Buy XH A1, or rent and wait for AVCHD?

[Chris Leffler]

The HMC150 is also something that I am looking at. However, I am in the same situation as above. I don't have the cash to upgrade my Macbook Pro. If I am not mistaken that is not even close to being able to handle AVCHD.

[Jerry Norman]

Jeff, I've read several spec sheets on the HMC 150 - very interesting camera. There are two features on the A1 that really fit my style of shooting and I'm not yet sure from my reading whether the 150 supports these:

- Ability to do rack focus (i.e., A1's ability to set a focus point, and return to it via push of a button).
- Ability to smoothly ramp a zoom in/out of the end points.

Originally Posted by Jeff Kellam

Jerry:

I tend to agree with your friends that the market is going to AVCHD or another tapeless format. I am not sure, can HDV even be implemented on a tapeless camera?

[Randy Panado]

Originally Posted by Jerry Norman

Randy, I would like to get Canon's ZR2000 lanc remote zoom but experienced real sticker shock when I looked it up - about $370. I have the Canon ZR1000 8-step lanc zoom for my GL2 and I see from other posts that it can work with the A1, although you give up some A1-specific features found on the ZR2000. I think I am going to try using my ZR1000 for now and possibly purchase the ZR2000 in the future. But I would really like to be able to ramp the zoom speed up/down (i.e., easy in/easy out) and I am not sure if this is doable without the ZR2000. Your thoughts?

What I've done is use my middle and ring finger to operate the zoom rocker and use my pointer finger to "scroll" the custom speed up and down while zooming. This allows me to go from QUICK zoom to a very slow one in a controlled way which would still work if I was shooting one camera. I'm not sure if that was how it was intended to be used but it's awesome nonetheless.

If any A1 owner has not yet tried that technique (I discovered it the method by just fiddling around so it may already be common knowledge), I would suggest trying it. During receptions, I can follow the wedding party during the grand entrance and match pace with their walking very easily.

And I was pricing out LANC controllers earlier this month, damn they are pricy ;).

[Nick Gordon]

Originally Posted by Chris Leffler

The HMC150 is also something that I am looking at. However, I am in the same situation as above. I don't have the cash to upgrade my Macbook Pro. If I am not mistaken that is not even close to being able to handle AVCHD.

I use a MacBook Pro to edit AVCHD with no problems (even running on battery). The only significant limitation I can see would be if you don't have much RAM installed, but upgrading is very cheap if you go to Crucial or Kingston, instead of using Apple's own (overpriced) memory.

2GB is OK; 3-4 is better.

[Chris Leffler]

Isn't the MBP limited to only 2 gigs?

[Nick Gordon]

Originally Posted by Chris Leffler

Isn't the MBP limited to only 2 gigs?

I'm writing this on a MBP with 4 gigs!

[Mark Fry]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kellam

...can HDV even be implemented on a tapeless camera?...

Yes, and no. HDV is 4:2:0 8-bit video, compressed using MPEG-2 at 25 Mbps (various resolutions and frame-rates), written to a mini-DV or DV size/shape tape. You can write the same data-stream to solid-state or hard disc as well (e.g. Sony MCR-1, Fire-Store, etc. already do this), but to carry the HDV logo, a camera must have a tape drive. I've seen a description of a prototype JVC camera, shown at IBC, that appears to record HDV-style MPEG-2 to solid state only, and carries JVC's own "ProHD" logo. The Sony EX1 and EX3 write MPEG-2 at either 25 or 35 Mbps (still 4:2:0 sampling??) to solid state with no tape option, and call the format something different (XDCAM??).

[Mark Fry]

If your current PC is not up to editing native AVCHD (almost all PCs will struggle with more than a couple of layers, AFAIK), the alternative is to transcode to a less-compressed codec (Edius HQ, CineForm, etc.) and work on that, if your NLE will allow it. However, that consumes disc space and takes time, removing much of the advantage of dragging and dropping the footage directly into your NLE.

[Jeff Kellam]

Originally Posted by Mark Fry

If your current PC is not up to editing native AVCHD (almost all PCs will struggle with more than a couple of layers, AFAIK), the alternative is to transcode to a less-compressed codec (Edius HQ, CineForm, etc.) and work on that, if your NLE will allow it. However, that consumes disc space and takes time, removing much of the advantage of dragging and dropping the footage directly into your NLE.

Rendering times

Tonight I put together a surfing video I shot today with the HMC150 in 1080/60i. It had 2 video and 2 audio tracks.

It took 1 hour and 5 min. to render 11 min/25sec of video to the 1080i/29.97 HDV template in Vegas 8.0c at the maximum quality.

The Nehlam platform is twice as fast. That will be my next move as soon as they are available.

[Jerry Norman]

Jeff, I also use Vegas 8.0c. What processor/OS/ram was your render on?

Originally Posted by Jeff Kellam

Rendering times

Tonight I put together a surfing video I shot today with the HMC150 in 1080/60i. It had 2 video and 2 audio tracks.

It took 1 hour and 5 min. to render 11 min/25sec of video to the 1080i/29.97 HDV template in Vegas 8.0c at the maximum quality.

The Nehlam platform is twice as fast. That will be my next move as soon as they are available.

[Jeff Kellam]

Originally Posted by Jerry Norman

Jeff, I also use Vegas 8.0c. What processor/OS/ram was your render on?

Processor: Q6600 @5% OC
OS: XP SP2
RAM: 2GB DDR2 @1133Mhz

I rendered the same 11 min/25 sec video using the 720X480 DV template at maximum quality (including slider @ 100%) and it took 14 min. This is a little slower than HDV which usually renders to DV in almost realtime.

What I didn't mention in the last post was that the AVCHD to HDV renders are quite a bit slower than HDV to HDV renders, which is what I do with my HDV cameras footage. I author most projects for both DV and HD delivery.

Bottom line, renders to DV are still fast using this equipment.

[Jerry Norman]

I'm the OP. After much deliberation I've ordered an HMC150. Tough decision because I have really enjoyed my trusty old GL2 and I know the A1 is a very fine camera with a great heritage. In the end, I think the low light performance and bang for the buck of the HMC150 really appealed to me. I may come to appreciate its "tapelessness" but that wasn't a key consideration at this point. Thanks to all for your help and insights.

[Jeff Kellam]

Originally Posted by Jerry Norman

I'm the OP. After much deliberation I've ordered an HMC150. Tough decision because I have really enjoyed my trusty old GL2 and I know the A1 is a very fine camera with a great heritage. In the end, I think the low light performance and bang for the buck of the HMC150 really appealed to me. I may come to appreciate its "tapelessness" but that wasn't a key consideration at this point. Thanks to all for your help and insights.

Jerry:

You made a great choice. You really wouldn't go wrong either way.

Until you have it, you just cant appreciate the tapeless ease of use. I didn't think it would be so great, but it is. I definately reach for the HMC150 instead of the A1, it's really just a tapeless A1 (of course with a totally different control set which can be baffling).

Jeff

[Mark Fry]

Good luck, Jerry. Don't get rid of the old GL2, you'll need it for playing the old tapes. How will you archive your footage from the HMC-150?

[Vinny Flood]

I was considering posting a new topic on this but chose not to because it was only hearsay, but someone I know who attended the massive audio-visual trade fair in Amsterdam (forgot the name of it!) recently said that he was told by a Canon rep to brace himself for 'a big announcement' from Canon in November.

This was a response to his complaint that Canon seem to be getting left behind Sony et al in terms of digital acquisition.

So perhaps it'd be better to hold off for a couple of weeks or so. That said, I love the XH-A1.