Info on PAL DVX100

Hi all,

I'm very new to the DVi community, and fairly new to the whole world of DV. There are a lot of terms that I don't understand in and around these forums, but I'm getting there slowly. Anyway, please bear with me if I say or ask some obvious things.

I e-mailed Panasonic (UK) last week asking them to clarify the difference between the MX350 and the DVC15 as the spec sheets showed the MX350 to be superior (to my untrained eye) but at half the price.

They got back to me saying that the DVC had been discontinued (as you are all probably aware) and the DVX100 was its replacement.

I then asked when the DVX100 would be available in the UK and how much it would be. They answered these questions, but also said something else that might be of interest to you...

===From Panasonic===
The latest information we have from our factory is that the camera will be available in Europe around February 2003. So far a list price has not been set, but the camera is expected to have a target list price of €5000: approximately £3,200 - £3,500 depending on exchange rate etc.
=================

I wish that prices in the UK were directly converted at current exchange rates from the US prices. I always feel ripped-off :(

This is the snippet that I'd like to know whether it is significant or not...

===From Panasonic===
Please note that the AG-DVX100 (PAL version) will be 25p NOT 24p.
=================

Thanks for all the other info in this community!
Matt.

[Chris Hurd]

Many thanks Matt,

I did not realize that the DVX100 was considered the replacement for the DVC15.

We've previously reported that the PAL version of the DVX100 will not have 24p, but doesn't hurt to hear it again. The feature would be somewhat redundant anyway, as the human eye cannot distinguish between 24p and 25p (the frame rate of PAL). Hope this helps,

[David Lach]

I might be wrong but I think the 25p vs 24p could be significant if you plan to blow your footage (if for a documentary or short) to film later on. I have no experience with PAL but my guess is that it would be tricky to convert 25p to 24p without experiencing degradation in image quality or audio resampling problems... I heard that some video to film convertion businesses don't like to work with PAL and that's for 50i so I don't see how 25p would allow more flexibility... But again I might be wrong all the way...

If no film blow up is involved, than I think PAL is better just for the fact that it has a better resolution than NTSC.

[Chris Hurd]

Hi David,

Converting PAL to 35mm film is not only easy, but the preferred method for many well-known professional film transfer houses worldwide, including Foto Kem, Tape House Digital Film, Swiss Effects and many more.

The process involves dropping one frame per second (25fps to 24fps) and stretching the audio by 4% without shifting pitch. PAL has a higher resolution than NTSC and the PAL to 35mm process and much easier than the 3:2 pulldown method of NTSC to 35mm.

Not to say you can't go NTSC to 35mm, some places will do this, but PAL converts to 35mm with no degradation in image or audio quality at all, in fact with a better image quality and higher resolution than NTSC.

For more info, see the three-part "DV To 35mm Technology Guide" on the XL1 Watchdog > Articles Menu > Post Production at http://www.dvinfo.net/xl1.htm -- hope this helps,

[David Lach]

Thanks for the info Chris I appreciate.

I thought the process was a pain but it seems it's the other way around. I was thinking getting a NTSC version of the DVX100 because I intend to blow to 35mm but maybe I will consider the PAL version since my NLE software supports it anyway and it is a big plus to have the resolution when putting it on the big screen.

Thanks for the correction... I'm new to the DV video scene (used 16mm before) and am still learning all the technicalities. You guys have been a big help so far.

The thing I don't understand however is why Panasonic won't do a PAL version with 24p 25p and 50i if they did a NTSC version with 24p 30p and 60i... Will the camcorder be cheaper because of that ?

[Chris Hurd]

Hi David,

<< why Panasonic won't do a PAL version with 24p 25p and 50i >>

The reason is because for relatively inexpensive prosumer-level gear such as this, it would be somewhat redundant... 24p & 25p are practically identical framerates... the average human eye could not perceive a difference between the two. The PAL version of this cam is already inherently 25p, therefore no need for 24p. Hope this helps,

[Stephen van Vuuren]

Interesting thought. Since I just had to sell my two NTSC, it will be a few months before I buy again. A PAL 24P and 25P would be attractive, just because my guess is film out and audio sync, especially in the NTSC world would be easier with 24p instead of 25P.

Plus those extra lines of resolution would be put to good use.

[Chris Hurd]

However, there won't be a PAL 24p... Pansonic has said the PAL version of the DVX100 will be 25p and 50i only.

[Stephen van Vuuren]

I suspect it's not a major reconfig of electronics to change it. So revision 2 PAL could have 24p, since most of PAL folks I've seen would like to have both.

[David Lach]

A PAL 24p DVX100 would've definitively been put to good use by a lot of us who only go to DV because they can't afford film for their next project (I don't know if we're a big group though) to have the best of both worlds : 720x576 and 1:1 for film transfer...

But a more interesting approach would be to wait and see if that 24p commotion generates enough waves so that all the big players start investing in developing 24p only prosumer camcorders (still with that unconventional 2:3:3:2 pulldown to avoid recompression when editing in true 24fps) putting the extra money on bigger CCDs and true 16:9

But listen to me I'm already talking about the next generation camcorders and people are still waiting for the first DVX100s to arrive in store... I think I'll go take a cold shower :-)

[Marcus van Bavel]

<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Hi David,


The process involves dropping one frame per second (25fps to 24fps) and stretching the audio by 4% without shifting pitch. PAL has a higher resolution than NTSC and the PAL to 35mm process and much easier than the 3:2 pulldown method of NTSC to 35mm.

>>>

Chris, no frames are dropped in a PAL to film transfer. Perhaps that's not what you meant, but it's a bad way of stating it because people take it literally. Every frame is recorded to film, but the projector runs slower than the rate the frames were recorded.

Incidently PAL has been the preference for those companies you mention not because of any great difference in quality.
but because they never developed the software to properly convert NTSC to film.

Even though the PAL DVX100 will not shoot at 24P, true 25P is still a great improvement over 25 fps frame mode or deinterlaced 50i, because the older cameras have to spoil the vertical resolution to make the image flicker-free on an interlaced monitor. The DVX100 allows you to switch that off. Unfortunately people will have to be trained to ignore the flicker as they're shooting.

Also I need to mention that footage from the PAL DVX100 can easily be converted to NTSC, without a 4% speed change, using our program DVFilm Atlantis (http://www.dvfilm.com/atlantis) so there is really no need to buy an NTSC DVX100 once the PAL version becomes available.

[Chris Hurd]

Marcus, thanks for setting me straight. I've learned something! Which is always a good feeling.

;-)

Many thanks and much respect,

[Stephen van Vuuren]

With this cam, how difficult will it be to export PAL 24P DV (via DV Filmmaker) to something NTSC happy?

What kind of artificact and issues? i.e. could you use the PAL version in progressive mode for NTSC DV work?

[Marcus van Bavel]

<<<-- Originally posted by Stephen van Vuuren : With this cam, how difficult will it be to export PAL 24P DV (via DV Filmmaker) to something NTSC happy?>>>

You would edit the PAL 25P DVX100 footage at 25 fps in a regular PAL timeline, not 24. This is so the audio rate can stay at 48000 Hz. And instead of DVFilm Maker, you would use DVFilm Atlantis to convert the final cut to NTSC.

<<<What kind of artificact and issues? i.e. could you use the PAL version in progressive mode for NTSC DV work? -->>>

The artifacts in Atlantis are the same you get in a telecine from film to NTSC because Atlantis uses something very similar to 3:2 pulldown. So to get something that looks like a movie on American television you have to make sure you shoot at 1/50th sec shutter speed to emulate a movie camera.

Flicker might be an issue, so I will probably put a deflicker option in Atlantis similar to the one in DVFilm Maker, when the PAL DVX100 is released.

There are people happily using Atlantis to convert PAL CGI to NTSC, which originates progressive-scan, so I think live action will look fine as well.

There is more info at http://www.dvfilm.com/atlantis.

[Stephen van Vuuren]

Thanks Marcus. Atlantis sounds like the missing piece.