[Karl Holt]

I have never seen images this good from a video camera

It seems the CCD’s have a really good lattitude – unless they have been very cleverly lit. Even so, I can normally tell HD footage from film – this would have fooled me.

15,000 euros isnt half bad really…… under

[Karl Holt]

Thanks Graeme,

“there is a point whereby the lens would be too good for the chips and produce aliassing artifacts ”

Ok I believe you 🙂

as a mater of interest, if the lens is created in tandem with the CCD to stop aliasing aritfacts infront of a higher res CCD – then how does this work with a digistill cam? I can take the lens from my 300D and slap it on my 350D with 2Mpixel more resolution – no specially designed compromise here between ccd changes and lenses; and no aliassing artifacts either.

Im not saying your statement isnt true, just trying to understand how it happens only in video.

[Karl Holt]

What I meant was – are you saying that the type of lens they are going to put onto the HVX wont make any difference anyway as the lens isnt up to it?

I have a digial SLR and while Im using the same detachable lenses – i can tell you that CCD pixel really does make a difference, granted we’re talking bigger leaps in resolution on digistill cams – but to say that capturing the full res would make no or little difference is only correct if the glass is soing to be whack – which I hope it isnt.

[Karl Holt]

doesn’t this come down to how good the lens on this camera will be?

[Karl Holt]

pardon my ignorance if Ive got it wrong, but once you’ve captured in DVCPROHD then the damage (if you want to call it that) has been done. you’re then at 920×720 instead of 1280×720. Converting to CFHD isnt really going to help from that point (unless you’re talking about recompressing lots).

I keep getting the impression that a hack or firmware upgrade may be able to make the cam record in a different format. CFHD is probably a too labour intensive codec to capture real-time too, but it wouldnt prevent the camera from accepting an upgrade to the current DVCPROHD codec to capture the full HD signal in the future. The DVCPROHD codec maybe limited in the way it is simply because of a tape transport mechinism – it wouldnt suprise me if it changes to accomodate a larger res now P2 is here.

If you want to edit in CFHD for better recompression – then Im sure you can convert it all later in your NLE; but I’d like to see the source material use the full pixel resolution from the start.

Karl

[Karl Holt]

“Fps of the camera is not about playback, it’s about recording time of each frame.”

Yup you are right, but if you have recorded at 60fps, then there is no reason why you should not be able to play back at 24fps/ 25fps or even 30fps once the data is recorded. The codec may be a limitation, but if Varicam recording DVCPROHD can do it with a fixed tape transport then P2 should have no problem.

[Karl Holt]

because the P2 card will be too small to play back a 30 minute programme – or however long the module is.

[Karl Holt]

What would be ideal would be a HDD recorder, similar to an mp3 player which had basic controls, inputs and analogue/digital outputs.

A little protable unit that you can take with you and play on external devices…..

[Karl Holt]

they are all switches on a DVX100

the little tricksters

[Karl Holt]

I think the fact than Jan is on this board and others, shows Panasonic are very interested in hearing and reacting to public opinion. It’s an encouraging sign. Just think if Sony had done the same thing when everyone was saying “We want 24P” in the dev stages of the Z1 – maybe it would have turned out a little different.

With all the concerns floating around I would have guessed these are issues that Panasonic have already thought about and hopefully addressed.

we’ll see soon.