my best guess is that it takes a single 30pprogressive frame and splits it into 2 60i fields. u will need to a deinterlace to restore back to original progressive frame

I think it iust the same as we shoot HV20 in HDV mode(60i) using 1/30 shutter because HV10/20/30 has a progressive CMOS, am I right???

HC1, 3, 5, 7, etc, etc... CX7... and of course the HV20 and presumably the new ones!

Bingo. Standard operating procedure which hasn't changed from the SD days of digital video. The two fields per frame are created at the same time and therefore do *not* have a 1/60th second time separation between them that normal interlace video has.

So, it would be much easy to convert to 30P than 24P in HV20. Good news!
Thanks you.

Is this what we should be doing in PAL land for 25p shot footage on the HV20?

Gosh i wish there were a few more additions to the HV30. Does anyone think they will give us proper metadata (or stream info) to show 24/25/30p flags etc? Woudlnt be to bad if this little gem of an update made it in. Though still not worth upgrading for 99.5% of HV20 owners.

No change here, sorry (by the way pulldown flags are not needed for 25P or 30P).

Yeah,
but I just purchased my HV20.
So I returned it to B&H and will wait for the HV30
for me the better LCD (as I am using this with a 35mm adapter) is great.
30p is nice too.
enough of a reason to wait for a month

Improvement...
 

Who are these yo-yos who say "30p is of little use to pros"? MANY "Pros" think 30p actually looks better than 24p. And no problem with judder. I might pick up one of these just for the 30p. Some of you have obviously been blinded by the "24p" hype. That's all it is folks... hype. Shallow DOF has MUCH more to do with your heralded "film look" than frame rate.

When one of you gets the HV30... do a little test between 24p and 30p for the shutterbugs here.. then be honest with yourself regarding which one actually looks better.

24p Question
 

Will the final product of shooting at 30p, importing to NLE and then exporting as a 24p file give the same film effect as the final product of shooting at 24p, removing pull-down, importing to NLE and then exporting as 24p? The reason I am asking is the removal of pulldown procedure is time-consuming (especially when there are no flags), and I was wondering whether one can achieve the same film effect simply by reducing the number of frames per second to 24 during export of a footage already shot and captured at 30 fps?

P.

It won't look the same because the shutter speed used by the camera is different.

I was set to order my HV20 from B&H right before Christmas. I am glad that I decided to wait. However, the $300 price difference is a fairly big deal considering the minor improvements. B&H is selling the HV20 for about $680 while the HV30 is gonna retail at $999. I suspect that the price will drop shortly afterwards.

The 30p mode would be great for the web productions that I create and the black color is much cooler, but I still don't know if that justifies the extra 300 bucks.

Eugenia, can you explain further how the shutter speed will effect the film look of the footage other than effecting the exposure. Let's say at 24p mode you used a shutter speed of 1/48 and at 30p mode 1/60. Don't you think, as long as the exposure is compensated appropriately by aperture and/or gain, you should get 24 full frames in 24p mode and 30 full frames in 30p mode and the desired exposure?

Back to my question, will reducing the number of frames per second from 30 to 24 during export by eliminating 6 frames give you the same effect of film look compared to getting 24 frames from start?

P.

In the "old days" (nine months ago :) ), my understanding from various companies offering conversion programs, is that it was better to shoot in 60i, at 1/60, edit, and convert you final product to 24p using a "proper" conversion system. That provided preservation of a maximum amount of the preservable resolution in the process.

I have actually shot 60i footage on my FX1, and taken the captured files into Cineform's HDLink, doing pulldown removal to get 24p in the Conversion. David Newman at Cineform says you do lose resolution, but the resulting footage looked pretty good to me.

At least they didn't downgrade it, and they didn't raise the price on it... and black is way cooler IMO.

Seems like by coming out with a slightly upgraded version for less money, we can continue to capture outstanding video in the sub 1k range for a long time to come.

Any links to an official spec sheet anywhere?

Dale -- official spec sheet at this link:

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...elTechSpecsAct

Is there any way to get 30p out the HV20 using 60i mode??

If so how, I'm assuming post processing???

Yes you can, rather simply. It's called deinterlacing.

60i -> 30p = deinterlacing
60i -> 60p = bob deinterlacing

I'm constantly dismayed at the laughable quality of most deinterlacing algorithms in popular pro software. AviSynth for the win in this department. MCBob is kind of ridiculous, but very slow. Magic Bullet isn't bad, but AviSynth is better - and free! :)

If you're shooting 60i with the HV20 (or any HDV camera) it's recording 60i.

If you're shooting 24p, it's recording 60i - but the 60i has pulldown flags. Removing these flags (with a competent NLE or AviSynth) recovers the actual 24p that the sensors captured. There is no deinterlacing required - it's called field matching. Fields get moved around and so forth, but there's no interpolation performed. Hence it's a lossless process.

Deinterlacing is not lossless.

I'm not sure how the HV20 captures its images, if it performs its own internal (probably bad) deinterlacing, or if it actually acquires progressive images. I'm sure someone here knows ;)

~MiSfit

From 24p standpoint 30p itself doesn't interests me that much but as a slow-mo shooting mode it's an excellent option. 30 -> 24 slow down will be great for subtler slowmo shots, and of course it doesn't lose vertical resolution.

HV30 is understandably a very conservative upgrade. Regardless of actual cost of adding more feature, I think Canon doesn't want to make their now 'vixia' line of cameras any more pro-friendly than they are now ;)

Derek,
HV20 (and 30) captures image progressively for 24p, which is why it garnered so much interest since announcement.

Nice upgrade Canon, and kept well away from the XH-A1 by sticking with the rather slow (F/1.8) rather short (10x) and rather 'dull' focal lengths that immediately cry out for a wide-angle converter. But like other posters have said - the deserved sales success of this little wonder-cam show that Canon are a real pin-prick in Sony's side. All power to them.

tom.

You can use this program to get 30P or 60P

Fieldkit...

http://www.revisionfx.com/products/fieldskit/

I'd have to agree with Euisung Lee. Looks like a really big statement from Canon saying "We will not revolutionize, just slowly evolve". Canon says "We are not RED". lol

A shame. I really was looking forward to seeing what they could have brought us for the second time around given their first attempt brought us the beaut HV20.

Is the HV30 a 720 or 1080 (squished) camera? If it's 1080 (squished), is this giving us 1080/30p (as well as 24p)?

Going out of the country in late March and definitely buying either the HV20 or HV30 for the trip. I do hope the HV30 is available at that point.

Would it be as simple as a firmware update for the HV20 to do 30p?? Doubt it would happen though.

I'm not sure what you mean by "1080 (squished)." If you are referring to the 1440 x 1080 aspect ratio, that is the HDV standard and any HDV camera, including the HV30, will have it -- no HDV camera is 1920 x 1080, nor could it be.

That's what I mean - 1440 (squished - i knew something was squished PAR wise). My previous HDV experience is only 720p with the JVC HD1/0 cams, not to mention I've been out of the HDV world for a while - not up to date with my terms.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you are using aspect ratio and pixel count interchangeably, when they shouldn't be.

If I understand correctly, HDV uses rectangular pixels, not square. They are more wide than they are tall. So while HDV has a 1440 by 1080 pixel count, it indeed has an aspect ratio of 1920 by 1080, i.e. 16:9. If this were not the case, it would have an aspect ratio of 4 by 3.

This may seem like splitting hairs, but if it's not clear, it can lead to some confusions down the road. At least for me it has. ;)

Full featured wired remote for these cameras.
 

Yes ... We need a wired full featured remote for these cameras. I was extremely disapointed when Canon gave up the Lanc connection. I was using this commection for remote and helmet mouted camera work and I wanted to carry this on with the HV20 but no luck. When you attach a camera to the side of a helicopter, truck or motercycle. You expect there may me some risk. This is palitable with a $1,000.00 camera but make you think twice when using your $4,000.00 or $8,000.00 camera. Also the more expensive cameras are quite large and won't work in all the places you can mount the HV20. I would pay good money for a wired remote controller for the HV20. I heard somwhere that there was a firewire version of a controller in the works but have not heard since. It seems this might be possible as the XLH1 is controllable via Firewire using the Canon Console software. How about something for the smaller siblings in the family?

If you are that serious about getting a LANC, you could probably hire a EE student to mod a camera to extend the record button, or do it yourself if you have ever soldered anything, I doubt its that hard, it could probably be done in less than an hour.

Or a solution with off the shelf components, get a learning IR remote which has a powerful IR blaster. Or get a wireless IR recv/transmitter to pipe the IR from where you are to where the camera is.

...not THE James Blunt?

Full HD on Tape
 

I'm hoping some one could explain something I can't seem to find answered. I'm looking to get a couple consumer cameras and later a prosumer camera that can work with the consumers. I want to go HD but was trying to stay with tape. What' the difference between 1920 and 1440? Are they both HD? Should I go the Sony way? Just wondering what camera does shoot full HD on a consumer level, and in what format. We're talking HV30 on tape but knocking it down to 1440. Is that bad?

The 1920 has more detail, all else being equal.

Yes. But be aware that HD is a very vague term, thanks to marketing.

Quality is what matters, not the format. Having a full HD sensor (1920x1080) is only one part of the equation. How the encoder handles dark areas, noise, motion, and how well it utilizes the available bandwidth can have a huge impact on quality. Consider the resolution of the lens at the focal lengths you'll use (e.g. most cheap cameras get soft at the telephoto end).

Dilemma
 

Oh, the agony! Looks like my XH-A1 needs to visit the service centre, so that'll probably be away best part of a month, but I still need to capture HDV into my NLE and do a bit of shooting while it's away. "No problem" I thought, "get an HV20". Seems it's not so simple ATM. Do I:
a) get an HV20 now?
b) wait for the HV30 to appear in the UK?
c) wait a little longer for the price to drop a little?
d) try to get one of the last HV20s at a bargin price once the HV30 is around?

If the HV30 had a LANC socket I'd gladly pay a little extra. What a shame it doesn't. Failing that, if the zoom control is much easier to use on the new model, then maybe it's worth it. I don't suppose anyone who knows the HV20 has got their hands on an HV30 yet, have they?

But that should come as no surprise. Canon hasn't had LANC on a consumer camcorder for years, and it's not likely to ever come back.

Yes they are both HD.

No, in fact it's *exactly* how the most popular HD format in the world for High Definition broadcast masters (Sony HDCAM) does it: 1080 x 1440.

Who's surprised?
 

Yes, Chris, as you have said before. On the other hand, if enough potential customers mention it, if only in passing and with resigned acceptance, maybe someone at Canon will feel a pang of guilt? IMO, it is such a serious omision on a not-very-cheap camcorder. Handsome is as handsome does, and it is such a shame that this really useful feature is still missing from an otherwise very well-judged camera. I'll probably still go for an HV20, but I'm going to check out the little Sony HDV cams first, just in case one of them has LANC.

LaNC on the Canon
 

You said Mark, I too would have jumped all over the HV-30 if at least it would have a Lanc port. Instead you have to end up improvising with Toslink cables, Velcro straps, and right angle connectors, to use with their remote control. if you want to have some of the most basic needs, like start/stop, zoom in/out etc... from a tripod handle to avoid camera movement. Canon has fallen way
behind in the Accessory Dept. to compliment the fine cameras they produce.

I would gladly pay for an accessory that would put out to make the camera more user friendly. (They use to be very good at it) I don't know why they stopped.
Overall, I think the HV-30 upgrade is a big Joke.
I hope they bring something new and usefull next time around.
Thanks,


Luis

I looked at the specs of the HV20 vs. the HV30 and I didn;t see anything that makes me think the LCD is better on the HV30. Am I missing something?

Thanks.

Specs don't tell you everything. What you're missing is that the new HV30 borrows the flip-out LCD display from the previous HG10 and HR10 camcorders. It's better than the one on the HV20 because it's brighter with better color accuracy, and allows for accurate viewing from an angle (hence the term "multi-angle viewing" on this LCD display). Hope this helps,

Thanks Chris. That does help. However I was hoping for more resolution rather than better viewing angles or color. Good to have though.

THanks.