Sony NEX-VG10 AVCHD E-Mount Lens Camcorder

[Ron Evans]

In my mind most of the film look comes from the techniques used to mask the slow frame rate. Shallow depth of field so that the background is out of focus and the judder in the background is thus minimized by out of focus motion blur. Letting the action take place in front of the camera rather than camera moves like panning. Tracking shots rather than panning with shallow depth of field. Choosing contrast and saturation to emphasis the subject . Use slow motion effects( shoot at really high frame rates) when the action really is too fast for 24P. etc etc All of these techniques can be used with higher frame rates.

The slower frame rate of film was economics driven. Minimize the cost of distributing to all those theatres.

60i was economics driven too. Minimize the bandwidth required to transmit a usable video image. And just like film/projectors combination, 60i was designed as a system of cameras and CRT displays. Flat panel displays were not part of the system hence the issue of scaling and deinterlacing that causes so much problem. From the display point of view they refresh at 60Hz or more so a 60p video signal would be the most compatible. I am looking forward to that day!!!

Ron Evans

[Steve Mullen]

That's what find amazing about the 24p video folks. They completely fail to understand that filmmakers make every effort to MINIMIZE the nasty side effects --foreground and background strobing from low temporal resolution -- that comes from the ECONOMICS of the cost of film.

No one wanted 24fps. It was the most economic way of getting sound on film. It was never an esthetic choice. It had nothing to do with "suspension of belief" for narrative film.

In fact, compared to the original 15fps to 18fps -- 24fps was a step toward higher quality because it offered greater temporal resolution.

There is no reason to believe had film been cheaper, that 30fps or even higher wouldn't have been used.

Now it has become a fetish. (Google the word.)

The fetish is so strong that even when people learn that what they SEE with 24fps on video is actually not 24fps but 2-3 pulldown -- they then insist they like 2-3 pulldown. This despite the fact that those who actually shoot film want monitors that show film without 2:3 judder.

Obviously, the fetishists are no longer SEEing anything. They are BELIEVING. They are past evidence. They are have a faith. A faith not in aactual LOOK, but in a number. Might as well be avoiding 666.

Moreover, like all faith, the key is to admit no new information. No doubt. No option to actually LOOK at 30fps at see IF it looks better. No option to actually LOOK at 30fps and compare it to projected film.

Faith cannot get updated by new technology. Things can NOT be better. Things must remain the same.

We've seen this reaction before. When sound was added to film. Folks were convinced that subtitles created a story in the mind (like books) and were people to hear actors speaking it would destroy the imaginative power of film. (I imagine film itself was feared for the same reason by writers.) And, printing a Bible was claimed to destroy religion because it bypassed priests.

So the question is do folks want the look of projected film or do they want a camera specification?

PS 1: one of the primary reasons why filmmakers want a shallow DOF (VG10) is because it reduces background strobing from low temporal resolution!

PS 2: The point of a slow shutter-speed (VG10) is to help cover the strobing from low temporal resolution.

[Graham Hickling]

> Obviously, the fetishists are no longer SEEing anything. They are BELIEVING. They are past evidence.

With this statement, this thread has officially jumped the shark. Google it.

[Chris Barcellos]

Not much changing in this argument since last year when I asked:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/film-loo...s-way-out.html

[Dom Stevenson]

Steve Mullen

Excellent myth-busting posts. And long overdue.

The tiresome drone of 24p fetishists is very boring, and often delusional IMO. Like the emperor's new clothes you have to be a believer to see it.

But is there anything there? I'm not convinced. Of course i may be wrong.

[Eddie Blake]

Has anything new about the vg10 came out lately?

[Ron Little]

Hey, I have been using 30p for a while now and I really like the look. If I am getting this right the VG10 is shooting 30p within a 60i stream. How well do you think it will cut with a Sony V1 with a nano flash?

[Glen Vandermolen]

Steve Mullen,
Thank you for your excellent posts. This 24p fetish can be really irritating. I can take this new VG10, 60i or 30P and all, and turn it into a money-making tool for my business. I can also go out and shoot my own personal film projects with it. It's ability to give me a narrow depth of field and to use a large array of lenses gives me a new option in my productions. I already have 24P in my present camera. I'll trade that for better DoF control any day.

I compare this fetish to other interests in my life - motorcycles and rifles. There are some bikers who only ride Harleys. To them, all other makes suck. Never mind their bikes are 1940s - 50s tech. Never mind modern sportbikes can run rings around them, and beat them in every single performance category. They simply refuse to look at any other bike if it doesn't say "Harley" on it. And on their clothes. And boots., And bandannas, etc... It's that same close-minded attitude that irks me about 24P fanboys, and I even ride a Harley! (One of many bikes I've owned.) I'm not saying you shouldn't own a Harley if you like them, just don't bad-mouth all other bikes because they're not.

it also goes to those who are enamored to "black rifles," aka AR-15s. If you don't have the latest and greatest AR-15 ( M4gery) clone, with all the latest scopes, tactical lights, etc. you're not "with it." Never mind if the rifle has inherent weaknesses that more modern rifles have addressed. I've owned one before, found it was too much trouble to upkeep, and moved on to other rifles.

I have no personal investment in Sony. I don't own stock, etc. But I hate to see this product being unfairly criticised because it doesn't conform to some 24P fanboys' idea of video nirvana.
Let's try the cameras out before we make any judgements. Have an open mind. And never forget, content is king; always has been, always will be. If your film sucks, 24P won't save it.

[Chris Barcellos]

The way you devotees of 60i and 30p can defeat the evils of 24p is show your amazing work to the industry, and press it to adopt these better frame rates. While you may be absolutely right about its value, wringing of hand and talk is cheap.

The concern raised by some that this camera should have 24p, is a valid concern, given an emphasis on that frame rate by many if power in segments of the industry. What if you show up at a job and the client says, "Of course, you will be shooting in 24p, right ?" So having it available is a valid concern. I have it available on my Canon 5d, and my Canon T2i, and I am happy it is there. On the T2i I also have 60p, and I am happy it is there too !

Point is with this camera, Sony continues to leave it off of its low end cameras, while Canon has included it. So I will opt for a camera that does have it available.

[Jay West]

I've found it interesting how passionate folks are about what they do and how diverse our members' styles are.

There are those of us (myself included) who think this camera won't be suitable for what we do because it doesn't have a true 60i. From the other side, there are folks who think it won't be suitable because it won't give them 24p. There are those of us on the 60i side who could care less about 24p and vice versa , and there are folks on either side who feel that their views reflect the only proper way to do things. Some think it's low light performance won't be good enough. Others think it will be fine for what they do as long as they can find suitable lenses. Some of us will be pleased to have changeable lenses while others of us feel extra lenses will get in the way of what we do. Some enjoy the the prospect of learning new techniques with a different kind of camera while others (with sizable investments in other cameras) are disappointed that it will not integrate well (or not well enough) with our existing equipment investments.

The VG10 gets hit from several sides at once. Mostly for not being designed to be all things for all videographers.

Can that really be done? I think not. It seems to me instead that this camera might be finding a new niche and will develop its own following, some of whom will be equally as passionate and we find ourselves reading a whole new array of posts where folks exasperatedly accuse each other of being fanboys or fetishists of weird, antique or niche technologies.

I agree wholeheartedly with the part of Glen's comment: "Let's try the cameras out before we make any judgments."

I think that comment also answers Ron Little's question for now.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Personally, I prefer 24p (even with 3:2 pulldown) - if it's shot well. If you pan quickly or slowly, it works fine. If you pan at a medium speed, the strobing can be obnoxious.

Why do I like it? The judder makes things look more dreamlike. Smooth out the motion, and it can look more real. Personally, I prefer the dream feel to the reality feel for films. So, for me, 24p is preferred.

Regarding the "fan boy" talk, I don't think it's helpful. The 24p crowd could turn it around and call 24p doubters "haters" or "60/30p fanboys." That just divides us. We should leave cheap polarization for cable news.

The reality is that any camera that doesn't offer 24p, 25p and 30p (if not 60i and 60p) will lose some market share. Even if one delivers finished media at 30p, they might want to undercrank to 24p to speed up a fight scene. The feature doesn't harm anyone, nor does it add hard costs (as we saw with the Canon 5D2 firmware that added 24, 25, and 29.97 fps.)

All shooters should be requesting all the standard framerates - if not additional framerates for over and under cranking too.

[Robert Young]

Originally Posted by Jon Fairhurst

All shooters should be requesting all the standard framerates - if not additional framerates for over and under cranking too.

I think that's a terrific idea- but I'm afraid Sony is not going to give it to us for $2,000 :(

[Glen Vandermolen]

Well, hopefully this camera will have a frame rate upgrade. If it's just a software change, it should be possible - right?
But let's remember, it is marketed as a consumer camera. I don't expect much from a $2,000 camera. If it shoots good video, I'd say it's an incredible bargain.

I was just on a music video shoot yesterday using a 7D. Since I am new to DSLRs, it was quite the learning experience. And yes, the director wanted it shot in 24P. But the shoot only reinforced my desire for a large sensor, interchangeable lens VIDEO CAMERA. Given the choice, I'd much rather use a dedicated video camera platform than a DSLR. Will the VG10 fulfill that role? We'll find out in September.

By the way, the director is a friend of mine, and he's aware of the VG10. If we shot with the VG10, he would have been satisfied with 60i. Or 30P, or whatever it really is.

[Ron Evans]

Jon I accept that it depends on the subject matter. A story/film can include all the artistic input desired by the director. The audience will be the judge. All of my projects are theatre with my aim to produce a finished product as if the viewer was sat in the audience. Not a film of the story unfolding on stage but a record of the stage production. Maximum depth of field and smoothest motion, as alive as possible. Same is true for my family video. I want to be there in the memory.

I support people who want 24p because they want it. For all the reasons stated before, 24p on a TV is not acceptable to me. The problem for me is that even the slightest movement has the cadence applied to it and destroys the dream like effect that the projected image would have. I just don't watch because more and more productions are poorly shot. Beautifully clean images with bad camera work and editing. They look worse than my projected 18fps Super8 film of almost 50years ago.

One needs to use a compatible chain of technologies. For video in NTSC that needs to be a multiple of 30 for PAL 25 and then none of these cadence issue will arise.(There will still be the scaling issues !!!) IF one then needs an oddball cadence for artistic effect then let the NLE do that. That is the nature of video.

Ron Evans

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Chris Barcellos

The concern raised by some that this camera should have 24p, is a valid concern, given an emphasis on that frame rate by many if power in segments of the industry. What if you show up at a job and the client says, "Of course, you will be shooting in 24p, right ?" So having it available is a valid concern. I have it available on my Canon 5d, and my Canon T2i, and I am happy it is there. On the T2i I also have 60p, and I am happy it is there too !

Point is with this camera, Sony continues to leave it off of its low end cameras, while Canon has included it. So I will opt for a camera that does have it available.

I do agree that it SHOULD have 24p. We know it can be done -- look at Pana and Canon. And, Pana makes "pro" cameras and so has a valid marketing reason to NOT include it. Yet they do.

As a reviewer I've had many many meetings with Sony execs. Some people remember I made a way too big a stink at a Sony press conference about the lack of 24p and the horrible CineFrame "feature." It was this that I think led Sony to loan me a V1 prototype.

I also don't know why Pana consumer camcorders shoot 24p but not 30p -- yet shoot 25p.

Or, why cameras don't shoot 25p AND 30p. Or, why 25p/30p are not recorded natively.

After years of fighting -- I'm convince that every company finds a way to cripple everything -- just a bit.

So not only do I think Sony should have included 24p -- I think they REALLY REALLY should have included Cine gamma and Black Stretch/Compress.

I see no valid reason why someone who wants 24p should not get it. It is 2010! Offering 1080p24 costs nothing. I can even give a really valid reason for shooting 24p -- you can convert to 60i and to 25p(50i) and go to film. And, 24p goes to BD.

My pushing against the 24p fans is only to get them to really think about the ABSOLUTE NEED to shoot 24p verses 30p for a "near" film look -- especially when the film look involves so much more than frame-rate.