[Toke]

AVC-I-frame-only has about same efficiency than mpeg2-I-frame only and dv-codec.
So the datarate reduction is made by sacrifing piqture quality.
Unless Panny is making a whole new codec.
If its targeted to mainly eng then it might be good enough for them.

Somewhere around 2009 when Panny and Apple will both have support for this AVC-I also with European framerates (25/50fps) everybody else will be using wavelet codecs, which offer way much better quality…

[Toke]

I’m a bit angry to Panny.
That size of a copmany could have done 720p25 quicktime codecs by themselves fast and easily.
They chose not to serve “PAL”-world. HVX might remain my only Panny purchase ever…

[Toke]

I think the biggest bug in 5.1 is that it does not have support for 720p25/50 or for MXF native use.
How could I buy hvx200 here in Europe, when I can’t edit it?
Has anybody (Jan?) heard any timeframe when cfp will support European hvx200?

[Toke]

Just to continue the speculations, 35Mbps interframe compression should give higher picture quality than 40Mbps intraframe compression. What happens beyond 24p is a different thing. If xdcamhd maintains 35Mbps, but dvcprohd increases datarate to 100Mbps, then the latter one should be better with higher framerates.

True progressive compression should also give better efficiency to the compression.
(Both sony and panny uses interlaced recording for progressive images in some cases.)

The rest (and usually more important part) is about camera head…

[Toke]

I think we are all waiting for small detachable high res lcd’s for these cameras.
There has been many years 15″ laptops with 1920×1200 screens, so it wouldn’t be too hard to cut from the same panel motherglass about 10″ displays with real 1280×720 resolution.
Analog component hd input to that from camera and there’s the solution.

I just don’t understand why we are not getting that kind of products already…

[Toke]

[Lawrence Bansbach] “Conceivably it could develop some codec based on the MPEG-4 Studio Profile. But the computing horsepower (ie, encoding/decoding chips) necessary to do so probably wouldn’t be cheap enough to implement for the $15,000 to $30,000 range within which the new HD offerings seem to be falling.”

Looking at Infinity, at least jpeg2000 can be quite affordable codec.
And good thing about jpeg2000 is its scalability.
It wouldn’t be very expensive these days to add feature that you could dial in the compression ratio you want…

[Toke]

[Lawrence Bansbach] “While that’s possible, why not just use HD D5?”

That’s even older codec than dv. Why stick with legacy codecs? This is afterall about tapeless workflow at least before the master and archiving. I expect some new codec from this millenium…

[Toke]

[Shane Ross] “The HVX footage is slightly softer, but chalk that up to the stock lens on it as opposed to the $15,000 Fujinon on the Vari.”

It would be very interesting to see how Fujinon’s Th16x5.5BRMU would work with hvx. Lenses price is about $600. Maybe this guy will test it as soon as he gets his hands on a hvx:
https://www.eidomedia.com/hdve/

[Toke]

[JeremyG] “I’m hoping for FCP v11 (why go to 6 when this one goes to 11?)”

Spinal Cut Pro? (Or even Spinal Tap Pro?)

I see no reason why panny wouldn’t announce 16GB p2, which will be shipped in 31st Dec in microscopic quantities. If I remember correctly, they did same thing with some other product 😉

So I’m still waiting for that 2005 announced product to Europe, so I guess nab2006 will tell what I could have in 2007…

[Toke]

[Steve Freebairn] “I think that a DVCPro200 codec will be released for the Varicam.”

If this will come, I hope they adopt some modern technology to it like jpeg2000 adopted by Infinity.
10b of 12b colors is a must too.
Just raising the dataspeed and keeping over a decade old codec and color depth won’t be enough anymore with competition with eg. Red.