HV20: 24p implications for H1 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Canon EOS / MXF / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Canon HDV and DV Camera Systems > Canon XL H Series HDV Camcorders

Canon XL H Series HDV Camcorders
Canon XL H1S (with SDI), Canon XL H1A (without SDI). Also XL H1.


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 30th, 2007, 01:00 AM   #1
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 73
HV20: 24p implications for H1

Not looking to get into 24f vs 24p here, but I found it interesting that Canon is advertising the HV20 as a 24p camera. There is no mention of 24f in the literature. I might be wrong on this, but as far as I know this is the first claim of 24p HD from Canon.

I realize that I'm asking for nothing more than pure speculation, but I'm wondering if anyone thinks this may signal a future update of the H1 to 24p status.

Thoughts?
Josh Keffer is offline  
Old March 30th, 2007, 09:29 AM   #2
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 89
As near as I'm aware, what this means is basically the difference between CMOS imagers, which are by their nature progressive, and CCD's, which may or may not be (in the case of the A1/G1/H1 the chips are interlaced). Basically two different methods of arriving at the nearly the same destination, 24P. While this doesn't really mean anything for existing A1/G1/H1 cameras, what I have heard bandied about is a possible multiple CMOS imaging capture, perhaps for future prosumer models, although I am pretty sure that was just pure conjecture. As near as I'm aware, once you get into talking about CMOS, one chip is all you need (?!?). While the CMOS/24P imager may be integrated into future models, I certainly wouldn't ditch your H1, if that's what you have currently, simply for this speculation, and I also wouldn't expect any impact on the value of, or anticipate any changes to, existing models.
Todd Mattson is offline  
Old March 30th, 2007, 10:57 AM   #3
Obstreperous Rex
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: San Marcos, TX
Posts: 26,900
Images: 513
Hi Josh, please see my article at http://www.hdvinfo.net/articles/canon/hv20overview.php

I answered this question on the bottom half of that page, but the short story is that Frame mode requires three chips to work, but the HV20 has one chip, therefore it can't use Frame mode. Details in my link above. Hope this helps.
__________________
CH

Search DV Info Net | DV Info Net Sponsors | A Decade (+5) of DVi | ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!
Chris Hurd is offline  
Old March 30th, 2007, 11:09 AM   #4
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 73
Thanks for the info, Chris. I didn't see that article because I only searched within this forum.

What I wonder about is whether Canon, now that it has a 24p HD camera, won't eliminate Frame mode altogether by introducing 24p into the prosumer line.
Josh Keffer is offline  
Old April 1st, 2007, 09:37 AM   #5
New Boot
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 5
I am wondering about the implications of the HV20 too Josh, albeit for a different reason maybe.

I have been following this thread: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=57643
and am NOT so much bothered by the 24F vs 24P thing.

My wondering lies more in the line of an H1 Mark II being HD (not HDV) and possibly containing CMOS chips (which will obviously make them 'progressive').

This would only mean a 2MP primary color array, which is not far from what the H1 has now (@1.67MP).
I do not claim anything but ignorence here (it can be bliss) but I cannot foresee Canon with their trackrecord in very fine CMOS chips for D-SLRs (more my line) being far from bringing something out that will possibly couse me to act like one of Pavlof's dogs.
Jacques Swanepoel is offline  
Old April 1st, 2007, 10:25 AM   #6
Obstreperous Rex
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: San Marcos, TX
Posts: 26,900
Images: 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacques Swanepoel View Post
being HD (not HDV)
It's very important to understand that HDV *is* HD.

If you're under the misconception that HDV somehow is not HD, then you're on the wrong web site.
__________________
CH

Search DV Info Net | DV Info Net Sponsors | A Decade (+5) of DVi | ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!
Chris Hurd is offline  
Old April 1st, 2007, 12:37 PM   #7
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hurd View Post
If you're under the misconception that HDV somehow is not HD, then you're on the wrong web site.
Perhaps it could be that one hasn't been here LONG ENOUGH?
Todd Mattson is offline  
Old April 1st, 2007, 01:54 PM   #8
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: cape town South-Africa
Posts: 251
Jacques,

Welcome to the forum / This forum offers the best anti-misconception
threads and discussions on the planet.

Also new to HD-LAND / Herman . Cape - Town. S-A.
Herman Van Deventer is offline  
Old April 1st, 2007, 03:41 PM   #9
New Boot
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 5
Chris

Not trying to sound resentful of possibly a 'kind' brush-off... Maybe you are suffering from a delusion of grandeur.

If you say one thing is the same as another, then they must be the same on all counts. If an orange is the same as an apple, then we are all confused. Both being part of a foodgroup called fruit, only makes them the same on that count, and not anything else.

I understand that HDV is a format of HD... But please DO NOT try and tell me that they are the same. If 1920x1080 is the adopted nature of HDTV, and I am shooting 1440x1080 (like I am at the moment) then I cannot submit to any HD channel (like Discovery HD).
There are numerous threads on this board where people are addressing this very thing... Are you telling them, and the burocratically minded that they are all seeing things wrongly?

There is only one "misconception" here, and that is that I have maybe been led to believe that there is a difference between HDV and HD cameras. Hell, even on the thread I have quoted, there is mention of a Panasonic HVX.
Not wanting to sound too stupid (not knowing the camera) and someone stating the lack of 800 lines of resolution (on the Canon H1), I read about the other Panasonic line-ups. An AJ-HDX400, stated by 'Panasonic' as a "TRUE HD" camera, with 1920 capture resolution.

Of course my interest was more to the fact that the camera only does 700 lines "in the center" and that it has a 1,019,280 pixel sensor. At 1920 pixels horizontal, that would only give it 530 pixels vertical. At US$35,000 (on special aparently) this does seem a far cry from 700 lines, and also begs the question about their claimed "True 24P" HD captures. Now of course meaning 1280x720, its a different kettle of fish. But either way, a far cry from quoting HD as far as 1920x1080 goes, and comparing that to other 1920x1080 cams.

Now I admitted, and still do, that I am new to DV SD/HDV. But I have been around digital for many a year, only on the still side of things. If you would like to tell me, like some of my students do, that their Nikon D2X(s) @ 12.1MP is the same as a Canon EOS 5D @ 12.8MP then you are suffering from the same 'misconceptions' that they do.

The one cannot be the same as the other because they have different formats. The one being an APS-C sensor, and the other full frame 35. The one having almost 3 micron size per pixel advantage on the other, says a lot, not only for light, noise, and IQ, but also for sharpness and resolving power.

But lets get back to HD(V)

"The HV20 is the HD camcorder to go along with everything else in your HD world. It captures true 1080 High Definition resolution video in 16:9 format, using MiniDV cassette tapes. The HV20's true 16:9 widescreen HD image is made for your new HD widescreen TV. High Definition and widescreen are the future. Be sure you invest in that future with Canon's HV20" (Quoted from the Canon USA website).

Apart from the HV10, all their other cameras in "HD" is refered to as HDV (H1, A1, G1). Is Canon then saying that the HDV is NOT true 16:9? Are they claiming that there is a difference between HD and HDV?

Am I wrong in assuming that the "HD" refers to the horizontal resolution of 1080? If not, then I am sure that any format able to give you 1080 would be classified as HD. (Or 720 in the case of Panasonic. Which I also question, but you can brush me off later on that one.)
But the mere fact that 1440x1080 is not 16:9 and that HDTV is, does make me wonder about the inherent differences in format (in at least where it concerns the aspect ratio). 1440x1080 is 4:3, 1920x1080 is 16:9, HD720 @ 1280x720 is 16:9.


If you have taken the time to read through this, maybe give your fellow posters some credit, that maybe, just maybe... a snorty remark is not warranted all the time, and that maybe there is a genuine (however misdirected or construed it may seem to the enlightened ones) understanding of what they are dealing with. Even if it just means that they question the validity of claimed specifications and speculations, even at the hands of demi-gods.

If we can at least agree that there is a difference in accepted HD norms and HDV (480 pixels on the long side) then read my post again. (This is straight from the manufacturers' perspective. Read on.)

Maybe I should have said:
"My wondering lies more in the line of an H1 Mark II being HD (not HDV) and possibly containing CMOS chips (which will obviously make them 'progressive')." Meaning that it would contain three CMOS chips with 1920x1080 pixels, giving you a true 16:9 aspect ratio, a non-speculative 24p scan, with HD-SDI transfer delivering me the standard set by Discovery HD in order to post footage to their standards.

Would this have been more acceptable?

"Under the "HDV1080i" (HDV) specifications, 1440 x 1080 (16:9) images in 24 frames are recorded. (24F recording)." (Quoted from the Canon USA website)

Do you understand the dilemma here?
A company, like Canon, makes a destinction between HD and HDV. Broadcasters do the same thing. (Read 'Discovery HD' broadcasting requirements. It categorically states that no more than 25% HDV footage is acceptable. Only HDCAM, DVCPRO HD, HD (1920x1080)...).

And you are frying me about my "MISCONCEPTION".

http://shop.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs...72005012903035

Read their definition of the differences in the HD formats. Now you tell me from that, how am I to understand all the "LIES" printed there. Reading this, you would obviously have to think that any footage with a transfer of less than 100 Mbps, and done to tape, cannot be classified as HD. Having less than 4:2:2 color sampling is also not HD. yada-yada-yada

Are you telling me that I am on the wrong website because I am questioning the validity of such BS statements?
Am I on the wrong website because I dared to destinguish between HD and HDV?

As an obviously senior poster here, I would have thought you had a bit more class and understanding for the possibility that some people may also make assumptions about certain things. Like me assuming (wrongly) that I answered Josh on a sensor claimed (by Canon) as being HD 24p (1920x1080). I also assumed wrongly in thinking that (as apposed to their other cameras) calling in a difference between this HD sensor, and the other HDV sensors, that we were discussing sensor resolutions, and NOT High Definition formats.

I will assume, for now, that you understand that I do know the differences between SD and HD. That I do know the difference between some HD formats. That I also know the difference between sensor resolutions and aspect ratios.
And that I understand that HDV is not the same as HD if HD is 1920x1080 @ 16:9 and not 1440x1080 @ 4:3 non-interlaced, streched, manipulated, or by whatever means and process to get to 16:9.

(And before you tell me the same as Canon, that they have 'native 16:9 sensors' capturing the vid, and there are no differences to the pixels used in the video array:
"In addition to all of the features and capabilities you'd expect from a Canon HD camcorder, the XL H1 also gives you the flexibility to record still images. The images can be captured at full HD resolution (1920x 1080)" (quoted from Canon USA website.)
So the stills are captured at 1920x1080 ("full HD resolution") but the vid at 1440x1080.
Do you still believe that the sensors capture video 'natively' at 16:9?

We have a saying in South Africa: "Moenie my vertel perdedrolle is vye nie"... Which roughly translates to: Don't tell me horse droppings are figs.


So I do believe that I am on the right site. I do have enough knowledge to make posts here, and even enough ignorence and humility to ask questions and advice.

Don't spoil this for me or anybody else with your holier-than-though attitude master Chris...
Jacques Swanepoel is offline  
Old April 1st, 2007, 04:44 PM   #10
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 314
Hmmm... Do you really think you should be insulting the owner of the forum?
John McManimie is offline  
Old April 1st, 2007, 05:09 PM   #11
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, UK
Posts: 321
so many things wrong - Im not sure where to start!
Fergus Anderson is offline  
Old April 1st, 2007, 05:11 PM   #12
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Atlanta GA
Posts: 1,427
Jacques,

I think that maybe what chris meant but didn't say is that the "hdv vs HD" comment is something that has been talked about ad nauseum on this and other boards around the net and isn't particularly the goal of HIS forum.

Which brings up another point. Chris has been suprisingly fair to all of his posters and he very rarely acts as some DV posting dictator. However if he felt like it he could, this is his forum, he pays to have it maintained and gratiously offer up a resource to all people interested in discussing cameras and filmmaking and engineering and any other number of things dorks like me like to talk about on the internet.

that being said I'd like to clarify some of the issues that you re proporting as "true"

1) 1920x1080 as a distribution format. Currently no one can broadcast in 1080p it's bandwidth is too high, I'm sure it will happen eventually but currently that is not the case.

2) the 1440x1080 stretch that you accuse the xl series cameras of doing is the same stretch that is applied to HDCAM footage shot with an f900.

3) "Apart from the HV10, all their other cameras in "HD" is refered to as HDV (H1, A1, G1). Is Canon then saying that the HDV is NOT true 16:9? Are they claiming that there is a difference between HD and HDV?" This statement doesn't make any sence to me no where does the quote you have posted before this actually lead to the statement that you make.

The reason why you are incorrect about your 1440x1080 capture being 4:3 is because you are assuming that we are working with square pixels, which we are not.

I believe that you may be bringing some of the digital still line of thinking to the video realm and the transfer isn't always 1 to 1.

4) You are wrong to assume that horizontel resolution is the ONLY thing that determines what HD is.

"If you have taken the time to read through this, maybe give your fellow posters some credit, that maybe, just maybe... a snorty remark is not warranted all the time, and that maybe there is a genuine (however misdirected or construed it may seem to the enlightened ones) understanding of what they are dealing with. Even if it just means that they question the validity of claimed specifications and speculations, even at the hands of demi-gods."

However in your case this was warrented because your genuine understanding is in fact a genuine misunderstanding. Though you do bring up a good point perhaps we could get the moniker demi-god underneath our name.

Your understanding of discovery HD broadcast requirements is also slightly off as well in that the growing acceptance of HDV (vs HDCAM and DVCPROHD) has allowed for more airable HDV content. Though you must still deliver your footage on HDCAM or DVCPRO HD you can stil accquire the footage in HDV and while it may have been 25% at one point of time I am positive that number will change if it has not already.

The fact that Panasonic prints promotional material doesn't mean that HDV is not HD. (and again, it does not say that)

The fact that you are so up in arms over your misunderstanding about pixels being recorded to tape (they are recorded 1.33x1 so 1440x1080 is in fact... wait for it... a 1920x1080 image.)

we have a saying here: "don't come into my house and pee on my furniture" I'm not sure if that's applicable here but I'm sure it will reflect MY (not chris hurds) holier then thou attitude.
__________________
I have a dream that one day canon will release a 35mm ef to xl adapter and I'll have iris control and a 35mm dof of all my ef lenses, and it will be awesome...
Nick Hiltgen is offline  
Old April 1st, 2007, 05:54 PM   #13
New Boot
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 5
With all due respect...

I am not insulting anybody.
I am making a claim as to what I regard as having to be a fair post to a simple matter of a chip on a camera. By telling me that I have a misconception regarding HDV as not being HD, and then acting on that assumption and tell me in a nice way that I am maybe addressing the wrong site, leads to one possibility:
You do not know what you are talking about, therefore leave.

I have stated that I am ignorent in these matters, and I have not laid a claim otherwise.

Did you (or Chris, or Fergus) read in my post that I claim HDV NOT TO BE HD.

Assuming that Chris read that in my post, why the rebuff (Chris?)
Assuming that I am misinterpreting anything here, what is wrong in what I said Fergus?

If Canon makes a destinction between HD and HDV (and the only thing I can see) is because of the pixel ratios being different 1920 vs. 1440, then why can't I do that if I am refering to a chip with this pixel count?

On Chris's HDI pages, he states: "HDV2 (from Sony and Canon) is a 25 megabit-per-second MPEG-2 transport stream with a resolution of 1920 pixels wide by 1080 pixels tall."

The only thing I can agree with here, is the 25 Mbps transport.
My camera (Sony HDR-HC1) certainly does not do 1920x1080, and neither does the Canon XL-H1.

So do I take it the Canon HV10, and HV20 have 1920x1080 chips? But we know the H1 does not.
So what do you want me to read into this.

How can 1920 and 1440 be the same?

So pls tell me Fergus, what am I wrongly interpreting here. (And I am not being sarcastic).

Set aside the attack mode, and just think about what I am asking in my follow-up post. How can a native 16:9 chip, natively capture 1440x1080 if that aspect ratio is 4:3 vs. a true 1080 aspect of 16:9 would be 1920x1080?
Jacques Swanepoel is offline  
Old April 1st, 2007, 06:05 PM   #14
Sponsor: divergent media
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 201
This is going to quickly become a flame war, but just to restate:

If you believe that a camera has to record 1920 horizontal pixels to be "true" HD, then by your definition the Cinealta F900, Varicams, and the bulk of other high end cameras must not really be HD.

If you agree that this is a silly assertion (I hope we all do), you should refine your definition.
__________________
Divergent Media Support
www.divergentmedia.com
Colin McFadden is offline  
Old April 1st, 2007, 06:11 PM   #15
Obstreperous Rex
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: San Marcos, TX
Posts: 26,900
Images: 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacques Swanepoel View Post
I understand that HDV is a format of HD... But please DO NOT try and tell me that they are the same.
But that is just exactly what I am saying, and your reluctance to accept that fact is what leads me to believe that you're on the wrong web site. HDV is a format of HD, therefore HDV is HD.

HD is composed of a group of formats: among them are HDCAM SR, HDCAM, DVCPRO HD, XDCAM HD, HDV and AVCHD. The HDV format is no less "HD" than any other format in that group. I cannot control what you choose to believe, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to convince you otherwise. Rather, let it be understood in no uncertain terms that if you choose to remain under the misconception that HDV somehow does not qualify as "real HD," then you'll have to seek out another internet experience, because I won't tolerate that mindset here. It gets in that way of what we're trying to accomplish, which is to discuss *how* we use this gear, and what we are creating with it... and definitely NOT the number of pixels on an image sensor, as that has never been any sort of limitation to producing compelling content with moving images.

Quote:
If 1920x1080 is the adopted nature of HDTV, and I am shooting 1440x1080 (like I am at the moment) then I cannot submit to any HD channel (like Discovery HD).
Actually yes, you can submit to an HD channel like Discovery HD if you are shooting 1440 x 1080, because that's just exactly what HDCAM is, and HDCAM is by far the most widely accepted HD format for HD broadcast purposes, including not only Discovery HD but many other channels as well.

Discovery HD will in fact accept a limited amount of HDV and HVX200-originated DVCPRO HD. The limitations are related to the size of the one-third inch image sensors of these camcorders, and not the horizontal resolution of 1440 pixels for HDV (because after all, HDCAM is the exact same resolution, and yet it it is the only acceptable HD format for submissions to Discovery HD).

Quote:
...HDV is not the same as HD if HD is 1920x1080 @ 16:9 and not 1440x1080 @ 4:3
Actually it's 1440 x 1080 at 16:9 (not 4:3), with a pixel aspect ratio of 1:1.3, just like HDCAM.

Quote:
How can 1920 and 1440 be the same?
When PAR = 1.3, that's how.

Quote:
But the mere fact that 1440x1080 is not 16:9...
You're mistaken. 1440x1080 is indeed 16:9, when PAR = 1.3. Just like HDCAM.

Jacques, I will allow you to participate here *only* if you are open-minded enough to be willing to learn. You are under some severe misconceptions about HD... the primary one being that somehow HDV is not HD. In fact the HDV format *is* one flavor of HD, just as real and legitimate and bona fide as HDCAM, DVCPRO HD, XDCAM HD, HDCAM SR and even AVCHD. We're willing to help you to get on the right track to get those misconceptions cleared up, but only if you approach this with the right attitude, which so far I'm not seeing yet. Try to understand: 1440 x 1.33333 = 1920 x 1.00000

It's been good enough for HDCAM for years, so it's good enough for HDV today.

Quote:
Am I on the wrong website because I dared to distinguish between HD and HDV?
Yes. Such furious measurebation is the pursuit of other web sites perhaps, but not this one.

Contact me offline if you need further clarification. On this site we do NOT waste time arguing the utterly ludicrous notion of whether HDV is HD any more than we pointlessly debate the curvature of the Earth. Hope this helps,
__________________
CH

Search DV Info Net | DV Info Net Sponsors | A Decade (+5) of DVi | ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!
Chris Hurd is offline  
Closed Thread

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Canon EOS / MXF / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Canon HDV and DV Camera Systems > Canon XL H Series HDV Camcorders

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:48 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network