XL-HI 24f BIGSCREEN footage at Resfest

[Martin Costa]

LOL Stephen, do you think it come with a free Joe Pesci!

[Lawrence Bansbach]

Originally Posted by Eric Brown

Lawrence, guess I should have spoken for myself on that one. I would be very satisfied with the Varicam, personally.
I'm just happy to be making stuff.

Exactly. The emphasis should be on the stuff you can do with a camera, not on the camera itself. Besides, like beauty, perfection is in the eye of the beholder.

[Lauri Kettunen]

The ongoing discussion on the 24p versus 24f and on the 720 versus 1080 lines is interesting in the sense that the PAL version of XL2 creates already 576 vertical lines in the 25p mode, if vertical detail is set to normal. Such an image is amazingly sharp for a SD camera. (Maybe we who have the PAL version should post some our best footages to give to the NTSC land people an idea of the 25p image.)

The difference between 720 and 576 is not that remarkable, and thus, it is understandable that Canon went straight to HDV2 and 1080 lines although some people seem not to be happy about that. I wonder, if the XL2 25p image is interpolated to 720 lines, whether the difference between the SD and 720 25p HDV signal is that big -in another words, is the difference worth of an investment?

If I understood it right, the difference between the XL1 25f mode and the XL2 25p mode is that in the XL1 25f mode the number of lines was reduced (by 100) to avoid flickering. In XL2, the vertical detail is included in the menu, and one may choose whether there is the reduction or not. Whatever is the case, the difference in sharpness between XL1 and XL2 is easily observable. (Of course, the lens and other facts matter)

Now, when it comes to XL H1, does anybody know, does Canon give a new meaning to the f-mode, or has it the same meaning as in XL1? Making any judgements from the footages available so far is rather difficult, for there is hardly any device available (here in the PAL land) from which the footages could be viewed in full resolution. All HD ready TV's marketed seem to have ony 720 lines, and have neither seen yet ordinary wide screen computer display which had 1900 horizontal pixels.

[Nate Weaver]

Originally Posted by Lauri Kettunen

The difference between 720 and 576 is not that remarkable,

You should probably view some footage first. I agree the difference in numbers does not seem great, but I think most people viewing HD100 footage on a proper display would agree that it's more than a small change.

[Thomas Smet]

720 compared to 576 may not be that big of a jump but 1280 compared to 720 sure is. It isn't just about the vertical resolution but the horizontal as well. You cannot say the XL2 shoots 960 horizontal pixels because when on tape it is dumped down to 720. HDV on tape and live output will be the full 1280x720 pixels which is much higher than 720x576. Now if you could manage to somehow get the full 960x576 from the CCD's on the XL2 then you would actually be fairly close to the resolution of DVCPROHD.

DVCPROHD is only 960x720 and even some people consider this to be a little soft for HD. If 960x720 is going to be a little soft than 720x576 will be worse.

720x756=414720 total pixels
1280x720=921600 total pixels

That is still a little over double the amount of overall pixels on tape which is a lot of extra detail.

[Lauri Kettunen]

Originally Posted by Nate Weaver

You should probably view some footage first.

Nate, you are absolutely right, especially for my phrasing was bit inaccurate; My intention was to say, I can understand if Canon felt some preassure to go straight to HDV2, for the change at least sounds more remarkable.

I've seen recently a demo on a LG screen in full 720 line resolution, and, indeed, the HD(V?) image popped up among the other displays in the store. However, back in 98 I saw some HD demo in the Sony building in Tokyo, and that really captured my eye. The amount of details and color tones was amazing compared to what I had seen before. Have no idea of the format.