3D Vision Blog

A normal user's look into the world of 3D Stereo Technologies

3D Vision Blog header image 2

Hands-on Review of the Panasonic HDC-SDT750 3D Consumer Camcorder

August 4th, 2010 · 7 Comments · Shooting in 3D

Camcorderinfo.com has managed to get their hands on the Panasonic HDC-SDT750 3D Consumer Camcorder in order to do a review of the product, testing not only its 3D functionality, but also how well it does in 2D too. Panasonic HDC-SDT750 is scheduled for October release, so if you are interested in the product you’ll find this review interesting, although unfortunately in the review there are no samples that show 3D photos and videos shot with the camcorder and that would’ve been nice. So if anyone finds samples of 3D photo and video shot with this camera please do share the links here, so we can see what is the actual level of the quality and volume provided by the camcorder. For those of you that think that they would be able to fit the 3D conversion lens (VW-CLT1) on an older Panasonic camera, it seems that you’ll be out of luck and you will not be able to do that… not to mention that the conversion lens will probably be sold separately only in Japan.

According to the review for best results you should shoot subjects that are between 1.2m and 4m from the camcorder, and this was to be expected considering the small interaxial distance between the two lenses of the 3D adapter. The 3D conversion lens alters pretty much disabled all or actually most of the manual controls, sets the aperture to a fixed f/3.2 and you will need a lot of light in order to get good image quality in 3D, but that is to be expected with pretty much any 3D recording hardware. Another drawback is that you cannot record in 3D using the highest quality 28Mbps compression method, but instead you’ll have to deal with up to 17Mbps maximum bitrate, which is not that bad, but the higher bitrate option that is available only for 2D would’ve been nice to be available for 3D mode too. It seems that the bundled HD Writer AE software (version 2.6T) is also capable of editing 3D content (basic functionality) as well as burning it Blu-ray discs, but it is not very clear if it supports the Blu-ray 3D format or not. The rest of the details you can read in the full review.

To read the review of the Review of the Panasonic HDC-SDT750 3D Consumer Camcorder…
To pre-order the Panasonic HDC-SDT750K Consumer 3D Camcorder, shipping October 15th…

Tags: ··········

7 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Michael // Aug 4, 2010 at 18:07

    That was a terrible review for a stereo videographer. No samples were provided and unless I missed something, HOW did the reviewer test the quality, or 3D-ness, of the recorded 3D video? They just said it’s capable of producing stunning 3D. Did they hook it up to a 3D television and viewed the content with active shutters, or download the video to the computer and use 3D vision? They couldn’t review the 3D with the camera alone. The short interaxial distance of the two lenses is a major concern for anyone working in 3D. We can imagine what 1.2m shooting distance and a 58mm equivalent looks like, but some samples would have been very helpful.

  • 2 Fredz // Aug 5, 2010 at 01:25

    George Joblove, executive vice president of advanced technology for Sony Pictures Technologies, said this on the subject of interaxial distance :
    “While the typical distance between two human pupils is often thought of as a good basis for stereographic image capture, that’s not necessarily true. Perhaps counter-intuitively, the ideal is not the human interpupillary distance. It turns out that shooting with this interaxial distance often creates imagery that is uncomfortable to view. In fact, for many scenes, the best results are yielded by an interaxial of 40mm or less.”
    Source : http://www.studiodaily.com/blog/?p=3614

  • 3 Marton // Aug 5, 2010 at 11:50

    what? the whole thing depends on subject distance!
    (near and far)

    Take a landscape picture with 4cm base…

  • 4 Fredz // Aug 7, 2010 at 02:20

    Having a 40 mm or 60 mm stereobase won’t change anything if you take a landscape picture…

  • 5 Foveon // Aug 24, 2010 at 08:11

    It seems like the 3D adapter are designed by assemble 2 anamorphic lenses together to create 2 horizontally “squeezed” image capture by the 3mos sensor. Each recorded frame will consist of 2 side by side (L &R) images with each image occupied 960x1080pixel respectively. When output to 3D ready HD TV, the camcorder will split each recorded frame into L & R channel, stretch or interpolate each L & R image back to 1920×1080 size and mix them into format that compatible with the 3D ready HD TV. Bassically, this camcorder still output “True HD” 3D video to the HD TV. Just wondering how good the 3D video captured by using this method, seem like not sample video are currently available to refer to. May be the quality isn’t good enough for Panasonic to show it off.

  • 6 Nick // Aug 31, 2010 at 02:25

    960×1080i pixel is what all 3D broadcast are right now (at least in US). Blu-Ray 3D is 1080p for each eye. So it is easy to compare visually as both sources are widely avaliable. My opinion — broadcase 3D is pretty good, but is visibly worse than Blu-Ray 3D. I would be more concerned with the short interaxial distance of the conversion lens and with possible loss of light and geometry caused by such lens.

  • 7 Tom3D // Nov 13, 2010 at 03:28

    Although I can agree that bringing lenses closer together might indeed give a more ‘comfortable’ 3D experience, I would be tempted to ironically say: just stick to 2D footage then, as this is most ‘comfortable’ to watch!

    3D photography has been my hobby for years, even before digital cameras were born. Having assembled a number of different set ups myself, I can confirm that keeping both lenses c.a. 10cm/4in provides experience closest to real life. This is is in fact an interesting area to experiment with, as by varying the distance, you are effectively creating a ‘model head’ – if you bring them close together, small things will appear larger (take a picture of toy train and it will look like a real scale one when watched in 3d). Taking cameras apart will do the opposite, it will be a ‘Gulliver’s view’ with real size object looking like toys (your ‘model head’ becomes larger – e.g. with cameras 1m apart, your garden will look like a bonsai in a pot).

    To conclude, what we whave here is for me a ‘2D footage with a 3D touch’. What I cannot understand is why on earth is it so pricey, with all those limitations?! I’ve experimented with two cheap cameras hooked together and got a nice 3d results – true, it was not HD, but…it costed me less than 100 quid!
    Splitting images side-by-side? Has been around for a while, check out Loreo products, not a big deal.
    A nice ‘first’ though, I’ll buy one, out of curiosity, when they come down to less than £200 – I’ll give it a year or two :-)

Leave a Comment