"I still not quite sure what the mechanism for packaging 24 fps data into the DV format spec is. How does one edit the 24 fps footage shot with the new Panasonic camera? "

you edit like you would any other video ... you only need special software if you want to remove the 3:2 so it end up at 24fps for a transfer to film

"Additionally, if the 24P footage is the same resolution as the 30P footage shot with the camera, why would anyone want to shoot 24P, other than for a planned blow-up to film?"

you answered your own question ! 24p is for transfer to film AND at that point it can be converted to any other medium - ntsc , pal , HD , dvd etc ...

"Why drop data, when saving it incurs no expense? "

the savings? is the direct transfer to film

"And that looks like a really chintzy lens assembly on the Panasonic, too. I think the XL1s is still the machine to beat. "

so you judge a book by the cover ? i saw the photo and it didn't look chintzy to me ... the GL1 , Xl1 , vx2K, pd150, jvc streamer, panasonic dvc100 are all different - what you like on the XL 1 might NOT be right for me ( i choose the gl - i found the XL draws too much attention to it when shooting in street) .. i buy a camera to suit my needs/project - $$ is 2ndary ... IMO all these under $5K camera's are throw -away - you buy it -shoot your project..and after 1 1/2 -2 years you got your $$ worth , SO on to the NEXT camera ...
there is a camera for ALL budgets ! my budget might call for a pd150 , yours a dsr 500 , others arricam ....

"Here's to hoping that the Canon XL2 is a prosumer version of Sony's HDW-F900 Cinealta, "

dream ON ...


"Such products would *really* be the democritizing revolutions forecasted by Coppola and others back in the '70s."

DV is that revolution ... today anybody can make a MOVIE ! finance it themselves and edit it at home ... you don't need the 900 cinealta to join the revolution !!!!!!!!!

"DV is that revolution ... today anybody can make a MOVIE ! finance it themselves and edit it at home ... you don't need the 900 cinealta to join the revolution!"

DV is great, but we've yet to see a DV-to-film transfer enjoy the same kind of release as 35 mm and 24P productions (excepting, perhaps, the upcoming Full Frontal). Besides, if you want to do a DV-to-film transfer, PAL XL1s have been available for years. Who needs 24P when 25P can be transferred to 24P film with no perceptable difference?

Small chips lack the dynamic range (latitude) and range of depth-of-field that film formats and HD video posess. Folks in Hollywood love to see great films made regardless of format, but it's difficult to get a good film taken seriously by distributors unless it's shot on a high-res medium. (The only DV film I've seen receive any kind of worthwhile release was last year's Center of the World.)

There's really no technical reason why 24P HD chips can't be mass-produced and stuck into modified XL1s, except that no video manufacturer would want to undercut the profits of their lines of professional gear.

With HD NLE for the PC, bandwidth, storage, and compression still pose stifling technical hurdles, but with the clock speeds of motherboards keeping pace with processor speeds, this limitation will cease to exist in a year or two.

At every video show I've gone to, I've called on the Canon and Canopus reps to get in gear and start the big revolution. Prosumer HD. Let's see it.

You're correct when you say that DV films don't enjoy a wide print release into theaters.

I think the great thing about DV and accessible editing gear is that it allows filmmakers of all shapes and sizes exercise their creative muscles. You don't need to rent or buy expensive gear.

With that said, this is like the desktop publishing revolution we experienced with the Macintosh. Soon everyone felt they could design a brochure, books, business materials anything that goes to print. You then saw a lot of badly designed print materials.

Out of any revolution like this you then begin to see many people grow and learn through their experience and dedication.

I'd rather hone my skills with video before I jump into burning money by the foot with 35mm.

Plus, there are a lot of other uses for DV (consumer/prosumer) cameras besides a narrative film. Documentary filmmaking is one of them, artistic, real life, events, or even weddings. More people make a living in these fields then ever before. And in turn more broadcasters are broadcasting this level of filmmaking.

"DV is great, but we've yet to see a DV-to-film transfer enjoy the same kind of release as 35 mm and 24P productions "


the dv films that have had theatrical release IMO would have done NO better in release if they had been shoot on FILM ! so far most have been "art type movie's" or small nitch movie" ...

a studio spends 10-30 million on advertising for a MOVIE that they think they can make $$. a small FILM that a studio doesn't think they can market to a large audience just is NOT going to get the advertising $$ so it will play on 20 screens and something they think they can market to masses will get 2000 screen release ... THIS is a BUSINESS it's NOT art nor is it democracy ..ALSO a studio might put up a 30 -60 million budget for a movie and You better believe they are going to market that MOVIE to get their $$ back!!! if you put up 30-60 million you are NOT going to have it shot on DV !!! you didn't see steven S ask for big $$ for full frontal and it has a 20million star (julia roberts ) that got SAG minimum !

a dv movie by a nobody with nobody actors/actresses made for 10K is going to get a small release !!


"Who needs 24P when 25P can be transferred to 24P film with no perceptable difference? "

the USA needs 24P ... just read these threads over the past year persons have been BEGGING for a 24p mini dv ....

"There's really no technical reason why 24P HD chips can't be mass-produced and stuck into modified XL1s, except that no video manufacturer would want to undercut the profits of their lines of professional gear"


there is much more to it .. CCD's are difficult to make - look at the canon GL and the HOT pixel problem using cheap ccd's!!!
HD chips are VERY expensive .. then you need electronics ..
and EVEN more then that you need a MARKET .. 24p is only used by hollywood and that is a very small market compared to the masses of the world that buy camcorders . the MASSES of the WORLD are PAL & NTSC - that's 25fps and 29.97fps -ALL those TV's in the world will NOT play back 24P ..just like ALL the worlds 35mm projectors run at 24 or 25 and IMO that is why we are STUCK with those 2 speeds !!!! in the end you must convert to what the masses have in their hands and currently that is VHS and a 19" TV ..true DVD is coming on strong ...
HD TV in the US is so slow !!! just not catching on ??

"but it's difficult to get a good film taken seriously by distributors unless it's shot on a high-res medium. (The only DV film I've seen receive any kind of worthwhile release was last year's Center of the World.) "

this is a BIG lie ... most distributors are followers. they are looking for a SAFE product that they know can make $$ ... anytime a distributors tells you there is NO market for a dv/video movie READ between the lines - he's really saying HE can "NOT" make any $$ from your movie! ...

NOTICE if a distributor thinks they can make $$$$$$$$$ from your/a movie. it doesn't matter what it was shot on - they will get it to what ever format they need for it to make them $$$$$ ...it doesn't matter if it is GOOD/BAD - most important "is it marketable" again this is a BUSINESS !! bottom line is $$$

Don't Worry About DVD Camcorder...
 

People always grouse over when is the industry going to introduce a DVD camcorder. I do not see why.

In order to use DVD you really need a VBR (Variable Bit Rate). The compressionist makes use of this when he is creating the DVD. Higher bit rates are used for faster action and lower rates for less actions.

To my way of thinking that is going to be a little hard to set while shooting. Maybe advanced software will be able to select this automatically one day.

From what limited information I have seen on the new Panasonic offering is the best thing it *MAY* have added is a stock wide lens. If there is something I wish the XL-1 had is the ability to shoot wide screen.

As far as telecining to 35mm goes, big deal. 35mm is going to die. Economics will fuel this faster than anything else...as soon as the technology gets here...and it is not that far away.

When DV makes it to the moviehouse (the next victim), Hollywood will not have to ship movies all they will do send them by satellite. Tremendous cost savings and maximizes profits.

The other thing about the new Panasonic offering is that it seems to support both NTSC and 24P. It will be interesting to see the technology of how they do that.

Nathan Gifford

Re: Don't Worry About DVD Camcorder...
 

"The other thing about the new Panasonic offering is that it seems to support both NTSC and 24P. It will be interesting to see the technology of how they do that."

That's what I was asking. It may be something as simple as a hardware 3:2 pulldown.

Go to the panasonic website and drool over the HD cameras. ONLY $60K!!! Think I'll write a check. Chump change for a movie studio. But, it's coming.

panasonic
 

was at NAB yesterday checking out the Sony and Panasonic models
of the Hi-Def 24p cameras...Wow, very nice...was able to work with them hands on and they are amazing especially the image quality.
also saw the prototype for the 24p mini DV, they said retail itll be around 3499.00, not bad for what it is..will be available around the end of September, what a wonderful b-day present that would be! better notify my
girlfreind. hehe

My birthday is in september too ;-)

I've been wanting a XL1S since last year - have the money - but no real need for the camcorder right now. Now it looks like I'll be getting the DVX100 instead.

Can't wait for the complete specs. It could be a wet dream for anybody who does VFX with MiniDV - like me.

Just hope that lens has a true manual lens. It looks like it could have - it has manual iris control on the lens barrel - complete with LENS MARKINGS!!! Panasonic should go the whole way and have true manual focus and zoom. I want to rack that focus like crazy!

A true manual lens that´s nice and wide at 32.5mm, 24p, dual XLR's with controls on the camera body, 3.5 inch LCD, fake 16:9 (native is out of the question), 2 ND filters, no auto shut-off, 16:9 lines in 4:3 like the XL1S - and I'm SOOOOO there!!!!

This camera could be the greatest indie camcorder EVER!

Nielzen

Just returned from NAB, saw the Panasonic 24p Mini-DV...well, saw the non-functioning mockup, anyway. Definitely a disappointment not to see what kind of pictures it could make.

As far as the questions posted here--yes, it does incorporate 3:2 pulldown circuitry. The explanation I was given was that it shoots and records native 60p, then flags frames to be dropped/repeated if set at 24p to trigger the 3:2 processing. Thus it can be viewed and fed into an editing system etc. in a normal fashion.

The lens does incorporate true manual zoom and focus, no electronic linkage like on the stock XL1 lens. The iris control is just aft of the lens and uses a rotary dial with f-stops appearing in the eyepiece, similar to the XL1 (that's actually conjecture, the viewfinder was non-functional). I suggested to the product manager that it should have gearing cut into the lens rings to support follow focus, external zoom controllers etc. but he was indifferent ("let them buy the high end cameras if they want that!"), as if that would be actually hard to do...not! The chips are 4:3, the front element is 72mm which will require new anamorphic adaptors, wide angle adaptors etc...

Basically, it feels like a bit of a crap shoot. Outside of the feature set listed on that press release, there wasn't too much more to learn about the camera by handling the mockup. We'll have to wait a few more months to see what kind of picture it delivers.

Thanks for the report steadihiccup! :) It's amazing the amount of hype they've been able to build up with just a wooden mock-up. Well, all eyes are on them now and if the picture quality doesn't succeed then everybody is going to be REALLY disappointed and I hope the press lets 'em have it. It had better live up!

It's simply astonishing how some OEM's consistently just miss the mark. Panasonic and JVC come instantly to mind. With a few tweaks, some of their CONsumer stuff would classify as PROsumer. Oh well, like the sales rep said....if they want pro, let them eat pro prices.

Are you sure about the lens?
 

From the litterature (no misspelling) Panasonic seems to suggest that it would incorporate wide angle into the lens. I guess I was reading too much into that.

It is nice to know that it is using 72mm lens. Maybe now that there are two cams using this size we will be able to get an amorphic lens for the XK-1!

Nathan Gifford

"As far as the questions posted here--yes, it does incorporate 3:2 pulldown circuitry. The explanation I was given was that it shoots and records native 60p, then flags frames to be dropped/repeated if set at 24p to trigger the 3:2 processing."

You're kidding. If this is correct, this is the bass-ackwards way of going about it, because then it's never really truly shooting 24P (or 23.98P or whatever the exact number the CineAlta shoots at is). 60 fields/s -> 24 frames/s is NOT a 3:2 pulldown process; it's 24 frames/s -> 60 fields/s that requires 3:2 pulldown. So if the explanation you're giving is correct, the Panasonic actually performs an inverse 3:2 conversion, which is just plain ridiculous, because then not every frame in the 24P version would be a still frame.

The only right way to do this is to record 24P and do a hardware-implemented 3:2 pulldown resulting in fake 60 fields/s for NLE.

<<<-- The only right way to do this is to record 24P and do a hardware-implemented 3:2 pulldown resulting in fake 60 fields/s for NLE. -->>>

That had better be the way it works or else I will stay far far away!

OK, I'll try again, but bear in mind that this was coming from one of the guys at Panasonic who also erroneously told me that the Mini DV camera had native 16:9 chips, which it doesn't.

What he said, or what I thought he said, was that the camera head captures at 60p: 60 progressive frames of information per second. The user selects either 60i, 30p or 24p as the desired frame rate. The camera derives the desired frame rate from the 60p. If it is 60i, then that signal is sent to the recorder. If 30p or 24p, the appropriate pulldown is performed so as to achieve 60i for recording onto tape, but the keyframes are flagged so that the NLE can reconstruct the original framerate. This is the part that Panasonic and Apple are working on together for the next version of Final Cut Pro, as I understand it.

The only part of this that doesn't make sense is that the final output to 60i would, in my thinking, permanently trash the progressive aspect of the signal. But here my knowledge level of this process falls down. I'm sorry that I wasn't able to deliver the gospel, hopefully someone else can pick up the slack.

but does the resolution improve?
 

The chips are 4:3, but does their resolution get better in comparison to the XL1's? Is it good for slow-mo?

Howdy from Texas,

It will not be a good camera for slow motion videography (the frame rate is not *that* variable.)

I did not speak to the Panasonic product manager myself, but everything I have heard confirms the explanation that Charles presents above.

My main concern is finding some solid, accurate info that can be used to construct some "Watchdog-style" pages for the website.

And yes it was only a couple of wooden mock-ups at NAB, but remember that Canon USA generated just as much excitement with similar non-functional wooden XL1 mock-ups at DV Expo in 1997.

Well, I think the illuminating details should effectively kill the hype. Any camera that derives 24P by way of 60i is a piece of junk.

Still waiting for my prosumer 24P HD--

24p
 

On arena that hasn't been discussed is the huge "straight to video" market. Shoot it, edit it, dupe it. Your selling your product for cash. It's not a bad market to specialize in.

also Justin mentioned the Mini35 system that ZGC carries. It allows you to use cooke, Zeiss, etc. 35mm prime lenses with all the advantages of depth of field, etc.

I've seen some footage from this set-up. Yea I knew it was shot on an XL-1.......but the look of the final product was so outstanding I wouldn't have been able to tell if I hadn't read the explanation.

JMHO...

David

Yes, I agree about the P+S Technik adaptor. I wasn't a fan of the version I saw last year but I liked what I saw of it's current (third generation) incarnation. I think it could make some really pretty pictures.

The 35 mini adapter actually has a nice demo reel availible on CD that I watched. The clips provided enough to show a client and convince them to let me shoot a national spot on the Canon XL1S with the adpater instead of 16mm.

I hope the adapter won't let me down in actual use. :)

resolution
 

For me, the most important thing to wait for, in this camera, is a higher resolution of it's chips. This would be the main improvement over the XL1 for every field of users here, everyone could benefit from it. If it is better than the XL1 then it will be considerable. Then we have secondary details for different uses:

For video-to-film, 24p makes it a bit easier than 25p but it doesn't seem like a big deal, you just wouldn't have to stretch that extra frame of your audio when transfering to 35mm.

For international videography, being able to shoot and then edit the same video in both PAL and NTSC, just by deciding that in your computer and in the camera, sounds like a big progress, avoiding the transfer house.

For a humble slo-mo, if the camera can do 60p, at least it would be better than regular video.

resolution
 

Isn't this better resolution in the chips?

AG-DVX100
"Representing a revolutionary leap in digital video technology, the palm-size AG-DVX100 is equipped with three, newly-developed 1/3" 410,000-pixel progressive- scan CCDs"

XL1
"3 CCD 1/3" Pixel Shift (charge coupled device) 270,000 pixels (250,000 effective pixels)"

resolution
 

sorry, just wanted to add the

PAL XL1

Pixel Count
Total: 320,000 pixels (per CCD)
Effective 300,000 pixels (per CCD)

Howdy from Texas,

Yes the XL1S is "only" 250,000 effective pixels per CCD but don't forget the Pixel Shift process which increases resolution. Pixel Shift is nothing to scoff at -- it actually works, and has been used before in several pro-market Panasonic cameras. So it is a bit of a misconception to categorize the XL1S as being low in res. Hope this helps,

resolution
 

Hi Chris,
So the pixel shift makes the less pixels in the xl1 more or less equivalent to the more pixels in this new panasonic?

Dosen't the XL1 have bigger pixels than most other cameras, which is the reason for it's apparent "low" pixel count?

Adrian -- yes, the individual pixels are larger (and therefore gather more light) because there are fewer of them to fill the surface of each CCD.

crottini - not sure about that; I'll have to check the pana specs again.

I think comparing pixel count on different brands is like comparing processor speeds on Macs and PC's. It's not a true measure of performance as different methods are used to achieve the numbers

still, it seems to me, and I'm not sure about this, that the fundamental resolution is a function of pixel density on the CCD. There are ways to artificially increase the pixel density, like pixel shift, but, the driving term is pixels/sq in. In the case of a 3 pixel detector, the situation gets much more complicated since each channel is recording a different wavelength of the same image.

IMO camera's that use pixel shift tend to have more noticable "stair stepping".

Just to get back to the original subject for a moment...

I would love some sort of confirmation from Panasonic about the nuts and bolts of how this thing really acquires images and writes them to tape.

Earlier Robert K S said that if it's using 60i to get to 24p, that's no good. I totally agree. steadichupap's report says that the Panasonic rep claimed true 60p which is then converted to your dialed-in setting of choice, i.e. 30i, 24p, or 30p. Um, no. I'm not believing that for a second.

I think this is mostly a great marketing job by Panasonic. Technically, they are introducing something new: 24 progressive images a second... but we all know you can already buy a PAL XL1S that does 25 progressive images a second. Yes, if you are shooting to blow up to film, 24p is technically less a problem than 25p, but I think it's already been adequately demonstrated 25p to film is accomplished with relative ease.

However, I think that from a theoretical standpoint, it is important to note that regardless of everything else, when motion is captured at 24 images (35mm frames, progressive scans, whatever) it will capture that motion in a way that is distinct from 23 images per second, or 25 images per second, or 30, or 15, etc. etc. My theory is that our eyes are capable of discerning far more that we realize... that if we watched two monitors of the exact same thing, only one was originated at 23fps and one was at 24fps, there would be something inside us that would not allow us to call them perfectly identical. I think we all agree that discerning between 30p and 24p is noticeable, and of course 60i is completely different. We've been subconsciously trained to register motion displayed at 24 images per second as a "film look." Capturing digital video "scans" at this rate is not a bad thing i trying to emulate that look.

Oh, and story/content really does make all of this stuff irrelevant, anyway. ;)

MR

mistery
 

So, basically, how this camera works is still a mistery to all of us. Nothing firm at least. We'll have to wait until someone gets a hand on it or somebody from Panasonic gets in here.

24fps NLE, DVD's and DV-to-film experience
 

Until recently, the only NLE systems that allows editing true 24fps have been the Avid FilmComposer, and MediaComposers with Film option. By that, I mean that the many extra fields generated during the 24fps-film->video transfer (usually called pulldown fields) are removed during the capture of the source tapes into the Avid drives - saves around 20% storage space, and allows editors to watch their footage play back at the same rate it will appear on the theatrerr screen. Pixar and Disney films are edited on FilmComposers becasue of this fact. Of course, to play back on the 'Client Monitors' (the NTSC or PAL monitors) the extra-fields are re-inserted - these standard-definition monitors can handle only 59.97 fields-per-second.

This is what happens with DVD's, the actual media on film-based DVDs is 24fps, again to save space on the discs, allowing improved compression. If you're lucky enough to own a 'progressive monitor' as a home television, and wired appropriately, then you are in fact watching "Monsters, Inc" at 24fps on that TV screen. If you run the signal through the 'S' connector, say, or if you have a standard TV, then the DVD players re-insert puldown fields, allowing standard "30fps" (59.97 fields, actually) NTSC video to play.

I've read that there are 3rd-party solutions that allow FCP to capture 24fps-originated tapes at true 24fps, and edit at that rate. The very high-end Discreet and Sony HD systems also do this for 24p HD...there may be others I'm not aware of.
I'm not sure how Panasonic is acheiving their 24fps capture, and maintaining compatability with standard NTSC output, but it's probably doing something very much like the scenarios described.
As far as watching DV-to-film, the best way to "settle this here debate" is to just go to the movies, and see DV-originated movies! There have been quite a few in the last few years, and it's probably safe to say that sometimes a DV-to-film transfer will look great, and for many people doesn't create a distraction, and sometimes the transfers are poor, or some people just can't get past the "soap-opera" quality of these types of productions. I went to Richard Linklater's "Tape" (great movie) and some of the people there, non-video or film-production types, commented on the 'strange look'. Most of that percentage weren't put off by it, though they did notice it enough to bring it up. Although there are many video-to-film examples, I think "Tape" is a good test-case since it's very much a dramatic, theatrical piece, and yet uses a format many people associate with the 7pm news, or with soap-operas. I think "Tape" really challenges viewers becasue of those qualities.

This is a time of merging, mangled and liberating aesthetics, where video and film, proefessional and amateur, definitions of petty & noble, novel and traditional are all getting thrown into a spin - what a great time to be involved in production - more colors for the canvas!

(added line breaks between paragraphs -- CH)

Re: 24fps NLE, DVD's and DV-to-film experience
 

<<<-- Originally posted by hphillips : Until recently, the only NLE systems that allows editing true 24fps have been the Avid FilmComposer, and MediaComposers with Film option. By that, I mean that the many extra fields generated during the 24fps-film-video transfer (usually called pulldown fields) are removed during the capture of the source tapes into the Avid drives - saves around 20% storage space, and allows editors to watch their footage play back at the same rate it will appear on the theater screen. Pixar and Disney films are edited on FilmComposers becasue of this fact. Of course, to play back on the 'Client Monitors' (the NTSC or PAL monitors) the extra-fields are re-inserted - these standard-definition monitors can handle only 59.97 fields-per-second.
This is what happens with DVD's, the actual media on film-based DVDs is 24fps, again to save space on the discs, allowing improved compression. If you're lucky enough to own a 'progressive monitor' as a home television, and wired appropriately, then you are in fact watching 'Monsters, Inc' at 24fps on that TV screen. If you run the signal through the 'S' connector, say, or if you have a standard TV, then the DVD players re-insert puldown fields, allowing standard &quot;30fps&quot; (59.97 fields, actually) NTSC video to play.
I've read that there are 3rd-party solutions that allow FCP to capture 24fps-originated tapes at true 24fps, and edit at that rate. The very high-end Discreet and Sony HD systems also do this for 24p HD...there may be others I'm not aware of.
I'm not sure how Panasonic is acheiving their 24fps capture, and maintaining compatability with standard NTSC output, but it's probably doing something very much like the scenarios described.
As far as watching DV-to-film, the best way to 'settle this here debate' is to just go to the movies, and see DV-originated movies! There have been quite a few in the last few years, and it's probably safe to say that sometimes a DV-to-film transfer will look great, and for many people doesn't create a distraction, and sometimes the transfers are poor, or some people just can't get past the 'soap-opera' quality of these types of productions. I went to Richard Linklater's 'Tape' (great movie) and some of the people there, non-video or film-production types, commented on the 'strange look'. Most of that percentage weren't put off by it, though they did notice it enough to bring it up. Although there are many video-to-film examples, I think 'Tape' is a good test-case since it's very much a dramatic, theatrical piece, and yet uses a format many people associate with the 7pm news, or with soap-operas. I think &quot;Tape&quot; really challenges viewers becasue of those qualities.
This is a time of merging, mangled and liberating aesthetics, where video and film, proefessional and amateur, definitions of petty or noble, novel and traditional are all getting thrown into a spin - what a great time to be involved in production - more colors for the canvas! -->>>

"Earlier Robert K S said that if it's using 60i to get to 24p, that's no good. I totally agree. steadichupap's report says that the Panasonic rep claimed true 60p which is then converted to your dialed-in setting of choice, i.e. 30i, 24p, or 30p. Um, no. I'm not believing that for a second. "

i was at NAB and at panasonic it was a little confusing because their techs were talking mostly about their HD 24p camera in front of HD monitors , with camera's on display including the mockup mini 24p ... so when they talked teckie talk IMO everyone thought they were talking about ALL 3 camera's on display BUT infact the tech talk was really for the 2 hd camera's NOT the mini 24p ...

i did find the HEAD of development for the mini 24p camera. this camera is different then the HD 24p camera's . the mini 24p when in 24p mode captures TRUE progressive frames 24fps BUT when it lays the image to tape in ADDS the 3:2 pull down ( with flags so it can later be pulled out) so to tape it lays down 60i, by laying down 60i you can view/edit on any system/Tv ..if it laid down 24p to tape you would NOT be able to view it on your TV ( without special equipment) ... if you shoot in the 30P mode then it captures images true progressive 30fps and lays down to tape at 60i ......... or you can choose to shoot in normal 60i ( normal video) ........ that is what he told me .... also they are working with FCP and others to be able to read the 3:2 flags and remove them so you can have the 24P images ( if you choose) or just edit normal 60i for those that don't need to work in 24p .... the 24P ( 3:2 60i) is a trade off as they want to price the camera at less then 3500 and have you be able to USE it today and NOT have to buy other monitors, decks to play it back. so for 3400 you have the choice to shoot NTSC 24P , 30P or 60i and are able to view it on any TV .... for a NTSC 24p mini dv camera costing 3400 other then going to film there is very little that you can do with true 24fps ( the 24p mini ) in a NTSC world.

the HD 24p they say captures at 60P and somehow from that it does ???? they lost me ....

It's possible that I may be able to persuade Jan Crittenden of Panasonic to chip in on this discussion... working on that now,

Glad I wasn't the only one confused at the show. It was a little too crazy to get the Pana folks to focus on in-depth explanations of this type. From having demoed at industry trade shows in the past (and I'm sure Chris will corroborate this), it can be a challenge to remain patient, friendly and helpful all day!