Getting back to the press release. The marketing person seemed to be saying the gs400 has more in common with the dvx than with the gs200 or previous dv953. The chart clearly shows they are capturing a full progressive image and saving it as 2 interlaced images (like 30p of the dvx). Now all of you are saying this is not so? Who to believe....

btw...

Simplified Horizontal resolution for the math challenged
is the number of vertical lines going from left to right...
example...
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

Simplified Vertical res
is the number of horizontal lines from top to bottom
example...
_____________
_____________
_____________
_____________
_____________

NTSC rectangles are wider than tall

PAL rectangles are taller than wide.
Thats why when converted to square PC pixels you end up with
more vertical resultion to work with in you nle. (very simplified answer to PAL resolution).


And if the gs400 is true 30p/25p then I may buy it. But not if it's only 'fake' progressive (frame * 2).
The marketing person seems to want this to be the camera for those who want the dvx but can't afford it.

No, we aren't saying that at all. Frame mode and 30P will both save and output the fields the same way...as two interlaced fields. It has to be this way to be compatible with NTSC and PAL TVs. What isn't clear is how the two fields are created. Progressive captures both fields without interpolation of the rows. Frame mode interpolates the rows which reduces the resolution but increases the light sensitivity. We are still waiting on Panasonic US to clarify their press statement.

<<<-- Originally posted by Joe Carney : Getting back to the press release. The marketing person seemed to be saying the gs400 has more in common with the dvx than with the gs200 or previous dv953. The chart clearly shows they are capturing a full progressive image and saving it as 2 interlaced images (like 30p of the dvx). Now all of you are saying this is not so? Who to believe....

Like I previously posted, EXACTLY the same explanations and illustrations were given by Panasonic Japan with the PROCINEMA function of the GS100, the black mamba to some. There are enough members of this board who own the GS100. So what do they say about the Procinema feature of their cam?

Just how difficult is it to replace the word FRAME by PROGRESSIVE in both the menus and the LCD displays?

I am no Japanese but I think I have familiarize myself enough to know how painfully detailed and accurate and practical they are when in comes to choice of words and classification, especially for technical terms. This is a country that calls X-Ray as Roentgen.


The marketing person seems to want this to be the camera for those who want the dvx but can't afford it. -->>>

That marketing person better learn some Japanese first and talk to Panasonic Japan. Yes of course, he wants those who can't afford the dvx to buy the GS400. From all Japanese sites I have read, including the first reviews, the common thing emphasized is the Crystal Engine (technology).

Panasonic Japan is very clear that the GS400 does not have Progressive Scan CCD, but now, I am not sure at all if such type of CCD is required in order to be "true progressive scan capable."

They said they would get back to me on the resolution under Procinema/Frame Mode and I am still waiting for that :-(

Yesterday, I took 2 minutes of sample videos inside the store using the GS400, approximately 10 seconds each under all 6 settings. (Normal Interlaced, Wide Interlaced, Procinema, Normal Frame Mode, Wide Frame Mode, and Procinema again). If anybody here has the knowledge and equipment to analyze the footages to find out whether Procinema or Frame mode is progressive scan or whatever, I am willing to send him or her the tape. I can't do it :-))

BTW, whether it is actually progressive scan or frame mode, and regardless of the still capability (I have NOT used my black mamba to take any stills), I think this high-end (consumer) cam is a nice buy...d_mn I paid more than 1.5 times for my Optura100.

Yes Guy, I admit the Procinema sample looks great compared to widescreen interlaced mode. I cannot make any conclusion but my best guess/opinion is, Frame Mode PLUS Crystal Engine :-))

Ok, Allan, we have it. Frame mode not 30P. But, it still looks great!

the issue for me is in the nle when editing. In vegas (and other nles') that can properly handle 24p, you get a full 720x480 picture to work with. With frame mode you get the same limitations of trying to convert interlaced to progressive for uprezing or changing to different formats. If frame mode, I'll just keep my mx500 and keep saving for another camera. Still nice to read all the posts about it. I'm sure Panasonic appreciates all the free publicity.

A few years back and you had a lot of progressive scan options in the consumer/prosumer segment but these days its slim pickings.

Maybe a DVX100A for you?

Joe, in either 24P or 30P (and frame mode is 30P because the two fields are created at the same time--no interfield motion blur) you still get two fields from the cam to make a frame. The frame is 720x480 regardless of true progressive or frame mode. When you bring the video to the timeline and set project properties, there is no deinterlacing necessary because the two fields are already deinterlaced in the camera. So, there is no degradation of the image like that which occurs when deinterlacing 60i.

Guy Bruner said:

-------no deinterlacing necesssary-----
----------------------------------------

Guy, did you use the right word, when you said "no deinterlacing"? Are you forgetting that the camcorder records and outputs the signal as interlaced?

Steve McDonald

Yes, but I think Guy is saying that you would not want to de-interlace footage in post that was recorded with frame mode in-camera.

What Guy said was that the camera has already deinterlaced it, when actually it has been interlaced by the camera before recording and output.

Steve McDonald

Exactly, Tommy. The two fields recorded in frame mode are recorded at the same time. There is no temporal difference to compensate for, and no interfield motion blur. When you bring the video into an editing package and tell the software that the video is progressive, it combines the fields without any alteration or need for running a deinterlace.

Guy, I guess I didn't make my point before. The camcorder doesn't record the two fields at the same time in NTSC or PAL DV. They are recorded as separate interlaced fields and output in the same way. So any NLE system that needs to have a deinterlaced signal, will have to deinterlace them after it comes from the camcorder. It can't be done in the camcorder.

Steve McDonald

I thought frame mode was taking one field and doubling it to two fields, thus loising half your resolution before it got to the pc/nle.

Unlike progressive, which uses the entire vertical resolution (480) and divides it into two fields . Thus making it easy to recombine back into progressive without resolution loss, a true 720x480 frame vs two 720x240 slightly different fields.

So while both are stored as interlaced on tape, the true progressive chip acts more like a film to video transfer in laymans terms. Thats one of the reasons the DVX100 material uprezs so well.

Thats also why I bought the mx500 over the dv953, at least I get more in frame mode and a true 16x9 that uses more of the chip instead of cropping like the dv953.

And if thats what is really happening in the GS400, well, then, I'm not interested. Not that the camera is bad, just not worth trading in my MX500, even if it has better low light and better whiz bang features. If the GS400 had/has true progressive, it could be the number 1 Guerilla cam on the market. Making it an excellent second camera for the DVX. Oh well, sigh.....

With Canon shooting itself in the foot with the XL2 (IMHO), I'll probably be looking at the DVX100a very soon. Haven't decided whether or not to get PAL or NTSC. I have no desire to do live types of broadcast, so compatibility with NTSC interlaced is of no concern.
(Just to save people posting reasons why not to get PAL).

Please see this thread about progressive vs. frame mode.

The GS400 has frame mode, not progressive scan CCDs; and this frame mode is different than Canon's frame mode. Pana claims resolution is increased, especially in the vertical. Also, frame mode first appeared in Panasonics, and not in Canons. With progessive scan, it may have been with the JVC GR-DVL9000 or perhaps one of Canon's 1-chip cams prior to the original Optura. Not sure.

OK - it's a slight setback without 30p but will this camera still outperform the PDX10 ?

Good question. The GS400 obviously lacks the PDX10's XLR inputs and DVCAM capability but then the GS400 touts its cine-like gamma and frame mode not found on the PDX10. Both have high quality 16:9 but I think the deal breaker for some will be price. There is over a $600 difference between an imported Japanese GS400 compared to a PDX10 from B&H. I'm not sure what the street price of the N.A. GS400 will be but if it follows the DV953 then it will be below $1300 in a few months from reputable online sellers.

Really, that is the bottom line isn't it !Throw in a couple of hundred more and one could get a gs400 and optura 500. Although the pdx10 is beautiful and the replacement for my pd100a , the dvcam and xlr inputs are minimal improvements . In fact , I've come to think the dvcam part is a downside since you have to spend more money on tape and it's the exact same image quality. I guess the next step is to wait for real world reviews. thanks

<<<-- Originally posted by Kurth Bousman : In fact , I've come to think the dvcam part is a downside since you have to spend more money on tape -->>>

To to clarify, you can still shoot in DV SP on the PDX-10 which is what I do most of the time. I thought I read somewhere that the PD-100a could only shoot in DVCAM mode. Is that true?

Another slight advantage to the PDX-10, although certainly no deal breaker, is the hi-res black and white viewfinder. And of course.... it's black :-)

So is the Japanese GS400.. :)

Click here

For those who like Japanese menus and dislike warranties?... ;-)

Reviews are in the works and will be up next week.

Boyd, what lighting levels did you use for your resolution charts on the PDX10 and VX2000?

I didn't take any readings with a light meter. The chart was illuminated by a total of four 100 watt screw-base frosted household halogen light bulbs in household light fixtures (3 of them were in one of those cheap "pole lamps" and the other was in a desk lamp). The lamps were about four feet away from the chart.

I think you should have an idea of the light levels by looking at the exposure data that was published on my site. The VX-2000 was at f6.8, 1/60 sec, 0dB gain. The PDX-10 was at f2.8, 1/60 sec, 0dB gain.

Boyd-
You're absolutely right about the viewfinder- I momentarily overlooked it and that is probably the most important improvement- Yes it's true - the pd100a only shoots in dvcam. I hope the gs400 will have slightly better low light abilities than the pdx10 and the fact that it's silver actually, for me living in Mexico , is an advantage. Here , you always want to keep a low profile with equipment. Most of the tv stations here use either dsr-200's. 250's, or xl1's , and the shooters always have their bodyguards ( or equipment guards ! ) For still , I use a dig rebel ( which is silver ) , which also is low profile and doesn't attract much attention . Here it's guerrillas all the way down. I look forward to Guys' review. thanks

Why is it that Japan always gets a choice between silver and black?

I just saw today that they have a black Digital Rebel (Kiss/300D).

http://www.kakaku.com/images/product...0500210636.jpg

Thanks, Boyd. I saw the exposure specs but was curious about the lighting. I had some similar shots for the DV953 on my website.

Kurth, DVSpot and Camcorderinfo will have reviews out next week on the GS400. I can only hope to get my hands on one.

Guy- reviews at camcorderinfo.com - well, I was hoping for a review from someone who knew something about video ! Tommy- It's a simple answer- when you're cooking for your own table , you always put in the best ingredients !

Well, Tommy should be getting his any day now. I'm sure he will give us lots of good information.

You know, I just sold the GS100 and my Canon 10D cam to invest heavily into video and of course my thoughts have wandered to the DVX100A and PD170 but I keep coming back to the GS400.

Guy, if you were in the market for a new cam, what would you get?

I literally have a headache from this decision!

Interesting question! I have been pondering that since the GS400 was announced. I originally selected the DV953 over the GL2, TRV950 and VX2000 due to the considerable difference in price versus the marginal technical advantages of the more expensive cams (low light excepted). I don't shoot commercial or I would have gotten a VX2000. I know you do some commercial work, but believe you have access to a VX2000.

I like the smaller cams, but most pocket cams don't have the color quality of the larger 3 CCD cams or high quality widescreen. I have been seeing some video from the Canon 30/40/400 that looks pretty good, though, both 4:3 and 16:9. Something about the size of the 953 or GS100 would be nice if it had excellent widescreen. So, I'm going to have to see if the improvements in the GS400 or the HC1000 over 953 are significant enough to warrant an upgrade. If the DVC30 had HQ widescreen, the 953 would be gone in an instant.

Well, maybe not the HC1000...

Yes, Guy, that review of the Sony does kind of kill one's appetite - especially with the $1700 msrp. No wonder Allan said sales in Japan were rumored not to be going well, either.

And the HC-1000 has a smaller battery than the PDX-10/TRV-950 plus exposure is controlled by touch screen menus... ugh. It does appear to have the PDX-10's high quality widescreen mode and black color however...

<<<-- Originally posted by Tommy Haupfear : You know, I just sold the GS100 and my Canon 10D cam to invest heavily into video and of course my thoughts have wandered to the DVX100A and PD170 but I keep coming back to the GS400.

Since you have the budget and willing to use it, don't seem to mind carrying bigger cams, not to mention exceptionally good at recovering your cost everytime you sell your gear, why don't you try to get DVX100A and tell us more about it :-)). The DVX100A does have a good widescreen right?

If I were in the market for a new cam, it's gonna be either the GS400 or the HC1000 because that's the maximum I can afford, despite my willingness to carry heavier cams :-).

<<<-- Originally posted by Patricia Kim : especially with the $1700 msrp. -->>>

You'd hope that actual street prices would be lower than that, with the PDX-10 selling for $1850 it sure wouldn't make sense to spend $1700 on the HC-1000.

AFAIK, the DVX100A doesn't have HQ widescreen, although it apparently does offer anamorphic widescreen which the original model didn't. However, I have seen posts where folks were quite pleased with the old letterboxed image that was cropped and blown up to HD dimensions. So, I guess YMMV.

I'm still waiting on the perfect cam...F/1.2 30X optical lens with OIS, 500grams with battery, 52Gig SD card, 1920x1080 no compression progressive scan video, wireless video transfer, wireless direct to eye viewfinder, wireless direct to ear audio, mental control, 5.1 surround, and it has to be BLACK!

<<<-- Originally posted by Patricia Kim : Yes, Guy, that review of the Sony does kind of kill one's appetite -

I just read Robin's first impression review. Unless there's something totally wrong with my memory, I remember that I was able to set the shutter speed of the HC1000 manually from 1/4 - 1/10000. And if I'm not mistaken, low shutter settings (1/4, 1/8, 1/15 and 1/30) are available under video mode - those low shutter settings are not under digital effect...and those low light settings under video mode are not available with the GS400.

I'd better play with the HC1000 again to verify. I could be dreaming :-))


Guy, I'd be uploading new samples of the GS400 and the HC1000, if that's ok. The new samples are better comparisons IMO because the scenes are almost identical.

Well, maybe NA got a stripped version again!:)

Maybe Robin simply read the spec sheets :-) and assumed that the HC1000 shutter speed setting behaves similar to Sony's other cams - you know, that Program AE controlled shutter speed, combined with slow shutter settings under digital effect. Let me verify first, but I do remember playing with and appreciating those low shutter speed settings of the HC1000 and thought 1/15 appeared very controllable.

The only thing missing in the HC1000 is the cool looking square hood of the TRV950, though it has a cute little circular hood.

The fact that the HC1000 can be had for $1,000 in Japan is affecting my impressions of this cam of course. :-))...and btw, based on the samples I have seen so far, it appears to be better than GS100 in low-light, although the default sharpness setting seems to be softer than that of GS400.

Sure, Allan, put them up...and some Optura 30 clips if you have them.

I think Robin was considerably unimpressed with the ergonomics of the HC1000 that she probably didn't look too much at the exposure technology. There will be a more thorough review when they can get a cam to test.