A couple of dumb AVCHD/HFS100 questions

[Hal Snook]

I'm close to pulling the trigger on selling my Canon HV20 (sniff) and buying an HFS100. Just a couple of things I'd like to ask, that I haven't been able to glean from Google:

1. Final Cut's Log and Transfer, I gather, is transcoding as it imports. How long does it typically take to import to ProRes? Will it be faster than real-time? I have a 2.2ghz Core 2 Duo with 4gb ram.

2. Some people complain about the rolling shutter jell-o effect with these cameras. However, if I didn't have a problem with it on the HV20, it shouldn't be any worse with the HFS100, right? It's a CMOS thing, not an AVCHD thing, correct?

3. If you've switched from HDV to AVCHD, what have been the biggest disadvantages? Advantages?

Thanks!

[Norris Combs]

I can only answer #3 for you: going from an HV10 to the HF-S100, I see no disadvantage. The advantages are significant. On all my HDTVs, and on my 30" LCD computer monitor, the picture quality is very discernible. The instant access is awesome too. I had gotten used to rewinding and fast forwarding the tape, flash memory is here to stay. For archiving, I have all my AVCHD footage (albeit not much since I just got the S100 about 2 months ago) on multiple hard drives and also on a couple of Blu Ray discs.

[Bruce Foreman]

And my answer to #2 is that I believe "rolling shutter" problems to be way overhyped. I too had an HV20 and moved from that to HF100's. And I now also have a Canon T1i Digital Rebel with HD video and CMOS shutter in video mode.

I have NO problem with rolling shutter and any "jello" effect, Now I have seen examples ranging from "Awww, crud no" to downright awful but all resulted from improperly controlled movement or from failing to isolate the cam from serious vibration. My tripod with Velbon PH 368 "fluid effect" (but not true fluid head!) gives very smooth controlled tilts and pans and in any handheld video I attempt to control movement.

If you didn't have a problem with the HV20, I look for you to have no problem with the HF S100.

And I agree one thousand percent with Norris' answer to #3. Tape is history with me.


Someone who knows the Mac will have to handle #1.

[Stuart Hooper]

On the first question, I haven't measured exactly how long it takes, but it's definitely *slower* than real time!

[Hal Snook]

Originally Posted by Stuart Hooper

On the first question, I haven't measured exactly how long it takes, but it's definitely *slower* than real time!

Ooh, that's disappointing. I shoot in 24p, so it already takes me a while to get down to editing (first capture, then inverse telecine).

Do you think Apple will ever come out with a way to wrap AVCHD files in Quicktime format? It'd be really handy for software like JES Deinterlacer that requires a Quicktime input, and save a generation of transcoding, hard drive space, time, etc etc.

[Buba Kastorski]

can't answer to the first one, I'm a PC guy,

2) it's not worse than HV20, and it is a CMOS thing mot AVCHD, it's quite noticeable when you're panning on moving objects, but if you didn't have any problems with HV20 I don't think you'll have them with HF Sx

3) the biggest disadvantage of switching from HDV to AVCHD is your computer response time during editing, AVCHD is a very heavy codec;
my quad q95 raid 0 plays 35Mb/sec XDCAM with no problem at all, and it is very choppy preview in vegas and full screen of 24Mb/sec AVCHD.
but you're getting large lens, large sensor, awesome picture, (I used to have Z1, HF S10/100 beats it in day light easy) and tapeless workflow, which is a huge advantage by itself alone,
if you'll go with either 10 or 100 you will not have any regrets.

[Nick Gordon]

Originally Posted by Hal Snook

Ooh, that's disappointing. I shoot in 24p, so it already takes me a while to get down to editing (first capture, then inverse telecine).

Do you think Apple will ever come out with a way to wrap AVCHD files in Quicktime format? It'd be really handy for software like JES Deinterlacer that requires a Quicktime input, and save a generation of transcoding, hard drive space, time, etc etc.

Clipwrap have something like this on the way - version 2 wraps AVCHD in QT format - just waiting for a date.

[Hal Snook]

Originally Posted by Nick Gordon

Clipwrap have something like this on the way - version 2 wraps AVCHD in QT format - just waiting for a date.

Thanks for the heads up, Nick. I'll definitely keep my eye on ClipWrap.

[Tripp Woelfel]

Being on a PC, I can only answer a couple of your questions. I have an HV10, HV30 and an HF100.

Originally Posted by Hal Snook

2. Some people complain about the rolling shutter jell-o effect with these cameras. However, if I didn't have a problem with it on the HV20, it shouldn't be any worse with the HFS100, right? It's a CMOS thing, not an AVCHD thing, correct?

Yes. It has nothing to do with the video format. Although the sensors in the two cameras are different, you should notice no differences in the rolling shutter effect. By that I mean if you don't have a problem with the HV20, you won't with the HFS100 either.

Originally Posted by Hal Snook

3. If you've switched from HDV to AVCHD, what have been the biggest disadvantages? Advantages?

The biggest disadvantage is the transcoding as I'm on CS3. Each week I transcode over three hours into QT/Animation. I just render overnight and then it's all good. The other advantage is the long recording time with a 32GB card. I use the HF100 unattended for a "speed shot" at motorsport events that can run over 4 hours. Plugged into the grid, I have plenty of space, however battery options with the Canon flash cams are pathetic compared to the HV20/30.

One other comment is that the HF seems to degrade more gracefully than the HVs as the light wanes. That could be effected by the HF's location being different than the HVs. I think you can be confident that the HF will be no worse than the HV.