Creative COW SIGN IN :: SPONSORS :: ADVERTISING :: ABOUT US :: CONTACT US :: FAQ
Creative COW's LinkedIn GroupCreative COW's Facebook PageCreative COW on TwitterCreative COW's Google+ PageCreative COW on YouTube
FORUMS:listlist (w/ descriptions)archivetagssearchhall of famerecent posts

Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200

COW Forums : Panasonic HVX - HPX (P2)

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Share on Facebook
EmeryAttn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 5:02:45 pm

Hello fellow Cow members...

Inspired by Michael Pappas' article: http://www.pbase.com/aghvx200/do_hvx200s_dream_of_lenses I have decided to start this thread so we may voice our desire for removable lenses on the HVX-200. If we want Panasonic to take notice we need EVERYONE's support.

Please keep this thread focused on the subject and reply only with content relating to getting removable lenses on the yet to be released HVX-200.

Answer three questions...

1. Do you want removable lenses on this camera?

2. Would you pay more?

3. How much more would you be willing to pay?

In respect to question three, please keep your answers reasonable and take into account not only what it costs Panasonic to implement such a mount, but also what it means to the sales of their high-end cameras.

Again, if we stay focused on the subject of the thread, and everyone that visits this forum voices their opinion, it may be possible to get Panasonics attn.
Also, lets keep the subject title the same throughout the thread.

Thanks, now lets go after a new mount!!


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

EmeryRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 5:07:54 pm

1. Do you want removable lenses on this camera? Most definitely

2. Would you pay more? Absolutely

3. How much more would you be willing to pay? I would pay up to $3,000 more.

If we had the option of a removable lenses model there would be NO competition whatsoever. At this point however, the JVC model has me on the edge due to its superior optics.

Emery


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 5:25:42 pm

You say the JVC has superior optics, but you can't possibly know that. The lens they ship with the camera is incredibly cheap for an HD lens, and therefore I don't believe it can be a true HD lens. Even good SD lenses cost more than the JVC camera and lens together.

I think that Panasonic will probably do a big borther to the HVX200, and that will be like a SDX900 / Varicam hybrid on P2 steriods. That will have real lense and cost real money.

Seriously, by keeping the lens of the HVX integrated, Panasonic can spend more on it and get us better quality glass than if they'd spent the money making it removable. If there was a removable lens then I reckon it would cost twice the cost of the HVX to get a decent quality one that will do the camera justice.

In essence, calling for a removable lens on the HVX200 is just plain daft. Poll or no poll, Panasonic aren't going to do that. If you really want the camera with a removable lens, then go get a Varicam.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


BlubRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 5:42:56 pm

Sounds like a control freak to me. Do this, don


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Luis CaffesseRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 5:54:33 pm

[Blub] "I sense that most people who want a removable lens mount don


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 6:03:42 pm

Yes - I'd say go for a fully manual non-removable lens as long as it doesn't impact on the picture quality. I'd pay another $1000CAD for a fully manual lens.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


jeremiah blackRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 2:23:19 am

What I really, really want that's been missing from all prosumer cameras is a decent wide. Even the "wide" adapters by century optics are really only about a 35 mm equivalent- not someting I'd call wide.

What I really need is a lens (or adapter in the HVX's case) that yield something closer to, say a 12mm equivalent. But since I've never seen these, maybe they're not possible? Don't really know enough to say, but maybe someone can chime in here and lend a hand.



jeremiah black
dual 2 gig G5
2.5 gigs of RAM
Decklink Extreme capture card


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jan Crittenden LivingstonRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 9:54:53 am

So what does that equate to in 35mm still cameras?

Best,

Jan


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

jeremiah blackRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 5:11:50 pm

Jan,

Not sure about still cameras. Not my area of experience or knowledge.

I was just hoping someone here could tell me why the widest of the "wide" adapters for fixed lens cameras such as the DVX-100 is only around a 30mm equivalent. And then there's also a fisheye. But nothing in between where a "real" wide is on film cameras- something around 12-18mm. Event the removable "wide" lens for the XL2 isn't even close to wide- maybe a 40mm equivalent. If you called a 40mm lens a "wide" lens on a film shoot, you be laughed at.

For the money and ease of use that shooting digital brings us, I can live with a little noise or grain. I've always thought digital looked fine in terms of image quality, and it just seems to get better and cheaper every day. But, I'm seeing no progress on the lenses, really, and don't know enough to say why. I always say, "If you're willing to live with a little noise and a shortened dynamic range, you can shoot your entire movie, not on film, but digitally." The only hitch (besides depth of field that everyone mentions) is that you can't get any real wide shots. I know this a board primarily concerned with the digital world- chips and DSPs and codecs and so forth, but maybe somebody knows why there are no really wide lenses or adapters for cameras under 100,000.


- jeremiah black, NYC


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Brian WellsOK,
by on May 3, 2005 at 8:54:45 am

Your assessment is terribly inaccurate.

In Super35mm motion picture speak, a DVX100 with a 0.6X Century Optics adapter is roughly comparable to the field of view offered by a 12mm lens on a film camera.. as a generalisation... The DVX would actually be a tad bit wider.



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

jeremiah blackRe: OK,
by on May 4, 2005 at 4:49:48 pm



[Brian Wells] "Your assessment is terribly inaccurate.

In Super35mm motion picture speak, a DVX100 with a 0.6X Century Optics adapter is roughly comparable to the field of view offered by a 12mm lens on a film camera.. as a generalisation... The DVX would actually be a tad bit wider"


Brian,

I don't mean to be rude, but, I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers from.

On a normal lens (53 degree angle of view) focal length is equal to the diagonal of the image area. The diagonal of a 35mm piece of film is 43.27mm. The diagonal of a 1/3 inch CCD is .236 inches (5.9 mm)- yeilding a 22/3 ratio between the two, or 7.33. At 4.5mm (the DVX) at it's widest point is a 33mm equivalent (4.5 x 7.33). Using the .6x century optics adapter, multiplying the magnification of the lens by the zoom focal length, gives you a 35mm film equivalent of 20mm. And that's on the DVX which has, as you stated, the widest capabilities of the dv cameras out there. And since the PD-170 has a 6mm wide, the widest point it can achieve it is 26.5mm.

I've shot with the PD-170 using the .6x century optics adapter, and in my opinion is doesn't look like a 27mm equivalent. To my eye it looks more like a 35mm or even 40mm equivalent. So, I'm hoping someone can chime in who knows his or her stuff, and lend a hand to the conversions.


- jeremiah black, NYC


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Barry GreenRe: OK,
by on May 4, 2005 at 8:48:04 pm

[jeremiah black] "On a normal lens (53 degree angle of view) focal length is equal to the diagonal of the image area. The diagonal of a 35mm piece of film is 43.27mm. The diagonal of a 1/3 inch CCD is .236 inches (5.9 mm)- yeilding a 22/3 ratio between the two, or 7.33. At 4.5mm (the DVX) at it's widest point is a 33mm equivalent (4.5 x 7.33). Using the .6x century optics adapter, multiplying the magnification of the lens by the zoom focal length, gives you a 35mm film equivalent of 20mm.

Your numbers would be appropriate for a 35mm still camera, but not a 35mm movie camera, which is what Brian was referencing.

The 7.33 multiplier you used is typically rounded off to 7.2 -- you'll find most manufacturers, when listing a "35mm equivalent" for a 1/3" camera, will use 7.2x. So the DVX lens, at 4.5 to 45mm, is listed as equivalent to 32.5 to 325mm on a 35mm still camera.

With a cine camera, the frame is much smaller than it is on a 35mm still camera, so you use a smaller multiplier. For cine equivalency, the multiplier is 4.2. A DVX lens delivers the equivalent of 18.9 to 189mm on a 35mm movie camera.

With a .6 wide-angle adapter, the DVX matches the field of view of a 35mm movie camera with about an 11.5mm lens (or a 35mm still camera with a 20mm lens).


-----------------
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available at http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/dvxbook/ and at Amazon (http://tinyurl.com/54u4a)


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


jeremiah blackRe: OK,
by on May 5, 2005 at 5:34:45 am

[Barry Green] "The 7.33 multiplier you used is typically rounded off to 7.2 -- you'll find most manufacturers, when listing a "35mm equivalent" for a 1/3" camera, will use 7.2x. So the DVX lens, at 4.5 to 45mm, is listed as equivalent to 32.5 to 325mm on a 35mm still camera.

With a cine camera, the frame is much smaller than it is on a 35mm still camera, so you use a smaller multiplier. For cine equivalency, the multiplier is 4.2. A DVX lens delivers the equivalent of 18.9 to 189mm on a 35mm movie camera.
"


Barry,

I can't thank you enough for sheding some light on this for me. The math I'm using are entirely my own deductions, and, in a sense, it's gratifying to know I was correct, if not entirely. But help me out here. Why is the diagonal of the frame smaller (around 25mm by your numbers) on cine cameras? 25mm seems awfully tiny. Also, shocking to think that 35mm cine only has a diagonal four times mini-dv.

And why does it still not look very wide when I rent the adapter and put it on? Still doesn't look like a 12mm to me at all by a long shot.

thanks agian,



- jeremiah black, NYC


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Barry GreenRe: OK,
by on May 5, 2005 at 8:04:31 am

[jeremiah black] "Why is the diagonal of the frame smaller (around 25mm by your numbers) on cine cameras? 25mm seems awfully tiny. Also, shocking to think that 35mm cine only has a diagonal four times mini-dv."

35mm film, as used in a still camera, runs through the camera horizontally. There's 24mm between the sprocket holes. (the width of the holes, plus the thickness of the film on each side, bring the total dimensions up to 35mm). So on a still camera you get 8 perforations per frame, and the frame size is 36 x 24mm (w x h). The area between the sprocket holes is the height of the frame.

In a movie camera, you use the same (or basically the same) film, but run it through vertically. The area between the sprocket holes is now the width of the frame, not the height. As such, the frame is now a maximum of 24mm x 18mm.

A full-aperture Super35 frame has a maximum possible area of 24mm x 18mm, which is exactly half of the size of a 35mm still frame. Accordingly, lenses look more telephoto on a movie frame.

Now, that's not where it ends -- the actual, usable area of the 35mm cine frame is even smaller, due to two levels of cropping. First, one side is cropped down a couple of millimeters to make room for the optical soundtrack area. And, vertically, a lot gets lopped off to make for the 1.85:1 aspect ratio. So the actual, usable, visible area of a 35mm movie frame is more like 21mm x 11mm. That's a total area of just 231 square mm, vs. a 35mm still camera's total area of over 800 square mm.

Of course, it's different if you're shooting anamorphic (which uses a much larger 1.2:1 frame size, the full height of the frame and most of the width. And full-aperture Super35 lets you get the full 24mm size.

If you want to compare fields of view among various cameras and formats, the Panavision angle-of-view calculator is a most handy tool, at:
http://www.panavision.co.nz/main/kbase/reference/calcFOVform.asp

-----------------
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available at http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/dvxbook/ and at Amazon (http://tinyurl.com/54u4a)


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Barry GreenRe: OK,
by on May 5, 2005 at 8:09:03 am

... soon, Ron promises we will be able to edit posts...

Okay, that was the wrong calculator I posted in the link. That was for the depth-of-field calculator.

This is the one that compares angle of view between different formats:
http://www.panavision.co.nz/main/kbase/reference/tblelenseqvform.asp

-----------------
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available at http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/dvxbook/ and at Amazon (http://tinyurl.com/54u4a)


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Ron LindeboomRe: OK,
by on May 5, 2005 at 2:09:57 pm


[Barry Green] "... soon, Ron promises we will be able to edit posts.."


But as I said, there will only be a 30-minute-or-until-someone-responds window of operation and we will never expand the functionality beyond that basis.

Not wanting hopes set too high,

Ron Lindeboom


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Barry GreenRe: OK,
by on May 5, 2005 at 7:25:56 pm

That would be perfect -- 30 minutes is more than enough!

-----------------
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available at http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/dvxbook/ and at Amazon (http://tinyurl.com/54u4a)


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

jeremiah blackRe: OK,
by on May 7, 2005 at 5:21:49 pm

[Barry Green] "A full-aperture Super35 frame has a maximum possible area of 24mm x 18mm, which is exactly half of the size of a 35mm still frame. Accordingly, lenses look more telephoto on a movie frame"

B,

Thanks again for all the help.

Since Super35 is 3 perf, what would standard 35mm (4 perf) be? About 25% smaller, no?

- jeremiah black, NYC


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


toke lahtiRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 3, 2005 at 10:37:10 am

Lack of wide angle is only for "non-changeable" lenses.
In 2/3" there is 5mm primes from all manufacturers and zooms from 4.4mm and prices start from under 10k.
Eg. Fujinon has lots of cctv lenses that start from 2.8mm for 1/3", 1/2", 2/3" & 1" chips with cs- or c-mount.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

EmeryRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 6:16:48 pm

wow, my poll failed right off the bat. I was hoping we could keep this thread specific to the poll.

Graeme I respect your opinion as you've been a leader on this and other forums. Surely you understand the benefits of the ability to change lenses. Im astonished that you folks that have responded so far don't see the need for such a camera.

The glass is one of the most important pieces of the puzzle when it comes to image quality. Its just plain crazy to state that a true fujion HD lens wouldn't make any difference. I dont have first hand experience with the lens that ships with the JVC, but the camera certainly has the ABILITY to have superior optics.

Having control over what glass you put in front of the camera is one of the most, if not the most artistic choice you make in regards to cameras.

The implementation would not be expensive, the guys that chopped off the front of their FX1 clearly showed that. I think there should be two models, one fixed, one removable.

The price increase would be mostly due to the fact that a removable lens would take sales away from the Varicam.

Emery





Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 6:27:54 pm

I fully understand, acknowledge and want the benefits of better glass, but what are Panasonic to do?

1) fixed lens, but as that keeps costs down, good glass for the price

2) removable lens, "starter lens" included that doesn't do justice to the camera (because it costs a lot more to make a removable lens than a fixed one)

3) removable lens, no "starter lens" - good glass that costs about $20k from a.n.other lens company

Who is going to buy the JVC camera and stick a $20k lens on it? That's just silly! At that point they'd not want the compression compromises of HDV and put their decent HD lens on a real HD camera. There's got to be balance between the lens, the video format and the electronics.

Panasonic are not going to radically alter the specs of the HVX200, so no amount of polls are going to change that. What I think you should be asking is for the features of HVX200 on a shoulder mount camera that has a removable lens. Then I'd totally agree with you, but I could never afford it! The HVX200 is about getting the best quality for the price, and that price is already too high for some people.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


PappasArtsRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 7:19:18 pm

<<>>

It's called RENTAL for the jobs that require more expensive glass..................


<<2) removable lens, "starter lens" included that doesn't do justice to the camera (because it costs a lot more to make a removable lens than a fixed one) >>>



Yeah! But that's why Panasonic doesn't make removable lens anyway. They package or sell head only.

In the end it's cheaper. To make a lens requires for you to higher a 3rd party to design the optics and a long time of testing to marriage it to your system ( HVX200 ) this 1 or 2 years of R&D will cost more then going with mounts you already have in your resources that you make probably in China for a lot less.

Again Panasonic does not make lenses for these cameras. They do however machine 100 dollar b4 or 1/3 mounts, and they have had that science in there company for many years.

No r&d needed. No 3rd party to design it!


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 7:26:42 pm

But would you see any benefit to the JVC HD100 picture quality if you could attach a Panavision Primo Digital lens to it??

I fully see your point that Panasonic doesn't manufacture their own lenses, but gets Leica to do it for them, but I don't see how that equates to being worse value for money than a cheapo starter lens from a.n.other.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

PappasArtsRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 8:11:13 pm

<<<>>>>

Yes you would. The same reason when you hook up a P+S TECHNIK to a fixed lens on a low res SD camcorder like a DVX100a or PD170.

Even though the fixed lens is now the weakest link. Your lens performance is improved.



Now on a High Def with no weak link, like a fixed lens. It's even better. A B4 or 1/3 mount is about "OPTIONS"


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Graeme NattressRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 8:52:00 pm

So by adding a spinning groud glass disc and some prisms, lenses etc, you're going to get a better picture??? Sure you get much reduced DOF, but you do so at the expense of resolution and contrast.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jiri VrozinaRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 11:34:21 pm

Mate,You can talk about it with other cameramen who will understand You 100%.
Unfortunatly there is plenty of users who have never operated decent video camera with decent optics.I am behind You 100%.
jiri vrozina


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Peter DeCrescenzoRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 6:47:58 pm

Here are my answers your questions:

=========================
1. Do you want removable lenses on this camera?

Yes.


2. Would you pay more?

Yes.


3. How much more would you be willing to pay?

Up to $1,000 USD added to the cam's list price (although I don't believe it needs to cost that much.)
=======================

Given that Fujinon & Canon put bayonet mount hardware on even their _least_ expensive lenses, I don't suppose it adds more than about $100 - $300 to the list price of a lens to put a bayonet mount on it. For example, Fujinon's approx. $2,000 USD list price lens #S17x6.6 includes bayonet mount hardware; how much of that price can the bayonet hardware possibly account for?

Also, Canon has bayonet lens mounting hardware on their XL2 (and previous XL1 & XL1s) cam, and JVC has it on the new HD100. These cam bodies sell for less than $6,500 -- and in the case of the XL1 & XL1s, considerably less than that. A complete guess on my part is that the lens mount hardware on these camera bodies accounts for about $200 - $500 worth of their list price.

Lenses and cameras which require electrical connections between the lens and the cam body (to support features such as autofocus, exposure, zoom motor & electronics power, and so forth) might cost a bit more, but these electrical connections (and control circuitry) aren't likely to cost much.

So my guess -- and it's a complete guess -- is that "removable lens" as a feature on a modern video camcorder shouldn't add any more than about $1,000 to the list price of a cam & lens system, and it might sell for considerably less and still be profitable.

Now, as to _why_ I want "removable lens" as a standard feature on all high-end prosumer camcorders: So users can select the most appropriate lens given their client's or project's needs and budget -- even if that means using only one most appropriate lens. "Removable lens" doesn't always mean changing the lens every 5 minutes; it can also mean using one lens -- the one which is right for most of your shooting situations, most of the time. But what works as a general purpose lens for one shooter often isn't appropriate for someone else. That's why built-in lenses on high-end prosumer cams suck.

It makes sense that cam makers offer "low-end", less expensive prosumer models (such as the VX2100, FX1, and so forth) which don't offer a removable lens feature. But the "slightly bigger brother" models, such as the Z1, should feature a removable lens.

This situation is really no different than whether or not high-end prosumer camcorders should feature XLR audio connectors. Just like a removable lens, an XLR external mic or audio connector allows using whichever external audio equipment is most appropriate for a client's or project's needs and budget.

Canon & JVC are currently the only companies who offer a "removable lens" feature on their high-end 1/3" camcorders, and I'm glad they do, and I hope they continue to do so on their future 1/3" and larger models. I also hope Sony does the same regarding their future high-end 1/3" models.

Given the huge flexibility a removable lens offers, it makes sense to me that high-end prosumer camcorders should feature "removable lens".

All the best,

- Peter

Just a friendly reminder to all: Please consider filling-in your COW user profile information so we have a better idea who you are, where you're from, and so forth. It's the friendly thing to do. Thanks!


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Graeme NattressRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 6:54:37 pm

Say the HVX200 came with no lens and you had to supply your own - just hypothetically speaking - which lens do you put on it and why, and how much does that lens cost?

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

BlubRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 7:11:09 pm

Interesting, I like the lens that they are offering with it. Its made by, or at least quality approved by a great lens maker and it is the zoom range I like, wide to med telephoto. This allows for better quality because it is not living on the edge of a quality hit due to the overly ambitions zoom range. Even if I was offered the option, a good idea thought it is, of having to choose between no lens and the one they offer now, I would choose the lens that is offered making the assumption that this lens is custom fitted in a way most off the shelf lenses are not, to this specific camera specification. The lens was designed with this camera in mind the camera was designed with this lens in mind, sort of like a hand in glove thing, know what I mean?

Strange but true.

Chris



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Peter DeCrescenzoRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 7:27:00 pm

[Graeme Nattress] "Say the HVX200 came with no lens and you had to supply your own - just hypothetically speaking - which lens do you put on it and why, and how much does that lens cost? "

Hi Graeme: Let me get out my crystal ball ... let's see ... ;-)

That's an incredibly hypothetical question regarding a hypothetical version of a camera which itself won't ship for several months, and about which Panasonic continues to be somewhat unclear as to the "finalness" of its specifications, but if I had to hazard some guesses:

- Panasonic might offer two or more lenses for use with the camera, similar to what Canon & JVC do with their 1/3" removable lens cams. I might select one of these for particular projects, depending on the lens' characteristics (suitability for a project/scene), availability and cost.

- Canon & Fujinon might offer lenses for use with the camera. It's not difficult to imagine that these lens companies would be happy to start making a range of 1/3" lenses for a popular, new cam such as the HVX200, given it's imaging capabilities. Especially if these same lenses could be used on other, similar cams, such as the JVC HD100, and possible future Canon 1/3" HD cam, too. I don't think 1/3" HD cams are going to disappear as a category anytime soon, so the lens makers have some incentive there, too.

- Panasonic might offer a 1/2" lens adapter (as JVC may do with the HD100), allowing use of high-quality 1/2" SD lenses and a the new 1/2" HD lenses from Canon & Fujinon which have recently entered the market. Again, selection of these lenses would depend on their characteristics, availability and cost.

- P+S Technik might offer a version of their mini35 prime lens adaptor for use with the camera. This would be a no-brainer. These units are commonly rented, but some folks buy these babies.

As for what any of the above might cost, um, well I guess it would depend on each lens' capabilities. There's no reason why a very, very simple but useful lens should have to sell for more than a couple $K USD (or less), and as a lens' capabilities go up, so would its price. Nothing new there.

Essentially it's not much different than the situation of lenses for 16mm motion picture film cameras. My understanding is that these lenses can cost anywhere from a few hundred dollars for a very, very simple lens to many, many tens of thousands of dollars for a wonderful lens. Not to mention that 16mm film is probably more visually demanding than what any current 1/3" video camera requires, lens-wise.

All the best,

- Peter

Just a friendly reminder to all: Please consider filling-in your COW user profile information so we have a better idea who you are, where you're from, and so forth. It's the friendly thing to do. Thanks!


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


EmeryRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 7:38:26 pm

I think youve hit the nail on the head Peter.

Emery


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 7:56:44 pm

But is not the mini35 famous for lowering your resolution, even in SD? I like the idea of controling DOF better, but surely reducing resolution is no solution either? Same with using an SD lens on an HD camera - how is that going to effect the resolution.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Peter DeCrescenzoRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 8:29:45 pm

[Graeme Nattress] "But is not the mini35 famous for lowering your resolution, even in SD? I like the idea of controling DOF better, but surely reducing resolution is no solution either? ..."

The P+S Technik mini35 adaptor was just one of several senarios I listed concerning a purely hypothetical situation, but in any event: Lots of folks like the look the mini35 generates when used with a prime lens on a 1/3" camcorder. Those who don't probably won't spend money on it. It's an asthetic choice as much as it's a technical solution to any particular problem.

Resolution isn't everything. That's why I'm underwhelmed by JVC's & Sony's initial HDV cams. Give me a smooth, good-looking, color-accurate image instead. Good ol' uncompressed 16:9 480p standard definition NTSC is more than good enough for 99% of most shoots I'm likely to particiapte in anytime soon, especially if this video is generated by a current-technology 2/3" 3-CDD pro camera head. But even a modern 1/3" native 16:9, SD 3-chipper can look pretty darn good in uncompressed 480p mode.

[Graeme Nattress] "... Same with using an SD lens on an HD camera - how is that going to effect the resolution."

I suggested occasionally using a high-end SD lens on a low-end HD cam (e.g.: the new 1/3" HD cams). In many cases this might be a better solution than using a low-end HD lens on these cams.

All the best,

- Peter

Just a friendly reminder to all: Please consider filling-in your COW user profile information so we have a better idea who you are, where you're from, and so forth. It's the friendly thing to do. Thanks!


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Graeme NattressRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 8:49:59 pm

As far as I understand the physics of optics, for a given ccd resolution, a 1/3" chip is giong to need a higher resolution lens than a 2/3" ccd does.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Peter DeCrescenzoRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 11:36:07 pm

[Graeme Nattress] "As far as I understand the physics of optics, for a given ccd resolution, a 1/3" chip is giong to need a higher resolution lens than a 2/3" ccd does."

Yes, I've heard that's true.

If it's also true the sharpest part of a lens is the center area, not around the edges, then perhaps using a 1/2" lens with a 1/3" CCD might make sense depending on the cost & availability? I don't know.

All the best,

- Peter

Just a friendly reminder to all: Please consider filling-in your COW user profile information so we have a better idea who you are, where you're from, and so forth. It's the friendly thing to do. Thanks!


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 11:41:05 pm

Well I've said all I know. I don't know more about lenses, but I wish I did. All I learned was when I was doing my R&D project with Panavision and needed all the lens and ccd specs for the software I was writing to deal with their lens metadata.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


PappasArtsRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 8:33:36 pm


Graeme,

I would rent my lenses depending on my needs. Good lenses are cheap to rent. Compared to camera packages. Outside of that, I would find a good 1/3 or hook up a B4 mount adapter and test lesnes that work. But when I need the best lenses, I rent lenses.

It's about the "OPTIONs"

Here is example!

On my Canon DSLR I have a Canon - 70-200 F2.8 L IS USM It's a 2,000 dollar lens on a DSLR rebel that cost less then half that. When you have lens options it's always better. I rented a month ago a ( Canon - 28-300mm ) that is a $2,600 dollar lens that is three times more then the my camera. From our rental house here it was $56 a day to shoot for two days.

It's all about ""OPTIONS"


<<>>>




Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 8:57:33 pm

Totally agree that options are good - I just don't think there any affordable lens options for an affordable HD camera that are of a quality to do justice. From my understanding of optics, you need a better lens for a 1/3" HD ccd than you do for a 2/3" HD ccd than you do for 35mm film. Amd I totally agree that reting is a great idea for special stuff, but you still really need to buy a stock lens, and that's where i come unstuck.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Barry GreenRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 9:43:41 pm

[Luis Caffesse] "But, why not a fully manual fixed lens?
What is so difficult about giving us an iris, focus, and zoom ring with reliable markings that is not a servo based infinite spinning design?

At that point many people would stop screaming for a removable lens, realizing that all along what they wanted was the same manual controls you would get with a removable lens, but at the price of a fixed lens design."


Forgive me for sounding facetious, but -- isn't that EXACTLY what they're delivering? Except better?

Here's what I mean: the zoom is a fully manual, cam-driven zoom. Certainly should be every bit the match of any other manual lens zoom. Much better feel than the DVX lens' zoom, it's an improved design. So it should be at least as good as what you'd expect on a "manual" lens, because it *is* manual. How is it better? Because instead of just relying on markings on the barrel (which it will have, of course) it also offers a much more precise scale in the viewfinder. Where the barrel markings on the existing DVX lens show 20mm and 45mm, and if you want to know the focal length inbetween (via the markings) you have to guess, the in-camera viewfinder Z00-Z99 scale shows 25 discrete distances between 20mm and 45mm. And in the HVX, they'll probably incorporate actual mm displays in the viewfinder too.

Okay, on to iris: a "real" lens has a ring. The HVX will have a wheel. Exactly what more control do you get from the ring, than from the wheel? Granted you can take your eye away from the viewfinder, tilt the camera up, and dial in a specific f-stop on the ring. But using the viewfinder display you can dial in exactly the specific f-stop you want using the wheel, while not having to take your eye away. I know the ring is familiar, and "feels right", but does it actually give you more control? Yes the ring can be set between f-stops, but so can the wheel. The wheel on the DVX gives you 1/6 stop control. You have more control with the wheel than the display even shows -- the display shows half-stops, but the wheel is calibrated in 1/6 stops. Again, not being facetious, I'm asking a serious question -- what is it that you can do with the iris ring on the lens, that you can't accomplish with the wheel on the DVX? I've used every modern broadcast camera, I'm not arguing that the wheel is "better", I'm just saying -- I can do everything with the wheel that I can do with the ring. What additional feature are you looking for?

Finally, focus. Everyone seems to gripe about the "infinitely spinning servo wheel". And to that I say -- this ain't no VX2000 or XL1. The DVX focus ring has no hard stops, that's true, but it provides precise, measurable, repeatable focus moves. It doesn't move the focus elements based on the speed you move the ring, like the PD150 does. It is directly, precisely, completely measurable. It moves the elements based on how you move the ring. That's why Century could make their markable focus ring with hard stops -- because the DVX ring was precise and repeatable.

So what was it missing? Markings and hard stops. That's about it. And how does the HVX address it? First, the ring will have more dampening, more control, more precision. Second, it will have markings. Not on the barrel, but in the viewfinder. Which is, of course, more usable and better. Why? Because the markings on the barrel must inevitably be done in certain steps, so you'll see a marking of maybe 10' and the next marking is 15'. On the HVX, you'll be able to turn the ring to 10', and turn it further and it'll say 15'. But what if you want 11'? With the markings-on-the-barrel, you have to look at the 10 and the 15, and then kind of guess as to where 11 would come in, realizing that 12.5 is *not* halfway between 10 and 15 of course. So if you measure 11' from film plane to subject, using lens barrel markings on a broadcast lens will be imprecise. But with the HVX, just turn the ring until it says 11'. It'll read out 11' in the viewfinder, far more precisely than the lens barrel markings would. You will have precise, repeatable, discrete focus control, and you will have distance markings -- they'll just be in the viewfinder, not on the barrel. Which is more user friendly anyway -- now the operator can see the markings while still looking through the viewfinder, instead of having to pull his head away from the viewfinder to go look at the physical lens barrel. And an AC can have the same functionality by turning the LCD panel around -- instead of looking to the barrel, they can see more precise distance marks by looking at the LCD.

So -- as a practical, functional matter, the HVX is going to offer you all the manual control that you would otherwise be getting on a "fully manual" lens, because it is a fully manual lens (except that it also supports optical image stabilization, and the possibility for autofocus if you choose to use it, something you're not going to have available on a fully manual lens). So what's the problem? Is it the lack of hard stops? Do having hard stops somehow help you focus better? Really? Does the ring stopping really make it easier to focus with? I've never found a circumstance where in an actual, real, production environment, the fact that the ring stops has made any difference. The HVX lens will stop at infinity and minimum object distance, whether the ring stops or not -- so what difference does it make? And, assuming that someone just really *needs* hard stops, you can have that -- get the Century manual focus ring, which adds gear teeth, hard stops, and a markable surface.

Which is a several-thousand-word way of saying "relax -- they're already giving you a fully manual lens."

-----------------
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available at http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/dvxbook/ and at Amazon (http://tinyurl.com/54u4a)


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Luis CaffesseRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 11:21:43 pm

[Barry Green] "Forgive me for sounding facetious, but -- isn't that EXACTLY what they're delivering? Except better?

Well, no not exactly, but it's really really close.
Let me be clear by the way, I have no complaints with what I've heard about the HVX lens so far, I was only commenting on the fact that I think most people who are saying they want a removable lens are saying so due to the manual controls they would like to have. I think most people would be happy to get the control and feel of a "removable lens" in a fixed lens design.

Here's what I mean: the zoom is a fully manual, cam-driven zoom. Certainly should be every bit the match of any other manual lens zoom. Much better feel than the DVX lens' zoom, it's an improved design. So it should be at least as good as what you'd expect on a "manual" lens, because it *is* manual.

I'm with you 100%
And as it was, I was happy with zoom on the DVX.
Getting away from the servo 'infinite spin' zoom ring was a huge step forward.

Okay, on to iris: a "real" lens has a ring. The HVX will have a wheel. Exactly what more control do you get from the ring, than from the wheel? Granted you can take your eye away from the viewfinder, tilt the camera up, and dial in a specific f-stop on the ring. But using the viewfinder display you can dial in exactly the specific f-stop you want using the wheel, while not having to take your eye away. I know the ring is familiar, and "feels right", but does it actually give you more control? Yes the ring can be set between f-stops, but so can the wheel. The wheel on the DVX gives you 1/6 stop control. You have more control with the wheel than the display even shows -- the display shows half-stops, but the wheel is calibrated in 1/6 stops. Again, not being facetious, I'm asking a serious question -- what is it that you can do with the iris ring on the lens, that you can't accomplish with the wheel on the DVX?

You are right in practice, I suppose that you can accomplish the same end with a wheel as you can with a ring. However, I think the incorporation of an on-lens iris ring would be a great improvement. First, it does "feel right" (as you mentioned) and there is much to be said about the ergonomics of a camera and how comfortable it is to shoot with it. From a practical standpoint, if the iris were on the lens it would mean less hand movement while shooting, as you could focus/zoom/expose by only having to move your fingers, and not change your hand position. This would make it easier to do hand held shooting without bumping the camera accidently to change exposure. Third, I see no reason why an iris ring on the lens could not have the same readout on the display screen - I just assumed that it would (we're still talking about a fixed lens here). So you still get all the benefits you mentioned of exposing without taking your eyes off the screen (except now you don't have to move your hand much either). Fourth, personally I've always felt that the 1/6stop settings on the DVX wheel design was a detriment rather than a benefit. While it's great to not see the exposure 'steps' that you get in say a PD150, it's also more difficult to know where you are between stops. An iris ring would be easily viewable and could include markings. The wheel is simply too small and out of the way to include any accurate marking that can be easily seen.

So, while I agree with you Barry that you can do everything with a wheel design that you can do with an on-lens ring, I still believe an on-lens ring would make for better ergonomics, and would have a few 'ease of use' benefits. I suppose my question would be, why not have an on-lens iris ring? What do you lose? What can you do with the wheel that you can't do with a ring? It would simply make for a better camera in my opinion.

Granted, it's not a dealbreaker. I still plan on owning an HVX when it becomes available. I'm just saying it would be preferrable and would make my shooting more comfortable.

I'm not arguing that the wheel is "better", I'm just saying -- I can do everything with the wheel that I can do with the ring. What additional feature are you looking for?

Like I said, it's not really additional features I'm looking for, just better handling and ergonomics. I agree that the wheel is not "better," and I just don't see what real cost or complications an on-lens ring would add. Then again, I don't design cameras for a living...so there is probably a reason. Perhaps size? I mean, these cameras are pretty small as it is.

The DVX focus ring has no hard stops, that's true, but it provides precise, measurable, repeatable focus moves. It doesn't move the focus elements based on the speed you move the ring, like the PD150 does. It is directly, precisely, completely measurable. It moves the elements based on how you move the ring. That's why Century could make their markable focus ring with hard stops -- because the DVX ring was precise and repeatable.

I agree 100% again.
And, like the zoom on the DVX, I thought the manual focus on the DVX was a huge step forward for prosumer cameras. Now, why not take another step forward and give it hard stops. Again, it would simply make it that much more comfortable to shoot with (I'm thinking mainly about handheld shooting here).

As far as the display markings, that is again another step forward.
I was thrilled to hear we would hve real measurements as opposed to the Z measurements (which granted, were a big improvement over NO measurements in the past).

Like I said, all in all I'm happy with the lens details I've heard so far.
My point was only that I think most people are looking for the feel of a professional lens, and are confusing that with removable. I still think a fixed lens camera can feel and work every bit like a professional removable lens camera. As of right now it's only missing a couple of small details.

So -- as a practical, functional matter, the HVX is going to offer you all the manual control that you would otherwise be getting on a "fully manual" lens, because it is a fully manual lens (except that it also supports optical image stabilization, and the possibility for autofocus if you choose to use it, something you're not going to have available on a fully manual lens).

Absolutlely.

So what's the problem? Is it the lack of hard stops? Do having hard stops somehow help you focus better? Really?

It feels more comfortable to me when shooting handheld, especially in a documentary situation. It's nice to know when you've reached the end the lens.

Which is a several-thousand-word way of saying "relax -- they're already giving you a fully manual lens.""

I'm fully relaxed Barry.
:)
And again, I realize it's a fully manual lens, I guess I should have specified the 'feel' and ergonomics of a fully manual lens.

I still think it would be a more comfortable camera to work with if it had an on-lens iris ring and hard stops on the focus.

I can definitely live without that, but I can't say I wouldn't prefer it.



Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Barry GreenRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 1:17:16 am

Luis, PLEASE understand that post wasn't directed at you personally! You are and always have been fully "relaxed"! :)

I was just responding to the things I've heard a hundred times on various boards. In fact this post is a rewrite of one I already had to write over on DVXUser. And like I ended the one on DVXUser -- if the HVX lens controls are not up to snuff, if they're bogus servos like on the other cameras, I'll be the first to leap off the HVX bandwagon and throw it in the trash. I expect *more* control, *better* control. I expect it to be fully usable.

However, I just can't fathom how having the focus ring "stop" makes any bit of difference at all, in any real situation. I just don't get it. I think somehow people are stuck in a mindset that says "no hard stops = no control; hard stops = real focus". That's not the way it has to be. And I've used dozens of broadcast lenses with hard stops. I demand focus control at least as good as a hard-stop lens. But the HVX won't have hard stops. So? I mean, what does it matter?

In the old-school way of working, yes, it matters, because you can't see where the lens is positioned, you get no feedback. So you'd want to focus by "feel". But you don't have to do that with the DVX or HVX, because it tells you right in the VF or LCD where the lens is. That's "new school". There's no need to rely on "going by feel", because you get discrete, distinct feedback, with far more precise feedback related to lens position than you'd ever get with any "hard-stop" lens. And if you want to slam the ring to infinity and freeze it there, you can push the "push to infinity" button. Not EXACTLY the same thing as slamming a real ring to the hard stop, but at some point you have to recognize that "a difference that makes no difference IS no difference."

I fully recognize that it's different. I'm just trying to understand why it's inferior. If you can do everything that you could with the other system, but with more precision, with more feedback, and also a couple of goodies like optical image stabilization and the option to use autofocus -- how is that not good enough? It's different, yes, but I think there's enough bonuses to make it at least as good.

Do we wish it was interchangeable? Of course we do. Who wouldn't want more options? But does that make the existing option bad? Not by a country mile, I say.

-----------------
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available at http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/dvxbook/ and at Amazon (http://tinyurl.com/54u4a)


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Luis CaffesseRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 1:27:22 am

[Barry Green] "There's no need to rely on "going by feel", because you get discrete, distinct feedback, with far more precise feedback related to lens position than you'd ever get with any "hard-stop" lens."


Barry... we agree 150%
Just wanted to make sure I had made my point clear...
I'm also tired of the 'we want a removable HD lens for $6000' posts.


In the following thread on DVinfo Jan mentioned that the HVX won't actually read out the inches on the LCD (which is pretty disapointing).

Any idea if this means we will only have the same MF0-99 scale we have now?
Or will there be feet and no inches?

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=43697

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Graeme NattressRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 1:31:54 am

No, I think it'll be metric, Metres etc. Who does feet and inches anymore anyway??

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Barry GreenRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 6:35:34 pm

No inches. Just feet.

So you get three readouts: MF00-MF99, meters, and feet.

-----------------
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available at http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/dvxbook/ and at Amazon (http://tinyurl.com/54u4a)


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 7:06:40 pm

To what sort of "resolution" can we expect these measurements to be, to the metre, decimetre, centimetre or what?

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Barry GreenRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 3, 2005 at 2:17:43 am

Well, that I don't know. Didn't ask that question. Hopefully Jan can clarify for us.

-----------------
Get the most from your DVX camera. The DVX Book and DVX DVD are now available at http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/dvxbook/ and at Amazon (http://tinyurl.com/54u4a)


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Chris BellRe:Panasonic: poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 6:03:57 pm

I am sure panasonic has researched this issue extensively. First thing, there are no 1/3" HD zoom lenses from Canon or Fujinon. It is unclear of what quality the JVC/Fuji lens has. I am sure Panasonic made the determination that at this price point, an interegrated lens made the most sense for 2 reasons:

1) Cost Control... a good HD lens could cost more than the camera. My Fuji 20x HD lens cost me $20k.

2) Quality control...Since Panasonic builds the lens, they are able to control the quality of image from the camera.

I think it is unrealistic to expect Pansonic to priovide everything at this price... that is why they offer the Varicam.

Chris Bell

PS: I think the only reason Canon offered a removable lens for the XL1 is because they are in the Lens business. Sony never offered a removable lens at this price point.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jiri VrozinaRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 11:26:34 pm

Why we need a decent lens??
Because one needs to control it Mr.Nattress.
Fujinon on JVC has got decent manual controls.Panasonic Leica does not have it.
jiri vrozina


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 1, 2005 at 1:14:13 am

Decent manual lens does not equal great quality picture. The only real variable that equals the best picture is the optical nature of the lens itself.

From what others have said about the DVX which this camera improves on - it has about the best, in terms of control, manual-ness of it's type. In terms of control, what, precisely, does the lens of the HVX not do. Is it that the focus doesn't have hard end stops. I'm told you can still get repeatable focus on it as it works on dead-reckoning, not some crappy Sony focus, so if you want, you could fit a follow focus and get the control you want.

As has been noted the stock lens on the JVC looks "nice" from a physical aspect, but it's cheap in terms of quality even for an SD lens, never mind an HD lens.

And yes, I have used proper broadcast removable lenses. I just can't afford to buy a decent one that would do justice to the rest of the camera.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

JP DriscollRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 6:03:04 pm

I work for a small-market (100+) TV station looking at making the switch to P2. Right now we have the (dis)pleasure of using MII (not one of panasonic's finer products) as our main format. Needless to say, when this station makes another jump in format, it will be as far ahead as possible because of the cost involved in format changes. P2 looks good. The initial investment may be spendy, but it's future-proofed a lot better than say XDCam. It's also cheaper than another tape format switch. No decks, etc.

The HVX200 looks like the key to convincing the people with the checkbook that this is worth it. The lack of removable lens is a big setback to me. But really, with news, the only time we take a lens off is when it's broken. So have an extra camera on hand for any problems. They're about the same price as a lens. But I'm in the comercial production side. Even though we are typically low-budget, there are times when a macro or wide-angle lens is needed. Will this camera have any of that?

If so - I'm in. If not, better think a little harder. I'll even take an adapter that fits on the lens.

BTW - love the forum. Huge source of info for me in my research of P2. I'd love to hear from any low-budget commercial production or news broadcasters currently using P2.

JP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 6:07:05 pm

My first real camera was an MII and I loved it! Better picture than BetaSP for lower price. Given that they were not popular I picked it up really, really really cheap - about the cost of a new VX2000 or whatever DV camera was around at the time.

I don't see any problem putting filters or other adapter lenses on the HVX200 - and indeed, I reckon Panasonic will make and market some themselves. I hope my existing matte box fits though!

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Luis CaffesseRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 6:13:17 pm

[Graeme Nattress] "I hope my existing matte box fits though! "


I wouldn't hold out hope on that Graeme, given that the HVX's lens diameter is 82mm, most of the lens accessories probably won't make the switch.

Luis Caffesse
Studio 3 Productions, Inc.
Austin, Texas


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 6:22:06 pm

My Matte box fits with a rubber gasget that comes in many sizes, and even a one you can cut out your own shape, so as long as the mix keeps out of the way, I think we'll be ok.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

EmeryRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 6:24:51 pm

What makes a lens "HD" anyway? Ive never actually known what the difference was. The guys that chopped off the front of their FX1 used an SD lens:

http://www.eidomedia.com/hdve/ziess_fuji.htm



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 6:33:53 pm

It's all to do with MTF - that's how much contrast the lens passes through as detail increases. As HD requires more definition, it needs a higher MTF or you'll just get SD quality images at a higher resolution with no increase in definition. All things being equal, the better the MTF, the better the image. You also need to take more care over chromatic aberations as they are more easily noticed at the higher resolution of HD. Indeed, you need better lenses for HD than you do for 35mm film! That's because the HD CCD is much smaller than the 35mm film frame, and hence the lens has to pass through finer detail. And that's why an HD lens is not cheap.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

PappasArtsRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 7:01:16 pm

Hi Graeme!

Why would pay 80,000 for a loaded Varicam where possibly anywhere from 1,000 to 3,000 you could have a modified HVX200 with a lens mount.

An approximate 80,000 dollar savings is big, very big.

The fixed lens technology at this level can never beat even the basic of standard definition professionally engineered lenses. Just can't.....

If they built a fixed lens design with a stabilizer, auto-focus in a short and light weight chamber without compromise to the lenses performance, giving us professional response, it would nearly double or triple the price of the camera.

It's much much cheaper to choose the path of machining a B4 or 1/3 mount on a camera.

I have machined mounts out of blocks aluminum and other metals just as the Italians did. Not hard to too at all, basic machining 101.

Graeme! - Panasonic Already has the tooling/molds to build 1/3 and B4 mounts. They have for many years. They build them on all their other cameras now and have. So they don't have to invent or have to travel a learning curve to do so one bit.

It's in Panasonic's resources " NOW "............

It's always cheaper for a company to use what they have in there resources, then it is ever to reinvent, redesign or higher a third party to do it. They also would not have to hire Leica to design it. There is a bundle saved.

They had "NO" HVX200 lens in there resources. It's all new to a certain dgree.....

It's a new system. A good percentage of the DVX series lens can't fully be carried over since the lens diameter is much larger. The technologies had to be improved on. The specs of the camera are much higher

What Panasonic does have in there resources is plenty B4 and 1/3 mounts already built.

Of-course this route means that Panasonic does not need to bank roll a lens to be designed and built, because Fujinon and Canon have already the offerings.

Panasonic already has a flowing channel between them. Just as Fujinon is a offering to the 6K HD100u.

Plus you can sell a camera as head only and leave it up to the buyer to supply the glass of his desire.

Therefore; Always cheaper to use your resources at hand then design from scratch a whole new system.


I must thank you Graeme, you made think of few new points that I should have written in the article. I will update the article with these new points. Thanks


I suggest you follow the " Italian guys" link that show's what two small guys ( Panasonic are " BIG " guys ) can do with a SD older Fujinon lens against the the Zeiss.

LINKS: The Italian guys---------
http://www.eidomedia.com/hdve/
http://www.eidomedia.com/hdve/ziess_fuji.htm



Graeme I will take a Varicam, if you buy one for me! Please......Just one Vari! I'll even take it without the lens. Otherwise that kind of money difference goes to my family that I take care of. :-)


Michael Pappas


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 7:13:00 pm

Because the for the quality of the lens you'd have to put on the front to do justice to the electronics at the back end will cost plenty more than the camera itself!

"The fixed lens technology at this level can never beat even the basic of standard definition professionally engineered lenses. Just can't....."

Why?? Please elaborate. Whether the lens is fixed or removable doesn't effect the quality of the image, only the ease of use of the lens to achieve the results you want. I've owned cameras with real broadcast lenses and they're just lovely to use, but I'll struggle to afford the HVX200 as it is, never mind what a decent broadcast HD lens costs, and there's very little point putting a cheapo SD broadcast lens on an HD camera - you may as well have shot SD in the first place.

I truely beleive that for the money, Panasonic can put a better fixed lens on that camera than I could afford in a removable lens, which means that I get a better picture for my dollar by going with a fixed lens until I can afford to go into silly prices for both camera and lens.

That's why I was asking what lens people would put on the HVX200 if hypothetically Panasonic made it removable.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Noah KadnerRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 7:50:10 pm

Mikey- if you really believe that a removable lens is the only difference between a VariCam and an HVX you haven't done your homework. Check into a little something called CCD for a starter.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

PappasArtsRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 8:03:24 pm

So Noah you going to get condescending and call me " MIKEY " now

I thought we had no Issue?

You know, I only care about pushing envelope as far as I can.

But condescending is what your going to do to someone you have NEVER met and have no reason to be childish...........


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

PappasArtsRe: Noah Kadner- out of line - condescending and childish
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 8:37:47 pm

So Noah you going to get condescending and call me " MIKEY " now

I thought we had no Issue?

You know, I only care about pushing envelope as far as I can.

But condescending is what your going to do to someone you have NEVER met and have no reason to be childish too...........


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Noah KadnerRe: Michael doesn't like it
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 8:41:01 pm

Wow you sure have thin skin for someone who insists on broadcasting their every word on multiple forums, Michael. Feel better? Good, now how about answering the actual question?


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

PappasArtsRe: Michael does like it
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 9:23:34 pm

Noah,

Of cousre there is difference between the CCD's. Night and Day

So even more so, putting a B4 or 1/3 mount won't hurt Varicam sales.

But, cripple the camera? Why kill "" OPTIONS ""

Simple, Panasonic has B4 and 1/3 mounts in their resources. In the end it's cheaper. To make a fixed lens requires for you to hire a 3rd party company to design the optics and a long time of testing to marry it to your system.

This alone 1 to 2 years of R&D. That will cost a lot more then using mounts or the tooling you already have in your resources.

They do however machine 100 dollar mounts, the technology has been in their company for many years.

Why is this hard for you to understand Noah. If you do understand this, then you would easily understand by Panasonic going the mount route that is cheaper for them to do.

You know as a Filmmaker you could rent lenses, renting is mostly how it's done.

Noah I have a question for you...

If you had made Formosa with the HVX (if it was out then), would you not prefer to have the option using professional lenses from a rental house.

Noah, why didn't you make Formosa using Varicam?


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Noah KadnerRe: HVX
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 9:51:22 pm

To be honest I probably would have shot Formosa on the VariCam were I to do it again and wanted it on HiDef. To me a prosumer camera is just that and putting better lenses on it only takes things so far. Until you get up into the 2/3" CCD chipset and all of the pro settings, optics and internal circuitry of a broadcast camera you're just seeing incremental increases. What comes out of the box on a prosumer camera is fine with me. If I like the specs, I'll get it. If not, I'm not going to wedge a square peg into a round hole.

I find it a little odd seeing someone shooting on an XL2 with a $7,000 P+S and $10,000 lenses. For the same exact rental money or less they could have used an off-the-shelf HD camera with way better results. Some people just want to tinker on a constant basis as if there's a holy grail prosumer camera that the big electronics firms are intentionally denying them. That's fine but why blame Panasonic for not reading your mind?

At any rate, removable lenses aren't gonna happen with the HVX because that ship has already sailed long ago. You should research a bit more about how cameras like these are developed and how long it takes to bring a product to market. Why make it sound like someone just flips a removable lens switch at the machine shop and all is fixed overnight? That's not how it works.

Yet you insist on decrying Panasonic for not making a camera to your exact personal specs and you do this on multiple boards. I know of no one else who cut and paste cross-posts like this every week. Last week it was the DCT encoding of DVCPRO HD that bugged you until folks pointed out just about every camera uses it. I guess you're cool with that but now the lens is no good. What's up for next week? The HVX's paint scheme isn't as pro as the JVC's? So paint yours and the rest of us will somehow survive.

If you want to be a tinkerer be a tinkerer but why not be an equal opportunity basher? Plenty of things to complain about over at Canon, JVC and Sony. And sorry if you don't see yourself as a basher because that's how your posts have read. There's always something just off about Panasonic's stuff. Change your tune once in a while and you'll sound a lot more credible. And I'm not saying that as something personal, just responding to what you've written.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


jeremiah blackRe: HVX
by on May 2, 2005 at 2:14:22 am

[Noah Kadner] "I find it a little odd seeing someone shooting on an XL2 with a $7,000 P+S and $10,000 lenses. For the same exact rental money or less they could have used an off-the-shelf HD camera with way better results"

People do that with DV, because tons of money gets saved in post (and rentals) by shooting DV instead of HD. Also, nobody buys a P+S, they rent.

Noah, I understand your point that dumping too much money into DV is a waste, but it does make sense in certain situations. I've seen many music videos shot on DV with the P+S that look great, and were made relatively very cheap.

jeremiah black
dual 2 gig G5
2.5 gigs of RAM
Decklink Extreme capture card


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

BlubRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 7:32:32 pm

Marketing makes an HD lens an HD lens.

The last great wave of glass/lens breakthroughs came in the late 70's up to the mid 80's. Everyone has been making glass and lenses based on those break thoughts. Supercomputers were used by military contractors and addressed the whole optic/glass thing to establish a modern base of just how to design and make glass and lenses.

We still have fantastic lenses from that era and before, the Nikon 105 sticks out. When you shoot large format film, the optical requirements of that stuff,8x10 film is so unbelievably high it blows HD out of the water. What kind of glass and lenses do they use? Lenses designed and built well before HD.

PR is PR, it adds some fun to the mix but in the end its just marketing. If you tired to buy a stereo system from the 80s today you could not, you could only buy a better system at a cheaper price, all the components have been upgraded, we now know more regarding how to use the components. In other words the base line has been raised permanently, the same is true of lenses. All the technology of the past has been applied to the most common lens. The fantastic new (20 years old) coatings etc its all there even in cheep lenses. HD lenses simply are a waste of money, but they look cool because they copy the external appearance of film lenses, most of which are over 10 years old. When was the last time you saw a 35mm film and said, man, that lens sucked.

Chris





Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 7:54:26 pm

I don't think that's so. The more the resolution AND the smaller the imaging area, the better lens you need. That means you need a better lens for HD than you do 35mm film. The HVX200 has a 1/3 imager and HD resolution, and if it uses pixelshift too, it's going to need an even higher quality of lens than you'd stick on a HDCAM.

HD lenses are not bunk, and high MTF doesn't come cheap.

http://broadcastengineering.com/mag/broadcasting_hdtv_lenses_mtf/
http://broadcastengineering.com/mag/broadcasting_hdtv_lens_design/

I also tried to find the link to a web page where someone does the SD / HD lens comparison, but I can't find it. Anyone know where it is??

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


BlubRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 11:12:17 pm

The info links you supplied looks like good info. But, I don


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 11:24:04 pm

The eye sees more because the brain is an amazing DSP - not because of the lens and sensor.

Still, you need a good MTF as that gives good contrast, and the eye likes contrast even more than it likes resolution in determining picture quality. The thing is, a lens is often the limiting factor in a camera, and they cannot always pass the resolution need to make the most of the CCDs.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

PappasArtsRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 7:56:30 pm

<<<>>>


Stop this, your smarter then that. It's getting ridiculous.

It's like Neuro surgeons debating with each other how to apply a band aid.

Strictly speaking about fixed lenses on camcorders. When you see a cut a way of these lenses they contain nowhere near the same integrated designs and corrective optics that even the basic of professional lenses. Nowhere near the mechanical tolerances or technology. I have seen most cut a ways on these. There a compromise in cost and in quality of design. You know that! And I do to. You and I did not just fall of the turnip truck.

A B4 or 1/3 mount was the route to take.


Removable is just not about one lens.

It's about "" OPTIONS "" to hook up what you want. Be it fiber optics system. Home made lenses for experimental shots. A blender if it works.

It opens the creative doors to possibilities of doing what the artist/cinematographer wants.

These cameras are not being built to shoot Johnny's birthday party. There being built for professional to use.

It's about the option to rent very expensive lenses for a few hundred dollars a a day to get that special shot. Renting is how it' done when comes to expensive lenses in a large degree in the industry.

That option is killed by not having a mount.

The JVC had P+S TECHNIK srtaight to the camera. This is a good 'RENTAL OPTION"

Many people would do this if given the "" OPTION ""

Why lock this ""OPTION"" out.

Many bitched when they thought P2 was only going to be the option to record HD and you would not have any other "OPTION". It's the same thing. Letting us have the "OPTION"

Believe it or not, Lenses are more important then that recording option if there was list of importance of 1 thru 10.


It's about the ""OPTION""




Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 8:01:28 pm

But what you're talking about here is a different camera. You're talking about something bigger, and although the body costs could be very similar, I still think that if you're putting a external lens on it, to do justice to the rest you're looking at a cost greater than that of the whole camera, and that puts the package into a completely new price point.

I would really like the camera you envisage, but there's no way I could afford it - just like I can't afford the varicam.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

donatelloRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 29, 2005 at 10:13:03 pm

1. Do you want removable lenses on this camera?

NO!! panasonic please do not put a removable lens on this camera.

2. Would you pay more?
NO !! if you do put a removable lens on it i will NOT buy it..

3. How much more would you be willing to pay?

zero ... i'll pay 6K or 10K w/2P2 cards .. you put a removable lens = i'll buy different camera ...

i want a hand size camera .. the JVC/XL are too big for my use..

perhaps a removable lens calls for a different model ?







Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jan Crittenden LivingstonRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 12:16:09 am

Hi Folks,

I have been watching this little thread on my Blackberry all day, and found myself rolling my eyes, hitting my forehead and even giggling at times, as I have not been in my office today and could not respond sooner. (Noah, you have a sense of humor I have never seen before.) If this camera was going to have interchangeable lenses, it would have been shown that way at NAB. It is not like we would say, "Jeez, we didn't think about it that way" and change our minds. No, folks, we are not willing to take it back to the drawing board and postpone delivery for 6 months, so that we can, at best, put on SD lenses. Frankly, this was an engineering decision.

As Graeme has tried to point out HD lenses do have certain specs related to them, MTF being just one of them. The lenses that are going on the JVC camera are not true HD lenses. You can expect certain aberrations from them, green to one side and magenta to the other, on the extremes. You can see it even on the Varicam when you put an SD lens on it.

So this camera is a price perfomer. If we were to delay the shipping in favor of an interchageable lensing arrangement, people would buy this camera and then, because they have a budget, they would buy the less expensive lens or the lens they thought looked good, so when the camera has a sub par performance; which would be blaimed? The Camera or the guy that was buying on the cheap or thought he was buying a real HD lens? That was a rhetorical question; I know the answer; the camera. We are not willing to take that hit.

Reality Check: There are no HD lenses under $10,000, and the one at $10,000 is not the best.

Point is, by putting on a lens like the one, for which, we are contracting with Leica, we have a better quality control over what comes out in the recording on each and every camera. This is because it is carefully mated to the rest of the system; the optics, the prism, the filters, the CCDs, even the material that bonds the CCDs to the prism and we still have to meet the price point.

So folks, can you just give it break? Should they really bring out HD lenses that would be affordable for this size camera, perhaps that would mean there is another camera in the making. But not today, not with what is available.

I hope this helps,

Jan

Jan Crittenden Livingston
Product Manager, DVCPRO, DVCPRO50, AG-DVX100
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 1:04:04 am

Jan, thanks for you insight. It's been a fairly interesting discussion today!

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Peter DeCrescenzoRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 1:06:33 am

[Jan Crittenden Livingston] "... Reality Check: There are no HD lenses under $10,000, and the one at $10,000 is not the best. ..."

Hi Jan: Um, so what kind of "lens" will be built-into the forthcoming Panasonic AJ-HVX200 camcorder, which I believe will have a MSRP of around $7K USD?

Or, were you only referring to removable HD lens costing at least $10K?

If so, how does a >$10K get shoehorned into a <$7K camera?

Now I'm really confused. (But what else is new?)

[Jan Crittenden Livingston] "... If we were to delay the shipping in favor of an interchageable lensing arrangement, people would buy this camera and then, because they have a budget, they would buy the less expensive lens or the lens they thought looked good, so when the camera has a sub par performance; which would be blaimed? The Camera or the guy that was buying on the cheap or thought he was buying a real HD lens? That was a rhetorical question; I know the answer; the camera. We are not willing to take that hit. ..."

Well, I appreciate Panasonic looking out for us, preventing us from saying or doing stupid things. Next, would you folks get to work on "fixing" online banter -- it sure could use some similar "fixing". ;-)

As I said in my preevious post, I have no problem with a "low-end" prosumer camcorder (and I don't mean that in any kind of negative way) having a built-in lens. However, one can certainly imagine a not-too-far-off happier time when there might be a bigger brother/sister for the HVX200 -- perhaps the "HVX300"? -- which "features" a removable lens.

No, I'm not referring to a Varicam, unless the Varicam is coming w-a-y down in price in a year or so. Instead, I'm just taking about a small, shoulder-mount version of the HVX200 which can use removable lenses. Of course, this "HVX300" will sell for more than its smaller sibling, but it needn't cost more than twice as much.

Anyway, I've got to get back to reading the copy of the Panasonic AJ-SPX800 P2 2/3" 3-CCD standard definition camcorder operating instructions manual which Panasonic's Sales Account Manager was kind enough to send me. I don't know yet if I can afford one of these babies (haven't gotten a quote yet), but boy do I love reading manuals for _real_ gear. Sorry, can't help it; I'm a geek. ;-)

All the best & have a great weekend everybody!

- Peter

Just a friendly reminder to all: Please consider filling-in your COW user profile information so we have a better idea who you are, where you're from, and so forth. It's the friendly thing to do. Thanks!


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Post removed.


Jan Crittenden LivingstonRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 11:17:37 am

Peter DeCrescenzo:Or, were you only referring to removable HD lens costing at least $10K? If so, how does a >$10K get shoehorned into a <$7K camera?

It can be a lot better than you think it can, because the quality goes into the glass.

Best,

Jan


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Peter DeCrescenzoRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 3:57:22 pm

[Jan Crittenden Livingston] "Peter DeCrescenzo: Or, were you only referring to removable HD lens costing at least $10K? If so, how does a >$10K [lens] get shoehorned into a <$7K camera?

It can be a lot better than you think it can, because the quality goes into the glass."


I hear you, Jan. I'm trying to think thru the manufacturing issues (removable vs. built-in, bayonet hardware vs. fixed, lens-in-camera-housing vs. lens-in-standalone-housing, integrated built-in electronics & wiring vs. compatibility with an external lens' electronics & connectors, plastic & metal molding design & manufactur costs ...), but it just makes my head hurt.

So, I've decided to not worry about it, and instead just be happy and go shopping!

... For an expensive standard definition pro camcorder that is. ;-)

(I'm enjoying reading the AJ-SPX800 user manual; it'll trigger some good questions I'm sure!)

All the best,

- Peter

Just a friendly reminder to all: Please consider filling-in your COW user profile information so we have a better idea who you are, where you're from, and so forth. It's the friendly thing to do. Thanks!


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

jeremiah blackRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 2:39:16 am

Jan,

Could you please be more specific in answer Peter's point? I'm not sure I fully understand your response. If the lowest cost HD lens is around $10,000, and even that lens sucks poopy (poopie?), then what kind of lens can the $6000 HVX-200 possibly have on it? If it's not a "true HD" lens, then what is it? I'm going to assume that it's going to be great, because the lens on the DVX-100a was one of the best fixed lenses I've ever used on an inexpensive, prosumer camera. But, Peter's point is pretty good. Everyone's been chiming in on the cost of "true Hd" lenses and how impractical removable lenses are for an HD camera and everyone that suggests it is a fool, and so forth. But if Panasonic can afford to put a great lens (I'm assuming) on a $6000 HD camera, then (1) the lens can't have cost too terribly much to manufacture, and (2) wouldn't sell for too terribly much if purchased separately.

These questions are about the HVX-200, which obviously is a design that was locked long ago. (Thank God, by the way. I wouldn't wait any longer for it than I already am!) But they are simply about "what's possible" and, by extension, what might be possible in the coming year(s).

Once again, your presense on this board is invaluable, and is one of the top reason why people like myself are intensely brand loyal to Panasonic.


jeremiah black
dual 2 gig G5
2.5 gigs of RAM
Decklink Extreme capture card


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 10:21:02 am

I'm sure if you put in an order for 100,000 HVX200 lenses, then they're very affordable indeed, but if you, as a consumer put in a single order, they may then just cost $10,000! I think that's just how the economics works - by making it a fixed lens, Panasonic can put more of the lens budget into the glass, and because they're buying a rather large amount of them, they get a good deal, and because they got it designed specificaly for this camera, prism, chipset, they can optimized parameters to get better quality out of it that would be otherwise possible.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

toke lahtiRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 12:23:03 pm

If Panny would make the lense changeable, but bundles it with every camera sold, it will sell as many as if it would be fixed.
The price of lens comes from glass, not the enclosure, so for the quality-price ratio, it's quite irrelevant if the lens has its separate or same enclosure with camera.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 12:38:48 pm

I think that's an economic over-simplification, and I do think the lens housing of a fixed lens will be significantly cheaper for Panasonic to produce, and looking into the economics of parts cost compared to final customer purchase price, they don't have to shave much off the parts cost of going fixed to have a significantly bigger budget for glass.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


toke lahtiRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 2:32:30 pm

My guess for the expenses are $1k for glass, $100 for housing and $10 for bayonet.
If somebody could give factual numbers...

One thing about changeable lenses: you always know their price, when they are sold separately.
Fixed lens prices are part of a whole camera and therefore only guessings...


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 2:37:28 pm

Unless the removable lens is a "special" just for that camera and bundled with it. You still have no idea what it would go on sale for in a less "tied" economic environment. BTW, have JVC published the specs on their lens for the HD100, MTF curves etc.?? I wish manufacturers would publish a long list of specs with their cameras, and the methodology by which they measure them.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

toke lahtiRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 2, 2005 at 4:26:16 pm

It seems that Fujinon does not even list T16x5.5BRMU in its website...


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


toke lahtiRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 10:46:23 am

[Jan Crittenden Livingston] "The lenses that are going on the JVC camera are not true HD lenses. You can expect certain aberrations from them, green to one side and magenta to the other, on the extremes."

Jan, have you checked that page:
http://www.eidomedia.com/hdve/ziess_fuji.htm

It clearly shows that even a changeable cheapo sd lens is better than fixed one.
I'm not saying that fx1's zeiss and hvx's leica will be identical but they will surely be in the same ballpark, but you could as well say that "the lens on hvx-200 will not be a HD lens" if you define "HD lens" to be something like "lens that is as good as those which cost $10k".

I'd rather say that there is no clear line between sd and hd lenses that when lens becomes "HD".

So I think this fear that someone would use inferior changeable lens than what these fixed are is quite hypotetic.

I fully understand that it is impossible to put bayonet to hvx-200 for the launch 6 months away, but I think it would be a good thing for next model.
Putting one bayonet between the lens and the camera and another socket for electronics wouldn't cost almost anything. After that camera could be still sold with exact same lans as it is sold in hvx-200, but bayonet would give creative option for people who needs macros and supertele and so one.

When every camera is sold with same lens either fixed of changeable, you could always say: "Why didn't you use it's original lens?" if these hypotetic accusations about camera's quality comes up.

I see only 2 problems if doing this:
1) protecting the more expensive camera sales
2) with two models, both model's volumes in manufacturing lowers so much that they both would be significally more expensive

Then little bit about "demystifying picture quality".
It is so often said here that Varicam or some other 2/3" camera is sooo different than 1/3" cameras.
Now what is the difference actually?
Let's assume that both cameras have same resolution in their chips.
Biggest difference in real life is, that you can't find as good optics to 1/3" as to 2/3", but lets assume that they both have lenses that can resolve what sensors take.
2/3" gives you 2 stops more sensivity and 2 stops shallower DoF.
And thats about it.

Example of two identical shots:
1/3": 10mm, f2, 2m, CoC 4


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jan Crittenden LivingstonRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 11:29:16 am

toke lahti:It clearly shows that even a changeable cheapo sd lens is better than fixed one.

Since it was being used on a Betacam, I would bet that it cost more that the SD lens that comes with the JVC.

>I'm not saying that fx1's zeiss and hvx's leica will be identical but they will surely be in the same ballpark,

The Zeiss lens has a lot of chromatic aberrations. This is noticable from the minute you turn it on. We are aiming for better.

>I'd rather say that there is no clear line between sd and hd lenses that when lens becomes "HD".

Here you would be really wrong. There is a dividing line. Go talk to the folks at Fujinon and at Canon.

>So getting real resolution of 1920x1080 with 1/3" camera is really utopistic.

This is true even in the more expensive gear.

>I have to settle down with hvx-200.
And for what I have read here, it should have best fixed lens in the world so I think I will be quite happy with it.

That is the way I am approahing it.

Best regards,

Jan



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 1:01:46 pm

But pixelshift, from the research I did, needs the CCDs to be able to alias (ie have too much high resolution detail on them) to be able to boost the resolution beyond that which the CCD is normally capable of. If the lens is soft, then I just don't see how pixelshift is going to increase your resolution up above and beyond the chip resolution. If the resolution is not coming though the lens, there's no way that a sampling device can make up for it, no matter how that sampling device is arranged. Surely, that's just basic sampling theory???

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 1:06:23 pm

On that page, I thought both lenses looked poor - and there was chromatic abberations on the stock ziess which were mostly absent on the fugi. However all the example shots provided had the sharpness up so high, with so much ringing artifacts that they all looked nasty - ouch. Why do you think the Z1 comes set with the sharpness up so high - because the darn thing doesn't have much real resolution and "sharpness" makes people who don't know better think they're seeing HDCAM quality (on their CRT monitors that don't have anywhere near enough resolution anyway to do a proper comparison).

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

EmeryRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 3:41:47 pm

excuse my ignorance about lenses but why do top of the line still lenses cost ony a few thousand dollars while HD or 35mm motion picture lenses cost tens of thousands?

Im sure the lens construction is more complex in HD lenses but id love to understand a little more about what mkes them different and so much more expensive to manufacture.

Emery


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

donatelloRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 1, 2005 at 4:52:11 am

movie/HD lens are better made (mechanical parts) as the movie/film/video business puts much more wera/tear on them..
plus the # of units sold/made = there are many more still lens sold then movie/HD/video lens = volume = less $$



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


toke lahtiRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 1, 2005 at 1:19:22 pm

Cost is all about mass markets.
When canon designs a new still lens it aims to sell one million of them.
When zeiss brings a new digiprime to market it aims to sell one thousand pieces.
So canon can press it's r&d and product line costs to 1/1000 of what zeiss pays.

A good still camera lens need resolving power of about 50 lp/mm.
A good 2/3" hd lens needs 200 lp/mm.
Glass grindings accuracy rises the costs exponentially.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Graeme NattressRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on May 1, 2005 at 3:00:47 pm

Good points. I reckon there's a real economy of scale in what Panasonic will be doing, especially if the interest allready in this camera is anything to go by. Still, in a 1/3" chip HD camera, the lens will be a limiting factor no matter what (fixed, removable), I think.

Graeme

- http://www.nattress.com - Film Effects for FCP


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

NICK BRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 12:33:41 am

I do not need a removable lens and i will not pay extra for something i do not need.

What i do want is the camera to be delivered as soon as possible.



Instead of spending extra money on lenses the filmaker would be better off paying the leading actress a few more $ to appear naked as that is what the audience realy wants lets get real ;-)


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


RennieRe: Attn: Jan and Panasonic: informal poll on removable lense for HVX-200
by on Apr 30, 2005 at 4:26:10 am

I'll take the HVX-200 just as it is now, it'll probably work with my steady-cam JR and the auto function will be a blessing for that. Even without the steady-cam, 3rd party lenses would put the camera out of balance, you'd have to hold it differently and all the controls would need to be re-located. JVC had to go to a mini shoulder mount camera to add the interchangeble lenses. Maybe the HVX-300 can be this style. A 1/2" adapter added between the lens and the ccd's would increase the focal length of your lens thereby reducing the wide end of the lens and increasing the telephoto end (an 18X6.7 becomes something like a 20X7). That's a crime. One of my favorite preferences over the DVX-100 and the HVX-200 over the Sony units is the wider to mid telephoto lens coverage they favor.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Share on Facebook


FORUMSTUTORIALSFEATURESVIDEOSPODCASTSEVENTSSERVICESNEWSLETTERNEWSBLOGS

Creative COW LinkedIn Group Creative COW Facebook Page Creative COW on Twitter
© 2014 CreativeCOW.net All rights are reserved. - Privacy Policy

[Top]