Download eight 1080/24F XH G1 clips provided by Kaku Ito

Marty Hudzik · October 18th, 2006, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yasser Kassana

Geez, go out make movies instead of pondering over the CA or some bull. Honestly, if you're a sad geeky videographer like me and you guys, then you would notice, but then general public will not!! Get on with making movies. Oh and the footage looks great, I'm sold.

The purpose of these boards is to discuss and have intelligent conversations about the positives and the negatives of the equipment we invest thousands of dollars into. I want to know what I am getting into when I invest that kind of money.

However if you feel that you don't really care to know about potential limitations of your equipment that is fine. Just buy it. Is there really any need to put down other people who find this kind of information exchange useful?

Robert Sanders · October 18th, 2006, 12:27 PM

Having discussions about CA is fine. But I think the number of threads and posts about CA is borderline absurd. The discussions here are exact repeats of discussions on the XLH1 threads a year ago. And I think it's unfortunate that Canon has somehow become the poster-child for CA issues when the reality is that ALL of these cameras have CA problems.

I think the bottom line is that CA on this camera and others is nominal at worst and non-existent the rest of the time. I think Barlow Elton has proven with screengrabs of "Revenge of the Sith" that even a $50k cinema-grade lens from Fujinon on a $250k F950 produces some CA.

Marty Hudzik · October 18th, 2006, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Sanders

Having discussions about CA is fine. But I think the number of threads and posts about CA is borderline absurd. The discussions here are exact repeats of discussions on the XLH1 threads a year ago. And I think it's unfortunate that Canon has somehow become the poster-child for CA issues when the reality is that ALL of these cameras have CA problems.

I think the bottom line is that CA on this camera and others is nominal at worst and non-existent the rest of the time. I think Barlow Elton has proven with screengrabs of "Revenge of the Sith" that even a $50k cinema-grade lens from Fujinon on a $250k F950 produces some CA.

I don't wish to engage in long debates over CA at all. I was simply reviewing the clips and that one clip jumped out at me. In my opinion I have never seen that on the H1. Never. Well at least not my H1.

If I recall correctly I was simply trying to keep people in check that making statements that the A1 lens is far superior to the H1 based on some downloads is a little premature. If I was going to make bold statements based on my own experience and these frame grabs, I might be inclined to think the H1 lens is better. But it's too soon to judge.

In my statement about looking for CA in my H1 I was kinda joking. I will keep an eye open to see if it does happen. But so far, I have not seen it. Nothing to the degree of that tree in the people walking clip.

Peace!

Robert Sanders · October 18th, 2006, 12:45 PM

Marty, please understand my post was not intended to be a directed at you personally. It was just my general commentary on the meta-discussion of chromatic abberations wrt to Canon lenses.

Chris Hurd · October 18th, 2006, 12:55 PM

Part of the problem is that some people think "chromatic abberation" anytime they see a fringe. As A.J. deLange has helpfully pointed out numerous times, fringe has a variety of causes, only one of which is chromatic abberation. More often than not, the cause of most fringe issues we see around here isn't chromatic abberation at all, but the far more common issue of chroma subsampling effects.

Image fringe does NOT automatically mean chromatic abberation. That's what some people just don't seem to understand. With the help of A.J. and others, we're working on correcting those misunderstandings.

Simon Dean · October 25th, 2006, 08:24 AM

It's taken me awhile to really analyse this footage - particularly as I'm really thinking of getting an A1.

Whilst I understand some of the comments on CA, what I have only just really picked up on is the vertical smearing on the night taxi ride. The streetlights have really big vertical lines.

Now I know this is quite common with small CCD chips, but for those with more experience - is this worse than normal?

There are just a couple of things tempting me with the Sony V1, the HDMI and the CMOS chips (For colour, latitude and lack of smearing) - however, hardly any footage has come out from the V1 (and I've seen none with correct pulldown applied) and I'm loving the Canon footage. 24F is better than I thought it would be.

Anyway, back to that smearing. Any comments?

Philip Williams · October 25th, 2006, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simon Dean

It's taken me awhile to really analyse this footage - particularly as I'm really thinking of getting an A1.
<snip>
Anyway, back to that smearing. Any comments?

I'd say it looks about normal from what I've seen. I think this is more controlled in some other cameras, but its not unexpected for the price and technology being used here.

Actually, I just finally got a chance to pull some of the 24F footage into After Effects and I was fully expecting to find some substantial macroblocking and banding effects when pushing the footage around. As it turned out, I was very surprised at how robust the footage was.

I took that taxi footage and did some brightening and contrast work on it and I was able to pull a lot of detail out of the darker areas while retaining a clean image. I could definitly use this at a wedding reception with minimal gain and boost it up in post without issue.

I pulled up the band footage and with some basic brightness/contrast boosting got an instant semi bleach-bypass look. No blocks, no weirdness, just solid footage.

www.philipwilliams.com

Matthew Nayman · October 25th, 2006, 09:36 AM

I don't what you are all talking about. I just watched osme of these clps exported to HDV tape then played on a 40" Samsung LCD.

Wow.

Nuff said

Marty Hudzik · October 25th, 2006, 09:46 AM

This stuff is amazing at first impression. No doubt. But having 6-8 months of HD viewing experience (both broadcast signal and HVX and H1) I am not simply blown away anymore by HD. Seriously.....you get used to the "wow" factor and you begin to notice little details that you didn't before. It's the nature of the beast really.

Now....when I am watching HD on a network I have to sometimes say "Is this in HD?", and switch channels to see how horrid the SD signal looks, and then switch back and say "Yup! Pure HD." Then I realize how quickly I got use to HD as a standard. It does not always just blow you away. And once you get past that point, you find little imperfections that are completely worthy of discussion. Whic is why we talk about CA and Smearing and such. Just creating an amazing HD signal does not automatically give the camera a free pass on other little things that should factor into your decision.

Peace.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Nayman

I don't what you are all talking about. I just watched osme of these clps exported to HDV tape then played on a 40" Samsung LCD.

Wow.

Nuff said

Matthew Nayman · October 25th, 2006, 11:32 AM

I watch a lot of HD programming to and have been using a JVC Hd100 for a few months now...

My WOW is basically that such a good image (as good as any 2/3" XDCAM stuff I have I seen" is from a $5000 cam.

Wow

Bogdan Tyburczy · October 26th, 2006, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marty Hudzik

...
Seriously.....you get used to the "wow" factor and you begin to notice little details that you didn't before. It's the nature of the beast really.
...

I agree. We get used to good things in life so quickly and soon after take them for granted. Even bad movies shot on 35mm become bad movies quickly. Blu Ray, HD DVD and beautiful large display help only for a moment :)

However, I think we should be a little bit more forgiving. Nothing is perfect, but considering the results vs the cost ratio, we really should not complain too much. $4k package that includes 20x HD lens and still produces such beautiful results is wonderful achievement, imo.

Density of 1.56 megapixels on 1/3" sensors translates to 44 megapixels(!) on 35mm SLR frame. Imagine the cost of 35mm lens resolving that resolution at 3x zoom, or even prime... Even the most expensive lenses suffer from CA and therefore there's always at least one reason for color fringe. Barlow Elton posted very good example of that. Here we have 20x lens and solution that in many image quality aspects is comparable to waaay more expensive equipment so who can seriously complain?

Maybe instead of pointing our fingers to inherent imperfections of equipment we use and can afford, we should rather discuss how to avoid situations that make those problems visible?

Just my humble 2 cents.

Marty Hudzik · October 26th, 2006, 11:57 AM

I originally pointed it out because I do not see any CA to this degree on my XL-H1. It seemed like a potential issue to me in comparison to another camera in the sub 10K market. Not in relation to $100k camera. Either way after not viewing it for a while and getting a chance to check it out again it really isn't that bad. The problems grow in our minds in direct proportion to how much we talk about it!!!

:)

Peace!

Bogdan Tyburczy · October 26th, 2006, 01:55 PM

I've seen it in XL-H1 and all cameras I had a chance to hold in my hands, including still cameras, but it's really hard, at least for me, to say if some of them were significantly better or worse than others (I'm talking about $4..10k range).

It would take putting them side by side in the same light conditions to draw near-objective conclusions. There is no guarantee other cameras in this class would behave better in the same situation. Just give them hard edges, enough contrast and point in direction they don't like and color fringe will sure be there.

Marty Hudzik · October 26th, 2006, 02:02 PM

I have seen it in other cameras, even some H1 footage I have downloaded on the web. However I have not seen it on my own H1 (lucky I guess....I usually get the problems!) as of yet. When I had my XL2 I never saw it much. But when I put a .7x in front of the lens it started looking weird out at the edges. More than just a tiny bit of fringing. I saw a lot of blur and distortion out there. I was not happy with it.

That XH-A1 shot (with the trees in the top left corner) looked more like that than what I have seen in other cameras. That is why it jumped out at me. I think the A1 is going to be a great camera despite this one incident....the rest of the footage is tight.....especially for a $4K camera.

Peace!

Bogdan Tyburczy · October 26th, 2006, 02:41 PM

I haven't seen much of that problem with XL2 also. I guess it's because SD hides most of the symptoms. In HD it's much harder to have those problems unnoticed. I guess you are lucky if you haven't seen it in your H1 footage :) Good thing is more often than we realize, we avoid those problems almost automatically using our esthetic judgment.

The XH-G1 shot you mentioned would be probably very tough to handle for any camera. The problem is visible in the left upper corner. Other 3 corners look perfect so it's not the lens weakness that caused it. There were many branches and leaves dancing in that area in high contrast. Actually, I'm quite impressed with dynamic range of new Canons.

Sure it would be interesting to compare A1/G1 against Sony V1 in that particular situation since they have similar zoom range (actually Canons start with wider angle, but they are all 20x zooms).

Peace!

October 18th, 2006, 12:27 PM	#32
Robert Sanders Starway Pictures Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Studio City Posts: 581	Having discussions about CA is fine. But I think the number of threads and posts about CA is borderline absurd. The discussions here are exact repeats of discussions on the XLH1 threads a year ago. And I think it's unfortunate that Canon has somehow become the poster-child for CA issues when the reality is that ALL of these cameras have CA problems. I think the bottom line is that CA on this camera and others is nominal at worst and non-existent the rest of the time. I think Barlow Elton has proven with screengrabs of "Revenge of the Sith" that even a $50k cinema-grade lens from Fujinon on a $250k F950 produces some CA. __________________ http://www.starwaypictures.com http://starwaypictures.blogspot.com/

October 18th, 2006, 12:45 PM	#34
Robert Sanders Starway Pictures Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Studio City Posts: 581	Marty, please understand my post was not intended to be a directed at you personally. It was just my general commentary on the meta-discussion of chromatic abberations wrt to Canon lenses. __________________ http://www.starwaypictures.com http://starwaypictures.blogspot.com/

October 18th, 2006, 12:55 PM	#35
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Part of the problem is that some people think "chromatic abberation" anytime they see a fringe. As A.J. deLange has helpfully pointed out numerous times, fringe has a variety of causes, only one of which is chromatic abberation. More often than not, the cause of most fringe issues we see around here isn't chromatic abberation at all, but the far more common issue of chroma subsampling effects. Image fringe does NOT automatically mean chromatic abberation. That's what some people just don't seem to understand. With the help of A.J. and others, we're working on correcting those misunderstandings. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

October 25th, 2006, 08:24 AM	#36
Simon Dean Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Coventry, UK Posts: 91	Vertical Smearing It's taken me awhile to really analyse this footage - particularly as I'm really thinking of getting an A1. Whilst I understand some of the comments on CA, what I have only just really picked up on is the vertical smearing on the night taxi ride. The streetlights have really big vertical lines. Now I know this is quite common with small CCD chips, but for those with more experience - is this worse than normal? There are just a couple of things tempting me with the Sony V1, the HDMI and the CMOS chips (For colour, latitude and lack of smearing) - however, hardly any footage has come out from the V1 (and I've seen none with correct pulldown applied) and I'm loving the Canon footage. 24F is better than I thought it would be. Anyway, back to that smearing. Any comments?

October 26th, 2006, 02:02 PM	#44
Marty Hudzik Trustee Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 1,771	I have seen it in other cameras, even some H1 footage I have downloaded on the web. However I have not seen it on my own H1 (lucky I guess....I usually get the problems!) as of yet. When I had my XL2 I never saw it much. But when I put a .7x in front of the lens it started looking weird out at the edges. More than just a tiny bit of fringing. I saw a lot of blur and distortion out there. I was not happy with it. That XH-A1 shot (with the trees in the top left corner) looked more like that than what I have seen in other cameras. That is why it jumped out at me. I think the A1 is going to be a great camera despite this one incident....the rest of the footage is tight.....especially for a $4K camera. Peace! Last edited by Marty Hudzik; October 26th, 2006 at 02:43 PM.

October 25th, 2006, 09:36 AM	#38
Matthew Nayman Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Toronto Posts: 917	I don't what you are all talking about. I just watched osme of these clps exported to HDV tape then played on a 40" Samsung LCD. Wow. Nuff said

October 25th, 2006, 11:32 AM	#40
Matthew Nayman Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Toronto Posts: 917	I watch a lot of HD programming to and have been using a JVC Hd100 for a few months now... My WOW is basically that such a good image (as good as any 2/3" XDCAM stuff I have I seen" is from a $5000 cam. Wow

October 26th, 2006, 11:57 AM	#42
Marty Hudzik Trustee Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 1,771	I originally pointed it out because I do not see any CA to this degree on my XL-H1. It seemed like a potential issue to me in comparison to another camera in the sub 10K market. Not in relation to $100k camera. Either way after not viewing it for a while and getting a chance to check it out again it really isn't that bad. The problems grow in our minds in direct proportion to how much we talk about it!!! :) Peace!

October 26th, 2006, 01:55 PM	#43
Bogdan Tyburczy Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Brooklyn Posts: 161	I've seen it in XL-H1 and all cameras I had a chance to hold in my hands, including still cameras, but it's really hard, at least for me, to say if some of them were significantly better or worse than others (I'm talking about $4..10k range). It would take putting them side by side in the same light conditions to draw near-objective conclusions. There is no guarantee other cameras in this class would behave better in the same situation. Just give them hard edges, enough contrast and point in direction they don't like and color fringe will sure be there.

October 26th, 2006, 02:41 PM	#45
Bogdan Tyburczy Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Brooklyn Posts: 161	I haven't seen much of that problem with XL2 also. I guess it's because SD hides most of the symptoms. In HD it's much harder to have those problems unnoticed. I guess you are lucky if you haven't seen it in your H1 footage :) Good thing is more often than we realize, we avoid those problems almost automatically using our esthetic judgment. The XH-G1 shot you mentioned would be probably very tough to handle for any camera. The problem is visible in the left upper corner. Other 3 corners look perfect so it's not the lens weakness that caused it. There were many branches and leaves dancing in that area in high contrast. Actually, I'm quite impressed with dynamic range of new Canons. Sure it would be interesting to compare A1/G1 against Sony V1 in that particular situation since they have similar zoom range (actually Canons start with wider angle, but they are all 20x zooms). Peace! Last edited by Bogdan Tyburczy; October 26th, 2006 at 08:39 PM.