HDX900 Thread

[Hiding Under Here]

I know this camera isn't out yet. However, over at Creative Cow they are going nuts discussing it. I am very interested in this camera. Is anyone else looking at it? Positive or negative. Doesn't matter to me. Your thoughts?

[SimonW]

Looks like a good well featured camera to me. Only drawback is to my knowledge it can only shoot high def. You can't switcc to record standard def. Apart from that though it does look good.

[Nino]

Tom, I played a little with the camera at NAB. It’s a SDX900 with steroids. Panasonic put a lot of impressive specs in that camera and probably if I would be doing only productions from beginning to end I would give it some serious consideration. I like the ability to record in 1080 and 720, that would satisfy a large number of HD clients. Like Simon pointed out it only does HD, but so are the other two tape HD cameras, the Sony F900 and the Varicam. The HDX900 has a firewire out so Panasonic intended for the camera to used also as a playback devise so recorded tapes could easily be down-converted during the output process. Unfortunately is also a tape based camera when the industry is going tapeless and workflow is becoming the key word in this business, the HDX900 has none of this. I also wouldn’t feel very comfortable using the camera continuously to play back and converting tapes into NLEs. On camera tape transports and heads are not as rugged as those on VTRs and according the only information that I was able to find on Panasonic web site, the least expensive deck that can handle 100Mbps is their AJ-HD1400 and that goes for around 25K.

It’s a great camera but not for the day-hire work that we do.

[freedom]

Tom
The company I mentioned to you in my PM is buying at least one. They tested it and loved it. These guys do a lot of cable network production.

[Run&Gun]

An ad for it in Millimeter caught my eye, and I started looking at it on Pannys website. The ability to record 720 and 1080 looked very nice, but the chips are only 1280x720(effective), so how does it get to 1080 without some type of internal uprezing/interpolating(tricks ;) )?

[2000lux]

Panasonic rep at the VariCamp workshop talked a little about it. He said it records in NTSC and PAL which is nice. However, It doesn't do the variable frame rates or the "film rec" that the VariCam does. They didn't want to make it a cheaper VariCam.

[Canonman]

but the chips are only 1280x720(effective), so how does it get to 1080 without some type of internal uprezing/interpolating(tricks ;) )?

That's exactly how it gets to 1080.

[2000lux]

Here's an article about it: AJ HDX-900 realeased. (http://digitalproductionbuzz.com/news_synd.php?newsid=918&site=GovVid)

[JCTV]

Ponder this, why would you need to record 1080i? If your Client’s HD work flow is 1080i, it’s more than likely HDCAM, what is he going to do with a DVCPRO-HD tape?

BTW, 2000lux, it does not record NTSC or PAL, (those are standard def formats), it only records HD. They may have been referring to the 23.97fps and 59.97fps which came from NTSC.

[freedom]

The 900, as I understand it, does an uprez of the 720p to 1080i in camera. What is the difference in doing that in post, other than the time involved?
JCTV has the essential point...how many 1080i shops will have a DVCPRO HD deck to play the material?

[SimonW]

We'll just have to see how things go. XDCAM HD seems to be the only new high def system that companies appear to be going for in a big way. I'm staggered by how many people have bought into these cameras as shown by the forum activity all over the web.

I'm simply not hearing much about other systems. Infinity seems to have gone quiet. I think that possibly this new HDX900 might be a knee jerk manouvre on the part of Panasonic. Sony had just released an affordable shoulder mounted high def solution. Panasonics own 2/3" tapeless high def solution won't be released until next year, so perhaps they had to get something out there to fill the gap.

[Ken]

Tom,
This was the camera I told you about after NAB. This camera rocks. I checked it out at NAB and was very impressed. The HDX900 does 24p/25p/30p/50i/60i, like the CineAlta, but does it in 1080 and in 720. The VariCam is 720-only but provides full variable frame rate capability and the FILM REC gamma modes, which the HDX 900 does not do. Here's another cool thing about it though. It has the 1394 firewire out port. So not only could you download to your computer through that port...you could double record using a product like Firestore 100, getting the material on tape and digitally (or you could just go tapeless to the FS100). So you can have the tapeless workflow with a built in full quality tape backup. Or just a tapeless workflow if you want to work with an FS100 type scenario. Again the issue is what do you give clients. They have to be set up for DVCProHD to accept the tapes...or be able to download to a computer or hard drive the digital stream. But it's a 2/3" chip HD camera in a price point that is affordable and Sony doesn't have that yet.

[Hiding Under Here]

Oh, I've been reading about the HDX900 myself. What it DOESN'T do that the varicam does is it doesn't do over- and under-cranking. Nor does it have the breadth of Cine Gamma adjustment that the Varicam does. There are (I think) three settings built into the camera and that's it. It does all the things Ken mentioned. Also, workflow or not, some people are going to stay tape-based for a while. Discs and P2 cards, in my opinion, won't conquer the world over-night. I have also heard that interest in the HDX900 is very high and that they are sold out of the first run before the camera debuts. I know I called one supplier and asked about SDX900 only to have him ask me why I was interested in SD when the new HDX900 was about to come out and was I interested in ordering that instead. The sales pitch was palable and strong. They were into selling this camera.

That stuff aside. I like the idea of the SDX900. I have an analog head. Digital is great but it decreases the tactile nature of photographing things.

[HDTV]

The thing I noticed on the spec sheet for this camera is that it records in a format called "DVCPRO HD-LP."

It's tape speed is roughly 67mm/sec. That's half the tape speed of the VariCam and the same speed as DVCPRO50 recorders.

All the other Panasonic DVCPRO HD record decks record (and playback) at 135mm/sec. It would appear that tapes shot on this camera can only be played back out of the camera or it's companion deck, the AJ-HD1400.

It seems to me that Panasonic has created an entirely different format that isn't directly compatible with their existing DVCPRO HD format...and we all needed another format, right? Someone please correct me if I am wrong about the compatibility issue.

It might be nice if you're using this system for in-house productions, but for freelancers who have to interface with a variety of clients, it just doesn't seem practical.

[quicklad]

I also had a question about this (tape playback compatibility).and heard through a third party that tapes from this camera WILL play back in a 1200 (not sure about a 1200A) - but because this was third party I am going to try and confirm it today.

Also - on the set-up files, or cine-gamma stuff. I know they didn't want it competing with the Varicam - but here's my question - If this is the HD version of the SDX-900 - which when tweaked right was the best looking SD camera I've ever used - then it cannot be a bad looking camera right?

It has more than three settings - I am pretty sure it is three user files. But how deep you can get into the tweaking I don't know. Anyone else been able to suss more out on this?

[SimonW]

I'm sure the new 900 can be tweaked to capture the full 600% range of the CCD's. Cinegammas aren't neccesary. They are usually just a pre-set way of doing the same thing that can be acheived by manipulating the knee, knee slope, black stretch, and step gamma adjustments.

[JCTV]

I saw this on the cinematography.net discussion thread and found it to be some very interesting reading. Allen Facemire, a DP in Atlanta, gives a brief review comparing the new Panasonic HDX-900 with a Sony F900/3.

Here is his report:

I finally got the chance to do a side by side comparison of the Panasonic HDX900 and a Sony F900-3 and the results were startling.

I did the test at PC&E in Atlanta where Panasonic had a representative bring a demo HDX900 and PC&E graciously supplied an F900-3.

We set both cameras for the normal factory video mode at 1080i for the HDX and 1080p for the F900, white and black balanced and then held a shot of a color/resolution chart. Right off the bat both cameras were pretty well matched with the F900 being just a bit Sony green. It seems to my eye all Sony cameras and monitors want to be a bit greener than say Panasonic and Ikegami... which tend to be a bit redder...however doing a standard white and black balance took care of that difference.

Color and contrast seemed similar to the naked eye as did the blacks.

In 24p mode, the HDX was a full 2 1/4 stops faster than the F900 with that difference narrowing to 1 full stop at 60i...the Panasonic still being more sensitive.

In resolution land the F900 had a slight edge. The chart we were using...and I'm sorry but I didn't get the name of the type of chart but it's one most camera houses use, has color blocks much like a Macbeth but not as many color blocks...and it has resolution patterns for the horizontal and vertical.

The vertical resolution pattern starts out with I think 5 or 6 curved lines that converge into a single line. It has numbered stages...1 the widest and somewhere up to 20 as the lines converge up the frame. The Sony held it's resolution to about 8 on the chart with the Panasonic losing that battle at about 7.

The F900 has 2 million pixels per chip....the Panasonic has 1.4 million pixels per chip so there has to be some difference. Again this was perceived by very close examination of both the Sony HD monitor and the Panasonic monitor we had set up...so we're kind of apples to apples in monitor world.

I then took both cameras into the parking lot and shot a couple of minutes of video of trees and parking lot stuff...all of which were back lit. Both cameras handled the wide range of contrast quite well and both seemed to capture the same color, contrast and shaded areas quite well. In fact pictures from both cameras could have been intercut with no perceptual difference.

I gave the F900 to a friend and we walked back into the building while still rolling. I wanted to see how deep each camera could reach into dark areas.
I set both cameras to the "D" filter and with the neutral set to 2 and we walked and rolled back into the building. We passed the through the camera department which is a mix of fluorescent and daylight, then down an unlit hall into camera test area that was only lit by the chart light. That was interesting because we were surely several stops under at that point but both cameras handled the detail in black areas quite well, with the HDX900 doing just a bit better. That's because it's a stop faster in straight video mode.

My main goal here was to see how well the HDX900 at a price point of $26,500 with no lens, viewfinder, camera mic or base plate, vs the F900-3 which is $80,000, including, viewfinder, camera mic and base plate, sans lens.

They matched quite well and I believe in a two camera shoot or inter-cutting between the two, it would be difficult to tell the difference.

I didn't have the chance to do 24p tests between the two but just for the few minutes we went into that mode, the HDX900 was over two stops more sensitive than the F900-3 and the perceptual picture difference was the same, that is to say, they looked very similar.

The HDX900 has a Varicam chip array that has been placed in an SDX900 body with all the menu and set up functions pretty music the same The camera does not have variable frame capabilities and does not have the depth in picture manipulation and film emulation the Varicam does but it has enough.

The HDX900 does everything the SDX900 did only it's HD.

As a standard feature, the HDX900 comes with a cache card so you can set the pre record from about 2-12 seconds. This also allows for time lapses and allowing for an extremely slow shutter mode.

Unlike the F900, the HDX900 has a built in downconverter and has firewire out.

This is going to be a great camera that's going to fill that ENG/EFP niche and it's taped based, which for the immediate future, has a more sensible work flow.

Within the next few months Panasonic will be coming out with a P2 slotted version of the HDX900. That'll be interesting as we approach the age of tapeless and no moving parts.

But with that being said, I'm still going to get a couple of the HDX900's because I still think we're 2-4 years away from viable, cost effective tapeless production.

Allen S. Facemire-DP/Director
SaltRun Productions,inc. Atlanta/Norcross, GA

[Hiding Under Here]

Simon, I agree with your inference. The Cine Gamma thing is overrated. And JCTV, thanks for that. Not overly insightful but a workman like comparison. A useful start. Sound like a good camera. And I agree with the conclusion that tape based systems will stick around longer than people think. I have been on record with that here for a while.

[joecam147]

hhhmmmmm, $30K for vs $80K ? I'm not sure that the Sony has enough of an advantage to justify a $50K difference. That would cover a pretty good HD lens setup or even some primes. I have not heard about the DVCPro100 LP tape speed thing but even so you have to admit considering what this camera can do $30K is a pretty amazing price point and with 2/3" chips it could record on wax paper, who cares? How many people are ingesting XDCam, isn't that as proprietary as DVCPro100 ? What I've seen of this camera looks pretty good to me although I must admit I am a bit biased owning an SDX900. As much of a pain in the butt tape is on mechanics it's still cheaper and simpler to hand off than any disk based system or ugh P2, I don't feel that will ever fly except for turnkey production. I think it would be a good addition to the arsenal and perfect for a HD freelance offering. I believe that this camera will be very popular but that's just my opinion.

[Ken]

Saw this on creative cow today:
(SECAUCUS, NJ -- August 4, 2006) Panasonic announced today that Wexler (Burbank, CA), a leading broadcast equipment supplier to the Hollywood production and postproduction community, has purchased 12 of the new AJ-HDX900 2/3" DVCPRO HD camcorders. Wexler will be offering the AJ-HDX900s for rental to its clients working in scripted and non-scripted television production, as well as in documentary, independent cinematography, and corporate video production.

You can view the whole article here:
http://forums.creativecow.net/cgi-bin/new_read_post.cgi?forumid=105&postid=856334