Canon announced five (5) flash memory camcorders today -- it's a little confusing, so here's the breakdown:

VIXIA HF10 (HD, black) -- $1099 / 16GB internal flash plus SDHC card / AVCHD at 1920 / 12x 3.3mp CMOS / Mic input, manual audio

VIXIA HF100 (HD, silver) -- $899 / SDHC card only / AVCHD at 1920 / 12x 3.3mp CMOS / Mic input, manual audio

FS11 (SD, gray) -- $599 / 16GB internal flash plus SDHC card / 48x 1.07mp CCD / Mic input

FS10 (SD, silver) -- $499 / 8GB internal flash plus SDHC card / 48x 1.07mp CCD / Mic input

FS100 (SD, choice of silver, blue, or red) -- $399 / SDHC card only / 48x 1.07mp CCD / Mic input

Basically you can choose between HD or SD, and dual memory recording (internal flash plus card) or SDHC card only. All of them have a mic input jack. The HF series has a new Mini-AAS jack (Advanced Accessory Shoe) hidden under a plastic tab at the top rear of the body, where you would expect to find an EVF.

VIXIA HF10 pics... click to see 'em big...

VIXIA HF100 pics... click to see 'em big...

FS series pics... click to see 'em big...

Mic inputs even on the lowest end! Wonder if they have HDMI out.

"new Mini-AAS jack (Advanced Accessory Shoe)"

Is this a proprietary plug to Canon?

I'm a little confused; I understood that the AVCHD spec provides for 1080i capture. But the Canon press release about the new VIXIA line says "the VIXIA HF10 Dual Flash Memory and HF100 Flash Memory camcorders offer a new feature called 30p Progressive Mode." Will this 30p capture still have full 1080 x 1920 resolution? If so, what bit rate will be required to deliver that much data? Or do 30p and 60i end up having the same bit rate, just captured differently?

I'd like to know what the maximum bitrates are for the HF10 and HF100.

Same bit rate. Although it's higher than it used to be on other Canon AVCHD camcorders; now 17Mbps to allow Full HD (1920) recording. But 30p and 60i are the same amount of data. For Wes... yes to HDMI output and yes the new Mini AAS jack is a proprietary connection. There will be a new external microphone, the DM-100, to fit in this accessory shoe.

I'm a little confused; I understood that the AVCHD spec provides for 1080i capture. But the Canon press release about the new VIXIA line says "the VIXIA HF10 Dual Flash Memory and HF100 Flash Memory camcorders offer a new feature called 30p Progressive Mode." Will this 30p capture still have full 1080 x 1920 resolution? If so, what bit rate will be required to deliver that much data? Or do 30p and 60i end up having the same bit rate, just captured differently?

One would think that 1080 30p and 1080 60i would require the same bitrate (Chris beat me to the post). I'd guess the 30p would just be recorded in a 60i AVCHD stream, you just wouldn't really notice because of the lack of pull down.

Same bit rate. Although it's higher than it used to be on other Canon AVCHD camcorders; now 17Mbps to allow Full HD (1920) recording. But 30p and 60i are the same amount of data.
Since HDV recording to tape uses 25Mb/s bitrate, I suppose AVCHD is using more compression.

I could see some consumer confusion developing over the lovely marketing claim of "Full HD Lens-to-Screen (1920 x 1080 Full HD resolution to capture, record and output)" for the AVCHD camcorders, while the tape-based camcorders actually have a higher bitrate. The final image is what counts, so I guess we'll just have to wait for test results from actual hardware.

I'm probably in the extreme minority here but is it a crazy idea to have one of these cameras scale the captured image 50% to 960x540 and use the entire bitrate that would have been used for the 1080p video on the downsized video.

Not really good for marketing but when I scale my HV20 video to 960x540 and play it on an HDTV, sit back on the couch a proper distance I can't tell the difference between that and the 1080p. For personal use I'd love a tiny SD camcorder that records 960x540 60p.

Just a crazy idea.

Since HDV recording to tape uses 25Mb/s bitrate, I suppose AVCHD is using more compression.

I could see some consumer confusion developing over the lovely marketing claim of "Full HD Lens-to-Screen (1920 x 1080 Full HD resolution to capture, record and output)" for the AVCHD camcorders, while the tape-based camcorders actually have a higher bitrate. The final image is what counts, so I guess we'll just have to wait for test results from actual hardware.

And do these cameras process the image at 1440 and blow it back up to 1920 before writing to the card? Not saying that's what's happening but would it be so surprising if it was? And if so then wouldn't capturing 1920 just use extra compression bandwidth and basically just be for marketing purposes.

For personal use I'd love a tiny SD camcorder that records 960x540 60p.Just a crazy idea.
That's not so crazy. Count me in as wanting 60p capture in a prosumer camcorder, even at some sacrifice of resolution. It ought to be possible at 720 horizontal lines, without the bitrate being too high.

Same bit rate. Although it's higher than it used to be on other Canon AVCHD camcorders; now 17Mbps to allow Full HD (1920) recording.

Out of interest, Where did you read that?

I think I'm more interested in the HF10 than the HV30, but as I need a camcorder very soon I'll most likely buy a HV20 then go for the HF10 in the future- If I feel I need it.

I could see some consumer confusion... while the tape-based camcorders actually have a higher bitrate. The final image is what counts...I try hard to stress to folks who come to this site that bit rate is *not* the arbiter of image quality. The efficiency of the codec is what matters. You can get a *better* looking image from a *lower* bit rate provided the processing of that codec is more efficient. Don't get caught in the numbers trap. And you are quite right, of course, the proof will be in the final image.

One cannot logically compare bit rates between HDV and AVCHD as they are two different formats.

It also appears it has better Lens and imaging sensors than the HV20/30

HF10
"Canon HD Video Lens with 12x optical zoom, a 3.3 MP Canon Full HD CMOS sensor,"



Is the only difference between the hf10 & the hf100 the memory card thing?


If so I might just be interested in the hf100 in the future

Where did you read that?From the official Canon USA specs for the HF10 (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=16186#ModelTechSpecsAct):

FXP (17 Mbps) 2 hours 5 min (to internal 16GB flash) -- allows 1920x1080 Full HD Recording

"Canon HD Video Lens with 12x optical zoom, a 3.3 MP Canon Full HD CMOS sensor,"

This is another 'trap'. More pixels don't necessarily make a better image, especially in the absense of good light.

It also appears it has better imaging sensors than the HV20/30 HF10 "Canon HD Video Lens with 12x optical zoom, a 3.3 MP Canon Full HD CMOS sensor"The CMOS chip in the HV series of HDV camcorders (HV10/20/30) is larger, with a slightly lower pixel count (1/2.7 and 2.96 megapixels) than the HF series of AVCHD camcorders (1/3.2 and 3.31 megapixels).

Is the only difference between the hf10 & the hf100 the memory card thing?Yes. That and the body color are the only differences.

One cannot logically compare bit rates between HDV and AVCHD as they are two different formats.
Two different codecs, isn't it? I keep hearing that AVCHD doesn't handle motion well, despite offering "Full HD Lens to Screen" resolution.

Actually, I'm trying to get OUT of the "numbers trap." But it's very difficult to discern real-world performance from the various numbers which the marketers sling out. As you pointed out, codec efficiency can be a "choke point" which may nullify other features such as pixel count, imager size, and even bit rate.

Thanks :)

I wonder how Final Cut Pro handles AVCHD - I've been put off AVCHD because of people saying it is difficult to edit with NLEs

Two different codecs, isn't it? I keep hearing that AVCHD doesn't handle motion well, despite offering "Full HD Lens to Screen" resolution.

Actually, I'm trying to get OUT of the "numbers trap." But it's very difficult to discern real-world performance from the various numbers which the marketers sling out. As you pointed out, codec efficiency can be a "choke point" which may nullify other features such as pixel count, imager size, and even bit rate.

DVInfo is the cure for the numbers trap. You get honest information from the pros here and you can decide for yourself.

As far as figureing out new products like this you really have to wait for reports from owners.

Where's that manual focus dial? I wish these guys had a focus ring the lens looks like it protrudes enough to have one.

Thanks :)

I wonder how Final Cut Pro handles AVCHD - I've been put off AVCHD because of people saying it is difficult to edit with NLEs

FCP6 takes in AVCHD as AIC or ProRes422.

Sorry to hijack with another question

Is AVCHD 4:2:2?

Would ProRes422 give me a much bigger file size than AVCHD?

Thanks

Where's that manual focus dial? I wish these guys had a focus ring the lens looks like it protrudes enough to have one.

Probably have to use the joystick for the manual focus.

Sorry to hijack with another question

Is AVCHD 4:2:2?

Would ProRes422 give me a much bigger file size than AVCHD?

Thanks

4:2:0 isn't it?

Hey Chris:

Have you actually seen one of these yet ?

Question I have from standpoint of budget indie shooter:

1. Mic input: Standard Mini Jack ?

2. Is there a separate Head phone monitoring capability not tied to the AV jack and menu switching as required by HV20 ?

3. Auto Focus: IAF and Standard ?

4. How is manual focus achieved.

5. AVCHD: I will check this out at Cineform thread, but have we gotten pulldown and conversion lined out in Cineform yet.

Just had a thought -

It says the HF10s lens filter size is 37mm where as the hv20/30 is 43mm

Does this mean it uses a smaller lens? Would this degrade quality at all?

Just had a thought -

It says the HF10s lens filter size is 37mm where as the hv20/30 is 43mm

Does this mean it uses a smaller lens? Would this degrade quality at all?

It could be the same lens, just with a different filter threads.

These new cams look great - except for the lack of a slow motion setting. Did I miss this in the fine print?

These new cams look great - except for the lack of a slow motion setting. Did I miss this in the fine print?

Shoot 60i, convert to 60p in post. Makes for really nice slow motion.

Some press releases, nothing new...

http://www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/pressrelease/20080107_hidef.html

http://www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/pressrelease/20080107_standardef.html

Have you actually seen one of these yet?Not yet, but one week from today I will. The only people outside of Canon that can see these camcorders today are those folks attending CES in Las Vegas who drop by Canon's booth... and that ain't me (not at CES).

1. Mic input: Standard Mini Jack ?Yes. standard 1/8th-inch stereo mini jack.

2. Is there a separate Head phone monitoring capability not tied to the AV jack and menu switching as required by HV20 ?No. Like the HV20, it's the yellow A/V jack which doubles as a headphone jack.

3. Auto Focus: IAF and Standard ? Yes to both.

4. How is manual focus achieved.Don't know for sure but probably via the joystick.

5. AVCHD: I will check this out at Cineform thread, but have we gotten pulldown and conversion lined out in Cineform yet.That's a CineForm question.

It says the HF10s lens filter size is 37mm where as the hv20/30 is 43mm. Does this mean it uses a smaller lens? Would this degrade quality at all?The image sensor in the HF10 is physically smaller than the HV20/30, therefore the diameter of the lens is also smaller, and no this does not noticeably affect quality.

slow motion setting... Did I miss this in the fine print?If it was in there, surely they'd be making a big deal out of it, so no I don't think you missed anything. It's just not one of their features.

Thanks for answering all my questions Chris DVI is proving to be a great site :)

Thanks Chris. Will look forward to your review when you actually get hands on.

What are current editing options for this camera....

Editing options are anything that can handle AVCHD.

I think we have some extensive discussions about that in our AVCHD forum.

Anyone want to start an HF10 vs. HV20/30 thread? :)

Shall I whip up a comparo chart, a la http://www.hdvinfo.net/articles/canon/comparehv10hv20.php ...?

How about just adding the HV30 to that one? And then making another one for the Canon AVCHD camcorders.

Since the differences between the HV20 and HV30 can be summed up in one paragraph and a photo, I'll probably just update the page to include the HV30 changes at the bottom.

Is AVCHD essentially the same as AVC (h.264)?

It is good to see that the data rates are increasing, but they are still well below what HD movies are encoded at. 25mb/sec and up, even for AVC or VC1 encodes.

Is AVCHD essentially the same as AVC (h.264)?

It is good to see that the data rates are increasing, but they are still well below what HD movies are encoded at. 25mb/sec and up, even for AVC or VC1 encodes.

This is the gripe I have with AVCHD - The standard dictates that manufacturers COULD go up to 24mbps but they rarely go past 15 or in this case 17mbps

HDV meanwhile might be seen as an older and perhaps inferior codec but it does record at 25mbps

Canon has them up on their site: http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ProductCatIndexAct&fcategoryid=173

They have HDMI via a mini-HDMI connector. Manual focus, 24p, 30p, and Cinema gamma settings just like the HV20. Canon continues to impress.

But will the image quality be improved in these new AVCHD models or be the same as the HG10?
Currently the HG10 is a step behind the HV20 because of the AVCHD compression- wonder if any improvements have been made with these 2nd gen cameras?
The HG10 is very good but not as good (sharp & motion handling) as the HV20.

No way to really know that until you can get 'em side by side.

Can't determine this from numbers or specs; it's all in the image and these aren't shipping yet.

I played with both cameras today at CES. Yes, the internal 16gb of memory is the only difference between the two models.

As you guys have suggested, the controls are very similar to the HV20 and I would imagine the manual focus cell phone trick would work but I didn't happen to bring a memory card with me to try it out. The joystick works just the same, press it to bring up mic and exposure controls. The Function button is on the LCD, as you can see in the pics, and you have all the same menu options and the interface is like the one on the HV20 and almost every other Canon consumer camera for the past couple of years.

The new LCD was noticeably clearer. The image quality was nice too. 24P looked a little funny though, I don't know if it was the new LCD, AVCHD compression, or both. I couldn't put my finger on it but it was just different looking from the 24P mode on my HV20. The image looked great though.

Also, it was TINY!!! Seems like a very convenient camera for travelers and I could just imagine it put together as a small 35mm adapter configuration.

I did see some footage on some LCD screens for the booth demo. The quality was good, normal 1080i HD 60i stuff. I wish I could have stayed to watch the demo again, I arrived when it was playing the last clip, but I promised my brother that we would stop by some of his booths over at the Sands and Venetian convention areas today.

Overall, I was sold up until I read that they were AVCHD cameras. I know the format's had some first generation blues as far as post and export goes, but I don't know, 24P and flash recording in a $1,000 to $1,100 package may be too much to pass up come April.

Jack:

How about manual focus. How does one manually focus the camera ?

You know, I honestly didn't have much time with it, crowd was breathing down my neck. But I think, not 100%, that when I was scrolling through the joystick menu, the focus was unfortuantely the with the exposure and mic settings like on the HG10 versus the little wheel on the HV20. =(

This may not be so bad if you're using a 35mm adapter, all you do is set the focus once for the camera's part, but I can see where rack focusing could be a problem when using the camera alone.

The fact with manual focus is that the AF and IAF are so good you rarely need to adjust the focus wheel, usually you just have to hit manual focus to lock the focus. At least I find this to be true for what I do and I'd imagine it to be true for most shots. Sometimes the camera can't find focus on what you want so you do have to dial it in and the thumb wheel is really nice for that.

I think for the intended customer having less buttons is better and it's going to make the camera cost less to manufacture.

The major questions as others have asked is how good are the sensor/lens and compression.

i hope you can fix the shutter speed on these