Canon HV20 review with pics. and movie footage at DVinfo.net

Tony Corkovic · March 11th, 2007, 08:44 AM

http://translate.google.com/translat...language_tools

Ron Lemming · March 11th, 2007, 12:07 PM

I saw that page like a month ago. :)

The video with Cinema Mode and PF24 (ezsm3.mov) is badly out of focus and I think and hope that the camera can do better than all the videos on that page.

Look at the last shot in ezsm4.mov (the pan and the bicycle). What can be causing that stutter? It doesn't look quite right.

And does anyone else but me think that this screenshot looks awful: http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/do...207/ez0175.jpg ??

Pieter Jongerius · March 11th, 2007, 02:11 PM

Hi Ron, it does look awful.

loads of noise, which is consecutively heavily suppressed using some contrast threshold blur filter (if that's putting it properly). Also there are quite prominent sharpening artefacts.

I can't really imagine the cam doing this. I think someone spent a bit to much time in photoshop correcting for a noisy shot...

...or maybe some of the in-cam image processing settings were set to their extremes.

Maury McEvoy · March 11th, 2007, 05:55 PM

Hi Ron,

If you look at ezsm3.mov, frame by frame, every fourth frame is a duplicate.

Ken Ross · March 11th, 2007, 05:57 PM

There's no reason the HV20 should have worse PQ than the HV10....in fact it should be as good or better in some conditions. I would put very little stock in those few frame grabs.

Thomas Smet · March 12th, 2007, 12:17 AM

It isn't really fair to use the clips from that site to judge the quality.

1. The clips have been re-encoded to H264. This means we are not seeing raw examples from the camera. We do not know how well the clips were encoded and they could have been done very quick and dirty.

2. Clearly the clips didn't have the pulldown removed correctly. Whatever tool was used to remove the pulldown did a very bad job because some shots look ok while others clearly have the pulldown all messed up giving extra jerky video.

3. I don't know how many times it has been said now but the lens, DSP and chip are exactly the same as the HV10. They will look pretty much exactly the same.

March 11th, 2007, 08:44 AM	#1
Tony Corkovic New Boot Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Canada Posts: 13	Canon HV20 review with pics. and movie footage http://translate.google.com/translat...language_tools

March 11th, 2007, 05:55 PM	#4
Maury McEvoy Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cambria CA Posts: 45	Duplicate frames in ezsm3.mov Hi Ron, If you look at ezsm3.mov, frame by frame, every fourth frame is a duplicate. __________________ Maury

March 11th, 2007, 12:07 PM	#2
Ron Lemming Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Sweden Posts: 46	I saw that page like a month ago. :) The video with Cinema Mode and PF24 (ezsm3.mov) is badly out of focus and I think and hope that the camera can do better than all the videos on that page. Look at the last shot in ezsm4.mov (the pan and the bicycle). What can be causing that stutter? It doesn't look quite right. And does anyone else but me think that this screenshot looks awful: http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/do...207/ez0175.jpg ??

March 11th, 2007, 02:11 PM	#3
Pieter Jongerius Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 101	Hi Ron, it does look awful. loads of noise, which is consecutively heavily suppressed using some contrast threshold blur filter (if that's putting it properly). Also there are quite prominent sharpening artefacts. I can't really imagine the cam doing this. I think someone spent a bit to much time in photoshop correcting for a noisy shot... ...or maybe some of the in-cam image processing settings were set to their extremes.

March 11th, 2007, 05:57 PM	#5
Ken Ross Trustee Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New York Posts: 1,945	There's no reason the HV20 should have worse PQ than the HV10....in fact it should be as good or better in some conditions. I would put very little stock in those few frame grabs.

March 12th, 2007, 12:17 AM	#6
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	It isn't really fair to use the clips from that site to judge the quality. 1. The clips have been re-encoded to H264. This means we are not seeing raw examples from the camera. We do not know how well the clips were encoded and they could have been done very quick and dirty. 2. Clearly the clips didn't have the pulldown removed correctly. Whatever tool was used to remove the pulldown did a very bad job because some shots look ok while others clearly have the pulldown all messed up giving extra jerky video. 3. I don't know how many times it has been said now but the lens, DSP and chip are exactly the same as the HV10. They will look pretty much exactly the same.