DV Info Net
Page 3 of 4 12 3 4
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Canon XL H Series HDV Camcorders (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xl-h-series-hdv-camcorders/)
-   -   New XL HDV shown at IBC (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xl-h-series-hdv-camcorders/50816-new-xl-hdv-shown-ibc.html)

John DeLuca September 12th, 2005 12:12 PM
Canon really let me down with the HDV format. If the Pana has a decent lux rating, 35mm adaptor, and a DTE disk, I can't see why anyone would be in the market for the canon HDV. Only time will tell the final outcome.


John

Greg Boston September 12th, 2005 01:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DeLuca
Canon really let me down with the HDV format. If the Pana has a decent lux rating, 35mm adaptor, and a DTE disk, I can't see why anyone would be in the market for the canon HDV. Only time will tell the final outcome.

John
How can they have let you down? They haven't announced anything yet. You should wait until any new camera is 'officially announced' with all the specs known before being let down.

=gb=

Michael Maier September 12th, 2005 02:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DeLuca
If the Pana has a decent lux rating, 35mm adaptor, and a DTE disk, I can't see why anyone would be in the market for the canon HDV. Only time will tell the final outcome.
John
How about "unlimited" quality glass possibilities with adaptors for PL and the most popular lens mounts in the industry?
How about the possibility of using a mini35 mounted directly to the XL lens mount, rather than having it going through sections and sections of prosumer glass?
How about a shoulder form factor for easier and more stable handheld shots? Specially if compared to the bulky HVX, which seems to be a brick block type of size and shape, this is very useful.
How about the possibility of using a high-resolution viewfinder or even a real HD viewfinder if you so want?
How about people who needs a more professional look camera for their clients, like wedding videographers? The average Joe could have an easier time seeing a XL type of camera, as a professional HD camera for which he's most likely paying HD prices, than a handheld prosumer looking camera.
How about freedom to shot without being dependent on a laptop to unload your P2 or 90 min. Firestore?
How about real focus and iris rings for real manual control?

Could you see now why somebody would be on the market for a Canon HDV?
Nothing against the HVX200, specially given it's not even out yet. But it sure won't be the end all cameras. It will have compromises as any other product. No camera is perfect. You just need to choose the one which is right for you. I can see the point on being upset if the new Canon has no 24p or even the projection that it will not sell very well, if it doesn't offer what the HD100 does, since they are somehow similar. But criticizing the camera for it being HDV is really pointless. HDV is just another option. If it isn't for you, just buy something else. But putting it down is really pointless.

Ivan Hurtado September 12th, 2005 03:03 PM
Michael, mind you could be speaking about the JVC too... And JVC will be cheaper with just those differences about Progressive and 1080.

But it´s true, it´s not out yet so we should wait and then argue about them... Three days!

Kevin Wild September 12th, 2005 03:19 PM
Michael, your points are valid, but you have to understand that many people including myself were hoping that Canon was going to do something truly "revolutionary." Am I disappointed if come Wednesday it's only HDV? Yes, I will be. Will it be a great, if not best-on-the-market HDV camera? Probably...I would love it for all of the reasons you listed.

That said, it's still HDV rather than a non-MPG2 format. For the past 3 months I was looking forward to buying the Panny. Then, I was surprised to hear Canon might announce a new HD "professional" camera. I was one really hoping that it would be a competitor to the HVX200. Unfortunately, it looks like Panasonic will be on an island at their price and quality point, with all the HDV stuff (JVC, SONY and Canon) below it.

It's making the decision for me which to buy even more difficult. I'd love to be tape based. I'd love to have DVC ProHD. I'd love a shoulder mount. I'd love to have Canon lenses. I'd love 2/3" chips. I'd love to spend less than $10k. Sigh...I guess I'll keep dreaming!

We'll see in a few days the details, but it looks like it's HDV from Canon. One thing nobody has brought up is the GL3, which may be announced, too. They're overdue for that and now THAT will be a nice camera for non-professional use, just like the incredible GL1 has been for me the past 4 years.

Kevin

PS-Hey, Canon: It'd better have 24p or the decision of which camera to buy is easy for me!

Michael Maier September 12th, 2005 03:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Hurtado
Michael, mind you could be speaking about the JVC too... And JVC will be cheaper with just those differences about Progressive and 1080.
You lost me here.

John DeLuca September 12th, 2005 03:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
How about "unlimited" quality glass possibilities with adaptors for PL and the most popular lens mounts in the industry?
How about the possibility of using a mini35 mounted directly to the XL lens mount, rather than having it going through sections and sections of prosumer glass?
How about a shoulder form factor for easier and more stable handheld shots? Specially if compared to the bulky HVX, which seems to be a brick block type of size and shape, this is very useful.
How about the possibility of using a high-resolution viewfinder or even a real HD viewfinder if you so want?
How about people who needs a more professional look camera for their clients, like wedding videographers? The average Joe could have an easier time seeing a XL type of camera, as a professional HD camera for which he's most likely paying HD prices, than a handheld prosumer looking camera.
How about freedom to shot without being dependent on a laptop to unload your P2 or 90 min. Firestore?
How about real focus and iris rings for real manual control?

Could you see now why somebody would be on the market for a Canon HDV?
Nothing against the HVX200, specially given it's not even out yet. But it sure won't be the end all cameras. It will have compromises as any other product. No camera is perfect. You just need to choose the one which is right for you. I can see the point on being upset if the new Canon has no 24p or even the projection that it will not sell very well, if it doesn't offer what the HD100 does, since they are somehow similar. But criticizing the camera for it being HDV is really pointless. HDV is just another option. If it isn't for you, just buy something else. But putting it down is really pointless.



About the last few sentences. Whoa.....I wouldn't call it criticism. More like an opinion. Maybe it was the picture of the black XL2 with the letters HDV on it that did it.....who knows ;-). Like I said, only time will tell.

John

Michael Maier September 12th, 2005 04:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
Michael, your points are valid, but you have to understand that many people including myself were hoping that Canon was going to do something truly "revolutionary." Am I disappointed if come Wednesday it's only HDV? Yes, I will be.
Only HDV? What else would you expect? HDCAM-SR?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
That said, it's still HDV rather than a non-MPG2 format.
Such as?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
For the past 3 months I was looking forward to buying the Panny. Then, I was surprised to hear Canon might announce a new HD "professional" camera. I was one really hoping that it would be a competitor to the HVX200.
And it will be, just like the HD100 and even Z1.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
Unfortunately, it looks like Panasonic will be on an island at their price and quality point, with all the HDV stuff (JVC, SONY and Canon) below it.
Bellow it? From which point of view? Optics? Ergonomics? Resolution? Color space? Image control? You do realize bellow or above in this case is subjective, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
It's making the decision for me which to buy even more difficult. I'd love to be tape based.
HD tape based in this price point is impossible, unless suing some type of compression, like the HDV format does. Why do you think the HVX200 records to memory?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
I'd love to have DVC ProHD.
On tape, for under $10,000 or possibly even under $30,000? Impossible on this day and age.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
I'd love a shoulder mount. I'd love to have Canon lenses. I'd love 2/3" chips. I'd love to spend less than $10k. Sigh...I guess I'll keep dreaming!
Oh yes, you are sure dreaming. I’m sorry, but that’s the truth.
Before making a request list, it’s wise to understand a little about the market realities.
Maybe in a couple of years, it will be possible to have a HD 2/3” professional shoulder camera with a non MPEG2 compression for under 10k. But for now, to dream about such thing is setting yourself up for disappointment.
Any and all HD cameras which come for under 10k now, will be full of compromises. You just need to pick the ones which you can better live with, or the camera which better suits you.

Mathieu Ghekiere September 12th, 2005 04:17 PM
Michael, probably I shouldn't be answering for Kevin, as I don't know him or his intentions, but I think he knows the market limitations very well, that's why he said and realised those whiches were dreaming.
I think he maybe ment (or that's my conclusion out of it) that if Canon waited this long, they could bring SOMETHING on the table that the others didn't have, or have some very good feature or price point.
But - and only IF, IF, IF the not-officially announced information is true, which I doubt - else, Canon is offering too little for their price, and they have nothing the others don't really have, like they did have with the XL1 (that was a pretty revolutionary cam at the time, wasn't it?)

Well, I think it's best for me to shut up now, and let Kevin respond to it, because he'll know better then I do what he meant with what he said.

Michael Maier September 12th, 2005 04:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathieu Ghekiere
Michael, probably I shouldn't be answering for Kevin, as I don't know him or his intentions, but I think he knows the market limitations very well, that's why he said and realised those whiches were dreaming.
I think he maybe ment (or that's my conclusion out of it) that if Canon waited this long, they could bring SOMETHING on the table that the others didn't have, or have some very good feature or price point.
1. How do we know they didn't at this point?
2. What else could they have done which wasn't HDV based, since this seemed to be the main complain from Kevin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathieu Ghekiere
But - and only IF, IF, IF the not-officially announced information is true, which I doubt - else, Canon is offering too little for their price, and they have nothing the others don't really have...
10k for a Canon 1/3"! HDV camera with 1080i only? That's sure bogus. Unless it will be a 2/3" camera ala the new JVC HD7000 and they found a way to fit it all in the XL body, or the XL body was just a decoy. See, we just don't know yet. We only know it will be HDV. That was basically what I addressed in Kevin's post. The HDV complain.

Mathieu Ghekiere September 12th, 2005 04:41 PM
Yes I agree the specs and information that's now released seems really bogus. I can't really believe it either.
We'll have to wait, I suppose...
Damn exiting :-)!

Greg Boston September 12th, 2005 04:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier

10k for a Canon 1/3"! HDV camera with 1080i only? That's sure bogus.
Well, hold on a minute Michael. That price point might include, if nothing else, a higher quality glass than the standard lens supplied with the HD-100. Keep in mind, JVC has an 'optional' high def lens for that camera that costs about $13,000. Still a bargain when compared to the previous costs of image acquistion at this level of resolution. But you have to keep that in perspective. A lens that costs more than twice the price of camera w/supplied lens. Would it sell the Canon camera? I don't know, but just wanted to point out that there are ways to justifiably get the cost to 10K fairly quickly. Glass being one of them.

=gb=

Michael Maier September 12th, 2005 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Boston
Well, hold on a minute Michael. That price point might include, if nothing else, a higher quality glass than the standard lens supplied with the HD-100. Keep in mind, JVC has an 'optional' high def lens for that camera that costs about $13,000. Still a bargain when compared to the previous costs of image acquistion at this level of resolution. But you have to keep that in perspective. A lens that costs more than twice the price of camera w/supplied lens. Would it sell the Canon camera? I don't know, but just wanted to point out that there are ways to justifiably get the cost to 10K fairly quickly. Glass being one of them.

=gb=

I could see this as an alternative more expensive package. But I can't see it as the main package. They will have to have an affordable package, which will be what will sell. As JVC did. Although I know there are some who don't see it, what JVC did was actually smart. ;)
It would make no sense if they only offered a 10k option, when most people would most likely go for a cheaper option if available. Anyway you look at it, that information post on that site smells like bogus.

Greg Boston September 12th, 2005 05:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
Anyway you look at it, that information post on that site smells like bogus.
Yes, I believe they might have some inaccurate, unreliable information there.;-)

Kevin Wild September 12th, 2005 05:38 PM
Michael, I'm really not even sure how to respond to you. I'm not sure what level of knowledge you have regarding these different cameras, but I'll try to defend my questions as I know many people felt similarly.

**Sorry, responses are within the quotes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
"Only HDV? What else would you expect? HDCAM-SR?"


What prevents Canon from coming out with a new format/codec that would offer an DVCPro HD-like offering via component out? Again, my post said I was hoping for something "revolutionary" from them...not evolutionary.

"Such as?"

Do you think that HDV is the "top of the line?" It sounds like it. HVX200...check it out. Yes, it's tapeless and has it's own challenges. BUT, Panasonic is putting out a camera with a much better format/codec than HDV. This DOES NOT mean it's a better camera. But I hope you won't argue that MPG2-based HDV is technically a better format than 1080p. Please.


"And it will be (a competitor to the HVX200), just like the HD100 and even Z1."

As far as competition, I guess it will be a competitor due to market price proximity. But these are 2 VERY, VERY different cameras. I would have say "they're both fruit," but to compare an "apple to an apple" you're talking about the different HDV format cameras competing. This would be the JVC HD100, SONY Z1 and the Canon "whatever HDV comes out."



"Bellow it? From which point of view? Optics? Ergonomics? Resolution? Color space? Image control? You do realize bellow or above in this case is subjective, right?"

Yes, sort of. I would take a great shooter shooting DV over a newbie shooting HDV. Is that a subjective decision on which looks better? Yes. However, resolution is much less subjective than that. I was talking strictly about formats, not ergonomics or any of the other things that I actually like more about the Canon.


"HD tape based in this price point is impossible, unless suing some type of compression, like the HDV format does. Why do you think the HVX200 records to memory? On tape, for under $10,000 or possibly even under $30,000? Impossible on this day and age. Oh yes, you are sure dreaming. I’m sorry, but that’s the truth."

Wow, you seem angry. Yes, I'm dreaming. That was the point in stating all that!! I'm quite familiar with why Panny went tapeless and everything else you mentioned. It was not a request list and if you read some of my previous posts, you may see that I'm quite "wise" in understanding this stuff.


Honestly, this will my last reply to you. I know the mods don't like posts to go in this direction. Thanks for replying.

Kevin






Before making a request list, it’s wise to understand a little about the market realities.
Maybe in a couple of years, it will be possible to have a HD 2/3” professional shoulder camera with a non MPEG2 compression for under 10k. But for now, to dream about such thing is setting yourself up for disappointment.
Any and all HD cameras which come for under 10k now, will be full of compromises. You just need to pick the ones which you can better live with, or the camera which better suits you.

Guy Bruner September 12th, 2005 06:16 PM
Quote:
Yes, I believe they might have some inaccurate, unreliable information there.;-)
Greg,
I guess we'll just have to wait a couple of days to see just how inaccurate and unreliable the Camcorderinfo.com information is, won't we?

Michael Maier September 12th, 2005 06:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
What prevents Canon from coming out with a new format/codec that would offer an DVCPro HD-like offering via component out? Again, my post said I was hoping for something "revolutionary" from them...not evolutionary. .
When was the last time you saw Canon developing their own format? What makes you think they could/would be willing to/ would be able to make the R&D money back on their products alone?
To hope that, is why I said it’s good to understand the realities of the industry before hoping for too much. You are just setting yourself for disappointment.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
Do you think that HDV is the "top of the line?" It sounds like it. .
Why would I think so when I mentioned HDCAM-SR?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
HVX200...check it out. Yes, it's tapeless .
I seem to remember you asking for a tape format…
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
I'd love to be tape based. .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
and has it's own challenges. BUT, Panasonic is putting out a camera with a much better format/codec than HDV. .
As you say, it presents it’s own challenges and have it’s own limitations.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
This DOES NOT mean it's a better camera. .
I’m glad you understand that :D

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
But I hope you won't argue that MPG2-based HDV is technically a better format than 1080p. Please. .
Why would I? But is a camera only about format?




Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
As far as competition, I guess it will be a competitor due to market price proximity. But these are 2 VERY, VERY different cameras. I would have say "they're both fruit," but to compare an "apple to an apple" you're talking about the different HDV format cameras competing. This would be the JVC HD100, SONY Z1 and the Canon "whatever HDV comes out." .
Or you could see it as both are alternatives for people who wants to shoot HD for an affordable price.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
Yes, sort of. I would take a great shooter shooting DV over a newbie shooting HDV. .
Same can be said for HDV vs. DVCPROHD or even HDCAM-SR.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
Is that a subjective decision on which looks better? Yes. However, resolution is much less subjective than that. I was talking strictly about formats, not ergonomics or any of the other things that I actually like more about the Canon. .
Format is not all. How good is HDCAM-SR seen through a prosumer lens for example?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
Wow, you seem angry. .
Actually, that was more like humour. I’m sorry emotions can’t be expressed in a message board. But anger was the last of the intentions. Really.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
Yes, I'm dreaming. That was the point in stating all that!! I'm quite familiar with why Panny went tapeless and everything else you mentioned. It was not a request list and if you read some of my previous posts, you may see that I'm quite "wise" in understanding this stuff. .
I’m glad of that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
Honestly, this will my last reply to you. I know the mods don't like posts to go in this direction. Thanks for replying.
It's being a pleasure and I think it’s being a civilized discussion. I didn’t see anybody offending anyone. I don’t think disagreeing is against the rules.

Chris Hurd September 12th, 2005 07:32 PM
All I ask is that the "spirited debates" and various disagreements are kept on a friendly, courteous and mutually respectful basis here. Thanks,

Peter Moore September 12th, 2005 08:44 PM
About bloody time.

Stephen van Vuuren September 12th, 2005 08:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
It's being a pleasure and I think it’s being a civilized discussion. I didn’t see anybody offending anyone. I don’t think disagreeing is against the rules.
Michael - while this discussion is civilized, it's virtually identical to another thread where you strongly disagreed with anyone, myself specifically, for disagreeing with manufacturer's design decisions (I was and am still unhappy with the HD100 lens choice and feel JVC made a significant error in bundling it).

While neither Kevin or I are camera engineers or manufacturers, we are buyers and our feedback to manufacturers over design choices is the most important things in determining the failure of success of the a camera.

You may argue that it's unrealistic for me to want more out of the HD100 lens or Kevin to look for more than HDV for $10k, (if the camcorderinfo is lucky enough to be correct), but the fact is the truly successful, revolutionary products deliver want customers want and people have considered unrealistic or impossible in the past.

The whole DV and computer revolution has been built on this very principle. While there is no "perfect" anything, there are "revolutionary" products.

The VX1000, XL1, DVX100, CineAlta and even the HD-10U were all revolutionary products delivering what was considered unrealistic at the time. They all have flaws and compromises (some more than others), but there mark on the market is far different from many other cams there were updates, mediocre or outright failures.

The unknown info is if Canon (or for that matter the HVX200) have a "revolutionary" product in the wings. The FX1/Z1 has certainly had it's impact but I'm not sure it's revolution yet. The HD100 is too new itself.

Bottom line, there is nothing wrong for asking for more, aiming high and demanding excellence.

Kryz Woodhouse September 12th, 2005 10:23 PM
I'd just like to say that putting HDV into the body of the XL2 (bogus or not) would be a nice compliment to the XL2. Giving anybody with both to share suitable equipment. I understand that Lenses might not be suited (which is a shame, but realistic) but the advantages for other accessoriries would be great.

At this moment I am hesitant to spend much on gear for my XL2 because of the looming change to HDV, however it would be a great to be able to confidentially buy gear for the XL2 that possbily will be able to transfer to a HDV XL3.

On the other hand, I am a bit disapointed because there are a few simple design features of the XL2 that could be improved. (eg, I wish the zoom on the cary handle was larger to enable smoother operation). Idealy I would like a HDV canon that retains the style and set up of the XL2, but with some areas more refined, not just copied.

Overall I am a bit disapointed with what has been yet suggested about the new HDV. I am kinda hoping that it is bogus, or at least just and indication of Canon's intended direction. My initial delight that HDV was to be as the XL2 was soon dropped when closer examination of the pics showed not even any attempt to make improvements of some of the features.

Rob Lohman September 13th, 2005 02:20 AM
A bit late, unfortunately, but here are some remarks from me:

- Yes, it really was being displayed at IBC (you trust your wrangler, right?)

- Yes, it was a mockup with nothing inside

- Yes, they where not saying anything about it

- Yes, there where extra buttons on the camera. Two by the recording button on the right and two as mentioned earlier.

- There where extra input/outputs on the right side of the XLR audio connector box. Probably more audio input/outputs or perhaps component out?

The only stand Canon has on IBC is Canon Broadcast. But due to the often
requests about the XL range of cameras they decided to have them on display
in the booth as well. As indicated earlier there where two working XL2's (one
with a mattebox system in front of it) and this Canon HDV mockup.

James Emory September 13th, 2005 06:48 AM
And now for some comic relief! Black Is Professional Grade!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
You know, painting a camera full black doesn't make it professional.
Well Michael, here's someone who would disagree.

Black is professional thread:
www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=17308

The Best Of posts for above thread:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost....2&postcount=11
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost....3&postcount=14
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost....2&postcount=19
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost....6&postcount=38
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost....3&postcount=39
___________________________

More great threads
www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=17710

www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=17709

To view the complete selection and get a few more laughs, just do a search on the thread starter's name. ENJOY!!!

Ram Ganesh September 13th, 2005 09:06 PM
maybe its a 2/3 CCD?

otherwise the pricepoint is crazy!

Greg Boston September 13th, 2005 09:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Lohman
The only stand Canon has on IBC is Canon Broadcast. But due to the oftenrequests about the XL range of cameras they decided to have them on displayin the booth as well. As indicated earlier there where two working XL2's (onewith a mattebox system in front of it).
That's pretty much the same setup they had at NAB. Minus, of course, the HDV mockup. And yes, I do trust a wrangler(well, most of the time).:-)

=gb=

Christopher C. Murphy September 13th, 2005 09:43 PM
It looks offical...no 24p on Canon's new HDV. How weird is that? Their previous model has 24p! Granted it's SD, but it's damn nice image for a lot less money.

If I were going to buy a Canon...I'd actually think about getting their XL2 now. It'll be cheaper and it does 24p for film outs...sounds like a bargain camera to me. This newer Canon HDV is up against still compeditors that are cheaper!

Pete Bauer September 13th, 2005 10:18 PM
Christopher, are you privy to a verified source that nobody else has reported as yet? I'm certainly hopeful for an HD camera announcement at Canon Expo in the coming days, but so far am unaware of any substantiated information about the capabilities of their next camera.

If you have an official source, please link it or tell us where to find it. Thanks!

Christopher C. Murphy September 14th, 2005 04:37 AM
I don't like linking to other sites, but here is where I found the information.

"....will not have a 24 frames progressive scan mode"
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...-Camcorder.htm

Peter Wiley September 14th, 2005 04:53 AM
Have a look at this blog on the speech yesterday by Fujio Mitarai, President and CEO of Canon.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content...po-Keynote.htm

and possible reference to more than one camera.

Apparently the announcement is going to come today, the 14th, at 10:30AM. I am eating my words on that photo . . .

Pete Bauer September 14th, 2005 05:54 AM
Christopher and Peter,

Agree that we don't want to make a habit of going to other web sites -- some of which may have a reputation for, shall we say, speculative reporting -- as we look for the hot news, but considering the buzz about Canon lately, verfying the source of the latest rumors and reports are most appreciated. Thanks.

Happily, we can stay right here at DVinfo for all the latest rock-solid information on Canon's new camera. As of today DVinfo "Kennelmaster" Chris Hurd has established a new forum just for Canon's new HD camera:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?f=101

I'm going to look in that forum to see what's new and true about Canon's new camera, like whether there's no NATIVE 24p, or no 24p at all (I'm sure we are all hoping for the former, not the latter). If you need me, that's where I'll be. C'mon over everyone!

Elie Zakaria September 15th, 2005 11:48 AM
Uhmm...

Here is the offical press release just in case you missed it, following this thread I saw no mention of it so I decided to post it :-)

http://opd.usa.canon.com/templatedat...0914_xlh1.html

Also here is a pic!!

http://opd.usa.canon.com/templatedat...loRes_XLH1.jpg

The hi res shot is here...
http://opd.usa.canon.com/templatedat...hiRes_XLH1.jpg

Looks interesting :)

Peter Moore September 15th, 2005 11:56 AM
Great, same crap as with the Z1 - it has some kind of "24 frame mode" but what does this mean? Will they botch it like CF24 with the Sony? If the CCDs cannot capture progressively, there is no way to make 24p without blending fields, and that means resolution loss.

Canon, WHY OH WHY? You had an almost perfect camera! Why did you botch it?

Michael Maier September 15th, 2005 12:16 PM
That's my question too. If it blends fields to make a frame, how is it possible to be as good as real progressive? Fields are not captured at the same time. To me, it seems like while progressive is like a solid digital still, this method would be like taking a still from a video stream, or a video still. I still can't see it.
Besides, in this day and age, going back to some sort of frame movie mode just seems like a step backwards. Maybe after the XL-H1S, Canon will make a XL-H2 with real progressive.
I hope sample footage will come soon.

Peter Moore September 15th, 2005 12:31 PM
Right, it probably will be comparable to the Frame Mode of the XL1 and GL1-2. Which, incidentally, isn't terrible. Their field blending algorithm is actually quite good as compared with most any other method of making 60i->24p. But still, why not just capture at freakin 1080p?

Damon Botsford September 15th, 2005 01:32 PM
I could be very mistaken, but doesn't the Sony F900 get progressive from interlaced fields? 24psf... something like that. Good enough for Lucas... good enough for me.

We might be suprised by this new camera.

James Emory September 15th, 2005 01:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elie Zakaria
Uhmm...

Here is the offical press release just in case you missed it, following this thread I saw no mention of it so I decided to post it :-)

http://www.opd.usa.canon.com/templat...0914_xlh1.html
Thanks for posting that informative page. I actually know what the hell is going on with the features now. I am not able to save the H1 images to my PC though. I can copy the image files but they don't display once on my machine.

Mike Marriage September 15th, 2005 01:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damon Botsford
Good enough for Lucas... good enough for me.

I hope you don't say the same about scripts and performances! :)

Damon Botsford September 15th, 2005 02:02 PM
Nooooooooo way, Mike!!!!!!! Talking purely technical.

Jimmy Smits??? gimme a break... and that Hayden Christianson couldn't act his way out of a paper bag!

Bill Porter September 15th, 2005 03:45 PM
Re: looks like a spray painted XL-2


If true, hey, at least it was spray. There would have been brush or roller marks if they did it the other way, and them'd have to be sanded off.


;-)

Kevin Calumpit September 15th, 2005 04:30 PM
Here this cant get any more official than Canon's very own site

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/con...&modelid=12152

then if you click on the "HDV recording" it tells you what it can record
it says 24F and 30F and 60i which im guessing the 24F isnt really 24P
only time will tell if it looks good or not.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:25 PM.
Page 3 of 4 12 3 4
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network