it at all.
Steve

Viewed it on HDTV via component out

CRT or LCD? Native 1920x1080 capable or 768 scaling? Production monitor or consumer? So many issues attributed to a camera can be caused by the monitor! Including that laptop.

I'd need to see it to know what you are on about. I just need a better description of the physicality of the picture when you say 'jittery'?

It's a 1080P plasma via component.
Can't find the time or inclination to post footage, but don't think it'd help anyway as it'd be so compressed you wouldn't be able to tell anyway.
Hope to get into a post house shortly to check all is well with PDW700 footage (including 720P for slomo which at first glance doesn't look that hot I'm afraid), so may get some answers then.
Steve

Shame though that the processing can't create the proxies on import. Perhaps with more GPGPU processing in computers this might be possible, thus saving what on P2 is valuable space.
I don't think they affect the P2 recordings or card space at all, though my experience is based on the first SD P2 2/3" cameras. On those, the idea was that the main recording went to P2, and the proxies went to an SD card. Hence, regardless of what happened to the main recordings, the producer could just walk away with an SD card at the end with a low res copy, and use that for off-line viewing or even e-mailing back to base, say, for an exec producer to see. The viewing could even be on a PDA if it had an SD slot.

Much better to do it in camera than on import, since it can just be handed straight to the producer etc after shooting - that may be well before any import or other post process.

but don't think it'd help anyway as it'd be so compressed you wouldn't be able to tell anyway.

That in itself would indicate that it isn't a CMOS issue.

The viewing could even be on a PDA if it had an SD slot.

The XDCAM series tried something similar with a Memory Stick addon, but it never caught on. It is still funny though because I remember having arguments with people on various forums who used P2 who told me that proxy files were useless and that they would much rather just use the final footage.

PDA viewing of footage would be useful though in some circumstances. One issue that would need sorting out is meta data linking. For example on the XDCAM discs any changes you make to the proxy metadata can be transferred to the full resolution files the next time that disc is hooked up. Does this new system have that capability?

It is still funny though because I remember having arguments with people on various forums who used P2 who told me that proxy files were useless and that they would much rather just use the final footage.
It depends what you're using them for. In the early XDCAM days I heard Sony describing two main reasons for having them on the discs - getting down to edit more quickly, before the full res files had transferred, and for the breaking news scenario - getting low res pictures on air quickly.

Come solid state, and the first reason tends to go away, and so too the need to record proxies on the main media. But the breaking news argument is still valid, and also the possibility of using them for off line logging/viewing/e-mailing. Here there's a clear advantage in NOT having them on the main media, but on a separate cheap SD card. And that can be far more easily played on a PDA, computer etc than a Memory Stick as the device is far more likely to support SD!

Why would they take such a lovely camera and put such a small chip in it? Seems a bit late in the game for more 1/3" chip cameras with the current state of things. Lovely codec and all that jazz though.

If a Sandisk Extreme III SDHC card (http://www.sandisk.com/Products/Item(2687)-SDSDX3-016G-A31-SanDisk_Extreme_III_SDHC_16GB.aspx) can handle 30 MBps, that's 30 MegaBYTES per second then it could easily handle 100 Mbps, thats 35 MegaBITS per second or 240 Mbps. (http://www.matisse.net/bitcalc/?input_amount=30&input_units=megabytes&notation=legacy)

You could over crank 60p and then some with a 30 MBps card.

Even a Sandisk Extreme II SDHC 15 MBps card could handle that with a 20% of overhead coming in at 120 Mebabits per second.

I think Sandisk is fibbing a whole bunch and that there sustained write speeds are nothing close to that and they are only burst write speeds. They have a "video" sdhc card (http://www.sandisk.com/Products/Item(2681)-SDSDHV-016G-A15-SanDisk_Video_HD_SDHC_16GB.aspx) and coincidentally the specs are left off for it's write speeds. This link What are SDHC Cards? (http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-sdhc-cards.htm) says the minimum specs for SDHC are:

* Class 2: minimum sustained DTS of 2MB/sec
* Class 4: minimum sustained DTS of 4MB/sec
* Class 6: minimum sustained DTS of 6MB/sec

Basically the class number means how many MB/s. I never knew that until now. It would be cool if they would publish their sustained write speed as well. There is no reason you would need a super expensive raided P2 card if a Sandisk Ultra III can even get half of it's advertised 35 MBps.

If you head over to the EX1 forum and look, you'll see that we have been testing the read and write speeds of the Sandisk, Lexar, Transcend, and other cards regularly for use in our cameras.

I've attached the test for my Sandisk Ultra2 16GB card. Mind you, this is testing through the expresscard adapter.

If you head over to the EX1 forum and look, you'll see that we have been testing the read and write speeds of the Sandisk, Lexar, Transcend, and other cards regularly for use in our cameras.

I've attached the test for my Sandisk Ultra2 16GB card. Mind you, this is testing through the expresscard adapter.


Wow! Faster than advertised!!

Well I was just about to post back that the 15 MBps on the Ultra II 16 GB does not claim write speed, which I overlooked, and that it probably means read speed and that it really only has to comply with the class 4 rating of 4 MBps write speed which would equal 32 Mbps write speed but your screenshot tells a very different story!

Your screenshot proves that the Sandisk Ultra II is capable of handling full 100 Mbit AVC Intra. Very interesting. I will have to head over to the EX1 forum.

Edit - Although I just noticed it was only a 100 MB block, correct?

It’s obvious that Panasonic wanted to price the HPX-300 close to Sony’s EX3 and I think 1/3” chips were the only way to achieve that goal. If they used bigger chips, they would have gotten some complaints that it cost to much more than the EX3. You cant please everybody and they took a gamble to keep the price low.

It’s obvious that Panasonic wanted to price the HPX-300 close to Sony’s EX3 and I think 1/3” chips were the only way to achieve that goal.
There is also a big power difference between the two - the HPX300 consumes nearly 50% more power than the EX3, in spite of the 1/3" v 1/2" chips. Interesting to wonder what the power consumption of a 1/2" HPX300 would have been? There's a great deal to like about the HPX300, but I keep on finding myself thinking "if only it had 1/2" chips and cheaper than P2 memory......."

There is also a big power difference between the two - the HPX300 consumes nearly 50% more power than the EX3, in spite of the 1/3" v 1/2" chips. Interesting to wonder what the power consumption of a 1/2" HPX300 would have been? There's a great deal to like about the HPX300, but I keep on finding myself thinking "if only it had 1/2" chips and cheaper than P2 memory......."
The power consumption might be the more processor intensive avc intra codec? One advantage of using the larger batteries is light, you'll be able to run better onboard lightning without bulky battery packs as are the case with Ex1/3, but batteries will be a investment that cost some $$ to...

And the memory prices some places between p2 and sxs are so low that they wont interfere with what cam to choose.

One advantage of using the larger batteries is light, you'll be able to run better onboard lightning without bulky battery packs as are the case with Ex1/3, but batteries will be a investment that cost some $$ to....

I don't follow. If the EX3 uses less juice, it will have more available to power lights. It seems like the reverse of what you're saying.

Wow! Faster than advertised!!

Well I was just about to post back that the 15 MBps on the Ultra II 16 GB does not claim write speed, which I overlooked, and that it probably means read speed and that it really only has to comply with the class 4 rating of 4 MBps write speed which would equal 32 Mbps write speed but your screenshot tells a very different story!

Your screenshot proves that the Sandisk Ultra II is capable of handling full 100 Mbit AVC Intra. Very interesting. I will have to head over to the EX1 forum.

Edit - Although I just noticed it was only a 100 MB block, correct?

The Sandisk Ultra series cards are consistently coming in above their spec. Which is why THEY work and most other brands of SDHC cards don't in the EX1/EX3. And why the Sandisk Ultra2 16GB card for $35 that we've been getting is SUCH a steal. I am writing on $35 media what Sony charges me $799 for on SxS. That kind of math is why we're adopting this workflow so happily. Tapeless for $35/hr. LOVE it.

Yes, the test I did was a 100MB block. I don't have my card with me tonight, or I'd test it for you with a larger block size. Do you know what block size you're interested in? The EX1 writes 16GB per hour (or 4MB/s by my math) and it writes out every 5 seconds, so it should be writing an ~20MB file to the card each time.

-P