Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Hingsberg
I wouldn't say superior resolution. Both cameras use the same bag of tricks to achieve higher "effective" resolutions. Canon goes with horizontal pixel shift to achieve 1440 pixels horizontally but since it's an interlaced sensor offers 1080 pixels natively for vertical resolution.
|
Chris already beat me to it, but there is no pixel shift on the Canon CCD. All elements are native 1440x1080 active pixels.
Quote:
A resolution chart in front of both cams may reveal slightly more sharpness with the XLH1 in 1080i modes but for 720p shooters likely no advantage - especially if you have to deinterlace in post or go with the frame mode of the Canon.
|
There is more detail there, but the frame mode does present a problem on fast moving subjects - as I noted above. On a static res chart, the pixel shift of the HVX makes it appear to have more resolution than it does... Various wobulation techniques can break down the pixel shift, as can fast motion once again, and detail is lost. Subjects that are far from the camera such as scenery type shots begin to test the limits of the pixel shift. Look at Robert's report on the H1 vs. the HVX for scenery/landscape shots.
Quote:
Adding P2 cards to the HVX may not make the XLH1 more expensive, but if you want to record 4:2:2 you need to go external with the XLH1 and that's no cheap option either. Let's not forget the advantages of shooting to solid state memory either ie. no mechanical parts, no maintenance, quiet, use in harsh environments, drop it in your fish tank, etc..
|
The 4:2:2 isn't all it's cracked up to be... Not by the time the DVCPROHD codec trashes your resolution from a pixel shifted 960x540 (up to 1280x720 or 1920x1080) down to a 960x720 and 1280x1080 respectively (1440x1080 for PAL users). The pixel shift along with Panasonic's color matrix create stunning visuals with the HVX and I do love the camera for this. But sooner or later, depending on the task at hand, the pixel shift and low-res CCD block become a hinderance to the camera.
Quote:
Speaking of 4:2:2 it's more than just less jaggies for chroma-keying. DVCPRO HD uses intraframe compression which compared to HDV makes for a lot more ease during the editing and rendering process. It's exactly why programs like Cineform exist - so people can convert their HDV non frame independent compressed footage to something similar to DVCPRO HD (intraframe compression) and be happy editing.
|
True, but the conversion to Cineform RAW is quick and painless and it can be done as the video is captured. There are times that the extra color depth of the DVCPROHD from the HVX gives more range to pull a key, but I've found with a properly lit set and greenscreen I have just as easy of a time with the higher resolution of the HDV originated footage. Honestly, I don't know which one is truly better. I have found both to work just fine and both to be lacking of what I want... Hence why I'm shifting over to RED. The keying tests I've done on RED frames are mind-blowing. It's so clean and has all the color depth I can hope for, images practically key themselves in Shake. Personally, I despise HDV in every way. Especially with all the in-fighting amidst the HDV crowd and how tapes from one brand of camera/deck won't always work in another. Sony cameras/decks play back 720p HDV from JVC cameras/decks just fine, but Sony cripples them and won't let the signal pass out over HDMI or firewire, only component. That's just wrong... I have no love for DVCPROHD either.
Anyway, I'm going to get a huge dose of HDV stupidity this weekend and for about 10 days of editing after that. Hopefully it will be the last time... And to make matters worse, it's coming as 720p30 from a JVC JY-HD10U camcorder... w/Letus35 adpert and Nikkor lenses. Should be interesting... I get to cut that with stuff I shoot on the HVX.. All the HVX work is mostly going to be 720p60 and/or greenscreen. At least the project involves hot chicks with guns, so I do at least have that to look forward to.
Quote:
Let's not even begin to started on other features of the HVX like 4 channel 16 bit uncompressed audio, variable frame rates from 12 to 60 fps, not front end heavy........ . ...
|
Of course... You just mentioned two of the biggest reasons why I bought the HVX200 in the first place. In fact Panasonic had me at 60fps, 720p. Tapeless workflow was the icing on the cake, even though now I'm a bit grumpy over the [much] slower than initially promised evolution of the P2 format.