-
Excessive noise with CMOS Panasonic HVX300
I would like to thank Panasonic for showing off their cameras at special events so potential customers can get a hands on demo of their performance, not just reading spec sheets. I was blown away with the quality of the HVX 500 camera, and was very impressed with the “noise free” picture at high gain. I saw this camera demo’d at both Birns and Sawyer and at a HD green screen studio in Santa Monica. The 500 camera is a IT chip camera, but the chips will only produce 1440x 1080 at 24p, not the “full” 1920×1080. The IT chips (I have been using IT chips for years Sony broadcast cameras, both SD and HD) in this camera produce an astonishing picture. I am looking for a “full” 1920×1080 24P camera in the $10,000. range with interchangeable lenses, so I went to see the new Panasonic HDX300 camera, a 1920×1080 3CMOS chip camera with 24P with a 17x interchangeable lens retailing for about $10K. People were already writing on the internet that this camera could be the “IT” camera for 2009. They weren’t talking chips… I had high expectations. Upon viewing the displayed pre-recorded “African” footage shot with the HDX300, I noticed a lot of “noise” swimming around in the bright blue African sky. How could this be? Daylight, bright sky, noise? Shot most likely with no gain? I asked the Panasonic reps if I could take the HDX300 camera outside and shoot a test and they agreed. When I played back the 32gig card on an SDI input monitor, there was that “noise” in the blue sky, and in the all the shadow detail in other of my shots. My setting were 5600K preset with 0 gain. We made some other tests indoors with the tungston setting, in a dim part off the set with 0, 3, 6 db gain and the noise was extreme and at 3 and 6bd unusable. The Panasonic rep said that I should have used the -3db setting outdoors, and that my shot of the sky was “unprofessional” because I had underexposed it. I intentionally used the manual iris to expose the sky so I would not blow out the sky, and why I panned the camera, the sky might have been a half or a quarter of a stop underexpose. My point to all this is that I am unhappy with the performance of CMOS chips, especially in this new HDX300 camera. Why can’t manufactures spend a little bit more and use the IT, or god forbid the holy grail FIT chips. I know that CMOS chips are cheaper, use less power and have “rolling shutter” but these are no excuses. The quality of the Panasonic HVX300 is unacceptable. Panasonic should not release this camera until they resolve this CMOS issue.
-
9 Replies
-
Hi Mark,
I think before you just write off the camera I would give the final camera a shot. The cameras that are out there are 2nd generation cameras, the footage in Africa was first gen. I just got a firmware upgrade and it is quieter.
I am surprised that no one mentioned that it was a prototype, and the final product would only be better. This is true.
As far as working at -3, I am on the fence about this as it take that off the top, so may range is reduced. Back to the noise issue, where was the pedestle set on the camera you shot with and where was the Coring set. The factory was shipping this cameras with the settings at +15 pedestl, a guaranteed noise maker and the coring at 0. We made recommendations to the factiory and from what I see they have introduced them on version 3, and will finish it off in version 4 which will be the final version before serial numbers are affixed.
Wait till you see a serial numbered version before you write it off.
All the best,
Jan
Jan Crittenden Livingston
Product Manager, HPX500, HVX200, DVX100
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems -
Jan;
I had no idea that Panasonic reps would read this blog, but now that you are here I would ask you something.
My question to Panasonic is why a company that has such a great history building professional cameras such as the Varicam, SDX-900, HDX-900, HDX2700, HDX-500, (all with IT chips) now start using CMOS, noisy, chips in there new shoulder mounted camera, the HDX300? Are there any other reasons but saving money? Noise, less sensitivity, rolling shutter are not good reasons for using the CMOS chip. The only good thing I have heard about CMOS is less power consumption. I rather change mt battery more often than have bad quality. Don’t skink on the chips! The HDX-500 is an extraordinary camera (with IT chips) doesn’t downgrade the quality of your product line. -
It would be best to wait and see the final release of any camera before criticising aspects of image processing. I’ve never seen a Sony or Ikegami pre release camera that didn’t have some major issues.
Noise in “Blues” is always a problem in these pre release cameras, traditionally any 3 chip camera pre filters noise form the other two chips into the Blue channel as most images have less blue channel information than reference green or red. The amount of pre filtering is always tweaked until release.
I remember seeing the same issue in the PDW 700 prior to it’s release.
The manufacturers are doomed if they show or not show the product and images before release.
It’s part of the process of letting future customers in on the production process.
You would never want to drive a pre production car, there are rattles, things don’t work well, the ride quality is less than ideal.
Matthew. -
[Mark Shepherd] “I had no idea that Panasonic reps would read this blog, .”
Been here for years my friend.
[Mark Shepherd] “but now that you are here I would ask you something. My question to Panasonic is why a company that has such a great history building professional cameras such as the Varicam, SDX-900, HDX-900, HDX2700, HDX-500, (all with IT chips) now start using CMOS, noisy, chips in there new shoulder mounted camera, the HDX300? Are there any other reasons but saving money? Noise, less sensitivity, rolling shutter are not good reasons for using the CMOS chip. The only good thing I have heard about CMOS is less power consumption.”
You need to understand the camera market a little more thorughly to see why we did what we did. We have the HVX200/HPX170 at $6,000 the next step up for us is at $20,000 for the HPX500 with lens. There is a real sweet spot in camera purchasing world at $10000. So how do we make a camera that competes with other cameras in that range? Well with CMOS, yes I do get lower power consumption,in the 1/3″ domain I can’t get more resolution with a CCD, a CMOS can get the camera there. We could have put the HVX200/HPX170 chip in there but our feeling was that would not compete with the Sony EX3 that well, resolution-wise. CMOS also eliminates the streaking from light sources that do indeed happen with CCDs. There is no perfect solution. We couldn’t make a 1/3″ 2.2 million pixel CCD as it just wouldn’t be low light sensitive at all. This is another benefit of CMOS, more low light performance.
Now in that low light sensitivity there is a gain in the noise department but as I mentioned the camera is not yet finished. Yes the rolling shutter is there, but you know CMOS imagers are in a lot of cameras these days, and if it could be used as an effective creative tool then there a good number of manufacturers that wouldn’t be able to sell cameras, starting with RED, Sony, Canon , Grass Valley and Phantom.
[Mark Shepherd] “I rather change my battery more often than have bad quality. Don’t skink on the chips! The HDX-500 is an extraordinary camera (with IT chips) doesn’t downgrade the quality of your product line.”
Frankly I think you are prejudging the camera. The tough part is that in order to make the price point the camera uses CMOS and I do fully believe that it will be very competitive in its market. We are not making it to compete with $20000 cameras, but $10,000 ones. Look at the field of cameras in this price point and I think you will see where we are going with it. The cooll part with this camera is the main competition uses CMOS as well, but this camera uses I-Frame codecs including a Master Quality codec called AVC-Intra, 4:2:2, 10 Bit.
CMOS can be worked with, many do. Technology has driven shooting decisions for the last 50 years, starting with film. Wait till it is a finished camera to make your judgement and if you still feel adverse to the CMOS, then we do have a very nice line up of CCD cameras to choose from.
Best regards,
Jan
Jan Crittenden Livingston
Product Manager, HPX500, HVX200, DVX100
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems -
I have a 2nd Generation HPX-301 for review and if you care to look at my blog https://www.hdwarrior.co.uk you will see how noisy the camera is. I have had to suspend my review till Panasonic offer a fix for this problem.
“Setting the standards for others to follow” http://www.hdwarrior.co.uk
-
Hello
I am considering buying a hvx300, and I don’t see any resolution of this noise issue. In the last analysis, the buck should stop with Panasonic, with a demonstration or other evidence that the disturbing observations are fixable with settings or were handled in development. Why don’t we see any final answer to these concerns? Am I missing something here? I emailed Panasonic managrment, but received no reply: could be too soon. However, as time goes by, and I don’t see any resolution to this, I have to conclude the worst. I would aply these common sense approaches to buying a car, why not a video camera?
Does anyone know of a detailed eview of the hvx300 including these issues? A comparison with competing models from other vendors would be helpful.
Hoping for some clarification.
John Brookes
HD Productions -
This noise issue was addressed back in June or July with a firmware upgrade 9.28 which also gave the Flash Band Compensation. We are now at 9.30.
Best,
Jan
Jan Crittenden Livingston
Product Manager, HPX500, HPX300, HPX170, HVX200A
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems -
Thanks. So did it solve the issue, and has anyone reviewed it?
JB -
Jan,
I just purchased th HPX 300 and I am disapointed with the picture quaility thus far. It just doesn’t have that “POP” to it. It is nosiy even after the 9.30 update. I’m trying to upload addtional scene files to see if that will help but the camera is not reading the SD card properly (Card is fine). Please help. I’m getting a bad taste in my mouth after purchasing this camera.John
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up