3D Vision Blog

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

3D Vision Blog header image 2

Panasonic Lumix DMC-3D1 3D Camera is Now Available

February 5th, 2012 · 9 Comments · Shooting in 3D

Panasonic Lumix DMC-3D1 3D camera is what is considered as the first actual alternative in the form of a portable digital camera of the very popular among 3D users Fujifilm Real 3D W1/W3 compact digital cameras is now available on the market and you can get it for $499 USD. The Lumix DMC-3D1 camera comes equipped with dual 12-megapixel sensors capable of capturing stereo 3D photos with a maximum resolution of 3264×2448 (8 Megapixels with 4:3 aspect) or 3264×1840 (6 Megapixels with 16:9 aspect ratio) as well as 3D video with Full HD 1920×1080 resolution (Side by Side with half horizontal resolution, 60i for the NTSC model and 50i for the PAL model). The camera also comes with 4x optical zoom, optical stabilization system, 3.5-inch touchscreen display that is unfortunately not autostereoscopic 3D capable, but there is a HDMI 1.4 output for direct connection to a 3D-capable display.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-3D1 3D camera’s interaxial distance should be very close to 3 centimeters or around 1.2 inches based on the officially announced camera size and the photos of the device, but the exact distance between the two lenses of the camera still hasn’t been officially announced. This is about half of the interaxial distance that the Fujifilm 3D cameras have, meaning that the Panasonic’s product should be more suitable for closer photography in 3D mode. The fact that the Lumix DMC-3D1 does not feature an autostereoscopic 3D display that can be used for direct previewing of the images and video you’ve shot in 3D mode is a serious drawback in the useability of the device in stereo 3D mode as well. If you were so eager to get one of these and try it out, you are welcome to confirm the exact interaxial distance as well as to share your feedback from the product and even some sample 3D photos and 3D videos you have recorded…

The Panasonic Lumix DMC-3D1 3D Still and Video Camera is now available for purchase….

Tags: ········

9 responses so far ↓

  • 1 StarKnight // Feb 5, 2012 at 14:11

    According to those specifications my Fujifilm W3 still remains the best 3D camera on the market so far :-D

  • 2 Max // Feb 5, 2012 at 17:46

    Just buyed the W3 yesterday ;-)

  • 3 Domon Fujiyama // Feb 6, 2012 at 07:32

    Looking at sample photos (mpo) on the Lumix DMC-3D1 site, white balance and exposure of the left and right do not seem to have been synchronized.


  • 4 jesse kleitman // Feb 6, 2012 at 11:15

    No autostereoscopic display? And such a small distance between the lenses? This is NOT a competitor to the W3. It’s a copycat.

    The autostereoscopic display accompanied by the easy, manual parallax adjustment on the W3 are indespensible when taking 3d photographs.

    With no on camera autostereoscopic display one might as well purchase a loreo stereoscopic lens for a dslr or use two inexpensive snap and shoots on a DIY rig.

    For a camera to be better than the w3 it must have the 3d features the w3 has AND any of these features:

    manual exposure control dials for iso, fstop and exposure time.
    greater range of parallax.
    macro capability.
    Have an option to provide 4 images for superior lenticular prints (the one I had fuji do is abyssmal – the image was far superior on screen).
    Be superior in low light.
    a wide range of in camera effects.

    Touchscreen is great on a tablet but on a camera it’s just stupid.

  • 5 Bloody // Feb 6, 2012 at 11:29

    It seems that Panasonic has removed the sample images from their website… I’ve read that they were actually taken with a Fuji W1 camera according to their EXIF data.

  • 6 Max // Feb 6, 2012 at 12:15


  • 7 Dave G. // Feb 6, 2012 at 23:08

    I had a Fujifilm W1 for a long time and sold it because of the frustratingly bad image quality. Even for a point-and-shoot in 2009 it was bad. The W3, which I have rented, made a slight improvement but it was still far from acceptable. Part of this resulted from the poor sensors used, but also from distortion due to the pixel inflation.

    In 2012 if you spend $325 for a point-and-shoot camera you can find models that have excellent image quality. In fact, they can take professional-looking shots with ample lighting and low ISO.

    So I have been without a compact 3D camera for some time (I do have a rather bulky dual-dSLR rig).

    I’m looking forward to the Panasonic 3D1 in hopes that it won’t be crippled by this defect. I will not miss the Fuji’s autostereoscopic display. Although it was often handy for previews of images, no small screen display can give the viewer the proper “immersive” effect. A 24″ computer monitor really is the smallest display for good 3D viewing (one needs to maximize both field-of-view and resolution). And what Fuji called “parallax” adjustment (actually, convergence) should be done with Stereo Photo Maker during editing, not with an in-camera function.

    The small stereo base (the distance between the lenses) of the 3D1 is actually an advantage in many, and perhaps most common applications. In fact, I’d say that I was hampered by the W1/W3’s larger stereo base for taking close-up shots (portraits or individual people, small objects or food). The idea of an ideal stereo base is simply a myth, different situations call for different stereo bases. Many would be surprised to know that the Hollywood guys are often down around 0.5″ stereo base for much of their film work. The 3D1 would mostly suffer in landscape shots, although even this can be mitigated by proper composition (including appropriate foreground objects).

    My main gripe swith the 3D1 are:

    1. It does not allow manual exposure or exposure bracketing in 3D. There is no reason not to include this feature on any camera, as it costs Panasonic nothing, and especially in such an expensive camera it is embarrassing. Although it should be noted that the W3’s manual exposure settings could only be changed by a clunky procedure of going through a sub-menu.

    2. No raw file capability. Again, this costs nothing for a camera manufacturer to include (although it slows down the rate at which it can write individual files to the card). Being limited to JPEGs is absolutely crippling.

    3. Flash and connectivity. The flash should not be in the center, between the lenses. It should have been on one side or the other, and ideally they would have included a flash port so that we could use an off-camera flash. It also would be nice if it had a shutter release port or a USB function for external shutter release.

    I don’t mind touchscreen interfaces, per se, although they should be supplemented by at least a few physical buttons.

  • 8 kumquatsrus // Feb 6, 2012 at 23:45

    can we expect a review up on this site in the near future of this camera?

  • 9 markr041 // Apr 4, 2012 at 20:59

    For a user review, discussion, and picture and video samples, go to:


Leave a Comment