The JVC IS genuine 24p also. Untill the HVX (it seems), it's the only true progressive camcorder in the bunch.

The HVX will shoot true 1080p but due to the DVCPRO HD codec it uses, will record it using a 1080i stream. It is the same method as used on the DVX100 and XL2, which record their progressive footage using a 50i/60i DV stream.

Chris, I don't know what you have been able to see so far, but what is your impression of the camera's general picture quality?

Check out my brief thoughts on the JVC here:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=50903

Reply to those thoughts on that thread.

heath

The DVX100 calls itself 24p and they put progressive material in an interlaced format then you use pulldown to acheive the 24p, if that is what Canon is doing then why not call it 24p. Some people are saying it's a "legal" thing, but does that mean that Panasonic is screwed legally for calling it's DVX100 a 24p camera. It seems there has to be something different going on.

I heard a rumor someone owned the trademark to 24p and was to receive money for that right. But I think that's been debunked.

Though, as we all know with HDV, to use the logo, you gotta pay some money:

http://www.hdv-info.org/

heath

It is different - the Canon uses a interlaced CCD and interlaced video stream to carry the footage, the DVX uses a progressive CCD and that progressive footage is only carried in an interlaced stream.

Canon has come up with a way to create a progressive effect using interlaced CCDs. Sony merely de-interlaces the interlaced footage to make CineFrame mode, loosing resolution. Apparently the Canon manages to maintain the full 1080, maybe by scanning both fields at once..??

kind of think of it as when you watch progressive video on your TV. The TV is still an interlaced device and it displays first the even lines and then the odd lines. Your video looks like and is progressive.

I do not know this 100% but think of the Canon as the opposite. You have an interlaced device but each of those fields is taken at the same time but still alternated. I don't know how they do it. This would give you a full 1440x1080 pixels at one moment in time but a different way of getting to that point. Maybe there are two processors that sample the odd fields and the even fields at the exact same time.

I expect it's going to be something like the Frame mode on the XL1s. Canon's press release talks about the individual frames in 24F as opposed to the "exceptional resolution" in 60i impling that there is a resolution loss. I can't remember (or find) anything on how frame mode worked in the XL1s but I do recall that it involved averaging of adjacent lines which gave better SNR but cost somewhat in resolution. These musings are just that: musings.

If it is like FRAME mode, that is a back step for them... although I personally liked frame mode, it is now consider limited.

Go to:

www.usa.canon.com

And click on Consumer, Digital Camcorders, then the camera. That may answer some questions.

heath

Even "if" it was frame mode (which I doubt it is) that might still be better than 720p.

Somebody mentioned that frame mode on the XL1 had about 360 lines compared to 480 instead of only 240 from one field. Based on that ratio "if" the XLH! used frame mode we should get about 810 lines instead of only 540 from the Z1 and 720 from the HD100. The only other camera that might beat that is the HVX200 but we do not yet know how they will get 1080p. It may be interpolated from 720p chips so it may not be any better than 810 lines from frame movie mode.

Again this is a what if it is situation.

I don't think it's like Frame Mode. Also, check this out:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...hlight=28+days

heath

24f
 

A little confusion seems to be being introduced to this question of 24P. Lets set aside the naming of names point initially: The key issue is that if the data on the CCD is clocked at the same moment AT 24 FPS but then read out off the block as two interlaced fields, we really don't care about how it is read do we? The key issue is that the image capture is at one moment in time and at 24Hz

The important issue then becomes do they then recombine the two fileds to form a FRAME at 24 Hz BEFORE any image processing. They would be crazy not to, but maybe there are processing limitations on this (like no actual full frame store anywhere). What happens to get the data into the HDV transport stream seems irrelavant then, provided the field sequence is marked, and recoverable.

Then back to the naming of names: 24P implies the data can be read off the block progressively. 24F implies the data can be CAPTURED at 24Hz but is read as FIELDS. So there is a difference, and maybe it would affect noise patterns or something, but it probably is simply a technical difference, not one that affects the actual image we finally get to use.

Or is this too logical?

Someone say yes Charles...this is what we do....

Thank you Mr. Spock, that is very logical.