PDA

View Full Version : Canon Unveils New Prosumer HDV Line: XH G1 and XH A1



Pages : [1] 2 3

Yardsale
07-26-2006, 09:11 AM
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-Unveils-New-Prosumer-HDV-Line-XH-G1-and-XH-A1.htm


Canon has finally released some successors to their famed GL2 cam: the XH G1 and XH A1. The two cameras offer a slew of new options to the prosumer, not least of which is the HD resolution offered by the HDV format. Both cams feature the same 16:9, 1/3-inch CCDs of Canon's XL H1, along with 1080i recording at 60 and 24fps and Canon's 24p-like 24f option. The XH cams nicely fill the GL2 gap, trading the XL's interchangeable lenses for size and cost savings. Both models feature 2.8-inch LCDs, 20X zoom lenses and even XLR inputs, but the XH G1 has an extra "jack pack" and a $3000 premium. What'll that three grand get you? Pro ports like HD/SD-SDI, Genlock and TC in/out that allow a serious shooter to output uncompressed HD footage for recording to another format with less compression than the consumer-ish HDV tapes. Smooth move on Canon's part, and we're sure more than a few pro video types will gladly fork over the extra cash for the privilege. The vanilla XH A1 version goes for $4000, and should be available in October, while the XH G1 will follow in November for $7000.

looks like we got some competition!

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/upload/Image/news/2006/Canon/XH%20G1%20and%20XH%20A1/Product%20P%7Biece/Canon-XH-G1-vanity.jpg http://www.camcorderinfo.com/images/upload/Image/news/2006/Canon/XH%20G1%20and%20XH%20A1/Product%20P%7Biece/Canon-XH-A1-frontright.jpg

Larry Rutledge
07-26-2006, 09:17 AM
What does "Canon's 24p-like 24f option" mean?

Color
07-26-2006, 09:28 AM
they call 24p, 24f.

that cam looks amazing

Yardsale
07-26-2006, 09:31 AM
What does "Canon's 24p-like 24f option" mean?
That part really confused me. If you have true 24fps, why would you need Canon's 24p-like 24f option??

Brandon Rice
07-26-2006, 09:47 AM
It's not true progressive.

Larry Rutledge
07-26-2006, 09:51 AM
That part really confused me. If you have true 24fps, why would you need Canon's 24p-like 24f option??

Well, it says "1080i recording at 60 and 24fps" which leads me to believe that it is 24 non-progressive. Then it says "24p-like 24f option"...so I assume it is some sort of "faked" 24p. Just wondering what process they use since it appears to not be true 24p.

Kholi
07-26-2006, 09:56 AM
It is not 24p. It is Canon's approach to twenty-four frames a second which, as stated, is dubbed 24f. Along with that, there's a 30f and a 60i, but not 60p or 60f.

Either way, it's been kinda shown that you can't really tell the difference between 24f and 24p.

AshG would be able to tip you off more on the subject of 24f. But, it's not at all bad. Just another form/fashion of getting film-like cadence.

TC
07-26-2006, 10:33 AM
I can't decide if I love or hate the form factor.

I'm pretty sure I hate it...

The Machinist
07-26-2006, 10:45 AM
$7,000 for a fixed lens HDV camera?

No thanks. I'd sooner go with the HD100U.

or just pay the extra what 1700? for an XLH1?

It is a pretty slick design though.

Filmjunkie677
07-26-2006, 10:47 AM
Looking pretty hot.

But it ain't a DVX/HVX.

HorseFilms
07-26-2006, 10:57 AM
I'll stick with my DVX for now... for quite awhile, actually.:)

Brandon Rice
07-26-2006, 10:58 AM
me too... though I think an HVX is in my near future :):):)

FilmMakerr
07-26-2006, 10:59 AM
$7,000 for a fixed lens HDV camera?

No thanks. I'd sooner go with the HD100U.

or just pay the extra what 1700? for an XLH1?

It is a pretty slick design though.


You read my mind.

mikkowilson
07-26-2006, 11:16 AM
Hmm..
VERY interesting!

It's like a "mini me" for the XL-H1. Those TC/Genlock/SDI jacks on the back still draw a big line in the sand, and now again at a lower price point. Combined with the PAL/NTSC switchablity option, that's the new cheapest universal conectivty camera.
The G1 can connect and send a signal to practically any video system. Use it in your edit bay to send video from firewire to your analog monitor - or walk up to the very latest HD production truck and plug into their genlock and SDI input and you are set as a studio camera. Damn that's prety impressive.

Not havign seen the output or having read the manual for this camera, I can't tell, and don't think, it beats out the HVX yet. But it did just kill the Z1 in my books. Not that I'm buying a new camera right this minute, but if I was, Sony is out of the running.

- Mikko

razamalik
07-26-2006, 12:00 PM
Hmm..
VERY interesting!

It's like a "mini me" for the XL-H1. Those TC/Genlock/SDI jacks on the back still draw a big line in the sand, and now again at a lower price point. Combined with the PAL/NTSC switchablity option, that's the new cheapest universal conectivty camera.
The G1 can connect and send a signal to practically any video system. Use it in your edit bay to send video from firewire to your analog monitor - or walk up to the very latest HD production truck and plug into their genlock and SDI input and you are set as a studio camera. Damn that's prety impressive.

Not havign seen the output or having read the manual for this camera, I can't tell, and don't think, it beats out the HVX yet. But it did just kill the Z1 in my books. Not that I'm buying a new camera right this minute, but if I was, Sony is out of the running.

- Mikko


I agree with you Mikko... HVX is still better in my books... though we will have to see the images coming of this camera but i dont expect it to be any different than its big bro XLH1...

I JUST POSTED IN ANOTHER THREAD:

nice one & at a good price too but i think its a bit late on canon's part ... just seems like a copy of fx1 & Z1 on may accounts with a few extra features ! if this was released a year ago that is before Hvx200 & XLH1 it would have created some vibe.. ah but its all a bit too late for HDV now.

nice to see an iris ring on the lens... but hate the free ring designs... why on earth cant canon just put ends on the zoom & focus ring like the HVX200???? if i am right sony fx1 does have zoom & focus ends... so why is this not implemented?

dustino
07-26-2006, 12:12 PM
Too bad canon can't get true 24p. I find it both amazing and bizarre. I want to be a canon fan, really I do. They make great glass and I love almost everything they do in their still camera line. So what's up with the 24p? Why are they overlooking such an enormous factor in image quality?

Barry_Green
07-26-2006, 12:23 PM
Very, very interesting. I was wondering how they would respond to the concept of a GL3, and I figured they'd never be able to make a 1/4" HD camcorder, so instead they take the same imaging block out of the XLH1 and put it in a fixed-lens body, and drop the price by $2,000.

Now, the A1 for $3999, that looks mighty interesting. Completely obsoletes the Sony as far as I'm concerned, feature-wise, presuming the video quality holds up. I mean, if you want 1080 HDV, you could get the Sony Z1 for $5946 (MSRP) or the Canon for $3999 (MSRP) and add 24F instead of CineFrame 24? How does the Sony stand against that?

Man oh man though, if this had been AVC-HD instead of HDV I'd buy one today. BUT: the big question mark is the lens controls. I hate (despise, actually) the rubber-band loosey-goosey "wet cabbage" feel of the XLH1's lens. If Canon has addressed that, they may have a contender here. If they haven't addressed it, I don't care what it costs I wouldn't stand using it.

As far as an HVX competitor? Naw. 4:2:0 HDV vs. 4:2:2 DVCPRO-HD, 1080/24F vs. 1080/24P, 1080/30F vs. 1080/30P, no 720p at all, no variable frame rates, no DVCPRO50, no Cinelike-D and Cinelike-V, and back to a tape-based workflow? No thanks on that aspect.

Well done on Canon's part though. I think these look pretty solid, and they should totally eat the FX1's and Z1's lunches.

TimurCivan
07-26-2006, 12:25 PM
its too expensive. for 7G's i can buy a full HVX kit. i dont thin i will ever be usingthe SDI as a Studio camera, plus,, if you opt out of that ability, youre stil spending 4g's for a HDV camera.

although the 24F at 4g's isnt bad. It doesnt look too bad at all.



....Also there is now a "deck" for the XLH1.

Barry_Green
07-26-2006, 12:30 PM
So what's up with the 24p? Why are they overlooking such an enormous factor in image quality?
It's not that they're overlooking it; remember they put 24p on the XL2.

It's more likely that they're buying their CCDs from Sony, and Sony seems to have a hard-to-understand aversion to making progressive scan. I mean, even in their new supposedly-progressive-scan XDCAM HD lineup, they're using interlaced CCDs and "faking it". That's why the variable frame rate 350 drops to half-resolution if you push it to faster than 30fps; it drops to using a single field. Even in AVC-HD, a format that natively supports 1080/24p, they put out an interlaced-only camera. It seems like their marketing slogan should change from "Sony: The One And Only" to "Sony: Interlaced Only."

I think Canon is probably a victim of their suppliers. They know people want 24p, and I'm sure they'd love to be able to offer it, but apparently they can't find the chips they need.

razamalik
07-26-2006, 12:52 PM
LOL i like that "Sony: The One And Only" to "Sony: Interlaced Only"... btw shouldn this tread be in the news section?

Jarred Land
07-26-2006, 01:38 PM
I am impressed.. i almost was thinking Canon was gonna go hide for awhile.. but this camera seems like it may become one of the best HDV cameras out there.. on paper it performs better than the H1.

Brandon Rice
07-26-2006, 01:43 PM
on paper it performs better than the H1.

I was thinking the same thing... and scratching my head as to why they'd eliminate the H1 already...

Terry_Lasater
07-26-2006, 01:44 PM
Those three letters on the outside of the LCD display kill it for me.

Brandon Rice
07-26-2006, 01:45 PM
Yeah.... same here.... HDV... BLAGH...:zombie_smiley:

tnle2
07-26-2006, 01:58 PM
I think these are great cameras, especially as "B" cameras. You need long run times if you've got this sealed up in an underwater housing or a crash box or rigged up in some remote location so HDV makes sense. Try doing that with P2. The lens is also really nice. Good ol' Canon glass and it's just as wide an the HVX but 50% more telephoto! We still have to find out how the zoom/focus/iris rings feel but Jesus it's got an iris ring!

You could shoot almost anything with this camera: indie filmmaking, ENG, event, wildlife, weddings, whatever. And it really only cost $4K because not that many people will need the $7K G1 model which only adds SDI, Genlock and TC.

I don't know why anyone would buy a DVX now with this camera only being $500 more. It also makes buying an HVX pretty hard too. The damn thing is $2000 less and that's not counting P2 media cost! That's pretty persuasive to me. I can really see this camera becoming the "B" camera workhorse like how the PD150's were.

Brandon Rice
07-26-2006, 01:59 PM
Well... the DVX still has 24 progressive frames... this camera does not. And, we still need to see the color and latitude that this camera is capable of as well.

Yardsale
07-26-2006, 02:05 PM
Too bad canon can't get true 24p. I find it both amazing and bizarre. I want to be a canon fan, really I do. They make great glass and I love almost everything they do in their still camera line. So what's up with the 24p? Why are they overlooking such an enormous factor in image quality?
I think it has something to do with licensing. They only fork over for their expensive models.

Am i wrong? I heard that somewhere...

Yardsale
07-26-2006, 02:08 PM
24P on the XL2 or other Canon camcorders isn't true 24P. The CCDs, even on the XLH1, are interlaced CCDs and progressive images must be interpolated from two interlaced fields.

While there is technically no direct licensing requirement in terms of patents/copyrights, etc.. for someone to produce a 24p/24FPS camera, it seems that most manufacturers are paying royalties to 24P, LLC. A "company" that holds the patent on acquiring 24 progressive frames per second from a digital imaging device, in order to replicate the appearance of film. Robert Faber, who holds the patent, is nothing more than a bully and it is outright extortion that he collects royalties for such a patent as it is very vague and extremely all-encompassing. Faber actually chased down Sony several years ago when they started shipping some of their intial 24p capable HD cameras and Sony lost (actually settled out of court). All licensing of 24P from Faber is handled confidentially on an individual basis and several cases have supposedly bordered on blackmail and illegal activity and they all involve a patent that should never have been granted in the first place. When Faber applied for his patent in '92, it was hardly an original idea then and various camera makers were already talking about such cameras and were playing with prototypes. It's almost as bad as the early '90s patent application by the Pizza Hut Corporation to patent their stuffed-crust pizza... A novelty of many pizza kitchens world-wide that has been around for at least a few hundred years. Perhaps I should go apply for a patent on 300FPS acquisition via a digital imaging system and then whenever upcoming digital cameras capable of 12.5X slow-mo arrive (240FPS digital are right around the corner), I can start collecting money for every slow-mo shot in every major motion picture.

Check out this link to a blurb at studiodaily.

Anyway, all that this shows is that Canon is developing or even preparing to release a 24P capable camera. Beyond that, I don't think anyone really knows what Canon is up to and they're very good at keeping quiet about their new products. It could be a new 720p consumer HDV camera or a 1080p pro camera, or anything in between. 24P and variable-rate progressive technology from 24P,LLC is currently used in just about every progressive-scan camera out there, including the Varicam, HVX200, DVX100, etc.. It's a small license, and could mean a lot of things, but it shows that Canon is taking a step towards a camera that has true progressive frame shooting abilities.

got this from somewhere so people don't think i'm an idiot and just making things up :)

dustino
07-26-2006, 02:17 PM
It's not that they're overlooking it; remember they put 24p on the XL2.

I didn't know the XL2 had true 24p. Back when we had the "other cameras" forums, I remeber someone posting some images from the XL2 that was supposedly in progressive mode, but they were nasty interlaced. Perhaps that user didn't know what he/she was posting. All this time I've been dismissing the XL2 unnecessarily...

Bottom line, I would SERIOUSLY consider the cheaper version of this camera tomorrow if it had true 24p.

tnle2
07-26-2006, 02:29 PM
Well... the DVX still has 24 progressive frames... this camera does not. And, we still need to see the color and latitude that this camera is capable of as well.

Does it matter if by the time you put it into your NLE the results are the same? Here is an explanation of the 24F mode by Chris Hurd:

"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 constitute a "new and improved" version of Frame Movie mode, based on a technology originally developed by Panasonic and adapted by Canon in 1997 for the first XL series DV camcorder, the XL1. This updated version of Frame Movie mode is nearly identical to the 30P and 24P results produced by progressive scan CCDs. The Canon XL H1 CCD block is interlace, not progressive, therefore the 30fps and 24fps frame rates cannot be referred to technically as 30P and 24P. However, 30F and 24F from the XL H1 appear almost indistinguishable from 30P and 24P, as they are basically the same results as progressive scan, but produced by different means. When the XL H1 is set to Frame recording, the CCDs are actually clocked at 24 frames per second. The video signal remains at 24fps as it is passed from the CCD block to the baseband LSI, and through the HD Codec LSI. Only when it reaches the recording output stage is it resampled to 60i via a 3:2 pull-up method."

The rest of the article is here:

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

I say cheers to Canon if they are able to bypass that guy's patent and still achieve the same results. Also, I suspect there are engineering problems such as heat issues with reading the information off full rez native progressive scan 1440 x 1080 1/3" chips so that's why no one uses them and why Panasonic uses lower rez chips and JVC had problems with their 1280 x 720 chips.

William_Robinette
07-26-2006, 02:57 PM
Those are some sexy looking cams. Although the LCD mounting looks weak. Depending on image quality, I can see the A1 being a huge contender in the market. Does anyone have an example of 24f footage next to 24p footage?

J.R. Hudson
07-26-2006, 03:12 PM
It also makes buying an HVX pretty hard too.

Two different monster's.

TC
07-26-2006, 03:18 PM
Bennis- I dig your avatar. :thumbsup:

Pettersen
07-26-2006, 03:18 PM
Am I the only one seeing the striking resemblance to the Sony Fx1/Z1? Look at the mic... look at the viewfinder..

Thirsty
07-26-2006, 03:20 PM
There's a show on Lifetime called Lovespring International that is shot on the XL H1 in 24f mode. I caught one episode a few weeks ago and the picture and motion looked pretty dern sweet, any doubts whether it didn't looked like true 24p went out the window for me.

Info on the show:
http://www.lifetimetv.com/shows/lovespring/index.php

Info on how they shot it:

http://www.studiodaily.com/main/minisites/xlh1/f/mwhatsnew/6788.html

TimurCivan
07-26-2006, 03:36 PM
its teh exact same chipset as the XLH!, so it latitude and Dynamic range should be identical, say unless the lens REALLLLLY sucks. which i doubt it will.

End of the day, Its HDV. No good for me, i cant trust an acquisition format that is the same as a Cable TV broadcast format.

Isaac_Brody
07-26-2006, 05:05 PM
Very interesting. It's funny that the form factor of all these cameras is incestuous.

It looks like a DVX, mated with a GL2, producing the bastard offspring named FX1, who illegitimately sired a child with Z1, the brother of FX1, who ran off with uncle HVX... :evil:

TimurCivan
07-26-2006, 05:31 PM
eww.......

Blaine
07-26-2006, 05:36 PM
I can't decide if I love or hate the form factor.

I'm pretty sure I hate it...
A little too much Tombstone, me thinks...:Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

Shane Realm
07-26-2006, 06:09 PM
Uncompressed 4:2:2 HD/SDI.

AshG
07-26-2006, 07:35 PM
24F, at least on the XLH is every bit as sharp as the HVX in 24P, if not moreso. The motion cadence is identical. It is a cleaner image, but has a different color, more kodachome. It edits in a 24P timeline and has no interlacing artifacts...


ash =o)

roxics
07-27-2006, 08:19 AM
I'm kind of surprised more people here aren't more excited about this camera. I mean I know this is DVXuser.com but I figured any HD camera with 24fps recording and a lower pricetag would get more people excited. Especially since Canon seems to have done almost everything right with this camera.

Sure the recording format may leave something to be desired. But I wonder how many people here have actually used HDV (instead of just reading about it) and how many people here actaully need anything bettr then HDV or if they just think they do. I've seen some really good stuff shot on HDV. I wouldn't dismiss it just yet.

ChuckS
07-27-2006, 09:36 AM
I'm kind of surprised more people here aren't more excited about this camera. I mean I know this is DVXuser.com but I figured any HD camera with 24fps recording and a lower pricetag would get more people excited. Especially since Canon seems to have done almost everything right with this camera.

Sure the recording format may leave something to be desired. But I wonder how many people here have actually used HDV (instead of just reading about it) and how many people here actaully need anything bettr then HDV or if they just think they do. I've seen some really good stuff shot on HDV. I wouldn't dismiss it just yet.

Regarding the excitement level on this forum I think Barry said it best - "As far as an HVX competitor? Naw. 4:2:0 HDV vs. 4:2:2 DVCPRO-HD, 1080/24F vs. 1080/24P, 1080/30F vs. 1080/30P, no 720p at all, no variable frame rates, no DVCPRO50, no Cinelike-D and Cinelike-V, and back to a tape-based workflow? No thanks on that aspect." Its more of an HDV vs DVCProHD thing.

For post production I have pretty much completely switched to a Digital Intermediate (DI) workflow, so I don't care about HDV vs DVCPro on the input or HDDVD vs BluRay for the encoding. I just want the best image quality possible.

"dustino -- Too bad canon can't get true 24p. I find it both amazing and bizarre. I want to be a canon fan, really I do. They make great glass and I love almost everything they do in their still camera line. So what's up with the 24p? Why are they overlooking such an enormous factor in image quality?"

A freind of mine holds the pattent on 24P and had to take all of the major manufacturers to court, Panasonic was the first to license the technology. I believe Canon and Sony's implementation of "24P" functionality is just an attempt to get around the patent.

Although I have not used the Canon XL-1H myself, I have seen some great footage from it and heard lots of good things from people who own them. Granted that's a bit like asking an FCP user how they like Apple... If this camera has the same image quality as the XL-1H for this price point in this form factor, I agree with Jarred, this might well become the best HDV camera out there.

Its all good.:love4:

roxics
07-27-2006, 09:46 AM
Regarding the excitement level on this forum I think Barry said it best - "As far as an HVX competitor? Naw. 4:2:0 HDV vs. 4:2:2 DVCPRO-HD, 1080/24F vs. 1080/24P, 1080/30F vs. 1080/30P, no 720p at all, no variable frame rates, no DVCPRO50, no Cinelike-D and Cinelike-V, and back to a tape-based workflow? No thanks on that aspect." Its more of an HDV vs DVCProHD thing.


Sure but you'll spend twice as much to get that over the XH-A1.
As much as I like 4:2:2 color and the idea of tapeless workflow spending twice as much to get it will put it out of alot of peoples ballparks. For a working pro maybe not, but for an amateur filmmaker who doesn't hardly make a return that's a lot of money. What Canon is offering sounds pretty good.

But then again I see it as being in the same market as the DVX100 not the HVX200. So if I had to chose between a DVX100 or a XH-A1 that part of the market just got more interesting and I'd personally go with the Canon.

ChuckS
07-27-2006, 09:59 AM
Oops, sorry I just read Yardsales post regarding licensing 24P.

The company that Bob formed that developed the 24P technology was FilmLook. This article makes it sound like Bob was "blackmailing" camera manufacturers with a patent that was so vague it shouldn't have been issued. Any of these manufactures could have developed this technology, but didn't and refused to pay for the licensing for years. When it became painfully apparent that they would lose thier law suite the manufacturers began settling out of court.

If there was any borderline illigal activity it wasn't on Bob's side. If this patent was so vague the manufacturers would just ignor it, which is pretty much what they tried to do. Bob is now a VERY wealthy man. Someone needs to inform the author of that article that patents that are defensible are more than ideas. Bob mortgaged his house and spent years developing his business, good for him to be able to defend it.

Ideas ar like ass holes, everybody's got one.

tnle2
07-27-2006, 10:12 AM
I'm kind of surprised more people here aren't more excited about this camera. I mean I know this is DVXuser.com but I figured any HD camera with 24fps recording and a lower pricetag would get more people excited. Especially since Canon seems to have done almost everything right with this camera.

I'm not that surprised. There is often intense brand loyalty here. But then again if you already made your camera purchase it kinda stings when something better comes along and is also cheaper.

With the release of these Canon HD cameras, I think for the independent filmmaker, both the HVX and the DVX at current prices are bad choices. Sure, DVCPRO-HD is nice, but the reality is most indie filmmakers are broke. We all know that. So paying $3k+ more for the HVX and P2 media for very marginal improvement makes no sense to me. You could put that 3 grand towards a better tripod, sound equipment and lighting that will immensely improve your production values. It's also money well spent because all that stuff can be used with your next camera purchase anyway.

If anything, more people should show excitement for these Canon cameras because if more people buy them, Panasonic will have to lower their prices on the HVX and the DVX to remain competitive. Because for $4K I'd take the A1 any day.

ecking
07-27-2006, 10:25 AM
Anyone know how or where to preorder the A1?

I want it the second it ships!

ChuckS
07-27-2006, 10:25 AM
Sure but you'll spend twice as much to get that over the XH-A1.
As much as I like 4:2:2 color and the idea of tapeless workflow spending twice as much to get it will put it out of alot of peoples ballparks. For a working pro maybe not, but for an amateur filmmaker who doesn't hardly make a return that's a lot of money. What Canon is offering sounds pretty good.

But then again I see it as being in the same market as the DVX100 not the HVX200. So if I had to chose between a DVX100 or a XH-A1 that part of the market just got more interesting and I'd personally go with the Canon.

I agree, the market is not only becoming a lot more interesting but a lot more affordable.

David Jimerson
07-27-2006, 12:29 PM
I have to say, I'm not sure why you'd opt for the DVX over the A1.

Don't get me wrong; I'm all about the mojo. But at that price point . . .

TimurCivan
07-27-2006, 02:21 PM
there is a big difference between 420 and 422 colospace. it isnt important for eventcoverage or weddigns or the such. but for commercials, music vids, budgeted features etc i think the producers/DP/directors would probabaly like the post production controll the dvcpro can offer. evenif the hvx isnt the sharpest.

but i will admit, 24F at 4G's is mighty good. and the xlh chip block is very very good.

anyone know if it shoots 24F/P in DV mode? if so its AWESOME.

Kholi
07-27-2006, 02:21 PM
I have to say, I'm not sure why you'd opt for the DVX over the A1.

Don't get me wrong; I'm all about the mojo. But at that price point . . .

Seriously.

That's like a serious no-brainer. At 3999.99 + Tape Media?

I suppose, though, some people would stick with the tried and true?

Isaac_Brody
07-27-2006, 02:23 PM
I have to say, I'm not sure why you'd opt for the DVX over the A1.

Don't get me wrong; I'm all about the mojo. But at that price point . . .

Agreed. There's more and more of a demand for HD shooting, especially for freelance jobs.

tnle2
07-27-2006, 02:46 PM
Seriously.

That's like a serious no-brainer. At 3999.99 + Tape Media?

I suppose, though, some people would stick with the tried and true?

I think it's crazy that the list price for the DVX100B is still $4K! That's the same as this new Canon. In my opinion the DVX100 is a dead end and is way overpriced. The future is HD and every knows it. I can't believe that Panasonic would still charge this much for an SD product. They are clearly taking advantage of the mojo. And their rep on here said there will not be a bigger or better incentive than the current rebate. Well tell you what Panasonic, I found an even better deal: the Canon XH-A1! Hahahaha :D

OK seriously I am not trying to flame but you have to admit the DVX is way overpriced and if you vote with your pocketbook by going to the competitor then maybe finally Panasonic will wake up.

Kholi
07-27-2006, 02:57 PM
I think it's crazy that the list price for the DVX100B is still $4K! That's the same as this new Canon. In my opinion the DVX100 is a dead end and is way overpriced. The future is HD and every knows it. I can't believe that Panasonic would still charge this much for an SD product. They are clearly taking advantage of the mojo. And their rep on here said there will not be a bigger or better incentive than the current rebate. Well tell you what Panasonic, I found an even better deal: the Canon XH-A1! Hahahaha :D

OK seriously I am not trying to flame but you have to admit the DVX is way overpriced and if you vote with your pocketbook by going to the competitor then maybe finally Panasonic will wake up.

Well, I don't think it's way overpriced. The XH A1 has yet to be released, we're still a month and so many odd days off of it's official shelving date.

And if I had a product that had all of this mojo going for it, I'd keep it at that price point up until the day that better camera in it's exact same price range hits the shelves. No sense in losing pennies when people are willing to pay for the good stuff.

That being said-- XH A1 is sounding like a really nice camera, and at four-thousand dollars (minus a few golden options) it's a pretty good deal.

Especially if it's going to produce images that're the same as the H1's.

Weston
07-27-2006, 03:14 PM
yeah panasonic needs to update the dvx to a 4000 dollar hd camera....

with real progressive.....since barry said the only reason canon didnt do it is because they can't get the right ccd's.

Heck...panasonic has those.

Filmjunkie677
07-27-2006, 03:44 PM
These cameras aren't shipping till mid November.

Kholi
07-27-2006, 03:48 PM
These cameras aren't shipping till mid November.

October, November is the G1.

Bad Filmjunkie. Read, young man, read.

TimurCivan
07-27-2006, 04:01 PM
yeah panasonic needs to update the dvx to a 4000 dollar hd camera....

with real progressive.....since barry said the only reason canon didnt do it is because they can't get the right ccd's.

Heck...panasonic has those.
WAYYYYYY easier said than done. Still would be cool though.

David Jimerson
07-27-2006, 04:10 PM
This all is, of course, predicated on the picture being good.

razamalik
07-27-2006, 04:16 PM
yeah panasonic needs to update the dvx to a 4000 dollar hd camera....

with real progressive.....since barry said the only reason canon didnt do it is because they can't get the right ccd's.

Heck...panasonic has those.

i always thought HVX200 was an HD update of the DVX, ok may be the price is a bit higher but u get what you pay for... DVCPROHD/24P/Variable Frame rates... the list goes on...

XH A1 does have a lot going for it but remember this is 2006 a camera at $4000 today has to be better than the camera at that price point from the previous generation... other wise why would any one buy a new camera when they already have an old mojo as u say aka DVX?

LuckyStudio 13
07-27-2006, 04:30 PM
As much as i love the DVX 100b color mojo and the hvx200 (seen some real very2 impressive footage), once the new canon comes out, the (if still unchanged, price-wise (msrp $3999) or feature-wise (HD, 16x9)) dvx100b would be in trouble.

If i have the cash though, its HVX200 otherwise the $4k canon would me my ticket. Again because of the classic Panasonic 24p mojo !

William_Robinette
07-27-2006, 05:07 PM
I love the mojo. I really do, but I could not chose the DVX again if I had to buy a cam right now.

It almost hurts to say, because I love the DVX but if the Canon delivers any sort of a good image, I would/might buy it.

Jarred Land
07-27-2006, 05:18 PM
Its interesting reading the feedback on this camera here... and if the images look good, i have a feeling the A1 is gonna beat the DVX...

Kholi
07-27-2006, 05:23 PM
Hey dudes--

It's not really a competition yeah? It really is another paintbrush.

For those of you who do not know, though:

24f, as nice as it is, is not supported by Final Cut and Vegas. I believe you can cut with Premiere after upgrades, and Canopus Edius slices 24f right out of the box.

That's another thing to consider with Canon's camera.

If I am incorrect, someone please correct me. That's one reason our company is looking at the purchase of HVX200's as opposed to the XL-H1's. Our editinng bays are Avid and Apple-centric.

( :mumble: Car... or A1? Car... or A1? )

David Jimerson
07-27-2006, 06:01 PM
Vegas has no problem with 24f.

William_Robinette
07-27-2006, 06:15 PM
Vegas has no problem with 24f.

Is it handled just as 24p? (basically I don't have to do anything :) )

TimurCivan
07-27-2006, 06:57 PM
will Veg 5 cut HDV?

Just curious. i have VEgas 5 and wanna drag my laptop to B&H and import some HDV. just to play

AloysiusK
07-27-2006, 09:12 PM
Having my own event video production company(and still banging away at my short film) I have been salivating for an upgrade of image quality for about 6 months.

I own DVX and a VX2000, and so I drifted to HVX. The P2 storage is a dealbraker, though. Although I'd be able to function on dramatic projects, there is no way in hell I can work a wedding or the such with the their storage lengths.

So I drifted to the others, and found the only contender to be the XL-H1. Alas, it was too damn expensive to get for at least a year, I thought.

Now, I am shocked. For these prices, I'm game this winter.

For anyone who is unsure of the image quality that will be packed into these new versions(or Canon's 24F or whatever), I invite you to check out some of Disjecta's new footage with the Xl-H1. Very, very exciting.

Now all I have to do is to perpuate a lie to myslef that working a 2 camera setup, with an HD and SD format, is a smart and possible thing.

lacuna
07-27-2006, 09:22 PM
1080x1440 chips - with higher res than the HVX/Z1 in both interlace and frame modes (which, by the way, have identical candence to progressive)

Independent iris ring on lens

20x flourite lens

1920x1080 still image capture

Optional HD-SDI, Genlock, Timecode, Pal/NTSC switchable

More image controls than any sub 10k camera

Cheap media

Sleek design

If this camera doesn't have mojo, mojo must have died in a hail of bullets and gone to transitor heaven

PANA-MAN
07-27-2006, 09:38 PM
Well... the DVX still has 24 progressive frames... this camera does not. And, we still need to see the color and latitude that this camera is capable of as well.


'Have I'Q's just dropped sharply while I was away?" heh heh, sorry, man. Couldn't resist. :)
You won't find too much info on 24f here, I don't think, but for all intents and purposes 24f is 24p and unquestionably can be referrred to as "electronic" 24fps, and uh, if I'm not mistaken, isn't that what 24p was suppose to be emulating in the first place?
In terms of "mimicking" 24fps, I cannot, by eye, detect the difference between 24p and 24f.

ShannonRawls
07-27-2006, 10:11 PM
24f, as nice as it is, is not supported by Final Cut and Vegas.
SONY VEGAS supported 24F before 24F was invented. *smile*

it will capture 24F, It will edit 24F, it will Master 24F. It will even outut 24F HDV footage back to an XL-H1 if you want. (although I recommend using CineForm). Sony veags was the VERY FIRST program to ever handle 24P and 24F footage from any video camera.

Just thought I should put that out there so people won't misunderstand things.

Check this: http://www.xlcinema.com/cinematic/showthread.php?t=596&highlight=vegas

Kholi
07-27-2006, 10:14 PM
SONY VEGAS supported 24F before 24F was invented. *smile*

it will capture 24F, It will edit 24F, it will Master 24F. It will even outut 24F HDV footage back to an XL-H1 if you want. (although I recommend using CineForm). Sony veags was the VERY FIRST program to ever handle 24P and 24F footage from any video camera.

Just thought I should put that out there so people won't misunderstand things.

Check this: http://www.xlcinema.com/cinematic/showthread.php?t=596&highlight=vegas

Thanks, Rawls--

I thought I had read somewhere that Vegas didn't support 24f. Thank you very much for correcting me.

I don't use Vegas, anyway, though. =P

Jarred Land
07-27-2006, 10:17 PM
actually dude your wrong.. Vegas was not the first NLE to support 24p.

man though do i miss it. As good as FCP is.. I think vegas was one of the best programs ever written.

ShannonRawls
07-27-2006, 10:18 PM
actually dude your wrong.. Vegas was not the first NLE to support 24p.
Really, then what was?

Elton
07-27-2006, 10:26 PM
But I wonder how many people here have actually used HDV (instead of just reading about it) and how many people here actaully need anything bettr then HDV or if they just think they do. I've seen some really good stuff shot on HDV. I wouldn't dismiss it just yet.

Look at Disjecta's pieces with the XL-H1. I have plenty of links to share if anyone's interested.

A lot of folks don't seem to understand that Canon's MPEG2 encoding is especially robust in 24F mode because of two things:

--Lower frame rate. 25 mbs for 24 fps instead of 60i (true 24fps with no pulldown actually recorded to tape)
--Progressive encoding (much easier on MPEG2)

I think the G1 is certainly expensive for a handycam but you have to consider how cool full uncompressed SDI with timecode and audio actually is. A big selling point for me with the H1 was the fact that you can bypass HDV if you need to with a more robust solution than flakey non-bnc component connectors. I've done torture tests with HDV and found that only in the most extremely high frequency motion scenes could I induce noticeable blockies. ( a CU of a babbling brook for example) When I compared the HDV to the uncompressed SDI recording via Kona/FCP--the SDI was flawless; so hence, I had a good option if faced with an extremely challenging scene.

Bottom line in all of this: Competition is great and Canon's in the game! Hopefully the response from the other manufacturers will be be even better offerings.

Elton
07-27-2006, 10:53 PM
Really, then what was?

Avid? Edit Droid? he he

ShannonRawls
07-27-2006, 11:00 PM
Avid? Edit Droid? he he Nope. Vegas was 1st.

Elton
07-27-2006, 11:04 PM
As much as i love the DVX 100b color mojo and the hvx200 (seen some real very2 impressive footage), once the new canon comes out, the (if still unchanged, price-wise (msrp $3999) or feature-wise (HD, 16x9)) dvx100b would be in trouble.

If i have the cash though, its HVX200 otherwise the $4k canon would me my ticket. Again because of the classic Panasonic 24p mojo !

Speaking of color mojo: Many don't realize that 4:2:0 24F HDV downsampled to the PhotoJPEG (or say, CineForm) codec at 1280x720 frame size basically yields 4:2:2 color, and if downrezzed at 100% quality in SD is basically 4:4:4. HD-SDI uncompressed from the G1, downsampled to PhotoJPEG @ 100% quality in a 720p frame will be very close to full raster 4:4:4.

I think with the advent of the XH-A1, both the DVX and XL2's days are numbered.

Elton
07-27-2006, 11:12 PM
Nope. Vegas was 1st.

Wait a second...Avid Film Composer has been around a lot longer than Vegas. That was the first true 24p NLE.

ShannonRawls
07-27-2006, 11:17 PM
Wait a second...Avid Film Composer has been around a lot longer than Vegas. That was the first true 24p NLE.
Barlow, stop fighting me. *smile* 24P is a patented & coined VIDEO term. It has nothing to do with film. Avid Film Composer cut a digital intermediate of REAL FILM @ 24fps, not 24P.

Plus, I said: "Sony veags was the VERY FIRST program to ever handle 24P and 24F footage from any video camera."

Which it was. I know, because that's how I found it and first used it back in Version 4.0b. *smile*

Barry_Green
07-27-2006, 11:25 PM
I think with the advent of the XH-A1, both the DVX and XL2's days are numbered.

Supposing that the XH-A1 holds up (and I don't doubt that it will), I think there's a lot more numbered-day products out there. The Sony Z1, for example -- why would someone pay $2,000 more for a Z1? The XH A1 is $3999 MSRP, the Z1 is $5946, and the A1 does (theoretically) more than the Z1 does and can be upgraded to offer the same NTSC/PAL switchability. And the FX1? Pshaw. Who would buy an FX1 ($3699) instead of an XH A1 ($3999)? The XLRs alone are worth the price difference, not to mention the superior 24F instead of CF24 and the longer lens. I think the FX1 and Z1 have met their match, and they both lost.

What I'm really, really curious about is the impact that the G1 will have on JVC. JVC was planning on their HD250, $9000 (without lens, figure around $12,000 with a halfway decent lens). The HD250 's big deal was that it was going to have HD-SDI with embedded TC and embedded audio, something the XLH1 didn't do. But now the G1 offers that, for $7,000 including lens. Now, granted, the JVC can interchange its lens, but -- so? With a 20x zoom that goes from 4.5 to 90mm, do you really, really NEED to interchange the lens? And would you pay $5,000 more for that capability? Read JVC's annual report, just released yesterday -- they've really got their backs up against the wall, and frankly I think Canon just gamed them out of their HD200/HD250 product line before they even hit the shelves. I do not think JVC can be happy about this.

Canon has made a bold move here. Competition is indeed good for the consumer, and it will be most interesting to see how the manufacturers respond. I think the FX1, Z1, HD200, HD250, XL2, PD170, VX2100, and the DVX, will all have some explaining to do when the XH A1 hits the store shelves.

Of course, this is just one move in the grand chess game between these manufacturers. Imagine if Panasonic put out an AVC-HD version of the DVX; that might change a lot of people's perceptions quite quickly. Sony's rumored to be introducing an FX2 soon -- will they respond in kind? Or will they give us another interlaced-only product that still doesn't do what we (the membership of DVXUser.com) want? I'm betting on the latter, but Sony has made some amazing products in the past and they could do it again. Congrats to Canon for producing a product that seems quite in tune with what users wanted. Now I just hope hope hope that the lens controls are usable and not the famous "wet cabbage" system!

rawfa
07-27-2006, 11:51 PM
All I have to say is that this is exactly what the market needed to spice up the competition and actualy FORCE the other brands to come up with the products that can compete with these new cameras (and beat them). It would be good to see sony fall flat on it's face because of their own stuborness. As for Panasonic, they're into the habit of waiting until all the other brands come up with their stuff so that they can check out everything these cameras have, to make theirs better. I think everybody here is waiting for a AVC-HD DVX...but the question is...wouldn't that kill their golden boy, the regular DVX? Wouldn't that even still SOME of the HVXs' thunder?

Jarred Land
07-27-2006, 11:56 PM
Really, then what was?

lol In Sync Blade was 1st. It was out before even the BETA of Vegas with DVX support was out.

Elton
07-27-2006, 11:57 PM
Some great points.


What I'm really, really curious about is the impact that the G1 will have on JVC.

I've been thinking the same thing. Considering that the G1 is pretty much good to go for a small form (REALLY small form!) TV studio capable camera, whereas the JVC will need a lens. (it does have a CCU though, right?) And I think the lens is easily the biggest compromise with the JVC product. Although I like the "feel" of the little Fujinon, that thing breathes WAY worse than my XL 16x manual lens, which is actually sharper than the Fujinon too.

I think you're right; Canon may have pulled the rug out from under them. Krikey!



Canon has made a bold move here. Competition is indeed good for the consumer, and it will be most interesting to see how the manufacturers respond. I think the FX1, Z1, HD200, HD250, XL2, PD170, VX2100, and the DVX, will all have some explaining to do when the XH A1 hits the store shelves.

It may be the camera that really puts the nail in the coffin for SD DV filmmaking. I mean, no matter how much you may like the DVX look, it's still a 720x480 frame with a meager 4:1:1 color sampling which in reality is much worse for keying than even HDV.

The DVX got the ball rolling on low-to-no budget 24p, and many phenomenal works have been produced with it, but now it's time to move on from SD. The entry level price for good "affordable HD" has just been lowered dramatically.


Imagine if Panasonic put out an AVC-HD version of the DVX; that might change a lot of people's perceptions quite quickly.

True, true...but HDV already has an established support system of NLE's, whereas this AVC HD format may suffer a bit from new format inertia in the marketplace.

I think the XH-A1 may have signifigantly sped-up the developement cycle for these future offerings from Sony and Panasonic.

It'll be interesting to see how many FX1's, Z1's and DVX's show up on ebay in the coming months.

rawfa
07-28-2006, 12:02 AM
It'll be interesting to see how many FX1's, Z1's and DVX's show up on ebay in the coming months.

My FX1 probably will hahaha :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

Elton
07-28-2006, 12:08 AM
As for Panasonic, they're into the habit of waiting until all the other brands come up with their stuff so that they can check out everything these cameras have, to make theirs better.

Funny, that sounds a lot like Canon too. They're always late to the game but seem to consistently do something interesting.


I think everybody here is waiting for a AVC-HD DVX...but the question is...wouldn't that kill their golden boy, the regular DVX? Wouldn't that even still SOME of the HVXs' thunder?

What are the bit rates proposed for AVC HD? I have a sneaking suspicion that they will be lower than even HDV, but if the codec is actually intra-frame, no matter how modern it may be I believe it's going to need a higher bit rate than MPEG2 to look at least as good.

If this XH-A1 sells like hot cakes could it lead to a signifigant price drop for the HVX?

The plot thickens...

ShannonRawls
07-28-2006, 12:16 AM
lol In Sync Blade was 1st. It was out before even the BETA of Vegas with DVX support was out. *cringe*
DAYUM!!! I forgot about that program!!! I'm totally wrong on that one. Aight.....you got me! *smile*

hatsoff2halford
07-28-2006, 12:17 AM
so does everyone think it would be smart to sell off your DVX's? Is DV dying?

sodotoguwangus
07-28-2006, 12:57 AM
Imagine if Panasonic put out an AVC-HD version of the DVX; that might change a lot of people's perceptions quite quickly.

What is AVC-HD? A new format? What cameras are using this, can someone please explain?

spencer
07-28-2006, 12:58 AM
I really feel goofy right now--as great a camera the DVX is, literally three months after I buy it an affordable good image camera with HD comes on.

I knew this was going to happen.

spencer
07-28-2006, 01:00 AM
What is AVC-HD? A new format? What cameras are using this, can someone please explain?

I think AVC-Hd is a new format that Sony and Panasonic are going to use. I believe it has something to do with Blu-Ray, and I think it's tapeless?

hatsoff2halford
07-28-2006, 01:12 AM
Spencer, that's exactly how I feel. I just buy a used 100a for $2500 not even two months ago, and now this comes along. I'm wondering if selling is a good choice.

spencer
07-28-2006, 01:42 AM
Don't get me wrong man, I loveeee the DVX, but it just seems like HD (be it HDV or not) with 24f seems like a good deal for the 4000 price tag. Even when Jarred and Barry are speaking of its merits, well, that piques my interest.

David Jimerson
07-28-2006, 03:00 AM
Blade was definitely first. Had great timeline support of multimple formats, too. I was seriously considering it before I discovered the big V.

David Jimerson
07-28-2006, 03:02 AM
will Veg 5 cut HDV?

Just curious. i have VEgas 5 and wanna drag my laptop to B&H and import some HDV. just to play

Cut, yes. Capture? That's more problematic.

David Jimerson
07-28-2006, 03:03 AM
I really feel goofy right now--as great a camera the DVX is, literally three months after I buy it an affordable good image camera with HD comes on.

I knew this was going to happen.

You can't spend your life waiting for the next thing, because the next thing is always coming. Just go shoot.

lacuna
07-28-2006, 05:28 AM
I think the FX1, Z1, HD200, HD250, XL2, PD170, VX2100, and the DVX, will all have some explaining to do when the XH A1 hits the store shelves.

Frankly, this is also going to hurt HVX sales. Sure, the HVX will have its diehard fans. But for those like myself who are not scared off by HDV, because we've seen it produce beautiful results quite flawlessly, these new cams look very attractive.

I was weighing up between the HVX and H1. The H1 unquestionably has higher res, and a crisper picture. It is also extremely tweakable. What put me off was the form factor - I don't like the balance, the size, the lack of LCD.

The new cameras address these issues plus they're cheaper.

HVX has P2 workflow (for better or for worse), but it's real claim to fame are the codec and variable frame rates.

Canon have proven with the H1 that their implementation of HDV holds up very well. I'd still go with DVCpro HD, but the difference is not major for many, including me.

But look what the HVX does not have:

20x lens with Iris ring (did anyone notice this, three rings on the lens!!!)
800x800 TV lines resolution (800x540 in frame mode)
Optional HDSDI, Timecode in/out, Genlock, 50i/60i switch
Cheap HD recording media

Canon's console software also looks very promising. And there's a custom Firestore on the way for these camera's too, so you don't have to rely on tape.

Panasonic will have to react to this - I predict an 'a' version of the HVX sooner rather than later. Anyway, it's all good!

ecking
07-28-2006, 07:05 AM
Hey dudes--

It's not really a competition yeah? It really is another paintbrush.

For those of you who do not know, though:

24f, as nice as it is, is not supported by Final Cut and Vegas. I believe you can cut with Premiere after upgrades, and Canopus Edius slices 24f right out of the box.

That's another thing to consider with Canon's camera.

If I am incorrect, someone please correct me. That's one reason our company is looking at the purchase of HVX200's as opposed to the XL-H1's. Our editinng bays are Avid and Apple-centric.

( :mumble: Car... or A1? Car... or A1? )

Yeah 24f may not be the easiest to edit right now, but remember now there will we 3x as many 24f cameras on the market and if these sell well(which is a given) NLE companies will have no choice but to support it.

*I just hope in comes in a free FCP download instead of fcp 6 lol*

Barry_Green
07-28-2006, 08:18 AM
but the question is...wouldn't that kill their golden boy, the regular DVX?
Here's the thing nobody seems to understand -- they don't care! They want to make the best product at the best price. If some other product (even in their own product line) can't compete, then too bad for that product. They've sold a lot of DVXs, and they'll continue to sell to those who need and want that product, but if you think that's going to hold them back from making a better product then you're in for a very big surprise.

And actually, that's what it seems like Canon has done as well. The XLH1 doesn't look all that compelling against the new ones anymore, does it? I'd wager a few people are upset that their XLH1's don't have embedded timecode and audio in the HD-SDI, but the cheaper G1 does. So? Better is better, and they made it better.

Should they have crippled the G1 so that H1 owners wouldn't be mad? That's Sony thinking, sure, but that's not how Panasonic and Canon are operating anymore. It's a different world.


Wouldn't that even still SOME of the HVXs' thunder?
Maybe for the low-cost crowd who are stretching to get into an HVX, but not for the core HVX buyer. HVX is multiple-format variable-frame-rate with frame-discrete compression. AVC-HD is long-GOP. That right there would rule it out for most higher-end use. Different products for different market segments.

Barry_Green
07-28-2006, 08:31 AM
What is AVC-HD? A new format? What cameras are using this, can someone please explain?
AVC-HD is a new high-def format that frankly beats HDV in nearly every category. Probably the most interesting aspect of AVC-HD is that it's sponsored by both Sony and Panasonic. In the marketplace Sony and Panasonic combine to account for something like 80% of all camcorders sold, with all the rest of the companies (JVC, Canon, Sanyo, Sharp, Samsung, etc) all scrambling for a piece of that last 20%. So to have both behemoths on the same page is a significant development.

AVC-HD is based on the hottest codec going, H.264/AVC. It's not based on old outdated MPEG-2, it's the newest & best. H.264 is another name for AVC (which is short for Advanced Video Coding). Sony's announced some cheapy consumer cameras based on AVC-HD already, one that records to a mini-DVD and one that records onto its own hard disk. Panasonic's announced that they'll have AVC-HD cameras that record to SD cards, and they're aggressively pursuing licensing the format to the other manufacturers.

AVC-HD is the next generation of formats that will (I boldly predict) obsolete MPEG-2 HDV entirely. It's got a couple of things in common with HDV, in that it's also a long-GOP codec and it's also 4:2:0. But after that, it's all better:

AVC is full-raster 1920x1080 recording, HDV is 1440x1080

AVC supports 24p natively, from the get-go. It's 1080/60i, 1080/24p, 720/60p and 720/24p all in one cross-compatible format (unlike HDV)

AVC is at least twice to 2.5 times as efficient as MPEG-2 at the same bandwidth, so 18 megabits of AVC-HD should deliver quality akin to 36 to 45 megabits of MPEG-2! That puts it potentially up there with XDCAM-HD. Should be far more resilient against compression artifacts than HDV.

AVC audio is uncompressed at up to 7.1 channels, vs. HDV's two channels of compressed MPEG-1 layer II audio.

Also, AVC audio can be recorded in Dolby Digital AC-3 mode! Try that with HDV's two compressed channels, or four super-compressed 192kbit channels.

HDV is an inherently incompatible format, JVC footage won't play in Canon gear, Canon footage won't play in JVC gear, Sony footage won't play in JVC, Canon's 24F and 30F won't play in Sony or JVC, JVC 24p footage won't play in Sony at all, and JVC 30p footage can be displayed but not digitized by Sony gear. Contrast all that with AVC-HD, which is one compatible standard, any AVC-HD equipment will play any AVC-HD footage (provided it's on the same media of course!)

The AVC-HD train is yet to get really rolling, but once it does HDV will disappear. AVC-HD is better in every possible way except for a couple, and in those two ways (long-GOP and 4:2:0) it's equal.

Frankly the only doubt about AVC-HD is: will the manufacturers produce a camcorder worthy of the format? The currently-announced Sony models most decidedly don't live up to the format's potential. But a high-def DVX running AVC-HD certainly would.

That's why I say, it's surprising Canon put out this product as HDV at this time. Had they made it AVC-HD it would be an amazingly bold move and could have seized the title of being "the new DVX". As it is, it remains to be seen how much "legs" HDV will have once AVC-HD hits in force. I think Canon may have breathed some life into HDV here.

Then again, it's a long way until October/November, and anything can happen between now and then. Politicians find that out all the time.

Elton
07-28-2006, 08:32 AM
Yeah 24f may not be the easiest to edit right now, but remember now there will we 3x as many 24f cameras on the market and if these sell well(which is a given) NLE companies will have no choice but to support it.

*I just hope in comes in a free FCP download instead of fcp 6 lol*

24F works pretty well with FCP 5 already. It does require capturing with a free utility program and converting to a better editing codec (PhotoJPEG@75% quality is good) via MPEG Streamclip. It's slightly more complicated than using FCP to capture but I've found that intermediate codec editing is highly preferable to MPEG2 editing, and FCP has a number of good codecs to choose from.

The cool thing about taking this route is MPEG Streamclip allows you to perfectly export 1080 24p clips from 24F captures.

roxics
07-28-2006, 08:34 AM
I predict (based off no solid information) that Panasonic will release an AVC-HD camera in the same price range as the current DVX. It will probably be hard drive based and offer recording to SD cards as well. It won't have the DVCPRO-HD recording or P2 storage so that will still leave plenty of room for the HVX on the more pro end of things. But I bet Panasonic will undercut Canon by about $400 while still offering things like 24p and a nice Leica lens. Variable frame rate, probably not. I also doubt we'd see a DV tape drive. Things will really get interesting I'm sure.

Barry_Green
07-28-2006, 08:46 AM
What are the bit rates proposed for AVC HD?
Anywhere from 5 up to 18 megabits, perhaps 24 if some reports are to be believed (but others think that the "24" references 18mbps video + 6 megabits of audio).

AVC is two to 2.5 times as efficient as MPEG-2, so 18 megabits of AVC-HD should deliver picture quality about akin to XDCAM-HD running at 36 megabits.



If this XH-A1 sells like hot cakes could it lead to a signifigant price drop for the HVX?

Well, that depends on a couple of things. If it steals sales from the HVX, then sure Panasonic might need to respond. But I think there's likely something else going to develop -- I think the A1 may indeed sell like hotcakes, but it'll be stealing sales from the other HDV products. I really have a hard time understanding why someone would buy a Z1 or FX1 against this A1, and I think a lot of people will have a harder time justifying an HD110 or HD200 or HD250 against these.

I think if someone was wanting a tape-based HDV product, the A1 is looking unbeatable in that market segment.

But not everyone wants that. HVX is in a whole different ballgame. It's an entirely different beast. It's tapeless, it's 4:2:2, it's variable-frame-rate, it's multiple-format, it's frame-discrete compression, it's DVCPRO50, it's just a very different product entirely. I know this'll probably annoy some people but I'll say it anyway: the HVX is a word processor among a sea of typewriters. The XH A1 may be the new king of the typewriters, but it's still a tape-based long-GOP compressed-audio "typewriter."

So -- would an A1 cause a price drop in the HVX? Only if people quit buying HVXs, I'd wager. Right now the factory still can't keep up with the orders and they're selling two and a half times more HVXs than they predicted. As long as that stays current (regardless of whatever other product comes out) then no price reduction would happen. But if sales dried up, then sure they'd respond, one would assume...

Barry_Green
07-28-2006, 08:47 AM
I predict (based off no solid information) that Panasonic will release an AVC-HD camera in the same price range as the current DVX. It will probably be hard drive based and offer recording to SD cards as well. It won't have the DVCPRO-HD recording or P2 storage so that will still leave plenty of room for the HVX on the more pro end of things. But I bet Panasonic will undercut Canon by about $400 while still offering things like 24p and a nice Leica lens. Variable frame rate, probably not. I also doubt we'd see a DV tape drive. Things will really get interesting I'm sure.

That's exactly what I think too.

Jarred Land
07-28-2006, 08:52 AM
The A1 isnt going to hurt the HVX.. the DVX is more on its radar. But remember.. the DVX is 3 years old now...

Brandon Rice
07-28-2006, 08:56 AM
The A1 isnt going to hurt the HVX.. the DVX is more on its radar. But remember.. the DVX is 3 years old now...

Yeah, and I don't think this camera is even aimed at the HVX consumer.

Elton
07-28-2006, 09:00 AM
Sounds very interesting, as I am big fan of the AVC codec for distribution...but it sounds like AVC will be acquisition-only for most. If you think MPEG2 is hard for a computer to encode/decode--try AVC/H.264! So if it's long-GOP too I would hope that they make a good camcorder that really exploits that extra efficiency...but there's the rub; that extra efficiency leads to inefficiency on a timeline.

I think this will be another job for CineForm, PhotoJPEG, etc.

rawfa
07-28-2006, 09:06 AM
I predict (based off no solid information) that Panasonic will release an AVC-HD camera in the same price range as the current DVX. It will probably be hard drive based and offer recording to SD cards as well. It won't have the DVCPRO-HD recording or P2 storage so that will still leave plenty of room for the HVX on the more pro end of things. But I bet Panasonic will undercut Canon by about $400 while still offering things like 24p and a nice Leica lens. Variable frame rate, probably not. I also doubt we'd see a DV tape drive. Things will really get interesting I'm sure.


I'll cross my fingers to that!

Barry_Green
07-28-2006, 09:08 AM
I think this will be another job for CineForm, PhotoJPEG, etc.
Quite the opposite, with any luck. AVC is everywhere and getting more prevalent. IPTV, DirecTV, Dish, European HD broadcasts, blu-ray, HD-DVD, even the ATSC is looking at revising broadcasts in America to support AVC.

So, graphics card manufacturers are adding AVC decoding (and perhaps encoding) to their cards. That should give us high-speed high-quality real-time (or faster-than-realtime) decoding. So with an AVC-equipped graphics card AVC-HD should be very editable.

Jarred Land
07-28-2006, 09:19 AM
Sounds very interesting, as I am big fan of the AVC codec for distribution...but it sounds like AVC will be acquisition-only for most. If you think MPEG2 is hard for a computer to encode/decode--try AVC/H.264! So if it's long-GOP too I would hope that they make a good camcorder that really exploits that extra efficiency...but there's the rub; that extra efficiency leads to inefficiency on a timeline.

I think this will be another job for CineForm, PhotoJPEG, etc.


as Barry says.. AVC isn't just some random new format.. its superior in almost every way to Mpeg 2... Mpeg 4 / H264 / AVC has been buliding strong for the last couple of years.. and im excited to see Panasonic and Sony both rolling out this format.

William_Robinette
07-28-2006, 09:23 AM
So after sleeping on it, I can see no reason to keep my DVX after the A1 comes out. I love Panasonic and I love the DVX but this things makes it obsolete (in my opinion). If the image is there (which I don't doubt). My DVX will hit the eBay road a lot sooner then I thought.

Elton
07-28-2006, 09:46 AM
The A1 isnt going to hurt the HVX.. the DVX is more on its radar. But remember.. the DVX is 3 years old now...

I agree/disagree :). The bar has been raised from DV and now that the price is similar EVERYONE can get into HD and get quality film-like 24p results. If the FX1 had a good 24F/P mode like Canon's I'm sure the DVX's run would've been a little shorter, but now that Canon's stepping up to the plate--everyone benefits--and sooner rather than later everyone will be shooting some acquisition form of HD. I think that AVC DVX successor has most likely been put on the front burner now.

I think you may be wrong about hurting the HVX sales though. There are a lot of folks that extended themselves financially and bought the HVX but winced and only purchased one P2 card with no Firestore/P2 Store, extra cards etc. If the A1 basically delivers XL-H1 image quality in a cool little handycam, that will certainly weigh into consideration for a number of potential HVX buyers. But the HVX has its totally unique qualities (var. frame rates/dv100 etc.) that will continue to make it a best seller.

I'm personally glad there's vigorous competition in the sub-$5K range now.

rawfa
07-28-2006, 09:58 AM
I agree/disagree :). The bar has been raised from DV and now that the price is similar EVERYONE can get into HD and get quality film-like 24p results. If the FX1 had a good 24F mode like Canon's I'm sure the DVX's run would've been a little shorter, but now that Canon's stepping up to the plate--everyone benefits--and sooner rather than later everyone will be shooting some acquisition form of HD. I think that AVC DVX successor is has been put on the front burner now.

I think you may be wrong about hurting the HVX sales though. There are a lot of folks that extended themselves financially and bought the HVX but winced and only purchaesd one P2 card with no Firestore/P2 Store, extra cards etc. If the A1 basically delivers XL-H1 image quality in a cool little handycam, that will certainly weigh into consideration for a number of potential HVX buyers. But the HVX has its totally unique qualities (var. frame rates/dv100 etc.) that will continue to make it a best seller.

I'm personally glad there's vigorous competition in the sub-$5K range now.

There's no arguing with that logic.

Jarred Land
07-28-2006, 10:03 AM
yeah Elton i agree with you.. everyone wins when we start seeing decent HD cameras in the sub $4k pricepoint.

Kholi
07-28-2006, 10:13 AM
I'm wondering how soon we'll get footage from the camera.

Honestly? I have only owned an older Pana cam and if the A1 is producing the same images as an H1, I think I'll finally settle into buying my own camera instead of trying to get my workplace to do so.

Four-thousand as a suggested retail, we'll probably see it for thirty-seven hundred or so making it even more tempting.

As far as editing goes, and Elton you might be able to answer this:

Has anyone had success with 24f footage in Final Cut Pro? I saw a thread on DVinfo started by Rawls on the subject but there didn't seem to be much movement on it.

Has anyone had any success running Canopus or Vegas on the new Intel Macs?

Elton
07-28-2006, 10:38 AM
As far as editing goes, and Elton you might be able to answer this:

Has anyone had success with 24f footage in Final Cut Pro? I saw a thread on DVinfo started by Rawls on the subject but there didn't seem to be much movement on it.

Has anyone had any success running Canopus or Vegas on the new Intel Macs?

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=492340&postcount=7

Kholi
07-28-2006, 10:47 AM
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=492340&postcount=7

Great. I copied it all down and saved it.

Thanks, Elton.

spencer
07-28-2006, 11:42 AM
You can't spend your life waiting for the next thing, because the next thing is always coming. Just go shoot.

I didn't, that was the point. I bought the DVX, and I shot a 48 Hour Film Project with other stuff lined up. Strangely enough, I actually "go shoot" so much that I have a group of people that like/want to shoot movies with me.

I'm just saying, wouldn't all of the aforementioned facts look a helluva lot nicer in 1080i?

Therefore, current plan is probably try to make an extra thousand dollars by doing something, see how this whole A1 thing pans out, then maybe sell (as much as it hurts to say) my DVX and move up to HDV. that scenario actually works well cuz I use Vegas now and Vegas supports HDV, correct?

cobb
07-28-2006, 01:26 PM
I'm confused by some of the comments here... Isn't it obvious? If you make a camera with interlaced chips you won't get 'true' progressive footage. Full stop. It's a fundamental design decision.

Robert Sanders
07-28-2006, 01:37 PM
I don't understand how Canon's HD integrated lens camera isn't a direct competitor to Panasonic's HD integrated lens camera?

How is it exactly that Canon's HD camera is targeting a 3-year old SD non-widescreen camera?

TimurCivan
07-28-2006, 01:53 PM
I don't understand how Canon's HD integrated lens camera isn't a direct competitor to Panasonic's HD integrated lens camera?

How is it exactly that Canon's HD camera is targeting a 3-year old SD non-widescreen camera?

BEcause the DVX is in the price class of the new canon. This new camera coming out isnt going to deter people who want the benefits of the P2 based HVX. Its going to dete people who were thnking of buying a DVX(Real 24p)/ FX1/ Z1/HD100 ( Real 24p aswell, but with a "hobled" lens).

I am still going HVX, because i am more interested in its particualr benefits it offers, overcrankind, 4:2:2 color, dynamic range, 4:2:2 SD, uncompressed sound (vs HDV Mpeg2 layer 2), and tapeless work flow.

IF the canon did all that, i would say, sayonara PAnasonic. HEllo CAnon.

Its not the resolution, or removable lens that makes a good camera, the camera is more than the sum of its parts.

tnle2
07-28-2006, 02:01 PM
I don't understand how Canon's HD integrated lens camera isn't a direct competitor to Panasonic's HD integrated lens camera?

How is it exactly that Canon's HD camera is targeting a 3-year old SD non-widescreen camera?

As far as I'm concerned, the G1 with SDI is a direct competitor to the HVX. Whatever advantages that P2 and DVCPRO-HD has can easily be offset SDI out to a suitable off-board recorder. For example, if RED comes through with an inexpensive and small RED Drive that operates off of SDI and compress to a potentially even better codec such as their RED CODE then the HVX becomes even more irrelevent IMO.

The only reason the A1/G1 is being compared to the DVX is because of the price. Even though anyone in their right mind knows the DVX is an inferior product. Yes, it was a good product in it's day but it's 2006 now and it's time to move on. Yet Panasonic still maintains the list price on this camera at $4k and people still defend it!

Elton
07-28-2006, 02:14 PM
I'm just saying, wouldn't all of the aforementioned facts look a helluva lot nicer in 1080i?

You actually get a nice 1080 24p image if shot well. It'll be interesting to see how much used DVX's will go for in the coming months.

btw, yes, Vegas fully supports HDV, as does Premiere Pro, Edius, and soon with native 24F support, FCP too. (likely FCP 6)

Here are some frame grabs of 24F I shot at Bryce Canyon a few weeks ago:

http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/Bryce/BrycePic4.jpg
http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/Bryce/BrycePic1.jpg
http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/Bryce/BrycePic7.jpg
http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/Bryce/BrycePic13.jpg

I think it's likely that the A1 will at least be this sharp. :)

Kholi
07-28-2006, 02:20 PM
If I do end up investing entirelly in this camera... I might be just a tad angry if the 24f Support isn't a free upgrade for Final Cut. Just a tad. Like, the kinda angry where you write a nasty letter.

Elton
07-28-2006, 02:25 PM
All 24F support is really going to bring to the table is the simplicity of capturing in the usual FCP mode. Most will find the desire to transcode to a good intermediate like PhotoJPEG or even Sheer. (lossless HD)

I've found FCP5 works fine as long as you know a few of the workarounds.

Here's a downconvert of 24F to 720p:
http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/Bryce/rafters.jpg

lacuna
07-28-2006, 02:30 PM
the HVX is a word processor among a sea of typewriters. The XH A1 may be the new king of the typewriters, but it's still a tape-based long-GOP compressed-audio "typewriter."

Barry, the Canon's have a word processor option in the form of the Firestore. I'd love to work with P2 - but give me affordable 64gig cards.

This will hurt Panasonic. Sure there a lot of people on this board who would never touch the Canons, simply because of HDV. But there are a lot of people who do not see the codec as the principal issue. A lot of people make their purchase decisions based on other factors. Almost any pro is going to take an F350 XDCAM HD over an HVX, and XDcam HD is basically HDV (albeit in a non-linear tape free form).

For myself image quality is the key factor. I don't regard myself as a complete amateur. I am in the video business, it's my full time job. Tape/P2, DVCpro HD/HDV - I'll deal with it (personally I'd love HDCAM). Every acquisition format has issues. In any case I want a Firestore.

I was planning to order two HVX cameras on Friday, but I went into my local pro dealer and found everyone discussing the Canons, and they weren't just comparing it to the Z1. The HVX is going to get a run for it's money.

Some were put off the H1 because of form factor, iris control, lack of LCD, lack of wide angle on the standard lens, and price. These issues have been addressed comprehensively. Canon has listened, and they didn't skimp on CCDs as they did with the GL series.

As I'm in no rush, I'm going to hold off a bit now and shoot SD, but the Canons have gone to the top of my shopping list.

[Perhaps I should also point out that the HVX is not so attractive if you're in Pal land like me, and running FCP - still no 720p support, so no variable frame rates! Severely lessens the appeal of the HVX. In contrast, I've heard 25F on the Canon works fine with FCP]

lacuna
07-28-2006, 02:41 PM
I am still going HVX, because i am more interested in its particualr benefits it offers, overcrankind, 4:2:2 color, dynamic range, 4:2:2 SD, uncompressed sound (vs HDV Mpeg2 layer 2), and tapeless work flow.

Right, for some people these will remain the key issues. But I have to take you up on dynamic range - I've read every test and comparison of these cams and nowhere have I seen any evidence that the Panny has grater dynamic range - if it did that would seal the deal for me. In fact, Adam's tests showed that while latitude is basically even among the 1/3" chippers, the Canon handles highlights more gracefully than the HVX.

Robert Sanders
07-28-2006, 04:50 PM
"True 24p". That's funny. It looks the same. It acts the same. But it aint "true".

You guys crack me up.

The other night I showed the latest rough cut of my project to an audience. Not one person in the audience responded, "I would've like it more if you'd shot it with a real 24p camera."

PANA-MAN
07-28-2006, 05:40 PM
"True 24p". That's funny. It looks the same. It acts the same. But it aint "true".

You guys crack me up.

The other night I showed the latest rough cut of my project to an audience. Not one person in the audience responded, "I would've like it more if you'd shot it with a real 24p camera."


Well said... and for anyone dismissing 24f. Take a gander here: http://www.starwaypictures.com/twenty-third/index.html shot on an XL-H1

Policar
07-28-2006, 05:56 PM
This is the first camera that's made me seriously consider selling my dvx. Look at the specs. Look at the price. Wow.

Noel Evans
07-28-2006, 06:07 PM
Yes I have to say....thinking thinking. But we will see.

razamalik
07-28-2006, 06:27 PM
So -- would an A1 cause a price drop in the HVX? Only if people quit buying HVXs, I'd wager. Right now the factory still can't keep up with the orders and they're selling two and a half times more HVXs than they predicted. As long as that stays current (regardless of whatever other product comes out) then no price reduction would happen. But if sales dried up, then sure they'd respond, one would assume...

hmm i personaly think that all panasonic needs to do with HVX is drop the price of the media i.e P2 to a point where its affoardable to the inde market & they can keep the price of the camera where it is at & they will sell more cameras than they are selling now... the only complains/issues people go on & on & on about HVX is the price for the media so once thats out of the door... its all a dream workflow!

Kholi
07-28-2006, 06:58 PM
Well said... and for anyone dismissing 24f. Take a gander here: http://www.starwaypictures.com/twenty-third/index.html shot on an XL-H1
You rock. Thanks for that link!

Was it ever answered if it were straight to tape or SDI-out?

Just saw a music video (rough cut) done on H1 and Mini35. 16mm all the way.

Thing to be seen is adapter + A1/G1. What will the fixed lens do for this Canon camera and a 35mm setup?

Zim
07-28-2006, 07:14 PM
when is Sony and Panasonic going to come out with this new format that will kill off HDV? It looks like Canon might get them moving just alittle faster.



My $4,000 or hopefully less will go to a A1. It looks closest to what I need. But I'm going to wait and get more info. Sony or Panny might have a surprise too.

Elton
07-28-2006, 07:30 PM
Was it ever answered if it were straight to tape or SDI-out?

That's all HDV to tape and edited in DVCProHD 1080 24p. :)

Kholi
07-28-2006, 07:47 PM
That's all HDV to tape and edited in DVCProHD 1080 24p. :)

It looks really good. Only wish I was at home so that I could view it on my television via DVI out.

Have you had a chance to view much H1 footage on television sets? Hi-Def and Standard Def?

TimurCivan
07-28-2006, 08:21 PM
Right, for some people these will remain the key issues. But I have to take you up on dynamic range - I've read every test and comparison of these cams and nowhere have I seen any evidence that the Panny has grater dynamic range - if it did that would seal the deal for me. In fact, Adam's tests showed that while latitude is basically even among the 1/3" chippers, the Canon handles highlights more gracefully than the HVX.

actually the JVC is one of the best. its roll off to white is very natural.

I shall have to do more reasearch on this. i thought HVX was pushing a half stop on the rest. :)

TimurCivan
07-28-2006, 08:23 PM
That's all HDV to tape and edited in DVCProHD 1080 24p. :)

Why didint they just shoot it in DVCproHD to begin with... HVX cough cough.... ( i'm sorry i couldnt help it......)

Barry_Green
07-28-2006, 09:53 PM
Barry, the Canon's have a word processor option in the form of the Firestore.
I wouldn't agree, not by a long shot. I see the firestore as a temporary stopgap measure. Work with one, then work with the cards. The cards are far superior to work with (barring only the shorter record times.)



Almost any pro is going to take an F350 XDCAM HD over an HVX
Well, almost any pro would choose 1/2" over 1/3", and $20,000 instead of $5995, sure. But XDCAM over P2? I don't think so. Not once they actually look at what the system means. For example, look at the BBC -- perhaps the largest content producer in the world, perhaps the most stringent quality standards in the world, perhaps the most pro of the pros, and they're committed to going tapeless. They've been reviewing XDCAM-HD, Panasonic P2, and Thomson Infinity Rev Pro. Anyone want to take any bets on which system they will *not* choose?


In any case I want a Firestore.
Which means, by the way you say it, that you don't have one yet? Then do yourself a favor and work with one for a while. You may find it adequate, or you may find it lacking.


The HVX is going to get a run for it's money.
It should -- that's what competition is all about. And I don't doubt that some people who were stretching well beyond their means to try to afford an HVX will now think it a more prudent move to go with the less-expensive Canon. As long as people are aware of the differences, then they can make an informed decision. But if someone's going to try to say that an HDV camera with a FireStore is the equivalent of an HVX/P2 system, you'll have to forgive me if I disagree in the strongest possible terms.


Some were put off the H1 because of form factor, iris control, lack of LCD, lack of wide angle on the standard lens, and price.
Price mostly. Lens controls secondly.


These issues have been addressed comprehensively. Canon has listened, and they didn't skimp on CCDs as they did with the GL series.
Agreed. I think the A1 is far and away the most promising HDV camcorder on the market. But there are reasons that a lot of people are dissatisfied with HDV, and HDV itself is the core differentiating factor. For some people that won't matter. For others, like the D.P. of Monster Garage who ditched the Z1 specifically because of HDV, it matters a lot.

Zim
07-28-2006, 09:58 PM
what did DP start using?

Barry_Green
07-28-2006, 10:41 PM
I met him at NAB, he was looking at the HVX. They shoot most of the show on F900's, and had tried using the Z1 for some POV on-camera shots and found it completely unacceptable, so they ditched it and were looking to replace them with HVXs .

Elton
07-28-2006, 10:45 PM
Have you had a chance to view much H1 footage on television sets? Hi-Def and Standard Def?

I've watched it on just about everything but film. (someday soon...the word is film transfer is exceptionally good from the H1)

I usually watch it on my 12' HT screen with an HD projector. I've also projected HDV 24F on a $10,000 Sony 1080p LCOS system, and also some new 1080p HDTV sets.

All very good, with the 1080p front projection being my favorite. It just looks great. :)

Elton
07-28-2006, 11:06 PM
Why didint they just shoot it in DVCproHD to begin with... HVX cough cough.... ( i'm sorry i couldnt help it......)

Better low light and DOF with the H1. Also used the SD wide lens with great results in HD. Signifigantly wider than the HVX. Lens options were important for this project.

I hope this thread doesn't regress into the old HDV vs. DVCproHD thing. It's so played out.

All that matters is that these new little cameras should be a very good option for a certain market segment.

I think it's fairly obvious that Canon is looking to seriously compete with the HVX and Sony's, not only on price but on features. The G1 should be a strong consideration for anyone that understands how cool SDI can be for acquisition. Combining H1 imagery with codec choice via SDI is a phenomenal thing. Many don't realize that the Canon CCD block tech. uses pixel shift horizontally to legitimately achieve a full 1920x1080 (rather than subsampled 1440x1080) raster. This means with capture to a full raster codec like CineForm or PhotoJPEG or Sheer, you actually get true 4:2:2 HD chroma sampling, which is signifigantly higher than DVCProHD subsampled 4:2:2.

If I'm not mistaken that means an image with 1920 luma x 960 x 960 chroma. This is in contrast to DVCProHD 1080, which is 1280 luma x 640 x 640 chroma, and 720 is 960 x 480 x480 chroma.

Not all 4:2:2 sampling is created equal.

lacuna
07-28-2006, 11:10 PM
The cards are far superior to work with (barring only the shorter record times.)

Absolutely, I said myself I'd love working with 64gig cards, even 32.


Well, almost any pro would choose 1/2" over 1/3", and $20,000 instead of $5995, sure.

But that's my point, if this is such an inferior codec, what's it doing in $20,000 1/2" cameras. Not all pros are hung up on HDV codec issues.


But XDCAM over P2? I don't think so. Not once they actually look at what the system means.

We'll have to agree to differ here Barry. You've just been over here in NZ - both of the major networks are using the SD version and rave about. Sole operators are in the process of transferring from XDcam to XDcam HD - they love the workflow, and from what I've seen demonstrated first hand, it rocks.[/QUOTE]


Which means, by the way you say it, that you don't have one yet?

You're right, I don't have a firestore yet, and I'm aware of its limitations. But golly, 8gigs of DVCproHD is a fairly severe limitation as well. My point is no solution is ideal. But let's not go there. I know P2 has some terrific advantages.


if someone's going to try to say that an HDV camera with a FireStore is the equivalent of an HVX/P2 system, you'll have to forgive me if I disagree in the strongest possible terms.

No one said they're equivalent, just that there are options for the indi-film maker here - pro or otherwise - and not all differences favour the HVX. Not everyone sees this as a clear cut battle between codecs and acquisition styles. Personally I could live with P2 or Tape, HDV or DVCproHD, and I don't think I'm the only one in that position.

If the HVX had a little more grunt in the ccd department, if it had a 20x lens, and if it had all the optional inputs/outputs, then it would be a no-brainer.


For some people that won't matter. For others, like the D.P. of Monster Garage who ditched the Z1 specifically because of HDV, it matters a lot.

Absolutely. As I said codec is an issue for some. Though I don't think you can compare Sony's implementation of HDV to the more robust offering from Canon.

At any rate, I stand by my initial comment that this will impact Panny sales, and that I think they will respond sooner rather than later, which is all good!

lacuna
07-28-2006, 11:32 PM
actually the JVC is one of the best. its roll off to white is very natural.

I shall have to do more reasearch on this. i thought HVX was pushing a half stop on the rest. :)

yes, the JVC is probably the best of the lot in this respect.

The HVX does have half a stop in sensitivity (the trade off being that it's arguably noiser), but not dynamic range from Adam's testing. At any rate, they're all in the same ballpark.

Elton
07-28-2006, 11:47 PM
BUT: the big question mark is the lens controls. I hate (despise, actually) the rubber-band loosey-goosey "wet cabbage" feel of the XLH1's lens. If Canon has addressed that, they may have a contender here. If they haven't addressed it, I don't care what it costs I wouldn't stand using it.

This is an interesting question mark about the A1/G1. My guess is that they will actually be an improvement over the standard lens of the XL-H1. I own the XL manual lens and it works well in HD in certain apertures, and there is no doubt that the "feel" is much better. I also like the fact that I can do whip zooms with the manual lens, (on rare occasion, mind you, he he) which is impossible with the auto lens. However, I find that I miss the focus distance readout feature when switching to the manual lens, but the manual lens is fairly easy to focus and repeat focuses because it has end marks, etc. The manual lens also breathes a little, which the 20x H1 lens doesn't exhibit at all.

The interesting thing about the little Canon's is the iris ring on the lens. That is seriously cool. I hope it's got a fluid feel while rolling through exposures without "steppiness" which the old XL suffered horribly from. I guess we'll see but that seems to be a very useful new feature on the lens.

My guess is that there may be some "wet cabbage" leftovers, but as to how "loosey-goosey" it will feel will anybody's guess until it ships. It may have an improved focus preset function that will allow for perfectly repeatable rack focuses at different speeds.

Have you ever tried the H1 lens with a good Chroziel follow focus? It's surprising how much it improves the "tactile" feel of focusing with the standard lens. It also improves repeatable rack focusing accuracy at longer focal lengths when using the distance readout. You can move the lens in much finer increments then you would normally be able to achieve by moving the focus ring manually.

Barry_Green
07-29-2006, 07:42 AM
Haven't tried that, no. And I just thought -- I wonder if that "instant focus" autofocus thing would make it a non-issue... if you can spot in exactly what you want to focus on and instantly snap to it, then it might be a good workaround?

tnle2
07-29-2006, 09:49 AM
Haven't tried that, no. And I just thought -- I wonder if that "instant focus" autofocus thing would make it a non-issue... if you can spot in exactly what you want to focus on and instantly snap to it, then it might be a good workaround?

Barry, I think you're thinking of Fujinon's Precision Focus system. In Canon's system I don't think you will have control over the focus point (hopefully I am wrong). Instant Focus is just an improvement to regular AF by using a secondary IR sensor. The Fujinon system actually puts a crosshair on the viewfinder and the camera operator uses a cursor control on the focus controller to move the crosshair around the frame and then pushes a button to focus on that point.

One downer is that you will not be able to put a standard geared follow focus system on the lens because the Instant Focus sensor and XLR housing are physically in the way. See this:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=72454

Also, standard matte boxes will block the Instant Focus IR emitter on the front of the lens. So if you use a matte box, you will have to turn off Instant Focus (which you can in the menu). That doesn't mean you lose all AF capability, just the additional benefit of the IR sensor.

Elton
07-29-2006, 11:08 AM
Looks like an IndieFocus would work because its a rubber wheel instead of a geared ring. I don't know how good they actually are but something like it might work reasonably well.

Kholi
07-29-2006, 01:14 PM
I'll wait until I have the camera in hand to find out if the rings are loose.

I just moved moneys to another bank account, I'm getting the A1 on release.

As far as the Iris ring goes, is this new to the Canon line? Or was it on the H1? Mis-informed there.

lacuna
07-29-2006, 07:41 PM
As far as the Iris ring goes, is this new to the Canon line? Or was it on the H1? Mis-informed there.

It's not on the standard H1 20x lens, but is on the newly announced 6x.

These new cameras also feature underscan (missing on the H1), so along with the other new functions, it looks like an H1s is going to come along soon... or else it's really asking a lot to make people pay thousands more for a camera lacking the features of its siblings.

TimurCivan
07-29-2006, 09:40 PM
Combining H1 imagery with codec choice via SDI is a phenomenal thing. Many don't realize that the Canon CCD block tech. uses pixel shift horizontally to legitimately achieve a full 1920x1080 (rather than subsampled 1440x1080) raster. This means with capture to a full raster codec like CineForm or PhotoJPEG or Sheer, you actually get true 4:2:2 HD chroma sampling, which is signifigantly higher than DVCProHD subsampled 4:2:2.

If I'm not mistaken that means an image with 1920 luma x 960 x 960 chroma. This is in contrast to DVCProHD 1080, which is 1280 luma x 640 x 640 chroma, and 720 is 960 x 480 x480 chroma.

Not all 4:2:2 sampling is created equal.

Yea but... wait. youre trandslating HDV 4:2:0 => cineform/DVCcpro/PhototJpeg 422 codec. you cant get that color space back regardless of what "lossless" codec you use. That just soundsl ike taking SD video, stretching it to "hd" and presenting it as HD. the image does not have the information in it. How does that work???

Im seriously asking and not flaming this cause if i can get "better" results, I WILL shoot Canon G1 and rent a HVX for over cranked shots. How does this work? I am looking at this from the standpoint of a DP, keeping my clients best interests in mind, and giving them footage that can be manipulated without problems.

Kholi
07-29-2006, 09:51 PM
If I'm understanding the misunderstanding correctly...You can capture 4:2:2 via SDI out on the G1 and H1... that means you are no longer dealing with HDV as a codec but the ones that Elton mentioned.

savethestars
07-29-2006, 10:52 PM
I'm not trying to start anything but I seem to remember some of you saying about 3-6 months ago that the HDV format was already dying and would soon be dead. Given this announcement, do you see a different view, and if so, what changed your mind?

Thanks, (considering a new camera purchase and don't want to invest in a format that is hard to edit, or that will soon be "dead," or that the industry doesn't like.)

Drew Ott
07-29-2006, 11:42 PM
Well HDV obviously isn't dead, but I think everybody can agree that true HD is "better".

lacuna
07-30-2006, 12:11 AM
Well HDV obviously isn't dead, but I think everybody can agree that true HD is "better".

I kinda like Canon's implementation of fake HD... it's higher res than its competitors with "true" HD

Emanuel
07-30-2006, 02:34 AM
1080x1440 chips - with higher res than the HVX/Z1 in both interlace and frame modes (which, by the way, have identical candence to progressive)

Independent iris ring on lens

20x flourite lens

1920x1080 still image capture

Optional HD-SDI, Genlock, Timecode, Pal/NTSC switchable

More image controls than any sub 10k camera

Cheap media

Sleek design

If this camera doesn't have mojo, mojo must have died in a hail of bullets and gone to transitor heaven:thumbsup:

Emanuel
07-30-2006, 04:16 AM
It's not that they're overlooking it; remember they put 24p on the XL2.

It's more likely that they're buying their CCDs from Sony, and Sony seems to have a hard-to-understand aversion to making progressive scan. I mean, even in their new supposedly-progressive-scan XDCAM HD lineup, they're using interlaced CCDs and "faking it". That's why the variable frame rate 350 drops to half-resolution if you push it to faster than 30fps; it drops to using a single field. Even in AVC-HD, a format that natively supports 1080/24p, they put out an interlaced-only camera. It seems like their marketing slogan should change from "Sony: The One And Only" to "Sony: Interlaced Only."

I think Canon is probably a victim of their suppliers. They know people want 24p, and I'm sure they'd love to be able to offer it, but apparently they can't find the chips they need.My dear friend Barry, quite informative and enlightening, as usual. How long?... It reminds me those good old HVX pre-launch hot times...

I read all of your recent comments and I can follow your POV about AVC-HD vs. HDV or your pro A1 thoughts, as well.
why would someone pay $2,000 more for a Z1? The XH A1 is $3999 MSRP, the Z1 is $5946, and the A1 does (theoretically) more than the Z1 does and can be upgraded to offer the same NTSC/PAL switchability. And the FX1? Pshaw. Who would buy an FX1 ($3699) instead of an XH A1 ($3999)? The XLRs alone are worth the price difference, not to mention the superior 24F instead of CF24 and the longer lens. I think the FX1 and Z1 have met their match, and they both lost....but maybe are you forgetting the Canon's 3 x 1.67mp CCD block?!... The best 1/3" deal I could find. Actually what made me away from the HVX. Its lowlighting & noiseless properties were/are speaking (and they will now as a smaller form factor) for themselves. What awesome 1/3" camera is that XL-H1!!

Now we'll have the same camera but LIGHTER & really handheld, as well, for less than a half of the price!!!

As you well said regarding the AVC-HD reply vs. Canon's offer:
Probably, Sony will be interlaced.

I add:
Pana will be what the lower 1/3" CCD HVX block shows what the major manufaturers have to offer.


AVC-HD is a new high-def format that frankly beats HDV in nearly every category. Probably the most interesting aspect of AVC-HD is that it's sponsored by both Sony and Panasonic.They have a high-end market to protect. That's all !!!!

...Canon doesn't offer more than 1/3" camcorders and period.

Aside the RED & Silicon Imaging route, now we'll also have the Canon's 24f higher res via beginning from $3,999. Where's the competition?

PS
It's not relevant -- at least to me, if it is tape (otherwise, a cheap media even if old) or a hated label like HDV seems to be here for many. I'm not a geek just an INDIE moviemaker.

Zim
07-30-2006, 05:13 AM
THe Canon A1 doesn't offer SMPTE . Is that much of a problem for one camera indie filmaking? Or what if you planned to have some on TV? Where is this a must?

Emanuel
07-30-2006, 05:42 AM
THe Canon A1 doesn't offer SMPTE . Is that much of a problem for one camera indie filmaking? Or what if you planned to have some on TV? Where is this a must?I said: «Aside the RED & Silicon Imaging route, now we'll also have the Canon's 24f higher res via beginning from $3,999.»

Beginning from...

It depends of your own needs and other gear that you own as well your budget, of course. IMO, even without SMPTE, as run & gun deal for doc work, for example, or "B" camera for simple handheld capture -- the $3,999 A1's offer can be an unbeatable deal. At least, for unbiased dvxuser.com members.

Even if without SMPTE and with compressed audio or from the HDV environment. Specially if we are going to the Cineform codec solution@post where the MPEG2 handicap is away.

Just a hint.

Zim
07-30-2006, 06:02 AM
I don't have any other video gear. Just Nikons!! The only video editing I have is FCE so that will need a upgrade. Run and gun doc work and maybe some type of indie production. Not planning on starting a production company, not much event work either. Maybe alttile.

I just would like to know if not having it could later down the road be a problem.

Ralph Oshiro
07-30-2006, 06:14 AM
If the A1 street prices at under $3,500, they may have something there. It would be one of the least expensive ways to acquire native 16:9 images, albeit, with its "sort-of-24p-ish" feature. This would make a great "stunt" camera (car mounts, etc.).

Emanuel
07-30-2006, 06:19 AM
I don't have any other video gear. Just Nikons!!So you already have something! :D Good stuff indeed!! :thumbsup: Maybe the 35mm adapter route specially if you want it for narrative work.

There, here is my best bet:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=62742

Or try this one mainly if you are going to the relay-lens via with an interchangeable device like XL-H1 actually is:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=626538&postcount=28


The only video editing I have is FCE so that will need a upgrade. Run and gun doc work and maybe some type of indie production. Not planning on starting a production company, not much event work either. Maybe alttile.

I just would like to know if not having it could later down the road be a problem.Targeting a $15,000 budget (editing solution included) I would go with the Silicon Imaging Mini-cam setup. Less than that, I would follow a Canon road (higher res --> sharpness, better lowlighting and noiseless features) from a $3,999 basis even if with compressed audio (strictly if with the A1 option).

On the other hand, the improved autofocus system (unique feature) will be a great help for run & gun shooting like doc work and the well-known high definition focusing problem. Above all if you're dealing from an indie production basis (genre one-man show; a real must around these boards).

Barry_Green
07-30-2006, 07:40 AM
but maybe are you forgetting the Canon's 3 x 1.67mp CCD block?!...
I'm not forgetting that at all. I just don't care.

It doesn't make that much difference. Seriously. Are you (or is anyone) going to try to say that because the Canon has three times as many pixels, that it's three times sharper? Of course not. It's a little sharper, but only a little. When you're looking at 1/3" CCDs, there's only so much resolution that can be resolved at that chip size. All the 1/3" cameras are in the same basic ballpark, the Canon being the only one that's a bit sharper. And I wouldn't give up the HVX's unique/characteristic footage "look", or its variable frame rates, or its 1080 & 720, or its flexibility, or its P2 workflow, or its DV50 mode, or any of those things, just to be able to say "yeah, but my cam has more pixels."

The only place where the Canon does show a notable res increase is in 1080/60i mode. I don't think I've ever shot anything in 1080/60i. If someone really wants 1080/60i, the Canon is superior resolution, no argument.

Really, the pixel thing is such a non-issue. If it's an issue to someone, then go ahead and get the Canon. But if you want to make footage that looks like what we screened yesterday at the L.A. BootCamp, the HVX does just fine. Ask anyone who was there if they think the HVX's pixel count is inadequate!

rawfa
07-30-2006, 07:57 AM
Hahaha. These arguments are simply hilarious.

evenkiehl
07-30-2006, 08:58 AM
I'm not trying to start anything but I seem to remember some of you saying about 3-6 months ago that the HDV format was already dying and would soon be dead. Given this announcement, do you see a different view, and if so, what changed your mind?

Thanks, (considering a new camera purchase and don't want to invest in a format that is hard to edit, or that will soon be "dead," or that the industry doesn't like.)

Am following this thread with interest, as I, too, am looking for another camera in the near future. Not being a techy, and believing that how it is lit, how it is shot, and the material itself outweighs the number of pixels and other statistical comparisons between cameras...

With that said, it does not seem that the questions above have really been addressed, and I would be very curious and appreciative for thoughts about the HDV format in the contect of this particular camera. The A 1 has most of what I want, but what happens to this product when/if AVC comes out? Will HDV still have legs for a few years? Obviously, Panasonic and Sony will present their new offerings in this continual and ever changing progress dance, but how might that affect the Canon HDV owners? Or, would it not make much difference?

I am trying to learn from these discussions, and much of it is over my head, but, at the same time, trying to understand the basics, and hoping to spend my money on the right camera for me, so thanks for any clarifications or explanations.
Ques from above quote: hard to edit, dead format, industry may not like it?
Thanks, Stuart

Emanuel
07-30-2006, 09:32 AM
Good old times Barry!

It was nice read you again...

My best HVX find:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=64147

One of my best Canon's finds:
http://www.starwaypictures.com/twenty-third/index.html

Anyway, I've been missing your posts and I'd like to see you@RED_forum.

Or even better @Silicon Imaging sub-forum. They have been trying with Jarred but it's not easy to get anything in the others' backyard specially when RED is around. Because I'm with the Jim's project, that's my home too. So, it's not a problem to me. But I'd also like to go with Ari & Jason team. IMHO they need more support than they had been with. Unfairly. They have an excellent product and they would need for a support like yours.

Emanuel
07-30-2006, 09:35 AM
Hahaha. These arguments are simply hilarious.Menino mal comportado! :evil:

Emanuel
07-30-2006, 09:41 AM
I would be very curious and appreciative for thoughts about the HDV format in the contect of this particular camera. The A 1 has most of what I want, but what happens to this product when/if AVC comes out? Will HDV still have legs for a few years? Obviously, Panasonic and Sony will present their new offerings in this continual and ever changing progress dance, but how might that affect the Canon HDV owners? Or, would it not make much difference?http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=629879&postcount=25

rawfa
07-30-2006, 09:56 AM
HDV vs avc is a good point. These new canon cameras got me very very excited...but if I buy one and a week after that Panasonic or Sony come up with a progressive HD-AVC I would be pissed! But to be honest I have a strong feeling these 2 formats will co-exist for a couple of years. Besides, if you wait for the perfect technology to come up we would still be shooting with HI8 because we wouldn't be sure how long DV was going to last before a new technology showed up. Keeping up with techology is hard. Who knows if in 5 years there's going to be a Ultra-Super-Mega-Hyper-High-Definition and both AVC and Hdv will be dead. Btw, I've heard Sony is coming up with a new format called HVD ;-)

Kholi
07-30-2006, 10:00 AM
HDV vs avc is a good point. These new canon cameras got me very very excited...but if I buy one and a week after that Panasonic or Sony come up with a progressive HD-AVC I would be pissed! But to be honest I have a strong feeling these 2 formats will co-exist for a couple of years. Besides, if you wait for the perfect technology to come up we would still be shooting with HI8 because we wouldn't be sure how long DV was going to last before a new technology showed up. Keeping up with techology is hard. Who knows if in 5 years there's going to be a Ultra-Super-Mega-Hyper-High-Definition and both AVC and Hd will be dead.

I was JUST getting ready to post this same exact thing.

If Panasonic releases some AVC-HD camera with variable frame rates and other hoo-haa right after, and I have to go through the process of reselling my A1 I'll be pretty grumpy.

It almost makes me want to stick with the DVX100a and rent hi-def when needed, or rent my friends with HVX200's or H1's.

But, then, renting isn't really an investment. At least if I purchase one I can resell it for maybe fifty-dollars under what I payed for it on ebay like I did with my first Pana camera.

I suppose there are still a pair of months in front of the release dates... here's to hoping that if there are any Panasonic cameras ready to go befor the holidays that they do a press release before the A1 is released.

Emanuel
07-30-2006, 10:11 AM
HDV vs avc is a good point. These new canon cameras got me very very excited...but if I buy one and a week after that Panasonic or Sony come up with a progressive HD-AVC I would be pissed! But to be honest I have a strong feeling these 2 formats will co-exist for a couple of years. Besides, if you wait for the perfect technology to come up we would still be shooting with HI8 because we wouldn't be sure how long DV was going to last before a new technology showed up. Keeping up with techology is hard. Who knows if in 5 years there's going to be a Ultra-Super-Mega-Hyper-High-Definition and both AVC and Hdv will be dead. Btw, I've heard Sony is coming up with a new format called HVD ;-)LOL

Eu concordo com você, Rafa/I agree with you rawfa

...but I can't believe those majors would go to lose their market.

Maybe only after RED. Some years later.

Once more, HVX is what it is because they wouldn't want it in any way other than as it was.

Canon is out of this business 'cause they're manufacturing JUST 1/3" camcorders as their own high-end. However, G1/A1 is a surprise but not so much if we'll notice its delay. One year after XL-H1. Just a couple of months after the AVC-HD announcement. Without it, the $6,999/$3,999 offer wouldn't be possible.

Emanuel
07-30-2006, 10:42 AM
If Panasonic releases some AVC-HD camera with variable frame rates...LOL

Although possible, it will never happen now.

And when there will be their launch, it will be lower res than Canon (Pana) or interlaced/fake progressive (Sony) -- that's for sure!

Kholi
07-30-2006, 10:49 AM
LOL

Although possible, it will never happen now.

And when there will be their launch, it will be lower res than Canon (Pana) or interlaced/fake progressive (Sony) -- that's for sure!

Meh, lower-res ... okay. But it sure ain't lower resolution keeping me from shelling out for an HVX.

I think it's almost safe to say that if the HVX's price-tag with at least an 8gig p2 card were oh... between four and five-thousand (3999 to 4999.99)? The majority of this forum would have one, including myself.

Instead, I'm forced to wait until the company I work for shells out the dough, because I'm not paying sixty-five hundred plus (6500.00+) for it, no matter what it does.

Has nothing to do with the resolution, or the p2 media itself, for me. It's all about that dollar amount.

And, I'd wager that the reason the A1 and G1 are garnering so much attention is because of those lovely MSRP's that've been given. A street price from thirty-five to thirty-seven hundred? That only makes the pixel count sound sweeter.

Emanuel
07-30-2006, 10:57 AM
And, I'd wager that the reason the A1 and G1 are garnering so much attention is because of those lovely MSRP's that've been given. A street price from thirty-five to thirty-seven hundred? That only makes the pixel count sound sweeter.It is a killer price indeed! Above all if you can buy the most higher res of the 1/3" chip HD cams (a Mini-XLH1 unit) for less than a half of its original price...twelve months later its own native launch.

Elton
07-30-2006, 12:58 PM
Yea but... wait. youre trandslating HDV 4:2:0 => cineform/DVCcpro/PhototJpeg 422 codec. you cant get that color space back regardless of what "lossless" codec you use. That just soundsl ike taking SD video, stretching it to "hd" and presenting it as HD. the image does not have the information in it. How does that work???

Im seriously asking and not flaming this cause if i can get "better" results, I WILL shoot Canon G1 and rent a HVX for over cranked shots. How does this work? I am looking at this from the standpoint of a DP, keeping my clients best interests in mind, and giving them footage that can be manipulated without problems.

TimurCivan, I'm talking about capturing the live camera head signal via SDI. This bypasses HDV compression and the image is true full raster uncompressed 4:2:2, not subsampled 4:2:2. I've captured this way numerous times into a G5/KonaLH setup using FCP "capture now" directly from the camera output. I usually capture with the Sheer lossless codec (45 MBs--http://www.bitjazz.com) and then transcode to PhotoJPEG later on to work with smaller, high quality clips (12-16 MBs). This preserves nearly all the spatial and chroma info the camera offers in an easily editable codec. It makes a difference in scenes with extremely challenging motion characteristics and definitely helps to achieve frighteningly good chroma keys. Loads of latitude for cc too.

You may find you won't need the HVX for overcrank unless you need frame rates between 30 and 60fps. I use a Nattress plug-in for FCP (Standards Conversion, Map
Frames) which does an extremely good job of converting 1080i to 720 60p. It will even do a surprisingly good job of making 1080 60p from 1080i in the HQ field to frames mode. You have to see it to understand it, but it definitely achieves good 2.5 slow mo that is very intercuttable with 24F in a 1080 24p timeline. You can also shoot 30F for a slight slow mo when conformed to 24p.

SDI 1080i is actually very flexible if you know how to work with it in post.

Elton
07-30-2006, 01:53 PM
The A 1 has most of what I want, but what happens to this product when/if AVC comes out?

Who cares?!! A good HD image is just that. AVC is still hyper-compression too. And it's long GOP 4:2:0 also...so if you like what you see from H1 imagery (look at disjecta's H1 stuff! http://www.pinelakefilms.com/blog.html) than just shoot!! Why hang around for a technology that is not likely to make much of a difference in your storytelling and most likely to be a diminishing returns prospect from what the A1 offers?

The future is now! Quality HD is here at DVX prices...dig in!


Will HDV still have legs for a few years? Obviously, Panasonic and Sony will present their new offerings in this continual and ever changing progress dance, but how might that affect the Canon HDV owners? Or, would it not make much difference?

I think the threshold of high quality film-like HD has already been passed some time ago. If you can't get BIG SCREEN theatrical release -worthy images with 24F 1080p (or 720p HD for that matter) than it's certainly not a question of the technology.

rawfa
07-30-2006, 02:41 PM
Elton, I couldn't have put it better my self. Those are exactly my thoughts.

Kholi
07-30-2006, 02:57 PM
I think the threshold of high quality film-like HD has already been passed some time ago. If you can't get BIG SCREEN theatrical release -worthy images with 24F 1080p (or 720p HD for that matter) than it's certainly not a question of the technology.

Barlow for Vice President.

ecking
07-30-2006, 03:57 PM
Who cares?!! A good HD image is just that. AVC is still hyper-compression too. And it's long GOP 4:2:0 also...so if you like what you see from H1 imagery (look at disjecta's H1 stuff! http://www.pinelakefilms.com/blog.html) than just shoot!! Why hang around for a technology that is not likely to make much of a difference in your storytelling and most likely to be a diminishing returns prospect from what the A1 offers?

The future is now! Quality HD is here at DVX prices...dig in!



I think the threshold of high quality film-like HD has already been passed some time ago. If you can't get BIG SCREEN theatrical release -worthy images with 24F 1080p (or 720p HD for that matter) than it's certainly not a question of the technology.

Exactly! These things are to make movies with, not dick measuring contests. I don't give a damn what company offered the XH A1, if it was what it is I'd buy it.

Sometimes I think if Panasonic to made both the HVX and the A1 I think this forum would give it more praise.

Elton
07-30-2006, 04:15 PM
I don't fault anyone for a Panasonic bias here given the name on the door. The reality is simply that there's a huge crowd hungering for quality HD 24P (yes, HDV 24F is pretty much that) at the DVX price range. In other words, truly "affordable HD". So far the A1 seems to be the only product that fills the bill. I have no doubts that great competitive products are around the corner, but the XH-A1 is likely to be the "big bang" camera that got all the starving indies and film students on board producing HD films. A lot like the DVX made SD digital filmmaking explode.

Sundance FF screens all digital entries at 1080 resolution from HDCAM decks. (many 16/35mm films too) I can guarantee that you will have a much nicer product to project on a giant theatrical screen than a DVX could possibly deliver.

TimurCivan
07-30-2006, 04:51 PM
TimurCivan, I'm talking about capturing the live camera head signal via SDI. This bypasses HDV compression and the image is true full raster uncompressed 4:2:2, not subsampled 4:2:2. I've captured this way numerous times into a G5/KonaLH setup using FCP "capture now" directly from the camera output. I usually capture with the Sheer lossless codec (45 MBs--http://www.bitjazz.com) and then transcode to PhotoJPEG later on to work with smaller, high quality clips (12-16 MBs). This preserves nearly all the spatial and chroma info the camera offers in an easily editable codec. It makes a difference in scenes with extremely challenging motion characteristics and definitely helps to achieve frighteningly good chroma keys. Loads of latitude for cc too.

You may find you won't need the HVX for overcrank unless you need frame rates between 30 and 60fps. I use a Nattress plug-in for FCP (Standards Conversion, Map
Frames) which does an extremely good job of converting 1080i to 720 60p. It will even do a surprisingly good job of making 1080 60p from 1080i in the HQ field to frames mode. You have to see it to understand it, but it definitely achieves good 2.5 slow mo that is very intercuttable with 24F in a 1080 24p timeline. You can also shoot 30F for a slight slow mo when conformed to 24p.

SDI 1080i is actually very flexible if you know how to work with it in post.

ahh thats excellent, thank you. It sounds limiting as far as mobility but for static situations thats sounds great.

mikkowilson
07-30-2006, 05:45 PM
THe Canon A1 doesn't offer SMPTE . Is that much of a problem for one camera indie filmaking? Or what if you planned to have some on TV? Where is this a must?

SMPTE is the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers! IT DOES NOT JUST REFER TO ONE CONNECTOR!

There cameras have Timecode don't they? I mean they record it to tape? Yes of course the do! Well guess what? That's SMTPE standard timecode! Do they do "NTSC" color bars? Yes! Those are SMTPE Color Bars! Infact they are leinced from SMPTE! Is teh SMTPE standard timecode connector the only SMTPE connection on the camera? No! Geuss what, the SDI connections match SMTPE stanrds too!
There are loads of things that match SMTPE standards on all video cameras.

Use the acronyms correctly! Do you mean the SMTPE Timecode connector? Oh you do? THEN SAY TIMECODE!


- Mikko ... is picky today.

razamalik
07-30-2006, 06:16 PM
SMPTE is the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers! IT DOES NOT JUST REFER TO ONE CONNECTOR!

There cameras have Timecode don't they? I mean they record it to tape? Yes of course the do! Well guess what? That's SMTPE standard timecode! Do they do "NTSC" color bars? Yes! Those are SMTPE Color Bars! Infact they are leinced from SMPTE! Is teh SMTPE standard timecode connector the only SMTPE connection on the camera? No! Geuss what, the SDI connections match SMTPE stanrds too!
There are loads of things that match SMTPE standards on all video cameras.

Use the acronyms correctly! Do you mean the SMTPE Timecode connector? Oh you do? THEN SAY TIMECODE!


- Mikko ... is picky today.

Mikko dont be so picky man... LOL i notice you always spell "the" as "teh" but we all know what you mean so keep your cools you are a cool lad & i have learnt a lot from you in my time on dvxuser. peace

mikkowilson
07-30-2006, 06:24 PM
Ok, yeah, good point.

But a Typo is one thing, totally misusing a term is different.

It's like answering the question "What video camera do you have?" with "It's a Sony!" or perhaps "It's a 'DSR'! " ... Gaah! This one of my big pet peves!

</rant>

That aside, thanks for the compliment. :beer: :)

- Mikko ... is lesdixic.

Zim
07-30-2006, 06:39 PM
Mikko,,,,,so what are you saying? Look I don't want all the crap.,,,,,I just want to know how much of a problem not having SMTPE timcode on the A1 will be, if any? I shoot some video, put it in the computer and edit. Then burn a DVD or whatever. When will not having SMTPE timecode be a problem. Please.

mikkowilson
07-30-2006, 06:43 PM
The camera DOES record SMTPE standard timecode to tape. It's part of both the DV and HDV standard. If footage is DV or HDV (Or many other formats), it's SMTPE spec. TC.

The only thing that the A1 doens't have in comparison to the G1 related to timecode is a timecode input/output.



It's not like we call "TC" a "SMTPE member" ... though that would be funny. Jarred?

- Mikko

Kholi
07-30-2006, 08:05 PM
Omfg.

I just had a chance to view the STARWAY PICTURES SCENE 10 file on my television via DVI out to 32" Samsung CRT HDTV ....

Omfg. That image was so freaking sick.

I've seen it on my Dell Laptop, which looked okay. THen 30" Cinema HD, which looked eye popping...

CRT blew them all out of the water. Just, wow.

What I didn't notice, though, was the BETACAM SP box on the ground. That was too funny.

Zim
07-30-2006, 08:23 PM
The camera DOES record SMTPE standard timecode to tape. It's part of both the DV and HDV standard. If footage is DV or HDV (Or many other formats), it's SMTPE spec. TC.

The only thing that the A1 doens't have in comparison to the G1 related to timecode is a timecode input/output.



It's not like we call "TC" a "SMTPE member" ... though that would be funny. Jarred?

- Mikko

Thanks

Noel Evans
07-31-2006, 05:34 AM
OK after a lot of thinking today I have weighed up the pros and cons of my next purchase. I own a DVX100A and reularly use a HVX and JVCHD100. I have been wondering weather to jump ship (the DVX) before I start shooting on my next project, and being a regular user of both HVX (this wont change thus I still want that bootcamp DVD whenyou guys Barry and Jarred can get one together) and JVChd100 these were the two cams on my radar. From my home end I have a new mac and FCP Studio latest HD version... just changed over in anticipation of my next move.

The best cam is the HVX read all the info blah blah (I mean look at all the recording optionms this baby has) ...... of course we havent seen the image from the A1 yet but I really do not feel that the HVX will suffer because of its little cousin that can (maybe) the A1 - totally different market IMO. The HD100 is a great camera IMO and I love the layout and look, as do the many people who stop and ask what it is. Best of all it produces a great image. But to change the lens that comes with the cam your looking at some major $$.

OK now we have the A1.

HVX here in Japan is cheap. Actually cheaper than the A1 by a fraction mind you, but once you add your p2 cards or other storage options etc the price goes up considerably - not to mention accessories etc.

One thing is the A1 lens screw mount is 72mm. Thus works with everything I already have. Wonder would it accept the Century 0.6 wide angle lens? (any thoughts on this from people with the knowledge?) Its lighter than the HVX and thus an easier ride on the Merlin I already own.

I also wonder would this work with the current letus flip? I mean the flip works by focusing on the gg and then focusing from the lens. So my brain says yes it would?

The cost is much cheaper in the end from any other upgrade I concieve, especially when you factor in matteboxes etc etc and having to by new to changeover (especially since I did just buy a new one). Did I also mention that next year I return to the sunny shores of AUS and a cam that is both NTSC and PAL compatible is also a major drawcard.

Looks like Ill be going in to order mine in the next few days. Thus I could actually be the first to have one on the board (being in Japan) - only problem is I would be so busy I would hardly have time to do big reviews at that stage but I will be sure to post up somme footage cut from dailies etc.

Luckily for some shots I can access the HVX for FREE (couldnt use it for an entire shoot - but a day or two here and there is fine) when I need those variable frame rates.

The DVX has been such a great camera. I will be sad to see it go.

Isaac_Brody
07-31-2006, 05:46 AM
Let us know what the image is like NCJE. The DVX has been a great camera. I think people are almost happy to see it dethroned because it's gotten so much attention. I think it's a good thing when you outgrow your tools though.

rawfa
07-31-2006, 06:11 AM
I have no doubts about selling my FX1 and buying the XH A1. The only thing that could make me change my mind would be a new improved HDV/AVC camera from Pana, Sony, JVC. The control you have over the image on the XH A1 is amazing and it has pro audio (2 major points over the FX1). The only thing I'm going to miss from the FX1 is the awesome bigass LCD.

rawfa
07-31-2006, 06:21 AM
BTW, does anyone know when will they start selling in Europe?

Zim
07-31-2006, 06:33 AM
We probably shouldn't rule out Panasonic or Sony just yet. But I think I have the cash lined up for a A1 and will buy it if nothing better comes along.

Mediacre
07-31-2006, 09:59 AM
Man oh man though, if this had been AVC-HD instead of HDV I'd buy one today. BUT: the big question mark is the lens controls. I hate (despise, actually) the rubber-band loosey-goosey "wet cabbage" feel of the XLH1's lens. If Canon has addressed that, they may have a contender here. If they haven't addressed it, I don't care what it costs I wouldn't stand using it.

Opinions, opinions, opinions…. I feel the same way about any fixed, non manual lens. No, the retarding lens controls on fixed servo lens cameras like HVX200, DVX100, Z1 and auto lens in the XL series said to be manual focus and zoom don’t count. I’m talking about real manual controls. I can’t stand using a camera without a real manual lens. Rubber-band loosey-goosey "wet cabbage" feel or not.
Now seriously, isn't it like a thief bad mouthing a burglar? The HVX200 also doesn't have a real manual lens. Nitpicking on the Canon for some personal issue sounds really ironic.

As far as an HVX competitor? Naw. 4:2:0 HDV vs. 4:2:2 DVCPRO-HD,
I read several times about the HVX200 being “actually in reality” a 4:2:0 camera. I don’t recall the reason, since I dropped my interest on the HVX200 long ago when footage, resolution charts, noise issues and other glitches started to surface, but I’m pretty sure I could find it again.


1080/24F vs. 1080/24P, 1080/30F vs. 1080/30P, [QUOTE]

Isn’t it more like 540p? 540x540 actually. So, a more correct way to put it would be 800x600 24f vs. 540x540 24p, 800x600 30p vs. 540x540 30p.

no 720p at all, no variable frame rates,


Now you touched on a real advantage, specially variable frame rates, which is the only real advantage of the HVX200 over its competitors on my book.


no DVCPRO50,


That’s subjective. Unless you work for a TV station that uses the format, I don’t see a reason to shoot DV50 over 720p. But yes, it does offer you the option so I guess it counts as an advantage.


no Cinelike-D and Cinelike-V, and back to a tape-based workflow?


Back you mean? Have we ever realistically gone way from it? A HVX200 with 2 small cards that allow you to record a ¼ of a hour costs as much as 2 of these new Canons and the workflow is not quite mature yet. There’s hundreds of people complaining online about the workflow. P2 is the future, not now.


[QUOTE]No thanks on that aspect.

Naturally.

Kholi
07-31-2006, 10:08 AM
Between the A1 and the HVX200... I think it's safe to assume, all pixel counts aside, that it is NOT THE CAMERA that's going to have people purchasing the A1.

NCJE is the perfect example. DVX100 owner, knows that the HVX200 is the camera of choice... but the cost to take advantage of such is too great.

Like him, I'd rather rent or borrow than own it, because of these reasons.

Tape-Based Workflow, 4:2:0, HDV, No Variable Frame Rates... throw all the nonsense you want at me. What the bottom line really sounds like to me is:

You can get awesome looking Hi-Def footage for 3999.99 + Tape Media.

Sorry... you can toss all of that tech-spec stuff at myself and as many people as you want.

3999.99 to 5499.99 (and that's being leniant on the HVX's side)... At that price point I'm deaf, my friend.

And the statement you're referring to is HVX's 1080i being 4:2:0 and that was a guestimate. Not factual, I believe.

David Jimerson
07-31-2006, 10:12 AM
"Actually 4:2:0" and "540p" are FUDs which have been thrown around by HVX detractors who haven't actually used the HVX for some time now.

This cam doesn't compete with the HVX, and I don't think it's supposed to. Will it kill the DVX? Quite possibly. But that's not the same thing.

Isaac_Brody
07-31-2006, 10:19 AM
I read several times about the HVX200 being “actually in reality” a 4:2:0 camera. I don’t recall the reason, since I dropped my interest on the HVX200 long ago when footage, resolution charts, noise issues and other glitches started to surface, but I’m pretty sure I could find it again.

How about you give the trolling a rest.

It'd be great if people looked at these cams without getting so emotional. You can't think of these cameras as being the best out of what's available, you can only choose what will be best for you.

Jarred Land
07-31-2006, 10:24 AM
yeah as soon as this starts becoming a pissing contest its goes away.

rawfa
07-31-2006, 10:56 AM
The President and Chevy Chace are absolutely right. DVXuser is one of the most complete sources of online information for film there is. Countless times I found the answer for difficult issues here and I'm sure I'm was not the only one. This is an amazing place for sharing VERY useful information and it is truly a pity when people have to spoil it all over stuff like this. Live and let live. I really can't undestand this "necesity" to prove that "this is better and this is worst". Jesus, isn't it good enough to have so many choices to chose from to suit different styles, preferences, etc? Must people go through the trouble of going online, log in on to dvxuser just to make sure they "win" which is best? This is not a competition and nobody is going to gain anything here. The only thing I want to gain from being here in the forum is useful information and have a good time talking to people who share the same passion then me. Now that the mood is lighter, lets get this tread on the track and focus on canons' new pupies.

Noel Evans
07-31-2006, 04:18 PM
and being a regular user of both HVX (this wont change thus I still want that bootcamp DVD whenyou guys Barry and Jarred can get one together)


One thing is the A1 lens screw mount is 72mm. Wonder would it accept the Century 0.6 wide angle lens? (any thoughts on this from people with the knowledge?)

I also wonder would this work with the current letus flip? I mean the flip works by focusing on the gg and then focusing from the lens. So my brain says yes it would?



OK still have these questions - anyone care to speculate? Sorry Jarred and Barry gonna keep bugging you about the HVX DVD :P.

Also found this: doesnt seem entirely accurate but it does show A1 specs compared to z1 xlh1 and HVX. Forget Xlh1 and HVX they an entirely different kettle of fish for this... but FX1 looks dead in the water here. http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-XH-A1-XH-G1-XL-H1-Panasonic-AG-HVX200-Sony-HDR-FX1-Compared.htm

Barry_Green
07-31-2006, 05:14 PM
Sometimes I think if Panasonic to made both the HVX and the A1 I think this forum would give it more praise.
Interesting point. I think that there may be some merit to this supposition, because by it being Canon we're back to that whole brand war thing again.

You never see this "mine is better than yours" attitude within the same brand -- I don't see H1 users bagging on XL2 users, or XL2 users laughing at H1 users because they spent 2x or 3x as much, etc. I don't see DVX users mocking HVX buyers, or HVX buyers dissing on DVX buyers.

But, back to your original point, Panasonic wouldn't have made the A1 as-is. They wouldn't put HDV in it. If they were to make an A1-caliber camera with all the same features and capabilities as the A1, it wouldn't have HDV in it, it'd probably have AVC-HD in it instead. And then, yes, you'd probably see substantially more praise for it, no doubt.

Barry_Green
07-31-2006, 05:22 PM
Now seriously, isn't it like a thief bad mouthing a burglar? The HVX200 also doesn't have a real manual lens. Nitpicking on the Canon for some personal issue sounds really ironic.
You're joking, right? Have you tried them both? The HVX's lens ACTS like one, feels like one, performs like one, and gives control like one. And as far as zoom goes, it *is* one. The Canon is none of the above.

Or would you actually still prefer the HD100's lens, having seen what that does to the footage? Because it's "real"?


I read several times about the HVX200 being “actually in reality” a 4:2:0 camera.
There was random speculation about that, yes. But the fact of the matter is that the HVX delivers substantially better chroma resolution than any of its competition, including the $30,000 XDCAM-HD system. The guys from WETA Digital (Peter Jackson's digital effects company) tested the HVX against the XDCAM HD system in a chroma keying test and got substantially superior keying from the HVX. So if someone wants to argue technicalities then they can go right ahead, but the actuality is that you're getting more usable chroma resolution from the HVX.


As far as the rest of your post, looks like we're back where we started, you and I. Nothing's changed, so no real reason to go into it.

Barry_Green
07-31-2006, 05:25 PM
OK still have these questions - anyone care to speculate?
The Century .6 isn't a threaded product, so it won't thread onto the A1's lens. But, you could probably get them to remount it, pull off the DVX mount and attach a Canon bayonet mount. I believe they already offer that service for the 1.6 teleconverter.


Sorry Jarred and Barry gonna keep bugging you about the HVX DVD :P.
It's due soon. Soon...

Noel Evans
07-31-2006, 08:10 PM
Just an update. Looks like I cant get my hands on this soon enough so my current project looks like it will end up shot on a DVX. If thats the case I plan to make this the best damn little DVX flick I can. I havent given up though... I have some avenues I can try to get it sooner.

Emanuel
07-31-2006, 08:26 PM
The President and Chevy Chace are absolutely right. DVXuser is one of the most complete sources of online information for film there is. Countless times I found the answer for difficult issues here and I'm sure I'm was not the only one. This is an amazing place for sharing VERY useful information and it is truly a pity when people have to spoil it all over stuff like this. Live and let live. I really can't undestand this "necesity" to prove that "this is better and this is worst". Jesus, isn't it good enough to have so many choices to chose from to suit different styles, preferences, etc? Must people go through the trouble of going online, log in on to dvxuser just to make sure they "win" which is best? This is not a competition and nobody is going to gain anything here. The only thing I want to gain from being here in the forum is useful information and have a good time talking to people who share the same passion then me. Now that the mood is lighter, lets get this tread on the track and focus on canons' new pupies.Rafa said all.

SPZ
08-01-2006, 03:07 AM
I'm curious to see how many shorts shot with HVX and XLh1 end up in, say, Sundance. One thing is for sure: With a 35mm adaptor, It will be hard to tell the difference from either cam and 16mm film (even 35mm, if it is well post-produced enough...)

StMad
08-01-2006, 04:47 AM
it wouldn't have HDV in it, it'd probably have AVC-HD in it instead. And then, yes, you'd probably see substantially more praise for it, no doubt.


Apart from your test Barry (pirate ship?), I haven't seen an example of the motion problems HDV inherently has. That may be because the shooter doesn't post it when it appears. It could also be that it is rarely (extremely rarely?) a problem, or that my eyes can't detect it. Almost every comment I see about HDV is of the "HDV - yuk!" variety. I'm not sure that people who post those sorts of comments have seen the issues either.

Of all the footage you've seen, how much suffered from the inherent issues that HDV faces? Would you be willing to put a % figure on it? Obviously I'm leading - though objectively I am curious.

There's often a lot of personal, emotional investment in the camera we purchase (I'm getting giddy waiting for my HVX and thinking about playing with framerates, and popping an adapter on the front).

The issues I do see with the HVX (soft footage/grabs when displayed at full res, chroma noise) I see more often. There's plenty of defense of these issues - it appears in part due to emotional investment and the solidarity of this community. Which is no knock - these factors play a part in making this community as enjoyable as it is.

I'm not sure it's a given that on technical merits Pana's (hypothetical) new cam - HDV = more praise.

If you were to say...Canon's new cam + DVX mojo = more praise, then I'd be inclined to agree :)

I can't finish this semi-emotional post without saying...Everyone get your butts over to the XLH1 forum and check out Disjecta's latest footy. OMG!!

rawfa
08-01-2006, 05:08 AM
Things are getting steamy. We've been warned before. Let's not spoil the fun and keep the focus where it should be.

rawfa
08-01-2006, 05:54 AM
There's an interesting article on camcorderinfo on how will these cameras do on the the current market.

razamalik
08-01-2006, 09:25 AM
There's an interesting article on camcorderinfo on how will these cameras do on the the current market.

link please...

rawfa
08-01-2006, 10:03 AM
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canons-Role-in-a-Crowded-HD-Market.htm

Kholi
08-01-2006, 10:38 AM
I'm curious to see how many shorts shot with HVX and XLh1 end up in, say, Sundance. One thing is for sure: With a 35mm adaptor, It will be hard to tell the difference from either cam and 16mm film (even 35mm, if it is well post-produced enough...)

IT depends on how many of those have Sundance worthy content, right?

Camera helps, but it's not going to make you a great storyteller.

Elton
08-01-2006, 11:00 AM
IT depends on how many of those have Sundance worthy content, right?

Camera helps, but it's not going to make you a great storyteller.

Amen. The signifigant difference with these new cameras is that audiences won't have to fight a soft/fuzzy image on the big screen and digital will look less digital than before, whether transferred to film or HD projected. (film projection at festivals wil become increasingly rare) :)

David Jimerson
08-01-2006, 11:02 AM
(Actually, it probably depends quite a bit more on the names which are in the credits.)

Kholi
08-01-2006, 11:06 AM
Amen. The signifigant difference with these new cameras is that audiences won't have to fight a soft/fuzzy image on the big screen and digital will look less digital than before, whether transferred to film or HD projected. (film projection at festivals wil become increasingly rare) :)


Exactly. It puts you right into the realm of film-like images. Starway picture's Twenty-Third Letter is a perfect example.

There's just not an excuse, anymore.

Well, having to work a nine-to-five is one. :cough: But, other than that.

Elton
08-01-2006, 11:14 AM
You never see this "mine is better than yours" attitude within the same brand -- I don't see H1 users bagging on XL2 users, or XL2 users laughing at H1 users because they spent 2x or 3x as much, etc. I don't see DVX users mocking HVX buyers, or HVX buyers dissing on DVX buyers.

This is a natural, tribal kind of instinct that is fostered by a signifigant investment in a brand. Ford/Chevy stuff.


Panasonic wouldn't have made the A1 as-is. They wouldn't put HDV in it. If they were to make an A1-caliber camera with all the same features and capabilities as the A1, it wouldn't have HDV in it, it'd probably have AVC-HD in it instead. And then, yes, you'd probably see substantially more praise for it, no doubt.

I just don't understand all this hoopla for AVC-HD yet. It's just theoretically better EXTREME compression that will probably require long-GOP rebuilds for edits, just like native HDV (which is why so many opt for the intermediate approach)...and it isn't like HDV is old school MPEG2; it's the absolute latest and best of MPEG2 technology which isn't all that different from AVC.

We'll see what's what with the format when there are tangible , professional products to discuss, but HDV is what it is; if done well it's a "who care's, it looks great!" kind of thing. That's how I feel about XL-H1 HDV. It's like a pretty damn good HD meal, and SDI is a 5 star gourmet experience.

Kholi
08-01-2006, 11:18 AM
We'll see what's what with the format when there are tangible , professional products to discuss, but HDV is what it is; if done well it's a "who care's, it looks great!" kind of thing. That's how I feel about XL-H1 HDV. It's like a pretty damn good HD meal, and SDI is a 5 star gourmet experience.

And what about NLE support? It seems that adaptation of codecs happens fast...

What are you able to slice AVC-HD on at the moment? If Panasonic were to release an AVC-HD camera around the same time (october/november... even december)... would it be safe to say that by then there'd be editing solutions?

Elton
08-01-2006, 11:43 AM
And what about NLE support? It seems that adaptation of codecs happens fast...

What are you able to slice AVC-HD on at the moment? If Panasonic were to release an AVC-HD camera around the same time (october/november... even december)... would it be safe to say that by then there'd be editing solutions?

There'd probably be some editing solutions in short order, but I've never *edited* AVC/h.264/MPEG4...only encoded to it.

Barry_Green
08-01-2006, 11:43 AM
What are you able to slice JVC 24p HDV on yet? What are you able to slice Canon 24F on yet?

Things take time.

With that said, I am extraordinarily confident that the reason we didn't see Vegas 7 debut at NAB is because they were holding on to it to implement AVC-HD into it.

And I'm also quite confident that the reason we didn't see FCP 6 debut at NAB is because they're holding onto it to implement AVC-HD into it.

You guys have to understand (whether you want to or not) that JVC Broadcast is a tiny, tiny, tiny fringe player in the camcorder market, and pulling man-hours to develop support for JVC's proprietary 24p is just not going to rank very high on anyone's priority list. And Canon's proprietary 24F is in the same boat, and actually worse off, because there are probably five HD100's out there for every XLH1. Sony probably sells a hundred camcorders of various types for every one that Canon sells. And Panasonic probably sells a hundred camcorders of various types for every one that JVC sells.

Sony and Panasonic are the dominant behemoths, the big dogs. So when Sony and Panasonic are on the same page? That's when stuff happens. That's why DV was so immediately everywhere. That's why AVC-HD, being a single unified universal format, is going to be supported far better than all the various implementations of HDV combined.

You're really missing the point on AVC-HD. It isn't just that it's "better under extreme compression". It's that it's THE FORMAT that's going to go forward. HDV is a splintered/fragmented vague "standard" that resulted in three nearly incompatible formats. HDV was a "format war" in and of itself. AVC-HD is the next DV, it's the high-def DV. The universal standard. And since AVC-HD is inherently scalable (because in the consumer realm it'll support anywhere from 5 to 18 megabits) I don't doubt for a second that we'll see professional implementation as well, even in bigger cameras. Sony took DV and turned it into DVCAM, they could just as easily take AVC-HD and turn it into AVC-HDCAM by adding some more megabits -- heck, existing AVC-HD is probably as good as, or better than, existing XDCAM-HD (as a FORMAT, not as a camera.)

AVC-HD is also going to have support from the hardware manufacturers, the graphics card manufacturers, the next-gen DVD players, the broadcasters, the IPTV broadcasters, the satellite transmission companies... look at the bigger picture and then you'll see what I'm talking about. HDV will turn out to be a blip on the radar in the history of camcorder formats. It'll go down in history as the Hi8 of HD formats. AVC-HD is the next "DV", the next universal "big" format that everyone, everywhere is supporting.

Yes you're finding HDV to do what you need right now, I understand that and have no problem with that. I'm not telling you your chosen product doesn't do what you want. What I am saying is, it's about to be overwhelmed by an onslaught of H.264 product, and instead of being washed away by the tidal wave I'd rather grab a surfboard and ride it.

David Jimerson
08-01-2006, 11:48 AM
FWIW, you can cut both JVC's 24p and 24F in Vegas.

Elton
08-01-2006, 11:51 AM
All good points Barry.

My original point about Canon HDV is simply that it looks good and can encode well to intermediate codecs, Blu-Ray, HD DVD and the like. A good HD image is all that's needed to work with.

Kholi
08-01-2006, 11:57 AM
Yeah, I was gonna say...

I could've sworn I was just corrected on 24f editing... Vegas does it all.

I dunno. My standpoint isn't nearly as professional as the rest. I'm very new to the camera thing, starting with the DVX100a.

This entire codec war was news to me when I started over a year ago and it really still is baffling.

I think that it's a good thing, for myself, that the A1 is two months away. I can honestly say that if Panasonic were to launch a camera in this same price range, I wouldn't be so quick to leap on an A1 in the near future.

Barry... you're as confident in AVC-HD as you are in Panasonic. Would you be so if Sony were the sole proprietor of AVC-HD and it weren't a joint venture between the two mega-powers?

Kind of a hollow question... but you're really adamant about AVC-HD being the new DV. Makes me wonder, at least.

Emanuel
08-01-2006, 12:16 PM
IT depends on how many of those have Sundance worthy content, right?

Camera helps, but it's not going to make you a great storyteller.What Sérgio want to mean is which camera will be the favorite one by the (best) storyteller for this sort of work... If the best storytellers are choosing this or that gear it must be for any particular reason, right?

My bet is HVX despite my own choice: RED > SI > Canon

But Pana has DVCPRO-HD (and the bitrate numbers are deceiving but there are) and some relevant support like dvxuser.com and a man like Barry Green. He is the Panasonic's Figo (to the american fellows: the best world's soccer player of the last years). Frankly, if I was the Canon staff I would like to have this guru playing in my team's side.

Barry_Green
08-01-2006, 12:19 PM
Barry... you're as confident in AVC-HD as you are in Panasonic. Would you be so if Sony were the sole proprietor of AVC-HD and it weren't a joint venture between the two mega-powers?
Not at all, because there'd still be room for "format wars". But with both on the same side, it's a settled question. And it's not just them -- it's every other link in the chain. It's AVC in broadcast and AVC in distribution and AVC in transmission and AVC in IPTV and AVC in scalable bitrates and AVC in intraframe-only that make it all so compelling!

If you look at AVC-HD vs. HDV, you really have to determine WHICH VERSION of HDV (because it's really HDV vs. HDV vs. HDV.) If you settled on HDV, which version do you settle on? Canon? Sony? JVC? There's really no reason to look at Sony's version of HDV at all anymore, since Canon's implementation is a superset of Sony, but for one factor: Sony's camcorder division is a hundred times larger than Canon's. So it's still a factor, plus -- what do you do for a deck? Sony makes 'em, Canon doesn't, and Sony's deck won't play Canon's 24F or 30F. So which HDV do you look at? Where do you place your bet?

With AVC-HD, that all goes away. It's like DV -- do you bet on Canon's version of DV over Sharp's version of DV? No, because it's all DV. Canon's camera plays Sharp's tapes, and vice versa. DV is a universal format.

That's what AVC-HD is. It's universal.

AND, it's tapeless. And whether people like it or not, I'm a big fan of tapeless and have been since before there was a P2 system. Tapeless moves the whole process out of the "video hardware" domain and over to the "computer hardware" domain, where scalability and cost efficiencies come into play and make a massive difference in how someone works. Tapeless is in its infancy, but it's already paying dividends and it's only going to get bigger, faster, and cheaper.


Kind of a hollow question... but you're really adamant about AVC-HD being the new DV. Makes me wonder, at least.

How can it be anything but "the new DV"? Look at the press release again: Panasonic and Sony jointly announce this as their new format, and they say they are going to aggressively pursue licensing so that everyone else adopts it too.

That's it. Game over. The guys who make 80+ percent of all camcorders have declared this as the new format. Where is there even room for argument? This is like the DV announcement all over again. When DV was announced, that was the end of Hi-8 and S-VHS. Sure those formats lingered and staggered around for a little while, but -- when DV was announced, they were dead. They just didn't know it yet. Same with HDV (although I do think that with the introduction of the A1, HDV is going to buy itself a little more time, like a boxer making the "standing 8 count"). But the end result will be the same.

HDV wasn't, and it never was going to be, "the new DV." Without Panasonic in there you had half the market missing, and you had competition. A lot was made of how HDV had Sony, JVC, Sharp and Canon. Well, look at what *really* happened: Sony made a few models. JVC has released one camera that says HDV on it, and two consumer-ish models prior to that, and they've sold a few, not a tremendous amount, and they're completely incompatible with the Sony models. And Canon has released exactly one HDV model and they've sold a scant few, and it's completely incompatible with the JVC models. Sharp never even bothered to make an HDV product. Far from being some "grand alliance".

We always look at the camcorder business from the aspect of cars, right? Well let's examine it like this: HDV is to cameras as fuel is to cars. What if General Motors partnered up with Yugo, Daihatsu, and Suzuki to announce that they were now making corn-oil-fuel cars? You might think that sounds all wonderful, until you find out that the GM cars run on E-85, the Yugo cars won't run on the same corn-oil fuel but instead require E-50, and that the Suzuki cars need E-25, but they will run in reverse on E-85 if you want them to. And you can only buy E-85 fuel at GM car dealerships, an dyou can only get E-50 fuel at the very few Yugo dealerships, and you can't buy E-25 fuel anywhere.

Now, instead, contrast that with the idea that Honda, Toyota, Ford, Nissan, Mercedes, Chrysler, Hyundai, Mobil, Exxon, Texaco, Citgo, and British Petroleum announce a new initiative for Hydrogen cars. The car manufacturers have standardized on hydrogen as their new fuel, and the oil companies are actively converting so that every station in the world will have at least one hydrogen-dispensing station. And every hydrogen car will run on exactly the same hydrogen fuel, and every filling station will offer the same fuel. And you'll go twice as far on a "gallon" of hydrogen as the corn oil car will go on a gallon of corn oil fuel.

Which system would you buy into? Which would you place your bets on?

The corn-oil initiative would go nowhere. It would gather a little steam up until the hydrogen plan was rolled out, and from then on it's game over.

That's what we're gonna see happen in high-def. It's specifically because it's NOT proprietary to one company, but it's cross-platform (and cross-industry!) compatible, is why I'm so bullish on AVC-HD. And because the companies that are involved are the massive behemoths, the ones who sell the overwhelming vast majority of camcorders, and the ones who dominate in broadcast as well as consumer areas.

This isn't some anti-Sony rant. Sony is behind HDV, but they're also behind AVC-HD. And this isn't some sort of pro-Panasonic rant, because Panasonic is heavily behind blu-ray, and I think blu-ray is shaping up to be the biggest fiasco in the history of consumer electronics. blu-ray will not be "the next DVD", it'll be "the next Circuit-City DIVX", or "the next SACD", or "the next DVD-Audio." Panasonic Broadcast will probably never produce an AVC-HD product. I'm lobbying, I'm telling them an AVC-HD DVX would sell like hotcakes. They may not do it though, but they're going to go with AVC-Intra in the bigger broadcast cameras. 50 megabits per second, intra-frame. In the end it doesn't really matter, it's all still AVC. You could use a 50-megabit intraframe-only version of AVC to make a DVCPRO-HD-comparable codec, or you could use an 18-megabit version of long-GOP AVC to make an XDCAM-HD-comparable codec, or a 9-megabit (or 12-megabit) version to make an HDV-comparable codec, or you could use a 5-megabit long-GOP version to make a consumer long-recording-time format, and it's all still AVC, it's all editable on the same computer, it's all playable on blu-ray and hd-dvd and broadcastable over IPTV or DBS or European HDTV or in the newly-being-revised ATSC, etc. AVC is going to be the single, unifying, universal format for acquisition, transmission, and delivery.

(at least until something better comes along!) :thumbsup:

Emanuel
08-01-2006, 12:37 PM
OK Barry but as far as we know, AVC-HD is a consumer format by now. On the other hand, where can we find a noiseless 3CCD* block as it's possible to get on the Canon route?

Otherwise, there is the HD-SDI option.

* far away whether by Pana (lower) or Sony (full interlaced or fake progressive)

Kholi
08-01-2006, 12:38 PM
Great post and worth a triple read through.

Makes a lot more sense in that perspective. I mean, I never thought about it as being Panasonic and Sony's AVC-HD. It was more like your explaination with HDV... as in Panasonic's version of AVC-HD and then Sony's version of AVC-HD.

Nevermind that last bit--

I got it. You were speaking about Panasonic Broadcast.

Really, though... if they're gonna do something It'd be great to hear about it before October.

Barry_Green
08-01-2006, 01:03 PM
OK Barry but as far as we know, AVC-HD is a consumer format by now.
AVC-HD is a format. The only thing we've seen it used for so far is a couple of Sony consumer cameras. So let's spell it out properly: AVC-HD is a format that SO FAR has only been used by a couple of consumer cameras. But that doesn't make AVC-HD a "consumer format."

DV is a format as well. Is it a "consumer" format? We were told that when it was introduced, but I'd argue that cameras like the DVX, JVC DV500, Sony DSR450WS, and Panasonic SDX900 are anything BUT "consumer" cameras, and they all record on standard DV tapes.

We were also told that HDV was a "consumer" format. Read the headline on the original HDV press release again: "Establishment of HDV Format That Realizes Consumer High-Definition Digital Video Recording
(taken from the HDV press release, 9/30/2003, here: http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press_Archive/200309/03-0930E/)

So HDV was also announced as a "consumer" format. Are you going to tell me that the HD100, the Z1, and the XLH1 are "consumer" cameras?

I know there are some out there clinging to the notion that AVC-HD will only be a "consumer" format. I say -- sit back and watch.


On the other hand, where can we find a noiseless 3CCD* block as it's possible to get on the Canon route?
You think the Canon is noiseless? Dude... look at some footage.

The only one that comes close to being fairly noiseless is the Sony.


* far away whether by Pana (lower) or Sony (full interlaced or fake progressive)

I don't understand what you mean here. The Canon is full interlaced and "fake progressive" just like the Sony is. What the Canon brings is reclocked 48Hz acquisition for its 24F mode, which looks for all intents and purposes like the Sony's CineFrame 25 mode. Same idea, but Canon had the wisdom to reclock the CCD for 48Hz so that it gives a proper motion simulation of 24p.

If you want noiseless, stick with 2/3" imagers and above. The larger the imager, the larger the pixels, the less noise. The SI or the RED or the likes of those should be much less noisy than any 1/3" imager.

Barry_Green
08-01-2006, 01:08 PM
Oh, about that "consumer" label that some people are trying to stick on AVC-HD: look at the press release (available here):
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/200605/06-0511E/index.html

Can anyone find the "consumer" word in that press release? I can't.

All I can find is this statement:
"Panasonic and Sony will extensively promote this format throughout the industry as the new HD digital video camera recorder format best suited for the HD era."

Does that leave any doubt? Guys, this is on SONY'S website. They've just laid it out there, right there for everyone to read: they are promoting AVC-HD, and NOT HDV, as the format best suited for digital video camera recording for the HD era. Not HDV. Sony just said it themselves.

Emanuel
08-01-2006, 01:25 PM
:dankk2: for your input Barry!

As you well know, after the first HVX footage, I changed my flag. I like the lowlighting properties of the Canon. More than the others. Although that's why I was out from the 1/3 route til now. Also 'cause the 2/3" or S35 sensor RED & SI offers. But I'd also like to have a run & gun tool. The new IF autofocus seems to me an ideal choice. My doubt is with or without HD-SDI? Will $3000 (G1 vs. A1) deserve the financial effort?

You remembered the HDV press release like it happens now with the AVC-HD. So, maybe we will have great new AVC-HD products. But from Pana & Sony? Genre those that we already know and made my non-choice?

Aside Pana (I figure out your position, Barry) and about the Sony's case, OK the Sony's CF mode can be similar than the Canon's "f" one but there aren't complains from the Canon customers or even from you techie gurus. But I haven't read the same regarding the Sony's CF offer.

phally
08-01-2006, 01:25 PM
take a look at this port, it is located near the rear. along side the real of all of the video ports. it is on both the A-1 and G1.

is this another SDI port available standard on both camera? could this could output uncompress HD?

if so then this then kill the need for the jack pack because i doubt a person like me will need the timecode anyways.

Also if this is what it is , (SDI port) then I think many will pick up the A1 over the G1 with this addition.

does the H1 have something similar? is this port used for a external monitor?

speculations?

http://images.camcorderinfo.com/images/upload/Image/news/2006/Canon/XH%20G1%20and%20XH%20A1/PhotoGallery/XHG1-38.jpg
</IMG>

AloysiusK
08-01-2006, 01:26 PM
I guess it was only a matter of time before this exciting thread about new canon cameras, in the "other cameras" section, eventually became bogged down with technical slurs, retorts, and speculation (about other cameras) to fit ones argument that one format is better than another.
I have been so excited since I heard the news of these affordable new cameras.....well, every party needs a pooper.

Kholi
08-01-2006, 01:35 PM
take a look at this port, it is located near the rear. along side the real of all of the video ports. it is on both the A-1 and G1.

is this another SDI port available standard on both camera? could this could output uncompress HD?

if so then this then kill the need for the jack pack because i doubt a person like me will need the timecode anyways.

Also if this is what it is , (SDI port) then I think many will pick up the A1 over the G1 with this addition.

does the H1 have something similar? is this port used for a external monitor?

speculations?

http://images.camcorderinfo.com/images/upload/Image/news/2006/Canon/XH%20G1%20and%20XH%20A1/PhotoGallery/XHG1-38.jpg
</IMG>

I never saw that. What the hell is that port?

Elton
08-01-2006, 01:42 PM
I'm betting that's the composite SD video port.

Elton
08-01-2006, 02:05 PM
At what point here do we decide to see the forest from the trees? I would assert that a good HD image is its own reward, whether through HDV, SDI, DVCProHD or AVC HD. If you get a great image by 18 mbit AVC HD, GREAT! What I don't get is how suddenly 4:2:0 AVC HD has no color resolution problems but HDV does? I can definitely see the benefit of full raster progressive recording, but again I think we're talking about minimal returns. I mean, after all DVCProHD 1280x1080 works pretty well when "unsqueezed" to a 1920x1080 frame and it's missing 33% of the horizontal resolution!

For those that might worry that Canon HDV might not cut the mustard, (it does) I would highly recommend considering the G1 if you were maybe considering stepping up to that price range which is right in line with the price of an HVX+adequate P2 media.

SDI full raster 4:2:2 is simply sumptuous from the XL-H1. You can record to any HD codec that floats your boat. (it makes for phenomenal DVCProHD 1080, btw) There are even laptop SDI cards being developed that should allow a portable and economical solution to tethered shooting. It is as good as it gets in this category of cameras and now this feature has been added without any audio/timecode workarounds. If you consider the possibilities of the G1 as a codec agnostic device, than you will be free to stop worrying about future format compatibilities.

At the end of the day, does any of this matter for storytelling? Just like Panny said stop counting pixels and look at the image, I would say the same about formats. If it looks well-defined and feels rich than what else matters?

I'm sure in time Canon will make an AVC product if it makes sense, but for now all that matters is that quality HD has made it to the DVX price range.

mikkowilson
08-01-2006, 02:16 PM
speculations?

http://images.camcorderinfo.com/images/upload/Image/news/2006/Canon/XH%20G1%20and%20XH%20A1/PhotoGallery/XHG1-38.jpg
</IMG>

I *think* it's a Composite video port.

If you look carefully over the connector you can see "V2". There's a "AV1 / V2" switch on the back of the camera. I'm going to guess that that switch switches between the AV multiport and the BNC connector - just as the XL2 and XL-H1 have a switch between the RCA and BNC conector.

- Mikko

Barry_Green
08-01-2006, 02:34 PM
OK the Sony's CF mode can be similar than the Canon's "f" one but there aren't complains from the Canon customers or even from you techie gurus. But I haven't read the same regarding the Sony's CF offer.
I think the language barrier is kicking in here, so I can only guess at what you're asking.

Are you asking why we eviscerated CineFrame 24, but not 24F? And what about Sony's CineFrame 30 vs. Canon's 30F?

CineFrame 24 is a horrible abomination, a bogus hack to try to vaguely sort of emulate what film looks like, and it fails miserably at it.

CineFrame 25 and CineFrame 30 are much better, they're simple field-doubling de-interlacing that give proper motion cadence.

Canon's 24F and 30F appear to be the same thing. 30F appears to be 60i but only one field, 25F is the same thing from the PAL 50Hz unit. And 24F appears to be the same thing, just slowed down a bit. According to Adam's tests he thinks 24F is basically a single field.

So it's lower res, but it's proper motion cadence. CineFrame 24 on the Sony is not only lower res (and much lower res than 24F) but it's variable resolution depending on which frame (out of the five-frame cadence) you're looking at, and on top of that it's the wrong motion signature anyway. So we fairly universally despise CineFrame 24, whereas 24F is nowhere near as disliked. 24F is basically like CineFrame 25 and CineFrame 30, which is: proper motion signature, just lower resolution.

Barry_Green
08-01-2006, 02:36 PM
I'm betting that's the composite SD video port.

I think Chris Hurd already confirmed that, yes. Composite video port, just using a locking BNC connector.

Barry_Green
08-01-2006, 02:42 PM
What I don't get is how suddenly 4:2:0 AVC HD has no color resolution problems but HDV does?
Who ever said it doesn't? All I've said is: if you are happy with what HDV offers, AVC-HD offers everything it does at least as well, and many things are better. Color sampling and long-GOP structure are the same or similar, and everything else is better.

Doesn't mean I think it's good enough. But it is going to be the format of the future.


If you consider the possibilities of the G1 as a codec agnostic device, than you will be free to stop worrying about future format compatibilities.
And that is a great point. But -- look at the poll on DVInfo. Nobody's looking at buying the G1, they're 90% aiming for the A1.


Just like Panny said stop counting pixels and look at the image, I would say the same about formats. If it looks well-defined and feels rich than what else matters?
Nice feeling, but it's not gonna happen. If telling a story was all that mattered why would we have progressed beyond VHS camcorders? You can tell a story on VHS, can't you? We like progress, we like to talk about it, and we like to see what comes from it. 24P, for one thing. That's something that mattered a whole heck of a lot to a lot of us. Variable frame rates, for another. That's one that matters to a lot of us. Better keying, for another. That matters to a lot of us. Tapeless workflow for another. Lower cost, for another (hence all the interest in the A1; I mean, if the A1 was $7999 do you think this conversation would have gone on this long?)

Yes it's true that it's not the camcorder that tells the story (obviously). But not everyone here is a "film" maker, for one thing. For another, the future of distribution and compatibility and ease of editing matter (a whole lot). Workflow issues matter to a lot of us. Compatibility issues matter a whole lot to a lot of us.

Elton
08-01-2006, 02:51 PM
If 24F is a single field, it's the most ridiculously high res single 1080 field I've ever seen. I believe there's some kind of synthetic extra field taken from the (likely) 48i and stitched/interpolated back together.

It might be that the extra horizontal res of the H1' CCD vs. the Z1's may be helping the image in perceived res, but I still think it's more than simple field doubling.

Here is a frame from 24F SDI output:

http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/SDI/LilBuds1.jpg

Does that look like a single field?

Elton
08-01-2006, 03:13 PM
Again, all very good points Barry and I too am obviously interested in progress.

My very simple assertion is that good HD is good HD no matter what format it was recorded to.

I too have my minor reservations about long GOP and all, but at the end of the day I looked at what the Canon HDV image was as a baseline and judged that it is definitely good enough.

I'm excited to see what happens with AVC HD and I think it would be super cool for the DVX's low cost HD successor to move towards this. Universal compatibility is another plus when that happens, but in the here and now I don't think HDV is that much of a problem.

Barry_Green
08-01-2006, 04:19 PM
If 24F is a single field, it's the most ridiculously high res single 1080 field I've ever seen.
Not me saying it's a single field, it's Adam saying that. Which is the same thing he said about CineFrame 30, and on his wobbling resolution test he got around 540 lines out of both modes.


I believe there's some kind of synthetic extra field taken from the (likely) 48i and stitched/interpolated back together.
I agree, I think that's what the Digic II processor is doing.


It might be that the extra horizontal res of the H1' CCD vs. the Z1's may be helping the image in perceived res
I agree here too.

evenkiehl
08-01-2006, 05:49 PM
Barry,
Thank you for the big picture overview and for discussing all the related issues in your last few posts. It is very useful to have the situation explained in all its dimensions, so as to make a choice. Thank you also for the examples and explanations in your posts.

Earlier, another person whom I quoted in a similar post, asked about HDV concerns and you have answered them very well with facts, examples, analogies, opinions and experience.
With much appreciation and thanks,
Stuart
www.vineyardvideo.com

Zim
08-01-2006, 07:37 PM
when Barry? When? Can we maybe see a DVX100 type camera with AVC-HD or a Z1 with it this year? Or are we talking years?

David Jimerson
08-01-2006, 07:52 PM
Anybody who knows can't say.

Barry_Green
08-01-2006, 08:12 PM
when Barry? When? Can we maybe see a DVX100 type camera with AVC-HD or a Z1 with it this year? Or are we talking years?
Well, David has a point -- if I knew anything I couldn't say it. So take this as speculation.

When HDV was announced, it was 9/2003. It was 10/2004 before the first product bearing the HDV logo was on the market, the Sony FX1.

However, within a few weeks of making the AVC-HD announcement, Sony also announced its first AVC-HD models. Unfortunately for indie moviemakers, they're little 1080i-only consumer models.

But, there's also the whole thing of "is the FX1 discontinued or not?" And if so, will its replacement be HDV, or AVC-HD? Given that the new Canons look to have pushed HDV pretty far, and that Sony's said that they think AVC-HD is the format for HD for the future, it seems only logical that any proposed FX2 will be an AVC-HD model. And if the FX2 is AVC-HD, is there any possibility the Z2 (eventual replacement for the Z1) would be tape-based? I'd say no chance. And, come on -- surely they've learned by now that we want 24p, right? Surely? And AVC-HD 1080 does provide for 1080/24p, so... cross your fingers that Sony actually delivers this time. But hedge your bet, because their track record on 24p is dismal.

So, it seems to me that we've probably seen the last HDV model introduced by Sony. I think the HC3 will probably prove to be the end of the line for Sony HDV.

Canon's clearly not done yet, but Canon alone can't set the agenda, so it wouldn't surprise me at all if the A1 and G1 were the last of Canon's HDV offerings. And JVC was talking about new models too (HD200 & HD250), although I don't know if they're in the financial shape they'd need to be in to produce them, and frankly I think the G1 and A1 pretty much ate JVC's HD200/HD250 lunch, so whether there'll be more JVC HDV models remains to be seen. How can a $12,000 JVC HD250 (with cheap lens) stand against a $8000 Canon G1, when the whole point of the 250 was adding HD-SDI output?However, JVC is not going to be producing AVC-HD product, so I don't know where that leaves JVC. Not on solid ground, that's for sure, if you read their annual report and follow the news.

As for Panasonic, the DVC30 and DVC60 have been around for quite a while, I wouldn't be surprised if they got replaced with AVC-HD models. And the 100B has been on the market for close to a year, almost four years from the original 100 being released... it seems glaringly obvious that we're due for some real "action" from the Panasonic side of things.

But the big question is: who's going to produce the camera the indie filmmakers WANT that uses that format? It'd have to be comparable to the A1, or the A1 will "win" by default. Will Sony do it? Unlikely, as they seem to have a borderline pathological aversion to 24p. Will Canon do it? In HDV, apparently, but not AVC-HD as there's been no announcement of them taking out an AVC-HD license. Will Panasonic do it? I think an HVX100 (a DVX with HD chips and AVC-HD format) would be killer, but... well, we'll see what happens.

Christmas is a long, long way away right now, and I would be quite surprised if we don't see some announcements from both Sony (on the FX2 front) and Panasonic about what their end-of-year plans are. It only seems reasonable that both companies would want their new product on store shelves for the holiday buying season. But, it would be uncharacteristically quick to do so when one considers the timing between the HDV announcement and the release of the first HDV product, so...

Kholi
08-01-2006, 08:14 PM
Anybody who knows can't say.
Way to tease. =P

Barry_Green
08-01-2006, 08:31 PM
And Barlow, I gotta say... those are some very, very cute kids! :thumbsup:

tnle2
08-01-2006, 08:32 PM
And JVC was talking about new models too (HD200 & HD250), although I don't know if they're in the financial shape they'd need to be in to produce them, and frankly I think the G1 and A1 pretty much ate JVC's HD200/HD250 lunch, so whether there'll be more JVC HDV models remains to be seen. How can a $12,000 JVC HD250 (with cheap lens) stand against a $8000 Canon G1, when the whole point of the 250 was adding HD-SDI output?

Some JVC sales may be loss to the Canons, but there will always be room for a shoulder mounted camera and the JVCs are the only truly shoulder mounted 1/3" HD camera. Also, if I was operating in a studio with HD-SDI, I would want a real ENG lens with real, standard rear lens controls. You can't get that with the A1/G1. I think the JVCs will do just fine with smaller market TV stations moving to HD, ENG stringers, etc. The market is much bigger than just indie filmmakers.

As for JVC's financial position, yes they have had several difficult years but the problems are mainly with their consumer products. You can find all of the financial results for JVC at their investor relations site. Read the President's message. He is very frank about the difficulties they have had.

http://www.jvc.co.jp/english/company/ir/index.html

Here's the Cliff Notes version:

Their problems were mainly with the consumer products division. Sales were down due to quality problems with DVD recorders and late product introductions. Fierce competition with digital products also eroded prices and profit margins.

The professional products division was actually pretty stable, although not really a standout. Sales were down slightly about 1% but profits were actually up. Professional products only account for 8% of the JVC's consolidated sales (compared to 74% for consumer products).

JVC is a pretty small player. JVC's entire sales revenue only makes up 7% of its parent company, Matsushi*a's (Panasonic) consolidated yearly sales. Panasonic AVC Networks (the divisions that make all the consumer and professional A/V electronics) make up 39% of Matsushi*a sales. That division actually lost money in 2002 but quickly recovered after that.

Zim
08-01-2006, 08:59 PM
thanks Barry maybe Sony or pansonic will try and still some of Canons thunder before they release it in October.