Well the new 3 Chippers are out... at DVinfo.net

Peter Jefferson · April 5th, 2004, 03:47 AM

http://www.panasonic.com.au/catalogue/list.cfm?cat=2_1

now for the gs400...

Frank Granovski · April 5th, 2004, 03:59 AM

A week ago, Pana AU only had 2 GS400 proto-types, so even if the specs are released soon, it's going to be some time for the PAL versions Down-Under. Thanks for the link!

Dave Largent · April 5th, 2004, 08:10 PM

I looked at that site. I notice the *size* of the CCDs is
not mentioned.

Frank Granovski · April 5th, 2004, 08:15 PM

Now what does this tell you? :-))

That's right. :-((

Oh, well.

Dave Largent · April 5th, 2004, 08:49 PM

And as the CCDs get more "Megapixel", you know what that
does to the low light reach in itself, regardless of what they're
doing to the size of the CCDs.
I'm surprised this doesn't come up more.

Frank Granovski · April 5th, 2004, 09:50 PM

I knew that. :-))

Justin Boyle · April 6th, 2004, 01:39 AM

heh it is interesting to note that the gs120 is cheaper then the gs70. which cam is better. also are the gs200 ccd's the same as the 953 because they have the same pixel count and it is funny that this camera doesn't have 3 megapixel. Both these cams could be the perfect start for people getting into serious video because they are cheap for 3ccd.

Justin

Frank Granovski · April 6th, 2004, 02:58 AM

The NTSC GS120 video effective pixel count is 290K X 3; the GS200's is 440K X 3. Therefore both pixels counts (video effective) are lower than the NTSC MX5/PV-DV953. :-))

Dave Largent · April 6th, 2004, 11:26 AM

Wonder when we'll see 1/8" CCDs. It's headed in
that direction.

Tommy Haupfear · April 6th, 2004, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Wonder when we'll see 1/8" CCDs. It's headed in
that direction.

Actually, some single chipper CCDs have been increasing in size lately. Sony for instance is peddling 1/3.6" CCDs in their 2 megapixel cams. Of course the low light performance is still dismal with all those pixels!

Bryan Beasleigh · April 6th, 2004, 06:32 PM

Is is the size of the CCD or how you use it?

I figure Tommy ought to know the answer to that one.

Curtis Rhoads · April 6th, 2004, 10:11 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Justin Boyle : heh it is interesting to note that the gs120 is cheaper then the gs70. which cam is better. also are the gs200 ccd's the same as the 953 because they have the same pixel count and it is funny that this camera doesn't have 3 megapixel. Both these cams could be the perfect start for people getting into serious video because they are cheap for 3ccd.

Justin -->>>

After reading the review of the GS120 over at CamcorderInfo.com ( http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/panasonic-pv-gs120-camcorder-review.htm ) I popped into Circuit City today to check one out in person. Unfortunately, I did it right after work and didn't have a tape handy to capture some video on. Anyways....

In my opinion, the GS70 is still the better camera for _manual control._ The GS120 doesn't have a focus ring, that was saved for the GS200. When you're in manual mode, if you zoom in on something, everything goes out of focus. The way to get things back in focus, is to push the auto/manual switch towards the front of the cam, and hold it there until it focuses. That's a poor implementation of a manual focus in my book. I spent a good 45 minutes with the cam, and didn't see another way to control focus manually.

Other than that, the cam felt great in my hands. Everything was within reach, and layed out pretty well. There's been a lot of talk about hiding the menu controls under the LCD. That's never bothered me. Then again, I shoot 90% of the time with the LCD screen. The Power LCD thing seems pretty cool, but at what cost? Sure it's gonna drain the battery, but how fast? One thing that I noticed in the review, is that the low light for this camera appears to be much better than the GS70. I've used my friend's GD70, and wasn't too impressed with it's low light capabilities.

I downloaded the GS120/200 manual from Pana's site and I'm gonna skim over it tonight and then head back to CC tomorrow with a tape to check out the 120 some more.

Right now, if I had to choose between the GS70 and the 120, I'd take the 70. And not just because you can find the 70 extremely cheap right now! :-) (Note: Circuit City's across the USA have been selling off excessive stock at ridiculous prices. One CC store 40 miles north of me, sold 4 off at $499 a piece.)

Personally, I'm more interested in the GS200. Especially if I can get it here in the States in black! (no, black doesn't make it "pro", it just looks very cool!!!) And that's even after reading some of the remarks on the web about the 200! ;)

Justin Boyle · April 6th, 2004, 10:40 PM

frank that doesn't make sense to me. the pana aus website is showing thatthe ccds are 3x800. why is the pixel count that low then. possibly this cam has similar 16:9 system to the pdx-10 where it will actually widen the view. i don't know but it seems silly to get a ccd with that pixel count when only half are being used.

Justin

Frank Granovski · April 6th, 2004, 11:50 PM

Justin, I mentioned, "video effective CCD pixels," for the NTSC versions. Also, the PAL versions may very well have more pixels, total count and video effective, like with the NTSC MX3000 and PAL MX300.

Justin Boyle · April 7th, 2004, 02:05 AM

who knows but still the fact remains that it would be an utter waste. After a little looking around the ntsc version does have the same ccd's as the pal version. there is a review on camcorderinfo. The question still remains wether or not this will make the cams 16:9 mode better and similar to the pdx-10.

Justin

April 5th, 2004, 03:47 AM	#1
Peter Jefferson Inner Circle Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Aus Posts: 3,884	Well the new 3 Chippers are out... http://www.panasonic.com.au/catalogue/list.cfm?cat=2_1 now for the gs400...

April 6th, 2004, 01:39 AM	#7
Justin Boyle Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 207	heh it is interesting to note that the gs120 is cheaper then the gs70. which cam is better. also are the gs200 ccd's the same as the 953 because they have the same pixel count and it is funny that this camera doesn't have 3 megapixel. Both these cams could be the perfect start for people getting into serious video because they are cheap for 3ccd. Justin __________________ jlboyle

April 6th, 2004, 10:40 PM	#13
Justin Boyle Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 207	frank that doesn't make sense to me. the pana aus website is showing thatthe ccds are 3x800. why is the pixel count that low then. possibly this cam has similar 16:9 system to the pdx-10 where it will actually widen the view. i don't know but it seems silly to get a ccd with that pixel count when only half are being used. Justin __________________ jlboyle

April 7th, 2004, 02:05 AM	#15
Justin Boyle Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 207	who knows but still the fact remains that it would be an utter waste. After a little looking around the ntsc version does have the same ccd's as the pal version. there is a review on camcorderinfo. The question still remains wether or not this will make the cams 16:9 mode better and similar to the pdx-10. Justin __________________ jlboyle

April 5th, 2004, 03:59 AM	#2
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	A week ago, Pana AU only had 2 GS400 proto-types, so even if the specs are released soon, it's going to be some time for the PAL versions Down-Under. Thanks for the link!

April 5th, 2004, 08:10 PM	#3
Dave Largent Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,483	I looked at that site. I notice the size of the CCDs is not mentioned.

April 5th, 2004, 08:15 PM	#4
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Now what does this tell you? :-)) That's right. :-(( Oh, well.

April 5th, 2004, 08:49 PM	#5
Dave Largent Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,483	And as the CCDs get more "Megapixel", you know what that does to the low light reach in itself, regardless of what they're doing to the size of the CCDs. I'm surprised this doesn't come up more.

April 5th, 2004, 09:50 PM	#6
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	I knew that. :-))

April 6th, 2004, 02:58 AM	#8
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	The NTSC GS120 video effective pixel count is 290K X 3; the GS200's is 440K X 3. Therefore both pixels counts (video effective) are lower than the NTSC MX5/PV-DV953. :-))

April 6th, 2004, 11:26 AM	#9
Dave Largent Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,483	Wonder when we'll see 1/8" CCDs. It's headed in that direction.

April 6th, 2004, 06:32 PM	#11
Bryan Beasleigh Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,922	Is is the size of the CCD or how you use it? I figure Tommy ought to know the answer to that one.

April 6th, 2004, 10:11 PM	#12
Curtis Rhoads Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Orem, UT Posts: 76	<<<-- Originally posted by Justin Boyle : heh it is interesting to note that the gs120 is cheaper then the gs70. which cam is better. also are the gs200 ccd's the same as the 953 because they have the same pixel count and it is funny that this camera doesn't have 3 megapixel. Both these cams could be the perfect start for people getting into serious video because they are cheap for 3ccd. Justin -->>> After reading the review of the GS120 over at CamcorderInfo.com ( http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/panasonic-pv-gs120-camcorder-review.htm ) I popped into Circuit City today to check one out in person. Unfortunately, I did it right after work and didn't have a tape handy to capture some video on. Anyways.... In my opinion, the GS70 is still the better camera for _manual control._ The GS120 doesn't have a focus ring, that was saved for the GS200. When you're in manual mode, if you zoom in on something, everything goes out of focus. The way to get things back in focus, is to push the auto/manual switch towards the front of the cam, and hold it there until it focuses. That's a poor implementation of a manual focus in my book. I spent a good 45 minutes with the cam, and didn't see another way to control focus manually. Other than that, the cam felt great in my hands. Everything was within reach, and layed out pretty well. There's been a lot of talk about hiding the menu controls under the LCD. That's never bothered me. Then again, I shoot 90% of the time with the LCD screen. The Power LCD thing seems pretty cool, but at what cost? Sure it's gonna drain the battery, but how fast? One thing that I noticed in the review, is that the low light for this camera appears to be much better than the GS70. I've used my friend's GD70, and wasn't too impressed with it's low light capabilities. I downloaded the GS120/200 manual from Pana's site and I'm gonna skim over it tonight and then head back to CC tomorrow with a tape to check out the 120 some more. Right now, if I had to choose between the GS70 and the 120, I'd take the 70. And not just because you can find the 70 extremely cheap right now! :-) (Note: Circuit City's across the USA have been selling off excessive stock at ridiculous prices. One CC store 40 miles north of me, sold 4 off at $499 a piece.) Personally, I'm more interested in the GS200. Especially if I can get it here in the States in black! (no, black doesn't make it "pro", it just looks very cool!!!) And that's even after reading some of the remarks on the web about the 200! ;)

April 6th, 2004, 11:50 PM	#14
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Justin, I mentioned, "video effective CCD pixels," for the NTSC versions. Also, the PAL versions may very well have more pixels, total count and video effective, like with the NTSC MX3000 and PAL MX300.