DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Area 51 (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/area-51/)
-   -   canon xl HD DV? (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/area-51/39760-canon-xl-hd-dv.html)

Simon Sekulovich February 18th, 2005 08:58 PM

canon xl HD DV?
 
Has anyone heard any rumblings about the possibility of Canon evolving its XL2 to some form of HD DV camera? The adjustable frame rates and personal settings options along with the changeable lenses platform would be interesting in an HD native 16:9 1080i or 720p camera. If so, any details... timelines, etc.?
Thanks.

Douglas Spotted Eagle February 18th, 2005 09:02 PM

Were there anyone "in the know" on this, they couldn't comment one way or another....Canon is a member of the HDV consortium, but that doesn't mean that they're rushing to put out a cam or anything.
HDV in a Canon XL format would indeed be nice, but realize that HD requires a whole different lens setup in addition to the CCD's.
It won't be a surprise if or when Canon comes out with a cam, but I don't believe there are any rumors, stories, or concrete bits of information about Canon and HDV right now.

Heath McKnight February 18th, 2005 09:29 PM

Canon doesn't show vaporware, like last year's NAB showing of the FX1 vaporware. So we'll see a Canon HDV camera when it comes out.

heath

Simon Sekulovich February 18th, 2005 09:47 PM

Thanks guys. I guess keeping us guessing is the sad truth for now.
Any tips on getting SD to approach the HD look, ie. lighting, framerates, gamas, etc?

Heath McKnight February 18th, 2005 09:52 PM

HD look? Well, I guess you could capture your footage in uncompressed 10 bit and do an uprez from 480i to 1080i and go from there. I've seen good and bad come from that. Make sure lighting, etc., is good.

I'll see if Jon Fordham can advise on this. He's had stuff on the DVX100A and DVCam go to HD. But it's a hardware thing to uprez it, and that can cost thousands of dollars.

heath

Douglas Spotted Eagle February 18th, 2005 10:17 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Heath McKnight : Canon doesn't show vaporware, like last year's NAB showing of the FX1 vaporware. So we'll see a Canon HDV camera when it comes out.

heath -->>>

You lost me with this one....At NAB, Sony didn't show an FX1...they showed a body prototype of the Z1. FX'1's showing came later, and when Sony did finally announce the professional cam in June, it came out on target, shown in November for first time, and actually released a month early.

There was some confusion on where the cam (s) were going to live in the Sony lineup, and that may be why you're thinking the FX1 was what was in the glass at NAB?

Kevin Dooley February 19th, 2005 07:18 AM

I think the point is that while everyone else (JVC, Sony, and Panny) like to show off prototypes, and then have the cameras come out 6 months to a year or more latter, Canon likes to show a camera right as it's ready to ship.... No mockups from good ole Canon...

Bill Pryor February 19th, 2005 05:30 PM

We had a half hour short on Stan Brakhage shot with a DSR500 uprezzed to HD. Special Tribeca festival price was 80 bucks. I didn't see it but my partner did and he said it looked great.

Barry Green February 19th, 2005 07:50 PM

The question asked is: will canon evolve the XL into being an HDV camera?

It seems like the obvious answer is "yes", especially as Canon has publicly said that the XL2 would be their last standard-def camera in that line.

However, the next question is much more telling: WHEN? And here's where you may not like the answer... I'd bet it'd be years before there was an XL3 HDV model. Canon kept the XL1 on the market for three years, and the XL1s for three more years. The XL2's been on the market around half of one year. It will probably be a long, long time before there's a high-def XL2.

I do, however, expect to see a high-def GL-form camera soon. They've had a rebate on the GL2 for a long, long, long time... I fully expect that they'll hit us with an HDV GL3 type of camera, sooner rather than later.

It's all speculation, but given Canon's history, it seems reasonable...

Chris Hurd February 19th, 2005 08:54 PM

That's exactly the reply I would have made, Barry -- thanks for saving me the typing!

;-)

Heath McKnight February 19th, 2005 10:08 PM

Spot,

I meant Z1! <g> sorry for the confusion!

I second what Barry wrote!

hwm

Kevin Dooley February 19th, 2005 11:21 PM

Might as well chime in too-- I agree with Barry wholeheartedly. Canon is obviously working on HDV cameras, as they are part of the consortium and have made the statement about the XL2 being the last SD XL cam... But only an idiot, would come out with something like the XL2 and then 6 months later announce it's replacement... and if there's one thing I've learned in my time as an XL1(s) owner, it's that Canon's higher ups are definately not mentally incapaciated... It'll be interesting to see if there's an HDV GL3 anytime this year...

Pete Bauer February 19th, 2005 11:48 PM

I guess we're drifting off into Area 51 territory here, but I can't help myself...

I'm wondering if Canon will use the current HDV spec with the truly consumer cameras like ZR, Optura, Elura -- maybe including a "GL3", maybe not? Or perhaps use DV on those below the GL and make the GL an HDV cam to fill that square for the HDV consortium it signed up to. And either way, I wonder if they'll then go with a higher data rate (like the recently announced Panasonic we'll see sometime after April) for the "XL3".

Although I guess the XL is marketed out of the consumer division, everyone knows that it ain't Joe-Point-n-Shoot out there buying all those XL cameras; if there are 100mb/sec cameras out there in a similar price point (Panasonic!), Canon's going to have to respond in kind, I would assume. Wouldn't it be sweet to have an XL shooting 720p60 and 1080i at 100mb/sec?

Sadly, only time will tell. Any other W.A.G.s?

Douglas Spotted Eagle February 19th, 2005 11:55 PM

<<<if there are 100mb/sec cameras out there in a similar price point (Panasonic!), Canon's going to have to respond in kind, I would assume. Wouldn't it be sweet to have an XL shooting 720p60 and 1080i at 100mb/sec?

Sadly, only time will tell. Any other W.A.G.s? -->>>


This could only happen if Canon departed from the HDV group, or had a camera that could do all three modes; DV/HDV/DVCPro-HD. The consortium agreements are fairly well spelled out, I doubt they could technologically and/or have the marketability do all three. Especially if they're hitting a price point of the GL or XL, which are both in the realm of the Sony HDV cams but lower than the purported cost of the new Panny cam. Would surely be sweet, but then again, so would world peace and an end to starvation, trips to Venus on weekends, and clean streets in Tijuana. :-)
Then again, Area 51 is very close to Las Vegas, and NAB is in Vegas, so who knows??

Chris Hurd February 20th, 2005 12:33 AM

Hah! Great post, Spot.

I think the most grounded question to ask regarding Canon HDV is whether they'll do 720p or 1080i.

Bill Pryor February 20th, 2005 09:17 AM

I think that, indeed, is the question. A writer in last week's TV Technology (I think that's the one, but I'll check later) said Canon was going to have an HDV camera. Didn't say when.

Rob Lohman February 20th, 2005 09:42 AM

Moved to our own Area 51...

Ignacio Rodriguez February 21st, 2005 09:52 AM

> camera that could do all three modes; DV/HDV/DVCPro-HD

Well since we are in area 51... why not? If it has the encoder and resolution for HDV and also has the encoder for DV all it needs to do is pass the high res image to the DV encoder instead of the MPEG2 encoder. At the right resolution this would result in a 100 Mbps stream. The extra cost would be adding the storage for 100 Mbps, that would have to be solid state or disk.

Bill Pryor February 21st, 2005 10:06 AM

I'm gonna vote for Canon to do simply the 720p. And, wouldn't it be nice if they got rid of the white.

Heath McKnight February 21st, 2005 10:38 AM

JVC is leaning towards a 720/24p camera, I hear, that's under $5000.

hwm

Ignacio Rodriguez February 21st, 2005 10:53 AM

720p or 1080i can both be implemented as HDV or DVCPROHD. However excluding MPEG2 encoding could allow for a less expensive camera. Excluding a tape drive would make it less expensive still!

Kevin Dooley February 21st, 2005 05:50 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Bill Pryor : And, wouldn't it be nice if they got rid of the white. -->>>

I know, I know--this is merely a personal preference issue... but I love the white. It's kind of nice having a camera and line that instantly recognizable and very well thought of... I guess I'd feel different if the XL series were crap...

Ignacio Rodriguez February 21st, 2005 08:44 PM

If making it black brings down the price, I'm all for it.

Greg Boston February 21st, 2005 10:22 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Dooley :
I know, I know--this is merely a personal preference issue... but I love the white. It's kind of nice having a camera and line that instantly recognizable and very well thought of... -->>>

Funny you should mention that Kevin. I was watching CSI:Miami this evening and they had a female murder victim who was a freelancer that supplied packages to the local affiliate. When they did the flash-back scene of how she got murdered, she was shooting footage wielding non other than our beloved Canon XL. I didn't really appreciate the comment made by Horacios's boss that she was a 'bottom feeder' because she was a freelancer.

-gb-

Kevin Dooley February 22nd, 2005 07:08 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Greg Boston : I didn't really appreciate the comment made by Horacios's boss that she was a 'bottom feeder' because she was a freelancer.

-gb- -->>>

Yeah, as an on again, off again free lancer myself, that's a little not right... free lance simply means that you don't work with a set company... how would that make you a bottom feeder?

Crappy Hollywood. I hate them, and yet, I love them... oh the travesties of life....

And now, we're way off topic...

Bill Pryor February 22nd, 2005 11:20 AM

I think of myself more like a hooker than a bottom-feeder. We sell ourselves to businessmen for the time it takes to get the deed done, we remain aloof and independent, and we move on to new streetcorners when they cut their budgets, always looking for new prospects.

Phil Johnston February 27th, 2005 06:41 PM

Canon XL-3 HD
 
Canon are having a hard time in the UK as the Sony Z1 has taken centre stage and has brought sales of the XL2 to a stand still.
They are rumoured to be offering the 3x WA lens as part of a sweetner in future sales...this in my opinion would be seen badly by those of us who have forked out £950 for the lens only 4 weeks ago ! I must admit that the Sony Z1 which I also own is a superb camera and well recomended. We are producing our first project in 16:9 DVCAM mode and the pics are stunning...thats before we even use HD mode which is for future projects and the advent of Apple Tiger and FC Pro-5 HD.

Jon Fordham March 4th, 2005 06:10 PM

Simon,

I've been busy shooting a project the last few weeks and haven't had the time to address your question regarding "the HD look" that Heath brought to my attention.

In all honesty, the "HD Look" is just as subjective a thing as the "Film Look". But in my opinion, the HD look has three properties that I can usually spot. I call these three properties: sheen, tone, and pop. Forgive me if the following descriptions fall short in regards to conveying what I mean by those terms. I'm a cinematographer, not a writer...

Sheen. When footage from a high resolution source (HDCAM) is downconverted to a lower resolution format (DVCAM or DVD) , it usually has a certain look to it that I call a "sheen". Think of the sheen of a rose petal. That light, almost imperceptible layer of... I don't know, sheen. It's kind of a very light pro-mist look.

Tone. Images that are captured with a high resolution camera system such a HDC27F Varicam or a Sony F900 Cine-Alta, retain the many fine details and subtleties that are often lacking in images captured with lower resoltion camera systems. The capture and retention of these subtle details create a certain "tone" in terms of contrast. An even transition between highlight and shadow.

Pop. This is one that is much easier to describe and something I've reffered to on these boards before. I'm talking about that unmistakable high res pop that you get from the incredible sharpness and detail from High Definition cameras.

So for me, the task of creating the look of HD would involve instilling the above characteristics to whatever camera/format I was working with. There's no denying that a great many cinematographer uses the ubiquitous Tiffen Pro-Mist filter to diffuse and create a glow. And plenty of those guys are still using them with HD cameras. So one way to create a type of sheen would be to use a very light pro-mist filer. I'm talking no more than a 1/4.

Since the tone I'm describing involves not only detail, but contrast, I would then employ a contrast filter. Which one, and what grade would depend on my suject and particular shooting conditions. A contrast filter would bring your contrast down to a more even place that will, at very least, give you that tone. And maybe even bring a little more fine detail out that could be lost in the harder contrast.

Unfortunately, that high res pop is the most difficult characteristic to emulate. The only advice I can offer that would be a step in a similiar direction is employing shallow depth of field. By limiting your depth of field you can more easily isolate your subject in the frame. This of course does all the standard things it's supposed to do like drawing the viewers eye to where you want it, and lending a more polished, professional "film look". And that more isolated, sharply focussed subject will take you a step closer to the illusion of "pop"!

It's worth noting that Bill Pryor's comments regarding the DSR-500WS are dead on. Of the very many camera systems and formats that I've worked with over the last few years, the Sony DSR-500WS is without a doubt one of the best performing cameras I've worked with. And, when uprezzed to HD, those 2/3" widescreen CCD's go a long way in giving you excellent uncompromised source material.

If anyone in the southern California area is interested in viewing some DSR-500WS material that has gone through an HD uprez, I suggest you visit the Damah Film Festival next Friday March 11. The Damah Film Festival is screening the award winning short film Blackwater Elegy that I shot for 95 These Entertainment and NFocus Visual Comminuacations. Directed by Joe O'Brien and Matthew Porter, Blackwater Elegy stars Barry Corbin (One Tree Hill, Northern Exposure) and John Cullum (Law & Order: SVU, ER).

I shot this film with a Sony DSR-500WSPL/1 PAL DVCAM camera. I replaced the typical Canon industrial lens with a Fujinon HD-EC T2.1 zoom lens. Since the DSR-500WSPL/1 is a 50i PAL camera, we had the advantage of a bit higher vertical resolution than NTSC and a 25fps frame rate. BUT those 25fps were still interlaced with the tell tale "video look". After being cut in SD uncompressed, the 50i PAL master was uprezzed using a Teranex converter. The Teranex system interpolated the 50 interlaced fields into 25 whole frames and uprezzed them to 1080P. Then the 1080/25P was played back with a 4% slow down to 24fps for a final 1080/23.98Psf HDCAM master. I do not know whether or not the Damah Film Festival will be screening the HDCAM master or a downconverted version the HDCAM master. Either way, it's worth viewing for anyone interested in seeing DVCAM upconverted to HDCAM and/or donwconverted HDCAM back to SD. The downconverted NTSC master of the film runs at 24fps with the standard 2:3 pulldown like any other 24 frame material retainning the 24fps motion signature.

Blackwater Elegy has won 6 Best Short Film Awards. John Cullum won the Best Supporting Actor Award at the 2004 Tambay Film Festival for his portrayal of J.T. And I won the Best Cinematography Award at the 2004 Thunderbird International Film Festival for my work on the film.

Blackwater Elegy is screening as part of Nominated Films in the 30 minute category next Friday evening March 11 at the Laemmle Music Hall Theater in Beverly Hills.

Steven White March 14th, 2005 09:51 PM

If I were a Canon engineer and faced with the prospect of making an HDV camera to compete with an interchangable JVC with a special brand of 24p, a Panasonic, and the Sony FX1/Z1U with 1080i and the CF modes I would try to build on the 1080i standard, and implement true 30p, and true 1440x1080 24p with a pull-down scheme, or a new encoding scheme like it seems JVC is proposing.

If you had a choice in a true 24p format war between:
1280x720 HDV @ 19 Mbps (or 25 Mpbs?) (JVC)
960x720 DVCPRO-HD @ 40 Mbps (Panasonic)
1440x1080p HDV @ 25 Mbps (Canon)

Which would you pick?

Heath McKnight March 14th, 2005 09:53 PM

I'd rent whichever was good enough for me and the DP.

heath

Patrick King March 14th, 2005 10:02 PM

Hey, whatever happened with that Software Development Kit for the XL2. Maybe the SDK will let XL2 owners upgrade the software in their camcorders to be an HD format. Only $500...what a bargain! ;)

Heath McKnight March 14th, 2005 10:08 PM

It's more than just software, it's all about hardware. I don't think we'll see a Canon HDV camera until Canon is ready to ship it. Maybe NAB 2005, maybe not...

heath

Gary McClurg March 14th, 2005 10:48 PM

I thought I read somewhere that the SDK was no longer in effect or something along that line.

Dana Rasmussen September 15th, 2005 05:58 PM

You have seen this: http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/con...&modelid=12152


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:50 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network