Which Panasonic camera for 16:9 shoot? at DVinfo.net

Susan Joseph · February 3rd, 2007, 12:36 PM

Hi,
I am looking to shoot widescreen for a DVD title and was impressed with the color saturation of DVX 102. But I find the CCD's are not native. Which 3CCD or CMOS camera from Panasonic ( or other manufacturers ) can do better widescreen?

Also I have found that the overall color saturation in Pansaonic cameras are greater than other models, Have anyone noticed that? How does this cam compare with CAnon HV 10?

Please give your sugggestions.

Thanks

Tom Hardwick · February 3rd, 2007, 12:59 PM

I feel we can only make camcorder recommendations when we know a little more about you and your wants Susan. Is size and weight a problem? How about money in the bank? Do you want to step up to HDV? How do you feel about bottom loading, single vs tripple chips, low light ability and manual controls? Have you already got some Panasonic batteries?

The point you make about 'not native 16:9 chips' is a good one, but many camcorders take a 16:9 aspect out of their 4:3 chips (PDX10, HC1 etc) and so son't lose out in the resolution stakes.

Can't say I've ever noticed that Panasonics give greater colour saturation than other brands.

tom.

Benjamin Hill · February 3rd, 2007, 04:10 PM

Susan, the Panasonic AG-HVX200 (or Asian equivalent) has native 16:9 CCDs so you can shoot true widescreen SD or HD video, in many different formats. The color is pretty saturated in the Panasonics but not to the extent that you can't control or customize it in camera for your needs.

Leigh Wanstead · February 3rd, 2007, 05:21 PM

I think that RED camera is quite nice. ;-)

Thanasis Grigoropoulos · February 3rd, 2007, 07:17 PM

Standard Definition:
On the cheap: Panasonic GS400 (now discontinued) and GS500
More expensive: Canon XL2

Otherwise, ANY HD camcorder is native 16:9, AFAIK.

You really need to provide us with more info though. What is your budget? Do you care about 24p? Do you care about low light performance? Do you mind if manual controls are in the menu and not on the camera body?

Thanasis

Susan Joseph · February 3rd, 2007, 07:36 PM

Well it is for Travel video , hence it should be hand held. Budget is about 4500$.
CAn GS400 ouput better widescreen?
I like that cam due to its small size and great footage, which I have seen already.
I have already tested a few Sony HDV cameras FX1 and Z1 and shot in HDV mode, But i think the color saturation and details in pictures ( Like trees, water ) etc are far less when compared to DVX102.

Hence I was put away with HDV until I saw CAnon HV10.But I must confess that the demo put in by CAnon USA site is overwhelimg, while the real user videos was not that promising. Maybe some trick!!!

To conclude, I need a camera that can be used for broadcast in 4:3 SD mode, as well as make some DVD's on 16:9 widescreen mode.

Do not mind if the camera is top loading or bottom loading, but should have some low light capabilities.
Thanks for your time to reply...

Thanasis Grigoropoulos · February 3rd, 2007, 09:15 PM

I think it is a bit unfair to say that FX1 or Z1 have less detail than DVX. DVX is standard definition. FX1/ Z1 are HD (high definition). ANY HD camera resolves more detail than DVX (or any other SD camera). Definitely. Did you see the footage on an SD or an HD screen?

Having said that, since you are delivering in SD, DVX's definition is more than enough.

GS400 is native 16:9. It has a lot of manual controls on the body (given it's size) and under good lighting is very good. Not as good as DVX, of’ course, but still very good. I have used it in travel doc's in very, VERY difficult conditions and am very satisfied (given it's price...). It is not good at low light, though. No IR capability either. It is very light and small which was a huge plus for me and also does not look pro at all which was also very important for me. It does not have XLRs. For a hands on experience (problems) with GS400, have a look at http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...804#post551804

I don't own an HV10 but I have tested one. It produces very good picture (better than GS400 or even DVX for that matter!) but gets really grainy at low light situations, has no external mic input (not even a cold shoe!) and the manual controls are difficult to handle, especially when you shoot on the move!

To my knowledge, the only SD camera with very good low light capabilities and a native 16:9 sensor is the XL2. It also has an (almost) useless LCD screen that makes life very, very difficult (at least to me) when shooting on the move.

In HD, the best low light performance will come from an FX1 or a Canon A1 (Z1 is out of your price range and similar to FX1). Between the two, I would definitely choose the A1.

Needless to say that between the GS400 and the A1, the A1 produces a far, far better image and offers far, far better image control.

And now my turn for some questions:
How are you recording your sound? Should the camera look pro, non-pro or it does not matter? Is it significantly difficult for you to carry a camera 15cm longer and 3 kilos heavier? Wouldn't you prefer to buy an HD camera and better future-proof your investment?

Thanasis

Tom Hardwick · February 4th, 2007, 02:36 AM

I'd go along with everything Thanasis has said. I too really rate the GS400 for all the reasons he's pointed out, but the low light performance is pretty dismal as too is the wide-angle coverage. You'll need a decent wide-angle adapter. But it is an amazingly small package for the quality it can deliver and the 16:9 (out of the 4:3 chips) is very good.

I think in this day and age I'd avoid any camera that's purely 4:3 (GL1, VX2k1) as that aspect ratio has run out. All 16:9 cameras will shoot 4:3 (with loss of wide-angle coverage of course).

Maybe the Sony A1 (looks like the discontinued HC1) would be good for you. Small, HDV, bottom loading, XLR mics, 10x zoom. A bit so-so in poor light, but gain-up modes are not to be discounted these (HDV) days.

If the size and weight of the FX1 and Canon A1 are ok with you then these offer much better manual control and are better in the gloom.

tom.

February 3rd, 2007, 12:36 PM	#1
Susan Joseph New Boot Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Trivandrum India Posts: 16	Which Panasonic camera for 16:9 shoot? Hi, I am looking to shoot widescreen for a DVD title and was impressed with the color saturation of DVX 102. But I find the CCD's are not native. Which 3CCD or CMOS camera from Panasonic ( or other manufacturers ) can do better widescreen? Also I have found that the overall color saturation in Pansaonic cameras are greater than other models, Have anyone noticed that? How does this cam compare with CAnon HV 10? Please give your sugggestions. Thanks

February 3rd, 2007, 04:10 PM	#3
Benjamin Hill Major Player Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Iowa City, Iowa Posts: 670	Susan, the Panasonic AG-HVX200 (or Asian equivalent) has native 16:9 CCDs so you can shoot true widescreen SD or HD video, in many different formats. The color is pretty saturated in the Panasonics but not to the extent that you can't control or customize it in camera for your needs. __________________ youtube.com/benhillmedia linkedin.com/in/benhillmedia

February 3rd, 2007, 12:59 PM	#2
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	I feel we can only make camcorder recommendations when we know a little more about you and your wants Susan. Is size and weight a problem? How about money in the bank? Do you want to step up to HDV? How do you feel about bottom loading, single vs tripple chips, low light ability and manual controls? Have you already got some Panasonic batteries? The point you make about 'not native 16:9 chips' is a good one, but many camcorders take a 16:9 aspect out of their 4:3 chips (PDX10, HC1 etc) and so son't lose out in the resolution stakes. Can't say I've ever noticed that Panasonics give greater colour saturation than other brands. tom.

February 3rd, 2007, 05:21 PM	#4
Leigh Wanstead Trustee Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: NZ Posts: 1,276	I think that RED camera is quite nice. ;-)

February 3rd, 2007, 07:17 PM	#5
Thanasis Grigoropoulos Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Currently on the move! Posts: 33	Standard Definition: On the cheap: Panasonic GS400 (now discontinued) and GS500 More expensive: Canon XL2 Otherwise, ANY HD camcorder is native 16:9, AFAIK. You really need to provide us with more info though. What is your budget? Do you care about 24p? Do you care about low light performance? Do you mind if manual controls are in the menu and not on the camera body? Thanasis

February 3rd, 2007, 07:36 PM	#6
Susan Joseph New Boot Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Trivandrum India Posts: 16	Well it is for Travel video , hence it should be hand held. Budget is about 4500$. CAn GS400 ouput better widescreen? I like that cam due to its small size and great footage, which I have seen already. I have already tested a few Sony HDV cameras FX1 and Z1 and shot in HDV mode, But i think the color saturation and details in pictures ( Like trees, water ) etc are far less when compared to DVX102. Hence I was put away with HDV until I saw CAnon HV10.But I must confess that the demo put in by CAnon USA site is overwhelimg, while the real user videos was not that promising. Maybe some trick!!! To conclude, I need a camera that can be used for broadcast in 4:3 SD mode, as well as make some DVD's on 16:9 widescreen mode. Do not mind if the camera is top loading or bottom loading, but should have some low light capabilities. Thanks for your time to reply...

February 3rd, 2007, 09:15 PM	#7
Thanasis Grigoropoulos Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Currently on the move! Posts: 33	I think it is a bit unfair to say that FX1 or Z1 have less detail than DVX. DVX is standard definition. FX1/ Z1 are HD (high definition). ANY HD camera resolves more detail than DVX (or any other SD camera). Definitely. Did you see the footage on an SD or an HD screen? Having said that, since you are delivering in SD, DVX's definition is more than enough. GS400 is native 16:9. It has a lot of manual controls on the body (given it's size) and under good lighting is very good. Not as good as DVX, of’ course, but still very good. I have used it in travel doc's in very, VERY difficult conditions and am very satisfied (given it's price...). It is not good at low light, though. No IR capability either. It is very light and small which was a huge plus for me and also does not look pro at all which was also very important for me. It does not have XLRs. For a hands on experience (problems) with GS400, have a look at http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...804#post551804 I don't own an HV10 but I have tested one. It produces very good picture (better than GS400 or even DVX for that matter!) but gets really grainy at low light situations, has no external mic input (not even a cold shoe!) and the manual controls are difficult to handle, especially when you shoot on the move! To my knowledge, the only SD camera with very good low light capabilities and a native 16:9 sensor is the XL2. It also has an (almost) useless LCD screen that makes life very, very difficult (at least to me) when shooting on the move. In HD, the best low light performance will come from an FX1 or a Canon A1 (Z1 is out of your price range and similar to FX1). Between the two, I would definitely choose the A1. Needless to say that between the GS400 and the A1, the A1 produces a far, far better image and offers far, far better image control. And now my turn for some questions: How are you recording your sound? Should the camera look pro, non-pro or it does not matter? Is it significantly difficult for you to carry a camera 15cm longer and 3 kilos heavier? Wouldn't you prefer to buy an HD camera and better future-proof your investment? Thanasis

February 4th, 2007, 02:36 AM	#8
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	I'd go along with everything Thanasis has said. I too really rate the GS400 for all the reasons he's pointed out, but the low light performance is pretty dismal as too is the wide-angle coverage. You'll need a decent wide-angle adapter. But it is an amazingly small package for the quality it can deliver and the 16:9 (out of the 4:3 chips) is very good. I think in this day and age I'd avoid any camera that's purely 4:3 (GL1, VX2k1) as that aspect ratio has run out. All 16:9 cameras will shoot 4:3 (with loss of wide-angle coverage of course). Maybe the Sony A1 (looks like the discontinued HC1) would be good for you. Small, HDV, bottom loading, XLR mics, 10x zoom. A bit so-so in poor light, but gain-up modes are not to be discounted these (HDV) days. If the size and weight of the FX1 and Canon A1 are ok with you then these offer much better manual control and are better in the gloom. tom.