Look at JVC HD100. It will have same CCD, will have same interchangable lenses, same low light lux rating, will also have MPEG2 mode, will have true 720/24p. Why? Panasonic owns JVC and both cameras come out same time, same CCD size, same price.

The Panasonic cheaper to make because no tape transport. If same price, also will have interchangable Fuji lenses.

It uses expensive flash memory. It means it will need low bit rate. That is why it will have MPEG2 mode.

Anybody wants to bet?

When it will sell at year end, the SD cards will cost lot less.

The advantage over JVC is it will also record DVCPRO-HD.

Radek

I bet that Canon will also use ProHD, like JVC. It will not adapt Sony 1080i HDV. It will use same CCD as the JVC.

Canon will be the best camera from the three because it will have best lenses. Otherwise the 3 cameras will be similar, will be excellent for film out.

<< Panasonic owns JVC >>

Sorry but this is not true. To say that Panasonic owns JVC is grossly inaccurate.

Panasonic is wholly owned by Matsushita, while JVC is only partially owned by Matsushita. While there may be some sharing of technologies (which is common among all electronics manufacturers, including Sony and Canon), the fact is that Panasonic and JVC are two distinctly different companies which compete against each other in the marketplace.

That is true but Panasonic is one of Matsushita brands and they have majority share of JVC. They compete but if they come with similar cameras with new technology that is expensive to produce I bet they share technology. The cameras are different but both 1/3" 720p and Matsushita makes CCD, which must be made in largest possible quantities to make the process economical.

It will be interested to see if Canon use 1080i or 720p. If they would come out with 1080/24p camera for 10 thousand USD that would be a riot.

<< They compete but... I bet they share technology >>

That is true, they do share technology, but you can say that of any two competing manufacturers in this industry. For example, the earlier JVC DV500 used a Sony CCD block. Sony licenses optical image stabilization technology from Canon, and calls it Super Steadyshot. Canon puts a Control-L jack on some of their camcorders, which is a Sony protocol. Canon also uses Pixel Shift technology which was first implemented by Panasonic. We could go on and on, but my point is that the industry is already fairly incestuously inbred.


<< It will be interested to see if Canon use 1080i or 720p. >>

I agree with you, that will be very interesting indeed.

<<but my point is that the industry is already fairly incestuously inbred>>


...what we need is a company making cameras OUTSIDE of Japan.

>>...what we need is a company making cameras OUTSIDE of Japan.
<<

Yes, but both Kodak and Polaroid dropped the DV ball so to speak. They aren't that big of players in the lower end digital still image market either.

{{{Written by Joe Carney:
Yes, but both Kodak and Polaroid dropped the DV ball so to speak. They aren't that big of players in the lower end digital still image market either.}}}}



Hi Joe!

Kodak is not a big player. Well we need some facts here about the lower digital still camera market.

Kodak shipped approx. 4.66 million digital cameras to domestic retailers in 2004.

Sony for 2004 shipped approx. 4.33 million cameras.

Kodak blasted ahead of the front-runner Sony Corp. in U.S. digital camera shipments in 2004 which took Sony by a big surprise. Canon comes in at third place. Kodak as well ending 2004 with number one digital camera market share in Australia, Argentina, Peru, and Chile; and the top three share positions in Germany, the United Kingdom, Mexico, and Brazil.

Kodak is doing quite well based on their 2004 numbers.

Michael Pappas
http://pbase.com/ARRFILMS

I don't think they're the same at all - one uses HDV and the other doesn't.

JVC entered the HDV market with the HD1/HD10 and now are responding to Sony FX1/Z1 with a new camera.

Panasonic isn't part of the HDV market at all, and by adopting flash or HDD will simply provide a different option to the prosumer or professional.

Thanks you, Dave! I was hoping I wouldn't have to say that myself. Bravo!

Michael I didn't know that. Most people talk about Nikon and Olympus and then Sony, Kodak.... Just wonder why Kodak didn't take the initiative and come out with a dv camcorder. Wouldn't hurt their film sales at all. I can't help but feel they could have owned the market. If they came out with a viable 1080p cam, they could still make an impact.

<<<-- Originally posted by Radek Svoboda : Look at JVC HD100. It will have same CCD, will have same interchangable lenses, same low light lux rating, will also have MPEG2 mode, will have true 720/24p.
Radek -->>>

Radek, This is an incorrect assumption, the JVC chip set is theirs and not the one we will be using. The 24P on the JVC will have a GOP around every 6 frames, and thus the HDV will have it way, and the color will be at 4:2:0. There is no connection of this product to the Panasonic P2 HD camera.

Hope that helps,

Jan

Jan,

Thank you. So now we know CCD's will different. Notice Jan did not say lenses will be different.

Jan, you're right. The recorded image will totally different but how about MPEG2 mode? Notice Jan did not say there will not be MPEG2 mode in addition to DVCPRO HD mode.

Radek

Yeah but why stick in stupid HDV when you have HD DVCPro with better sampling and NO GOP! Maybe they will, in order to capitalise on the HDV mania that's going around, but I'd imagine that seeing as they're going for a different HD format, they'll just stick with 1 and drop the cost a little to keep it under the magic 10K.

Aaron

<< Notice Jan did not say lenses will be different. >>

That's because Jan is in no position to confirm or deny anything about this camera until Panasonic officially announces it. However, you're certainly entitled to my opinion and I'm happy to give it.

The JVC camera you refer to, the GY-HD100, is using high-definition Fujinon broadcast video lenses. I've been following these P2 HD discussions closely and I don't recall any hint that the forthcoming Panasonic P2 HD will have removeable lenses. Most likely it's going to have a built-in Leica lens, but that's just a guess on my part.

Regardless, there are a wide variety of Sony, Panasonic and JVC cameras that will take a Fuji or Canon broadcast video lens. So I guess I'm not seeing your point.

<< Notice Jan did not say there will not be MPEG2 mode in addition to DVCPRO HD mode. >>

Notice Jan is not saying many things until the news is official; you can't possibly infer something about this camera based on what she has *not* said. I hope we're all clear on that concept,

Exactly -- I had to make this point to someone on DVXUser.

Jan cannot confirm or deny anything -- she's under lockdown. If she went around denying our speculations, then we'd quickly be able to paint her into a corner, forcing her to reveal something, and she's too smart for that. So she pretty much lets the speculation run wild, because she cannot confirm or deny anything other than the few things she's been authorized to release, which are: DVCPRO,DVCPRO50,DVCPRO-HD, P2, and "under $10,000".

Apparently more info will be released on April 4th.

I just hope they do two versions - under 10K and an ~$5K to really compete price wise with the Xl2 and Sony etc. For me, I can't afford a $9999.99 cam, but $5K maybe.

Aaron

Radek..Radek..Radek

Did you notice that Jan did not say there will not be a: Electromagnetic Low-Energy Pulse Laser With Sub-Benign Antiparticle Submicroscopic Wave Weapon either. Hhmmmm!

Panasonic, Jan and the DOD are holding out.........

Jan are you holding out on us?????? Step forward with the truth and you might be forgiven. Plead the 5th and well?


Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/ARRFILMS




<<<Radek Wrote:

Notice Jan did not say lenses will be different.

Notice Jan did not say there will not be MPEG2 mode in addition to DVCPRO HD mode.>>>>>>>

Sorry about being rude but what´s the point of keeping a mpeg2 based format and tape having everywhere better codecs (like Pana´s new cam) and average computers wich can handle the data stream?

I´m sorry again but i think HDV is a tactic to protect higher end cameras so consumers and prosumers can jump to the HD world without having the top hell machines. I think the consortium is more like a conspiracy than a reunion to make what masses are asking for. Perfect for an old X-files episode.

I´m glad Pana didn´t participate on it and went their own way. Tells a lot about them and their attitude, or at least tells a lot about their marketing teams...

And about the price, well, this camera can adquire in three different formats, and will improve in estorage time every year. For 6 or 7000 $ without P2 card is a very good invest that will work for at least three years. I must think that DVCPROHD is a much better format than HDV and till the rest of companies learn this and offer a better systems will take a good couple of years. even 10.000 are not so bad...

<< i think HDV is a tactic to protect higher end cameras so consumers and prosumers can jump to the HD world >>

This is going off topic now, as this is not an HDV format discussion area, but it should be understood that HDV is a response to a market demand for affordable high-definition video. So yes, it is so that consumers and prosumers can jump to the HD world, but that's what they wanted in the first place.

<< I think the consortium is more like a conspiracy than a reunion to make what masses are asking for. >>

Sorry you feel that way, but can you imagine the negative backlash if HDV *wasn't* compatible with Mini-DV cassettes? Now *that* would be a conspiracy!

The end-users ultimately control the market with they spend their money on. If HDV was such a bad idea, then it wouldn't sell. Fortunately, regardless of how you feel about one format or another, there are a variety of format choices available, which means this is a great time to switch up to HD.

<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd :
Sorry you feel that way, but can you imagine the negative backlash if HDV *wasn't* compatible with Mini-DV cassettes? Now *that* would be a conspiracy!
-->>>

I think the format is irrelevant to the storage medium. If they can stick MPG2 stream on miniDV, why not something that's intraframe compression on the tape? Maybe you'd end up with less time on the tape, but so what? You could still use your deck and have something superior to long GOP crapparooni.

Given the fact that all this secondary stuff had to come about (Cineform etc) to make working with HDV a bit easier, I think the cost in more tapes would have been justified for less headache, better image quality and more responsive editing.

While I would hesitate to call HDV a conspiracy...or would I?...it's definately some form of mass control of the market - probably due to the paranoia in the potential for lost profits if they did something innovative and maybe it didn't quite mean they hit their target revenues.

We are being led, we always will be, it's just how fast we are lead I'm interested in - Panasonic seems to jog - the others, crawl.

Aaron

Panasonic and Sony need protect their higher end market. Panasonic is making pro format come down to under 10,000 USD. That tells me they will be introducing new higher quality HD format. They have D5. Maybe they can make camera that will record D5 quality in hard drives.

In SD was DVCPRO and DVCPRO 50. Now in HD will be DVCPRO HD and they will have a competing tormat to Sony HDCAM SR, I bet. Hopefully this NAB. Faster they move to highest end, easier will be for them to improve quality of lower end, without killing high end sales.

The HD Formats now are:

Lowest quality:
HDV, DVHS, Blu-Ray, HD DVD

Medium quality:
HDCAM, Varicam

High quality:
HDCAM SR, Thomson Viper, D5

Top quality:
Arri, Dalsa

Actually the lowest quality is superb in historical perspective. It is of same or higher bit rate and resolution as HDTV boadcast. You can call broadcast quality.

In SD past, before digital, lowest quality was VHS, which was not broadcast quality. 2/3" U-Matic, was pro format, was medium quality then and was not broadcast quality either. U Matic SP was broadcast quality.

Broadcast quality was never affordable before arrival of digital. At that time term broadcast quality lost original meaning.

I’m still just wondering how hard it must be for a multinational company to make a cheap camera when we have small groups of people (as low as one) who can make their own HD cameras with interchangeable lenses and direct to hard disk recording [???????????]

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Vrionis : I’m still just wondering how hard it must be for a multinational company to make a cheap camera when we have small groups of people (as low as one) who can make their own HD cameras with interchangeable lenses and direct to hard disk recording [???????????] -->>>

Well it is very hard to make an inexpensive camera that will be in the right price point, with reliability enough so that any one can pick it up and use it, have it work with a multitude of accessories and NLEs and make it a standards based product. Pretty difficult indeed.

Jan

It's more than technology. Sony protect also rental houses sales, including Panavision, where they sold many HDCAMS. The rental houses must recoup profits before less expensive products of same quality are introduced. You must keep the customer happy. Panasonic has similar situation.

Sorry but that's incorrect. Rental houses actually recover their equipment costs very quickly. The primary consideration is, as Jan points out, the development of technology.

<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : Sorry but that's incorrect. Rental houses actually recover their equipment costs very quickly. The primary consideration is, as Jan points out, the development of technology. -->>>

As usual, Chris is right on the money. Rental houses don't buy cameras/vcrs, or whatever, if they cannot recoup their expenditure quickly.

Best,

Jan

Jan it's not that hard - I am doing it. I have one guy working for me....things change, with all the FPGA and highspeed CPU power that is on the market stuff can be done.

I will have a 4:4:4 1080p 24fps 12bit system soon sitting on my desk soon, ready for a camera body design to go around the system. It will spit out many many formats of your choice from full 4:4:4 HD to compressed SD.

and BTW I am not alone in the effort.

Don't let me forget to say that it is YOUR company(and the other big 3 ) that have driven me to this project. It's NOT a matter of desire but a matter of NEED. We NEED good tools as artists. A good paint brush does NOT cost $100,000 and in this day of computer power a camera that has MANY less options then even the cheapest single ccd dv camera but is un-compressed need not cost $100,000 or even $20,000 IMOH

<< We NEED good tools as artists. >>

But we already have them. Since the digital video revolution began in 1995, we have been living elbow-deep in an embarrassment of riches, making it easier and more affordable than ever to create high-quality content.

Obin, all can say is I am glad you and the others are doing this. Your pioneering new technology concepts and work flows. Re-thinking the process.

I can't wait to see the Panasonic, but I also have seen the small samples that have come from your camera on big screen test as well on HD systems. Those were only low mbs clips. Nothing compared to the originals. But they were excellent quality even at low mbs. The Panasonic, though it will be a major, double major advancement in video acquisition technology sold from Pansonic. It will however not be able to compete with your system and others alike on a just a pure quality of Digital video imagery.

Michael Pappas
http://www.pbase.com/ARRFILMS


<<<-- Originally posted by Obin Olson : Jan it's not that hard - I am doing it. I have one guy working for me....things change, with all the FPGA and highspeed CPU power that is on the market stuff can be done.

I will have a 4:4:4 1080p 24fps 12bit system soon sitting on my desk soon, ready for a camera body design to go around the system. It will spit out many many formats of your choice from full 4:4:4 HD to compressed SD.

and BTW I am not alone in the effort.

Don't let me forget to say that it is YOUR company(and the other big 3 ) that have driven me to this project. It's NOT a matter of desire but a matter of NEED. We NEED good tools as artists. A good paint brush does NOT cost $100,000 and in this day of computer power a camera that has MANY less options then even the cheapest single ccd dv camera but is un-compressed need not cost $100,000 or even $20,000 IMOH -->>>

<<<-- Originally posted by Obin Olson : Jan it's not that hard - I am doing it. I have one guy working for me....things change, with all the FPGA and highspeed CPU power that is on the market stuff can be done.
-->>>

We all know that Panasonic and all other camera manufacturers could do it - it's obvious though that they won't or should I say can't - simply because they have shareholders that they have to appease. I'm really interested in what you're doing Obin, sounds great. Do you have a website with any stills or video images available?

Any super duper advance in technology that's accessible for the masses will require that it's done by someone who has noone's pocketbooks to please and so can offer it at a price affordable by most

Good luck.

Aaron

Thank you Michael for the plesant reply. Chris I understand that you may not get involved in the pains of compression on a day-to-day basis..but I do as a high-end commercial production house with low-paying clients we MUST make the best of what we have(and I love my dvx100) but it's not good enough, not by a long shot and IMHO the Panasonic VariCam is also not good enough after using it...what gets my goat is the fact that if you take COMPRESSION off ANY camera with 3chips you have a WONDERFULL workable image! it's NOT the resolution I am after as it is the color space and bit depth! I guess if your not doing color grading and compositing of CG with plates you would not care. I can see that a DOC or FearFactor would not need an un-compressed camera but I do.

I look at 8bit images as a joke now. but maybe this is because I have seen what can be done with a simple RAW image without ANY camera compression/color fixing etc. its jsut amazing imho and I can see why film snobs are so stuckup..it's not DIGITAL that is at stake but the bit depth of the recorded image. It should not be "what DSP is the camera using" but "what bitdepth does the chip record in"? the question should be asked "what bit depth is the final recorded image in and how heavy is that compression" not is it mpeg2 or DV or HDCAM and "does the camera toss out 1/2 of the image information from the compression and pixel format it uses"? not "is that 4:1:1 or 4:2:2"...dunno maybe this will hit some as weird but when you start to look at what a HUGE amount of color and pixel information the standard professional camera jsut tosses away and how the camera is set by a company to jack the images to look the way they want it started to dawn on me the reason why people say "VIDEO" and "Film"
sorry for the ramble I will go to bed now...;)

funny thing is Aaron is it would be LESS work to do what I need done then building all the sub-systems it takes to compute the images. I take a RAW exposure and capture it. the standard camera system takes the raw image and converts it from the native raw format to a HEAVY compression and loads all types of color filters on it so the image can be "baked" into a heavy compression format.That is for a camera like the VariCam or the dvx100.

Oh and then all the work to build and design a tape transport!! forget it!

dunno just my 2cents

Obin, I think what your are doing is great. But from a busines standpoint, could you support a 100k ignorant users.
What would it cost to set up a toll free help desk. How about sales people, technicians, labor costs, usable documentation...benefits for your employees, legal fees, legal support fees, accountants, bookeepers, other admin over head, ...advertising...R&D andhealth insurance.. and still pay dividends to your stock holders..in other words all the things that are required to run a publicy owned business.

What you do is exciting and cutting edge, but comparing yourself to a multi national company is sort of an apple and oranges situation.

Do you have a Jan hanging out at all the various boards promoting your products? Would you have time to do that yourself if you suddenly had 10 thousand orders for what you've created?j Could you fulfill 10K orders and maintain quality. Suppose you just wanted to sell plans and insructions? Could you defend them against people copying them and sharing them with others for free?


Just trying to keep things in perspective. Concentrate on what you do best.

Obin, what you and other independent producers of cameras are doing is great and it would not be possible if big ones did not leave vacuum in market place. Obviously you don't have to make low cost HD camera to be limited to 25 Mbps. 25 Mbps DV has been around 8 years. Why continue with this tradition. Panasonic is proving that no one has to. But you were first.

<<What would it cost to set up a toll free help desk. How about sales people, technicians, labor costs, usable documentation...benefits for your employees, legal fees, legal support fees, accountants, bookeepers, other admin over head, ...advertising...R&D andhealth insurance.. and still pay dividends to your stock holders..in other words all the things that are required to run a publicy owned business.>>

If they can do all that and produce a camera that processes and compresses the image, why can't they just record a 4:4:4 image to hard disk like Juan or Obin? I think it can be done, but the Japanese consortium members are just locking in technologies for the oligopolies benefit.

Once again it will be left to ever growing mod/hack enthusiast to do the full job.

Go for it Obin.

The film industry was started by enthusiasts hacking together their own gear.

Make it open-source while you're at it. :-)

Hey Jan,

So everyone was figuring for a while the Panny will have a fixed lens. But now rumors of interchangeables are flying. Will lens be fixed or interchangeable please?

Hoping so, Hoping so .....

Can't say, NAB!

Sorry,

Jan

Hey Jan, do you have that response saved as a hot key. I am seeing that everywhere. :- O :- l :-)


<<<-- Originally posted by Jan Crittenden Livingston : Can't say, NAB!

Sorry,

Jan -->>>

Jan,

Can you say if the new camera will use the same kind of zoom controller as the dvx100?

Any chance the new camera has a remote Focus port? This would be a life saver!!!!!

Jan really isn't in any position to comment on the feature set of the HVX beyond what she has already done. Please don't pester her with questions she's not allowed to answer yet. Instead, let's all speculate! Speculation is just as definitive as not getting an official answer, and much more fun. My own speculation is that it *will* have the Aux jack required for a VariZoom-style remote lens controller. As for focus, that depends. If the camera has auto-focus, then it has a motor, which could be remotely controlled. If it's manual focus only, then there's no focus motor, meaning any remote focus control will have to be a mechanical link to the ring, like a follow-focus mechanism.

Well Im hoping if the camera isn't finished yet and does not have a remote Focus port... That we should petition for that feature!

Please give us the Remote Focus Port

Well, I'm pretty sure the feature set has been locked in.

To recap: if the lens has autofocus, that means there's a motor that might be controlled remotely.

If the lens is manual focus only, then there is no focus motor, and remote control will be a mechanical linkage to the focus ring.

Hope that's clear,

<<<-- Originally posted by Laurence Maher : Hey Jan,

So everyone was figuring for a while the Panny will have a fixed lens. But now rumors of interchangeables are flying. Will lens be fixed or interchangeable please?

Hoping so, Hoping so ..... -->>>

Which rumours of an interchangeable lens?! The "under the covers" picture tha's out doesn't look like your standard interchangeable lense to me and I doubt they'd do that. In fact, don't you dare do that Panasonic, I would have a heart attack and empty my bank account in one fell swoop.

Aaron

No Jan, NOOOOOOOOOO

The pain . . .

THE PAINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!

Thanks for response, though.

Aaron,

Ya, I know, just heard a bunch of rumors, that's all. Had to ask.

Chris,

Here's a quote from you . . .

"Speculation is just as definitive as not getting an official answer" . . .

LOL . . .

Strange statement. Never bothered looking at it that way, just struck me as funny, kind of like, "A platapus is just as definitive as a pink platipus." See, neither a platipus, NOR a pink platipus gives one answers to the "meaning of life" question. But it's kind of funny to say anyway.

:)