Toshiba 1920x1080 HD camcorders
 

I actually predicted that Toshiba may release an HD camcorder and I can’t believe it happened. The only difference is that I was expecting it to use mini HD DVDs to compete with Blu-Ray camcorders such as the ones from Hitachi and Blu-Ray compatible camcorders such as AVCHD. A 100 gig hard drive is good enough.

Imager: 1/3” CMOS
Resolution: 1920X1080 60i
Compression: H.264

Original Japanese
http://www.gigashot.net/mobileav/mov...es/index_j.htm

English Translated
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babel...%2Findex_j.htm

It's AVC, but not AVCHD.

I definitely think this will still only yield results similar to the HC3. 1490K effective during recording with 1920x1080 recording?

Press Release
 

Original Japanese
http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press...9/pr_j2501.htm

English Translated
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babel...2Fpr_j2501.htm

The other versions does 720p

Hopefully that's a good Fijinon lens although it’s a shame the camcorder appears to not have a focusing ring. Now that’s an odd combination.

Watch.Impress review
 

Original Japanese:
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/do...2/zooma334.htm

English Translated:
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babel...2Fzooma334.htm

60i. Yawn. Who in the world is buying interlaced displays today? Not the same people buying these camcorders.

If I read the translated page correctly, it looks like the 720 HD model will shot in either 30p or 60p.

If the image quality is good, then this may be a camera to consider.

Who would buy a non-native resolution camera either? If I had the money, I'd get myself a PMW-EX1.

Just about everybody, since practically all HD camcorders are non-native resolution (from RED on down, the EX1 being an exception, and here's a hint: it hardly makes a difference).

But in the Texas HD shootout it turned out that the actual measurable resolution of each camera correlated to the number of physical pixels on the sensors - so why not look for cameras with sensors which match the recording format? Seems like a logical thing to want which is borne out by real-world testing.

Why not? Because so many other considerations are of far greater importance when choosing a camera, such as format, feature set, workflow and ergonomics, that's why not. You have a strange habit of continuously referring to the Texas HD Shootout which I produced in 2006, yet you fail to comprehend the single most important result of that experience: "Side-by-side tests like this overemphasize differences rather than noting similarities. You can take any one of these cameras and shoot stunning material with it. Which one you pick depends on your aesthetic preferences, working style, and postproduction workflow." (Adam Wilt).

Aesthetic preferences, working style, and postproduction workflow: each of those factors trumps "resolution" any time. Note specifically that in the Texas HD Shootout results, Adam does not say "which one you pick depends on native resolution." Resolution is no longer an issue. We're there. We won. Except for D-Cinema, the resolution battle is over. As Adam said, you can take any one of these cameras and shoot stunning material with it. Pixel counting remains an issue for chronic armchair measurebators only, and that counterproductive mindset is happily of no concern here. I started this site to get away from that regrettable mentality.

Besides, there's still that elephant in the room that you're conveniently ignoring: the primary reason not to look for cameras with sensors that match the recording format, is that they simply don't exist (the Sony EX1 and the JVC HD110 being the only two exceptions I can think of out of a myriad of HD camcorders presently available).

I agree with the primary conclusion of the HD shootout that any of the cameras tested can produce great results, but there was also useful information in there about the differences between cameras and the consequences of same. Saying that sensor resolution doesn't matter isn't rational; a better comment would be that it's not the only thing to be concerned about. Agreed on that point.

Any of the cameras tested can produce great results, therefore the sensor resolution doesn't matter. There is no need to be concerned about it.

Feature set. Ergonomics. Workflow.

Those are the primary concerns when choosing a camcorder... if there's one lesson to be taken from the Texas HD Shootout, and from DV Info Net in general, that's it.

If you want to argue pixels, you're simply on the wrong site.

Has anyone tried the Toshiba HD camcorders?

If so which model?

Interested in hearing about 720/60p results.

One place pixels (actually noise-free color resolution) matters is if you're doing chroma keys. But it's more than just the sensor. It depends on the color sub-sampling, in-camera processing, and the compression. It's nice if the sensor has as many or more pixels as the final target, but that's not the whole story.

Of course, it's also important to have good lighting, make good artistic choices, have good tools and know how to use them. A clean output with good color resolution is also important though.