|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 13th, 2010, 12:55 AM
|
#1 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Forest Ranch, CA
Posts: 106
|
nano & xl-h1
Does anyone know where I can see a "side by side" comparison of video from Xl-h1 tape and nano files? I would love to see what kind of improvement I will be investing in. I've see the files at the convergent design website, but it's hard to compare when it's not from the camera I'll be using. Even caps would help. Anyone?
|
|
|
|
October 13th, 2010, 08:45 AM
|
#2 |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Augusta Georgia
Posts: 5,421
|
Dear Joe,
I would like to help, but I do not have any comparison files available. We will see if we have any handy. Everyone who has added a nanoFlash to their XL H1 has been happy with the increase in visual quality.
__________________
Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia |
|
|
|
|
October 13th, 2010, 09:19 AM
|
#3 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 775
|
I've shot plenty with my Nanoflash and XL H1s. I've been quite happy with the footage quality, and just as important, the addition of a file based workflow while maintaining the tape workflow as well.
With a lot of my work and clients, the demand for both formats have been equal. The broadcast work and pieces I produce for NBC have used the tapeless Nano files while tape has worked really well for handoffs to clients. Its great to please any client with a need for either. |
|
|
|
|
October 13th, 2010, 12:02 PM
|
#4 | |
|
Trustee
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 1,138
|
XDR & XL H1 Quality Comparison
Quote:
As you know I have the XDR, which I use with my XL H1. The technology is identical to the Nano, and in terms of overall image quality, I have three points to make: 1. The MPEG 2 encoder in the Canon XL H1 produces HDV m2t files of unprecedented quality for a low data rate encoding rate (25 Mbps). I have never noticed any blocking or artifacting with rapid movement action with the XL H1 upon tape playback. 2. With the addition of the XDR or Nano, there is a noticeable increase in overall image and audio quality @ Long GOP 50 Mbps (Double the camera's native HDV encoding rate) one goes up in........ A) Color Space Precision: from HDV 4:2:0 to 4:2:2 B) From HDV's thick raster 1440 x 1080 to Full Raster HD @ 1920 x 1080 pixels. C) From 16 bit mpeg compressed Layer II audio to PCM Uncompressed 24 bit 48 KHz audio ! 3. Once you go up to I-Frame (Intra) MPEG 2 Recording @ data rates of 220 & 280 Mbps, then you reach a very low level of MPEG 2 compression. There is no visual perceptible traces of blocking or artifacting of any kind which I have been able to observe on playback out of my XDR on a top of the line, ultra high end SONY LMD-940W 9 inch HD-SDI-3G Digital Broadcast Monitor. ** I would like to see an ultra high end Recording setting of 300 or 320 Mbps just the same. The XL H1 certainly is not the typical HDV consumer camcorder. When using the onboard manual programmable user presets to dial in "a look" that you want, you can literally make this camera produce images with astounding finesse and detail for an 8 bit encoding digital camera ! Another thingy you simply must know is the Nano and the XDR take full advantage of Canon's 24 F setting ! The Nano can be set to 3:2 pull down removal on the fly to give you an effective 24p live output and recording ! (It's actually 23.98 or 23.976 according to Avid Media Composer's import project settings !) Just my 2 cents |
|
|
|
|
|
October 13th, 2010, 05:44 PM
|
#5 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 775
|
I agree with Mark here... I've always found the image quality of the XL H1 (and XL H1s) to be top notch.
The Nanoflash has taken it even further. The 3:2 pulldown removal feature is a godsend if you shoot a lot in 24F. It'll record the HD-SDI out as 23.976 files which eliminates a lot of hassle if you edit in native 24P. Truly something worth noting. Thanks Mark. |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
