DVCPROHD can be awesome... at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Panasonic P2HD / AVCCAM / AVCHD / DV Camera Systems > Panasonic P2HD / DVCPRO HD Camcorders

Panasonic P2HD / DVCPRO HD Camcorders
All AG-HPX and AJ-PX Series camcorders and P2 / P2HD hardware.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 18th, 2005, 02:15 PM   #1
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UT
Posts: 945
DVCPROHD can be awesome...

In the interest of discussing the DVCPROHD codec, I wanted to show everyone a few examples of how amazing the codec can in fact be.

I have a few DVCPROHD 1080p QT single frames from a film that was shot in 24p HDCAM.

The entire nearly 40 hours of footage was captured to a 2 TB RAID through FCP 5 and a Decklink HD card via SDI from a portable HDCAM player-only deck. (ain't that a mouthful!) The card captured the footage flawlessly at 23.98 fps without any pulldown removal. (Decklink recognized the 23.98 frame rate)

These are single still frames of twice compressed HD material (HDCAM 144mbs/DVCPRO 80 mbs, approx). The data rate of the material is 11.4 MBs according to FCP. Unfortunately, you will need the DVCPRO HD components of QT to view these frames. I have converted one of the frames to a Tiff, but it's bothersome because something within QT player adds a little aliasing to the 1920x1080 frame upon export, and I'm not exactly sure why. The actual frame from the codec looks appropriate from within QT as a DVCPRO HD clip. If anyone knows how to properly export this frame without adding artifacts, please let me know.

This is the level of quality that we are working with in order to compress an HD h.264 and WMV trailer.

As those who are able to view the frames can see, DVCPRO HD is pretty phenomenal overall. It is my desire that the HVX will produce 1080 res footage at this level of compression cleanliness. I know there are all sorts of issues with just how much res you get from the CCD and at what level of noisiness (disregarding aesthetic issues of DOF with 1/3 chips amongst other items), but I think Panasonic can do it.

Just wanted to show what can be acquired through SDI in that codec.

www.homepage.mac.com/mrbarlowelton
Barlow Elton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2005, 02:25 PM   #2
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 613
Excellent examples. Here are more examples from the Varicam as well.

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx20..._Example01.jpg
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx20..._Example02.jpg
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx20..._Example03.jpg
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx20..._Example04.jpg
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx20..._Example05.jpg
http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx20..._Example06.jpg

Hopefully the HVX200 yields similar results.

-steeV
__________________
www.holyzoo.com
Steev Dinkins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2005, 05:56 PM   #3
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UT
Posts: 945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steev Dinkins
Excellent examples. Here are more examples from the Varicam as well.

Hopefully the HVX200 yields similar results.-steeV
I think it will, I just hope the signal processing is on a par with the Varicam.
This will likely determine whether the camera can produce a superior 1080p image, at least in comparison to the H1. Obviously, the codec is capable, it's just a matter of how it's massaged.

I think alot of indie movies are going to be made with both.
Barlow Elton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2005, 08:28 PM   #4
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 613
The footage posted yesterday from the HVX200 is plenty good to tweak away on:

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/hvx200/images/Freak1.jpg

:)
__________________
www.holyzoo.com
Steev Dinkins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2005, 10:02 PM   #5
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UT
Posts: 945
Lay off the drugs, son. ;-)
Barlow Elton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19th, 2005, 04:52 PM   #6
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 1,689
Varicam? Dont expect that quality. The bigger chips do more than just give you DOF....



ash =o)
Ash Greyson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19th, 2005, 05:00 PM   #7
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 613
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash Greyson
Varicam? Dont expect that quality. The bigger chips do more than just give you DOF)
By "yields similar results", I mean something *resembling* the quality seen in that camera. What it really needs to compete with is the XL-H1. We shall see soon. Regarding shallow depth of field, I'll be using a 35mm imager. ;)
__________________
www.holyzoo.com
Steev Dinkins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19th, 2005, 11:07 PM   #8
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Freeport, Texas
Posts: 25
XLH1??? No Contest!

Recently, I've worked with the DVX100, the XL2, the XLH1, and the Z1u. all have lovely pics, but some outperform others. On the DV side, I much prefer the DVX. The XL2 just didn't do it for me. the native 16:9 was nice, but no matter what I did, I couldn't get the image I wanted.

on the HDV side, the Z1 has some qualities I like over the H1, but being a shoulder mount, the H1 wins out. The picture is a little XL2ish in rendition, but resolution wise looks great. Plus, you can't beat the HDSDI output. Personally, I'd like to try this cam recording to an SRW1 recorder, just to see what it can do.

Now enter the HVX200. I think this is where the war for HD Domination will end.

HDV is good. In fact, it's better than many of us have seen in a recording format. But, HDV (in the 1080i flavor) is only recording at 25Mbps. The DVCProHD format records at 4 times that rate. that means four times the information, and instead of MPEG-2 compression, it uses a DCT compression scheme just like the other DV formats. In other words, INTRAFRAME compression, which means each frame stands on its own without referring to other frames for information. This DCT compression (unlike DV) is variable up to 7:1 depending on what's in the frame.

What it boils down to is that there is no lag in the image. HDV can, in some situations, soften during a pan, or on a subject with alot of movement, and when that movement stops, the picture "snaps" back into clarity. Not with DVCProHD.

HDV isn't dead yet, but I think it's quaking in it's boots as this PitBull from Panny begins stalking the market.

Rob
Robert Rock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2005, 12:02 AM   #9
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UT
Posts: 945
Marketing hype. Seriously aggressive marketing hype.

We've been subjected to specs, features and theory with the HVX, but still haven't seen anything substantial that really shows the superiority of this camera. Until the model ships, all I can really infer is that there is a good chance this camera will be fairly noisy in comparison to the others, based on the released footage (masked by the ambiguity of h.264/WMV encoding, and the problematic compression/signal processing of the prerelease raw footage from DVExpo). Also, when you shoot 1080 24p, you're wasting roughly 20% of the bit rate because you have to encode those extra pulldown frames as I frames and they're just taking up valuable bits that'll be thrown out when you work with a native 1080p timeline. Consider also that 720 24p is only giving you roughly 40 megabits of the 100 megabits that are theoretically possible with the format. You can't lavish any of those extra bits on the 24 frames, just extracting what is allotted to 24 out of a possible 60 fps. Also, with this 40 megabits you're also sampling 4.2.2 color, but compressing to a considerably higher compression ratio than even DV! That's really not that much more data for a high-def image!

Are you aware that the H1's 24f mode only compresses 24 frames and then encodes repeat frames to be 60i compatible? It saves the 25 mbs for less frames, and progressive ones at that. This is highly efficient and smart. Considering that the best of current MPEG2 encoding can be roughly 4x more efficient than DVCPROHD, it's not necessarily the bastard format that one might presume at first blush. Good signal processing (DIGIC), a good lens (at least in terms of optical quality) and a high res (oversampled) CCD all add up to a pretty damn fine image coming from the H1. This camera should not be lumped in with the rest of the HDV products. It's truly in it's own league, and don't be surprised if the HVX doesn't quite measure up in the 1080p realm.

These two cameras are neck and neck. They have their virtues and compromises, but I think the H1 is proving that you can't just automatically assume that it's an inferior camera for acquisition, just because it's, at a base level, an HDV camcorder.

There's a very good likelihood that you will get a superior DVCPRO HD image from the H1 (SDI) then you could get from the Pany...and maybe just a better image overall.

Last edited by Barlow Elton; December 20th, 2005 at 12:50 AM.
Barlow Elton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2005, 10:28 AM   #10
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Golden, CO
Posts: 681
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Rock
HDV isn't dead yet, but I think it's quaking in it's boots as this PitBull from Panny begins stalking the market.
I wouldn't count on that... Sony is selling their new HDR-HC1/A1 consumer camcorder like hotcakes. I'm guilty, I even bought one myself because Ikelite has a nice underwater enclosure for it.

But also keep in mind that HDV is an evolving standard and there are currently considerations within the HDV consortium for variants that record to solid-state or other media besides DV tape that can handle higher bitrates. The only constant with HDV seems to be that Sony is firmly committed to 1080i and has no real interest in 720p, nor do they really have any interest in 1080p or anything 24p, at least not on the lower end of their product lines.

I wouldn't put it past Sony to announce a 50~100 Mbps upgrade to the FX1/Z1 at NAB. It will probably record to internal 2.5" HDD and/or a new flavor of their MemoryStick. If Sony does show up with something like this, you can still bet it will be 1080i only and something like CF24 will be the closest thing it will offer to what us progressive video guys would want.
__________________
- Jeff Kilgroe
- Applied Visual Technologies | DarkScience
- www.darkscience.com
Jeff Kilgroe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2005, 11:31 AM   #11
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Golden, CO
Posts: 681
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barlow Elton
Are you aware that the H1's 24f mode only compresses 24 frames and then encodes repeat frames to be 60i compatible? It saves the 25 mbs for less frames, and progressive ones at that. This is highly efficient and smart.
As you've said yourself, "marketing hype". Saying the H1 captures a progressive image is stretching the truth a bit. It has an interlaced CCD which scans at 60Hz. The internal DSP takes the two fields and de-interlaces them in-camera to produce a "progressive" frame, which is then processed and compressed. Arguably more efficeint than doing a de-interlace on the footage after it's been processed, but still by no means truly progressive and unlike the footage from the HD100 or what little we have seen from the HVX thus far, the H1 does exhibit some interlace issues which are clearly visible on fast motion and pans when viewed on a monitor that can display the full 1440x1080 resolution. As you have also said, the H1 "encodes repeat frames to be 60i compatible", well duh... You do realize that by encoding these repeat frames, that those (even though they are a repeat) still count within that 25Mbps allotment on tape.

The 1080p encoding on the HVX works the same way, (but better because it's truly progressive). True progressive frames are captured from the CCD and are encoded as fields along with duplicates in order to fit within the 60i specification for DVCPROHD 1080i.

Quote:
Considering that the best of current MPEG2 encoding can be roughly 4x more efficient than DVCPROHD, it's not necessarily the bastard format that one might presume at first blush.
You're really reaching with that statement.... Yes, MPEG2 can be that efficeint under circumstances where the compression is hand-tuned and undergoes multipass encoding as we would do for output to DVD. I have yet to see any indication from any HDV camera, H1 and HD100 included that their on-the-fly, one-size-fits-all MPEG2 encoding really has that much to offer over any of the intraframe/DCT formats.

Quote:
Good signal processing (DIGIC), a good lens (at least in terms of optical quality) and a high res (oversampled) CCD all add up to a pretty damn fine image coming from the H1. This camera should not be lumped in with the rest of the HDV products. It's truly in it's own league, and don't be surprised if the HVX doesn't quite measure up in the 1080p realm.
I will agree with that. The H1 is a very impressive camera and for some it may fit the bill just perfectly. I still miss my XL1 that I sold when I bought my DVX100 and the extra flexibility the interchangeable lenses offered. I also like it's compact, shoulder mount form factor a lot better than the chunky brick approach of the DVX/HVX. But let's look at it this way... I can buy the HVX w/3x4GB P2 cars, a really nice tripod, bag, rain slicker, extra batteries, etc.. For *LESS* than what I can buy a bare H1 for. I'm not broke or a seriously penny-pinching miser, but I think the HVX200 will fit the bill perfectly for a camera I own. If I need better for a specific project, I'll rent. If I'm going to start considering $9K for just a camera with a stock lens that really only offers 1080i (although repackaged a few different ways) at 25Mbps, then I may as well just suck it up and spend $22K and get the Sony XDCAM system with an even nicer stock lens. ....Yeah, I priced out that option too. IMO, Canon has a real nice unit, but they have priced themselves out of their own market. Sure, they'll still sell a handful of them, but they would probably sell more and generate more revenue if they dropped the price by $2500 or so. Instead, they're trying to convince everyone (and probably themselves) of their own superiority by inflating the price.

Quote:
These two cameras are neck and neck. They have their virtues and compromises, but I think the H1 is proving that you can't just automatically assume that it's an inferior camera for acquisition, just because it's, at a base level, an HDV camcorder.
True, but I don't see too many people doing that. If everyone did, then nobody would spend $9K to buy one.

Quote:
There's a very good likelihood that you will get a superior DVCPRO HD image from the H1 (SDI) then you could get from the Pany...and maybe just a better image overall.
I doubt that about a superior DVCPRO HD image... Or at least not in any sensible manner. You wouldn't in your right mind use the H1 combined with a $16K DVCPROHD deck in the field and if you were to capture from its SDI interface in-studio direct to a PC/Mac, DVCPROHD would be the wrong format to use. I would capture direct to one of the DVCAM variants that supports the native 1440x1080 resolution, or if the system is powerful enough go direct to uncompressed or a relatively lossless codec like the ones from Avid or Cineform. It's cool that Canon put an SDI interface right on the camera, but let's be realistic about it for a minute and acknowledge what it is. It's not this magical connection giving us raw 1080 line HD in pure digital glory. The video is still processed and has undergone all the same treatment that the HDV video in this camera has, with the exception of skipping the MPEG2 compression. The HVX200 offers the same level of pre-compressed video out of its D4 component out. Unfortunately, Panny made the total bonehead move of giving us an analog interface... Why??? If they didn't want to provide SDI, fine... They should have at least given us DVI, or better yet, HDMI and we would have had all 4 audio channels on the same connector. Total bonehead move by panny with the component out - they give us an all digital, tapeless workflow and then pull something like that. And the rationale of it being more friendly for field monitor connections is a bunch of BS... Any decent newer prosumer, even consumer monitor/display is DVI compliant these days. Going higher-end, all the new stuff is DVI and/or SDI. So I'm still shaking my head over the component connection...

But for me, the HVX200 is still where its at. I may be able to squeeze a better image from the H1 under the right conditions and the H1 is probably a hands-down better camera for in-studio or TV work. But the HVX200 still wins out for me with the multiple format support DVCPRO50 is a huge deal for those still working with SD and need an option to compete with or compliment digibeta. Tapeless workflow? Hell yeah! Variable frame rates? Wooohooo! Not to mention the price... An HVX with a CinePorter or FireStore will still cost less than a bare H1.
__________________
- Jeff Kilgroe
- Applied Visual Technologies | DarkScience
- www.darkscience.com
Jeff Kilgroe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2005, 11:40 AM   #12
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Rock
HDV isn't dead yet, but I think it's quaking in it's boots as this PitBull from Panny begins stalking the market.
On the contrary, I don't see the Panasonic P2 format threatening HDV as a viable option for at least a good five years or more. It's tough to beat the practicality and affordability of HDV, and when all is said and done the most common solutions for distributing HD content will be at HDV or lower bit rates. Not that P2 footage won't look good and be sought after by many, but it's simply not going to replace HDV given current pricing and workflow considerations. As I've said before, P2 will make sense when I can buy a 32+ GB P2 card at Walmart for under $100, and that isn't going to happen any time soon.

Most customers are barely willing to pay for HDV right now, and for the few who want something better I can always rent something like the HVX200. Maybe I'll pick one up used when the HVX200B comes out. ;-)
Kevin Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2005, 02:44 PM   #13
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Freeport, Texas
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barlow Elton
Marketing hype. Seriously aggressive marketing hype.
Also, when you shoot 1080 24p, you're wasting roughly 20% of the bit rate because you have to encode those extra pulldown frames as I frames and they're just taking up valuable bits that'll be thrown out when you work with a native 1080p timeline. Consider also that 720 24p is only giving you roughly 40 megabits of the 100 megabits that are theoretically possible with the format.

1080p aside... (since I'm only going to shoot 720p) If you closely look at DVCProHD, you'll see that the camera supports a native 24p mode that only records data at the framerate set in the camera. There is no pull down, or "I" frames in this mode. each frame is encoded as a discrete frame (unlike MPEG2), with each frame having it's own variable compression applied, that doesn't exceed a 7:1 ratio. In other words, the camera also records a true 24p stream. The only way to get the variable framrates in the 720p mode without the need for a framerate convertor, is to record a true 12p,24p, 30p, 60p, stream. Basically the cam is the DVX, and although the DVX can be noisy in some situations, the majority of the visible noise is due to the DV compression.

Granted, few have seen the HVX in action, and there are many unknowns, but from what I've seen, "Hype" doesn't belong in the description. Panasonic isn't stupid. they've waited on HD just for this reason. Provide a true brodcast proven format to the masses.

Rob
Robert Rock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2005, 02:53 PM   #14
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Freeport, Texas
Posts: 25
P2 is irrelevant

With the advent of a P2 compatable harddrive recorder, the issue of P2 cards becomes irrelevant. The Cineporter will put this cam in a competative arena with the HDV products, and also allow for the "average joe" to have access to a true broadcast format. To me, it's kinda like shooting with a consumer DV camera, vs. a DVCPro 50 Camera like the SDX900. They both look good in their own right, but one looks better, and is just that much more accepted. Since the majority of my clients will be producing "films", or programming for broadcast, I feel the HVX200 will give me an edge over the competition when it comes to format considerations.

Rob
Robert Rock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2005, 03:39 PM   #15
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UT
Posts: 945
Hey Jeff,

I love a good spirited debate! Just a few retorts:

Quote:
As you've said yourself, "marketing hype". Saying the H1 captures a progressive image is stretching the truth a bit. It has an interlaced CCD which scans at 60Hz. The internal DSP takes the two fields and de-interlaces them in-camera to produce a "progressive" frame, which is then processed and compressed. Arguably more efficeint than doing a de-interlace on the footage after it's been processed, but still by no means truly progressive and unlike the footage from the HD100 or what little we have seen from the HVX thus far, the H1 does exhibit some interlace issues which are clearly visible on fast motion and pans when viewed on a monitor that can display the full 1440x1080 resolution. As you have also said, the H1 "encodes repeat frames to be 60i compatible", well duh... You do realize that by encoding these repeat frames, that those (even though they are a repeat) still count within that 25Mbps allotment on tape.

The 1080p encoding on the HVX works the same way, (but better because it's truly progressive). True progressive frames are captured from the CCD and are encoded as fields along with duplicates in order to fit within the 60i specification for DVCPROHD 1080i.
Actually, I believe the CCD scans at 48Hz in 24F mode. The CCD is reclocked for this mode. I'm pretty dang sure of this because you lose some sensitivity in 24F mode. And the repeat flags tell the encoder to output the 60i on the fly from 24 PROGRESSIVE frames on tape! That means the 25mbs are for the 24 frames. The downside of this, of course, is that it is a new format in it's native form, which is why you can't currently capture 24F through firewire with most NLE's. Again, I could be wrong because there is nothing official from Canon that confirms this, but I do know that the few Canon reps that I spoke to at DVExpo basically confirm this theory, at least as far as what is laid tape being 24P. How they arrive at the frames is still a mystery. Digging any further and they'll just respond with "DIGIC". I'm just connecting the dots as best as I can. Again, the results have been impressive to my eye, and anyone that says you can't make a good looking film from this mode has gotta have blinders on.


Quote:
You're really reaching with that statement.... Yes, MPEG2 can be that efficeint under circumstances where the compression is hand-tuned and undergoes multipass encoding as we would do for output to DVD. I have yet to see any indication from any HDV camera, H1 and HD100 included that their on-the-fly, one-size-fits-all MPEG2 encoding really has that much to offer over any of the intraframe/DCT formats.
Have you seen Nick Hiltgen's posts about the H1? He tested it against an F900 and said material from the H1's HDV could intercut quite well with HDCAM. Look at his posts from the thread Shannon Rawls started entitled, I think "XLH1 meets F900".

"...and that's all she wrote." (guess the movie)


Quote:
IMO, Canon has a real nice unit, but they have priced themselves out of their own market. Sure, they'll still sell a handful of them, but they would probably sell more and generate more revenue if they dropped the price by $2500 or so. Instead, they're trying to convince everyone (and probably themselves) of their own superiority by inflating the price.
I sure would like the camera to be $2500 cheaper, but I can't fault Canon for testing the market. Maybe the brightside to the price is it won't be the "oh, you have one too" camera. One thing I do expect is to see quite a bit of material from this camera on Discovery HD and HDNet. Yes, it's Discovery HD approved, believe it or not. Even the HDV.


Quote:
I doubt that about a superior DVCPRO HD image... Or at least not in any sensible manner. You wouldn't in your right mind use the H1 combined with a $16K DVCPROHD deck in the field...
Actually, in a low-budget filmmaking sense, this is definitely a "in my right mind" option. The Watchmaker demo was recorded SDI into a 1200a deck.
Looks phenomenal. Damn close to HDCAM quality. Shown on a 1000 line Sony HD CRT. Shown at RESFEST on the big screen...reports say it was beautiful that way too. Not surprising at all. Cineform and other options are wonderful too. That's the beauty...options. And the HDV is no slouch either.



Quote:
It's not this magical connection giving us raw 1080 line HD in pure digital glory. The video is still processed and has undergone all the same treatment that the HDV video in this camera has, with the exception of skipping the MPEG2 compression.
And this is insignifigant? Skipping MPEG2 compression is probably very important in a lot of applications. Yes, the signal goes through DIGIC, but then it's spitting out a raw, 10bit SDI compliant HD stream. Again, seeing is believing, and I definitely believe the DIGIC processing is doing some good things.


Quote:
But for me, the HVX200 is still where its at. I may be able to squeeze a better image from the H1 under the right conditions and the H1 is probably a hands-down better camera for in-studio or TV work. But the HVX200 still wins out for me with the multiple format support DVCPRO50 is a huge deal for those still working with SD and need an option to compete with or compliment digibeta. Tapeless workflow? Hell yeah! Variable frame rates? Wooohooo! Not to mention the price... An HVX with a CinePorter or FireStore will still cost less than a bare H1.
Sure, and if the HVX gives you the image that best suits your purposes, awesome!

Please don't mistake me for a Canon fanboy, please, these are wonderful tools and they have overlapping applications.

You've gotta admit, Canon has been very low-key about the H1. They're letting it sell itself, and isn't that a refreshing approach?

Personally, I'm torn between the two contenders. I think the H1 will own the 1080p realm, but the HVX has so many other filmmaker friendly features.
When we see some nice raw images from the HVX (go Kaku!), we'll be able to nitpick and debate further.

Panasonic makes wonderful tools. I've recently cut a local PBS documentary that was mostly SDX900 24p DVCPRO50 stuff, with some sprinklings of DVX b-camera footage. DV50 is a fabulous SD format. I plan on testing our studio's SD93 Panny decks SDI in with downconverted H1 material. It'll be interesting to see if it intercuts well with the native DV50 widescreen material.
Barlow Elton is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Panasonic P2HD / AVCCAM / AVCHD / DV Camera Systems > Panasonic P2HD / DVCPRO HD Camcorders

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:01 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network