The XL2 does not create shots as robust in color nor resolution as does either of the two branded 1080 camcorders available. (Canon/Sony) I've tested it, it's VERY easy to compare. XL2 is a great camcorder, but it's not 1080 originated. It does have larger vertical resolution, but that still doesn't bring it to the same grade as the 960 x 1080 imager or 1440 x 1080 imager resolution of the other two.

JohnnyRoy, I agree with you about the DV shooter and have made the same statement many times to the Apple crowd when the FX-1and Z-1 was new. But the “downconvert sucks, you need to capture HDV and downconvert with xxxxx" myth actually was started at the Apple training sessions, stated to push new hardware and FCP. Then it became one of many anti-sony agruments about not buying a new HDV sony camera and wait for Panny.

Like you, I like vegas but have added "features" for HD and SD mixing, pushing pixels ratios around, etc, but I keep reminding myself "don't re-invent the wheel, if its not alot better". That said, I believe most FX1 users are not ready for HDV editing, but a lot of that group would benefit greatly from editing(vegas, of course) in HDV and going to SD in the end. DSE has pointed this out many times before, as many others have too. And I do agree with you about the myth issue. I think what your saying is, buy the camera, shoot, learn the features and when your ready, edit in HDV. Good plan. I believe Sony Style was using that marketing approach last year and it was good advice then but they failed to include "vegas" in the discussion.

All, I haven't had a chance to update the web page yet. I was focusing on comparing the footage on the timeline with a subtract composite mode. Have two tracks each with the footage you want to compare synched up. Upper track, select Composite Mode = Subtract. Open up the scopes window.

Here's what I found:

Best/None output to lower field first = Best/Blend output to progressive = Best/Interpolate output to progressive.

There was no difference in either of the three above (solid line on the left of the histogram). So Sony has a bug in the "None" selection, and my webpage is comparing interlaced to progressive footage.

Also, there are differences between Best/Blend lower field first to the Camera downconvert. Which is better, though, is probably going to depend on the specific footage at hand, and who is looking at it. Use the scopes, you can see that there is a difference.

If I was going to do a quick and dirty turnaround of some footage, then I may take the camera download approach.

If, however, I was going to do any pan/crop, etc., then I will continue to capture as HDV, convert to Cineform or DV intermediary. and work with that. As you can see from my findings, IF you have to zoom in at all on the footage, HDV is the way to go, in my opinion.

I was told in another thread that there was no debate on this topic and the matter was settled long ago so everyone should ignore this thread ... but since I'm here anyway, I just wanted to mention that the business issues are equally, if not more, important ... it comes down to this: do you want to preserve the higher HD clip for later and take the workflow hit now or do you want to get into HD later..? ... if you already have the HD camera and have to shoot SD for your client and time is tight, I'd convert in-camera ... whether there's a quality hit or not is not irrelevant because the client won't really get anything less than what he's paying for ... and, in your spare time, you had better start getting used to the DV workflow hit and shoot in HD so you can get a leg up on the certain HD future of videography and broadcast ... give the client what they want and don't look back ... all the rest is just teething pains ...

> If I was going to do a quick and dirty turnaround of some footage, then I may take the camera download approach. If, however, I was going to do any pan/crop, etc., then I will continue to capture as HDV, convert to Cineform or DV intermediary. and work with that.

Great advice Dave and I think this is all anyone has been trying to say. There is nothing wrong with the in-camera downconvert and you should not be afraid to use it. As DSE has pointed out, understand that you will only have SD footage but if your delivery is SD and you are not doing a lot of color correcting or any chroma keying, then this will result in extremely good footage. If you are planning to use pan/crop definitely capture HDV so you have room to zoom and still retain full SD resolution.

~jr

............and, in your spare time, you had better start getting used to the DV workflow hit and shoot in HD so you can get a leg up on the certain HD future of videography and broadcast ... give the client what they want and don't look back ... all the rest is just teething pains ...
Amen,
but with the speed of puters gettin faster and faster, maybe the workflow hit will be short lived.So I hope.

" ... the workflow hit will be short lived...."

.. it most certainly will ... it's business ... the first software developers to reduce or eliminate the pain will prosper ... there's absolutely no doubt that this will happen soon (for a price) ... whether it's through better/faster proxies or faster native editing, it will surely happen ... meanwhile, absorb all you can about current HD stuff ... it'll pay off bigtime later ... these forum threads are worth their weight in gold ...