Much frustration with shooting video with MANY of the latest still cameras comes from the perceived downside of no control over shutter and iris when shooting. The fear stems from:

1) Inability to set shutter-speed when shooting 24p, 25p and 30p. Of course, even when a camera offers this ability, given the smaller chips, iris is typically limited to under f/8 so in bright light an ND filter is required.

2) Inability to set optimum F-stop, typically f/4 to f5.6. Of course, even when a camera offers this ability, given the smaller chips, shutter-speed will typically be too fast so in bright light an ND filter is required.

3) The ability to set both. Once again, in bright light an ND filter is required. Complicating these issues is that when in AE, a still camera has a program that is biased to keep shutter-speed as high as possible to eliminate camera shake artifacts.

So, one way or another, adding an ND filter is a must in bright light.

I've long wished for a camera that would switch programs when shooting video to keep shutter-speed as low as possible to eliminate strobing artifacts when shooting at 24p, 25p and 30p. The new Canon SX20 has exactly this function.

In an EV14 (ISO = 80) the "still" exposure is f/2.8 at 1/2000th. When shooting video -- you can see the current exposure by touching the exposure button -- the exposure changes to f/5.6 at 1/500th. "Still" mode is biased for a high-speed while the "video" mode is biased for smaller aperture.

Adding an ND8 filer brings the "video" exposure to f/5.6 at 1/60th. Very nice. Adding an ND1.2 filer would drop another stop, which could bring the exposure to f/5.6 at 1/30th. This would be perfect for 720p30, which the camera shoots.

The 1.2ND filter would allow a brighter scene of up to EV15 and still keep the shutter-speed under 1/60th. At a very bright EV16, shutter-speed would only be 1/120th which is OK.

========

The other great thing about the SX20 is that it uses a 1/2.3-inch (0.44-inch) 12Mpixel CCD. Yes, no jello!

Plus it has a very good Optical Image Stabilizer System. It also has a 2.5-inch TFT color articulating LCD. Best of all it as a large 0.44-inch viewfinder with 235,000-pixels.

It shoots 30.0p (not 29.97) H.264/AVC (Baseline@L4.1; no CABAC with 1 reference frame) at 24Mbps VBR with stereo PCM 16-bit audio captured at 44.1kHz. I see no motion artifacting.

And, of course, AF while shooting. But, you can Auto-Lock Focus and AE as you may need to do.


I've sent my Casio EX-F1 back.

This looks real interesting, I have been seriously thinking of getting a panasonic LX3 as my next point and shoot still/video camera, as I like the fact it goes to 24mm wide and shoots raw, but I will look into this one more..thanks for the lead. It appears you can buy an adapter for using threaded filters.. John

yes -- real threads for 52mm filters. Cheap too at under $400.

PowerShot SX20 IS Digital Camera (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=144&modelid=19208)

I compared it to the new Pana and every test I could find the Pana had better ois at full 20X zoom, but the Canon had far more acurate -- not bluish -- awb. This is important to me -- although you can manually set wb. The Pana also had more edge-enhancement which I hate when viewed on a 63" screen. The Canon looks softer, but I can live with that.

I'm surprised no one is talking about these new alternatives to the way too expensive GF1. I think Canon may sneak-up on everyone from above and below.

PS: stills are great too. No RAW, but for the internet I really could care less. I haven't made a print since the `80s.

well I ordered one, and the filter adapter from lensmate (they are 58mm not 52).From all the samples I could see they looked great, and the price is great as well. I got mine from newegg for 359.00. I know they have a firmware hack via CHDK for adding raw for the sx10, so hopefully there will be one out for this cam soon.

i own sx200is, and the video is really excellent. so film looking and sharp. ois is quite good - and only the lack of zoom and focus lock is the downside. i filmed interview in bar on the loud concert (just to see how it will sound) and it was impressing. the video on sx200 is wow.
i also own a630 and the raw from hacked firmware is not so impressive, not to say that is is quite useless.

well I ordered one, and the filter adapter from lensmate (they are 58mm not 52).From all the samples I could see they looked great, and the price is great as well. I got mine from newegg for 359.00. I know they have a firmware hack via CHDK for adding raw for the sx10, so hopefully there will be one out for this cam soon.

Odd. I put what I thought was a 52. I'll double check. Can you describe the hack

the hack info is located here..
CHDK Wiki (http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK)

its an ongoing collaboration to alter the firmware in many cameras to give you more options. I use it with my canon sd800IS to get raw files, timelapse,etc.

"... and the filter adapter from lensmate (they are 58mm not 52)."

My filter is definitely 52mm.

that is wierd because I just bought this adapter from these guys and it says 58mm, so go figure..but maybe the lens itself is 52mm, but I assumed it didnt have built in threads on the lens..either way, cool camera.

Lensmateonline - Canon PowerShot SX20/SX10 & SX1 IS (http://www.lensmateonline.com/newsite/SX10SX1.html)

It has threads which is one of the nice things about it. B&H has a Tiffen 52mm 1.2ND that cuts light 4-stops.

You can twist a 52mm filter onto an SX1 or SX10 lens and it will stay firmly attached, even though Canon didn't intend for this to be possible. No adaptor is needed. The SX20 lens is probably the same.

Very odd.

My old Sony 52mm camcorder filters screw on fine.

My new 52mm Tiffen 1.2 ND does not -- although it will screw into any Sony 52mm filter.

So I've screwed the 52mm Tiffen 1.2 ND into a clear 52mm Sony.

What's the 58mm lensmate and how does it fit with the hood?

the lensmate adpater is a bayonet mount that goes on end of the sx20 lens, and has 58mm threads on the other end..

The footage from the Canon point and shoot cameras like the SX-1, SX-10 and S-X20 is at 30p rather than 29.97 and is at cRGB levels rather than the sRGB levels of a regular HD camcorder. Both these items are automatically corrected when you convert the .mov format native clips from the camera to .avi Cineform codec with any of the Cineform products like Neo Scene. The 30p will be slowed down slightly to 29.97 and the levels will be rescaled so that it won't look to contrasty and the highlights won't be blown out on an HD TV. I believe that the color correction is a playback function and not something that is actually changing the data. Anyway, without Cineform it is quite challenging to use the footage from one of these cameras. With Cineform it is extremely easy to get great results.

There's no real reason for CineForm.

While it's true that 29.97 isn't 30.00 -- with a typical clip used a project being about 5 seconds long -- there's no cause for concern. You can do the math to see how long a single clip in a project needs to be before a 1 frame error will occur.

Likewise, cRGB or sRGB is going to be converted to YUV by all PRO NLEs. If your NLE allows for SuperWhite (over 100IRE) then cRGB is simply going to give you are wider dynamic range -- up to about 108-110IRE which is perfectly normal. In fact, it's great!

Given the fact about 1 in 10000 TVs have black level set correctly ( at 0IRE) when the NTSC norm as been 8IRE since Day 1 -- the fact that the camera can record a few more dark shades which will get truncated going to YUV is not a significant issue. (Assuming the CMOS chip actually provides real information at such low light levels.)

Moreover, the fact is that HD cameras use 709 standard which is YUV and not sRGB.

The whole CineForm premise is that there is an advantage to not editing native formats. In terms of speed this was true 5 years ago with MPEG-2. And, yes, with H.264 it remains true until the quad-core laptops become the norm. On the other hand unlike CineForm, disk band width is VERY low with H.264. Especially 720p30!

Every other claim they make is false. No intermediate is needed with any any current pro editor. There can NOT be an advantage to converting one format to another -- quality can only lost. It can't be preserved nor can it be improved.

All modern NLE's have there own intermediate codecs to use IF AND WHEN RENDERING NEEDED is needed and all are real-time codecs -- which with FCP CineForm isn't. So, CineForm will be no better than native H.264. You'll have to render both!

Moreover, unless you have 10-bit data -- not bloodly likely -- only the internal NLE calculations need be done at 10-bits. FCP give you better than that. Avid gives you 16-bits.

Remember, any source is only decompressed ONCE when the final export is made. No intermediates (e.g., ProRes) are used. Everything pre-rendered is NOT used by FCP. And, with Avid, you can force renders to be discarded.

Renders are only used for pre-viewing.

the lensmate adpater is a bayonet mount that goes on end of the sx20 lens, and has 58mm threads on the other end..

OK -- so HOW does it connect to the SX20 lens if it does use the threads?

And, what about a lens hood?

When I put my 52mm ND on the Sony 52mm -- the Canon hood no longer fits.

PS: I'm still puzzled by how there can be two different 52mm sizes? One screws in and one doesn't.

I just bought then returned a 52mm UV filter yesterday. The size was right, but it looks to me like the Powershot is grooved rather than threaded. I could twist it in a little but I couldn't tighten it. It just sort of sat there loosely.

I do like Cineform with my SX-1. I use this as an extra camera with a Sony HVR-Z7 being my main camera. I use Sony Vegas and it previews the Cineform very smoothly without dropping frames but gets maybe three or four frames per second in the native .mov format. Vegas plays video in a .mov container but not terribly efficiently so the situation is probably quite different for FCP users. The cRGB to sRGB conversion makes the SX-1 blend quite a bit better with my Z7 and seems to avoid the blown out looking highs that I get otherwise. Vegas also smart-renders the Cineform very quickly. Quality of Cineform encoding is really good even after many generations and thanks to the smart-rendering it only re-renders when it has to. Your mileage may vary, but for me, Cineform is quite useful with this camera.

as I have mentioned before, you have to buy the adapter for it that is grooved for the 52mm bayonet style mount on the end of the lens..this adapter has 58mm threads on the other end for your filter..works great.you can then attach your lens hood to the filter if you like..it is impossible to attach any filter directly to this camera lens.

OK, I get it now. You use this adapter:

Lensmateonline - Canon PowerShot SX20/SX10 & SX1 IS (http://www.lensmateonline.com/newsite/SX10SX1.html)

Just one more question. It looks like you might want to get one for each filter you use (say one for a UV filter and one for a polarizer) in order to be able to change it quickly. Is that what you do? Not too horrible at $15.95 each.

well you could do that but not needed. just grip the adapter and unscrew the filter, put on another one..or better yet, just leave the UV filter in place all the time and just screw another filter on top of that..note you may get vignetting at the full wide setting. And whats going to make this camera even better than it is, is the chdk firmware hack will be available soon (its in beta now) and you will be able to shoot raw and get access to the superfine jpg setting among other things..
http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/SX20

as I have mentioned before, you have to buy the adapter for it that is grooved for the 52mm bayonet style mount on the end of the lens..this adapter has 58mm threads on the other end for your filter..works great.you can then attach your lens hood to the filter if you like..it is impossible to attach any filter directly to this camera lens.

So the end of the lens is 52mm and it is grooved, but it's "groove" is not the same as a 52mm filter thread. Correct?

So, somehow, my 52mm Sony ND filter must have thread that fits in where the adaptor goes.

Now my problem is that I own an $80 52mm ND filter, but I suspect the 52mm adaptor can't accept a 52mm lens. Unless, the make one that doesn't alter size.

the end of the lens is 52mm, but its not threaded ! it is a weird bayonet mount..thats why you need that adapter and yes you have to use 58mm filters with it.

Quote: The whole CineForm premise is that there is an advantage to not editing native formats .... no intermediate is needed with any current pro editor.

I disagree. AVCHD decoded directly by current Adobe products (AME, Premiere) gives a poor result, with chroma artifacts that can be avoided with a Cineform workflow. See for example these images, which are framegrabs from 720p60 AVCHD from a HMC40, converted to avi using AME vs. HDLink (i.e. Cineform). Compare the edges of the red pack.

Hey Graham, I think you posted in the wrong place?

John, I was responding to post #15 - that's where the "quote" is from....

Quote: The whole CineForm premise is that there is an advantage to not editing native formats .... no intermediate is needed with any current pro editor.

I disagree. AVCHD decoded directly by current Adobe products (AME, Premiere) gives a poor result, with chroma artifacts that can be avoided with a Cineform workflow. See for example these images, which are framegrabs from 720p60 AVCHD from a HMC40, converted to avi using AME vs. HDLink (i.e. Cineform). Compare the edges of the red pack.

There likely are poor AVCHD and H.264 decoders used by some NLEs -- and I should have thought of that. My bad.

There's been a lot of encoder comparisons, but I don't know about decoders. I would expect CineForm to be one of the best. My problem is that FCP uses ProRes and Avid uses DNxHD -- and both have their own real-time engine. As I remember, CineForm can't run under Apple's or Avid's real-time engine.

So that leaves Premiere because Adobe allows it's real-time engine -- which isn't real-time at all -- to be replaced by CineForm's engine. But, now Adobe has developed a GPU RT engine for Premiere. I wonder if they will allow it to be replaced. Maybe we will find-out at NAB.

PS: Panasonic's new 1080p60 consumer camcorder skips AVCHD for H.264.

John, I was responding to post #15 - that's where the "quote" is from....

sorry my bad...

The SX20 IS comes with a HDMI output. CHDK allows for a 10-bit RAW capture - so clearly the internal processing is 10-bit. There is a chance that the HDMI output is actually 10-bit 4:2:2 720P - a first in the camera world.
Would anyone care to check with a HDMI uncompressed 10-bit frame grab ?
I am just not sure how the color data can be checked to see if it does indeed have 10-bit colorspace.
Would be an interesting experiment anyway.
And if it is indeed 10-bit, we have a camera with the sensor size of the EX-1 for under 400 bucks..

well the bummer is the CHDK is still in beta for this camera, I am waiting patiently for it to come out and make this camera even better..