Sony announces HVR-V1u, 1080p, 24p, 30p, 60i

[Heath McKnight]

http://news.sel.sony.com/en/press_room/b2b/broadcast_production/pro_audio_video/release/25017.html

and for details:

http://bssc.sel.sony.com/BroadcastandBusiness/minisites/HDV1080/HVR-V1U/index.html

heath

[mikkowilson]

no, 60i - there is no 1080/60p, and sure as heck not at the HDV level.

- Mikko

[Heath McKnight]

no, 60i - there is no 1080/60p, and sure as heck not at the HDV level.

- Mikko

Might be a mistake in the press release, because the second link says 24p, 30p and 60i.

heath

[Barry_Green]

Oooh, very interesting! They actually put 24p in there... and with the optional hard disk recorder it gets over most of my objections to HDV (no tape dropout, no deck incompatibilities, all that stuff).

Gotta love the comparison shot on their site where they show V1 against HVX against XLH1; not so much in that it shows the V1 looking better (because, seriously, did anyone expect that Sony's marketing would show anything where their own product DIDN'T look better?) but they show the HVX next to the XLH1 and they specifically mention the pixel count, but... doesn't the HVX shot look equally (if not more) detailed and less noisy than the XLH1 shot? Heh.

Of course, they're really pushing the 1920x1080 aspect as if that was something special; it takes a careful reading to realize that they're not disclosing the pixel chip count (Mikko was told 960x1080, but you won't see that in their specs, although they do print 1,037,000 which = 960x1080). They also, if you read carefully, mention the word "interpolation". But you don't get that impression from the marketing, it's all "1920x1080" this, and "1920x1080" that (which is the same method that Canon and Panasonic use; the chips are sampled into a 1920x1080 matrix and processed internally at 1920x1080). Oh well. At least they're finally on the Progressive bandwagon!

Anyway, congrats to Sony for producing this product, it goes a long way towards putting them back in "the game" and it looks like those who had already written their Canon XHA1 deposit checks may now have to think twice! Even then it's still not a clear choice; 3999 Canon 1080/24F, or 4800 Sony 1080/24p, Canon = interlaced chips but 1/3" CCD, Sony = progressive chips but 1/4" but CMOS. Sony + HD recorder = 6600, which puts it in HVX territory but no variable frame rates, no 720p mode, no DVCPRO50, no 4:2:2, but it can record 4 hours tapelessly vs. 10 minutes per card... compressed audio vs. uncompressed... frame-discrete but short recording times vs. long-GOP but long recording times...

... very interesting. Things just got stirred up in a big way.

[Barry_Green]

Might be a mistake in the press release, because the second link says 24p, 30p and 60i.
They're saying the sensor scans at 60p, and that internal processing is done at 60p. But you can't do anything with that, it can't output 60p in any way; the analog and digital outputs are all 60i all the time. It's the same thing the HVX does, and the same as the HD100 does; they can all scan their chips at 60p but the V1 can't output the 60p signal, it can only output 60i (as the HVX does when in 1080 mode); the HVX can output 60p in 720 mode, and the HD100 can output 60p in analog HD or also in 480.

[Jeremy Ordan]

I had lost all faith in Sony across the board although the inclusion of progressive shooting modes gains them a little respect back I am still wondering who is running things over there and do they not look at the people next door before they make a decision.

[Barry_Green]

Looks like they were listening this time. I'm still curious on a few things, like manual zoom or servo only? What's the focus control like? Things like that. But it looks like they're trying hard this time, and that's very encouraging.

[rawfa]

I want to know about their image control options (knee, gamma, matrix, etc). If it's as good as cinematone it sucks like linda lovelace.

Barry, where did you see the comparison?!

[Barry_Green]

It's on the "devices" tab on the Sony site.
http://bssc.sel.sony.com/BroadcastandBusiness/minisites/HDV1080/HVR-V1U/devices.html

Be sure to click on the "enlarge" button.

[mikkowilson]

There's pictures of the Main Menu from the V1e here: http://ibc.mikkowilson.com/photos/Day3Gallery/pages/IMG_3803.htm (this and the next 3 pictures)

- Mikko

[filmmaker1977]

but you won't see that in their specs, although they do print 1,037,000 which = 960x1080. They also, if you read carefully, mention the word "interpolation". But you don't get that impression from the marketing, it's all "1920x1080" this, and "1920x1080" thatHuh!.. :huh:

it isn't what i could find there:

http://bssc.sel.sony.com/BroadcastandBusiness/minisites/HDV1080/HVR-V1U/devices.html

960x1080 vs 960x540.. we know it hurts but this was their decision.. and the test comparision speaks for itself.. at least in europe, it is sony who rules :crybaby: but rules..

and following the sample it will rule and rule.. i'm sorry barry and so on but this is only a real and cruel truth..

[Barry_Green]

On that very page, look at the graphic for input/output in the middle right side. It shows that the clearvid sensors go through a "Sony original interpolation process" and are then rendered as 1920x1080. Then once DSP processing is done it goes through a "resolution conversion process" to become 1440x1080x4:2:2 for analog output (and presumably HDMI output?), or 1440x1080x4:2:0 for HDV output. Regarding 960x1080, that's what they told Mikko Wilson, although you won't find those numbers anywhere on their specifications page on their website. But you do find 1,037,000 pixels on the chips listed, and 1,037,000 = 960 x 1080.

960x1080 vs 960x540.. we know it hurts but this was their decision..
Again, maybe it's a language barrier, but I don't follow what you're saying. What "hurts"? Sony shows pictures between the 960x1080 V1U, the 960x540 HVX, and the 1440x1080 XLH1. All three show about the same level of detail, can you point out how having 3x as many pixels (on the Canon) makes any real difference on the final picture or helps their final picture that they show?

The point is not to say that 960x1080 is bad. It's fine. The point is that people are all getting ga-ga over Sony's brochure saying 1920x1080 here, there, and everywhere, and it's not a 1920x1080 system. It's the same kind of system that Panasonic, JVC, and Canon are already using. Panasonic and Sony and Canon all scan their chipsets at 1920x1080; JVC scans its chipset at 1280x720x60p. There's nothing new going on here, other than how blatantly they're pushing "1920x1080" front and center, and hiding that their 1920x1080 gets "interpolated" from a 960x1080 chipset. So I'm not saying that's bad, I'm just saying "what's good for the goose and the gander and all that should be fully equally disclosed among all waterfowl."

[mikkowilson]

[...] can you point out how having 3x as many pixels (on the Canon) makes any real difference on the final picture?

More noise than neccesarry?

Did I win?


- Mikko

[Barry_Green]

Oh, Mikko... :)

Hey, what's the deal with the USB port? What do they use USB for? That's a first for an HDV camera, isn't it?

[filmmaker1977]

Again, maybe it's a language barrier, but I don't follow what you're saying. What "hurts"? Sony shows pictures between the 960x1080 V1U, the 960x540 HVX, and the 1440x1080 XLH1. All three show about the same level of detail, can you point out how having 3x as many pixels (on the Canon) makes any real difference on the final picture or helps their final picture that they show? i'm seeing a lot of differences in their sample.. and i just don't know why they're here when red is 4k.. i'm trying but i don't get it..

yes, maybe it is a language barrier.. i'm speaking the picture tongue and they are into other language..

will it be only a question of numbers?.. :grin:

[ecking]

Their pricing scheme makes no sense to me, what are they thinking they're offering for almost a thousand more dollars than the cannon?

True progressive? Ultimately digital indie filmmaking is about getting the best you can for the least money, because we had none.

That's what dvxuser used to be about before all the camera battle bs started.

A couple years ago the dvx was called expensive, now has money inflated so quickly that 4800 is the new 3800? I don't think so.

A lot of young people use these cameras, people that the extra grand is a big deal to, it's probably that single reason why the original dvx hit that sweet spot.

But now I feel like sony is pricing themselves slightly out the market.

If sony would smarten up and price this the same as the xh-a1 I can almost garentee that once it came out a single cannon would not leave the factory or wharehouse. But like this sony is essentially giving away thousands of sales. And for what? to protect the fx7? If that's the case it'd make more sense to just do away with the fx7 and translate all those sales into v1 sales, which at 3800-4000 they'd have no problem doing.

Or they could have the fx7 at 2999 and the v1 at 3900 and they'd immediately have the market in a stranglehold.

I'm sorry but I want to like this camera and I want to like sony but I'm just really confused.

[rawfa]

I agree with you, ecking. I still think I'm going to go with the canon A1. It basicly offers everything that the sony offers (actualy the image control and resolution seems to be much better than sony's) for way less money. At the end of the day it's the image each camera produces that counts. Nobody is going to be watching a film made with the A1 and say "Amazing images...too bad it was not recorded with a CMOS, otherwise I would have liked it".

[Fugitive]

True. The A1 seems a better option at the moment. Cheaper, and with more resolution. At that price, what was Sony thinking?

Just a sigh of releif to finally see Sony getting into the progressive arena. Looks like they are listening, but apparently not enough. It'll take time...

[filmmaker1977]

agreed..

but worst than to be pro-sony is to be anti-sony.. (i was.. maybe i am yet.. :D)

c'mon people this is the new mini-cinealta.. it's a sony brand.. remember.. not a canon..

me likes high def canon but i hate the first footage available.. and this isn't the cinealta colorimeter.. those sony colors, well, are sony.. not anything else.. a blonde is a blonde not a brunnette..

still, see their sample on their website.. sony rules..

[filmmaker1977]

sony rules.. :evil:

[rawfa]

If sony makes a surprise revalation that this new camera is actualy true 1920x1080 with a 4:2:2 color rendering I might change my mind.

As for mini-cinealta... :) ...I think this camera is what they feed the cine-alta when it's hungry.

I'm not saying this is a bad camera. On the contrary I really think it'll be a very good camera...but when you think about the overall cost/benefit ratio when compared to other brands...it makes me have my doubts.

[Barry_Green]

If sony makes a surprise revalation that this new camera is actualy true 1920x1080 with a 4:2:2 color rendering I might change my mind.
Why do people keep thinking that? Sony has clearly spelled out what it is. 960x1080 CMOS chips, interpolated to 1920x1080x4:2:2 for internal processing, and downrezzed to 1440x1080 for output. There is no 60p that you can get out of it, there is no 1920x1080 that you can get out of it. There won't be any surprise announcements, they've already made announcements in their brochure.

It is what it is. It has at least two unique features going for it: HDMI output (which may be thought of as a poor-man's HDSDI maybe?) and CMOS sensors. But the chips are 1/4" (whether that matters or not is up to the final image) and they're not gonna magically grow in size. It's HDV, which means it's not magically gonna become 4:2:2 anywhere along the process of recording to tape or disk. It's 1440, not 1920, and that's not gonna change.

[filmmaker1977]

i'd like to see a 4:2:2 cam like the hvx with a 1440x1080 chip + canon knee circuits for the blacks performance and lowlighting + sony colorimeter.. why not?

960x540 is low lower..

[rawfa]

Sorry, Barry...I don't think my sarcasm was evident enogh there ;-)

[filmmaker1977]

sarcasm?.. from you?

edit
forget these consumer cams.. red rules..

[filmmaker1977]

the problem is their highend.. that's why i'm with red.. these sony or matsushita are mafia.. canon don't have highend.. don't have interests to protect..

edit
but i'm sorry because it seems canon hd logo is as far as grainy/noisy..

[TwistedLincoln]

The fact that they are actually including a "Digital Zoom Extender" is unfortunate... I'm sorry, but on a prosumer camera, there is no place for crappy digital zoom. The fact that they even put it there makes me worry a bit about the quality of the other features. I suppose I'll have to wait and see. I'm still looking forward to seeing some footage, especially at low light (which Sony has always seemed to do well with in the past).

[Barry_Green]

filmmaker1977, if you have absolutely no interest in the V1U, then you are invited to stop participating in this thread. We do not condone people coming in and bashing a particular product, calling these companies "mafia" is unwelcome, harping on chip pixel count when it's been conclusively proven to deliver comparable sharpness is unwelcome.

What you're doing now is called "threadcrapping". We do not condone it. Please stop it.

[Tim Le]

I think this is a very interesting camera. I like that it's smaller and lighter than the Z1/HVX/A1/G1. The HDMI has uncompressed 1080 4:2:2 (AFAIK). That's huge considering Blackmagic just announced their $250 Intensity HDMI card. Early reports on picture quality by three different guys at DVInfo are very promising and even Mikko's stealth footage of the V1e looked pretty nice (for trade show footage).

The slick hybrid recording is great for a tape archive and HDD recording. CMOS might have a potential for better dynamic range because you can address each pixel. RED ONE uses a CMOS so that might tell you something. CMOS also uses less power so the batteries last longer. It also has an iris ring and possibly usable slow motion and digital zoom features. Word is that the digital zoom works differently than what people are use to and it actually maybe usable--something about the way the CMOS ClearVid pixels are arranged they can get more info out of it.

But I wish the lens was wider like the A1/G1. And the Canons have that Instant Focus and the A1 list price is $800 less. It's going to be tough deciding between the two for me.

[Heath McKnight]

If you look at how Sony prices things, they offer the Z1 for sale at $6000 and you can pick it up at B&H for $4200 or so. I'm guessing we'll be able to pick this camera up for the price of the DVX100b or less. Also, Canon's list price is what the actual price is at B&H.

For my money, the V1 is the best in the business, at least until I've had a chance to test it out. The Z1 is great, and I've used EVERY single low-cost HD camera thus far, except the newest JVCs, which I will be able to test soon. I've used the HD10, FX1, Z1, HD100, HVX200, and the XL H1. I like the Z1 the best. I also use the DVX100a almost daily.

heath

[filmmaker1977]

filmmaker1977, if you have absolutely no interest in the V1U, then you are invited to stop participating in this thread. We do not condone people coming in and bashing a particular product, calling these companies "mafia" is unwelcome, harping on chip pixel count when it's been conclusively proven to deliver comparable sharpness is unwelcome.

What you're doing now is called "threadcrapping". We do not condone it. Please stop it.i just express my opinion and the basis of our societies is the free speech.. however, i can even understand you.. besides that i'll respect, you're wrong.. i'm just doing a comparision on the offer.. and on the budget.. why small cameras from the "majors" if we have the indy red?..

it's a mere thought.. useful.. there are people over here.. and some info is better rather the silence on the subject..

conclusion: why less if it's possible more and they don't deliver?.. call it what you wish.. in my book, that's the name.. but i'll will be silent as far as you won't read.. :laugh: at least, over this board where you rule just because you're a mod.. :beer:

sony rules.. :evil:about my V1U and previous care posted all over this board, i add another link from another member that i had prepared even before you came:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=695222&postcount=13

[Barry_Green]

The point is, if you have nothing positive to add and only want to bash, that type of behavior is rude and is simply not welcome here (regardless of claims of "free speech".)

And frankly, I can think of some reasons would prefer a $4800 camera over a $17,500 (without lens) camera. In fact, I can think of about 12,700 reasons why.

So the point is: let the V1U interested parties discuss their chosen tool unmolested, without references to the manufacturing company being "the mafia", okay?

[Heath McKnight]

The point is, if you have nothing positive to add and only want to bash, that type of behavior is rude and is simply not welcome here (regardless of claims of "free speech".)

And frankly, I can think of some reasons would prefer a $4800 camera over a $17,500 (without lens) camera. In fact, I can think of about 12,700 reasons why.

So the point is: let the V1U interested parties discuss their chosen tool unmolested, without references to the manufacturing company being "the mafia", okay?
Barry,

Thanks for posting that. I'm not here to bash cameras, and I pretty much like every offering out there. This is a board to talk about specifics and though it's fun to armchair quarterback new cameras, it's not fair until we get a good look at it.

heath

[rawfa]

If you look at how Sony prices things, they offer the Z1 for sale at $6000 and you can pick it up at B&H for $4200 or so. I'm guessing we'll be able to pick this camera up for the price of the DVX100b or less. Also, Canon's list price is what the actual price is at B&H.

For my money, the V1 is the best in the business, at least until I've had a chance to test it out. The Z1 is great, and I've used EVERY single low-cost HD camera thus far, except the newest JVCs, which I will be able to test soon. I've used the HD10, FX1, Z1, HD100, HVX200, and the XL H1. I like the Z1 the best. I also use the DVX100a almost daily.

heath

If you are right then I would reconsider before going with the A1. But I seriously doubt it. Of course, this is all conjecture until we can see and evaluate more footage and functionalities form these new cameras (the "functions" section on the sony website is not even available yet)

[Tim Le]

And frankly, I can think of some reasons would prefer a $4800 camera over a $17,500 (without lens) camera. In fact, I can think of about 12,700 reasons why.

I totally agree and it doesn't even have to do with the price. Just because RED ONE may have the ultimate picture quality, doesn't mean every other camera out there now is a POS. Like Jim Jannard said, you use the right tool for the job and RED ONE is NOT appropriate for every job. Without getting too OT, I think a lot of people will be in for a huge wake up call when they step up to 2K/4K S35 digital cinematography and discover their camera operating skills aren't quite there.

[Zim]

from first the first look the V1 looks pretty good. I would like to see it under $4,000. Maybe Sony will do that to sink the Canon A1.

I long will it take for Sony to go from a "suggested price" to a real price?

[Barry_Green]

Like Jim Jannard said, you use the right tool for the job and RED ONE is NOT appropriate for every job.
Exactly. And there's plenty of room in the marketplace for products at all levels and price points and feature sets. But to come in and bash and say (effectively) "you're all fools for thinking about this product or that product, just get a RED instead" is insulting to the thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of individuals who may have very good reasons for being interested in this specific product.

Just like I find it incredibly condescending and rude and arrogant and dismissive whenever someone comes in and says "you're all stupid for even thinking about cameras, it's all about the STORY, it's only the STORY that matters." If someone truly feels that way, why don't they just write stories? Or direct plays? Plays give you actors and stories and you don't even have to worry about cameras and lines of resolution, right? Sheesh. Give the people some credit, we're all intelligent individuals around here and we're certainly entitled to discuss our favorite tools without someone coming in and telling us we're all stupid for doing so.

[Barry_Green]

I long will it take for Sony to go from a "suggested price" to a real price?
Sony doesn't. Their dealers do (unlike Canon with the XLH1 where they apparently enforce a strict MSRP-only policy).

Sony quotes an MSRP. It's up to the dealers to decide what to sell it for. The Z1 was launched with an MSRP of $5946. From the very beginning dealers sold it for $4900, I doubt anyone ever paid a penny over $4900 for a Z1. If (and this is wild speculation) but IF the margins and policies stay the same, that might mean a street price for the V1U of around $3960. And if (and this is equally wild speculation) but IF Canon sticks with MSRP-only pricing for the XH series like they do for the XLH1, then that would mean a street price for the A1 of about $3999. Which puts these two similar products priced very competitively in the marketplace.

[rawfa]

The more we talk about this the more I feel like waiting to see what Panasonic and JVC will do. I have no doubt Panasonic will raise the roof, but I read some very disturbing reports on JVCs' financial situation. Aparently they are almost bankrupt. I read some other company was taking over but they would keep the JVC name. They said they were hope to recover by selling DVDs!!! This is not a joke. This could be the perfect oportunity for them to come out swinging. If they play their cards right and put out a good enough camera with the right price this could mean big big bucks for them.

[rawfa]

Just like I find it incredibly condescending and rude and arrogant and dismissive whenever someone comes in and says "you're all stupid for even thinking about cameras, it's all about the STORY, it's only the STORY that matters." If someone truly feels that way, why don't they just write stories? .


Hahaha. Touché, Barry. :thumbup:

[Barry_Green]

but I read some very disturbing reports on JVCs' financial situation. Aparently they are almost bankrupt.
JVC has indeed been in very dire straits, and there was talk of them getting shut down a few months ago. They've been plagued with quality issues and product returns as well as the bottom dropping out of the CRT market. But apparently their turnaround strategies are working and the latest news story I saw said that parent company Matsushita was pleased with the progress JVC is making and doesn't expect to have to step in and take any drastic action if things keep progressing.

http://www.tinyurl.com/omqjx

[filmmaker1977]

hey barry, about your major concern, i already answered.. no worries there.. but i stand..

"that type of behaviour is rude"?.. call it what you wish.. to be silent i'd call what i won't, at least over here.. still respecting you.. now, with this behaviour will i be rude?.. not at all.. not me..

about red being without lens..

ah barry how you are very known all over the internet as a clever guy.. you would be a good advocate.. i stand corrected: you are.

how is it possible you're posting this when you well know:

red will have nikon f and canon manual mounts.. even Mathieu Kassovitz knows it.. how will i need to provide a ordinary lens (like a small camera) to it?.. don't kid with me.. :) i'm asking what i'll read into your red book when available?.. (you can count on that! :thumbup: i'll be your customer there! :thumbsup: that's my revenge!.. :))

still on your previous quote on pixel counting (don't take an useful other's point to make your own point!.. it reminds me something.. :D) that you'll have offered in hvx defense.. i just posted and asked you there:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=71783

"Sony’s 16:9 1/4in. ClearVid CMOS chips deserve special note, because these wonders introduce a pixel grid that’s tilted 45 degrees, such that pixels that would ordinarily be square are diamond shaped. This makes possible a new zigzag-shaped co-siting of pixels that’s beyond the scope of this short description. Not a pixel-shifting technique, the configuration effectively multiplies the resolution of these 1/4in. chips."

do you know why?.. because your biased arguments can even be very well constructed but they don't convince me.. i admire your knowledge but i disagree when it's obvious you're defending your own beliefs or this or that point..

The point is, if you have nothing positive to add and only want to bash, that type of behavior is rude and is simply not welcome here (regardless of claims of "free speech".)

And frankly, I can think of some reasons would prefer a $4800 camera over a $17,500 (without lens) camera. In fact, I can think of about 12,700 reasons why.

So the point is: let the V1U interested parties discuss their chosen tool unmolested, without references to the manufacturing company being "the mafia", okay?

[Zim]

Sony doesn't. Their dealers do (unlike Canon with the XLH1 where they apparently enforce a strict MSRP-only policy).

Sony quotes an MSRP. It's up to the dealers to decide what to sell it for. The Z1 was launched with an MSRP of $5946. From the very beginning dealers sold it for $4900, I doubt anyone ever paid a penny over $4900 for a Z1. If (and this is wild speculation) but IF the margins and policies stay the same, that might mean a street price for the V1U of around $3960. And if (and this is equally wild speculation) but IF Canon sticks with MSRP-only pricing for the XH series like they do for the XLH1, then that would mean a street price for the A1 of about $3999. Which puts these two similar products priced very competitively in the marketplace.

Under $4,000 would be a great price.

I can't help but wonder if a under $4,000 V1 won't drive down the DVX100 price some too?

[Heath McKnight]

The more we talk about this the more I feel like waiting to see what Panasonic and JVC will do. I have no doubt Panasonic will raise the roof, but I read some very disturbing reports on JVCs' financial situation. Aparently they are almost bankrupt. I read some other company was taking over but they would keep the JVC name. They said they were hope to recover by selling DVDs!!! This is not a joke. This could be the perfect oportunity for them to come out swinging. If they play their cards right and put out a good enough camera with the right price this could mean big big bucks for them.

This is news to me. Do you have a link to that report(s)? EDIT: Thanks for the link, Barry.

heath

[Heath McKnight]

I don't think the DVX has any competition from any of the HD cameras, and I'll explain why, IMHO. At the film school I work at, our students learn how to use the DVX100a and the Z1/FX1. Sometimes, a good chunk of students want to use HD. But I recently had 3 entire classes choose to shoot on the DVX100a because they happened to like it better and want to shoot their second films in HDV.

heath

[rawfa]

I saw it on the news. Tom Brokaw was crushed because he loves JVCs' progressive 720p.

;-)

I first read it on camcorderinfo.com but then I read in a couple of different places I can't recall.

[Zim]

I think Panasonic needs to do something. If as barry suggested that the price of the Sony V1 is under $4,000 and the Canon A1 is $3,999, then it will take sales away from the DVX and the HVX. Prices cuts? Rebates. Cheap P2 cards?

My personal dream a DVX100 with native 16:9?

I don't think they can just sit on the sidelines.

[filmmaker1977]

I totally agree and it doesn't even have to do with the price. Just because RED ONE may have the ultimate picture quality, doesn't mean every other camera out there now is a POS. Like Jim Jannard said, you use the right tool for the job and RED ONE is NOT appropriate for every job. Without getting too OT, I think a lot of people will be in for a huge wake up call when they step up to 2K/4K S35 digital cinematography and discover their camera operating skills aren't quite there.if you have a few dollars to a purchase.. red hypothesis included.. what would it be your better option?

aside specific conveniences, generally speaking, of course..

[Kholi]

For those of you ineterested in HDMI-tethered 4:2:2 options...

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/intensity/

Yummy.

[rawfa]

For those of you ineterested in HDMI-tethered 4:2:2 options...

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/intensity/

Yummy.


I've seen that before. Too bad it can't be done with the FX1 :( If only there was some sort of converter that allowed me to hook up the FX1 to a HDMI.

[Kholi]

Does the FX1 have Analog in/out? Because you can get Analog > HDMI cables and vice-versa. I had one for my Samsung DVD player. Or was that HDMi > DVi ... humm.

Here's an interesting thought-

XH-A1/G1 have a playback deck ready in the form of another camera. Can you use the little HDV Sony Cam to playback/capture from the V1u?

[rawfa]

It DOES have analog out! So this means I could capture uncompressed footage from the FX1 directly to my pc with the blackmagic card?!

[Kholi]

Don't go askin me that. The term "uncompressed" is way too lose, in my opinion.

That's something to ask someone else. I do know that Barry mentioned the V1u's HDMI is an uncompressed signal.

S'all I know, dude.

[filmmaker1977]

Exactly. And there's plenty of room in the marketplace for products at all levels and price points and feature sets. But to come in and bash and say (effectively) "you're all fools for thinking about this product or that product, just get a RED instead" is insulting to the thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of individuals who may have very good reasons for being interested in this specific product.

Just like I find it incredibly condescending and rude and arrogant and dismissive whenever someone comes in and says "you're all stupid for even thinking about cameras, it's all about the STORY, it's only the STORY that matters." If someone truly feels that way, why don't they just write stories? Or direct plays? Plays give you actors and stories and you don't even have to worry about cameras and lines of resolution, right? Sheesh. Give the people some credit, we're all intelligent individuals around here and we're certainly entitled to discuss our favorite tools without someone coming in and telling us we're all stupid for doing so.i didn't say nothing what you are insinuating in your post.. if this is related to me.. if not, my excuses.. i thought so.. but i want to believe it's not.. eheh

i invite you to quote me, if you can.. :thumbdown

on the other hand, you seem to me a little man (not you!) who is thinking that can speak for millions of people.. speak up for yourself not for the others.. that's what I'm used to say to myself or to my friends..

i can even understand you're an opinion maker.. a good one.. it's your method.. okay..

but again: thus, your arguments don't convince.. (if i cannot say all the intelligent people.. i wouldn't apply the same method than you if it is the case..) i would and i should say: your arguments don't convince ME (may i have this right?)

about the content.. the content of the second part of your post, i agree..

do you know something?.. i like you.. sometimes, i'm just thinking that you underestimate your readers.. exactly the opposite what you're posting now crossing between the lines of the content of your post.. i don't know if we're all intelligent individuals around here but you're right: there are intelligent people over here..

[rawfa]

ah, nuts. I should stop spending money on the fx1 and save up for the hvx...or the new pana hd :cool:

[KevinPeeples]

"Even with a point of high-intensity light in the frame, you can record smear-free footage with the HVR-V1U."

Whats the HVX's take on this?

[Barry_Green]

"Even with a point of high-intensity light in the frame, you can record smear-free footage with the HVR-V1U."

Whats the HVX's take on this?

CCDs are subject to smear, and always have been. That's one of the big things about the CMOS technology is that each pixel is individually sampled and cannot therefore bleed over and cause a vertical stripe.

With that said, susceptibility to smear is typically tied to pixel size. The smaller the pixels the more likely smear will happen, which is why we saw massive smear on the tiny-pixel PDX10 when it first came out. The HVX has bigger pixels and is more smear-resistant than its competition, but it can still happen. It doesn't happen in CMOS.

CCD is a fairly mature technology and we know what to expect from it; CMOS sensors in cameras is brand-new, we've only really had the HC1 and HC3 to compare and now the V1/FX7 are the first 3-CMOS. The HC1 and HC3 have a "rolling shutter" artifact that gets talked a lot about, no word whether the V1/FX7 will have similar. In the end you've got to know what the characteristics are and how to work around the undesirable characteristics.

[Barry_Green]

filmmaker1977, I do not follow what you're saying at all. I do expect it's a language barrier issue. I am not accusing you of saying things like the "story" part, that's just bringing out a general point of what this forum is, and what it is not.

So I will say it again. This particular thread, in this particular forum, is for people to talk about the V1U. And on DVXUser, people are allowed to talk about their chosen subjects.

We do not need anyone coming in and saying anything like "this is a stupid product". That is pointless and counterproductive, and will not be tolerated. If you determine that this product holds no interest for you, that's fine, MOVE ON. Go elsewhere. Talk about the Red in the Red forum if that's what you're interested in. But there are people who are interested in the V1U, or who are at least interested in finding out whether the V1U is appropriate for them. Please allow them to discuss it without any counterproductive, negative sniping.

This discussion should probably have moved to private messages, but it's symptomatic of something that's been happening on the boards and something that happens every time a new camcorder is introduced. And we're tired of it. Last time we said "take all discussions of other cameras somewhere else, but stop griping here." This time we're trying something different -- we're hosting discussions but we are not going to allow trolls, gripers, complainers, whiners, sabotagers, or any other type of threadcrappers. So you, and everyone else, are served notice that this is a place for intelligent thoughtful discussion. It is not a place to savage other people's products or their choices. There are other forums where that type of thing is allowed. This is not one of them.

If you play nicely in our sandbox, you're welcome to stay. If you cannot abide by our simple rules, you will be escorted out. And that doesn't apply to just you, that applies to everyone.

[filmmaker1977]

filmmaker1977, I do not follow what you're saying at all. I do expect it's a language barrier issue. I am not accusing you of saying things like the "story" part, that's just bringing out a general point of what this forum is, and what it is not.

So I will say it again. This particular thread, in this particular forum, is for people to talk about the V1U. And on DVXUser, people are allowed to talk about their chosen subjects.

We do not need anyone coming in and saying anything like "this is a stupid product". That is pointless and counterproductive, and will not be tolerated. If you determine that this product holds no interest for you, that's fine, MOVE ON. Go elsewhere. Talk about the Red in the Red forum if that's what you're interested in. But there are people who are interested in the V1U, or who are at least interested in finding out whether the V1U is appropriate for them. Please allow them to discuss it without any counterproductive, negative sniping.

This discussion should probably have moved to private messages, but it's symptomatic of something that's been happening on the boards and something that happens every time a new camcorder is introduced. And we're tired of it. Last time we said "take all discussions of other cameras somewhere else, but stop griping here." This time we're trying something different -- we're hosting discussions but we are not going to allow trolls, gripers, complainers, whiners, sabotagers, or any other type of threadcrappers. So you, and everyone else, are served notice that this is a place for intelligent thoughtful discussion. It is not a place to savage other people's products or their choices. There are other forums where that type of thing is allowed. This is not one of them.

If you play nicely in our sandbox, you're welcome to stay. If you cannot abide by our simple rules, you will be escorted out. And that doesn't apply to just you, that applies to everyone.
c'mon barry! :beer: you are a clever man.. me likes.. as i already posted i like you all.. :kiss:

there isn't a language barrier.. in the most of the cases.. at least, from me..

there isn't any negative resistance against this or that particular small camera..

my viewpoint is what it happened when i decided to come over these boards: the red announcement..

there is an industry and there are people living from this industry..

red is an industry aside.. if you wish, a new industry.. but not what those "majors" are on behalf.. an industry assumes a lot of interests.. maybe one day red will be like the others.. not today..

i just did a comparision between different offers..

imo, these small cameras aren't what the "majors" can deliver.. imo, they're cheating..

but as i said, i understand your position.. you are doing consulting.. that would be what I'd call it for.

and this has its own rules.. please, don't think i put a negative meaning on this.. it's just a different viewpoint, a different position..

otherwise, as we are in a free society, i believe it isn't useless to make a point.. even if it is THIS point..

it isn't sabotage.. all my previous posts are proving my interest in this or that particular gear debate.. even if coming from "the majors"..

nevertheless, it's amusing to see you from the v1u side.. or if you prefer, as i would be a red fanboy.. even if i already am not a boy.. sometimes, unfortunately, sometimes, not.

:)

[Zim]

Red will only be for a small % of people. Not everyone will like sony, Canon panny or JVC etc. But I would not call any of these companies mafia,,,,,

[Elton]

This camera seems quite promising, even with the lack of a full raster sensor. I am very intrigued by the ability of CMOS sensors to hold extreme highlights without smear...at least theoretically. What bums me out a little is the fact that Sony went with 1/4" chips. It's too bad that they are actually providing progressive images, but at the same time making it even harder to get selective focus.

It's hard enough to pull off dramatic, shallow DOF with 1/3" cameras. Now you've got an even harder job with this camera.

One step up...two steps back. :(

[filmmaker1977]

Red will only be for a small % of people. Not everyone will like sony, Canon panny or JVC etc. But I would not call any of these companies mafia,,,,,for sure.. :D but sometimes, they seem to be.. at least, crossing their interests from my eyes.. their product don't present what they can deliver.. why will it be?

as i said, call it what you wish.. by now, i'm out from this public debate.. think what you wish..

[filmmaker1977]

This discussion should probably have moved to private messages, but it's symptomatic of something that's been happening on the boards and something that happens every time a new camcorder is introduced.check your pm box please..

[John Trent]

filmmaker1977,

I'm a strong believer in free speech. I was banned (permanently, I guess) over at dvinfo for defending somebody's right to ask a negative question about a jvc camera. But you've had your say -- now cool down before you ruin a good thing for yourself, here. At least you've been warned. I got kicked out with NO WARNING and NO EXPLANATION. DVXUSER is a lot better concerning free speech. So -- be cool.

NOW, HERE'S A BIG HONKIN' QUESTION: if 1080i taxes the HDV compression codec and creates artifacts, and if shooting cineframe or canon's f mode reduces artifacts (because it's asking less of the compression), won't 1080P be harder on the compression AND CREATE MORE HDV ARTIFACTS?

Makes sense to me. Has anybody whose actually seen the footage (not web stuff -- real stuff, fresh from the cam) seen any increase in artifact problems? I'm really curious about this.

Peace.

[filmmaker1977]

filmmaker1977,

I'm a strong believer in free speech. I was banned (permanently, I guess) over at dvinfo for defending somebody's right to ask a negative question about a jvc camera. But you've had your say. At least you've been warned. I got kicked out with NO WARNING and NO EXPLANATION. DVXUSER is a lot better concerning free speech.

Peace.agreed.. :thumbup: but because there is an open public forum where i could post all what i could and i stand.. and another one where the privacy takes place, by now this kind of comments will just be at pm box.. sorry..

edit
once again, barry check your pm box for my new pm answering now to your reply.. thx

[Elton]

filmmaker1977, NOW, HERE'S A BIG HONKIN' QUESTION: if 1080i taxes the HDV compression codec and creates artifacts, and if shooting cineframe or canon's f mode reduces artifacts (because it's asking less of the compression), won't 1080P be harder on the compression AND CREATE MORE HDV ARTIFACTS?

If you mean 1080p as in 24 or 30p, it should be more artifact resilient than 1080i 60. Canon's 1080 progressive encoding is actually more artifact resistent due to the efficiency of progressive encoding. If Sony's progressive encoding uses all the bandwidth for progressive frames only it should technically look better in challenging scenes.

[ecking]

If you look at how Sony prices things, they offer the Z1 for sale at $6000 and you can pick it up at B&H for $4200 or so. I'm guessing we'll be able to pick this camera up for the price of the DVX100b or less.

If that is true sign me on....in blood.

But I'm looking at making a purchase soon as in the next 3-4 months and even if the price were around there eventually I'm worry it'll take too long to get there.

[rawfa]

for sure.. :D but sometimes, they seem to be.. at least, crossing their interests from my eyes.. their product don't present what they can deliver.. why will it be?

as i said, call it what you wish.. by now, i'm out from this public debate.. think what you wish..

All companies operate like this...even though some are more discreet than others. I'm 100% sure that all these big companies are way way ahead of what we all think (it's what they get payed for). But if they put everything on the table at once they'll lose years of upgrades and new products. It's how the industry works.

[Ralph Oshiro]

FWIW:

If someone said, "Give me your old VX2000, your old DVX100, plus, $1,000, and I'll give you a brand new Sony V1," I would jump at the chance to have such a cool little camera! I really need/want a small, inexpensive, native 16:9 24P camera for stunt camera work. My first choice would be an HVX200, but, for the money, the V1 would be a great value. Also, 1/4" sensors would actually help in certain applications, for example, having that increased depth-of-field for shooting miniatures.

[filmmaker1977]

All companies operate like this...even though some are more discreet than others. I'm 100% sure that all these big companies are way way ahead of what we all think (it's what they get payed for). But if they put everything on the table at once they'll lose years of upgrades and new products. It's how the industry works.yeah.. that's why i said about them what i said.

[John Trent]

If you mean 1080p as in 24 or 30p, it should be more artifact resilient than 1080i 60. Canon's 1080 progressive encoding is actually more artifact resistent due to the efficiency of progressive encoding. If Sony's progressive encoding uses all the bandwidth for progressive frames only it should technically look better in challenging scenes.

Canon: 800x700+ (H & V resolution)

Canon f mode: 800x540 (figures courtesy of Adam Wilt)

Your dropping 160+ lines of resolution. Not a lot, but this is line-doubling with some voodoo, and it makes it easier on HDV compression. True progressive doesn't drop resolution. It either scans it all at one time or stitches it together (or so I've read). Either way it would seem to me to be a bear on HDV compression and increase artifacts. Wouldn't it?

[Elton]

It either scans it all at one time or stitches it together (or so I've read). Either way it would seem to me to be a bear on HDV compression and increase artifacts. Wouldn't it?

All I can tell you is that with the XL-H1, extremely challenging scenes that can break the codec--to some degree--in 1080i are often less artifacted when shot in the F modes, which are actual progressive recordings/encodings.

I would imagine that Sony's encoder would work similarly. But we'll see when the camera gets put through some tests in the coming months.

[Hideaki Anno]

I would imagine that Sony's encoder would work similarly. But we'll see when the camera gets put through some tests in the coming months. Canon Xl H1 encoder did a great job, and considering that this one is progressive I think it will do a better job.

[Fugitive]

doesn't the HVX shot look equally (if not more) detailed and less noisy than the XLH1 shot? Heh.


Less noisy, yup. equally detailed...hmmm. I keep noticing the edge of the wall right next to the window (right side). The ridges of the brickes are rather evident on the Canon. On the HVX, its kind of a blurred straight vertical line. But then again, not surprising at all given the higher resolution of the canon.

What surprises me more actually is that even the Sony retains those details on the ridges of the brick-wall (where its resolution is suppossedly very near that of the HVX). Could this be Sony's picture manipulation? I dont know. But taking the picture at face value, the HVX does seem to lose out on detail compared to the V1.

(I think I dont have to mention that I am not trolling, do I? All in the name of objective discussion as a film-maker)

[Barry_Green]

the HVX does seem to lose out on detail compared to the V1.
I would expect nothing less coming from Sony's own website. If it showed the HVX beating it, they wouldn't show that picture, would they? They also show the V1 beating the XLH1.

[filmmaker1977]

I would expect nothing less coming from Sony's own website. If it showed the HVX beating it, they wouldn't show that picture, would they?you're right!.. of course, they wouldn't.. :Drogar-Dum(DBG):

otherwise, because they dare to publish this comparision it is a good sign pro-v1..

and v1 is coming one year after hvx, it's acceptable that will show better results.

They also show the V1 beating the XLH1.yeah.. that's more interesting yet.. because of the upcoming a1/g1.. aside the HD-SDI embedded option, my bet is v1 will be better than the canons:

800/700 vertical lines against 540 in progressive or f mode_s..

[MovieSwede]

Yes but there is more to good image than resolution. We have color, latitude, low light, DOF, compression artifacts, skin tones etc

So the qouestion will be does the Sony produce a 1000$ better picture?

[Mack Fisher]

I really how the CMOS gets rid of vertical streaking. I dont know if the CMOS has better light sensitivity because it seems like everything I have read told me that the CCD beats the CMOS, also take into account it is a 1/3CCD vs a 1/4CMOS that is what kills it for me. If it was equal I would definently pick this camera up but I dont wanna downgrade in sensor size for 1000$ because 24p means nothing to me.

[filmmaker1977]

Yes but there is more to good image than resolution. We have color, latitude, low light, DOF, compression artifacts, skin tones etc

So the qouestion will be does the Sony produce a 1000$ better picture?http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=699003&postcount=49

"In the progressive system the entire 960x1080 chip is scanned at once using an interpolation method to make it into 1920x1080. It will probably also have a vertical resolution of around 700 lines, all the HD cameras appear to be in the ballpark of 700 lines. The difference is, when the FX1 tries to simulate progressive scan it drops in resolution to around 540 lines, but the V1 shouldn't drop at all since it's inherently progressive."

[Bogdan]

...

Anyway, congrats to Sony for producing this product, it goes a long way towards putting them back in "the game" and it looks like those who had already written their Canon XHA1 deposit checks may now have to think twice!

...

I agree, it's nice move by Sony, but it did not make me think twice about Canon XH-A1. I have pre-ordered Canon today :)

The spec on Sony's website leaves no doubt they employ 960x1080 sensors. 45 degrees photodiodes rotation in ClearVid sensors produces effect similar to pixel shift, but Canon's advantage starts with 1440x1080 pixels on each sensor and ends with progressive compression in HDV mode. Canon's F mode is not truly progressive technically speaking, but who cares if it produces best quality images one can get below $20k. It's a fact based on already existing technology (XL-H1), not on company ads. I don't think Sony's going to change that with V1, but I'm happy we have more options coming up.

CMOS vs CCD issue grabbed so much of our attention and we should thank marketing wizards for that. Of course, CMOS is taking ground from CCD technology slowly but it is not because of final image quality. The reasons are very practical: lower energy consumption and easier integration with A/D circuits. Hmmm, even with that, Sony V1 and Canon G1/A1 offer similar battery life so there we go with another reason why we should not let tech stuff play with our minds so much but rather pay more attention to bottom line.

I think we all have to realize one fact: currently and in the near future nobody will offer full quality, true 1920x1080 or 1440x1080 progressive resolution camcorder below $20k. Good thing is we get closer and closer for much less than XDCAM HD, for example. Canon's H1/G1/A1 camcorders will have the edge in the class for some time.

And of course, we should trust in company ads much less. Sony and above all, Panasonic, know how to trick us, while Canon delivers best-in-class results.

[Zim]

I haven't pre order. I am on a waiting list. But I sure would like to hear something new from Canon on the A1. Maybe some video. Something!!!!

[Bogdan]

I haven't pre order. I am on a waiting list. But I sure would like to hear something new from Canon on the A1. Maybe some video. Something!!!!

A1/G1 include the same core imaging technology as XL-H1 and we know it delivers. I think we can rely on Canon's reputation. A1 and G1 will not disappoint. They will do quite the opposite, I think.

[Zim]

I had a XL1s and it was a good cam, but I still want to see more. How is the noise, etc.

There is no reason why we can't see a few reviews. Sample videos.

[Bogdan]

It's Canon's style not to reveal much before cameras hit the market. They don't promise Holy Grail, but deliver the best in class when the time comes.

[Bogdan]

Canon: 800x700+ (H & V resolution)

Canon f mode: 800x540 (figures courtesy of Adam Wilt)

...

Oh no, one more time the numbers from the famous Adam Wilt test. 800x540 resolution in Canon's F mode is total misinformation. Check another tests and comparisons available on the Web. Rent XL-H1, test it and witness the results yourself. Guys, Canon's results in progressive mode are closer to CineAlta rather then 540 lines. I don't understand why those myths still exist ...:huh:

[Zim]

It's Canon's style not to reveal much before cameras hit the market. They don't promise Holy Grail, but deliver the best in class when the time comes.


I hope so.

[J.R. Hudson]

Yes but there is more to good image than resolution. We have color, latitude, low light, DOF, compression artifacts, skin tones etc

So the qouestion will be does the Sony produce a 1000$ better picture?

The best point made yet in this thread

Rez is Neglible at this level (Give or take). Ill sacrifice some lines for overall image quality and 24fps cadence.

It's why I choose the DVX100 over the XL2 and the HVX over any other HD camera currently availble

[Fugitive]

I think we all have to realize one fact: currently and in the near future nobody will offer full quality, true 1920x1080 or 1440x1080 progressive resolution camcorder below $20k.


What about Silicon Imaging? And Red? Both well below 20k.



Sony and above all, Panasonic, know how to trick us, while Canon delivers best-in-class results.


Oh come on, stop being a troll. All of these companies have and will continue to produce great products. If you dont like anyone of them, or their products then so be it. No point in making subjective statements like that.

[rawfa]

I keep waiting for the functions link (http://bssc.sel.sony.com/Broadcastan...V1U/index.html) to work but it never does. I'm crossing my fingers for an extensive image control (matrix, knee, black stretch/gamma, etc). The image control on the canon(s) is pretty amazing.

[Zim]

it seems like they should know the functions by know.

[Bogdan]

What about Silicon Imaging? And Red? Both well below 20k.

Oh come on, stop being a troll. All of these companies have and will continue to produce great products. If you dont like anyone of them, or their products then so be it. No point in making subjective statements like that.

Silicon Imaging and Red are not commercially available yet, and I did not mean just camera, but camcorder. That includes the whole recording system. Silicon Imaging is very nice product, but still not full 1080p system. 1920x1080 1-layer sensor will not produce that resolution.

I don't intend to offend anyone's feelings. We chose the products that suit our needs and personal preferences. However, I witness so much hype and misinformation recently that I simply feel the need to say something from time to time. All those opinions criticizing Canon H1 technology for "resolution drop" in F mode, for fake progressive and so on and so forth, are a little bit unfair, to say the least. I think those of us still trying to make a choice deserve to be honestly informed, not misinformed. This supposed to be the purpose of this forum also. Maybe we should express and discuss the strenghts of our cameras instead of criticizing others? Personal preferences are subjective by definition, but when it comes to image resolution, for example, that's totally different story and simply don't get why the best product in this aspect in 1/3" class receives so much criticizm. Resolution can be and was measured and tested. Properly conducted tests don't lie. In currently commercially available products, only XDCAM HD brings better quality than Canon XL-H1 in price range we are discussing.

I said a few bitter words about Panasonic not because I don't like their product. I have never used such words so please don't twist it. I don't like to be cheated into so called 1080p camcorder (HVX200) that in fact barely resolves 720p, even though it's a great product with unique advantages not found in other models in this class.

And hey, talking about HD, shouldn't the resolution be the primary parameter considered when other image quality aspects are so close that their interpretation depends so much on personal taste? :)

Cheers.

[Fugitive]

Silicon Imaging is VERY nearly out, just around the corner. About it not being full 1080 progressive, well then niether is XL-H1. But both cams are great at what they do, and I wouldnt criticize either.

As far as the bitter words go, you mentioned them about Panasonic as well as Sony. I cant really think of a way I could have twisted your words really. You mentioned Sony and Panasonic as, uhm, "cheaters". As far as not resolving, you get what you pay for, and the HVX is cheaper than the XL-H1, so thats a moot point. They are not cheating. They are selling you a cheaper product, for a reason...
I mean come on, do you really expect "any" company to come out and say "Hey, here is my product, and here is a list of features that its missing. But you still gotta buy it!" Does even Canon do that?

Shouldnt we be talking about resolution? Sure, but then I would like to have the Dalsa, Viper or CineAlta. Bottom-line: Price. Again, the XL-H1 has a higher resolution, but costs more bucks. If you can pay for it, go get it. But atleast dont call my cam a cheat because thats all I can afford! Besides, all other aspects are not so close as you might think. Which other competitive cam comes even close to giving you variable fram-rates and Tapeless workflow?

By the way, I dont get offended over discussing merits and demerits of a camera. Thats what we are here for. We need to know which camera to use, and when. There isnt a camera forum on DVXUser that I havent visited and havent tried to make a positive contribution to, whether it be Red, Silicon Imaging, or any other camera. But what I find rather unjustifiable is when someone uses rather bold (rash?) statements like: "So-and-so company are pirates" or of the sort, that I have heard lately. Its just not right.

But as far as constructive criticism is concerned, i'm cool. All part of the learning process :)

[John Trent]

Oh no, one more time the numbers from the famous Adam Wilt test. 800x540 resolution in Canon's F mode is total misinformation. Check another tests and comparisons available on the Web. Rent XL-H1, test it and witness the results yourself. Guys, Canon's results in progressive mode are closer to CineAlta rather then 540 lines. I don't understand why those myths still exist ...:huh:

Why do I always have to defend Adam Wilt on the forums? He seems objective to me. He's not playing favorites. He reports his findings and gets nothing but grief from fanboys.

I'm not going to repeat the, "All the cams are great..." thing. Frankly, I find them all lacking. The Canon XL-H1 LINE-DOUBLES in frame mode -- accept it. Most people who've seen both Canon and Sony Cineframe (30P &25P) say THEY LOOK THE SAME -- accept it. If your satisfied with it, great. But IT IS LINE-DOUBLED PIXEL-SHIFTING FUDGING.

People who haven't seen the XL-H1 24f in action can watch "Lovespring International" (Lifetime ch. Mon. nights). It looks interlaced, with tampering, and soft, to me. I usually turn on MTV, during and afterwards, and marvel at the superior colour and clarity of the DVX footage (no I don't own a Panny).

Why do you think Canon has recently bought a 24P license? Because everybody else is going with the superior progressive format and they don't want to be left behind with their resolution-dropping gimmick. That's why.

End of Rant.:Drogar-Smoke(DBG):

[Tim Le]

Why do you think Canon has recently bought a 24P license? Because everybody else is going with the superior progressive format and they don't want to be left behind with their resolution-dropping gimmick. That's why.

Canon's XL2, introduced in July 2004, has progressive scan chips that capture at 24P. The 24P license announced in June 2006 was probably to avoid litigation with FILMLOOK Inc./24P, LLC, instead of because Canon finally decided true progressive scan was superior and had to have it (again, they already had this in the XL2).

Thomson/Grass Valley and SONY, as well as Matsushita/Panasonic, have all previously taken licenses from FILMLOOK Inc./24P, LLC for their 24P progressive frame cameras. Additional licensing agreements with other manufacturers of broadcast cameras that create 24P images, which give the appearance of film origination, are being aggressively pursued at this time.

[Elton]

The Canon XL-H1 LINE-DOUBLES in frame mode -- accept it. Most people who've seen both Canon and Sony Cineframe (30P &25P) say THEY LOOK THE SAME -- accept it. If your satisfied with it, great. But IT IS LINE-DOUBLED PIXEL-SHIFTING FUDGING.

Your post inspired me to take out the Z1U from work this afternoon and shoot a quickie side by side of CineFrame 25 and H1 24F. I had the Z1 on a tripod and the H1 handheld with nearly the same framing for a very short--simultaneous--recording.

I put the Z1 in CinemaTone 2 and it's sharpness was "11" out of 0 to 15 scale. The H1 was in Cinegamma 2 with sharpness set to -3 in a possible scale of -/+ 9

The exposures aren't identical on both cams, but their pretty close.

Results? I think "most people" could be wrong here. We all know the Z1 field doubles in CineFrame...but the H1? I don't think it's that simple. See for yourself:

Z1U CineFrame 25: http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/Z1U-25F-2.jpg
XL-H1 24F: http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/H1-24F-2.jpg

Raw m2t's for your inspection:

Z1-25F clip (17 MB): http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/Z1U-25F-2.m2t
H1-24F clip (19 MB): http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/H1-24F-2.m2t

"IT IS LINE-DOUBLED PIXEL-SHIFTING FUDGING" ;)

[rawfa]

Very interesting comparison, Elton. The frame from the Z1 looks like it was taken with a bad digital zoom. The colors and definition on the canon apear to be much better.

[rawfa]

Here's an interesting article on how great things can be if sony played their cards right with it's 3 CMOS. According to the article the possibilities conserning image control could be amazing. Anyway, many of you probably already read it, but here it is:

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-Unleashes-the-24p-HVR-V1U---and-a-Glimpse-at-the-Future-of-Image-Control.htm

[Elton]

Very interesting comparison, Elton. The frame from the Z1 looks like it was taken with a bad digital zoom. The colors and definition on the canon apear to be much better.

Yeah, I don't know how much the CinemaTone feature affects the image, but I set the Z1 for a color gain of +2...same as the H1. I suppose the Sony's definition of color saturation is totally different and so the colors might be slighty exaggerated, whereas the Canon's look reasonably natural.

I'm going to shoot a few more side by sides just to be sure, but I think it's fairly obvious that the Sony CineFrame mode just doesn't come close to the same resolution as the H1 in F mode.

[rawfa]

Also the Z1 seems a bit more overexposed. The image control is different. You can't simply try to set them the way in one camera and the other. On the Texas HD shootout they had to tilt setting all around to try and reach the same image on different cameras. If I had access to a H1E I'd like to the a test like this because i feel the FX1E has a decent CF25...but the image control sucks. For what I've seen the H1 seems to have a wider dynamic range and amazing image control, hence resulting in a much more film like image. What I can say on the FX1/Z1's deffence is that they are the most noise free cameras I've ver worked with...which is good for people who shoot a lot of run and gun stuff under uncontroled lightinig situations.

[Bogdan]

Your post inspired me to take out the Z1U from work this afternoon and shoot a quickie side by side of CineFrame 25 and H1 24F.

Elton -

Thanks for posting the results of your test. I wonder how many examples some people have to see to finally stop spreading their wrong theories. One image is worth thousdand words, but still it's not enough to convince so many of us.

[Bogdan]

...
The Canon XL-H1 LINE-DOUBLES in frame mode -- accept it. Most people who've seen both Canon and Sony Cineframe (30P &25P) say THEY LOOK THE SAME -- accept it. If your satisfied with it, great. But IT IS LINE-DOUBLED PIXEL-SHIFTING FUDGING
....

John -

I'm afraid your information is very inaccurate. Elton's test and other examples available on the Web confirm it. First of all, Canon's F mode is closely guarded secret and nobody explained officially how it works, so I have no idea where your confidence comes from and I don't accept it. Progressive images produced by XL-H1 are just too good to be deinterlaced or approximated. I tried the best software deinterlacers and pushed them to the limits. In some situations they just fail because it's very difficult to deal with time displacements between the fields. So far I have not seen such problems in XL-H1 F-mode footage.

I think Canon employs phase shift for clocking their CCDs, possibly scanning the signal in two parallel sweeps instead of one like in technically true progressive scan process. Because of that some extra filtering is required, but the results are so close to progressive scan I really doubt people watching the movies made with XL-H1 or HVX200 on their large LCD, plasma screens or in theater will ever tell the difference. Surely, they will notice the difference in resolution, but not in cadence.

As far as overall image quality and artifacts are concerned, all properly conducted tests proved Canon XL-H1 is only surpassed by +$20k CineAlta. Resistance to artifacts has always been strong side of Canon camcorders. Some time ago I did extensive comparisons between XL1 and DVX100, and then with XL2 and in some situations when pushed to the limits, especially on high contrast edges DVX suffered from discreet artifacts, while Canons were still holding very well with much smoother lines.

Again, I am not saying DVX100 or HVX200 are bad products or that I don't like them, so please folks, don't put those words in my mouth. All I'm saying is Canon has the edge.

I think we can rest assured XH-A1 and G1 will not disappoint. Quite the opposite, I believe.

[Elton]

Also the Z1 seems a bit more overexposed. The image control is different. You can't simply try to set them the way in one camera and the other.

As you can tell, I ran outside for just a few minutes to get a shot. I tried to get both cameras somewhat matched...but when I went back into the studio to capture the clips, I looked at the Z1's gain switch and realized it was on 6 dB, so that explains the exposure difference.

You're right, it's no simple thing to match the cameras. When playing around with the Z1 it made me realize how much more control I had over the image with the H1, and how much simpler it was to access the needed functions.

I'm sure CF 25 can look maybe a smidge better, but the camera simply stretches the 960x1080 CCD image so much to record the HDV, and then you have the fact that it isn't doing anything other than field doubling.

The Canon is obviously going a little further. I think it's due to these factors:

--Higher resolution CCD
--Better DSP
--Sharper lens
--(speculation)Smart deinterlacing that retains some added res...or...
--(speculation) Phase clocked CCD that gives it some temporal advantages in dealing with an interlaced sensor.

On the Texas HD shootout they had to tilt setting all around to try and reach the same image on different cameras. If I had access to a H1E I'd like to the a test like this because i feel the FX1E has a decent CF25...but the image control sucks. For what I've seen the H1 seems to have a wider dynamic range and amazing image control, hence resulting in a much more film like image.

I'm spoiled by the H1's image control. It makes a huge difference.

What I can say on the FX1/Z1's deffence is that they are the most noise free cameras I've ver worked with...which is good for people who shoot a lot of run and gun stuff under uncontroled lightinig situations.

True, true...but the H1 is pretty close. A funny benefit of these interlace cameras is that they are simply cleaner due to the added sensitivity inherent in an interlace sensor.

It'll be interesting to see how the V1U fares in general. I hope it offers more image control than the Z1.

[Elton]

Progressive images produced by XL-H1 are just too good to be deinterlaced or approximated. I tried the best software deinterlacers and pushed them to the limits. In some situations they just fail because it's very difficult to deal with time displacements between the fields. So far I have not seen such problems in XL-H1 F-mode footage.

Interesting you should say that. I've tried deinterlacing of all sorts and was never able to match the quality and consistency of the F modes.

I think you're on to something with the phase clocked CCD theory.

[Bogdan]

I also heard a theory of phase inverting of the green CCD which would render progressive scan with each field, but carrying half of the resolution. Then the Digic processor would merge it with the second field. Well, it's possible, but I think there much more than just that involved with the process. This method still results with time displacement of 1/48, 1/50 or 1/60s depending on frame rate and I just find it kinda hard to believe they do such smart deinterlacing real time in the camera.

For now I can't wait to grab XH-A1 :-) That baby will rock everyone who does not need uncompressed HD-SDI.

[Fugitive]

Elton you da man! Its great to see someone finally get off their butt and show something rather than theorize about it.

Thanks a bunch. That comparison should put Canon critics to rest. :)

[John Trent]

Elton,

I'm happy I inspired you to prove me wrong.:) I think the Sony could have been set up a little better but there is no doubt to anyone with eyes that the Canon smokes the Sony. Hands down. Unequivocally.

I still kinda think it's voodoo fudging...but of the very best kind. Wilt does say the Canon maintains it's 800 horizonal resolution. It's larger pixel count helps. It still looks a little soft to me, with CA, and it looks sort of interlaced on the red curb lines. But I admit I'm nit-picking, and I doubt I'll see better. I'd love to see the same shots interlaced and f'd (you know what I mean) to see the difference. Please, could you do this. I really haven't seen tests like this. Thank you.

Bogdan, I apologize, I was wrong. Mine eyes have seen the light.

Now I understand what all the XH-A1 excitement is about. The only thing keeping me from saying I'll buy one is RELIABILITY. I've read many a post and have friends that have XL/GL series horror stories. So, I'm a little nervous and gunshy, but otherwise it's a go.

I still think "Lovespring International" looks bad.

Elton, seriously, thank you for taking the time to do the test and post it. I need to make a camera choice soon and you've saved me from spending money on a FX1E. Whatever I do, your help has ensured my future films will look better, and for that you have my eternal gratitude.

Peace.

[John Trent]

I just had my sister look at the comparison pictures. Her comment, "Well...it's obvious the top picture sucks compared to the other one." I guess that says it all.

[J.R. Hudson]

Haha

Nice job Elton !

[pto2212]

I find it funny how Sony once claimed that they will not be producing 24p cameras because independent film making was not the field of videographers that the wanted to target. Now with JVC, Panasonic and Canon, they're cowering.

[Elton]

Elton,

I'm happy I inspired you to prove me wrong.:) I think the Sony could have been set up a little better but there is no doubt to anyone with eyes that the Canon smokes the Sony. Hands down. Unequivocally.

:) Btw, I hope you don't think I was trying to embarrass you. I just didn't believe that Sony CF and Canon F were all that close in actual quality. I've seen all the shootouts and whatnot, but because I had access to a Z1U at work, I decided to get to the bottom of it and see it with my own eyes.

I still kinda think it's voodoo fudging...but of the very best kind. Wilt does say the Canon maintains it's 800 horizonal resolution. It's larger pixel count helps.

Sublime voodoo fudging. ;)

It still looks a little soft to me, with CA, and it looks sort of interlaced on the red curb lines.

SOFT??!! What the...?!!

CA...there's maybe a hair of it, and yes, the stock lens does show some here and there. It goes with the territory.

Interlaced curb lines? Yeah, there's some teeny weeny twitter of sorts going on...but that's something you really have to be looking for. Also, it's fairly adressable in post with a good anti-aliaser.

But I admit I'm nit-picking, and I doubt I'll see better. I'd love to see the same shots interlaced and f'd (you know what I mean) to see the difference. Please, could you do this. I really haven't seen tests like this. Thank you.

I'll try to in the near future.

Now I understand what all the XH-A1 excitement is about. The only thing keeping me from saying I'll buy one is RELIABILITY. I've read many a post and have friends that have XL/GL series horror stories. So, I'm a little nervous and gunshy, but otherwise it's a go.

Reliability? I've heard of some issues with the GL's, but from personal experience...I totally abused the XL1 for nearly six years and it only needed minor maintenace. It was subjected to the dirt and dust of the desert on a nearly daily basis for years.

I have to say that the XL-H1 is built like a tank and I've had zero trouble. I believe Canon's build quality has dramatically improved, overall. I wouldn't hesitate at all on the new XH cams.

I still think "Lovespring International" looks bad.

No doubt...and I don't think it's the camera's fault at all.

Elton, seriously, thank you for taking the time to do the test and post it. I need to make a camera choice soon and you've saved me from spending money on a FX1E. Whatever I do, your help has ensured my future films will look better, and for that you have my eternal gratitude.

Peace.

:)

[Fugitive]

I need to make a camera choice soon and you've saved me from spending money on a FX1E. Peace.

Well you must remember the comparison was between "F" modes only. In normal interlaced modes, the resolution difference is "not" that pronounced. Besides, a person considering the FX1E would be mainly considering it due to eiether of the two reasons:

(1) Noise issues

(2) Price

And in that respect, the consideration is still valid. The FX1 has less noise, and its MUCH cheaper. With a proper de-interlacer (nattress) you should be able to get a very affordable good-looking 24p image.

[rawfa]

The freacking "functions" button just won't work! When will they make it available?!

[luster]

anyone know if this thing has an hdmi port that bypasses the hdv downsampling?

[luster]

nevermind....i'm stupid.

[Kholi]

I am unclear on the entire HDMI port thing. All I know is that you're supposed to be able to capture 4:2:2 to another codec if you go tethered and get better results.

[Fugitive]

What is there to be unclear about? The HDMI port allows you to output uncompressed HD (that bypasses HDV compression) out of the camera into a black-magic card.

Now, how it compares to HD-SDI is another question.

[John Trent]

:) Btw, I hope you don't think I was trying to embarrass you. I just didn't believe that Sony CF and Canon F were all that close in actual quality. I've seen all the shootouts and whatnot, but because I had access to a Z1U at work, I decided to get to the bottom of it and see it with my own eyes.

Your a class act, dude.

DVXuser, and boards like it (well, there are none as good as this board) are here for information, but a lot of information is mis-information and I believed it. Every camera has it's "group" and after being unimpressed with the hyped frame mode on the old Canons, I figured the nay-sayers were correct about 24f. What you did, is what I wish more, who have access to the gear would do, you went out and proved your point. I'm happy to be wrong, if I've learned what's right. Learning here, is what it's all about.

If I wasn't so adamant in my wrong-headedness, you may not have posted comparisons of Sony's CF and Canon's F. So, embarrass away. I'm sure, I wasn't the only one happy to be educated by your examples. So, thanks for getting to the bottom of this and letting us all see with our own eyes.:thumbup:

I hope when the Sony V1u comes out, you can get your hands on one and post comparisons between it's progressive and Canon's F modes. I'd really like to see those.

Dead pixels are at the top of the list of problems, friends and posters have gripped about concerning Canon (and JVC cams) -- far more so, than their Sony/Panasonic counterparts. Glad to hear you've never encountered the dread of the dead (pixel).

[Elton]

I hope when the Sony V1u comes out, you can get your hands on one and post comparisons between it's progressive and Canon's F modes. I'd really like to see those.

I'll give it a try when my local dealer gets both the V1u and the A1 in-stock.

Dead pixels are at the top of the list of problems, friends and posters have gripped about concerning Canon (and JVC cams) -- far more so, than their Sony/Panasonic counterparts. Glad to hear you've never encountered the dread of the dead (pixel).

I've heard of more dead pixel cases with the JVC. With the XL-H1 I've only heard of one case, and it was replaced fairly quickly. As far as I can tell there really haven't been any horror stories to speak of about the camera.

[Bogdan]

Hot pixel visible at 0dB gain is a defect and subject to free service while on warranty. Higher gain settings or prolonged use in hot enviroment (like 90 degrees or more) may make some hot pixels visible. In such cases it's probably good idea to contact factory service and discuss the issue.

[Four Eyed Monsters]

Does anyone know if the Consumer V1u will have the 24p feature or is that just on the pro model? :huh:

[MovieSwede]

The FX7 is the consumer version and it wount have 24P.

[Four Eyed Monsters]

ok, thanks, looks like i am going to have to find an EXTRA 1k for the V1 this winter!

EDIT: wait, does the FX7 do true 30p? I would think it has something better then the FX1 or is it a downgrade from it?

[meta4]

I would suggest this article (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-Announces-Smaller-Less-Expensive-HDR-FX7-with-3-CMOS-Chips.htm).

FEM: Do you know Arin or Susan?

[Four Eyed Monsters]

meta4: I am EXTREMLY close friends with Arin&Susan! They are great friends and talented filmmakers....THEY KNOW HOW TO USE A DVX CAMERA :)

[SteveO]

So to recap,

1. Both the HVX and the V1U can do 4:2:2 natively, but due to Sony's codec limitations one would need a PC nearby to connect to via HDMI, otherwise it's 4:2:0 in HDV. Too bad the DVR-DR60 can't store uncompressed content directly from the V1u's HDMI port.

2. The HVX can capture 1080p, 720p and 480p at 24fps, 30fps and 60 fps, whereas the V1u is limited to 1080p and 480p at 24fps and 30fps. But, they both record the a/v signal in 60i.


Do I have that right?

[Barry_Green]

Sounds about right. There's also DVCPRO50 and variable frame rates and uncompressed audio and things like that. Then again, the Sony has a lot more telephoto reach and a lower price tag. Then there's 1/4" CMOS vs. 1/3" CCD, and we have no idea about comparative sensitivity, color, noise or dynamic range performance either...

[JPatnaude]

We just bought one of these to shoot chase footage in the back of jets.
We had too many problems with steady shot and the Z-1, and the guys at our facility in Edwards AFB don't care for the smaller Sony HVR-A1. So we struck middle ground and bought the V1. We are also hoping it will make for a good "B" camera when (if?) we get our XDcam HD rig. Since most of our shooting will involve daylight, we've ignored the low- light sensitivity complaints.

We have a test flight with the not-so-new and improved C5 Galaxy and a chance to shoot chase footage from a Lear jet. We'll let you know if the camera holds up to expectations. Fun with new tools.....

Jeff Patnaude
Lockheed Marietta
:engel017:

[philnerd]

We just bought one of these to shoot chase footage in the back of jets.<snip>

Sounds like you're going to get some incredible footage with your camera. If you can get any of that footage cleared for public viewing I bet people would totally dig it.

By the way, I was starting to think I was the only person in Snellville with a camcorder!

[Bucknfl]

I used the v-1 on a 3 day shoot in early January. It is a nice small camera. The 24p look on the camera is the real deal. It looks very nice. The camera is about the 3 stops slower than my dvx100B. I shot in a lot of class rooms with flourescents. It was fast enough to make good pictures with minimal fill light. I think it's a great camera for documentary work, especially if you are shooting 3 or 4 hours of footage per day.

I don't do editing so I like to hear from someone about their post experience with this camera.

[Collink]

I'm looking at buying a V1 also. I shoot indie film now with the DVX, A, and I'd like to go HD. I know I'd feel more comfortable with the HVX, but I NEED the record time, there's just too much shoot limitation using P2 right now. I need the HVX with two 32GB P2 cards, but that will clearly be 2009-2010 at the rate we're going. I love the look of 24p, so maybe the V1u is the way to go? I rented an HVX and the Focus Enhancements HD last year and despite a day or so of working with it I couldn't get it to work, I think. The images looked great coming right of the camera.

[Barry_Green]

32GB cards should be out in about 8 or 9 months, if that affects your decision.

[Collink]

Hey Barry, we met at the DVX Users group party during NAB last year, and at the HVX unveiling the year before, as if you don't meet tons of people you might not remember. Thanks for the 32Gb info. It might just be worth it to me to stick it out in SD land for nine more months to end up with a camera I would be instantly more familiar with. I'm buying a new HD ready HP workstation the last week of March, and was planning on a HDV cam then. Panasonic rarely seems to meet their anticipated release dates though. I hope it's only 9 months away.

[Barry_Green]

16GB cards are supposedly coming out very soon, with 32GB cards purportedly due at the end of the year. That info comes from Russ Walker of Panasonic, and they're supposedly only going to be around $1000. So 32GB cards could be cheaper than today's 8GB cards!

[Collink]

That's very cool. Thanks!