I just read something from another forum that "Pro" version will have "46 differences". This information was provided from someone who visited the Government Expo in WA.

If there are even HALF that amount of differences and they're all improvements - I am waiting for the "Pro" verison. Anyone else thinking that too?

Murph

That is tantalizing. OTOH, when the PD-170 was released I recall that two of the improvements they cited were a strap for the iLink cable and a new color scheme ;-)

I'm at Govt Video Expo and had a sneak peek at the pro version, for which there isn't a model number yet. It's black, so it must be "pro." The presenter showed a working pre-production sample and mentioned the "46 differences." Among them, a 24fps mode, XLR inputs, manual audio pots on the body, pre-set focus positions, DVCAM and more. I haven't seen an FX1 yet so I can't compare it to anything. This pro model is very, very nice; should be a big hit for Sony at under $7k.

Double take here -- did you just say "24fps mode"?

If that's the case then Sony is releasing a legendary camera, and I officially challenge Canon/JVC and everyone else to respond to it! It's starting to feel like a buyers market for 2005.

Murph

The consumer model also has a 24fps mode ("Cineframe 24"). So how does the pro version differ? Did they incorporate true progressive scan?

Chris, certainly they must have had some sort of demo footage on HD displays - how did it look?

thanx!

There was also mention of the pro version being released in January. Any truth to that?

I was told the pro version will be out in Jan. Yes they were running demo material, and I thought it looked superb. But were they showing HDV or HDCAM in its place as a substitute? I'd like to believe it was HDV. Sony's biggest problem with this camera will be its ability to meet the demand for it.

Maybe the presenter was confused (or maybe I'm confused; I'm so easily confused) and the reference was to 25fps not 24fps. But really, what's the difference? None that you could see. More pro version info coming up,

Get all the info you can Chris! If I knew you were going, I would have made my list for you. Ask the Sony people if the footage there showing is from the HDV camera. Also ask them if the 24fps is the same as cineframe on the pro-sumer and if not what are the differences........

Michael you're not out driving that car? What's the deal?

Here are some differences in the pro version... not 46 but a few: black body, XLR Inputs, separate recessed audio volume controls, Time Code preset, camera switchable between 50 Hz /60 Hz, simultaneous use of LCD display and EVF, EVF switchable between B&W and color, Hyper Gain, zoom display w/numbers, hours meter, Audio Noise Reduction, audio limiter, action safe zone display. That's all I've got for tonight.

Fast response Chris! I was out, and driving the speed limit too..hmmmmm :-). I came back from having dinner with Bob & Barb. Can't wait tell you come to LA in December for DVexpo. It's been to long as usual... Thanks for the info. This camera is sounding sweeter everyday. Your my eye's and ears looking at that camera...................

Camera switchable between 50 and 60 Hz... now that sounds
interesting. So if I interpret this correctly the camera is both PAL/
NTSC compatible in one? Yes I know the HD format is one standard,
but I assume it can downsample it to both? Can the SD mode
record in both? That would be a very interesting feature as well.

Chris, a lot of speculation that maybe even the glass (ie. higher quality lens to better suit HD) on the pro version will be different/ie. superior to what is on the consumer version to justify the significantly higher price - any way you can find out if the lens element is different?

thanks Chris - your reporting from gvexpo is the best i've seen on the net so far - and believe you me, we've been out looking....

thank you for your excellent work!

your post hinted under $7k - so, like, how much under $7? Can you elaborate a bit?

also, any hint how close software support on pc side is coming from the vendors that initially announced support (ie. ulead, adobe, sony vegas) etc.?

so many questions... only 1 day left at expo...

please chris, give us more!

I read about this cam in this month's DV mag... It doesn't shoot 24fps, but it will playback at 24 fps to emulate film.

If it had interchangeable lenses, I'd give it a go... It's a sweet little cam.

I'm not even sure that I can get back into that suite today but I'll try!

So far I have not heard enough extra features that seem to support such a large price difference. How do the vx2100 and pd170 compare in features and price.

Dave

Couldn't get back in. DSE was there, I'll ask him to post.

Chris,

you rock, chief!

heath

I had only a very brief look at it just once, no photos, and couldn't get back in the second time. But just wait for the reports from those who had better luck than I did!

I think there's a post with a pic of the pro version. lots of wires and the rquisite black color. So, gray=consumer and prosumer while black=pro, huh? JVC is confusing us with the black HD1 and black HD10. <g>

heath

<<<-- Originally posted by Keith Forman : I read about this cam in this month's DV mag... It doesn't shoot 24fps, but it will playback at 24 fps to emulate film. -->>>

It doesn't shoot at 24 fps, but it can play back at 24 fps? How does that work? Are you saying the cam's VCR can play back at 24, and your PC can capture it?

Charlie,

I believe the consumer version has something in their SD mode that does that.

heath

That might make sense, because so far, I've had no idea what use the SD mode could possibly serve!

I shot something over two days last May with my HD10. First day, I shot in SD (forgetting it records in mpeg2-ts like HD) and the next day in DV. I finally did a down-convert when I realized not many Mac HDV third partiers support the SD mode yet. I should've shot DV both days, or just HD and done the down-convert.

I LOVE the down- and up-convert on the HD10!

heath

From what I've read the DV (SD) mode sounds very interesting. Like a VX-2100 with native widescreen, calibrated zoom and focus rings, and much better manual controls than a PD-170.

I am currently working with footage shot with the FX1 25fps version and I have to tell you, it's a winner!

The footage looks incredible and it should be a serious solution for filmmakers wanting to shoot features at an incredible price and transfer to film.

The footage shows no chroma noise like we've seen with the 1 chip HDV cam. If 24p is important to you, most likely it is because you want to do a film out. If its the case, buy the 25p version.

Frederic

Frederic,

Let me know if you can help Jon Fordham and I get our hands on either the NTSC (preferred, actually) or the PAL FX1, so we can test and review it!

heath

Heath,

They are keeping a tight grip on these pre-release units. If there is anything I can do, I will.

Frederic

Hey all, I've never considered buying a Pal 25p before. But, after reading this stuff it's making me think that it might be worthwhile this time.

If we buy a Pal version - yet, want to consistantly convert to NTSC - what is the deal with that? In FCP do we cut at 25p and upon export convert to 29.97 frames? Anywhere I can look to read up on this?

Also, can someone explain to me the whole "Camera switchable between 50 Hz /60 Hz" thing? Does that mean 50i and 60i? I'm dumb when it comes that stuff.

Thanks!

Murph

Frederich,

Let me know--I can use it for a magazine article I'm writing and also for a review for another major video magazine.

Murph,

You can always convert PAL to NTSC and vice versa using DVFilm Maker (www.dvfilm.com).

Thanx,

heath

Heath, I just read somewhere that it's only 1 unit...it'll switch PAL/NTSC. If that's the case then we're getting 25p on the camera regardless if we wanted it or not. Is this confirmable? (is confirmable a word?)

EDIT UPDATE: Ok, now I just read that the "Pro" version is the one that'll have switchable PAL/NTSC. I guess we should cease that topic until we have total "confirmable" news!

Murph

Good call, Murph. By the way, it's confirmation.

heath

Heath,

Will DV Filmmaker work in HD resolutions?

Frederic

Good question. I believe they've updated it, but I'll ask Marcus v. B.

heath

Oh yeah, confirmation is right. But, confirmable should be a word. :)

Murph

Originally posted by Christopher C. Murphy : Heath, I just read somewhere that it's only 1 unit...it'll switch PAL/NTSC. If that's the case then we're getting 25p on the camera regardless if we wanted it or not. Is this confirmable? (is confirmable a word?)


There won't be any 25P. The camera doesn't shoot any type of progressive scan. There will be the CineFrame option, which is their 24p and 30p simulator, but there won't be any 25P.

Barry,

You are correct. It is 50i & 60i.

Frederic

According to one video to film transfer lab I talked with, the FX1 50i type can be used for film projects, as they shoot the video at 25 frames. There's no interpolation as on NTSC to 24 frames transfers.

Apparently it may not be that easy to go from HDV 60i to 24 frames, because artifacts may be more visible than in SD video.


Carlos

thought PAL is easier to go to 24p, 1080i60 can also be transferred to 24p, then, if one wishes, to 35mm.

heath

<<<-- Originally posted by Heath McKnight : thought PAL is easier to go to 24p, 1080i60 can also be transferred to 24p, then, if one wishes, to 35mm.
-->>>


Apparently not, according to the lab. At least for now.



Carlos

Go to DVFilm (www.dvfilm.com) for more on transferring to 24p and 35mm.

heath

I kept arguing on another site about this EXACT same subject (and about DVfilm too)!

I worked a few years in a post facility where we do film out for video. The site you mention keeps telling people that they can transfer both 60i and 50i as easily because they want your $$$. In reality, YES, ANYTHING is transferable. Heck, bring me 30p JVC, I'll chop 6 frames out every seconds and there you go! But that is totally unusable.

About 60i to film out (no matter what the resolution):

We take the (usually NTSC) footage, convert it to (PAL) 25p by removing the interlace and rebuilding 25 full frames out of 60 fields. This means stuttering motion is pans, loss of resolution. UGLY. If you worked with DV, it's even worst as you are upsampled to 576lines from 480 too. The PAL or 25p HDV master is then slowed down 4% and shot at 24p onto film stock.

50i: slowed by 4% and that's it, although I would recommend using field blending on all projects to get good clean frames for film out. If you shot DV, you get 25% more resolution too!

Masters at 30fps look like TV sitcoms shot on Video, Masters at 25fps are already somewhat film-like in quality. Imagine taking an episode of Oprah and converting it to 24p for a film out. How can you even BEGIN to imagine that would look even remotely professional???

The fact is: if you have the tens of thousands of dollars necessary for a film print, or if you are thinking of selling your project to a distributor for a film release, it is completely IRRESPONSIBLE of you NOT to get a PAL/Zone 50 camera when they are readily available, just as it is irresponsible for DVfilm not to educate people about it (that is the FIRST thing we did with every one that inquired about video to film services).

X Frederic Haubrich

It's posiible for you post a 1080i.Ts 25fps clip?

PLEASE!

Best regards


Gabriele

Gabriele,

I just asked my contact if it would be OK to share some of the footage with this forum and he asked me not to.

The footage is of a nice young lady who was kind enough to pose for a test and she hasn't agreed to have her face all over the internet.

He did say that he will try to shoot something else or someone else and let me share that footage with this forum.

If any of you live in Doylestown PA, you are more than welcome to come over and take a look.

Frederic

Thanks Frederic

I have appreciated your attempt,
I hope you will can post some others clip!!!

Thank you very much for your invitations,
you are very very kind but i live in Florence (Italy)!!!!

PS:that lady has lost the possibility to become famous!!!!!


Best regards


Gabriele

"Apparently not, according to the lab. At least for now. "

What exactly is the problem with going from 60i to 24p, besides resolution loss, which should be a non-issue since we've got 1080 lines to start and will still wind up with a sharp picture even after deinterlacing.

<<<-- Originally posted by Peter Moore : "Apparently not, according to the lab. At least for now. "

What exactly is the problem with going from 60i to 24p, besides resolution loss, which should be a non-issue since we've got 1080 lines to start and will still wind up with a sharp picture even after deinterlacing. -->>>

1-Take 30 fps, convert it into 24

2- Take a wild guess...

There is no "problem"... film labs have been doing it for decades, and they've gotten pretty good at it.

Obviously you could do a better job by going from 50i, since a simple de-interlace would get you to 25P, and then a 4% speed modification would enable a 24P conversion. Going from 60i is more complex, but some labs are doing it and getting reasonable success with it.

To get a 24P image, the best would be a camera that shot 24P.

Next would be one that shot 25P, converted to 24P.

Next best would probably be either 50p or 60p.

Next best would be 50i, converted to 25P -> 24P.

Next would be 60i converted to 24P.

The worst format for 24P conversion is 30P.

So 60i to 24P is possible, but it won't look as good as other formats. However it's been done, and is being done today, and obviously starting with a high-def image will result in higher resolution in the finished product (not as high-res as the original source, but HD 60i should still be higher res, after converting to 24P, than SD 60i ever was!)

<<<-- Originally posted by Barry Green : There is no "problem"... film labs have been doing it for decades, and they've gotten pretty good at it.

Obviously you could do a better job by going from 50i, since a simple de-interlace would get you to 25P, and then a 4% speed modification would enable a 24P conversion. Going from 60i is more complex, but some labs are doing it and getting reasonable success with it.

To get a 24P image, the best would be a camera that shot 24P.

Next would be one that shot 25P, converted to 24P.
-->>>

I am sorry to say that the lab was not too specific about the "problems", but I will try to find out more. The term "resolution loss" is very wide, but what the lab said is that "the advantage of HD is the better resoluzrion, but in the case of a standard pulldown 60i to 50i it will better show the problems of this technique".

Completely agreed with the order you scaled our options with. I imagine that by "25p converted to 24p" you mean shooting PAL, de-interlacing and then doing a 4% pitch correction on the audio.

The unmentioned matter is that it's a very effective and cheap way to do video to film. If we add HD to that, then the quality vs cost gets very good.

I have seen SD video to film transfers at another lab, origin PAL, from different sources (DV, analog Beta, digital Beta) and the results are incredible. I even saw a blow-up of a film where they used an XL1 with a CCD lacking dots that had to be painted frame by frame, and you could not see it!

In any case, if we can get results as those on the "flower tests" I saw from the FX1, and we can get to hide the artifacts (apparently more visible on pans or fast movements), this new HDV could become a very prolific medium.


Carlos

I have seen some amazing transfers lately (that didn't even get distribution) from SD video shot in 60i. I can imagine that HDV in 60i will look much, much better. Plus the native 16x9 of the FX-1 helps another 10% or so just not having to go 4x3 to 16x9.

I doubt if Sony in LA takes the 60i NTSC footage into PAL before transferring.