BobDiaz
12-29-2005, 05:52 PM
First, I'll say that my views on the cameras are NOT objective and I don't think anyone has fully objective views. We all have a bias one way or another and some features that are important to some, are not as important to others. What weight we give to the different strong/weak points of a camera defines our own view of the camera. Overall I think all the HD cameras out there are good considering the price point, but as I weigh the different features here's what I see:
SONY Z1:
Nice camera, great price, BUT ... (1) This is an interlaced camera. If you shoot in 30F or 24F, there is a loss in vertical resolution. (2) With a 15 frame GOP, a dropout will result in a 1/2 a second loss of video. I don't know how likely it occurs, but Murphy's Law says it will occur at the worst possible place in the video. (3) The Sony MPEG-II compression can't stand rapid changes in the image. A quick pan from side to side generates major motion artifacts.
CANON XL H1:
Canon fixed many of the problems that we see in the Sony Z1. The images appear to be sharp and the de-interlacing of the video appears to work for the 24F and 30F modes. Still it does have things that worry me: (1) The camera uses a 15 frame GOP and a single dropout results in a 1/2 a second loss of image. (2) I'm very unsure of how well the Canon's MPEG compression holds up. Is the camera sensitive to artifacts when there are rapid pans? I'll admin that there's a lot to this camera I just don't know.
JVC HD100U:
MY hopes were very high for this camera, BUT there are a number of troubling things about the camera: (1) The stock lens is poor quality and suffers for chromatic aberrations. Even the people at JVC admit the stock lens isn't that great. Yes, one can put a better lens on the camera, but the other zoom lens costs around twice as much as the camera. One can use an adapter and put 1/2" & 2/3" lenses on the camera, but you won't get wide angle with a 1/3" CCD. (2) The battery life is TOO SHORT. OK, one can adapt a bigger battery for the camera, but you need to add that to the total price for the camera. (3) SSE (Split Screen Effect); word is the problem is solved, BUT it still does worry me. The left and right side of each CCD uses its own A/D (Analog to Digital) converter. In theory, they should track exactly, BUT there are times where they do NOT track exactly and the left and right sides of the image show a slight mismatch.
PANASONIC HVX-200:
While I knew the HVX-200 was coming out soon, but it really didn't catch my attention until DV Expo West. On paper, it looked great, but didn't the Titanic also look great on paper? Will the camera fit my needs and not have some hidden problem(s) that make it a pain to work with?
I like to think of each bit of information as a data point in my decision process. The demos at DV Expo are a positive data point, the reports from Barry are another positive data point, Jan's presentation at DV Expo is another positive data point, and the images from the WEB are another positive data point. In a few weeks we'll get a whole lot more data points as the first users get their cameras and talk about it. It should be VERY interesting.
What do you think of the different cameras?
Bob Diaz
SONY Z1:
Nice camera, great price, BUT ... (1) This is an interlaced camera. If you shoot in 30F or 24F, there is a loss in vertical resolution. (2) With a 15 frame GOP, a dropout will result in a 1/2 a second loss of video. I don't know how likely it occurs, but Murphy's Law says it will occur at the worst possible place in the video. (3) The Sony MPEG-II compression can't stand rapid changes in the image. A quick pan from side to side generates major motion artifacts.
CANON XL H1:
Canon fixed many of the problems that we see in the Sony Z1. The images appear to be sharp and the de-interlacing of the video appears to work for the 24F and 30F modes. Still it does have things that worry me: (1) The camera uses a 15 frame GOP and a single dropout results in a 1/2 a second loss of image. (2) I'm very unsure of how well the Canon's MPEG compression holds up. Is the camera sensitive to artifacts when there are rapid pans? I'll admin that there's a lot to this camera I just don't know.
JVC HD100U:
MY hopes were very high for this camera, BUT there are a number of troubling things about the camera: (1) The stock lens is poor quality and suffers for chromatic aberrations. Even the people at JVC admit the stock lens isn't that great. Yes, one can put a better lens on the camera, but the other zoom lens costs around twice as much as the camera. One can use an adapter and put 1/2" & 2/3" lenses on the camera, but you won't get wide angle with a 1/3" CCD. (2) The battery life is TOO SHORT. OK, one can adapt a bigger battery for the camera, but you need to add that to the total price for the camera. (3) SSE (Split Screen Effect); word is the problem is solved, BUT it still does worry me. The left and right side of each CCD uses its own A/D (Analog to Digital) converter. In theory, they should track exactly, BUT there are times where they do NOT track exactly and the left and right sides of the image show a slight mismatch.
PANASONIC HVX-200:
While I knew the HVX-200 was coming out soon, but it really didn't catch my attention until DV Expo West. On paper, it looked great, but didn't the Titanic also look great on paper? Will the camera fit my needs and not have some hidden problem(s) that make it a pain to work with?
I like to think of each bit of information as a data point in my decision process. The demos at DV Expo are a positive data point, the reports from Barry are another positive data point, Jan's presentation at DV Expo is another positive data point, and the images from the WEB are another positive data point. In a few weeks we'll get a whole lot more data points as the first users get their cameras and talk about it. It should be VERY interesting.
What do you think of the different cameras?
Bob Diaz