Here's a slow one with 79 frames:
http://www.dominik.ws/24p-test2.png
Again absolute regular (as regular as my chair rotates ;) ).
The ex1 really does its job right.

...it is a shame that new/amateur videographers like myself have been shy to ask questions for the fear of being ridiculed.

That is exactly what DVINFO WILL NOT stand for. If you feel that way, the forum is failing because one of the greatest strengths of this forum is that new/amateurs can seek advice of professionals and expect to receive courteous, helpful responses.

If you or anyone ever feels ridiculed, please avail yourself of the "report bad post" button to the left. All DVINFO mods will be alerted.

I myself, have answered the same questions over and over to different folks and feel that the slight inconvenience it may feel like is greatly overshadowed by the goodwill it promotes.

Don't be shy, Todd. Seriously, I mean that.

regards,

-gb-

Here's a slow one with 79 frames:
http://www.dominik.ws/24p-test2.png
Again absolute regular (as regular as my chair rotates ;) ).
The ex1 really does its job right.

Of course it does. 24 fps and they're all there.

But the frame sequence you are showing would probably be stroby in motion by virtue of its narrow shutter.

Try turning off the shutter and do the same thing and you should see continuous (or almost, depending on the composite method you are using) streaks.

Try 180° and you'll see a dotted line with half on/half off cadence. This is what any film or progressive camera should be shooting for the generally accepted "film look"

Well said Greg. This forum is well moderated, and abusive or aggressive posts in particular I know are not tolerated and I have seen them dealt with.
Keep up the good work guys.
Steve

First I would like to say I totally disagree with Eric Pascarelli. I have worked with 35mm film for 8 years, both still and motion. The EX1 has flicker ever on slow moving shots and people with a good eye can tell. If you have an EX1 do the following (24p 180 shuttle) shoot while zooming, not too fast and make sure you are at a steady rate of zoom speed on a person or sharp defining object such as a book cover (do this while holding camera). when you play back, freeze frame, then play one frame at a time you will notice that on a wide to tight shot some will be in focus and some wont. the fact of the matter is there are many different shots that show flicker people just look at your subjects if you do not notice flicker and out of focus get your eyes checked out. Some people are uneasy with coming to terms that their new EX1 as well as all 24p HD cameras on the market suffer from rolling shutter as well as 23.98 not true 24 frames . I am one who has a love hate relationship with my EX1.

I think we need a Sticky on basic trouble shooting or system setup.

Like:
Check HD playback on HD monitor or HDTV.
Make sure input to HDTV actually spec'd to handle and display the signal you're inputing (for example: component input on some HDTV is only 1080i, not 1080p)
EX LCD, while excellent for focus and framing, may not be most accurate for color or motion display.
Be aware that a monitor that is not calibrated may not be color accurate.
Be aware that Computer may have issues decoding the XDCAM EX codec in real time at full frame size.
Be aware NLE may be doing scaling on the fly, which will impact various playback aspects negatively.
Be aware that compressing the file to another codec may introduce or exaggerate certain aspects negatively.

The best way to check a recording may be from "native" or "rewraped" (but not re-encoded) file (MP4, MXF, MOV from Sony Clip Transfer) played to HDMI input to HDTV or HD-SDI to HD Monitor from a Computer known to handle the source file decode and playback without issue. HDTV should be able to handle both 1080P input and display.

Could it be issues with the batches of cameras Sony has put out? I have not had any issues with pans. I've done TONS of tests when getting my LEX setup correctly and comparisons. I also get clean blacks, reds, etc. No vinetting, etc.

BTW, another thought - and this is the bigger point/question I have:

HAS anyone checked to see if its the codec written to the cards that the issue? I'm wondering if anyone is capturing out of the HDSDI and seeing much better results capturing into an intraframe codec instead of the GOP we get on the cards.

If you have an EX1 do the following (24p 180 shuttle) shoot while zooming, not too fast and make sure you are at a steady rate of zoom speed on a person or sharp defining object such as a book cover (do this while holding camera). when you play back, freeze frame, then play one frame at a time you will notice that on a wide to tight shot some will be in focus and some wont.
I did:
http://www.dominik.ws/zoom.mov
This is a 100% frame-crop. On the upper right you can see the whole picture.
24p, 180°-shutter, f2.4, full MF, linear 10s-shot-transition from full wide to full tele.
Each frame is perfectly in focus.
But this was shot on a tripod. Why should I hold the camera while doing this??

Ummm... I noticed the same thing then just took off the "auto-gain", "stabilization", "auto-white" settings, as well as everything else where it looked like Sony was trying to Vista"ize" my production experience.

After I did that the camera began to sing.

I am using a Letus Extreme, and shallow depth of field, the problem is still there. In comparison, the JVC HD250 with 18x4.2 BRM-M48 Fujinon was very sharp, well it looked like it was electronically boosted sharpness, and with no shallow depth of field, it was nice 24p motion.


I've owned the JVC HD100 for a couple years and have a lot of footage. The motion looks the same, except the JVC codec can fall apart with real high detail motion such as water or rustling of leaves.

I did:
http://www.dominik.ws/zoom.mov
This is a 100% frame-crop. On the upper right you can see the whole picture.
24p, 180°-shutter, f2.4, full MF, linear 10s-shot-transition from full wide to full tele.
Each frame is perfectly in focus.
But this was shot on a tripod. Why should I hold the camera while doing this??

Dominik,
I'm not sure why this test was presented. It mentions focus while zooming not the imaginary extra judder.

This test is implying focus is changing during zoom which would only happen if back focus was out and not in-and-out from frame to frame.

Just been looking back at airshow footage filmed by Alister at 25p and 50p with NO problems with the motion as others have been describing.

Surely if this was a real issue then more than a few people would be complaining about it considering the thousands of cameras that have been sold!

Has anyone compared 24p in SP mode to 24p in HQ mode? The SP mode should have the 3:2 pulldown encoded to make it HDV compatible, and I'm wondering if SP looks smoother on a HD monitor than the HQ mode which I understand is adding 3:2 right before the output to the monitor. I'm getting an EX1 next week, and I will probably want to use HQ for almost all of my shooting and editing. Dominik's chair test eases my mind, now that I know the camera records 24 equally spaced frames per second. Perhaps the HQ component out isn't getting the true 3:2 pulldown it needs to for smoother motion on 60i monitors.

Perhaps the HQ component out isn't getting the true 3:2 pulldown it needs to for smoother motion on 60i monitors.


Possibly,
This is why I never trust previewing. The JVC HD100 component out looked a bit strange when hooked up to my Pioneer plasma.

The HD100 and EX1 rendered and played back look great.

First I would like to say I totally disagree with Eric Pascarelli. I have worked with 35mm film for 8 years, both still and motion. The EX1 has flicker ever on slow moving shots and people with a good eye can tell. If you have an EX1 do the following (24p 180 shuttle) shoot while zooming, not too fast and make sure you are at a steady rate of zoom speed on a person or sharp defining object such as a book cover (do this while holding camera). when you play back, freeze frame, then play one frame at a time you will notice that on a wide to tight shot some will be in focus and some wont. the fact of the matter is there are many different shots that show flicker people just look at your subjects if you do not notice flicker and out of focus get your eyes checked out. Some people are uneasy with coming to terms that their new EX1 as well as all 24p HD cameras on the market suffer from rolling shutter as well as 23.98 not true 24 frames . I am one who has a love hate relationship with my EX1.

Nick,

I don't think that amount of experience has anything to do with it. It's just understanding how video/film acquisition works. There is not much room for subtlety in acquiring moving images. There's the time interval (the fps), the exposure time (shutter angle) and the response curves (gamma etc.). Yes, there's rolling shutter, but even film cameras have that to a certain extent (at least more so than CCD cameras).

As long as the camera accumulates photons and records them reasonably linearly, and each exposure is the same duration, and the spacing of exposures is consistent, there is not much you could really do to make one camera stutter more than another, all of the above being equal between cameras. Even if you wanted to, you really couldn't.

The voodoo is in the compression and even more so in the viewing.

The EX1 does a great job of compressing and introduces almost no visible artifacting. Examining stills frames proves that out.

So if there is a perceived difference in stutter, it's probably in the viewing. The interface between the digital image and the brain is where there is the most room for voodoo. There might be something in your viewing setup that's creating the appearance of stutter.

As you probably know, theatrical film shows each frame twice (48 Hz) to make the brain think the motion is smoother. Broadcast shows each frame an average of 2.5 times (3-2 pulldown). Even Sony CRT HD broadcast monitors flicker at 48Hz with a 24p signal. But your computer LCD does not. All you see is a succession of frames, one after another at 24Hz. For some this is too slow to be perceived as smooth motion.

If you have ever done traditional process photography with rear projection you've seen the immense amount of judder in the projected image when viewed live. This is because the projectors used are synchronized to the shooting cameras and have single shutters rather that two bladed shutters and show their film at a true 24fps. It looks very similar to true 24p on an LCD monitor.

BTW, the difference between 23.976 and 24 is imperceptible and does not cause judder. Unless you've watched the above mentioned rear projection, you've probably never actually seen anything at a true 24fps. This is because all video in the NTSC world is 23.976/29.97/59.94 and most every "24p" pro and consumer camera actually shoots at 23.976. And projected film is 48Hz.

I'm not sure why this test was presented. It mentions focus while zooming not the imaginary extra judder.
This test was the answer to Nick Bakers assertion that the ex1 has out-of-focus frames while doing a zoom. (I hope I understood him right)
I guess I already showed that the ex1 (at least mine) does sampling in the time-domain at 24p accurately, so this question is answered for me.
The question about judder-perception of some individuals is too ambiguous for me.

But your computer LCD does not. All you see is a succession of frames, one after another at 24Hz.
That's not right. LCDs also do have a refresh rate (although there isn't a synchronized electron-ray, the electronics behind need it). 60Hz are typical, so if you watch 24p on a LCD there is hopefully something resulting in a 3:2-pulldown.
(but the rest of your post I absolutely support :) )

Yes, there's a refresh rate but no flicker. So essentially you are seeing one frame after another at 24Hz, but technically there would be a cadence introduced by the beating of the refresh rate with the frame rate, a form of 3-2 pulldown (assuming 60 Hz). And the cadence may contribute to the appearance of judder (though not more so than in standard 3-2 pulledown).

But there is no flicker on an LCD. It's the flicker introduced by CRT's, plasmas and projection that fool the eye into seeing smoother motion where there is not. Not so on the LCD.

Anyway this is all part of the "voodoo" of getting the image from computer to brain. It's somewhere in this part of the workflow that the appearance judder is being introduced. It's not specific to the acquisition or camera.

Thanks for (otherwise) agreeing with my post.

Yes, there's a refresh rate but no flicker.
Yes, there is flicker! Of course there's some smoothing, because of not insignificant response-times, but a perfect LCD-display with a zero response-time running at 60Hz shows exactly 60 frames per second each with a duration of a 1/60 second. And 1/24 isn't an integral multiple of 1/60, so you can't do anything but 3:2-pulldown => flicker. (Flicker = variable duration of consecutive frames. Common sense?)
Again: The electronics behind do work with whole frames and the count of frames/second running through your DVI-data-cable is fixed, so you have to deal with that.

Yes, there is flicker!

There is not.

3-2 pulldown does not equal flicker. It's a cadence that can occur with or without flicker.

It means that the duration of every other frame is different (3 refreshes vs 2).

LCD's do not go to black between frames as a projector does. This "blanking" is what is commonly known as flicker.

but technically there would be a cadence introduced by the beating of the refresh rate with the frame rate, a form of 3-2 pulldown (assuming 60 Hz). And the cadence may contribute to the appearance of judder (though not more so than in standard 3-2 pulledown).
Sorry, my last answer was too hurried. About that kind of judder (3:2-judder) I tried to talk. :)
But I don't think that the 60Hz-flicker of CRTs does contribute more to a 24p-perception-issue than to a 60p-perception-issue. Do you know what I mean?

But I don't think that the 60Hz-flicker of CRTs do contribute to the 24p-perception-issue.

You may be correct.

But the point of my post, which i think you agree with, is that there is no magic to camera acquisition, and that cameras won't differ much in their "rendering" of motion as long as certain basic criteria are met.

And the EX1 most definitely meets those criteria.

There's much more magic involved in the way our brains stitch images together to form motion. It's affected by things like cadence, flicker, etc. and is the likely part of the chain where differences in judder are being introduced.

The examples I cited (48hz projection, etc.) are ways that technology has been developed to help us better see smooth motion from a series of still images.

To be more clear, if you are seeing judder in a scene where you wouldn't expect it, it's probably happening in playback, your screen, your chosen frame rate, shutter angle, etc.

It's not because you chose one brand of camera over another.

But the point of my post, which i think you agree with, is that there is no magic to camera acquisition, and that cameras won't differ much in their "rendering" of motion as long as certain basic criteria are met.

And the EX1 most definitely meets those criteria.

There's much more magic involved in the way our brains stitch images together to form motion. It's affected by things like cadence, flicker etc. and is the likely part of the chain where judder is being introduced.
I absolutely agree! Let's convince the others! ;)

All this talk about LCDs and computer screens and how and why they flicker is not really that relevant I don't think, as I put the same sort of shots through my Macbook from an HPX2100 and an EX1 at the same frame rates etc. and it was only on the EX1 that I saw motion problems. Never seen the like of it from any other camera I've used either. Just my observations.
Steve

All this talk about LCDs and computer screens and how and why they flicker is not really that relevant I don't think, as I put the same sort of shots through my Macbook from an HPX2100 and an EX1 at the same frame rates etc. and it was only on the EX1 that I saw motion problems. Never seen the like of it from any other camera I've used either. Just my observations.
Steve

I am interested in seeing some footage from Jeremy Hughes as he seems to have a perfect camera.

OK, Take a look at this clip:

http://www.ingenioustv.com/clips/ex1-motion-test.mov

I shot this with a Sony F350 XDCAM HD camera and an EX1, mounted side by side, following the same car down the road on the long end of the lens, both cameras set up and framed to give matching shots.

Both cameras were set to 25P with 1/50th shutter. I chose 25P over 24P to eliminate any pull up issues as what we are looking at is the way the EX1 capture motion, not how monitors or edit suites add or subtract frames. The F350 has been around for a couple of years and has been used for many programmes shooting at 24P and 25P and no one has complained that it doesn't handle motion correctly.

The clip is not trying to show a perfect shot. The pan is too fast for 25P which should exaggerate any differences. What I believe it shows is that both cameras handle the motion exactly the same. If there was a problem with the EX1's progressive motion handling I don't believe it would have passed Discovery's extensive tests which do involve a lot of motion tests as the one thing they look for is how the codec handles rapidly. changing images.

Well done Alister, that's what's needed.
No argument here, they look identical to me.
Hmmmm!
Steve

I thought I would see more skew on the lamp posts but even that seems so slight as to be practically invisible.

Good job, Alister.

I have been waiting for someone to do that. I hope this issue has been put to rest.

Much appreciated, Alister, that you have proven the issue is not existing, and the whole buzz about the EX1's low frame rate, progressive modes being more stuttery than on other cameras is simply unjustified.

Which of course only makes the right shooting technique even more important - without it, the motion may indeed appear unpleasant, to say the least.

Also worth mentioning is the importance of the viewing device; watching 25p stuff on a 60 Hz PC monitor is not the best way to judge motion. I can see a huge difference between what I can see on my 24" LCD when compared to my 100Hz plasma, which displays each frame 4 times!

OK, Take a look at this clip:

http://www.ingenioustv.com/clips/ex1-motion-test.mov

I shot this with a Sony F350 XDCAM HD camera and an EX1, mounted side by side, following the same car down the road on the long end of the lens, both cameras set up and framed to give matching shots.

Both cameras were set to 25P with 1/50th shutter. I chose 25P over 24P to eliminate any pull up issues as what we are looking at is the way the EX1 capture motion, not how monitors or edit suites add or subtract frames. The F350 has been around for a couple of years and has been used for many programmes shooting at 24P and 25P and no one has complained that it doesn't handle motion correctly.

The clip is not trying to show a perfect shot. The pan is too fast for 25P which should exaggerate any differences. What I believe it shows is that both cameras handle the motion exactly the same. If there was a problem with the EX1's progressive motion handling I don't believe it would have passed Discovery's extensive tests which do involve a lot of motion tests as the one thing they look for is how the codec handles rapidly. changing images.

Allister, thank you for that footage.

A couple fo things I would like to note.

A. It was in 25 and not 24p (not much difference but 24p is where my gripe is)

B. The pan was pretty slow and the majority of the image was over 100 feet+.

If you pan at that speed or just slightly quicker , you will see an annoying flicker effect if the image is closer.

The only thing that this test proved (and yes it did prove something valuable) is that pretty much all HD video cameras have the flicker effect.

This is why I refused to believe that 35mm film 24p is the same as video.

Dennis,

For reasons I tried to explain above, all 24p 180° shutter footage with reasonably linear light sensitivity (film, video, whatever) will exhibit the same tendencies, if played back using the same methods. If there is an anomaly, it's highly unlikely it's in the acquisition and much more likely to be in the playback.

So if you shoot film and progressive video at 24p 180° and transfer/dub them to the same method of playback, the will be more or less identical in their depiction of motion.

What do you envision that film does that video does not to decrease the stutter?

There is in fact a significant difference in how different recording systems may cause more motion judder than others, even all else being equal. The edge enhancement used in video cameras can make 24fps acquisition look much more juddery than say 35mm at the same everything including projection. The issue seems to be so significant that the EE can cause perceived negative steps in movement. Please don't ask me to explain this but there's an excellent paper from the BBC which explains this in great detail with lots of maths.
The way to minimise if not avoid this is to turn down edge enhancement in the camera.

I can make a HDW750 exhibit the same effect if I max out the detail level.
You can emulate an increased-exposure-time-look with heavy detail-settings? Well, I can't. ;)

You can emulate an increased exposure-time with high detail-settings? I don't think so...

I've only just caught up on this thread (and i've had too much coffee so putting my 2c in) but the whole 24p strobing thing is just that HD cameras have more DOF with parts of the frame in focus with high contrast areas and therefore the strobing is more obvious. Adding detail would also serve to create parts of the frame that have high contrast, hence the 750 comment.

As many people have pointed out this is completely normal and will vary depending on what's being shot. Having long shutter speeds will help but as Eric quite rightly points out, the cameras cannot really produce odd stuttering effects, what they're doing is pretty simple. Unless the EX1 internal timebase is not accurate and wavers around (which i don't believe it to be the case, it would be pretty impossible to technically screw that up anyway)

In the past people are just careful of how they shoot.

However there is the chance that playback is introducing stuttering (as opposed to strobing) which is dependant on each pipeline. Without examples of bad motion it's difficult to tell. In the case of comparing cameras you need to make sure it's like for like. Like Alister shows, same settings (shutter speed and motion) and im pretty sure that you'll see the same effect because that's just physics at work. Doing 60i -> 24p will introduce blurring artifacts which will help (resolution would be less, less detail to see the effect).

I've got stuff with strobing using a wildly spinning steadicam (don't ask!) and i can see that it's because there's too much detail visible and not enough blur, i can add motion blur in post (it's part of a heavy comp so i knew that going in).

So either some physical cameras are broken (unlikely i would have thought) or the playback has problems or we're expecting the impossible?

Perhaps it would be worth just doing some comparisons of shutter speeds and focus (or try to compare shallow DOF with wide). Or take the example footage and add motion blur in post (but that's only part of the solution, throwing the background out of focus is better)

cheers
paul

On my HDW750 you get motion blur but not the stroby motion I saw on the EX1. Still a bit baffled by this, and because of the fair volume of people raising the issue I don't think it can just be disregarded. Maybe it is the monitoring though, I don't know. Thing is on Alister's tests above I siad they look identical, but they are identical in that I see horrible juddery motion on both - they are equally bad! Nothing to do with you Alister, I know you stated quite clearly that they were too fast and it was to show the effect. But I would expect the effect to be blurring but I see juddering! Again, maybe it's just 'cos it's compessed for the web or whatever?
I may get hold of an EX1 again and try to do some motion tests and get them into an edit suite, I really think this is the only way to know, and again urge anyone to take internet discussion onboard but in in no way treat it as gospel!
Steve

Don't forget though Paul, that there is a radical difference in the EX1 to say Sony 750, which is that it has a rolling shutter, and it's a reasonable assumption to make that this may have an effect.
Steve

Don't forget though Paul, that there is a radical difference in the EX1 to say Sony 750, which is that it has a rolling shutter, and it's a reasonable assumption to make that this may have an effect.
Steve

Sure, but im pretty sure the rolling shutter won't affect the strobing if you're panning left to right because the sensor readout will be in the same place for a given vertical position, so the same distance even if the overall position is different at the top of the frame compared to the bottom. If you're panning up and down violently then you'll get the jello effect and jello effect trumps strobing each time as far as being objectional goes!

I think that we, as a group, need to quantify what the objectional strobing looks like then take a vote as to whether it is a problem or normal. Alisters examples are normal as far as im concerned. But we've had discussion about a JVC and EX providing different results and i would like to see that.

cheers
paul

On my HDW750 you get motion blur but not the stroby motion I saw on the EX1.
If you're using a loooong exposure-time it gets blurry and if you use a shrt exposure-time it gets stroby. A general rule. But what's the difference between what you've seen from the ex1 and your hdcam-footage concerning that subject? It would be nice, if you would post a sample-clip from your hdcam doing a similar pan like that from the xdcam-hd/ex example.

Dominik, unfortunately I couldn't post EX1 clips as I don't have an edit system so couldn't convert to mpeg or whatever. Can't post 750 clips either, but there are some on my website, also film and Phantom HD on there, and none of them have stuttered motion. I did shots on the EX1 following flying birds, also scenic pans and tilts up vegetation to birds in background, all with jittery motion. This was evident at 60P, 25P, shutter 180 degree.
Steve

But of course there will be a mixture of strobing and blurring in my test clips. I was using a 1/50th second (180 degree) shutter.

During the pan, while the shutter is open the camera moves a short distance so it captures an image that includes a lot of background that is blurred due to the motion while the car which is reasonably static in the frame is less blurred. Then the shutter is closed for the same period, meanwhile the camera is still moving. When the shutter re opens the camera is pointing in a slightly different direction so the background jumps while the car stays still. The effect is that the background appears to jump while the foreground car does not.

This is completely normal and totally expected from any sensor or medium exposed in this manner. If you have ever been to an IMAX show you'll know just how bad this can look if the pan speed is too fast.

There is nothing wrong with the way the EX1 captures motion. There are thousands of EX1's in daily use, yet there are less than a dozen (very vocal) people claiming that there is some kind of fault. There are even fewer examples of this "problem" being posted as clips. I think what we are seeing is people getting a camera that can shoot true progressive with a level of detail and resolution that really shows up the issues you get with shooting progressive at low frame rates. Then in many cases the material is being viewed on computers or monitors that add further issues and inconsistencies. This is then being viewed by people not used to seeing such images that don't understand the very nature of progressive and whole frame capture by video and film cameras.

Rolling shutter won't add strobing, it can add skew but only with very,very fast pans or very fast motion and even then it's only slight. Take a look at the lamp posts in my test clips, they don't suddenly lean as I pan.

My test footage was shot at 25p to ensure that there were no issues with pull up from 24p which is another stumbling block for many users not used to working with progressive. The difference between 24P and 25P is only 4% and just about impossible to see visually.

If you are going to do any tests I urge you to do side by side, like for like tests. I can make the output from my EX1 look ugly, I can also make it look beautiful. The difference between ugly and beautiful may just be a small difference in the speed of a pan or the focal length of the lens. Unless you do a like for like test how can you be sure that what you are seeing is down to the camera and not the user.

Steve,

Must also figure in that your 750 is 2/3rds so unless you match the aperture then you'll have less DOF which is a major way of hiding the effect in backgrounds. (even then DOF is a factor of lots of things not just sensor size).

Shame you don't have any of the offending footage to view, that would help enormously!

cheers
paul

because of the fair volume of people raising the issue I don't think it can just be disregarded.

Fair volume? Hmm.. with only a couple (who don't even own the camera) and out of the thousands who do....

It's not magic, it's only frame rate and shutter speed here.

Just incase anyone thinks my settings are wrong, I am shooting 1080 24p Angle 180 , detail OFF and still getting judder. I put on a soft FX 3 filter yesterday to make it even softer and it still had judder which was shocking.

Post the footage...
It's hard to buy something like this. especially when there's no proof. Not to mention the majority of us use this camera (along with other cameras) professionally.

Alister, Not all people who've seen this effect are not used to "a camera that can shoot true progressive with a level of detail and resolution". I've shot most of 'em, extensively, Varicam, Sony 750, Phantom HD etc. So it's not as if I or some of the others have just come up from a VX1000!
And I don't see it as helpful to say "less than a dozen (very vocal) people" either, very few people have an agenda here, we're just making comments and observations. Very often I've seen threads like this degenerate into insults and patronising posts (usually by those defending a piece of kit they own and have paid good money for).

Steve

But it is just a handful of people saying there is a problem out of the thousands of EX1 users and owners and they are being very vocal about it, not just here but in other forums as well, refusing to believe that there is no problem. Not one single person that claims there is an issue has been able to post a clip showing it, yet EX1 material must be some of the simplest material in the world to get off the camera and convert.

I have posted a clip that as far as I can tell clearly demonstrates that the EX1 handles motion no differently than any other progressive camera. Now it is being suggested that my test is flawed as both cameras exhibit stutter.
The F350 and EX1 are very different cameras and generate progressive images in very different ways yet they both look the same. What does that tell you? It tells me that the images are as they should be. I could repeat the test with my HD100 but why bother when there are some that clearly don't want to believe that the EX1 works as it should.

I don't understand why anyone expects there not to be judder or stutter when you are doing pans while shooting at 24 or 25P with a 1/50th shutter. That judder is why we have been using 50i or 60i for TV broadcasts for the past 40 years.

Yes I like my EX1 and as a user of one since January I am pretty sure I know what it can and can't do. I've shot almost exclusively using 25P and I've sold footage to Discovery HD, Nat Geo, NHK and others and no one has complained about judder or stutter.

I give up on this thread. No point in saying any more.

Nobody of those claiming that there's a judder-problem were able so far to express that in objective measurable technical terms.
The simple question is:
What exactly does the ex1 wrong? How can I measure it?

I think we just need to await some example footage and then start the discussion again. The ideal would be a comparison of a camera that is said to perform correctly and the EX1 in the same situation.

You see i don't really understand what those that have problems are expecting to see. You open the shutter for X amount of time X times a second and the image is according to that.

The only thing i can think of is that stuttering sounds like a playback issue whereas strobing sounds like a recording one.

cheers
paul

I will post something soon. In the mean time, what benefit does it do that I post a clip of what I am seeing if you guys can't see it from your own monitor. If you don't see it on your monitor with your clips, what makes you think that mines will be any different, unless mine is defective.

Long story short, it does not have the same motion blur when panning as a film camera. The judder looks nasty and I have several people that I showed my footage to that pointed it out. People who have never touched a camera with comments like "is that normal"?

I love the image quality of this camera, workflow, the feel, but the rolling shuuter and the flicker effect has to go.