Sorry, don't have A1, but my feeling is Canon A1 and Sony FX1 are very similar in chip configuration. I ve done a bit of outdoor with the FX1 at a nature preserve here locally, and I will take the HV20 out today or tomorrow, and be able to give you some idea there. I would certainly be shooting in a mode that I could control blow outs, most like "TV" which give priority to shutter speed. One thing I haven't run across is a ND filter change capability, and I assume that there is no access to that on board the camera. They do show screw ons in their accessories.

Yes. You can shoot in a shutter priorty or aperature priority mode. In aperature priority mode, you can adjust from F1.8 (or 2.5 I think in full telephoto) to F8. That is extent of it. When you adjust those, the camera then adjust shutter speed automatically. Then, you go to the "joy stick" and adjust exposure further to try to match get your blow outs off screen, using the zebras. If in aperature priority, the adjustment is being made with the shutter, and gain, or any other non-aperature adjustment available.

You don't get to know what is happening in those adjustments, and at what speed the shutter is shooting.....

Interesting shots. From those shots the color and detail really look better on the HV20, but the FX1 does do a better job holding the highlights.

now are these digital stills from the camera or are these "Screen" caps of the "non compressed" film?

Have you tried the focus assist? The review at camcorderinfo says it helps by enlarging the image (double) and peaking to help focus. The review liked it quite a bit.
Your experience matches the CCI review; namely the focus wheel is a joke. All Canon had to do was out a focus ring on the lens barrel and they would have blown the HC7 out of the water. Again, the Focus Assist might help. If you've tried it let us know how well it works for you. There are plenty of us with "older" eyes who are wondering how difficult it will be to manual focus on the tiny 2.7" LCD.
If I understand the CCI review correctly, there is no independent control over gain with the HV20.
Again, the CCI review downgraded the HV20 for it's viewfinder. In particular, if you attach a larger battery you will have a very difficult time even looking through it. All they had to do was make it slide out. HV30 maybe?

Good luck.

Dennis

These are bitmap captures of the time line of .m2t files captured to Premiere Pro.

Dennis and all:

Well I just took the camera out into the field, and did some wildlife shooting, just to see how it went.

A couple of things impressed me.

1. IAF actually worked real well ! I followed a bird through weeds, shrubs and grass, and the focus was maintained pretty well. I think Canon has recognized that in most situation in which you have HD filming, focus is a big issue. This instant focus feature snaps in pretty well. I am surprised.

2. I shot with teleextender, and it did quite well too. Even with IAF

3. I shot everything through the viewfinder, either steady stick, or tripod. For the telephoto, steady stick was no good. But, I will back track a bit on viewfinder. I think it worked better than I anticipated. Still not really a focusable situation, but actually could monitor decently through it.

I will try to post some screen graps and maybe even a couple of seconds of footage...later this evening.

Chris,

looking forward to the footage. Thanks for your work and all this info. really good insites. Looks like May is the date for us here in aus. Can't wait!

This is short clip, highly compressed that demonstrates the instant auto focus. I had heard some bad comments about it, but it seems pretty nice the way it focus. I would like to post a couple actual .m2t files, but I don't think I can do it with the attachments provided below... I will have to see how much bandwidth I have on my site...

Here is a rack of clips HV20 M2V
 

As close to original as possible. Note that the pond shots are a bit of a struggle, with the angle of the sun, and dark birds. I have done no color correction.

Also note that with the teleconvertor shots at the end, you may see some red fringing, which I assume is chromatic aberration. It really pronounced on other shots I took with teleconvertor today.

Download clip by right clicking and saving target, please. I don't know how much bandwith I will have

http://www.makeyourfilm.net/downloads/HV20clips.m2v CLOSED AT MOMENT DUE TO BANWIDTH Megaupload url provided below.

Chris, I've never understood those comments where people were having trouble with IAF. Mine works perfectly and is far faster and more accurate than any I've used before.

Crhis, regarding the clips, the only 2 scenes were of the bird in the tree (very nice) and what looks like that backyard scene with the swimming pool.

Ken, it should have been a about 160 megabyte download. Was yours less ?

I ve had to pull the file just now, due to bandwidth issues.... I will see what other way I can post the file.

Chris, no, it was about 29megs.

I didn't think you could play a partial down load like that.. wow. File was definitely 162,000 plus kb...

Will DVinfo host some footage
 

Moderator:

Given the interest in this thread, will DVinfo host some footage for me ?

Chris,
please shoot something in 24p Mode
and please upload it to www.megaupload.com

Many thanks in advance.

Regards, Stefan.
P.S: Can the NTSC US 60 Hz model also be switched into PAL
25 frames/sec ?
Is there any hidden menu that can do this or a firmware upgrade trick ?

Okay, I will check it out.

Okay, I have uploaded the footage I previously listed to Megal upload. Check it out there, unless someone at DVinfo wants to host. Here is url:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=XL96FDZ0


I will also try to post a 24 clip of about 250 megs.

24 p File
 

This is a 24p file. Has static shot with subject moving, then a pan. It was captured to Premiere Pro 2.0 in native .m2t format. Of course, HV20 records 24p inside the 60i stream, so some processing is subsequently required to maximize the 24p benefit. Here is download url at Megaupload:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LGSN70AP

Think you might have uploaded two different clips. the one on mega upload is the M&M's one. Was that shot in 24p? and did you do any color correction? Did you use natural light or additional?

EDIT:: sorry for asking 24p i see it in your post now. =)

EDIT2:: okay was the M&M shot done in 24p? =)

Two things:

Chris, is the tele-lens the authorized Canon one? I need something to extend my zoom range, so I'm wondering which one I should get for my HV20.

Second, Chris, I can absolutely set you up with server space on my server - if you know how to use FTP. Let me know, and I'll provide you space to share your HV20 footage.

Cheers!

Not sure what you are indicating by M&M. This late in week I might be running a little dense. I uploaded to files to megauploads. First should download as :

HV20clips.m2v

and second should download as:

backyard24p.mpg or (.m2t)

only shot 24p on the second one. Sorry they aren't that exciting, just test shots.

Robert:

Thanks for the offer. I learned a bit about FTP using my IE just a few weeks ago. If you want to email whatever access information I need, I can make an attempt. I will send this via PM email too.

Robert:

No. This is a teleconvertor from Sony with the HG Tag, bought for my VX2000 before HDV even arrived. I also had a cheapy 2X bought from somewhere, branded Kenko. It worked horribly on the VX2000, mainly because it claimed to be threaded for 58mm, it had a very small rear lense. Could only shoot at full telephoto, and had bad CA. I dug it out this morning, slapped it on the HV20, and was able to get a non-vignetted picture around the 1/2 tele mark. As you approach max telephoto, picture degrades with the CA , but at three quarters, not bad.

Back to the Sony 1.7 x convertor, I had shot it a full zoom on the FX1, and didn't notice any fringing. I am going to test a bit more to see if just that situation was the issue. Certainly would like to avoid buying another teleextender.

I just switched from a Sony FX-1 and HC-3 to the Canon HV20. My first reaction is that the HV20 has superior detail, a bit weaker color saturation (overcome somewhat by using the "Vivid" mode), a bit of a flimsy feel but nothing too severe, and a comfortable feel not very different from the HC-3 and vastly more comfortable to hold and carry than the FX-1.

The low light performance seems very good but not outstanding, and this seems to be the only area where the Sony FX-1 and HC-3 may do a slightly better job.

Also, the Sony HC-3 automatically reduces its' high frequency detail indoors in low light, leaving an image with less noise but also a lot less detail. The Canon preserves detail, perhaps at the expense of really outstanding low light sensitivity.

I wish I had all the cameras here at the same time to directly compare them, but only have footage from prior controlled lighting shoots which make me believe that the HV-20 still has a bit of difficulty in the low light area, but still looks very good in this regard.

Larry

Larry:

So far, I am not wild about HV20 low light either. I don't think they put that little "pen" light on it for nothing. The exception is shooting in 24p, where it seems to do better. Of course, I have fairly high expectations of cameras, being that I also own the VX2000.

Chris, nothing matches the VX2000....as an owner of one I can attest to that...except the VX2100. :)

There seems to be continued interest in what I've posted at Megaupload, with about 30 downloads of the large .m2t files, so I'm posting this one too.

It is, again, pretty pedestrian stuff. Just shot hand held with the HV20, in Cinemode, with 24p. About one minute. Instant autofocus was engaged, which I am finding pretty decent. Otherwise, I made no serious effort to manage the exposure, letting the camera do its thing.

In meantime, Robert Ducon has indicated he has space and I will try to shoot more footage taking a bit more control this weekend.

Here is url for this one: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=HQQLWQHL

Latest clips: Street Basketball players in 24p, otherwise auto exposure.


http://www.megaupload.com/?d=Y8RJBDD0

Chris, I'm assuming you removed the pulldown for these clips?

no. I am posting raw footage as they come off the camera. It is up to you guys to do whatever magic you have. My idea was to give you something raw to work with. Its still 24p in the 1080 60i stream, as far as I know. The exception is if I have to cut, it will be rerendered, and that might be an issue. The basketball was cut, for instance.

new Footage
 

Two files here.

First is a shot with 24p. I took the exposure selected by camera, and backed it off -5, to see what would happen in the blacks and shadows.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=BIFSJ5GB

Next, I turned on Cine mode and left 24p on. One thing that does happen is Cine mode, is you lose your control of the shutter speed or f stop priority. You live with what the camera gives you there. Again, after the exposure was selected by camera, I backed it off -5.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=FCKRIBH7


These file are captured raw files and not color corrected, and no pull down has occurred.

Chris, the reason I ask is that I've shot some 24p footage for fun. The footage I shot looks more 'stuttery' than yours.

My hypothesis (Which is completely based in ideas in my head and not any concrete information) was that in Cine mode the camera (to enhance the 'cinema' aspect of 'cine mode') might actually lock the shutter speed at something like 1/48.

Again, this is just something that I thought might be the case, is there any way to check to see if something like this is true? Are you able to see ANY indications of a fast shutter speed when shooting something absurdly bright where the camera would be stopped down as much as possible with both NDs and then would have to resort to a high shutter speed?

I'm curious because I like the wider latitude that appeared to be present in the cine mode clips I've seen.

Thanks

I just downloaded these files and was wondering if you're 100% sure these two files aren't switched/mis-named. I ask because the big difference I noticed in the other comparison clips I've seen was in the highlights.

In the other example clips the cine mode was lower contrast and revealed details in highlight areas that the "regular" mode captured as completely blown-out white. In your two clips, this is the opposite where the cine mode clip has the blown out whites and the non-cine-mode clip does not. The second one (coke24andcinemode.mpeg) seems to have the bright/hottest hot spot (on the can) while the first one (coke24ponly.mpeg) reveals information in that area.

Additionally, pulling a single frame into Photoshop and looking at the histogram on two other clips showed that the CINE clip not only lacked any info at 100% black and 100% white but also that the info was much more 'smooshed' into the middle. Again, your "coke24ponly.mpeg" indicates that "Cine Mode" behavior when compared to your "coke24andcinemode.mpeg"

David:

I don't think I got it backward, but I am going to just reshoot it to see if I get the same result. I was surprised as you were, because I shot some cine mode last night on my 35mm adapter, and what you indicated was true. Seemed that everything was "flatter". But when I shot this scene, I was looking to crush things on the low side a bit, and that's why I shot with both setting by running the exposure down -5 on each shot. I get back to you after I recreate the scene just to be sure.

David:

I reshot the test, and I believe it shows you were right. Somehow I got the order wrong in which I thought I shot the two scenes. I am uploading the reshoot, but the first shot on the reshoot is the 24ponly and the second is the cine mode. There is voice on the track this time to confirm. Probably will be up in about half an hour.

MEANWHILE, TO ALL THAT HAVE DOWNLOADED THEM, MY LABELS ARE BACKWARD ON THE Cine Mode and 24p only clips.

Thanks for catching that David.

Edit:

Here is reshot test footage, all on one clip: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=9DMU933Y

35mm Adapter testing
 

So I've been trying to tune my DIY 35m adapter, and rigged a way to attach the HV20. Mind you, this thing is a bit unpredictable, and I have a Letus coming, but I have been able to get some images with this set up. The adapter is a rough approximation of the Micro 35 do it yourself project, that you can order plans from from Redrock.

At this point, it appears that an achromat is in order. I am using one I bought from Cinevate. Would love to actully try their adapter, but, well you know I spent my money on a camera instead. Here are picture of what I rigged up. An upload of some clips is pending and I will post.

35mm Adapter Footage with A20
 

These brief clips were shot with the Adapter described in the previous post.
Camera set at 24 p, TV. I had the shutter at 1/60. These shots were taken to learn a bit about what needs to be done to shoot with a 35mm adapter.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=GQ9Z51P4

Hey man, thank you for posting those clips.

So, the thing I noticed in other sample cinemode clips was that there were no true blacks. Even the darkest part of the frame seemed mushy to me in a dark gray but not quite black kind of way.

So I grabbed a frame and took it into photoshop and noticed that, indeed, even the darkest shadows weren't at full black. Even though it's so completely dark that there is no detail available at all, it's still not captured as true 100% black. And the histogram backs that up. There just seems to be something in the cinemode preset that puts even total absence of light up at a dark-gray area.

To me, the interesting thing about your cine mode sample is the fact that you brought the exposure down to -5. This puts the darkest areas of your frame at about 99% complete black. Much closer to what I'd want to see in an image. Knowing that the bottom end can be brought down to black through the exposure settings is good to know.