Leica lens on the HVX200

[Toke Lahti]

Originally Posted by Robert Lane

First, there would be no logic for either Leica or Panasonic to invest in the same type of elements that go into 35mm film bodies for the HVX or any digital video camera - there simply isn't enough resolving power in any video chipset to take advantage of the added resolution the lens would be capable of.

Maybe you missed my reply, but AFAIK resolving power means certain amount of lp/mm with certain MTF.
I just gave an example of how small chip video camera needs more resolving power than 35mm film.
Of course there are also other things that affect price/quality ratio (mechanics, production volumes etc.), but resolving power is usually considered to be the most important one.

Still cameras have and should have more resolution than moving image cameras but that's because of bigger image circles, not because of higher resolving power. Bigger image circle cost more money, but the most expensive attribute is resolution, so going beyond 125lp/mm (which is needed for full hd resolution with smaller chips than 2/3") should cost more than Zeiss Digiprimes (if manufactured and sold with similiar quantitatives & profits)...

[Dean Sensui]

Originally Posted by Jan Crittenden Livingston

Actually Leica is involved with the design of the lens and they have to approve the final manufacture or we cannot use their name. There is a quality assurance on their part to protect their good name. From what I have seen it is one of the nicest lenses on a hand-held HD camcorder.

Hello Jan...

Is Panasonic considering the possibility of marketing a matched wide angle adapter for this camera?

For the sort of work I do I often find a need to get the 35mm equivalent coverage of a 28mm or 24mm lens.

[Toke Lahti]

Originally Posted by Robert Graf

The CCD block is likely to have either 960x1080 or 1280x1080 resolution.
There are also some insightful calculations here:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=55325

For starters, problem with those calculations is that 2/3" imager does not have a diameter of 0.67 inches; that's the size of image circle that the lens produces.
Real diameter is 11 mm.

Secondly, it is said that hvx uses both horizontal and vertical pixel shift. So it having 1080 vertical pixels would be waste of sensitivity.

Also I'm not sure how useful it is to compare cameras that have been in production for years. Progress in imager tech is slow, but sensivity per area is increasing all the time.

[Michael Maier]

With all the lp/mm talking in this thread, remember that a Zeiss Digiprimes, supposedly the best HD lenses for 2/3" have only 56 lp/mm. Since 2/3" is twice as big as 1/3", a lens with 112 lp/mm would supposedly do as good for a 1920x1080 1/3" camera as the Digiprimes do for a 2/3" 1920x1080 camera. So a 100lp/mm could be enough for a 1280x720 1/3” camera.

[Toke Lahti]

Originally Posted by Michael Maier

Zeiss Digiprimes, supposedly the best HD lenses for 2/3" have only 56 lp/mm.

That's 56lp/mm with MTF of 90%.
If you accept lower MTF (real world imagery), resolving power is greater.

[Michael Maier]

You mean resolving power needs to be higher when MTF is lower?

[Toke Lahti]

Here's a nice tutorial about what MTF means:
http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF.html

So if you accept "detail" to be something that has only 50% difference in contrast, you get a lot more of those "details" than if you require 90%.

[Chris Hurd]

Thanks for that link, Toke. Much appreciated,