DV Info Net

DV Info Net (http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Canon XH Series HDV Camcorders (http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xh-series-hdv-camcorders/)
-   -   Canon XH series -- various sample clips (http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xh-series-hdv-camcorders/81162-canon-xh-series-various-sample-clips.html)

Jerome Marot December 7th, 2006 12:36 AM

Canon XH series -- various sample clips
 
I am just a newbie here, but as I had the chance to make a direct comparison between a A1 and a Sony FX-7, I thought I should post some of my unscientific observations. After all, the question "which is one is better in low light?" is asked regularly.

First disclaimer: I am in PAL land, so those were PAL models.

Second disclaimer: this is an unscientific test.

The test was very simple: I tried both cameras in a very low light setting and examined the noise on a monitor. The light was turned down until the cameras were reaching maximum gain (18 dB, the A1 can turn the gain even higher, but will not do this automatically) and the picture was examined. This is an important test for what I will be using this camera for (filming live jazz gigs).

A few things are striking:

-first: the noise is different, you get more gritting luminance noise on the Canon and some blotchy chrominance noise on the Sony. At first sight, the Sony noise looks less obvious, but this is a question of taste.

-second: Sony automatically switches some kind of noise resolution on, while Canon does not. The picture from the FX-7 gets a bit less sharp when gain is increased.

-last but not least: the FX-7 is noticeably less sensitive than the A1. From 20 years of photography practice, I would say about a full stop less sensitive: the image is underexposed while the Canon still shows detail, you lose details in the shadows long before the Canon, etc. No surprise here: the chip is smaller.


That is about the extend of the observations. Now if someone can do a more scientific test, measure the actual sensitivity of the cameras and post pictures, I would be delighted, but characterizing the two cameras is more difficult than it seems. One can't compare one to the other without also comparing the noise, which is very different. The Sony is also obviously designed as consumer model, with higher contrast, higher sharpening, automatic noise reduction and the loss in dynamic which results of that choice. Sony's noise reduction appears to be very clever: the loss in resolution is minimal. The A1 can be tweaked to do lots of things, but apparently needs to be tweaked. Still: I chose the A1, because of the higher base sensitivity, which is important for me.

But the Sony is also a nice camera: smaller (the Canon is about the size of the FX-1) and lighter. I also liked the way the Sony always displayed the aperture, speed and gain at the bottom of the screen (they are also easier to set up) and the bigger external screen.

Evan C. King December 7th, 2006 06:29 AM

How do you like the other handling options of the fx7 compared to the A1? Images tweakability and external manual control buttons and such? And maybe your opinion of colour difference between the two.

Jerome Marot December 7th, 2006 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evan C. King
How do you like the other handling options of the fx7 compared to the A1? Images tweakability and external manual control buttons and such? And maybe your opinion of colour difference between the two.


That is difficult to answer. I am used to a Sony camera, so I could find my way on the Sony easily. OTOH, the Canon has lots of buttons which to me look as if they are spread around the case without any system... your mileage may vary.

As to tweakability and color, the Sony has more "punch" out of the box and the Canon produces images which are easier to improve in post. But there is one major difference: the Canon has custom controls to tweak the picture and give about any kind of color look you like, while you need to choose the VX1 (the "pro" version of the FX7) to get the same amount of control.

Jay Stebbins December 11th, 2006 10:15 PM

Two Sequences
 
The first sequence http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=81457
is a clip used for a discussion about presets here
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=81457

the beginning is the comparison between adapted presets. It transitions into the preset I like. Of which I am looking for opinions on as far as colors go.

The second is my very first sequence ever, http://www.jaystebbins.com/movies/thefirstclips.mov shot with the Panalook preset...

Please right click and download....

Thanks,
Jay

John Huling December 12th, 2006 05:51 AM

Jay

I would like the color boost somewhere between the two settings personally. Seems that is what it might have actually looked like. What is the "squiggily" thing going on as you pan across the hull of the boat from right to left. Is that a common byproduct of video or MPG artifact?

Beautiful shots by the way.

Jay Stebbins December 12th, 2006 08:22 AM

Thanks,

I think the jiggly thing, might be the image stabilizer, as I forgot to turn it off. I found a couple of references last night mentioning that the OIS would cause a disruption during slow pans on a tripod. I agree with you on the boost as well. Last night I tweaked the settings, and added the HDF setting as well. I am headed down to the same spot today as the light is the same today as yesterday.

Thanks again,
Jay

Poppe Johansson December 19th, 2006 01:02 PM

"Ice and Water"
 
"Ice and Water"
Pictures from Finnish national park (2006/12/19).
http://rapidshare.com/files/8167401/Haukkajoki.mov

Original HDV PAL 50i > De-interlaced H.264 / 640x360, 98Mb. Manual settings, outdoor white balance, -3dB gain. Customize settings: CAM N * KNE L * BLK P * PED -1 * SET/SHP 0 * HDF M * DHV/COR/NR1/NR2 0 * CMX 1 * CGN 20 / CPH/RGN 0 * GGN 3 / all rest at zero.
Hoya UV-filter was used in all shots. First two shots are color corrected.

EDIT:
Two raw clips:
http://rapidshare.com/files/8266676/HelvjHDV50i.mov
(Quicktime native HDV file)
http://rapidshare.com/files/8238784/HelvjHDV720p.mov
(downconverted with FCP, QT)

Mark Williams December 19th, 2006 02:56 PM

Nice video quality. I was just filming ice 2 weekends ago in North Georgia, USA. Images looked really good considering compression. I was particulary looking for any pulsing of the stationary rocks with fast moving water in the scene that was described in another thread but didn't see any. Nice golden natural lighting.

Regards,

Raymond Toussaint December 19th, 2006 05:21 PM

Thanks for sharing Poppe! It is real winter over there, but for Finland it is mild I think? No sign of problems in the moving waterstream and black rocks, its fluid.

Poppe Johansson December 20th, 2006 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Williams
Nice video quality. I was just filming ice 2 weekends ago in North Georgia, USA. Images looked really good considering compression. I was particulary looking for any pulsing of the stationary rocks with fast moving water in the scene that was described in another thread but didn't see any. Nice golden natural lighting. Regards,

Yes, the mpeg compression really has improved since early days. A1 seems to be a good camcorder for shooting nature. Of course there are still some softness in wide shots, but for the money this is just great cam!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raymond Toussaint
Thanks for sharing Poppe! It is real winter over there, but for Finland it is mild I think? No sign of problems in the moving waterstream and black rocks, its fluid.

This Dec there has been only few cold days in southern Finland. I just took (and shoot) advantage of these couple of freezing days, but now it seems that we won't have white Christmas, temperature has risen again.

Nathan Brendan Masters December 29th, 2006 10:11 PM

It's amazing stuff. I really like the footage. I can't wait until I get this camera. I'm hoping to get it soon. Those close ups are nothing short of amazing, particularly at this price point.

-Nate

Doug Davis January 5th, 2007 12:54 AM

Birmingham Alabama Noob footage
 
Ok, so the link is below... But I have to subtitle it a little before everyone is like "Why the freak did you do that...?"

I had the camera for about 24 hours or so and it was really my first thing I tried to shoot on the new cam... So middle of the night + new camera + tons of settings + A Noob = Not the best possible product

Some of the shots I slowed down and shouldn't have... Oh yeah and its SUPER COMPRESSED MP4... So that being said... I think really this probably the worst case scenario for this camera in terms of quality...

Oh yeah, and I only did about 13 minutes worth of total filming and edited it in about 3 - 4 hours...

http://www.gowildolive.com/camera/Downtown%20Bham.mp4

Kevin Dorsey January 5th, 2007 12:40 PM

Looks pretty good for only having the camera for one day. Now I know my way around Birmingham. Someone should call the fire department, there's a flaming pole in the city.

Nathan Brendan Masters January 5th, 2007 03:39 PM

I don't know, putting the flame out of what is apparently an eternal flaming pole may not be a good idea. Might release havoc on the city. I love the footage. What's great about this footage is when you think of Southern cities you really don't seem them as the big cities they are. These aren't small towns. They have skyscrapers and thriving metropolis setting. I'm loving the songs you guys are picking. (Most of these I've never heard). Thanks for letting the song play out.

-Nate

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Dorsey
Looks pretty good for only having the camera for one day. Now I know my way around Birmingham. Someone should call the fire department, there's a flaming pole in the city.


Rafael Lopes January 10th, 2007 03:09 AM

Macro Footage
 
I found an old 10+ macro I had laying around and decided to have some fun with my precious A1. Here's the footage:
http://rapidshare.com/files/11041958...cro10.wmv.html


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:45 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2018 The Digital Video Information Network