It's official: Panasonic AG-HVX200

Graeme Nattress · March 31st, 2005, 11:47 AM

I'd hope they don't use any pixelshift tomfoolery. I'd guess 1280x1080 chips, no pixel shift, but that's just a guess based upon the DVCProHD codec.

Graeme

Joe Carney · March 31st, 2005, 11:50 AM

1080 24p at 8bit 4:2:2 and still comes in at 100mb. Cool.

Bob Zimmerman · March 31st, 2005, 11:55 AM

I did talk to a Panasonic rep two weeks ago and he said there was talk about tape. But he wasn't for sure (or couldn't say) what was going to happen.

I think tape would be a good thing to have on this camera. For you people with unlimited budgets no tape will be ok. But for myself and others 4 minutes of HD on a P2 card for $1,700 is not going to help.

But if you can record on tape and the camera was around $4,999 more people will be able to afford it. The people with plenty of cash can buy the P2 cards.

Maybe there is more to this story,,bundle cards, cheap cards. I guess we will find out more in a few days.

Chris Hurd · March 31st, 2005, 11:56 AM

Say Graeme, surely you're aware that Pixel Shift is a very real technology and not some marketing gimmick... Panasonic invented it quite awhile back; Canon resurrected it for their XL and GL series camcorders and now even Sony is using it. Personally I don't see anything wrong with Pixel Shift. Looking forward to seeing you at NAB!

Luis Caffesse · March 31st, 2005, 12:00 PM

"For you people with unlimited budgets no tape will be ok. But for myself and others 4 minutes of HD on a P2 card for $1,700 is not going to help."

Bob, if the cost of P2 cards is the issue, then adding a tape transport probably wouldn't help anyhow.

As Jan has mentioned, a DVCProHD tape transport requires 16 record heads. These things aren't cheap.

If this camera were to have an HD tape transport, it would increase greatly in size and in price.

From what I understand, tapeless is the only answer to keep the price down while keeping the versatility of the camera.

Keep in mind that pricing has not been announced on either the camera or the cost of P2 cards.

Steven White · March 31st, 2005, 12:00 PM

we aren't talking about 'settings' here

Well, other than the temporal sampling - which is a legitimate change in how the image is sampled - we are talking about "soft" hardware. I.e., hardware that takes whatever the image is, and changes it to these different specs.

For example, with an appropriate scaler, it is easy to take 1080p (60) or 1080i (60) to 720 (60p) or vice versa, 1080p (30) to 720p (30) and the same with 24... Doing it all in hardware to the various formats is indeed great... as it assists workflow dramatically.

If it really IS a 1080p camcorder with 1080p chips... then BOOYAH! My inner engineer screams with joy, and all the conversion software will be just to take it to lesser formats and data rates.

My primary concern is that its a 720p camcorder with circuitry to upsample it to the 1080 formats. If this is the case than the 1080 business is just in there as a competitive marketing feature, and that all sensible uses of the camera would be in the 720 mode.

anything wrong with Pixel Shift

I view it as a conditional increase in resolution that doesn't dramatically decrease the signal-to-noise and detector sensitivity. Not necessarily a bad thing... and the sensitivity issue will probably keep it around for a long time to come.

Graeme Nattress · March 31st, 2005, 12:04 PM

Pixelsshift is real, but I'm hard pressed to see any benefit from it. Any type of sampling, which is what a CCD is doing to the image, relies on mathematical sampling theory, and according to that, you can't represent a signal with more frequency than half the sample rate. I'm at quite a loss to see how PixelShift gets around this requirement or creating aliassing problems.

If anyone has any links to any nice mathematical papers on the subject of pixel shift, I'd be very happy to read them.

Graeme

Michael Pappas · March 31st, 2005, 12:09 PM

I don't want as much as a single video head in this camera. No fast moving parts, no helical scanning. None, nothing. Tapeless is wonderful! Good work Panasonic.

Michael Pappas
http://www.Pbase.com/ARRFILMS

<<<-- Originally posted by Bob Zimmerman : I did talk to a Panasonic rep two weeks ago and he said there was talk about tape. But he wasn't for sure (or couldn't say) what was going to happen.

I think tape would be a good thing to have on this camera. For you people with unlimited budgets no tape will be ok. But for myself and others 4 minutes of HD on a P2 card for $1,700 is not going to help.

But if you can record on tape and the camera was around $4,999 more people will be able to afford it. The people with plenty of cash can buy the P2 cards.

Maybe there is more to this story,,bundle cards, cheap cards. I guess we will find out more in a few days. -->>>

Bob Zimmerman · March 31st, 2005, 12:16 PM

No tape will be great,,,,,it's just the cost that might keep me from getting the HVX...we shall see in a few days.

Aaron Shaw · March 31st, 2005, 12:20 PM

The way I see it, if it can record to hard drives there won't be ANY problems for me at least :D

I agree whole heartedly with the no tape idea.

Obin Olson · March 31st, 2005, 12:28 PM

OMG 1080p/24??????

this has GOT to be a hoax!

Chris Hurd · March 31st, 2005, 12:32 PM

Heh... it's for real, baby!

Kevin Wild · March 31st, 2005, 01:03 PM

Am I the only one that was hoping this would be a shoulder mount camera? I LOVE all these new cameras, but I still love the XL2 because to the client it looks more substantial and professional.

That said, this looks like a sweet new addition...

Luis Caffesse · March 31st, 2005, 01:08 PM

By the way, am I being paranoid and nitpicky here?
(stop me if I am)

We all sort of went on the assumption that this thing would probably hold 2 P2 cards...but the specs released today say it will "record on a P2 card"

Does that mean only 1 slot?

Or am I just being too literal?

"I still love the XL2 because to the client it looks more substantial and professional."

Well, it's always been a problem at this level, but I think that is changing a little bit. I used to have serious problems with the DVX, until my clients saw the footage.

It's just a matter of setting up expectations.
As long as their reminded of what they're getting in the end, hopefully most can get past the size issue.

Now from an operator issue, it's a tough call for me.
There are times I appreciate the bulk and size of a shoulder mount, and times I hate it.

That's why JVC's new design kind of intrigues me, they seem to have split the difference. I'm curious to see how that feels.

But, in the end....if it shoots 1080/24P, I could care less how small it is.
:)

Michael Pappas · March 31st, 2005, 01:10 PM

It has two P2 slots!

Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/ARRFILMS

<<<-- Originally posted by Luis Caffesse : By the way, am I being paranoid and nitpicky here?
(stop me if I am)

We all sort of went on the assumption that this thing would probably hold 2 P2 cards...but the specs released today say it will "record on a P2 card"

Does that mean only 1 slot?

Or am I just being too literal? -->>>

March 31st, 2005, 11:47 AM	#16
Graeme Nattress RED Problem Solver Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,365	I'd hope they don't use any pixelshift tomfoolery. I'd guess 1280x1080 chips, no pixel shift, but that's just a guess based upon the DVCProHD codec. Graeme __________________ www.nattress.com - filters for FCP

March 31st, 2005, 11:56 AM	#19
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Say Graeme, surely you're aware that Pixel Shift is a very real technology and not some marketing gimmick... Panasonic invented it quite awhile back; Canon resurrected it for their XL and GL series camcorders and now even Sony is using it. Personally I don't see anything wrong with Pixel Shift. Looking forward to seeing you at NAB! __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

March 31st, 2005, 12:00 PM	#20
Luis Caffesse Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 704	"For you people with unlimited budgets no tape will be ok. But for myself and others 4 minutes of HD on a P2 card for $1,700 is not going to help." Bob, if the cost of P2 cards is the issue, then adding a tape transport probably wouldn't help anyhow. As Jan has mentioned, a DVCProHD tape transport requires 16 record heads. These things aren't cheap. If this camera were to have an HD tape transport, it would increase greatly in size and in price. From what I understand, tapeless is the only answer to keep the price down while keeping the versatility of the camera. Keep in mind that pricing has not been announced on either the camera or the cost of P2 cards. __________________ Luis Caffesse Pitch Productions Austin, Texas

March 31st, 2005, 12:04 PM	#22
Graeme Nattress RED Problem Solver Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,365	Pixelsshift is real, but I'm hard pressed to see any benefit from it. Any type of sampling, which is what a CCD is doing to the image, relies on mathematical sampling theory, and according to that, you can't represent a signal with more frequency than half the sample rate. I'm at quite a loss to see how PixelShift gets around this requirement or creating aliassing problems. If anyone has any links to any nice mathematical papers on the subject of pixel shift, I'd be very happy to read them. Graeme __________________ www.nattress.com - filters for FCP

March 31st, 2005, 12:32 PM	#27
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Heh... it's for real, baby! __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

March 31st, 2005, 11:50 AM	#17
Joe Carney Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Centreville Va Posts: 1,828	1080 24p at 8bit 4:2:2 and still comes in at 100mb. Cool.

March 31st, 2005, 11:55 AM	#18
Bob Zimmerman Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Illinois Posts: 888	I did talk to a Panasonic rep two weeks ago and he said there was talk about tape. But he wasn't for sure (or couldn't say) what was going to happen. I think tape would be a good thing to have on this camera. For you people with unlimited budgets no tape will be ok. But for myself and others 4 minutes of HD on a P2 card for $1,700 is not going to help. But if you can record on tape and the camera was around $4,999 more people will be able to afford it. The people with plenty of cash can buy the P2 cards. Maybe there is more to this story,,bundle cards, cheap cards. I guess we will find out more in a few days.

March 31st, 2005, 12:00 PM	#21
Steven White Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 547	we aren't talking about 'settings' here Well, other than the temporal sampling - which is a legitimate change in how the image is sampled - we are talking about "soft" hardware. I.e., hardware that takes whatever the image is, and changes it to these different specs. For example, with an appropriate scaler, it is easy to take 1080p (60) or 1080i (60) to 720 (60p) or vice versa, 1080p (30) to 720p (30) and the same with 24... Doing it all in hardware to the various formats is indeed great... as it assists workflow dramatically. If it really IS a 1080p camcorder with 1080p chips... then BOOYAH! My inner engineer screams with joy, and all the conversion software will be just to take it to lesser formats and data rates. My primary concern is that its a 720p camcorder with circuitry to upsample it to the 1080 formats. If this is the case than the 1080 business is just in there as a competitive marketing feature, and that all sensible uses of the camera would be in the 720 mode. anything wrong with Pixel Shift I view it as a conditional increase in resolution that doesn't dramatically decrease the signal-to-noise and detector sensitivity. Not necessarily a bad thing... and the sensitivity issue will probably keep it around for a long time to come.

March 31st, 2005, 12:09 PM	#23
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	I don't want as much as a single video head in this camera. No fast moving parts, no helical scanning. None, nothing. Tapeless is wonderful! Good work Panasonic. Michael Pappas http://www.Pbase.com/ARRFILMS <<<-- Originally posted by Bob Zimmerman : I did talk to a Panasonic rep two weeks ago and he said there was talk about tape. But he wasn't for sure (or couldn't say) what was going to happen. I think tape would be a good thing to have on this camera. For you people with unlimited budgets no tape will be ok. But for myself and others 4 minutes of HD on a P2 card for $1,700 is not going to help. But if you can record on tape and the camera was around $4,999 more people will be able to afford it. The people with plenty of cash can buy the P2 cards. Maybe there is more to this story,,bundle cards, cheap cards. I guess we will find out more in a few days. -->>>

March 31st, 2005, 12:16 PM	#24
Bob Zimmerman Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Illinois Posts: 888	No tape will be great,,,,,it's just the cost that might keep me from getting the HVX...we shall see in a few days.

March 31st, 2005, 12:20 PM	#25
Aaron Shaw Major Player Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 587	The way I see it, if it can record to hard drives there won't be ANY problems for me at least :D I agree whole heartedly with the no tape idea.

March 31st, 2005, 12:28 PM	#26
Obin Olson Trustee Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Wilmington NC Posts: 1,414	OMG 1080p/24?????? this has GOT to be a hoax!

March 31st, 2005, 01:03 PM	#28
Kevin Wild Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Raleigh, NC Posts: 540	Am I the only one that was hoping this would be a shoulder mount camera? I LOVE all these new cameras, but I still love the XL2 because to the client it looks more substantial and professional. That said, this looks like a sweet new addition...

March 31st, 2005, 01:08 PM	#29
Luis Caffesse Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 704	By the way, am I being paranoid and nitpicky here? (stop me if I am) We all sort of went on the assumption that this thing would probably hold 2 P2 cards...but the specs released today say it will "record on a P2 card" Does that mean only 1 slot? Or am I just being too literal? "I still love the XL2 because to the client it looks more substantial and professional." Well, it's always been a problem at this level, but I think that is changing a little bit. I used to have serious problems with the DVX, until my clients saw the footage. It's just a matter of setting up expectations. As long as their reminded of what they're getting in the end, hopefully most can get past the size issue. Now from an operator issue, it's a tough call for me. There are times I appreciate the bulk and size of a shoulder mount, and times I hate it. That's why JVC's new design kind of intrigues me, they seem to have split the difference. I'm curious to see how that feels. But, in the end....if it shoots 1080/24P, I could care less how small it is. :) __________________ Luis Caffesse Pitch Productions Austin, Texas

March 31st, 2005, 01:10 PM	#30
Michael Pappas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: California Posts: 667	It has two P2 slots! Michael Pappas http://www.pbase.com/ARRFILMS <<<-- Originally posted by Luis Caffesse : By the way, am I being paranoid and nitpicky here? (stop me if I am) We all sort of went on the assumption that this thing would probably hold 2 P2 cards...but the specs released today say it will "record on a P2 card" Does that mean only 1 slot? Or am I just being too literal? -->>>