PANASONIC Z-10000 at IBC Amsterdam

i will buy

Amazon (USA) is taking orders for $3500. Ships in 1 to 3 months.

Considering how strong the yen is these days, and that this camera is essentially two 3 chip camcorders, I'm pleasantly surprised it doesn't cost a lot more.

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-HDC-.../dp/B005J29IA2

David

Looks good but kinda expensive, but I am sure well worth it.

In reading the product description on Amazon it is stated, "In order to play images recorded onto a Blu-ray disc, a device that is compatible with the AVCHD 3D/Progressive Standard is required." Exactly what does this mean? If I understand the statements preceding this statement, 3D images on this camera can be directly downloaded to a hard drive, a SD memory card, or a Blu-ray disc. Does this mean I can insert said memory card directly into my Panasonic 3D TV's memory card slot and get 3D video? Likewise, can I insert said Blu-ray disc into my Panny Blu-ray disc player and get 3D video on the screen? In other words can I edit directly onto an SD card from the camera without having to use Vegas or some other editing suite? Am I understanding correctly that one can download 3D video from this camera directly to a computer's Blu-ray drive to create a Blu-ray 3D disc that can then be played on any 3D TV?

Does this mean I can insert said memory card directly into my Panasonic 3D TV's memory card slot and get 3D video?

jup i thinks so.
on my panasonic gt20 im only able to play avchd movies made with a panasonic cam on a sd card.

Previously Amazon had this item available for preorder with an estimated delivery date of mid November. Currently Amazon indicates the item is out of stock. Were some orders fulfilled or has there been a delay in availability? (Anyone know if and when available?)

Similar in Europe. I got not even an indication from Panasonic Austria, when the product will be available.

good informed sources told me in 3-4 weeks the first units will be there.

Comes out here in Japan on Dec 1st, dang thing is gonna cost 398,000 yen which is about $5,086 Good grief they really rip us off in this country.. Better to buy from the USA and import.

Can you believe most TV's are made in this country and we have to pay almost twice as much as the USA does? Yet they import the TV's to there by ship. You would think the USA would have to pay more after that, but nope.. JAPAN pays for it. They jack the prices for the Japanese knowing some will pay it, and sadly Japanese believe a higher price means ultra super good quality.

Actually, a number of Japan branded TVs are being manufactured in Mexico, at least for Panasonic. Seems like a lot of other brands are coming from China including many of Sony's models. Toshiba and Sharp may be exceptions though. Apparently the multi-level distribution system in Japan has traditionally been a major factor in adding cost though there often is a greater measure of personalized service that comes with it. I noticed when I was in Japan at the end of last year there were very few Korean 3D TVs such as Samsung or LG in Japanese electronics stores to compete against the Japanese models so there is something blocking competition which of course keeps prices higher as well.

Thats because the Japanese goverment retricts what products they can sell. They want only usually Japanese products, any products from other countries will have even more of a hefty price often.

For instance, foods from the USA which may cost a $1 there will cost $5-$7 here. A pack of taco spice which is 50cents in the USA cost me $4.00 here...

I was curious about this cam too so I started to examine the specs. Has anyone else looked into this as an insert to current work flow? How do you all plan to edit the video?

The 1080p60 will be such a robust file that the computer processing will be about 4 times the current MVC 108060i standard most of us are used to working with. Then there is the editor itself. Will Vegas support the Avchd 2.0 SPEC WITH A SIMPLE UPDATE? maybe next year, early, since Sony and Panasonic are the partners in this new format. Might need for Sony to come out with a new NX3D1 that has new hardware to handle the processing load to compete with the Panasonic first though.

No doubt this will be the top gun of shooting and will combine the smooth motion with the high PQ of pixel density before we start seeing the 2x 4K 3D maybe in 2013.

Presently we are seeing a disjointed progress in technology. We have the camera many months before we see the editing software support, and then we see the software support many months before we see the CPU and GPU processing power.

Think about it: Many of us started with being able to buy a JVC TD1 last February and there was no single editing support package for it until Power Director Ultra in the middle of October. Now we are still trying to beef up our hardware big enough to process this. With Sony we get the HDR TD10 in the middle of May, and the editing from SCS Vegas is still lacking in a good 3DBD authoring although the timeline end of the chain is pretty good as of Vegas 10e. Still waiting for a good 3DBD authoring from Sony.

So, my point is, while it is great to see the first kid on the block and if money resources were no object, I would love to shoot in the new AVCHD 2.0 format, however, the reality is, buy the camera in December and expect to edit and distribute your video in 2013. Think about it!

Budget-
1080-60p camcorder $3500
1090-60p edit software- $1000
1080-60p cpu hardware- $4000
1080-60p playback- $500

My guess on the initial cost to get on board from where I am today.

While the P Z-10000 has this great new AVCHD-2.0 shooting recording mode, it doesn't appear to support the present day 1080 60i mode for today's editing compatibility. IMO That is a mistake Panasonic made here. Please correct me if I missed this in the specs. But Panasonic would stand a better chance of me buying their cam early next year if I could put it to work in the editing chain immediately by shooting in 1080 60p and having a conversion output in 1080-60i as an option until the rest of the workflow catches up.

Don, my information is that the Z10000 will use the same MVC file format at the Sony TD10. So, it will be no issue to edit Z10000 files in Vegas or the PD10 - have some first test footage here and that seems to be fine.

The new thing about AVCHD 2.0 is that it allows 1080 50p in 2D - in 3D you will have MVC with 1080 60i (NTSC)/50i (PAL) and 1080 24p, all of that seems to be fine for Vegas.

I found the specs in several locations on the Z-10000 and it stated only one recording format for 3D That is 1080 60p. There were no other recording formats listed for 3D. Let me see if I can find and pull quote it for you-




But, Now I found the Panasonic spec sheet and it is more detailed. You are correct and it has the additional compatible recording modes. Thank you! That cam is back on my list to compete with the NX3D1.

http://panasonic.net/avc/camcorder/h...fications.html

http://panasonic.net/avc/camcorder/h...fications.html

Signal System NTSC:

[3D] 1080/60i*1, 1080/30p*1*2, 1080/24p*1
[2D] 1080/60p*1, 1080/60i*1, 1080/30p*1*2, 1080/24p*1

*1 60p=59.94p, 60i=59.94i, 30p=29.97p and 24p=23.98p
*2 1080/30p is recorded in 1080/60i mode.

One thing I like about this cam is the 5 mic on board for 5.1 sound. I don't believe the NX3D1 supports 5.1 audio like the TD10.

I'll need a hands-on first at a trade show. Hopefully Pany will have it at CES. Wonder if Sony is planning to have a new TD10 to blast past the competition again. JVC?

Meanwhile- I have yet to get a good 3D bluray in DTS from PD10. Still lots of rendering and burning issues. At least now the timeline looks perfect.

Reading around, the Sony NX3D1 is good but the zoom is horrible. Many have stated the zoom switch is to loose causing it to zoom way to fast. Trying to zoom slow is almost impossible. A few even said the zoom is like a bit of zoom, pause, zoom, pause, zoom, pause and not even really a zoom! Sony should fix that, its supposed to be a professional cam!


The Sony lenses are also only 31mm apart, while the Panasonic I believe is a bit more. It also seems to have a macro mode shooting 3D up close I think this Panasonic will blow all others away with its 3D!

The NX3D1 is a consumer camcorder with some pro features. The zoom control is the same as the TD10 and does require some skill in using it because it is a short range lever. I don't have any problems with it but true, I prefer the variable rocker that is common to most professional and broadcast rigs.

I saw the specs on the macro for the Z10000 is at 45 cm. That's pretty good, IMO. I'm glad that wolfgang pointed out the different 3D shooting modes to me because I was ready to write it off if it only shot in a mode I can't edit. FYI- The optimum IA for lenses for most common shooting distances is 2.5 inches or about 65 mm. The reason for using shorter IA is to make the camcorder a reasonable size for individual shooters. I don't mind the shorter IA because if I need to shoot larger scenes, I'll switch to a bench twin cam system. Most people will decide on camcorder physical size as smaller and sacrifice the 2.5 inch IA for the shorter 1.3-1.5" separation.

Will the Panasonic blow the others away? I doubt it except for more serious shooters. At $1000 street price on the TD10, I think that cam will remain popular. The few of us who are into the complete package of serious editing will be the candidates for the 24 fps native shooting mode. I still want a hands on before I buy but based on specs I would spend $300 more for the Z10000 than the NX3D1 just to have it's audio compliment of 5.1 Time will tell because before I have the budget to buy, I'll be reading plenty of user reviews. FYI Panasonic was a loser in the pro business until they made the DVC Pro and DVCPro HD camcorders. Their older SVHS and later MII cams were a complete flop in the pro world.

Well, the i.o for the Z10000 is somewhere around 42 mm - what is much better then the TD10 or TD1 with about 31 mm. So I expect a better depth effect, even if for some shootings even 42 mm are still too low. So also the Z10000 will focus to people shooting mainly, but not so much to take videos of the Grand Canyon!

Yes, the price difference of the Z10000 and the TD10/TD1 will mean that a lot of people stay with the TD10. The Z10000 addresses a more professional segment, that is keen to have much better manual controlls, and that is keen to use XLR-audio equipment. So a clear professional approch.

Where I am still not sure is how the Z10000 will behave in a lowlight situation. Especially for 3D you need 3 points: light, light and again light. So I am not sure here, since the Z10000 has maybe two times the Panasonic 909 in, as you hear. Well, the 909 is a good camera, but it is still a consumer camcorder. So to my opinion, that will be the most important point to check, especially for wedding videos in a maybe darker church.

Well, by the time I get money for one the price should go down and numerous reviews out, and maybe even better models out also haha! But this cam sounds great and I am very curious how it shall perform. The Sony sounds good also and I shall wait to see reviews for it more.

I found a TD10 for only 63,000 yen today, thats about $700 and came with a tripod and 16GB SD card Was so tempting to buy but I have a JVC already so kinda pointless.

I got yesterday a call from my supplier - delivery of the Z10000 starts now in Austria, it will be distributed by the professional channel of Panasonic (at least here in Europe). They start to take the first orders, and I think that I will be one of the first customers in Austria with such a 1080 50i/24p Z10000.

"Well, the i.o for the Z10000 is somewhere around 42 mm - what is *much better* then the TD10 or TD1 with about 31 mm. So I expect a better depth effect, even if for some shootings even 42 mm are still *too low*."

I am sorry but I do not get this ranking. The interocular difference determines the window in which depth can be perceived in terms of distance from the camera to subject. If the io is close, then the closest distance is smaller and if it is higher than the closest distance is farther. So, the io distance determines how far and how close you can get 3D. In other words, which io is "better" depends on what you are shooting.

Did I miss something, or is what you are saying specific to your own needs and not generalizable to anyone else?

An increasing in io changes increases the overalll depth of the 3D scene, but it changes also the foreground to background distance. Mendiburuh has called that to set the depth bracket, I think that this can be generalized.

The way I see it is this way- The size of the stage where your 3D action takes place is controlled buy the inter-axial separation between the cameras is properly aligned in combination with the focal length. The limits of the closest object before divergence is set by the interocular distance. The limits of the fartherest objects that maintain depth is a function of both the wide angle and the IO distance. There is no simple formula as the interaction of focal length and IO for all objects on stage controls the size of the stage.

As such, a 31mm IA distance compared to a 44 IA separation will not make a big difference in the size of the stage. The most natural image depth is one that matches the human interocular separation which is an average of 65mm and a focal length of 35mm for the best close to distant stage depth. Going much wider such as 150-300mm IA and 50-70mm focal length will permit stage sizes that can achieve good 3D separation of objects for large scenes such as large buildings and mountain ranges. But these scenes have greatly extended the minimum object distance to several hundred feet in some cases. Conversely, going to much smaller IA than 31mm and close up focus will permit some nice macro 3D imagery. In order to achieve extreme close up 3D an over/under camera rig with a beam splitting mirror is utilized. This allows two physically large cameras to be positioned so that The IA can be reduced to >= 0

I suspect the math for proper depth is even more complex then we suspect.

Try this experiment. Display a still 3D image on your monitor or TV. Note the perceived depth. Now get closer or farther from the display. Notice how the perceived depth changes? I've found that moving away from the display causes the depth to appear much deeper.

For a natural depth, where depth matches the scale of width and height, I believe these parameters must be taken into account to set the correct camera lens separation

1. Eye separation
2. Camera field of view
3. Size of display
4. Viewer distance from the display

The correct lens separation won't always be the same as eye separation. I believe this is why professional rigs are designed to cover a wide variety of separations including near 0mm. It's all based on how much closeup is used and how large the image will appear to the viewers.

Of course directors don't always want natural depth. Sometimes they may want to exaggerate it for effect or diminish it to minimize fatigue.

I can only recommend to read Mendiburuhs great book.
http://www.amazon.de/gp/product/0240811372

What you describe here is a well-known phänomen, as far as I remember he discusses that with the question where you would choose to sit in a movie theater - in the first or last lanes.

It is also well-known, that the size of the display has an significant impact. What is a special problem for the editor, for example I use a 3D 120 Hz monitor sized 23 inch - but my HDTV is a 55 inch size. With different distances during editing and during presentation.

Together that makes it hard to adjust the deep bracket really, since you have to come up with assumptions about the distance of the viewer to the display, the display size and so on. That are some points that make 3D not soo easy as 2D.

Here in this context of choosing a camcorder with an fixed IO of 42 mm we have to be aware, that we loose one of the two major aspects anyway - beside the adjustment of convergence we loose the ability to change the IO. But we win the ability to have a camcorder that is easy to use, with the two views adjusted in a perfect way, and - compared to the Sony TD10 and the JVC TD1 - with all manual adjustments required for working really. We win that we can acquire footage with both 1080 50i/60i but more important 1080 24p, what is still the best frame mode for authoring cutted footage to 3D BD-Rs. Beside the professional audio section of this unit.

Given the fact, that a lot of people will use this camcorder to shoot events and people, I think this camcorder is a very good unit to film such events - like weddings or similar events. It will be possible to move during taking the movie, without a heavy steadicam that you would need with a 3D rig and two camcorders. Maybe with a light steadicam - I tend to use a monopod for that.

And that is the conclusion - to my opinion: if somebody wants to take a movie from the Grand Canyon, he should go for two separate Camcorders - use an external controler and a side-by-side stereo rig. The Z10000 would fail to deliver here great 3D footage. But for the group of event moviemakers the Z10000 will be an improvement, compared to the TD10 or TD1. Sure, there will be still some limitations, since the Z10000 uses a chip size that is from consumer camcorders (some rumors say from the Panasonic 909). And the footage is taken with AVCHD - what is still a consumer format. But camcords that fulfill really professional requirements will be priced much higher.

I agree with everything Wolfgang said- expect with respect to the spelling of Bernard Mendiburu's name. The math is indeed very complex. So much so that Mendiburu resorts to an included DVD with clips of a screen using 3D Studio max to create a 3D CGI of the angles and how they change in the real world to demonstrate how varying one factor can affect others. He could not adequately demonstrate the complexity on paper so use of a wireframe of the scene stage and twin cameras with 3D studio to the rescue. I must have read his paper description a hundred times and finally broke out the DVD to study and seeing that made everything clear.

Actually you can pretty much take #1 the eye separation to be a constant 65mm since that is the average separation of human adults. Besides, according to Mendiburu, minor differences do not make a major difference at this range the same as the minor differences in camera IA at this range. But, when the scene stage is expanded from a normal shooting environment of a 15ft x 25 ft room to that of the Grand Canyon, we're now looking at separations ranging from 6" IA to 3 ft or more. Here the major concern is to avoid close objects in the scene with wide IA as they just do not converge for a 3D effect. My experiments with the 28" IA bench showed me I want no closer objects than 500 feet. My recent test shoots with an IA of 8" demonstrated no close objects than 30 ft.. With 4" IA, no closer than 15 ft. What going wider IA accomplishes is that you can see differences in 3D objects at extreme depth in the 3D stage where closer IA will tend to flatten the distant objects out.

Now for the hard part, while compressing a stage the size of the Grand Canyon to a home theater screen of say 110" wide using good IA, the scene suffers an artifact of dwarfism. So, preserving 3D depth at great distances causes a size proportion distortion that tends toward bending reality. The only thing the stereographer can do is find a happy balance between all these factors.

Fortunately, the 3D reality distortion is less affected by screen size vs viewing distance than other factors. Meaning, sitting 5 ft from a 32" monitor and sitting 15 ft from a 9 ft monitor has about the same reality distortion. The problem is where you have a production that is designed for the IMAX screen and the audience is sitting very close, the depth has to be adjusted to much less than a production for a smaller screen. Personally, when going to an IMAX movie in 3D I go to the back of the theater to achieve the best 3D effect that has the least reality distortion.
OK, if you want a better explanation you'll need to buy the book!

Bottom line is this- Smaller camcorders with less than 65mm IA allow a shooting stage that is more friendly to the typical home movie making stage size than a larger physical camcorder with 65mm just to achieve better 3D at distances between 25 and 200 ft. but limiting the close objects to greater than 6-7 ft.

If you are planning to shoot sports on a playing field then yes, do buy a wider IA camcorder it will better suit your intended stage.

Yaaah, the spelling.... he could have an easier name! But I think it is really a great book, even if I found it in some parts not 100% specific. What I missed especially was the calculation, but he states that he never ever did that really... what is great for most of us.

I had also some reflection about the IO of the famous 65 mm - the "standard". One could argue that we should film all the time with such an IO, to repro the natural viewing. My first understanding was that the 31 mm of a TD10 or TD1 is too small. But since I am interested in a low distance to the nearest object, I think it is great to have a smaller IO compared to the 65 mm.

First footage can be downloaded from a German test page:

http://www.videoaktiv.de/Praxis+Tech...sentation.html

but it is 3D 50i only, neither 60i nor 24p.

By the way, I got the information that my Z10000 will be ordered tomorrow, and could arrive in Vienna end of next week...

Thanks for the book recommendation, Wolfgang. I will definitely read it.

At first I assumed the small distance between lens in my JVC TD1 was just to make the camcorder small, but now I've been using it, I find it's usually a good choice for subject matter and viewing setup.

I'm looking forward to reading your review of the Panasonic Z10000. I plan on getting one next spring. I've been pleased with the video quality of my JVC, but miss the view finder and physical controls found on prosumer models.