SONY HDV HDR-FX1 will be out Oct. 15th

[Heath McKnight]

Well, until someone like DVFilm can get their hands on the FX1 and do some tests and transfers, there won't be a 100% answer.

heath

[Troy Lamont]

Any other vendors for PC editing of HDV with the Sony HDV cam?

• Ulead Medastudio Pro
• Avid Express Pro 4.5
• Sony Vegas

From off the top. The HDV website lists more.

Ulead's press release said the Sony HDV plugin will be released at the end of October.

I wonder what editing package will be included, I'm betting a Vegas SE? Anyone else?

Troy

[Ben Buie]

This is really exciting news!

However, just some clarifications (from my point of view) . . .

If the thing has a CCD with a pixel resolution of 960x1080, and the resulting resolution is 1440x1080, the pixels themselves must be 8:5 (width = 1.5 x height). That is the only math that makes sense. In other words, 960 x 1.5 = 1440. If the pixels were 16:9 (as Sony claims), then it would record at 1704x1080, and have to get rid of some of the extra horizontal resolution in order to record 1440x1080. This of course would kill their claim that the entire CCD is utilized (and would likely make the 3 lux rating impossible), so I am going to go with the assumption the pixel elements are 8:5 ratio (1.5:1), and the marketing people were just trying to say "non-square" or "rectangular" but "16:9" came out of their mouths :)

If it is true that they are using rectangular pixel elements, and none of the CCD is wasted, this is great news. That, combined with the 3 CCD's, is about the only way they can achieve that 3 lux rating.

Now, obviously 1440x1080 is not 16:9 (it is 4:3), so I assume to playback at 1920x1080/60i (1080i), it uses a rectangular pixel aspect ratio of 4:3 (1.3333x1) as well. Indeed, 1.333333 x 1440 = 1920.

Anyway, a true 1920x1080 would have been nice, but that probably requires 1/2" or 2/3" CCDs, which would put it way out of the $3,800.00 price range.

I imagine the pro version will allow you to record 720p, how they do that will be the question. They can either a) use less of each CCD, or b) use software to downsample the 1440x1080 to 1280x720. If they use the former technique the results will look better but you will lose your 3 lux rating, if they do the latter it will not look quite as good but you will keep your 3 lux rating.

Personally I wish they would have stuck with a native 1280x720 rectangular CCD, and just recorded at native 720p. Roughly the same cost but a lot less funny math going on. Besides, there aren't any TV's (projectors, rear projection TV's, or Plasmas) at a reasonable price that can reproduce a native 1080i image anyway, while nearly all of them can easily show a native 720p image. I also REALLY like working in progressive, I hate to go back to interlaced!

However, you can't have everything, and the manual controls and low light performance of this camera will make it a winner. I can't wait to see some hands on reviews.

Just my 2 cents.

Anyway, exciting news!

Ben

[Heath McKnight]

I'm guessing the HD10/HD1 will drop in price.

If Sony is releasing the "consumer" version, I wonder what the pro version will have? My friend speculates there won't be a 24p version because of the CineAlta, but who knows?! It was rumored the camera would be 4:3 but it's actually 16:9...

Which once again proves, wait until the official announcement! (And wait until we actually use the camera to see how awesome it is!)

heath

[Ben Buie]

As a user of the HD10, one of the exciting features of this Sony HDV camera is the "expanded focus" feature.

This is a brilliant idea.

As many of you may know, focusing for HD on a 3" LCD is near impossible. Anyone who has used the HD10 knows this. This is simply due to the huge amount of downsampling necessary to show a 1920x1080 image (or 1280x720) on a 250,000 pixel LCD.

The "expanded focus" feature basically shows only part of the image (basically a 25% portion), but it shows it at near full resolution on the small LCD display. That means you will be able to see that portion of the image at near actual size.

Since most of the time you only need a small portion of the screen to focus anyway (such as someone's eyes, or the letters on a street sign, etc.), this is a great solution. I can actually perceive working without a field monitor now!

Thanks Sony, forgot all the bad things I said about you :)

Oh yeah, I'm sure the overall quality of the Sony LCD will be far superior to the JVC one anyway, which will help for determining color accuracy in the field. Not to bash JVC, but Sony has a history of great LCD display technology.

Ben

[Ignacio Rodriguez]

Has anybody done the math with the focal lengths? Will the optics go wider than the PD170/VX2100? It would be a shame to have to add a WA adapter.

[Giroud Francois]

just because the sony is 3CCD versus the 1 CCD of the JVC, you can bet that the picture will be better.
What you should read too, is the HDV mode require special DV tapes that should cost 18$ for one hours. That is a problem since the HDV is supposed to be fully compatible with DV, here it is not the case anymore , like SVHS was not with VHS or Hi8 with 8mm.

[Heath McKnight]

You use regular mini-dv tapes to shoot HDV, which the Sony says it will shoot on those, too. But, they're going to offer their own "HDV" tapes, that I'm sure will cost some cash...

heath

[Ed Hill]

OK Sony releases the HDR FX1 in Oct. So how will JVC compete?

A Sony 3 chip camera for $3300 makes the 1 chip JVC HD10 seem a little expensive at current price.

Will JVC drop HD10 prices to compete? Or will JVC build a 3 chip camera at same price to compete?

I've been to JVC site but see know new info.

[Steve Nunez]

The form factor is excellent- I like the styling and button placement.....looks sorta like the DVC80.....I'm psyched already!

[Robert Mann Z.]

<<<--
Any other vendors for PC editing of HDV with the Sony HDV cam? -->>>

http://www.canopus.us/US/canopus/pr_..._camcorder.asp

[Daymon Hoffman]

I agree the design looks very sweeeet. Still really smashed my hopes with this 960x1080i CCDs' tho :( Buti spose i'll just plod along and wait till we see some footage from it. hmm

[Anhar Miah]

you gotta like the look of this camera, it looks sleek n sexy..


i cant wait for some clips..........(just wondering if my PC will be fast enough ! , might choke on the 1080i footage!)

I god i can see it comming >>>>>> HDR FX1 vs DVX100 vs XL2 !

Very interesting times ahead :)

[Steve Crisdale]

<<<-- Originally posted by Anhar Miah : you gotta like the look of this camera, it looks sleek n sexy..


i cant wait for some clips..........(just wondering if my PC will be fast enough ! , might choke on the 1080i footage!)

I god i can see it comming >>>>>> HDR FX1 vs DVX100 vs XL2 !

Very interesting times ahead :) -->>>

It certainly looks interesting.....

I'm wondering how many of you have actually been able to play or edit (on PC or Mac) MPEG2 1080i footage? From my experiences with 1080i FTA captures, it's almost impossible to play back in any standard media player, especially if the bitrate is up. I have managed to edit 1080i streams in Vegas, and render to lower bitrate 720p with some success.

I'd assume that until software support is added to some of the standard PC/Mac player software the only real way to view the new Sony's 1080i output would be via the component outputs on a HDTV. Perhaps Sony will 'value add' with the software they offer with the cam - who knows!!

One things for sure; I'm itching to see one in action. I might just expand my HD camcorder collection with one!!!

[Heath McKnight]

Steve,

To be honest, no clue on capturing 1080i mpeg 2 ts video, since for now, we've only been able to capture 720p mpeg 2 ts video. Shouldn't be a problem, though...

heath