The H1 is here right now at Birns

[Jim Martin]

Hey everyone it's 2:10 pm here at Birns & Sawyer and we've been playing with the H1 for about 1 hour before it goes up to RESFEST(we needed to measure it for plates and matte boxes) First off, the 24f looks just like 24p....on a 42" hd plasma (via component out)....still very sharp! Also the cine gamma(2 of them) make it look really nice. Oh...there is no problem panning the camera in 24f like the Sony.........Anyway, all-in-all it's very impressive

[esperman]

thanx for the update. How does the footage from tape look?

[stephenlnoe]

Yes, panned images from the tape and is it front heavy? infinity focus ring? etc....

[Jim Martin]

just did a quick taping in 24f......looks great, no artifacting...

[Jim Martin]

yes its just a tad heavier than the XL2......yes front heavy like the 2.....range finder on the focus is great and the ring itself is a little better than the XL2.....If your in LA, you can go to RESFEST and play with it your self.....It's leaving here in 10 minutes to go there

[Jim Martin]

Oh, and one last thing, we just put the P+S mini35 on and it fits perfect with the XL2 mount. We put on a Cook S4 50mm and WOW!!!! amazingggggggglook.

[Barry_S]

Jim--thanks for posting your report. That sounds like a pretty cool package you put together.

[Antoine_Fabi]

Jim,

post some pictures !

[Barry_S]

Footage--he means footage. :)

Jim,

post some pictures !

[Nathyn]

I wanna see!

-Nate

[Antoine_Fabi]

OOOOOPS....

Barry S is right, i mean footage !!!! he he...

(I speak french)

[Jim Martin]

Sorry but we've got no way to play back the tape and get it up-loaded for you to see. I think everyone will get a chance to see and play with it soon (Canon is very good at marketing and getting footage out there) and again, if anyone is here in LA, get over to the Egyptian theater/RESFEST and see, touch, and try!!!!

[Antoine_Fabi]

Jim,

What are your first impressions about the noise level AND the dynamic range AND color rendition (contrast ratio etc...) ?

[Barry_Green]

Sorry but we've got no way to play back the tape and get it up-loaded for you to see.
This situation is worse than you can imagine. NOBODY can play back the tape and upload it. Canon's apparently gone and made their own, completely incompatible format!

I'm sitting here with a tape of 24F footage from the XL H1 right now. It will not play in any HDV gear in existence. It will not play in the HD100. It will not play in the HD1. It will not play in the FX1. It will not play in the new HC1. I really, really expected it to work in the Sony gear (after all, 1080i HDV is 1080i HDV, right?) but no, Canon's gone and made it incompatible.

If you want to play 1080/24F, there's only one piece of gear that can play it: a Canon XL H1. If you were thinking you could buy the Canon and then get a cheap Sony HC1 to use as a "deck", think again -- it won't work.

This "HDV" thing is starting to really irritate me. I mean, if you had a VHS tape, you'd expect you could play it in a VHS deck, right? And you can. What if you had a BetaSP tape? Would you expect that your BetaSP tape can only be played back in an Ampex deck, and not in a Sony deck? Or what if you recorded that BetaSP tape in a Sony deck -- would it play back in an Ampex? Of COURSE it would!

I can record a tape on a PD170 in DVCAM mode and play it back on a JVC BR-DV3000 DV deck.

But you cannot play a Sony HDV tape in a JVC HDV deck.
You cannot play a Canon HDV tape in a JVC HDV camera or deck.
You cannot play a Canon 1080/24F HDV tape in a Sony camera or deck.
You cannot play a JVC HDV tape in a Canon camera.

You *may* be able to play a Sony tape in the Canon camera, but I wouldn't bet on it and after today's trials, I most definitely would *not* make that assumption.

You basically have three almost completely incompatible formats, all calling themselves "HDV" and all recording on the same tape. It's asinine. It's stupid. It's a boondoggle -- who's in charge of the "HDV Consortium" anyway - FEMA?

Basically, if you shoot HDV to tape, you're screwed. You'd better hope and pray that whoever you give that tape to is using the exact same gear you are, or they're hosed. You can't even give a JVC 24P HDV tape to a JVC HDV user unless they have an HD100 -- it won't play back in the CU1 deck or the HD1 or HD10! And that's JVC to JVC!

This HDV thing is probably the biggest argument for "tape is dead" that I've ever seen. The only way you can have a prayer of compatibility is to forget the tape and just shoot straight to the FireStore. That way you can use the files in your computer and actually USE them! (well, sort of ... of course FCP claims to edit HDV, but it has no support for 24P HDV... and you can bet your tuckus that FCP won't work with 1080/24F now, if the Sony camera can't even work with it!)

Well, sorry for the tirade, but after three hours searching for a confounded FX1 just so I could digitize and post this footage, and finding out that it won't work and that THE THREE 'HDV' FORMATS ARE ALL INCOMPATIBLE WITH EACH OTHER, (and to rub it in, I've got a $5500 piece of HDV equipment here that won't work with this tape), well...

It's just insane. If someone thinks they're going to buy an HDV camera and get hired to shoot HDV footage for other companies, they're dreaming. You'd better hope and pray that whoever's hiring you is using the EXACT SAME equipment, or your tape will be totally useless to them. First time you hand someone a tape and they try to play it and it says "unable to read tape format", well, you can expect that'll be the LAST time you get hired by that client...

Okay, tirade off -- back to your regularly-scheduled programming...

[esperman]

Yikes! If this is in fact all true, then HDV is screwed....and strictly for home movies and weddings. I have had doubts that HDV could be used in the pro field arena....I've been waiting to see for myself. BUT DVCPRO HD from HVX just keeps sounding better and better.

[stephenlnoe]

This situation is worse than you can imagine. NOBODY can play back the tape and upload it. Canon's apparently gone and made their own, completely incompatible format!
It likely will play in a deck. The Sony HVR-M10E should play all HDV2 formats and the JVC BR-HD50U should play all HDV1 formats. I doubt if the camera's can play each other's tapes across the board. A deck is likely required unless you use the same camera as a deck.

Sort of no different from BetaSP to DigiBeta to DVCPro to miniDV to DVCam to etc, etc...

[stephenvv]

Okay, tirade off -- back to your regularly-scheduled programming...

That's just crazy wild. I already was irritated over the JVC 24p issue but know I think we can officially declare HDV dead as "format'.

If tapes don't play except in the cam that records them, that's not a format, that's proprietary closed system.

What's even worse is I NEVER use by camera as a editing deck - bad idea for any number of reasons and serious shooters with the HD100 and XL H1 will have to buy expensive decks (so much for saving money by shooting to HDV tape).

Shooting to a Firestore seems the only solution if you are shooting 24fps in either cam.

Suddenly Panny's 24p methods in the DVX/HVX (I have several pals using $200 miniDV cams as their DVX edit decks) and P2 is looking like a really smart business decision, both for Panny and for camera owners.:laugh:

[stephenvv]

It likely will play in a deck. The Sony HVR-M10E should play all HDV2 formats and the JVC BR-HD50U should play

I don't know if it's "likely" - maybe "hopeful". From the HD100 24p playback issues so far, AFAIK there is no universal HDV deck at all yet.

But someone does need to test soon to confirm.

[ChuckS]

It likely will play in a deck. The Sony HVR-M10E should play all HDV2 formats and the JVC BR-HD50U should play all HDV1 formats. I doubt if the camera's can play each other's tapes across the board. A deck is likely required unless you use the same camera as a deck..

Barry what do you think? I don't have any of these decks (or an XL H1) to test with. Although not out of the realm of possibility I do find it hard to believe that Canon would create a prorpietary format. Since they don't manufacture decks that would put them at an increadible disadvantage.

But I have no way to test this...

[stephenlnoe]

I'm not talking out my arse here guys......

[Barry_Green]

I don't know -- the deck was announced a long, long time before the Canon was a known quantity, so I would suspect that it won't play it.

The Canon guy told me that he didn't think it would play back in Sony stuff. I figured they would have just implemented it the way Panasonic (and Canon) implemented 24p in an interlaced stream, which would have made it compatible. But, the Canon guy said "no, actually what comes out of that firewire port, and what gets laid down on tape, is a 24p data stream." So no, it actually apparently *is* it's own incompatible format!

And yes, because they don't manufacture decks, I think that *does* put them at an incredible disadvantage. I really don't understand it. It seems completely illogical.

Maybe they're counting on you only recording it to a FireStore (at which point the tape transport/digitizing becomes irrelevant)...

[Policar]

Bizarre. It may mean that it's higher quality, though....if it's truly a progressive stream, there won't be any wasted data on extra frames.

Oh well. The one thing I liked about HDV was that it was a standardized format. Except I guess it's not anymore. Really, really strange....

[Tibby]

Maybe they're counting on you only recording it to a FireStore

How much HDV footage could you store on a Firestore?

[MovieSwede]

I think one solution to make the HDV format better is if they make a camera that can store the HDV stream on P2.

Benefits.

Dropouts is going to be much harder to get.

And on 2 card ala 8gb you can store 80 minutes of 720P and 64 minutes of 1080i

And easier to get the material to your computer.

[Rush]

Personally, if I am going to use P2, I might as well get full DVCPRO-HD quality. The whole idea of HDV is that is supposed to be cheap (DV tape) and convenient (No offloading of material). If those two go away, I may as well use the HVX200. :huh:

[Barry_Green]

How much HDV footage could you store on a Firestore?
On the 40-gb FireStore, you get about 3 hours of 1080 footage, or around four hours of 720 footage.

[Barry_Green]

Bizarre. It may mean that it's higher quality, though....if it's truly a progressive stream, there won't be any wasted data on extra frames.
Perhaps. I postulated over on DVInfo what I think "24F" is. Hopefully Kaku Ito will be able to digitize some footage direct from the XL H1 which will give us more info.

The one thing I liked about HDV was that it was a standardized format.
Since when? JVC and Sony are completely incompatible with each other, and both are "HDV"... although now having a third incompatible format is really starting to push the limits of it being "standardized"...

[vidled]

All interesting info, thanks Barry.
It seems almost as Canon threw in the HDV as it was the latest "buzz". Certainly hasn't convinced me at all, but the H1's real beauty may be the uncompressed HD-SDI.
....of course, once we figure out how to cheaply capture that footage! :beer:

[thisiswells]

Thanks, Jim Martin for the update! The XL-H1 sounds like a really slick camera. That's cool that you've outfitted it already! The Mini35 Rig would be a nice addition to this camera!

As for "standardization"... I can imagine in a pre-prod meeting sometime next year:, "Shall we shoot HDV, HDV, or HDV? Excuse me? Could you repeat that? Oh, I see. What a crapshoot."

[Anhar Miah]

I think recording to a firestore type device should be solve this, because once the data is copyied to the computer is is effectively a "UNIVERSAL" deck becuase it will read just about anything and reformat to just about anything.

Anhar

[Jack_Felis]

Yeah, but what about the average prosumer joe that doesn't know about Firestore? Or what about the guys that want tape? HDV sounds pretty bad right now. Well, I guess it's the HVX200 for me.

[stephenlnoe]

I don't know -- the deck was announced a long, long time before the Canon was a known quantity, so I would suspect that it won't play it.


I'd be surprised if the deck does not play the tape. Canon and Sony both set the standard in September '03 for HDV2. Canon's 2 year production/R&D cycle put's their camera out now ('05).

Do you have any editors out your way that have the Sony Deck?

[thisiswells]

If the deck can read the format, it must also be able to record in the format. That's essentially saying the Sony deck must be capable of recording 1080p/24 outside of 1080i with a pulldown. (?)

Barry: is your tape 24f or 60i from the XL-H1? Maybe a 60i tape would work in the Sony camera?

[esperman]

There goes your "low cost" hd solution guys. So, now you'll have to buy a deck for each specific HDV camera to output or edit with? What a mess. So, spend 9K for the XL H1 and then what for a deck?

Stay away from HDV until things get together. Keep your XL1/2 and avoid the headaches.

[vidled]

Well, it's SD and HD, but not HDV, that will probably win out. HDV will last as long as [real] HD can not easily be edited & transferred.

[stephenlnoe]

If the deck can read the format, it must also be able to record in the format. That's essentially saying the Sony deck must be capable of recording 1080p/24 outside of 1080i with a pulldown. (?)

Barry: is your tape 24f or 60i from the XL-H1? Maybe a 60i tape would work in the Sony camera?

OK, I see now. I missed that it was shot in the 24Frame mode on the H1. Nevertheless, try it in the deck.

[stephenlnoe]

Well, it's SD and HD, but not HDV, that will probably win out. HDV will last as long as [real] HD can not easily be edited & transferred.
I'm wondering if you realize that HDV1 m2t is the same ase HDTV transport stream? Unless HDTV is going away HDV is not going away. If you look at Monday Night football in 720p HDTV guess what you're watching? HDV.

If you want to bone up on the subject Click here to order this book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1558607927/qid=1128186811/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-4178114-1576739?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) or pick it up from your local library.

[Nathyn]

What are you all, girls? You guys do know this isn't a problem right? Just going from what I know about HDV isn't the big thing using tape as back up while doing digital capture? So what's all this fuss about what plays on whose camera. You're going to have to play back from the camera and view it in on the LCD or via one of small HD monitors.
This HDV thing is probably the biggest argument for "tape is dead" that I've ever seen. The only way you can have a prayer of compatibility is to forget the tape and just shoot straight to the FireStore. That way you can use the files in your computer and actually USE them! (well, sort of ... of course FCP claims to edit HDV, but it has no support for 24P HDV... and you can bet your tuckus that FCP won't work with 1080/24F now, if the Sony camera can't even work with it!)
How many of us have put up with Sony incompatability for years? All the sudden incompatability is big problem? I think everyone has caught on that the Firestore or digital capture device is the solution. You basically inform people what you're shooting on. When you're getting your crew together who just says "Bring a camera." You always say "We're shooting on the DVX100 or the XL1." Most times everyone's shooting on the same camera, if not they're usually doing some editing in between again giving people time to do a drop down to a compatable format. Pro live shooting will probably use HD out. And if everyone captures digitally the only drawback is will your NLE handle it.
That's just crazy wild. I already was irritated over the JVC 24p issue but know I think we can officially declare HDV dead as "format'.
Nope not at all true. Companies who want HDV will update they systems accordingly using digital capture methods and tape back up or HD-SDI for news and a compatable NLE. Do the editing then drop down to a compatable format everyone else can use. (Big companies will probably record out to an HD deck or to whatever they need). Workflow problem solved. I still prefer the space HDV saves.
Shooting to a Firestore seems the only solution if you are shooting 24fps in either cam.
This isn't just the only solution it's the best.
Yikes! If this is in fact all true, then HDV is screwed....and strictly for home movies and weddings.
Why couldn't someone make an indie film with HDV or do news or sports? When you use any equipment you set your system up for it. You edit then drop it down via whatever way you do it. Just like with DV I record straight from the computer into the camera and a VHS VCR at the same time (connect cam to VCR). I figure HDV will be the same way once inside an NLE it's all information to be spit out as you choose.
Yeah, but what about the average prosumer joe that doesn't know about Firestore? Or what about the guys that want tape? HDV sounds pretty bad right now. Well, I guess it's the HVX200 for me.
Ironically the big thing is consumers don't seem to care about HDV, hence the companies trying to make it a proformat. Frankly the Canon and Panny are coming out around the same time the JVC will be up and running. Canon and the HVX shoot DV (so they're still useful until NLE's upgrade) and FCP can handle footage from the JVC now just not the 24p stuff. I'm willing to bet in the next few month Final Cut Pro (Apple seems to be a partner with all of these companies) will have updates supporting all this stuff and eventually so will the rest. If not, that's just dumb on their part. I know Apple thrives on trying to do it all so I'm hoping they do support all these formats.

HDV is not dead. It's cheap and decent quality, but what I want to know is HOW THE HECK DOES IT LOOK! We got off the point of how does the image from the Canon HDV look. Are there artifacts? Is the image tight. Will Canon let you play back from a tape you record? If not why not? (What are they hiding). Hows the fast pans and fast motion looking.

-Nate

[esperman]

What are you all, girls? You guys do know this isn't a problem right? Just going from what I know about HDV isn't the big thing using tape as back up while doing digital capture? So what's all this fuss about what plays on whose camera. You're going to have to play back from the camera and view it in on the LCD or via one of small HD monitors.



Why couldn't someone make an indie film with HDV or do news or sports? When you use any equipment you set your system up for it. You edit then drop it down via whatever way you do it. Just like with DV I record straight from the computer into the camera and a VHS VCR at the same time (connect cam to VCR). I figure HDV will be the same way once inside an NLE it's all information to be spit out as you choose.



-Nate

I don't think get what we're saying. If I shoot Beta SP...that tape will work in any BETA SP deck. If I shoot minidv....that tape will work in ANY DV, DVCAM or DVCPRO deck. Period...regardless of what shot it.

With HDV...the format is not one standard..and if you are a pro getting paid freelance...you may have issues shooting in on your camera, and then giving it to the client for their purposes....out of state, a production company.... a network... whatever. It sounds like that HDV between each manufacture will not be compatible with all HDV. So yes, you have some serious issues. There has always been various formats...but for Gods sake...if your on Beta or DVCAM or DVCPRO ...you expect that tape to work with all other things for that particular format ...right?

[thisiswells]

You're going to have to play back from the camera and view it in on the LCD or via one of small HD monitors.
Perhaps you're more familiar with playing back from tape. However, all of my projects are delivered on DVD. Tape as an aquisition tool? Yes. As a distribution product? Well, more people are asking for DVD's.

How many of us have put up with Sony incompatability for years? All the sudden incompatability is big problem?
Every MiniDV tape will play back in any MiniDV player.
Every BetaSP tape will play back in any BetaSP player.

Do you see a pattern emerging?

It's easy to trade tapes recorded on different equipment because the information recorded on those tapes is identical. They are compatible because they share something in common; what's written on the tapes is compatible.

"HDV" is actually three different formats that record on the same tapes and share the same name. But, despite their commonalities, you cannot share your Sony tapes with a JVC guy, or Canon tapes with a Sony guy. That's why it's a problem.

Plus, what will you do in ten years with those tapes? Where will they end up? Fast forward a little bit and you'll probably (finally!) realize that everything will be on our computers in ten years. Our music, our photos, our videos. In fact, videos are the only thing that aren't on mine. But, that's changing slowly as I've already begun capturing all my good clips onto HDD storage. Eventually, I will throw all my tapes.

Workflow problem solved. I still prefer the space HDV saves.
Let me present some possible scenarios. You are a full time shooter. You decide, "hey, if I get that new camera then I shoot HD" but, the client wants this other guy to handle the editing. The other guy does not have a Canon camcorder. They can't play the tape back without a Canon camcorder. See, that's the problem.

Any of the HDV formats seem to work well for a solo operation. But, once you get into the world of handing the tape over to the client on a regular basis you'll find yourself in a great deal of trouble when they discover they can't do anything with the tape you've given them.
When you use any equipment you set your system up for it. You edit then drop it down via whatever way you do it. Just like with DV ...
No, not like DV.

Let me put it this way. I own three MiniDV cameras. The DVX100a and two handycams. I keep the handycams connected to both of my Mac's and capture tapes with them. This has proven to be a very efficient way to cut the 26 hours of doc footage I shot last month. I also took one of them with me while I was shooting to watch tapes at night. With the XLH1, this workflow would be impossible since I would need to buy several XLH1 cameras to play the tapes! Crazy!

HDV is not dead.
1080i HDV is barely a year old. It isn't looking so healthy, tho. Maybe it'll get SIDS.

[vidled]

I'm wondering if you realize...

"HDV is a "consumer high-definition video format" proposed by a consortium of manufacturers..."

As such, I probably do agree after all that there will be a continued consumer market.
I am just pleased that Panasonic is offering the HVX. It's a gutsy, clever and brilliant move for some of us who prefer not to go the HDV route.
Got to love choices, so now everyone can get what they can want / afford.
All good.

[stephenlnoe]

"HDV is a "consumer high-definition video format" proposed by a consortium of manufacturers..."

As such, I probably do agree after all that there will be a continued consumer market.
I am just pleased that Panasonic is offering the HVX. It's a gutsy, clever and brilliant move for some of us who prefer not to go the HDV route.
Got to love choices, so now everyone can get what they can want / afford.
All good.
Actually HDV serves a dual role. It is the transport stream of HDTV. It's compression favors high definition broadcast. HDTV's transport stream is nearly identicle to m2t which is recorded on HDV camcorders. This puts HDV and XDCam in another league altogether and why broadcasters favor XDCam. It is ready for HDTV broadcast right off the camera. Now with Pinnacle and Avid joining and native HDV between the two it's likely HDV will really take off. Avid and Pinnacle have tremendous pull in broadcasting.

Sony, Sharp, Canon and JVC's "consortium" not only set a standard for HDV1 and HDV2 but it also defined HDTV under one pact. Pinnacle, FCP and now XpressPro are all onboard with native Mpeg2 editing. That should speak volumes.

None of this is to say that Panasonics solutions aren't good. They are. Just as you write, they offer more choices for all of us.

[thisiswells]

It is ready for HDTV broadcast right off the camera.
But, in what instance does a recording go straight from camera tape to broadcast? Isn't there always a "buffer" involved, such as a router, switcher, chyron, etc.?

... still trying to connect the dots on why having distribution-grade .m2t files is favorable to broadcasting (unless there is a defined workflow from camera to edit to decks to switchers to cg and then towers all in the exact same format... is this possible without transcoding at any stage?) I think sat-tv providers are moving with H.264, as are HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. So, the pro-hdv producers better re-think their motives.

[mmm]

There must be a deck in the works that will play back XLH1 footage in 24f, it would be crazy otherwise... unless they really don't care about indie's anymore.

BTW, just because there is suddenly this rumoured problem with the XLH1, it doesn't mean HDV is dead! Anyone wanna take a bet that in 5 years there will be at least twice as many HDV cameras sold as DVCPROHD cameras? It will probably be more than 10 times... but that is too risky to bet on.

[Nathyn]

I don't think get what we're saying. If I shoot Beta SP...that tape will work in any BETA SP deck. If I shoot minidv....that tape will work in ANY DV, DVCAM or DVCPRO deck. Period...regardless of what shot it.
Understand it, just don't think it's a big problem.
Let me present some possible scenarios. You are a full time shooter. You decide, "hey, if I get that new camera then I shoot HD" but, the client wants this other guy to handle the editing. The other guy does not have a Canon camcorder. They can't play the tape back without a Canon camcorder. See, that's the problem.
You explain the HDV workflow to the customer. If they still want it let them know they will have to bring a laptop with appropriate sized HD and you will download to his laptop from your Firestore at the end of the day. The client walks that day with digital footage in their laptop ready for edit. Sweet.
No, not like DV.
Very much like DV in other than the situation you presented. Once in the computer that footage is at your beck and call.
Let me put it this way. I own three MiniDV cameras. The DVX100a and two handycams. I keep the handycams connected to both of my Mac's and capture tapes with them. This has proven to be a very efficient way to cut the 26 hours of doc footage I shot last month. I also took one of them with me while I was shooting to watch tapes at night. With the XLH1, this workflow would be impossible since I would need to buy several XLH1 cameras to play the tapes! Crazy!
Yes, you'd have to change your workflow the way you would have to with some technologies. Now you'd have to go completely digital, just like you would if you had the HVX. (It doesn't do DVC ProHD tape, you'd have to use P2 or a Firestore).
1080i HDV is barely a year old. It isn't looking so healthy, tho. Maybe it'll get SIDS.
Not at all. Cheap HD is cheap HD. You'll be seeing HDV pop up and many places. HDV will become popular with indy filmmakers and others while the HVX will become popular with others. Tape is out, digital workflow is in, but tape back up is in too. As it is with computers it too shall be with digital camcorders. If I go HDV I'll be backing up to tape. I don't have this safety with the HVX and as a matter of fact right now it's the only thing that makes me shakey about the HVX. (Even though when the HVX hits SMS here in Chicago, I hope to be all over it).

-Nate

[thisiswells]

What I'm saying is, given the choice between the HVX200 at $6K and the XLH1 at $9K, plus a Firestore for each, what does the XLH1 offer in terms of picture quality based on initial reviews to justify the 50% price hike? Everything I've read says the XLH1 has two stops less dynamic range than the HVX. Why would I pay more for something that does less? The storage for DVCProHD isn't as bad as you might think because storage is cheap. Cameras are not.

[evinsky]

The Canon guy at rez-fest said the 24F should play in the Sony HDV deck no problem. I records to tape in 60I just like the DVX 24P. You will have to do a pulldown reversal to get native 1080 24F.

[Nathyn]

What I'm saying is, given the choice between the HVX200 at $6K and the XLH1 at $9K, plus a Firestore for each, what does the XLH1 offer in terms of picture quality based on initial reviews to justify the 50% price hike? Everything I've read says the XLH1 has two stops less dynamic range than the HVX. Why would I pay more for something that does less? The storage for DVCProHD isn't as bad as you might think because storage is cheap. Cameras are not.

Well now this is a point I've made in other forums. It looks questionable for Canon but not particularly for HDV. But again I have to say it's all about what's needed. Some people will have space concerns, I saw the one TB1 drive I want Thursday and I'm thinking about the space concerns. I think 1TB is enough. I'd be editing on a G4 for now though. Either way you've got others who will want interchangeable lens but not risk the problems with the JVC.

For me the Panny stock lens has always been enough, not so for others. If I really want a super wide shot I'll buy one of those screw on deals for the DVX, but other want dertain types of lens. Don't think the HL1 is dead in the water. Far from it. I was thinking about getting a 16:9 adapter for my DVX100 but now I'm thinking of just getting the HVX.

-Nate

[Spiff]

Eh. If the 24F mode isn't compatible with the Sony decks, it means that Canon made efforts to maximize the efficiency of their 24F encoding - which means higher quality 24F, fewer artifacts, and an all around better image. This is actually good news... otherwise, people would be complaining that the 2:3 pull-down was messing up the compression.

If JVC can make a "ProHD" format, and implement 720p24, I don't see why Canon can't implement their own too. Right now quality is the number 1 concern.

-Spiff

[evinsky]

I guess you didn't see my earlier post.
The Canon 24F footage IS compatible with the Sony deck.

[Barry_Green]

Do you have any editors out your way that have the Sony Deck?
I had a hard enough time finding the darn camera! I eventually found one in the SonyStyle store, and the employees were very gracious in letting me use it.

I tried to find the deck there, but they didn't offer it (and I'm not surprised, as the deck is sold by the broadcast division, not the consumer division, and SonyStyle only sells consumer stuff).

I have now located two people with FX1s in town, so this shouldn't be that much of a hassle in the future. But I don't know of anyone with the M10 deck. Anyone reading this in Vegas with an M10 who's up for an experiment?

[Barry_Green]

Barry: is your tape 24f or 60i from the XL-H1? Maybe a 60i tape would work in the Sony camera?
The tape is 24F, not 60i.

I'm pretty sure the 60i would work -- if it doesn't, that's just insane. However, even then, Canon's gone their own way -- they've changed the audio spec, so instead of recording two tracks in 384kbits, they offer four tracks in the same 384kbits. Will the Sony support that? Don't know...

[Barry_Green]

But, once you get into the world of handing the tape over to the client on a regular basis you'll find yourself in a great deal of trouble when they discover they can't do anything with the tape you've given them.

EXACTLY! This is the exact argument pro-HDV guys have been using: "at the end of the day, I can hand my client a tape." Well, yes, I guess you can -- but will it do the client any good? Can they use it?

Or will you be put in the rather uncomfortable position of having to tell them "oh, yeah, about that... um, you need to buy a $9,000 Canon camera before you can play that tape... did I forget to mention that?"

Or, you the shooter are put in the position of having to buy one of each camera, depending on what the client uses. So much for cheap acquisition, now you have to have an HD100 and a Z1 and an XL H1 (well, okay, hopefully the XL H1's 60i mode is compatible with the Z1, so we can maybe drop the Z1, but then you'd be limited to not being able to use 24F and not being able to use the four channels of audio... so why spend twice as much for the XL H1?).

Here's the other thing that people aren't factoring in: when you're working freelance, the people hiring you DON'T KNOW technical things. They don't know, they don't care. I'll get a call that says "we're shooting for a convention, and we need someone with a DV camera". Great, I take the DVX and go. But now, the conversation is "we're shooting and we need HD." So I say "okay, what KIND of HD?" And they say "the little one. You know, that little camera." So I say "HDV?" And they say "yes! That's it. We're shooting HDV." And I, being a responsible business owner, then go to the next level and say "what KIND of HDV?" And they will, I guarantee you, say "what?" And I'll say "there are three kinds of HDV and they're all incompatible with each other. What kind do you want to use?" And they will say, I guarantee you, "what are you talking about?" And I'll patiently try to explain, and they'll say "I don't know, how am I supposed to know? I'm just the production coordinator, you'd have to talk to the editor". And on and on.

For a "closed shop", meaning a place where you do all the editing for everything you shoot, then it's not a problem. But for those of us who get hired, it's a massive boondoggle. A quagmire. It's a really, really bad thing.

[evinsky]

This is why despite the cost concerns of P2 I know any editor can take a Lacie 250 GB firewire HD and pulg it right int his NLE and transfer the MXL files right to his RAIR bucket. Then start cutting away.

[Barry_Green]

There must be a deck in the works that will play back XLH1 footage in 24f, it would be crazy otherwise... unless they really don't care about indie's anymore.
They are totally at the mercy of Sony. If Sony decides to throw them a bone, to give a competitor a gift, then maybe they'll make their deck compatible. But why should they? Their cameras don't support the format, so if they decide to make their decks support it, they're just giving away market share. Sure they may sell a deck to XL H1 owners, but -- if they don't support the 24F mode, maybe a lot of prospective XL H1 buyers will just go with Sony's Z1 anyway, and that way Sony sells TWO products to the consumer instead of one...

Well, it's all in Sony's hands. Canon does not make decks, never has, and probably never will (at least according to the Canon rep I talked to at Res.) JVC makes decks, but their decks are totally incompatible with all 1080 HDV. Panasonic makes decks but they'll never make a professional deck that plays HDV. So that leaves only Sony...

Anyone wanna take a bet that in 5 years there will be at least twice as many HDV cameras sold as DVCPROHD cameras? It will probably be more than 10 times... but that is too risky to bet on.
I would bet that if HDV survives, it will survive because eventually the consumer decides to buy into it. And in that case, yes obviously there will be 10x as many $399 Sharp Viewcam HDV cameras sold as there are DVCPRO-HD cameras. But in 5 years I expect HDV in the professional realm will be completely obsolete, having long since been surpassed by some new Wunderkam that records direct H.264 onto P2 or XDCAM or solid-state.

[Barry_Green]

The Canon guy at rez-fest said the 24F should play in the Sony HDV deck no problem. I records to tape in 60I just like the DVX 24P. You will have to do a pulldown reversal to get native 1080 24F.
That is exactly the opposite of what the Canon guy told me. He said that what is on the tape, and what comes out the firewire port, is a 24-frame signal. It is *not* 60i.

And this has been verified by trying to play the tape back on both Sony cameras (FX1 and HC1) -- both brought up an error message saying "incompatible tape format."

Plus, it also explains why they were showing the 24F footage off of a DVCPRO-HD deck (how's that for irony?) They cannot play back the 24F footage on any HDV deck, so they had to transfer it to a different format.

I think whoever you talked to at Canon was wrong -- there were several people in the booth, but only one was an actual Canon employee, the rest were hired filmmakers who were there to "talk shop" with the filmmakers attending ResFest. Tim Smith was the Canon employee, and he's the one who told me that the tape wouldn't likely play back in a Sony deck (and he was right).

[stephenlnoe]

I guess you didn't see my earlier post.
The Canon 24F footage IS compatible with the Sony deck.
I saw it evinsky.

As I wrote 2 pages ago, the tapes may not play from camera to camera but they should play in the deck. B. Green is right in the fact that HDV1 tapes will not play in HDV2 decks but HDV2 tapes should play in the HDV2 deck and the format is non exclusive.

Once again, The Sony HVR-M10E should play all HDV2 formats and the JVC BR-HD50U should play all HDV1 formats. This very question came up when we were formally introduced to HDV in October '04, but who knows, maybe things have changed in a year!

Give it a shot when you find a deck in your area.

[evinsky]

You right this guy was definately not a Canon tech. Just a shooter showing off the camera. I guess I just assumed he knew what he was talking about. In that case then there are more delivery problems with the XL-H1 than the HVX!

[evinsky]

Also, are there any NLE's that will edit 24F yet? After all it's a totally different flavor of HDV?

[stephenlnoe]

Also, are there any NLE's that will edit 24F yet? After all it's a totally different flavor of HDV?
Neither FCP nor Liquid will capture 24p, however Liquid will edit 24p HDV and fuse 24p as well, so it is capable of 24p elementary streams output. We (Liquid editors) are waiting for 24p HDV capture to complement our 24p HDV timeline. So to summarize, no end to end 24p HDV editing. Liquid is only missing the capture piece and FCP (AFAIK) will not edit 24p HDV at all. Somebody correct me about FCP if I'm wrong please.

Our Premiere edit station does not have 24pHDV either (Cineform) and we prefer not to use Premiere for HDV anyway.

[mmm]

If only the whole world used 50Hz!:grin:

We would even be shooting major films at 25 fps. No more pulldown...ever. :beer:

I doubt the 25f will be a problem on the Canon.

[evinsky]

And if we all switched to the metric system world peace would be ours. But it ain't happening in our lifetimes.

[Barry_Green]

B. Green is right in the fact that HDV1 tapes will not play in HDV2 decks but HDV2 tapes should play in the HDV2 deck and the format is non exclusive.
But Canon has gone BEYOND the HDV2 spec. That's the problem. They added a new 24F mode. They added four channels of audio. They've made their own format, effectively.

Easy enough to test, if I can find someone with an M10 deck, or -- alternately, if anyone HAS an M10 deck, I'll be glad to send the tape to them.

[thisiswells]

Here's the other thing that people aren't factoring in: when you're working freelance, the people hiring you DON'T KNOW technical things. They don't know, they don't care. I'll get a call that says "we're shooting for a convention, and we need someone with a DV camera". Great, I take the DVX and go. But now, the conversation is "we're shooting and we need HD." So I say "okay, what KIND of HD?" And they say "the little one. You know, that little camera." So I say "HDV?" And they say "yes! That's it. We're shooting HDV." And I, being a responsible business owner, then go to the next level and say "what KIND of HDV?" And they will, I guarantee you, say "what?" And I'll say "there are three kinds of HDV and they're all incompatible with each other. What kind do you want to use?" And they will say, I guarantee you, "what are you talking about?" And I'll patiently try to explain, and they'll say "I don't know, how am I supposed to know? I'm just the production coordinator, you'd have to talk to the editor". And on and on.
EXACTLY! I had to explain to a client the other day it was okay to shoot on a DV camera and record to a VHS deck since they wanted a VHS tape (for immediate review purposes). I can't fathom being a coordinator and getting the "other side of the story" with Barry Green on the other line! Aaaahhhkkk! :happy: A guy who really knows what he is talking about? Don't see those often enough...

For a "closed shop", meaning a place where you do all the editing for everything you shoot, then it's not a problem. But for those of us who get hired, it's a massive boondoggle. A quagmire. It's a really, really bad thing.
Yes, for solo operations it could work. But, the future is so uncertain with new tape formats. I'm really, really uneasy about investing in another one.

[Nathyn]

Or will you be put in the rather uncomfortable position of having to tell them "oh, yeah, about that... um, you need to buy a $9,000 Canon camera before you can play that tape... did I forget to mention that?"

I just really think these cameras are for certain applications. Mainly indie filmmaking as well as being used as cheap studio cameras, where compatability won't be an issue. While I'm strongly following the Panasonic HDV is still looking good to me because of the tape back up aspect. In this day in age there are a lot of "closed shops" who use the camera maybe to make some extra cash but it's not their main business.

-V

[braw]

Now imagine if they could make a small form factor camera that used a very widely accepted format that would work awesome for a closed shop, and for delivering footage to clients without issues.

That would be cool. :evil:

[stephenvv]

Also, are there any NLE's that will edit 24F yet? After all it's a totally different flavor of HDV?

There are 24F clips in mT2 format on DVInfo and they load fine in Vegas into a 1440X1800 23.976 progressive project. They look like decent 24fps motion but they come in as 23.976 with no pulldown applied, so it 24 frames.

However, without shooting a rez chart, it's hard to see if it's full rez. They do look much better rez wise and motion render wize than Sony CineFrame. But it's also clear there is a little something something going on to make them progressive - for lack of a better word they look very "processed" i.e. very digital.

But the clips are mostly hand-held bad lighting like the HD100 early stuff. But at least Vegas 6.0c brings them in okay, though I did not actually try to do anything with them.

[Jim Martin]

Hey everybody, I'm back at the office (Birns & Sawyer) and I see that people are getting "amped" over this playback issue. As a general rule in our rental department, we have always encouraged people to rent a camera for an extra day so they can upload their footage from the camera they shot with....to guarantee no compatibility problems.....problems that have been around for a while (canon tapes don't always play so good in Sony decks, etc). So, with that in mind, the camera will be out in mid-November and there should be some good answers by then. Believe me, if there is a problem in playback, Canon will be looking for a solution ASAP. I would suggest that everyone give them a little time on this, especially because they just announced/showed the camera 2 weeks ago.

Anyway, like I said on Friday, the picture REALLY looks great, the color really impressed our lens guy Stacy, not to mention the lens itself, the 2 cine-gammas (1 for filmout,1 for video) are very good in what it does with the colors and with the P+S...WOW.

[myfriendimage]

not worth 9000

[PANA-MAN]

not worth 9000


That's debateable. For those individuals on a limited budget wanting uncompressed HD output over HD-SDI it may be very reasonable indeed. You can't get this feature in any other camera at this price point. Period.
You're probably saying, "Who gives a f@#$? Well, true, some don't. But some really do.

I think it's a matter of perspective. I've heard many people say they want and will buy this camera because it suits there purposes just fine.

My point being, if someone says 10 divides into a hundred ten times. Well, er..yes. Of course it does. That's an immutable fact. But to say this camera is not worth 9000 dollars means it's not worth 9000 to you and some others. Not to everyone.

:)

[evinsky]

I'm not saying it's not worth 9K. If it performs as well on HDV as it seems to throught HD-SDI then it is most definately worth 9K. I just can't use it till an affordable deck that supports 24F is available.

And a note on affordability. Eventually the wide angle question has to be adressed. When a seperate wide lens is developed for this camera it's going to cost BUCKS! And I mean more than the camera! So as a system this is not a 9K investment. That is just the start, add 5k for a deck and 11K for a wide lens and your at 25K. Less than any other 2/3" HD camera but not exactly indie. This camera is very good, but maybe not ready for the masses.

[David Jimerson]

We (Liquid editors) are waiting for 24p HDV capture to complement our 24p HDV timeline. \

Now that Pinnacle has been acquired by Avid, it might be possible. But Pinnacle sure wasn't going to do it on its own.

[HorseFilms]

Looks like my first thoughts about HDV were dead on... it's not for me.

[PANA-MAN]

This camera is very good, but maybe not ready for the masses.


Agreed. It is definitely not for everyone. :)

[Jarred Land]

yes indeed. What I dont understand why Canon, who decided to make their own format for this camera, didnt use a proper wrapper. HDV is garbage, sure it may now look nice, but sorry to break it to everyone, editing the stuff is a complete nightmare and GOP issues wont go away anytime soon. Im just surprised that they didnt use some creativity to just create a solid state solution or perhaps license someone else's codec.

HDV, as most of us can agree, is mostly just a fad right now, in a couple years it wont be around in the professional arena. Most Post facilities i know arnt gonna go out and buy 6 different decks to accommodate what has come a broken HDV standard.

That said, I have a feeling HDV will get really big in the consumer arena, as its the only affordable solution for that market, and since the mandate to switch to HD broadcasts and HD televisions come cheaper and better, People are gonna watch little Jimmy's birthday party in HD rather than SD. But that is where it will stay, its just not a professional format, and I will be very pleased to see it go away.

[evinsky]

I don't like HDV anymore than you do but, what I find so intersting is that Canon really dosen't want you to think this is an HDV camera. Not once during thier presentation or during the demo in the booth outside did the Canon reps tout the HDV. It was all SDI this and SDI that. This is essentially just a camera head. They don't even consider the HDV a viable format. They want you to buy this camera and then rent a $25,000+ deck to record DVCPro HD or a $60,000 HDCam deck. So this camera is aimed at all the mid tier TV stations that need a camera that can output HD and send it back to the truck or booth to be recorded or broadcast. The HDV is just an after thought or back up. They figure a solidstate or HDD recorder will come around to compensate but it still seems odd.

[kyle_doris]

I'm wondering if you realize that HDV1 m2t is the same ase HDTV transport stream? Unless HDTV is going away HDV is not going away. If you look at Monday Night football in 720p HDTV guess what you're watching? HDV.

If you want to bone up on the subject Click here to order this book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1558607927/qid=1128186811/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-4178114-1576739?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) or pick it up from your local library.

this is not the best comparison, since, when you watch a DVD... you are watching a 480p image transfer from what is usually 35mm film to mpeg-2 SD. the image still looks far superior to a 480p frame from a 24p camera like the DVX. there are a ton of other factors to "HD" than just resolution... the camera's that sports broadcast are using are far better. having full sized CCDs and amazing lenses, to what is most likely WAY better color sampling.

with HDV you are acquiring your HD in a very compressed way, there is a large difference between acquisition and output.

[Landon D. Parks]

Personally, I dont see why I should pay $12,000 for the XL H1 with a Firestore device, when I can get a HVX200 + 2 x 8GB P2 cards for $10,000.00.... or even a HVX200 with a firestore device (if you want that) for around $8,000.00.... Whats the point of paying MORE for an inferior format? Regardless of if the camera has 50 Megapixels o.5, it still records HDV (to the tape anyway), and thats a 25MBPS MiniDV stream... DVCPRO HD records 100MBPS (3 x Less compression, etc than HDV).

The thing that makes me mad at canon more than there incompatablity issues is the fact that they choose to use the 1080i format, and just "Smilulate" 24p with a 24F mode. 24F is not true 24p, no matter how great people say it looks.

There for a while, I was all keen on buying the XL2 over the DVX-100, but now it seems Panasonic has an edge over Canon (better camera, cheaper on top of it)...

Plus, from what I hear, Final Cut 5 supports the new P2 format Panasonic is using (what is it? MFX or somthing like that), so with a nice dual G5 Mac, you should have little problem with capturing and editing DVCPRO HD 720p or even 1080p footage.

HVX wins in my opinion.

[mmm]

The thing that makes me mad at canon more than there incompatablity issues is the fact that they choose to use the 1080i format, and just "Smilulate" 24p with a 24F mode. 24F is not true 24p, no matter how great people say it looks.


I really can't see this matters at all... if it looks great, it is great, no matter what you call it, 24P, 24F, 24Z. If it does turn out to look rubbish, well, the it is rubbish.

24P and 24F and both merely imitations of 24fps film anyway.

[Landon D. Parks]

Still, Doesnt 24F actually cut down on the resolution of the image being recorded, similare to how the 30F feature in XL1 did? Or am I wrong?

[icicle22]

[QUOTE=Landon D. Parks]Personally, I dont see why I should pay $12,000 for the XL H1 with a Firestore device, when I can get a HVX200 + 2 x 8GB P2 cards for $10,000.00.... or even a HVX200 with a firestore device (if you want that) for around $8,000.00.... Whats the point of paying MORE for an inferior format? /QUOTE]

It's only inferioir if your needs aren't met by it. What would be the point of say "PBS" to buy the HVX200 which actually records a better format HD, but they cannot easily integrate it into their studio workflow because it has none of these features? They may want to go from a 3 camera setup to a 5 camera setup and HD cameras are uber expensive. The H1 would allow them to tie into their existing HD infrastructure for under $10k. Under $20k for 2. Compared to the other HD cams that will do this the H1 is downright cheap!

It really depends on the features you need. If none of the studio features that the XL-H1 offers appeal to your specific needs then it's preceived value will be less to you.

[Barry_Green]

Doesnt 24F actually cut down on the resolution of the image being recorded, similare to how the 30F feature in XL1 did? Or am I wrong?
That is a question that isn't answered yet. We don't know how 24F is made, or what impact it has on the image resolution; I don't think anyone's shot a chart and compared the two.

[Barry_Green]

It really depends on the features you need. If none of the studio features that the XL-H1 offers appeal to your specific needs then it's preceived value will be less to you.
Exactly! The cameras offer very different feature sets. For some people (such as studios) the lack of HD-SDI may be a dealbreaker. For others (indie filmmakers) the presence of HD-SDI may be irrelevant.

[mmm]

That is a question that isn't answered yet. We don't know how 24F is made, or what impact it has on the image resolution; I don't think anyone's shot a chart and compared the two.

Barry, do you think a chart will actually show true results. Some people have suggested that the camera uses an intelligent de-interlacer which would produce abnormally high resolution for 24F when shooting a completely static chart. Of course if the camera doesn't work that way, it would be a far test.

Does that make sense?

[Barry_Green]

You make an excellent point. If it truly is a "smart de-interlacer", a chart will show it at full res, whereas moving footage would be noticeably softer.

If, however, it's a system such as Sony's CF25, then a chart will easily show the res drop.

So running a side-by-side on a chart would be perhaps illustrative, but not definitive.

[mmm]

You make an excellent point.
:laugh: That's like getting a gold star for your homework when you're 5.

[Mirezzi]

I'm curious how many people actually use cameras to shoot and how many actually buy cameras to merely talk about statistics and features?

It seems like nobody ever mentions prime lenses. Any DP's in the house or is this like a Blizzard website where guys talk about their Mage versus another guy's Rogue versus some girl's Amazon?

:-D

[MachinePhilby]

There seems to be quite a discussion related to what the cams are capable of, what you need to make this capability a reality, and how much all this costs...

Can we simply this a bit?

For someone that straight out wants to buy JUST THE CAMERA... what do we have? What are the bare-bones if you like that make the decision on which cam to buy easier? I'd be guessing here but by the sounds of it not many people here are interested in multiple cams or studio setups etc etc. So, what is on offer for those that buy just the cams themselves?

1) What does each cam shoot/record? (even just to DV tape)
2) What features, that are actually useful, do you get
- lists ones they both have, then the ones that one cam has that the other doesn't...
3) Which cam is suited to what type of output - I mean film-style or doco or other...
and for most people the critical part would probably be:
4) How much does a bare-bones cam cost?

I'm sure you could expand on these questions rapidly, but keep it simple... what do we have to start with, not after 20 thousand dollars later (if you know what I mean)

Cheers

[evinsky]

I'm curious how many people actually use cameras to shoot and how many actually buy cameras to merely talk about statistics and features?

It seems like nobody ever mentions prime lenses. Any DP's in the house or is this like a Blizzard website where guys talk about their Mage versus another guy's Rogue versus some girl's Amazon?

:-D
Yes there are a few DPs here including myself. Primes are awesome, I have a Zeiss standard speeds myself, but they are impractical to use unless you have a $7000 P+S technic adapter. Maybe once the G35 comes out we will have an option for primes but you will still need to have the stock lens attached for that. These cameras may not have primes but they are surprisingly capable despite that. More to the point the make high resolution imaging affordable in way not availablle before.

[Zim]

not worth 9000

I saw in some magazine the price of the Canon was $8,999. But it also showed the DVX100a at $3,995. We know it's cheaper than that. So maybe that's the list price?

[Barry_Green]

$8999 is the list price, yes.

[Luis Caffesse]

But why should they? Their cameras don't support the format, so if they decide to make their decks support it, they're just giving away market share.


I suppose you could see it as 'giving away' market share. Or, you could view it as gaining back some market share that otherwise would have been lost.

How many people are truly debating between the XLH1 and the Z1U? Not many it seems.
The bulk of the debates seem to be centered around the XLH1, the HVX200 and the HD100.

My point is, those who decide to buy the Canon camera probably weren't going to buy a Sony camera instead, at least not the majority of them. By releasing a deck that is compatible with Canon's HDV variant Sony could gain some lost market share. A 'universal' HDV deck would be THE deck to get if you were editing HDV.

So, I wouldn't be completely shocked if Sony did support this cam in it's next generation HDV decks.

[Barry_Green]

Luis, the only problem I have with what you just said is that it's rational and well thought out. But it ain't Sony's way of thinking.

Sony is "the one and only." Sony is "like no other." I don't think for a minute that they'd go out of their way to support someone else's format. I'd LOVE to be proven wrong, but I don't think there's any glimmer of hope anywhere that would go to support that notion. Even when they added nominal support for JVC's HDV flavor, by allowing some tape playback, they made sure it was crippled by not allowing firewire playback.

I really wish what you were saying was true. But I look at it in the same light as Vegas -- by all accounts the HVX is going to be one of the hottest cameras going. So Sony's response to it is to add support in their editor for it, right? Well, no... instead they added support so you can render out a Playstation Portable file from the timeline. Uh... yeah, thanks. And of course, MXF Op-Atom is the new SMPTE-codified standard that is used for file interchange, so Sony added MXF support for: XDCAM. Op-A1. Not Op-Atom. And they specifically say "no other version of MXF is supported."

Like No Other.

The One And Only.

Well, who knows -- maybe Howard Stringer will look at his balance sheet and realize that that strategy isn't working, and maybe they'll come up with a new slogan. Maybe a whole new attitude. Maybe they'll seriously consider something like "Sony: Giving the Customer What They Want." We can only hope, because their stubborn excluding-all-others philosophy is certainly not working for them in the marketplace anymore...

[Luis Caffesse]

Even when they added nominal support for JVC's HDV flavor, by allowing some tape playback, they made sure it was crippled by not allowing firewire playback.


You're probably right.
My DSR11 for example will play back DVCPro tapes without a problem....as long as "without a problem" means analog only.

It's funny because a few months back when everyone was speculating on what Canon was going to offer on the HD front there was a lot of talk of them coming up with their own spin on HDV, or even a whole new HD codec. Everytime the topic came up I kept telling people not to expect anything new from Canon for one simple reason... Canon has never put out decks to support their cameras. Therefore, I never thought for a second that they would release anything other than a camera which shot on a widely accepted format.

Huh, shows what I know.
You're probably right Barry.

(wow, I'm really going on a limb with that statment aren't I? Barry might be right, again)
:)

[Bob Diesso]

Barry's HVX insights are really wonderful. In one of his posts he mentions Panasonic invites him to private internal strategy meetings. The HVX insights he comes up with are incredible for those of us who dream of HVX. Because of his unusual access to Panasonic, he's not exactly speaking as an independent third party. In a sense, it's a mixed blessing.

What's becoming a turn-off is his incessant denegration of every other manufacturers' HD camera besides Panasonic. It really undermines whatever objectivity he hopes for.

Whether his claims are accurate or not, one wonders how long it will take for the owners of this forum to receive a defamation lawsuit from one of them...

[stabwound]

What's becoming a turn-off is his incessant denegration of every other manufacturers' HD camera besides Panasonic. It really undermines whatever objectivity he hopes for.



I dunno about that.

He did shell out big bucks for the JVC... and he sent it back because the split screen issue drove him mad.

I suspect that if Canon and Sony made 24p and dvc pro cameras, he'd have bought one of each by now.

I feel the same way he does.... give the customer what he wants... and so far, only Panasonic seems to be listening.

[MovieSwede]

Barry's HVX insights are really wonderful. In one of his posts he mentions Panasonic invites him to private internal strategy meetings. The HVX insights he comes up with are incredible for those of us who dream of HVX. Because of his unusual access to Panasonic, he's not exactly speaking as an independent third party. In a sense, it's a mixed blessing.

What's becoming a turn-off is his incessant denegration of every other manufacturers' HD camera besides Panasonic. It really undermines whatever objectivity he hopes for.

Whether his claims are accurate or not, one wonders how long it will take for the owners of this forum to receive a defamation lawsuit from one of them...


I really dont se any errors in Barrys comments. The things he said are true. The only thing you could be biased of is when it comes to what film look is. Thats individual.

As for HDV, Splittscreen, interlace etc those stuff is a fact.

[Stevet]

What's becoming a turn-off is his incessant denegration of every other manufacturers' HD camera besides Panasonic. It really undermines whatever objectivity he hopes for.

Whether his claims are accurate or not, one wonders how long it will take for the owners of this forum to receive a defamation lawsuit from one of them...


Oh please...

[Jack_Felis]

Barry's cool, the man knows his stuff about videocameras, a shite-load more than many of us at that. Do I think everything he says is fact? Most of the time, but not always. Nobody's perfect, ya know. But when it comes to what I would see and experience with a videocamera, I'd wait to see what Barry says. He just tells it like it is and he can give a really technical answer if you ask him for it.

Do I think he's biased about HD cameras these days? No, no I don't. He HAD the JVC HD100, he saw the splitscreen, he studied all the pros and cons of the camera but the splitscreen was an unforgivable flaw. Had he kept it, what would that have done? He'd have wasted $5k for a broken camera. Has he been bashing every other camera? No, not at all. Sure, we've all had our hopes dashed slightly by the limitations of the Sony FX1/Z1U cameras, but they still work for what they do. I haven't heard him say anything negative about the Canon yet, unless I missed something, but judging from what he's said in the past few posts, I think he's as much in the dark about the performance like the rest of us and can't say too much as of yet, still much like the rest of us, and can only make assumptions based on the facts available to us, like HDV flaws and the pros and cons of the HD-SDI output. But, based on the information available for the HVX200, Barry can give some excellent views towards the camera and, as he's stated in the past, several times, can't fully judge the camera as no footage has been available.

So, before turning this into a "Praise Barry Green!"-thread, just take into account that the man has 10,000+ of helpful and generally friendly posts under his belt and he included my name in the 10,000th post video:laugh:! HAW!

[Jarred Land]

Whether his claims are accurate or not, one wonders how long it will take for the owners of this forum to receive a defamation lawsuit from one of them...

careful cowboy.. Barry is the last person here that would be getting a defamation lawsuit, but your inaccurate statements towards him puts you in that legal position.. so guard your grill, knuckles up.

[Isaac_Brody]

Bob are you making this stuff up? Because it reads pretty thin.

[Barry_Green]

In one of his posts he mentions Panasonic invites him to private internal strategy meetings.
What? I don't think I ever said anything like that! What I said was that Jarred, by virtue of having this site, basically gets treated like the press. He gets granted exclusive interviews. And Jarred invites me along to write the articles when we get a chance to interview Panasonic representatives. How that translates into "being invited to private internal strategy meetings" is way beyond my ability to fathom.


What's becoming a turn-off is his incessant denegration of every other manufacturers' HD camera besides Panasonic. It really undermines whatever objectivity he hopes for.
Incessant denegration? "Incessant"? I answer questions when they're asked, and I answer them truthfully and honestly. And every answer I give is easily verifiable. Put it to the test, you'll see the results. How is that "incessant denegration"? If I was starting threads saying "oh, you won't believe what a piece of junk this canon is" or "holy cow, could Sony have fouled up this other camera any worse", well, I'd agree with you. But I only discuss the other products in the context of answering questions that have been asked. And I answer those questions with easily-verifiable, duplicatable facts.

Seems like you may have an axe to grind. If so, please do so through private messages. Thanks.

[J.R. Hudson]

Well; I've been meaning to give this to someone lately. Might as will be here and now.


http://img458.imageshack.us/img458/9611/troll4gm.jpg

[Nathyn]

Hey Barry, I hear you get invited to "private internal strategy meetings." Can you bring me and a couple of my closest friends with you next time. I'm sure Panasonic have nothing better to do than invite some guys who run a freaking internet forum to "private internal strategy meetings." That's like telling the girl next door, (who really likes you but you don't really know her), your social security number and bank account numbers.

-Nate

[MovieSwede]

It couldnt be that easy why the HVX200 gonna be a favoured cam on DVXuser, is that the panasonic engineers actually read our wish list here at DVXuser???


I remembered something like. "Just give me 1080P with 4:2:2 compression and 2/3 ccds".

So 2 out of 3 aint bad.

[kai]

Trolls taste good with bbq sauce.