HF G40 question

[Dave Baker]

As far as the "Task in progress" warning goes, mine (HF G30) does it too, it causes no problems, it's just part ot the shut down routine.

Re. the auto focus, I found Instant AF to be too fast, finding AF more accurate. Not that I use it much, preferring manual focus.

Rainer, you have got me interested now. When I asked about bit rates a long while ago, namely, if I shoot 50fps at 35mbps and edit at 25p, will the overall bit rate be less than the 25p 24mbps before render. I was thinking that if I throw away half the frames I would also throw away half the bits, but at the time the consensus was that 50p reduced to 25p will still be 35mbps. Was I right? Just curious, I have no use for 50p, the only reason I tried it was for the higher bitrate.

[Rainer Listing]

Hi Dave, My thinking is close to your initial view - you can't throw away half the frames and keep all the data. I don't think you can access and reassemble a data stream to produce half the number of frames initially recorded, so regardless of codec if you're rendering at a half the framerate it's a question of either discarding half the frames or combining them, in which case there always will be other compromises. Intra frame compression and smaller changes between frames at 50p does mean that 50p delivered at 50p doesn't need twice the bitrate of 25p to achieve the same quality, but that's a different argument.

[Dave Baker]

Hi Rainer

The argument put forward was that, as the frames were recorded at 35mbps, they would always be 35mbps however many you throw away. I just accepted it and didn't think of it any more until you just mentioned it. To me it's academic anyway since I don't shoot 50p, but it's nice to find somone else who thinks the same way as me about it. It would be pleasing to get a definitive answer though.

That's enough of that, we don't want to hijack Steve's thread, do we.

[Steve Rosen]

Originally Posted by Rainer Listing

One thing you might want to keep in mind is although the 60fps might look better on playback the maximum bitrate per frame is actually higher at 30fps.

What I was noticing at 29.97 is that there's noticeable judder (and surprisingly, some motion blur - the two don't usually happen together). When I changed to 59.97 the judder went away.

Coming from film I used to always shoot at 24fps (23.97) until I realized some video cameras don't handle it well, so I switched to 29.976. That's the impression I'm getting from this camera at 29.97. Admittedly I haven't tried 29.97 again since forever abandoning the P setting and using either TV or Manual exposure, where I can be sure the shutter is always at 1/60... So I'll try that again today.

As for it being a consumer camera, I totally agree. However, the HV40 was a consumer camera too, and as I said above, I was able to use it professionally with success. In fact I often intercut it with much higher end cameras.

[Ian Thomas]

the only thing I find with the hv40 is the viewfinder been fixed is a pain when its bright when you can't use the screen.

Have you thought of an external recorder like the DN60 Steve, Don't think people or in fact Canon now how good the HV camera's are and to this day too

[Steve Rosen]

Ian: I only use the LCD for the menu and setup, and actually find the EVF pretty decent for a camera in this category... People complain that it's too small, but as a matter of fact it's not much smaller the the viewable image in my Gratical EVF, which cost $2,000 all by itself.

I tested 29.97 and, keeping the shutter at 1/60 using either manual exposure or TV, the judder I experienced using the P setting is nonexistent. That's good because I really prefer the look.

Also, I mostly handhold, so never use an external recorder, even with larger cameras. In fact my primary reason for buying the G40 for this particular job is that I need to be discreet, and look like a typical tourist in shorts and a crisp new Hawaiian shirt with fish-belly white legs and arms (I'm actually tan, but you get the idea).

BTW, I wrote the below in another thread, but want everyone to know how much I appreciate this forum since I probably won't be back in this particular section for a while...

Thanks everyone for all the help I've received setting up this camera. Being old school, I'm not very comfortable with too many auto options, and tend to get confused by things that should be easier, not more difficult... I was never able to take a decent photograph with a Kodak Instamatic...

I'm packing up and getting ready to go.

[Bryan Worsley]

Wait, we didn't talk about audio ! Just kidding.

Only thing I was going to comment on was your preference for WDR mode. Can't say I was enamoured with it when I checked out the HF-G40. Definitely exhibits increased noise levels in the shadows and the type of blotchy noise you see when gain is cranked up in low light situations - rather more difficult to treat selectively in post. The image is also softer than in Normal mode with a certain loss in fine detail that cannot be adequately recovered by sharpening in post, and attempting to do so only amplifies the noise. If it's the softer/flatter filmic look that appeals to you, I'd be more inclined to go with Cinema mode (Filter 1 configured to taste), which does preserve detail well, is much cleaner (than WDR) in the shadows and offers more latitude for grading, in my opinion. You would also be able to use the (+/-) Exposure function. Or else shoot Normal mode with reduced Contrast and Sharpness (Func > Image Effects). Frankly, I can get a better looking 'pseudo WDR look' manipulating the shadows and highlights with the log wheels in DaVinci Resolve.

What I did note comparing matched sample clips shot in Normal mode on the HF-G40 and HF-G30 (with identical settings) was that dynamic range was definitely improved on the HF-G40, as it was on the HF-G30 relative to the HF-G10/20. 'Highlight Priority' mode on the HF-G40 also looked like it could be useful for 'highlight protection' in some high contrast situations, but not as a 'look' in itself, which is how Canon seem to promote it.

Anyhow, have a great trip, I'm sure the HF-G40 will serve you well.

[Steve Rosen]

Hey Brian... Not quite gone yet. I haven't noticed a lot of noise or macro blocking with WDR. I'll check it again today. There was just something I didn't like about the normal setting, it looked too vacant and "videoy" to me compared to other Canon cameras I've owned.

And, yes audio - I bought one of those hot-shoe Canon mics and it works really well - basically the same as on the HV40 - which was the only mic I used on LOOKING FOR AN AUDIENCE, the doc I mentioned above, even for the VOs.

I'm also taking my Tascam and 416 for the important stuff like interviews (I can probably use the Tascam as a pre-amp too, and cable it into the G40, but probably won't)....

[Bryan Worsley]

Originally Posted by Steve Rosen

Hey Brian... Not quite gone yet. I haven't noticed a lot of noise or macro blocking with WDR.

No macroblocking per se, just noise. Here's an example I have to hand:

https://i.imgur.com/X3Y7WQv.png

(Click on + cursor to magnify)

Frame grabs from clips shot in Normal, WDR and Highlight Priority mode. This was from the first set of samples I shot in the camera store (Lozeau, Montreal). It was a bit rushed; there was another customer (with cash at the ready) interested in the HF-G40, so I didn't really have time to properly frame match the shots. But you can see the higher noise levels in WDR mode on the green wall and underside of the umbrella on the left. I couldn't be doing with that. Those are are YUV Histograms on the right side of the images by the way, the top histogram of each set being the luma.

Originally Posted by Steve Rosen

I bought one of those hot-shoe Canon mics and it works really well - basically the same as on the HV40 - which was the only mic I used on LOOKING FOR AN AUDIENCE, the doc I mentioned above, even for the VOs.

If you mean, as I assume, the Canon DM-100 (which replaced the original DM-50 for the HV cams), I have one and still use it a lot for run-and-gun. I commented on it recently:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-thin...ml#post1936571

What's nice also is that the 120o Stereo pick-up pattern is such that, in a pinch, you can record usable behind-camera narrative/dialogue provided you hold the camera fairly close. Not much help for tripod work though. More recently I've taken to using a lavalier and Zoom H1 for recording 'live' behind camera dialogue.

Also the DM-100 disables the Low Cut filter option on the HF-G30/40 that is otherwise available for externally connected mics and the mic itself has no Low Cut filter, so you are at the mercy of what physical wind protection is afforded by the stock furry wind cover, which is not much. I actually have a custom Rycote Windjammer for the DM-100 that came about when I inquired when there was one for this particular model; there was a windjammer for the DM-50 that was designed to fit over the two-part stock foam windscreen, but there is no foam windscreen for the DM-100. The prototype they came up with for me to test was comprised of an inner sleeve of low density reticulated foam (as used in the Softie windjammers) and a lined fur that fitted over that covering the entire microphone. Quite a bulky combination, but the wind isolation is excellent. Unfortunately Rycote decided not to put it into production as they thought there wouldn't be the demand at a viable price point. The only other custom wind cover for the DM-100 I'm aware of was produced by Windcutter who sadly ceased business due family bereavement.

[Steve Rosen]

Bryan: I'm in Kauai, and it is extremely windy, up to 35 knots at times. I've used the furry windscreen that came with the mic, and surprisingly it's pretty good. I think they (Canon) must have done something to improve it because it fits well and there are no open sections (as I've seen commented on elsewhere). As a matter of fact, the wind cut is almost, that's ALMOST, as good as when I use the 416 in a Zeppelin...

The camera's working well, and I'm comfortable dialing in exposure even though I've taken your advice and switched to standard gamma from WDR...

I find the EVF to be very good, contrary to what some people have said. But then those people probably never looked through the finder at the ground glass screen on an Eclair ACL or Aaton.

[Tim Lewis]

I found the furry that came with the DM-100 to be absolutely useless in wind above a zephyr on my Canon Legria HF200.

I bought two foam covers on eBay and cut and joined them with PVA glue to fit the slightly odd shape of the mic. I then made a furry with some teddy bear material from the local fabric shop and put it over the foam. It now stands up to the toughest punishment from the wind.

Maybe not pretty, but effective.

[Bryan Worsley]

Originally Posted by Steve Rosen

Bryan: I'm in Kauai, and it is extremely windy, up to 35 knots at times. I've used the furry windscreen that came with the mic, and surprisingly it's pretty good. I think they (Canon) must have done something to improve it because it fits well and there are no open sections (as I've seen commented on elsewhere). As a matter of fact, the wind cut is almost, that's ALMOST, as good as when I use the 416 in a Zeppelin...

The DM-100 has been around for a good many years now (2008 I think, when they first introduced the Mini Advanced Shoe on the HF-10/100 camcorders) - I guess it's possible, but seems unlikely that they woke up to the need for a better fit after all this time. Maybe (since they probably outsource the manufacturing) you got lucky with a production batch that fits more snugly. All I can say is the stock fur I have does not seal well around the mount - when stretched over that short rear section of the microphone tube, it leaves a gap in the fur opening that allows wind to enter. I found that fitting an elasticated hair scrunchy to close down the gap helps a bit. In my experience it fairs a bit better when facing into a prevailing wind and in Shotgun mode - I have some footage shot on a boat trip across a lake where it performed surprisingly well. But in blustery conditions, where gusts are blowing in from all directions, I find it to be pretty useless (lots of wind rumble), especially when tripod mounted - handheld you can shield it a bit from rear winds if you hold it down low and close to your body, looking down at the LCD screen.

But hey, if it's holding up for you under the conditions you describe (35 knots, that's nigh on 40 MPH), that's great. I'm just surprised.

[Bryan Worsley]

Originally Posted by Tim Lewis

I found the furry that came with the DM-100 to be absolutely useless in wind above a zephyr on my Canon Legria HF200.

I bought two foam covers on eBay and cut and joined them with PVA glue to fit the slightly odd shape of the mic. I then made a furry with some teddy bear material from the local fabric shop and put it over the foam. It now stands up to the toughest punishment from the wind.

Maybe not pretty, but effective.

Hey Tim, yes I remember you posting pics of your DIY windmuff when we discussed the DM-100 a couple of years back. Here are a couple of frame grabs from a video I did for Rycote in the course of our dialogue about the custom windjammer. I had an HF-G10 then.

https://imgur.com/MQeS8P1

https://imgur.com/KCpB5a7

Like I said, this was a prototype. The inner sleeve of foam shown in the second image quite didn't cover the rear end of the microphone tube, so I shaped a piece of foam from an HVAC filter to cap it - that was the closest I could find in the hardware stores to the low density reticulated foam Rycote used. Aquarium filter foam would have been another option. I also contemplated putting another piece of synthetic fur over that foam cap, as the aperture closes down with a draw string, but it works just as well without it. The only practical downside is that the fur encapsulates the entire microphone, shock mount and all, so I have to open it up to access the Stereo/Shotgun selection switch and it's a bit awkward turning the lock-down knob when attaching and removing the DM-100 with the windjammer fitted.

Quite bulky isn't it, and with that thick foam core probably even bigger than yours....yours is definitely more hairy though ;>)

[Dave Baker]

I have the Stormchaser model from (now defunct) The Wincutter. Their approach was similar, a foam tube at the front and a short tube at the back, but two shaped pieces of foam cut to fit the holes in the shock mount pillar and held in place by the fur. Better than the supplied fur, but still not good in crosswinds.

Depending on the position of the hot shoe on the camera, due to the short pillar, fur can be seen in the frame at minimum zoom ( I was trying it on an HF S100 which has the shoe well forward) and yes, it also makes it difficult to access the mike switch. By the time the fur is cut to avoid intrusion, the thing is much less effective. I guess it's why Rycote didn't go ahead.

Logically, the only solution is a custom made job to suit the camera being used.

[Tim Lewis]

Well that looks much more professional and tidy than mine Bryan. I must admit that I am always on a constrained budget and was able to make mine for about fifteen dollars. The foam was two microphone foams from eBay and the material was a sunk cost as I had bought it for my Rode Video Mic.

I find the switch is sufficiently accessible and usually set it before affixing the mic to the camera. It is easy to forget it is there though. On the Canon Legria HF200 the Advanced Mini Shoe is at the rear of the camera, so all that fur never gets in shot.