My bad. I meant the programs will choke on the non standard 20p video, not the quality of the video itself.

I totally agree with you on that one!

Not picking on anyone in particular here... this attitude that "the gear isn't good enough yet" is a mental block, a self-imposed barrier to creativity and free expression that affects a lot of people. I don't know of any cure, I just try to tackle it with tough love. Get off your ass and start shooting. Walk away from this web site, pick up a cheap $200 digicam and go outdoors and make photographs and little movies.

Or you could....

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/dv-challenge-our-semi-regular-contest/145660-dvc16-sign-up-thread.html

I don't know about that. A significant percentage (that will use the video feature at all) may well have an HV10/20/30 or one of the many Sony HDV flavors already. These things have been on the market for three years now. When they pull 1080/20p off this thing and try to stick it into iMovie or Pinnacle, it's not going to be pretty.

I've edited stuff captured at 15fps in iMovie and it didn't get upset. I doubt there'd be significant problems with 20 fps (QuickTime happily takes different frame rates and does it's best to convert them to match.)

That said, if I got a Rebel, I *think* I'd primarily shoot in 720p.

The "right camera" is the one that works, the one you can get your hands on right now this minute.

Exactly. I'd love a perfect digital cinema camera - there isn't one yet. I think Scarlet may be what I'm looking for, but best case scenario by the time it's readily available I'll have shot 5 or more incredible looking shorts on my 5DmkII, despite all of it's 'limitations'.

It's not just that if you're waiting, you're not creating - if you aren't shooting, you aren't improving (couldn't think of a catchy way to make it rhyme). I know that every film I shoot now will contribute far more to the quality of the films I make in the future than whatever camera I end up shooting them on.

That said, if I got a Rebel, I *think* I'd primarily shoot in 720p.

Right - remember this is a competitor to the D90. 1080p makes for a nice marketing item in a feature list, but when it comes down to it this should be a great 720p camera while the D90 isn't. If you'd like the image and compression quality of the 5D but can't afford it this is a much better alternative to the D90 for now.

Sorry for rambling, but it just hurts every time ;) You are discussing that 20p is not good enough, ok lets take the lower res 30p option. Where, where, where are our 25p? We have good money here that converts to Yen at a favourable rate.

The *real shame* to me is that these things don't do 25p. That's what I don't understand...

It's not just that if you're waiting, you're not creating - if you aren't shooting, you aren't improving (couldn't think of a catchy way to make it rhyme).
If you're not churning, you're not learning?

Regarding not having the perfect camera, as soon as you get it, you'll find that you don't have the right lights, the right support system, the right monitor, the right location, the right actors, the right props and so on.

Shoot what you can. Keep in mind though that the world's best photographers don't show *all* their photographs. If you never shoot crummy stuff, you'll never shoot good stuff.

If you're waiting, you're not creating.

The single worst excuse for sitting on the sidelines is "the cameras aren't good enough yet." That's complete nonsense, of course. It's a horrible mentality. We're currently living among an embarrassment of riches with regard to the quality and sheer affordability of digital media content creation... we've been there for several years now.

So much remarkable material has been created with "lesser" equipment and technology that came before. The limitlessness and the limitations don't come from the gear or the technology... they come from the people who are using it. Anyone who says they can't use what's available right now isn't ever going to be able to use anything.

The "right camera" is the one that works, the one you can get your hands on right now this minute.

Not picking on anyone in particular here... this attitude that "the gear isn't good enough yet" is a mental block, a self-imposed barrier to creativity and free expression that affects a lot of people. I don't know of any cure, I just try to tackle it with tough love. Get off your ass and start shooting. Walk away from this web site, pick up a cheap $200 digicam and go outdoors and make photographs and little movies.

Very well said, Mr. Hurd. Very well said.

I recently had a conversation with my wife (who is also my amazing producer) where I said, "I think we need to sell the XLH1 and get into either an EX3 or an HPX300 for our next film. The cameras are so much better now." She looked at me deadpan and eventually responded, "We just watched our XLH1 movie on one of the biggest movie screens in Los Angeles and it looked absolutely gorgeous! Explain to me again why we need yet another new camera?"

To which I didn't really have a great answer. I went on about data workflows and all of that. I went on about chips and raster and glass.... and that's when she kinda just walked out of the room. LOL!

..."Explain to me again why we need yet another new camera?"That's a great question! It's best if you have a specific answer, like...

* Our next release should be on Blu-ray; our DVX is only good enough for DVDs
* We're filming our next documentary at night with natural light; we need more sensitivity
* We're filming a boxer wearing a helmet cam; rolling shutter won't do
* We're filming the whole thing in a phone booth; we need a wider lens
* We're filming lions in the wild; we need a longer lens

If you don't have a specific problem that your camera won't solve, you probably don't need a different camera.

Also, most indies would probably do better spending the money on lights, support, audio - and more pizza for the crew. :)

Take it easy fellas. Waiting on the sidelines to buy your next cam doesn't mean you're not producing and creating. It just means the technology you want in a camera for the price range you want isn't there yet.
From what I see, a great cam is just around the bend and if what you're using now suffices I'd wait. One quick question though. One poster mentioned the canon 5dmkII blew the HV20 out of the water. That's mainly what I use with a letus. I have a ton of old nikon glass so I'm chomping at the bit to get the canon but I'm waiting at least until it supports 24p. In good light does the 5dmkII really blow the HV20 out of the water?

A great cam is *always* just around the bend.

Because of its very large sensor size and high, clean ISO capability,
the 5D2 is superior to just about any existing HD camcorder in low
light. But if you're holding out for 24p, you could be in for quite a
wait... I wouldn't count on that happening any time soon.

what recording will the pal mode do in the new rebel
for video

michael seiler

MauiHDTV (http://www.mauihdtv.com)

A great cam is *always* just around the bend.

Because of its very large sensor size and high, clean ISO capability,
the 5D2 is superior to just about any existing HD camcorder in low
light. But if you're holding out for 24p, you could be in for quite a
wait... I wouldn't count on that happening any time soon.So are you suggesting that in good light they are basically on par. Low light is one thing...but I believe in good light...anything can look good.

I agree with you wholeheartedly, Ian. In good light, anything can look good (and can be made to look great).

what recording will the pal mode do in the new rebel for video
There is no PAL mode, unfortunately.

So are you suggesting that in good light they are basically on par. Low light is one thing...but I believe in good light...anything can look good.

I've shot more low light so far than good light on the 5D, and I haven't attempted to intercut with HV20 footage directly, but I wouldn't say they're on par. In my experience intercutting HV20 with XHA1 footage even under ideal lighting situations had the HV20 falling slightly short of the XHA1 - and I feel the same way about the XHA1 footage when cut with the 5D. I don't know that it 'blows it out of the water', but it's certainly an improvement. I'd bet the difference is even more noticeable if you're comparing to an HV20 with a lens adapter which inevitably degrades the image quality.

I just download some 500D some 1920 x 1080 clip from
Rob Galbraith DPI: HD video capture, 15MP sensor in Canon EOS Rebel T1i (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-9973-9976)

why it only show 940x540 when i put it in premiere CS3?

am i missing something here?? the 1280 x 720 clips are just fine

I don't have CS3, but I can tell you that Final Cut Express reports both the
Grand Central Station and 42nd Street 1080 clips as 1920 x 1080 at 20fps.

I bet I know what happened.

A high ranking Canon rep and a high ranking Panasonic rep were talking to each other at a bar and after several shots, they decided to make a deal. Panasonic promises not price the GH1 to low while Canon promises not to have either 24 or 30 fps in the 1080 mode of the T1i.




Realistically, I think with some of the bad press that Canon had over the 50D and because the sales will suffer a bit with these new HD capable cameras, a replacement may come within the next few months and that’s what they will use to compete against the GH1.

Nikon is obviously over due to replace the D300 and it’s true that the D400 will have a lot of praise if it records to h.264 at 1080 24p and 30p even at around $2,000 but imagine if they price that to around $1,500 with a lens. For the replacement of the D700 or a newly designed camera with a full frame, I started thinking about which company doesn’t have any professional camcorders and cameras that would be able to help with the video features and it recently popped into my head that Sanyo would be perfect. Nikon should really call them up.

20p has been used before as a cinematic capture frame rate. Team America was captured in 20p.

Rob Galbraith DPI: HD video capture, 15MP sensor in Canon EOS Rebel T1i (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-9973-9976)


I've found the one benefit to 1080p20.

My Intel Q6600 can play it. The 1080p30 from the 5D2 is the only one that won't play nicely.
Any advice anyone?

Take it easy fellas. Waiting on the sidelines to buy your next cam doesn't mean you're not producing and creating. It just means the technology you want in a camera for the price range you want isn't there yet.
From what I see, a great cam is just around the bend and if what you're using now suffices I'd wait. One quick question though. One poster mentioned the canon 5dmkII blew the HV20 out of the water. That's mainly what I use with a letus. I have a ton of old nikon glass so I'm chomping at the bit to get the canon but I'm waiting at least until it supports 24p. In good light does the 5dmkII really blow the HV20 out of the water?

I think the biggest thing that most everyone completely glosses over when comparing adapted camcorder set-ups to the 5D is ease of use. I've been using 35mm adapters for several years now. They were a great stepping stone and allowed us to capture images not possible before they were created. But consider the sacrifices to make this happen. Take an already slow HV20 and then strap-on some more additional light loss, double the weight, double if not triple the length.

I used to say the indie filmmaker was forced to work even harder than the normal filmmaker from a lighting perspective. Because the indie guy was working with a camera and 35mm adapter set-up that forced him to need a much larger light package and almost always shoot wide open in his 35mm lenses. It should be the reverse. I remember how fun it was to shoot with the VX-2000 back in the day because it was so sensitive.

Being able to shoot with a 5D in such a small, simple & sensitive package dramatically increases the ability of no budget indie shoots to pull off their productions. Now you can have a limited lighting package, 35mm depth of field, a light run and gun camera and the ability to stop down you lens when you want to. It's the closest thing to having the same creative choices that the big guys have.

24P would be great but I've been doing these conversions for years. It's not an impossible thing to convert to this standard. In my experience it is far more important to have a 35mm DOF and good cinematography than to just have 24P. I think it's long overdue for Hollywood to bump up the frame-rate of film. What I would really love is for some gutsy director out there to say 24P be damned and shoot at 30P, 48P or 60P. Let's see if the film watching public would really mutiny and not watch it.

Home projectors and HDTVs are now shipping with a new frame interpolation mode that tries to "fix" 24P so that it doesn't appear so juddery. It does this by creating new frames in between the actual 24 frames. Seems to me that the general public is ready to move on to something better.

I've found the one benefit to 1080p20.

My Intel Q6600 can play it. The 1080p30 from the 5D2 is the only one that won't play nicely.
Any advice anyone?
Make sure your computer is set on maximum performance.
The less stuff you have open the better and that includes web pages.
As for software solutions, download a free trial of CoreAVC and/or Nero.

Nathan, yes, I'm lugging alot of gear and lights too. I'm a cheap bastard at heart and waited out through the A1 because I didn't feel like it offered THAT much more than the HV20 in good light. But these new 35mm, well, er, I will bite as soon as shooting 24p is a viable alternative. I'm actually hoping the next canon will have adjustable frame rate that I can overcrank because I shoot sports too.

Friends of mine have had success converting the canon's 30 to 24p but they're all on final cut. Is that what you're using? I'm on CS3 and Cineform aspect and not sure there's a good way to do the conversion.

Matt, sorry I didn't get back to you right away. But yes I'm on FCP. It's the main reason I stay on Apple hardware. Final Cut Studio 2 (the most recent version) is the best version of the entire software package ever and I've been using it since the very beginning. It really gives you so much creative control. (It's due for an update supposedly coming around NAB.) Pro-Res is an outstanding intermediate codec and serves the role of cineform on the PC side except that Pro-Res comes with the package standard. I'd highly recommend the switch, but I understand the costs involved.

The best thing I think we can hope for from Canon is what they're going to do with the rumored firmware update that's coming in April. I don't hold out much hope for 24P, but surely we'll get full manual control. However, maybe the announcement of the Panasonic GH1 might prompt Canon to offer 24P. Plus there is a gaping whole around the $1500 price range for another Canon product. I think they've realized what they stumbled on with the 5DMKII because they still can't make enough of them to keep them on the shelves. The 5D is a BIG BIG deal. It is a revolutionary product and it's completely changed everything. I know the T1i isn't everything everyone wants but the price is pretty wow!

"Coarse words" would never fly on DV Info Net, and Jon knows that.

The typical internet experience is all about being personally insulted and flaunting your righteous indignation over perceived injustices such as this consumer D-SLR. However, this site is definitely *not* the typical internet experience. Hopefully that's why Jon and so many others choose to post here.

Of course, Chris!!! I am glad this is a forum full of people not strange nicks and little education!!! ;-DDDD

Have you looked at the clips? I can't help but get the feeling that some of you guys are judging this thing sight unseen.

Yes. By locking down he avoided camera movement. By shooting as he did he minimized the motion vectors of moving objects. Even so, the moving cars strobe badly. Thus, if soccer moms stay far up in the stands all will be fine. But, a soccer dad who shoots at the edge of the field with a tele, will not be thrilled with the results.

Moreover, anyone who shot 8mm at approximately 18fps knows what a 20fps frame-rate looks like. And, when the HD1 came-out with 720p30 it was panned by every reviewer because of the horrible judder. That's vastly faster than 20fps.

Of course, for those who want a film-look AND know how to shoot it, 24p is acceptable. But, I doubt even the most ardent film-look fanatic would try to shoot as slow as 20fps.

But it's not just frame-rate. A 180-degree shutter will be 1/40th second. Motion blur will degrade the image.

But, it gets worse. To overcome motion judder with 720p30, many resorted to a 1/30th second rather than 1/60th second shutter. Unfortunately, motion blur then degraded the image so much it looked like SD. If folks try this with 20fps, there will be nothing but blur as soon as anything moves with a 1/20th shutter.

HOWEVER -- Canon may have chosen 20fps for a reason. In theory, 20fps can indeed capture motion. And, 1/30th may be an ideal shutter-speed as it sits evenly between 1/20th and 1/40th. So the amount of motion blur may be "just right" to be generally acceptable.

But what about judder? 30p judder (strobing) is really an eye-tracking artifact. It comes from repeating the same frame twice when viewing at 60i or 60p. In theory, the perception of judder might be less if the same frame were repeated three times.

To get 20fps to 60i (and hence to 60p) -- which is going to be necessary for any HDTV -- each frame will have to be repeated 3 times as three fields. (I have no idea how NLEs will treat 20fps, but HDTVs aren't going to play 20fps. Something is going to have to add pulldown. In fact pulldown will be needed to get 20fps out of the HDMI port.)

If any of my speculation is true, Canon may have exploited our vision system. And, this would explain why no PAL version. No way to divide 50 fields by 3. (Of course, the 720p mode should have offered 720p25.)

PS: Having used a DSLR with a non-articulated LCD, I find having to hold the camera exactly at eye level a royal pain. And, who wants every shot at eye level? The GH1 -- which isn't going to $2000 since the G1 is less than half that -- is far more video shooting friendly.

There's an interesting interview with Chuck Westfall, technical adviser for Canon's professional products marketing division, over on cnet.com
Q&A: Canon helps usher in the video SLR era | Underexposed - CNET News (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-10213645-39.html?tag=newsLeadStoriesArea.1)

He talks about the future - in general terms - and really trys to sell that it's the early days of video on DSLR's, and Canon's still trying to figure out what to do (and yes, they know about the people that want more manual controls....)

Interesting days ahead. Meanwhile, I can't wait to see what Nikon has up their sleves with the new DSLR with articulating LCD screen that's been photographed while they were making an ad for it!

If you can, waiting is probably the best thing to do if you're thinking of buying a D-SLR primarily for video...next year could bring even more exciting advances.

Interesting Q & A. For me, it puts a real human face on Canon for first time. But it also confirms what is apparent at this point-- Canon won't be offering any change on the 5D II, to give us more control over the camera during video shooting.

Well, then I guess the money put aside for my 5D purchase will be held until May or June for the Panasonic GH1. A shame, because I prefer Canon for the availability of lenses and the image quality. But given that I am buying it almost solely for the video capabilities, the non-24p is a deal-breaker for me. As an indpendent filmmaker, the problems caused down the line for conversion to 24p, and even more so, for 25p for PAL distribution, make the 5D MKII a no-go.

Extremely frustrating. Extremely.

I'm with Nathan. I've owned a 35mm adapter and for weddings with only 1 person at the Prep, it can be rough. If you are not 100% with the adapter and miss the shot, its over. I think the ease of use (and you this makes more sense if you have setup a 35mm adapter) and package size are what make these cameras so appealing to us. I've been dealing with my D90 for 6 months now and I'm only using it for detail shots at this point. If I didn't own so much Nikon glass, I would have purchased the Canon (5D, I need those extra frames) already.
I guess the next few months will have a lot of stuff that will interest us. I'm about to start trolling the Red forums again to see what the Scarlet will bring. I know it is way over the price range of what we are currently looking at, but there might be a few extras that make it worth it.

Well, then I guess the money put aside for my 5D purchase will be held until May or June for the Panasonic GH1. A shame, because I prefer Canon for the availability of lenses and the image quality. But given that I am buying it almost solely for the video capabilities, the non-24p is a deal-breaker for me. As an indpendent filmmaker, the problems caused down the line for conversion to 24p, and even more so, for 25p for PAL distribution, make the 5D MKII a no-go.

Extremely frustrating. Extremely.

Mark as much as I'm frustrated by the limitations of the 5D I think everyone seems to ignore the issues with the GH1 simply because it gives them the holy grail of 24P. The GH1 is not a FF chip and the current lens selection for this micro 4/3rds format is pretty sad. Sure you can put on normal 35mm lenses with adapters but you lose any auto functions of the auto lenses for stills. I guess for the indie-film guys they're already planning on manual nikons so they don't care. But they're are a lot of questions I need answered before I'm going to crown the GH1. Most notably is some amazing footage. I know the 5D can create some unbelievable shots.

And of course don't think for a second that Canon or Nikon are done. More models are coming. Nikon has the most to gain by getting it all right since they don't have a video division.

And of course don't think for a second that Canon or Nikon are done. More models are coming. Nikon has the most to gain by getting it all right since they don't have a video division.


Amen. But I think Canon is the closest to being there, going by what they've released so far. In particular, I find it hard to believe Canon came up with a 38 - 42 Mbps AVCHD codec engine so it could spend its life inside something where video is a relative afterthought. Even the T1i leaves the original consumer spec. of ~24 Mbps behind. I can't believe the video side of the company isn't jumping on that with new product.

There's an interesting interview with Chuck Westfall, technical adviser for Canon's professional products marketing division, over on cnet.com
Q&A: Canon helps usher in the video SLR era | Underexposed - CNET News (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-10213645-39.html?tag=newsLeadStoriesArea.1)

He talks about the future - in general terms - and really trys to sell that it's the early days of video on DSLR's, and Canon's still trying to figure out what to do (and yes, they know about the people that want more manual controls....)

Even though the reasoning for lack of manual is weak. Can't really blame Chuck as he is simply communication the corporate stance. I'm almost positive it only requires a simple coding change to allow manual control for video. It could be as simple as VideoManualControlFlag = FALSE; (or something along that line)

While 1080p20 plays smoothly in an NLE or QT Player where the LCD update rate is 60Hz as I expected -- there may be a problem when it's output in a conventional 1080p30 movie.

The capture sampling rate of 20fps seems to interact with the 30fps movie rate which is then played at 30fps by repeating each frame twice to match the LCD rate of 60Hz. Looks like every other frame is duplicated. This cadence is then repeated twice.

ABCD >> AABCCD >> AAAABBCCCCDD

To get smooth playback your NLE may need to truly output at 20fps so the final playback is 3X at 60Hz.

I'm not sure all NLE can be set to have a 20fps Timeline.