Ok, so Nick Hiltgen, a member of this great community, hits me up last night in email saying he had some time this weekend and wanted to shoot some stuff with the XL-H1. We exchange number......today was the day.

A little about Nick:
This guy is one cool dude! He's a Professional DP who flys the F900 out of Bennett Studios in Santa Monica. Very knowledgable about cameras and specs and settings and lighting and all that DP type stuff. He decided to compare the XL-H1 in its RAWEST-OUTOFTHEBOX state next to a DIALED-IN Sony F900. He felt that if he could keep the camera in it's most innocent state and only tweak the aperture, white balance and shutter speeds then he could get a better understanding of how the camera would react if it was dialed-in to a perfect shooting environment with the preset image settings. This is one smart dude.

A little about Shannon:
Little is known about this guy.

OK....On to the test......

WE SHOT ABOUT 7-MINUTES of raw HDV footage to give you guys. You don't need all of it, so I figure I would upload a few seconds of the Resolution chart footage so you can see that. A quick little introduction, and two clips showing the camera in 1080p24 @ 1/250th shutter and 1/48th shutter. The reason we did tests @ 1/250th shutter is because nick is contemplating on shooting a Horror movie in Atlanta which was originally going to shoot with the F900 but now may shoot with the Canon XL-H1. The producers of the movie are awaiting Nicks recommendations.....I think the XL-H1 will do this movie, but that's for Nick to decide.

AFTER CONNECTING BOTH CAMERAS it was CLEARLY OBVIOUS that the F900 was sharper and had a more rich image then the XL-H1 did......but after Nick did a few twists of the wrench on the XL-H1 it started to become indistinguishable. In our opinion, the F900 still had a better image no matter what Nick did to the XL-H1...but not by much folks!! not by much at f******ing all!!! The F900 was one and a half stops brighter then the XL-H1 so we had to open the aperture up a bit to get the same amount of light to spill in when comparing it to those 2/3" chips. Also, the F900 depth of field was shallower right off the bat. Well, then again, the F900 had a $15,000.00 lens afixed to the front of it too. *smile*

WE PUT BOTH CAMERAS IN 24P MODE.... by testing the motion cadence on the HD monitor, it was hard to tell which camera was which. The motion cadence of the subject was identical. Frequently, I would get mixed up as to which camera I was looking at. I had to look at the input light that was on to know for sure. As a result, it is clear that the XL-H1 can be matched up to F900 footage without a single proble for intercutting footage together for a project.

THE RESOLUTION CHARTS were next up. The Sony F900 was so slear it went off the chart at all frame rates. This chart stopped at 800 lpph and the Sony was clear all the way to the end. Guess what..........so was the XL-H1!!!!! After setting up the Canon and setting up the lighting and setting up the distance from the chart and all that technical stuff Nick was doing (I just sat back like a pupil), the Canon XL-H1 came in right at about 775-800 lines in 24f mode. In 60i it went off the chart.

WE HOOKED UP THE SONY Z1U to see how it fared up to these two interchangable lens cameras. We didn't bother putting the Sony in any of the CineFrame modes because it was uneccessary after seeing it in 60i. The picture on the Sony Z1U was pretty.....however, not as pretty as the XL-H1 or F900. On the reolution chart in 60i with no Picture Profile selected, the Sony Z1U topped out at about 700 lines, and that was with squinching and give tie to the runner. it was more like 685-700 lines. Also the Z1U's picture was much darker and we needed to open the aperture more then the Canon to get the same amount of light to spill in. Shutter Speed was @ 1/60th.

MY CONCLUSION....the Canon XL-H1 is BAD ASS! and I'm happy that I bought it. I won't be getting rid of this camera even after I buy the HVX-200 (which I may never do now!) If I hire a good DP who can dial this puppy in with thopse 23 image settings it has, I have COMPLETE CONFIDENCE that this camera will make some good looking movies that are comparable to many movies shot in big-budget Hollywood today!

BONUS......As we were standing on the corner of Olymnpic & Bundy in Santa Monica shooting cars and stuff, this cool-looking guy pulls up in a hot BMW....

"HEY...SO HOW DO YOU LIKE THE XL-H1????" he asks

We were a bit startled, but he was friendly... "WE LOVE IT" was my reply.

"ARE YOU ON THE INTERNET???"

"yes", i said

"DO YOU GO TO A WEBSITE CALLED DVINFO.NET?" he asked

"yes", i said

"DO YOU HAVE AN ALL WHITE LIVING ROOM AND MADE SOME POSTS ABOUT THAT CAMERA RECENTLY?", he asks

(i smiled) "Yes", i said

"YEA MAN, I GO TO DVINFO.NET TOO, I SEEN YOU ON THERE! MY NAME IS MITCHELL....I OWN AN F900 AND A BUCNH OF OTHER HIGH-END HD GEAR LIKE AN SRW-5500 AND SOME OTHER STUFF. I WAS THINKNG ABOUT GETTING A COUPLE OF THESE CANON XL-H1's FOR MY COMPANY. MAYBE I CAN USE YOU IF YOU'RE INTERESTED...."

"Yes", i said!!!

We began to talk and chop it up and discuss the HVX-200 and the XL-H1 and his plans on the big wonderful things he's about to do. He then gives us his business card "Kasdin Productions". we talk a little more then he jumps in his sexy BMW and speeds off like a Hollywood Millionaire would do on a sunny Sunday afternoon. *smile* Later on...it "HITS" Nick.... "OH YEA...KASDIN PRODUCTIONS...THEY WERE THE FIRST TO BRING THE P&S MINI35 TO LOS ANGELES!!!"

wow....

double wow, for us running into a DVINFO.NET member on any given sunday in the streets while shooting with the XL-H1. I guarantee you if we were shooting with a candy cane Xl1s or Xl2 he would have drove on by never giving us a thought. But that big sexy black XL-H1 caught his eye!

So kudos to Mitchell @ KASDIN.COM.

Anyhow....would you guys like to see some still photos from today? Here, check it out:

http://www.cinemahill.com/hidef/xlh1&f900/

For the video...I am going to capture that now and make it available either at that same photo site, or give them to Chris Hurd. I'll update you with that as soon as they are ready.

Gone

- ShannonRawls.com

I like to see the HD100U compared to both the XL-H1 and the f900. That should be interesting. Can't wait to see the video shot.

Shannon, thanks again for contibuting these results! Those H1 stills look great. I was sold on the Panasonic, but now I am getting high hopes for the H1 based on the images I saw DV expo (still iffy on HDV rendering).
I'll wait for a shootout with the Canon/Panasonic next month.

1. What are Nick's thoughts on the XLH1 so far based from today's test?
2. Shannon, how is your experience working with HDV so far (with H1 HDV)?


I worked with some HDV today and it takes about 8 minutes to render a 1 minute clip from HDV to Apple Intermediate Codec (and takes even longer to render to a DVCPro Codec) ...that means with my Dual 2.5 G5 it would take about 8 hours to render to a reasonable codec to edit with before I start editing! (I refuse to work with HDV on the timeline).

larry

Brian, we actually discussed the JVC but as we didn't have one in house didn't think it would be fair to rank it with the other cams, that in addition to the not so favorable reviews from some fellow dvinfo members.

A few other things I noticed.

The HDV codec is awesome, super awesome. We were monitoring straight hd-sdi out but when we watched the HDV footage through the same connection it was very close to the straight HD-sdi out.

THE 60I IS EXCELLENT! To be completely honest the 60i would be able to cut between a 900 if the f stop is taken into consideration. (roughly 3/4 of a stop but those in the know can correct me, (f11 on the 900 = f8 on the canon, f4 on the 900 = f2.4 on the canon)

The bottom line for me was if this camera has enough light it can definitely produce great results. Now we didn't tweak the canon at all and my 900's are set up for a very particular picture, but I'm confident with some tweaking this camera can produce 24F footage that can cut in with the 900.

That's all, that and I do work as a DP but I think shannon was being a litttle generous in his discription mostly I'm a D.I.T. and engineer for HD-CAM camera's.

Also I will say about Shannon Rawls, he is definietly a super cool dude. Who else would take time out fo his weekend just to do tests with some guy that e-mailed him out of the blue!?!

Anyhow this was a great experience and I'm more then impressed with the canon results.

::edit::
Larry I think my post answers your question, a reasonable workflow (it seems) would be to take the downconvert out of the camera and cut that then do an online later on to cut out some of that rendering time.

I have a HD-100U with mini35, so if you guys have time we can do a test on all three, which I am sure a lot of people want to know.

that sounds good, except I'm heading out of town to work on that film this weekend and will not be back for a few weeks but if everyones still interested at that point in time I'd be mroe tehn happy to host the shoot out.

that sounds good, except I'm heading out of town to work on that film this weekend and will not be back for a few weeks but if everyones still interested at that point in time I'd be mroe tehn happy to host the shoot out.

Let's do it when you get back. I can be contacted at duke@superbadmusic.com

Thats wonderful! Thanks for taking the time out guys... Good thing I have the money in the bank!

Is the footage from the Canon XL H1 from the HD-SDI out or is it on HDV tape?

Well hopefully i'll be able to write some reviews on the 50i PAL version soon! *Smile*

FOOTAGE!... footage!... footage!...

Just wanted to say Thanks! - you work so hard to provide reliable information for us all! (CANT wait till i get mine too)

Any chance to download the footage soon?

Shannon and Nick,

Thanks very much for your work here; really happy to have confirmation from professionals that my crude rez tests were in the ballpark.

I hope to post a little more testing (motion artifacting) by tomorrow and will look forward to your comments. And I know everyone wants to see regular non-test clips, so I'll risk my bandwidth limit and post a short clip or two.

Also one more thing for those interested about canon's 24F...

ON the Sony HD monitor's when you plug them in they will tell you what format they're getting from the source. It's not completely accurate (for example it reads the f900's 24psf as 48i, which is technically accurate but it would be so much nicer to see it says it's getting a 24p signal) but it's definitely a fair assessment of the technology. Anyhow when it reads the canon's signal (hd-sdi, or component) it was always listed as a 60i signal, which isn't really a surprise (otherwise we'd be getting 80 minutes out of our 60 minute dv tapes) but it leads me to believe that it is producing a varicam like effect in how it derives the info in camera. I should note this is really nothing new, just a little more info for whomever is interested.

Also as a note any of the footage that Shannon posts from our work will be from the HDV tape we shot as we didn't capture any HD-SDI in. (though I will be sure we try and do that at the next shoot out)

Now that's some video that I'm happy to host. Let me know if I can assist with server space and bandwidth. What a great test! Thanks fellows,

Thank you Shannon and Nick!

You are heroes,
thanks for this test.

All the best

Carl

Well, the BAD new is the CANON CONSOLE program is not a capture program! It's a live recording program only. I should have brought my laptop to the test yesterday because now I cannot capture the footage recorded to the tape.

Console has no transport features (play, ffwd, etc....) to control the camera and play it back. It looks like the only reason Console will switch the camera to VCR MODE is so it can lay your footage from your computer back to tape. otherwise, that's it.

HELLO CINEFORM......Connect HD on the otherhand, can do this. This is the program I was going to get anyhow! So it looks like I'll have to buy ConnectHD to make this happen for you guys. So it will take longer then expected. I was up all night trying to capture this stuff for you guys, until i fell asleep at the keyboard.

- ShannonRawls.com

Bugger... Oh well, you know your working in post production when your head hits the keyboard at 5am! :-)

The picture on the Sony Z1U was pretty.....however, not as pretty as the XL-H1 or F900. On the reolution chart in 60i with no Picture Profile selected, the Sony Z1U topped out at about 700 lines, and that was with squinching and give tie to the runner. it was more like 685-700 lines.

So in other words, a Sony Z1U costing under $5000 has roughly 80-85% of the resolution of an F900 costing over $100,000? Cool, thanks!

:-)

While I'm sure kevin was joking I have to really step in here and make sure no one takes this to far.

Yes Under controlled lighting, and movement the z1u produced I would estimate an image that was @ 70% the quality of the f900, however when you get into low light, moving camera, and lots of movement, that's when you'll really see the picture breakdown and the power of recording on HDCAM.


Also technically since the z1u topped out at around 675-700 lines and the 900 resolves 1000 you're looking at an image that is maybe 65% of an f900 in 60i mode.

Just saw the pictures and wanted to make sure I note that innovision is a great hd company, but DID NOT have anything to do with these tests, they're good guys and while I'd love to work with them, but this wasn't a sponsered shoot for them (just a shirt they gave me). Also the chart is available for purchase from bandpro.com or directly from DSC labs, and uh you shouldn't, you know... download the picture and make your own.

While I'm sure kevin was joking I have to really step in here and make sure no one takes this to far.

Not exactly joking, but just having a little fun. Obviously one would expect an expensive HD camera to yield a noticeably better image than a prosumer-priced HDV model, but it's still encouraging we can even have that discussion. Thanks for the correction about the resolution on the F900.

:-)

Kevin I agree it definitely is exciting that we can even begin to compare the big boys to the consumer (prosumer cameras and not do it completely tongue in cheek) The fact is I KNOW that some companies out there are cutting between the 60i off the z1u and 60i on 2/3 inch cameras and getting away with it. (note: our my company is not one of those). While I think it's great that it's being done I hear from the editors that they can see the difference an they have to be careful about how they cut the footage. But I'm sure as the technology grows there will be more and more of a blur in the professional and prosumer... well at least until NAB when the next gen pro commercial are released.

Nick,

Any thoughts/opinions on the lens and the EVF? Also, what did you think of the focus assist features?

To be completely honest I wasn't a huge fan of the EVF. Now I didn't switch over to black and white mode, but for me even with the sony HD Color Viewfinder, it's just hard to get focus on a color viewfinder. Personally I wouldn't want rely just on the image in the VF. I would love to see the camera with a 1000FU, or a mini 35 and the sony vf they're premoting to go with it now.

I like the focus assist features but as Shannon pointed outthe peaking isn't really the greatest thing in the world. For me personally it would be great if you could choose to double the image of something besides the middle of the screen for composition (though you could set your composition, move the camera, check focus, then move the camera back, to check composition but that would probably annoy me after a while) but for run and gun ENG and Studio work that's the perfect place to have a focus assist.

As far as the lens, well uh my PERSONAL opinion... If I could buy a body only kit I would, then just use the mini35 and 35 lenses. The lens itself is a strong lens, though people were correct in pointing out that the wide really isn't THAT wide. I'm also used to using ENG lenses that are 3x the cost of the camera, and I like the full manual feel. That being said, it is a VERY good lens, I do not feel like the camera was hindered by it much at all, I would like to see sharper lenses (I left my eos adapter at home for the test that would have been interesting) and manual lenses but I think this is easily the best lens that canon has ever included with a camera.

Thanks for the feedback, Nick.

It's pretty obvious the biggest compromise on all the "affordable" hd's out there is the VF. I've said before that the resolution needed is probably more like 960x540...but of course that'll never happen. Not at their current prices.

The other fairly big drawback with the H1 is that you can't use the focus assist while recording...or so they say. Tha't s a big advantage to the HVX, also that the HVX focus assist apparently gives you a pixel accurate blow up of the central image in the VF, but the screen itself won't go to black and white and it seems as low res as the DVX's.

Thanks again for doing some good work with the H1!

...Any thoughts/opinions on the lens and the EVF?

Barlow.... I have yet to find a viewfinder as nice as the one that comes on the Sony Z1U. The canon XL-H1 viewfindr is bigger and better then that of an XL2...but still, the Sony View finder spanks the hell out of Canon's VF and every other viewfinder for a camera under $20,000 for that matter! Sony got it right with the Z1U VF.

And personally...I think the 20x lens that comes with the XL-H1 produces a superior picture....BUT..... is horribly unresponsive and slow acting. Especially the zoom ring! It's like an old lazy dog who wont move off the porch to let visitors in the doorway. Just slugish and tired. I think Canon did that on purpose to inspire sales for theirforthcoming lenses, but that's just my opinion. For movie making this is fine, because you don't "ZOOM" in and out during a shot anyhow. You move the entire camera rig closer or further to change your angle of view. But for videography....it's ain't like a manual lens BY FAR!

- ShannonRawls.com

Good points, Shannon.

I think the ability to do whip zooms is a fairly critical thing for run-and-gun shooting. I can't tell you how many times I see it on promos for say, the local NBA team. Whip zooms all over the place. Hell, that was a technique played to the hilt in "Napoleon Dynamite".

I know I'm gonna want a manual lens...but, gulp, at what cost?

I'm actually shooting tomorrow with my 16x manual lens on the H1, I'll let you know what I think... Steve Rosen

I'm actually shooting tomorrow with my 16x manual lens on the H1, I'll let you know what I think... Steve Rosen


Won't you get a warning on the screen if you put on another lens? If so does that stupid warning go away after a few seconds?

show me da footage!!!

or even a jpg FROM the footage?? please??

;-)

Look in the other pages and there is a link to shots

Also one more thing for those interested about canon's 24F...

ON the Sony HD monitor's when you plug them in they will tell you what format they're getting from the source. .................... Anyhow when it reads the canon's signal (hd-sdi, or component) it was always listed as a 60i signal, which isn't really a surprise (otherwise we'd be getting 80 minutes out of our 60 minute dv tapes) but it leads me to believe that it is producing a varicam like effect in how it derives the info in camera. I should note this is really nothing new, just a little more info for whomever is interested.

Nick,

Found this info here: http://videosystems.com/mag/video_canon_xl_3/

here's what he says in his review/article....

At any rate, what comes out of the HD-SDI spigot is always uncompressed 1080/60i. Newly minted synthetic progressive frames must therefore be segmented into halves in order to fit the 60i cadence. For instance in 30PsF (progressive segmented frames/second), a progressive frame's odd lines are first output, then even lines, amounting to 60 half-frames per second, all of which are reassembled into intact progressive scans upon playback. This introduces the unique irony that 30F, which began life interlaced at 60i, is output as 30PsF at 60i.

24F comes out the HD-SDI spigot as 24PsF, with 2:3 pulldown added to pad 48 half-frames into a total of 60 segments. Downstream devices like NLEs that recognize segmented progressive frames and 24p repeat flags will readily ingest Canon's PsF stream and restore either 30F or 24F “progressive” frames upon playback.

So, essentially, it's treating it the same way a Sony F900 records 24p to it's big huge HDCAM tapes. Thought those that might be curious like we were as to why it always said 60i when connected via HD-SDI.

- ShannonRawls.com

Shannon: NICE FIND! That would seem to make since, and would also give a reason for the 24F "still" footage looking as sharp as it does, Hmm I wonder if the reason why "on movement" the camera has a lower resolution is because of the combination of frames producing an actual lower resolution frame, or our eye's adding blur to make it appear as though the camera has lower resolution. Since the f900's PsF is basically just doing a top and bottom frame you don't introduce the redundancy that you have with the 24F over 60. I wonder if that redundancy is what is causing this perceived (or actual) loss of resolution. I suppose the real test would be to see if 30F is "sharper". Either way good find, and I still stand by my original statement that this camera looks darn good.

All of the "EF Adapter" posts that were in this thread have been moved into their own topic:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=56642

In this case it's the motion blur.

You know one of these days I'm going to gaffer tape a res chart on a person riding a bike and follow them around. That would be real world moving res.

1/48th a second is not even expectable in still photography at all were there is movement unless for artistic blur.

At 1/48 even a very very slight movement renders a image severely blurry on a resolving factor of detail. 1/125th is usually considered a starting point. At showscan this was the shutter speed used, because of showscans ultra res this 1/125th gave it even a more heightened reality of sharpness at 60fps 65mm neg. Them were the days, loved working with 65mm film!

I have some research document somewhere that was on still photography and how camera shack caused the most hit to res. For this reason higher shutters speeds with optical stabilized lenses used together render the best results.

So again at 1/48th a second, it's not even fair to critique loss of res on any movement at all.



Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/




Shannon: NICE FIND! That would seem to make since, and would also give a reason for the 24F "still" footage looking as sharp as it does, Hmm I wonder if the reason why "on movement" the camera has a lower resolution is because of the combination of frames producing an actual lower resolution frame, or our eye's adding blur to make it appear as though the camera has lower resolution. Since the f900's PsF is basically just doing a top and bottom frame you don't introduce the redundancy that you have with the 24F over 60. I wonder if that redundancy is what is causing this perceived (or actual) loss of resolution. I suppose the real test would be to see if 30F is "sharper". Either way good find, and I still stand by my original statement that this camera looks darn good.

In this case it's the motion blur.

At 1/48 even a very very slight movement renders a image severely blurry on a resolving factor of detail. 1/125th is usually considered a starting point.

Not disagreeing, but doesn't IS add about 2 stops for a stationary subject? Isn't 1/48 IS within spitting range of 1/125 non-IS (again, assuming the subject is not moving)?

Best,
Christopher

True Christopher..... Depending on the size of the detail and the percentage of degrees of movement at what speed and distance are taken in to account. Even at 1/125th shutter very fine lines as the ones on res charts render out blurred with subtle movement. That same 1/125th reacts different when shooting a medium shot of a person because we focus on the larger details of the subject , but blow it up and analyze the label on that persons shirt and you will see that detail was lost on the finer elements a kin to the finer elements of a high res chart. On a res chart especially at the higher res parts, it's very critical for no movement. When we used to do 65mm showscan resolution tests, subtle movement was so obvious, inducing motion blur quite quickly and rendering that motion artifact on the higher res parts of the chart as loss of detail even at 1/125th.


>pappas


Not disagreeing, but doesn't IS add about 2 stops for a stationary subject? Isn't 1/48 IS within spitting range of 1/125 non-IS (again, assuming the subject is not moving)?

Best,
Christopher

Any of you guys think The XL-H1 would be good enough to be included in the filming of the popular TV comedy, "The Office"?

Jack, it depends if the office needs 24p, the show has a reel world feel, so I think if it's shot in 60i, yes. That being said I'm sure a good amount of post is done on it, it also depends on the lighting, i think if they can pump an extra stop/stop and a half in it would be remarkably similar to results achieved with a 2/3 inch camera.

Slightly off topic & FYI... "The Office" (The successful British version, not that terrible US attempt) was shot on Digi Beta using Canon Cine Optics with some really nice matrix settings on the Digi Betacam.

There's many rumours on internet message boards going around that it was shot on PD150's or similar prosumer cameras which is definitely not the case!

And 24/25p would definitely not suit the look they needed to achieve in this brilliant series!

Let's do it when you get back. I can be contacted at duke@superbadmusic.com
Maybe, just maybe, the Fuji 13x lens will have made it's grand entrance by then and we can have a look at it.

I'm talking about the US remake. Can they use a XL-H1 in 24p and is it good enough for them?

I'm talking about the US remake. Can they use a XL-H1 in 24p and is it good enough for them?

It's meant to be like a reality show so the "realness" of interlaced video is what suits it best.

"The Office" had a decent budget, I can't see any reason why they'd consider using prosumer cameras instead of full size Digi Beta/HD cameras.

Also slightly off topic, but does anyone know what Grizzly Man was shot on, and who did the absolutely stunning transfer to 35mm? At least the brand new print I saw at our film festival in Traverse City was amazing, better looking than most films originating in film. I am thinking it was an early 3 chip DV camera like the VX1000.
And this is germane since I wonder with the ever improving transfers from 60i if one should consider shooting the H1 (which I don't own but am considering) and the z1 in 60i rather than either 24f or 50i even when film out is intended. 60i would also mean that HD projection and/or NTSC DVD/TV screenings will be optimal.