HD For Indies

That's the one Barry Green didn't like, right? Personally I agree with Adam Wilt though - it seems pretty nice.

What do YOU think, Mike? After all, you're one of the few people in the world with almost simultaneously-recorded compressed and uncompressed frames from the Z1, HVX200, HD100 and XLH1 (whose sensors seems very similar to the A1) from the Texas Shootout...

I'd still love to some of those frames from the Texas Shootout at full-res.

Also, does anyone know of anywhere on the Internet where we can see examples of uncompressed recording off of the component / HD-SDI / HDMI outputs of HDV cameras? I'm looking to compare uncompressed with HDV frames in order to decide whether it's worth building a small form factor pc for on-set uncompressed / Cineform / high-quality JPEG codec recording (with simultaneous high quality digital sound of course!).

Bruce
 

Bruce - I preferred the XL H1 for sharpness and clarity. As for samples, just you wait...testing HDMI uncompressed stuff tomorrow...

-mike
 

Awesome. I trust you to help put an end to the debate over whether, on current cameras HDMI is:
a) true 1920x1080
b) 1920x1080 sampled down to 1440x1080, then blown back up to 1920x1080 again
...just trying to figure out where the HDMI out fits into the signal chain of current cameras.

PS. if you want to sell a double DVD-R set with a chunk of sample footage from the 4 cameras from the Texas Camera Shootout (a little bit uncompressed, then a little bit compressed, 4-5 scenes or so - indoor latitude test, some outdoor stuff), I think you'd have some customers, if the price is right, Even if they just came in a cheap plain white box and were hand-labeled "HDFORINDIES" with a Sharpie. More indie that way. The currency of the information is what's important.
 

after seeing footage of the XH A1 and the V1U, i'd say the V1U. but then again, i'm a sony guy. i have an FX1 on a UPS truck on the way to my doorstep as i write this.
 

Personal opinion after shooting with the FX1 and Z1U for a while, and watching quite a few XH A1 clips posted by others of various technical skill levels:

I think the Z1U might be easier to acquire a reasonably low noise image, when using mostly camera defaults (particularly in low light). But once you spend a little time tweaking the Canon, it starts looking better to me than the Sony. Just my 0.236533 Krooni...

Matt Jeppsen
FresHDV.com
 

Edit: meant to say "...and watching quite a few XH A1 and V1U clips posted by others of various technical skill levels..."

My bad.

-Matt
 

I've owned both the V1E and the XH-A1. The Canon wins hands down.

Why?

The V1E had horrendous over filtering problems in 25P. Sony took back my camera then applied an updated firmware. The V1E was then inline with the US version in quality. In 25/24P the V1 can produce a very poor image. I did some extensive tests and showed that the camera is excessively filtering detail in certain situations. It also produces a lot of macroblocking in darker areas of the image.

I decided I couldn't be sure of a consistent image. The excessive filtering, macroblocking and increased mosquito noise are only in 25P mode. 50i is really very good. Sony recommend reducing the sharpness to overcome some of the problems but 25P is far from usable.

I returned the camera and purchased the Canon XH-A1. A superb camera in both 25F and 50i. Hardly noticeable drop in resolution when in 25F and the image is consistently excellent even in poor light. One thing very noticeable with the XH-A1 image is the lack of over sharpened edges. It produces a picture full of detail without the tell tale video edge enhancement. It has a huge number of parameters to setup so any in camera look is achievable if that is your thing. I have the camera set up flat with as much latitude as possible then grade in post.

The only thing the Sony does better than the Canon is the LCD. Not enought to recommend it.

That's my unbiased opinion. The Canon is the superior camera!!!
 

After having my own hands on an A1 and the FX1, and from the viewpoint of an event shooter, I prefer the FX1. My review will be on EventDV.net in March. Everyone got the A1 cameras from Canon at the same time. :)

The A1 does offer far more "tweakability" but that capability requires that you know exactly what you need before you start shooting, which requires full control of the situation. Not possible with documentaries, events, news, etc.

For instance, you can take the FX1/Z1U and go to manual shutter. Slow it down to get more light. Then, with that light, you decide to extend your depth of field and you pop on the manual iris and dial it in. You simply can't add manual iris to a manual shutter setting with the Canon without _first_ putting the camera in "all manual" mode before you even roll tape. The Sony lets you add and subtract all modes at all times.

I wouldn't go with the CMOS Sony till it's more sensitive and they continue to upgrade the firmware. The V1U is less sensitive than the FX1, which is less sensitive than the PD-150, which was less sensitive than the PD-170. It's several stops slower and for events, documentary, news, that isn't heading in the right direction.

Anthony Burokas
IEBA.com
 

Mike, have you struck a deal with DV? Similar to the one with Red? Just curious...
 

What i did understood from Barry Green review is that he did like the camera. But as a fan of P2/Tapeless recording and 100 Mb codec, he prefered HVX over it.

The issue here, at least for me, is HDV x DVCPROHD. I'm a pos guy, so i like flat capturing and tweaking in post. DVCPROHD is a much superior (less color compression) format.
 

HDV 720p has 1280x720 luma and 640x360 = 230,400chroma. DVCProHD has 960x720 luma and 480x720 = 345,600 chroma. You've basically traded some luma rez for chroma rez. That's perhaps not the best trade in the world. Given the relative efficiency of MPEG2 over DVCProHD, They're really much of a muchness. There are certainly workflow differences favouring DVCproHD though.