I'm confused at DVinfo.net

Pete Tomov · December 9th, 2005, 05:26 AM

Canon claims that the ccds on the H1 have 1.67M pixels...That's a little more than enough to produce 1440x1080 progressive image.Then why does the 24f/30f footage look like the frame mode on an xl1?

Robert Niemann · December 9th, 2005, 05:36 AM

The CCD technology, Canon uses for its XL H1, is always recording interlaced pictures, not progressive. There is a difference betwenn interlaced and progressive CCDs. At time 1080p CCDs are too expensive, so Canon has decided to go the other way: using 1080i CCDs and for the f modes deinterlacing the pictures internally.

Pete Tomov · December 9th, 2005, 05:47 AM

That's like deleting half of the 60i.Isn't it better to record in 60i(if you need 30f) and deinterlace in post?That way you can get slow motion and you won't lose any resolution compared to the 30f.

I guess that just a metter of choise.

Robert Niemann · December 9th, 2005, 09:07 AM

By deinterlacing You always loose resolution (at least 25 percent). So it does not matter, if You do it Yourself in the postproduction or if the camera does it internally. But the last way if faster.

Pete Bauer · December 9th, 2005, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete Tomov

Canon claims that the ccds on the H1 have 1.67M pixels...That's a little more than enough to produce 1440x1080 progressive image.Then why does the 24f/30f footage look like the frame mode on an xl1?

It doesn't. The F modes are not only dramatically sharper than any SD camera but much closer, percentage-wise, to the resolution of the camera's 60i mode than would be the case with the older frame modes like in the XL1.

If you want slow motion, shooting 60i with a de-interlace in post is probably what you'd do, at the expense of some resolution. Or, you could wait for the Panasonic DVX200 to ship; it will have a 720p60 mode. That should at least be on par with deinterlacing a 1440x1080i60 signal.

For normal-speed scenes in a 24 or 30 fps program, it makes no sense to shoot 60i; there's some good third party software out there, but I doubt any of it is going to de-interlace 60i to look just as good as the 24F or 30F modes.

Also, we're using HDV here. Although we'll have to wait for someone with HD-SDI capability to do some testing, given the sensor size and the use of pixel shift, I suspect that the 1920x1080 HD-SDI output will resolve even more detail in all modes than HDV, both for luma and obviously for chroma (4:2:2) than HDV.

Pete Tomov · December 9th, 2005, 09:56 AM

I'm planing on getting xl h1 and i have hd-sdi capture on my computer at home.The thing is that I won't be able to get a h1 untill February.

Pete Tomov · December 10th, 2005, 12:21 PM

Ok, I just had to ask:
http://img457.imageshack.us/img457/6346/can3xi.jpg

What's up with that?
I mean if there's really no diffurence between the cameras i can get the NTSC,send it to Canon,pay $500 to make it NTSC/PAL and have it back with FedEx over night and still it'll be cheaper than buying the PAL model.
Now,i'm not trying to save $200 but what's up with the price diffurence if the cameras are the same?

Chris Hurd · December 10th, 2005, 12:46 PM

The price difference is most likely due to the dealer's own higher cost of getting the non-native-system camera. That extra cost is passed on to you. Go overseas and most likely the situation will be reversed. If you're in PAL land, it's usually less expensive to buy a native PAL camera. If you're in NTSC land, it's usually less expensive to buy a native NTSC camera. The "other" system is harder to get in each respective area, thus the disparity in pricing.

Christopher Glaeser · December 10th, 2005, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete Tomov

what's up with the price diffurence if the cameras are the same?

Several possible explanations. The supply and demand of these two models are not the same within a given region. If relatively few US companies stock or sell the PAL model, for example, then prices will not be as competitive. Also, the Canon volume discounts and other incentives for retailers may apply to each model separately.

Best,
Christopher

Pete Bauer · December 10th, 2005, 12:48 PM

I don't know what is up with that because I have no idea where you got those images from. However, if it is from a non-sponsor of DVinfo.net, please let it go.

Pete Tomov · December 10th, 2005, 12:55 PM

It's no only the same dealer,it's same web page.That's part of a screencap,it's not edited,the two camera are next to each other just like in the pic.I only cut out the rest of the page because they're not DVinfo.net sponsors.

I was just randomly browsing and i came across this.

Chris Hurd · December 10th, 2005, 01:16 PM

Since it's from a dealer who is outside the DV Info Net sponsor realm, then this is a dead topic as far as I'm concerned. I'll close by repeating that there is almost always a difference in price between PAL and NTSC gear. In PAL land, NTSC is more expensive. In NTSC land, PAL is more expensive. The reason is that it's more difficult and more expensive for a dealer to bring in equipment that is not native to wherever they are located. Hope this helps,

December 9th, 2005, 05:26 AM	#1
Pete Tomov Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 106	I'm confused Canon claims that the ccds on the H1 have 1.67M pixels...That's a little more than enough to produce 1440x1080 progressive image.Then why does the 24f/30f footage look like the frame mode on an xl1?

December 10th, 2005, 12:46 PM	#8
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	The price difference is most likely due to the dealer's own higher cost of getting the non-native-system camera. That extra cost is passed on to you. Go overseas and most likely the situation will be reversed. If you're in PAL land, it's usually less expensive to buy a native PAL camera. If you're in NTSC land, it's usually less expensive to buy a native NTSC camera. The "other" system is harder to get in each respective area, thus the disparity in pricing. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

December 10th, 2005, 12:48 PM	#10
Pete Bauer Wrangler Join Date: May 2003 Location: Eagle River, AK Posts: 4,100	I don't know what is up with that because I have no idea where you got those images from. However, if it is from a non-sponsor of DVinfo.net, please let it go. __________________ Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress!

December 10th, 2005, 01:16 PM	#12
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Since it's from a dealer who is outside the DV Info Net sponsor realm, then this is a dead topic as far as I'm concerned. I'll close by repeating that there is almost always a difference in price between PAL and NTSC gear. In PAL land, NTSC is more expensive. In NTSC land, PAL is more expensive. The reason is that it's more difficult and more expensive for a dealer to bring in equipment that is not native to wherever they are located. Hope this helps, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

December 9th, 2005, 05:36 AM	#2
Robert Niemann Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Berlin, Federal Republic of Germany Posts: 109	The CCD technology, Canon uses for its XL H1, is always recording interlaced pictures, not progressive. There is a difference betwenn interlaced and progressive CCDs. At time 1080p CCDs are too expensive, so Canon has decided to go the other way: using 1080i CCDs and for the f modes deinterlacing the pictures internally.

December 9th, 2005, 05:47 AM	#3
Pete Tomov Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 106	That's like deleting half of the 60i.Isn't it better to record in 60i(if you need 30f) and deinterlace in post?That way you can get slow motion and you won't lose any resolution compared to the 30f. I guess that just a metter of choise.

December 9th, 2005, 09:07 AM	#4
Robert Niemann Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Berlin, Federal Republic of Germany Posts: 109	By deinterlacing You always loose resolution (at least 25 percent). So it does not matter, if You do it Yourself in the postproduction or if the camera does it internally. But the last way if faster.

December 9th, 2005, 09:56 AM	#6
Pete Tomov Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 106	I'm planing on getting xl h1 and i have hd-sdi capture on my computer at home.The thing is that I won't be able to get a h1 untill February.

December 10th, 2005, 12:21 PM	#7
Pete Tomov Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 106	Ok, I just had to ask: http://img457.imageshack.us/img457/6346/can3xi.jpg What's up with that? I mean if there's really no diffurence between the cameras i can get the NTSC,send it to Canon,pay $500 to make it NTSC/PAL and have it back with FedEx over night and still it'll be cheaper than buying the PAL model. Now,i'm not trying to save $200 but what's up with the price diffurence if the cameras are the same?

December 10th, 2005, 12:55 PM	#11
Pete Tomov Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 106	It's no only the same dealer,it's same web page.That's part of a screencap,it's not edited,the two camera are next to each other just like in the pic.I only cut out the rest of the page because they're not DVinfo.net sponsors. I was just randomly browsing and i came across this.