Panasonic breaking more arbitrary records with two new 1080p24 camcorders

Another day, another couple of Panasonic HD camcorders. This pair may not make the same "world's lightest" (with an asterisk) claims as the entrants we saw yesterday, but each sports a dubious record of their own. First is the HDC-TM30 (pictured after the break), another "world's lightest" cam, this one with the caveat that, at 227 grams, it's the lightest with 32GB of internal storage. It sports a 16x (44 - 706mm equivalent) optically stabilized zoom ahead of a single CMOS sensor that can record 1080p24 video. The other player, the HDC-TM350 (above), offers a bit more on the quality front and pledges the "world's largest capacity" full HD camcorder, offering 64GB of storage. That equates to a nigh-ridiculous 16 hours of 1080p24 video shot through a stabilized 12x (45 - 540mm equivalent) lens. It even records 5.1 audio, but with the mics all placed within what looks to be a one square inch patch don't expect great channel separation here. Both are set for release in late-June for undisclosed (but hopefully non-record-breaking) prices.

[Via Akihabara News]

[Enjo @ May 20th 2009 7:28AM]

For some reason I find this story headline hilarious. What's next, "The world's lightest camcorder with two-tone color scheme whose total number of menus is a mutliple of the model number divided by 17 (times the volume in cubic decameters)"?

[bebop @ May 20th 2009 8:12AM]

Panasonic has been doing this for a while, and it's a gimmick that has really worn thin.

World's thinnest digital camera (with a 28mm lens!)
World's lightest camcorder (with AVCRUD!)

Put enough qualifiers in the fine print, and you too can be the proud owner of a "world's first" something or other.

Still, spare a thought for the sods who have to write these press releases. Must be a pretty dispiriting job.

[Information Central @ May 20th 2009 3:00PM]

World's lightest camcorder with no wide angle whatsoever, making it crap for many (if not most) real-world situations.

[jason51873 @ Jul 8th 2009 10:00AM]

Yea no shit! LOL

[saiko @ May 20th 2009 7:39AM]

Please check the specs before you confuse the readers! This camera is NOT 1080p, but 1080i. The camcorder manufactures have been calling FULL HD to any camera that supports 1920x1080. Whereas with televisions FULL HD indicates 1080p, with camcorders it only means 1080. Please read the fine print!

[Wwhat @ May 20th 2009 8:11AM]

Only 24 fps and i? yesterday's technology, cheap drugstore cams already do 1080p60 by now.

[bebop @ May 20th 2009 8:21AM]

Japan's impresswatch says 1080i. They usually know what they are talking about.

http://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20090520_168747.html

[Neil @ May 20th 2009 8:25AM]

Wouldn't interlaced or progressive be irrelevant to a recording device? 24fps is the current claim of today's tech, not yesterdays.

[bebop @ May 20th 2009 8:28AM]

.. though, on further reading, the TM350 seems to have the option of 24p

my Japanese comprehension and patience only go so far with this...

[kadajawi @ May 20th 2009 8:30AM]

But it's 24 fps people want, not 60.

[in5ane @ May 20th 2009 8:58AM]

Panasonic HD cameras have been Full HD for a couple of years. I have their first 1080p24 shooter. I'm happy with AVCHD, it's the 24fps that bothers me. It's too slow for non-tripod use, which is, umm... 99% of camcorder use. 1080i50 or 60 looks so much better for family-holiday purposes. Wake me up when Panasonic do Worlds First Panasonic 1080p60 camcorder.

[LondonConsultant @ May 20th 2009 1:53PM]

"Full HD" is just a marketing term that has been applied to camcorder output resolutions of at least 1440x1080. It says nothing about interlaced/progressive, frame-rate, bit-rate, etc. It's funny that everyone assumes it means 1920x1080p, whereas it is currently used for mainly interlaced output. Even this camera is actually interlaced, despite the misinformation spread from blog to blog...

[solmar @ May 20th 2009 3:00PM]

I wonder why I keep seeing people refer to "Full HD" as being *only* 1920x1080xprogressive, when it just means that the device is capable of 1920x1080 resolution, with no regard to frame rate and progressive/interlaced. It was meant to differentiate between the old 1366x768, 1024x768 and whatnot TVs from the TVs that actually had 1920x1080 pixels. Yes, some manufacturer's logos had the word "1080p" included, but that was not universal.

One thing that I like about this camcorder is that it bucks the trend by actually including an EVF. LCDs have come a long way, but they still are rendered nearly useless when you try to use them in daylight. Canon's consumer HD camcorders are awesome in nearly every aspect, except that they rarely have an EVF, and that is the deal breaker for anyone actually takes their camcorder outdoors, not to mention that the LCD is a battery hog.

[geckofrog2000 @ May 20th 2009 7:38AM]

Well sure I can make a world's lightest too, with 32mb of hard drive space! Make a world's lightest 120GB and 60GB and then lets talk Panasonic

[alx @ May 20th 2009 7:42AM]

I am semi amateur movie maker and can say AVCHD is not very good. I have tested it long enough.

Better is h.264 or mp4 its easier to handle and burn.

[shorelinedigital @ May 20th 2009 8:16AM]

alx-

AVCHD is based on h.264 compression. It is the same codec and much higher quality than the older MPEG2 based HDV codec.

[Stephen Lang @ May 20th 2009 10:39AM]

I think the main issue with these first AVCHD cams is bitrate and sub-optimal encoding? (thus the 100000 hours of recording on 32GB of memory...)

[kadajawi @ May 20th 2009 8:32AM]

Hold on... 45-540mm? Where's the wide angle?

[superhobo @ May 20th 2009 9:01AM]

Only I can have a world's first camera held by me...in my left hand!

[johnnyderm @ May 20th 2009 9:25AM]

Panasonic is junk

[Michael @ May 20th 2009 9:51AM]

Now that many point and shoot digicams are capable of recording decent quality video, I think these dedicated videocams should start focusing on better quality video (more color space, less compression, better audio circuitry, easy to use manual controls liek focus rings around the lens, ect).

[ill trooper @ May 20th 2009 10:09AM]

Agreed, I don't need "nigh-ridiculous 16 hours" of recording, I'd rather have 1-2 hours of high-quality video. And audio input. I'm leaning a lot more towards the (also from Panasonic) GH-1 "still camera that does video" route.

[solmar @ May 20th 2009 3:08PM]

Point and shoot digicams can take video as good as a camcorder can take stills... in other words, not very good (with some very small exceptions, like the REDs, which aren't even out yet). You disagree? Try doing a side-by-side comparison. Compare motion, artifacts, zooming, noise, sound, color, and quite a few other aspects, and you'll see that the P&S falls flat on its face. A P&S is a world of compromises for compactness and economy... it won't take stills as good as a DSLR, and it won't take video as good as a good HD camcorder. If it did, NOBODY would be shelling out the $$$$$$$$$ premium over the P&S.

You want all those things? Less compression? Only 1 hour of recording? Manual controls? High quality? They have all been available in HDV camcorders for years.

[Goreged Bushed @ May 20th 2009 12:00PM]

OK why is Sony the only one allowing the record hd in the dark to catch all those prevs in the dark. Come on Panasonic give me some Sony competition. I need night vision and to not want sony.

[lakersin2025 @ May 20th 2009 10:12AM]

I need 1080p 60fps. 24p is useless unless its a sunset you're filming from a tripod.

[Salsa Shark @ May 20th 2009 11:12PM]

24p is the standard for film. Your tripod comment has nothing to do with 24p or 30p or 60i, but your aperture and gain settings.

[solmar @ May 21st 2009 1:50AM]

He's talking about 1920x1080 *60P*, something which is basically out-of-spec, and which precious few products (not just camcorders) support. The new Sanyo camcorders coming about will supposedly be able to do it (the first to), but we know what segment they are in, so it'll be more of a gimmick than anything. Going to 60p means doubling the amount of raw information, so if you keep it at the same or similar bitrate (something you need to do to keep things in control), you're doubling the framerate but decreasing picture quality.

Frankly, I don't get the obsession (albeit by only a few folks) over 60p. If you want motion, use 50i/60i. If you want film-like, use 24p/30p. End of story. Why add even more standards just to get bragging rights? Most TVs won't be able to show it, most players won't be able to play it, most people won't even be able to edit it, etc. If you want out of spec, just go ahead and do something like 120p. Now that's something to brag about.

[Kendra @ May 20th 2009 11:14AM]

Heres A Cheaper Version that Works Great, 1080P HD Video Camera - High-Res Video Camcorder (Up To 60FPS). http://atxelectronics.com/store/comersus_viewItem.asp?idProduct=241

[marc @ May 20th 2009 12:32PM]

The amount of HD flavors has gotten so ridiculous they are now marking FULL HD on the outside of a camera.

[Todd Smith @ May 20th 2009 12:47PM]

Using the term "FULL HD" is getting pretty ridiculous... and what about those lenses? That red stripe belongs to Canon!

[shayera @ May 20th 2009 1:27PM]

I‘d rather keep my Sanyo FH1 which claims it has true "FULL HD" 1080p at 60fps,though the optical image stabilization of Panasonic is lure,Idon't think its price can beat 599CAD of FH1.

[shayera @ May 20th 2009 1:31PM]

Forgot to say,I meant HDC-SD10 and HDC-TM10 which seems the same product line as FH1/HD2K.