Hey all,

In anticipation of a forthcoming Aug 2 announcement, I checked out the Canon: Japan site. And it looks like that second announcement could be a couple of consumer HDV models and a new DVD model:

http://cweb.canon.jp/newsrelease/2006-08/pr-hv10.html?jp=pr-hv10

Translated via Google:

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fcweb.canon.jp%2Fnewsrelease%2F2006-08%2Fpr-hv10.html%3Fjp%3Dpr-hv10&langpair=ja%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools

I was hoping for an XL H1s or another pro release/announcement of some sort...oh well...

Canon has annouced a new HDV mini in the vertical format, slightly smaller and lighter than the Sony HC-3. Looks like a nice machine, and I am partial to the vertical layout, but I will stick with the Sanyo HD1 until someone comes out with a more attractive model using the SD cards -- presumably AVCHD.

http://cweb.canon.jp/newsrelease/2006-08/pr-hv10.html

so... that's a 1CCD HDV version? i want a 3CCD consumer version priced @around$1,000 or lower =). that would rock

It has an RGB color filter; that makes it just about as good as a three-chip.

Read about it at http://www.hdvinfo.net/

Japanese links:
http://cweb.canon.jp/ivis/hv10/index.html
http://www.yodobashi.com/enjoy/more/i/57353736.html

Rough translation of basic specs:
1/2.7" 4:3 CMOS sensor with 2.96MP
Actual pixel count is 1920x1080 (2.07MP) in 16:9 mode
Low-light: 5 lux in normal mode (1/30s), 0.3 lux in night mode (1/2s)
10x Optical Zoom (f1.8-3.0, 43.6-436mm 35mm equiv.), 37mm filter size
Optical image stabilization
SuperQuick AF (active IR emitter, similar to A1/G1)
2.7" LCD with 210k pixels
Looks like no mic input or headphone output

It looks like the Japanese retail price will be around $1160. Canon products are usually 10-20% more expensive in Japan than in the US, so it might come in around a grand or a little under.

MSRP in the U.S. will be $1300.

See http://www.hdvinfo.net/articles/canon/hv10pressrelease.php

new canon hd cams

info + product comparison

http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Camcorders/High_Definition_HDV/index.asp?ComponentID=380231&SourcePageID=25108#

"The HV 10's 2.96MP Canon HD CMOS video sensor allows capture of HDV1080i footage with true 1920x1080 pixel resolution"

Now if Canon's imager captures 1920x1080 doesn't it still have to write 1440x1080 to tape?

"A level marker on the LCD makes it easier to line up the perfect shot."

Cool!

"Analogue-to-digital conversion is possible via AV input - older home movies can be easily archived to digital tape for safekeeping."

I wonder if this is DV only or if one could convert old VHS tapes to HDV format. Which would be nice if you want to keep one format of video around.

"DIGIC DV II helps to ensure low noise, a wide dynamic range, and accurate color reproduction for both video and photos."

Wide dynamic range compared to what?

yes but does it record, or more importantly will t play back 24F and 30F? I can't find that information anywhere.

You're not looking in the right place, Nick...

See http://www.hdvinfo.net/articles/canon/hv10overview.php

The news there might be interesting to you.

yupo just found it WAHOO!!!!!! awesome chris, overlooked 24f twice before I saw it in big letters right on the site...

Years ago I bought an elura 20MC to playback my xl1 footage now I can't wait to get this camera, oh man this thing is awesome

From the HDVinfo site:

"Although the HV10 doesn't offer 24F or 30F Frame modes nor four-channel audio while shooting, at least these capabilities were wisely added to the VCR mode of the HV10, and undoubtedly some XL H1 owners will probably buy an HV10 just for these specific playback features."

Undoubtedly I know of one XL-H1 owner who will... (note: we should all be aware as soon as you spend 1300 on using this camera as a deck a 1200 dollar portable HD-SDI system will be released...)

Alright, who wants to step up to the bar and be the first to make a feature film with one of these cameras?
Wouldn't it blow your mind if someone was able to make a good visual movie with one of these cameras?
Darrell
FIRST CINEMA PICTURES

Well, that's impressive. 1920x1080 for $1,300? Exciting times.

Canon USA's site is now up for this camera.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelFeaturesAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=14059&pageno=11

Well, that's impressive. 1920x1080 for $1,300? Exciting times.I think it actually scales that down to 1440x1080 before writing to tape. HDV can't be recorded as 1920x1080.

i believe a big issue would the crew looking at the director and asking him, where's the camera?

in this case... size will cause issues with the crew questioning how "professional" the director is =).


Alright, who wants to step up to the bar and be the first to make a feature film with one of these cameras?
Wouldn't it blow your mind if someone was able to make a good visual movie with one of these cameras?
Darrell
FIRST CINEMA PICTURES

Wow, Canon is down to only 5 SD MiniDV models. And three of those are ZRs!

Well, five single-CCD models (Optura 50, Elura 100 and three ZRs). They also have two three-CCD camcorders, the XL2 and GL2.

Alright, who wants to step up to the bar and be the first to make a feature film with one of these cameras?
Wouldn't it blow your mind if someone was able to make a good visual movie with one of these cameras?
Darrell
FIRST CINEMA PICTURES

I'd be happy to if it had 24f, but it appears that it doesn't. Strange though... It has Digic DVII processor, Plays back 24f, but doesn't do 24f. I'd be cool if it did do 24f They could always rebadge it as "cinema mode" option. Probably just wishful thinking. That would make for an awesome little B-camera for an XL-H1 or any of the XH series.

Yes, yes...YES!!! As the z200 is to my XL2, so shall this little guy be to my soon to be had A1. Very excited.

Only has USB2, but claims to support 1394 protocol for transferring video. Does this mean it comes with special software to emulate firewire?

i'm a bit confused on CMOS vs. CCD.

does 1 CMOS=3CCD's? or does it mean it's an equivalent? if so, why bother with 3 CMOS?

There's a FireWire 4 pinner on the front. The Canon site just has some confusing text.

wrong, Chris Hurd explained - and showed pics - that the HV10 has both USB2 and Firewire 400 :
Visit http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=72816

I think it actually scales that down to 1440x1080 before writing to tape. HDV can't be recorded as 1920x1080.

knowing HDV, we'd assume that. except, no where on the Canon web site does it even reference 1440x1080 - it emphasizes full resolution ("The HV10's CMOS sensor reproduces high-resolution images at 1920 x 1080 resolution with full HD information in video images"). so, either the marketing info is inaccurate (and not entirely truthful), or they are writing 1920x1080 to tape - which, would be very nice indeed... :-)

hopefully canon will clarify or confirm

I purchased a HDR-HC1 several months back because I was tired of waiting for Canon to offer a less expensive HDV camcorder. I was hoping that they would offer a single CMOS or CCD model like the Optura Xi but with HDV and 24f (or at least 30f). I think that those of us who own the HC1 can still be happy with our purchases. I'll just stick with the HC1 for now until they come out with something significantly better (in the same price range) or until I start making more money. :-)

As far as I can see, the new Canon HV10 does have some advantages over the Sony HDR-HC1:

- Optical image stabilization
- Instant AF system
- Noise reduction built into the CMOS chip
- Higher resolution LCD (210K pixel vs. 123K pixel)
- Adjustable zoom speed
- Composite video IN (actually not a big deal to me)
- RGB color and DIGIC DV II digital signal processor (Nobody does color as well as Canon --- my opinion)
*- Playback for 24F & 30F Frame Mode and four-channel audio (only great if you own a higher end Canon)
- It is a Canon! (in my opinion it is the better company)


But, I still see advantages of the Sony HDR-HC1 over the new Canon HV10:

- Form factor and weight (my opinion)
- Higher resolution viewfinder (252K pixel vs. 123K pixel)
- Shutter speeds (1/4-1/10,000 vs. 1/8-1/2000)
- Microphone jack
- Headphone jack
- Spot meter and Spot focus
- Focus/zoom ring
- Shoe (admittedly it requires an add-on to be a true cold-shoe)
- *Cinema effect (most might argue that this not an advantage and that it is crap, but at least it offers an option for a different shooting mode from 60i)
- Dual mode (does the HV10 offer a DV/HDV recording choice?)

does 1 CMOS=3CCD's?It does if it has an RGB color filter (and yes the HV10 has an RGB color filter).

Any single-chip camcorder with an RGB color filter will come very close to the color accuracy of a 3CCD camcorder. In fact, it will beat a 3CCD if the processing is superior. For example, take the old 3CCD Canon GL1 and put it up against the recent 1CCD Canon Optura 600. The Optura will have better color reproduction than the GL1, because its RGB color filter puts it in the ballpark of the 3CCD look, and then its Digic DV processor gives it an advantage over the older processor in the GL1.

Color accuracy is not just in the image sensors but also their color filters *and* their DSPs (digital signal processors). See http://www.dvinfo.net/canonoptura/articles/optura40elura70-2.php#rgb for some more details.

Remember also that your better digital still cameras (Canon, Nikon etc.) are all single-chip image sensors with RGB color filters. Think about how good those photos look and you get an idea of the advantages of single-chip video camcorders with RGB, like the HV10 and the Optura series.

Wow. I'm thinking this is really a trifecta by Canon.

I'm suitably impressed. Wonder if Panasonic is erasing their drawing board about now?

Go Canon. I'm definitely gonna get one of these as well...hmm, gonna have to do some saving for the A1 and this!!

thx chris. v. interesting technology =).

Do we know if the tape transport in the HV-10 is the same as in the XH A1 and XH G1?

Is the tape transport in the XH A1 and XH G1 the same as in the XL H1?

I find it amazing that we have all of these choices.

Is the tape transport in the XH A1 and XH G1 the same as in the XL H1?I don't know for certain if it's the same transport mechanism across all those camcorders, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if it is.

Dear Chris,

Thank you for the update and all the work that you do in order to bring us the latest information.

Dan

I don't know for certain if it's the same transport mechanism across all those camcorders, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if it is.
One thing we don't mean to confuse the reader with is the thought that a one chip 2/3" CCD camera with an RGB filter will have more light gathering power than a 3 chip 2/3" CCD camera. I felt we need to clarify somehow that more chips are better generally better than single chip camera. This assumes the 14-bit DSP or whatever the processor component it's using, is approximately equivalent in both cameras. I was almost getting the impression that we were implying 1 chip is better than 3, that would not generally be true.

Well Douglas, just to stir things up a bit and to play the devil's advocate, I will go on record and say that I can demonstrate how a one-chip camcorder *can* outperform a three-chip camcorder. But it's got to be a newer one-chip vs. an older three-chip, because as I pointed out above, the DSP technology has a lot to do with it and the newer the processor, the better. Single-chip with RGB gets into the ballpark with image quality that isn't far from the three-chip. Newer, superior processing technology will then give the advantage to the single-chip camcorder.

Now I don't know of any single-chip 2/3rd-inch camcorders that I can get my hands on, but the example I used above should work very well: take an older 1/3rd-inch 1998 Canon GL1 and compare its performance head to head with either the 2003 Optura Xi or the 2005 Optura 600 or any Optura model between that spread.

The single-chip Opturas have RGB color filters, megapixel CCDs slightly larger than 1/3rd-inch, Digic DV processors, and either Optical I.S. or the new version of Electronic I.S. which rivals OIS quality. The 1998 GL1 was great for its time but really isn't superior to the newer technologies found in the post-2003 Optura line.

So yes, I'll stand by that claim and I urge you to check it out for yourself sometime. The results might surprise you. It's more a case of newer technology beating old than it is three chips vs. one anymore. I'm willing to bet that the demise of the three-chip camcorder is not too far off. We haven't seen the last three-chip camcorders yet but there are fewer of them now than there have been. At the same time image quality is better than it ever has been before.

Allow me to again point to digital still cameras: the best ones are all single-chip with RGB, not three-chip. Sooner or later, video camcorders will be the same way too.

This is what I've been waiting for to start shooting HDV big wall climbing videos - woo hoo!! I'm glad I didn't buy one of the Sony HDV cams - this looks like a high def version of my Optura 100MC's !!! ;^)

Doug, I'm a little confused about how Chris' comments on the tape transport have anything to do with the sensor?

But anyway, about the sensor. The HV10 will have a single CMOS sensor, not a CCD, so that changes the equation a bit. If everything else were to be equal (which in reality it never is), splitting the same amount of light amongst 3 sensors will reduce low light performance compared to an otherwise identical 1 chip camera. Three chip cameras generally do well because all else is NOT equal, such as absolute aperture, sensor photosite size and native sensitivity, etc, etc. So there probably isn't any real way we can know just how the low light performance of the HV10 with 1 CMOS will be vs its "big brother" 3-CCD cameras until we get our hands on them.

Another thing we'll have to wait and see about is how well the camera's footage can be matched to the images from other cameras. It would rock if little or no correction would need to be done to credibly B-roll this camera with an A1 or H1. Hoping! But with a CMOS sensor (color/gamma matching issues possible) and a much smaller lens (lowered image sharpness possible, despite the 1920x1080 sensor area), it won't surprise me too much if the camera doesn't cut easily with the "big brothers."

If low light performance turns out to be superb and the camera cuts well with an H1, that'll be a huge bonus. I think it is a bit beyond reasonable expectations for an inexpensive pocket camera, but we can hope. ;-) Be that as it may, this is going to be an amazing low-cost pocket camera that as a bonus acts as a deck for professional cameras...I'm thinking I'd better reserve mine now because these little hi tech wonders are going to SELL!

I agree with both Pete Bauer and Chris Hurd concerning the picture quality of this camcorder. Camcorder technology has come a long way especially considering the fact that the picture quality of the HC1/HC3 is nearly identical to the FX1/Z1u in good lighting. I expect the picture quality of the HV10 to definitely be close to the XH-G1/XH-A1/XL-H1 camcorders.

Call me completely insane but it would not surprise me one bit, if the picture quality of the HV10 ends up being a little bit better than the Z1u/FX1 during outside day shooting.

If everything else were to be equal (which in reality it never is), splitting the same amount of light amongst 3 sensors will reduce low light performance compared to an otherwise identical 1 chip camera.

Actually the opposite is true. The prism in a 3CCD camera puts all the green light of the incoming light to the green CCD, all the red light to the red CCD and so on. So all the red, green and blue light will hit a CCD pixel.

On the other hand in a 1 CCD camera every pixel has a color filter in front of it which blocks about 66% of the incoming light. For example the red pixels will get only the red light, the green and blue will be absorbed in the filter.

So if you have a 1 CCD and a 3CCD camera and the 1CCD camera gets three times the amount of light the 1 CCD camera gets, they will have the same amount of light arriving to the CCD photosites.


This 1 CCD Canon CMOS camera is intresting for me because Canon manufactures the most light sensitive imaging chips for still cameras. And they are CMOSes. If they can get down that technology to this camera they may produce a 1 chip camera that is more sensitive than other 3 chip cameras with less light sensitive chips.

Thanks for the very nice clarification, Balazs. My (poorly stated) point was that this is a CMOS camera. The sensor block technology employed is going to be quite different from the guts of a 3-chip CCD block, so considering only the number of sensor chips in guessing the low light performance is not a useful exercise. Other aspects of design also matter tremendously. All we can do is wait for the camera and see how it performs.

1. if the HV10 is going to perform fairly close to its more expensive bros. in the XH series, why spend more $ when the lower price can achieve similar results?

2. hard to discern from the pictures, but does the HV10 accept filters/lenses? i'm starting to imagine people adding wider lens onto the HV10 =). ~$1,000 buys 1920x1080 AND very wide capture... this is pretty cool =).

I do not pretend to be an expert in this area, but both systems, 1 chip and 3 chip cameras have to have filters.

In my opinion, the 1 chip cameras have the filters in front of the sensor for each pixel, while the 3 chip cameras have a beam spliting prism and filters for each color.

1. if the HV10 is going to perform fairly close to its more expensive bros. in the XH series, why spend more $ when the lower price can achieve similar results?One word: control. It all boils down to the basic differences between the consumer and professional realms (and it's the exact same situation that has always governed standard definition DV). There are no audio recording management capabilities on the HV10. There are no custom presets, no way to dial in a specific f/stop, no way to smoothly adjust zoom, focus or exposure during shooting. You're going to show up for a paying shoot with this little thing? It will have its limited and specialized applications for certain instances in professional shooting, such as sneaking shots, crash cam, helmet cam, etc. but that's only in situations where nothing else will do.

2. hard to discern from the pictures, but does the HV10 accept filters/lenses? i'm starting to imagine people adding wider lens onto the HV10Yes it is a 37mm threaded filter diameter. Any 37mm attachment will go on there but it had better resolve for HD.

I do not pretend to be an expert in this area, but both systems, 1 chip and 3 chip cameras have to have filters.

In my opinion, the 1 chip cameras have the filters in front of the sensor for each pixel, while the 3 chip cameras have a beam spliting prism and filters for each color.

In 1 chip cameras the filters in front of the pixels simply absorb the filtered out colors. In 3 chip cameras the filters are much more sophisticated. Some of the surfaces of the prisms in the prism block are coated by a large number of layers with different optical properties. These surfaces reflect back part of the incoming light and let through the rest depending on the wavelength. So when the light comes into the prism it is going through a surface. But the blue portion of the light is reflected back in the direction of the blue CCD. Then the light goes through another surface where only the red portion is reflected back and is going to the red CCD. So here the advantage is that the filtered out light is not lost unlike in the case of the 1 chip camera filters.

Dear Balazs,

Thank you for the explanation.

I found a reference to how this works on wikipedia.org:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichroic_prism

Dear Dan,

Great link, thank you!

Originally Posted by Stu Holmes
I think it actually scales that down to 1440x1080 before writing to tape. HDV can't be recorded as 1920x1080.

knowing HDV, we'd assume that. except, no where on the Canon web site does it even reference 1440x1080 - it emphasizes full resolution ("The HV10's CMOS sensor reproduces high-resolution images at 1920 x 1080 resolution with full HD information in video images"). so, either the marketing info is inaccurate (and not entirely truthful), or they are writing 1920x1080 to tape - which, would be very nice indeed... :-)

hopefully canon will clarify or confirmSee this page :
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ja_en&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.watch.impress.co.jp%2Fav%2Fdocs%2F20060802%2Fcanon1.htm
Scroll down til you find the paragraph starting "In addition, with respect"

Transaltion isn't great, but its clear what is happening.

Also, read Chris' post here:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=521859&postcount=2

regards

See this page :
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ja_en&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.watch.impress.co.jp%2Fav%2Fdocs%2F20060802%2Fcanon1.htm
Scroll down til you find the paragraph starting "In addition, with respect"

Transaltion isn't great, but its clear what is happening.

Also, read Chris' post here:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=521859&postcount=2

regards

Hi stu,

thanks for the links. the translated text reads "In addition, with respect to the standard of HDV, record resolution becomes the 1,440×1,080 dot, but with iVIS HV10 from CMOS it quarries out image with the 1,920×1,080 dot, from there has reduced in the 1,440×1,080 dot.", so it does imply a reduction from 1920x1080 to 1440x1080 - definitely not clear on any of the official canon english-language sites.

so, why go 1920x1080 -> 1440x1080, instead of using native 1440x1080 as Sony does in the HC3 since the only output option is HDV? I'd think you'd get a better picture by not having to scale the source image (i.e., recording what you capture vs extra processing required). or, am I wrong? I see that the XH A1/G1 still capture at 1440x1080.

based on the CMOS alone, looks like the HV10 is "newer" than its big brothers HD cams. i imagine canon moving forward with their CMOS (in the form of 3x) technology in:
XL H2
XH G2
XH A2

now, if they did that and added that new avc codec to record 1920x1080x24p that would totally rock.

so, why go 1920x1080 -> 1440x1080, instead of using native 1440x1080... This is just like the Canon XL2. It produces 16:9 widescreen from a CCD pixel matrix of 960x480 even though what's actually recorded to tape is 720x480. Nobody argues with the fact that it's the best way to do 16:9 standard definition in DV. It's the same thing here. Remember an HDTV display is going to scale it back to 1920x1080 anyway.

It's the same reason why SD cameras use pixel shift. On SD cameras such as the DVX100 the chips are at 720x480 but yet pixel shift is used for higher detail. That is because starting with a higher source will always look better.

Since 1080i HD is really 1920x1080, starting at this point may give you a more natural look when the HDV is stretched back out on your TV.

The Varicam also does this. It uses chips at 1280x720 even though DVCPROHD only uses 960x720 anamorphic pixels. If the chips were 960x720 then when the image is stretched out to 1280x720 you could have some pixelated or aliased edges. Starting with 1280 and scaling down to 960 can smooth the transitions between the details so when it is scaled back up to 1280 on your HDTV the detail edges will be smoother giving a more natural look.

It can be a very small effect but to some it can make a difference.

Also note that while the XLH1 uses 1440x1080 chips it does use pixel shift to try and make that closer to a 1920x1080 chipset. With a single cmos chip you cannot do pixel shift so it is best to start with 1920x1080.