I don't suppose this is an HDMI 1.3 spec camcorder is it? I know that there's really no reason to complain if it's not HDMI 1.3 and that there's a lot of hype around it, etc. etc.

I just want to know so that when I pick up a 25ft HDMI cable for it I know whether or not the cables from Monoprice.com will work. Because I heard you need a Category 2 certified HDMI cable for HDMI 1.3 and all of the cables on Monoprice are said to be certified in Category 1.

Also, does anyone think that 25ft or 50ft would pose problems? I'm going to shoot most of my films in my apartment and I'd love to monitor how most of my shots are going to look on my TV.

I can't imagine what the HDMI 1.3 spec would do for a camcorder. I think most of 1.3 is hype anyway.

Because of the uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2, etc, output that you can get through HDMI of the V1u, I’m certain that it is version 1.3 and besides, the PS3 is already 1.3.

Here is a link that talks about the benefits of 1.3 over the rest as well as what you need for a lengthy HDMI cable.
http://www.hdmi.org/consumer/faq.asp



HDMI 1.3 is not hype at all.
Going from HDMI 1.2a to HDMI 1.3 is like going from USB 1.0 to 2.0.

Because of the uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2, etc, output that you can get through HDMI of the V1u, I’m certain that it is version 1.3 and besides, the PS3 is already 1.3.

Here is a link that talks about the benefits of 1.3 over the rest as well as what you need for a lengthy HDMI cable.
http://www.hdmi.org/consumer/faq.asp



HDMI 1.3 is not hype at all.
Going from HDMI 1.2a to HDMI 1.3 is like going from USB 1.0 to 2.0.

Much of 1.3 is hype. They speak of severe banding with 1.2 and below in digital displays and they imply that 1.3 cures that. That is pure nonsense and hype. I've got several digital displays and they very very rarely show any type of banding. In fact, many instances of banding can be traced to the source and not the display. They show pictures of 'before/after' with 1.3 and without 1.3. The pictures are absurdly exaggerated. This has been discussed quite frequently on some other websites.

They also speak of how 1.3 provides certain audio benefits (which it does to some extent), but most of these benefits can be had without the need for 1.3.

I'm not saying there is no benefit to 1.3, but I am saying that much of what they say is indeed hype and geared to make the consumer think they absolutely must replace all 1.2 and below equipment with 1.3. "Deep color" can only be attained when the display AND source are geared for that. As of now there is nothing that can take advantage of that. They mention the billions (or trillions) of colors that can be had with 1.3, the fact is that displays today are quite capable of showing virtually all the colors that are available. Most inaccuracies in a display's colors are not due to the lack of HDMI 1.3, but rather to poor or compromised (due to cost) design.

Sorry, I know this can turn into a big thing about whether or not HDMI is a big deal... but I was posting more in the hopes of getting some direction when it comes to cables. Has anyone heard of these Category 2 compliant cables versus the Category 1 compliant cables?

Craig Irving,
It’s always best to get the latest HDMI plugs. I heard that some people who have the cheaper 1.0 or 1.1 compliant HDMI plugs will sometimes get audio problems and although plugs that are 1.2a compliant works with future 1.3 compliant devices, you will not get the full benefits of 1.3 compliant devices so you should get 1.3 compliant plugs.

Ken Ross,
As you know, 1.3 complaint TVs aren’t out yet and we will surely see them at CES, so how are people able to conclude that 1.3 compliant TVs aren’t that much better than 1.2 or 1.2a complaint TVs as far as picture is concerned?

Anyway, here is an article I posted last month.
http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=82182

Um, again... my question was more to do with the cable purchase itself (Category 1 versus Category 2). I just don't want to have to replace the HDMI cables I'm going to buy since I'm buying them in 35-50 foot lengths.

Scroll to the bottom of this article if you haven't heard the new certified testing for the HDMI cables themselves. Not knowing what version of HDMI is in this new V1U (though it's doubtful it actually is 1.3 I think) I still can't make a decision whether to invest in a Category 2 cable, or just get a regular Category 1 cable.

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/articles/2006/08/hdmi_part_8_-_cables_for_13-save.php

MODERATOR NOTE: This thread was hijacked with a winding discussion on opinions about various HDTV technologies. The bulk of that OT discussion was moved to a new thread here:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=83329

Please reply in this thread if you can help answer the original question. Other topics should go either in the thread linked above, or in their own thread.

On the HDMI.org site, it mentions this:


__________
Q. Does HDMI accommodate long cable lengths?
Yes. HDMI technology has been designed to use standard copper cable construction at long lengths. In order to allow cable manufacturers to improve their products through the use of new technologies, HDMI specifies the required performance of a cable but does not specify a maximum cable length. Cable manufacturers are expected to sell reasonably priced copper cables at lengths of up to 15 meters. As semiconductor technology improves, even longer stretches can be reached with fiber optic cables, and with active cable technologies such as amplifiers or repeaters.

Q. I need to connect two devices with 20 feet of cable, but the cable I bought doesn’t seem to work at that length.
One solution is to buy a higher-quality cable. Another is to use an HDMI repeater.
__________




For the length you’re trying to use, you may get problems so to be on the safe side I’d get a category 2.


As for rather the V1u is HDMI 1.3 compliant, you can read this thread, although it was never really answered.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=82246

I really do think the V1u does have 1.3 because soon you will see camcorders with Mini HDMI outputs and mini HDMI is something that was added to the 1.3 specification. I still wish there were someone that can come here and give a straight answer.

Thank you for your input. I may in fact have to get one of MonoPrice's extenders. I have a concern now for the HDMI connector though. I've heard stories that if you're going with a long 24AWG or 22AWG cable that it's going to give quite a pull on the actual port.

For those people using HDMI while shooting (whether it be for live-capturing or monitoring on a TV) do you have the same concerns?

I'm thinking of picking up one of those "Port Savers" from MonoPrice, but it only gives another 8 inches. I can see that working for a TV where the cable could then rest on a stand or something, but not when your camera is set up on a tripod off the ground. Should I be concerned for the port on the camcorder?

I'm starting to wonder if maybe I should just be attaching couplers and running component cables now instead.

Since Sony just released specs on all the upcoming consumer HD cameras using marketing speak like "x.v.Color™ technology" I'm starting to think that *those* ones have HDMI 1.3 because that's the "Deep Colour" feature that was added to HDMI 1.3. I'm thinking they probably would've slapped that label on the V1U when they were promoting it. Maybe they're reserving it for the replacement for the HVR-Z1U.

A dude in a TV shop told me that the only cable capable of transmitting a 1080p signal was HDMI 1.3. So given that the V1 is a 1080p capable camera... doesn't that suggest that it should be?

what is the advantage in using this to say usb 2 is it spedd or what?

A dude in a TV shop told me that the only cable capable of transmitting a 1080p signal was HDMI 1.3. So given that the V1 is a 1080p capable camera... doesn't that suggest that it should be?


This is a false statement, made by the "dude at the TV shop".


Not to mention the fact that the camcorder is outputting 1080i through the HDMI, not 1080p. The 24/30p is only achieved through 2:3 Pulldown when using computers and NLEs. At least that is my understanding so far.

Saw this article and thought of you guys.

http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/01/08/philips-intros-wireless-hdmi/

Wireless HDMI hmmm that would be useful on a camera! For that 4:2:2 uncompressed untethered feeling...

TT

For those who, like me, missed the Basic HDMI 101 class and want a quick primer on it, Tomshardware just put up a brief overview article of HDMI. Just took a couple minutes to read. It gave the impression that all versions of HDMI could use the same cabling?

What I don’t like is that some companies are calling their cables 1.3 complaint when their all supposed to be made the same way so it could be that some of the original cables weren’t made properly. At least the companies that are making the cables now are paying more attention which is why a lot of them are being called category 2 cables. 1.3 complaint cables and category 2 cables are the same if anybody’s wondering.

Basically category 2 cables are tested much better than category 1 cables.
Category 2 cables also handle the higher bandwidth if you have 1.3 complaint devices.


http://ezinearticles.com/?HDMI-vs-DVI&id=394968
"A Warning about Cable length The HDMI specification does not define a maximum cable length. HDMI 1.3 defined two categories of cables: Category 1 (standard or HDTV) and Category 2 (high-speed or greater than HDTV) regardless, neither HDMI or DVI work well over distances greater then 15 feet. If you need a cable longer then 10 feet you will definitely want to consider top quality cables. For anything greater then 15 feet, some companies offer amplifiers, equalizers and repeaters that can help bridge longer distances."