How is 24f?

[Elton]

It must be the CCD's of the Canon then, because I clearly have always seen a difference in perceived resolution between the Sony CF modes and the Canon's F modes.

I'm sorry but I've seen plenty of Sony CF footage and it is not even in the same ball park. Not saying they're bad at all, but I've played both on full 1080 Sony LCoS projection and the H1 easily beat it for detail. However that's achieved with 24F is fairly irrelevant, it just pushes more image than the Sony.

 

[Barry_Green]

But vertically? The Canon does have a noticeable edge in horizontal res, and that makes a big difference.

I mean, a DVX in 30P mode delivers as much vertical res (550 lines) as a Sony in CF30 mode. But the Sony slays it in horizontal res, and there's no question as to which is which when watching on a high-def set.

So even if they have similar vertical res, the Canon is still delivering more horizontal, which will lead to a sharper picture.

Anyway, I'm basing those numbers off what I've measured, and what Adam has reported; Adam says 540 for both, I say 600 for the Canon, and about 550 for the Sony. Even so, res chart numbers are hardly the determining factor in what the actual image looks like! All I was trying to point out is that the Sony doesn't drop in half, it drops from 750 to around 550 when going in CF25/CF30 mode.

 

[Barry_Green]

And to the 25F? Is it 48hz too? Or 50hz? And if so, why should it be better than Sony's CF25?

No, 25F would be 50Hz.

And if it's going to be better than the Sony, it'll be due to the higher res of the Canon and its apparently-more-robust HDV codec.

 

[Elton]

And to the 25F? Is it 48hz too? Or 50hz? And if so, why should it be better than Sony's CF25?

50hz. IMHO, it's better than the Sony because of a host of factors:

--Higher res CCD
--Better lens
--Better HDV codec
--Better processing via DIGIC

btw, Emanuel...are you any closer to actually taking the leap and buying one of these cameras?

What's holding you back?

 

[Kholi]

Great posts, Barlow!

Read the entire thread so-far and you make some really strong points.

Not that I'm an expert on these cameras or anything. =P

 

[Elton]

Even so, res chart numbers are hardly the determining factor in what the actual image looks like! All I was trying to point out is that the Sony doesn't drop in half, it drops from 750 to around 550 when going in CF25/CF30 mode.

Interesting point. I do think it's the CCD that makes the most difference for the Canon, but I also think there's something going on with the synthesized frame that adds a bit more to the perceived resolution of the image, not just the extra horizontal res.

Ever blown up a CF mode frame to double it's size in QT player? It doesn't hold up nearly as well as 24F from the H1. Do you think that's all just the native, non pixel shifted 1440 horizontal res of the Canon at play there?

 

[Jarred Land]

and something to do with the sharpening on the Sony.

 

[Elton]

Great posts, Barlow!

Read the entire thread so-far and you make some really strong points.

Not that I'm an expert on these cameras or anything. =P

We're all just learning this new game. I'm certainly not a seasoned expert with my camera the way Barry is with the Panny's, but I know enough to be dangerous. *smile*

Muaahahaha...just when I thought the debate might finally, mercifully be coming to a peaceful conclusion...there's always more to pick at!

What surprises me is Steve Mullen (the guy who figured out the HVX's res) hasn't quite got his math model to calculate exactly what 24F is...but I'm sure he's close.

 

[Elton]

and something to do with the sharpening on the Sony.

Could be, yet I've dialed down the sharpening on the H1 and it still looked noticeably more detailed than CF stuff.

It's just got more image than the Sony.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. ;-)

 

[Emanuel]

btw, Emanuel...are you any closer to actually taking the leap and buying one of these cameras?

What's holding you back?

As you fairly said: «We're all just learning this new game.» Following you:

I'm certainly not a seasoned expert with my camera the way Barry is with the Panny's, but I know enough to be dangerous. *smile*

Actually you made me a real laugh...

Returning to the serious play, I've been following the texas shootout as it's possible to see. All the inputs. And as far as the combined opinions is concerned, it seems that there is a consensus around the closer performance between the $8,000/$9,000 XL-H1 and the $20,000/$25,000 PDW-F3xx series, so what can I say?

As conclusion, before this post, I had been to read again the Michael Devlin's post (after a previous search - LINK) and it seems that he's talking about 700-750 lines@24p, 600 lines with the shutter speed@48Hz (yet circa 10% more than the XL-H1 540 vertical lines according Adam Wilt's article -- he is as accurate as unbiased as usual). So?

Besides, the same Michael Devlin has been to announce here & there that the Sony is 1.5-2.5 stops faster than Canon's.

As well, Simon is referring here that Sony handles the skin tones very well. Maybe 'cause it uses the same Cinegamma software than HDCAM HDW-F750? post link now thread link too.

Otherwise, there is other kind of info like Nate (also texas shootout tester) here or Simon and the engineer/producer Alister Chapman there.

Otherwise, there are the significant clues like the Miguel/macgregor or Sanders that already worked with CineAlta (gold label) that have choosen Canon. Will it be the case of Steven (Dempsey)?

I've been here in my european place, during the night, to play with the Michael's Canon files. And I can add, those were very well indeed.

 

[David Jimerson]

A couple of problems with your assertions:

1) The H1 allows for shutter speeds as low as 1/3 in 24F mode.

Sure, with frame repeating, like the slow shutter on the DVX100A/B. But it's mathematically impossible to read the CCD for longer than 1/48th of a second per frame.

 

[Emanuel]

ADD/EDIT (to my last post)

I found the H1 had finer noise and less macroblocks, ironically even from HDV.

That's why I prefer the HD100 footage, far away from any other competitor despite its lesser resolution. BTW, to a non-techie like me it's difficult to figure out how it's possible to have a definition of 700 lines -- right? (according Adam Wilt numbers LINK) with just 1280x720 when 24F with 540/600 lines it offers 1440x1080 (to 1920x1080) ?

Last but not least if I was saying that I prefer the HD100, I'm afraid that the noisy HD100 performance will be less suitable to the use of a 35mm adapter than the subtle/smaller noise caracteristics of the Canon. Al the stuff that I saw it has oriented me in that way. Even available pics@M2_website it confirms my first impression when I saw the first HD100 + Mini35 available (and well known) test. Therefore, with a 35mm adapter, the Canon XL-H1 will be able as more cinematic, more film-like. For not to mention the low light XL-H1 potential, the best among all. Really run & gun.

Regarding the XL-H1 vs. PDW-F3xx series, the handheld form factor -- nevertheless its heavy weight user reports, it is an indie filmmaking advantage. Not only to narrative purposes but specially to doc work.

My major doubt will carry on the compressed audio. Even to dialogues or human voice capture. OK we have the double option but will it not be an hassle cons? Specially if one of the video capture advantages (HD or not) it is the sound synchro with the picture...

 

[Elton]

My major doubt will carry on the compressed audio. Even to dialogues or human voice capture. OK we have the double option but will it not be an hassle cons? Specially if one of the video capture advantages (HD or not) it is the sound synchro with the picture...

The audio converters in the H1 are excellent. They have more to do with actual quality of dialog recording than the 384kbs audio.

If you have proper slates and timecode sync I don't think dual system is much of a hassle at all, especially with the Tascam HDP2. You just drag and drop your audio files (which are much smaller than video) to a backup drive and throw them on the timeline with your video clip. If you did go dual system it would be wise to run a feed to the camera at least as a backup.