Final HVX200 Beta test time? Is it to short? Serious questions that need to be addre

[Michael Pappas]

Jan Crittenden Livingston, posted that the HVX200 will be 100% final at the end of October. The current cameras are handmade and don't do progressive but only 1080i at this point.

I'm very concerned that if they don't have a fully working camera tell the end of October or beginning November that it will not give them much time to beta the final 100% HVX200 enough to catch bugs in the system. That's not a lot of time to run off production samples of the final version, then do QC tests to fine tune the production line.


We don't want issue's like this example or new ones we don't know about....
The chroma-patterning problem Adam Wilt Discovered on the DVX100

http://www.adamwilt.com/24p/#The_chr...erning_problem



I don't want issues like this on a HD camera. I do believe that if Adam Wilt, I or others that have very strong backgrounds and critical eye's were part of the beta tests, issues like this might not exist to a large degree.

No different with the vertical line issue on the first XL1's. I found it in the first hour of use the first day it came out. Canon could not see it, even with there best eye's. So I was asked to have a meeting at the Irvine corp office and in a conference room with Joe Bogacz who made a trip out from NY to be shown in person. Tim Smith etc was there too! It was subtle, but was a major flaw that was hard to see until you saw it.

I don't want this issue with such an awesome camera to be, but a short beta time does not go well with me and others.

It's one thing to have the components laid out on a bench working, but once the camera is at 100% final, weird things sometimes hide their ugly heads and it can be laborious in rectifying the issues do to component interference etc. You have to slowly trace the problem back to it's source. Under tight release schedules this is how bugs happen.

Hence the reason that it would be good to at-least do a 3 month beta time at minimum on the 100% final HVX200. Not three or four weeks. Again I don't want Adam Wilt to have to find an issue or I, etc as well.

Nobody wants to see a HVX200a one year down the road. That's also why Jan it's time to adopt the firmware upgrade plan that the Varicam has, just like my Canon DSLR does. So if there is an issue, it's a SW fix if that does it.

Jan, is Panasonic going to implement a firmware upgrade policy for bugs that might show up on the HVX200 like Varicam gets? Instead of making a HVX200a down the road.



So as I said before, If it's does ship the 5th of Dec. The cameras then were made around the second or third week of November. QC'ed , then boxed, and then shipped or flown to locations.

That only gives Panasonic three weeks or so to test the final version of the HVX200 that does progressive. Maybe that's enough time. I know they're not new to making cameras.

However this seems to be a short beta time for a HD camera unlike any camera ever made at this size and price point of it's kind....



Side question on Dead pixels etc....

Jan,

I want to be sure if I get the HVX200 in Dec that hopefully it does not have a single dead pixel on any gain setting, and any major bugs.

If so, what is Panasonic's policy on this. I have a zero tolerance on dead pixels. Canon maps them out without any BS, how about you guys.

Jan,
What's the official policy on this?



Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com

My latest articles:
http://www.pbase.com/aghvx200/do_hvx...ream_of_lenses

The JVC GY-HD100 and Its Second Coming
http://www.hdvinfo.net/articles/jvcprohd/pappas5.php

ARTICLE ON JVC'S HIGH DEF CAMERA THE JVCHD100u
http://www.pbase.com/aghvx200/pappasarts_entertainment_

HDX-200 lens good or just functional Article....
http://www.pbase.com/aghvx200/hdx200...st_functional_

SDX900 vs AG-HVX200 Article..
http://www.pbase.com/aghvx200/sdx900...llustrated_pov

[Boyd Ostroff]

Originally Posted by Michael Pappas

I want to be sure if I get the HVX200 in Dec that hopefully it does not have a single dead pixel

You make a very compelling case for not buying an HVX until it's been on the market long enough for end users to find the bugs which the manufacturer didn't notice. So why would you even consider buying one from the first batch?

[Michael Pappas]

Hi Boyd!

I have owned the D60-10D and a Rebel300 first month of release. On two there was a firmware upgrade I did to correct issues. Nothing major.

On a recent Varicam we did a Firmware upgrade for a noise issue I believe.

HVX200 is all digital just like a DSLR. Minus MiniDV drive

So what I want from Jan is an official statement on these issues as well the firmware upgrade policy that will or will Not be offered for the HVX200 line.

I bought the DVX100 the first month it was out. That was and still is in my top 2 favorite DV cameras. Of-course then the XL2 came, that's my favorite minidv camera now.

If Panasonic did the beta right, then there are minimum issues to surface. If they offer firmware fixes to sw glitches over looked do to not having a final 100% progressive HVX200 to run through many tests for a few months I will not worry if there are firmware upgrades to download off their web site.

I have 10K ready for a camera, and if that goes to the HVX200 and it has bugs that only will be fixed with HVX200a's and not firmware upgrades because of a short beta time that if it were a longer beta time would have caught the issues in the first place, Panasonic and I will have a serious problem.

If dozens of professionals everywhere were doing real world beta for a few months on a HVX200 final version, this could cut the possible bugs way down if any. So, for the missed bugs that can happen we need the Firmware upgrade assurance if that fixes the issue's.

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff

You make a very compelling case for not buying an HVX until it's been on the market long enough for end users to find the bugs which the manufacturer didn't notice. So why would you even consider buying one from the first batch?

[Jan Crittenden Livingston]

Michael Pappas wrote: "I'm very concerned that if they don't have a fully working camera tell the end of October or beginning November that it will not give them much time to beta the final 100% HVX200 enough to catch bugs in the system. That's not a lot of time to run off production samples of the final version, then do QC tests to fine tune the production line."

Michael, Fortunately in our engineering area are engineers trained to find problems and they find them as the camera is designed and implemented.

"We don't want issue's like this example or new ones we don't know about.... The chroma-patterning problem Adam Wilt Discovered on the DVX100"

I have gone over this with Adam and find that his fault finding which makes it seem like a huge flaw is not like a huge flaw and in fact we never changed the camera. Additionally I have several examples of DVX100A Chroma-keyed footage that looks looks great, even with reds in the picture; which of course is his premise that this anomally would keep the camera from being used in a chroma-keyed scenario. I can find anomalies in many of the DV cameras and could do an article on each of them, but frankly to what purpose? The DVX that delivered that image still delivers that very same image. It is not a fault in the camera that we felt needed correction.

"I don't want issues like this on a HD camera. I do believe that if Adam Wilt, I or others that have very strong backgrounds and critical eye's were part of the beta tests, issues like this might not exist to a large degree."

Then you probably should look to purchase a Varicam or more likely a Viper and do uncompressed work. The reality is that every compression scheme, every camera has its own signature. And actually even the Viper does. So frankly the fact that you can get a DVCPRO HD camera for under $10,000 is amazing, but the reality is that it is not a 2/3" inch chip set with all the resolution of the VariCam, and to expect it to be so is outrageously unrealistic.

"No different with the vertical line issue on the first XL1's. I found it in the first hour of use the first day it came out. Canon could not see it, even with there best eye's. So I was asked to have a meeting at the Irvine corp office and in a conference room with Joe Bogacz who made a trip out from NY to be shown in person. Tim Smith etc was there too! It was subtle, but was a major flaw that was hard to see until you saw it."

Actually that is much different than that, that was a flaw that should not have been there. It was corrected. There has not been a flaw like that in a Panasonic camera.

"I don't want this issue with such an awesome camera to be, but a short beta time does not go well with me and others."

The DVX had the same amount of time, the SDX had shorter, the VariCam H was shorter yet. Since you are not in the manufacturing, you may not realize what happens. It is not like software in a computer, it is a camera and it is tested in all operations.

"It's one thing to have the components laid out on a bench working, but once the camera is at 100% final, weird things sometimes hide their ugly heads and it can be laborious in rectifying the issues do to component interference etc. You have to slowly trace the problem back to it's source. Under tight release schedules this is how bugs happen."

Here you are guessing and building uncertainty and doubt. You have no clue on how we design, develop and bring a product to the market.

"Nobody wants to see a HVX200a one year down the road. That's also why Jan it's time to adopt the firmware upgrade plan that the Varicam has, just like my Canon DSLR does. So if there is an issue, it's a SW fix if that does it."

Your example of the HVX200A makes me think you are referring to the DVX line up. The DVX100A was not a fix, Michael ,it was a different camera with a different prism and different DSP, we decided to include some addtional features because we could. The DVX100B is also a different camera, and the architecture within it would also prevent any sort of upgrade path. Point is when we find a better technology that can bring about a reason to initiate a new camera, we do and have done so.

"Jan, is Panasonic going to implement a firmware upgrade policy for bugs that might show up on the HVX200 like Varicam gets? Instead of making a HVX200a down the road."

If there is a problem with the camera that prevents it from doing what we say it will do, that camera would be fixed. But let's say we think of 10 more things that we might be able to get the camera to do over the next year and it is based on redoing a about 1/4 of the internals of the camera and then bringing it out as the HVX200A. This is not a upgrade path, this is a new camera. This is what we did with the DVX100A, and the 100B is virtually all new on the inside.

"So as I said before, If it's does ship the 5th of Dec. The cameras then were made around the second or third week of November. QC'ed , then boxed, and then shipped or flown to locations."

I don't have any idea where you get this stuff, who says it is shipping on the 5th of December. We currently build and ship in the same month and at this point we fly all but the heaviest product.

"That only gives Panasonic three weeks or so to test the final version of the HVX200 that does progressive. Maybe that's enough time. I know they're not new to making cameras."

And you know for a fact that there is not a full working sample in Japan? How do you know that? This is all just guess and postulation. Again, you are not a camera engineer, the folks that are building this camera are. This is what they do. I have a great deal of faith in them as so far they have delivered some really great cameras.

"If so, what is Panasonic's policy on this. I have a zero tolerance on dead pixels. Canon maps them out without any BS, how about you guys. Jan,
What's the official policy on this?"

We stand behind our products completely. Our warranty is one year parts and labor with a 2 year warranty on the CCD assembly. Mapping out dead pixels is just simply Standard Operating Procedure.

Thanks,

Jan

[Hans ter Lingen]

Jan :

"Mapping out dead pixels is just simply Standard Operating Procedure". Can I use this quote when I get a HVX with a dead pixel at my local dealer? Does the same holds for the LCD screen with a dead pixel?

[Jan Crittenden Livingston]

Originally Posted by Hans ter Lingen

Jan :

"Mapping out dead pixels is just simply Standard Operating Procedure". Can I use this quote when I get a HVX with a dead pixel at my local dealer? Does the same holds for the LCD screen with a dead pixel?

As far as Panasonic is concerned. I don't know your dealer but here in the US the dealers are not involved with the service of this product. We have trained service centers and this is SOP.

Best,

Jan

[Hans ter Lingen]

Here also not (I meant the importer, wrong word choice). However if a HVX unit slipped through your controll system with a defect CCD pixel will Panasonic (local importer) exchange the complete HVX unit for a new one (sealed in a box). What about the LCD screen? I hate it if I buy such an expensive cam and I have to watch even one defect pixel on the LCD.

[Luis Caffesse]

Why is everyone suddenly so paranoid about dead pixels?
This entire thread is starting to sound like FUD to me.

[Jacques Mersereau]

The JVC HD100 has been reported to have, what I would say is, severe
dead pixel issues. One person reported 9 dead pixels. That's not
good and really not good considering JVC reputation concerning quality.

That said, we have four DVX100a cameras, two EZ-20s, an EZ-30
and an AJD400. None of them have had any dead pixels that I know
about. The EZs have been hammered on by students for years and
still work, though they are about to die because they have been *pounded
into the sand*. When they do I will still be happy for what they have given.

I expect the Panasonic's HVX200 quality will very high.

[Kevin Wild]

Thanks, Jan.

It really is a great thing to have a rep of a company here to clear up issues like this. Canon, are you listening...umm...reading?

Kevin

[Stephen van Vuuren]

We stand behind our products completely. Our warranty is one year parts and labor with a 2 year warranty on the CCD assembly. Mapping out dead pixels is just simply Standard Operating Procedure.

Thanks,

Jan

Wow, I'm so impressed that this thread got a response from Jan - she's a champ since I agree, very FUDish. Other than being disappointed it with not be able to see footage yet (since I'm no where near IBC or ResFest), the cam seems well on schedule compared to the DVX.

Having owned both a DVX100 and DVX100a, the DVX100 purple chroma "flaw" was touted based on mine and other's early footage. Turned out, we just were overexposing edges in cinegamma mode.

Having learning how to shoot well now with the DVX, I always chuckle when people ask me after seeing one of my shorts projected on a large screen or even online: "Was this project shot on HD or the new HDV cams?"

Jan is right - every camera, every film-stock, every lens has it's quirks, flaws, anomalies that takes a little time to understand. Making a mountain out of one of the molehills is not constructive.

The other side is that any camera that did have issues on release (XL1 lens, CCD, PD150 audio, HD100 CCD etc. - the manufacturers have stepped forward to investigate and fix).

Which brings up the final point - always, always buy from a quality, authorized dealer. Great dealers always take care of customers buying expensive gear, so go ahead and buy one of these spiffy new HD or HDV cams from a dealer, relax and start shooting some great stuff.

[Chris Hurd]

The *only* thing about "dead pixels" is an annoying trip to the service center.

A fixable issue is not an issue at all.

[Michael Pappas]

Originally Posted by Jan Crittenden Livingston

"And you know for a fact that there is not a full working sample in Japan? How do you know that?"

We only know what you tell us or choose to tell us Jan. No more, no less.

So here is a better question that would have answered all the above. By the way just to let you know, I can have this concern and will not feel pressured by anyone into not asking what I want since it's 99% sure I'm spending 10K+ for Panasonic's HVX200.

Here is my question, depending on your response, there is a good chance there will be no more said on this matter.



Jan, Does Panasonic have a fully working HVX200 as of now that is being tested either here or abroad?





Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com

[Stephen van Vuuren]

Originally Posted by Michael Pappas

[
Here is my question, depending on your response, there is a good chance there will be no more said on this matter.

Jan, Does Panasonic have a fully working HVX200 as of now that is being tested either here or abroad?

I really don't see what the big deal is - I would have like to have seen more footage and specs at IBC, but then again the camera is still several months off, so it would have not have been final anyway. I would prefer Panasonic wait (despite my and all our collective impatience) until they are satisfied with the camera and then let us see specs and footage.

I'm sure they have all sorts of cameras and parts in various stages of development - as Jan pointed out, they've made a camera or two in their time. Unlike a product like Andromeda that comes from a tiny company producing their first produce, I don't see the reason for an expose on Panny's "missing HVX200". Panasonic is a major manufacturer with a proven track record. Until they screwup a number of times, I think we need to give them the benefit of the doubt.

[Michael Pappas]

Just to be clear, I don't care that they don't have footage of 24p etc. I am on the other side that says don't release it until next year if that is needed.

Hell, if Jan said it needs another 6 months to a year to be worked on, I would be ok with that. But; she somehow thinks I'm the enemy because I actually #$%$ing care about the outcome of the HVX200....

I am behind P2 100% and the HVX200 so much that I don't want it to be rushed on any level. So why the "F" am I being attacked for christ sakes on all sides.

Michael Pappas

Originally Posted by Stephen van Vuuren

I really don't see what the big deal is - I would have like to have seen more footage and specs at IBC, but then again the camera is still several months off, so it would have not have been final anyway. I would prefer Panasonic wait (despite my and all our collective impatience) until they are satisfied with the camera and then let us see specs and footage.

I'm sure they have all sorts of cameras and parts in various stages of development - as Jan pointed out, they've made a camera or two in their time. Unlike a product like Andromeda that comes from a tiny company producing their first produce, I don't see the reason for an expose on Panny's "missing HVX200". Panasonic is a major manufacturer with a proven track record. Until they screwup a number of times, I think we need to give them the benefit of the doubt.