New Canon HD camera?

[tim_brown]

Anyone see this? https://www.bi-travel.com/expo2005/seminar.do

[Barry_Green]

Link doesn't work.

[tim_brown]

Hmmmmm.... that's interesting. Earlier today it showed a schedule of events for Sept. 15th outlining the features of a "Professional" camcorder along with demonstrations on connectivity with Avid and Apple.

Leak or conspiracy.... hmmmm.

[Sirius_Doggy]

bi-travel.com? Doesn't sound like anything official from Canon.

[TimurCivan]

hey if the canon has 680,000 pixels per ccd, is that 720P resolution? imean maybe the reason why it costs so much is the "possibly maybe HD ready chips?" like they just re relase it with the propper microchips for proccesing HD. THIS IS SPECULATION/A QUESTION- I have no idea what canon is doing. no rumors will be spread from this.

[Digigenic]

WELL...HERE'S SOMETHING... (http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/index.php?showtopic=8622)

[mikkowilson]

Hmm.. I'd better pay Canon a vist at IBC next week and ask some questions...

- Mikko

[Gary_McClurg]

There's nothing there that link doesn't work, Jacob.

Do you know what it said or didn't say?

[Digigenic]

Holy crap!
Okay, that message has already been moved once, so maybe it was moved again.
Another forum with a dedicated thread similar to this one has been following this legitimate leak pretty closely.
Essentially, there were no details officially released on the camera specs, but a date had been specified, "September 15th". That is when this supposed wundercam that "will not disappoint" will be announced and displayed to the public at the Jacob Javits Center in New York.

[Gary_McClurg]

Just kidding here, Jacob.

But just change your last name to Javits and say hey I want to know what's going on at my center on the 15th.

[Barry_Green]

Interesting. "Will not disappoint" -- does that mean it won't use HDV? 'Cause so far HDV's been pretty disappointing. Then again, someone here posted that Canon sent him a message saying they "don't have access to the technology" (referring to HDV) so maybe they're actually pursuing a different HD system?

If it's an XL2 with HDV, JVC's already got a head start on that.

Now, if it's 1080/24p with removable lenses and a non-HDV recording system... THAT would be interesting!

[mmm]

Grrrr..... I hate waiting for cameras... I hope it's good... but then again, it'll tempt me into waiting....even longer!

[Digigenic]

Just kidding here, Jacob.

But just change your last name to Javits and say hey I want to know what's going on at my center on the 15th.

Well...I have called the Jacob Javitz Center just to get a listing of upcoming events at the center, and there most certainly is a "Canon Expo" that is scheduled for the 14th-16th in their listing.
So, it appears as though we'll see some pretty intense activity in the film and video forums for the next two weeks...
I'll get the beer, who's got the popcorn?

[Barry_Green]

The thing with Canon is, if they've got something, you won't have to wait for it. Canon usually delivers very, very shortly after announcing something. They don't sell to broadcasters so they don't go through the whole NAB pre-announce phase.

So if Canon's got something fancy coming out... hmmm... wonder if it's worth it to get bumped down on the HD100 waiting list a few notches...

Man, why didn't they have their expo next week? Between a new camera announcement, the US Open, and "Spamalot", that'd pretty much justify a trip to New York!

[Shaw]

Looks like Canon might piss off some XL2 owners...

[Digigenic]

Looks like Canon might piss off some XL2 owners...
I don't think this will even be considered a successor to the XL line. I do recall them referring to the camera as "revolutionary", which would imply this camera isn't an evolution of the XL or any other platform. It sounds like it will be an entirely different beast.

[Shaw]

Great point! Dang.. hate waiting!

[bikefilms]

I have heard from a reliable source at a video magazine, that Canon will be doing and HDV GL and an HD XL camera. Apparently they've "had the technology" for a while, and have been holding back to play the market.

I'll post more if I get it.

-a

[skart82]

That sound quite logical to me,... the gl2 is now almost 4 years old and Canon is part of the HDV consortium. If they come up with a HD(not hdv) XL... i hope for the people who got the Xl2 that it s in a different price range(i.e. quite more expensive) otherwise, yes... the xl2 owners will be pissed...

Thing (almost) sure,...it would be HD in a way or another... i can hardly imagine a SD camera at that point.

[bjingbar]

I think it may be a HD camera combined with stills camera

[Digigenic]

Is it possible to have HDV in 4:4:4 and still have a manageable output rate below that of Panasonic's HD codec?

[Robert_Niemann]

https://www.bi-travel.com/expo2005/home.do.

[mmm]

Is it possible to have HDV in 4:4:4 and still have a manageable output rate below that of Panasonic's HD codec?

I guess that it would be possible, although unlikely to happen. Considering 1080i 4:2:0 HDV is 25Mbit/s, I suppose you could record the equivalent 4:4:4 at 50Mbit/s. Is it possible to use anything but 4:2:0 with MPEG 2 though, or would a different codec be needed?

I would like to see a 40-50Mbit/s 1080i/p 4:2:2 interframe codec. That would look great I reckon, but would take some processing power!

[Digigenic]

...I would like to see a 40-50Mbit/s 1080i/p 4:2:2 interframe codec. That would look great I reckon, but would take some processing power!
Perhaps Digic III processing power...? :laugh:

[Glenn_Gipson]

I could be wrong, but I'm skeptical. Canon has always been the last one up to bat. I'm thinking they wont have an HD camera on the market for another 2 years. I hope I'm wrong though.

[Jack_Felis]

One theory going on at DVInfo.net was an HDV GL3-type camera along with a more expensive HD XL-type camera. That'd be neat marketing. Though, I wonder if it will live up to its promise on launch or fumble like the JVC HD100U is doing right now (though it is a great camera that just needs the bugs ironed out). Quite ballsy to release this information now just as the HVX200 launch is coming up (ie. footage, press, whole schpeal).

[Barry_Green]

Is it possible to use anything but 4:2:0 with MPEG 2 though, or would a different codec be needed?
MPEG-2 has many profiles; there are 4:2:2 profiles that could be used. But not in HDV. HDV is fixed at 4:2:0.

I would like to see a 40-50Mbit/s 1080i/p 4:2:2 interframe codec. That would look great I reckon, but would take some processing power!
JVC has announced plans to produce exactly that (and it'll be 1920x1080 also; no 1440x1080 subsampling). And the camera shooting it will be 2/3", and CMOS on top of that. But it'll be $28,000 without the lens, so not exactly prosumer.

Sony's XDCAM HD is due to be announced at IBC as well; I think the only thing we know about it so far is the bitrate (36mbps); if it is also 4:2:2, that'd be interesting.

Both systems are tapeless; XDCAM records to blu-ray discs and JVC's will record directly to hard disk.

[Digigenic]

One theory going on at DVInfo.net was an HDV GL3-type camera along with a more expensive HD XL-type camera. That'd be neat marketing. Though, I wonder if it will live up to its promise on launch or fumble like the JVC HD100U is doing right now (though it is a great camera that just needs the bugs ironed out). Quite ballsy to release this information now just as the HVX200 launch is coming up (ie. footage, press, whole schpeal).
Well, the theory of there being an "HDV GL3" and "HD XL3" certainly has a nice ring to it, and the theory itself has been circulating on many forums for quite some time. Buuuuut, when you look at each new HD/HDV offering coming from Sony, Panasonic, and JVC, they clearly are not successors to any of their previous DV platforms. All of their DV models coexist with their HD models, i.e. VX and FX, DVX and HVX. Now, I'm not saying Canon will follow in the footsteps of the other three, but it just seems like too big of a leap to make within one model line, it's an entirely different set of standards that apply. I'll reiterate that this camera has been referred to as "revolutionary", and that wording alone, albeit is only wording and unreliable at that, reinforces the implication that this camera will not be an evolution to previous generation DV model(s).
No doubt, Canon does need a neat marketing strategy to stand out in the soon to be diamond studded sea of prosumer HD/HDV models produced by the other three.
They know what they need to offer, will they actually do it?

[Nate Weaver]

...or fumble like the JVC HD100U is doing right now (though it is a great camera that just needs the bugs ironed out).

Both the XL-1 and VX2000 had issues upon launch that eventually were taken care of. In hindsight they might be called "fumbles", but people at least here never mention them anymore. Effectively forgotten.

The JVC is going to sell like hotcakes, just based on it's functionality and spec alone.

[Tzedekh]

MPEG-2 has many profiles; there are 4:2:2 profiles that could be used. But not in HDV. HDV is fixed at 4:2:0.

JVC has announced plans to produce exactly that (and it'll be 1920x1080 also; no 1440x1080 subsampling). . . . Sony's XDCAM HD . . . bitrate (36mbps) . . . Both systems are tapeless . . .Therefore neither camera is HDV (which is tape-based and has 19- and 25-Mbps data rates). Very interesting -- it means divergence from HDV, at the HD mid-range, into splintered, proprietary MPEG-2 formats. I guess that Canon could offer yet another format, although Digigenic's question about 4:4:4 sampling at sub-DVCPro-HD data rates is probably (and unfortunately) answerable in the negative for MPEG-2. MPEG-4 is more efficient, but I doubt that HD H.264 acquisition will be implemented in prosumer or mid-range pro cameras for at least a few years.

[mmm]

Right, this is what I hope for from Canon, just been thinking about it in the shower:

• Improved XL form-factor (like the HD100 maybe :) )
• Decent manual lens, with OIS. Canon loves OIS, and does it well!
• Mini DV deck for DV stream or low bitrate HDV in 1080i/p (p implemented as on DVX/HVX, not Cineframe or "frame mode") & 720p. I am happy with 25fps on this.
• Attachable "upgrade" hard drive for high bitrate interframe at ~40Mbit/s (4:2:2). This would be a $500 option for about 60GB, giving ~3hours record time. Controller is built into camera, so any firewire/USB2 drive can be used if there is a power source.
• HD CRT viewfinder and 3.5" HD LCD. Maybe the viewfinder would need to be LCD colour, depending on if a focus assist function was needed.
• Consumer battery power, with pro options.
• Decent uncompressed dual XLR audio with P48V
• A good compromise of dynamic range/resolution on chip set.
• Complete manual control of picture.

Most of those are software issue = cheap to include per unit.
Hard drive wouldn't need to be super fast, as my 3rd Gen iPod can handle 40Mbit/s. It would need a decent buffer though- ~500MB.

I love idle speculation

[Tzedekh]

Right, this is what I hope for from Canon, just been thinking about it in the shower:

• Attachable "upgrade" hard drive for high bitrate interframe at ~40Mbit/s (4:2:2).

A higher bit rate is a tough one. JVC won't make that available for a while, and it'll be on a significantly more expensive model, and Sony's forthcoming HD XD-CAM offering is also bound to be more than $20K.

If you're going for higher bit rates, how about an option for recordable 10-bit 4:4:4 output? I can only imagine how big that data stream would be.

[mmm]

But recording at a higher data rate should make the camera no more expensive to manufacture. For Canon, there is also no concern about overlaping with higher models.

A portable hard drive could easily achieve 50 Mbit/s, and once solid state prices drop in a year or three, someone could produce a solid state drive that sat in the same cradle as the hard disk. It would have to clip on the back, like an external battery does.

You could achieve the same compression/pixel/second as ProHD but using 4:2:2 and 1080p with uncompressed audio for 50Mb/s ish using MPEG2 if my calculations are correct.

[Angrius]

:thumbsup: HERE IS THE PASSWORD TO GET INTO THE SITE:

https://www.bi-travel.com/expo2005/findProgram.do
password: ExpoSeminars

have fun.

[Shaw]

Been doing some hacking eh?

Not much special behind there unfortunately :(

[mr._guiyotinne]

Mmm you got the point!

Pana has demonstrated that you don´t need a hell lot of money to get DVCpro50 or even 1080i(p) just by getting rid of the heads and using P2. ProHD 4:2:2 as you said wouldn´t have to be the reason to increase the price of the camera (they could do it even on a palm camera and hard disk or flash memory, so...).

These cameras (JVC and Sony) will be orientated to big proffesionals that can afford those prices and half inch CCDs, but they could do them "cheapo" 1/3 to be competitive with panny and give us what we want. Will they do it? we´ll see it, but probably after the big toys. Panasonic is breaking some rules and will be rewarded because of it.

And let´s see if Canon follow them.

[Tzedekh]

But recording at a higher data rate should make the camera no more expensive to manufacture. For Canon, there is also no concern about overlaping with higher models.I don't think the worry is feasibility or cost. The problem is compatibility. Sony, JVC, and (I think) Canon formed the HDV consortium to promote standards, even if each wishes to dominate its respective format. But there has to be some widely accepted standards or else there won't be third-party support (Adobe, Avid, Apple, etc). Panasonic could go it alone because it already had DVCPro HD in place. And, yes, JVC and Sony have to consider that offering too many HD formats may prove confusing to the end user.

[mmm]

Everyone already seems to be using such different formats, that it hardly seems to matter anymore. Sony and JVC's ideas of HDV are pretty incompatible - one 19 Mbit/s 720p, the other 1080i @ 25Mbit/s. Then Pany's got another one with a load of different DVCPRO formats on the HVX.

[Tibby]

If it is a GL3 HDV camera I wonder what the possibility would be that it would have a 24p feature?

[Barry_Green]

Well, looking through that agenda, it doesn't lead one to have confidence that any new product is due to be released, does it? Certainly nothing on that agenda implies that any of the seminars is about introducing a new product...

[Digigenic]

The information I initially referred to was from an interview, which I believe originated in another forum and was put on the cinematography.com forums and had been removed twice. I was linked there through the DVi.net forum administrator who'd reposted the link after the first one had been removed. Within the same thread, located in DVi's area 51, they also had the same link/password to the original Canon Expo doc that Brian posted in this thread, which was also deactivated at one point and time. I know other people here and on DVi saw the same information within the interview, does anyone remember the name of the person that was being quoted as the tester of the camera?

[Tzedekh]

Everyone already seems to be using such different formats, that it hardly seems to matter anymore. Sony and JVC's ideas of HDV are pretty incompatible - one 19 Mbit/s 720p, the other 1080i @ 25Mbit/s. Then Pany's got another one with a load of different DVCPRO formats on the HVX.I think it would matter very much. The HDV spec comprises only the two formats you cited, and look how long it's taken for them to be widely supported by the video-editing software companies. As to the DVCPro formats, they're already mature (how long has Varicam been around?). It's the new, "splinter" formats that I'd be worried about, especially if nothing much distinguishes one from another. With any luck, one or two will stand out and the (hopefully) inferior ones will disappear.

[robroysyd]

Does anyone here understand anything about optics?
Using 1/3" CCDs to achieve 1000 lines res is beyond the optical limits at any aperture smaller than about f4, the iris causes diffraction. Doesn't matter how good the glass is or how lossless the encoding is, there's nothing that can be done about it, apart from adding enough ND filtering to keep the iris open.
JVC probably knew this when they limited themselves to 720, if only they'd used a decent lens but then the camera would've hit > $20K.
I've no doubt someone in one companies marketing department will convince engineering to ignore the laws of physics so they can boast about their new HD camera that does 4.4.4 to a HDD or a bank of P2 cards. There seems to be no shortage os suckers that'll buy the thing just for the boasting rights.

just in case anyone thinks I'm blowing smoke out my butt:
http://www.tvtechnology.com/features/Masked-Engineer/f_mario_orazio-08.17.05.shtml

[Barry_Green]

We know all about that. We've discussed it before. Sony even acknowledges it in their camera, mentioning diffraction in the manual and offering a menu option that keeps the iris from going smaller than f/5.6 in autoexposure.

So? So it means we may need to use ND filters to keep the iris in range. It means we can go another stop or two deeper in 720p vs. 1080p. I think a lot of us would consider that a small price to pay, to cut the entry point for 1080/24p footage from $100,000 down to $6,000.

Yes, people who don't know what they're doing are going to be surprised when their footage is soft. My question is: what are those people doing shooting high-def anyway?

[Barry_Green]

Furthermore, there are people out there shooting CineFrame 25 on their Sony Z1s to try to emulate a "film look", even though it means they're giving away half their potential vertical resolution. They're shooting "high def" but settling for vertical resolution that's no higher than today's PAL XL2 or DVX. The losses from using CineFrame 25 are a whole lot more severe than the losses from diffraction would be, yet those shooters are willingly choosing it. Voluntarily.

Boggles the mind.

Well, diffraction will also limit horizontal resolution, so it's not quite the same thing, but ... it's the same thing...

[mezelf27]

Diffraction a f4? That seems quite weird... It still is microscopic. I'm sorry, I am a master in Physics (no joke), but someone needs to explain to me how can an iris of f4 cause diffraction?

a 1/3 inch lens -> about 8.5 mm of diameter. End of story. There's no edges that are as close as the general order of ther wavelength of the light? With a roster, okay, buet there isn't one.....

[mezelf27]

Actually, I would be more concerned with using an ND filter for diffraction. After all, the pattern used to darken it (if it's polaroid) could cause diffraction.

[MattDavis]

Diffraction a f4? That seems quite weird...

I think f4's the sweet spot, but I've definately got diffraction at f8 on a Z1.

Ob. on-topic quote:

My colleagues and I were gassing on about camcorders last Friday, and the consensus was that Canon, if it had plans for an XL3 and knowing JVC were doing something special, would hold out to see if the JVC was top banana or bit of a lemon. Former: wait and see. Latter: Go for it.

Such beer fuelled conjecture assumed a year's turnaround, so seeing XL3 at NAB 2006.

But September 15th? This flurry of activity so close to IBC in Europe, but focused on a NY event, is interesting. IBC isn't purely a 'Broadcast' show, so even if Canon don't push this device as broadcast, such a camera would be a natural launch at IBC. I'll prod them gently about this on Friday.

[mmm]

I hope Canon show their cards, or at least tell us what they are planning...

Grill them hard Matt! Use of force is permitted.

[Jack_Felis]

What would you guys do if it was a $20,000 dollar camera? Canon's first entry into a pro line?

[mmm]

Not buy it...

[Tzedekh]

What would you guys do if it was a $20,000 dollar camera? Canon's first entry into a pro line?That would be a risky move for Canon. They'd have to deliver one compelling camera! To do that, they should announce, say, three HD cameras: a GL type at about $2,500-$3,000, an XL type at $6,000-$10,000, and a "pro" model at $20,000; they might even consider introducing a $1,500 palmcorder. By unveiling a spectrum of HD camcorders, they could show that they have a vision (or at least a plan), and not just a one-off. Additionally, by offering differing feature sets at different price points, they could possibly justify a $20,000 camera rather than selling it in a vacuum ("But it's worth 20 grand!" "Compared to what?")

[Digigenic]

I know other people here and on DVi saw the same information within the interview, does anyone remember the name of the person that was being quoted as the tester of the camera?
The name is Neil Moreno, of blizzard productions (http://www.blizzardproductions.com). A seasoned professional who's accumulated a respectable list of credits under his belt.
Interestingly enough, the topic resurfaced at DVinfo as well, with the name recirculating, people are trying to find out from Mr. Moreno himself if he has any knowledge of such a camera's existence.
:grin: :lipsrseal

[lars steenhoff]

here some pictures from IBC
it looks a bit like xl2 only black and hvd


http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/DSC_4410.JPG
http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/DSC_4342.JPG
http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/DSC_4408.JPG

[skart82]

damm !...i hope there s a big price difference between this "xl2 HDV" and the xl2...or i m really sorry for the xl2 user...

[bjingbar]

Does anyone have specs for the new camera

[mr._guiyotinne]

HDV and infinite rings... i hope they have another big hidden surprise.

[Gary_McClurg]

I was told by a guy at a camera rental house in hollywood that rents 35mm and 16mm, along with HD. He said that the camera was coming.

That Canon was going to be aggressive and that the camera will have a lot that the others don't have.

He said he couldn't say more until next week.

But since I've rented a 35mm package and a super 16mm package from him before. I was hoping that he's pretty reliable.

Now I see the pictures.

We'll see because it'll be the pictures in the end that'll determine the best camera if you know what I mean.

[Digigenic]

oh...so...it's...HDV... :huh:
Fingers are still crossed for something else on the 15th damn it!
decoy decoy decoy

[mmm]

hmmm... looks like they spray painted an XL2 black.

Please say they have improved things under the skin - better manual focus for one.

if it is HDV, is it likely to be 25 Mb/s 1080i/p and 19Mb/s 720p or can the standard be higher than that?

[Zig_Zigman]

And that atrocious Canon Form factor....well it'll probably be better than the jvc at least...

[Barry_Green]

if it is HDV, is it likely to be 25 Mb/s 1080i/p and 19Mb/s 720p or can the standard be higher than that?
That's what HDV is. So no, it cannot be higher than that.

The only thing they could do to really advance the state of HDV would be to implement 1080/24p within the 1080/60i data stream. Now THAT would make it an interesting camera!

[Digigenic]

hmmm... looks like they spray painted an XL2 black.
:grin: I was gonna say, it reminds me of how car manufacturers cloak all of their prototype test cars in black to avoid anyone getting a look at what exactly it possesses in terms of aerodynamics etc., it's just funny how Canon decides to do this now on what's obviously an XL body. It would be interesting if they retain the black finish though.
...if it is HDV, is it likely to be 25 Mb/s 1080i/p and 19Mb/s 720p or can the standard be higher than that?
The probability of improving upon the HDV standard, which isn't so standard anymore, is entirely likely. However, I can't see them improving upon it without increasing the data rate, which would then necessitate them dropping tape and using something that supports higher capacities.

[mmm]

The only thing they could do to really advance the state of HDV would be to implement 1080/24p within the 1080/60i data stream. Now THAT would make it an interesting camera!

Is that because it would compress the data better without interlace? Is it possible to run tests on HDV simulating 24p in the 1080i stream?

[Ralph Oshiro]

I think f4's the sweet spot, but I've definately got diffraction at f8 on a Z1.I was taught that the "sweet spot" of a given lens is typically about one stop under wide open. As the aperture is reduced (or numerically "increased") it loses its acutance at an increasing rate.

[Tzedekh]

That's what HDV is. So no, it cannot be higher than that.

The only thing they could do to really advance the state of HDV would be to implement 1080/24p within the 1080/60i data stream. Now THAT would make it an interesting camera!You're probably right about the data rate, but then everyone thought 24p wasn't part of the HDV spec, and disk-based recording supposedly isn't part of the spec either, yet both are supported by the HD100, JVC's first "ProHD" camcorder. Also didn't JVC announce at NAB that it had plans for higher-frame-rate (and therefore possibly higher-data-rate) models down the road? Maybe Canon is scooping JVC. Sadly, because it appears to have the same form factor as the XL2, the Canon HDV cam probably has third-inch sensors, rather than half-inch. That's unfortunate. I would have hoped that Canon would have absorbed the cost of a larger sensor until it could produce them more economically. Now that would have been amazing. Achieving a 24p frame rate as part of the 60i stream has been done; doing it with HDV is something Canon should have figure out a yearor two ago. And I wish it had gotten rid of that butt-ugly shape.

[Digigenic]

Will we not get official specs on the XL-style Canon HDV until the 15th?
Did they at least have an official name for it? I mean, it does look like it would be appropriately titled the XL3 HDV camera, but does anyone know for sure?

[author]

here some pictures from IBC
it looks a bit like xl2 only black and hvd


Oh, MY! Come to papa, baby!

;-)

I anxiously await specs.

--Ralph

[Digigenic]

Well, it appears that there's a fair bit of skepticism surrounding the legitimacy of the Canon HDV cam photos submitted here this afternoon.
The DVinfo forum members are meticulously observing the images and reviewing the data files. I'd say there's a pretty good chance that their suspicions are validated, and that we discover there is in fact no HD/HDV camera from Canon after all...yet.

I personally couldn't tell if the images were Photoshopped or not, but I will agree with the assertion that it does seem a bit strange we have only one report to rely on throughout the entire day. Nobody else has covered it. Is it because it's not worth it to cover a nameless camera without any specs, and/or is it because everybody within the loop knows an even bigger announcement is coming on the 15th?

If proven to be a hoax, I know this wouldn't be the first time, and it certainly won't be the last time, but it will probably be one of the funniest times, at least for me. Considering I've posted these images on other forums, attempting to spread the news... And now, I'll probably have to go back and remove those photos and explain how much of an idiot I am for assisting in the spread of HDV propaganda poo :(

Lars, care to come to your defense? Is there something you're not telling us? Or are we all just overreacting?

[Barry_Green]

Is that because it would compress the data better without interlace? Is it possible to run tests on HDV simulating 24p in the 1080i stream?
No, it's that it would be something that isn't currently offered.

The HDV "spec" is set in stone -- if a camera's going to carry the "HDV" label, it's got to abide by the September 2003 spec. That means 1080/60i at 4:2:0, 15-GOP and 25 megabits, or 720 at 25p, 30p, 50p or 60p, at 4:2:0, 6-GOP and 19 megabits. And both using two tracks of MPEG-1 Layer II compressed audio. That's it. Anything outside those specs cannot, by definition, be HDV.

And the Canon pic said "HDV", so that means it would use one (or both) of the recording systems as outlined above.

Now, there's a little wiggle room, as long as you stay perfectly compliant: JVC was able to implement 24P because they didn't actually make a 24P stream (which would have been incompatible with HDV). They instead implement 24P as carried within a 60P stream (and 720/60P is a valid HDV format).

I'm saying Canon could, theoretically, implement 1080/24p if they just did the same thing to 1080/60i as Panasonic did to DV: carry the 24P within a 60i stream. That's about the only thing that I can think of that would constitute a big step forward for the format, while keeping it compatible with the format (and thus earning it the right to wear the "HDV" badge).

Actually, Canon could go one better and make it dual-format; maybe they could make it 1080 and 720 (a la HVX). That would be interesting, as it would make the Canon the very first "HDV" product that actually plays back both types of tapes.

Another option would be to be HDV compatible, but also make their own non-compatible format. That's what JVC plans to do with the GY-HD7000U; it'll shoot 720P HDV, but it'll also shoot a new 50-megabit 1920x1080x4:2:2 format (but only to hard disk). So that camera can wear an "HDV" badge, but it's more than HDV. But again, that involves creating their own format.

Regardless, we'll likely hear more about this Canon entry next week at the Canon Expo.

[Barry_Green]

but then everyone thought 24p wasn't part of the HDV spec
It isn't.
and disk-based recording supposedly isn't part of the spec either
It isn't.
yet both are supported by the HD100, JVC's first "ProHD" camcorder.
Yes, they are. But as I said in the memo above, 24P is *not* a new format; it's carried within an existing accepted HDV data stream (720/60p). And disk recording is not part of DV either, yet the FireStore works with DV cameras as well.

HDV is a defined system. It cannot be extended upon and still be HDV. They'd have to call it something else.
Also didn't JVC announce at NAB that it had plans for higher-frame-rate (and therefore possibly higher-data-rate) models down the road?
Yes, but they will not be HDV. They've already announced plans to make their own 1080i recording system, using higher specs and higher bitrates, and it will *not* be compatible with HDV.

It's like DVCPRO50. DVCPRO50 is an extension to the DV format, offering vastly superior pictures, double the color sampling, less compression and a higher bitrate. It is akin to DV in the same way you guys are speculating about new extensions to HDV... but DVCPRO50 is *not* DV. It's not compatible. No DV device would have a clue what to do with DVCPRO50 data. It's a new and completely incompatible format.

That's what any new extension to HDV would be: a new and completely incompatible format. Just like Sony's XDCAM HD system: they've announced a new 35-megabit MPEG-2 recording system for high-def. And it's not HDV, and it's not compatible with HDV. It's a new format. As it would have to be.

Let me put it this way: yes there will be new MPEG-2 formats, and there will be ones with higher bitrates and all that. But they will not be HDV. They will, necessarily, be new formats.

[AshG]

Sorry those pics are not legit... I mean come on people! That is an XL2 painted black with HDV written on it! Seriously, why would Canon release a camera WITH NO MARKINGS.... I cant believe how gullible people are... WOW!



ash =o)

[Barry_Green]

They haven't "released" anything yet. If it's legit at all, it's obviously there to let people know where Canon is headed. For months and months there's been speculation as to what Canon's high-def intent is; would they go HDV? Would they abandon HDV and go after some other format? Would they go after the consumer market with a GL3? Pretty much everyone discounted the idea that they'd go for an HDV XL3.

By showing this model (if that's indeed what they've done) they sure answered a lot of those questions.

I'll ask Mikko to please go to the Canon booth and verify this.

[mikkowilson]

I will check on this today.

- Mikko

[mmm]

Cheers for the HDV info Barry!

Is the HD100 a HDV camera though, because they refer to it as ProHD. Or is it that ProHD is just a sub-set of HDV. I feel a Venn Diagram coming on :)

[mikkowilson]

IT'S TRUE!

There IS a Canon HDV camera coming.. they will announce at the EXpo in new york in a few days time. That is ALL that they would say about it.
more in the "News from IBC" thread

- mikko

[Digigenic]

:thumbsup:

[mmm]

http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/DSC_4342.JPG
http://www.canon.com.hk/myContent/Product_Tab/DigitalCamcorder/Digitalcamcorder/XL2/En/images/1b.jpg

Weird... you would think that the "XL3" would be a completely new camera, maybe retaining a general XL form factor, like the upgrade of XL1 to XL2.

Maybe this will be an XL2s??

Look at the picture, the only difference I can see (apart from colour!) is the buttons around the lens release.

So, if this is the new camera, why does it look so very nearly the same?

If this is just an XL2 painted black, why is it different to an XL2? Surely you wouldn't bother to just change thoose buttons...?

Maybe Canon are just teasing us??? Does anyone know if their is a variant XL2 with those buttons above the lens release??

Any speculation?

[Digigenic]

Maybe this will be an XL2s??
If that is proven to be the case on the 15th, then Panasonic clearly has everyone pinned to the wall by their throats.
I do suspect their reasons for being so tight lipped are to truly shock and awe everybody on the 15th. It may not appear as though they've implemented new sensors or attached a true HD lens, but then again, that might just explain why all of those markings that would indicate such a transformation have been blacked out. All in all, this camera appears to have been sitting on Canon's shelf for some time, and it's just now being announced for release to cater to majority demand. If anything, it may use a high profile variation of HDV, like Pro HD, but other than that, it's impossible at this time for me to see what truly distinguishes this camera from what's currently being offered by the other guys.

[jochem]

Maybe it is true that this camera is a decoy of what is waiting around the corner. Obviously they aren't making any effort to blast everybody away at the IBC, so they will do that soon. Otherwise this camera is giving too much away without any exposure.
However, if it's a decoy, they did a smart job. It isn't painted, the components actually look genuine. magnesium alloy, man. :beer:

[author]

IT'S TRUE!

There IS a Canon HDV camera coming.. they will announce at the EXpo in new york in a few days time. That is ALL that they would say about it.
more in the "News from IBC" thread

- mikko

Thanks, Mikko!!

--Ralph

[Gary_McClurg]

The best way to tease is just to show it.

Keep everyone guessing.

Smart move from Canon's marketing stand point.

Think about it how much guessing was going, was it real, was it fake, etc.

Might it come as quick as I hear other Canon releases not long after being shown?

[mmm]

Might it come as quick as I hear other Canon releases not long after being shown?

It could well be realeased before the HVX (if it is a new camera at all!) which could be quite a scoop over the HVX... well if the Canon is good anyway. I am so glad I didn't buy an XL2 in May.

[mr._guiyotinne]

4:1:1 or 4:2:0 Canon against 4:2:2 and speed ramps and DVCpro50.

For me there is no competition (HVX hands down winner). For the rest maybe everything will be about the lens they use (crazy rolling spinning rings of death). We´ll see.

[Tzedekh]

but then everyone thought 24p wasn't part of the HDV specIt isn't.But in "JVC Clarifies ProHD Announcement" (here (http://www.creativemac.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=32220)), Dave Walton, General Manager of Corporate Communications at JVC, says, "There has also been some confusion regarding the intent and features of the HDV format, in part due to information published since its announcement in 2003. Therefore, we would like to make you aware of these points: The 24p mode and LPCM (Linear quantization PCM recording) record/playback capability have been part of HDV format since it was established." From this I infer that 24p was indeed part of the original spec and not "We've figured out a way to add 24p to the 60p stream since the spec was published." That 24p is implemented as part of the 60p stream really means nothing -- that's how it's done in HDVPro HD, too.

[mmm]

For the rest maybe everything will be about the lens they use (crazy rolling spinning rings of death)

LOL

The rings of death would REALLY put me off. I have used an XL2 a little, and it is better than an XL1(s) which was TERRIBLE. Still leaves a lot to be desired though. My friend who owns one says he doesn't mine the XL2 lens now he is used to using it... I am not convinced though!

[mr._guiyotinne]

Neither me mmm! if just they change those CRSRofD for manuals like HVX, Then Pana would be in really really big trouble and everything would be about their compression methods. Will it happend? sorry, i don´t think so, but i would be glad to be wrong!

[Jack_Felis]

I'm starting to think that the spray painted XL2 is a joke and what Canon is really going to do is show their true HD solution on the 15th. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm right. But as with the HVX200 and JVC HD100U, we'll just have to see.

[mmm]

...But I want to know NOW!! :angry:

[tnle2]

I don't think it's a decoy. The buttons above the lens release are obviously new so it's not just an XL2 painted black as a teaser. I have feeling this is exactly what the camera will be. This is similar to when they released the 5D still camera. There was a leak of a photo of the camera and people said it was photoshopped but there were new buttons on the body and it turned out to be exactly like the leak. It makes sense in this case because it's a lot cheaper and quicker to get to market with an existing body and reworked electronics. Of course I hope it isn't so, but I'm keeping my hopes low.

[Barry_Green]

The 24p mode and LPCM (Linear quantization PCM recording) record/playback capability have been part of HDV format since it was established." From this I infer that 24p was indeed part of the original spec and not "We've figured out a way to add 24p to the 60p stream since the spec was published."
Y'know, I know he says that, but when you look at the evidence in cntext it doesn't make sense. If it was "always intended to be there", why don't their earlier cameras support playing it back? Why doesn't their earlier deck support it? Not just in recording, but in playing it back.

I guess th epoint is moot -- 720P HDV is whatever JVC says it is, because they're the only company that uses it, so they only have to make their gear compatible with itself (excepting the notable exception that their earlier gear can't play back the current 24p stuff).

But if you go by the official HDV format announcement, there is *no* mention of 24P and there's *no* mention of LPCM audio. Specifically it is spelled out that HDV includes 2 channels of MPEG-1 Layer II compressed audio, and 720p features frame rates of 25, 30, 50, and 60. That's what the official press release, signed by JVC, states. For them to claim that these other features were there from the beginning is contradictory and bizarre.

[Barry_Green]

... and let's clarify something else: the idea of 24P and LPCM audio are great improvements! They make HDV much, much, much more attractive. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, I'm saying it's a great thing -- the 24P HDV implementation is the best HDV implementation. And if they ever do add LPCM audio to the format, that'll be a bonus too.

I'm just saying that I can't understand how they can claim it was "always in the format" when the official statement of the format specifically doesn't mention either feature, and their first high-def gear specifically does not support either feature.

[Barry_Green]

Is the HD100 a HDV camera though, because they refer to it as ProHD. Or is it that ProHD is just a sub-set of HDV. I feel a Venn Diagram coming on :)
The HD100 *is* HDV. It bears the HDV badge, and everything it records is 100% compliant with the HDV standard. "ProHD", as implemented right now, is just a marketing badge; there is nothing about ProHD (as a format) that is any different than regular HDV. The extension to add 24p is completely compatible with HDV (but not compatible with their earlier cameras; but to be fair, their earlier cameras were not HDV, they pre-dated HDV).

ProHD is a tag similar to JVC's marketing of the DV500 and DV5000 cameras, which bore the marketing tag "ProfessionalDV". They claimed to have made a heavy-duty tape transport, and to have implemented locked audio, but the format recorded was in all ways regular DV and nothing more than regular DV. It's the same thing with ProHD; it may actually use better components (I don't know if they've even claimed that, just guessing) but the format it records is HDV. If it wasn't, it couldn't wear an "HDV" badge, and it does.

Where it gets confusing is with their announcement for ProHD XE, which would indeed be a different format, presumably a superset of HDV. But there is no ProHD XE gear available yet, so there's no reason to bring it into the discussion except to point out that perhaps that's where some of the confusion comes from.

[mmm]

We're definitely going to need a Venn Diagram!! :)

[mikkowilson]

I have no information on this camera, as Canon wouldn't say anything, however I took some better quality pics of it that are up at www.camcorderinfo.com (http://www.camcorderinfo.com)
There will be more pictures tommorow.

- Mikko

[lars steenhoff]

Sorry guys for the late reply, I was at IBC again.
As you all know by now the pictures are real. :thumbsup:
this is where I took them:

http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/DSC_4558.jpg

[Digigenic]

I find it funny how I've been at camcorderinfo updating nonstop with information (images) in their forums as first retrieved through here for the past 24 hours. In my post, I made the comment that DVXuser is the only source covering these events, which was the truth, and then suddenly when I return to camcorderinfo, I find that they've suddenly decided to cover the event, and act as if they've been on top of it the entire time. :grin:

[Digigenic]

Great to see you back Lars, you and Mikko are doing a great job out there...

[Digigenic]

...If the camcorder is an HDV version of Canon's popular XL2 model, it would mean that it has interchangeable lenses and many advanced features.
:grin: How perceptive, but how can they be so sure*...??? :laugh:
*mild note of sarcasm

[mikkowilson]

P.R. must be so much fun to dictate!

- Mikko

[lars steenhoff]

Here are more images of the new canon hdv camera

http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/canonhdv/DSC_4574.jpg
http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/canonhdv/DSC_4559.jpg

http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/canonhdv/DSC_4568.jpg

http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/canonhdv/DSC_4564.jpg
http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/canonhdv/DSC_4570.jpg
http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/canonhdv/DSC_4562.jpg
http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/canonhdv/DSC_4571.jpg
http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/canonhdv/DSC_4563.jpg
http://www.larssteenhoff.com/blog/pictures/ibc/canonhdv/DSC_4567.jpg

enjoy!

[mmm]

I think that camera is a tease:

• Why would it have no markings?
• the DV labels look awkwardly placed,
• Why reveal a brand new camera and hide it at the back of your stand just days before the proper launch?
• Why release a camera that looks just like an older model...?

[mikkowilson]

www.camcorderinfo.com just updated their article.. they got are reporting $10k-$12, with lens. 1080i only.
Good luck.

- Mikko.

[Barry_Green]

That can't possibly be accurate. I'd bet thirty bucks that it's got 24p. How can Canon possibly go back to an interlaced-only camera? I don't believe it. I cannot believe they would screw up like that.

I'll wait for the official Canon press release.

[mmm]

I find that very hard to believe. If so why would anyone buy it? I could get a HVX, 2x8GB P2 cards and probably a firestore for long recording times too!

That kind of a camera would completely miss the target market. Guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[mmm]

Barry beat me too it!

Must learn to type faster.

[lars steenhoff]

1080i seems reasonable, considering 24 fps is not part of the HDV spec.

[Barry_Green]

Yes, this boggles the mind. A 1080i-only camera, for four times the cost of the FX1?

An interchangeable-lens camcorder with no 24P, for TWICE the cost of the HD100?

If this is honestly what they intend to put out, it will be the final nail in the coffin of Canon's pretenses at being a market leader. Revolutionary? Hardly. Evolutionary? Not. We had "1080i-only" a year ago with the FX1.

"1080i-only" at twice the cost of the HVX? When the HVX is offering 4:2:2 1080/24p?

It's preposterous.

It simply cannot be true. If it is, it will be a bungle of monumental proportions.

[Barry_Green]

1080i seems reasonable, considering 24 fps is not part of the HDV spec.
Sorry, I've got to completely disagree. 24P is not part of the DV spec either, but Panasonic (AND CANON) implemented it anyway. And they could do it exactly the same way in HDV.

1080i-only is useless to the filmmaking crowd -- the one that Canon markets to, the one that Canon built loyalty with.

1080i-only is fine for event shooters, I guess. But if they make it 1080i-only, they are walking away from a huge market segment. If they honestly actually make it 1080i-only, and then run some "filmmaker" ads... I think I will actually have to puke.

Well, it's all unconfirmed at this point, as far as I'm concerned, until we hear from Canon themselves.

[lars steenhoff]

I agree that canon should make 24 fps let that be clear :thumbsup:
But Sony didn't do it right with fx1, so that's whats got me a bit worried about true 1080p 24 fps. let's hope Canon will implement it the way you discribed

[Zig_Zigman]

10k for 1080i HDV??? Gee, they've matched the 1900.00 cam from Sony...


This is a smokescreen. I notice the camcorder.com source quoted is NOT Canon, but a source close to Canon.

Canon has not lost their minds. There is more to this story.

Or else panasonic owns the world for the next 2 years...

[Zig_Zigman]

Hmmm "under 10 to 12k" meaning we'll bring it in at 6k, just cuz we're amazing...

I say there is a higher level model with the same form factor ready to go as well...

[Digigenic]

...I notice the camcorder.com source quoted is NOT Canon, but a source close to Canon...
Why is it that raving lunatics are always positioning themselves so close to the information and us normal folk are kept so far away? :laugh:

[thisiswells]

[CamcorderInfo]said that they are really pissed because they had allready arranged for get the full lowdown...[then] Canon pulled a fast one on them and put this thing on display at IBC without telling them..
www.camcorderinfo.com (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/) just updated their article.. they got are reporting $10k-$12, with lens. 1080i only.

Gotta wonder if they're distributing 'dis-info' in an attempt to shove it to Canon for not telling them about the sneak peak at IBC?

(BTW, way to go Mikko!)

[Digigenic]

...Gotta wonder if they're distributing 'dis-info' in an attempt to shove it to Canon for not telling them about the sneak peak at IBC?
That very well could be...
Then again, maybe it's dis-info for dis-info? Canon brings out a decoy, one which even fools camcorder info. into thinking their arrangement has been broken by Canon, when in fact they will still give camcorder info. the *real* low down a day in advance of the *real* camera and its full specs. These aren't my thoughts though, I got my information from a source that's close to the source that's close to Canon...

[Barry_Green]

Hmmm "under 10 to 12k" meaning we'll bring it in at 6k, just cuz we're amazing....
Excellent point -- both JVC and Panasonic promoted their cameras as being "under 10k" and they both ended up at $5995, so that could very well be what Canon is doing too.

Can't wait for the 15th though, to find out what they're actually up to.

If they implement 1080/24p the same way they put in the XL2's DV 480/24p, then we should hold a DVXUser birthday party for the camera.

If they honestly, truly, absolutely don't have any sort of 24p I think we should hold a DVXUser "funeral" for Canon.

Of course, if they put CineFrame 24 on it, then we should hold a roast for them.

So now it just comes down to: am I stupid enough to put my foot in my mouth again? A few of you remember when I adamantly, doggedly, thoroughly insisted that there was no way, no how, no possibility that Canon would introduce a standard-def XL2. I insisted it would *have* to be HDV, or I'd eat my hat. (mighty tasty hat, by the way, as far as hats go). So should I go out on that limb again, and proclaim that there's absolutely, positively, completely NO WAY that Canon would introduce an INTERLACE-ONLY XL3?

Um... man, I dunno, I still have some hat stuck in my teeth. I don't think I'll take that bet this time.

But I would be shocked and flabbergasted if they put out an interlace-only camera, and I would be HORRIFIED if they put out a CineFrame 24 camera!

[TimurCivan]

If they honestly actually make it 1080i-only, and then run some "filmmaker" ads... I think I will actually have to puke.



HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[TimurCivan]

WEll perhaps, liek some one stated earlier, this is a XL2s. a bridge in a way between the XL3, a full fledged 24P cam and the SD XL2. This is just to hold over the HD market till the next shoe drops. I mean, you know, Hidef for the 1080i crowd, and soon to come, 24P XL3. It seems to make sense. if you think about it. Everyone says the mockup has barely changed. Perhaps thats just to save some money while the factory tools up for the Big one.

Cause if they do it, ala PAnasonic, the price would be significantly higher, in the 10K range. The earlier price suggestion of 12K was rediculous. This thing will probably be 5K like the Xl2 origionally was. just with HDV capability Forthe people who arent particularly concerned with 422 color, and completley flawless 1080P images. ( there are some BTW, Wed videographers, corporate videos, etc.... not everyone who buys a XL2 is a filmmaker. like barry said) Then in a few months the Beast is released. For us all to drool over and compare the HVX.

Idunno it makes sense to me. Like a DVX100 and a DVX100a ( with more significant changes obviously)

[thisiswells]

If they honestly, truly, absolutely don't have any sort of 24p I think we should hold a DVXUser "funeral" for Canon.
In the words of SONY:
"You can have 24p or you can have HD, but you can't have both..."

In the words of Yvonne Elliman:
"If I can't have both, I don't want nobody baby..."

:cheesy:

[Jack_Felis]

1080P native? No interlace except for output conversion? 24p option? 4:4:4 color space? HDV and true HD combo camera? Release date next month? I'm excited about the possibilities. But x2mag68 reminded me of my comment about "XL2S", what if Canon/JVC/Sony/Panasonic keep doing this strategy of releasing a slightly upgraded version of a videocamera a few months down the line? If everyone caught on and didn't buy then I think they would stop, but what if people keep going for it? I'm debating right now whether to wait it out for an HVX200A (though I'll probably be doing that anyway because my birthday is in June) or go for one of these cameras when they come out. It's tough, this HD war.

But anyway, getting back on topic. 1080i only huh? That'd be bad unless they had good 24p modes and tons of manual control features. I just can't imagine what they could do unless they actually did make this basically a big professional $50,000 camera (color, features, ect.) but cheap due to 1/3" or CMOS CCD's and small build. Maybe that's the way of the future. Or maybe that opens up space for Super/UltraHD.

[Tibby]

It will have 24p.

If it doesn't someone needs to lock up the CEO of Canon...because, well...HE LOST HIS DAMN MIND!!!

It's quite simple, the market is too competitive right now for a camera of that type not to have a 24p option.

[mr._guiyotinne]

In the article they say something like that "while it will have a 24 frames per second "feature," it will not have true 24P support".

Panasonic didn´t call it 1080p either, so...

What about socks now (make it a clean wool winter pair) , Barry? I bet this time you won´t eat them, just maybe chew them for a while...

I´m mildly interested on what they will bring us, but i see tipical Canon features coming with this camera, so, if I was sold before, next 15 i won´t be dissapointed (It won´t dissapoint, somebody said before?) cos it will make my choose even more pleasant.

EDIT: I just had a flash dream with people loving the interchangeable feature and then asking for a mortgage over their house to pay their next HD lens... :evil:

[Tibby]

"while it will have a 24 frames per second "feature," it will not have true 24P support".


Huh...uhh...okay thats a bit vague. It will be 24p but it wont support 24p. What exactly does 24p support mean? Either it shoots in 24p or it doesn't.

Wait... do you mean to say that the article is implying it wil be Canons version of "CineFrame". Hah!!! Thats about the silliest speculation yet.

Didn't Canon already do that with the XL1? That frame mode thingy?

Why on earth would a company like Canon take such giant strides backwards just to put out a 10k non 24p HDV camera in a such a competitive market that features the HD100, HVX200, and the Z1U.

Who the hell would pay money for a camera like that?

It would be tempting for me to purchase a 24p XL type camera over an HVX200, but take away the 24p and I would have no interest whatsoever.

[Barry_Green]

Panasonic didn´t call it 1080p either, so...
Yes they do. They most definitely do. Go look at panasonic.com and look up the HVX, you'll see it clearly says 1080/24p and 1080/30p.

What about socks now (make it a clean wool winter pair) , Barry? I bet this time you won´t eat them, just maybe chew them for a while...
Only if they're cotton socks. I don't want to get burned by Canon again... :laugh:

cos it will make my choose even more pleasant.
I think if it turns out to be 1080i-only, yes it will make everyone else's choices much more pleasant. Those who choose the HVX and the HD100 can be pleasantly comforted by the fact that they chose the right thing... :thumbsup:

[Barry_Green]

Why on earth would a company like Canon take such giant strides backwards just to put out a 10k non 24p HDV camera in a such a competitive market that features the HD100, HVX200, and the Z1U.

Who the hell would pay money for a camera like that?
Well, the obvious "conspiracy theory" speculation is that Canon is getting their CCDs from Sony. And if Sony won't make a 1080/24p CCD, then Canon can't have 1080/24p.

And if they're getting their chips from Sony, is it unreasonable to think that it'd inherit CineFrame 24 also?

I have no evidence whatsoever that Canon is getting chips from Sony, I'm just guessing that since Sony is the only manufacturer of 1080i HDV, and the Canon is rumored to be 1080i HDV, well, put 2+2 together and that's what I come up with.

If the XL2s/3HDV /whatever uses CineFrame 24, that will be the most preposterous market-position abdication I've witnessed yet. I thought Sony's plummet from the great TRV900 to the not-as-great TRV950 to the hated HC1000 (or whatever it was) was bad, but for Canon to totally punt by going 1080i-only would be an unprecedented mistake.

So, well, assuming the damage is done and they've abandoned the filmmaker market, who could care about it? I'm sure there are a lot of potential customers for it. There is no interchangeable-lens 1080i camera out there yet, so that's one possible market. There's a lot of 1080i programming getting produced, such as sports on NBC & CBS, so maybe it'll find a place there. Maybe when news stations start converting to HD news origination, the Canon could find a place in local news broadcasting. I don't know. Grasping at straws here; I'm sure it'll fit some market segment somewhere.

But most definitely *not* the filmmaker's market!

This just can't be true... it can't be...

[Haakon]

Excellent point -- both JVC and Panasonic promoted their cameras as being "under 10k" and they both ended up at $5995, so that could very well be what Canon is doing too.
I think the only reason that Panasonic said "under 10K" is because if they had said "under 6K," then they would have received way too much flack about "well you need a P2 card to shoot the HD, so the cost is really a lot more than that." Since they're offering a package with two cards at $9,999, they can reasonably market their "hd solution" at "under 10k." That's my take, anyway.

I really don't think this new Canon camera is going to be an interim "XL2s" or anything like that. The XL2 was already way late out the gate when it was introduced... there would be no commercial sense in delaying their product line even further and allowing Sony, JVC, and Panasonic to eat up the entire HD market while they putz around. I, like Barry, would be very surprised if the cam didn't have 24p... but then again, it's HDV so I don't really care. I'm sure whatever it is, they'll keep some of their market just because of the interchangable lens deal... though it's funny, no one I know with an XL2 has other lenses for it besides the 20x that came with it and yet "interchangable lenses" is the biggest arguments they make in its favor. Go figure. I'm sure this new camera will be decent... they must have been working on it for quite awhile but just chose the quiet route instead of the "we'll tell you about it 9 months in advance" like Panasonic did, but either way... I'm not sure what they could even offer at this point that would justify a $12,000 pricetag...

[Digigenic]

Camcorderinfo. has actually posted a brief and what they call "fair comparison" between the Sony Z1 and the as of yet named Canon HDV.
The administrator's post can be seen here (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/bbs/t118911.html)
IMO, this is hardly a "fair comparison", none of the specs/price point have been confirmed by Canon directly. I am beginning to believe they actually are pretty pissed that they were caught off guard and excluded from the pre-expo scoop, and now they're deliberately trying to incite negative activity over the camera because of this.

[mmm]

"I think this is a fair comparison to do. At least from what I know about the new Canon. Any arguments? Fire away!

Market: both will be for the professional who shoots HD as for Independant Filmaking and Wedding / Documentary

HD format: both will record in HDV1080i, 1440x1080 MPEG2@25Mbps onto MiniDV tapes.

Cost: Z1 = $5000, Canon = $10,000 - $12,000 (may be lower).

Introduced: Z1 = November 2004, Canon = September 2005
On Sale/Available: Z1 = December 2004, Canon = ??

Lens: Z1 = 12x zoom, non-changable
Canon = 20x? interchangable? (assuming like the XL2)

Audio: both have dual XLR inputs

Controls: both have full manual controls

manual rings: Z1 = focus and zoom (separate)
Canon = focus and zoom (separate) and iris?

DVCAM: Z1 = yes, Canon = ??

50i/60i support: Z1 = yes, can record either 1080/50i or 1080/60i
Canon = ??

tape loading: both are tripod friendly"

That is about the lamest thing I have ever read! LOL!

My guess is, if that info came from a real source at all, that the camera will record 1080i HDV, but implement 24p like the XL2 does. They might have got confused by the source saying it would no record 720p24 - Judging by the comments above, they could be pretty clueless!

I would also hope that the camera will have a higher bitrate recording method, up around 40Mb/s. Now if it implemented 24p into a 40Mb/s MPEG2 1080i stream, that could REALLY be something! Possibly 4:2:2....? :kiss: Of course, it would require a hard drive to record to, but if they could build the controller into the camera..? Then as solid state prices fall, it would replace the hard drive without the camera even knowing - just like the iPod nano.

[scharky]

Personally, I have never read a reliable review or preview from anything on that site. I don't know, but camcorderinfo.com just rubs me the wrong way. They are more focused on getting the scoop, rather than getting the facts right. It is entirely possible that Canon realy is releasing that beast of a 1080i camera, but I won't believe it until I see it somehwere, anywhere else than camcorder info. :(

[mezelf27]

... XL2 and some black spray paint ...

[mmm]

... XL2 and some black spray paint ...
And add two little buttons behind the lens....Weird?

Maybe that is all part of their ploy though!

[author]

That can't possibly be accurate. I'd bet thirty bucks that it's got 24p. How can Canon possibly go back to an interlaced-only camera? I don't believe it. I cannot believe they would screw up like that.

I'll wait for the official Canon press release.

I totally agree with ya, Barry. To NOT include 24p would be beyond stupidity by a few hundred light years. The market is the market.

--Ralph

[Tzedekh]

Panasonic didn´t call it 1080p either, so...
Panasonic calls the 24-fps mode 24p, because it is.

[mr._guiyotinne]

ok, ok... But i was using a past tense... I think, maybe i´m mistaken, that in some presentations they just said it was a 1080i stream and then explained the 24p function like in DVX.

I´ve been here a while and i understand the method since my first posts, i was just pointing that it´s just a technical way of saying something without saying something (even if it´s the real thing and totally licit to say it) to keep some surprises for the real presentation. Of course we know the true, but till it´s confirmed we are still trying to jump over the fence to see better what is behind. EDIT: I´m speaking about the Canon here...

Word games are fun and a good comercial strategy. Or i´m i wrong?

[Digigenic]

If they don't put progressive in this camera, I already have the perfect ad made up for them...
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y228/WICKEDPIXEL/DIRTY%20PIXELS/CANONXL2SHDVAD_mock.jpg

[mmm]

LOL!

Email it to Canon.

[mikkowilson]

*ROFL*


- Mikko

[Tibby]

Well, the obvious "conspiracy theory" speculation is that Canon is getting their CCDs from Sony. And if Sony won't make a 1080/24p CCD, then Canon can't have 1080/24p.

And if they're getting their chips from Sony, is it unreasonable to think that it'd inherit CineFrame 24 also?

Yikes Barry!!! You're scaring me! :shocked: I hope they aren't getting their chips from Sony. That would be tragic indeed.

On another note...that ad above is is Hilarious :grin:

[author]

Now THAT is a fine ad, Jacob! ;-)

But if Canon leaves 24p off, they won't be able to afford placing the ad.

--Ralph

[Digigenic]

Now THAT is a fine ad, Jacob! ;-)

But if Canon leaves 24p off, they won't be able to afford placing the ad.
:) good point...
Thanks for the compliments everybody, I threw it together pretty quickly. If Canon really doesn't implement progressive, I'll bring out an improved high res version of the ad and plaster the f@cker all over the web. Haha, I love making art not work.

[mr._guiyotinne]

I agree with mmm... Send it to them!

Well, maybe after the expo so they will appreciate the neutral view of the customers!

[Digigenic]

I agree with mmm... Send it to them!

Well, maybe after the expo so they will appreciate the neutral view of the customers!
Yeah, it would be best afterwards. Sending a pre-emptive email like that would make me look worse than camcorderinfo.com, and that's pretty gosh darn bad.

[AshG]

I still dont think the camera they showed was anything but a dummy mock-up that probably wont resemble the final camera. $12K for an XL2 that does 1080i would be rather silly... we'll see, they have created quite a buzz though!


ash =o)

[Zig_Zigman]

I am straining to think of ways where this cam, as stated, would be worthwhile...could they mean no "1080 24p" and bring us 720/24p? Or even 1080 60p?

Canon, I'm trying to work some marketing for ya, so you don't turn out a big black snow cone, but you have to give me something here...

[lars steenhoff]

I think they will give you a free copy of Magic Bullet with the camera. :shocked:

[Jack_Felis]

I think they will you a free copy of Magic Bullet with the camera. :shocked:

lars, that's exactly what I was thinking.:grin:

[Spiff]

Bah. Just wait until an announcement from Canon comes. If it isn't an official press release, it's worthless.

-Spiff

[Tzedekh]

Now if it implemented 24p into a 40Mb/s MPEG2 1080i stream, that could REALLY be something! Possibly 4:2:2....? :kiss: Of course, it would require a hard drive to record to, but if they could build the controller into the camera..?Really? No way to use improved recording heads and a faster tape transport? I mean, DVCPro HD is four times the bandwidth of 1080i HDV, but 40 Mbps isn't even twice.

[mmm]

Really? No way to use improved recording heads and a faster tape transport? I mean, DVCPro HD is four times the bandwidth of 1080i HDV, but 40 Mbps isn't even twice.

I'm sure you could do it, but I don't know how reliable the signal would be. You may need to use new and hence expensive recording heads too.

[Tzedekh]

I'm sure you could do it, but I don't know how reliable the signal would be. You may need to use new and hence expensive recording heads too.I understand the need for new recording heads, hence my reference to "improved recording heads." It just seems likely that head technology isn't static and that the jump in data rate you mentioned is 60%, not 300% (like DVCPro HD). I would hope that wouldn't mean a $10,000 premium, as with DVCPro HD recording heads, but rather a couple hundred dollars.

[Barry_Green]

I think it's doubtful that anyone's going to be investing in new tape methods. Tape is dead. All the manufacturers are offering tapeless options (Canon and JVC offer integrated bundled firestores, Sony offers XDCAM, Panasonic offers P2). I think the very fact that HDV uses the exact same tape decks and tapes as DV probably proves the point: they didn't want to develop new tape systems, so they re-used the existing one.

We'll see new formats, but they may not be put on tape. JVC's extending their HDV system to include a high-end MPEG-2 recording system at 50 megabits, and they're not even bothering to record it to tape at all, they're making it a hard-disk-only option.

I doubt we'll see a tape-based improvement to HDV. The R&D and manufacturing to bring up a new tape system, just to be limited by the tape workflow, may not pencil out. You're much more likely to see improved systems based on nonlinear recording systems.

[AshG]

Tape is not dead....not close. Just on the downward end of its life cycle. I agree that there is no point in creating a new tape format but that doesnt mean tape is dead. A slow burn on the way out maybe but until solid state memory gets under $5 per gig, tape will be the prevalent media.


ash =o)

[stephenvv]

Tape is not dead....not close. Just on the downward end of its life cycle. I agree that there is no point in creating a new tape format but that doesnt mean tape is dead. A slow burn on the way out maybe but until solid state memory gets under $5 per gig, tape will be the prevalent media.


ash =o)

But once it burns out (probably sooner rather than later given Samsung's relentless increasing size and decreasing cost of chips), there will be esoteric sites claiming DV recorded to tape has some special "quality" that is different from recording to disk. And they will sell you a special hand assembled DV tape for $8000 along with $20,00 firewire cable to transfer into an NLE with.

:laugh:

don't laugh, there was a argument floated around for quite some time (maybe still is) that the XL1 recorded better to tape than to hard disk. It was all due to mislabeled images on Scott Billips site :shocked:

[Digigenic]

CCI.COM: Canon CEO Announces Their Entrance into the High Definition Camcorder and Display Market (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-CEO-Displays-HDV-Camcorder.htm)

[Jack_Felis]

Yeah, so what else is new? They haven't said anything except "Wait until the expo!" and that they'll have models supporting HDV and "high definition recording". Waiting still.

[Digigenic]

I'm eager to learn more about their displays, I had heard somewhere previously about their plans to release some new display technology, but wasn't aware that they would couple it with the announcement of HD, that's an interesting development, IMO.

[Jack_Felis]

True, that is an interesting development, Digigenic. I hope it will be cost effective, maybe OLED-style? But I'm not really into displays much, all I know is Panasonic has the best selections most of the time. As far as displays go, I just wish they'd make some smaller displays for cramped college dorm room-type situations ^_^, a nice 9-13" 1080i/1080p/720p HDTV flatscreen would be nice! All they manufacturers have now are misleading computer displays and 30"+ flatscreens =P.

[tnle2]

Interesting how the CEO said "models" as in plural!

As for the display technology, they're probably referring to SED:

http://www.canon.com/technology/display/

This was developed in conjunction with Toshiba. It basically merges the best of both worlds from flat-panels and CRT's. Earlier this year Toshiba displayed some prototypes at a trade show and apparently they looked really good.

[thisiswells]

Canon will focus on three display technologies, OLED, SED, and another I'm not too familiar with...

[mmm]

Interesting how the CEO said "models" as in plural!


Maybe a GL3 and an XL3..?

[mr._guiyotinne]

But he said they will just present "one" HDV camera in this expo... Time to seat with popcorn and listen... It´s the day!

[Digigenic]

Let's join hands

[mmm]

When is the announcement in proper time - ie GMT? :)

[Digigenic]

I believe the reports should start pouring in about 2 to 3 hours from now, unless somebody else (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/) starts feeling jumpy.

[mmm]

I really want this camera to have 24p...SOOOO much... not to actually use it, but to see CCI look like a bunch of dicks! Haha!

[Digigenic]

tick tock tick tock tick tock tick tock tick tock...

[bjingbar]

Its XLh1

[Digigenic]

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y228/WICKEDPIXEL/photography/XLH1pdodurtphoto.jpg
Looks pretty freakin clean, but what's on the inside...?

[mmm]

1080i only but the sounds...

[mgalvan]

well looky here ...

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-Announces-HDV-High-Definition-XLH1-with-1080i-with-No-24P.htm

a big :(

[mmm]

"According to the press release the 24 frame rateL "Filmmakers can utilize the 24 Frame rate when creating the look and feel of movie film," however, the press release never calls the format 24P, indicating that it is not true 24P. "


Source: http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-Announces-HDV-High-Definition-XLH1-with-1080i-with-No-24P.htm

[Digigenic]

THE XLH1 WATCHDOG HAS SPECS POSTED (http://www.dvinfo.net/canonxlh1/watchdog.php)
* Uncompressed 1080/60i 4:2:2 HD-SDI output at 1.485 Gbps

* Multi-format external HD recording to HDCAM, DVCPRO HD, etc.

* Genlock input and TimeCode input /output

* 20x HD L/SR OIS lens (5.4mm-108mm, f/1.6-f/3.5, 72mm fil.)

* 3 x 1.67mp CCDs (native 16:9 shape), 1440 x 1080 effective

* Digic DV II processor supporting 30fps & 24fps (25 fps in Europe)

See the rest of the specs on Canon's new camera at this LINK (http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=165&modelid=12152)

[mmm]

* Uncompressed 1080/60i 4:2:2 HD-SDI output at 1.485 Gbps



Thank God they included that... I am sure loads of people in this price bracket can afford to use it! Can that be right?

[mmm]

Go here!

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=165&modelid=12152

[mmm]

From the horses mouth:

"The XL H1 delivers 1080i HD resolution, along with selectable frame rates of 60i, 30F and 24F. For high-speed subjects 30 Frame delivers spectacular clarity, 24 Frame gives the look and motion of film."

[Tzedekh]

* Digic DV II processor supporting 30fps & 24fps (25 fps in Europe)
Sounds like CineFrame 24 and 30. Except for the exclusion of 24p, the camera sounds OK. But that one omission might prove a killer.

[Digigenic]

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y228/WICKEDPIXEL/DIRTY%20PIXELS/HEYEVERYBODYCANHDcopy.jpg

[mmm]

"The images recorded on the tape are configured as follows:

* Under the "HDV1080i" (HDV) specifications, 1440 x 1080 (16:9) images in 60 fields (or 50 fields for PAL*) are recorded. (60i/50i recording)
</li>
* Under the "HDV1080i" (HDV) specifications, 1440 x 1080 (16:9) images in 30 frames (or 25 frames for PAL*) are recorded. (30F/25F recording)

* Under the "HDV1080i" (HDV) specifications, 1440 x 1080 (16:9) images in 24 frames are recorded. (24F recording)


*Assumes 60i/50i Mode optional upgrade has been performed."


SOURCE:
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelFeaturesAct&fcategoryid=165&modelid=12152&pageno=16


But what does it all mean?!!? If there is full res 1080p25, I could be VERY tempted.

[mmm]

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y228/WICKEDPIXEL/DIRTY%20PIXELS/HEYEVERYBODYCANHDcopy.jpg


LOL!

They weren't that full of shit...most of what they said is true. Still funny though!

[bjingbar]

Any word that you will be able to downconvert the HD to SD on playback

[alexrodz]

I did see a picture of the XLHD camera - I forgot the real model number but it looks just like the XL2 but it's black - very slick -
by the way - is anyone using the XL2 for EFP shoots - I am so disapointed with it....the color saturation is DIRTY...that's the only way I can describe it. I mean...if I take my time and light the subject right, it gives me a nice image but for field news gathering...it sucks!!!
and the white balance....horrible -
any opinions? ideas?

[Zig_Zigman]

Hmmm shoots "24f" which is a digic 2 sampling of interlaced chips. Well maybe it looks great, who knows.

Interesting that they refuse to disclose the DSP bit depth.

[Haakon]

So the camera shoots in compressed HDV only, has no 720p, no variable framerates, and the "24 frame" option may not even be true 24p - all for the bargain price of $9,000? I dunno about you, but painting an XL2 black isn't gonna sway me with those specs...

[Zig_Zigman]

uncompressed video out might be spectacular, but it does require some kind of raid array on the set.

I don't know what you would do in the field. Attach a firestore product?

1440 by 1080 chips, 30f and 24f....the key is how well digic II samples the interlaced at 24 frames.

[Spiff_2]

If Chirs Hurd's article here is correct:

http://www.dvinfo.net/canonxlh1/articles/article06.php

Then the 24F mode of the XL H1 will be absolutely identical to 24P acquisition in terms of resolution and motion. In other words - it is 24P as you know it... and the camera is everything you'd pretty much want. 1080p24, 1080p30, 1080i60 with uncompressed 1440x1080 4:2:2 HD-SDI out, and the option of 1440x1080 4:2:0 HDV and 720x480 4:1:1 DV to tape.

Which - I might add - stops thoroughly on the HVX200... considering how much money you'd have to spend on P2 cards - you could spend it on BlackMagic cards and Hard Drives and end up with higher resolution uncompressed video.

Not to mention the shoulder mount form factor and the interchangable lenses.

Go Canon! :beer:

-Spiff

[glassblowerscat]

At least they're not just hacking off a frame every now and then like Cineframe…

[Digigenic]

Good catch Spiff :thumbsup:

- Chris Hurd - from the "Canon XL H1 Image Sensors, DSP and Frame Rates" (http://www.dvinfo.net/canonxlh1/articles/article06.php) article on
The XLH1 Watchdog page.
"The Canon 30F and 24F frame rates and the technology which creates them are related in no way whatsoever to the current Sony HDV implementations known as CineFrame 30 and CineFrame 24 (which have been commonly referred to as CF30 and CF24). Instead, the Canon 30F and 24F frame rates are identical to the 30P and 24P results produced by progressive scan CCDs."

It's looking pretty gosh darn alright...well, maybe the price could come down a little. :laugh:

[Spiff_2]

I wouldn't knock the price until the community gets a good handle on the lenses. Keep in mind this is a Canon product - and they've always been somewhat expensive. We know that the lens supplied with the JVC HD100 is mediocre for the task, and similar complaints can be waged against the Sonys.

If this camera really does come with a decent HD lens, it may be worth it's weight in gold compared to the competition.

-Spiff

[elrosten]

Very interesting stuff here. But it's missing a big feature for me. 720 60p. I loves me my slow-mo.

[Shaw]

Seems like they might just use the lens which ships with the XL2?

From Canon's website:

XL H1
20x HD L/SR OIS lens (5.4mm-108mm, f/1.6-f/3.5, 72mm fil.)
XL2
20x zoom XL 5.4-108mm L IS

EDIT:

If so we do know that the 20X lens with the XL2 is quite sharp. The only real downside being the chromatic aberration which seems prevelant at the etremeties of the lens. I suppose you would expect that with a 20x lens though!

While the price is a bit higher than the XL2 I'd still be pissed if I had bought one (an XL2 that is)....

[mmm]

Hmmmm... how many users are likely to use HD-SDI out? The data rates are beyond 99% of people at this price point.

I would have liked to have seen a more meaty built in codec, possibly going to hard disk.

Also for $9000, it had better be bloody good, I can get an HVX and a couple of P2s for that... nearly.

[Digigenic]

Seems like they might just use the lens which ships with the XL2?

From Canon's website:

XL H1

XL2


EDIT:

If so we do know that the 20X lens with the XL2 is quite sharp. The only real downside being the chromatic aberration which seems prevelant at the etremeties of the lens. I suppose you would expect that with a 20x lens though!

While the price is a bit higher than the XL2 I'd still be pissed if I had bought one (an XL2 that is)....
As much as I hate having to use a quote from the CCI.com blog, here is a response to the assertion that one could use an XL1 or 2 lens on the XLH1
One final note: although the XL H1 uses the same lens mount as the XL1 and XL2, it seems that you can't use lenses designed for the XL1 or XL2: the optics won't resolve properly. I guess that this is not a big surprise, but it's a pain nonehteless, as they've only launched one lens with the XL H1. It seems that the EF lens adapter (that allows you to use EF lenses for Canon still cameras) should work, though, although with a 7.2X multiplier, you won't get much of a wide angle effect.
Again, this is coming from CCI.com, so I would wait to see another source confirm this until we take this as fact.

[mikkowilson]

Only just logged on... Wow.

You know, it may not have 24p..though it does seem to.. and it *is* HDV (the big bummer..), and it may cost a little more.
But you know.. HD-SDI, and GENLOCK-IN ..that right there is a fully functional HD studio camera! i mean shit.. that's so impressive.. i'm i'm lost for words! Damn.
And it has true TC I/O (beats the heck out of Firewire jamming, you've gota admit..) and then all the other fuss like an exchangeable lens, and, and the ability to make it an 50i(PAL) / 60i(NTSC) camera too!
Maybe not for those loking for the Indy features of the HVX, but for a slightly different (more 'pro' )market (to be honest, me included...) Those are some incredible features! ..which makes sense, as Canon doesn't have a haigher range to protect.

Ok.. who is first ot write a program to convert XLH1 settings to HVX Settings on those SD cards?

..hey, Pana and Canon.. hows about you make them cross compatible! you'll all sell more!


..Nowthen.. how does the picture look?

- Mikko

[MattC]

I own an XL2 and will admit to being a bit bugged. But who knows, in a year or so when/if I'm ready for HD, this may be the camera for me. First I'll let it get out there and see how well it works in the real world. Then I might make the switch...

[Shaw]

Looks like my guess was wrong :)

The similarities end there, however. The 20x HD lens is a new optical design incoporating high-refraction glass with a special coating (called "SR" by Canon) to reduce image ghosting.

http://www.dvinfo.net/canonxlh1/xlh1skinny.php#difference

[MattC]

I wonder how long before they introduce a manual HD lens and what that will cost. To me, the 16X manual lens is the best part of my XL2.

[mikkowilson]

Continuing on my idea of using it as a HD studiocamera in multicamera work (with Genlock sync in, and HD-SDI out to the video mixer) it also has that RCU [remote control unit] software package coming..

So now what we need is someone to make a hardware RCU for the software!

3 of those cameras, 3 RCUs with host machine and synergy S100 MD switcher.. that's a fully functional 3-camera HD system for, god, about $50 grand...

- Mikko

[will_griffith]

or a set of Canon 1/3" HD primes... ? :)

that may be asking a little too much.

-will

[Barry_Green]

Hmmm... interesting... I don't know what to think about it yet, gotta let it sink in.

The initial reaction is "HD-SDI out? Cool! Studio camera for sure."

But then I think of that lens. The lens and viewfinder on the XL2 were the two things I was most disappointed with (well, I think "hated" would be the more correct term), and the XLH1 looks to have the exact same lens design (but hey, at least they added MF00-MF99, finally!) and a similar style viewfinder.

I'm totally willing to give their 24F mode the benefit of the doubt...

Will this camera eat the JVC's lunch? On the surface it seems like it could (1080/24p vs. 720/24p, true 60i vs no "reality" option at all on the JVC, and HD-SDI vs. nothing similar) but the JVC actually has other lenses that can be interchanged, and it's possible to configure the JVC (although with a horrid lens) for just over half the cost of the Canon.

It'll all come down to the pictures, I guess. HD-SDI will be quite valuable to those who need it, and pointless to those who don't have a 167-megabyte-per-second capture solution. On the surface this Canon would seem to be a huge step up from the Sony, offering everything the Sony does and a whole lot more... but then again, it's 50% more expensive than the Sony, so it should.

Most interesting. Most interesting indeed.

Well, looks like our three-way shootout just became a four-way! :)

[AshG]

It seems they went the indie studio camera route... probably wise given the devotion of small indie features to the Panny products. You XL2 owners shouldnt feel bad at all, with the cam at $9000 you still have to add (hopefully coming soon) a wide lens and a manual lens which will both come in at $2000+ I would think. So, my currnent XL2 set up cost me under $5k while the HD setup would be $12K+....




ash =o)

[mmm]

Continuing on my idea of using it as a HD studiocamera in multicamera work (with Genlock sync in, and HD-SDI out to the video mixer) it also has that RCU [remote control unit] software package coming..

So now what we need is someone to make a hardware RCU for the software!

3 of those cameras, 3 RCUs with host machine and synergy S100 MD switcher.. that's a fully functional 3-camera HD system for, god, about $50 grand...

- Mikko

That is true, but isn't this a rather small market. The HD-SDI seems a strange choice. I guess it is cheap to add! For fiction there is no practical way of capturing those kind of data rates.

[AshG]

I agree Barry, it looks like every camera has advantages... maybe the next gen, they will all do everything!



ash =o)

[Haakon]

I guess I feel really confused as to all of the hype for this one... did everyone just suddenly turn into studio videographers as opposed to independent filmmakers? The real benefit of the XL system is interchangable lenses, yet with a $9,000(!) starting point, I certainly wouldn't have cash left over to fork out for better glass. Uncompressed HD out is "cool," but who has room for all of that data - especially in "run and gun" shooting environments? We already know there's no variable framerate of any kind, and at the end of the day, you're STILL recording to 25Mbps HDV!! If nothing else, that's reason enough for me to say no thanks. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure this camera will run circles around the Sony, but in my opinon, that's not saying much. Is there some key factor I'm missing here?

[Tibby]

I guess this whole 24Frame mode is there so the XL2 owners won't be pissed off. It sounds to me like the footage can be easily dropped into an NLE at 24p. Hopefully it won't lose vertical resolution like the sony. Maybe Cineform will make something for this exact purpose.

[Damon Botsford]

Sweet!!!!!
Now all I have to do is order a Firestore uncompressed HD-SDI capture device. Yeah, in the year 2015. Come on computer technology... catch up! catch up!

The funny thing is, all the guys that were freakin' out about absolutely needing uncompressed out probably won't buy this camera. Reality sinks in... it costs how much to edit this stuff??!!!!

[Antoine_Fabi]

WOW !!!!!

If the info is true,

...then that Canon HD "black beauty" is exactly what i was looking for !

When is it supposed to be available ?


EDIT
oh...dont get me wrong, i am going to buy also a HVX200, but only if the noise level is acceptable.

[Digigenic]

I think that when the smoke settles, and we've reviewed some beautiful footage from both cams, I'll still find myself attached to the HVX. I finally sat down a moment ago and slowly reviewed the XLH1 specs (price included, gah), and breathed it all in, relfected on my feelings for the HVX::tear runs down my cheek:: I think the HVX is still my number one pick.
Any side by side spec comparisons available yet?

[Shaw]

Me too. I'm not willing to give up 4:2:2 color space for anything lower end at this point (I love my greenscreen)!

Still does seem like the H1 will be a nice camera and I'm sure it will fit the needs of many.

EDIT: make that 4:2:2 color sampling! Color space is another topic entirely :)

[glassblowerscat]

I guess I feel really confused as to all of the hype for this one... did everyone just suddenly turn into studio videographers as opposed to independent filmmakers? The real benefit of the XL system is interchangable lenses, yet with a $9,000(!) starting point, I certainly wouldn't have cash left over to fork out for better glass. Uncompressed HD out is "cool," but who has room for all of that data - especially in "run and gun" shooting environments? We already know there's no variable framerate of any kind, and at the end of the day, you're STILL recording to 25Mbps HDV!! If nothing else, that's reason enough for me to say no thanks. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure this camera will run circles around the Sony, but in my opinon, that's not saying much. Is there some key factor I'm missing here?

I think it's important not to overlook that this could be a good "growth" camera. If you don't have money to handle HD-SDI and its accompanying data rate, you can just buy the camera and use tape, and you'll still be shooting HD. There are people to whom even HDV is a big step up from DV. Like HDNet Films, for example.

But then, if you outgrow the HDV, and you've saved your pennies properly, you can buy yourself the appropriate additional equipment to record through HD-SDI.

Point being, you have two solutions for recording HD, one cheap and one expensive, and that's more than anyone else, including our beloved <lust>HVX</lust> is offering.

[Shaw]

This whole "cheap" HD revolution is great. It makes me wonder if we will start seeing more indie stuff up on the big screen in the near future.

I'm looking forward to the Panasonic at the moment but there are beginning to be so many HD options there's just about something for everyone. Exciting times!

[AshG]

At this point I would say the Panny is the better field camera and the XL is the better studio camera. Which one is better for film makers? Depends on how you work... I agree, let the dust settle before anyone is declared king. However, I think we are going to be back in the XL2 vs DVX world... where neither camera has a clear advantage.


ash =o)

[mikkowilson]

That is true, but isn't this a rather small market. The HD-SDI seems a strange choice. I guess it is cheap to add! For fiction there is no practical way of capturing those kind of data rates.

Small market?
The market for live cameras is huge!
Let's say that a live system on average has 4 cameras.. most have 3, but many more have 5,6,8+
How many video switchers are sold each year? Now i'm not just talking the Panny MX20/50/70, the Videoonics/Focus MX1/Pro/proDV/MX4 the Datavideo SE800, etc.... I'm talking ALL switchers!! Ross, Grass Valley, Sony, For-A, S&W, Philips, etc.. (and lets not forget the Video Toaster, Tricaster, Globecaster..) This camera is DIRECTLY compatible with every video switcher moddel in the world!
..Hell, with the PAL/NTSC switching enabled, this camera is really the first one (even close to it's price) that can be plugged into ANY live system, and be instantly available and operational, in sync, without need for TBC or frame buffer.
And with more and more people/companies/groups going to HD.. this is a BIG BIG thing!
Hell, even your local church with large AV system who has those new nice HD ready projectors, and allready preshoots HD stuff with the Z1/HD100/[HVX] but is wondering how will they ever afford ot make the live mix HD can now do it!
Your local TV station that is worried about how to make the upgrade.. is allready shooting some of it's news stories in HD, and producing HD news.. but based in a SD studio environment, are desperatly looking for new HD studio cameras that won't cost them $75,000 (the curent price of a basic Sony HD studio camera, without lens)
..Or maybe they allready have HD local news studoio cameras too.. but how about that Microwave or Sat van? they have the HD feed gear in place.. but a HD live cemara for a Microwave truck? pricy.. nope! this is perfect for that!
..you get the idea.

The HVX will still be the most versitle camera out there for the indy shooter, and for field work.. but there is a huge section of the market that jsut got a LOT of features they've been after for a while!

- Mikko.

[mmm]

I'm looking forward to the Panasonic at the moment but there are beginning to be so many HD options there's just about something for everyone. Exciting times!

It is really annoying though - there are all these different cameras coming out, and NONE of them match my, very common, needs! It isn't a choice of what fits my needs, it is a choice of which lacks the fewest features.

The Sony has no progressive scan and is HDV only.

The JVC has faults still, no reality mode, bad lens (CA aside, just wide angle), poor battery life. 720 only.

HVX - too heavy for form factor, fixed lens, very expensive to shoot and archive anything but DV.

XLH1 - Expensive, but still only HDV only. HD-SDI output worthless for indie filmmakers. Servo lens??

Surely someone can get this right! For God's sake:

HVX in a HD100/XLH1 form factor with built-in controller for external memory - HD and solid state. More modern codec than DVCPRO HD but higher bitrate than HDV. HDV option to tape. $7500. Anyone got a factory?

[Shaw]

Well there is always that Thomson Grass Valley Infinty HD camera for 19K =D. It records 4:2:2 10bit video in the JPEG2000 codec.

What I'm eagerly awaiting is a camera that records to 1$ holographic media in a modern wavelet codec in 4:2:2 10 bit for 10K or less. One of these days we'll see it I believe (a few years away at least certainly)....

[mmm]

Small market?
The market for live cameras is huge!
Let's say that a live system on average has 4 cameras.. most have 3, but many more have 5,6,8+
How many video switchers are sold each year? Now i'm not just talking the Panny MX20/50/70, the Videoonics/Focus MX1/Pro/proDV/MX4 the Datavideo SE800, etc.... I'm talking ALL switchers!! Ross, Grass Valley, Sony, For-A, S&W, Philips, etc.. (and lets not forget the Video Toaster, Tricaster, Globecaster..) This camera is DIRECTLY compatible with every video switcher moddel in the world!
..Hell, with the PAL/NTSC switching enabled, this camera is really the first one (even close to it's price) that can be plugged into ANY live system, and be instantly available and operational, in sync, without need for TBC or frame buffer.
And with more and more people/companies/groups going to HD.. this is a BIG BIG thing!
Hell, even your local church with large AV system who has those new nice HD ready projectors, and allready preshoots HD stuff with the Z1/HD100/[HVX] but is wondering how will they ever afford ot make the live mix HD can now do it!
Your local TV station that is worried about how to make the upgrade.. is allready shooting some of it's news stories in HD, and producing HD news.. but based in a SD studio environment, are desperatly looking for new HD studio cameras that won't cost them $75,000 (the curent price of a basic Sony HD studio camera, without lens)
..Or maybe they allready have HD local news studoio cameras too.. but how about that Microwave or Sat van? they have the HD feed gear in place.. but a HD live cemara for a Microwave truck? pricy.. nope! this is perfect for that!
..you get the idea.

The HVX will still be the most versitle camera out there for the indy shooter, and for field work.. but there is a huge section of the market that jsut got a LOT of features they've been after for a while!

- Mikko.

Maybe it is because I only watch the 5 terrestrial channels in the UK, but in my experience, if you can afford a studio, you aren't going to be spending £6-7k on a camera - it is such a vital link, but a tiny budget percentage. Why compromise the picture with a 1/3" CCD camera.

I would be surprised if even 10% of these cameras ever output a HD-SDI signal. I think the money could have been better spent... but maybe it was dirty cheap to implement..!?!

[Haakon]

It is really annoying though - there are all these different cameras coming out, and NONE of them match my, very common, needs! It isn't a choice of what fits my needs, it is a choice of which lacks the fewest features.
Lol... I agree with you completely, mmm. Although I do think that DVCPROHD is a good compromise between quality and data rate.

glassblowerscat, if you don't have the money to handle HD-SDI and its accompanying data rate, why not just buy the Sony for $5,000 less? You can have your HDV and eat it, too (please, take mine).

Mikko, you're talking about production systems with 4+ cameras (?!) and extensive post equipment... I don't think most of us have that kind of setup. Even if we did run some kind of "live switching environment," are you really going to want to save your masters in HDV? Uncompressed is great, if you've got the storage and means to store it, but to do that you've added several thousand more dollars to your budget (and the camera is already $9,000 as it is!!) I can see where the XL H1 system has its place, but what I keep reading is how wonderful the XL2 was for independent filmmakers. I don't see the XL H1 as a logical extention of that line at all.

[MattC]

I don't see why HD-SDI is worthless for indie filmmakers - depending on your definition. If you talking about no-budget folks doing a run and gun, stealing shots to make an el-cheapo film, then yes, it's worthless. But if you're talking about a real independent film being produced for theatrical distribution, then I don't think HD-SDI is so far fetched. Yes, you would need a tethered computer to capture the data and at least one other on set (or on location) to handle transfers/storage/logging, but for full blown film production (even a low budget one) I don't see this as a barrier at all. The lens? For now, yes, but I assume that just as with the SD XL they will release a fully manual HD lens. If Canon continues as it has, that lens will be better than any other comparable option.

My only concern is the 24F thing and how that will look and how it would transfer to film. If that turns out to be crap, then the camera will be useless to indie filmmakers. If on the other hand it turns out to be great, then this camera would, to me, be the ticket.

By the way, for those of us concerned with audio, it looks like a big leap forward over the XL2 which already provides stunning audio for a camcorder.

Matt

[mmm]

I don't see the XL H1 as a logical extention of that line at all.

That's my point, well said!

[mmm]

I don't see why HD-SDI is worthless for indie filmmakers - depending on your definition. If you talking about no-budget folks doing a run and gun, stealing shots to make an el-cheapo film, then yes, it's worthless. But if you're talking about a real independent film being produced for theatrical distribution, then I don't think HD-SDI is so far fetched. Yes, you would need a tethered computer to capture the data and at least one other on set (or on location) to handle transfers/storage/logging, but for full blown film production (even a low budget one) I don't see this as a barrier at all. The lens? For now, yes, but I assume that just as with the SD XL they will release a fully manual HD lens. If Canon continues as it has, that lens will be better than any other comparable option.


By the time you have pissed around capturing uncompressed HD onto your $10,000 RAID, which you'll need several of for a feature; paid all the extra crew to lug around, set up and operate the system you could have shot on Varicam or film and have a far better picture.

HD-SDI is too hardcore for this camera. If there was a manageable compressor and storage solution, it would help, but that should be built in to the camera!

[MattC]

Got it. Ok.

[MattC]

What do you think would be the lowest cost HD-SDI computer recording solution?

[mikkowilson]

I agree that thsi possibly isn't an extension of the same.. and it's not made to be an Indy shooter's HD camera.. why would they even try.. they can't beat the HVX in that field. so make somethign that appeals to others.

ANd I agree that many of us here dont' use live switching.. and that's why i don't belive that we are the primary market of this camera.

Canon knows it lost to the HVX ages ago, so it didn't even bother tryign to fight, but it found it's own market segment.. one that will very possibly take a notable nibble out of the bigger cameras from other companies.

- Mikko

[mmm]

Sorry I was ranting... :)

[mmm]

If they are trying to change the market for the camera, why make it look exactly like the old one...(well paint it black, even less like a studio camera)?

I see your point completely, but it just seems odd really. I think a lot of people requested it without real reason. It is nice to have, but there are more important omissions.

[Haakon]

Yes, you would need a tethered computer to capture the data and at least one other on set (or on location) to handle transfers/storage/logging, but for full blown film production (even a low budget one) I don't see this as a barrier at all.
I guess this is exactly the kind of mindset regarding the XL H1 that I find confusing... so for those who can't afford two 8GB P2 cards, but still love the idea of streaming DVCPROHD to a laptop where they can have unlimited recording times, being tethered down is completely unacceptable... but to get access to the almighty HD-SDI, it's a blessing? Just seems a bit hypocritical. (Not saying that you share this sentiment, but I've seen both of these views expressed quite a few places on different forums).

[MattC]

I don't think the indie filmmaker was EVER a real market for Canon (not since the arrival of the DVX at least). Does anyone???

[MattC]

I guess this is exactly the kind of mindset regarding the XL H1 that I find confusing... so for those who can't afford two 8GB P2 cards, but still love the idea of streaming DVCPROHD to a laptop where they can have unlimited recording times, being tethered down is completely unacceptable... but to get access to the almighty HD-SDI, it's a blessing? Just seems a bit hypocritical. (Not saying that you share this sentiment, but I've seen both of these views expressed quite a few places on different forums).

Oh no, not at all, I don't mind to shoot tethered (I'm almost always tethered to a field monitor) and if I get the HVX someday down the line, would certainly shoot that way whenever possible. Personally, I have not understood the resistance to the tapeless solution offered by Panny. I hate tape, less tape more better. My only complaint with the HVX is the formfactor and the lens. I'm not saying the XL2's formfactor is MUCH better, but for my taste it is at least little better. Also I didn't like the feel of the DVX lens at all. Not wild about feel of the XL2's stock lens (although for certain situations I do like it) but I love the manual lens - MUCH better than the DVX lens.

So for me I would like a body style like the JVC, the optics/switching features/hd-sdi/audio of the Canon and the gamma/HDPro/P2 of the Panny.

Where's Mary Shelly when I need her?

[glassblowerscat]

glassblowerscat, if you don't have the money to handle HD-SDI and its accompanying data rate, why not just buy the Sony for $5,000 less? You can have your HDV and eat it, too (please, take mine).

Because you might be looking for a "growth" camera, as I said.

Additionally (and this will hang on the quality of 24F), CF24 is stupid and shouldn't be used. If 24F can match actual 24P, the Canon has the edge.

Also the form factor. The interchangable lenses. (They will come out with more. Trust me.) The Canon glass. The professional I/O.

And again, for anyone who missed it: growth camera.

[Haakon]

Canon knows it lost to the HVX ages ago, so it didn't even bother tryign to fight, but it found it's own market segment.. one that will very possibly take a notable nibble out of the bigger cameras from other companies.
Okay, I can probably buy that. I'm in agreeance with mmm, though, in that by name it's an extention of the "XL" line (which has been established, up until this point, as the independent filmmaker's solution), it looks identical to the last camera they made, and even with all of the HD-SDI press it's getting, it continues to record to MiniDV tape as the core recording mechanism. All of these things kinda tout it as the next logical step in their previous line. Their website even declares, "whether you're a broadcast ENG producer, or documentary, feature, or commercial videographer, the XL H1 is the affordable, lightweight HD camcorder you've been waiting for." They aren't really marketing it as the "low-cost, studio-production camera alternative." But I'm sure you'll be able to make some kickass uncompressed game shows with it. :grin:

[Haakon]

So for me I would like a body style like the JVC, the optics/switching features/hd-sdi/audio of the Canon and the gamma/HDPro/P2 of the Panny.
Don't we all... :beer:

[mikkowilson]

hell, i mean it's great as a SD studio camera! That genlock will do wonders with jus teh regular Composite out.. or SD-SDI (If it has it, i'd presume it would - but you should never prsume anything) it'll be a kick ass studio camera.. a baisc SD Studio camera will cost you over $20k ..oh yeah, and it does HD too.

Just for the record: by Studio camera, i mean any camera that can be Externally syncronized (Genlock) and can (preferably) be externally controlled from a remote control unit (in this case the software [and i'm sure someone will make hardware for it too..])
Of course it's not a 2/3" Triax camera.. but if need be, it can work side by side with one in the same system.

- Mikko

[Knock Out Films]

Couldn't you take the uncompressed HD-SDI straight into an NLE while shooting but capture at an intermediate codec. SOmething above DVCProHD but not quite full uncompressed.

As some one stated, you are always tied to a feild moniter anyway, why not a labtop also?

Just thinking.

Cheers,
Chris

[mmm]

Don't we all... :beer:

No...I don't want P2... and a more efficient codec than DVCPROHD

I want an intergrated memory controller. Then you could plug a hard drive onto a sled at the back, or output straight to firewire/USB2. Once solid state is affordable, you use that instead of hard drives.

This way you pay a little more for the camera ($100 say) but you get 80GB of memory for $500-600.

[Digigenic]

...They aren't really marketing it as the "low-cost, studio-production camera alternative." But I'm sure you'll be able to make some kickass uncompressed game shows with it. :grin:
Hell yeah, haha.
I can totally see their list of testimonial quotes touting the benefits of the XLH1 - all the way from Robert Rodriguez and Michael Mann to Alex Trebek and Bob Barker.

[jdv]

Does any one know exactly how the new Cannon will record its HD signal to tape?

Specifically, is the method used similar to JVC's? I know that the HDV format has its weaknesses, but that (according to Barry Green), JVC's method of recording is the most robust.... Is Cannon different? Thanks, John.

[mmm]

Canon uses the longer 15 frame GOP like the Sony FX1 and Z1. It is 25Mbit/s. However, I believe that they have also extented the format and called it HDV2. I think it has 4 channel audio. I is likely that the footage will show more compression artifacting than the HD100.

[Haakon]

No...I don't want P2... and a more efficient codec than DVCPROHD.

...once solid state is affordable, you use that instead of hard drives.

So is cost the reason you don't want P2?

[mmm]

It is currently poor value. The cost is okay, the capacity isn't.

[Haakon]

It is currently poor value. The cost is okay, the capacity isn't.
I see. Well that will only continue to grow, I suppose. Still, if the only reasonable alternatives are HDV (plenty of capacity but at a piss-poor bitrate) or HD-SDI (quality footage but requires tons of storage, expense, and the need to be tethered), then I think the P2/DVCPROHD combination is a pretty workable system. I guess we'll see how everything actually plays out when the cameras are released.

[mmm]

This is what I mean, all the current solutions are flawed.

They should be using around 50Mb/s interframe and recording to cheap hard drives. If the controller was built into the camera any hard drive would do, but specially shaped drives to fit into or onto the camera would be best. A modest buffer would prevent problems from all but the worst motion.

As solid state becomes cheaper, it could then be used to replace the hard drives, but in the same casing. The camera wouldn't even know.

It would be future proof live P2 but also present proof!

[goldyprog]

It seems the biggest concern is the 24F, and that's what is ultimately on my mind: the JVC with the Fujinon HDTV lens is about $14,000 (about $9500-10K for the lens, 4400 for camera body). Let's say the 24F works on the Canon, and it can be transferred to 35mm. What other hesitations:

-a problematic lens; JVC's generic Fujinon shipping with the HD100 or this new Canon

Canon's CCDs has more than 60% more pixels per CCD, 4:2:2, 4 audio channels. If 24F convinces everyone it is true 24p HD (that is, HDV from its tape deck), then how can someone hold back from the Canon for image quality vs. the JVC, regardless of manual control?

[goldyprog]

I feel very pressed on this issue of XL H1 vs. HD100, since I was originally planning on getting 2 JVC's and use 720, 24P!!!!!

[Haakon]

If 24F convinces everyone it is true 24p HD, then how can someone hold back from the Canon for image quality vs. the JVC, regardless of manual control?
I don't think anyone's really doing that... at nine grand it ought to do something better. The problem is that even if the "24F" thing turns out to be acceptable 24-frame-like footage, you still have to record it to HDV. Like mmm pointed out, you don't really have the best of all worlds with any of these cameras. You just have to find the best hardware solution that works for your needs.

[goldyprog]

I don't think anyone's really doing that... at nine grand it ought to do something better. The problem is that even if the "24F" thing turns out to be acceptable 24-frame-like footage, you still have to record it to HDV. Like mmm pointed out, you don't really have the best of all worlds with any of these cameras. You just have to find the best hardware solution that works for your needs.


I agree with you and mmm, all four camera's from all four manufacturers don't give us exactly what any of us may be looking for-- there's +'s and --'s.

Also, with the JVC, there's a 6 pin firewire port, whereas it looks like the Canon XL H1 only has a 4 pin. And, no LCD (though a 2.4 " color viewfinder), just like the other XL's and this new and upcoming one.

[mmm]

We should all club together and make our own camera! Put all these mega-corps outta business!

Now, we need a catchy name...

[thisiswells]

Canon's CCDs has more ... 4:2:2
Canon's XL-H1 does not have 4:2:2 recording. It does, however, include a 4:2:2 digital output.
This is completely worthless unless the owner has a portable HD-SDI capture device.

Find one.

I feel very pressed on this issue of XL H1 vs. HD100, since I was originally planning on getting 2 JVC's and use 720, 24P!!!!!
The HD100 is turning into a great camera. JVC is taking care of the customers.

[MattC]

Brian,

Couldn't a powermac with a blackmagic card do this?

Matt

[MattC]

I mean, isn't this essentially what the Andromeda was doing (but in 4:4:4)? I don't know, I'm asking...

Matt

[thisiswells]

Hi Matt,

I'm not sure, really. I would imagine anything is possible with a PowerMac and a BlackMagic card... For me, "portable" is the key word.

Interestingly enough, a DVCProHD deck may be suitable because of the HD-SDI input.
Although it is compressed, it is a more robust format than HDV... Mainly because of the 4:2:2...

Hope this helps,
Brian

[MattC]

Well if a DVCProHD deck would do it, that would be portable enough for me for an indie film.

Interestingly though, I find myself between a rock and a hard place for an upcomming doc that someone is asking me to help with in Africa. The DVX would be the perfect HD solution for portability (P2 Cards and REAL HD). But I think I'd need the Canon for reach (this is if they go HD if they go SD I'll use my XL2) as I often find myself filming from a LONG way away (harder for them to draw a bead on you). Seriously, the Canon is the only camera that gives me that kind of reach (High end surveillance footage if you will). I can't hump a powermac with me into the bush and I don't think I could do this with a powerbook, have to wait and see how it all shakes out.

Matt