1080 vs 720 (closed)
 

Ive recently been reading up on the forum and although there are some great discussion about the JVC Pro HD line and the Sony and Cannon lines, I have not found something that answers my question. So I guess I might as well ask it.

I dont care about what is better, what is the difference betweem Cannon/Sony's 1080 resolution, versus JVC's 720...? I dont care about Interlaced or Progressive. I can always fix things in post, and I mostly shoot for the intention of Television and occasioanlly the home theatre system with a Pojector screen about 1/4 the size of a regular cinema.

I need a Basic 101, and why ppl think one is better than the other. I need to know what I'm getting into, bacuse I want a JVC HD-101E (I'm in Australia so I dont know the US model numbers) but the Sony Z1 looks tempting and is much cheaper by comparrison, yet I do want a shoulder cam that is under the $10,000 AUD mark. And Cannon cant help with their $14,000 AUD HD cam.

Leo

"I dont care about Interlaced or Progressive."

Well that IS the differance.
If you want a shoulder cam that fits your price, it looks like the JVC is your only option.

I guess I can understand that... But what irks me is that there are some people out there that say 720 isnt real HDV... I dont know what that means, but I thought that they were talking about 1080i and 720i...

Still, JVC will have to be the cam I'm lookin for.

There are two flavors of HDV. Each one is as "real" as the other. There's the JVC flavor, which is 720p, and the Sony flavor which is 1080i. And Ken is quite right, the primary difference between the two is progressive vs. interlace.

according to the spec 720p is real... lol
and according to the manufacturers who are making money from this, its real enough to earn money with...

alot of people also say that HDV isnt real HD...

to me... the difference between 720p and 1080i is afew very key major points.
the first is system resources. with 720p, you dont need oodles of CPU and HDD capacity and grunt. 720p uses only a slightly marginally higher capacity than DV25. on top of that, 720p is true progressive, being that youre getting full frames in HD resolution without interlaced artefacting. On top of that, progressive scan allows for a clean acquistion of stills (without interlacing) as well as progressive motion which is what the "film look" is all about. To me the film look is alot more than progressive, you need good lighting, a great DoF and above all, a good subject to shoot..

If your running ur gear off a projector or plasma, i would recommend delivery in Progressive scan.

In Aus, the Canon is going to go for $14000, while the HVX will hit jsut under the $10k mark, the JVC is at $9k and the Z1 is at $7k
I dont see the need for shoulder mount unless its what youre used to, however i know many guys who used to shoot with the ENG type DSR units, whove jumped ship to the FX/Z1 and are not looking back. Health issues with weight and physiical restrictions while shooting with these cameras is no longer an issue for them.
As for broadcast, i regualarly delivery to DigiBetaSP from HDV shot with Z1s, If i had the choice though, i woulda held back and gotten the HD101e, simply due to its similar mechanics with regard to image tweaking like the DVX100. I also like the lens on the unit, as well as its form factor. JVC did alot of work on these units, but i wa advised to wait for a second release before buying one. Unfortunately due to NDA i cant go into it.
But now that the HVX is coming out soon... well things will change...

We can provide the Basic 101, but not why "one is better" because that pretty much constitutes a format war and we don't do that on this site. Choose the one which is right for your specific applications. In other words, you're the only one who can determine which one is right FOR YOU. Hopefully we can help out in that process, but we are not hashing out a 720p vs. 1080i battle here. Period.

Even if you tried to argue what format it better, you couldn't win on either front because everyone works and produces their content differently. There's just too many variables. Since I do corporate video, and 90% of my content is viewed on the computer via interactive CD's or from PC Projectors, that 720 progressive seems to be a good fit. I'm going to rent one and see for myself.

Pete

Even though I shoot 1080i, I often encode to 720 because that is the native resolution of the majority of the televisions out there (mine included - for now), it fits better on a PC screen, and the frame size reduction reduces some of the quality loss involved in deinterlacing, and it is easier on the processor to play it back.

For broadcasting, you will find different stations broadcast different formats. So choose according to your clients needs if you can.

My advice is choose the right camera for your end result as well as the features you get for shooting. Take your time and choose carefully.

Thanks all for that guys... It seems that Progresive is the way for me then. Which means I need to come up with another 2 grand somehow.

I'm sorry if it looked like I was about to spark a format war debate. I didnt intend that, I was only asking why some people would recomend 1080i and others, 720p. And when they do, I get the response, "Its so much better" etc. I know the VHS and beta format war story, I hope it never comes to that in our own time. I hope we can all get along ;)

Leo, the answer for you depends on the kind of footage and end product you are seeking, which you havent really indicated.

Personally I have no interest in 24p "film look", but I do shoot 'run and gun' material with high action.

For that reason I've recently switched from JVC 720p to Sony 1080i, and am pleased with the results.

Drats, I'm getting ahead of myself.

I'm a doco maker who use to use an old hi 8 cam. It was for school uses and secondary material for people in education who wanted to show their kids 'other' certain points of views. Like Showing Outfoxed to a Conservative, Republican School.

Now I want to do both Doco, and start making short films for festivals. So basically, I want something that is really felxible, and I was leaning toward JVC, because not only I can get a picture that I do not need to de-interlace for projection and other such stuff, but something that can be used on DVD and DVD-ROM. So I guess, Its the JVC for me.

Its worth noting that almost all HD broadcasters require 1080 i or p for programme delivery and won't accept 720. That dosn't mean you can't shoot 720 and then up convert, but the delivery format is normally 1080 HDCAM. I sell a lot of stock footage and 1080 is far more popular than 720 with my clients.

Alister,
What is more "popular" is different than what is "required." I'm curious as to your experiences there. The two local stations we deal with won't take 720p, but they do offer (for a fee in their post room) an upconvert to 1080i or 30p. We deliver on hard drive, as it's easier to get it in to their media server than if we deliver on HDCAM, and we rent the HDCAM deck anyway, so it saves us cost.
However, who are the clients/stations you've got that demand/require 1080, and are you delivering in 60i or 30p?

I'm actually a Theatre Graduate with a Background in Videography and directing.

Im 20 going 21. Having said that, I know how to shoot well... The Problem arises inthe cost of having to rent. Which is why I REALLY want to be sure what I'm getting will last mean around 5 or 10 years .... I'm hoping at least 10. But I guess thats a long shot huh?

OK, so you were not around for VHS vs. Beta Max. It just sounded funny, and like it was comming from a kid. Apparently I wasn't far off. Damn I feel real old now.

Leo, only you will know what will suit your needs better (progressive/interlaced) based on the style of your projects. Judging from your responces you have known all along which suits you, just you wanted to take a short cut on your home work. I am glad you shoot well and I wish you the best with whatever cam you choose. See you at the Oscars.
Good luck and good shooting.
Ken.