Sony NEX-VG10 + NanoFlash?

[Roelf Wentholt]

Does anybody know if this new Sony will output HD footage through SDI or HDMI? And what kind of quality that output would be? 4-2-0 or 4-2-2?

[Bruce Schultz]

Can't speak to the NanoFlash capabilities, but a quick look at the camera specs shows it's a 60i interlaced camera - no progressive frame rates so color space isn't really that much of an issue.

[Roelf Wentholt]

As I understand it the 60i or 50i is only a 'wrapper' and can easily and without loss be turned into 25 or 30 p. Is that correct?
And, my main question, could this camera 'feed' my NanoFlash?

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Roelf,

Real Interlaced footage originates at the sensor.

Two "Fields" are produced at separate times. One with the odd scan lines, one with the even scan lines. Thus, the sensor is exposed twice.

The two fields make up one Frame. In 1080i60 (True), there are two fields every 60th of a second and one frame every 1/30 of a second.

(1080i60 is fairly rare, 1080i59.94 is much more common, and is the typical format even when one discusses 1080i60 unless one says something like 1080i60 True).

Read Progressve footage originates at the sensor.

There is only one "Frame", where all of the scan lines are scaned progressively at one time.

CCD sensor have a Global Shutter, thus they actually expose the frames or fields all at once.

CMOS sensors generally are still exposed to the light while they are scanning.

One can deinterlace footage in post, but it can not overcome the fact that with a true interlaced sensor the even scan lines were obtained from a different point in time from the odd scan lines.

[Roelf Wentholt]

It seems to be like this: this shoots progressive segmented frames, not interlaced, two identical streams of progressive material in the container. So no deinterlacing needed, no blending two streams, they’re both identical.
Could it be a good camera to combine with the NanoFlash?

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Roelf,

If it is Progressive Segmented Frames, then the nanoFlash should be able to record it.

PSF is used when the sensor and electronics create progessive frames, but the video is to go out HD-SDI (or maybe HDMI).

PSF takes the odd scan lines and puts them into a field, and the even scan lines in a field, both are in one frame.

The nanoFlash can take PSF and convert it back to true progressive before it is recorded. This is what our "Record PSF>Prog(ressive)" menu option does.

We would be very happy if this camera puts out a high quality image via HDMI.

[Gerardo Campos]

ProVideo Coalition.com: FRESHDV by Matthew Jeppsen & Kendal Miller

In this review you can see that the HDMI signal from the Nex-VG10 is uncompresed, so will work perfect with nanoflash.

www.gecoproducciones.cl

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Friends,

The absolute best assurance that the nanoFlash will work with this camera is for us, or anyone else with a nanoFlash and access to the camera to test it.

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Friends,

Our friend, Alister Chapman has a mini-review of the NEX-VG10 on his website XDCAM-USER.com (Go to Alister's Blog).

Alister reports that the camera definitely shoots progressive and the output is progresive in a 50i wrapper. I assume that it also supports a 60i wrapper.

So, far me, the question is if it is outputting Progressive Segemented Frames, which appear to be interlaced to a monitor or TV.

[Gerardo Campos]

Dear Dan,
Do you have more information about the NEX-VG10 an the posible conection with NanoFlash?

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Gerardo,

I have not found a review indicating the quality of the HDMI output. You may know of such a review.

If it is clean, and if it is of high quality, then the nanoFlash would be ideal for use with the NEX-VG10 camera.

[Gerardo Campos]

Dear Dan,
But you know about some serius test with nanoflash? some video to download on the web to test the resulting conbination?

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Friends,

Late last night I received an email from a person that has both the Sony NEX VG10 and the nanoFlash.

The VG10 puts out a Green "Standby" Dot on the HDMI output when the camera is not recording.

When the HDMI output is in use, the LCD and the Viewfinder go blank.

HDMI never carries timecode as this is not included in the HDMI spec.

One must press record on the camera to get rid of the Green Dot and then manually start the nanoFlash.

There is controversy as to whether the HDMI output is before or after compression in the camera.

It appears, from examining the footage it is after processing in the camera as artifacts in the recorded images (in-camera recording) are also in the nanoFlash recordings.

Please consider all of this information to be preliminary. We have the results of one reliable tester, but we need others to confirm these results.

Here is the original email, reproduced here with permission:

I just came across the thread at DVINFO.NET concerning the use of a Nanoflash with a Sony NEX VG10. I thought I'd drop you a line to let you know that I purchased a VG10 a few weeks ago and have been testing recordings with the VG10 HDMI output port into the nanoflash.

There are clams that the HDMI out of this camera is pre-compression 4:2:2. In my testing, I have observed aliasing artifacts in the native AVCHD recordings, as well as in the MXF mpeg2 files, as recorded by the Nanoflash. This would indicate to me that the HDMI output stream has already been processed by the VG10 processor.

I would also note that a 1:1 scaling and comparison of the native vs. Nanoflash files shows, quite clearly to my eyes, that the resolution of the Nanoflash recorded files exceeds the native AVCHD file until there is significant frame motion, such as a camera pan. With full frame motion, the Nanoflash files appear to suffer a degredation in image resolution as compared to the native AVCHD files.

I should note that I recorded at 220Mbps, I-frame only mode. Both files were read into Avid Media Composer v 5.03. The AVCHD files were transcoded to DNxHD, the Nanoflash files were linked via AMA. and the two images were compared after applying a scale filter.

I'm not sure if this will help you any, however, I thought I'd give you the info as I've seen. Somewhat subjective results, I admit, but, this is what I've observed.

[Gerardo Campos]

Dear Dan,
Can you tell your friend to make this test: "go in to a dark room with a big lamp, start recording in both, camera and nanoflash, then turn on and off every 3 seconds the big lamp, must to be a lamp that can be turn it off and on fastly, that way you don't give time to the codec to process all the information about colors and shadows; then compare the two recorded footage, specialy in the moments that light turn on and off; in the camera footage tou must find some compresion blocks; if you have the same in the nanoflash footage, then the HDMI is after-compression, if is not is pre-compression." I must to tell you that the "aliasing artifacts" is a problem on the down-scale process from the big senssor to HD; this senssor is almost full 35, so to accomodate to HD 1920x1080 must to be processed in a down-scale way, and aliasing artifacts is not a codec compression problem. Please ask your friend to do the test and let us know. Thanks

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Gerardo,

I forwarded your request this morning.