Yet another XL2 thread

Christopher Toderman · November 9th, 2003, 01:05 AM

Here's what I think. Canon was limited in the past because it was not really a consumer electronics manufacturer like Sony or Matsushita. It made optical products, office products, broadcast lenses, etc. Until now it does not make its own CCDs but it is starting to make CMOS sensors. These are less expensive to manufacture than CCDs so bigger size chips could be used without increasing cost of the camcorder. Bigger chips mean shallower depth of field and more artistically looking image.

Canon is a memeber of the HDV consortium. HD Blu-Ray DVD format, developed basically by Sony, is available to Canon.

Japan nearly completed conversion to digital broadcast. They have broadcasted HD for many years, but in an analog form. The profit margins on SD equipment are slim to none. Matsushita, Toshiba, and Sony are quitting making CRTs in Japan as of next year. They'll only be making flat screens -- HD screens -- there. There will be a strong push into HD, because of profits.

The new Canon camcorder, unveiled at next NAB will be HD, or HD/SD switchable. The change Sony made on their PD170 was minimal, to counteract the DVX. The real new model will be HD and I believe that it too will be announced at NAB; a consumer version will probably be announced at next CES.

Both HDV and Blu-Ray have a potenial to achieve quality that is close to that of Varicam. Varicam footage, after downconverted to 24p, is only 40 Mbps. Blu-Ray and to some extent HDV, with its more efficient MPEG2 compression, can match Varicam quality at a lower transfer rate.

If Canon develops high quality MPEG2 processors for their camcorder, and it certainly is capable of doing so, or it may combine its resources with another company, and if it puts up quality camera head on its camcorder, we'll have Varicam or near Varicam quality camera, less the slow motion capability, for a samll fraction of Varicam price. Lenses will be superb and we may even see variations of this model in the future with larger CMOS sensors that would allow mounting of Canon and other 2/3" HD lenses. I think that Panasonic will introduce at NAB a camera to compete with CinaAlta SR. They know that their Varicam will in not too far from now become dated.

By moving into quality HD camera production, Canon will be able to make a lot of profit in selling HD lenses, aldhough most of them would be a lot less expensive than their current HD lenses.

So quality affordable independent filmmaking will become reality at NAB 2004. That is my opinion. Other manufacturers are aware of the demand of low cost HD gear. Pror to this only Sony and Panasonic had recorders for HD camcorders. Now both HDV and Blu-ray DVD recorders will become available inexpensively also to Ikegami, Hitachi, Sharp, Thomson, and others. They'll all be competing for the semi-pro and pro market. Maybe even Samsung will. That will mean high quality cinema tools soon, at affordable prices.

HDV also has transfer rate of 25 Mbps at 1080i at 1440x1280 pixels (same as CineAlta tape recording) Naturally CineAlta has a lot higher transfer rate, but 1080i broadcast is 19 Mbps. Because of the digital transparency, the HDV camera would be good enough to create HDTV content. The current JVC HDV camera naturally has too many defficiencies to be used professionally for anything. That is my opinion. The new Canon should change all that.

Basically the new low cost HD cameras will be good enough to produce anything, from a movie to be projected, digitally preferably, to a big screen, do HDTV contennt, to wedding videos in both HD and SD forms.

Peter Moore · November 13th, 2003, 02:33 PM

And what is Canon's incentive to obsletize all of its expensive gear for all but the richest production studios? The last thing they want is for TV broadcasters, mid-budget indy filmmakers, and the like to use a $3500 camera instead of a $50,000 one.

That's why I think the prosumers will forever remain crippled.

Aaron Koolen · November 13th, 2003, 03:08 PM

A little *OT* but can someone fill me in on why people would be happy with something like MPG2 compression with their footage when it's more lossy than DV. I hate the fact I have lossy DV even ;)

Does the HDV format allow other compression formats like DV?

Cheers
Aaron

Peter Moore · November 13th, 2003, 04:04 PM

Apparently not, though with the extra resolution I think it doesn't quite matter that much. Look, even HD shown on television is lossy MPEG-II. It's not so much the type of compression but the quality. A 4 Mbps DVD compressed using Canopus will look way better than an 8 Mbps DVD compressed with MainConcept, I think. Maybe that's a little extreme but you get the idea.

I wish there was a DV-like HD format, but apparently the bandwidth would be too high for current DV tapes, and everyone's goal seems to be to keep that old technology. Why I don't really know.

Michael Struthers · November 19th, 2003, 04:17 PM

So why was Christopher disabled? Did he spill the beans?

Peter Moore · November 19th, 2003, 05:13 PM

Don't you think his post would have been deleted then?

Sebastian Scherrer · December 25th, 2003, 01:26 PM

... some time ago I came across the
following article:

"Canon says XL1S replacement will likely include 24 frames progressive video"

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...t_04_07_03.htm

"good things come to those who wait" - I will definitly be among those who resist the temptation buying an XL1s right now,
and wait for things to come.

Best regards,

Sebastian

Chris Hurd · December 25th, 2003, 08:58 PM

Sebastian

The person interviewed for that article was seriously misquoted. I know because I was there at the time. If I were you, I would carefully consider the source concerning any such "news" item. The information on this site, dvinfo.net. will be much more accurate and much closer to legitimate sources.

There are a few different reasons why someone's account here has been disabled, but I won't discuss specifics -- except to say that in this case, it had nothing to do whatsoever with the content of the post. The content in his post is not at all accurate, reliable, or factual. Reasons why an account might be disabled may include the use of a false name and/or failure to provide a legitimate email address. Hope this helps,

November 13th, 2003, 03:08 PM	#18
Aaron Koolen Trustee Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 1,727	A little OT but can someone fill me in on why people would be happy with something like MPG2 compression with their footage when it's more lossy than DV. I hate the fact I have lossy DV even ;) Does the HDV format allow other compression formats like DV? Cheers Aaron __________________ My Website Meat Free Media

November 19th, 2003, 04:17 PM	#20
Michael Struthers Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: SF, Ca Posts: 421	So why was Christopher disabled? Did he spill the beans? __________________ Michael Struthers www.buzzdigital.com

December 25th, 2003, 01:26 PM	#22
Sebastian Scherrer Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Mainz, Germany Posts: 26	Just to fuel the rumors a little more... ... some time ago I came across the following article: "Canon says XL1S replacement will likely include 24 frames progressive video" http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...t_04_07_03.htm "good things come to those who wait" - I will definitly be among those who resist the temptation buying an XL1s right now, and wait for things to come. Best regards, Sebastian

December 25th, 2003, 08:58 PM	#23
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Sebastian The person interviewed for that article was seriously misquoted. I know because I was there at the time. If I were you, I would carefully consider the source concerning any such "news" item. The information on this site, dvinfo.net. will be much more accurate and much closer to legitimate sources. There are a few different reasons why someone's account here has been disabled, but I won't discuss specifics -- except to say that in this case, it had nothing to do whatsoever with the content of the post. The content in his post is not at all accurate, reliable, or factual. Reasons why an account might be disabled may include the use of a false name and/or failure to provide a legitimate email address. Hope this helps, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

November 9th, 2003, 01:05 AM	#16
Christopher Toderman Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: New York Posts: 60	Here's what I think. Canon was limited in the past because it was not really a consumer electronics manufacturer like Sony or Matsushita. It made optical products, office products, broadcast lenses, etc. Until now it does not make its own CCDs but it is starting to make CMOS sensors. These are less expensive to manufacture than CCDs so bigger size chips could be used without increasing cost of the camcorder. Bigger chips mean shallower depth of field and more artistically looking image. Canon is a memeber of the HDV consortium. HD Blu-Ray DVD format, developed basically by Sony, is available to Canon. Japan nearly completed conversion to digital broadcast. They have broadcasted HD for many years, but in an analog form. The profit margins on SD equipment are slim to none. Matsushita, Toshiba, and Sony are quitting making CRTs in Japan as of next year. They'll only be making flat screens -- HD screens -- there. There will be a strong push into HD, because of profits. The new Canon camcorder, unveiled at next NAB will be HD, or HD/SD switchable. The change Sony made on their PD170 was minimal, to counteract the DVX. The real new model will be HD and I believe that it too will be announced at NAB; a consumer version will probably be announced at next CES. Both HDV and Blu-Ray have a potenial to achieve quality that is close to that of Varicam. Varicam footage, after downconverted to 24p, is only 40 Mbps. Blu-Ray and to some extent HDV, with its more efficient MPEG2 compression, can match Varicam quality at a lower transfer rate. If Canon develops high quality MPEG2 processors for their camcorder, and it certainly is capable of doing so, or it may combine its resources with another company, and if it puts up quality camera head on its camcorder, we'll have Varicam or near Varicam quality camera, less the slow motion capability, for a samll fraction of Varicam price. Lenses will be superb and we may even see variations of this model in the future with larger CMOS sensors that would allow mounting of Canon and other 2/3" HD lenses. I think that Panasonic will introduce at NAB a camera to compete with CinaAlta SR. They know that their Varicam will in not too far from now become dated. By moving into quality HD camera production, Canon will be able to make a lot of profit in selling HD lenses, aldhough most of them would be a lot less expensive than their current HD lenses. So quality affordable independent filmmaking will become reality at NAB 2004. That is my opinion. Other manufacturers are aware of the demand of low cost HD gear. Pror to this only Sony and Panasonic had recorders for HD camcorders. Now both HDV and Blu-ray DVD recorders will become available inexpensively also to Ikegami, Hitachi, Sharp, Thomson, and others. They'll all be competing for the semi-pro and pro market. Maybe even Samsung will. That will mean high quality cinema tools soon, at affordable prices. HDV also has transfer rate of 25 Mbps at 1080i at 1440x1280 pixels (same as CineAlta tape recording) Naturally CineAlta has a lot higher transfer rate, but 1080i broadcast is 19 Mbps. Because of the digital transparency, the HDV camera would be good enough to create HDTV content. The current JVC HDV camera naturally has too many defficiencies to be used professionally for anything. That is my opinion. The new Canon should change all that. Basically the new low cost HD cameras will be good enough to produce anything, from a movie to be projected, digitally preferably, to a big screen, do HDTV contennt, to wedding videos in both HD and SD forms.

November 13th, 2003, 02:33 PM	#17
Peter Moore Trustee Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Arlington VA Posts: 1,034	And what is Canon's incentive to obsletize all of its expensive gear for all but the richest production studios? The last thing they want is for TV broadcasters, mid-budget indy filmmakers, and the like to use a $3500 camera instead of a $50,000 one. That's why I think the prosumers will forever remain crippled.

November 13th, 2003, 04:04 PM	#19
Peter Moore Trustee Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Arlington VA Posts: 1,034	Apparently not, though with the extra resolution I think it doesn't quite matter that much. Look, even HD shown on television is lossy MPEG-II. It's not so much the type of compression but the quality. A 4 Mbps DVD compressed using Canopus will look way better than an 8 Mbps DVD compressed with MainConcept, I think. Maybe that's a little extreme but you get the idea. I wish there was a DV-like HD format, but apparently the bandwidth would be too high for current DV tapes, and everyone's goal seems to be to keep that old technology. Why I don't really know.

November 19th, 2003, 05:13 PM	#21
Peter Moore Trustee Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Arlington VA Posts: 1,034	Don't you think his post would have been deleted then?