Im looking for a camera that shoots 1080p 24p. does the 500 shoots it or if it doesnt what is the diference between it and the HVX200? Can anyone tell me. Thanks.

I don't think there exists any camera in the world today that shoots 1080p.

Cinealta.... Varicam.... Red.... Genesis.... etc etc... those shooot 1080p at 24p

Those cameras are priced at 4X to 8X (maybe much more) than your target camera. You didn't specify your budget.

i have no budget limit. but of course im looking to see if the 500 or the 2000 panasonic shoot 1080p this because i like the p2 system and because i own a hvx200 and love the image qualituy. but i want to blow up to 35mm.. that is why am looking for a camera that does 1080p

As far as I know, HPX500 only does 1080i. I have no information on HPX2000.

thanks for your respose.

The HPX500 of course shoots 1080p!

are you completely shure??? i can shoot 24p at 1080p???

From Panasonic's website:

Records in 1080/60i, 50i, 30p, 25p and 24p; in 720/60p, 50p, 30p, 25p, and 24p; and in DVCPRO50, DVCPRO and DV

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?displayTab=O&storeId=11201&catalogId=13051&itemId=112115&catGroupId=34401&surfModel=AG-HPX500

Absolutely, positively, completely, unquestionably, YES. The HVX200, HPX500, and HPX2000 all shoot 1080/24p. 24 frames per second acquisition from progressive-scan chips.

Sigh! My apologies. My eyes not working today. I thought I was reading 1080/60i ... where it is really 1080/24p. Terrible.

I shoot 1080 24p all the time with the HVX200. I was a NAB and shot with the HPX500 and it shoots the same frame rates as the HVX.

But what im talking about is not 1080i.... i want to know if they shoot 1080p
for axample, the hvx200 does not shoot 1080p at 24p...

But what im talking about is not 1080i.... i want to know if they shoot 1080p

As is obvious from the posts here there remains, almost two years later, some confusion and doubt about the HVX filming 1080p or not.

I tried to find this out once from Panasonic directly. There was no satisfactory or straight answer. I asked: YES or NO, and was told to look at the statistics.

The stats are not clear. Many suppliers it seems to me deliberately have confusion in their stats and this whole world of HD is full of it. I find it very annoying and decided not to buy the HVX200, nor any HD for now and when some company stops talking about pulldowns, transpositions, interlace throw-over reverse spins, etc; and says: "Our camera films 1080p," then I'll buy.

Clear information could look like this: 1080i/60fps, 1080p/24fps, 720p/60fps, etc. No?

Sort of like the government, though, clear information and common sense often are hidden behind spin (although it nice to see companies produce fine products...but some companies do that and put out straight info.

Some companies even write clear and useful manuals.

But what im talking about is not 1080i.... i want to know if they shoot 1080p
for axample, the hvx200 does not shoot 1080p at 24p...

Do you have an HVX? I have thousands of clips on my website that
are 1080 24p shot with the HVX...
You shoot 1080 24PA and remove the pulldown when you import.

Yes.. but are they 1080p??????

Yes.. but are they 1080p??????

Google is a great way to search this forum. Look what I found.

Barry Green answers your question technically here:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...028#post321028

Jan Crittenden answers more consisely here:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=45796

Yes.. but are they 1080p??????

From what I understand, since the chips on the camera are progressive, the image the camera shoots is 1080p and is then saved in an interlaced stream. In the US spec for HD, there is no 1080p format, therefore there's no point for the camera to offer it in your final product since you could not broadcast this footage.

However, the image is progressive and then saved to an interlaced stream. Barry Green said something about re-combining the two interlaced frames back into the original progressive frame without quality loss. Not sure on how that is accomplished, but thhere you go.

it's more about the fact you're trying to film in a format that does not exist as part of any spec.

Yes.. but are they 1080p??????

Yes. Several people have already confirmed that you can indeed get true 1080p with the HVX by way of progressive scan CCDs and advanced pulldown.

I think the only thing that will make you a believer is to get your hands on an HVX and try it for yourself.

for axample, the hvx200 does not shoot 1080p at 24p...

Of course it does.

Barry,

May I ask a fundamental question?

1080i - the "i" here stands for interlaced mode
1080p - the 'p' here stands for progressive scan mode

24p/25p - what does the 'p' stands for?

Thanks.

Some people are never satisfied. They want to hear their absolute truth or they will keep on asking until they hear what they want to hear.

If Barry Green tells me the HVX does 1080/24p knowing that he wrote a book on it and Panasonic used for their promotion, I'll take his word on it.

Barry,

May I ask a fundamental question?

1080i - the "i" here stands for interlaced mode
1080p - the 'p' here stands for progressive scan mode

24p/25p - what does the 'p' stands for?

Thanks.


24p = 24 progressively-scanned frames per second.
25p = 25 progressively-scanned frames per second.

I am editing several projects - 2 in 1080 24p and 3 in 720 24p
The FCP timeline is 23.98 fps....
All the clips are DVCPRO HD shot with the HVX200 -

Barry,

Would it sound contradictory if a camera does 1080i at 24p? I mean, how does the sensor do 1080 interlaced, and still gives you a progressive scanned 24 frames per second output? And why is there no 720i (but only 720p)? Thank you for answering my basic question.

Barry,

Would it sound contradictory if a camera does 1080i at 24p?

It does sound contradictory, which is why we have so much confusion going on here.

So let's clarify one thing first:
how does the sensor do 1080 interlaced
The HVX sensor *never* does interlaced. Not at 1080, not at 480, not at 576. The HVX sensor is always progressive, always. When you put the camera in 1080/24p mode, it scans its sensor at 24 frames per second, progressively.

(so how does it do 1080/60i you ask? It actually scans at 1080/60p, and splits the progressive frames into fields for recording as 1080/60i, or downrezzes it to standard-def for 480/60i, but it's actually running at 1080/60P!)

still gives you a progressive scanned 24 frames per second output?
Well that's the thing. There is no 1080/24p recording format, there's only 1080/60i. So what it does is the same process that every hollywood movie undergoes when being broadcast: the 24 frames get split up into fields and recorded as interlaced fields, because the recording formats are all interlaced. Even HDCAM 24p is actually split into fields and recorded as 48i. In the case of DVCPRO-HD, 2:3 pulldown is used and the recorded information is recorded as 1080/60i. But the footage is 24p. It's just being "carried" in a 60i transport stream.

Once the NLE gets ahold of the footage, it "un-does" that pulldown step and restores the footage to its original 24p state.

And why is there no 720i (but only 720p)? Thank you for answering my basic question.
Because (to quote the classic film "The Waterboy") "Interlaced is the debbil." Interlaced video is an archaic holdover from the first days of television broadcast. The 720 standard was created to once and forever eliminate interlace from our lives. 720 is progressive at all times, and there will never be an interlaced version of 720.

Hopefully 1080/60i is the last interlaced format we'll ever see. The future should be progressive at all times, and hopefully the manufacturers, broadcasters, and standards bodies will all get on the same page from here on out...

The HVX sensor *never* does interlaced. . There is no 1080/24p recording format, ..The 720 standard was created to once and forever eliminate interlace from our lives.

I see. Well, that explains a lot. It does, although I sometimes feel in these discussions about HD that more faith is required than in being 'born again.'

For example, after months and months of hearing how, I thought it was being said, that 1080/24p (as you say) was the Holy Grail of Video it almost sounds like shocking heresy to hear you declare it doesn't exist!!

But I believe you. I now believe 1080p/24fps does not exist. I believe it pulls down and travels on an interlaced stream.

I also believe I should think more about doing video in 720p/60fps and that this is not only a current broadcast standard but that in the glorious future, on Plasma TV, or Apple TV, or MTV that this format could be 'transubstantiated' to whatever Future Greatness we evolve.

Wouldn't that be a good bet? 720p/60fps....or, as the experts like to say:
720/60p.

I see. Well, that explains a lot. It does, although I sometimes feel in these discussions about HD that more faith is required than in being 'born again.'

For example, after months and months of hearing how, I thought it was being said, that 1080/24p (as you say) was the Holy Grail of Video it almost sounds like shocking heresy to hear you declare it doesn't exist!!

But I believe you. I now believe 1080p/24fps does not exist. I believe it pulls down and travels on an interlaced stream.

I also believe I should think more about doing video in 720p/60fps and that this is not only a current broadcast standard but that in the glorious future, on Plasma TV, or Apple TV, or MTV that this format could be 'transubstantiated' to whatever Future Greatness we evolve.

Wouldn't that be a good bet? 720p/60fps....or, as the experts like to say:
720/60p.

Why stop at 720 60p then? Why not go for 1080 60p or higher? 1080p doesn't exist because our current system in the U.S. is NTSC, and there isn't enough bandwidth for the higher resolution. But, who knows? Maybe with more efficient codecs, more resolution can be squeezed in the narrow NTSC video bandwidth.

i think what is being confused here is the fact that the HVX does progressive (obviousy) but uses an interlaced stream for transport (2:3 or 2:3:3:2 pulldown or 2:2 in Pal land)...

thats the fundumental difference between 720pn and 1080p, being that 1080p is progressive but requires a pulldown service to remove redundant frames

Internally the HVX200 does process the signal at 1080/60p (or at any of its variable frame rates, but always as 1080p). If you were to get the forthcoming Hydra modification you could actually use it in 1080/60p mode.

There's no broadcast standard for 1080/60p, nor is there any SMPTE-codified recording format for 1080/60p, so the broadcast equipment manufacturers don't offer 1080/60p. But the internals are capable of it, if you wanted it, and Hydra will let you get at it.

In the US spec for HD, there is no 1080p format, therefore there's no point for the camera to offer it in your final product since you could not broadcast this footage.

However, the image is progressive and then saved to an interlaced stream. Barry Green said something about re-combining the two interlaced frames back into the original progressive frame without quality loss. Not sure on how that is accomplished, but thhere you go.

it's more about the fact you're trying to film in a format that does not exist as part of any spec.

Jason, there is no 'US spec' for HD. The digital transmission specs have been developed by a worldwide consortium called the Advanced Television Standards Committee (ATSC). Part of the reason for this is the elimination of two or three different broadcast methods around the world. Instead, it's one set of specs for different resolutions that allows for many different frame rates as well as progressive or interlaced broadcast. The main difference in the future say between US and Europe will be different frame rates, necessitated by different power line frequencies to maintain sync with lighting. At this time, US broadcasters have settled on 1080i60 or 720P60, but there is indeed other frame rates in the ATSC spec and they are free to use them if they choose to.

Here's a hint: Why do you think television set makers are starting to sell units capable of displaying 1080P60? There are already cameras out there that can shoot 1080P60. And many of them can shoot 1080P24.

My XDCAM HD shoots 1080i60, 1080P30, 1080P24, 1080P25, 1080P50 as well as NTSC or PAL DVCAM standards.

What Barry said about splitting a progressive scan into two fields is called PsF or, progressive segmented frame. Not only is there no quality loss, there is no time differential between each field so it's a simple matter of sticking the odd and even scan lines back together to form a complete frame for editing in the NLE.

-gb-

I think greg means the XDCAM shoots 1080i50, not 1080p50. Anyway, Greg, very nicely done on explaining this. I think that 1080p60 might be a reality in future broadcast because of more efficient compression codecs. For those of you who do not know, the interlace NTSC system was created to solve flickering because of the system's limited 30 frames per second. Why didn't they do progressive? There isn't enough bandwidth in the current NTSC analog system. Digital is different in that it doesn't require all the extra space that analog needs to broadcast; therefore, other information, like surround sound can be added. Also, because DTV has more bandwidth to work with, it is capable of HD. Of course, there is more to it, but that's the two cents worth.

I think greg means the XDCAM shoots 1080i50, not 1080p50.

Ooops, you're right. Strictly a typo. That's what I get for not grouping all the I's and P's together in the list.

Thanks for catching that!

-gb-

Jason, there is no 'US spec' for HD. The digital transmission specs have been developed by a worldwide consortium called the Advanced Television Standards Committee (ATSC).

Actually, I hate to contradict you Greg, but the ATSC is firmly North-American centric (with only a small handful of other countries adopting the standards).

A considerably larger number of countries (35 vs 6?) are using the European originated DVB standards... which actually does include 1080p50 (though no-one's broadcasting that yet!).

Of course it does.

you are telling me it does.. so if i shoot a feature with the HVX will it be the same as the vsaricam as in i can do the blowup to 35mm and will it look without pixels?

you are telling me it does.. so if i shoot a feature with the HVX will it be the same as the vsaricam as in i can do the blowup to 35mm and will it look without pixels?

I think you have resolution (pixels) confused with frame rate. However, if you film 24p with the HVX200 you will be able to output to a film print that is free of interlace artefacts and other video nasties... if that's what you're asking.

I think you have resolution (pixels) confused with frame rate. However, if you film 24p with the HVX200 you will be able to output to a film print that is free of interlace artefacts and other video nasties... if that's what you're asking.

I guess i made the wrong quwestion, what i was tryiung to say is.. the HVX shoots 720p 24p. if i blow that up to 35mm, will it look pixeled as if the resolution wont support it or do i shoot 1080i and then do a pulldown?

Watch "Iraq In Fragments". That was shot on a standard-def 720x480 DVX100 and blown up to 35mm, and nominated for an Academy Award for "Best Documentary". Nobody complained about pixels.

Or, watch "Murderball", that was also shot on a standard-def 720x480 DVX100 and blown up to 35mm, and also got nominated for an Academy Award for "Best Documentary". Nobody complained about pixels.

The HVX200 is going to look substantially sharper, cleaner, crisper, and "better" than either of those. Its 1080/24p will look better than its 720/24p, but either one is likely to prove adequate. If you watched Scorcese's "The Departed", there was a shot from an HVX200 that made it into the final film print. Nobody even noticed.

Will it match a VariCam? Of course not; one's a $45,000 camera and the other's a $5,000 camera. But can you do a film with it? Yes. Watch for "Childless" starring Joe Mantegna and Barbara Hershey, that was shot entirely on an HVX with no lens adapters, 720/24pN mode, a million dollar budget and should be hitting theaters soon. Or, if you want to see HVX200 footage blown to film in the theater right now, go sit through the previews in front of the Nancy Drew movie. There you'll see a preview for "Sarah Landon and the Paranormal Hour", a movie shot entirely on the HVX200 (using the Redrock M2 lens adapter) and being distributed on something like 2400 movie screens starting October 26th. The film itself won't be out until October, but the previews for the film are playing in front of the "Nancy Drew" movie so you should be able to see that now.
http://www.sarahlandon.com

Actually, I hate to contradict you Greg, but the ATSC is firmly North-American centric (with only a small handful of other countries adopting the standards).

A considerably larger number of countries (35 vs 6?) are using the European originated DVB standards... which actually does include 1080p50 (though no-one's broadcasting that yet!).

Alex, I didn't choose my words correctly. I was thinking when I wrote that post that someone would question it. By worldwide, I didn't mean every country or continent on the face of the Earth. The gist I was trying to impart to the person I replied to, was that there is no HD spec that's specific to the US/North America, as there was with NTSC. For example, I have no idea what France is going to replace SECAM with. But PAL vs NTSC issues should evaporate in the not too distant future. February 17, 2009 is the date for US broadcasters to cease analog transmission...the end of NTSC!

Sorry, didn't mean to highjack the thread but I felt compelled to dis-spell some myths about HD broadcast standards.

-gb-

Alex, I didn't choose my words correctly. I was thinking when I wrote that post that someone would question it. By worldwide, I didn't mean every country or continent on the face of the Earth. The gist I was trying to impart to the person I replied to, was that there is no HD spec that's specific to the US/North America, as there was with NTSC. For example, I have no idea what France is going to replace SECAM with. But PAL vs NTSC issues should evaporate in the not too distant future. February 17, 2009 is the date for US broadcasters to cease analog transmission...the end of NTSC!

Sorry, didn't mean to highjack the thread but I felt compelled to dis-spell some myths about HD broadcast standards.

-gb-

Well, in a sense, you're correct; but it's too bad the U.S. couldn't agree with most of the countries on the same standard. Sure it's no longer 625 vs 525 lines, but U.S. and Europe still differ on frame rates, at least regarding terrestial TV broadcasting and modulation. Of course ATSC can accomodate 25/50 frame rates, but no one wants the 8 VSB modulation. In fact, some satellite companies here have adopted the European DSB-S/S2 standard, and cable companies refuse to adopt the 16 VSB modulation under ATSC's cable standard and went with their own, QAM 256. But you are essentially right; there is no real HD spec. Each standard can work together in theory.

Oh, to be politically correct, you are disspelling some myths about digital broadcast standards. High definition is a subset of digital television. Broadcast TV stations might opt to not air high definition. The advantage would be that they can broadcast multiple standard definition channels or they can use the extra space for Broadcast Internet or other data services.