Yeah, by the time my wife and I finally stumbled into bed around 4am Monday morning after an all-night drive back from a thoroughly rigorous and exhausting horse show last weekend, I was thinking "this is why I had to cancel that trip to New York." We spent yesterday and most of today entirely in recuperation. Really sorry I missed this thing... I need to clone myself!

Sorry y'all... it'll have to wait for the morning (GMT -6).

Yeah it was great to meet both of you Boyd and Spot, too bad about the jacket, but there's a jacket on the way for you Chris as soon as you send me your mailing address. And yes that was one hell of a presentation, the MPEG-2 vs AVCHD portion was quite an eye opener. I think Boyd got a lot of it with his digital camera - in between wishing his Z1 could do that :-) The presentation convinced me we probably won't see AVCHD in professional applications for a long while, if ever.

I base that comment largely on the landscape examples they were running because I love shooting that kind of thing. The PDX-10 was a good start for me several years ago with its high quality widescreen mode, but the Z1 was a big step forward. Nevertheless I always wish I could see more detail in complex scenes with trees and fields. The stuff I saw today sure looked like it was a major improvement to me. I think this camera should also be very attractive to wildlife photographers with the 20x zoom and 1.5x digital extender.

To follow up on what Spot said. In 2003, I bought the first "mini-hd" camera and was thoroughly disappointed. I recently sold it and am happy for that!

Test a camera before passing judgment. A room full of blogging pundits don't know what's right for YOU.

heath

I remember, Boyd and I both jumped when Spot used the 1.5 digital zoom to zoom into one of the para-glider's boots, the image is amazingly clean, and looks very usable. That's probably the first time I've ever seen a digital zoom that I felt was good enough to be truly usable.

AVCHD vs MPEG2
 

Hi there!

Excuse my ignorance but would it be possible to elaborate a bit more on this?
Which presentation was this, who delivered it and what were the reasons presented that indicate AVCHD will not make it in the next foreseeable future into the professional camcorder market?

My apologies if this is common knowledge to the other members of this thread but I am rather new in this forum (this is only my 2nd post!) and I was waiting until now for someone (probably Panasonic, given the discontinuation of DVC30) to come up with a small AVCHD camcorder recording long hours in solid media, as this suits better my needs.

Thanks a lot,

Thanasis

Sorry if we were being obtuse.

The portion of the presentation that I thought was very interesting was made by Hugo Giaggioni, Sony's Chief Technical Officer. Boyd took several pictures of the slides, so you should be able to see some of it.

It was very interesting because he explained how the V1 was implemented, why they chose certain technologies, and what we can probably expect down the road.

His main reasons for using MPEG-2 are:
- it is a mature technology across the entire workflow, which means they can provide quality solutions from acquisition to delivery at every stage
- it currently provides better quality at a lower date rate
- specifically, it holds up better than AVCHD over several generations of compression/decompression, he showed us a simple comparision of a difficult image over 5 generations, MPEG-2 held up decently, the AVCHD image was completely degraded.

He did say that he thinks AVCHD will mature much more quickly and that we should see it in the future. But from where I was sitting, it looked like it didn't really deliver at certain points of the workflow, and if it ever did, it would be competing with other maturing technologies.

I think that AVCHD is targeted at a consumer market where editing at most is likely to be cutting out scenes ( shots of feet!!!) and adding titles. I for one would like to know how AVCHD stands up to this use. The SR1 at 15mbs might do very well with this scenario, even as a B camera!!!
Ron Evans

Attention! Long post following!
 

Hi Michael!

Thanks very much for taking the time to reply!

Not at all! If you were, this must be the most knowledgeable and generous group of "obtuse" people I have ever seen :) (by the way, where did you get this word? I had to look it up in the dictionary to know what it means! English is not my first language... )


Very interesting the points Mr Giaggioni made. It is quite surprising that these are coming from Sony though, don't you think? I mean, they are the ones who, along with Panasonic, have defined AVCHD as the next "universal" HD format. Granted, they called it a "consumer" format, but so was DV and HDV called, when they were first introduced, no? One would expect Sony would be a bit more cautious and not exposing the current flaws of this format in the most official way...

I am aware of the issues with AVCHD's great editing difficulties for the time being. Is this what you meant by "certain points of the workflow"? Or is there something else as well?


Given the AVCHD quality issues Mr. Giaggioni presented, what strikes me is that Panasonic has chosen to commit to AVCHD without having any other "cheap" backup options (such as HDV). I was thinking that they MUST have some kind of a trick up their sleeve to be so persistent in not using HDV. I mean, obviously they are loosing such a big market share by not providing cheap long HD recording hours (documentaries, event videography, weddings, to name a part of this lost market). P2 is definitely not ideal for such projects and it looks like it needs a lot of time to arrive to this point (recording hours and cost wise). Do they honestly believe that the "filmmaking" market is so big that it can cover the loss? I would be very surprised if they do!

So?

So, maybe it is just Sony who has not invested a lot in AVCHD yet. Maybe they actually do intent AVCHD in their products to be consumer only. But Panasonic?

What I mean to say with this 2-hours-long monologue is that maybe it is just Sony's implementation of AVCHD that cannot stand the test of comparing with HDV at this moment. Or maybe Panasonic is heading for their biggest blunder in their camcorder history! (and maybe if I use the word "maybe" again, my post will be moved to area 51 :))

By the way: I am not a Panasonic "lover". I am using whatever covers my needs (and too bad nothing is covering all my needs at the moment!). I am just expressing my puzzlement... ( I looked this up in the dictionary as well!)


OK, more to the point of this thread:

Having watched this presentation, what are your conclusions regarding this new technology employed in V1, as opposed to the H1/XH technology? Are we witnessing a real step in front here in terms of quality or is Sony merely testing the market to see if it would accept a new (cheaper to produce) technology with similar image results to their existing products? I am asking this because they did not withdraw their previous models (FX1, Z1). If they were so sure of their new product (I mean, if it was such a leap in front), there would be no need for them to keep their previous models in the market, would there?

Hmmm. this should be the first time someone judges a camcorder based on marketing strategy :)


So, you've managed to read until here! Sorry if I wasted your time!

I promise next post will be shorter!

Thanks a lot,

Thanasis

I think from Mr. Giaggoni's point of view, workflow includes all possible uses of the video after it's been shot. Sony is thinking in broad terms of all the different ways to acquire video, all the different ways people manipulate it, and finally all the different methods people use to deliver it to the consumer. From that broad perspective, Mr. Giaggoni showed us why he though MPEG-2 was currently the best compromise between video quality and price for the V1's target market.

He was very enthusiastic about AVCHD, and was postive about it's future at Sony, but he did note that it was very new, the algorithm is much more complicated than MPEG-2, and much of the real world implementation had yet to be worked out. MPEG-2 which has been around since 1984 and is a much more mature technology. So basically it's easier and cheaper for Sony to provide professional solutions today using MPEG-2 at all the different levels of the "workflow" above.

Or as it's been said before, AVCHD is great if your doing basic editing, but if you need a professional solution, where almost anything can happen to the video at any stage of the production, HDV is a better solution.





... well,then there's always the XDCAM and CineAlta series after that.

First, it should be pointed out that NO ONE has the financial investment in AVCHD that Sony has at this point. No one. But it's their consumer division for now, that is offering AVC-HD, just as it's Panasonic's consumer division that will first ship AVC-HD.

Second, Hugo Gaggioni's points were made almost exclusively towards AVC Interframe, pointing out that such a format loses the value of what makes MPEG tick efficiently, increases bitrate requirements to ridiculous levels for zero gain in quality, and mathematically cannot resolve itself. Not to mention the decoding requirements that currently cannot be affordably met by the average Joe. All that adds up to a pretty weak picture, as displayed in the presentation. Normally you wouldn't see this sort of a scientific/technical presentation at a press release, but Sony was left no choice but to publically respond to a white paper that Panasonic recently issued that said anyone using MPEG 2 is foolish. Since the release of that white paper, Sony has announced a new camcorder and deck, Canon has announced 3 new camcorders, and JVC has done the same. Grass Valley announced their MPEG2 module, and other new MPEG 2 devices. In other words, only Panasonic thinks "MPEG 2 is dead" to exactly quote the white paper. Canon, Sony, Grass Valley, JVC, and Ikegami account for virtually all of the broadcast industry, so I'd submit that their statement is far more weighty.

AVC HD stands to eventually be the new "DV." That's a long way off, IMO.

I feel you hit the nail on the head, and I believe this is why Canon, Sony, and JVC are *all* addressing the myth of AVC-I at this point. Panasonic does not have a low-cost/high quality answer to HD, and to prevent potential buyers from purchasing the excellent offerings of all three companies, they issue what the industry calls a "take-out" statement. By confusing the market by announcing a "new" format, potential buyers of the HDV offerings might be enticed to wait for whatever is forthcoming, if anything is forthcoming. In other words, potential buyers are "taken out" of the market because they might want to wait for whatever is coming next. It might be 6 days, 6 months, 6 years or 6 decades before there ever is an AVC Interframe camera that is worthy of being called "professional." It may happen tomorrow and it may happen on the twelfth of never.

However, if you're a shooter casual or not, you live in the *now* and *now* we have HDV, we can edit with HDV, we can deliver HDV, and we can broadcast HDV. Most NLE's treat HDV just like DV, and most editors are quite comfortable with editing DV.

And with that, we're significantly off topic, and probably should split this out as a new thread to the AVCHD forum.

Good idea, Spot--put the AVCHD stuff in that forum.

heath

Excellent comments, Douglas. It does, indeed, seem to be a human failing to always be waiting for the Holy Grail of 1/3" chip camcorders. I really haven't seen that attitude much in the pro realm. Like, you need a new camera you go get the one that best fits what you do in terms of quality/price/reliability/compatibility with existing systems. It only seems to be in the "prosumer" realm that we get the Holy Grail mentality, and the manufacturers have learned to take advantage of that. Sony, for example, announces the new 1/4" chip 24p camera just in time to stop those who were ready to go with the new Canon next month and cause them to reconsider. Panasonic does it, Sony does it, everybody does it, and it will be an effective marketing technique until people quit thinking of a 1/3" chip camera as a lifestyle statement instead of a tool.

I could not have hopped for a more clear answer to my "puzzlement"! Thanks a lot for taking the time to help me understand the situation. It makes things more clear for me now as I can see much better my available choices.

BTW, the reason I was waiting for the "upcoming-small-size-solid-state-long-time-hd-recording-camera" is because the project I need it for starts in February. If it was starting now, I would have finalised my choices already! But Bill, I can see your point very well. It is indeed a characteristic of the low-to-no budget market to wait for the "perfect" camera, since the decision to invest this amount of money is not an easy one for everyone.

Thanks a lot for your input,

Thanasis

P.S. Sorry for diverting this thread!

Bill's post above is 'Post of the Day' in my opinion.

- If you need/want a new cam, look at whats currently available and match it as close to your own requirements and make your choice cos this is The Reality Of What Is Currently Available. Of course next year will be something newer shinier and improved but thats the nature of the game.
If any company ever gave us the Perfect Camcorder, or Perfect Car, or Perfect Software.... the company would go broke cos nobody would need to upgrade/replace it!
I do think some people 'worry' that they have to have the Latest Thing or else somehow their 'status' is devalued in some way. Whatever new machine comes out, it doesn't mean your current cam suddenly performs any less capably overnight..

Well said. What I ought to do is put this in the agreement clause for all new members registering here.

Douglas Spotted Eagle may find this surprising coming from me but he does have a point about the editing factor since all of the NLEs are very good at editing RAW HDV files and it may take a while until AVCHD becomes editable and I still think AVCHD may be a good alternative in the future but at the rate things are going, you cant really tell which will be better in the long run.

At least for now, the Vlu is the best camcorder to get out of all of the HDV camcorders and I’m still hoping Panasonic shows us something before Christmas because so many people including myself will have bought either the XH-G1 or the Vlu and it will be a little too late if they waited until after Christmas.

The ¼ inch imager issue reminds me about the time I bought the HC1 in the first few days of August of last year. You had so many people saying that the HC1 will fail because it had only 1 imager and I myself have always thought 3 chips were going to always be better, but for spending some time researching about the CMOS chip I came to realize that it has the potential to have a better picture than the GS400 even in DV mode and sure enough, the HC1 became a classic.

I think there is a second point of view to the holy grail mentality, and that is 'prosumer features' such as for example, HDMI, or progressive output from a natively progressive camera, or something as simple as an external microphone jack are left off the cheaper models. While prosumers constantly feel exploited they will always dream of a product that throws in a mic jack for free and has HDMI, and can be tweaked to do 24p at no extra cost and where the extra money directly reflects the extra quality they get in the output.

If the V1e/V1u actually needed different hardware to the FX7, or implimented a true 24p encoding system there might be an argument, but all it does is enter a different sequence of fields to the existing interlaced (half a frame) encoder from the data it has allready. Moving to a true 25p or 24p encoding and storage system for the 24p sensor output would bring real improvements to the quality for a given bitrate, its how MPEG2 is designed to work.

To justify a steep price gradient the companies maintain a features gradient that often bears no relation to the extra cost. This is true with almost all technology. While consumers are at the bottom of a slope and pretty much on the flat (there is very little left to remove from a camcorder and still have it function as one) and the pros are on a totally seperate flat way up high (there simply isn't anything to add nomatter how much money you throw until the technology improves), prosumers are perpetually clinging to a cliff face where one extra feature can mean spending as much as an entire consumer camera.

I think this is the best visual representation I have ever read for the definition of "prosumer"! I believe that there is also another factor to consider when discussing the "prosumer-awaiting-perfect-camera" issue: what is the use the "prosumer" will put this equipment to? And what is the potential return of this use? Is it an economic return? If yes, then the equation is simple: if the future projects can cover the cost of the purchase in a reasonable amount of time, then you buy. If not, then you go for a cheaper model. If there is no cheaper model that can deliver the projects (highly unlikely in the current market state), then you have what is called a "barrier to entry" in this market and you are in trouble...

But.

What if the expected return from the use of the camera is not an economic one? What if the expected return is simply... artistic expression? What if you work in the morning as a salesman and dream of shooting dramas in the evening? (if you don't work in the evenings as well...). In this case, the camera will probably never pay back it's money. Sure it will pay back a lot more, but not the money. Or if it does, you cannot count on it. And this money may well be your vacations money, or your child's school money. And, since it will not pay back, it is simply... expensive!

I write all these because I know the feeling. I have been there. Now I have the convenience to go out in the market and buy basically whatever suits my needs. But this is not where I started. And in my view, things would have been much faster for me, if prices were lower at my debut.

Now, some examples on the low end of the "curve":
Sony throws HC1 in the market. The "consumer" HDV market is not open yet. So, Sony plays it smart and throws a VERY GOOD MACHINE for it's money. But it is not just very good in image quality. It also has a mic-jack! And a focus ring! And headphones-jack! Why? Consumers don't need all these. But Sony needs to open the market and knows that consumers don't have an opinion. They rather do a quick search on the net and read the forums. "Prosumers" WRITE in forums! Therefore, consumers read what "prosumers" write. Consumers speak with a knowledgeable employee who sells cameras (probably the same fellow I was talking about before). He most probably cannot afford to buy an FX1 but he is now saving for an HC1. Easy. Give the "low-prosumers" what they want and they will advertise it to the consumers!

And what happens next? Well, next you get HC3! No mic-jack, no headphones jack, no focus ring. But hey! My cousin bought this small sony and its HD and it's awesome! I am going to buy one as well. I bought the NEXT model. So, it's better than his, no? "Low-prosumers" are not needed anymore. The market is now open. Let's charge them more, now! Say hello to HVR-A1...

Canon HV10. Same digital signal processor as H1!!! Plays back 24f!!! Does it record it? No! Of' course not. Why not? It's the same processor! Does Canon honestly believe that any serious professional would choose the HV10 over an A1? No, of' course not. But then, how could they introduce their next $2.500 - $3.000 camcorder with 24f, focus ring, mic jack, headphones jack and no xlr's? Would it be cost-prohibitive for HV10 to be this camcorder? Certainly not! Sony has proven this with HC1. So?

So, IMHO the "low-end-prosumers" are the ones to be constantly left unsatisfied. They are the only ones in the market pushed to extend beyond their budget to satisfy their needs. That's why they got into the happit of waiting. Professional event videographers (to name one $4.000 to $5.000 category) are the best ones served! They get what they need in a price they are more than willing to pay. In order for this to happen, "low-end-prosumers" have to pay! Because if they don't, then the event videographers will definitely get angry. Who likes to know that he is paying $3.000 or $4.000 more for a similar product with a different, more professional look?

I don't remember where it was but I read some time ago about the idea of being able to "custom build" your camera. Like with PC's. Order the parts that you need, pay for each part separately and assemble it. Or have it assembled for you. I thought this is a really innovative idea! It's hard to imagine how it would be possible but then, I guess Red was hard to imagine some years ago... But, if this was to become reality, then the companies would start to antagonise on the parts prices. Not a very nice scenario for them, since this would enable more players to enter the market. Smaller companies that specialise in CCDs for example, or lenses or lcds etc. This would definitely drop the prices and the truth would be revealed. (Btw, I don’t know if this would be technically possible at all. But it certainly gives a good example of what I am trying to say…)

I think after all this, a re-definition of "prosumer" is necessary. I would say that a “prosumer” is the person who needs a lot of professional features but will probably never have an economic return in his camera investment. Everybody else above him/her is a professional.

Again another long post! And this time, we are definitely in a very different topic and I really do not know what is the common practice and whether I should have posted this here or not. Please tell me if I am doing something wrong :)

Thanks for reading,

Thanasis

Camcorder choices are getting harder these days and obviously Panasonic is not going to release a Professional AVCHD camcorder although I still would like to see a consumer version to compete against the Sony’s SR1 camcorder this year. People are basically stuck with choosing either the Sony HVR-V1 or the Canon XH-G1 as an affordable camcorder and I’ll skip the others because it’s in a higher price range.

At least in my case I wouldn’t have to worry about editing 24 P/f since I would never use that feature on a camcorder anyway.

i have to admit my brain can't take these models with all these new camera letter names ! ( happens when you go past 50 )
i use to be able to follow sony's names ..PD150 , PD170 , 2000 , 2100 so i could just refer to them as sony -150 , 170 , 1000, 2100 ..

wouldn't a name ( and maybe a number.. cineAlta 900 ) be easier then HVR-V1U , HDR-FX7 ...
same with canon .. GL1 , GL2 , XL1, XL2 was easy to follow ... now the new ones are just too many letters ...

I brought this up in another thread about a review, but I wonder how others feel about it. Assuming there is a button access panel underneath it like the VX and FX1 I have, I am happy Sony went back to side mount of LCD. With the top mount as on FX1, you had to be over the camera to read the button decriptions. With the mounting on the side panel, you can have the camera on a high tripod, but still read and access those buttons. In addition, with my ME66 mic, I have to swing mic away to open and close the LCD.

Anybody else ?

Personally I think the handle mounted LCD screen was a great innovation of the Z1/FX1. I much prefer that location to the side screen on my VX-2000 and PDX-10. I rarely use the viewfinder on my camera, and the LCD screen seems to be in a great position to use, even with a relatively high tripod that I use to shoot performances. I don't have much problem with the buttons on top; you just have to know where they are by feel regardless of where they are... can't see them in the dark while shooting.

But aside from all this, it allows the tape door to be on the left where it belongs. I can change tapes much more quickly on my Z1, and I'm not always getting caught up with the grip strap.

But as the designer of both the Z1 and V1 explained to Michael Wisenski and me, a handle mounted LCD would have been too wide for the V1 and would have also affected the balance.

I'm just happy it's somewhat smaller and lighter. The PD150 series was a reasonable size. When I saw the FX1 at Fry's, I thought my god, this thing is huge. The HVX is also huge.

My only gripe so far is I wish the lens was wider. 37.5mm equivalent on the wide end just isn't wide enough. 32mm would have been better. 28mm would have been awesome.

I think its easier and more forgiving to add a wide angle adapter, than to add at the other end. So I don't have a problem with that.

Well clearly everyone has different requirements. I don't like having to use an adapter if I can help it. They add weight (especially zoom-through wide converters) and you're adding optical elements so there has to be some lost in quality. Also, flare can be a bigger problem.

And given that the camera is targeted towards filmmakers, event videographers, and probably reality TV production, a wider lens is more useful in those genres. I notice most reality shows with ENG cameras have wide zooms from Canon or Fujinon on them. This camera already has a 20X zoom on it so a few extra millimeters on the wide end wouldn't have hurt. Oh well, I guess we just have to live with it but this camera is soooo close to meeting all my requirements.

I know this camcorder has a wonderful 1.5X digital extender for the zoom to make it 30X but I would still like to know if their will be a 1.6X/1.8X or even a 2X telephoto adapter. Just imagine the reach and clarity you would get with 60X by using a tripod.

I'd think you could use a stepdown adaptor with the 72mm Century 1.6x - or maybe they will make a new bayonet mount for the V1? The cool thing about that would be, you'd get more zoom through capability than 1.6x allows on the Z1.

OTOH, I doubt there will be a lot of demand for tele adaptors for this camera...

V1 with 35mm adaptor?
 

I seems to me that the V1 may be almost the perfect camera for low-budget cinema if you added a 35mm lens adapter. The 1/4" chips wouldn't matter then, only it's sensitivity to light. Pair this puppy up with a M2 or letus35 and you'd have an awesome compact, cheap cinema camera. What do you think?

i think the v1 could be pretty damn amazing with a lens adapter.. if it really does have a higher dynamic range then normal video and the super slow-motion feature works well, then my two major problems with digital video could be eliminated :)

..have to wait and see footage from the finished product.

Chuck the 35mm adapter and shoot with zoom from across the street. Check out footage showing zoom range in footage posted by DSE:

http://www.vasst.com

Yes, that is a little surprising, especially given that the 1.5x digital zoom feature is reported to be good enough for general use. Personnally, I'm very pleased with the lens range Sony have chosen, since I like to count the rivets on a locomotive's tender from 500 yards without adding a tele-converter, ( :-) ) but I realise that wide-angle is quite high on many people's priority-list.

Will the V1U have a ‘nightshot’ mode? I know this is somewhat of an esoteric feature but I’d like to capture footage of owls with an external infrared light source. If so, will the slow motion mode still work? Slow motion footage of the owls at night would be really cool.

There is indeed a hypergain mode, and yes, slo mo works in that mode.

I love this camcorder. Douglas, your footage has been amazing. I was pretty floored when I saw that zoom as well, even though I probably won't be taking advantage of it really, but it's good to know it can look that incredible!! I'll certainly be picking this up. I'm already in paradise, but obviously it'd be complete bliss if the BlackMagic HDMI enabled 4:2:2 as well. I guess time will tell. I can't wait to find out.

Also, does anyone know if the tripod that is being launched with the V1U is better or worse than the Sony 1170RM. Are those both fluid heads? I can't find many reviews of Sony tripods. No one seems to be using them. I guess I should be looking at Manfrotto and all those other manufacturers?

I have a question regarding editing. I know NLEs of today will be able to edit the footage right away as 60i. But in the future when Premiere and Vegas get updated...does anything change? Or is it still capturing as 60i. I've been trying to follow the conversation but I still don't understand this. I understand it's recorded to the tape as 60i...so what exactly is missing from NLEs? What work needs to be done to make it better? Anything? And is Vegas 7 addressing it, do you think?

Can't see why the BlackMagic won't support 4:2:2 - what I'd like to see is a locking mechanism on HDMI/FireWire/Etc cables so that they can't fall out during a camera move...

As for Sony tripods, never used one but can't believe they're all that worthwhile. It's worth spending a lot more on tripods than people do - a good one will last you the life of 5 camcorders for the price of half of one, and at the end of the day, what's the point in having a great camera if all your moves look sh*tty?!

For my tuppence worth (and I'm sure you'll get as many opinions as answers on this one) Vintons are the best bet at the lower (but still not budget) end of the range - I've got a Vision3 and it's just fantastic. Check out the "Support your camera" forum for more on our three-legged friends!

No i don't think it has that mode. Generally cams like this will definitely not have that mode. You're talking (i beleive) about the IR-illuminated mode with a physical switch to swing the internal IR-filters out of the optical path thus enabling IR light to reach the sensor(s). - It doesn't have this feature.
(Hypergain isn't the same thing).

rgards

Any thoughts on this camera working with the HVR-M25U VTR?

Dave