IBC: Sony announces HVR-V1e

Bob Zimmerman · September 7th, 2006, 01:25 PM

I will like to see more on this camera,,,looks good and I really wanted a smaller size. Canon has a choice to make. Hopefully we see a price war!!

Beth Dill · September 7th, 2006, 01:30 PM

Black stretch? Did I miss the info?

Beth Dill · September 7th, 2006, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Zimmerman

Hopefully we see a price war!!

I second that!

Boyd Ostroff · September 7th, 2006, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heath McKnight

And the tape transport's on the left, still. Like the first VX1000, if I'm not mistaken (and the FX1/Z1).

That looks more like an LCD screen on the left. Remember, it doesn't have the screen on the handle like the FX1 and Z1 so it seems like that would have to be on the left....

Simon Wyndham · September 7th, 2006, 02:55 PM

This new camera looks very cool. With the new Canons coming out as well there is some serious choice in the market now!

What do people make of this bit though?
"and has 4 times high speed scanning capability enabling "Smooth Slow Rec" function."

Thomas Smet · September 7th, 2006, 03:26 PM

This sounds great about the progressive scan feature but there is one problem with it. It is great that any deck or camera should be able to play this format. Canon's 25F still has one key advantage however.

progressive 4:2:0 sampling.

Since the 25P frames are placed in a 50i stream that means they use the interlaced form of encoding which can really mess up the chroma. With interlaced video the chroma alternates every other line. Progressive 4:2:0 uses clean 2x2 pixel blocks for the chroma. 25F on the Canon cameras uses a true progressive mpeg-2 encoding structure which is why it doesn't play on other devices. The chroma detail is much higher quality however.

I'm sure this may not be a big deal to some people but if you plan on keying you may be better off with the Canon form of progressive mpeg-2. Now perhaps if you are using live uncompressed this will not be an issue since you bypass the encoder anyways. Of course the uncompressed output may be limited to 4:2:0 just like it is on the XDCAM HD cameras.

Thomas Smet · September 7th, 2006, 03:32 PM

The one advantge that the SONY does have with it's flavor of 25P however is that it will work in any current NLE with no problems at all. Since it sits in a 50i HDV stream it will edit just like 50i HDV. This makes it very easy to deal with and it should have very high luma quality at least.

Even with 25P however I would wait to see what the video looks like. While it may be progressive scan it may still have that over electronic look to it and some may still prefer the look of the Canon cameras. Since SONY is using cmos I would think it would at least look more natural than the FX1.

Mikko Lopponen · September 7th, 2006, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Holmes

So.... are we talking about an in-camera de-interlacer here?? Hmm. Not sure quite what Sony have done. sounds *maybe* like a bit of a fudge to me, but i think we need more info on that.

No? They just have a progressive frame and they encode it into the hdv stream. There's nothing interlaced anywhere.

Barry Green · September 7th, 2006, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Carney

Being the same size as the PD-170 will appeal to many over the FZ and Z1. Where did someone see the chips were 1920x1080 instead of 1440x1080?

They're not. They're 4:3 960x1080. They get uprezzed to 1920x1080 for internal processing. Then the image gets scaled down to 1440x1080 for recording.

Michael Struthers · September 7th, 2006, 05:48 PM

4:2:2 HDV?? That can't be right, can it?

Paulo Teixeira · September 7th, 2006, 06:38 PM

If I were to make a choice between this and the Z1u, then it would have to be HVR-V1 and I earnestly don’t see why someone would choose the Z1u over this. I’d even get this over the XH-G1 but that would still be a very hard choice to make. The 3 CMOS chips should allow for a much better picture than all of the other HDV camcorders as long as there is lots of lighting.

Lynne Whelden · September 7th, 2006, 07:09 PM

It evidently uses the same slo-mo recording as the Sony HC3 does. Gives you three seconds of true slo motion by recording at a faster tape speed, I think.

Boyd Ostroff · September 7th, 2006, 07:15 PM

Since the data being written to tape is digital (just binary 1's and 0's), speeding up the tape shouldn't change the video speed during recording. I suspect something else must be going on there...

Lynne Whelden · September 7th, 2006, 07:17 PM

Yeah, you're right. It's probably just scanning the frame at a faster rate. And I see where, unlike the HC3's three second slow mo, this is supposed to give you 24 seconds of useful footage.

Brent Ethington · September 7th, 2006, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lynne Whelden

Yeah, you're right. It's probably just scanning the frame at a faster rate. And I see where, unlike the HC3's three second slow mo, this is supposed to give you 24 seconds of useful footage.

probably works the same as the HC3 by utilizing a memory buffer in the camera (the buffer in the HVR-V1e is larger than the HC3 as noted above) to capture at a much higher frame rate then writes out to tape at the specified speed

September 7th, 2006, 05:48 PM	#40
Michael Struthers Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: SF, Ca Posts: 421	4:2:2 HDV?? That can't be right, can it? __________________ Michael Struthers www.buzzdigital.com

September 7th, 2006, 01:25 PM	#31
Bob Zimmerman Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Illinois Posts: 888	I will like to see more on this camera,,,looks good and I really wanted a smaller size. Canon has a choice to make. Hopefully we see a price war!!

September 7th, 2006, 01:30 PM	#32
Beth Dill Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 45	Black stretch? Did I miss the info?

September 7th, 2006, 02:55 PM	#35
Simon Wyndham Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Malvern UK Posts: 1,931	This new camera looks very cool. With the new Canons coming out as well there is some serious choice in the market now! What do people make of this bit though? "and has 4 times high speed scanning capability enabling "Smooth Slow Rec" function."

September 7th, 2006, 03:26 PM	#36
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	This sounds great about the progressive scan feature but there is one problem with it. It is great that any deck or camera should be able to play this format. Canon's 25F still has one key advantage however. progressive 4:2:0 sampling. Since the 25P frames are placed in a 50i stream that means they use the interlaced form of encoding which can really mess up the chroma. With interlaced video the chroma alternates every other line. Progressive 4:2:0 uses clean 2x2 pixel blocks for the chroma. 25F on the Canon cameras uses a true progressive mpeg-2 encoding structure which is why it doesn't play on other devices. The chroma detail is much higher quality however. I'm sure this may not be a big deal to some people but if you plan on keying you may be better off with the Canon form of progressive mpeg-2. Now perhaps if you are using live uncompressed this will not be an issue since you bypass the encoder anyways. Of course the uncompressed output may be limited to 4:2:0 just like it is on the XDCAM HD cameras.

September 7th, 2006, 03:32 PM	#37
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	The one advantge that the SONY does have with it's flavor of 25P however is that it will work in any current NLE with no problems at all. Since it sits in a 50i HDV stream it will edit just like 50i HDV. This makes it very easy to deal with and it should have very high luma quality at least. Even with 25P however I would wait to see what the video looks like. While it may be progressive scan it may still have that over electronic look to it and some may still prefer the look of the Canon cameras. Since SONY is using cmos I would think it would at least look more natural than the FX1.

September 7th, 2006, 06:38 PM	#41
Paulo Teixeira Trustee Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 1,773	If I were to make a choice between this and the Z1u, then it would have to be HVR-V1 and I earnestly don’t see why someone would choose the Z1u over this. I’d even get this over the XH-G1 but that would still be a very hard choice to make. The 3 CMOS chips should allow for a much better picture than all of the other HDV camcorders as long as there is lots of lighting.

September 7th, 2006, 07:09 PM	#42
Lynne Whelden Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: williamsport, pa Posts: 604	It evidently uses the same slo-mo recording as the Sony HC3 does. Gives you three seconds of true slo motion by recording at a faster tape speed, I think.

September 7th, 2006, 07:15 PM	#43
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,801	Since the data being written to tape is digital (just binary 1's and 0's), speeding up the tape shouldn't change the video speed during recording. I suspect something else must be going on there...

September 7th, 2006, 07:17 PM	#44
Lynne Whelden Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: williamsport, pa Posts: 604	Yeah, you're right. It's probably just scanning the frame at a faster rate. And I see where, unlike the HC3's three second slow mo, this is supposed to give you 24 seconds of useful footage.