Panasonic unveils SDHC-lovin' AG-HMC150 HD camcorder
By Darren Murph 
posted Apr 14th 2008 9:58AM
posted Apr 14th 2008 9:58AM
posted Apr 14th 2008 9:58AM
The estimated percentage of cellphones that were recycled in 2007.
The EPA estimated that of the 126.3 million cellphones disposed of in 2007, only 14 million -- about 10 percent -- were recycled. The rest? Landfill heaven. (source: EPA, July 2008)
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
"Sure, $4,500 is still a lot of coin, but it's certainly within the realm of reason for many prosumers out there."
I wish :(
Looks like a damn fine piece of equipment though.
Damn fine.
The very idea of Engadget is to make us drool on stuff you cannot afford to buy. This fits the bill perfectly.
Sweet device in all respects though!
I want it more than I want my left nut back, even though I'd have no idea what to do with it and I may just end up using it as a webcam. That's all immaterial, I still want it! I do really miss my left nut though.
...
Don't judge me.
Was there really any need at all to tell us you lack certain parts parts that hinder your ability to perform?
I think there are more body parts then just nuts that you seem to be missing, if you want to use this camera as a webcam.
*Hint, the body part i am talking about should have been in your skull.
Yeah, you could use it as a webcam, that broadcasts at 1440x1080.
Hope you have the upload speed ;).
Look, all I'm saying is that your left nut might not make that great of a webcam...
Looks totally cheap o plastic :P
Totally want one.
Is it me, or do Panasonic cams just have that badass look? My GL2 looks all wuss in comparison. Not that look has anything to do with using a camera, but still...
My Panasonic cam definitely has a bad-ass factor.
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41zqw9F7SdL._SS400_.jpg
So's mine ;)
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l211/monkfishb/panasonic_XD50.gif
2 things, first wasn't the canon cheaper for 1080p quality?
I mean if your gonna use Leica glass...
Also, optical image stabilization...+Leica glass...is this the first Leica optically stabilized glass?
The Canon's are a more expensive product for similar resolution. There are obviously features beyond just the resolution, but Panasonic is definitely offering it at a better price point.
HDV is transitory and problematic codec. The early Sony cams were among the touchiest I've used. Spend the extra money and go full HD, even if it's just 720P.
No the first would probably be the one on the panasonic two thirds camera. Leica Vario Elmarit 14-150 3.5-5.6
No the first would probably be the one on the panasonic four thirds camera. Leica Vario Elmarit 14-150 3.5-5.6
Panasonic's flawed camera looks like the cheap plastic it is made out of. Most importantly, the format they chose is pretty much terrible at the low bit-rates they've fostered on the consumer. Their only good HD cameras use the P2 cards (which are overpriced). Those at least allow you to choose between various bitrates/resolution. Don't bother with AVCHD, its almost a dead format anyway.
What kind of resolution is 1440x1080? People still use 4:3? I'll consider it when there is a 1920x1080i version(p is a little much for what I would need)
1440x1080 is actually the resolution of most HDV camcorders so it's a pretty standard resolution. Most prosumer HD models have 1440x1080 sensors, but when you capture the video the editing program resizes it to 1920x1080. It's not that uncommon and won't noticeably affect quality unless you're spending 10k+ on a camcorder. There are cheap consumer cameras out there that offer 'true HD' or 'true 1080p' which have 1920x1080 sensors, but compromises in glass quality, compression codecs, and imagers mean these frequently have much lower resolution than prosumer models with 1440x1080 sensors.
Bottom line: It doesn't matter one way or the other since it all comes out of your editing program the same way. Heck, the HVX200 uses a 'lowly' 960x540 sensor simply upscaling the video to 1920x1080 during recording and people rave about the quality since the glass is good and you can use much lower compression settings.
On the other hand if you had a choice between two identical cameras and one had a 1440x1080 sensor and the other had a 1920x1080 sensor I'd choose the 1920x1080 one since it'd be 'slightly' easier to work with when editing. Think of it like an extra feature - it's kind of nice to have, but shouldn't have a noticeable impact on quality.
astroturf astroturf astroturf.com shaddup.org
@rcappo - it plays back at a 4:3 pixel aspect ratio, which is (4*1440/3)=1920x1080. No HDV cameras have square-pixel CCDs... although this records "AVCHD", which actually is an H.264 derivative that claims better quality at 21Mbs than the mpeg2 HDV stream at 25Mbs. I'd like to see its output...
In 1995, my business partner paid $3000 for a 3-CCD Panasonic SVHS camera that we used to shoot a demo. We got the contract. The camera is now sitting in my closet (my son used it to shoot some stuff, but for a recent school project he used it's late DV based sibling, which costs about $600 and shoots better video.)
Hey,
This camcorder records in full 1920 x 1080i and 1280 x 720 in most of its modes. Only in its lowest mode (6 mb/s) does it record in 1440 x 1080. It has 3 - 1/3rd inch CCDs, a solid processor, and a top quality AVCHD mode which averages 21 mb/s. Considering the highest is 24 mb/s in this format (twice the bandwidth as HDV), this is going to blow away HDV. I look forward to see if the actual video delivers these breakthrough specs.