HD100 720p vs Sony V1 1080p at DVinfo.net

Scott Jaco · May 1st, 2007, 06:19 AM

Hi,

I would like to better understand the way the Sony & Canon handle progressive footage with their new 30p & 24p 1080 modes.

Are the chips scanned progressively or are they scanned interlaced, then interpolated to progressive w/ software? Does this greatly affect the picture quality compared to native progressive cameras like the HD100?

Is the HD100 still the only "true" progressive HD camera? or are the Sony's & Canon's superior?

It seems like the lines are being blured. Is the HD100 becoming obsolete?

Steve Benner · May 1st, 2007, 07:08 AM

Delete. Double Post.

Steve Benner · May 1st, 2007, 07:10 AM

From what I gather, the Sony V1 is almost identical in terms of performance to the Canon XL-A1. The Sony is a Progressive Chip, but it is not a Native 1920x1080. It uses 3 CMOS chips (960x1080 "Diagonal"), the Canon uses 3 CCD (1440x1080) and the JVC usese 3 CCD (1280x720).

Now, also remember that 1080 HDV is recorded at 1440x1080. You are not getting native 1080P Pixel by Pixel performance. The JVC is still the only FULL 720P HD camera on that market that records in square pixels without any pixel shifting.

In 24P, the Sony is supposed to look VERY slightly better than the Canon, due the the fact that the Canon's chip starts Interlaced (this is only in reference to resolution).

As for which looks better, I prefer Images from the JVC as well as the form factor. The Sony is by far a lightweight being only about 4 pounds, the Canon I belive is about 5, the HD100 anywhere from 6-10 depending on Batteries and lense mount.

The HD100 also has the best Focus Assist feature IMHO.

Also remember what editing system you plan to use. Currently, FCP can work with the JVC and Canon without any real problems (and the HD200 60P HDV is coming very soon). The Sony works with the same easy setup as the Canon when in 24P mode, but the Sony also has a 24A mode (not to be confused with 24PA) that forces "A" frame when each clips starts and FCP has not adapted this type yet.

Avid Media Composer / Xpress Pro cannot edit 24 HDV for any of these cameras. Canopus handles all of them, and Premiere I know handles at least the JVC.

Basically rememer that currently, none of these Prosumer cams offer True 1080P recording. The JVC is the only one that offers 720P (all Progressive, none of this interlaced nonsense) at a full Pixel-by-Pixel 1280x720 3 CCD set.

Scott Jaco · May 1st, 2007, 06:02 PM

Thanks.

It's easy to forget that the Sony V1 only has 960x1080 native chips. I'm still undecided wether I think pixel shifting is all it's cracked up to be. Also, the CMOS chips are only 1/4 inch.

When it comes to HDV, if you don't have at least a 3-chip camera w/ 1/3 sized sensors, your low light performance is really going to suffer. It's hard enough as it is! Don't make those chips smaller!

What I really liked about the JVC is that they offered 720P with very few compromises. Native chips, no pixel shifting, progressive scanning & storage, short GOP.

It seems like all these other prosumer cameras are cutting corners to claim that they offer 1080. The most common complaint is the interlacing, with pixel shifting & long GOP coming in a close second.

Steve Benner · May 2nd, 2007, 04:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Jaco

Thanks.

It's easy to forget that the Sony V1 only has 960x1080 native chips. I'm still undecided wether I think pixel shifting is all it's cracked up to be. Also, the CMOS chips are only 1/4 inch.

When it comes to HDV, if you don't have at least a 3-chip camera w/ 1/3 sized sensors, your low light performance is really going to suffer. It's hard enough as it is! Don't make those chips smaller!

What I really liked about the JVC is that they offered 720P with very few compromises. Native chips, no pixel shifting, progressive scanning & storage, short GOP.

It seems like all these other prosumer cameras are cutting corners to claim that they offer 1080. The most common complaint is the interlacing, with pixel shifting & long GOP coming in a close second.

Yes, I fogot to mention the GOP. The ProHD series uses a 6-GOP structure for 24/25/30P and a 12-GOP for 50/60P. The 1080i cameras use a 15-GOP pattern. If there is a dropout, you have a problem. The JVC Codec handles motion much better because of the Short GOP.

May 1st, 2007, 06:19 AM	#1
Scott Jaco Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Sherman Oaks, CA Posts: 471	HD100 720p vs Sony V1 1080p Hi, I would like to better understand the way the Sony & Canon handle progressive footage with their new 30p & 24p 1080 modes. Are the chips scanned progressively or are they scanned interlaced, then interpolated to progressive w/ software? Does this greatly affect the picture quality compared to native progressive cameras like the HD100? Is the HD100 still the only "true" progressive HD camera? or are the Sony's & Canon's superior? It seems like the lines are being blured. Is the HD100 becoming obsolete?

May 1st, 2007, 07:08 AM	#2
Steve Benner Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: United States Posts: 590	Delete. Double Post. Last edited by Steve Benner; May 1st, 2007 at 07:13 AM. Reason: Double Post

May 1st, 2007, 07:10 AM	#3
Steve Benner Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: United States Posts: 590	From what I gather, the Sony V1 is almost identical in terms of performance to the Canon XL-A1. The Sony is a Progressive Chip, but it is not a Native 1920x1080. It uses 3 CMOS chips (960x1080 "Diagonal"), the Canon uses 3 CCD (1440x1080) and the JVC usese 3 CCD (1280x720). Now, also remember that 1080 HDV is recorded at 1440x1080. You are not getting native 1080P Pixel by Pixel performance. The JVC is still the only FULL 720P HD camera on that market that records in square pixels without any pixel shifting. In 24P, the Sony is supposed to look VERY slightly better than the Canon, due the the fact that the Canon's chip starts Interlaced (this is only in reference to resolution). As for which looks better, I prefer Images from the JVC as well as the form factor. The Sony is by far a lightweight being only about 4 pounds, the Canon I belive is about 5, the HD100 anywhere from 6-10 depending on Batteries and lense mount. The HD100 also has the best Focus Assist feature IMHO. Also remember what editing system you plan to use. Currently, FCP can work with the JVC and Canon without any real problems (and the HD200 60P HDV is coming very soon). The Sony works with the same easy setup as the Canon when in 24P mode, but the Sony also has a 24A mode (not to be confused with 24PA) that forces "A" frame when each clips starts and FCP has not adapted this type yet. Avid Media Composer / Xpress Pro cannot edit 24 HDV for any of these cameras. Canopus handles all of them, and Premiere I know handles at least the JVC. Basically rememer that currently, none of these Prosumer cams offer True 1080P recording. The JVC is the only one that offers 720P (all Progressive, none of this interlaced nonsense) at a full Pixel-by-Pixel 1280x720 3 CCD set.

May 1st, 2007, 06:02 PM	#4
Scott Jaco Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Sherman Oaks, CA Posts: 471	Thanks. It's easy to forget that the Sony V1 only has 960x1080 native chips. I'm still undecided wether I think pixel shifting is all it's cracked up to be. Also, the CMOS chips are only 1/4 inch. When it comes to HDV, if you don't have at least a 3-chip camera w/ 1/3 sized sensors, your low light performance is really going to suffer. It's hard enough as it is! Don't make those chips smaller! What I really liked about the JVC is that they offered 720P with very few compromises. Native chips, no pixel shifting, progressive scanning & storage, short GOP. It seems like all these other prosumer cameras are cutting corners to claim that they offer 1080. The most common complaint is the interlacing, with pixel shifting & long GOP coming in a close second.