Were the frames taken at keyframes or not? Keyframes look usually better than intermediate frames. That's one situation to deal with in hdv world. But it most likely won't cause that big a difference though.

Hc3 was reported to have way better low light than HC1 but all those video caps I've seen tend to not show that at all. I want video and straight from the camera. I tried downloading those clips, but didn't get any.

And you're a spokesperson for Canon ;)

..
 

3d tracking...tested on 3ds MAX

http://www.dvuser.co.kr/zboard/data/...titledy6y6.wmv

Good point, worth considering. I suppose if we were to step through the frames and spot a noticably better rendered image every 15 frames it would be worth noting. I didn't spot this of any footage, but still an interesting point.

Everyone Buy Canon !!!!!!! :)

Fortunately for me I only own a lowly JVC MC500 (standard definition !!!!) so when viewing the various examples I hope I am not swayed by anything other than the quality I see in-front of me.

If you were to find a $400 dollar camera made by Sanyo that outshone a Sony Z1 and posted examples showing just that - you would find the thread besieged by Z1 owners telling you that this cannot be so, it must be the lighting or the set-up or post production or the recording settings or a mistake - it is impossible !!!

Spending large sums of money makes people inerrant about what they have bought.

But the truth is this years $400 products can outshine $2000 products from two or three years ago.

I still have read nothing in this thread to give me reason not to think the HV10 has the better image quality. I am torn between the HC1 for its manual control ring around the lens and its form factor and the HV10 for its sheer video quaity.

See!! a flaw in the HV10 !!!!

If you look closely there is a large purple lens aberration towards the right hand side, a little like a purple teapot.

That wasn't on the FX1 examples.

_______________________________________


:)


---

Now that's what I call a real "bug" on the HV10!!! :)

Please elaborate.

We'll have to see how the 3CMOS FX7 (Sony) compares to the HV10. (I know different price points but worthy comparison as they represent the latest HDV offerings)

Why not the HVR-V1e also ?

Both the FX7 and the V1 should have identical video quality.

I will volunteer to post screen caps of the xl-h1 and the hv-10 when I get the hv-10 in. if it's better then the xl-h1 that's awesome I'll just bring it along and shoot all of my footage with the camera taped on to the XL on the side opposite of the client...

Great ! I am waiting ....

LOL. My vendor told me to order an HV-10 to use a deck for the H1. Well, the H1 will make an impressive deck for the HV-10 when editing with the clients.

Just something I want to add... (note: I own an FX1, but I'm not gonna argue here)

Most of these frames of comparisions are about the same as comparisions of the HC3/HC1/A1U to the FX1. In broad daylight there won't be much of a difference. The HV10 frames in some shots seemed marginally sharper, I think this probably has a lot to do with Canon's DSP. I expect in broad daylight the HV10 to look similar to even XLH1 footage, slightly softer, but comparable. The issue for the semi-pros/professionals who will be using the higher end gear is mic inputs, level of image control, depth of field, frame rate, and adjustability...all things that will be lacking in ANY consumer-oriented device like the HV10.

Who cares if the $1300 HV10 can get images near the same quality as the $3000 FX1 or $4000 XHA1...if I show up to a shoot with a camera that looks like an electric shaver, I'm gonna have a lot of explaining to do to justify the amount the client would be paying me...

"So why am I paying you $5000 when I could go to Best Buy or Circuit City and get that for $1300 and shoot it myself?" Granted I'm not someone who thinks we all need to carry around Sony F950's and a truck full of CCU's and Xserve RAIDs and monitors to shoot a wedding or something... I'm just saying its pointless trying to defend a 2-3 year old camera when a new one comes out that has approximately the same image quality at half the price. Also look at the last frame grab, the low-light capabilities of the FX1/Z1U/XLH1, ect are really where the higher priced cams shine.

Who cares if the $1300 HV10 can get images near the same quality as the $3000 FX1 or $4000 XHA1 ??

People like me !!! - who can not afford $4000 but would like similar image quality and are prepared to sacrifice the more professional features.

...Me !

Hse Kha (the second post in this long thread) says: ''The FX1 is totally outdated now. I can't see how people would buy it anymore...''

This is such a common statement made about *any* camera, and is just so much one-upmanship garbage. When you buy a photographer or cinematographer for a shoot you're buying in their experience first and foremost. Way down the line there's the equipment he uses.

Give me a seasoned pro with a 1976 film fed Nikon F4 over a newbie with his D-SLR. Give me someone with the nous to buy the FX1 over someone who accepts automatic internal ND filtration because he doesn't know what it's doing for him.

Camera - all camera - are cheap. The expensive and really valuable bit about filmmaking is the experience, and generally that only comes with time.

tom.