First of all, thanks to everyone for posting footage and impressions the last few weeks. I decided to get the H1 and went out shooting global warming in my own backyard yesterday--green grass, blue water, and people out in shirtsleeves here in Northern Michigan where usually skiing is king this time of year.
I am blown away by this camera. My first impression is that the detail and colors are simply amazing. And I have shot very successful feature films on full HD and film (mostly as a producer, not a DP.) So far in my HDV experience, all the complaints have turned out to not be true or to be overcome with good shooting/learning the workflow. When one factors in that your DV film was probably NOT going to air in theaters just BECAUSE it was DV, HDV is a miracle. HDV is not perfect, it just gets one into the realm of the resolution that just MAY take the audience into the story and away from fighting the image.
I also own a Z1 and it is a great camera. But the lense and tweaks to the H1 put it in a different league to my eye.
As a side note I personally have always been a little leary of the Panasonic hype because when testing the DVX for transfer to film it never came close to beating other affordable DV cameras available yet the forum had newbies thinking this camera was the second coming. (Of course as a doc guy the P2 option is not one I would consider anyway.) Both the dvx and hvx are great camers but the hype has been misleading and a real problem to newcomers in my view.

Lacking uncompressed audio is a near deal killer for me on this camera. However, a local shop I deal with is also getting them in for rental. Meaning I can rent an identical unit for two-cam shoots, and will have their conversion support as well.

I can have HD-SDI for studio and dedicated setup. For run and gun, I'll have to figure out a third party audio capture. I'm not sold on mpeg layer II for post.

How is the camera for shoulder/run and gun shots? I hear it's more forward heavy than the XL's. What's your impression? 75% of my stuff is on a tripod, but there are times...

I too had been worried about the sound, but so far recording mono and stereo voice and nat sound into my Z1 and what little I have done into the H1 I have been happy with. (I have only had the H1 for two days keep in mind.) Better than the sound from DV cameras recorded similarly to my ears. Again I am producer, not a technical person. Will post more later, balance and other issues seem minor compared to the stunning image and control.
I can only echo Shannon and others that the so far all the drawbacks to HDV seem to overdone and the H1 is am amazing tool--for me the best run and gun doc tool save HDCAM unless you want a smaller camera like the z1.

Congratulations! It seems we have just freed another person from the misconceptions and myths of HDV. HDV audio is perfectly fine. I know I did three broadcast projects with it. It seems the only company strangely enough that says you need to rent an audio recorder with HDV because the audio in the camera is unusable is Panasonic. Strange? I wonder why they would say that?

Here is one truth you can take to the bank. It's time we kept on educating folks to the marketing ploys of these companies and expose them every step of the way.

Going to use the XLH at all in the new MM doc? How is that going?




ash =o)

I also get a little tired of people proclaiming that you can't shoot decent audio with certain cameras, such as the PD150/170. I've worked on a documentary shot with a DSR500, a DSR250, a PD150, and XL2, and some other cameras I can't think of offhand. Projected theatrically (on a fairly small screen, only 28 feet), it looked great and the sound was excellent. The mics used were mostly Lectrosonics wireless systems with a variety of lavs, and a Sennheiser MKH60 and a couple of other shotguns, and different mixers too. Better quality recorders can get better sound, of course, but the differences in DV recording with most any camera are minimal. I'll get my first HDV interviews in a couple of weeks, but from the headphone monitoring, I'm confident the Z1 sound is good too.

So far in my HDV experience, all the complaints have turned out to not be true or to be overcome with good shooting/learning the workflow.

i guess that i must have missed something in your post? i understood you to say that you just got the camera yesterday, is that correct?

what have you actually shot, edited, and delivered with hdv?

Lacking uncompressed audio is a near deal killer for me on this camera.

I´ve been working with pro-audio since the days of analog tape. First in the music business, then post for film & video. In my view the MPEG compression is only one factor to consider. Uncompressed 16bit 48K or whatever are just numbers, and doesn´t automatically mean better audio. The pre-amps are just as important. Good ones cost more and can make better sound in a compressed codec then bad pre-amps to uncompressed. So you have to use your ears to make a judgement. Also you need to make comparisons using good mic´s. The one´s that come with the cameras are usually no good.

By the way, digital audio in general v.s. analog, is like film v.s. digital video. Less practical headroom. The resolution in digital sound rises with higher levels so for really critical sound with high dynamics 16bit uncompressed won´t do anyway. You need 24bits or higher and outboard gear.

In most cases I believe the H1 will make great audio put in the right hands.

Dan, you must have missed where Jeff said he has also used a Z1.

Jeff, since you have experience with actual film, we'll look forward to more of your thoughts as you move past first impressions with the XL H1. Also, it'll help us to know you better if you fill out the info in your profile (location is required, the rest is optional but much appreciated).

... Uncompressed 16bit 48K or whatever are just numbers, and doesn´t automatically mean better audio...

I'm with you on that. I'd have to hear it first. Just that reading about compressed audio is not a good first impression of a $10K camera, which should be better than the XL it replaces.

All of this yak is irrellavent while waiting anyway. I'm hoping to rent the H1 and see (and hear it) for myself.

Thanks Jeff for sharing your experience.

Pete

In my view the MPEG compression is only one factor to consider. Uncompressed 16bit 48K or whatever are just numbers, and doesn´t automatically mean better audio. The pre-amps are just as important. Good ones cost more and can make better sound in a compressed codec then bad pre-amps to uncompressed. So you have to use your ears to make a judgement. Also you need to make comparisons using good mic´s. The one´s that come with the cameras are usually no good.

By the way, digital audio in general v.s. analog, is like film v.s. digital video. Less practical headroom. The resolution in digital sound rises with higher levels so for really critical sound with high dynamics 16bit uncompressed won´t do anyway. You need 24bits or higher and outboard gear.


One of the most astute and rarely heard comments about audio in the video world. Too often, it all becomes just a numbers game, especially amongst audio or video engineers or shooters.
One comment tho, there isn't any audio standard above 24bit, just 32 bit floating, which is really about 27-28 bits or so, and no hardware actually supports this. (I mention this because it's a video board, so don't want folks to start running around looking for 32bit audio recorders)

I just wish HDV could record audio at a higher bitrate..

i find the 256kbps substandard for Dolby Digital delivery, Especially when working witha large range of fluctuating frequencies... If i wanted a 256kbps mp3, id use a dodgy iriver...

Dolby Labs wouldnt license material aqcuired at such a low bitrate, and they dont look kindly on upsampled bitrates either as its a compromise to quality,
Not to the naked ear, but to the fact that the standard 5.1 encode is 448kbps (384 is also acceptable too)

I also find that the mpg2 audio encode to be rather mushy (i do alot of stage shows and live concerts with multiple mics into a mixer yadda yadda, so im using a variety of mics.. Ive ben doing audio for 11yrs, and as an acquisition format, for most its OK... for the heavy ****, get a dedicated recorder...

Now, im recording audio straight into a DVX100, while i shoot with Z1's. It helps having a visual cue by doing it this way too, and having the raw audio DOES make a difference.. believe me..

HDV audio is good for normal stuff, but when ur pushing frequencies to exploit the full bandwidth of a said piece, then it doesnt cut it..
Sorry... but thas just my opinion

One comment tho, there isn't any audio standard above 24bit, just 32 bit floating, which is really about 27-28 bits or so, and no hardware actually supports this.

Thanks for the correction Douglas. I don´t know why I said that. I was actually thinking of higher sampling frequencies when writing it.

To clarify. The number of bits refers to the dynamic in levels, and 24bits is the highest.
---------------------

The challenge in making good audio in low cost equipment is to know it´s limits. Digital audio (in general) has the limit that low levels doesn´t use all the available bits. On the other side levels over zero will introduce distortion at once. You need to avoid that at all cost, hence you end up with less practical headroom, though the spec´s tells you you have all the headroom in the world.

Analog audio introduces distortion slowly and much nicer and can be compared to film, where you can tweak out information in overexposed whites.

So.. what does this mean in real-life, recording audio on the H1 (or any other digital cam for that sake)? Well, you could turn on the onboard compressor, but the quality of these are mostly bad and will introduce all kinds of unwanted artifacts like "pumping". So in the end you will have to learn to control your levels. Best way is right placement of mic´s and keeping a steady eye on the level meters. And of course good mic´s makes everything so much easier.

If the starting point is good even compressed formats will deliver good quality, just like compressed video. I could go on for hours but I guess I´m a little off topic here, and I really don´t wanna upset Chris H. so I´ll leave it with that.

My point anyway was that after reading so many threads here about numbers, I would love to see more discussions on how we can tweak the best out of our equipment. Remember, never before has so many people been able to participate in making movies. It´s harder to make good quality on low bud. equipment, but it definitely can be done... with a little help from our friends here at the forum.

pk

I also find that the mpg2 audio encode to be rather mushy (i do alot of stage shows and live concerts with multiple mics into a mixer yadda yadda, so im using a variety of mics.. Ive ben doing audio for 11yrs, and as an acquisition format, for most its OK... for the heavy ****, get a dedicated recorder...


Peter I´m also doing stage, and I usually hook up my DAT to the P.A. mixer.
Then blend with my own mic´s. when mixing in studio.

Are you saying that you achieve good audio with mic´s through your own separate mixer and then go straight to the DVX? Are we talking no PA here?

If it´s like live orchestra recordings, that´s the most demanding of all when it comes to quality and dynamics. That indeed requires dedicated everything. I wouldn´t recommend anyone doing that with any camcorder.
-------
Chris, if your out there. Do we have a place to discuss gear for different scenarios.

Chris, if your out there. Do we have a place to discuss gear for different scenarios.

the Now Hear This forum is for discussion of audio gear and recording scenarios.
Peter, you might find the referenced article useful for understanding HDV audio vs PCM audio.
http://www.vasst.com/resource.aspx?id=c7ff16c5-9a4d-4660-bb4d-a1ebcaaf1463

To expand on what Spot says above, "Now Hear This" may look like a gear forum at first glance, but we're trying to steer it toward technique. In other words, NHT is sort of an audio-everything board, for now anyway.

"Are you saying that you achieve good audio with mic´s through your own separate mixer and then go straight to the DVX? Are we talking no PA here? "

this is what do now... other times i run 2 cameras so in effect im running 4 audio channnels..
I use abuout 4 to 6 mics, jacked into my own Yamaha 01v console, mixed in there (EQd only, no other effects) then output to either 2 or 4 channels straight into the cameras line input

I used to use a Tascam HD-P2, but i found the redundant video footage to come in handy :)

Ive never had an issue doing this...

DSE thanks for the link, however even at 384kbps its JUST on the verge of being acceptable for Dolby Standardisation...

this is what do now... other times i run 2 cameras so in effect im running 4 audio channnels.. I use abuout 4 to 6 mics, jacked into my own Yamaha 01v console, mixed in there (EQd only, no other effects) then output to either 2 or 4 channels straight into the cameras line input. I used to use a Tascam HD-P2, but i found the redundant video footage to come in handy :)
Ive never had an issue doing this...


Well, if it works don´t fix it. =) An alternative setup that would perform well would be a laptop and a Motu Traveler. Very good converters and pre-amps. Gives you full multitrack option and easy post (for audio)

From a practical point of view it can be tempting to record audio on the cameras. I will be be shooting stage with 3 xl-H1´s this summer, so
you made me curious on how well the H1 audio will perform in HDV. I did a quick subjective a/b test today. I took a raw stage-recording from my DAT player (a semi-pro Tascam) and recorded DAT analog out to H1 analog in. (unbal.)
The recording originates from the PA mixer (-10 analog out to -10 analog DAT in) and hence shows how the H1 would perform as the recorder on the set. It´s not all fair to the H1 because the sound now has gone through two semi-pro converters (DAT+H1) but it certainly wouldn´t be any worse. I first recorded in SD which should give me PCM audio and then recorded the same piece in HDV now recording MPEG2 audio. I listened to both playbacks switching A/B between DAT/PCM and DAT/MPEG.

Now, when listening to sound through different converters your bound to hear different sound. How much of the difference comes from the converters and how much from the different formats is hard to say.
The DAT had some more resolution then both of the other sources, some of it could be the result of the DAT´s better converters. The difference between the PCM and the MPEG on the H1 however, in my ears was minor. That is my first impression anyway.

On paper there is a clear difference and it could turn out to be more pronounced in other scenarios. Personally I think a lot of other factors will have a much larger impact when it comes to actual results. MPEG2 audio stands well beside MPEG2 video as far as I´m concerned. Neither is perfect but both performs quite well.

I will upload the 3 files later in another thread so people can make their own judgement.

Thanks for your report Jeff, very good info indeed.......

Jeff were the producer on Michael's "Bowling for Columbine" and "Fahrenheit 9/11." ?


Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com

CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }

PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
XLH1 and HVX200 frame grabs and news here:
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms

http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts





First of all, thanks to everyone for posting footage and impressions the last few weeks. I decided to get the H1 and went out shooting global warming in my own backyard yesterday--green grass, blue water, and people out in shirtsleeves here in Northern Michigan where usually skiing is king this time of year.
I am blown away by this camera. My first impression is that the detail and colors are simply amazing. And I have shot very successful feature films on full HD and film (mostly as a producer, not a DP.) So far in my HDV experience, all the complaints have turned out to not be true or to be overcome with good shooting/learning the workflow. When one factors in that your DV film was probably NOT going to air in theaters just BECAUSE it was DV, HDV is a miracle. HDV is not perfect, it just gets one into the realm of the resolution that just MAY take the audience into the story and away from fighting the image.
I also own a Z1 and it is a great camera. But the lense and tweaks to the H1 put it in a different league to my eye.
As a side note I personally have always been a little leary of the Panasonic hype because when testing the DVX for transfer to film it never came close to beating other affordable DV cameras available yet the forum had newbies thinking this camera was the second coming. (Of course as a doc guy the P2 option is not one I would consider anyway.) Both the dvx and hvx are great camers but the hype has been misleading and a real problem to newcomers in my view.

Jeff were the producer on Michael's "Bowling for Columbine" and "Fahrenheit 9/11." ?

I thought Gibbs was the music composer on that flick?

last nite i went to Adwar Video in farmingdale ny . thay had sony panasonic jvc and canons hd products ,cameras and hd displays . i hope some others on this board were also there . seing all these hd cams side by side was a thrill . i am a canon fan and own an xl2 .but i have to say in my humble opinion the panasonic had them all beat by a mile . every thing about the 200 is better . and also the panasonics sales team was well informed and knew there product . on other thing jvc had a dvd player on display not yet on the market that up grades a standard dvd to hd it realy was awson . thanks and chow dp

Donald,

Thanks for the report. Yeah, the HVX200 is quite amazing. It's going to be an awesome tool for those filmmakers / Documentarians / News etc that use it. With solid sate recording ( P2 ) it is today were it's all going to be in the very near future. Tapeless.... Please if there is any other stuff you learned or saw, let us know. I would be curious hear about it as well others.



Link: XLH1 and HVX Info and Footage
http://www.pbase.com/arrfilms

Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site

CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }


XLH1 and HVX200 frame grabs and news here:
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms

http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts


last nite i went to Adwar Video in farmingdale ny . thay had sony panasonic jvc and canons hd products ,cameras and hd displays . i hope some others on this board were also there . seing all these hd cams side by side was a thrill . i am a canon fan and own an xl2 .but i have to say in my humble opinion the panasonic had them all beat by a mile . every thing about the 200 is better . and also the panasonics sales team was well informed and knew there product . on other thing jvc had a dvd player on display not yet on the market that up grades a standard dvd to hd it realy was awson . thanks and chow dp

panasonic had them all beat by a mile . every thing about the 200 is better . and also the panasonics sales team was well informed and knew there product . Did you base your opinion on the spec comparison they provided you?

on other thing jvc had a dvd player on display not yet on the market that up grades a standard dvd to hd it realy was awson . thanks and chow dp

that product deserves an infomercial. ;)

to anser your question my opinion was based on what i saw . all cameras were running and they were only 20 or 30 ft apart if that .so it was easy to compare . also it was easy to see that panansonic was getting a good deal of the crowd . i got there early and had an opportunity to talk to the reps . but by 5pm the place was packed . also that dvd player . jvc guy told us it was made by another company for jvc and was not on market for sale at this time . one other thing if you could beleave this a pana rep told me that in the next few years there will be 100 gig p2 cards . thanks dp

to anser your question my opinion was based on what i saw . all cameras were running and they were only 20 or 30 ft apart if that .so it was easy to compare . also it was easy to see that panansonic was getting a good deal of the crowd . i got there early and had an opportunity to talk to the reps . but by 5pm the place was packed . also that dvd player . jvc guy told us it was made by another company for jvc and was not on market for sale at this time . one other thing if you could beleave this a pana rep told me that in the next few years there will be 100 gig p2 cards . thanks dp
hey donald, there are already dvdplayers whch connect though HDMI and DVI which upscale SD to HD (720p or 1080i)
thereyre about 250bux AUD...

yes i have seen them in best buy . my samsong 42" hd dose a real nice job of making video look good . i hook my xl2 up via rca cable .and it is very nice to to look at .shot some seaguls the other day in 24p got one of them hovering over the car . watching the wings in 24p is awsom .anyway this unit they had at the jvc table was just better than i have seen . although after giving it some thought it may have been just a very good monitor . the jvc guy did say it was new though .well thanks and by dp