Canon Unveils New Prosumer HDV Line: XH G1 and XH A1

[David Jimerson]

FWIW, you can cut both JVC's 24p and 24F in Vegas.

 

[Elton]

All good points Barry.

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

 

[Kholi]

Yeah, I was gonna say...

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Emanuel]

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

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

What Sérgio want to mean is which camera will be the favorite one by the (best) storyteller for this sort of work... If the best storytellers are choosing this or that gear it must be for any particular reason, right?

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

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

 

[Barry_Green]

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

Not at all, because there'd still be room for "format wars". But with both on the same side, it's a settled question. And it's not just them -- it's every other link in the chain. It's AVC in broadcast and AVC in distribution and AVC in transmission and AVC in IPTV and AVC in scalable bitrates and AVC in intraframe-only that make it all so compelling!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Emanuel]

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

Otherwise, there is the HD-SDI option.

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

 

[Kholi]

Great post and worth a triple read through.

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

Nevermind that last bit--

I got it. You were speaking about Panasonic Broadcast.

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

 

[Barry_Green]

OK Barry but as far as we know, AVC-HD is a consumer format by now.

AVC-HD is a format. The only thing we've seen it used for so far is a couple of Sony consumer cameras. So let's spell it out properly: AVC-HD is a format that SO FAR has only been used by a couple of consumer cameras. But that doesn't make AVC-HD a "consumer format."

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

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

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

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

On the other hand, where can we find a noiseless 3CCD* block as it's possible to get on the Canon route?

You think the Canon is noiseless? Dude... look at some footage.

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

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

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

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

 

[Barry_Green]

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

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

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

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

 

[Emanuel]

:dankk2: for your input Barry!

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

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

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

 

[phally]

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

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

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

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

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

speculations?

</IMG>

 

[AloysiusK]

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

 

[Kholi]

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

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

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

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

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

speculations?

</IMG>

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

 

[Elton]

I'm betting that's the composite SD video port.

 

[Elton]

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

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

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

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

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

 

[mikkowilson]

speculations?

</IMG>

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

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

- Mikko

 

[Barry_Green]

OK the Sony's CF mode can be similar than the Canon's "f" one but there aren't complains from the Canon customers or even from you techie gurus. But I haven't read the same regarding the Sony's CF offer.

I think the language barrier is kicking in here, so I can only guess at what you're asking.

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Barry_Green]

I'm betting that's the composite SD video port.

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

 

[Barry_Green]

What I don't get is how suddenly 4:2:0 AVC HD has no color resolution problems but HDV does?

Who ever said it doesn't? All I've said is: if you are happy with what HDV offers, AVC-HD offers everything it does at least as well, and many things are better. Color sampling and long-GOP structure are the same or similar, and everything else is better.

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

If you consider the possibilities of the G1 as a codec agnostic device, than you will be free to stop worrying about future format compatibilities.

And that is a great point. But -- look at the poll on DVInfo. Nobody's looking at buying the G1, they're 90% aiming for the A1.

Just like Panny said stop counting pixels and look at the image, I would say the same about formats. If it looks well-defined and feels rich than what else matters?

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

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

 

[Elton]

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

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

Here is a frame from 24F SDI output:

Does that look like a single field?