The Official Panasonic HDC-TM900 Owners Thread - Page 2

Steve: I did it again, I meant Ken!! Corrected the post. Darn.

Steve, no setting in the 900 would initiate a low level, rhythmic beep...unfortunately. Even disengaging the beep signal for menu changes has no effect.

If low light is an issue, it's easy to put the Sony in manual focus. So objectively I have to give the nod to Sony in that regard.

The PS3 does not play the 900 clips well at all, lots of stutter. I couldn't figure out why Mark's clips played better than mine (stuttering took longer to begin) until I saw that he edited them. Perhaps the data rate or something else changed during editing, but my clips begin stuttering within 2 seconds and Mark's take more like 15 seconds or so. I also noticed his had a bit of very brief picture breakup between each cut and that too might have been how the PS3 handled cuts. The data rate can really get surprisingly high and apparently higher than what I recall with the 700.

I'll give it a try before I leave on a business trip this morning. It IS a good sign if you used it and I didn't notice it. I know the ETC on my GH2 is 100% visually transparent, I've tested that. I'd guess even if the 900 is 90% transparent, that's good and certainly usable in a pinch.

Can you upload one of those clips with the high bitrate and stuttering to Vimeo for me? I'd like to see if my system also has a problem with it.
What did your PS3 say the Mbps rate was? My system has handled 38Mbps without a problem but those were TM700 clips.

I guess the beeping is a problem with the camera itself. Mine shipped yesterday but I won't see it until Friday.

I have done both and I ususally test both ways to see if it works from the card as well as the PS3's HDD.

The PS3 is easy to configure, mine is always connected to the Internet so I technically can upload videos from it, albeit slowly due to wireless.
The new update seems bug free so far 3.60 is the lastest one.

Steve, I haven't been able to upload a 900 video yet. Each time I try, I get 'failed'. I have uploaded 700 videos without much of a problem, so something must have changed in the 900 making it more difficult to encode. Judging how the PS3 plays back the 900 footage vs my old 700, it seems to provide further evidence that the files are more difficult.

I saw peak rates in the mid to upper 30s. I'm headed to the airport now, but when I get back from my trip I'll try again. I've asked for an exchange on the cam, so I'm dropping it off for mailing prior to the airport.

They play perfectly on my Panasonic BD player.

Were you able to play 700 clips smoothly on the PS3? I couldn't. They play OK for a bit then they begin to stutter. With the 900 the stuttering begins almost immediately.

Mark, I did a very quick test at 20X, and there was some degradation of the image. I didn't have time to much more since I had to box the unit up for exchange.

Hi Ken, I've not had any stuttering from any clips from the TM700, TM900 or CX560 when played on my PS3. I think you might have a setting off on your PS3.

I have no idea what's wrong with Vimeo that you can't upload to it. I'd test out mine but it's slated for delievery sometime Friday.

Hi everybody, how is the TM900 compared to TM750?
mrh

Here is a video I made showing you how to eliminate the audio stutter in your PS3.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C98pn2c-LYc

Mark mentioned that he too had some issues with Vimeo 900 uploads. Playback isn't a big deal since I've got a Panny BD player that plays smoothly and has a much better menu system for this kind of material.

I wonder what it could be? I guess I'll find out on Friday if it works on my PS3 or not.

Glad it helped.

Yea thanks Steve! Awesome!

I posted a new thread on this. Camcorder Info just released their review on the TM900 and it's looking like the TM700 is quite a bargain at the moment.

We'll I really expected that anyway. Your comment on the Sony having issues with focus is surprising though. The CX550 had no prolonged issues with low-light focus in my experience with it , so I don't know why this new model would. It seems the new cams stack-up in the same way as they did in last years models.

Better low light and stabilization with the Sony. Most likely better outdoor quality with the Panny. I really can't positively comment on the Sony's outdoor quality yet as I have not seen enough native footage from that cam. What I have seen does look good though.

What model of the PS3 do you have Steve? Is it the older style fatter one, or a newer slim model?

Hold on now. I saw no evidence that the OIS of the Sony was better than the 900. The low light yes, the OIS no. Good light PQ of the 900 was, IMO, definitely better from a sharpness, detail and color standpoint. That, to my eyes, was the biggest difference.

I have the older Fat model with 160GB HDD.

Haven't some said that the original was the best for playing 1080p?

That I really don't know about. Possibly but my Fat model works great. A few others in here have PS3's I wionder if those are Fat or slim?

Does anyone find it odd that the CCI review had identical resolution #s for the 700 @ 900, yet they found the 900 was slightly less sharp? Now granted, technically, sharpness and resolution can mean two different things, but I wonder if that's what they meant. Of course the difference could easily be attributed to nothing more than sample to sample variation.

Just speculating Ken. CCi states no difference in OIS from last years model. I don't know why because Panasonic states otherwise. If that is true, the Sony has better OIS. We all know the OIS on the Sony was the best last year. And from djandrea's posted videos it looks like it has not changed.

Thanks, that's interesting. I have a slim and fat, but the fat is broken due to YLOD. I was wondering why some report their PS3's play the high bitrate files with no issues and some do. My slim has issues with them if the bitrate goes above 33 to 34 Mbps. Maybe it is just the slim models that can't handle the higher bitrate files?

They did put redesigned cell processors in the slim units. I'm thinking that they might not be up to par as the original cell processor. I'm curious because it seems Ken has issues and so do I, and we both have slim models. I'm sure you will report your findings with your fat, so that would take us a step further as to what might be causing the issue. It certainly could be the newer processors.

I might get my fat fixed just so I can test files myself at some point.

Actually, if you look at Mark's 900 clips, it does look like it's improved from the 700. Remember that Panasonic is using a hybrid OIS this year and that's new. In my handling of the two, I saw little difference. If there is one, it can't be too great.