So in other words, a Sony Z1U costing under $5000 has roughly 80-85% of the resolution of an F900 costing over $100,000? Cool, thanks!

:-)

While I'm sure kevin was joking I have to really step in here and make sure no one takes this to far.

Yes Under controlled lighting, and movement the z1u produced I would estimate an image that was @ 70% the quality of the f900, however when you get into low light, moving camera, and lots of movement, that's when you'll really see the picture breakdown and the power of recording on HDCAM.


Also technically since the z1u topped out at around 675-700 lines and the 900 resolves 1000 you're looking at an image that is maybe 65% of an f900 in 60i mode.

Just saw the pictures and wanted to make sure I note that innovision is a great hd company, but DID NOT have anything to do with these tests, they're good guys and while I'd love to work with them, but this wasn't a sponsered shoot for them (just a shirt they gave me). Also the chart is available for purchase from bandpro.com or directly from DSC labs, and uh you shouldn't, you know... download the picture and make your own.

Not exactly joking, but just having a little fun. Obviously one would expect an expensive HD camera to yield a noticeably better image than a prosumer-priced HDV model, but it's still encouraging we can even have that discussion. Thanks for the correction about the resolution on the F900.

:-)

Kevin I agree it definitely is exciting that we can even begin to compare the big boys to the consumer (prosumer cameras and not do it completely tongue in cheek) The fact is I KNOW that some companies out there are cutting between the 60i off the z1u and 60i on 2/3 inch cameras and getting away with it. (note: our my company is not one of those). While I think it's great that it's being done I hear from the editors that they can see the difference an they have to be careful about how they cut the footage. But I'm sure as the technology grows there will be more and more of a blur in the professional and prosumer... well at least until NAB when the next gen pro commercial are released.

Nick,

Any thoughts/opinions on the lens and the EVF? Also, what did you think of the focus assist features?

To be completely honest I wasn't a huge fan of the EVF. Now I didn't switch over to black and white mode, but for me even with the sony HD Color Viewfinder, it's just hard to get focus on a color viewfinder. Personally I wouldn't want rely just on the image in the VF. I would love to see the camera with a 1000FU, or a mini 35 and the sony vf they're premoting to go with it now.

I like the focus assist features but as Shannon pointed outthe peaking isn't really the greatest thing in the world. For me personally it would be great if you could choose to double the image of something besides the middle of the screen for composition (though you could set your composition, move the camera, check focus, then move the camera back, to check composition but that would probably annoy me after a while) but for run and gun ENG and Studio work that's the perfect place to have a focus assist.

As far as the lens, well uh my PERSONAL opinion... If I could buy a body only kit I would, then just use the mini35 and 35 lenses. The lens itself is a strong lens, though people were correct in pointing out that the wide really isn't THAT wide. I'm also used to using ENG lenses that are 3x the cost of the camera, and I like the full manual feel. That being said, it is a VERY good lens, I do not feel like the camera was hindered by it much at all, I would like to see sharper lenses (I left my eos adapter at home for the test that would have been interesting) and manual lenses but I think this is easily the best lens that canon has ever included with a camera.

Thanks for the feedback, Nick.

It's pretty obvious the biggest compromise on all the "affordable" hd's out there is the VF. I've said before that the resolution needed is probably more like 960x540...but of course that'll never happen. Not at their current prices.

The other fairly big drawback with the H1 is that you can't use the focus assist while recording...or so they say. Tha't s a big advantage to the HVX, also that the HVX focus assist apparently gives you a pixel accurate blow up of the central image in the VF, but the screen itself won't go to black and white and it seems as low res as the DVX's.

Thanks again for doing some good work with the H1!

Barlow.... I have yet to find a viewfinder as nice as the one that comes on the Sony Z1U. The canon XL-H1 viewfindr is bigger and better then that of an XL2...but still, the Sony View finder spanks the hell out of Canon's VF and every other viewfinder for a camera under $20,000 for that matter! Sony got it right with the Z1U VF.

And personally...I think the 20x lens that comes with the XL-H1 produces a superior picture....BUT..... is horribly unresponsive and slow acting. Especially the zoom ring! It's like an old lazy dog who wont move off the porch to let visitors in the doorway. Just slugish and tired. I think Canon did that on purpose to inspire sales for theirforthcoming lenses, but that's just my opinion. For movie making this is fine, because you don't "ZOOM" in and out during a shot anyhow. You move the entire camera rig closer or further to change your angle of view. But for videography....it's ain't like a manual lens BY FAR!

- ShannonRawls.com

Good points, Shannon.

I think the ability to do whip zooms is a fairly critical thing for run-and-gun shooting. I can't tell you how many times I see it on promos for say, the local NBA team. Whip zooms all over the place. Hell, that was a technique played to the hilt in "Napoleon Dynamite".

I know I'm gonna want a manual lens...but, gulp, at what cost?

I'm actually shooting tomorrow with my 16x manual lens on the H1, I'll let you know what I think... Steve Rosen

Won't you get a warning on the screen if you put on another lens? If so does that stupid warning go away after a few seconds?

show me da footage!!!

or even a jpg FROM the footage?? please??

;-)

Look in the other pages and there is a link to shots

Nick,

Found this info here: http://videosystems.com/mag/video_canon_xl_3/

here's what he says in his review/article....

At any rate, what comes out of the HD-SDI spigot is always uncompressed 1080/60i. Newly minted synthetic progressive frames must therefore be segmented into halves in order to fit the 60i cadence. For instance in 30PsF (progressive segmented frames/second), a progressive frame's odd lines are first output, then even lines, amounting to 60 half-frames per second, all of which are reassembled into intact progressive scans upon playback. This introduces the unique irony that 30F, which began life interlaced at 60i, is output as 30PsF at 60i.

24F comes out the HD-SDI spigot as 24PsF, with 2:3 pulldown added to pad 48 half-frames into a total of 60 segments. Downstream devices like NLEs that recognize segmented progressive frames and 24p repeat flags will readily ingest Canon's PsF stream and restore either 30F or 24F “progressive” frames upon playback.

So, essentially, it's treating it the same way a Sony F900 records 24p to it's big huge HDCAM tapes. Thought those that might be curious like we were as to why it always said 60i when connected via HD-SDI.

- ShannonRawls.com