New Canon HD footage up:
http://usa.canon.com/app/html/See_Th...ce/index.shtml

Well... half of it at least. I'm really amazed that the microscopic HV10 1-CMOS looks as good as it does!

Moved here from Canon XH forum.

The direct link is http://usa.canon.com/app/html/See_Th.../hd_cmos.shtml

Files are H.264 video in QT7 format.

Cheesy content - bad compression - '1080' files rendered at 1629*916 (?) - and all the samples are progressive (which as we know is omething the HV10 does not do)

?

Lee, you're being too harsh IMO. I think the clips give someone not acquainted with the HV10 an idea as to its quality. Frankly I think the clips don't show the real sharpness & resolution the unit is capable of, but it does give an idea as to its potential.

Tough crowd.

All it is is footage showing the cam's capabilities.

LOL I agree it's not supposed to be some masterpiece or motion picture. In some ways I like the more amateur look as that's what / how the camcorder will be used by most people.

The large and medium links would not download for me using Safari. The "small" clip looked amazingly good considering the camera, although it choked my Mac G4 on playback.

Suffice is to say that when looking at these clips many would confuse the results with a far more expensive professional camera. I just did a very brief shootout between an FX7 and my HV10. I've been considering the FX7 as a replacement for my VX2000. Amazingly (I shouldn't be amazed at this point), the HV10 actually showed less noise and looked a tad more polished than the FX7. The FX7 showed a bit of edge enhancement that Sony always seems to like to enhance the 'apparent' sharpness. The HV10 simply looked a bit more professional with its amazingly low noise floor and absence of edge enhancement. This is certainly not to say the FX7 looked bad, it looked very good and I believe by lowering the sharpness of the FX7 you could probably get rid of that edge enhancement. Also surprising was how close the color rendition of both cameras was despite the fact that one is a 3-chip and the other a 1 chip. Go figure.

But the more I see and use the HV10 the more I continue to be floored by the picture it produces.

:) I am mean I know !!! :)


What is wrong with giving the consumer a sample of what comes out of the product that they would buy. The H.264 compression although very good as a codec lets the quality down a little, the resolution of the 1080 sample is in fact 916 not 1080 (!!!) and all the samples are progressive and not interlaced.

Take my comments with a pinch of salt, I am a the proud father of a HV10, it is just I have seen better, more representative and impressive samples from people right here on this forum.

I played the 720P on my computer with Gateway 21" widescreen HD monitor, and it looked very good. Almost convinced me to buy this camera, EXCEPT that it doesn't make up for this camera's lack of an external mike input and accessory shoe.

Well, Mark, you're in luck!

From B&H Photo:

Canon HV10 - $999
Zoom H4 Field Sound Recorder - $300
2gb Lexar SD Card for the H4 - (about) $100

Total - $1,400

About the same price as just the HV10 from most stores (ie. Best Buy, Fry's, ect.)

Wow, $999 for this cam has got to be the biggest steal in my video career. Absolutely unreal!

buy a XDCAM for 10 or a F900 for 100 times the HV10 price, buddy ;)

HV20 footage now available from Canon USA
 

I was wondering when they'd get round to it Is on same page as the HV10 clips

http://usa.canon.com/app/html/See_Th.../hd_cmos.shtml

Thanks Steven. Strange... description said there was some outdoor shots in the first vid but I didn't see any, just the footage of the club. Also, it looked like they were using a Brevis or something in the second vid.