Is HDV right now a GOOD choice or just ego?

Back to post

Comments

Laurence wrote on 10/30/2004, 9:16 AM
I understand that the CCD is permanently 60i, and that the 24p is accomplished by dropping every 5th frame and deinterlacing the footage. At HDV res, deinterlacing by doubling every other line is going to still look great, but dropping every 5th frame is probably going to be jerky, at least I've found it to be so when I do it in V-Dub. In any case, there doesn't seem to be much advantage theoretically to the "Cineframe" mode over doing the same thing in post, but then again, until we actually see it who's to say.
farss wrote on 10/30/2004, 3:26 PM
Even if SPOTs glass ball is wrong (highly unlikely) then you could shoot 720p, I know that'll be available on the pro version.
Bob.
Laurence wrote on 10/31/2004, 8:07 AM
Wait a minute! The pro version can also shoot PAL. If you were doing a "cineframe" type effect from a PAL CCD, you'd only need to drop 1 frame a second instead of 5 to get 24. Do that and a bit of deinterlace line doubling and you'd have 24P that would be pretty darned good. I'll bet that's the difference on the "pro" version of this camera with regards to 24P.
John_Cline wrote on 10/31/2004, 8:42 AM
Of course, maybe the pro version DOES shoot 24p. The people that know can't say because they have signed Non-Disclosure Agreements.

John
farss wrote on 10/31/2004, 12:12 PM
When someone builds an affordable camera that does 100 fps THEN I'll get excited!
bowman01 wrote on 10/31/2004, 7:16 PM
Not sure how many of you saw the raw footage posted on the other forum, but is it just me or is the night footage phenomenal?
ken c wrote on 10/31/2004, 7:25 PM
it's just ego

I'd wait til they settle on a standard
John_Cline wrote on 10/31/2004, 7:32 PM
I'd wait til they settle on a standard

A standard for what?

That's the great thing about standards, there are so many from which to choose.

John
Cheno wrote on 10/31/2004, 7:40 PM
Standard's been set, Ken - like the past has dictated, Sony or Panasonic are leading the HD markets - Sony will definately up the standard with their new HDV cams.

I'm stoked for the pro-model.. and just when I'm really liking what I'm doing with my DVX100

Mike
farss wrote on 10/31/2004, 8:53 PM
Ken,
the standard was settled on over a year ago, that's a long time in this business.
Bob.
Laurence wrote on 11/1/2004, 6:39 AM
Yeah, night footage taken off a moving bicycle! Pretty much a torture test for the format IMO. The footage looks incredible. For me at least, looking at the posted footage pretty much trumps all the arguements about "HDV not being ready" or "a format not yet finalized". The footage simply looks orders of magnitude better than that off any other camera!
GmElliott wrote on 11/1/2004, 7:29 AM
Neither. Better yet go with the overpriced XL-2 w/ accessories...then sell it for a PD-170 and VX2100.

I just got over pounding the point that going HD "now" is a waste of money in another forum. I haven't read all the posts here but I'm sure my sentiments have been expressed.

There WILL be a time to go to HD but right now...or any time soon isn't the time. Save your money and spend time working on your camera/editing techniques rather than daydreaming about how "cool" shooting HD will make you look.
John_Cline wrote on 11/1/2004, 8:51 AM
The FX1 and the upcoming pro version, the ZR1, can also shoot standard-def DV. I would think that even in the DV mode, it looks better than either the PD170 or VX2100 because of the higher resolution, higher quality chips. Of course, I don't know for sure, but I guess we'll find out in a couple of weeks.

John
Bill Ravens wrote on 11/1/2004, 9:22 AM
GrnElliot....

I quite agree with you, however, most of the people on this forum are very pre-disposed to Sony and won't hear what you're saying. Oh well, to each his/her own. Might as well save your breath and bandwidth.
John_Cline wrote on 11/1/2004, 11:27 AM
Kaku just posted some new FX1 HDV fooatge. He has uploaded some DV footage taken with the FX1 (as .MOV files.) He also uploaded some blue-screen footage taken with the FX1 using the Reflecmedia system so we can play with HDV's chromakey capabilities. Here's the link again:

Kaku's Raw FX1 HDV and DV test footage

If you're not familiar with the Reflecmedia chromakey lighting system (originally the Play, Inc. HOLOSET) here the link:

Reflecmedia Web Site

John
mbelli wrote on 11/1/2004, 5:09 PM
>You should also note that even if you don't want
>to go near HD at all this camera is the best DV25 camera Sony
> has built, it's their answer to the DVX 100 and better, 16:9 native.
>Think of it as buying a DV camera with the option to shoot HD if you must.

I think the main question is which camera to buy the DVX100a, XL2 or the FX1?

From what I understand the FX1 will not do real 24p/30p so it basically will not do true progressive shooting. The 24p mode in the DVX100a is a killer! It's awesome and the ability to do 24p or 30p progressive scan DVD's is important as more and more sets move towards progressive display (the merging of PC screens and television).

So, I'm torn. The XL2 and VX100a seem a more versatile camcorder. Why the hell didn't Sony just integrate 24p into the FX1 in non-high def mode and make the decision to buy the camera easier for us? Because, believe me, if they did -- everyone would buy the FX1.

Is it just me, or does Sony freaken hate 24p or anything resembling a filmlook? I guess they just love that sharp video, news look. Panasonic is totally going the right direction and is going to blow Sony off the broadcast map if Sony doesn't get with it.

I just used the Panasonic DVX900 shooting DVCPRO 50/24 fps on a current TV documentary that I DP'd and was blown away by the look. You'd think you're shooting film. Just a lovely system. I was looking at Sony prior to shooting and Digi-Betacam doesn't do 24p and their Blu-ray camcorder was too weird for the producers to handle (in regards to posting with DVD masters and stuff) and high def was out of the question.

I'm a big believer in HDV and I can see downsampling for a great look and I can't believe in the next 2 years, we won't see DVD decks that will be able to play high def (Blu-ray) and Windows Media high def. Also for specialized use, you can just use your PC's hard drive and feed a high def Windows Media file to a high def plasma or DLP projection TV set.

So, I think HDV has lots of great uses, but again in the next 3-4 years we're still in a 4:3, standard def world and the XL2 and VX100a might have more going for them then the FX1 (again, progressive shooting is very handy for web movies and for progressive high def TV sets which have limited high def capacity available from a PC or high def broadcasts)


MB
Spot|DSE wrote on 11/1/2004, 5:39 PM
Al I can do is chuckle at folks that *THINK* 24P is the holy grail. It isn't. Just wait. Relax. Let Sony do/show/say/demo what they're gonna do/show/demo/say with the professional version of the camera. This reminds me SO MUCH of over a year ago when Sony acquired Sofo software. Everyone was screaming how bad it's going to be. Things turned out to be just fine, didn't they?
Wish there was more to be said, but there isn't. Just remember 2 things:
1. FX1 ain't the end all HDV cam.
2. Sony will announce everything for the professional cam when they announce everything for the professional cam. It exists, I've held and shot with it. And I don't know why Sony hasn't said more about it yet. But I'm certain that when they announce it, and when you play with footage from it, you'll be impressed.
Nat wrote on 11/1/2004, 5:53 PM
I got a dumb question

Just loaded some m2t files on the timeline. The preview is very slow, almost unusable. I'm on a 2.4ghz P4.

Will this get better with future versions of Vegas ? While HDV looks very tempting, I can't edit some footage if the preview is that slow...
Spot|DSE wrote on 11/1/2004, 5:57 PM
You're right on the edge of being able to do much with the MPEG2 transport streams. Using the Cineform tool will benefit you significantly
mhbstevens wrote on 11/1/2004, 6:15 PM
Rather than being a marketing ploy, by NOT having 24P on the FX1 Sony is telling us this is the way DHV is going - film is dead. When we have a new technology why do we want to imitate the old technology? Like it or not film will soon be dead and frame rates will continue to get highter. Tthe marketing ploy that I think sucks is that on a $3700 camera they put f*c***g sh**y mini-plugs for audio.

Anyway to date your replies have me about 80:20 for the FX1.
Laurence wrote on 11/1/2004, 6:17 PM
How about those of us who don't do tape to film transfers and couldn't care less about 24P? I just want to make the best quality DVD's now, and HD DVD's in the future. Will the Sony pro HDV camera have any options (other than XLR inputs) that will benefit this? Are the optics better? Is the sound?
Spot|DSE wrote on 11/1/2004, 6:18 PM
The FX1 is NOT a professional camera. Most consumers don't even know what XLR is. Further, they'd bitch if it DID have XLR's. There have been those who've bitched about the DVX having XLRs. Probably a lot of Azden users out there.
Laurence wrote on 11/1/2004, 7:15 PM
I've been using a VX2000 for a couple of years now, and to tell you the truth, I really don't mind the XLR box adapters. I prefer the Studio1 design to the Beachtek. I like keeping the camera light and would rather have the heavy XLR cables coming off my belt instead of off the bottom of the camera. I only use the external mic and boom for interviews anyway. Also, In my videos, every so often I bring up the sound of the mics over the music, and when I do, I like the stereo image that you get from the VX2000 stereo mic. I have a fuzzy "micmuff" windscreen over it and it really sounds pretty good. I imagine I'd be pretty happy with the FX1 audio as well.
Spot|DSE wrote on 11/1/2004, 7:41 PM
No one in the "know" is permitted to comment on the professional camera beyond saying that it's really sweet.
However, look around the web, there is a lot of information on this cam. Whether it's accurate or not...who knows?