DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   AVCHD Format Discussion (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/avchd-format-discussion/)
-   -   Panasonics' 3CCD design Versus Sonys' CMOS design (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/avchd-format-discussion/79199-panasonics-3ccd-design-versus-sonys-cmos-design.html)

Jemore Santos November 8th, 2006 06:47 PM

Panasonics' 3CCD design Versus Sonys' CMOS design
 
Same format but different approach in cameras. I think the "Panasonics' HDC-DX1 verus Sonys' HDR-UX1" battle will be hotly anctipated. Both are recording on DVDs but Pannys' bitrate is 13mps while Sonys' is 12mps, probably not much difference but Panasonic have opted for three 1/4inch CCDs while Sony has opted for a 1/3inch CMOS sensor with a higher gross effective pixel count.

I think this format is great and maybe in the near future they will release prosumer cameras that have 18mps bitrates, but the battle have just begun with these cameras.

Jerry Jones November 8th, 2006 08:21 PM

Years ago, I compared video shot by the Sony DCR-VX1000 (3 CCDs) to video recorded by a Canon single CCD camcorder.

The difference was obvious to my eyes.

I suspect I'll be buying the Panasonic HDC-SD1.

By the way, the AVCHD specification was amended on July 13... up to 24 Mbps:

http://tinyurl.com/ylc2za

Jerry Jones
http://www.jonesgroup.net

Hse Kha November 9th, 2006 11:30 AM

Sorry but I disagree. OK with 3 CCDs may be better with colors, but even if they were the difference would be much hard to notice than RESOLUTION. Sadly the new AVCHD Panasonics have only 520K pixels as opposed to 2M pixels of the Canon CMOS in the HV10.

Paulo Teixeira November 9th, 2006 02:56 PM

Because of the ¼“ CCDs size and the low pixel count, you should expect the lowlight capabilities to be better than the HC3/HV10. When dealing with 3 images in a camcorder this small, it’s not a good idea to use a lot of pixels. If the pixel count was as high as 1440X1080 the camcorder would have been useless for videotaping indoors and 1920X1080 would have been worse. This is the same reason why the HVX200 used a lower pixel count as well. Panasonic would have made the biggest mistake in their career if they used 2MP per CCD in this small camcorder.

Jerry Jones November 9th, 2006 04:08 PM

I about fell out of my chair when I read Panasonic's press release:

http://tinyurl.com/yeb6pn

"Their high-sensitivity features also allow for shooting in poorly-lit situations - for example, as low as six lux."

Plus:

"Panasonic has also developed a new high-speed HD signal processor, the HD Crystal Engine, that processes images twice as quickly as progressive scan CCDs."

"Panasonic has also developed a new LSI to implement the MPEG4 AVC/H.264 technology used in the AVCHD format."

I'm anxious to read the review from CamcorderInfo.Com on the real-world performance because the press release marketing sounds nice, but it's nebulous -- and therefore not terribly informative -- absent some independent testing.

Jerry Jones
http://www.jonesgroup.net

Peter Jefferson November 9th, 2006 05:10 PM

give it a year or so and CMOS sensrs will be the norm at the current size of the current HDV CCD sizes

one thing people forget that with video, resolution isnt, and shouldnt be everything... IMO colour saturation and accuracy (ie dynamic range) are as important, of not moreso than resolution itself..

Wayne Morellini November 20th, 2006 07:41 PM

One thing that people also forget, is that good consumer quality CMOS 1/2inch chips can be had for $30, in reasonable quantities, circuits to deliver better codec quality than XDCAM HD, add another $100 in quantity, the rest to retail $500 (top notch lens is extra though). To equal the quality, or exceed it, is another few hundred to 500, plus lens. The quality of the cheaper sensor will probably also keep going up. But unfortunately we are under the thumb as to what we are allowed to buy.

Martin Sinclair November 27th, 2006 06:59 AM

The pixel count of the SD1 appears to be identical or at least similar to the HVX200. ( 520000 vs 518400 )

So the source quality could be as good as the HVX200 in theory.
(Assuming Panasonic are using pixel-shifting)

I guess we'll find out soon enough...

Ron Evans November 27th, 2006 08:36 AM

I think the lens will be more important. As someone pointed out the lens is really a lowpass filter. If the imager doesn't see it, then the recorder will not see it either !!! This will likely make the difference in consumer, prosumer and true pro HD cameras.

Ron Evans


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:50 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2020 The Digital Video Information Network