-
HVX CCD block?
I know the easy answer to this is ‘wait until NAB’. But we might be able to get an indication of the answer from current trends…. I wondered with this cam shooting 1080p, do people expect Panasonic to do some uprezzing or pixel shift to get this res? Or do we really think we might see a larger CDD on this cam?
How feasable is it? What are the limitations right now of having 2Mpixel on a 1/3″ block? Are they out there? Are they very expensive? Is it even possible?
DVCPROHD is 1280×1080 so maybe you would only need a 1.3M CCD anamorphic image? With the HVX having no tape transport, could the extra cost saving go into a more expenive CCD?
any thoughts
Karl
-
8 Replies
-
I think a 1280×1080 CCD would be funky. If it has pixelshift as well, it’s not going to do it any harm, but you’d need really nice glass to make it all worthwile. The proof will be in the pudding, so to say.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Well, if dark pictures are funky…
With 1280×1080 camera would be even less sensitive than fx1/z1. -
Well, if the resolution of the camera is not high def enough, what on earth is the point of it being a high def camera? I mean, the FX1 measures in about 800×800, which is barely an improvement over SD, and about half of what the camera is capable of, codec-wise.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Myself, I’d love to own a “small” multi-format, HD-capable video camcorder with a single, relatively large (2/3″-type) 16:9 image sensor.
For most of the work I do, _clean_ 480i & 480p video is adequate, and honest 720p capability would be a plus. A 2/3″ lens/imager size and a clean image are more important to me than higher resolution. However, I don’t know if a single, 2-3 megapixel 2/3″-type 16:9 image sensor can deliver this relatively inexpensively?
A cam’s light sensitivity is less important to me than getting natural-looking, clean video, together with the amount of flexible depth of field control only a “large” lens & sensor can deliver. If a single-sensor cam has relatively low light sensitivity, I can live with that if the image quality is otherwise high for the price. I own about 5KW-worth of tungsten lighting instruments, and I typically shoot on small sets and sometimes outdoors. When needed, I can rent HMI lights more conveniently and less expensively than I can rent a higher-end camcorder.
I rarely need a relatively long focal length lens, so a somwhat “wide” but “short” zoom lens would be adequate for most of my needs. In fact, a lens with very little zoom capability would be fine for me, especially if it might lower the cost of the lens. A cam with a “standard” 2/3″ removeable lens mount would be ideal, because then I could buy or rent a lens or add-on lens which fit my needs & budget.
As for the recording medium, P2 would be OK with me, whether I use it or not, if it means the cam is less expensive than a traditional camcorder! But this would work for me only if the cam included a small, built-in, inexpensive “DV25” tape transport (for DV25 recording only, of course), or at least included “deck control” via Firewire for use with a small, external, portable DV25 videocassette recorder.
I also wish cam manufacturers would make built-in LCD screens detachable, similar to pro viewfinders, so you can configure the cam as needed. It makes no sense to pay for a high quality built-in LCD screen which you can’t use in half your shooting because of where the LCD is mounted. And being forced to buy a 2nd redundant LCD screen because of this makes no sense. Since brackets & connector cables aren’t the ultimate in high tech, it’s hard to imagine this kind of built-in flexibility is expensive to implement.
Features such as timecode I/O, genlock, and analog component or SDI outputs are all things I have need for, but they wouldn’t have to be built-in as standard. As mature electronic technologies, they could be available as reasonably-priced options.
The new Panasonic P2 cam may (or may not) have some of the above features, but I hope it opens the door to the possibility of a cam like this being available soon.
Other shooters with different needs may need different features than what I list above, and that’s cool. The above is just my wishlist.
All the best,
– Peter
-
Good question Graeme.
Lets calculate:dvx100a (ntsc) has 380,000 pixels and chips are 4.4mm x 3.3mm.
Sensivity is about 640 ISO.
So you get 640 ISO with a pixel sized 38 -
What does 16:9 1280×1080 work out at? I don’t know enough about the physics of CCD sensitivity to question or confim your maths.
Graeme
– http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects for FCP
-
Still assuming that ccd has similiar sensivity than 100A-ntsc,
1280×1080 would result pixel size of 9.4 -
This is an excellent question! What’s the horizontal resolution of HVX200? I couldn’t find DVCPro-HD definition anywhere, except for Adam Wilt’s FAQ. There it indeed says that it is sampled at 1280 luma.
Is there a reason to believe HVX200 will have this 1280×1080 too? And 960×720 (instead of 1280×720)?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up