XL H1 meets F900, the moment you've all been waiting for!

[Nick Hiltgen]

Shannon: NICE FIND! That would seem to make since, and would also give a reason for the 24F "still" footage looking as sharp as it does, Hmm I wonder if the reason why "on movement" the camera has a lower resolution is because of the combination of frames producing an actual lower resolution frame, or our eye's adding blur to make it appear as though the camera has lower resolution. Since the f900's PsF is basically just doing a top and bottom frame you don't introduce the redundancy that you have with the 24F over 60. I wonder if that redundancy is what is causing this perceived (or actual) loss of resolution. I suppose the real test would be to see if 30F is "sharper". Either way good find, and I still stand by my original statement that this camera looks darn good.

[Chris Hurd]

All of the "EF Adapter" posts that were in this thread have been moved into their own topic:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=56642

[Michael Pappas]

In this case it's the motion blur.

You know one of these days I'm going to gaffer tape a res chart on a person riding a bike and follow them around. That would be real world moving res.

1/48th a second is not even expectable in still photography at all were there is movement unless for artistic blur.

At 1/48 even a very very slight movement renders a image severely blurry on a resolving factor of detail. 1/125th is usually considered a starting point. At showscan this was the shutter speed used, because of showscans ultra res this 1/125th gave it even a more heightened reality of sharpness at 60fps 65mm neg. Them were the days, loved working with 65mm film!

I have some research document somewhere that was on still photography and how camera shack caused the most hit to res. For this reason higher shutters speeds with optical stabilized lenses used together render the best results.

So again at 1/48th a second, it's not even fair to critique loss of res on any movement at all.



Michael Pappas
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
PappasArts & Arrfilms Main site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
http://www.Myspace.com/

Originally Posted by Nick Hiltgen

Shannon: NICE FIND! That would seem to make since, and would also give a reason for the 24F "still" footage looking as sharp as it does, Hmm I wonder if the reason why "on movement" the camera has a lower resolution is because of the combination of frames producing an actual lower resolution frame, or our eye's adding blur to make it appear as though the camera has lower resolution. Since the f900's PsF is basically just doing a top and bottom frame you don't introduce the redundancy that you have with the 24F over 60. I wonder if that redundancy is what is causing this perceived (or actual) loss of resolution. I suppose the real test would be to see if 30F is "sharper". Either way good find, and I still stand by my original statement that this camera looks darn good.

[Christopher Glaeser]

Originally Posted by Michael Pappas

In this case it's the motion blur.

At 1/48 even a very very slight movement renders a image severely blurry on a resolving factor of detail. 1/125th is usually considered a starting point.

Not disagreeing, but doesn't IS add about 2 stops for a stationary subject? Isn't 1/48 IS within spitting range of 1/125 non-IS (again, assuming the subject is not moving)?

Best,
Christopher

[Michael Pappas]

True Christopher..... Depending on the size of the detail and the percentage of degrees of movement at what speed and distance are taken in to account. Even at 1/125th shutter very fine lines as the ones on res charts render out blurred with subtle movement. That same 1/125th reacts different when shooting a medium shot of a person because we focus on the larger details of the subject , but blow it up and analyze the label on that persons shirt and you will see that detail was lost on the finer elements a kin to the finer elements of a high res chart. On a res chart especially at the higher res parts, it's very critical for no movement. When we used to do 65mm showscan resolution tests, subtle movement was so obvious, inducing motion blur quite quickly and rendering that motion artifact on the higher res parts of the chart as loss of detail even at 1/125th.


>pappas

Originally Posted by Christopher Glaeser

Not disagreeing, but doesn't IS add about 2 stops for a stationary subject? Isn't 1/48 IS within spitting range of 1/125 non-IS (again, assuming the subject is not moving)?

Best,
Christopher

[Jack Zhang]

Any of you guys think The XL-H1 would be good enough to be included in the filming of the popular TV comedy, "The Office"?

[Nick Hiltgen]

Jack, it depends if the office needs 24p, the show has a reel world feel, so I think if it's shot in 60i, yes. That being said I'm sure a good amount of post is done on it, it also depends on the lighting, i think if they can pump an extra stop/stop and a half in it would be remarkably similar to results achieved with a 2/3 inch camera.

[James Darren]

Slightly off topic & FYI... "The Office" (The successful British version, not that terrible US attempt) was shot on Digi Beta using Canon Cine Optics with some really nice matrix settings on the Digi Betacam.

There's many rumours on internet message boards going around that it was shot on PD150's or similar prosumer cameras which is definitely not the case!

And 24/25p would definitely not suit the look they needed to achieve in this brilliant series!

[Stephen L. Noe]

Originally Posted by Brian Duke

Let's do it when you get back. I can be contacted at duke@superbadmusic.com

Maybe, just maybe, the Fuji 13x lens will have made it's grand entrance by then and we can have a look at it.

[Jack Zhang]

I'm talking about the US remake. Can they use a XL-H1 in 24p and is it good enough for them?

[James Darren]

Originally Posted by Jack Zhang

I'm talking about the US remake. Can they use a XL-H1 in 24p and is it good enough for them?

It's meant to be like a reality show so the "realness" of interlaced video is what suits it best.

"The Office" had a decent budget, I can't see any reason why they'd consider using prosumer cameras instead of full size Digi Beta/HD cameras.

[Jeff Gibbs]

Also slightly off topic, but does anyone know what Grizzly Man was shot on, and who did the absolutely stunning transfer to 35mm? At least the brand new print I saw at our film festival in Traverse City was amazing, better looking than most films originating in film. I am thinking it was an early 3 chip DV camera like the VX1000.
And this is germane since I wonder with the ever improving transfers from 60i if one should consider shooting the H1 (which I don't own but am considering) and the z1 in 60i rather than either 24f or 50i even when film out is intended. 60i would also mean that HD projection and/or NTSC DVD/TV screenings will be optimal.