It's official: Panasonic AG-HVX200

Thomas Smet · March 31st, 2005, 05:44 PM

What if Panasonic plans on coming out with a seperate device for recording to tape for DV? It would kind of be like the old days when we had to use two piece equipment. Except now maybe the seperate tape device could piggy back on this new camera. It would kind of be a firestore but a tape drive instead of a hard drive. Of course if this is the case why not just use a hard drive then?

I still like the idea of somebody making a hard drive with a P2 interface built onto it. It would be kind of like those USB key storage devices but much bigger.

About the pixel shift thing. I hate it. I agree with Graeme. It might look good to the naked eye but in the end you are not getting true pixels. In the visual effects industry perfect pixels mean a lot. Maybe we are just pixel freaks but to me I can tell.

The interesting thing about pixel shift is that it only ups the luma resolution. The chroma resolution stays the same. Even though this happens before encoding this means even if you had a camera with true raw analog outputs your chroma is cut in half compared to the luma. Well the chroma isn't cut in half but it stays the same while the luma gets enhanced.

If you start with a 4:4:4 image and use pixel shift you will end up with an image at 4:2:2 no matter how it is encoded.

Finally about the HD tape device on the camera. Even if Panasonic invented a mini version of the HD tape device it would still be huge. I don't even think it would be possible with a mini tape. 16 heads take up a lot of space. The tape unit would have to be larger than the camera itself. If there was a tape device on the camera I think it would have to be a full size tape.

Now it could have just a DV tape unit but really how many of us would use it? If we had the option of shooting high quality video on P2 or ok video on DV wouldn't we end up choosing P2 even if it costs us more in the end? Maybe for the first few months you would use it but after that you wouldn't look at the tape unit ever again.

Obin Olson · March 31st, 2005, 05:59 PM

ONe question - is that 1080P from 1080P chips? or ?

Obin Olson · March 31st, 2005, 06:01 PM

do you guys know that 3ccd 1080p resolution is as good as 35mm film?!?! yap that's right it's 6 megapixels!! just like your PROFESSIONAL DSLR cameras!!!

and BTW the Arri D20 ...but it's 3 chips at 2 megapixels instead of 1 at 6

Aaron Koolen · March 31st, 2005, 06:06 PM

Wow, sounds sweet. Guess it's hard to now get excited, but we now have to wait for the one piece of information that will put it all in perspectice....Price. Will this really compete with the Sony, seeing as we need P2 cards as well for it. If it does, this is my new camera.

I'm in the position where I don't have a deck and haven't really needed one. With a P2 cam, I won't need one either.

Can't wait to see what the Viewfinder and LCD capabilities are too.

Aaron

Kurth Bousman · March 31st, 2005, 06:09 PM

Michael- I'm not comparing the camera quality or manufacturing capabilities of consumer vs. pro divisions - I'm talking about the kind of hype a company uses to outlay it's products. Simply put , I can't 100% believe we're getting a dvcpro50 1080/24p camera until I hear from people at NAB outside of the Panasonic team. I don't care what medium we'd have to use, that would threaten varicam sales - unless we're seeing an even bigger than DV/HDV revolution. Sorry , I just can't imagine they would make that big of a leap forward. I remember wanting, too much, a true progressive 16:9 3 chip minidv camera for less than 1500 bucks . then the true facts slowly slipped out of the panasonic spec people - you could see they were almost ashamed to admit it. By the way , was this the tidbit Jan promised or is there more info coming the 4th ? Kurth

Obin Olson · March 31st, 2005, 06:12 PM

hmm look at this...

Panasonic
AG-HVX200 DVCPRO HD P2 Camcorder
Unveiling at NAB 2005, the AG-HVX200 is the professional video industry's most anticipated technology breakthrough. This revolutionary, hand-held P2 camcorder provides 1080i

<-----ok this is weird it says 1080i above..and then...

and 720p recording with the production proven image quality of 100 Mbps DVCPRO HD. The AG-HVX200 records on a P2 card in 1080 in 60i, 30p and 24p; in720 in 60p, 30p and 24p; in 480 in 60i, 30p, and 24p either in DVCPRO50 and DVCPRO.

<_---it says 1080p/24 so it does both ? i and p???

Aaron Koolen · March 31st, 2005, 06:23 PM

Exactly, that's the information that we'll have to wait for. From people who see the thing or read it in several official places, rather than one single posting where it's possibly a typo.

Shit, I'm using an XM2, so damn, 720P is good enough for me.

Aaron

Greg Boston · March 31st, 2005, 06:42 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Graeme Nattress : 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 -->>>

See the original feature explanation for the XL-1 camera. Pixel shift is done ONLY on the green ccd because that's what our eyes are most sensitive to with respect to resolution. So, this fools us into seeing a higher resolution image. It works pretty good imho. If I can find the original Canon blurb on pixel shift, I will post it.

Forget mathematical papers. On paper, bumblebees and helicopters shouldn't fly, but they do!

-gb-

Graeme Nattress · March 31st, 2005, 06:52 PM

But I am a mathematician by training....

AFAIK the Canon used pixel shift vertically, not horizontally like the FX1. Unfortunately, although it's debateable about the mathematics of bug flight, sampling theory is tried, tested and true, wether it be digital audio or video, and you can't just magic it's bounds away. I'm still trying to find a good paper on this subject, and it seems that although pixels shift can add some extra resolution, it cannot add anywhere near the amount of resolution that Sony try to add with their camera, as measurements of that camera's actual resolution show. And that's why I'm keen to learn more about the imaging chips used by this camera.

Graeme

Barry Green · March 31st, 2005, 07:04 PM

Quote:

<_---it says 1080p/24 so it does both ? i and p???

It does:
1080/24p
1080/30p
1080/60i

720/24p
720/30p
720/60p

Aaron Shaw · March 31st, 2005, 07:25 PM

Kurth I don't think this is a false alarm. Panasonic would be stupid to let that happen. I VERY much doubt they would play a hand that proved untrue. I believe you ARE seeing a revolution greater than HDV. There will always be room for the Varicam. It's a 2/3 inch camera! That makes a lot of difference. The larger format - thus better sensitivity and signal to noise ratio combined with the more expensive processing and high end lenses really makes the Varicam stand out. I am sooo very glad that Panasonic listened to the customer base rather than go with HDV like everyone else. One of the smartest movies a company could ever make.

In any case we will know for certain soon enough. Personally I take the official announcement to be proof enough but for skeptics NAB is just around the corner :).

Buckle up. It's gonna be one hell of a ride!

Bryan McCullough · March 31st, 2005, 07:54 PM

Anyone want to buy an FX1? :D

Seriously, I can't wait to see the specs on this camera.

Graeme Nattress · March 31st, 2005, 07:58 PM

As for noise, I wonder what the possibilities are for shooting 60p and using some kind of adaptive noise averaging down to 24p? This camera, with it's much more flexible shooting options, should give endless possibilities for doing fun things to help get around tricky situations.

Graeme

Aaron Koolen · March 31st, 2005, 08:02 PM

Graeme, why not just shoot 24p then? Do you mean for a slow mo or something?

Aaron

Graeme Nattress · March 31st, 2005, 08:06 PM

I'm thinking if there's low light, you could shoot more frames per second than you need, and use some post processing to adaptively lower the noise level. I found when doing so Varicam 60p to 24p conversions, that the noise level seemed a bit lower....

I'm just thinking out loud on the possibilities for this camera....

Graeme

March 31st, 2005, 06:06 PM	#49
Aaron Koolen Trustee Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 1,727	Wow, sounds sweet. Guess it's hard to now get excited, but we now have to wait for the one piece of information that will put it all in perspectice....Price. Will this really compete with the Sony, seeing as we need P2 cards as well for it. If it does, this is my new camera. I'm in the position where I don't have a deck and haven't really needed one. With a P2 cam, I won't need one either. Can't wait to see what the Viewfinder and LCD capabilities are too. Aaron __________________ My Website Meat Free Media

March 31st, 2005, 06:23 PM	#52
Aaron Koolen Trustee Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 1,727	Exactly, that's the information that we'll have to wait for. From people who see the thing or read it in several official places, rather than one single posting where it's possibly a typo. Shit, I'm using an XM2, so damn, 720P is good enough for me. Aaron __________________ My Website Meat Free Media

March 31st, 2005, 06:52 PM	#54
Graeme Nattress RED Problem Solver Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,365	But I am a mathematician by training.... AFAIK the Canon used pixel shift vertically, not horizontally like the FX1. Unfortunately, although it's debateable about the mathematics of bug flight, sampling theory is tried, tested and true, wether it be digital audio or video, and you can't just magic it's bounds away. I'm still trying to find a good paper on this subject, and it seems that although pixels shift can add some extra resolution, it cannot add anywhere near the amount of resolution that Sony try to add with their camera, as measurements of that camera's actual resolution show. And that's why I'm keen to learn more about the imaging chips used by this camera. Graeme __________________ www.nattress.com - filters for FCP

March 31st, 2005, 07:58 PM	#58
Graeme Nattress RED Problem Solver Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,365	As for noise, I wonder what the possibilities are for shooting 60p and using some kind of adaptive noise averaging down to 24p? This camera, with it's much more flexible shooting options, should give endless possibilities for doing fun things to help get around tricky situations. Graeme __________________ www.nattress.com - filters for FCP

March 31st, 2005, 08:02 PM	#59
Aaron Koolen Trustee Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 1,727	Graeme, why not just shoot 24p then? Do you mean for a slow mo or something? Aaron __________________ My Website Meat Free Media

March 31st, 2005, 05:44 PM	#46
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	What if Panasonic plans on coming out with a seperate device for recording to tape for DV? It would kind of be like the old days when we had to use two piece equipment. Except now maybe the seperate tape device could piggy back on this new camera. It would kind of be a firestore but a tape drive instead of a hard drive. Of course if this is the case why not just use a hard drive then? I still like the idea of somebody making a hard drive with a P2 interface built onto it. It would be kind of like those USB key storage devices but much bigger. About the pixel shift thing. I hate it. I agree with Graeme. It might look good to the naked eye but in the end you are not getting true pixels. In the visual effects industry perfect pixels mean a lot. Maybe we are just pixel freaks but to me I can tell. The interesting thing about pixel shift is that it only ups the luma resolution. The chroma resolution stays the same. Even though this happens before encoding this means even if you had a camera with true raw analog outputs your chroma is cut in half compared to the luma. Well the chroma isn't cut in half but it stays the same while the luma gets enhanced. If you start with a 4:4:4 image and use pixel shift you will end up with an image at 4:2:2 no matter how it is encoded. Finally about the HD tape device on the camera. Even if Panasonic invented a mini version of the HD tape device it would still be huge. I don't even think it would be possible with a mini tape. 16 heads take up a lot of space. The tape unit would have to be larger than the camera itself. If there was a tape device on the camera I think it would have to be a full size tape. Now it could have just a DV tape unit but really how many of us would use it? If we had the option of shooting high quality video on P2 or ok video on DV wouldn't we end up choosing P2 even if it costs us more in the end? Maybe for the first few months you would use it but after that you wouldn't look at the tape unit ever again.

March 31st, 2005, 05:59 PM	#47
Obin Olson Trustee Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Wilmington NC Posts: 1,414	ONe question - is that 1080P from 1080P chips? or ?

March 31st, 2005, 06:01 PM	#48
Obin Olson Trustee Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Wilmington NC Posts: 1,414	do you guys know that 3ccd 1080p resolution is as good as 35mm film?!?! yap that's right it's 6 megapixels!! just like your PROFESSIONAL DSLR cameras!!! and BTW the Arri D20 ...but it's 3 chips at 2 megapixels instead of 1 at 6

March 31st, 2005, 06:09 PM	#50
Kurth Bousman Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: san miguel allende , gto , mexico Posts: 644	Michael- I'm not comparing the camera quality or manufacturing capabilities of consumer vs. pro divisions - I'm talking about the kind of hype a company uses to outlay it's products. Simply put , I can't 100% believe we're getting a dvcpro50 1080/24p camera until I hear from people at NAB outside of the Panasonic team. I don't care what medium we'd have to use, that would threaten varicam sales - unless we're seeing an even bigger than DV/HDV revolution. Sorry , I just can't imagine they would make that big of a leap forward. I remember wanting, too much, a true progressive 16:9 3 chip minidv camera for less than 1500 bucks . then the true facts slowly slipped out of the panasonic spec people - you could see they were almost ashamed to admit it. By the way , was this the tidbit Jan promised or is there more info coming the 4th ? Kurth

March 31st, 2005, 06:12 PM	#51
Obin Olson Trustee Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Wilmington NC Posts: 1,414	hmm look at this... Panasonic AG-HVX200 DVCPRO HD P2 Camcorder Unveiling at NAB 2005, the AG-HVX200 is the professional video industry's most anticipated technology breakthrough. This revolutionary, hand-held P2 camcorder provides 1080i <-----ok this is weird it says 1080i above..and then... and 720p recording with the production proven image quality of 100 Mbps DVCPRO HD. The AG-HVX200 records on a P2 card in 1080 in 60i, 30p and 24p; in720 in 60p, 30p and 24p; in 480 in 60i, 30p, and 24p either in DVCPRO50 and DVCPRO. <_---it says 1080p/24 so it does both ? i and p???

March 31st, 2005, 06:42 PM	#53
Greg Boston Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: DFW area, TX Posts: 6,117 Images: 1	<<<-- Originally posted by Graeme Nattress : 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 -->>> See the original feature explanation for the XL-1 camera. Pixel shift is done ONLY on the green ccd because that's what our eyes are most sensitive to with respect to resolution. So, this fools us into seeing a higher resolution image. It works pretty good imho. If I can find the original Canon blurb on pixel shift, I will post it. Forget mathematical papers. On paper, bumblebees and helicopters shouldn't fly, but they do! -gb-

March 31st, 2005, 07:25 PM	#56
Aaron Shaw Major Player Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 587	Kurth I don't think this is a false alarm. Panasonic would be stupid to let that happen. I VERY much doubt they would play a hand that proved untrue. I believe you ARE seeing a revolution greater than HDV. There will always be room for the Varicam. It's a 2/3 inch camera! That makes a lot of difference. The larger format - thus better sensitivity and signal to noise ratio combined with the more expensive processing and high end lenses really makes the Varicam stand out. I am sooo very glad that Panasonic listened to the customer base rather than go with HDV like everyone else. One of the smartest movies a company could ever make. In any case we will know for certain soon enough. Personally I take the official announcement to be proof enough but for skeptics NAB is just around the corner :). Buckle up. It's gonna be one hell of a ride!

March 31st, 2005, 07:54 PM	#57
Bryan McCullough Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Richardson, TX Posts: 842	Anyone want to buy an FX1? :D Seriously, I can't wait to see the specs on this camera.

March 31st, 2005, 08:06 PM	#60
Graeme Nattress RED Problem Solver Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,365	I'm thinking if there's low light, you could shoot more frames per second than you need, and use some post processing to adaptively lower the noise level. I found when doing so Varicam 60p to 24p conversions, that the noise level seemed a bit lower.... I'm just thinking out loud on the possibilities for this camera.... Graeme __________________ www.nattress.com - filters for FCP