Panasonic HC-VXF1 Camcorder: HD Picture Resolution:

Terfyn

The Panasonic site has a comparison option. I compared the VXF1, the VX1 and the 800. All the cameras have the same sensor and share many other functions. It is clear to me that the two 4K cameras are based on the 800 with the bits added to give 4K. The same basic parts are used in all the cameras for lens, chip, OIS and most recording options. Have a look Harry on the Panasonic site.

QUOTE="12harry, post: 26700025, member: 497304"]I'm interested in the VXF "Stills-Mode" so I can use the camcorder instead of my Stills camera (14Mpx), which has a 3x zoom. BUT - it needs to be substantially "better" - esp. if the filesize is significantly larger[/QUOTE]
I have used the stills mode on all my Panasonic cameras. You will see if you look at the comparison described above that the stills mode uses the same area as the HD mode. The results are satisfactory.

12harry

I've tried the UK Pana website and any comparison appears difficult - yet I cannot understand why these two camcorders would use identical sensors. Apart from their development dates their specs are different, the zoom ranges are different; so why would any discussion about the VXF1 take any information from another product?

I was asking a user of the VXF1 about still quality and filesize.... since their zoom ranges are different I might expect their internal working to differ. Also, unless OP also owns the HC-V800 why wouldn't I wait for his informed response on VXF1? ....he stated he had a TM0700, which is some years old. I've watched the results from this TM-700,  and it is very sharp.

I fail to understand what "Bits" ( your word) could be added to make a sensor that is good for HD work in 4K mode - This appears to require a sensor with about 4x the number of pixels. Surely the HD model would benefit from a sensor with fewer sites - of course it's possible the extra pixels are joined for HD - but that would  require more work for the 800-model, which is quite a bit cheaper...
That OP complained about  HD performance rather suggests the VXF1 is best suited to 4K and that HD is not optimised.  If it was the same sensor it would be easy enough to un-parallel the pixels for those wanting smaller HD files - maybe because of Memory restriction, or matching other camcorders.
That OP might need to continue with an older camcorder (for some work), seems a retrograde step by Pana - as many users are content with HD.                                                         
Maybe 4K is not a breath of fresh air when everything is included - and audiences are more-concerned with the "content"  - however, the purchaser will want to know they have flexibility when paying "more".
Just because Pana website gives similar=same figures doesn't necessarily relate to the product performances we can buy - and the only concern here is the VXF1 in HD-mode.
Cheers.
I await johnkm telling us like it is.

dosdan

A digital imaging system can only be fully optimised for one resolution. An Anti-Alias (AA) filter is used to reduce moiré. If using line-slipping to reduce res, say only using every 2nd line in the sensor, the amount of AA filtering (fixed) is now insufficient for this larger line spacing so moiré is more likely. Apparently the manufacturer can then then choose to blur the 1080p more than 4K to reduce this moiré.

The following excerpt is discussing the quality of DSLRs images in video mode (high-res) vs stills mode (much higher-res), but the same principles apply:

DSLRs use pixel skipping (and the A7Rii does this for 4k video off the full frame sensor). This retains the shallow DOF abilities of the larger sensor and most importantly yields the same field of view as full-res stills, but does nothing for noise. Worse, the higher the resolution of the sensor the more pixels that are skipped, and so moire increases. And even if there were an anti-aliasing filter in front of the sensor, it would be tuned for high-res stills, not video, so it would be inadequate. Hence DSLR manufacturers have to do some amount of blurring to reduce moire, but not so much that it hurts the image - it's a fine line there. It's also why S35 crop mode for 4K looks better than FF mode for 4K on the A7Rii - no pixels are skipped, yet there's some oversampling.​
Read the full message here: Pixel Binning vs. Skipping vs Oversampling: Sony Alpha Full Frame E-mount Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Moiré pattern - Wikipedia

If reducing the 4K->1080p res in PP, say in a video editor, you are operating after demosaicing (performed early in the in-camera processing) so, as long as the 4K output shows little signs of moiré, you should be OK when down-sizing to 1080p. But, inside the camera, I believe that the video res reduction operation is performed before demosaicing, and this is where the problem can arise.  (I think one of the reasons for early-stage down-sizing is that the bit-rate requirement for raw high-res video at high frame-rates are enormous. Reducing the frame-size/res (i.e. 4k->1080p) and thus the bit-rate, as early as possible in the processing pipeline, improves the max. frame-rate available and probably helps to reduce power consumption too.)

Note: some DSLRS are AA filter-less, relying on the high-res of their sensors to reduce the appearance of moiré. It will still be there, because the current high MP sensors are still insufficient (about 150MP-300MP is needed), but it will be less obvious.

Some AA filter-less DSLRs, with IBIS (in-body image stabilisation), such as in Pentax cameras,  oscillate their sensors with a very small circular motion. This is sufficient to emulate the operation of an AA-filter. So you can switch the "AA filter" operation on and off, and you could also vary the radius of the oscillation to suit different resolutions.

                               
But, as far as I know, this is only suitable for stills, not for the continuous sequence of frames required for video.


Dan.

Terfyn

I read the comparison as an example of cosmetic upgrading - almost like buying a car. The basic unit in this case is the 800, the VX1 adds 4K and the VXF1 a viewfinder. It is clear from the Operating Instructions that the VX1 and VXF1 also benefit from a higher level of software plus other desirable extras. Example the VXF1 has a proper manual focussing ring. But the basic engine and chassis (camera body) are the same.
So the same:- Sensor, Lens, Optical zoom, Intelligent zoom (HD), Microphones, OIS, LCD monitor and body design

The sensor on all three cameras is the same but may be used slightly differently.

I think I demonstrated in #15 that the 800 performs extremely well in adverse conditions.

johnkm

Sorry for the delay in coming back on this, but I thought it would be helpful to those thinking of purchasing a VXF1, to list my likes and dislikes of the VXF1 and where applicable, compared with the TM700

Stills Mode: I haven't really fully evaluated that as yet, particularly doing a comparison with the TM700, which has the following Mpx options: 2.1, 8.3 and 13.3.  I will have a go when the rain and now the wind stops!
Sensor: The VXF1 uses a BSI sensor, probably MOS type similar to the Sony XMOR R
“Exmor R” CMOS Sensor
which, if it had been available for the TM700, would have provided a very significant improvement in low light performance with the lens used (aperture range was F1.5 - 2.8, Focal length 35mm to 420mm (16:9).  However, Panasonic have used most of the extra performance to produce a compact wide range zoom lens: F1.8 – F4, consequently, the VXF1 only provides a slight noise level improvement in low light over the TM700.
4K Editing Computer: I think that getting one at a sensible price and adequate spec, to be able to edit 4K in a ‘reasonable’ time, is going to be a bit of a challenge, to say the least!  My current computer was a fairly high spec in 2011 and, while it is still OK for editing, even just downscaling 4K still takes a fair time.  So building a new computer is the next step and the following web sites give an idea of what is required:
Building a 4K video editing PC for 2018 by Jose Antunes - ProVideo Coalition

The Productive 4K Video Editing PC Build | MSI Motherboard

Building a 4K Video Editing PC for 2018 - Videoguys Blog

What’s Good about the VXF1:
Wide Zoom Range: Particularly the wide end to 25mm (35mm equiv), although this only applies to 4K (and oddly to 2K @ 24p).  The TM700 is very restricted at the wide end in particular, making the need for a wide-angle adapter for indoor use essential.  Unfortunately, while the Panasonic clip-on VW-WE08H X0.8 lens is very convenient, it has poor optical characteristics and a very limited zoom range.

Excellent Manual Focus Assist: Particularly in 4K mode, which is one step better than the good blue outline assist..

Selection of Manual Settings, via the front buttons: Very good and improved over the TM700.

Level Indication: Very useful, even if the ‘auto correction’ (video only) is limited in 4K mode.

Microphone with a Built-In Wind Screen: I have always considered the audio just as (or more) important as the video. Although I have yet to check how effective this is compared with the TM700 mic on its own, or with the furry wind shield my wife made for me for outside locations, where an external mic was not convenient.

Eye Cup for the Viewfinder: For those who wear glasses, this is essential.  I found the TM700’s rather useless in bright sunlight, which is when you really needed it.  The Sony AX53 has the same issue.

Much improved Hybrid OIS function: The VXF1 has a more useful (and better) implementation of this over the TM700 that also works well at extreme zoom.

Recording Operating Modes Selection (via the touch screen):  Much better than the TM700, particularly selection of ‘Scene Mode’ functions, as you no long have to go through the main menu (which is just as well – see ‘What’s Not Good’!).

The IR LED could be useful in zero illumination conditions, but the lens hood has the be removed to avoid blocking top LH corner of the IR beam

What’s Not Good:
Sub-standard HD Resolution: Obviously, this is my key issue, which I have now confirmed is also poor on 1080 MP4 recordings, so there is no point wasting storage space using the ‘higher quality’ 50Mb/s option!  It would be nice to be able to confirm if this is a ‘fault’ on mine alone.  But if it turns out to be a built-in defect (due possibly being optimised for 4K), then I would consider it unacceptable for a reputed company like Panasonic to market a camera/camcorder, that is ‘specified’ to have two ‘high quality HD’ modes, with neither of them making the grade!

I should add that this HD resolution defect was immediately noticeable when viewing the first clips of our garden, which looked soft/slightly out of focus.  It was only after taking the same views with the TM700 that I felt it was necessary to carry out the resolution tests.

No Zebra, Luminance, or Histogram functions:  Not having these is a pain, particularly the Zebra.  I cannot remotely understand why Panasonic have not included at least the Zebra warning.  Surely this would have been a simple software addition?

No dedicated Menu Button (as TM700): This is another pain, as the Menu can be needed frequently and, while this can be selected via the touch screen, it can sometimes require 3 steps to get to it.  Consequently, I have had to ‘waste’ one of the four programmable buttons (Fn2) to make this directly selectable.  Note: More dedicated ‘programmable only’ buttons would have been nice!

No IR Remote Control (or provision for one): The TM700 is supplied with one, which is mainly useful during in-camera playback, although I have used it during tripod recording.  With the VXF1, a smartphone/tablet is required for this via the WiFi connection and I have not found this an acceptable alternative, for three reasons:
1.     A programmable TV remote cannot be used.
2.     It’s not instantly available, as the device has to go through a ‘WiFi connection’ link-up each time it is used.
3.     The WiFi menu item required to connect, cannot be selected via the touch screen, only via the WiFi/Fn1 button, thus preventing the button being used as a programmable button if remote control is frequently required.

4K Discontinuity during In-Camera Playback: Sometimes it is necessary to view recorded footage via in-camera play back, so it was more than a bit disconcerting to find 4K playback has a long 600ms pause in the video between clips (800ms in the audio!).   OK, there is a short pause in the TM700 playback and I am perhaps being naive in expecting eight years on, in getting the same seamless playback I get from a cheap £100 Dashcam (at 2560x1080p).  Unfortunately, even in HD the VXF1 delay is roughly the same as the TM700.

Earphone and USB Socket positions: This is a minor issue, but neither is best located for ease of use when compared with the TM700: The USB socket is too close to the screen and plugging in to the earphone socket, prevents operation of the zoom lever if audio monitoring is needed during hand held operation.

No Flash facility for stills: The flash on the TM700 has been useful at times, but perhaps not essential.  However, it would have been nice to have a hot shoe option on the VXF1 for external flash.

Would I have purchased the VXF1 if I had known beforehand about the downsides listed above?
I can only say, apart from the HD resolution issue: ‘probably’.  Most things listed are a nuisance, but not deal breakers.  But I do wish that Panasonic had treated this as an up-market, easy to carry round, ‘prosumer’ model, as they largely did with the TM700.
The HD resolution issue is a different matter:  If this is ‘built-in’ (for whatever reason), then there absolutely no way I would have considered purchasing and would have gone for an HD only model.
Note: I would be interested to see how the Sony AX53 performs in HD compared with the TM700.

Terfyn

I cannot see that the HD has been downgraded for the 4K, it would not make sense. I find the HD in the 800 to have good clear definition but I record in AVCHD 1080/50p have just tried it in MP4 and the definition is still perfect but the white balance changed a little. Again I say the HD quality is not a problem in my camera.

The comments about the remote control are understandable. I use the App only when I am away from the camera. It sets itself very easily using my Smartphone but its only strength over other remote controls is the ability to control the VW-CTR1 pan/tilt cradle.
I tried the earphone connection and it is difficult to use the hand grip when the plug is in place. The USB has always been behind the LCD and, yes, it is a nuisance especially when using the pan/tilt cradle as I have to leave the LCD in the open position.

You may still need the extra wind muff as I have found that the mics pick up wind noise in anything greater than a light breeze.

Panasonic have removed all the built in lights on the 800. However I did not like the LED inside the lens ring as, with a protective filter in place, there was terrible reflection into the lens. But the location of the cold shoe is much better than the older models and I use a separate LCD flood mounted there which gives perfect lighting for handheld filming. The camera is so sensitive to low light that the extra light from the LED works well.

JabbaNut

Another review here

Review: Panasonic HC-VX1 Delivers 4K Video on a Budget - Videomaker


Panasonic HC-VX1-4K Sample Footage

JabbaNut

Also for comparison

chrishull3

One thing for certain the V800 film was much better filmed than the Panasonic TEST HC-VX1 / HC-VXF1 HC-VXF11 HC-  one but it does not prove much as that one is is 4K and looks much sharper.

johnkm

During the winds yesterday, I was able to confirm the same: The 'windscreen' on the VXF1 is slightly better in wind than the TM700 (without my wife's furry muff), but fitting the muff makes a huge difference.  So one is clearly required for VXF1, but may be more difficult to implement, due to the raised mic (when means that I am currently suffering from 'earache' from she-who-must-be-obeyed, when I asked her to make a new one!).