Thanks for submitting this, Spot!

http://www.hdvinfo.net/articles/sony/firstlookv1u.php

sounds pretty good and no in camera mic. I like that too.

Para2 seems to show 24p movement jitter, or than the para1. Were they shot or processed different ? Or is that just me...

Great!!! Everything I have been looking for. Any idea on shipping date and MSRP?

December 2006, about $ 4,800 msrp.

So the press release claims 60P but DSE doesn't mention it. Is the official spec sheet out?

So the press release claims 60P but DSE doesn't mention it. Is the official spec sheet out?
Probably because there's no way for the camcorder to output 1080p60.

-Steve

So the press release claims 60P but DSE doesn't mention it. Is the official spec sheet out?I saw that too and I'm 99% certain thats simply an error in the press release (surprising i have to say!).

its 60i and not 60p.

Here's a spec sheet for V1U :
http://bssc.sel.sony.com/BroadcastandBusiness/minisites/HDV1080/HVR-V1U/spec.html

I am concerned that 960x1080 is not a self consistant resolution for the diagonal pixel arangement, and that no mention has been made to confirm or deny that the unit suffers from the same (ClearVid intrinsic) diagonal resolution problems of the HC3.

Douglas, are you willing/allowed to comment on these?

Para2 seems to show 24p movement jitter, or than the para1. Were they shot or processed different ? Or is that just me...

Something is up with Para2. It looks like somehow pulldown to 29.97 interlace got added, and then when resized down to 1280x720 and 23.98 fields got blended.

Para 1 looks superb though. Resized down to 720p it looks nicer and more refined than my HD100 ever did. I would consider Para1 to be the one we should be looking at, and ignore Para2 for the time being.

I saw that too and I'm 99% certain thats simply an error in the press release (surprising i have to say!).

its 60i and not 60p.

Here's a spec sheet for V1U :
http://bssc.sel.sony.com/BroadcastandBusiness/minisites/HDV1080/HVR-V1U/spec.html


Is it possible 60p is going to be available by upgrade in the future- by some sort of an upgrade when and if that format becomes more standard??.

Is it possible 60p is going to be available by upgrade in the future- by some sort of an upgrade when and if that format becomes more standard??.

There is no 60p output on this product. It internally processes at 60p, but the only output is 1080/60i (whether 24p embedded in 60i, 30p embedded in 60i, or 60i as 60i).

There is no 60p output on this product. It internally processes at 60p, but the only output is 1080/60i (whether 24p embedded in 60i, 30p embedded in 60i, or 60i as 60i).

Barry:

I understand, and I don't pretend to understand the technical side of it. So you experts will know this better than I. But what I was trying to find out is that with the available onboard processing capability, could an upgrade in the on board software, be accomplished by some upgrade process, and if so, does the camera have the hardware to get it out. Edit: I think I remember Canon offering some upgrade recently like that...

I think I read your response to mean "no way".

Well, there's no way to know. There is no 1080/60p format out there, there's no broadcast standard for it, so I doubt they've designed an upgrade path for something that doesn't exist yet. Possible but I'd be surprised.

Now, if Juan at www.reel-stream.com were to Andromedize this, then there'd be a way to get 60p out of it, but other than that it's doubtful.

I'm guessing 60p's primary benefit would be for better slow motion production. Could the human eye really tell the difference between 30 full frames per second and 60 fps ? I kind of doubt it since, there is such a marked difference between 24 fps and 30 fps.

The way I see it, the real promising aspect of this camera is getting 30 and 24p into the HDV 1440 x 1080 frame without loss of resolution?

It is my understanding that whatever settings you use for 24p or 30p judder and smear are fighting eachother. Techniques like using depth of field to defocus areas that are moving quickly, and focus only areas that are moving slowly relative to the camera minimise this and an optimum shutter is around 1/48th. Faster and the result judders much more, like a strobe effect, slower and things smear too much.

60p by the same math should produce much smoother motion that stays sharper with a 1/120th shutter. Since small chip cameras don't have as narrow a depth of field, increased frame rate is the way to go for higher quality and ease of use.

Just my impression of the situation.

I'm guessing 60p's primary benefit would be for better slow motion production. Could the human eye really tell the difference between 30 full frames per second and 60 fps ?
Not following you here. 60p played back at 60p looks great, it looks like the "reality/looking-through-a-window" look. Watch ABC, ESPN, or Fox high-def and you'll see 720/60p.

Are you asking if there's a noticeable difference between 30p and 60p? Night and day different. Are you asking if there's a noticeable difference between 60i and 60p? Not too different, both impart a similar "feel".

But the point is: 60p is irrelevant on this camera, there's nothing you can do with it, it's for internal processing only. Apparently they're scanning the CMOS chip progressively, so in order to create its 1080/60i signal it has to work internally at 1080/60p, then it slices the 60p frames into interlaced 60i fields (same as the HVX does). The Canon and Z1/FX1 don't work that way because they use interlaced chips and scan them interlaced in the first place.

720/60p shot and played at 60p isn't for slow motion, it's for "reality"; watch the Super Bowl or the NBA Finals or anything like that and you'll see it in action.

The way I see it, the real promising aspect of this camera is getting 30 and 24p into the HDV 1440 x 1080 frame without loss of resolution?
Definitely, if you want 24p HDV this looks like the highest-res way to get it! Only thing is we'll need editing software that understands how to reverse out the 3:2 pulldown to reconstitute the original 24p sequence. That should be a trivial task to implement; everyone's been doing that for 24p DV for a couple of years now so they should be able to sort it out for 1080 in short order.

Plus this V1 has some other interesting aspects, such as its slow-mo mode where it shoots 240 fields per second and plays 'em back at 60 fields per second for 4:1 slow motion, plus it has uncompressed HDMI output and apparently they've introduced an HDMI capture/edit card, so that's an alternative to HD-SDI. And there may be more surprises in store; I still haven't figured out what the USB port is for.

My guess is that the USB port is most likely for moving still images and camera settings off of the Memory Stick. Sure you can just take the Memory Stick out and put it in a card reader... most Sony Vaio laptops and desktops have a reader built in... but I've noticed that the majority "megapixel" camcorders with still photo capability do in fact have a USB port included for this very purpose (the exceptions being the Canon XL and XH series).

So is 1/3 ccd suppose to be the equivalent of 1/4 cmos sensors? What are the positives/ negatives of using cmos chip instead of ccd chip?

Barry:

Thanks for the primer. I didn't realize HD was actually broadcasting 60p.

Barry:

Thanks for the primer. I didn't realize HD was actually broadcasting 60p.
In 720, but not 1080. 1080 = 60i (or 24p embedded in 60i), 720 = 60p.

I am concerned that 960x1080 is not a self consistant resolution for the diagonal pixel arangement, and that no mention has been made to confirm or deny that the unit suffers from the same (ClearVid intrinsic) diagonal resolution problems of the HC3.

Douglas, are you willing/allowed to comment on these?
Marvin,
I'm not into slide rules and the math. I get the same results from any number of tests with the camcorder, and until Sony shows me something different... I'm accepting what Fuji, Sony, Grass Valley, and other people I trust on the method in which the resolution is measured.
No matter how you look at it, I've shot a standard series of res charts with this cam vs every low cost HD cam out there including some of Sony's lower grade consumer cams (including the HC3) and it is the highest of them all by a fairly discernable grade. Boyd and Michael saw some of those images that I captured today. And frankly, that's all I care about. What the res chart that I can work with from my own eye is all I need, coupled with the images that I've captured in a variety of settings.
The camcorder (like a few others) processes internally at 60p. The pixels are processed internally as 4:2:2. None of that matters to me unless I need a supportive argument in favor of one cam vs another. it's about the picture. Nothing more. And nothing I own outside our relatively elderly CineAlta produces pictures as nice as this cam does.

Additionally, Nate is correct. In my hurry to convert the Para2, I apparently managed the flags incorrectly (Nothing currently supports the correct pulldown removal in HDV) and I need to change that out. It's not appropriate to capture this via my Xena and process it as 4:2:2 from the cam, because that's not a "common" workflow for anyone, and the flags can't be inserted (at this time) in post anyway. If I can figure out a means of watermarking the raw files, I'll do that.

What are the positives/ negatives of using cmos chip instead of ccd chip?Take my advice... don't concern yourself with this stuff. What matters most is, does the camera produce an image that you like? How does it feel in your hands? What can you afford? Those are the only considerations that truly mean anything when you're choosing a camcorder.

You're right. Its just this CMOS chip is new to me and caught me off guard.

Thankyou for the reply Douglas,

I of course agree that the actual visual performance is everything, but sometimes the internals give a clue as to how defects are being hidden. If you happen to have the camera out again with the resolution chart, would you consider estimating the resolution of a 45 degree diagonal please.

There's a slide of a resolution test which they showed at the presentation, and Chris has that along with a bunch of other stuff. Please be patient, I'm sure he will put it online when he has a chance but I know he's been busy so it may take a few days.

I'm just waiting to hear back from Sony that it's okay to put all of that online.

Thanks Boyd, Chris,

If this is a horizontal/vertical resolution test then it isn't the information I am after. On a normal sensor a 45 degree diagonal will have a resolution exceeding that of the H and V directions by a sizable amount. On the clearvid this will be lower. I would like to know how much this aspect of the picture suffers.

I do notice that on the V1 page the comparison uses only a part of the image that has just vertical and horizontal information, square bricks, a window. I am most concerned about the performance on the diagonals.

Douglas mentions that they shot time lapse. I can't find mention of this anywhere on the Sony site. Also, can the user change the camera's shutter angle as well as the shutter speed?

Yes the V1U has interval recording for time lapse video. I'm not sure about changing the shutter rotation angle, but I do remember from the video that you can set the shutter display indicator to show in seconds or rotation angle/degrees. The focus display can be set to feet or meters.

You can't change the rotation angle, only the display of angle.
The timelapse is referred in the Camera Setup menu under the title of "Interval Recording." In the old days, timelapse was achieved with an "Intervalometer."

60p played back at 60p looks great, it looks like the "reality/looking-through-a-window" look. Watch ABC, ESPN, or Fox high-def and you'll see 720/60p.

Definitely, if you want 24p HDV this looks like the highest-res way to get it! Only thing is we'll need editing software that understands how to reverse out the 3:2 pulldown to reconstitute the original 24p sequence.

You are SO correct about 60p. It alone creates the "window into reality look." That's because there are so many distracting interlace artifacts to 1080/60i that your window looks dirty.

The EBU wants only progressive -- and while only Panasonic and JVC will have 60p this year, you can bet ClearVid and EIP will provide 1080/50p within 18-months. Now that will be a WINDOW!

And, until Adam tests the V1 for resolution and aliasing -- I'm not sure we can really say the V1 delivers a "significant or meaningful" increase in resolution over JVC's 720p. Remember, for those that don't want 24p or 30p -- 25% of the resolution is lost when running in interlace mode. I suspect, that when 1080/60i from the V1 is honestly compared to 720/60p from the coming JVC -- the V1 will not have meaningfully higher resolution.

Folks need to know that pulldown does NOT need to removed. I'll be working with the V1 in a week and I'll edit 24p as 60i. The key is to not cut to a judder frame. Your production will look just like 24p converted to video. I'm saying this because I don't want folks to think they will not be able to use Sony 24p or 30p UNTIL software arrives. Sony has always said that they CAN do 24p but when they do it -- they will do it RIGHT. By right they mean using industry standard pulldown.