I put my SD card in the HFG10 at CES 2011 to bring you these sample videos. Consider the camcorder is not totally finished, Canon may still be tweaking things in terms of quality. I couldn't fit my Sennheiser MKE400 Shotgun microphone for better directional audio recording in the thing, I guess Canon doesn't use standard shoe size, surely I could get an adapter.

As far as I understand the $1500 Canon Vixia HF G10 has the exact same optics and video recording quality as the $2000 Canon XA10, only difference being XLR inputs. Let me know if there is more differences? I wonder if there are good not too expensive XLR audio recording options for the two XLR inputs in XA10 and if I should go with that instead of the Seenheiser MKE400 shotgun microphone that I have been using for over a year.

Find my Samples posted to my website: Canon Vixia HF G10 Sample recordings – ARMdevices.net (http://armdevices.net/2011/01/15/canon-vixia-hf-g10-sample-recordings/)

24mbitps@1080p@24p Sample:
On YouTube: YouTube - Canon Vixia HF G10 Sample (24mbitps@1080p@24p) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuEMUKlREWE)
Download sample (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BzVsbZCTO4l3ZDI4ODAxNjMtMTc4OC00NjE5LThiNDgtNTFhYmY1NDM3YTRh&hl=en&authkey=CPvykfIN) on Google Docs (96MB for 34 seconds)

12mbitps@1080p@24p Sample:
On YouTube: YouTube - Canon Vixia HF G10 Sample (12mbitps@1080p@24p) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kz45LoBz3k)
Download sample (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BzVsbZCTO4l3MWVlYmQ2ZTgtZmQ4YS00OWU0LTliNWYtZjMzYmJlYWI0Y2Iw&hl=en&authkey=CKrL7KYO) on Google Docs (52MB for 35 seconds, this is probably the quality I would record my video-blogging in for it not to take too long to upload to YouTube)

No in-camera cut and join editing? No 720p modes? No 60p mode? No overlay graphics integration (such as transparent png file with my logo at bottom right corner of videos)? No built-in Bluetooth mics and sound mixer (Canon says they got an external Bluetooth microphone option, though may not support more than one Bluetooth microphone at the time)? No built-in fast WiFi and Ethernet YouTube uploads? I would like a good in-camera compressor to make high quality at low manageable bitrates to upload HD on YouTube without requiring PC re-encoding, without it taking too long especially at conferences where there is slow upload speed. Those are features I would like in my next camera, but I still may do without if quality can be much improved over the Sanyo HD1000 that I have been using for all my video-blogging since March 2008. Do you think I should upgrade my video-blogging to this camera or do you have another suggestion for what new camera I should consider?

Hi Charbax! Fancy seeing you on here (and welcome). It's a few years since I was helping out on your Forum!

Well, if you're looking for a fairly top end camcorder with maximum picture quality in a small sized package for blogging then that Vixia will do a nice job I'm sure. Or you could consider the outgoing versions, e.g. Canon HF S21 (and it's variants).

Other top end camcorders to consider would be the (new) Sony CX700 (or it's outgoing sister CX550) or perhaps a (new) Panasonic TM900 or it's variants (again the current model is the TM700). These are the consumer camcorders often mentioned on here as being at the top end for picture/performance/features at this kind of price point. Choose what works best for your own needs.

Cheers!

This is the adapter I use on my HF S10

Hague Canon Shoe Adaptor - for Canon Camcorders CSA on eBay (end time 03-Feb-11 11:00:53 GMT) (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Hague-Canon-Shoe-Adaptor-Canon-Camcorders-CSA-/380304832746?pt=UK_Photography_CamcorderAccess_RL&hash=item588bef38ea)

Looks like the new approach to using a single 1/3 inch full-raster chip by Canon is bringing class leading low light performance to their new high end/prosumer small form camcorders - although last year's 3 chip Panasonic (TM700 etc.) can deliver a little more sharpness and colour saturation it seems, plus 1080p50/60 and at a much lower price point, albeit with weaker low light performance.

I imagine the next Canon model up, the XA10, would perform identically since it's the same chip, lens and AVCHD codec. This is the one I'm most interested in because of the XLR option so this HF-G10 review has been studied somewhat by me as an indication of what that one might be like too!

Also, the new Sony CX700 also uses a single sensor (1/2.88 inch, 6.2mm) so that one's low light performance will be interesting too - when it gets reviewed - hopefully sometime soon!

Just ordered this camera from Japan. Should be here in ten or so days. I will post some HDMI captures with it once it arrives. I believe that this camera will be unbelievable quality and value.

Take care.

yeah, I wanted to order from Japan too, but camcorder will be available only mid March, and mid March it'll be in every store, so I guess there is no point to loose a waranty option.

Unfortunately the camera may be delayed a bit. B&H was showing March delivery and it's now showing April delivery. Canon tells me it's 'shipping' in mid-March and will be available sometime in April.

First or second week of April to NY dealers.

Lou, where did you get that info?

Actually - the seller will be shipping April so cancelled my order

i can't believe how well it does in low light, i absolutely love this wonder of technology!
Canon HF G10 test footage on Vimeo

That was a great comparison video by Paramon (is that you?)

Glad he/you used some well know cameras (TM700, EX1, 5DMkII) in there and labelled the settings for shots.

The new Canon HFG10 does indeed do remarkably well in low light.

That was a great comparison video by Paramon (is that you?)


yes, it is me :)

Buba, thanks for the test. What's your take on how the HF-G10 compares to the Panasonic TM700 in good light? It seemed from your video that the 700 was both redder (perhaps an AWB issue?) and sharper. But you would know best.

I've got this puppy on order too, but who knows when we'll see it.

Thanks!

G10 doesn't have 60P, and in 60P TM probably looks it's best, I choose G10 because it has better low light , but i will run side by side with TM700, XF100, CX700 and any other camcorder I'll find,

Thanks, that would be great! I know the HF-G10 will do much better than the 700/900 in low light, but I'd like to see how much the G10 is sacrificing in good light relative to the 700/900.

it doesn't look to me like it sacrificing anything, and i like the look of G10 @ p30 better that TM series @ p60, to me TM @ p60 looks too videoish, but enough talking :) i will post some videos, it's just too busy at my jobs :)

Can someone help me out with what this means?

You would normally have to look to professional video cameras in order to have a sophisticated tool like 30p Progressive Mode at your command. In addition to the standard interlaced video frame rate of 60i, you may choose to set the VIXIA HF G10 to capture video in 30p, (30 progressive frames, recorded at 60i) which is particularly useful for footage to be used on the Internet. Excellent for action and sports shots, this setting gives enhanced quality to still images captured after recording

Jim, I've got the XA10, essentially the same unit as the G10. I fail to understand how 30p could be better at caputring sports and/or fast action than 1080i. As with 24p, that frame rate will introduce a degree of 'stutter' in your motion if you are not careful.

So I don't think it's good advice (from whoever wrote that), to say that 30p is great for action.

You can't compare 1080i to 30p.

1080 is the resolution and 30 is a frame rate.

You can have 1080i or 1080p, the difference being interlaced or progressive frames.

The reason they say that the 'p' is good for sports is that you get the whole frame in one go, whereas in an interlaced mode, such as 1080i 60, you get one frame split into to fields. This means that fast action sports will have significant motion taking place between the two fields making up one frame and this will then have to be deinterlaced at the cost of quality.

But as you say, a higher frame rate might also be beneficial in sports, so that one might want to shoot 60p if available over 24p or 30p.

Andree, I fully understand the difference between resolution and frame rate. I mentioned 1080i vs 30p & 24p because I thought it was understood that 1080i will generally mean to most people 1920X1080 60i. It is with that understanding I mentioned that rapid motion & sports would be better handled by 1080i (meaning a 60i frame rate) than 24p or 30p. You will not get the fluidity of motion with the slower frame rates. If you've ever seen 60i on an HDTV with a decent deinterlacer, the motion is absuolutely fluid and beautiful. Many sports are broadcast in this format and they are very well done. The issue of the loss of quality is a moot point these days since modern deinterlacers are so good they're visually transparent. I've got a Pioneer Kuro and it is very tough to tell the difference between 60i and 60p on it.

Some people may or may not like 1920X1080 60i (I do), but it will unquestionably be smoother for rapid motion than either 24p or 30p. Obviously 60p will also have the benefit of smoother motion handling.

Ken- I totally agree that 60i is more suitable than 30p for rendering fast motion (sports, etc.)
However, here's another 60i/30p issue that surprised me & I'm wondering what your observations are.
As part of a very detailed review of the HF G10, the reviewers measured recorded color saturation in low light shooting @ different framerates. Their results showed significantly higher recorded color sat in 30p than in 60i. Again, this was strictly low light conditions.
I had never heard of this, so I'm wondering- Is this common knowledge? Unique to this camera? News to the rest of you as well?
Thanks

Bob, I didn't see that review (can you post a link?), but I guess it doesn't surprise me too much. If you consider the slower frame rates are capturing more light in any given setting, it's not surprising that also yields higher color saturation.

Since I only use 60i, I can't say I've seen that or done any frame-rate A/Bs in low light environments to see the impact on color saturation. The negative impact for me with the lower frame rates (motion) would offset any gain in color saturation. I will tell you though that the XA10's color retention, even with 60i, is the best I've ever seen and nothing that would drive me to look for alternate means of capturing the scene.

Very good to hear your assesment. I really prefer 60i as well.
I'm going to order the XA10 as soon as they become available again.
It should be able to do double duty: be an upgrade from my CX 550 for travel & stealth, and fill in for a bigger pro cam when XLR audio/ wireless, etc. is needed.
This review is quite exhaustive and worth reading in detail- I'm sure you've seen these guys before:
Canon Vixia HF G10 Camcorder Review - CamcorderInfo.com (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-Vixia-HF-G10-Camcorder-Review.htm)
Thanks

To each, their own... 60i or 30p is certainly for everyone to decide for themselves.

I guess it's the whole concept of halving the resolution that doesn't sit well with me.

Sure, with 60i you get twice the fields (not frames), and that does smooth the motion, but you also only get half the amount of vertical lines.

Now, in slow pans or steady shots, the two fields will complement each other well, and overlap enough to make a convincing whole picture, but the "1080" part is more trickery than anything else.

Photographically speaking, the 180 degree shutter and 60 half frames is not enough to lock the frames in or for my peace of mind.

That all being said, since my target is 80% computer anyway (and not a TV set), I'm inclined to shoot progressive.

Well, at least there shouldn't lie any surprise in the fact that image quality wise, on a frame by frame basis, the 'p' will always win.

Enjoy your shooting!

I guess it's the whole concept of halving the resolution that doesn't sit well with me.
This is absolutely not true.
I have produced & edited lots of 1080 HD programming delivered on BD for HDTV from both 1080 30p and 1080 60i source footage, even occasionally mixing the two in the same project. There is no difference in the delivery resolution, either perceptually, or in fact.
To say that 60i results in half the resolution is ridiculous- it would be jaw droppingly obvious to even the most unsophisticated viewer.
I use both framerates- 30p is certainly beautiful and I often use it for more "cinematic" type shooting, but I also shoot action events, sports, etc. where 60i has a very visible advantage in motion rendering.
They are both useful, and both can produce stunning, full resolution HD imagery.
I understand your focus on the fact that each field is an alternating 1/2 of the vertical rez- we all get what interlaced video is- but the fact is, when those alternating horizontal lines are running @ 60fps, the effective resolution is full 1080, and that is exactly what it looks like on the screen.

Andree
I was just reading some of your other posts.
You've got these notions about 30p/60i that have some internal logic, but they are simply not correct regarding motion rendering:

Motion Rendering- fast action/panning
1) 30p/24p If you are shooting fast action/panning with a moderate shutter speed (1/60, 1/50) you can get significant motion blur in each progressive frame. This becomes quite noticable- for example with panning, the entire image can look blurry, then suddenly sharpen when the pan stops.
To avoid this, you can increase the shutter speed, like to 1/250. Now each progressive frame records a sharp image, but now the appearance of the motion is "stuttery" and that is just as noticable & un-natural looking as excessive motion blur.
The film industry (24 fps) has developed tons of shooting rules and techniques to avoid these problems, so it can be done, but you need to learn and follow the rules.
2) 60i At moderate shutter speeds you get some motion blur, but it is spread over two half images (fields) made at different points in time, which has the effect of reducing the perception of the blur by half. So, overall a fast image looks significantly cleaner/sharper than with 30p. With higher shutter speeds each half image (frame) is sharp, but since there are 60 of these sharp renderings per second, the image does not stutter as it does displaying fast motion with only 30 sharp frames per second. It looks smooth.
So, the bottom line, if you are a clever, knowledgable shooter, you can get good action footage with 30p, but it can be tricky. On the other hand, shooting 60i, it's a no-brainer to get good motion rendering- you just point the camera and shoot. So people like me, we like it- we don't have to be clever- we can do it with a hangover on a dark,windy day, one hand in the pocket... And, honestly, there's no real downside.

Hey Bob,

Everything I have said is correct. But perhaps I've been misinterpreted. I also realize you know the difference between 'p' and 'i', so there is no need to go deeper into that.

I didn't say or mean that the net resolution is halved by 60i, but let's look at the facts:

When recording 60i you are getting 60 half resolution fields per second. They can then be intertwined- deinterlaced- into 30 full resolution frames. Or simply viewed, "as is" at half res, at a "fast" refresh rate of 60Hz on a TV screen, alternating so quickly that they appear to be one. But as you say: two half res fields makes a full frame with full resolution.

If we have a stationary camera filming a static scene, there is absolutely no difference between 60i or 30p. But this is a rather unusual scenario.

Once we introduce motion things change. With a moving camera and/or moving subjects, the two half res fields will no longer be able to sync up to a perfect frame. What was captured on the odd lines has now moved when it's time for the even lines.

The changes between even and odd may very well be so minute that it's indiscernible to the eye. But the fact remains, that the only way to get a full frame of 1080p is by recording in a progressive format.

It's for everyone to decide what they prefer. Motion might very well appear smoother on 60i due to the higher refresh rate, but I personally like progressive better. For optimum results 60p would be great, but that would then need an even higher bitrate/second to account for the double amount of frames.

you may choose to set the VIXIA HF G10 to capture video in 30p, (30 progressive frames, recorded at 60i) which is particularly useful for footage to be used on the Internet. Excellent for action and sports shots, this setting gives enhanced quality to still images captured after recording

The assumption made in the Canon manual when recommending 30p for sports is that a still image is the final product.

The assumption made in the Canon manual when recommending 30p for sports is that a still image is the final product.

Are you suggesting that if the final product is a video/film, then the recommendation would be something else?

Broadcast sports is generally 60i or 60p. When shooting with the HFG10 for web delivery, the need or lack of need for slow motion replay determines whether to shoot in 60i or 30p. If you need slow motion, shoot 60i.

If you need slow motion, shoot 60i.

Why on earth would slow motion be a factor for deciding?

Because 60 is better than 30?

Because 60 is better than 30?

60 what is better than 30 what?

That is my constant worry on these forums.

People actually don't know the difference between fields and frames.

Why on earth would slow motion be a factor for deciding?

60i can be deinterlaced to 60p and 60p can slowed to 30p to obtain smooth 1/2-speed slow motion. If you start with 30p and slow it down to 1/2 speed you end up with 15p which isn't very smooth. It is possible to smooth 15p out using motion estimation, however this type of processing works best for smoothing out large scale movement and slow motion in sports needs to reveal quick small scale movements to be interesting. Thus, shooting 60i or 60p is necessary for slow motion. Over cranking to 120p would be even better and could be used to obtain smooth 1/4-speed slow motion at 30p, but this is not an option on the HFG10.

60 what is better than 30 what?

That is my constant worry on these forums.

People actually don't know the difference between fields and frames.

Maybe you should learn the difference between 60 and 30? Yes, 60 is interlaced, but that is still 2x more temporal information. Eric has it right.

60i can be deinterlaced to 60p

:)

Eric, you need to look into interlaced and progressive again.

Yes, 60 is interlaced, but that is still 2x more temporal information.

Hehe... I guess that's one way to put it!

But just to be clear: when you say "temporal information", you mean the two parts of the same frame, torn apart and separated by time in half resolution fields?

A detailed explanation of how to deinterlace 60i to obtain 60p is at

Eugenia's Rants and Thoughts Blog Archive Butter-smooth slow motion (http://eugenia.queru.com/2009/02/09/butter-smooth-slow-motion/)

You can find similar articles by searching this forum and elsewhere.

A detailed explanation of how to deinterlace 60i to obtain 60p is at

Eugenia's Rants and Thoughts Blog Archive Butter-smooth slow motion (http://eugenia.queru.com/2009/02/09/butter-smooth-slow-motion/)

You can find similar articles by searching this forum and elsewhere.

What you are effectively referring to are further proof to what I am trying to say! The advantages of progressive frames vs interlaced. And yes- for slow motion, more frame are better. And yes, progressive is better!

But please tell me that you realize that you cannot "obtain" 60 progressive frames out of 60 interlaced fields. Please acknowledge this!!

What you CAN do, using more or less sophisticated software, is to BLEND frames. It has been available in After Effects for quite some time:

By studying two successive frames and the pixel motion, the software can inject new frames, synthesized out of thin air (i.e. create new frames and pixel data not previously there).

The results may vary from very good to quite poor, depending on source footage and how much you're trying to push it.

This way I could create a 300p file from 30p footage.

But... this is not what this discussion was/is about.

60i makes for 30p. And for each of those "p" frames, two "i" fields are used. Those two "i" fields are separated by time if you shoot in a "i" format. And there is nothing that will or can change this 'after the fact'.

IF you KNOW that you will do frame blending via pixel motion, it might be interesting to to shoot 60i due to the fact that you get twice as many "half resolution frames" that the software can use when synthesizing new pixels. I haven't seen this tested, but it would be interesting to see how it compares to pixel motion from 30p footage.

But let's not for an instant assume that this is a "normal" workflow, or that this is what is happening behind the scenes in a normal video editing suite when your 60i footage is being deinterlaced.

I hope this helps and that we are now all clear on what is what.

Starting with 60 fields per second just rescale the fields into frames to get 60 frames per second. In the context of slow motion for sports, rescaling the fields in 60i to 60p and slowing this down to 30p looks far better than starting with 30p and slowing that down to 15p. However, if you do not want slow motion, film in 30p for web delivery.

Any opinions here as to how good the camera is as I'm thinking of buying one?

Ron

But please tell me that you realize that you cannot "obtain" 60 progressive frames out of 60 interlaced fields. Please acknowledge this!!

It's called bob-deinterlacing. It effectively creates two progressive images from one interlaced. It's not rocket science.


This way I could create a 300p file from 30p footage.

And it would be way more horrible than having a 60i image. Try it out yourself.


I haven't seen this tested...

Obviously you haven't. Software solutions are not that good. You cannot make a completely smooth 60p from a 30p file if the motion is even slightly complex. You can from a 60i. It will half the vertical resolution but it's still a lot better than using pixel motion.


But let's not for an instant assume that this is a "normal" workflow, or that this is what is happening behind the scenes in a normal video editing suite when your 60i footage is being deinterlaced.

It has been quite normal for Premiere and AE users as they handle interlacing way better than FCP. FCP does not do proper deinterlacing, it's actually terrible at it.

Any opinions here as to how good the camera is as I'm thinking of buying one?

Ron

Frankly, the consensus seems to be that the XA-10/G-10 is a spectacular camera.
Here is a massively detailed review of the camera:
Canon Vixia HF G10 Camcorder Review - CamcorderInfo.com (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-Vixia-HF-G10-Camcorder-Review.htm)

It will half the vertical resolution.

See! I knew we could get there if I only held my breath long enough!!

If you want to read up on Bob Deinterlacing, here's a small snippet from Wikipedia:

"Simple doublers (Bob and Linear) display only one half-picture at a time. Nevertheless, the quick alternating display produces a convincing illusion of full vertical resolution while playback is running."

See! I knew we could get there if I only held my breath long enough!!


I was wondering why you were getting so red in the face.

Let's take a look at your post once more: "Why on earth would slow motion be a factor for deciding? "

Now I have explained it to you fully. And even when explained you act like you don't get it. Or maybe you do? Very hard to say from that rambling.

I just hope you never recommend 30p instead of 60i for someone who is doing slowmotion again.

Now I have explained it to you fully.

As in:

"It's called Bob Deinterlacing" and

"You cannot make a completely smooth 60p from a 30p file if the motion is even slightly complex. You can from a 60i. It will half the vertical resolution but it's still a lot better than using pixel motion."

We all have different interpretations of "fully", that's for sure.

Mikko, you started by stating "because 60 is better than 30". This indicated to me that you equal fields to frames.

Then you went about saying how you can synthetically create half res progressive frames by line doubling. I was sort of assuming that doesn't count as a solution.

I have never recommended anyone to shoot 30p for slow-motion. I would recommend at least 60p. Preferably much more.

I simply stated that going interlaced doesn't magically give you 60p, and 60i cannot recreate the footage you would have gotten, had you shot 60p at the time of recording.

I was waiting for you and Eric to acknowledge that you cannot maintain resolution by doing it your way. If you want to use your "60i method" as a creative choice, of course that is totally up to you. Just like people adding grain to clean footage for effect.

But I felt it was important to clarify what 60i is and isn't. And it isn't 60p.

Unfortunately, the HF G10 doesn't support 60p, so you'd have to use another camera for that.