no one will buy this camera at 9k

Walter_Graff said:
They showed some in NY recently at a Canon expo. Those that saw it said it was awesome. I will test the camera out when I can get one. It's now been pushed back to December but I am thinking even later. Here is a thread about how it looks:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=51340
Click to expand...

The thread you pointed to was about HD-SDI out of the Canon. Of couse that's going to look spectacular. What's more important is what the m2t's look like off the tape. Canon's uses a GOP of 15 like Sony so it will be interesting to see how Canon's HDV codec handles the motion. JVC on the other hand uses a GOP of 6. I've been editing HDV for almost a year and I can say that the JVC implementation of HDV is terrific in every aspect. Sony's HDV codec has many flaws.

I wouldn't write JVC's effort off. Their HDV is the best I've seen for editing, screen caps, compositing, downsampling to SD, and DVD creation. I'm excited to see what Canon has to offer, and I hope they can match JVC's HDV methods.

@Graff-You may not like it but the JVC is the real deal. I'm waiting for some posted m2t's from the Canon. I don't care who makes the cam, give me the m2t's and I'll tell you how good it is...
 
Have to agree. On a network level its not just about equipment but promises. Sony made many promises some years ago if NBC would wait and go with them. They did. Same thing at CBS. It's about back scratching, package deals, and making long-term deals to get your equipment in the door at this level. Now a company like MTV might go for it cause they buy a million bucks a year of these types of things. XDCAM is the next thing in on the network level. My friend who does all the buying at CNN just went XDCAM too. It will be the predominate news format.
 
Sony's does have many flaws but that was first generation. JVC second and Canon third. I write JVC off because they could market there way out of a box. Never were a contender in the real world, and this camera will not make them one either as far as I can see. What I am mad at is folks who write off HDV who have never used it.
 
@Graff- As I wrote above, the cam doesn't matter, the m2t's do. JVC has put together terrific motion characteristics with their implementation. The m2t's speak and people will make quality content with it. Of that there is no doubt.

I agree with you that HDV is a real force and I don't think some know that XDCam-HD is really HDV's big brother and the next step from HDV. We've been edting HDV and are prepaired for XDCam-HD ingest now.

We'll see....
 
stephenlnoe said:
I agree with you that HDV is a real force and I don't think some know that XDCam-HD is really HDV's big brother and the next step from HDV. We've been edting HDV and are prepaired for XDCam-HD ingest now.
Click to expand...

I am very interested in XDCam-HD, I wish something similar was being used in the XLH1 and HVX200.

I think it will outsell P2 by a long way.
 
mmm said:
I wish something similar was being used in the XLH1...
Click to expand...

XDCam-HD is LongGOP Mpeg2 so the XL-H1 is already doing something similar, it is the same thing. The only difference is the datarate.
 
stephenlnoe said:
The thread you pointed to was about HD-SDI out of the Canon. Of couse that's going to look spectacular. What's more important is what the m2t's look like off the tape.
Click to expand...


Couldn't agree more.
I was a little disappointed that Canon chose to only show off the HDSDI output of the camera. I can understand highlighting that as a major feature, but it would have been nice for them to show off some HDV side by side with the HDSDI.

At least it won't be long before we get some real world feedback on the image.
I haven't written off HDV, but I am a little skeptical as I would be from any new format.
Just not looking forward to having to get a new deck. But, I suppose a new deck or P2 cards.... either way I'm having to buy some expensive additional gear.

It is kind of funny that apparently the footage Canon showed off was recorded on a DVCProHD deck :) I know that doesn't really mean anything, but on a base level of irony I found it slightly amusing.
 
stephenlnoe said:
XDCam-HD is LongGOP Mpeg2 so the XL-H1 is already doing something similar, it is the same thing. The only difference is the datarate.
Click to expand...

Sorry, by similar, I meant use a higher bitrate and recorded to disk or hard drive. I think interframe is a good idea for low end HD work, but would like a little more than 25Mbps personally. Most of the time HDV appears to work fine, but it certainly has some weaknesses that would be reduced with a higher bitrate.
 
I think that with the Firestore solution, we'll have a @#@# of a battle between Canon, Panasonic and JVC.

Think about it...!!!!

You will never be limited with a specific format.

For me, each manufacturer has a different vision.

Lightweight=Panasonic
ENG=JVC
Versatility=Canon

Now, let's see what each camera section (CCDs and DSPs) can output...
 
mmm said:
Sorry, by similar, I meant use a higher bitrate and recorded to disk or hard drive. I think interframe is a good idea for low end HD work, but would like a little more than 25Mbps personally. Most of the time HDV appears to work fine, but it certainly has some weaknesses that would be reduced with a higher bitrate.
Click to expand...

25Mb is not a low datarate for Mpeg2, it is a low datarate for DVCProHD which is a different format. I wish people would quit confusing the formats. The need for a higher datarate on XDCam-HD is to support 422 color sampling and 4 streams of audio, otherwise it is LongGOP.

The weaknesses you refer to have 100% to do with the hardcoded codec the manufacturer chooses to put on the camera's circuit board. Sony's has problems with motion estimation. JVC's has no problem with motion estimation. We don't know what algorithms Canon has used on their camera.

HDV is the standard set between manufacturers to carry the data but how to calculate motion estimation, perspective, positioning, scaling and rotation of the image is all dictated by the manufacturers engineering R & D and hardcoded into their onboard codec.

JVC's method is great. Sony needs to rethink their method for their next cam (to handle motion better), and we'll see how well Canon has done their math soon...
 
"Can I buy shares in Firestore? I think that they have a bright future! "
dixit mmm
==========================================

Agree !
 
Antoine_Fabi said:
"Can I buy shares in Firestore? I think that they have a bright future! "
dixit mmm
==========================================

Agree !
Click to expand...

NASDAQ - FCSE ... it goes for 1.000 just right now. You can buy it for 1.0300 but no one wants to buy it for higher than 0,9800

they are loosing 0,28/share
 
Jubal28 said:
:huh:

I'd be quite surprised to find that the people who bought the DVX for its progressive capabilities are in the minority of purchasers.
Click to expand...
I certainly didn't purchase the DVX100 becuase of 24P. To tell you the truth I don't really care about 24P, it's nice to have and play with but certainly not the reason I purchased the camera.

I purchased it because of the control that cinegamma provides over the look of the image - it much more film like than any other camera in this price range. I know this is a religious debate on this forum but that look has nothing to do with frame rate.

I can soft clip the highs and pump up the volume a little in the blacks and get just as good an interlaced picture.

I don't believe most of the people who purchased this camera did so becuase it was 24P. That's great for going out to film but I bet the number of people on this forum who have actually ever filmed out something from the DVX is less than 2%.

After re-reading your original comment I stand corrected a bit - you didn't specify 24P, I jumped to that conclusion. I do however stand by my original thought. I actually didn't appreciate some of the benefits of a progressive image until I had a chance to work with the camera a while. Was just very impressed with how this camera handled light.
 
ChuckS said:
I don't believe most of the people who purchased this camera did so becuase it was 24P. That's great for going out to film but I bet the number of people on this forum who have actually ever filmed out something from the DVX is less than 2%.
Click to expand...
I think it looks fantastic even if you aren't going out to film. Most of the things I've been working on lately have not been features, they've been more "commercial" in nature (music videos, promotional work, documentaries), and they are all catered to the small screen. None of that gets blown up, but still I shoot a great majority of the work I do in 24p because, frankly, I just like the look of it a lot better than 60i. The cadence has a look that's associated with film and more professional work, and that helps keep it in a class above "home movie" looking 60i. I also do short films with the DVX, and it's doubtful that many of those will get blown up, either, but even watching an SD presentation on DVD in 24p has quite a more cinematic feel than 60i does. Of course the cinegamma features and other technical implementations only further the cause, but the framerate is undoubtedly a large part of it. It's pretty much the reason I had no interest in the Z1 whatsoever. I actually agree with Nathyn for once. ;-)
 
Haakon said:
I shoot a great majority of the work I do in 24p because, frankly, I just like the look of it a lot better than 60i.
Click to expand...

Why would you shoot 24P if you going to TV???? Makes no sense not to shoot 30P or 60i when going to TV in NTSC land or 25P and 50i in PAL land.
 
stephenlnoe said:
Why would you shoot 24P if you going to TV???? Makes no sense not to shoot 30P or 60i when going to TV in NTSC land or 25P and 50i in PAL land.
Click to expand...

If you are going to TV in PAL land, shoot 25p. 25p and 24p look the same, 24p is just a pain in the arse ( in PAL land). Chances are if you are in PAL land you won't have the 24p option anyway, so...
 
Everything I shoot (docs) is 25P. After shooting a first "25P" project with it this spring, I've been swamped with work -- and it's all due to the slick and professional "look" of "film", rather than "video".

I even treat the camera as if it's a 16mm film camera, by preparing each shot so no "film" is wasted. I also confess to imagining hearing "click - whir-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r..." when I push the red button. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top