Sony announces HVR-V1u, 1080p, 24p, 30p, 60i
- Thread starter Heath McKnight
- Start date
John Trent said:
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:
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
MovieSwede said:
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
Bogdan said:
What about Silicon Imaging? And Red? Both well below 20k.
Bogdan said:
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
Veteran
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.
Fugitive said:
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.
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
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
Well-known member
Bogdan said:
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.
rogar-Smoke(DBG):
tnle2
Well-known member
John Trent said:
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
Veteran
John Trent said:
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:
XL-H1 24F:
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"
Last edited:
rawfa
Veteran
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/conten...-a-Glimpse-at-the-Future-of-Image-Control.htm
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/conten...-a-Glimpse-at-the-Future-of-Image-Control.htm
Elton
Veteran
rawfa said:
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
Veteran
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.