or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › Panasonic X900
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Panasonic X900 - Page 3

post #61 of 91
Hello all,

what is the estimated street price for the forthcoming HC-X900 (the NON internal memory version) and release date?

Thanks,
Brian
post #62 of 91
Camcorderinfo just released their review of the X900m. No significant improvements from the TM900 for them. It's still very interesting unit to me though because they added manual controls while shooting in 3D mode.

"Panasonic added a bunch of new controls and features for 3D recording with the HC-X900M. With the new camcorder you can control white balance, shutter speed, aperture, and gain when shooting 3D videojust like you can for 2D recording. The only area where you are more limited compared to 2D recording is with zoom and focus. There's no manual focus option when the 3D lens is attached and the X900M offers a sad 1.5x digital zoom in 3D mode (and no optical zoom). Additionally, you can use scene modes, pre-record, and the camcorder's iA auto mode for 3D recording as well".

If your shooting 3D these improvement are significant.

I don't like that they removed the "zoom" and "record button" on the side of the LCD like previous models. I use that record button quite often. Hopefully they are integrated into the lcd now?

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...der-Review.htm
post #63 of 91
Slightly improved stabilization and resolution in 1080p60 mode, better flip-out screen resolution and menu icons borrowed from a 10-year old Sony. I wonder why sensitivity has dropped.

On another hand, I think that companies should stop rolling out a new model every year or even twice a year just for the sake of it. I applaud Canon for keeping the G10/XA10 for another year.
post #64 of 91
"On another hand, I think that companies should stop rolling out a new model every year."

How in the world could it be bad if a company issues new models with improvements, even if minor? Who is worse off when that happens? Are you worried about the re-sale value of your old camcorder?

And why should Canon be praised for refusing to step up and offer 108060p like everyone else and sticking with their outdated technology (which is evidently incapable of processing 108060p at 28Mbps)?
post #65 of 91
"If your shooting 3D these improvement are significant."

Agreed, but this omits another big 3D improvement: the high-resolution LCD offers glasses-free 3D live when the 3D adaptor is in place.

I am not sure the X900 is the best option for 3D. If you want the best option, if you can take the size and the cost (although it is not much more than the new X900+3D converter and maybe not much bigger), the best option by far is the Panasonic Z10000. It has the same technology as the X900 (same new lens, new processor with pixel-shifting, new stabilization, new 3D LCD, but X2 - two lenses, two three-chip sensors) and you get everything in 3D you get in 2D, including 10X optical zoom and OIS. Plus more audio options, more buttons, more control over dynamic range, much better viewfinder. The performance in 2D is the same as the X900 and TM900 (great!), and so is the performance in 3D! No compromise in either 2D or 3D.
post #66 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

"On another hand, I think that companies should stop rolling out a new model every year."

How in the world could it be bad if a company issues new models with improvements, even if minor? Who is worse off when that happens? Are you worried about the re-sale value of your old camcorder?

And why should Canon be praised for refusing to step up and offer 108060p like everyone else and sticking with their outdated technology (which is evidently incapable of processing 108060p at 28Mbps)?

i think canon overproduced the G10/XA10...and have plenty G10/XA10 in company warehouse...so can't just upgrade their camcorders till unit gets sold out...

problem is people are buying sony and panny camcorders with 1080 60P....canon have to writeoff loss on old technology 1080 30p and throw out the G10/XA10 in their warehouse , give 50% mark down pricew or sell at current price and wait till inventory goes down and introduced the 1080 60p in their camcorders.......
post #67 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

"On another hand, I think that companies should stop rolling out a new model every year."

How in the world could it be bad if a company issues new models with improvements, even if minor? Who is worse off when that happens? Are you worried about the re-sale value of your old camcorder?

You cut my sentence. I said: "I think that companies should stop rolling out a new model every year or even twice a year just for the sake of it." Same thing with American car companies releasing a "new" car every year in 1950-1960-ies, where "new" meant a new color or more chrome or bigger fins. The X900M has very little improvement over the TM900 to warrant changes in the body, hence in the molding equipment. I hate pointless change for the sake of change. Although the X900M is not all that bad. At least Panasonic figured out how to produce hi-res flip-out LCD screens. Bravo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

And why should Canon be praised for refusing to step up and offer 108060p like everyone else and sticking with their outdated technology (which is evidently incapable of processing 108060p at 28Mbps)?

I think they can make it with firmware change. If not, maybe they need to change just an encoding chip. At least there is no reason to change anything else. They could call it G10M. It was obvious for me a year ago that the G10/XA10 have too few buttons and those that are there are located in wrong places. This could be figured a year ago. No reason to make another "new" model where this problem is solved as if it was unsolvable before. Again, I hate when they intentionally cripple their products only to release a "new" model next year. This production cycle is wrong, from technical and moral point of view. I prefer how they make pro camcorders: more thought put into them and longer cycles between models. And when they make changes they can make just a slight update, not a completely new model, like DVX100, DVX100A, DVX100B, keeping most stuff the same.

Same with battery type. Why Panasonic switched from VBG to VBN/VBK? They are pretty much the same size. They did it to protect their profits when third-party VBG batteries became available. Now there are third-party VBN/VBK batteries as well, so Panasonic won half a year worth of battery income, and consumers got more things to worry about. What if I had, say the SD600 and TM900? They have different batteries.

My post may sound a bit incoherent but I hope you will see where I am coming from.
post #68 of 91
You praise professional camera updates because, you say:

" And when they make changes they can make just a slight update, not a completely new model, like DVX100, DVX100A, DVX100B, keeping most stuff the same."

This contradicts your indictment of the X900. First, it also is a slight change. and second, Panasonic just changed two letters to one TM->X, keeping the same number. Just like the pro updates you like.

I still don't get your beef. As long as there are changes that require new hardware (like a new screen, or processor) there needs to be a new model. We want providers to innnovate. You are free not to buy a new model, so, again, why do you care if new models are offered, even if it is just a change in the size of the tail fin. You do not have to buy them. Where's the harm?

Fine, you hate change for change sakes (and I dislike pickles). But you have not indicated what harm there is from it. Your old car, camcorder is no less capable when a new model comes out.

In any case there are some improvements in the X over the TM as you acknowledge. And we all can freely decide right now to go for the cheaper discontinued model or "upgrade" to the more expensive new one with the bigger tail fin.

No way a simple "firmware" upgrade is going to permit the Canons to shoot at 28 Mps 60fps 1080. They need a new processor. "just" a new processor? that is a major step.
post #69 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

I still don't get your beef. As long as there are changes that require new hardware (like a new screen, or processor) there needs to be a new model.

CCInfo wrote that the body is different. Why? Is it for the sake of change or was it really warranted by newer hardware? As for a hi-res screen, should I say thanks to Panasonic for finally catching up with Sony and Canon after being behind for at least two years? Here: thank you, Panasonic. Now what about native 24p? I love 60p, but if the camcorder can record 24p, why it is not in native format? Is it because they are trying protect the HMC40, which can now be bought for mere $1400 and which has pretty much the same hardware as this new camcorder? This is a pro camcorder that has a lot more features than the X900M and should be considered by anyone who looks at current and last year's Panasonic models.
post #70 of 91
"This is a pro camcorder that has a lot more features than the X900M and should be considered by anyone who looks at current and last year's Panasonic models."

That model does not have 60p. By your reasoning, it does not have 60p to protect sales of the TM900 and X900!

I think you are overdoing it. I agree with you that companies do protect models and acts as monopolists. Sony is by far the worst at this: For example, they offer a consumer 3D camera and a professional version that is exactly the same at double the price but only offers one added feature - 24p. That one is pretty flagrant. Sony consumer camcorders and cameras with video do not have manual audio, only the pro camcorder models do.

You will be glad to know, however, that Panasonic is going to upgrade by firmware this month its pro AG-AC160 camcorder to 108060p because of strong demand by professionals. This was a new model with new chips so it is possible (unlike for fuddy-duddy Canon). This was a case where Panasonic thought of 108060p as a consumer gimmick, but everyone is now learning it is the way to go.

Panasonic's new top prosumer 3D camcorder has all of the pro features of the HMC40 but also real 3d (two lenses and sensors (in three's of course)) plus 24P and 60p!
post #71 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

"This is a pro camcorder that has a lot more features than the X900M and should be considered by anyone who looks at current and last year's Panasonic models."

That model does not have 60p. By your reasoning, it does not have 60p to protect sales of the TM900 and X900!

It does have 60p, 720p that is. Actually I would prefer having 720p60 instead of 1080p60 on my SD600 because I see occasional tiling due to bit-starving.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

Panasonic's new top prosumer 3D camcorder has all of the pro features of the HMC40 but also real 3d (two lenses and sensors (in three's of course)) plus 24P and 60p!

The controls are vastly different, the HMC40 is simply much easier to use and it is not that large with the handle removed. And it accepts Panasonic's own XLR adapter, with the X900M you need to buy something like Beachtek.

Anyway, I guess I am overdoing it. When I wind up it is hard to stop :-) I am going to stop ranting by saying "thanks, and bring more" to Panasonic.
post #72 of 91
Hi

Camcorder.info now has the full review on the X900. Unsurprisingly not much of an improvement over the TM900, and the low light performance they say was slightly worse.

10 out of 10 to Panasonic marketing. Hate to say I told you so.

Regards

Phil
post #73 of 91
"CCInfo wrote that the body is different. Why? Is it for the sake of change or was it really warranted by newer hardware?"

There is an answer to that too. The X900 has a wider-angle lens than the TM900, Making it wider angle and keeping it f1.5 required larger glass, a larger lens (physics). To accomodate the bigger lens, the body size had to be larger. The filter diameter went up also from 46mm to 49mm as a consequence. Many people complained that the lens did not go wide enough on the older model.

To recap: significantly better lcd, new wider-angle lens, and new stabilization (which is more effective) are non-trivial upgrades. Panasonic also substantially upgraded the 3D capability. There is also a new processor, though it is unclear that did much to improve anything, though slashcam review says it did improve low-light performance.
post #74 of 91
I suppose the X900M came behind the TM900 in CCInfo tests due to the fashion they perform their tests. If I understand correctly, they pull all camcorders at the same distance from the chart, then zoom in to fill the frame with the chart. With the X900M having wider lens they had to zoom in farther, and because the lens has variable speed, it closed further than the lens on the TM900. If they shot the chart at full wide setting and varied distance to the chart instead, they might have gotten better results.

I am comparing images from SlashCam: http://camcorder-test.slashcam.com/c...283799bb4.html It seems that the TM900 used faster shutter speed (look at the rotating wheel, it is more blurred and smooth on the shot made with the X900M). Right outside the wheel you can see some minor tearing, while image from the X900M is smoother. It also seems that the X900M makes sharper image, look at the red mushroom on the right. Is it real sensor sharpness or just artificial oversharpening? It does not look too objectionable to me. Maybe it is just a matter of focusing.

Images from both the TM900 and the X900M look more natural and less noisy than from the TM700. But the TM700 uses too much gain, its image is brighter. The HS300 is far behind in quality, all too noisy.

These are images shot with manual WB and the same 1/25 shutter speed:

X900M: http://produktdbimages0.slashcam.de/...imiert_230.jpg
TM900: http://produktdbimages4.slashcam.de/...imiert_185.jpg

The X900M has less noise, but the difference is minor. I bet if I tone down yellow from the TM900 shot it will look very similar.

Mark, thanks for pointing out to 49mm thread. I wish they went right to 52mm, which seems more ubiquitous to me.

The more I look at the image shot with the X900M on SlashCam the more I like it. There is a huge improvement in quality from the HS300/TM300 to X900M. I might shouted too loud yesterday ;-) The X900M is a better camcorder indeed. Still, I wish Panasonic did not change the battery type and allowed native 24p recording.
post #75 of 91
Hi

Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

To recap: significantly better lcd, new wider-angle lens, and new stabilization (which is more effective) are non-trivial upgrades. There is also a new processor, though it is unclear that did much to improve anything, though slashcam review says it did improve low-light performance.

One owner has said the LCD was fuzzy due to the 3D filters and was not as good as the SD900 they had sent back due to a fault. They have now sent the X900 back because they found images were not as sharp and build quality was worse than the SD900, for example a floppy LCD screen that flips open by itself too easily, no flaps covering the connections allowing dust and dirt in, no controls on the LCD panel, plus a poorer overall case finish. Basically the X900 has more cost cutting changes for Panasonic than real improvements for the consumer.

Who said there is a new processor? Panasonic refer to a new Crystal Pro Engine, but a 'new engine' could simply mean new firmware with some tweaks to justify the claims, that might only go as far as changing the UI. Marketing is just that, marketing, and we can already see Panasonic claims were exaggerated and probably just made up. If they had gone to the trouble of designing a new LSI it would surely be using a smaller fabrication, reducing power consumption and waste heat allowing them to do away with the dreaded fan. We still have the fan, and no improvements in performance has really been seen, in some cases it is worse, so I think the LSI is probably the same.

Basically yes it has a wider angle lens, you may or may not find the LCD better, plus it scored a bit better on the stabilization test at camcorderinfo. Is it worth ditching a perfectly good TM900 or TM700 for this? Only if you have money to burn in my opinion.

Regards

Phil
post #76 of 91
Phil, I have a TM900 and I agree with you that upgrading from a TM900 to an X900 is not worth it.

But I am not in denial of the changes/improvements, nor do I resent Panasonic trying to improve.

Here is what Panasonic says about the *new* processor:

"The X900/X900M/X800 features the newly developed, ultra-high speed Crystal Engine Pro II. By using this engine to perform high-speed processing of the huge number of pixels - approximately equivalent to four times the pixel count of Full-HD - that are obtained with pixel shift technology, superb Full-HD image quality is achieved even in detailed image parts."

You cannot increase processing power with a firmware change. They may be spinning the improvements we will actually see, but I think it is inappropriate to claim they are straight out lying about whether there is a new processor.
post #77 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_L View Post

no improvements in performance has really been seen, in some cases it is worse

Have you looked at the images from SlashCam?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_L View Post

Is it worth ditching a perfectly good TM900 or TM700 for this? Only if you have money to burn in my opinion.

I think no one here is talking about replacing a TM900 or TM700 with the X900M. The topic is whether the X900M is a big enough leap to call it a new model or to even for Panasonic to bother making it.

I think that the changes are minute, but feature-wise the X900M is better than the TM900. Not as much better as I would want, but better. As for myself, I will wait for Panasonic to offer AVC Long-G on a consumer model. If not in its full-blown 50 Mbit/s variant than at least something similar to current 1080p60 with bitrate increased to about 35 Mbit/s. This would be still within Blu-ray spec, so should be not problem for Blu-ray players to play back.
post #78 of 91
Hi

Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

Phil, I have a TM900 and I agree with you that upgrading from a TM900 to an X900 is not worth it.

But I am not in denial of the changes/improvements, nor do I resent Panasonic trying to improve.

They haven't improved anything though. The clue is in the fact it carries the same model number. They've done the same as Canon and just tinkered around the edges and looked at reducing manufacturing costs. There simply isn't money being made on these products with the economy as it for manufacturers to spend on R&D, so they haven't.

Quote:

Here is what Panasonic says about the *new* processor:

"The X900/X900M/X800 features the newly developed, ultra-high speed Crystal Engine Pro II. By using this engine to perform high-speed processing of the huge number of pixels ā€“ approximately equivalent to four times the pixel count of Full-HD ā€“ that are obtained with pixel shift technology, superb Full-HD image quality is achieved even in detailed image parts."

But it's all marketing blurb. You also don't need to process 4 times the amount of pixels of HD, what is the point of doing that, and I think they said this with the TM900 as well? The biggest losses are in the compression to H264, so whether you start off with exactly the right number of HD pixels or 4 times the amount, the end result is the same, even if the video was recorded uncompressed, you don't get any more resolution just because you started of with more pixels, in fact the scaling to reduce the pixel count will introduce artefacts and result in less detail, not more.

They also don't say when this engine was newly developed and what range of cameras it was introduced on. I'd put money on it being the exact same LSI as in the 700 series to the present day. It's all marketing, you can't believe a word of it.

Quote:
You cannot increase processing power with a firmware change. They may be spinning the improvements we will actually see, but I think it is inappropriate to claim they are straight out lying about whether there is a new processor.

They've not said there is a new processor as Panasonic don't define what they mean by the Crystal Engine Pro II. They go on to claim a 40% reduction in noise, but don't state how that is measured. In tests the noise levels are the same or within tolerances for typical variation of performance between units between the TM900 and X900, despite Panasonics claim of a 40% improvement. Unless you know how the measure is made, that 40% claim is meaningless and just marketing, as it has turned out to be.

I prefer to deal with the facts. Facts are the cold specifications show that there would be no improvements (same 3MOS, same F1.5 lens, same recording formats and bit-rates), and that is proved to be the case. Whether its got a new LSI or not, its made no difference to performance. It's not a bad camera, although at least one person has returned it for the SD900 which they felt was better, but it isn't anything different than the TM900 except for a wider angle lens really.

I like Panasonic cameras, I'd have upgraded if there were real improvements, but this way they've saved me and many others a nice sum of money, so not all bad.

Regards

Phil
post #79 of 91
Phil,

I really think you are going overboard. You even say : "same F1.5 lens". It is most assuredly not the same lens - it is now wide angle and much bigger than the one it replaced - cold facts about it's dimensions and zoom range; look it up. They are saying it's a new processor (that's what "newly-developed" means). And you evidently do not understand pixel shifting and what it does, and why it requires more processing. But if you do not want to believe them, no harm done. Both of us are not going to buy the X900 and are happy with the TM900. But I would certainly not discourage anyone from buying the X900 if the TM900 is no longer around.
post #80 of 91
I did some samples...

Good light (0 dB gain)
youtube.com/watch?v=ifjEDb3XHaM

Low light simulation (15 dB, 1/000s shutter)
youtube.com/watch?v=Fmx0nRLVPBI

X900M vs. GH2 (+ 14-140 lens)
youtube.com/watch?v=I5V04YDLFuc
1) GH2, 2) X900M

RAW *.mts files (+ high bitrate version of third video)
http://www.mediafire.com/?3kcgxb8maq...l7rp25d8b7k2pn
post #81 of 91
Hi

Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

Phil,

I really think you are going overboard. You even say : "same F1.5 lens". It is most assuredly not the same lens - it is now wide angle and much bigger than the one it replaced - cold facts about it's dimensions and zoom range; look it up. They are saying it's a new processor (that's what "newly-developed" means). And you evidently do not understand pixel shifting and what it does, and why it requires more processing. But if you do not want to believe them, no harm done. Both of us are not going to buy the X900 and are happy with the TM900. But I would certainly not discourage anyone from buying the X900 if the TM900 is no longer around.

I've acknowledged it is a wider angle lens elsewhere, when I say the same F1.5 lens I was meaning in context with low light performance. Nothing has been changed to improve low light performance, except perhaps for extra noise reduction in the processing, which is cheating somewhat, but reviews haven't seen less noise anyway. Where does Panasonic get it's 40% improvement figure from then if it isn't made up? In fact Panasonic made similar claims with the TM900 compared to the TM700, and that wasn't seen either.

I've also never said it isn't worth buying. What I have said is the marketing claims are just not substantiated by the specifications, and as we have seen, there is no real improvement in the performance. If you have a perfectly good TM900 or TM700/750, there is no compelling reason to upgrade to this 'new' model unless you really need the wider angle lens, even then you might be better off buying a wide angle lens for your existing camera.

Also the new camera has obviously had cost cutting changes to make it cheaper for Panasonic to manufacturer. It might even be the case that the larger lens is actually cheaper (used elsewhere in other models for example) than the more compact one. The negative being they have to increase the size of the camera, but then that creates extra space for easier assembly.

Quote:


Both of us are not going to buy the X900 and are happy with the TM900. But I would certainly not discourage anyone from buying the X900 if the TM900 is no longer around.

Exactly I agree, once all stock of older models are gone and the price drops to similar levels on the new model, it's a good camcorder to buy.

I just hate all the marketing rubbish, clearly it has no basis in the truth, it's like washing powder commercials. If washing powder had really improved over the last 10 or 20 years as they claim in the ads for each new improved formula, why are they now pushing the sale of stain removers to add in at the same time???? Why not add that into the washing powder? It's all about taking more money from the consumer while actually not giving them anything better in return.

Regards

Phil
post #82 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_L View Post

when I say the same F1.5 lens I was meaning in context with low light performance.

Still, it is not the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_L View Post

Nothing has been changed to improve low light performance, except perhaps for extra noise reduction in the processing, which is cheating somewhat, but reviews haven't seen less noise anyway.

So you haven't bothered to look at the images from SlashCam yourself?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_L View Post

If you have a perfectly good TM900 or TM700/750, there is no compelling reason to upgrade to this 'new' model

No one is talking about upgrading.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_L View Post

Also the new camera has obviously had cost cutting changes to make it cheaper for Panasonic to manufacturer. It might even be the case that the larger lens is actually cheaper (used elsewhere in other models for example) than the more compact one.

Which ones?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_L View Post

It's all about taking more money from the consumer while actually not giving them anything better in return.

Nah. Actually I think that engineers what to do more, but they are pushed back by bean counters who want innovation to trickle, not to flood. I don't think that switching to a new battery type or choosing weird power socket shape was done by the engineers. On another hand, even bean counters realize that they need to give SOMETHING for a consumer, and they do, but not at the rate we would want.
post #83 of 91
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_L View Post

One owner has said the LCD was fuzzy due to the 3D filters and was not as good as the SD900 they had sent back due to a fault. They have now sent the X900 back because they found images were not as sharp and build quality was worse than the SD900, for example a floppy LCD screen that flips open by itself too easily, no flaps covering the connections allowing dust and dirt in, no controls on the LCD panel, plus a poorer overall case finish. Basically the X900 has more cost cutting changes for Panasonic than real improvements for the consumer.
Phil

Where can I read this person's review or thoughts?
post #84 of 91
Hi

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira View Post

Where can I read this person's review or thoughts?

http://www.avforums.com/forums/camco...s-hc-x900.html

Regards

Phil
post #85 of 91
Interesting X900/TM900/SDT750 3MOS test:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dlVBYj-LkY

My aging eyes can't tell which is which. All three produce stunning images for the price, in my view :-)
post #86 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by brunerww View Post

Interesting X900/TM900/SDT750 3MOS test:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dlVBYj-LkY

My aging eyes can't tell which is which. All three produce stunning images for the price, in my view :-)

If you take your video in the first and last half hour of the day with any camcorder, they will be stunning! For me that means getting up too early or skipping the cocktail hour.

I'm currently living in a motorhome in an Arizona "RV Resort" (trailer park). My kids wanted some pictures. I took some video that sucks. So, I got up early and shot some video as the sun came over the mountains. The trailer park actually looks like a resort! The kids might even be impressed.

It is not about the camera, it is about how and what you point it at!
post #87 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post


It is not about the camera, it is about how and what you point it at!

i just completed our vacation video....combining the video shot with my sony xr550, and family member's sony cx700, panny 700, and my iphone cellphone....

in the finished video... it's hard to tell which scene is shot by which camera... i also added scenic scence downloaded from youtube... scenery i can download and add to my the vacation video... but video of family members can not be downloaded from youtube..

so when going on vacation always point camera to family members enjoying the scenic views....
post #88 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyker1212 View Post

i also added scenic scence downloaded from youtube... scenery i can download and add to my the vacation video... but video of family members can not be downloaded from youtube..

so when going on vacation always point camera to family members enjoying the scenic views....

Do you mean, fake it? Look at something that a viewer would think was a great scenery, but which in fact may be a garbage container? 20 years from now you will be watching these videos knowing that they are fake, I wonder what you will feel.
post #89 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

If you take your video in the first and last half hour of the day with any camcorder, they will be stunning! For me that means getting up too early or skipping the cocktail hour.

I'm currently living in a motorhome in an Arizona "RV Resort" (trailer park). My kids wanted some pictures. I took some video that sucks. So, I got up early and shot some video as the sun came over the mountains. The trailer park actually looks like a resort! The kids might even be impressed.

It is not about the camera, it is about how and what you point it at!

Agreed. Any modern consumer camcorder is capable of good enough video quality. Check out this one, shot with the HDC-SD9 with measly 1/6-inch sensors each having only half-megapixel resolution: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHlQneKwQLU As expected, low light scenes look bad, but in good light this camcorder puts out good image. Fast forward to 2:20 and you would think you are watching a documentary film shot with a pro camera.

post #90 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ungermann View Post

Do you mean, fake it? Look at something that a viewer would think was a great scenery, but which in fact may be a garbage container? 20 years from now you will be watching these videos knowing that they are fake, I wonder what you will feel.

it's not fake... just like borrowing video footage from a relative's camcorder... you are both there shooting video... your camera is pointing to your family member plus the historic flower... while your relative's camcorder is taking a close-up video shoot of the historic flower itself...

fake is if u never been there... yet you put on video to refer you went to that same spot and saw the historic flower...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Camcorders
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › Panasonic X900