Watch out Mini Red - Panasonic's 12mp "hd shooter"

[Greg Voevodsky]

Panasonic's 12 megapixel Lumix DMC-FX100: a wide-angle, "HD video" shooter

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/14523/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fx100/


Pretty cool... Now, if they could only do 30 frames per seconds at 12 megapixels, Red One would be in a run for its money.

[Graeme Nattress]

can anyone figure out how small it's pixels are? 1/1.72" sensor according to the article? What's that for real in mm?

G

[Tom Lowe]

What's the price?

I wonder if you could use something like this to shoot 4K timelapses? Does it have a shutter remote plug? All manual settings?

[Chuck T.]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0705/07052102panfx100.asp#images

[Eugene]

The Lumix only does 15 fps. The Canon TX1 does 30 fps. What good is 15 fps? I am getting the Canon, eventhough the bastards haven't sent me the rebate from the last camera I bought from them. Jerks.

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/13002/canon_powershot_tx1/

http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/artikelen/6/canon_powershot_tx1.jpg

[Sanjin Jukic]

MORE>>
The World’s First* 12.2-Megapixel 28mm Wide-Angle Premium Compact Digital Camera (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0705/07052102panfx100.asp)

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0705/Panasonic/FX100k-slant.jpg

[baro]

can anyone figure out how small it's pixels are? 1/1.72" sensor according to the article? What's that for real in mm?

The recently announced Sony 1/1.8" sensor has a 2.5 µm pixel size. If the two chips have the same proportions between the effective area size and the nominal size, the pixel size is 1.91 µm for the Panasonic.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0702/07021801sonyhighspeedcmos.asp

For the Sony: Diagonal 9.10 mm (Type 1/1.8) 6.4M effective pixels (2921H × 2184V), Pixel size: 2.5 µm unit pixel

2921 / 4000 * (1/1.72) / (1/1.8) * 2.5 = 1.91

[Jeremy Hughes]

can anyone figure out how small it's pixels are? 1/1.72" sensor according to the article? What's that for real in mm?

G

If I did the math right, it's roughly 1.19 nanometres. (1/1.72) inches = 14 767 441.9 nanometers, devide that by 12,400,000 and there's my result. Did I do it right?

[Phil Becque]

No I'm afraid not - the smallest transistor so far is 11nm and that was just one made in the lab. I'm not sure how you'd figure this out though?

All the best, Phil

[Michael Schrengohst]

That is cute, depending on price a hobbist may buy it.
Too little too late from Panasonic.

[Yash Keough]

It sounds like all it is is a 12 MP consumer still camera that happens to do some HD video at a low framerate. Nothing to worry about it seems for RED. :-)

[chuck colburn]

This is nicer.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/Leica/dlux3.jpg

[vanguy]

If I did the math right, it's roughly 1.19 nanometres. (1/1.72) inches = 14 767 441.9 nanometers, devide that by 12,400,000 and there's my result. Did I do it right?

Nope.

The 12 million pixels aren't all in one row.

[vanguy]

If MY math is right, it's closer to 3691 nm.

Sensor size about 3000 by 4000 pixels, 14 747 441.9 nm divide by 4000.

[chuck colburn]

Nope.

The 12 million pixels aren't all in one row.

That's the panaramic model.

[vanguy]

Assuming a whole bunch of stuff.

[vanguy]

That's the panaramic model.

LOL:)