Jump to content


Photo

AJ-HDX900


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Arni Heimir

Arni Heimir
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • Other
  • Reykjavik/Barcelona

Posted 02 July 2006 - 04:48 PM

Does the Panasonic AJ-HDX900 record 1080/24p?

It's product description says "2/3" 3-CCD 16:9 1080i/720p" on the one hand but "multi-format recording system that supports 1080 at 59.94i, 50i, 29.97p, 25p, 23.98p, 23.98pA" on the other.

Árni
  • 0

#2 Michael Nash

Michael Nash
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3330 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Pasadena, CA

Posted 02 July 2006 - 04:52 PM

It records 1080/60i, using a 3:2 pulldown to spread 24 frames across 60 fields, just like the HVX-200. So it's 24P capture, and 1080i recording.
  • 0

#3 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 03 July 2006 - 11:13 AM

We have a preproduction model in house at the moment for testing. It's quite a remarkable camera. For a similar price I think it outperforms the Sony 350 HD-XDCAM.
  • 0

#4 efrain gomez

efrain gomez

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 August 2006 - 12:20 PM

It records 1080/60i, using a 3:2 pulldown to spread 24 frames across 60 fields, just like the HVX-200. So it's 24P capture, and 1080i recording.


When you say "24p capture, and 1080i recording", you mean the actual footage you upload and playback is not a true '24-fps-progressive frames a second' ? So does the camera automatically interlaces the footage, making it a not-actual 24 progressive frames ?
  • 0

#5 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 August 2006 - 10:17 PM

The tape medium is interlace, but the recording is true progressive. It's just like the DVX100 in this respect. In an edit system the material can be deinterlaced to become a true progressive image.
  • 0

#6 adubbs10

adubbs10
  • Guests

Posted 17 August 2006 - 09:47 AM

We have a preproduction model in house at the moment for testing. It's quite a remarkable camera. For a similar price I think it outperforms the Sony 350 HD-XDCAM.



What is your take on using the P2 cards?
Have you been able to test the 1394 output to a firestore Hard Drive while shooting?
Also, Say for example your traveling on location for a week shooting HD daily...Do you think that the P2 cards and Hard Drive space would get cumbersome? Would I need a giant Hard Drive and stack of P2 cards? Do you have any recommendations?
  • 0

#7 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 17 August 2006 - 10:55 AM

Perhaps you are confused. The HDX900 uses DVCPro tapes, the smaller size. It does not record to P2 cards like the HVX200 or other models. Come January there will be a Varicam-like model that records to P2 cards, but not this model.

Even though it records on the smaller tapes, Panasonic has been successful in re-engineering the micron width of the tape recording path so that the same full runtime can be accomplished as the Varicam allowed. hat means 33 minutes on a "66" tape. The discontinued 1200A and the new 1400A decks play back these tapes.

Really nice stuff, especially at these prices. In most cases one would be hard pressed to tell the difference between an HDX900 and a Sony F900, even though it is 1/3 the price.
  • 0

#8 B. Schultz

B. Schultz

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 18 August 2006 - 02:20 PM

[quote In most cases one would be hard pressed to tell the difference between an HDX900 and a Sony F900, even though it is 1/3 the price.
[/quote]

Mitch, I am curious about this kind of statement. When this camera up-rezzes a 1080P image from it's native 720P block, there is absolutely no distortion from blowing that image up vertically as well as horizontally? I think that can't possibly be the case.

A native 1080P camera like the F900 can't be equated with a native 720P camera like the HDX900 or Varicam. They are two entirely different frame sizes. I can see a difference in footage I shoot with my Varicam blown up to 1080 and intercut with my F900 footage as clear as day. I can't believe a less advanced camera than the Varicam - like the HDX900 would be any better.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
  • 0

#9 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 19 August 2006 - 10:14 PM

Sure, if I put them up on a res. chart then it is certainly a clear difference. But for most non-critical shooting (let's just call that most shooting), it can be very difficult to see a difference. I would never say that one is as good as the other, but sometimes the difference is not worth it.

Note, we sell both of these cameras, and I recently helped a client with purchasing one of the first F900R cameras shipped by Sony. I think they are both remarkable machines but they also play to different clients. I'd like to think I'm not biased, but there are a number people who prefer certain aspects of Panasonic design to the point of choosing the HDX900 over the F900R even without regard to the price. At least this is what we've been finding.
  • 0

#10 Jonathan Bryant

Jonathan Bryant
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 284 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Athens, GA

Posted 02 September 2006 - 12:10 AM

Perhaps you are confused. The HDX900 uses DVCPro tapes, the smaller size. It does not record to P2 cards like the HVX200 or other models. Come January there will be a Varicam-like model that records to P2 cards, but not this model.

Even though it records on the smaller tapes, Panasonic has been successful in re-engineering the micron width of the tape recording path so that the same full runtime can be accomplished as the Varicam allowed. hat means 33 minutes on a "66" tape. The discontinued 1200A and the new 1400A decks play back these tapes.

Really nice stuff, especially at these prices. In most cases one would be hard pressed to tell the difference between an HDX900 and a Sony F900, even though it is 1/3 the price.

Just so everyone knows, I would be willing to accept the HDX900 instead of the F900 as a christmas gift.
  • 0

#11 Thomas James

Thomas James
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 844 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 02 September 2006 - 08:21 PM

I beleive the HDX900 uses pixel shifting technology to upconvert to 1080p. Pixel shifting technology is not fake upconversion because with pixel shifting technology it is theoretical possible to resolve infinite resolutions with the only limitation being the resolvability of the glass. For still photography it is not uncommon to upconvert from one megapixel to 10 megapixels using pixel shifting technology
  • 0

#12 Mike Brennan

Mike Brennan
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 581 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London

Posted 03 September 2006 - 04:37 PM

I beleive the HDX900 uses pixel shifting technology to upconvert to 1080p.


Panasonic say the 900 is horizontally shifted 1/2 pixel.They are calling it "Super 720p"




Mike Brennan


It records 1080/60i, using a 3:2 pulldown to spread 24 frames across 60 fields, just like the HVX-200. So it's 24P capture, and 1080i recording.



The 900 can record in all of the three codecs
The 1440x1080 (25p) records 50i.
The 1280x1080 30p codec record 59.94i
It also does Varicam.

I would suggest that for indy movies 25p would be a good solution far better quality recording than 960 x720 varicam codec and in respect to US indies a fair trade for 4% pitch change.
Upconverting to this codec enables it to work on FCP in native edit mode. (no support for 720 25p on FCP!)

If only it had 3x 1920x1080 ccd!



Mike Brennan
  • 0

#13 Lee Dashiell

Lee Dashiell

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Columbia & Charleston, SC

Posted 12 October 2006 - 05:42 AM

We just added one of these HDX900 cameras to our package. If I can help with any specific test, just let me know.

Is it just me....or did the east coast go more Panasonic and the west coast go Sony? It seems like everything in our region is heavy on the Panasonic side.
  • 0

#14 Rolfe Klement

Rolfe Klement
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 668 posts
  • Director
  • London | LA

Posted 26 October 2006 - 05:33 PM

Can someone explain the IEEE1394 connection on the aj-hdx900

I assume this means it can back up to a fire store - but does it mean that the camera could be used as a "cheap man's VTR" if connected to a MAC with Final Cut Pro

thanks

Rolfe
  • 0

#15 Delorme Jean-Marie

Delorme Jean-Marie
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 513 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • paris, france

Posted 13 November 2006 - 06:21 AM

after a talk with panasonic people at "satis" trade show in paris in november 2006 :
ajhdx900 is the same as ajhdx400 with gamas upgraded and 12 bit instead of 10 bits.
the effort was made on the price, it's a cheap camera.
resolution is the same as the 400, it records on dvc-pro at 100Mbts on 1440x1080 like any other cams not recording on hdcam SR like genesis or D20
a new version of the ajhdx900 is in the pipline in it's p2 card version.
  • 0


Glidecam

Opal

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

Willys Widgets

Aerial Filmworks

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineTape

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC

Paralinx LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

Technodolly

Tai Audio

CineLab

CineTape

Opal

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

CineLab

Abel Cine

Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio