Hi all,

I'm looking at getting the DVX100e which is the PAL version of the DVX100.

I hope that I don't come out sounding like a goof ball here, but from what I've read, I understand that the PAL version will be 25p and not 24p(which is standard PAL), therefore, is there really any advantage of getting the PAL version (I understand the higher reso thing)? And will it still be able to produce "film-like" shots?

Thank you in advance

If you live in a NTSC region, don't get PAL. If you want to get a PAL cam for DV to film transfers, the PAL version will give you higher resolution and better color. If you want to use a cam every day in NTSC land, but thinking you might want to shoot something for transfer, go with the NTSC version, unless you can afford more than 1 cam.

I don't think the human eye can distinguish the difference between 24 frames per second and 25 frames per second.

Well, I do live in a PAL region, but I would like to know if that makes the DVX100's special feature redundant?

If you live in a PAL country, don't even consider the NTSC version of this cam. The NTSC 24P mode is mainly there to give people an extra option for a 3:2 pull-down (film) look. There are a number of issues when shooting in this mode, however.

Sorry, but that doesn't answer my question. If the PAL version of this camera shoots at 25p, which is the normal framerate of a PAL camera, how does it give a "filmlook"?

25P is only 1 frame more than film's 24P. There's a certain film type look with 24P converted to play back on a NTSC TV. We see it all the time: stuff is shot with film, then it's converted for NTSC TV. So PAL countries already have this film look---a little hard on the eyes, though.

So is this to say that the "filmlook" function on the DVX100e is redundant?

So why else would anyone buy this camera if not for the 24p function?

Okey. Pal is 50i as NTSC is 60i. And the dvx 100e is 25p because it divides each double frame interlaced and processes it as two separate fields. It will really be more like 50p. You have to know that if you do not have 50 fields you can not watch your footage in a pal monitor, beacuse as I said Pal is 50i.

"So is this to say that the "filmlook" function on the DVX100e is redundant?"

No. Because if you shoot movement in 25P, and play it back on a regular TV, it'll be a tad bit choppy. And many regard this as the film look. Same goes for shooting in NTSC's 30P.

The great thing about this cam is that it is a great cam: great audio, high resolution, great controls, progressive, well balanced...it competes with the PD150. The DVX100 just has a few minor issues, very minor. DV Mag. gave it a rating of 4.5 out of 5 stars.

Frank, according to the latest issue of DV mag, 25p to 24p film just makes the film 4 percent longer. They don't do any special conversion since it's so close. It's literally a frame to frame transfer.

I already have an NTSC camera, so I want the PAL version for the additional resolution and more stable color. Plus other reasons that I've posted before. A bigf part, is I hope to do some principal taping over in Ireland or England.

If vegas or Procoder can't do the PAL to NTSC conversion well enough, I'm sure there is some production facility here in FL that can. Spending a few hundred more dollars at that point won't be a big deal.

I am looking for a good deal on a dual format vtr and monitor.
Any suggestions?

Ok, ok, I know that I'm obviously a little dense here. The problem is that all the reviews that I've been reading are about the NTSC version and none about the PAL one, therefore I'm asking lots of quesions here.

So from what you've said, the PAL DVX100's "filmlook" function, is no different from a normal PAL camera cos they both capture at 25p? Or is there something that I'm missing from the DVX100 that will be able to do that?

I don't think the camera even exists yet.
Many a slip twix the cup and the lip!

That means, a lot can change before it's realeased. I haven't heard anything concrete about the PAL version of this camera, only rumors and heresay. I think they (the rumorers) are saying that because 25p is so close to 24p it doesn't make a lot of sense to have both functions. IF you are buying this camera with the intention of blowing the video up to FILM it would be easier, cleaner, and smoother to just use the 25p (of PAL) than the 24p (a version of 3:2 pull down off of 30P). It does make perfect sense, if you understand any of it. If you live in PAL land OR want to make a FILM or both (in your case) do not even consider the NTSC version. Why would you intentionally buy a lower res camera with a more complicated system that isn't even compatible in your region?

<<<-- Originally posted by E-Gene Soh :
So from what you've said, the PAL DVX100's "filmlook" function, is no different from a normal PAL camera cos they both capture at 25p? Or is there something that I'm missing from the DVX100 that will be able to do that? -->>>

E-Gene, i think you are missing something here... it's the "p" in the 24 or 25p. it is true that all PAL goes 25 fps (= 50i = 50 fields p/s), it doesnt necessarily go 25p (= 25 full frames p/s).

another advantage of the 25p over the 24p is the better pulldown.
it is still not justifying an extra 1000$ over the NTSC version, but life is not so fair as my mother told me more then once... and its even a harder truth when it comes to prosumer cameras!

check this file for deeper information about progressive scan:
images.videosystems.com/files/127/209vsshexp.pdf

btw - the PAL version isn't out yet, but surely exists, since brochures are available as .pdf on the net. it will be out though in a month (that's what i know from the local dealer in Berlin).

greetings,
shai

"So from what you've said, the PAL DVX100's "filmlook" function, is no different from a normal PAL camera cos they both capture at 25p? Or is there something that I'm missing from the DVX100 that will be able to do that?"

No, a PAL camera does NOT capture at 25P but at 50i, which means you have a succession of 50 half frames or fields per seconds. One up, one down, one up, one down, etc....

The panasonic DVX100 will capture at 25 frame per seconds, not fields. The resolution will be better. If you go to film you won't have to deinterlace the footage. Just remove one frame per second to match the 24 P or film. If you use a "normal" PAL camera you still have to deinterlace.
If you live in PAL land, honestly don't worry or bother about that Panasonic because if you don't go to film and your footage is seen on a PAL TV what's the heck! 50 interlace will look exactly like 25P. That's the point of interlace. As far as I know you don't see the upper field, then the lower, then the upper, then the lower 50 times per second, right! you have the illusion of 25 frame per seconds. So in PAL land that Panasonic is useless for people who won't transfer to film.
Now the pany will make transfer to film easier for the house transfer, they won't have to deinterlace, but honestly Swiss Effect masters transfering interlaced PAL to Film so well, I wouldn't bother. Check film such as Personal Velocity, Bamboozled, All things put together, all shot with Sony PAL, two of them with a VX-1000 PAL.

It all boils down to; if you have a PD 150 PAL and live in PAl land don't bother about the panasonic. If you do NOt have a camera you should consider the Pany since it's audio capability is superiour to the PD, slighlty, and the Leica Dicomar is really nice, you might also save the price of a wide angle.

I'd say it's going to be a cam for the US. If you're smart you'll wait for Sony answer to that Pany.
Philippe

>>> 50 interlace will look exactly like 25P. That's the point of interlace. As far as I know you don't see the upper field, then the lower, then the upper, then the lower 50 times per second, right! you have the illusion of 25 frame per seconds. So in PAL land that Panasonic is useless for people who won't transfer to film.
Philippe -->>>

philippe.... are you sure of that??? wouldn't a 25P have at least the "frame mode" effect (besides the true native progressive scan)?????
...you dont actualy "see fields" in a normal interlaced footage.. you just see the annoying rappid image that we try to escape when we go progressive

i somehow think that a 25P footage will look as good as (if not better then) a 24P on a regualar monitor... is there anyone who knows for sure??

shai

"wouldn't a 25P have at least the "frame mode" effect (besides the true native progressive scan)?????"

>>>a 25P camera is what it is, a camera that takes entire frames, 25 of them every seconds. Yes. What's the problem here. I'm not saying anything agaisnt that.

I'm saying that a normal video cam PAl sampling 50i per seconds. On a PAL tv set DOES look like footage that was shot by a 25P.
I defy anybody to see the difference. NOW, if you were in NTSC land, you'd see the difference between something shot at 24P and broadcast on an NTSC TV


"you dont actualy "see fields" in a normal interlaced footage.. you just see the annoying rappid image that we try to escape when we go progressive"

>>>What! What are you talking about! the annoying rapid image that we try to escape.....?

So you're saying you see the fields ?

WHen Engineers developed PAL they chose 50 alternating fields per seconds because, amont other thing it' give the illusion of motion like a movie did. 25 is close enough to 24. There is not way yo can see the fields. NO WAY. You mean can you see the current in a bulb fluctuating 50 times per seconds? Can you? No, I 'd say for your eyes the filament is burning on all the time.
Think about it, if you were able to see the fields, 50 of them in one image of PAL footage you'd be able to see each 24 frame of a projected movie individualy. Can you? Do you see 24 individual frames when you watch one second of movie or do you see motion?

25P footage won't look better than 50i footage in PAL land. THe whole poing of 50i is to give the illusion of 25P. If 50i fields were not giving you the illusion of 25 full frame per seconds there would be no point. YOur eyes are not that good. Listen, I spent the first 30 years in my life in France where we use PAL and now I live in the US, I have two camera, a PAL and an NTSC, I'm used to the effect.

The advantage of 25P over 50i is that when you transfer to film there's not need to deinterlace, and so less chance of messing up by the transfer house. But again at the risk of being heavy, if all you do is watch footage on PAL land on a TV the 25P is useless since you already haver the illusion of 25p with the current 50i.

Philippe

------------------

edited by Chris Hurd 07 Feb 2003

A reminder to keep the nature of this conversation on a friendly, mutually respectful basis. Any flaming will be deleted. See the FAQ for a better understanding of our forum policy.

There is indeed much confusion here. It should be understood that regardless of system (PAL vs. NTSC), there will be a noticeable difference in the video image between progressive and interlaced scanning.

50i does not appear the same as 25p, just as 60i does not appear the same as 30p. The difference in each may be discerned by anybody who has the opportunity to compare them.

No one will claim to be able to resolve the separate fields of an interlaced image. The optical illusion we know as "persistence of vision" insures this, and is the key to understanding how interlaced images work. However there may be some confusion in this conversation about what constitutes an interlaced field... they are not "upper and lower" (these are editing terms), but rather, odd lines and even. The first field consitutes all the odd lines of the image, the second field is all the even lines... basically two full-size but half-resolution images one after the other, alternating so fast (1/50th second for PAL, 1/60th second for NTSC) that you can't notice them, thanks to persistence of vision.

With progressive scan it's a bit different. The entire frame, not just half of it, is grabbed at once by the CCD. Instead of alternating half-pictures 50 or 60 times per second, with progressive scan now it's a full-size, full-resolution image at 25 or 30 frames per second. As Frank says, "a bit choppy" compared to interlace, precisely because of the difference in frame rate.

And most everybody can notice a difference between progressive and interlace, regardless of whether it's PAL or NTSC. The reason is due to a perceivable difference in temporal motion... the change in frame rate (from 50 or 60 down to 25 or 30) won't be resolved by the eye but rather felt by the mind. Am I saying it's in your head? Yes, to a degree. If you're used to watching NTSC at 60i, and then look at a PAL 50i image, the flicker is instantly noticeable, and then goes away... because the brain adjusts for the change. I saw this myself at the NAB convention, where Sony had an interesting comparison of identical video images displayed on different monitors at different frame rates... 60i, 50i, 30p, 25p etc. It all looked like video but each one felt a bit different... the motion judder is different in each, as is the degree of strobe... because each frame rate produces a different feeling of temporal motion in the brain. And no one of them is right or wrong, they're just different.

In short, there will be a perceivable difference between 50i and 25p. I have seen it -- or rather, I have felt it -- and you can too. 50i does not appear to be identical at all to 25p.

However, I would seriously doubt anyone's claim to perceive a difference between 25p and 24p (or for that matter, 25p and 26p, if there were such a thing). A one-frame-per-second difference would not be noticeable. a 5fps or 10fps difference is noticeable, though.

Lastly, the Panasonic AG-DVX100 is a superb camcorder even without the 24p feature and it is a serious tool for video production whether it's the PAL or NTSC version. The advice to "wait for Sony" is sadly misguided. If you spent your time waiting for the next new camera, then you'll never produce anything. In this day and age, if you have something to shoot, then NOW is always the best time to buy.

E-Gene Soh, I hope this helps. There is so much more to a "film look" than the frame rate; but that's another topic which is covered in our Film Look forum. Keep your questions coming!