IBC: Sony announces HVR-V1e

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Steve Connor

Yes that's obvious even to non techie people like me, but it's better coming out HDMI from the camera head rather than going to tape as you avoid the HDV compression.

If you are really worried about compression and carry a computer around. :)

For the projects this camcorder -- with 1/4 CMOS chips -- are likely to shoot -- trying to record via HDMI doesn't really makes sense IMHO.

Reading the BM site it's interesting that they promote the capture and editing at 1920x1080 because it's not "compressed" HDV at "only 1440x1080."

But if they are capturing an HDV tape -- then this is nonsense. Worse, the computer is wasting time processing pixels that aren't carrying any information.

The MOST interesting thing is the notion of capturing from a settop box. So does that mean we can copy HD programs? Can we capture HD DVDs?

-------------------------
Steve Mullen
My "Sony HDV Handbook" is available at:
www.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

[Marvin Emms]

The card will not capture HDCP protected material, it's exactly what the spec is designed to prevent.

So no, you will not be able to capture and reencode protected Blu-ray/HDDVD titles.

If the output from the chips was so much better than the compression format was able to record, capturing HDMI would seem to be a good idea. At this stage, and with ClearVid again rearing its ugly head, its like buying laser alarms to protect a cubic zirconia.

I'm with Yasser, 25p seems like a massive step in the right direction but actually the camera is looking like a damp squib.

[Wayne Morellini]

Yes, that is right, plus HDMI 1.3 will let you do upto 16 bit video at 4:4:4 SHD resolutions, or even more (not that we can expect any thing like this). I hear they are upgrading HDSDI, but seriously they should settle on HDMI as a common standard.

If this can be fed into a computer and compressed on the fly, then what about cineform?

Steve C, thanks for the Black magic link, would have been good as a news thread. I came to a sudden realisation the other day of a way to capture HDMI camera output for a few hundred dollars, but this makes that a bit irrelevant. I am thinking of getting something like this. It maybe hard to use this to capture field footage, but it is easier to use than making your own complete homemade camera.


Now about the camera, great. Finally P without JVC. I would guess they are goign to come out with 1/3inch models too. I would hope that they would include 35mb/s XDCAM HD like codec.

[Heath McKnight]

I wouldn't assume it's 24p in the US version. I always say, we'll believe it when the announcement is made!

heath

[Michael Struthers]

Can we run the hdmi out to sony's new little deck? And does that bypass the 4:2:0 chroma sampling to give us 4:2:2?

Really reaching here, I realize.... :-)

[Bob Zimmerman]

$4,800? Seems a little high.

[Barry Green]

Originally Posted by Brent Ethington

Barry - are you saying the sensors are 1920x1080? or are they smaller, then scaled up to 1920x1080 and then down again? given that the still picture resolution is only 1.2MP, I'm guessing the native sensor resolution is not 1920x1080...

The native resolution is not 1920x1080. It's 960x1080. They say there are 1.03 million pixels in video mode, a few more for still mode.

The chips are 960x1080, they are scaled up to 1920x1080 for internal processing, and then scaled down to 1440x1080 for recording.

[Barry Green]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Berry are you sure? That would require a 2X horizontal scale to get to 1920. Not only would that cause a huge quality loss -- of what value is a 1920 image than is than decimated back to 1440 for encoding?

I can't explain why they did it, but that's what I'm reading in the various brochures and interviews.

It's probably the way the Z1/FX1 work as well, they also have 960x1080 chips but that's different, they employ spatial offset to read the chips, CMOS is a different pixel-based technology of course.

[Barry Green]

Originally Posted by Marvin Emms

Let me take a wild guess that while resolution measured strictly on the vertical and horizontal axes will be reasonable for a camera of this type, real world performance will be significantly worse due to the poor resolution on the diagonals.

Anything we speculate on is nothing but speculation until real-world results are seen. Apparently Sony is willing to go on record to say that in bright light/sunny conditions this FX7/V1E will look noticeably sharper than the FX1/Z1U (but in dark conditions the situation reverses).

[Barry Green]

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

Sony's DSP has always been CAPABLE of 1920x1080 processing. That's why the A1 could use higher rez CMOS chips.

So yes, the DSP can work at up to 1920, but I don't think that proves the 960 is uprezzed to 1920.

Sony's marketing material says that all internal processing is done at 1920x1080x4:2:2. They also say elsewhere that the chips are 960x1080. And we know that the recording format is HDV, which is inherently 1440x1080x4:2:0.

So piecing all that together, the 960x1080 chips get uprezzed to 1920x1080 for all internal DSP processing, then scaled to 1440x1080 for recording.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Barry Green

The native resolution is not 1920x1080. It's 960x1080.

I assume with horizontal pixel shift?

[Heath McKnight]

Originally Posted by Barry Green

Sony's marketing material says that all internal processing is done at 1920x1080x4:2:2. They also say elsewhere that the chips are 960x1080. And we know that the recording format is HDV, which is inherently 1440x1080x4:2:0.

So piecing all that together, the 960x1080 chips get uprezzed to 1920x1080 for all internal DSP processing, then scaled to 1440x1080 for recording.

Very similar to Panasonic's HVX200, which has a sensor size of 960x540, and shoots 960x720p and 1280x1080i.

heath

[Lawrence Bansbach]

-- Deleted --

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Barry Green

I can't explain why they did it, but that's what I'm reading in the various brochures and interviews.

I understand that is what Sony says, but we've been through the Japanese to English issues before. Let's wait until the USA announces.

An up-scale by 2X followed by a down-scale 1.5X makes so little sense -- and is so likely to cost quality -- that I think this sentence is in doubt.

Also, the V1 really seems to be an A1 replacement. Looked at this way, it's a great step forward. It fits much better with the Z1 in the PRO line. I would love one as the Z1 is too big and the A1 is too small. This one "is just right."

-------------------------
Steve Mullen
My "Sony HDV Handbook" is available at:
www.mindspring.com/~d-v-c

[Barry Green]

Originally Posted by David Heath

I assume with horizontal pixel shift?

Don't know, because CMOS is a different type of technology.

"pixel shift" is spatial offset, where the green CCD is offset 1/2 pixel, and then the sampler reads and builds a YUV signal off of those chips. The chips are analog and aren't read via RGB, they're read YUV, so each luminance pixel is composed of something like 60% green, 29% red, and 11% blue.

Whereas with CMOS you're talking about discrete pixel transfer, much more like starting with RGB in the first place. So it wouldn't necessarily be the same type of thing, it may be more of a conventional digital uprez.

But hey, this is new technology so we'll have to see what they have done. I would certainly expect that one of the chips would be offset from the others by 1/2 pixel, that's what they did in the FX1/Z1.