Panasonic MX300

[Frank Granovski]

I own 2 MX300s, so if you any questions, and I am able to answer them, feel free.

[florian otel]

<<<-- Originally posted by frank_granovski : I own 2 MX300s, so if you any questions, and I am able to answer them, feel free. -->>>

Well, well, look who's here :). Nice to see you here Frank. Quite a change from DV.com forums, or what ?. Btw, how's your promised site shaping up ?

Well, since we got to the question part, here's three items I need advice about:
- Tripod ? Smth really incospicuous (i.e. as foldable as possible, preferrably fitting in a hand bag)
- Which 43 mm circular polarized filter ? All equally good ? Thread or bayonette style ?
- Most important: Any experiences w/ VZ-LDDS9 DC MX300 add-on light ? (see http://www.dv.com/forums/showReplies.jhtml?sid=1&fid=2&tid=2100098 ). Any idea where to get one of those 'xcept "the land of the rising sun" ?

Cheers,

Florian

[Frank Granovski]

It's going slow. Some pages should be up later today. Though these are only the first step. Regading your questions, I think this should be posted on the "general..." forum (3rd down from the top of the main forum page). I'll post over there.

PS: how's BB doing over at DV.com?

[Ken Tanaka]

I took the liberty to split the original thread and place the MX300 posts over here.

[florian otel]

No problem Ken. On the contrary, really good idea to gather under this "hood" (sic!) relevant posts.

Once again thanks to Ken, Chris, Frank, and all involved in setting up this forum.


Only one (nasty) question though: Was it absoultely necessary a sepparate forum for an over-hyped, yet-to-be released camera :) ? You know which one I'm talking about...

Cheers,

Florian

[Chris Hurd]

Hi Florian,

Yes, it was necessary... although it has yet to be released, it is very real and very interesting and the amount of discussion about it warrants its own forum. I've seen the camera myself, and it's going to be a big hit for Panasonic. Hope this helps,

hello everybody. i am new to this forum. i bought a mx 300 (pal), wich had some dead pixel, wich were replaced in the waranty time. i have only done little test footage.
But now i have seen an other problem, wich i don´t now is a fault or a normal thing related to how the mx 300 is build. with the bigger professional cameras you are able to zoom in on an object, focus (manual), and then zoom out and now the object is still in focus. Not so with my mx 300. The object immiadetly goes out of focus when the zoom works and focus is set to manual. for me it´s a little bit strange because, in the user manual of the mx 300, they recommend this method for manual focus (zoom in, set focus, zoom out). so my question: is there anything wrong with my camera, or is this a "feature" due to how the mx is build. and if, is that the same thing with the canon GL2 / XM 2.
on frank´s website i read, that the optical image stabilizer of the mx 300 reduces the image by 10%. does that mean it reduce quality by 10% too. because i took part on a shooting of a feature this summer (with a VX 2000), wich may be going to be printed on film, i am concerned about reducing the quality of the material, because we wanted to use the mx 300 in an other project, wich is going to be printed on film either, eventually.
has anybody experience with this camera in projects, where the footage was use for a filmprint. what settings would you recommend then (sarpness down, etc.) or would it be better to change to an other camera in this price segment, like a canon xm 2.
i would be glad to find answers to my questions here.

[Terrence Smith]

The MX300 holds the focus when you zoom out (in manual). There might be a problem with your cam. Although the lens is fixed, there should be a 'back-focus' or other adjustment within. Should be a fairly simple repair at the Pana service center.

The OIS, in practice, does not degrade the image in any visible way. As with any such projects, it's best to discuss with the lab doing the transfer and request for test shots, with various settings recorded (slated) for analysis. Different labs have different preferences (and methods) and they would be in the best position to advise.

[Frank Granovski]

I agree with Terrence, "the OIS...does not degrade the image in any visible way." I've always just seen clean, rich video (with my eyes) with the OIS on. However, 2 things:

1) Panasonic states there is a 10% quality loss. At least they're honest with this one. I also presume that no optical stabilizer will not degrade the footage to some degree. However, with the high resolution of cams today, you won't see this.

2) With shooting for film transfers, or shooting for capturing the best footage, go with the OIS shut off, and use a tripod and/or other stabilizer---even your shoulder, if it's a "shoulder cam."

thank you for your prompt answer.
so i have to contact the pana service for the problem of not holding the object in manual focus, when zooming out. that means it is a fault of the camera.
when we were shooting a feature with the vx 2000 the director told me that he choose to shoot with optical image stabilizer, but that it would reduce quality a bit. i didn´t understand what he meant, because from all i know about OI´ses i thought it would be done without loss. but now it seem´s that´s normal with OI´ses to loose a bit of quality.
But for the settings: most companys making filmprints have recomandations for the more popular semi-pro consumer cams in this sector (like vx 2000, xl, xm 1, sony 900) but nearly no experiences with the panasonic mx 300. and my impressions of the information i got from the net "recherche" was, that the mx has algoritm to sharpen the image more than natural (what may be appropriate for playing back on monitors but not to blow up for film print), so if anybody has information about that...
thank you again.
greetings.

[Frank Granovski]

Concerning transfer labs, they will have guidelines. So it doesn't matter so much about which cam you use. You just have to stick with the guidelines. But, you should want 2 things with a cam:

1) The ability for the cam to meet these guidelines. Example, manual controls. Another example would be if the lab prefers PAL progressive. Then a MX300 should be used over the VX2000. The local lab here in Vancouver requires NTSC interlaced, so PAL is out, and so is progressive. This lab also requires that the shutter speed is constant, otherwise they're going to have a difficult time with the transfer, therefore they're going to charge you more. Ouch!

2) You want a cam with high resolution, because this will make or break the quality of the transfer. Example, a ZR only plays back 360 horizontal lines, wheras a VX2000 and MX300 plays back 500 horizontal lines. Which cam/s will give you better results? Certainly not the ZR.

hi. has anybody made experiences with xlr adaptors with the mx300? i think there are 3: the beachteck, studio1 xlr-pro, and the sv xlr-pro. i tend to choose between the studio1 and sv adaptor, because they work with all camcorders (what would be the appropriate beachtek model for the mx300). do they have differences in sound quality? in short: wich is best?
and second question, if i work with a samson mixpad4 as field mixer, do i need a xlr adaptor? what conection do i have to choose to plug the balanced stereo output of the mixer in the unbalancend stereo miniplug of the camcorder? can i choose a mechanical solution, or is it still a question of impedance? has anybody experiences with mixpad4 and mx300? thanks.
p.s. my mx300 is again at panasonic service: after capturing footage, shooted in frame mode, to the computer, dead pixels apeared in the left upper corner (about 20-30). but only when the material is uploaded to the computer. how the technican at service center reacted, it seem to me, that this is a common problem, because when i started to tell him my problem, he knew immediatly that it is not a problem with the ccd, but that something on the main board must be changed. wonder if anyone else had this problem, because you will first notice that, if you start editing footage, wich was shoot in frame mode and maybe this is after your warranty is gone. sorry for the long post.
greetings s.

[Frank Granovski]

I was hoping Terrence would jump in for this one. I didn't know that there are any XLR adaptors specifically made for the MX300. I do know that Beachtek has one that fits---that is if you want to screw it on. But the problem with this is that you'd have to remove it each time you wanted to get at the miniDV tape. As far as I know, both the Beachtek and Studio1 are good. That's all I know about this, sorry.

Thank you for your answer.
Yesterday I ordered already a Studio 1 XLR-BP-Pro, wich will not mount underneath the camera, but goes to the belt at the hips. The ground problem is solved there an other way, so it has not to be under the camera. I didn´t like the idea of destroing the advantage and the handling of a nice small 3 chip camcorder by attaching that kind of adapter directly (and yes the mx is a bottom loader).
Greetings