or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › New Camcorders unveiled at CES 2013
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Camcorders unveiled at CES 2013 - Page 3

post #61 of 107
The people who made the video might have been looking at the total size specs and than used that to say that the chips of the X920 are bigger. As for Camcorderinfo, they might have received the size of the video portion from Panasonic which might seam even smaller than the X900. Still no denying that the lens specs are all similar so it doesn't make much difference saying eighter 1/4.7" or 1/2.3". for the new cameras. We'll just have to see how they perform. It still wouldn't be surprising if they just made a mistake since they also made a mistake on the price saying that the camera will be no more than $1,300 when that's not accurate. The highest price you'll pay initially is $1,200. Ironic how you were able to get the X900 for half that very recently.

My AC90 doesn't need as much light as my SD600 does before any gain is needed to be applied so when testing both as 0dB, the AC90 is brighter. It wound be good to see how the X920 would do compared to the X900 and AC90 is real world tests in which your able to see the settings although at least Panasonic's "marketing" video gave interesting comparisons.
Edited by Paulo Teixeira - 1/13/13 at 2:50pm
post #62 of 107
Panasonic's website (UK) suggests there is indeed a 24/25p mode


http://www.panasonic.co.uk/html/en_GB/Products/Camcorders/New+Camcorders/HC-X920/Specification/11053351/index.html?trackInfo=true
post #63 of 107
How prevalent is Deep Color in 2013 Camcorders?
post #64 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Huntley View Post

Panasonic's website (UK) suggests there is indeed a 24/25p mode


http://www.panasonic.co.uk/html/en_GB/Products/Camcorders/New+Camcorders/HC-X920/Specification/11053351/index.html?trackInfo=true
"An error has occured. Ein Fehler ist aufgetreten."
post #65 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ungermann View Post

"An error has occured. Ein Fehler ist aufgetreten."

Link works fine for me on my mac and my nokia
post #66 of 107
I'm certain you probably just saw the number 25 and you didn't also saw the number 24. Having a 25p option for PAL doesn't necessarily mean you will see 24p in NTSC models. It can also mean that the NTSC version is 30p as well and looking at the NTSC specs, it actually says 30p.I think Panasonic must have worried about the fact that it's using similar chips as the AC90 and figured if they were to put native 24p into the X920, it might take away some sales from the AC90. Never mind the fact that 24p can be one way to get people to buy the 2014 model so that's another theory. I guess they figured that if other companies are willing to cripple their consumer camcorders in one way or another, they should do. Perhaps these companies figured that if one company started offering a lot of key features into a consumer camcorder, other companies would be forced to do it as well and in the end, they would all loose a little profit. It still seams hard to believe that Panasonic actually scrapped 24p. I mean that's really shocking that they'd do that.

I do wonder how Sanyo's newest camcorders would have been if they were still fully afloat. They released the HD2000 back in 2009 which was the first camcorder to record in 1080 60p.

As for the link, it's true that it wasn't working for a while and it's working now.
post #67 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira View Post

I'm certain you probably just saw the number 25 and you didn't also saw the number 24. Having a 25p option for PAL doesn't necessarily mean you will see 24p in NTSC models. It can also mean that the NTSC version is 30p as well and looking at the NTSC specs, it actually says 30p.I think Panasonic must have worried about the fact that it's using similar chips as the AC90 and figured if they were to put native 24p into the X920, it might take away some sales from the AC90. Never mind the fact that 24p can be one way to get people to buy the 2014 model so that's another theory. I guess they figured that if other companies are willing to cripple their consumer camcorders in one way or another, they should do. Perhaps these companies figured that if one company started offering a lot of key features into a consumer camcorder, other companies would be forced to do it as well and in the end, they would all loose a little profit. It still seams hard to believe that Panasonic actually scrapped 24p. I mean that's really shocking that they'd do that.

I do wonder how Sanyo's newest camcorders would have been if they were still fully afloat. They released the HD2000 back in 2009 which was the first camcorder to record in 1080 60p.

As for the link, it's true that it wasn't working for a while and it's working now.

The previous 900 models from Panasonic didn't have a 30p option, yeah? I don't seem to remember having one on my TM900. I actually prefer the inclusion of the 30p option at the expense of the 24p (recorded in 60i)

I sold my TM900 for a decent price the other day - this 920x better have significant improvements in low light!
post #68 of 107
Hi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira View Post

The people who made the video might have been looking at the total size specs and than used that to say that the chips of the X920 are bigger. As for Camcorderinfo, they might have received the size of the video portion from Panasonic which might seam even smaller than the X900. Still no denying that the lens specs are all similar so it doesn't make much difference saying eighter 1/4.7" or 1/2.3". for the new cameras. We'll just have to see how they perform. It still wouldn't be surprising if they just made a mistake since they also made a mistake on the price saying that the camera will be no more than $1,300 when that's not accurate. The highest price you'll pay initially is $1,200. Ironic how you were able to get the X900 for half that very recently.

My AC90 doesn't need as much light as my SD600 does before any gain is needed to be applied so when testing both as 0dB, the AC90 is brighter. It wound be good to see how the X920 would do compared to the X900 and AC90 is real world tests in which your able to see the settings although at least Panasonic's "marketing" video gave interesting comparisons.

I think all we can say for sure is there is some marketing embellishments going on from Panasonic, and not for the first time. The AC90 being aimed at the professional market and so in-the-know more than the average consumer, is being specified correctly as they wouldn't get away with it so easily.

It seems they are using a larger sensor, (maybe it failed QA to be used across it's full surface area) but essentially are using it as a much smaller sensor, but selling it using the larger number which is absolutely meaningless and quite frankly false advertising. If this sensor has more pixels squashed into what is a smaller area than the previous model, even being a BSI sensor may not make up for the lessor light sensitivity those smaller pixels equate to.

Regards

Phil
post #69 of 107
Here's the specs of the X900
1/4.1" MOS Sensor x 3
Total Pixels : 9.15 megapixels (3.05 megapixels x 3)
Effective Pixels :

6.57 - 6.21 megapixels (2.19 - 2.07 megapixels x 3)[16:9]

The X900 appears to be using a smaller portion as well and as I said before, the video portion of the X900, AC90 and the X920 might all be about the same size or the lens specifications wouldn't match but it's true that the video portion of the X920 appears to have slightly more pixels 8.49 megapixels ((2.83 megapixels x 3) [16:9]). Basically, every company uses a smaller portion of the chip for video but the X920 is sort of the first time people are noticing because of how unbelievable the specs seams at first for your average consumer who'll just look at the chip size and not pay attention to the size of the video portion or the lens specifications. It's definitely true that they shouldn't have said that the chips are bigger on the X920 in the video. Still, the AC90 has slightly less pixels than the X920 so the low light capabilities might be slightly better on the AC90 even though their both BSI chips. We'll have to wait until your average person compares all of them.
Edited by Paulo Teixeira - 1/15/13 at 12:07pm
post #70 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira View Post

Here's the specs of the X900
1/4.1" MOS Sensor x 3
Total Pixels : 9.15 megapixels (3.05 megapixels x 3)
Effective Pixels :

6.57 - 6.21 megapixels (2.19 - 2.07 megapixels x 3)[16:9]

The X900 appears to be using a smaller portion as well and as I said before, the video portion of the X900, AC90 and the X920 might all be about the same size or the lens specifications wouldn't match but it's true that the video portion of the X920 appears to have slightly more pixels 8.49 megapixels ((2.83 megapixels x 3) [16:9]). Basically, every company uses a smaller portion of the chip for video but the X920 is sort of the first time people are noticing because of how unbelievable the specs seams at first for your average consumer who'll just look at the chip size and not pay attention to the size of the video portion or the lens specifications. It's definitely true that they shouldn't have said that the chips are bigger on the X920 in the video. Still, the AC90 has slightly less pixels than the X920 so the low light capabilities might be slightly better on the AC90 even though their both BSI chips. We'll have to wait until your average person compares all of them.

Yeah i was about to post that in my opinion, the portion of the sensor used in the x920 will probably be the same as used in the previous 900 series camcorders. Will be interesting to see how much improvement there is in low light
post #71 of 107
High speed video only - were there any new cameras that offered improved performance in high speed video? Any that offered manual shutter speed control to reduce motion blur?
post #72 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Huntley View Post

The previous 900 models from Panasonic didn't have a 30p option, yeah? I don't seem to remember having one on my TM900. I actually prefer the inclusion of the 30p option at the expense of the 24p (recorded in 60i)
30p can be easily derived from 60p, so no need to have 30p at all aside of potentially more robust encoding and less macroblocking. 24p, on the other end, is a completely different beast. Panasonic offered native (!) 24p on the SD9/HS9 and SD100/HS100 way ago. It is no problem to offer zillon of frame rates on a tapeless camcorder, no need to sync mechanics with signal. But Panasonic is afraid to offer too many features on a consumer camcorder.
post #73 of 107
Link to Trustedreviews test of Panasonic X920

http://www.trustedreviews.com/panasonic-hc-x920_Camcorder_review
post #74 of 107
"...all hail the new king of camcorders..."?

Maybe it's time to finally trade in the old TM900 and pre-order the X920? smile.gif
post #75 of 107
yes I have been looking at the X920 and trying to keep my credit card in my wallet. I am wondering about the JVC PX100. It would be really nice to have a viewfinder. What do you guys expect from JVC? I have never had one and am not aware of the quality really of their lower level cams.
Oh crap...just noticed the panny seems to have a viewfinder???
Edited by ThinIce - 1/30/13 at 8:29am
post #76 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhnj View Post

Link to Trustedreviews test of Panasonic X920

http://www.trustedreviews.com/panasonic-hc-x920_Camcorder_review

They are saying that the x920 is using 3 1/2.3 sensors, so I guess they are. I know there was some speculation in this thread on that a few pages back. I have not looked at Panasonic's web site for specs yet. I'm anxious to read cc info's review of this unit with the bigger sensors and them being back illuminated as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinIce View Post

yes I have been looking at the X920 and trying to keep my credit card in my wallet. I am wondering about the JVC PX100. It would be really nice to have a viewfinder. What do you guys expect from JVC? I have never had one and am not aware of the quality really of their lower level cams.
Oh crap...just noticed the panny seems to have a viewfinder???

The x920 does have a viewfinder. It has good specs and some nice new features. Wifi, miniature effect, and others. If it performs better than the previous couple of years models it will be very nice. I expect it to perform even better in low light than previous models since it's sensors are back-illuminated this year for the first time.

I think the JVC will perform very well. It will have top notch sharpness just like the Panasonic. It has an available viewfinder but I think it will be an extra cost. JVC has a little different color palate compared to Panasonic from my experience. One may be more pleasurable than the other to a viewer of their video. It's all personal preference.

I am looking forward to cc info review of this one as well. Either cam would be a fine choice in my opinion. I would wait for some prefessional reviews and go from there
post #77 of 107
The Panasonic HC-X920 can't have 1/2.3 in. sensors since it shows a 2.84mm FL or 29.8mm eqiv at the wide end for a 10.5x crop factor compared to 35mm full frame and my Nikon P500 36x Superzoom with 1/2.3 in. sensor has a 22.5mm eqiv at the wide end and a 4mm FL for a 5.625x crop factor compared to 35mm full frame..





Click on above images to see large version.

I bet it has the same size sensors ( 1/4.1" ) as my TM700.
Edited by jogiba - 1/31/13 at 6:54am
post #78 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by jogiba View Post

The Panasonic HC-X920 can't have 1/2.3 in. sensors since it shows a 2.84mm FL or 29.8mm eqiv at the wide end for a 10.5x crop factor compared to 35mm full frame and my Nikon P500 36x Superzoom with 1/2.3 in. sensor has a 22.5mm eqiv at the wide end and a 4mm FL for a 5.625x crop factor compared to 35mm full frame..


I bet it has the same size sensors ( 1/4.1" ) as my TM700.

The x920 has 1/2.3 in. sensors, however due to the specs of the lens, it only uses a small portion of these chips, the same area as what the tm700/900 use.

So although the chips are physically bigger, they don't provide any extra benefits. Most likely panasonic didn't want to make custom size chips to fit the camera
post #79 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Huntley View Post

The x920 has 1/2.3 in. sensors, however due to the specs of the lens, it only uses a small portion of these chips, the same area as what the tm700/900 use.

So although the chips are physically bigger, they don't provide any extra benefits. Most likely panasonic didn't want to make custom size chips to fit the camera
Most likely Panasonic marketing realized nobody wanted to buy a camcorder with even smaller sensors than last year's model. (The X920 has 1/4.7" sensors just like the AC90 and the X900 has 1/4.1" sensors). So they tried to think up some way to hide the fact that the active sensor area was smaller than before.
post #80 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by hatchback View Post

Most likely Panasonic marketing realized nobody wanted to buy a camcorder with even smaller sensors than last year's model. (The X920 has 1/4.7" sensors just like the AC90 and the X900 has 1/4.1" sensors). So they tried to think up some way to hide the fact that the active sensor area was smaller than before.
The tm700/900 have 1/4.1" sensors, yet they only use 1/4.7" when recording video, so there's no change
post #81 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Huntley View Post

The tm700/900 have 1/4.1" sensors, yet they only use 1/4.7" when recording video, so there's no change
Where did you see that? I've only seen that the X900 has 1/4.1" sensors.

http://panasonic.net/avc/camcorder/hd/x900_series/specifications.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/838813-REG/Panasonic_HC_X900M_HC_X900M_High_Definition_Camcorder.html
post #82 of 107
The Panasonic HC-X920 has a 399.2mm eqiv at the long end compared to a full frame and only a 34.1mm actual FL compared to the 35mm F1.4 wide angle on my full frame Sony VG900 camcorder.


Click on above images to see large version.
Edited by jogiba - 2/1/13 at 5:49am
post #83 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by hatchback View Post

Where did you see that? I've only seen that the X900 has 1/4.1" sensors.

The physical size of the sensor is 1/4.1", yet the portion the camcorder uses is smaller

Total Pixels : 9.15 megapixels (3.05 megapixels x 3)

Effective Pixels : 6.57 - 6.21 megapixels (2.19 - 2.07 megapixels x 3)[16:9]

Note how effective pixels is less. It's also how the digital stabilisation works - the portion of the sensor that isn't (usually) used for recording, can be used to help stabilise the image
post #84 of 107
Can anyone comment on the build quality of the x900 compared to the tm900 or tm700? I'm guessing the x920 will be the same as the x900 in that respect

I've read that the x900 had a cheaper feel to it? Is that true? Or is it just that the plastic was a matte (rather than a gloss) finnish
post #85 of 107
Slashcam's tested the Panny x920 (over there it's the x929).

Low light seems to have improved, but not by as much as I would have hoped

http://camcorder-test.slashcam.com/compare-373efb69c5ccb7aa6347a3a98a20e804.html
post #86 of 107
Low light vid of the x920 on vimeo

http://vimeo.com/59795863
post #87 of 107
That video looked pretty good to me. I don't recall the colors on my 700 being that saturated, but it's been awhile and my recollection might not be accurate.
post #88 of 107
Thread Starter 
HF G20 sample footage.
Looks like they bumped up the quality over the HF G10:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZQ2s5eU7HE
post #89 of 107
Bumped up the quality ,the G10 and XA 10 already take great video with brilliant color,how a single scene youtube is going to tell us much i dont know,as far as i know only the low light recording may be improved.
post #90 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by xfws View Post

HF G20 sample footage.
Looks like they bumped up the quality over the HF G10:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZQ2s5eU7HE
Yes, but did you notice his $350.00 Nikon S9500 point and shoot camera took video of that same general scene that looks just as good? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZEOxBh1OFE
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Camcorders
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › New Camcorders unveiled at CES 2013