Greetings: This is a long story, I will make it as brief as I can.

I have a Sony HDR-FX1. I tried to use the camera on a GlideCam mounted on a Quad. I have been using the PD 170 on the same mount with stunning results. So I was excited to go to the HD 16x9 format. A big problem came up. First let me say that the GlideCam is possibly the best way to separate a camera from a moving object thus eliminating almost all vibration. It appears that the camera is so smooth the picture would be wonderful, it is on the 170. However, with the FX-1, the picture falls apart so bad it is unusable. All it takes to set the camera off is a gentle twist of the throttle raising the RPM ever so slightly. This camera can not handle any vibration at all. I mean very little vibration. I had a discussion going here at dvinfo.net a few months back. Everyone thought I had a bad unit. So I sent it in. After replacing the lens assembly, they sent it back and it still had the same problem. Sent it in again and they replaced the stabilizer circuit board. Sent it back to me again and the problem was not fixed. So at this time, this is what sony has to say about the HDV format in general.

From the Sony repair center:

"My apologies for the late reply -- but, we wanted to verify a few things with other Sony groups both here and overseas.

In your email below, you mention that you have mounted the camcorder on an atv. Although you felt the vibration was minimal, the steadyshot feature was not working.

Under page 95 of the owner's manual, the instructions do address certain conditions that may cause the camcorder to fail -- and, mechanical vibration is one of those conditions. We contacted the engineering team in Japan and they verified that the HDRFX1 is not designed to be mounted on moving vehicles such as your application. The steadyshot feature is intended for handheld use. Although you may have acquaintences that have been successful in using the camcorder mounted to some kind of vehicle, we cannot guarantee the camera performance as such since it is outside the scope of the intended use.

Please let me know if I can answer any other questions or concerns you may have.

Sincerely Yours,
Manager, Repair Operations
EMCS-A Service Company, San Diego

Now keep in mind that I never said the steady shot was the problem. In fact, I had it off. It only got worse with it on in all settings. Take note of what the Sony team has to say.

" We contacted the engineering team in Japan and they verified that the HDRFX1 is not designed to be mounted on moving vehicles such as your application. "

This camera is a terrible investment if you are hoping to use it anyplace but on a tripod. I'm stuck with a camera I can hardly use because of the nature of my current productions. And at this point, the Sony repair team will not even return an email to me. I would bet they marked my address as junk mail to get rid of me. So be the nature of Sony Repair.

If anyone can either confirm or prove me wrong about my camera I would greatly appreciate it. Is anyone using the HDV format on a moving vehicle with any success? Is there anyone willing to do a vibration test with their HDV camera? It doesn't take much to set it off.

This is a warning, The Sony HDV format is very limited....

You can see a test video of the problem at this address:

http://homepage.mac.com/kene3/HDVtest.html

Sincerely.. Ken Eberhard

Hi Ken, I wouldn't say that you are "stuck with the camera," as you can always sell it, and probably get a very good price for it in our Private Classifieds forum. One way to tell whether or not this is a limitation of the HDV format would be for someone to try the same sort of test with the Sony HDR-HC1, a different HDV camcorder. Could you be more specific as to how your GlideCam is mounted to your ATV?

I have mounted the glidecam via a hard mount, all the way to a very padded, air tube mount. I have found that the way the GlideCam separates movement by having several 360 degree elbows at different spots eliminating forward and back motion and the adjustable spring for up and down motion does the best job even on a hard mount. All my efforts, a weeks worth of experimenting with different ways to mount it. All proved that the GlideCam should be all that is needed. I swear, you can't see the vibration with the naked eye. It is so smooth, yet very little vibration destroys the compression totally. At least that's the way I understand the problem. Maybe a progressive HDV would work. But the interlaced is just trashed by the vibration. I might add that I am living in lower Baja Mexico and getting things back and forth reliably is a commercial plane ticket. I have spent a small fortune in wasted production time with this camera. I tried to do a cross peninsula quad trip from sun up to sun down in March. Talent flew in with my new camera. All wasted. This has been a very expensive lesson for me. I wish Sony listed the limitations up front with this format. And yes, I would love it if someone could perform a test on another HDV camera. That would be great.

Thanks for you time, but please warn other perspective buyers. This format is very fragile.

Ken...

I have a video posted with the PD170 being used. You can see how well the mount works with DV footage.

http://homepage.mac.com/kene3/QuadHeaven.html

Ken,

I've read elsewhere of people having trouble shooting out of helicopters - with the Z1 actually mounted to the chopper. The Sony reply to you suggested that you had written of other FX1/Z1 users who didn't have the problems despite attaching their devices to vehicles? Is that right?

Personally I'd wouldn't attach my Z1 to anything that would shake it as thoroughly as a quad, mountain bike, helicopter etc - and I guess it's too heavy for helmetcam. Of course the new Sony HDV camcorder is the perfect size to gaffer tape to your Shoei - and with all that movement, you wouldn't miss the difference to the FX.

I think the following thread discusses similar problems, and it's been mentioned before in other threads:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=49508

Although it's not the solution you're hoping for, you should be able to shoot in DVCAM mode (SD) and avoid the problem. At least it would give you much better 16:9 than your PD-170....

Yes, on this forum I had a man tell me that he had it attached via suction cups to the gas tank of a motorcross bike doing fifty foot jumps and he was happy with the picture.

Recording in DV mode has the same artifacts. That was one of the reasons we all thought it was the camera itself, rather than the format... but that was wrong... it must convert the HDV to DV. That would be my guess with the results I have had.

We did extensive Glidecam (V16 or V20) last December in 1080i mode on the FX1 with NO problems whatsoever. Were you on CineFrame 24, by chance, because that has a problem with motion.

heath

I'm on the V8, loaded with extra weight to smooth the up and down with rough terrane on the quad. Being on a GlideCam walking is no problem... It's the motor vibration, ever so small, that effects the picture... Take a look at the first posting. http://homepage.mac.com/kene3/HDVtest.html

I've even worn the GlideCam vest on the quad rather than mounted to the quads rack and it helps a lot. But the little bit of engine vibe that gets to the camera destroys the image even with that much separation. And that's sitting still giving the engine a very slight increase in RPM!!!!! That sensitive!!!!

The second movie posted shows my particular usage and how well the PD-170 works.

http://homepage.mac.com/kene3/QuadHeaven.html

The 16x9 video on that tape was shot with the FX-1, tripod mount. All the moving footage was with the PD-170 mounted on the quad.

Thanks, I'd love to find out I'm wrong... Ken

No need to add < and > on your url post. Leave it blank, but put in the http://

heath

Sorry, didn't answer your whole question... No CineFrame at all. No effects... Actually I tried everything, every setting, every mode. The cleanest picture was with everything off and locked down on manual settings.

You know, I just bought the FX1, having to negotiate a long time that I'd like for once to get a nice cam. I wont be strapping this $$$ cam to anything that vibrates like that. For one thing I dont see how the inability to strap your FX1 to an ATV to get a smooth pic has to do with major downfall of the HDV format. So what is wrong with the format again?

This may be out in left field a little bit Ken, but have you considered that it may not be mechanical vibration that's wreaking havoc with your camera. What if engine ignition electrical noise is getting radiated into the camera? This would explain how it is affecting all modes of operation. The PD-170 may somehow have more shielding in its design even if by accident.

Can you try mounting the camera on another vehicle? Since you feel the vibration is pretty well isolated in the design of your mount, it's time to think outside the box.

I should say that I didn't actually go watch the movies and I don't own the Sony cam to check it myself. I just have a technician background and I've seen some very weird stuff happen when rf energy gets where it isn't supposed to be. If you do have ignition noise, it will be all over the frequency spectrum.

Good luck,

-gb-

Actually Greg the electrical or electromagnetic interference you're suggesting sounds to me like a much more likely culprit than physical vibration.

And yes I am changing the title of this thread from the rather alarmist "Sony Admits Major Problem with HDV format" to something a little more focused, such as "ATV vibration causing HDV problem?"

For Ken, I realize and acknowledge that this is a major problem for *you,* but not necessarily for the HDV world at large because not everybody puts their camcorder on a four-wheeler. Thus the discussion subject title change.

Okay, maybe your right, it's not a major problem. But then again, what if you want to shoot a shot from a car and you want to simply put a mono pod to the floor board, oops, there goes that days production. What if you are placing a camera behind a driver in a race car, a common usage. You can forget it if the problem I am having is universal in the HDV format... Don't you think you'd appreciate a warning before you bought the camera for such a production.. I did, and so far I'm set back six months. I guess that isn't a major problem either.

Left field: Yes, I have considered the electrical aspect of the application. So I tried it sitting on the clothes dryer, other atv's and motor cycles. Now keep in mind, I'm stuck down her in lower Baja where I can't rent another unit and do a comparison test. So my perspective is that any moving object with an engine or other prominent vibration would render the camera useless.

Thanks for the ideas, I held the camera here is Mexico for two extra months to perform test on it and try to find out if it was worth sending back to the states for repair. This posting is after Sony gave up on it. The tech at Sony said it had a definite problem and replaced the whole lens assembly, then the stabilizer circuit board. My associate and he talked on the phone directly. They put a lot of effort into fixing this camera, in the end they refused to replace it saying the problem is the nature of the product. With no way to reach higher personnel at Sony to urge Sony to replace the unit, my only real option for a comparison test, I am obliged to post this message. "Buyer Beware"

"Recording in DV mode has the same artifacts."
It's not recording in MPEG 2 when you're in DV mode so it's not the HDV format that's causing issues.

If you're saying it looks smooth as you're shooting it, but looks like poo on recorded tape in HDV and DV mode, it's not the compression, it may be the tape mechanism on the camera that's not handling the vibration, so a tapless disc solution strapped to your body might do the trick. You'd have to secure the firewire cable and get one that was shielded well. But it doesn't sound like you have a B&H photo right down the street from you.

Tapeless recording, an excellent suggestion. Pretty soon the FireStore FS-4 will accomodate HDV direct to disk. Serious Magic offers HDV recording straight to a laptop right now. It's unfortunate that Ken may not have access to these options at this particular moment, but your suggestion may indeed be a viable solution.

It's hard to be sure, but it also seems to appear on the LCD. So that would eliminate the tape mechanism. I would be willing to try. Is there a drive that runs on batteries that has the bandwidth for HDV? I can go search on the net and find out myself. My associate has the camera in the states now so he can try the solution before I fly it back down. But I don't think that will fix it.

That was one reason I tried to have it repaired, the problem happens in DV mode too. I considered accepting the camera as is and looking to buy up to regular HD for my production. But I thought it could be fixed. Only to find out it can't be. Are you sure the camera doesn't first produce a compressed MP2 file and then convert it to DV? It has a real time converter on it for output.

By the way, any HD camera purchase suggestions under ten grand? Doesn't Panasonic have one coming out soon?

Is there a drive that runs on batteries that has the bandwidth for HDV?Not at this time. The best solution would be the (H)DV Rack software for a laptop PC from Serious Magic.

By the way, any HD camera purchase suggestions under ten grand? Doesn't Panasonic have one coming out soon?There are at least two. One is the JVC GY-HD100, a shoulder-mount camera, shipping now. See our forum for this camera at:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=98

The other is the Panasonic AG-HVX200. It ships in November and is closer in form factor to the Sony FX1. See our forum for this camera at:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=80

The JVC you listed is HDV.. At this time, I don't trust the format.. The panasonic looks interesting, its DVCPRO50... but we drift from the subject... Thanks for the info... Ken

Ken:

This probably won't help all that much with the camera issue, but...

I haven't upgraded to Tiger/QT7 yet, so I can't see your footage, but if you are experiencing any VISIBLE vibration issues, make sure to check through all the components of your Glidecam to ensure everything is tightened down (it's really easy to miss a pivot or adjustment bolt somewhere), and detuning your arm a bit so that you have to hold it up to level using your arms will also help smooth out vibration. And you may already know this, but it can help a lot with stabilizer vehicle mounts if you use a long drop time, i.e. more neutrally balanced top to bottom, to reduce the pendulum effect that can occur during acceleration/deceleration.

The panasonic looks interesting, its DVCPRO50...

Actually it is first and foremost DVCPRO HD.

It just happens to record DVCPRO 50 as well.

At any rate, you asked for your currently available HD options under $10K and there they are. Earlier I neglected to mention the Sony HDR-HC1 and HVR-A1U, which are smaller palmcorder-style HDV camcorders.

Are you sure the camera doesn't first produce a compressed MP2 file and then convert it to DV? It has a real time converter on it for output.

As far as I know it only does that when you set the camera to downconvert an HDV taped shot out the firewire, but if it's in DV record mode, it's not going through MPEG 2 before going to tape. It records DV straight to the tape.

If recording in DV mode you encounter the same artifacts then I would not call this a problem of the HDV format. One more thing. If you are putting the camera to a more demanding use, it would have made more sense you got a Z1 instead of a FX-1.

You are dealing with the consumer division of Sony which is known to neglect problems with their products specially when subjected to professional use or demanding situations.

If you had contacted the Sony Professional Division if you had bought the Z1, you would have gotten a different type of response or a more elaborate support (up to a point) from them.

For example if you had issues with the FX1 like white or dead pixels in the CCD let's say at 12db, Sony Consumer Division would tend to tell you that this is normal in a camera of this nature. While in the same situation, Sony Professional may even replace the CCD free of charge (depending on the situation) if you had bought a Z1u instead, even if it was out of warranty and assuming you had explained and documented your case. It has happened to me in more than one situation with Sony when I insisted on a problem. Remember also the audio issue of the VX200 and PD150? Sony Consumer Div. neglected the problem and said it was under specs while Sony Professional Div. recalled all of their PD150s and repaired them FREE OF CHARGE.

And who knows, maybe the Z1 has better shielding against electromagnetic or electric interference. And don't tell me I am wrong by telling you this because I have bought both "consumer" and "professional" products (the distinction Sony makes) and had always more luck with professional grade cameras maybe because of the better design and construction in addition to the features. This is, of course, not always the case, but you are less likely to have problems with products coming from the professional division. By the way, these two divisions are really separate divisions of Sony competing sometimes against each other like if they were separate companies.

You have bought a product designed for amateur or advanced amateur use. Expect the treatment of Sony Consumer Division as such. It maybe crazy but it is that way.

That's why in the realm of smaller cheaper cameras I decided a long time ago to purchase from the professional division of Sony regardless if the CCDs are the same. The additional expense is worth every penny.



Recording in DV mode has the same artifacts. That was one of the reasons we all thought it was the camera itself, rather than the format... but that was wrong... it must convert the HDV to DV. That would be my guess with the results I have had.

Recording in DV mode has the same artifacts. That was one of the reasons we all thought it was the camera itself, rather than the format... but that was wrong... it must convert the HDV to DV. That would be my guess with the results I have had.

Hey dude... Have you read the camera's manual? It says on page20 under the 'Recording' chapter heading...
"You can record movies in either the HDV or DV format."

Further to this, the DV format can be recorded using the LP mode, which indicates a non-HDV format is being written to tape.

This means: if you have selected DV as the recording mode via the camera's recording menu options, then it's DV that is recorded to tape. No recording of HDV can occur when the DV mode has been selected for recording via the camera's menu options.

So, if you set the camera up correctly for recording DV, and still saw the vibration errors in DV mode - it ain't HDV encoding that's a causin' it!!

I understand your reasoning on the Pro Division. But then again, Maybe I would be out more money. Also, I have lots of good mobile and studio recording gear for sound. The difference in the money wasn't worth two XLR plugs. I have no need to go to a 24 frame rate. I'm a private producer who does not go to film and frankly, I don't like the slower frame rate, especially with the camera in motion all the time. Besides, I bought the FX-1 before the Z1 was out. That's how long I've been dealing with this problem. I thought I would be well on my way with my project. I am not acting rashly or unreasonably about this problem. I gave Sony every chance to fix it before I cryed foul.

It still sounds to me that it is conjecture that the picture isn't first seen by the camera as MP2. Of course it records the DV to tape, but does it go through a real time conversion on the way? I argued your side of the problem in the beginning. But at this time, I'm not sure. Are you? I don't mean to be giving you a hard time. But to dismiss this problem as being unique to my unit may be cutting the solution short. Sony says it's the nature of the format. And it is not electrical interference. I'm sure my clothes dryer is clear of such interference.

So if someone at Sony cares about things like this, how do I get hold of them? Maybe they care about discussion groups questioning weather the unit is worth a purchase because to some of us it has an unacceptable major problem. I'd love to speak to someone who actually cares. I'd love to find out it is only my unit. Even if I sell this unit. At least I can get on with my work. It's beginning to look like a year's lost time to get my cross peninsula DVD out.

No problems driving and shooting with the FX1. CF24 may be a problem.

heath

Are you driving with the camera hand held, I'm sure there is no problem. Have you tried it with a mono pod touching the floorboards? It's vibration that sets it off. Not the motion.

And no it is not CF24. Read the rest of the postings before you take us back to a subject already covered please.

Ken,

I mentioned the CF24 because I get tons of emails asking about CF24, because we did a movie with CF24 (http://www.904am.com/3sisters.php). And it will be only a matter of time before someone asks the question here about driving in CF24 mode. I'm going to test CF24 while driving soon enough.

No issues really with either the FX1 or the DVX100A driving (in a VERY OLD car) while on a tripod, on the floor board. But, both cameras in the same very old automatic transmission car had issues while idling or at a stop (the vibrations are bad all around). No problems in a manual transmission car at a stop.

heath

Ken,
Do you have a laptop with a Firewire (IEEE-1394) port?
Why don't you - if you have such a laptop at your disposal - try using VLC in record mode with your FX-1? Using the camera in this way (if you set VLC up correctly, that is) negates recording to tape, so you could at least remove the tape mechanism from the equation.

I would also say, from my observations of the clips from my FX-1e, that the HDV MPEG2 m2t stream would probably become pretty horrible to watch if vibration got to the level of noticeable at the camera. Of course the fact that the image is also much more 'detail sensitive' because of the increased resolution, would also play a part in showing up vibration degredation. Indeed; even very small rapid vibration would cause the image to 'degrade' regardless of the in camera image-stabilisation mechanism's settings.

That is however; something that has nothing to do with HDV as a format.

Ken, your frustration comes through loud and clear. We hear ya. But here are my random observations on the issue. They probably aren't helpful to you, but should be food for thought as others consider a camera purchase.

1. Evidently you bought the FX1 shortly after it was released (you said the Z1 wasn't even on the market yet). This is always a risky proposition since there won't be a lot of feedback yet. Future buyers will now have the benefit of your experience if they plan to use an FX1 for a similar application. Of course they may not have the same problems, but at least there will be an awareness of a possible issue.

2. Don't repeat this and rush out to buy the new Panasonic or JVC camera since the situation is the same there. Especially in the case of the Panasonic, nobody has even gotten their hands on one yet, let alone put it to a torture test like yours. Now it's fine to be the first kid on the block with a new camera if you're willing to accept the inherent risk, but it doesn't sound like you are.

3. I try to read everything I can about the FX1 and Z1, and really dug around before buying my Z1. This is the first time I've read about a problem like yours. Can you point us to others who are experiencing the same problems?

4. The pre/post MPEG2 compression issue is something I've never been completely clear on, and your experience muddies the water even more. A number of people say with authority that the component video output and DV mode recording don't subject the image to MPEG2 compression, but I've never seen anyone explain how they've determined this.

5. You mention all the hardships and additional cost that this problem has created for you. I know that's frustrating, but I also have to think it's foolish to pin the success of your entire project on one $3,000 piece of gear. Chris pointed out much earlier that you could sell the camera and only take a small loss. Why didn't you do this long ago? You're just banging your head against the wall now and not getting your project done. Since you have obviously reached some firm conclusions in your own mind, just get over it, sell the FX-1, buy a good DV camera and make your movie! The little PDX-10 shoots excellent 16:9, much better than a PD-170. And it only costs $1,600 which probably makes a lot of sense for a camera that's getting lots of abuse and being put at risk. It also comes from Sony's pro division.

6. Augusto's point about buying from Sony's pro line is excellent and people really need to take this to heart. I've seen lots of stories about the level of service being better on these cameras. For example, people report that it takes weeks to fix a problem on the VX-2000 which could be resolved in days on the PD-150.

7. Related to number 5 above, I know that this issue is really eating you but the fact is that very few of us are using our FX1's and Z1's in such a way. We'd be reading about these problems everyday otherwise. Think about the time and energy you're putting into your "crusade" here. I'm glad that you've made us aware of your problem because it may help someone else. But consider what you could be doing if you devoted the same energy to something positive. Put this behind you and move forward with something fun and creative. Beyond that, DVinfo exists to inform and educate. It's good to make others aware of your pitfalls and disappointments, but we can't allow it to be your "sword of vengance" against a camera company, especially when there don't seem to be widespread reports of a problem like this.

I wish you the best of luck with your project, and hope you'll keep us informed as it progresses.

You should say Sony Consumer Division, not just Sony. You are dealing with the consumer division and they have more laxed ways to deal with problems. I have been there. I learned my lesson and I will never buy Sony consumer products again intended for professional use. I am 100% sure you would have gotten a different response from the professional division. Trust me.

It is not just the XLR audio or the extra features. I understand you bought it before they came out. And I bet the Z1 is more rugged than the FX1. I know quality control is more stringent with their professional products. What it could be a 'reject' for one component of the Z1, it may pass as Ok for the FX1.

Sony says it's the nature of the format. And it is not electrical interference. I'm sure my clothes dryer is clear of such interference.

So if someone at Sony cares about things like this, how do I get hold of them? Maybe they care about discussion groups questioning weather the unit is worth a purchase because to some of us it has an unacceptable major problem. I'd love to speak to someone who actually cares. I'd love to find out it is only my unit. Even if I sell this unit. At least I can get on with my work. It's beginning to look like a year's lost time to get my cross peninsula DVD out.

You say you had problems at an idle? Did you spend any time analyzing the problem? By my experience the FX-1 would fall apart with the idling vibration. That is exactly the nature of my problem. Even on the quad after the vibration reaches a higher pitch, the problem goes away, or at least the double edges get smaller. What puzzels me is that the DV formated camera showed a problem. That's why I am curious about a critical analyzes.

Here is a test anyone with the FX-1, or Z-1 can perform. If they have an older formated camera to do a back and forth comparison, it would be best. Put the camera on a mono pod, place it on a lightly vibrating cloths dryer. View the tape on a good monitor. Look at the edges of objects and look for double edges. Put a DV camera on the same mount. The difference is this. The DV camera looks like the camera is sitting on a cloths dryer and it's vibrating. Of course it does, I'm not a total idiot. Now look at the HDV, in each frame there are two edges on objects and a smear on solid color. That's a big difference. The viewer sees that the camera is mounted in a position with vibration and understands that, such as a pro auto race mount behind the driver. But the HDV picture is unusable.

I will second what Boyd said earlier--don't rush out before you (or someone else, like here) tests a camera. I bought the JVC HD10 nearly sight unseen. Ugh...

heath

Ken, I'm wondering what your final distribution method for your project is going to be... are you releasing on DVD? Going for broadcast on cable / satellite? If so, have you considered shooting in standard definition native 16:9? There are several DV camcorders that will do this, and it seems to be a much more robust format for what you're doing.

Ken,

The idle, much older car vibrated a lot, and both the FX1 and the DVX100a had issues. If you're going to shoot in an automatic transmission car at a stop, on ANY camera, put the car into neutral, problem solved. That's what we did.

heath

My final distribution as a product is SD, DVD, yes I understand. But I was hoping to be able to sell the HDV TV version of the program at some point in the future. It's time to archive in HD. Especially when dealing with such a scenic environment like the one I'm in. The DVD would be sent out as an example of the HDV version as well. The tapes could be made available as stock footage too. For the small expense that HDV has brought about, it seems a shame to shoot in SD.

The idle: I wish I could shut my ATV off and still shoot. That would save gas too. Not all of us have such an easy option.

So it seems I should shut up and eat my cake. In fact I am. My associate is going to test a few other cameras and buy the one that past the test on the spot. My production is held up now because of Hurricane season and the risky nature of making plans. I only posted this to inform other buyes, and I must admit, to let some steam out. The rest of this thread I have been answering others conceptions of the problem. So now I wont do that any more... If some one does the test I suggested, would they please email me at kene3@mac.com to let me know your results... I would love to use HDV, if it worked in my application. Thank you all for your input... Ken

If some one does the test you suggested, please post the results about it *here* for all to see... private email helps only one person; our message boards help that person plus everybody else. This is an online community, please keep the community spirit in mind when posting here.

Also Ken, nobody is suggesting that you should "eat cake," it's just that some folks are trying to offer some viable alternatives and solutions to you in an effort to assist you with overcoming this issue. The regulars here at DV Info Net have a real "let's solve the problem" approach to things and sometimes it requires some thinking about other options that you may not at first be willing to try. I think Boyd said it best by suggesting that you should consider getting out of that camera and perhaps even the format, get into another shooting package and put this experience behind you. That's why I recommended 16:9 standard def. Ultimately the point is that you are not "stuck with the camera" by any means -- sell it and get rid of it; you'll find that the FX1 still holds a fairly high value among potential buyers.

Meanwhile as far as letting off steam, I can appreciate that, but DV Info Net is not a "stop the presses" kind of site. We're a usability site; an improvise, adapt and overcome type of community. If you're not interested in that and are instead on a mission just to spread the word, then there are a variety of other message boards out there on the web that are much more reactionary than this one that seem to thrive on sensationalism... and those are excellent places to let off steam / make waves / get yer ya-yas out or whatever.

Okay, I'm getting mixed messages here. Maybe I am understanding Boyd wrong. But the impression I got from his post was to get off the discussion group with this subject. That the subject was well covered and I should stop posting. And I don't think I have been letting out steam to any great extent. I expressed my frustration, and I also addressed all the solutions people have come up with. None of them where new to me and I have already tried all of them, or at least the one's I could try, and I believe I responded to all them with a rational approach.

Below is what gave me the message to get off the board. Boyd seems to think I'm just venting. So if that's the impression, I quit. I don't want to come across that way.

"But consider what you could be doing if you devoted the same energy to something positive. Put this behind you and move forward with something fun and creative. Beyond that, DVinfo exists to inform and educate. It's good to make others aware of your pitfalls and disappointments, but we can't allow it to be your "sword of vengance" against a camera company, especially when there don't seem to be widespread reports of a problem like this."

It was in response to this aditude that made me say, send me the results. According to Boyd, the subject is over and done and I am just yeilding a "sword of vengeance." It may be over to him, But I still need to know a few things, like, what are the results of someone's test. I understand the purpose of the forum. That's why I was interested in the results. Even if Boyd is not. Who is the moderator here, I only want to get along.

This is turning into a battle, not a discussion.. So I bow out, thank you. And I will continue to follow the discussion, and of course I would prefer a test be posted for all to see. You've got me wrong.. Name one thing I said that is inflammatory or rude? Please talk to a few other folks.. Like, Hey Dude!

I already said I was getting out of the camera and the format.. My solution is clear.

Thank you all for you time... Ken

I'm sorry Ken, I think you're reading a little too much into what I said. I didn't say to "get off the discussion group" at all. I did point out, as Chris also has, that DVinfo shouldn't be used to prosecute a case in public. Your original title for the thread was "Sony Admits Major Problem with HDV format" which, as Chris noted comes off as being "alarmist". But I was merely pointing out that banging your head against the wall isn't getting your movie made, and a time comes to cut your losses and move ahead. But if you think there's a reason to keep pursuing this then by all means you should.

In fact, the issue does interest me and I just got back from making a few tests of my own. I went out in the pine barrens and drove down a very bumpy "washboard" type sand road with my Z1 on a tripod sticking out my sun roof. I recorded 1080i, manual control, steadyshot off, 1/60 shutter ND2, F4.4, manual focus at infinity. The Z1 was set to downconvert firewire to 480i, I captured in FCP 4.5 and exported these BMP's.

hitting a bump:
http://www.greenmist.com/hdv/hdvbumps01.bmp

a smoother section of road:
http://www.greenmist.com/hdv/hdvbumps02.bmp

Then I lowered the camera inside the car and set it for DV SP mode. I turned the steadyshot on for these tests, and if anything that seems to make the problem worse.

a big bump:
http://www.greenmist.com/hdv/dvbumps01.bmp

a smoother stretch of road:
http://www.greenmist.com/hdv/dvbumps02.bmp

For reference, here's something similar done with my VX-2000 from an old box of tapes I found from 2002. The VX-2000 was shooting in 16:9 mode, manual controls. Not sure of the other specifics but steadyshot was probably on. I was driving slower and trying to get a smooth shot however:

hitting a bump:
http://www.greenmist.com/hdv/vxbumps01.bmp

a smoother ride:
http://www.greenmist.com/hdv/vxbumps02.bmp

Finally, I did something similar with PDX-10 in 2003. Again, I was trying to get a smooth shot and driving slower however. These are also 16:9, steadyshot is probably on and manual controls.

a bump:
http://www.greenmist.com/hdv/pdxbumps01.bmp

smoother:
http://www.greenmist.com/hdv/pdxbump02.bmp

Sorry, I don't have any good way to capture the full res HDV since I'm still on FCP 4.5. I did watch the HDV on my 1280x720 Samsung 22" LCD via component video at 1080i. It looked about the way I would expect from unstabilized bumpy interlaced footage, and the stills seem like that too.

I never shot a lot of stuff this way because I don't like bumpy footage of driving around, so the whole thing isn't a big issue for me. But I was curious as to what might be going on with the Z1.

Is this similar to what you see?

At last, a real comparison test. And yes, this is exactly what I'm seeing. Your pictures from the Z1 are as bad as the ones on the FX-1.. Exactly... The person who I mistook as being feed up with me has shown the problem exist on the HDV format in general, at least that's the way I interpret the picts. This format can not be used in many applications. Such as pro racing mounted behind the driver. Or mounted to a helicopter for news gathering. Or maybe not even on a boat on a tripod if the engine is vibrating the boat at all. It's clear that all the old formats are perfectly clear and usable, maybe not like a still shot, but definitely usable, weather you like moving footage or not, a lot of us do it. Now is it being an alarmist to say Sony has not put this limitation up front for us to see. In my mind this confirms my whole experience as a problem with the format and the title "Sony admits to major problem with HDV format." may not be from an alarmist. From your result I believe you see the same doubling of edges when you use the DV format, that again points to the idea that the camera produces an HDV image before converting it to DV and recording it to tape. The pict from inside your car is best... you can see the doubling of edges in the mirror edge, the road edge and the dash line. Such artifacts have never been a problem on any other format. I am of the opinion that this needs to go out to the pro community in CAPITAL letters. This confirms my need to drop the HDV format altogether and look at other technology. The new Panasonic may be an answer for under ten grand. I'll have to wait until I can get my hands on one and test it before I buy it. I'll have to wait until Nov., or later to get back on track with my production. Thank you Boyd... you have crystalized my opinions. Ken

Just my 2 cents:

Having had a GL2, HC1 and now an FX1 I can tell you the FX1 is not as forgiving as other HDV & DV camcorders.

I was shooting an RC Flying event over the weekend and I had to set the Steady Shot to HARD, and even then is was very problematic to keep it steady, I ended up on the tripod.

I guess it takes a little bit of practice and getting confortable with the cam.

This format can not be used in many applications. Such as pro racing mounted behind the driver.

Ummm....Tell that to the Cline bro's and NASCAR, who are using the Z1 for in-car shots. Same with David Hague and the Australian Holden Racing club. I'm here in Australia, and have just seen some very clean footage from the Monaro club, driving on a track at extremely high speeds. Looks fine to me. (and to the ABC, who have broadcast it)

That may be true, I can't say, but then how do you explain the problem demonstrated with both my postings, and Boyds? What have they done to mount their camera's..? Maybe the pitch of the engine doesn't have that low rate vibration that seems to set the problem off. This problem is not in our imaginations, it's real.

Ken, I did those tests so we'd have something concrete to discuss and also because I have a Z1 and am curious as to its limitations. I'm curious to see how others react to these as well. I'm not sure that I share your conclusions however. To make a better comparison I'd need to use the VX-2000 on that same very bumpy road at the same speed. As I suggested, the images from that camera are a few years old and I was trying to minimize camera shake whereas I tried to maximize it with the Z1.

However, the doubled image of the mirror that you point to doesn't strike me as having anything to do with HDV or MPEG. It looks just like what I'd expect from a big jolt to an interlaced scan camera. In other words, that's how much everything moved during the 1/60 second between the capture of the odd and even field.

Have you ever seen the examples at this site? http://www.100fps.com/

They are all SD images and I see the same kind of things there caused by vertical movement, like this one: http://www.100fps.com/bigger.jpg

Douglas Spotted Eagle replied to your post, but somehow it ended up in the wrong thread when Chris was splitting things, did you catch this?

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?p=349978&postcount=4

I'll be curious to hear how others react to these examples. Personally, I'm not seeing anything which would rise to a "major problem with HDV format". Instead, it seems more of a "major problem with interlaced video." With the VX-2000 example, the 16:9 is created from only 360 scan lines which means you have something very soft to begin with, and my sense is that this minimizes the problem because you don't see so many discrete interlace artifacts.

Getting back to something Chris mentioned, I wonder if you wouldn't be a lot happier with an XL-2 or a DVX-100a. Aside from the 16:9 issue, they both shoot true progressive scan so you wouldn't see this sort of image doubling. However, I suspect that what you would see is just a big blur which encompases the full space between each of the "ghost" images in my example, since all 480 lines are captured at the same time.

Regardless, I'm glad that I've helped form your opinion even if we don't agree on the interpretation. Sharing information is really what we're about here at DVinfo. And no, I don't have anything against you but I think we just have a little different view of the world :-)

That may be true, I can't say, but then how do you explain the problem demonstrated with both my postings, and Boyds? What have they done to mount their camera's..? Maybe the pitch of the engine doesn't have that low rate vibration that seems to set the problem off. This problem is not in our imaginations, it's real.

Ken, I'm not in the least suggesting it's in your imagination. I would suggest that you're overreacting to what could be any number of problems. Frame rate set really high? That wouldn't help things much. Mounting got any absorption? that would be a problem. Steady shot on/off? Set to what setting?

To take the question the other way, how do you explain NASCAR and others using the format successfully?

Vibration on any compressed format is going to have some negative impact, but it's no where near as egregious as you're suggesting, IMO.

This is all quite odd. If it was just an interlace issue, wouldn't it have been as prevalent in the PD150 or VX2000 or whatever Ken used prior to the Z1?

Even so, with the degrees of steadyshot available on the Z1, it would certainly seem possible to isolate and eliminate vibration-induced footage problems.

From the title of this thread ("Sony admits fault with HDV format" or whatever) I expected it to be an announcement about the format itself, such as this one:
http://www.sonydigital-link.com/dime/hotnews/cam/cam_hdv_tape.asp?l=en

That's a blanket admission that 1/2-second dropouts are happening in, and peculiar to to the Sony HDV format and are sometimes unrecoverable.

Ken, have you considered using something like the CineSaddle? I would be surprised if it didn't absorb the vibration and deliver glass-smooth footage.

I don't fully understand Ken's situation, and since I'm not ready to upgrade to QT7 yet I can't watch his video.

However in the test I did, the issue wasn't "vibration." It was big bumps that caused the camera to shake up and down. I was trying to create a worst case scenario. Frankly I was surprised because even in that worst case I just saw pretty normal looking interlace, and not big blocky MPEG artifacts like others have complained about. I think the vibration is being well handled, as shown in this image where I was also driving down the same sand road at the same speed between bumps:

http://www.greenmist.com/hdv/dvbumps02.bmp

If I get time tomorrow I'll take the VX-2000 down that same road and shoot a few seconds for reference. But watching the video from the Z1 at 1280x720 on my 22" LCD, it really looked about the way I would expect from a bumpy road with no stabilizer....