Got an HV40 today
 

So I purchased an HV40 today mainly so I can have Native 24P just like on my Canon XL H1S. It replaces my HV30.

To my surprise, I thought that with the custom button were the only changes.

But, the camera makes the chime noise at startup just like the rest of the 2009 Canon VIXIA lineup.

Totally worth every cent of the upgrade knowing this now.

:)

You're so fast! 24f just like the XHA1?!!!

Erick!!!!

yes, you know me ... I say I'll get it, I get it an hour later :)

Michael because i thought the HV30/40s were virtualy the same in pal land i bought HV30,i generaly like the cam a lot but the two main things i dislike are 1 generaly poor build quality[tape door etc] and being very light a fairly sturdy tripod is needed for good footage compared to similar sized cams i have owned, second is the fact that the tape mechanism is the noisiest i have had on a camcorder for at least 13 years and even using a good external mic this sound is picked up on recordings.
so i was wondering if these points had in any way been addressed.

Hv 40
 

I bought a new HV 40 two weeks ago. "A chime noise" at startup? You can shut that off in the camera settings.

I find the HV 40 to be almost identical to my HV 20. There was a hardly noticable buzzing noise in the tape drive when I first used the camera. But, after the third tape, the noise is gone.

I experimented with one tape shooting in 24p in different settings & modes. It all looks great.

Capturing the 24p directly to the Vegas 8.0c Timeline is worth the investment. I'll make up my investment fast by cutting down on editing time and hard drive space. The 24p edits as easy and as fast as the intermediate Cineform files. Rendering times for the 24p are also faster than the intermediate Cineform files.

I liked using Neo Scene. But I won't need it anymore.

What function can be assigned to the custom button?

Function Keys:

off

Turn on/off Asst.Func. Mode Switch P

Activate Markers

Back Light

Magnify

So can anyone tell me what camera is better the HV30 or the HV40 or are they basically the same when it comes to picture and functions? thanks

Both cameras are essentially the same, from an image stand point.

I'd get the HV40 if native 24P is valuable to you (it is to me).

So the HV40 has a true 24p stream in the file and not 24P embedded into 60i stream? That seems like a significant difference in final output quality as the 25mbps data rate is now completely dedicated to the "real" 24 frames. I would think the final output could be significantly cleaner from an HDV compression point of view. Very interesting......

Glad you like the cam Michael! I've been considering the HV line ever since the HV20 but never had enough reason/funds to make the purchase. I was just holding out until I could afford another A1. But with 24P, the HV40 looks a lot more appealing than the previous generations. Now I can get this, pay it off, and get my A1s!! +1 @ Canon for listening to our needs!

JS

Yes, it is great.

Sometimes (or a lot of times) people get caught up in an upgrade just having to be a tech specs one, dismissing one's that are about improving functionality like this and the 'S' versions of their XL/XH line.

But as someone who has upgraded to the XL H1S from the original H1 and the HV40 from the HV30, I can tell you that these are very much upgrades. Working professionally in production and post production, these functional upgrades that can make a world of difference in workflows (like the native 24F capture and embedded audio in HD-SDI). They may seem like little to some, but they are a lot to me.

I agree with everything you said Michael but there is more to this than just aesthetics. Because of the true 24P nature of the HV40, it will almost definitely be an improved image going to tape, right? This could result in a much better final product just due to the improved usage of the codec (At least in 24f mode like the HV40's big brothers).

The H1 to H1S upgrade and the A1 to A1S upgrade were more about usability upgrades.....things to make the camera easier to use or work with and improve the workflow. I think the HV40 having 24f is a huge benefit that is not being given it's proper due. Everyone was raving about the Canon 24f codec and how robust it is compared to 60i HDV just a few years ago, and the HV20/30 didn't utilize that so that was the downfall to using the lower end cameras. That downfall is gone and I really expect an improved image from the HDV codec in the HV40.

Ok....having said all of this, if you are capturing data through the HDMI port, what happens now? Is the 24P slip-streamed back into 60i for compatibility? If so, then it really doesn't benefit HDMI acquisition over the HV30...right?

Well yes, the HDV 24F codec in the HV40 should be the same as on the Canon Pro line. I see it more as a workflow upgrade, but yes, video quality should be higher cause of the more efficient use of the bitrate.

But unfortunately, the HDMI still spits out 29.97 no matter what mode you shoot in. I tested this the day I got the camera with my IO HD.

So no direct 24P capture via HDMI.

Can you clarify the "workflow upgrade?" For me personally, the current 24f embedded into a 60i stream is ingested using Cineform which immediately creates a true 24P cineform avi file. I never see the 24/60i media myself. So based on my workflow very little would change since the conversion from 60i .m2t stream to 24P avi happens in realtime during capture. If your workflow has an extra step to get from A to B I can see how it mght help speed things up. But my own reasons for going to the HV40 would be the potential for less compressed images.

Either way, the HV40 seems to have filled in a few holes in the series quite well....and with very little fanfare to boot!