I *assume* it's 8bit - anyone been able to verifty if the HV20 is actually outputting 10bit?

If so, a Decklink HD Extreme capturing HD-SDI (from an HDMI to HD-SDI convertor) connected to an HV20 could use 10bit if the camera supported it.

We shouldn't poo-poo this notion unless it's tested - Terence Krueger was the one who put the notion in my head: "...for hdmi, the camera seems from what i can tell to leave the footage at 1920x1080, and convert the colour space to 4:2:2, either 8 or 10 bit, not sure yet..."

I don't think an Intensity could do 10bit, but if the HV20 can do it...

If you have proof either way, please share.

intensity is 8 bit only. the chip they are using is 8 bit only according to the analog devices specs. (ill get the link later)

converting to sdi, assuming the cam is 10 bit, would be a good idea.. but of course, much more expensive. hard to say if theres any bennifit til someone tries though.

terence.

I'm pretty sure it's the reason why the card works in a PCI-Express x1 slot. If you look at every other 10 bit HD capture card they always need a PCI-Express x4 slot. The Intensity is the only HD card I know of that will work in a x1 slot and I think that is because it is limited to 8 bit. Not every motherboard has a 4x slot so this is a very good thing or else a lot of people would have to buy new systems just to work with the Intensity card. Pretty much any newer computer from the last 2 years has a x1 slot so it should work well for a lot of people.

Keep in mind that every single HDV camera with SDI at the moment also only pumps out 8 bit so we are not any more limited then any other high quality HD solution right now. As far as I know the only camera under $20,000 that will output 10 bits is the Silicon Imaging camera.

I *assume* it's 8bit - anyone been able to verifty if the HV20 is actually outputting 10bit?

If so, a Decklink HD Extreme capturing HD-SDI (from an HDMI to HD-SDI convertor) connected to an HV20 could use 10bit if the camera supported it.

We shouldn't poo-poo this notion unless it's tested - Terence Krueger was the one who put the notion in my head: "...for hdmi, the camera seems from what i can tell to leave the footage at 1920x1080, and convert the colour space to 4:2:2, either 8 or 10 bit, not sure yet..."

I don't think an Intensity could do 10bit, but if the HV20 can do it...

If you have proof either way, please share.

A rather common misconception, but HDMI if used to get material from tape is nothing more than a fire wire connection, just transfer of digital data in the format it has been recorded on tape: 1440 x 1080 in 4:2:0 color space. Intensity may add some digital zeroes to the data stream, but it will NEVER improve the signal, because it has been lost by recording on tape.

I dont think anyone is talking about tape. We're talking about live recording which bypasses compression.

terence

A rather common misconception, but HDMI if used to get material from tape is nothing more than a fire wire connection, just transfer of digital data in the format it has been recorded on tape: 1440 x 1080 in 4:2:0 color space. Intensity may add some digital zeroes to the data stream, but it will NEVER improve the signal, because it has been lost by recording on tape.

I certainly *wasn't* talking about exporting recorded HDV! 4:2:2 UNCOMPRESSED footage. I wouldn't drop $6k on all this equipment just to have a cleaner HDV signal heh.

Recording LIVE camera.

Restating Question: CAN HV20 SHOW 10BIT.

Thomas points out most cameras are 8bit, so, very doubtful that HV20 would do 10bit.

Had to bring this up again in light of other threads - how can we tell if the HV20 outputs 10bit via HDMI?

Anyone know?

I guess you could always use the Cineform Neo HD codec to capture at 1920x1080 from HDMI which converts to 10 bit. Been thinking about buying this myself, even though it's quite expensive at $599. Just waiting to see if Vegas 8 will support 10bit video first though.

But by the same token, I could set my computer to capture to an uncompressed 10 bit codec of my choice - say, Blackmagic Uncompressed 10bit, or ProRes 422 HQ 10bit.

That's not my point though...

Does the HV20 actually OUTPUT 10bit 1080i LIVE footage via HDMI? That is my only question, and has been from the start.

A rather common misconception, but HDMI if used to get material from tape is nothing more than a fire wire connection, just transfer of digital data in the format it has been recorded on tape: 1440 x 1080 in 4:2:0 color space. Intensity may add some digital zeroes to the data stream, but it will NEVER improve the signal, because it has been lost by recording on tape.

I hate to go further off topic, but one improvement you might get is if the camera can output straight 24fps video rather than 60i with pull-down, then capturing using HDMI would be an advantage rather than capturing through Firewire and then use some other means to remove the extra fields.

Then there's the live aspect. I'm doubting that HV10 outputs 10 bit live, but I have nothing to back that up.

This has been an interesting read so far because I spoke with Canon directly and was told that if you go out the FW port you are ingesting HDV. However, you will get a higher resolution and thus a better picture if you go out the HDMI port (they seemed to imply it would be a much better image), even if you are recording to MiniDV tapes (not real-time without a tape). Is this not true?

The bandwidth of the HDMI signal is much higher than the FW cable signal (which can only be HDV). However, whatever you record to tape, because it's digital, will be the same over HDMI or FW (FireWire) - the HDV signal will MAX out the FW port, and when played over the HDMI port, it'll be the same (since it's digital) but won't be filling the bandwidth of what's capable. So no, I don't see how the quality of the image would suddenly increase when being played off tape and captured via the HDMI port instead of the FW port.

Canon assumes 99% of the people purchasing the HV20 are consumers that'll record to tape and playback over the various mediums - i.e. using the HDMI port to view their home movies on their nice new HDTV.

Since HDMI can show the true signal that the camera is seeing before it's compressed to the HDV spec, if one captures the raw LIVE image (without being in playback mode), the quality will be much higher. Using an Intensity card, or and HDMI - HD-SDI option, one can then choose a much higher end codec to 'save' the video as.

Most codec options people use today are 8-bit. I'm curious if the camera can actually output 10-bit (because the HDMI port has the bandwidth for it).

So far, no one has evidence that it can do 10-bit.

Whats specs is the HDMI port on the camera? HDMI 1.2 will be 8 bit only with some 10 bit processing of that 8 bit color. Only the newer HDMI 1.3 moved into true 10 bit color.

The thing about 10 bit is that in order to have true 10 bit you have to keep 10 bits all the way through the process. First the DSP in the camera needs to process the data from the chip as 10 bit or higher. Next that 10 bits would need to be pumped to the HDMI port. Now the HDMI port itself would have to support 10 bit color. Finally the capture card would have to support 10 bit color.

The Intensity card is strictly a 8 bit card so regardless of what the camera is doing it doesn't really matter. If it was sending 10 bits it would only get captured as 8 bit anyway. Even if we did have a HDMI 1.3 capture card that would capture 10 bit color there are a lot of things that would have to be true in the camera for it to put out true 10 bit color.

So my answer is I do not know but it doesn't matter at all unless somebody comes out with a HDMI 1.3 capture device for 10 bit color. I'm not even sure how anybody could figure it out outside of the engineers from Canon.

i mostly use the hv20 as deck and backup for the A1, but I can tell you with certainty that the live image out from the HDMI port is more vibrant and cleaner than its tape counterpart. i'm just not going to drag around or be tethered to an entire computer system to achieve this marginal difference.

I own a 10 bit capable capture setup - a Decklink HD Extreme with HD-SDI and a nanoConnect HDMI to HD-SDI convertor. I'm pretty sure the nanoConnect is 10bit too - could be wrong. Maybe I'm the only one that'll be able to tell then since I have a rare hardware setup (the Intensity and Intensity Pro didn't exist when I bought my Blackmagic Design card).

It's unlikely yes. But that said, how do I check? My HV20 is being replaced/repaired under warrenty for now, but I *will* do a Proress 422 HQ 10bit capture.

Once captured, what do I do to tell?

Has anyone definitively answered Robert's orginial ?. Can the HV-20 output 10-bit color or is it only 8-bit?

isn't the cmos 8-bit? if so, even if the rest of the 'chain' is 10-bit, it wouldn't matter since the original sensor is limited @8 anyways. to get true higher color depths u must have it from the very beginning to the very ultimate end (including editing/playback systems) and afaik, 99% of that chain for everyone is all 8-bit.

Is there even a 10-bit monitor? :) And what videocard outputs 10-bit anyway?

Yi, I've read differing accounts of the sensor, all seeming credible. Some say 8-bit and some say 12-bit.

Mikko, you are kidding, right?

But by the same token, I could set my computer to capture to an uncompressed 10 bit codec of my choice - say, Blackmagic Uncompressed 10bit, or ProRes 422 HQ 10bit.

That's not my point though...

Does the HV20 actually OUTPUT 10bit 1080i LIVE footage via HDMI? That is my only question, and has been from the start.I don't think anyone knows the answer for certain. But David Newman of Cineform seems to think it's 8-bit and upsampled from 1410x1080 to 1920x1080 out the HDMI output "live." That last part I doubt...but I am leaning on this cam actually outputting 8bits. my 2 cents.

Mikko, you are kidding, right?

Somewhat. Yes, I know it helps in color correcting blaa blaa blaa, but a full 10-bit pipeline would have to include native 10-bit monitors. An lcd panel can have 10-bit color corrections, but the final output is still 8-bit.

Somewhat. Yes, I know it helps in color correcting blaa blaa blaa, but a full 10-bit pipeline would have to include native 10-bit monitors. An lcd panel can have 10-bit
color corrections, but the final output is still 8-bit.I'm just not sure that I'm following you. AFAIK, there are many monitors that display 10-bit and higher color.

Here is an example from Eizo (which while a very nice monitor is not a true stuido or production monitor): http://www.eizo.com/products/graphics/cg241w/spec.asp

Unless I'm mistaken, this monitor displays either 12 or 16 bit color, depending on how you measure it.

I don't think anyone knows the answer for certain. But David Newman of Cineform seems to think it's 8-bit and upsampled from 1410x1080 to 1920x1080 out the HDMI output "live." That last part I doubt...but I am leaning on this cam actually outputting 8bits. my 2 cents.So does the HV-20 spit out of its HDMI port the same color sampling and bit depth that the XH-GI spits out of its HD-SDI port? Aren't both most likely 4:2:2 8-bit?

So does the HV-20 spit out of its HDMI port the same color sampling and bit depth that the XH-GI spits out of its HD-SDI port? Aren't both most likely 4:2:2 8-bit?As far as I know yes...both 4:2:2 8-bit.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&modelid=14869#ModelTechSpecsAct
the cmos sensor on the HV20 is 1920x1080p24 native. but it doesn't tell what colorspace it is.

imho, it'd be a waste of $ to include 10, 12, 16-bit color sensor only to capture it on tape OR hdmi because most gears/workflow is still 8-bit based.

there is only a handful of HIGH END pro video cards like the latest ati firegl that outputs 10/12+bit color depths. and as noted, displays don't handle that.

i think it is 8-bits. if it is, there'd be no point to try to capture 10 or more bit color on anything.

I don't think anyone knows the answer for certain. But David Newman of Cineform seems to think it's 8-bit and upsampled from 1410x1080 to 1920x1080 out the HDMI output "live." That last part I doubt...but I am leaning on this cam actually outputting 8bits. my 2 cents.


yes, it comes out of the HDMI port at 1920x1080 " Live"....

there is only a handful of HIGH END pro video cards like the latest ati firegl that outputs 10/12+bit color depths. and as noted, displays don't handle that.

The ATI X1900 XT apparently has 10bit out via DVI, which is pretty cool for a card over a year old and is considered a much lesser model than a FireGL level card.

"...10 bit per channel DVI output."

Sources for the X1900 XT:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ATI/X1900XT_256M
http://www.shentech.com/3056dh.html

Yes, most displays aren't 10 bit. Shame.

I'm pretty darn sure the HV20 is 8 bit at this point.

Robert,

You seem to be leading the way on HDMI capture front. I'm working on a documentary with a lot of indoor interviews. Of course tape would be easier to use, but external capture is a possiblility becasue the camera will be mostly stationary and indoors.

Do you find a significant improvement capturing out of the HDMI port versus using HDV tape? My subjects will not be moving much, which eliminates HDV's motion issues. I'm willing to do live capture but I'm just not sure if I'll see much of a difference.

One thing to keep in mind, is I am hoping to do a film out from the footage. This instinctively makes me say "capture," but with slow moving subjects and not very challenging lighting, is it really worth it?

Thanks VERY MUCH for your input!

As far as I know yes...both 4:2:2 8-bit.Do you know if anyone has done a comparison between the two signals? With the superior lens on the G1, I'd expect a better look, but you never know.

yes, it comes out of the HDMI port at 1920x1080 " Live"....
Sorry...I misquoted myself...let me rephrase... It "does" come out of the HDMI port @ 1920x1080 while shooting live. The part that is in question is whether or not that image was downsampled (to 1440x1080) while going through the DSP and then upsampled back to 1920x1080 out the HDMI port...all live. Me personally I don't believe there is any change in image size....but it really does not matter because it produces such a great image anyways. I also believe it's 8bits..simply because it does not support the new HDMI 1.3 which is 8, 10, 12 and 16 bit. The older HDMI format was only 8bit...but I could be wrong...

Do you know if anyone has done a comparison between the two signals? With the superior lens on the G1, I'd expect a better look, but you never know.
I'm not sure about that...but I do know there was a comparison on HDV and HDMI here:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=104431

Also look at sample pics here:

http://thomann.net/hv20/interpolation/

Sorry...I misquoted myself...let me rephrase... It "does" come out of the HDMI port @ 1920x1080 while shooting live. The part that is in question is whether or not that image was downsampled (to 1440x1080) while going through the DSP and then upsampled back to 1920x1080 out the HDMI port...all live. Me personally I don't believe there is any change in image size....but it really does not matter because it produces such a great image anyways. I also believe it's 8bits..simply because it does not support the new HDMI 1.3 which is 8, 10, 12 and 16 bit. The older HDMI format was only 8bit...but I could be wrong...

Well I never thought of it that way but you could be on to something...
I read somewhere that the HDMI port outputs at 1920x1080 either live or back from the tape... ( need to do some tests to verify)
If this is true then the video stream could come off the sensor at 1920 be compressed for tape at 1440 and un-compress it back out at 1920 via the HDMI port...

sounds convoluted from an engineering standpoint but who knows how they setup the DSP pipe for signal processing going in two directions....

I'll test it this weekend to know for sure....

Robert,

You seem to be leading the way on HDMI capture front. I'm working on a documentary with a lot of indoor interviews. Of course tape would be easier to use, but external capture is a possiblility becasue the camera will be mostly stationary and indoors.

Do you find a significant improvement capturing out of the HDMI port versus using HDV tape? My subjects will not be moving much, which eliminates HDV's motion issues. I'm willing to do live capture but I'm just not sure if I'll see much of a difference.

One thing to keep in mind, is I am hoping to do a film out from the footage. This instinctively makes me say "capture," but with slow moving subjects and not very challenging lighting, is it really worth it?

Thanks VERY MUCH for your input!

Hi Peter,

For what I've done recently, yes, very much so.. I'd skip shooting HDV all the time if I could, but this is because I often do a lot of colour correction.

The Apple ProRes 422 HQ codec seems so perfect (and I imagine Cineform is as good, and a little better), but there's many a time I need a remote camera without a generator, APC, cable, computer tower, monitor, 3 extra crew, etc etc.. so I'll still shoot HDV when I need to. The HV20 footage is still cleaner than Z1U HDV footage I've shot.

Sometimes I push my footage a *lot* - with the 'uncompressed' footage (actually ProRess 422, but I find it's 99% the same thing.. yes, really I said that) I can underexpose a bit to keep the skin or other highlights from blowing too much, and still bring up the darker areas in AE with custom masks that lighten areas, and in the final rendered shot, even I can't notice that the image has been pushed! I have to review the original to make sure the change has occurred sometimes. The HDV footage however, can't be pushed nearly as far because changes become noticeable.

If you don't do a lot of colour correction or image manipulation, and your subjects are talking heads and still, then skip the investment in time and money and equipment and stick to HDV for now. All depends on your needs!

Judging from the appearance of what little grain there is, I have a feeling that the image is resized in camera from 1440x1080, but I *only* can see this if I zoom in 300% and look for it in the darker areas. It doesn't matter.. the HDMI image is incredible, and 1920x1080 sensors are rare as is, so I feel very well off indeed. I have no proof - it may very well be not resized at all in camera.

Oh, I should add, I shoot HDV for every shot of ProRes capture shot I do - 1:1 ratio, incase the computer messes things up. I'd never trust a RAID 100% of the time, so, I'm still feeding the HV20 tapes. Sorry, don't have a comparison on hand right now.

Surely whether Canon's engineers designed downrezing to 1440 in the camera is not a top secret piece of information that someone from Canon couldn't answer. I would think that someone out there has a connection to a Canon employee that could mine that information and give it to us.

Do you find a significant improvement capturing out of the HDMI port versus using HDV tape? My subjects will not be moving much, which eliminates HDV's motion issues. I'm willing to do live capture but I'm just not sure if I'll see much of a difference.
Even without high motion subject matter, HDV compression still throws away most of the color resolution and a good bit of low contrast detail. The HDMI image is definitely superior, but only you can decide if the incremental quality gain overcomes the hassle factor.

but the cam itself is so tiny that strapping external drives to capture from the hdmi still feels like a STEAL from a pro-video tool's perspective.

many prosumer/pros are using taking this little engine that could to the whole next level due to the 1920x1080 native cmos. =D.

i think the next evolution of XLH2 or whatever is next should include higher color depths either internal to solid state or hdmi-output towards as lossless as possible. this will make definitely SHAKE THINGS UP =D.

I absolutely agree - keeping everything else on the XL-H1 the same, and just updating the bit death to handle native, true 10-bit out, would be enough of an upgrade to warrant the name XL-H2, in my opinion.

Any manufacturer that releases 10 bit camera with the feature set of the existing XL-H1 or EX1 will stir things up very nicely. Sony could have done it with the EX1; they tend to like to lead with ‘new’ technologies. Canon’s been really impressing lately.

Someone just needs to get the ball rolling…

on the other hand, our NLE editing chain isn't really provisioned to handle anything above 8-bit yet... so while we can capture in higher color depths, having the entire chain isn't currently viable... but i hope we move towards that direction soon!!!

the next evolution of NLE is higher color depth. how strange it is that COLOR, of all things, is the FINAL frontier of 2D video editing.

after that it's all about creating holonovels for star trek TNG's holodeck ;) or DS9's holosuite.

FCP has supported 10 bit natively for quite some time, so editing 10 bit is not an issue. The issue is that the Intensity card is 8 bit. I think it's very safe to assume the HV20 is not outputting 10 bit anyway, since that port is mainly there so you can plug in the camera to your flat screen TV, most of which wouldn't support HDMI 1.3 (10 bit) input.

That said, the footage coming in through the Intensity is extremely high-quality (provided you have enough light for the HV20). You can push it very far without seeing any 8-bit artifacts like banding. I wouldn't hesitate to apply extreme color correction to uncompressed HV20 footage... If you're really worried, do your color correction in 32 bit, which is how most color correction apps (including Color) work.

(BTW, the advantages of 10/12/16/32 bits vs 8 bit can all be realized without high bit depth output. In other words, you don't need a 10-bit video card and monitor to appreciate the flexibility that high bit depths give you. And I think you'd be hard pressed to see any benefit from a 10 bit monitor. )

After having worked with uncompressed footage from the HV20 a bit more now, I can say there is a very real advantage to using the full 1920x1080 @ 4:2:2 rather than HDV's 1440x1080 @ 4:2:0... and not just for keying -- there's a nice bump in detail and clarity.

Now if Blackmagic would just make an Intensity To Go card that fit in an ExpressCard slot!

Now if Blackmagic would just make an Intensity To Go card that fit in an ExpressCard slot!
Here! Here!

I second, err, third that as well!

I've captured HV20 footage at full 4:2:2, so I'll post a shot that you can all play around - it's incredible how far one can "push' the image when it's not full of HDV macro-block compression.

Captured at 4:2:2, 24P at full 1920x1080 raster, at 10bit with the Apple Prores 422 Codec HQ. I captured into a Mac Pro with the Decklink HD Extreme, and has 10bit I/O standard, guaranteed not to truncate to 8bit.

HOWEVER, just spoke to Convergent Design, who manufactures the HDMI to HD-SDI convertor that I use, and the person I spoke to told me that their products are 8bit because all HDMI connections they've encountered are 8bit as well - HV20 included. Yes, they have one there. ;)

So they're saying my footage is 8bit because the HV20's HDMI port is 8bit, as is their HDMI to HD-SDI connector.

And it looks great - the footage in general. Regardless, take a look at the shot - push it around in photoshop with the levels.

I'm prepping a raw still .PNG from a 1920x1080 frame from the footage I captured. There was a 35mm adapter in front, and I chose a poor shot on purpose (vignette + CA) so just ignore that ;) I saved the still as a 16bit PNG, so, as far as I've been able I've kept the quality above 8bit on the post production end - the extra headroom of the codec makes me feel safer.

So, there we have it - 8bit for sure (probably).

P.S. there's an interesting thread that parallel's this one going on in the Sony EX 1 camera thread - debate over 10bit. Some users are swearing it's a 10-bit camera. Adam Wilt made no mention of it, though he did import HD-SDI footage for his review I believe. If it's true, that'd make the EX 1 the first sub $10k camera with 10-bit out.

http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=111417

P.S. It seems I can't attach files... shame.

i wish new HD cams would implement software internal to the cam so that u can "record to external HDMI/FW hard drives". of course, i think u'll need SSD's to record the hundreds of megabytes per second requirements.

i wish new HD cams would implement software internal to the cam so that u can "record to external HDMI/FW hard drives". of course, i think u'll need SSD's to record the hundreds of megabytes per second requirements.

Isn't that what HDMI and FireWire outputs on the camera is already for? The Focus Enhancements FireStore exists for FireWire (HDV), and now, portable HDMI recording options are coming from Convergent Design (with HDMI-to HD-SDI convertor) and Cineform. It's great we have HDMI out :D Just a matter of time for portable support hardware to be made avaliable.

We just need a 50mb/sec HDMI 4:2:2 FireStore for HD! I'd prefer to record to hard drive too - cheap cheap $-per GB! I saw that a 250GB SATA hard disk sells for $80 now. Apple ProRes 422 is efficient enough that it'll capture to a single drive :)

i wish new HD cams would implement software internal to the cam so that u can "record to external HDMI/FW hard drives". of course, i think u'll need SSD's to record the hundreds of megabytes per second requirements.
Good luck convincing the manufacturers to engineer that. ;)

hi chris,

no. what is happening is the hdmi is streaming content out, but you need a dedicated PC/laptop w/software installed to capture that stream. think of it as a digital "rca cable" pretty much. that's all the digital outputs on camcorders do.

the reason why firestore is incredibly expensive is because they loaded the software right onto a memory chip inside of the hard drive enclosure to capture the stream itself.

my idea is to have the camcorder as the "PC" so to speak with the software built-in right into the camcorders. the hdmi basically becomes a glorified port to attach to external/portable SSD/raid enclosures. that way, when you press record, the external disks goto to capture things and that's it =P.
-yfy




Isn't that what HDMI and FireWire outputs on the camera is already for? The Focus Enhancements FireStore exists for FireWire (HDV), and now, portable HDMI recording options are coming from Convergent Design (with HDMI-to HD-SDI convertor) and Cineform. It's great we have HDMI out :D Just a matter of time for portable support hardware to be made avaliable.

We just need a 50mb/sec HDMI 4:2:2 FireStore for HD! I'd prefer to record to hard drive too - cheap cheap $-per GB! I saw that a 250GB SATA hard disk sells for $80 now. Apple ProRes 422 is efficient enough that it'll capture to a single drive :)

Yi Fong Yu, I understand how HDMI works - there is no 'speaking' on behalf of the recording device to the camera, it's just raw (or played back recorded) video & audio data presented digitally.

I think a FireStore with HDMI in (much like Cineform's proposed product, or a something that we may have seen come from Convergent Design) would be ideal for the future of capturing high-res data - for now, max 8bit 422 video – camera independent, keeping the price of the camera down, and allowing for flexibility on the part of the capture unit.

I think I hear what you're saying.. a port that'll connect to external devices, that the camera itself controls. I think the future of cameras are computer-controlled high-res sensors - think glorified, computerized industrial camera heads with small PC’s with lots of portable storage - but that's a whole different discussion best saved for the Alternate Imaging Methods thread.

As it stands, the HV20 is a 8 bit camera.

yes exactly, cameras function this way. all the software is inside the still camera, but the storage is just that, storage. it doesn't have any software inside to capture anything.

P.S. there's an interesting thread that parallel's this one going on in the Sony EX 1 camera thread - debate over 10bit. Some users are swearing it's a 10-bit camera. Adam Wilt made no mention of it, though he did import HD-SDI footage for his review I believe. If it's true, that'd make the EX 1 the first sub $10k camera with 10-bit out.

The single problem with live capture from the EX1 HD-SDI is that there is no way to capture full 1920x1080p30. If it weren't for that limitation I would have bought the EX1 so I'll still be playing with the HV20 until something else better comes out that can provide true 1920x1080p30 live out.

By the way, Adam Wilt has confirmed for me that the EX1 is 10bit! Which is kind of big deal as that means it's the first in a price this low and hopefully will start a new trend.
http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/pmw_ex1_update_2/

If i'm not mistaken, on the EX1, 30P will display fine in a 60i stream, just like the HV30 does. The image you're watching would be ture 30P. In the 60i playback/recording, each half of the progressive frame from the sensor is shown at the same time; the visible result is the true, fully progressive frame. If you were playing this video clip in QuickTime, you'd only be able to tell it was in a 60i timeline by looking at video clip's 'get info' window!

You'd be able to get 30P out over 60i via HD-SDI LIVE with the EX1 and it'll just require a rerender if you want to get it down to 30 frames instead of 60 per second. HV30 is no different in how it treats 30P.

The EX1 is not at fault in it's treatment of progressive video as many professional cameras treat progressive video in this way as a delivery method over 60i. And, it's 10bit!