The Official Panasonic HDC-TM900 Owners Thread - Page 11

I had this issue with SD600 clips. At least a couple of clips just could not upload after trying a few times while others worked on the first try.

I've had issues uploading the 108060p videos to Vimeo both before and after Plus membership.

I have not succeeded doing it from home (Comcast internet), but have always succeeded from my office computer, which has a T1 connection (about 10 times faster). I do not know why it works from the office and always results in an error at home. But it has nothing to do with Plus membership. I use the uploader software (both places).

I am a plus member, so I guess that doesn't explain it.

Guys, this is a Panasonic 900 owners thread. Pleas post Sony comments in Sony threads.

Mark, I don't think it's upload speeds since I have FIOS that has some of the fastest speeds in the country. It's certainly faster than a T1. The only distinction I can make is that I rarely had an issue uploading 700 footage, but have yet to be successful with the 900. I haven't tried the newest 900, so who knows?

Thanks guys. I guess the Pro idea wasn't right. I haven't bothered to ask Vimeo support as the first thing they do is to say to follow their much lower compression settings. I can get a 10-20 sec. clip up, but longer fail. And I don't have the luxury of FIOS or anything as nice. 512K upload only! Oh well, I think I'll pass on wasting more of my time and just Handbrake it down to an MP4 that they like!

--MDG

Ken sorry my question got into this thread.
Now I am very interested in the TM900 and now am trying to find one to buy.

What is the difference in this new TM900 from the older one? I know it cost more.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...tialSearch=yes

Check page 1 of this thread. About 5 replies down gives a quick overview. Take the low light improvement with a grain of salt. Some reviews say yes, some say no improvement.

That's Euro (PAL) version.

Thank you I will do that.

So it's the same camcorder but just priced in Euro's.

No it is a slightly different version (to be compatible with PAL) for the European market but priced in dollars at B&H. Why the PAL version costs more then the NTSC version I don't know. Maybe B&H has to pay more to get them imported?

No, it has PAL video standard, which is used in EU.

http://www.ihffilm.com/videostandard.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAL

Thanks I now understand.

So please update me, do people think the TM900 is a big improvement over the TM700?

Ken, one thing that worked for me is to actually re-wrap the file using ClipWrap. I haven't paid for it yet, but the 1 min limit to the demo should be good enough to see if that helps. I have an MTS file that would not upload properly, but then I re-wrapped it into a .mov container (didn't transcode video, did change audio to LPCM) and it now shows on Vimeo fine. I'm going to try again with the audio not converted to see if the re-wrapping still uploads and is converted fine.

--Mark G. (not the quoted Mark, the other one)

Thanks MilSF1

Moviemaker, no, I don't think the 900 is a big improvement over the 700, it's subtle at best. I do like the bigger LCD and VF (except for some aliasing in the VF) and I'm getting used to the somewhat new menu system. But thus far, I don't see much of a difference in PQ between the two. I think it was pretty hard to improve what they had already done with the 700. I do admit I was hoping for more in the low light arena.

I am only going to do this once, because there is a dedicated forum for 3D video here, but just to remind users of the TM900 (and other camcorders): there is an additional feature for the TM900 and some other new models - you can shoot, with an optional add-on, AVCHD 3D that is at least as good as broadcast TV 3D (like ESPN 3D). 3D is not possible with the "old" TM700.

Here is a link to a TM900 3D video in HD:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygtAiXIOKYo&hd=1

Youtube allows native uploading of the original TM900 3D files (sbs). The viewer can then choose what 3D viewing method to use. So, if you have red/cyan glasses from some old 3D DVD, choose color anaglyph (red/cyan) and you can see it in 3D with those glasses. And you can select 1080p also (the originals for 3D are 109060i, though two anamorphic views share that space, jsu as they do for broadcasts).

It's fun, and depth is a dimension that is important.

I know some people here don't care about 3D. But just remember, when color film came out there were a lot of photographers who said they were not interested in color. Who cares about stereo people said when that was first available. If you understand that video is much harder than still photography, 3D video is also much more difficult to do well than 2D video. But it can wow you.

Hi Ken, I've just been catching up and it looks like you are up to your 3rd TM900 now?
I returned mine, and will wait to see what happens with Canon over the next couple of months.

off topic but CCI just finished the review of the CX700 and it doesn't look very good for Sony.

Regarding 3D, I think it all depends on the viewer Mark. I've been (as well as many people I speak to) totally unimpressed with 3D, broadcast or otherwise. Color accuracy & quality is compromised, often sharpness takes a back seat to the 'effect' and many people are prone to headaches and other issues while watching 3D.

Additionally, many people don't like the need to wear glasses while watching 3D along with the associated issues for those that already wear glasses. Thus far, 3D has not been much of a success in the marketplace and for many, the only reason they buy a 3D TV is because it's already included in many top-of-the-line HDTVs. So if you want the best PQ in a given manufacturer's line, you are often 'required' to take 3D along with it. Of course the 3D PQ is almost always compromised relative to the non-3D HD the TV is capable of. I've lost track of how many people I've spoken to that are just not wowed by the 3D demos that stores like Best Buy now have.

It's also notable that most theatrical movies are geared toward kids (some things never change). Let's also not forget that to equip a 900 with 3D capability, is not a cheap affair. But yes, it does offer that choice if one is so inclined.

I'm just trying to give the other side to the 3D equation. Since I was a kid, we've had 3D and it's never really taken off. I'm not sure it will now either. IMO they need to improve the effect, get rid of the glasses entirely and begin offering something other than cartoons for content. Yes, ESPN is a step in the right direction on the broadcast side, but most in the industry believe they need to go a lot further in eliminating the ill effects of this technology as well as improving content.

Who says CCI is the last word on anything?

I don't see where I implied they were the last word. They are just one review site and they tend to be pretty good. They do a lot of reviews as do a few other sites. Sony fans don't like CCI because they tend to rate Sony's on the low end and Panasonics on the high end.
I'm not married to any brand so at least I can make up my own mind. But the review sites do provide some helpful info.

Hey Steve, glad to see you're feeling better. Yes, the 3rd unit is the best behaving piece thus far. This unit performs better in low light in terms of not having the focusing anomaly the 2nd unit had. I'm also getting an even focusing across the field of view. The difference is very significant.

Although initially I thought this unit was 'beepless', I was wrong. Fortunately the beeps are lower in volume and, for whatever reason, they show up less often. Truly bizarre.

The most interesting this that happened was in my final test before packing up the 2nd unit. I took an outdoor A/B with the 2nd & 3rd unit, pointing both units toward a few buildings in the distance. To my surprise, the 2nd unit showed a bit of the bondi-blue issue...a definite 'blue-green' cast to the sky. In reality the sky was a pure blue, no cast at all. The 3rd unit rendered that same area perfectly, pure blue with no cast at all. So I was pretty happy seeing that.

However, IMO it shows the bondi-blue issue is not truly 'solved' and may pop up with some units.

Regarding the low light tests conducted by CCI and their knocking of the Sony's performance in that area, IMO they are clearly wrong. I've played with both the 560 & CX and they are both unquestionably (IMO) better in very low light than the 900. There is no comparison in terms of the noise generated by the Sonys vs the Panasonics. CCI heavily weights 'sensitivity' in their opinions of low light and I disagree. A bright and noisy picture is not a quality picture IMO. I'd rather have a dimmer, noise-free picture any time. Unfortunately I just couldn't get excited about the Sony's outdoor performance...certainly relative to the 900.

Well, after reading this latest review of the Sony camcorder, I immediately thought about how I could incorporate it to my current lessons in class.

We are studying propaganda.


(I decided it was not really appropriate for 5th graders though )

Thanks Ken, still have 5 days of antibiotics left, my fever broke yesterday. Still feeling low but getting slowly better.

My TM900 didnot have the bondi blue issue but it did have other issues and I decided to send it back.
I'm glad you found a keeper.

I did read the CCI review and it really left me puzzled. I did use a 560 and while it wasn't as good in bright light it was virtually noise free in almost total darkness. The TM900 has a low light mode and yeah it will crank up the brighness but it's like looking through a thick screen door. You don't get that with the Sony, it's smooth and clean video in true low light. I do not want a bright and noisy video. That's like watching a bad drive in movie.

CCI seems to play favorites. They seem to be like Motor Trend where a car will totally dominate in all categories and win by overwhelming points and then they'll pick a mid pack car and declare it the winner.
A real WTF?! moment.

Sony can't get a break on CCI can they.
Still I do agree with some of their results but not the low light results, also gotta consider that other reviews have found problems with Sony's autofocus and it blurring and not focusing on the edges of the video.

Can you reduce the gain then to give a darker image on the Panny, but a noise free one?

Well, any good propogandist knows to incorporate truth. We were creating propoganda in class and some of my kids wanted to say (bassically we created advertisements for Bing on this day) that Google charges all users everytime they run a search.

So, took a moment and discussed why that might not be the most effective form of propoganda ever

I do think CCI does a lot of good, and that they are very influential in many peoples decision making (including mine), however, they are clearly being influenced by outside forces.

But who isnt, I was asked to resign in an obvious attempt to give my job to her niece, the government is obviously totally in bed with the oil companies in America, Japanese officials have obviously been overlooking the Tokyo Nuclear for many years-not out of ignorance. The world is full of self-serving corruption spawned by the left hemisphere of our brains. Not a big surprise that CCI would be impacted by some of this as well, though they still do good work overall.

Example?