You cannot have all ....
Lumix3D1 ... very expensive .... aaaaand nooooo lenticular display .... SHAME!
Movie only side-by-side :-( Best 3" lenticular displays: FujiW3, SonyTD10, LG P920
Both Fuji W3 and Sony TD10 have REAL 3D ! Not side-by-side.
With Lumix3D1 side-by-side you lose 50%, if you use passive TV, then you lose additional 50%. You get only 960x540 , 25% of 1920x1080, huhuhuhuhuhu.
Many people cry/cry/cry if lens distance is only 1cm - 3cm ... Fuji W3 has 7cm ... now other people are crying ... lens distance = human eye distance!
All that you have written sounds correct : )) The thing is, when you examine the facts, all is not what it may seem to be, apart from the one fact that there is no lenticular display. Can't argue with that and this is probably a real mistake that Panasonic have made if they are hoping that the 3D-1 will sell well to the general public
But I will return to this point when I have answered your other points.
I own a Fujifilm W3 and I will continue to use it and because I have both the W3 and the 3D1 cameras, I can report that your point regarding the quality of the 2 X full size w3 (AVI ) video being better than the Panasonic's SBS AVCHD is not correct. The 3D-1's video is far and away superior to that of the W3's video. It is better from the point of view of definition, with its new sensors and new video engine, of ease of editing, and of much much better use of memory, using far less of the SD card.
Although the (much) higher priced camcorders do have the potential for full 100% Bluray quality video recording, they also require a powerful ( therefore expensive ) computer to edit the video and I'm not even sure if there is a 3D MVC editor on the market at anything like the reasonable cost of the 3D Magix 17 or 18 editors.
The 3D-1's AVCHD 50% SBS format can be editied with ease on my i5 laptop using Magix, and can then be burned to DVD as a 3D HD M2TS video file to give a high quality image on screen, comparable to TV broadcast 3D from SKY.
In the future no doubt full 3D Bluray MVC will become more price friendly, but at present it is very expensive , requiring serious processing power to edit, a much more expensive 3D camcorder lke the Sony and JVC models you mentioned, and ( I believe ) a 2X (or faster) BDROM drive to burn the 3D video.
I'm not sure what you mean by .....
Many people cry/cry/cry if lens distance is only 1cm - 3cm ... Fuji W3 has 7cm ... now other people are crying ... lens distance = human eye distance!
Cameras do not have human eyes, camera lenses do a different job from eyes.
Eyes converge and focus at the same point, camera lenses are parallel. Camera lenses may be variable focal lenses, human eyes have one focal length. Humans don't have wide-angle or telephoto lenses. The image produced by a camera may be viewed on a small screen, like the camera's LCD display or a large TV screen or much larger cinema screen, each requiring a different io to get best results. Viewing on screen requires the viewer to focus and converge at different points ( not one the same point as happens in real life ) so there is a limit to the depth that a viewer can comfortably handle.
Panasonic ( like Sony and JVC ) have wisely settled on a ( approx ) 30mm io to get good 3D that appears realistic on a regular 3D TV taking account of the fact that home movies by and large are taken to record action in the 3ft to 25ft range.
Not only does this 30mm stereobase allow for good depth at this range but it also allows for backgrounds to be in shot as well. A 65mm ( human eye distance ) io is too wide to allow this and viewing is very uncomfortable. The wider still W3's 75mm io can be great for relatively small 3D images but care is still needed to record images that are not uncomfortable to view.
On a TV screen the hyper 75mm io images also appear 'smaller scale' than real life and it is very difficult to use the camera as a video camera without producing very difficult to view 3D.
Finally, to return to the lack of lenticular display....
Panasonic have probaably made a big mistake not providing a 3D display as any newcomer to 3D is firstly very impressed with the 3D image they see on the camera's screen, even on a poor barrier screen like that of the Sony Bloggie 3D, and totally amazed by the 3D they see on the Fujifilm's excellent lenticular display. I am sure that this will cost Panasonic lots of sales.
However for a keen 3D amateur, the 2D screen has its good points. LCD displays are very difficult to view outdoors ( impossible on a sunny day ) and a viewfinder loupe can be of real benefit. The 3D-1 's screen can be viewed through a loupe, magnified, and clearly viewed because it is 2D.
With experience it is easily possible to judge what the 3D will look like when you finally return home to view the video or stills on a full size screen.
Aside from it's being an excellent pocketable 3D camera and 3D camcorder it has a very useful 2D night shot trick up its sleeve as well and it can simultaneously take wide-angle plus telephoto shots or take independent 2D stills plus 2D video and it has excellent stereo audio recording and superb optical image stabilisation.
Man, this 3D-1 is cheap, cheap, cheap
