New panasonic 4K camera at #ibc2013

NEW Panasonic AG-PX270 4K Camera | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/omegabroadcast/9735020663/in/set-72157635508127494)

Say what?

Any details?

Let's hope the put a better lens on it than they did with the HPX250.

The Panasonic press release states it's not a 4K camera, but an AVC-Ultra camera.
It's actually the AJ-PX270.

TVTechnology: IBC 2013: Panasonic Debuts First Ultra-AVC Handheld Camera (http://www.tvtechnology.com/equipment/0082/ibc--panasonic-debuts-first-ultra-avc-handheld-camera/221418)


Interesting, that it has the designation AJ instead of AG. AJ is reserved for their higher end cameras, like the HPX3100. The HPX250 is an AG camera.

Let's hope the put a better lens on it than they did with the HPX250.

According to the press release, it's a newly developed 22x lens.

Yes. Thanks for that correction. There are also new AVC-ULTRA recorders:

NEW Panasonic AVC-Ultra Field Recorder_side | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/omegabroadcast/9735032827/in/set-72157635508127494)

Also an AG-AC8 shoulder mount camera.

The PX270 looks interesting.

If it is still 1/3" chips, how much are you gaining from AVC-Ultra?

I color corrected some footage shot on DVCPro HD with a 2/3" broadcast camera (unsure of the model) & I felt I had a lot more room for adjustment than anything I ever got out of a HVX200. The codec was the same between the cameras, but I really feel like the HVX chips weren't amazing enough to really take advantage of the codec.

I'm sure the PX270 chips are much better than the HVX chips, but the HPX250 already has AVC-Intra, which is a generation beyond DVCPro HD. So I really wonder since the HVX chips were worse than the codec (in my opinion), are the chips in the HPX250 or PX270 going to be advanced enough to really take advantage of the advanced codecs.

Panasonic AJ-PX270

http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/sales_o/broch_pdf/aj-px270.pdf

Don't see a Leica badge on the lens. That doesn't bode well.

The AG-HVX200 used spacial offset / Advanced Progressive Technology with a pixel count of 960 x 540.

"While pixel count is one of the many important factors that determine picture quality, it is not the only one that should be considered. Using a progressive type chip along with a precise implementation of Spatial Offset can optimize the resolution that is possible." From ftp://ftp.panasonic.com/pub/panasonic/drivers/PBTS/papers/AG-HVX200.CCD-WP.pdf

We have some thoughts on the new AJ-PX270 as a news item on our site:

Omega - News - Panasonic - Panasonic AJ-PX270 announced (http://www.omegabroadcast.com/fmp/omega-news-detail.php?&-recid=327)

The question is, will Intra200 support 1080p50/60? If so, that would make it slightly tempting for me, as it would be the first non-shoulder 3-chip 1080p50/60 cam with AVC-I.

Strike that, It's MicroP2, which is guaranteed to not support 1080p50/60.

Does it have slots for regular P2 cards?

Okay, I'm confused. This video taken at NAB 2013 shows the prototype of a hand-held AVC-Ultra camera, which I assume is now the PX-270. At the :13 sec. mark of the video, the info card says it's a micro P2 card cam with 1080/60P. Either micro P2 cards can handle 1080/50-60P, or the cam can also take regular P2 cards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SqN4Mm9_N8w

I understand the base model of the PX-270 does not have AVC-Ultra, you have to order it with the camera.

edit - never mind, I think Jack is correct. I have no idea what camera Panasonic displayed at NAB, but it's not the PX-270. My apologies, Jack.

Right now, I think the only handheld cam that supports 1080p50/60 in 10-bit, 4:2:2 is the Sony PXW-Z100 4K cam. It does "standard" HD in 50/60P. We're talking internally recording, of course.

This camera or group of cameras (Pana, Sony Canon) could be interesting, could be the perfection of the 1/3" camera or be stepping stones imho.

A long time ago...the only option for shooting anything associated with television was the large 2/3" camera. It was the only way to get great imaging sensors and great glass, and the broadcast codecs. These cameras were the profit centers for Sony and Panasonic. A lot has changed and you can probably see as many small cameras as large cameras on broadcast television today. I noticed a C300 being used as the main camera during Espn's draft day coverage. Things have changed.

One no longer has to have a 2/3" camera to get acceptable images for broadcast. So when I look at 1/3" cameras, I am looking for when the companies decide to not protect the larger cameras and put the useability features in the small cameras. We will see if it happens in the 4k round of small cameras.

The features I want/need are smooth servo motors (like a true broadcast lens) and light sensitivity of at least f11 at 2000 lux (without gain or detail robbing noise reduction).

The codec and resolution choices really make these cameras worth looking at, but for me it is the useability features that will make them worth buying. 4k might be useful in some situations, but these need to be an evolution of the 1/3" chip camera, not just resolution in a box for me to replace anything.

I went with the XF300 from the last round of 1/3" chip cameras (HPX-250, EX1...) because it checked a lot of boxes. I thought the Panasonic HPX-250, 160/130 were pretty nice but the servo motors were generic imho, there was no color matrix in the menu and the codec choices were only 100mbps or 25mbps (nobody likes AVC Intra 50). The lens had some question marks as well. I would hope that Panasonic would improve upon somethings with this PX270 as it has a lot of potential of being "the" 1/3" camera, but we will have to wait and see.
I am wondering how long it will take Canon to participate in the competition? They are usually last to arrive at the party. I hope that does not mean after NAB next year...

Right now, I think the only handheld cam that supports 1080p50/60 in 10-bit, 4:2:2 is the Sony PXW-Z100 4K cam. It does "standard" HD in 50/60P. We're talking internally recording, of course.

It does 4k60p in XAVC-intra too. Great codec but I'm still having trouble wrapping my head around the "consumer grade" headend.

"While pixel count is one of the many important factors that determine picture quality, it is not the only one that should be considered. Using a progressive type chip along with a precise implementation of Spatial Offset can optimize the resolution that is possible."

It isn't the only thing to be considered for sure, but there were sever limitations to the top quality a HVX could provide. I shot a couple multicam events using the composite output of the HVX200 & HVX200a, I could see a clear improvement on the HVX200a through a composite cable. Later I did a multicam event with the only change in equipment being the camera & I used two EX1 cameras instead of a HVX200 & HVX200a.

Again, through a composite video cable, the EX1 smoked both the HVX200 & HVX200a in picture quality.

So I'd think (in theory at least) that the spatial offset that can create an image resolution of 1080, should be able to make a very solid 480 image. But even the 480 image out of a HVX was mud compared to another camera in the same price point.

In my opinion, the DVCPro HD codec was much better than the image a HVX could produce. So (to bring this back on topic) I'm very skeptical that you'll see a worthwhile improvement in picture quality by using the AVC-Ultra 200 codec in the PX270.

I'll be very interested to see a head to head comparison of a HPX250 AVC-Intra vs PX270 AVC-Ultra, plus take a uncompressed live signal out & record uncompressed video to a Blackmagic Hyperdeck.

Then lets compare the four different recorded images. If I had to place my bets, I think you might see minimal gains (at best) in the uncompressed or AVC-Ultra, but really the AVC-Intra will perform exceedingly well & most of the picture quality limitations will come from the hardware & not the codec.

So the best selling point I can see for the PX270 is that it would be great for people who have a AVC-Ultra workflow & you don't want to deal with AVC-Intra from a HPX250.

------

tl;dr - I'm skeptical of the value of the PX270 when AVC-Intra probably out performs the chips in the HPX250.

(But, please, if someone can prove ,e wrong, show me some tests / articles.)

The features I want/need are smooth servo motors (like a true broadcast lens) and light sensitivity of at least f11 at 2000 lux (without gain or detail robbing noise reduction).
But you wouldn't want to stop a lens down to f11 with a 1/3" chip, would you? Surely that's past the point where diffraction effects soften the focus. I've worked with 1/3" HDV cameras for a few years and f8 seems to be the upper limit, f4-f5.6 the sweet-spot.

Zoom controls on "handy cams" are improving all the time. My Canon XH-A1s is very smooth and has the added bonus of being able to dial-in exactly the speed I want, with smooth accelleration and decelleration between speeds.

Hello Mark. The spec f11 @ 2000 lux is a benchmark standard of light sensitivity. A standardaized test is done by emitting 2000 lux of light and seeing where a camera at 0 gain will get correct exposure level. It is not an operational setting. For example, the EX-1 is rated at F10 at 2000 lux where the JCV 200 series was rated at F8 at 2000 lux. So no, you would not want to film at f11, but you would want your camera to be rated at f11 2000 lux (without all the noise reduction...)

As far as the servo motors, I do not know if you have the chance to use a broadcast lens and rear zoom controller very often, but imho they are still far ahead of a lot of handicams, especially the Panasonics. The XF300 is the best 1/3" LANC controller I have used, but it still has room for improvement. Like I said in my post, it is really a decision "if" the camera makers want to make the motors better. They can if they decide to.

I think f12@2000 is the "new" benchmark, as just about every broadcast HD camera coming out is up to that spec.

Paul

We have some thoughts on the new AJ-PX270 as a news item on our site:

Omega - News - Panasonic - Panasonic AJ-PX270 announced (http://www.omegabroadcast.com/fmp/omega-news-detail.php?&-recid=327)
It is stated there that "A couple of years ago the BBC approved some 1/3” chip cameras for use in production. The key seemed to be having a codec that could do 50mb/sec. HBO and the Discovery channel followed around the same time and AVC-INTRA-50 seemed to be an acceptable data rate for video for these networks."

It's important to note that the 50Mbs criteria for full broadcast acceptance ONLY applies to an inter-frame codec - *NOT* an intra frame one such as AVC-INTRA50. The latter is NOT considered fully acceptable to such as the BBC or the EBU for general broadcast acquisition - they require intra-frame codecs to be a minimum of 100Mbs for full acceptance. Hence for Panasonic cameras, AVC-Intra100 is acceptable, AVC-Intra50 is not.

As far as AVC-Ultra goes, then the question it begs in my mind is whether it implies that the new camera will be capable of such as 1080p/50(60)? If the answer is yes, then that would seem to be why the camera has got the "Ultra" designation, not down to lower compression at "standard" HD formats. I agree with Jack, it's likely to be the front end that's the limiting factor here. For 1080p/25, 1080i/25, AVC-Ultra is unlikely to produce any noticeable difference.

As far as micro-P2 goes, then whilst the Panasonic nomenclature is confusing, 1080p/50 should be recordable at 200Mbs. I'm pretty sure micro-P2 is capable of that, though not anything needing 400Mbs.

Hello Mark. The spec f11 @ 2000 lux is a benchmark standard of light sensitivity. A standardaized test is done by emitting 2000 lux of light and seeing where a camera at 0 gain will get correct exposure level.
There's more to it than that. It's also necessary to specify the signal/noise under the test conditions, and nowadays there is the complication of in-camera electronic noise reduction - comparative tests are really only valid if that can be switched out. (It's also assumed it's under the 0dB gain setting.)

All a figure such as "f11 @ 2000" tells you in isolation is the ISO rating of the camera at 0dB, not it's intrinsic sensitivity.

If you consider two cameras, both at 2000 lux, "A" with a spec of f11, but "B" with a spec of f8, first thoughts may be to say that A must therefore be a stop more sensitive than B?

But what if the S/N figures are included and A has a s/n of 50dB, B is 56dB? That then tells a very different story - the intrinsic sensitivity of each is the same, camera A could be made identical to B by simply putting in 6dB of gain.

[s]It's MicroP2, which is guaranteed to not support 1080p50/60.

Really? That would make this camera a no-goer for me too. Do you have a reference for that?

This video states that it does support 1080 50p/60p.

AJ-PX270 Ultra Handheld Camera Recorder - YouTube

Heeeeeeeey this looks promising. Any chance that since it takes microP2 it would take regular SD cards with the limitation being not recording in the higher bitrate modes?

This video states that it does support 1080 50p/60p.
That graphic may just be a generic one for AVC-Ultra. You may be right, and I hope you are, but it would be good to get positive confirmation from a definitive source once and for all before getting hopes up too high. I'm just surprised if it does have 1080p/50(60) the fact is not even mentioned in the initial announcement, or made a lot of in that video. (Whereas features like a front mounted run button are.)

That graphic may just be a generic one for AVC-Ultra.

The way it's presented, I think not. There's no reason to single out one particular part of the AVC-Ultra spec and show it along side a picture of the PX270, unless it does have it, or they are trying to fool people into thinking it does.

The video also mentions that the SDI outputs 50/60p. I find it unlikely that it would do that if it couldn't record it. The technical reasons for excluding 60p are about processing speed, not card write speed.

For me, not having 1080/50p immediately disqualifies it as an option.

If this camera has 50p and an image quality at least as good as the HPX250, and it's not too much more expensive, it might finally be the camera I've been looking for.

It very much looks like the "redesigned" lens is nearly identical to the 250's. I just hope Panasonic have increased the speed of servo focus compensation when zooming fast. That video doesn't look too promising in that regard. Still, there is a while before release for them to fine-tune the firmware.

I was looking really hard at the 250. One thing that eventually ruled it out was all of the complaints about the lens. . .stopping down all the way to 3.2, the issues with it being soft at wider focal lengths, and I even read about sharpness being uneven across the lens--sharper in center, softer at edges. This is all from internet research and not firsthand experience. If they have fixed those issues, that would be fantastic.

I was looking really hard at the 250. One thing that eventually ruled it out was all of the complaints about the lens. . .stopping down all the way to 3.2,


The lens on the 270 will do the same thing. There are certain design techniques that simply can't be done with this zoom range and price. One is that the maximum aperture will change with focal length, and the other is that it will not be para-focal. That has to be faked with software controlling the focus on the fly. This is also the reason focus must be fly by wire on all these long zoom range cameras in the price bracket. So I'm not expecting massive changes with the PX270 lens, but I'm hopeful for some improvement.

the issues with it being soft at wider focal lengths, and I even read about sharpness being uneven across the lens--sharper in center, softer at edges.

And yet I haven't seen AC130 and AC160 uses complaining of that, even though it's the same lens. It may be a case of the problem not being all that bad, but 250 users are usually coming down to it from the more high-end cameras, whereas the 130/160 users are generally coming up to it from lesser cameras.


This is all from internet research and not firsthand experience. If they have fixed those issues, that would be fantastic.

I'm in the same boat as you. I don't have access, short of a 1000km plane trip to actually try out any of these cameras. Australian stores don't have such generous return policies as US stores. And since I only do this as a hobby I can put up with my modified consumer camera in the mean time.

I wonder where this 22x lens thing came from? Were people unhappy with the 12-16x found on other camcorders? I would rather have less range that functions consistently throughout the massive range that comes bundled with mediocrity.

Does anyone know at what point that stop down begins on the lens? It's got to be constant aperture up to a point before it starts forcibly closing down. Perhaps one could train oneself to only use the constant part of the zoom range.

I don't know about most people, but I shoot wildlife and long reach is very important.

It was also important when I was shooting sport professionally many years ago. I could have bought a house for what some of those lenses cost.

Oh well. At least my foot tastes delicious. Maybe use a little less salt.

Shooting sports quite extensively in the past with the HVX200s Ive always liked this form factor for run and gun shooting. Documentation says 10 bit 4:2:2 in 50mb - sounds interesting. Also says AVC Intra 200? Curious to see some images and how it holds up to some abuse. This could be a solid run and gun sports/reality TV shooter.

Documentation says 10 bit 4:2:2 in 50mb - sounds interesting. Also says AVC Intra 200?

The only documentation I've found so far says:


Wide Range of Recording Bit Rates: AVC-ULTRA*1 Codec Family
•AVC-LongG50/25 and AVC-Intra100/50 codecs are provided as standard features. AVC-LongG50/25 codecs achieve 10 bit/4:2:2 image quality at a data rate of approximately 50/25 Mbps.
•Optional AVC-Intra200 codec for visually lossless images that approach uncompressed master quality.
•Low-bit-rate AVC-Proxy for network use.

*1: AVC-ULTRA is the name of Panasonic's professional video codec family. The AJ-PX270 does not support all of the formats included in the AVC-ULTRA family.


Notice that AVC-Intra 200 is optional. I like that idea if it means the camera will be cheaper, because I can't see that the quality from the sensor/lens is going to be good enough to justify AVC-Intra 200.

The way it's presented, I think not. There's no reason to single out one particular part of the AVC-Ultra spec and show it along side a picture of the PX270, unless it does have it, or they are trying to fool people into thinking it does.

The video also mentions that the SDI outputs 50/60p. I find it unlikely that it would do that if it couldn't record it. The technical reasons for excluding 60p are about processing speed, not card write speed.
Watching again, I see what you mean.

I can only say I'm very surprised that if it has any 1080p/50 ability, it isn't flagged up heavily right at the start - as it is they make big points about a front rec run button, and positioning of an audio level control - what you say about 1080p/50 output is tucked away towards the end.

Very unlikely that it will have 1080 50p/60p since it's locked to MicroP2.

The PMW-300 only speced out that their XAVC was up to 100mbps. If that's I-frame, that means no 1080 50p/60p.

Very unlikely that it will have 1080 50p/60p since it's locked to MicroP2.
I'm pretty sure that microP2 is able to handle 200Mbs - so should be OK for 1080p/50 at AVC-Intra Class 100. (It's 400Mbs which microP2 isn't rated to do.)
The PMW-300 only speced out that their XAVC was up to 100mbps. If that's I-frame, that means no 1080 50p/60p.
Pretty unimpressive if that's the case. One of the main reasons for introducing XAVC was to provide the route to higher resolutions and framerates. They may just as well left it XDCAM422.

I've done some research and discovered that these formats don't relate to the bit-rates in the way I expected. I expected Intra100 to always be approximately 100Mb/s, no matter what frame size or rate. This is not the case. AVC-Intra100 at 50p runs at a whopping 222Mb/s.

However, there are still some 1080p50/60 formats that come within Micro-P2's maximum write speed of 200Mb/s

In theory, the PX270 using Micro-P2 would be capable of supporting all the formats I've highlighted in yellow and pink. From the wording of the PX270 preliminary sales brochure, it sounds like the pink formats will be optional.

But also notice that the PX270 has a single full-sized P2 card slot. So it's anyone's guess what it might be able to handle.

A couple of other observations:

- Intra50 and G50 at 1080p50/60 seem to be arbitrarily missing from the specification and yet I can't see any technical reason why those formats couldn't be included. Maybe they are being saved for Ultra-AVC 2.


- Panasonic state that G25 produces similar quality to MPEG2 at 50Mb/s.

Comparing AVC-LongG25 to MPEG-2 compression adopted by other vendors with a bit rate
of 50Mbps and 8-bit 4:2:2 sampling, AVC-LongG25 archives comparable or better picture
quality with a 50% bit rate saving over MPEG-2.



- It sounds like there is some degree of compatibility between Micro-P2 and SD.

Precautions When Using SDHC/SDXC Memory Cards with the AJ-P2AD1G Memory Card Adapter
Only the DV, DVCPRO, DVCPRO50, and AVC-Intra50 recording formats can be used when using the Memory Card Adapter on P2 Series
products. Memory cards of Class 10 or higher are recommended, but recording may not be possible with some cards.


If SD cards can be used in the P2 adapter, then it seems likely that SD cards could be used in the PX270, given the limitations on supported formats and reduced reliability.

Of course, none of this matters as we will have access to to full specs just before the PX270 is available to purchase.

I've done some research and discovered that these formats don't relate to the bit-rates in the way I expected. I expected Intra100 to always be approximately 100Mb/s, no matter what frame size or rate. This is not the case. AVC-Intra100 at 50p runs at a whopping 222Mb/s.
I'd take that 222Mb/s figure to be a nominal 200Mbs, but it's correct that the whole AVC-Intra/AVC-Ultra nomenclature system is a confusing mess. Hence it would be possible to record 1080p/50 to microP2 in Class 100.

As evidence, look at the original press release for microP2. Panasonic Announces April Delivery of MicroP2 Cards at DV Info Net (http://www.dvinfo.net/news/panasonic-announces-april-delivery-of-microp2-cards.html)

That says: " The microP2 cards will guarantee data writing up to the class200 mode of AVC-ULTRA, the company’s newest compression system***. Then the note adds "***With the exception of 1080/60p/ 50p within class 200."

I take that to mean they WILL record the 222Mbs modes - 1080p/50 at Class 100, and 1080p/25, 720p/50 etc at Class 200, but WILL NOT record the 452Mbs modes such as 1080p/50 at Class 200.

I take that to mean they WILL record the 222Mbs modes - 1080p/50 at Class 100, and 1080p/25, 720p/50 etc at Class 200, but WILL NOT record the 452Mbs modes such as 1080p/50 at Class 200.

It does sound like that.

I guess I need to find something else to concentrate on for a few months until Panasonic releases the full spec for the PX270. :)

It's been rumored that the GH4 might use the 222Mbps bitrate of Class 100 AVC-Ultra, but that might not be the AVC-Ultra codec.

The only XAVC camera that can do 1080p50/60 is the 4K cameras forthcoming. The only disadvantage is the consumer-grade headend in the 1/2.3'' 20 Megapixel sensor.

Post editing timed out so I had to double post.

Didn't catch the single full-size P2 slot. That opens it up to the 452Mbps Class 200 1080p50/60. (if implemented)

If there is 1080p50/60 in this camera, Sony better release a new PMW-200 at NAB, a PMW-250 with XAVC and XQD perhaps. (Having a single non adapter XQD slot with 1 or 2 SxS slots would be great)

I really wish companies would develop what is really important.. Optics. This new lens may have a great range.. but with no known manufacturer behind it who knows how good it will be.

For now i'll stick with my PMW200. The Fuji lens on the front is great although i just wish it was a bit better quality throughout the iris range.. I've gotten far to use to how amazing my C300 looks with L series zooms.

Seems like from researching the lens was everyone's big complaint about the 250. I know for me it's what ultimately turned me off from it.

Actually looking into it.. its not a new lens. its the 250's lens.

To quote Anakin Skywalker. . ."NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

I didn't buy a 250 because of the lens issues so I hope it is not the same.

Actually looking into it.. its not a new lens. its the 250's lens.

Do you know something we don't? I agree that it looks like the same lens, but Panasonic tell us it's a "newly designed lens", and they may have simply needed to refine to element design and servo to make improvements, without scrapping the whole design.

No, sorry didnt mean to jump to conclusions. Maybe its been overhauled. Hopefully.

So it's been a few months since this was touched on but as more details are released this camera is shaping up to be pretty amazing. It's not 4k, sure, but here's a few specs which seem pretty exciting:

- It's actually AJ-PX270 (not AG as in the thread title) which I believe is more of their "pro" lineup.
- 1080p60 at 50Mbps LongGOP and over 200Mbps when long recording times aren't needed
- 3G-SDI Output
- 10 bit 4:2:2 recording INTERNALLY
- Approximately 12 stops of Dynamic Range (as described on another site)
- 22x Zoom Lens
- SLOW, CREEPING ZOOM! - Listed at 2 Seconds FAST, or up to 180 Seconds SLOW (That's 3 minutes!)
- Dual Micro P2 Slots
- Killer LCD with 1.56M dots
- Killer new OLED EVF
- Flash Band Compensation built in to limit banding when there's camera flashes at events, etc.
- Newly developed Sensor
- Newly designed lens
- Wireless and wired networking capability

Not bad, huh?