I think CANON HDV will be here sooner then later...

[Luis Caffesse]

DVCPro50 is an SD format.

DVCProHD is 100mb/s

As of right now there is no such thing as a 50mb/s HD format from Panasonic.

[Aaron Koolen]

Thanks Luis, I wasn't sure.

Cheers
Aaron

[Eugene Kim]

Is it just me or would Canon's REAL profit come not from a HD GL3, but rather a 24p SD GL3?

To me, that would be the killer. While HD is nice, the reality is most just aren't even equiped to handle it yet.

The DVX100A is still selling like hot cakes, yet even that is still a bit out of many people's price ranges.

IF the GL2 came with 24p, it'd be making a killing in sales at that price point I think. Plus the fact that accesories are quite a bit cheaper for the GL series.

I just think that an HD GL3 wouldn't have quite the same market share. Because in general only higher end users will be able to support HD properly anyway. And, because they are higher end users they would be willing to make fewer compromises (i.e. no manual lens option, fewer in-camera adjustments, built-in XLRs, smaller form factor, etc.).

I don't know, maybe it's just me.

[Steven White]

Well - most HDV cams have in-camera support for switching to DV. So if the GL3 were HDV, it would likely also be true 16:9, DV, and, with any luck, progressive.

[Robert Shuster]

It's alway's been true - Canon's video line is a Consumer commodity not Professional. That's their words. Alura, ZR-series, all the way up to XL-anything. Sure, they blew it when the XL-2 was plain SD 24 frames or otherwise. The XL-1 needed a MA-100 or -200 to input balanced audio (Beechtek too). Balanced audio is a pro feature. XL-1s diddo. Pro features came only as a result of prosumer demand, and then only as an accessory. Same for the 16XLM Servo, the 14XL manual, the FU-1000 EVF, etc. The point is, I guess, is that Canon doesn't really know where they're going. The XL-2 is loaded with pro features but still comes from the consumer division, even at 5 g's list. They signed up for HDV, admitted that the XL-2 was their last SD camcorder (in the XL-series) and missed the bus. Canon Pro Camcorders? Prehap's the user and application better define Pro or not-Pro. If you pay me, I'm a Pro. The XL-2 hasn't paid for itself from a manufacturing standpoint. Tooling a factory, new componants from new vendors, distributing literature, service manuals, training service tech's, etc. It take two years to break even on camcorder technology. With XL-2 sales dragging don't expect a "XL-3HD" until late 2006. Maybe.

[Aaron Koolen]

Maybe they'll realise that because it's dragging, they need to get their arse into gear and get an HDV out there. People will jump all over HDV, especially if the camera can do regular DV as well. I mean best of both worlds.

Aaron

[Shannon Rawls]

After DVEXPO West and all the footage & reviews from the XL-H1 camera, and the fact that people actually purchased and have this camera in their living room. I find this to be an interesting thread.

And so...some of you were saying...ummmm....saying WHAT again?

I can't wait for the HVX to be released so we can see what it can do as well to help people (like me) make a sound decision.

Good job Canon & Panasonic.

- ShannonRawls.com

[Steve Crisdale]

Originally Posted by Shannon Rawls

After DVEXPO West and all the footage & reviews from the XL-H1 camera, and the fact that people actually purchased and have this camera in their living room. I find this to be an interesting thread.

And so...some of you were saying...ummmm....saying WHAT again?

I can't wait for the HVX to be released so we can see what it can do as well to help people (like me) make a sound decision.

Good job Canon & Panasonic.

- ShannonRawls.com

Yo Shannon!!

Haven't seen your presence around the forum for a while...

I imagine you've been producing too much HD/HDV material for the Festival you've linked to!

Be nice to hear how you've been doing with your HD/HDV setup. I dare say you have learnt a lot in a very short period of time... about every aspect of shooting and delivering with this new level of equipment.

Also be nice to hear your thoughts on the Canon and Panasonic offerings given the fact that you want results - regardless of who provides them.

[Shannon Rawls]

Steve, my man! How goes it. I've been able to peep in to my favorite DV website now and then, thank goodness for the "send an email when someone replies" feature this forum has. That's how I've been able to keep up, but yea, I've been busy. Not so much with producing projects, but rather I bought a house this summer and if anyone has ever bought a house that needed to be heavily modified to fit your lifestyle, then you know what I have been going through since August. (I only wish I owned acres of land and mountainous ranges like Douglas Spotted Eagle does!! I'm waiting on him to invite me to go horseback ridin' for a weekend *smile*) Plus the HDV Festival was a bit of work as well. We wrapped up last night with a huge party and a successfull year. Peep the pictures at the website and at the /redcarpet area.

CANON & PANASONIC....man-o-man, they both are hitting homeruns it seems. Mainly because of their 1080i/f/p resolution abilities. Sweet feature the HVX has to be able to do 720p, but honestly.....I kinda doubt....that anybody will be shooting in 720p on that camera when 1080 is sitting right there for them. Same went for the Z1U. I rarely find or hear about ANYBODY shooting that camera in DV mode...it just doesn't make sense when you have HDV at your fingertips. Now, the music video directors will love the 720p60 the HVX does, but otherwise.....I'm sure that cameras resolution button will be stuck in 1080.

Now, I am a Movie Maker. So I am talking in reference to MOVIE MAKING ONLY. Ergonomics and 'comfort' and 'switch placement' and all that means little when you have a full crew & set. People shooting F900's aren't complaining about how un-comfy it is, so neither should moviemakers complain about any other camera for the same purpose.

For CANON....*shakin' my head* I just love it! You have these mind blowing reports on their picture quality. I mean, did we expect anything less? At the DV Expo, they did what they always do. Show their stuff, let you fiddle around with it, tell their representatives to explain as much as they can, give their specs, and if you like it, you like it, if you don't you don't. I mean, there is just something to say about a 'matter of fact' company like that, that makes you "TRUST" in them. Here you have a company who didn't gas up the world with fancy ads and propoganda and mock-ups and all that crap. Then, for them to have it out and UP FOR SALE for people to buy....is awesome!

Now back to that Canon picture quality....
1080p24 High Definition camera that records on a MiniDV tape where 1 hour of footage only takes 12 gigs and your image can end up with movie-like picture quality and film-like movement right out the box.
LORD YES!!!
and for the Einsteins out there.....yes, I said "p". I don't care about all that other mumbo-jumbo...never have. The scientists who come and start reciting pythagorean theories as to why I should say 'f' and not 'p' and all that crap...... man, get outta here with all that junk. Hell, in reality, those that say 'p' should REALLY be saying 'f'!!!!! if you think about it. But since we are used to saying 'p' for what we are trying to accomplish, then it applies to this camera.

I know people don't like me for the way I talk and the things I say...but....ummm, so what. As long as Chris does, I'm good. *smile* I follow the DVINFO spirit...hardcore too! I come here to receive and give DIGITAL VIDEO INFORMATION TO A NETWORK OF GREAT PEOPLE. Unbiased and taking no sides. I have no books to sell or software to distribute, so I tell it like it is.

See guys, let ole' shanny shan hip you to something.......and make no mistake.........those "Internet DP's" who crunch numbers all day seemingly never shoot true modern-day Digital Video Movie Making "FOR REAL". You'll know who I'm talking about based on the replies I get to this thread. LOL I mean, they have every type of resolution chart ever made and a great big basement to shoot it in. And they all type 85 words-per-minute so they can come here and spit a bunch of one-sided propoganda about a manufacturers camera...but the REALITY IS....all these cameras are good! It's the SHOOTER that sucks. My dad told me when I was a kid.... "SON, A BAD MECHANIC BLAMES HIS TOOLS!" when I would be fixing on my motocross bikes, go-karts, remote control cars and automobiles as a kid. Ever since he told me that...I always took the blame if something didn't work out like it should you, not the tools I used.

I just finished my 3rd year doing a PURE DIGITAL film festival that screened 171 films over 5 days with a 2k projector on a 45-foot movie screen seating 161 people at a time. Last year I projected 113 and 112 in 2003. This year I screened 1083 submissions from January to October along with my staff and last year it was about 800 and in 2003 I reviewed about 1300. This year was the highest year of people submitting HD projects of all flavors of HD. I've turned down projects that shot with Sony F900 that looks like utter CRAP and gave awards to people who shot with Hi8 cameras that look like a million bucks!! So I DARE TO SAY that I have probably seen with my own two eyes more digital videos from probably every digital camera ever made then anybody on this website....

My point is, I am no Spring-Chicken when it comes to the FINISH LINE of digital video movie making....so take my word for it people.....Forget all the B***LS****T you see/hear when you read/hear people going back and forth about 'f' vs. 'p' vs. 'i' vs. 480 vs. 720 vs. 1080 vs. this guys plug-in vs. that guys plug-in vs. abberations vs. lattitude vs. this vs. that! It's all about YOU and your DP and your CREW and how much HANDS ON TRAINING AND KNOWLEDGE you have from shooting correctly on REAL-WORLD SETS and bringing back REAL-WORLD FOOTAGE and correctly cutting it to make a REAL-WORLD DVD to finish & distribute to the REAL-WORLD.

So yes... as far as I am concerned the Canon XL-H1 is a 1080p24 High Definition camera that will allow you to record a movie-like picture with film-like cadence on a MiniDV tape where 1 hour of footage only takes 12 gigs. and from what I hear from you good people who put this puppy to the test and seen its image on a DECENT SIZE MONITOR with DECENT LIGHTING pointing to a set with DECENT COLORS, then Canon has hit a homerun!

Now PANASONIC......wow! Ok, there's not much to say about this, because not enough people have tested and used it the way it SHOULD and seen the footage the way it SHOULD to make a statement like they have the Canon XL-H1. But I will say this....

Why does a McDonalds burger taste different then a BurgerKing burger? I mean, they both have a soft sesame seed bun right? Both burgers have a meat patty and lettuce and tomatoes and ketchup and onions and all that, right? For some damn reason, if you were to do a blindfolded taste test...you would know the difference between a Mickey Deez burger vs. The King!

Thats how Panasonic is. Their picture image is just flat-out SCRUMCIOUS!! Aside from the speech I gave above, This year at the fest we had some people who shoot with the Pany SDX-900 camera. a few of them sucked so bad you would have thought they used a VHS camera. But....there are two in particular that looked absolutely STUNNING. Same thing about the DVX100a. MANY MANY MANY of the films this year shoot with the DVX100a. Some were junk, some were cool, and a FEW....looked like Panavision! Panasonic just 'does it right' when it comes to making a pretty picture. One guy shot with a Panasonic DVC80 Leica Lens and it was Niiiiiiiiiiiiccccccceeeeee!!

SO NOW....that said.....do you think for one minute they are going to drop the ball with the new HVX-200?? HELL NO! Now we are getting reports that the HVX-200 cameras tested at DV Expo West just sucked and were dissapointing. But I don't buy it. We are talking DVCPRO-HD with a LEICA LENS here people. How can that be so? What I think is Panasonic is going to lower the BOOM on people and just blow anything and everything in or near its class out the water! Yea it sucks the lens don't change...but hell, who changes their lenses that much anyhow at this price point? And from what I read...the lens it has...don't need changin'! *smile*

I'm just waiting for Panasonic to release this beast. I will be HELLA PISSED if they don't release it in December like they said. Besides that, when they do.....The HVX-200 is going to be WICKED! I'm waiting to hear "Yea, Shannon, we're shooting with a HVX200 for this one." I bet people will work pro-bono just to see how the project turns out.

THE REAL TEST.....

Since there are people who CLEARLY take sides when it comes to manufacturers and will use their equipment even if it SUCKS because they are brainwashed......here's the real test.....

I'd like to see what the Panasonic users have to say about H1.
I'd like to see what the Canon users have to say about the HVX.

Now THAT my friends is the real test. We already seen how CANON & PANASONIC users convicted Sony of Witchcraft for making the Z1U and burned them at the stake.....regardless of how pretty the picture was. But there is no way to do that here. So I guess we'll see Steve.

I'm gone!

- ShannonRawls.com

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Shannon, looking forward to seeing you in Burbank this week!
Just for a single comment...the reason Canon calls it "F" rather than "P" is because for some reason, they believe in truth in advertising. Imagine that....a company that is honest with potential buyers. Myself...I'm outraged that they'd tell the truth. :-)

[John Trent]

Mr. Shannon Rawls,

You were right on, with your Canon HDV prediction. Can you conjure up in your crystal ball, when and what will be Sony's response to the XL1 and HVX200?

Thanks.

[Kevin Shaw]

Shannon: don't forget that the Canon can also output true uncompressed HD via HD-SDI, which you could then capture in a variety of formats on a computer-based recording and editing setup. If the HVX200 is desirable because it can record a 1280x1080 data stream at 100 Mbps, how much sweeter would it be to record 1920x1080 10-bit Prospect HD or Avid DNxHD at up to 220 Mbps, and then start editing the moment you finish recording? And get a decent interchangeable zoom lens to boot, plus the ability to record to inexpensive miniDV tapes in a pinch which are available at almost any corner store? This could be a very interesting showdown for indendent film-makers...

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Originally Posted by Kevin Shaw

Shannon: don't forget that the Canon can also output true uncompressed HD via HD-SDI, ...

As opposed to fake uncompressed HD over HD SDI?
(sorry, couldn't resist) ;-)

[Kevin Shaw]

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

As opposed to fake uncompressed HD over HD SDI?

No, as opposed to the "real HD" which all the HDV naysayers said the HVX200 would offer, except it's not even full raster and is compressed about 15:1 compared to the HD outputs on the Canon camera. I find it interesting that people are raving about the possibility of recording DVCProHD on memory cards costing $200 per minute of storage, but aren't equally excited about the prospect of getting "REAL real HD" from a $9,000 camera. Maybe because Canon doesn't know how to generate that sort of buzz, or doesn't care to do so?

:-)

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Originally Posted by Kevin Shaw

No, as opposed to the "real HD" which all the HDV naysayers said the HVX200 would offer, except it's not even full raster and is compressed about 15:1 compared to the HD outputs on the Canon camera. I find it interesting that people are raving about the possibility of recording DVCProHD on memory cards costing $200 per minute of storage, but aren't equally excited about the prospect of getting "REAL real HD" from a $9,000 camera. Maybe because Canon doesn't know how to generate that sort of buzz, or doesn't care to do so?

:-)

You'll get no argument from me. I just keep chuckling at all these folks throwing around the term "true" or "real" HD when we never heard this kind of silliness back when everyone was taking potshots at DV. They had other things to say, but I can't recall the "true/real" comments at the time.
FWIW, it's ALL HD, excepting the JVC HD10 and HD1, and the only reason those aren't, is because they don't/didn't meet the ITU 709 spec. The ATSC spec doesn't have a single word in it about compression, lack thereof, full or sub raster, or other aspects that folks keep tossing about.