If you care about video image quality (large sensor, interchangeble lenses etc,) then 20fps is nearly a deal killer and 24p is probably more appealing than 30p for true shallow DOF film look, so D90 wins. All Canon has really is a better codec.

I'm a Pentax K10d user right now, so I still waiting before pulling the DSLR upgrade trigger, but the GH1 looks like the smart choice right now. But Nikon, Pentax etc. might surprise as well.

Noooooo... that's not what I'm saying at all.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I'm not saying 20fps is acceptable for us under any circumstance (it isn't). I'm proposing that the majority of folks out there who buy this thing will be happy to have 1080 video at any frame rate. For a significant percentage of them, this will be their first way to record 1080 video. A big chunk of the Rebel's market probably does not own an HD camcorder and has no plans to buy one.

What I'm objecting to, though, is this ludicrous notion that 1080 at 20fps is somehow a "fiasco" or "suicide" or "not worth offering." How utterly over the top can you get? From the standpoint of the average consumer, sure it's worth offering; one look at the sample clips bears that out. No it's not perfect, and no it's not something you or I would use. But geez... there should be shades of gray here instead of black and white. There will be thousands of customers who are going to be thrilled with this camera's HD video feature, even in 1080 at 20fps, and there will be thousands of customers who probably won't even care about it. But of course it's worth offering.

I've seen just as ugly handheld from the 5D2 though.

As far as I'm concerned, this whole "video on a D-SLR" concept would benefit from having some kind of lock-out mode where you can't toggle video unless the camera is mounted on sticks. In my opinion that would do everybody a favor.

Thrilled? That's pretty strong. Maybe "excited" when they see the specs but unlikely when they see it on their TV. First, most people don't have setups and viewing distances that resolved 720p vs 1080p but only the most nearly blind people cannot tell 30fps from 20fps. So they may get all excited about 1080p - until they shoot it and decide 720p at 30fps results in much more pleasing video. 90% of that market will shoot handheld and the 1080p handheld clip I watched on fullscreen 17" laptop was really unpleasant with the jerks and stutters with the rolling shutter to boot.

So that means the 20fps 1080p is primarily for Canon to market that feature, not because people will be "thrilled" with it's quality.

I replied before your edit. Now that is very valid point. I've yet to see D-SLR video that works well handheld because of rolling shutter. The GH1 might do it but I've not seen any real native clips yet for us to tell.

From my IMAX work on my project, screen size greatly amplifies screen and motion artifacts. To pull off handheld without making people physically ill (which happened to a filmmaker in Austin who projected his handheld doc onto an IMAX screen) is very difficult and you are best served on sticks, dolly etc. I think this first company that pulls off either very fast rolling shutter or global shutter on CMOS DSLR or video-only camera has a major advantage.

For a number of years, the video mode in the little PowerShot Elph gave you two choices, 320/30p and 480/15p. Everyone I knew who owned a PowerShot -- and these were all video people -- chose to shoot video in VGA at 15fps rather than QVGA at 30fps. I'm not saying that justifies putting 20fps on an HD frame size, but knowing that history might provide some insight as to why they went that way.

Screen size - what we tolerate on an a small laptop window is very different from a 60" Plasma.

You seem to keep ignoring the 720-30p mode... The D90 is 720p as well. So basically, this Rebel is the same as the D90, except it's 30fps, but ALSO has a 1080 mode (albeit weird) AND it's cheaper?

ANd for me, 20fps isn't a personal deal killer, I shot my last short film on a Canon 1D mkII at 8fps.

I'm not, I'm just saying 720/30p is old news now and it's good it's cheaper than D90 as 24p is a big deal. Converting 30p to 24p can be done in Compressor or AE but it's a pain.

I think the bottom line is that the video in this model is disappointing to most compared to what other cameras offer given this is Canon's second model with video. I think Nikon et. al. response will show this and the GH1 already does.

This model is only disappointing to those with unrealistic expectations and an unfamilliarity with consumer wants/needs. Everyone on these video forums is biased against it because they want/expect pro features on an entry level DSLR... At this early stage in the game, that's ridiculous. It's a soccer mom SLR made with soccer mom features... no one besides our tiny sliver of the market even knows or cares what 24p is... plus, 30p is a better format for your average shooter anyway. This is a home use camera, not a digital cinematography machine.

Canon is going to sell a billion of these regardless of what haters on internet forums think.

Canon Rebels always sell well, nobody's arguing that. I'm not arguing that it won't sell well - the 1080p 20fps is actually very smart marketing and why I argue it was included and will sell well. My point is about who will be happy with it or thrilled with it or love it after using it - some may tolerate but hardly anyone is going to love it.

Especially if Nikon's etc. new models offer better. The success of the HV20/30/40 points to a camera that serves the consumer and prosumer well - those models have done so well despite some quirks for pro use - I have a pimped HV30. But the T1i is no HV series yet.

Well no, in those days playback from my Elph was cabled into a 31" CRT in the living room. It was always much better to fill the screen at 15fps than to use only a quarter of it at 30fps.

They'll be excited when they see it on their TV. It's a two-megapixel image twenty times per second. They'll be quite happy with it. That is, if they shoot properly (always the real trick no matter what).

You're right in that it's easy to tell 30fps from 20fps, but 20fps isn't anymore "unwatchable" than 24fps is (the most badly used frame rate ever -- not by filmmakers, of course, but by Joe Average -- to shoot in 24p should require passing a practical exam). 20fps certainly isn't great; but done with care it'll probably be no less tolerable than 24p (done without care and it'll be just as bad as 24p). The trouble, obviously, will be getting people to do video with care, no matter what the frame rate is.

I think there will be some folks with 1080 sets who will choose to shoot video with this camera in 720, and some folks with 1080 sets who will choose to shoot in 1080. It's not going to go all one way or all the other.

I thought the handheld clip from Gizmodo was no more annoying than any other handheld samples I've seen, but I'm not getting any jerks or stutters from it or from Rob Galbraith's clips. This is with the latest version of QuickTime from a 2.5GHz quad-core Intel with 4GB of RAM and a 256MB video card and a 22" HD display at full screen. Not exactly a spectacular system. My laptop is a 2.2GHz dual-core Intel with 3GB of RAM and a 128MB video card, and it will not drive 1080 video, unfortunately, without a lot of stutter (edit: I mean *this* 1080; my laptop can handle 1080 AVCHD up to 17mbps or so).

Comparing the same angles Galbraith took of Grand Central Station and 42nd Street at both 720 and 1080, yes, I can clearly see the difference in frame rate but no it's not what I would dismiss as unusable, not by a long shot...

Ahh, somehow I missed these Galbraith shots earlier today. Now these look much better than the other stuff I've seen. Better than anything I've gotten out of my D90 (at 720) but I still don't really like the 20fps.

Anyone want to buy a lightly used D90? I'm willing to give up the 24p for a better codec. I'm about sick of having almost good footage out of my little D90 but having it held back by an iffy codec and or bitrate whichever is the culprit. I do however like the way the D90 handles highlights and color... maybe someone can cross breed a Canon and Nikon?

Well, sure they're just locked-down shots, but a lot of what you see there is Galbraith. Here's what I propose: a side-by-side D-SLR video shoot-out, a Rebel T1i at 1080p20, a second Rebel T1i at 720p30, a Nikon D90 at 720p24, and a 5D Mk. II at 1080p30. Identical settings as much as auto will allow, pointed at the same shot. I think that would be interesting. Wait until June to do this and throw in the GH1.

I'd PAY to see results from that shoot-out. Great suggestion, sir.

Having an articulating screen on an HD capable interchangeable lens camera is a huge benefit. In many concerts its best to have a camera that has excellent lowlight capabilities and holding a Z1u on top of your head for a long time because of people in front of you can be a little bit difficult. I would much rather prefer doing that with a GH1.

Anyway there is a workaround that you can use for the T1i and the 5D Mark II. You may or may not think it’s the best solution but you got to admit it’s still a good idea nonetheless, as long as you don’t cause any accidents.
View Category

Nathan, I agree with everything you said. I'd even push what you said a little further. I think we're right around the corner from a camera that will be even more significant than the VX1000. A cam that levels the playing field for a long time. Tapeless. Shallow DOF. Over and under cranking. Exposure control--all for a reasonable price. I wonder how many of us are sitting on the sidelines waiting. I say a year-and-a-half and we'll have it.

I don't know about that. A significant percentage (that will use the video feature at all) may well have an HV10/20/30 or one of the many Sony HDV flavors already. These things have been on the market for three years now. When they pull 1080/20p off this thing and try to stick it into iMovie or Pinnacle, it's not going to be pretty.

You're going to wait for a year and a half? that's like... forever!

If I can be of assistance... the footage from my 5Dmark2 makes the footage from my HV20, HVX200, and HD100 look like shit. No question. It's no stretch that the Rebel's video will look very, very similar to the 5D2's. I think the actual image quality will make up for the lack of temporal resolution in 1080.

Most importantly, this is going to save people having both a SLR and a camcorder, which to most people is more imporant than having 24p/30p (since your average soccer mom doesn't know/care what that is, and just wants to be able to take some video clips of her kids to show the grandparents).

If you're waiting, you're not creating.

The single worst excuse for sitting on the sidelines is "the cameras aren't good enough yet." That's complete nonsense, of course. It's a horrible mentality. We're currently living among an embarrassment of riches with regard to the quality and sheer affordability of digital media content creation... we've been there for several years now.

So much remarkable material has been created with "lesser" equipment and technology that came before. The limitlessness and the limitations don't come from the gear or the technology... they come from the people who are using it. Anyone who says they can't use what's available right now isn't ever going to be able to use anything.

The "right camera" is the one that works, the one you can get your hands on right now this minute.

Not picking on anyone in particular here... this attitude that "the gear isn't good enough yet" is a mental block, a self-imposed barrier to creativity and free expression that affects a lot of people. I don't know of any cure, I just try to tackle it with tough love. Get off your ass and start shooting. Walk away from this web site, pick up a cheap $200 digicam and go outdoors and make photographs and little movies.

My bad. I meant the programs will choke on the non standard 20p video, not the quality of the video itself.

I totally agree with you on that one!

Or you could....

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/dv-challe...up-thread.html

I've edited stuff captured at 15fps in iMovie and it didn't get upset. I doubt there'd be significant problems with 20 fps (QuickTime happily takes different frame rates and does it's best to convert them to match.)

That said, if I got a Rebel, I *think* I'd primarily shoot in 720p.

Exactly. I'd love a perfect digital cinema camera - there isn't one yet. I think Scarlet may be what I'm looking for, but best case scenario by the time it's readily available I'll have shot 5 or more incredible looking shorts on my 5DmkII, despite all of it's 'limitations'.

It's not just that if you're waiting, you're not creating - if you aren't shooting, you aren't improving (couldn't think of a catchy way to make it rhyme). I know that every film I shoot now will contribute far more to the quality of the films I make in the future than whatever camera I end up shooting them on.

Right - remember this is a competitor to the D90. 1080p makes for a nice marketing item in a feature list, but when it comes down to it this should be a great 720p camera while the D90 isn't. If you'd like the image and compression quality of the 5D but can't afford it this is a much better alternative to the D90 for now.

Sorry for rambling, but it just hurts every time ;) You are discussing that 20p is not good enough, ok lets take the lower res 30p option. Where, where, where are our 25p? We have good money here that converts to Yen at a favourable rate.

The *real shame* to me is that these things don't do 25p. That's what I don't understand...

If you're not churning, you're not learning?

Regarding not having the perfect camera, as soon as you get it, you'll find that you don't have the right lights, the right support system, the right monitor, the right location, the right actors, the right props and so on.

Shoot what you can. Keep in mind though that the world's best photographers don't show *all* their photographs. If you never shoot crummy stuff, you'll never shoot good stuff.

Very well said, Mr. Hurd. Very well said.

I recently had a conversation with my wife (who is also my amazing producer) where I said, "I think we need to sell the XLH1 and get into either an EX3 or an HPX300 for our next film. The cameras are so much better now." She looked at me deadpan and eventually responded, "We just watched our XLH1 movie on one of the biggest movie screens in Los Angeles and it looked absolutely gorgeous! Explain to me again why we need yet another new camera?"

To which I didn't really have a great answer. I went on about data workflows and all of that. I went on about chips and raster and glass.... and that's when she kinda just walked out of the room. LOL!

That's a great question! It's best if you have a specific answer, like...

* Our next release should be on Blu-ray; our DVX is only good enough for DVDs
* We're filming our next documentary at night with natural light; we need more sensitivity
* We're filming a boxer wearing a helmet cam; rolling shutter won't do
* We're filming the whole thing in a phone booth; we need a wider lens
* We're filming lions in the wild; we need a longer lens

If you don't have a specific problem that your camera won't solve, you probably don't need a different camera.

Also, most indies would probably do better spending the money on lights, support, audio - and more pizza for the crew. :)

Take it easy fellas. Waiting on the sidelines to buy your next cam doesn't mean you're not producing and creating. It just means the technology you want in a camera for the price range you want isn't there yet.
From what I see, a great cam is just around the bend and if what you're using now suffices I'd wait. One quick question though. One poster mentioned the canon 5dmkII blew the HV20 out of the water. That's mainly what I use with a letus. I have a ton of old nikon glass so I'm chomping at the bit to get the canon but I'm waiting at least until it supports 24p. In good light does the 5dmkII really blow the HV20 out of the water?

A great cam is *always* just around the bend.

Because of its very large sensor size and high, clean ISO capability,
the 5D2 is superior to just about any existing HD camcorder in low
light. But if you're holding out for 24p, you could be in for quite a
wait... I wouldn't count on that happening any time soon.

pal mode
 

what recording will the pal mode do in the new rebel
for video

michael seiler

MauiHDTV

So are you suggesting that in good light they are basically on par. Low light is one thing...but I believe in good light...anything can look good.

I agree with you wholeheartedly, Ian. In good light, anything can look good (and can be made to look great).

There is no PAL mode, unfortunately.

I've shot more low light so far than good light on the 5D, and I haven't attempted to intercut with HV20 footage directly, but I wouldn't say they're on par. In my experience intercutting HV20 with XHA1 footage even under ideal lighting situations had the HV20 falling slightly short of the XHA1 - and I feel the same way about the XHA1 footage when cut with the 5D. I don't know that it 'blows it out of the water', but it's certainly an improvement. I'd bet the difference is even more noticeable if you're comparing to an HV20 with a lens adapter which inevitably degrades the image quality.

960x540??
 

I just download some 500D some 1920 x 1080 clip from
Rob Galbraith DPI: HD video capture, 15MP sensor in Canon EOS Rebel T1i

why it only show 940x540 when i put it in premiere CS3?

am i missing something here?? the 1280 x 720 clips are just fine

I don't have CS3, but I can tell you that Final Cut Express reports both the
Grand Central Station and 42nd Street 1080 clips as 1920 x 1080 at 20fps.

I bet I know what happened.

A high ranking Canon rep and a high ranking Panasonic rep were talking to each other at a bar and after several shots, they decided to make a deal. Panasonic promises not price the GH1 to low while Canon promises not to have either 24 or 30 fps in the 1080 mode of the T1i.




Realistically, I think with some of the bad press that Canon had over the 50D and because the sales will suffer a bit with these new HD capable cameras, a replacement may come within the next few months and that’s what they will use to compete against the GH1.

Nikon is obviously over due to replace the D300 and it’s true that the D400 will have a lot of praise if it records to h.264 at 1080 24p and 30p even at around $2,000 but imagine if they price that to around $1,500 with a lens. For the replacement of the D700 or a newly designed camera with a full frame, I started thinking about which company doesn’t have any professional camcorders and cameras that would be able to help with the video features and it recently popped into my head that Sanyo would be perfect. Nikon should really call them up.

20p has been used before as a cinematic capture frame rate. Team America was captured in 20p.