It will produce a toasted Bacon, Lettuce and Cheese sandwich from the tape bay.

In the PAL version this is likely to be Bacon, Lettuce and Tomato.

Great, first PAL users get more resolution, then a proper BLT sandwich. Its just not fair.

Does "- Sharpness" actually turn sharpening off entirely or only limit it? I searched around but couldn't find an answer.

Great, first PAL users get more resolution, then a proper BLT sandwich. Its just not fair.

NTSC =Non Tomato Sandwich Country, it just the way things are.

Does "- Sharpness" actually turn sharpening off entirely or only limit it? I searched around but couldn't find an answer.

I'm not sure Wes, but I can tell you this camera has less sharpening than any other camcorder I've ever used. Even at its default setting, I can see absolutely no sharpening at all.

If you look at how Canon releases new technology on the still side of the house, you know that new sensors and features always get rolled out in consumer models first.

The still images we capture with our 1D series are vastly superior to anything we can get with our H1/A1 chips, and in low light the difference is so vast a comparison isn't even fair.

The 1Ds has a phenomenal CMOS chip, full frame 35mm, 17mp, 4992 x 3328 max resolution, and this sensor is two years old. If I could have 24p with the chip in my 1Ds mkII, wow.

Since Canon has a great track record with still sensors and single chip glass, there is no reason for them not to be looking at unified sensor R&D and production for both still and motion cameras.

I think this camera is a sneak peek at Canon's future product path. With Canon's market penetration in both professional video and still market, their continuing R&D, the size of their R&D budget, and the obvious growing interest in DOF adapters and digital cinema, all I can say is that Red could be dead, and Arri and Panavision should be worried.

For a consumer cam, this is nearly flawless.
From a professional standpoint, it will be able to keep up with the big boys. From specs alone, the resolution will be as good as the XLH1, and the lowlight almost as good. HV20 looks like a great addition to the HDV camcorders!

One thing though - i'm not 100% sure, but i think the quoted 3lux-rating is actually at 1/30th second shutter-speed, so the 'normal' shutter-speed of 1/60th sec. may therefore give about a 5lux rating.

Sony and Canon both seem to now be quoting lux ratings at shutter-speeds less than default 1/60th sec, so it is important to check the shutter-speed for the quoted lux rating. (often not explicitly stated unfortunately!). For example HC7 is quoted as being 2lux but that is at 1/30th second shutter too.

Given this, I think low-light might still be a long way off XLH1/XHA1 low-light performance IMO. (happy to be proved wrong!).

If someone could confirm that the 3lux rating is in fact at a shutter-speed of 1/30th second that would be helpful.

Yes that's right. The 3 lux rating is indeed at a shutter-speed of 1/30th second.

http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/31/canons-ivis-hv20-hd-camcorder-gets-real/
"As we hoped, low light shooting has indeed been improved from a 5 to 3 lux sensitivity at 1/30 second shutter speed"

The google translated Canon japan website, said the HV10 5lux spec was also for 1/30s shutter speed, so the 3 vs 5 is apples to apples.

HV10:
http://64.233.179.104/translate_c?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&langpair=ja%7Cen&u=http://cweb.canon.jp/ivis/hv10/spec.html&prev=/language_tools
"Lowest photographing luminous intensity

* Approximately 0.3 luces (at the time of knight mode, 1/2 seconds in shutter speed)
* Approximately 5 luces (automatic mode, at the time of o toss low shutter ON, 1/30 seconds in shutter speed"

HV20:
* Approximately 0.2 luces (at the time of knight mode, 1/2 seconds in shutter speed)
* Approximately 3 luces (automatic mode, at the time of o toss low shutter ON, 1/30 seconds in shutter speed)

I cannot remember if this helps or not but would a bigger lens help sensitivity? This may explian how the same exact chip and DSP could be more sensitive. More light comes through onto the chip. I cannot remember if that helps or not.

"Given this, I think low-light might still be a long way off XLH1/XHA1 low-light performance IMO. (happy to be proved wrong!)."

Here are the specs of the Canon XLH1: Minimum Illumination: 60i, 1/60 shutter speed = 7 lux; 30F, 1/30 shutter speed = 4 lux; 24F, 1/48 shutter speed = 6 lux

considering the Hv20 will be 6 lux effectively at 60i, they should be comparable.

I cannot remember if this helps or not but would a bigger lens help sensitivity? This may explian how the same exact chip and DSP could be more sensitive. More light comes through onto the chip. I cannot remember if that helps or not.

Yup, it does. I said in another post that it's that plus the noise reduction processing that's supposedly 'on-chip'. Those two together could help the low-light.

I think from the get-go Canon handicapped the Hv10's low light on purpose. Considering they are using the same CMOS sensor, that already had the progressive capabilities in the HV10. Progressive already requires more light than interlaced (about a stop) and with more noise +6db. So it seems to me to get better light out of the HV20, buy improving the lens slightly, and cleaning up the noise through the DSP seems rediculously hard to do. They would first have to fix the light loss from progressive and clean up the noise, then improve up the HV10, seems impossible to me.

Initially, they must have dumbed down the HV10, to not steal from the A1 too much. But as the HV10's sold faster than they could make, they decided on utilizing all of the performance available for the HV20.

Just a guess.

I cannot remember if this helps or not but would a bigger lens help sensitivity? This may explian how the same exact chip and DSP could be more sensitive. More light comes through onto the chip. I cannot remember if that helps or not.

The focal length and maximum aperture is exactly the same as the HV10. Chances are it is the exact same unit from the HV10. So there is no more light coming to the HV20 than there is to the HV10. The filter ring is larger but that's just what the outside housing of the camcorder happens to be. It doesn't necessarily mean the lens is larger.

How Canon achieved the better low-light performance is a mystery right now. According to Camcorder Info (http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-HV20-Yes-Its-True.htm):

This boosted performance comes despite having the same imager and processor as the HV10. Canon could not, at the time of announcement, explain what had changed to increase performance. There are a limited number of ways a manufacturer could tweak performance with the identical hardware to any significant degree, and the 5 lux to 3 lux difference is a substantial claim. Canon has stated that details of improvement will be made available closer to the ship date of mid-April.

If I had to speculate, I'd say they are enabling some noise reduction circuitry from the A1 cameras that they disabled in the HV10.

If I had to speculate, I'd say they are enabling some noise reduction circuitry from the A1 cameras that they disabled in the HV10.

I dont think that this is true. I have noticed in low light on the HV10 it seems to use the NR1 and NR2 settings (like the A has) I see much ghosting and trails when the HV10 runs out of light and I also noticed that the HV10 uses gain up to +24db in darkness.

I think they dumbed it down, intentionally.

from what we know about the HV20 so far. and Canon's foray of CMOS implementation on consumer grade models, i don't think my optimism is too enthusiastic when looking at the XHA1 footage thinking that could be (or pretty darn close) to what im getting at a sub $1k camcorder!

check out the following link posted by Elton at DVXuser...

)>> One shot with a few simple cc's in FCP just to show different looks. All handheld in 24F mode with OIS engaged.

150 MB h.264 (2 min.)
http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/FacesInTheCrowd.mov <<(

its a big file but worth it to at least have a sneak peak of what the HV20 could very well be. (or pretty darn close!)

full link here... http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=77926

Excuse me, but you don't need to leave DV Info Net to see Barlow's clip.

It's hosted here as well: http://media.dvinfo.net/canonxh/FacesInTheCrowd.mov

For more details, see http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=79651