The price point and 720p...

[Sean Hsieh]

Hey guys,

I don't post much on here as I'm mostly a digester of the information being passed around, but I am interested on this topic that I haven't been able to find much info about. I understand the differences between 720p and 1080i, but I wanted to see why people chose to jump 720p vs. recording in 1080i. Also, what makes this camera better than the Sony Z1U besides the interchangeable lens? Does this unit perform better in low light settings? I am interested in purchasing something a bit higher end than my current sony A1U which seems to crumble and fall in low light settings.

What are people's take on this camera with the upcoming Sony V1U that shoots in 24p? I know these are in very different size categories, but I would like to see why people choose this cam over the Canon XL H1 and Sony Z1U.

Thanks for all the help guys and gals.

[Shaun Wilson]

I prefer 720p to 1080i because of the P: I'm so over interlaced. All interlaced footage does is create issues you have to solve or hide later. Progressive just makes more sense. I don't mind a little bit less resolution for the sake of progressive footage.

I personally can't stand using those Sony HDV cameras. They're basically consumer level cameras with professional level stuff crammed in to them. This makes them a pain in the arse to use for anyone who's used to using a proper camera (or for that matter anyone who likes to control a camera properly). The HD101 is built from the ground up like a professional camera. It is not frustrating to use like I find a Sony to be - the camera itself gets out of the way and lets you do your job.

The Canon's are pretty good in this regard too - I used a XL1 for many years and loved it. However Sony & Pana's stuff at this level, regardless of what the cameras are technically capable of, just frustrate me when it comes to actually shooting something.

A detachable lens isn't really a huge issue for me, I'm probably not gunna be swapping it for anything else anytime soon. But what IS important to me is having a proper lens. I don't care if the damn thing is welded on, as long as I have real mechanical focus & a good zoom ring/rocker combo.

[Miltos Pilalitos]

The Sony Z1U was not even on my short list.

720p, the quality of picture and the price, did it for me.

As an ex-DVX100A lover i was between the HVX and the HD100 but when a friend of mine bought the HD100 and i had the chance to hold it in my hands and shoot stuff, it became instantly the only choice.

The V1U is not coming before December, so nobody knows much about its quality besides the fact that the 1080p video is generated by lower resolution CCD's after interpolation.

I don't know if i am supposed to post this kind of info here but if you want true 1080p wait for JVC as they will release a 1080p camera that records straight to hard disk sometime in 2007. I have no idea about the price though! :)

[Earl Thurston]

720p (or any real progressive scan) is easier to deal with when you've got effects work. I also hate the "shimmering" effect of interlaced footage.

[Sean Hsieh]

Thanks for the great responses you guys. I too am starting to get frustrated with interlaced images as it seems that I have to drop the resolution down in any form to get smooth motion without the shimmers.

I'm really starting to lean towards this JVC solution now as it has some add-ons that I won't be able to find in the professional level Sony cameras. The interpolated image of the V1U has gotten good feedback on the review posted on hdvinfo, and 1080p would definitely be nice. If in fact JVC is releasing a higher end version as a successor to the GY-HD line, then I might as well wait. Is this just hearsay that you're reporting or an factual announcement that you've heard?

Has anyone done a Z1U vs. GY-HD100 review? I'd be interested to see the results. I wish there was a B&H in the west coast for me to check out the different cams.

[Miltos Pilalitos]

Originally Posted by Sean Hsieh

Is this just hearsay that you're reporting or an factual announcement that you've heard?

It's not officialy announced but it's a fact. However, i am sure it's going to be pricey so i am going to uprade to the HD200 soon. :)

Also, since it's not announced yet i wouldn't expect it before fall of 2007...

[Guy Barwood]

Originally Posted by Miltos Pilalitos

I don't know if i am supposed to post this kind of info here but if you want true 1080p wait for JVC as they will release a 1080p camera that records straight to hard disk sometime in 2007. I have no idea about the price though! :)

I just did some caluculations and it works out a native 1920x1080 1/2" sensor has the same area per sensor as a 1280x720 1/3" sensor.

So let say JVC maintain their philisophy of a true native sensor, a 1920x1080 1/2" sensor would basically have the same sensitivity as the current sensor assuming the same CCD technology itself.

If it is a Sony sensor again (this could be pushing their friendship with Sony a bit too far perhaps!), it could even be CMOS improving sensitivity and reducing blooming etc. Sony have certainly shown with the CMOS sensor for the Nikon D2x (over 1") they are capable of producing high end large CMOS sensors (and that one is over 12MP).

[Miltos Pilalitos]

Your calculations sound very good Guy.

I'll try to contact my source in the coming week. Maybe i will be able to get some more intel... :)

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Sean Hsieh

I too am starting to get frustrated with interlaced images as it seems that I have to drop the resolution down in any form to get smooth motion without the shimmers.

Amazing how many folks don't notice line-twitter and line-flicker in 1080i video of any kind. They are so used to seeing it in interlace video, they think it's inherent.

It's a simple question: which would you want, a meaningless increase in measured resolution OR the absence of line-twitter and line-flicker?

Or, simple question 2: Do you need more comression artifacts caused by the encoder having to encode fields rather than frames?

Or, simple question 3: With 24p HDV -- do you want less compression than you get with DCVPRO HD 24N?

Or, simple question 4: do you need a meaningless increase in measured resolution that can double the computation time for FX renders and encodes?

Or, simple question 5: Do you want a Transport Stream that's compatible with our ATSC HD standard? (1080i at 25Mbps is not.)

Or, simple question 5: Do want 50p/60p in a few months or a few years?

Or, simple question 6: Do you want 24fps or do you want end-to-end progressive operation?

Or, simple question 7: Do you want your productions to be seen on progressive displays without combing (computer monitors) or with a 50% drop in vertical resolution when objects move vertically on HDTVs.

Your choice.

Steve Mullen

[Werner Wesp]

All true, but as Shaun Wilson already said, the fact it's a proper mechanical lens is a huge issue for some users (including myself) and it's a feature that's not shared with the Sony or the Pana...

Very happy with my JVC HD101. I was coming from a XL2, and finally I have a lens response the way you'd expect it...

[Sean Hsieh]

Originally Posted by Werner Wesp

All true, but as Shaun Wilson already said, the fact it's a proper mechanical lens is a huge issue for some users (including myself) and it's a feature that's not shared with the Sony or the Pana...

Very happy with my JVC HD101. I was coming from a XL2, and finally I have a lens response the way you'd expect it...

What do you mean by a proper mechanical lens? Also, I heard there are some issues importing into a FCP workspace, but I also hear they're updating FCP soon to handle the JVC. Does this still fall under standard HDV specs? Thanks for clearing everything up, if anyone has some advice, I am looking for true 24fps, low light advantages (low lux levels), not too worried about removable lens, as shallow of a dof as i can with stock lens. I will be shooting very minimal weddings, mostly short films and documentaries/interviews. Thanks everyone!

-Sean

[Earl Thurston]

Originally Posted by Sean Hsieh

What do you mean by a proper mechanical lens?

For the HD100's lenses, the focus, zoom and iris rings are mechanically connected directly to the moving parts. Thus, you get direct and instant feedback while operating those controls by hand. (The zoom and iris motors are externally coupled to those same rings, so in effect, they operate the controls for you.)

On other cameras like the HVX200, HVR-Z1U and XL H1, they have what are generally called "servo-driven" lenses. The moving parts are hidden away inside the body, and only the internal motors can move them. The control rings on the outside are nothing more than electronic controls, like the scroll wheel on a mouse. As you turn the ring, an optical sensor counts how many degrees the ring moves and in which direction.

There are several limitations with this approach, though. First, a "debouncing" buffer filters our spurious counts so the lens doesn't move when it isn't supposed to. This can create a control lag where the lens doesn't move right away. Secondly, the position of the control rings have no direct relation to the lens setting, which makes it difficult to repeat moves with marks on the lens barrel. (Fortunately, the HVX deals with this by including a focus value display in the viewfinder.) Thirdly, the amount you move the ring can be independent of the speed of the motor. So, depending on the camera, a slight move could make a big change, or a big move can make a slight change. It all depends on how they programmed the ratio of counts to the speed of the motors.