Newsmeldung von slashCAM: And yet, a new vertical mini-FullHD camcorder: Sanyo DMX-HD1010 of thomas - 8 Jun 2008 13:50:00
Sanyo promises the new vertical mini DMX-HD1010 some improvements in comparison to its predecessor model: slow useine new function (with zu8 to 300 photos per second in a Resolutionvon 448x336 pixels) and a better image with a new image processor and a higher bit rate (maximum of 14 Mbit / s) and a new 1080/30 fps mode (at least in the NTSC version). Recorded in 1920x1080 (and 720p) to SDHC memory cards. Additional features: a 1 / 2, 5 inch CCD, 10x optical zoom, 2.7 inch display with 230,000 pixels, 4-megapixel photos, pictures (up to 7 in a row), 2h Battery and editing functions in the camera. Sales begin in Japan at the end of June - when the cam comes to Germany and how much they will cost is not yet known.
This is an auto-generated entry
Antwort von cutty:
The chip size of 1 / 2, 5 inches is perverse ;-) 1cm would have been easier. Please, no more custom information! Although the Americans with violence durchdrücken want.
Antwort von Bernd E.:
... The chip size of 1 / 2, 5 inches is perverse ;-) 1cm would have been easier ... I'm not a fan of synonymous English words at any price, but in this case, the world's times now so established that a change only would create additional confusion. Incidentally, would the 1 / 2 ,5-inch sensor correctly converted incidentally 0.7182 cm-sensor hot, not 1 cm sensor ...
Gruß Bernd E.
Antwort von camworks:
hm? I come to 1.016 cm:
1 divided by 2.5 times 2.54 = 1.016 cm
or do I NEN gedanken error?
Antwort von Bernd E.:
... I do thoughts NEN error? ... Inch and Inch are unfortunately two different things:
http://forum.slashcam.de/2-vt60196.html?start=35
Gruß Bernd E.
Antwort von camworks:
na sowas! which I had read about ... you just never learns.
Antwort von WoWu:
1 / 2, 5 "= 5.76 mm x 4.29 mm (d = 7.182 24.71 qmm 4:3 pixel area design)
But at least with some. 3.6 Mpix for video .... because the slow interesting. This AVCHD but still no ISO standard MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 720p60 and 1080 (60 fields), as always, we suggest that now is, could be synonymous p30.
So it is yet. Perhaps this is the first recorder of 1920 presented us a real .... now lacks only the European version and a 4 times as big chip .... only then does not fit with the lens size. But the trend, both for the larger chip, as synonymous to the standard is a good step.
Antwort von kiteschlampe:
1 / 2, 5 "= 5.76 mm x 4.29 mm (d = 7.182 24.71 qmm 4:3 pixel area design)
But at least with some. 3.6 Mpix for video .... because the slow interesting. This AVCHD but still no ISO standard MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 720p60 and 1080 (60 fields), as always, we suggest that now is, could be synonymous p30.
So it is yet. Perhaps this is the first recorder of 1920 presented us a real .... now lacks only the European version and a 4 times as big chip .... only then does not fit with the lens size. But the trend, both for the larger chip, as synonymous to the standard is a good step. http://presse.samsung.de/news/newsread.aspx?guid=7279ac9e-057f-4f8f-8bae-08c697b2047d
Antwort von Daigoro:
Perhaps this is the first recorder of 1920 presented us a real .... maximum of 14 Mbit / s ... 1920x1080 may well be true, but whether the data rate as a synonymous Picture rauskommt clever.
Antwort von LarsProgressiv:
WoWu Hello!
But at least with some. 3.6 Mpix for video .... because the slow interesting. This AVCHD but still no ISO standard MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 720p60 and 1080 (60 fields), as always, we suggest that now is, could be synonymous p30. The HD1010 is the HD1000 is quite similar (Resolution CMOS, CMOS-size, compression, format, ...)
What is new is mainly 1080p30 and 448x336p300.
So far there has been only 1080i60, 720p60, 720p30 and smaller.
Why
do not you lift it out
AVCHD? Just because H.264 is not in the transport stream but in mp4's, but is not editable better. Or is it going to something else? (Or irony?)
Regards
Lars
Antwort von WoWu:
@ Lars
That was not irony ... But AVCHD is many things to the SD specification from 4:3 HDTV with nothing to do.
Unfortunately, there are always companies that the old stands herüberretten development and thereby of the overarching standards (want to), z.Tl. to brand loyalty too.
An open standard has also the advantage that each product of each company with each match the other products.
This is particularly important for the consumer market, where there are many NLE's, players and platforms, it is obviously. The broadcaster can do much more of a closed platform to choose, when the Consument. (but it does not, because the broadcast is now only open standards that apply)
Otherwise I would rather the transport container no preference.
No, it's really just a matter of once-standard signals to be seen and not the Herumgewurschtel as partially in AVCHD.
@ Daigoro
with the 14 Mbit / s if I had not my problem, it just always depends on what tools are used, although I am naturally 16-20 Mbit / s would prefer.
But I was with the DMX-HD1010 again after expected. Unfortunately, the Freue bit early, because a 1-chip Farbmaske part with you, unfortunately, synonymous only to approx. 1400 pixels horizontally, so still pretty much of the 1920th War is still with nix "FullHD".
(This would be synonymous to moderate data rate explain)
This would require the lens around. 120 Lp / mm can represent what synonymous with high level of requirement.
But nevertheless, it seems to me the right way, at least better than the designers of mobile phones with AVCHD.
@ Kiteschlampe
Thanks for the link .... but there are enough technical information in it to get a real picture of doing anything.
Cautiously we have to keep with the pixel data to be (here, 6.4 million). While the chips are so tiny, the individual pixels so small that light diffraction s.der Aperture lead to considerable uncertainty.
Also, extremely high demands s.das lens system by which such systems are usually not able to meet (eg at 6.4 Mpix and 1 / 2, 5 "--- rd. 150 Lp / mm) This is the best lens values).
The best would be just, really, the larger sensor areas to which the DMX-HD1010 so much in the consumer area has already begun.
This is quite something ...
Antwort von LarsProgressiv:
WoWu Hello!
@ Lars
That was not irony ... But AVCHD is many things to the SD specification from 4:3 HDTV with nothing to do.
Unfortunately, there are always companies that the old stands herüberretten development and thereby of the overarching standards (want to), z.Tl. to brand loyalty too.
An open standard has also the advantage that each product of each company with each match the other products.
This is particularly important for the consumer market, where there are many NLE's, players and platforms, it is obviously. The broadcaster can do much more of a closed platform to choose, when the Consument. (but it does not, because the broadcast is now only open standards that apply)
Otherwise I would rather the transport container no preference.
No, it's really just a matter of once-standard signals to be seen and not the Herumgewurschtel as partially in AVCHD.
That I do not understand. Are you now responsible for standards, so that the software must be defined to provide support, or not?
AVCHD is a standard that includes H.264. Now if Sanyo would just H.264 compliant and non compliant AVCHD, so there is a much larger variation of the possible format.
@ Daigoro
with the 14 Mbit / s if I had not my problem, it just always depends on what tools are used, although I am naturally 16-20 Mbit / s would prefer.
However, it can be synonymous 16-20Mbit / s verbraten without a quality improvement to be achieved. The number s.sich says genaus little, as the size of a megapixel sensor without information on the remaining optical system.
But I was with the DMX-HD1010 again after expected. Unfortunately, the Freue bit early, because a 1-chip Farbmaske part with you, unfortunately, synonymous only to approx. 1400 pixels horizontally, so still pretty much of the 1920th War is still with nix "FullHD".
(This would be synonymous to moderate data rate explain)
Can you put it briefly vorrechnen? I know that by Farbmaske the Resolutionleidet, but so strong?
The sensor has the following gross Resolution:
2288 x 1712
If it were only 1400 pixels at rumkommen, would be the only good 61%?
Regards
Lars
Antwort von WoWu:
Hi Lars
I consider myself in relation to television systems always liked s.die definitions. There are the definitions SD and HDTV definitions, of the SMPTE to ensure certain quality criteria have been made.
AVCHD has in large part to do nothing, but describes itself after SD 4:3. The codec has nothing to do, but with the formats.
And if any company their size would bring, would have almost no NLE more of a chance.
The number s.sich says genaus little, as the size of a megapixel sensor This is not completely true, because MPEG4 is divided into profiles and levels, which give very precise information about the possible tools to be used.
16 Mbit / s includes some higher-value tools.
Can you put it briefly vorrechnen? Sure:
3.6 Mpix 1 / 2, 5 "sensor, type 4:3
The 4:3 ratio results in a distribution of 2191 pixels horizontally and 1643 vertically
When 16:9 is vertically from the 2191 resolution only 1232 is relevant.
Bayer sensor uses 2 each green and one red and a blue for a Auflösugsdetail.
Depending on the algorithm vary the values of individual Manufacturer usable with each other, but it is of 30-45% loss of resolution.
Taking the middle, ie 40% remaining 60% as Relvanz.
They are still 986 vertically and 1315 horizontally, which represent a more detailed resolution.
It does not include methods for Alias | Wavefront Mayavermeidung and further technical details, which the pixel next budget would be a burden.
Moreover, in this Resolutiondas Objejktiv 114 Lp / mm must do what is impossible, but outside of the probability in the class.
It is expected that the additional Lens another limiting factor.
Antwort von Bernd E.:
@ Kiteschlampe ... ... Thanks for the link .... but there are enough technical information in it ... You already noticed that the press release linked to a very different one camcorder? Can of course be that the technical inner workings of both identical.
Gruß Bernd E.
Antwort von WoWu:
@ Bernd
nee, is not really struck me, what do you mean?
The heist, I have noticed that there is a different CC, but why the same inside?
Antwort von WoWu:
@ Lars
I can see straight, because you're going out of 3.9 Mpix ...
This changes the overall result but only marginally:
1026 V
1368 h
Pixel Pitch 2.53 y
Optics 119 LP / mm
Antwort von Bernd E.:
... no, I do not really have, what do you mean? ... but why the same inside? The discussion here, where it still has practical terms, revolves around the HD1010. Since uncommented, I found a link to a very different camcorder rather confusing, because now so not necessarily something with the HD1010 should have to do. Unless, of course, the two have the same technology installed, then you could both in the same breath and consider any evidence of one to the other. This was so I want to say - and did so now's the second start-synonymous done ;-).
Gruß Bernd E.
Antwort von Daigoro:
The link was probably the answer to the above specifications, the of the Samsung HMX20 synonymous are met - even FullHDHokusSchmokus and h.264 standard.
Unfortunately, even the picture quality of Vorgaengering HMX10 rather disappointing (test pictures in active video, there's videos on the net), although the 720p60 would be very interesting.
Antwort von WoWu:
Thanks Bernd.
I had the note on the 6 Mpix understood that there are now so generally no longer an issue that Resolutionzu create.
And trying to answer ... but totally correct .... other site.
@ Daigoro
I think synonymous that 720p50 us in the coming years, the soundest and HD will give the "FullHDHokusSchmokus" (nice name) has a variety of reasons for quite a while to continue.
It is just quite unfortunate that Consumenten, of which you really can not expect that they have penetrated matter entirely, with such a "Emplo." always be reingelegt.
That is the only thing that really annoys me.
Antwort von cutty:
The type of 1 / 2, 5 inch CCD find ich pervers ;-) Why is not 1cm CCD?
Antwort von cutty:
ups please delete the above post, there was still something in memory ;-)
Antwort von Eugen von ...:
... because the display is
not just 1 cm diagonal has? Look closely above next, there is the statement linked.
Antwort von LarsProgressiv:
Hello folks!
Ohhh, yes I see it now!
The HD10_0 do not have but a CCD CMOS!
This has probably even Slashcam confused.
Furthermore, I would like to point out that the LCD display is not (as synonymous Sanyo itself indicates), but act and an OLED.
This display type has some advantages in bright ambient light and (almost) no angular dependence more.
Regards
Lars
Antwort von kiteschlampe:
... no, I do not really have, what do you mean? ... but why the same inside?
The discussion here, where it still has practical terms, revolves around the HD1010. Since uncommented, I found a link to a very different camcorder rather confusing, because now so not necessarily something with the HD1010 should have to do. Unless, of course, the two have the same technology installed, then you could both in the same breath and consider any evidence of one to the other. This was so I want to say - and did so now's the second start-synonymous done ;-).
Gruß Bernd E. The link, that's right, among its other Cam, I have him because:
So it is yet. Perhaps this is the first recorder of 1920 presented us a real .... now lacks only the European version and a 4 times as big chip .... only then does not fit with the lens size. But the trend, both for the larger chip, as synonymous to the standard is a good step. By the Way:
The Samsung has NEN 1 / 1, 8 "CMOS installed.
But WoWu was right: I have ordered my Cam and crass blurs the whole picture. Have them sent back again.
This 1920s Cams with mini-optics in any case, I will avoid in future, because nothing can get out this clever ...
Gruss Chris
Antwort von Daigoro:
By the Way:
The Samsung has NEN 1 / 1, 8 "CMOS installed.
But WoWu was right: I have ordered my Cam and crass blurs the whole picture. Have them sent back again.
This 1920s Cams with mini-optics in any case, I will avoid in future, because nothing can get out this clever ...
Gruss Chris Blur the predecessor had, unfortunately, very striking. : (
Finally went for 250 on Ebay and I could not get to ravish them, although the 60p and the high-speed mode are very tempting (yes I film mostly sowas here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v = Q4SHWXQBVL4 - the example is of the Japanese professional colleagues - as can the Camera garnicht fast enough, as we can see:)
But not necessarily only s.der Optics - are other consumer devices have bigger synonymous nix, maximum value.
Since the data is playing again - lower data rate -> lower "level" -> less "Macrobloecke" per second (only one of the slimmed-down criteria) -> tschuessikowski HD sharpness.
A 720p picture would be comparatively better again (and is available for <20Mbit / s recommended, if I read the table correctly).
Antwort von cutty:
... because the display is not just 1 cm diagonal has? Look closely above next, there is the statement linked. I had already read ;-)
I would still prefer to FIRST and metric measurements in brackets inch figures. The alleged confusion is hardly hierorts to the use of ISO-dimensions but the mishmash of inch and metric attributed. I do not hold to the hope that the editors in this respect are somewhat more flexible ;-)
Antwort von WoWu:
@ Daigoro
Since the data is playing again - lower data rate -> lower "level" -> less "Macrobloecke" per second (only one of the slimmed-down criteria) -> tschuessikowski HD sharpness. Only the sake of good order ...
.... this is obviously not so.
The relationships are different and the picture sharpness with the codec is only under very special conditions to do so.
And the sharpness of the image with the data rate has almost nothing s.Hut.
A 720p picture would be comparatively better again (and is available for <20Mbit / s recommended, if I read the table correctly). Anyone who suggests such a nonsense?
In future avoid such sources!
Antwort von Daigoro:
@ Daigoro
Since the data is playing again - lower data rate -> lower "level" -> less "Macrobloecke" per second (only one of the slimmed-down criteria) -> tschuessikowski HD sharpness.
Only the sake of good order ...
.... this is obviously not so.
The relationships are different and the picture sharpness with the codec is only under very special conditions to do so.
And the sharpness of the image with the data rate has almost nothing s.Hut. Only the sake of good order ...
Nobody, except you have of "Bildschaerfe" spoken. : P
"Sharpness" within the meaning of "dissolution", which is synonymous with happy times the number of pixels (1920x1080 is doch ne super resolution) which is why I am neither "resolution" nor "Bildschaerfe" had written.
(I'd synonymous "quality" can write, but then yes None knows more about what it is and we come to the usual "to the Picture BEFORE Camera" on).
Be it so please do not practice outside their s / w test patterns buried.
As long as neither the optics, electronics, nor the dissolution this resolution really is the discussion about the possibilities of codecs synonymous rather idle.
Anyone who suggests such a nonsense?
In future avoid such sources! http://rob.opendot.cl/index.php/useful-stuff/h264-profiles-and-levels/
"Merely guidelines" - however is the goodness Computerfuzzi, its what I "merely guidelines" in relation to data erstmal believe give more than what you aus'm laboratory test fish. : p
Sunday
Antwort von WoWu:
That would not preclude any, may be only one such tables will not be misinterpreted simply reflect but should first of all with the familiar profile and level, before you write such a nonsense.
The fault lies not, as suspected cause in the table but in their interpretation.
But I had obviously overlooked the restriction:
.... when I read the table correctly. What is on the Refensseite finding is synonymous only a tiny, completely out of context excerpt from the MPEG4 H.264 descriptions with reference to H.264 in Wikipedia explained.
Supermarket Guru, which I would believe synonymous!
And the links with the macro blocks and the sharpness, I would recommend synonymous only once correctly Assessment.
"Sharpness" within the meaning of "dissolution" is even more nonsense, because the resolution in the encoding and certainly not more changes. At best, Quantisierungsprozesse aborted, leading to a degree of artifact education.
...
As long as neither the optics, electronics, nor the dissolution this resolution really is the discussion about the possibilities of codecs synonymous rather idle. Just do not .... the efficiency of a codec is highly dependent of the delivered image quality in several respects from.
So it is not futile to talk about it.
My recommendation: not only tables and look at any numbers draw, but backgrounds and relationships ...
Antwort von Daigoro:
"Sharpness" within the meaning of "dissolution" is even more nonsense, because the resolution in the encoding and certainly not more changes. At best, Quantisierungsprozesse aborted, leading to a degree of artifact education.
Do you now "resolution" = "Number of Pixels"?
The "resolution" within the meaning of the smallest structures still "play", is in aborted Quantisierungsprozessen from.
Antwort von WoWu:
As the Chinese philosopher Confucius of his young emperor was asked what he must do to be torn kingdom back in order, he replied shortly and concise: "place the meaning of the terms and restores tolerate no disorder in the words."
If there is a semiotic problem, the sewage but only once. Then we can content maybe continue.
Antwort von Daigoro:
One of mathematicians and engineers often observed phenomena - they are simply not so clear that there are other disciplines and of the equivalent definitions of these terms are collected, as well as other terms equivalent to the facts described. : P
More on Camera:
http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/en/news-16152-New+Xacti+HD1010+Hands+On%21+Not+Very+Revolutionary%E2%80%A6.html
